Does the government go back to their offices and cry?
No.
Am I ordered by the court to provide potentially damaging information against myself?
Yes. And you get to rot in jail for contempt until you provide those passwords. You're not being forced to incriminate yourself; you're being forced to provide the encryption keys for evidence seized under color of a legal warrant.
Cells are useless in large metropolitan emergencies (which, oddly enough, often accompany severe weather), because the network doesn't have the reserve capacity the PSTN does. While the cell networks oversubscribe to the max, the PSTN is provisioned to handle Mother's Day.
A vote for Bush is a vote for Ashcroft, and a vote for a third party protest candidate, however conscientious, is a vote for Bush. While failing to prevent terrorism despite a gross erosion (i.e. Ashcroft wiping his ass with) the Constitution, now he seems to have the resources to bust teenage kids sharing music.
I saw that it was just the GUI after I posted. Of course, I think the.net framework has as much long term chance as the UCSD p-System and the JVM that came before it. Heck,.net doesn't even have the advantage of being (designed to be) cross-platform. Mono is a sop to hold off Justice, nothing more.
Re:It's not cheating ... it's outsourcing
on
Cheating Made Easy
·
· Score: 1
Perhaps for the opportunity to work at something a bit more enjoyable than as a fry basket emptier at a fast food chain? I don't condone cheating, but a university education is required in all but writ.
In some states, you can drive at 14. But you can't leave your state.
I think you are correct on insurance, but not on this--states honor other states' driver's licenses ("full faith and credit" and all that), so if a state legally licenses someone at 14, that person can legally drive in another state that does not.
It's pretty easy to thing callously when dealing with insurance companies. I don't know how old you are, but I remember when the insurance companies pushed state legislatures for restrictions on young drivers--it would reduce accidents, and save lives. It did. But did rates for young drivers go down one cent? No.
The only brake on insurance companies rapacity is government regulation. And government regulation comes mostly from state insurance commissioners who are going to go back to work for the industry after their term. You can imagine how well that works.
The "surcharge for not driving an inexpensive compact 4 cylinder sedan" is a nice rhetorical device, if a bit disingenuous. You're altering more than one variable of the underwriting equation in your comparison when your original OnStar example results in a change in premium with all the other variables held constant. But you know that. Nice try, though:).
Not supported by history? That's a stupid argument, my friend: when in history has cheap and ubiquitous GPS technology and cars that can call home been available? Wait a few years, and we'll see whether you're right or I'm a paranoid nutcase.
And has it ever occured to you that a "discount" for OnStar is the same thing mathematically as a surcharge for not having OnStar?
Auto insurance is a mandated purchase by the government, and controlled by a few large companies. Those squealing that the "free market" will prevent abuses either are willfully blind to or for some reason can't see the imbalance of power involved here--in no way could the automobile insurance market be considered a free market in any sense. Because insurance is a government required purchase, and because of the history of the insurance industry robbing the public, the industry is and hopefully will continue to be heavily regulated, which is the only hope of preventing this becoming mandatory except for the very rich who can afford large surcharges.
Yep. It's optional. And in a few years, it'll still be optional, at least for those who can afford the $2,500/six months policy surcharge (or loss of discount, as the insurance industry will spin it) for not "consenting" to being monitored.
The answer to that one is strict driver's licensure, like in the U.K. Of course, that'll never fly here--idiots who aren't allowed to drive would suddenly start voting in droves, and the insurance companies with their government granted oligolopoly on a legally required product would never stand for it.
Re:Corporate deniability and local management amok
on
Best Buy Sued By Ohio
·
· Score: 1
I haven't actually tried this (of course), but I do remember that what you describe was true in Florida for some time. I'm not sure if it's true where I live now, though. I will check into it--thanks for the tip!
Until there's a power outage and/or the guy actually needs to call 911. Then having ditched the POTS line for VoIP just became a costly proposition indeed. The road I'm considering is maintaining the cheapest possible measured service on POTS to keep E911 access (and a working phone during power and broadband outages), and using VoIP as a main line.
Slashdot Mirror
No.
Am I ordered by the court to provide potentially damaging information against myself?
Yes. And you get to rot in jail for contempt until you provide those passwords. You're not being forced to incriminate yourself; you're being forced to provide the encryption keys for evidence seized under color of a legal warrant.
Cells are useless in large metropolitan emergencies (which, oddly enough, often accompany severe weather), because the network doesn't have the reserve capacity the PSTN does. While the cell networks oversubscribe to the max, the PSTN is provisioned to handle Mother's Day.
A vote for Bush is a vote for Ashcroft, and a vote for a third party protest candidate, however conscientious, is a vote for Bush. While failing to prevent terrorism despite a gross erosion (i.e. Ashcroft wiping his ass with) the Constitution, now he seems to have the resources to bust teenage kids sharing music.
The error you described would be a factor of 1000, not 10.
You've got a point there--excepting small claims.
I saw that it was just the GUI after I posted. Of course, I think the .net framework has as much long term chance as the UCSD p-System and the JVM that came before it. Heck, .net doesn't even have the advantage of being (designed to be) cross-platform. Mono is a sop to hold off Justice, nothing more.
Oh, really? :)
A dot NET filesystem driver? I feel dirty.
Latency?
Perhaps for the opportunity to work at something a bit more enjoyable than as a fry basket emptier at a fast food chain? I don't condone cheating, but a university education is required in all but writ.
I think you are correct on insurance, but not on this--states honor other states' driver's licenses ("full faith and credit" and all that), so if a state legally licenses someone at 14, that person can legally drive in another state that does not.
The only brake on insurance companies rapacity is government regulation. And government regulation comes mostly from state insurance commissioners who are going to go back to work for the industry after their term. You can imagine how well that works.
The "surcharge for not driving an inexpensive compact 4 cylinder sedan" is a nice rhetorical device, if a bit disingenuous. You're altering more than one variable of the underwriting equation in your comparison when your original OnStar example results in a change in premium with all the other variables held constant. But you know that. Nice try, though :).
And has it ever occured to you that a "discount" for OnStar is the same thing mathematically as a surcharge for not having OnStar?
________
Auto insurance is a mandated purchase by the government, and controlled by a few large companies. Those squealing that the "free market" will prevent abuses either are willfully blind to or for some reason can't see the imbalance of power involved here--in no way could the automobile insurance market be considered a free market in any sense. Because insurance is a government required purchase, and because of the history of the insurance industry robbing the public, the industry is and hopefully will continue to be heavily regulated, which is the only hope of preventing this becoming mandatory except for the very rich who can afford large surcharges.
Yep. It's optional. And in a few years, it'll still be optional, at least for those who can afford the $2,500/six months policy surcharge (or loss of discount, as the insurance industry will spin it) for not "consenting" to being monitored.
The answer to that one is strict driver's licensure, like in the U.K. Of course, that'll never fly here--idiots who aren't allowed to drive would suddenly start voting in droves, and the insurance companies with their government granted oligolopoly on a legally required product would never stand for it.
+1, you nailed it.
They're already piloting (ha, great choice of word, huh) that. Google for "trusted traveler program."
It's pretty easy for a program to detect that it's running under virtualization. Hell, VMware even provides hooks for it.
Welcome to the Corporate States of America. Politics has been run by those with the seven figure checkbooks for some time now.
Huh? Real's paying the record labels, too.
I haven't actually tried this (of course), but I do remember that what you describe was true in Florida for some time. I'm not sure if it's true where I live now, though. I will check into it--thanks for the tip!
Until there's a power outage and/or the guy actually needs to call 911. Then having ditched the POTS line for VoIP just became a costly proposition indeed. The road I'm considering is maintaining the cheapest possible measured service on POTS to keep E911 access (and a working phone during power and broadband outages), and using VoIP as a main line.
You would probably be right, at least among this demographic :).