So why doesn't the EPA issue certificates to these cars to run in all states? They will obviously conform to the less restrictive regulations. Why does no-one in Govt. have any common sense?
As stated in other replies, he is not being required to do anything or buy anything. He was convicted of using the Internet to conduct criminal activity. He is being let out of jail early with a restriction that if he wants to use the internet during that time (voluntarily), his use needs to be monitored.
Are you suggesting that the FBI spend THOUSANDS of taxpayer dollars to develop a version of the monitoring software for every possible OS on the planet so he doen't have to spend $100.00 to get back on the Internet?
You really feel that this has any kind of paralell to racial inequality????
Come on you people, he got caught doing something illegal and now he is being punished. I don't think it's the FBI's responsibility to make sure that their monitoring software works on all platforms.
I have a fiber network connecting 35 sites in my city, and about 60% of our outages come from someone shooting the fiber (we've had bullets, buckshot & an arrow) but it's not because they hate fiber!
It's usually just a GOB (good 'ole boy) shootin' at some varmint. In this case, someone probably drove down the fiber in their trusty pickup shootin at birds along the way. Buckshot has a wide dispersion patter (ask the guy that Cheney shot) so they would probably get some fiber on each shot! I've got a piece of fiber on my desk with several pellets embedded in it!
Move along... Nothing to see here!
I have a fiber network connecting 35 sites in my city, and about 60% of our outages come from someone shooting the fiber (we've had bullets, buckshot & an arrow) but it's not because they hate fiber!
It's usually just a GOB (good 'ole boy) shootin' at some varmint. In this case, someone probably drove down the fiber in their trusty pickup shootin at birds along the way. Buckshot has a wide dispersion patter (ask the guy that Cheney shot) so they would probably get some fiber on each shot! I've got a piece of fiber on my desk with several pellets embedded in it!
Agree... I just built a new PC with an ATI card and the DVI port basically didn't work with XP and the management software they provided wouldn't even open. After reading other posts on the Internet with the same results I put in an NVidia the next day and was up and running with NO issues. ATI needs to get their software act together!
You are all theorizing about this like you can just walk over and stop event "A" after casually looking at the output at "B". In 'reality' the time difference would be so small that you would not have time through any conventional method to relay a signal back to "A" to modify the initial action. The only way to get a significant time difference is to seperate the points over great distances, and getting a signal back through conventinal means (speed of light) will take longer than the 'back in time' effect.
_Plus, I don't understand where the 'back in time' effect comes from, so maybee someone can explain it better than the article which states:
"He would send one of the entangled beams (call it Signal A) through a circuitous detour - say, a few miles of fiber-optic cable - then fiddle with it when it came out of the cable. If the principles behind nonlocal communication held true, the evidence of that fiddling should be detected at a corresponding place in the other entangled beam (call it Signal B)."
Wouldn't a 'corresponding place' on the other beam also be several miles out from the origination of the signal, and wouldn't it take as long to get there, so you would see the entanglement at the same time?
It is true that if you have a document, you need to turn it over. But what is also true is that if you have a stated document retention & disp[osal policy, and a document is disposed of as part of that routine action before a case is brought against you, you are 100% Ok to say "We no longer have that document because it was destroyed in accordance with our 60 day policy" and there is NO action that can be brought against you period. You need to turn over anything that has not yet been destroyed, but you have NO obligation to archive anything for any period of time under this rule of procedure.
It's not a law, it's a rule of legal procedure, and it's not that complicated. It simply says that you can't destroy evidence, and that electronic documentation now counts as evidence. All the other details make allowances for if you do destroy something that you shouldn't have because you didn't know it was there untill someone asked for it. Say someone is suing you, and they tell their lawyer that they sent an e-mail to your company with XXX info on this date. You get notified of the action, and during the discovery process the other side asks for copies of that e-mail that they know was sent. If you have a documented retention/destruction policy and you can show that the document was destroyed prior to your knowledge of the case by a routine maintnenace process, than you have nothing to worry about. This is the type of detail that the fine print of the "rule" discusses. It is also a detail that the storage and archiving vendors will NEVER tell you!
Now that I've read the article, you notice that it references "CommVault Systems Inc.'s " product's. They are one of the worst FUD machines, getting articles in e-School News and other publications to drive up business from K-12 IT shops that don't understand the rules. They even have the school district IT guy's spreading the lies by saying "By and large, in the past, [FRCP] rules really didn't pertain to [K-12 school districts like] they did to the Enron's of the world," Attiya said. "But now we are being pointed in that direction, so we have to take steps to be prepared."
This is TOTALLY inaccurate! the new rules, like the old rules, make NO distinction between education/private or size of business. they just say that you can't destroy evidence in an ongoing legal action!
See My reply below, but the rules DON'T say you need to archive everything. It just says that you can't destroy evidence in an ONGOING legal action (or something you expect may lead to legal action)!
All the vendors of e-mail archiving hardware/software want us to think we need to archive everything, but that's just not the case!
read my post below, but this is mostly FUD to sell e-mail archiving gear! The rules just say that you cant destroy data On An ONGOING LEGAl ACTION!! it's basically just officially extending the 'you can't destroy evidence' rule to electronic communications as well. You can destroy all your stuff whenever you want as long as it isn't about a pending legal case. All the other details (retention policies etc.) just clarify what is punishible or not punishible if it is found that you did destroy stuff after you were aware of the case!
See my post below, but the HUGE point that everyone is missing is that the retention ONLY has to do with correspondance concerning ongoing legal action, or issues where it can reasonable be assumed that legal action may arrise! there is NO requirement to log ALL electronic commincations etc. in any way. Everything else this poster said about a retention policy etc. is true. Once you have a retention policy that deletes messages after x days etc. you do need to make an effort to START retaining messages beyond that window if it has to do with an issue that you now know has an ongoing legal action. The articles all do a horrible job explaining these details!
I manage the networks for a K-12 school district and I am being bombarded by this same info, most of it feuled by vendor FUD!! The Rules of discovery that everyone is referencing do NOT say in any way that all electronic communications need to be stored or archived in any way.
What the rules DO now officially state (which they didn't before last year) is that electronic communications must now be treated the same as traditional paper documentation.
Specifically, that means that you cant destroy any correspondance or record HAVING TO DO WITH AN ONGOING LEGAL ACTION/LITIGATION or that you can reasonaby expect may lead to litigation. For my organization, that is less than one percent of the volume of data I have. All the vendors are saying that we need to archive ALL our e-mails in a searchable database yada yada yada so that we can protect ourselves against some unknown threat that we may be found in violation of these rules. That simply isn't the case. We will be in trouble if we destroy evidenmce in an ongoing legal case, but that is about it.
What we DO need to do is insure that the HR department and others that typically deal with sensitive legal topics understand the rules, and that they should print out and save anything that they suspect could come back to bite us, like adverse personell actions. We also need to insure that building administrators do the same when it comes to discipline actions concerning students etc.
AGAIN, anyone who tells you that you NEED to archive/store ALL e-mail or other electronic documents is at best completely mis-informed (like most of the journalists parroting back the FUD)or at worst trying to scam you directly with their FUD.
FYI... No one coule EVER tell from someone's spelling that they aren't a native english speaker! We 'natural(?)' Americans can be pretty bad spellers from the get-go, so don't ever think that you'r on-line communications give anything away.
So just as I had the school board gathered to show them the types of porn our students could see through Google Images, my buddy was working in the server room under the raised flooring. Some dust got kicked up and set off one of the under-floor smoke detectors for the halon system.
After the halon alarm was sounding for 20 or so seconds he decided that it was probably going to go off soon, and hit the big red button on his way out the door. Down goes our Internet connection just as I was getting to the good stuff!
Speaking of the Hexagon on Saturn, one of my co-workers found this math paper that sems to describe the phenomenon. At the time, the article stated that they were still looking for a cause for the pattern. Anyone with a subscription to the chaos journal want to see if the paper really applies?
OK... So what everyone seems to be missing is that most of the shapes and forms you view are NOT one pixel in size, but are all different sizes at different angles. Taking hair and fabric as an example, everyone notices how much clearer these details look on HD, and I would argue that they will look even better still on a 1080p picture vs. standard HD even if you can't make out individual pixels.
Flowing hair is going to cut diaganolly across many pixels and move from pixel to pixel. The more detail presented as a thin hair moves through the field of view, the better your eyes will be able to distinguish it from other hairs and objects, and the picture will look more clear to you.
You don't need to be able to clearly distinguish every pixel for the picture to look better!
(By the way, I still have an old fashioned 32" tube set, so I'm not just trying to convince myself that the bundle I spent on 1080p wasn't wasted!)
How have Apple & Bose & others been able to dictate their MRP's to retailers for years. You can't find an iPod or Bose system discounted anywhere except for close outs etc.
What is their loophole, or do the retailers just not fight them because the demand is so high they will sell X products at any price?
So how have Apple and Bose etc. been able to circumvent the apparent existing laws restricting minimum price levels. You almost never find thier products at anything other than the manufacturers suggested retail, except on closed out items etc.
What loophole or other back side contractual agreement have they been making with their retailers to keep them from discounting products?
First, I was born and raised in a republican household and voted republican right up until the time that GWB became the frontrunner in the primaries in 2000. I did not, prior to this administration, have a political leaning to favor democrats, liberals, environmentalists, sissies, or any other stereotypical liberal cause or issue. I am a well educated person capable of digesting the news and information around me, and all that I have learned in the past 7 years tells me that George W. Bush will go down in history as the worst president ever!
I'd like for everyone who still supports GWB for whatever reason to just consider the following few points and try to compose literate and thoughtful responses to justify his track record on any of these issues.
1. Political Appointments - The role of the president is to look out for the best interests of the 'People'. That means trying to represent the many varied interests of ALL the people. Now, Corporations are part of that group, as are members of Greenpeace and all us regular Joes who fall in the middle. The Bush administration has consistently biased most appointments in favor of corporate interests over all other interests. As detailed in the originally referenced article, "Cooney () was a lobbyist for the American Petroleum Institute before becoming chief of staff at the White House Council on Environmental Quality". How can he be expected to provide impartial leadership? This is just one of hundreds of obviously poor choices detailed here. I'm not saying that a former Greenpeace executive would be a better choice for any of these positions. The presidents job is to appoint knowledgeable people who have worked in the field and who are capable of weighing the needs and interests of all sides of an issue to provide decisions that balance those interests. Bush has always failed to do this
2. Personal Freedoms and Liberties - The documentation of the Bush administrations poor record on this topic is pretty extensive. Bush continually uses 9/11 as an excuse to chip away at the basic rights our country was founded on. Illegally tapping domestic phone calls, gathering huge databases of personal financial and travel information, and that small matter of imprisoning and torturing people for indefinite periods without regard for the basic civil liberties spelled out and defended by the constitution. All in the name of preventing another attack that may or may not be preventable. Millions of people die every year for millions of reasons. Tossing away the foundations of our country for a 2% improvement in the chances that you might learn something that could lead to a possible disruption of a plot that may or may not have been successful is not in the best interests of our nation and has been specifically warned against by just about every one of the founding fathers and other great American leaders since then, as seen here !
3. Iraq War - The decision to invade and occupy Iraq and the continued resistance to every sane voice begging for a change in policy will go down in history as the worst single piece of leadership in the history of our nation! Even if you ignore the fact that the American people were deliberately lied to in order to foster support for Saddam's removal, the disastrous planning, execution, and failure to learn from a single mistake or appropriately adjust policies or tactics based on past failures is mind-numbing.
4. Corporate Welfare - One of the few things GWB has done "For" the people is some tax cuts for middle America. Of course, this was done with gimmicks (mid year refund checks etc.) to mask the fact that the real tax breaks were going to huge corporations that were in no dire consequences before GWB came along. The Bush administration has taken every opportunity to push money back to corporate America in one form or another at the expense of many many programs to assist poor and
The problem is that the media is under the control of the same empowered class that really controls the government. If all the news outlets were covering these statements (which they are not) there might be some public outcry for action. Nobody knows about this which is why I posted it!
Call your TV stations and complain... Ha!
Slashdot Mirror
So why doesn't the EPA issue certificates to these cars to run in all states? They will obviously conform to the less restrictive regulations. Why does no-one in Govt. have any common sense?
As stated in other replies, he is not being required to do anything or buy anything. He was convicted of using the Internet to conduct criminal activity. He is being let out of jail early with a restriction that if he wants to use the internet during that time (voluntarily), his use needs to be monitored.
Are you suggesting that the FBI spend THOUSANDS of taxpayer dollars to develop a version of the monitoring software for every possible OS on the planet so he doen't have to spend $100.00 to get back on the Internet?
You really feel that this has any kind of paralell to racial inequality????
As my title states, Oh My God!!!
Come on you people, he got caught doing something illegal and now he is being punished. I don't think it's the FBI's responsibility to make sure that their monitoring software works on all platforms.
Get Over It!!!
I have a fiber network connecting 35 sites in my city, and about 60% of our outages come from someone shooting the fiber (we've had bullets, buckshot & an arrow) but it's not because they hate fiber! It's usually just a GOB (good 'ole boy) shootin' at some varmint. In this case, someone probably drove down the fiber in their trusty pickup shootin at birds along the way. Buckshot has a wide dispersion patter (ask the guy that Cheney shot) so they would probably get some fiber on each shot! I've got a piece of fiber on my desk with several pellets embedded in it! Move along... Nothing to see here!
It's usually just a GOB (good 'ole boy) shootin' at some varmint. In this case, someone probably drove down the fiber in their trusty pickup shootin at birds along the way. Buckshot has a wide dispersion patter (ask the guy that Cheney shot) so they would probably get some fiber on each shot! I've got a piece of fiber on my desk with several pellets embedded in it!
Move along... Nothing to see here!
If they are offering backup etc. than I would say it's worth the price!
What... I'd buy one!
Agree... I just built a new PC with an ATI card and the DVI port basically didn't work with XP and the management software they provided wouldn't even open. After reading other posts on the Internet with the same results I put in an NVidia the next day and was up and running with NO issues. ATI needs to get their software act together!
"He would send one of the entangled beams (call it Signal A) through a circuitous detour - say, a few miles of fiber-optic cable - then fiddle with it when it came out of the cable. If the principles behind nonlocal communication held true, the evidence of that fiddling should be detected at a corresponding place in the other entangled beam (call it Signal B)."
Wouldn't a 'corresponding place' on the other beam also be several miles out from the origination of the signal, and wouldn't it take as long to get there, so you would see the entanglement at the same time?
"I am surprised no one copied and pasted the article"... Probably because it's copyright infringement???
It is true that if you have a document, you need to turn it over. But what is also true is that if you have a stated document retention & disp[osal policy, and a document is disposed of as part of that routine action before a case is brought against you, you are 100% Ok to say "We no longer have that document because it was destroyed in accordance with our 60 day policy" and there is NO action that can be brought against you period. You need to turn over anything that has not yet been destroyed, but you have NO obligation to archive anything for any period of time under this rule of procedure.
It's not a law, it's a rule of legal procedure, and it's not that complicated. It simply says that you can't destroy evidence, and that electronic documentation now counts as evidence. All the other details make allowances for if you do destroy something that you shouldn't have because you didn't know it was there untill someone asked for it. Say someone is suing you, and they tell their lawyer that they sent an e-mail to your company with XXX info on this date. You get notified of the action, and during the discovery process the other side asks for copies of that e-mail that they know was sent. If you have a documented retention/destruction policy and you can show that the document was destroyed prior to your knowledge of the case by a routine maintnenace process, than you have nothing to worry about. This is the type of detail that the fine print of the "rule" discusses. It is also a detail that the storage and archiving vendors will NEVER tell you!
This is TOTALLY inaccurate! the new rules, like the old rules, make NO distinction between education/private or size of business. they just say that you can't destroy evidence in an ongoing legal action!
Don't belive the hype!
All the vendors of e-mail archiving hardware/software want us to think we need to archive everything, but that's just not the case!
read my post below, but this is mostly FUD to sell e-mail archiving gear! The rules just say that you cant destroy data On An ONGOING LEGAl ACTION!! it's basically just officially extending the 'you can't destroy evidence' rule to electronic communications as well. You can destroy all your stuff whenever you want as long as it isn't about a pending legal case. All the other details (retention policies etc.) just clarify what is punishible or not punishible if it is found that you did destroy stuff after you were aware of the case!
See my post below, but the HUGE point that everyone is missing is that the retention ONLY has to do with correspondance concerning ongoing legal action, or issues where it can reasonable be assumed that legal action may arrise! there is NO requirement to log ALL electronic commincations etc. in any way. Everything else this poster said about a retention policy etc. is true. Once you have a retention policy that deletes messages after x days etc. you do need to make an effort to START retaining messages beyond that window if it has to do with an issue that you now know has an ongoing legal action. The articles all do a horrible job explaining these details!
What the rules DO now officially state (which they didn't before last year) is that electronic communications must now be treated the same as traditional paper documentation.
Specifically, that means that you cant destroy any correspondance or record HAVING TO DO WITH AN ONGOING LEGAL ACTION/LITIGATION or that you can reasonaby expect may lead to litigation. For my organization, that is less than one percent of the volume of data I have. All the vendors are saying that we need to archive ALL our e-mails in a searchable database yada yada yada so that we can protect ourselves against some unknown threat that we may be found in violation of these rules. That simply isn't the case. We will be in trouble if we destroy evidenmce in an ongoing legal case, but that is about it.
What we DO need to do is insure that the HR department and others that typically deal with sensitive legal topics understand the rules, and that they should print out and save anything that they suspect could come back to bite us, like adverse personell actions. We also need to insure that building administrators do the same when it comes to discipline actions concerning students etc.
AGAIN, anyone who tells you that you NEED to archive/store ALL e-mail or other electronic documents is at best completely mis-informed (like most of the journalists parroting back the FUD)or at worst trying to scam you directly with their FUD.
FYI... No one coule EVER tell from someone's spelling that they aren't a native english speaker! We 'natural(?)' Americans can be pretty bad spellers from the get-go, so don't ever think that you'r on-line communications give anything away.
After the halon alarm was sounding for 20 or so seconds he decided that it was probably going to go off soon, and hit the big red button on his way out the door. Down goes our Internet connection just as I was getting to the good stuff!
Speaking of the Hexagon on Saturn, one of my co-workers found this math paper that sems to describe the phenomenon. At the time, the article stated that they were still looking for a cause for the pattern. Anyone with a subscription to the chaos journal want to see if the paper really applies?
Flowing hair is going to cut diaganolly across many pixels and move from pixel to pixel. The more detail presented as a thin hair moves through the field of view, the better your eyes will be able to distinguish it from other hairs and objects, and the picture will look more clear to you.
You don't need to be able to clearly distinguish every pixel for the picture to look better!
(By the way, I still have an old fashioned 32" tube set, so I'm not just trying to convince myself that the bundle I spent on 1080p wasn't wasted!)
How have Apple & Bose & others been able to dictate their MRP's to retailers for years. You can't find an iPod or Bose system discounted anywhere except for close outs etc.
What is their loophole, or do the retailers just not fight them because the demand is so high they will sell X products at any price?
What loophole or other back side contractual agreement have they been making with their retailers to keep them from discounting products?
I'd like for everyone who still supports GWB for whatever reason to just consider the following few points and try to compose literate and thoughtful responses to justify his track record on any of these issues.
1. Political Appointments - The role of the president is to look out for the best interests of the 'People'. That means trying to represent the many varied interests of ALL the people. Now, Corporations are part of that group, as are members of Greenpeace and all us regular Joes who fall in the middle. The Bush administration has consistently biased most appointments in favor of corporate interests over all other interests. As detailed in the originally referenced article, "Cooney () was a lobbyist for the American Petroleum Institute before becoming chief of staff at the White House Council on Environmental Quality". How can he be expected to provide impartial leadership? This is just one of hundreds of obviously poor choices detailed here. I'm not saying that a former Greenpeace executive would be a better choice for any of these positions. The presidents job is to appoint knowledgeable people who have worked in the field and who are capable of weighing the needs and interests of all sides of an issue to provide decisions that balance those interests. Bush has always failed to do this
2. Personal Freedoms and Liberties - The documentation of the Bush administrations poor record on this topic is pretty extensive. Bush continually uses 9/11 as an excuse to chip away at the basic rights our country was founded on. Illegally tapping domestic phone calls, gathering huge databases of personal financial and travel information, and that small matter of imprisoning and torturing people for indefinite periods without regard for the basic civil liberties spelled out and defended by the constitution. All in the name of preventing another attack that may or may not be preventable. Millions of people die every year for millions of reasons. Tossing away the foundations of our country for a 2% improvement in the chances that you might learn something that could lead to a possible disruption of a plot that may or may not have been successful is not in the best interests of our nation and has been specifically warned against by just about every one of the founding fathers and other great American leaders since then, as seen here !
3. Iraq War - The decision to invade and occupy Iraq and the continued resistance to every sane voice begging for a change in policy will go down in history as the worst single piece of leadership in the history of our nation! Even if you ignore the fact that the American people were deliberately lied to in order to foster support for Saddam's removal, the disastrous planning, execution, and failure to learn from a single mistake or appropriately adjust policies or tactics based on past failures is mind-numbing.
4. Corporate Welfare - One of the few things GWB has done "For" the people is some tax cuts for middle America. Of course, this was done with gimmicks (mid year refund checks etc.) to mask the fact that the real tax breaks were going to huge corporations that were in no dire consequences before GWB came along. The Bush administration has taken every opportunity to push money back to corporate America in one form or another at the expense of many many programs to assist poor and
The problem is that the media is under the control of the same empowered class that really controls the government. If all the news outlets were covering these statements (which they are not) there might be some public outcry for action. Nobody knows about this which is why I posted it! Call your TV stations and complain... Ha!