Crazy-aside. I'm in Arizona, and I used to work with one of the 100,000 or so people on the planet who speak Navajo, [hick voice] and let me tell you what [/hick] it's a baffling language.
April 15, 2005 is almost 9 years ago on the nose. Nearly a decade by most measures. 10 years have made a difference. Cops used to tune people up pretty regularly in the 60's, 70's, 80's... and it tapered off a lot. I know things have happened to good people since then, but picking 2005 cases that went to a jury aren't exactly making a great case.
All the jury had to go on was her testimony and the testimony of 7+ police officers.
Again, they had at least as much information as we had - and they awarded her a small sum, presumably because they thought the slight was minor - cameras and all. They could have awarded the $500,000 she was seeking, but they didn't. Why is our Monday morning quarterbacking of the jury special?
While this won't make the tinfoil-hat people happy, there's almost nothing here.
The PDF is pretty harmless, and the Wired article is 100% speculative bullshit.
CALEA was the law when they built their system, so they built their system to support it. Saying things like "in close conjunction with law enforcement" is just flowery wording to say they made a phone call or two. The PDF is the most boring "meets or exceeds expectations" paper I've ever read.
Nolan, asked about those statements, said, “Despite what the person said in 2009, what I can tell you today and what the truth is today is that we adhere to CALEA and we do everything in conjunction with what law enforcement has asked us to do.” He added that, “There is no ‘super CALEA’ capability. Our capabilities and what we adhere to are exactly what any communications provider, including on the ground networks, adhere to when they abide by CALEA. Nothing more and nothing less.
The Wikipedia article tell us that the case went to court -- you know, like when you feel you've been wronged, and you put the people who wronged you on trial, and the thing is judged by a jury of your peers (normal people not cops), and the jury awarded $5,000 in damages -- the size of some medical bills.
A jury -- of normal people -- thought, after getting much more insight into this case than you or I, that the cops were a little rough on her, and nothing more.
Finally, the case is nearly A DECADE OLD.
What's next? Some cases where a firehose got turned on the colored in Mississippi?
Phoenix AZ and Durango CO both have a plethora of car rental options and a level of public transport that still comes out well ahead of the 5 hours saved.
Even "lowly" Durango has Avis, Herz, Budget, National and Enterprise at their airport - although I suspect at least 2 of those are DBA one of the others under a shared banner.
I'm a parent. Between the wife and I, we have a 22, a 15, and a 13, one of which is special needs -- the sort that actually lacks the ability to correctly understand and weigh the long-term consequences for his actions (good or bad).
Parenting is very difficult.
It's even more difficult if you don't do the simple task of teaching your children at a young age that actions have consequences. If you do X, Y will happen. Period. End.
It is a simple thing to teach your children that actions have consequences. Getting a child that's "an angel" may sometimes happen by luck, but happens much, much more because parents taught good lessons at an early age.
Pepsi was in from the get-go, and the branding requests were fairly simple. When on camera, please drink from Mountain Dew branded cans and bottles, and wipe off your nail polish. There will be other drinks available, just not on camera, and you'll even be able to drink non-Pepsi products in opaque Pepsi-branded containers. [...but lets be upset about it, `cause water from a Mountain Dew can is somehow a terrible violation of their artistic integrity.] Do you think the Idol judges are drinking Coke in their Coca-Cola glasses? They're all drinking water or coffee, except Tyler, who was clearly drinking Sterno or hand sanitizing fluid. Also...FFS people, it wouldn't kill you to play some ball and smile and drink some Amp on camera, you self-important twits. Spit it out and have water at the craft services table if you're oh, so inconvenienced by YOUR SPONSOR wanting some product placement.
While the "pretty girl" comments were dumb, the whole idea that everyone has to walk away in a huff about them is similarly laughable. You're not that important. Answer the question factually, and move on. It's just a producer looking for some drama. Let him find it in editing, not in you storming off set.
Frankly - and I read all the blogs - it just seems like a bunch of self-important twats who can't play nice with other children, so they took their ball and went home.
For what it's worth, there are, essentially, two major models for taxi companies.
1) Taxi drivers are hourly employees who hustle almost entirely for their tips; requirements for who they pick up or what else they might make per fare vary. 2) Taxi drivers are renters of taxi infrastructure. They pay a daily fee to take a companies cab out, complete with dispatch service, and they hope to make more than the rental fee, which, if they're lucky, they don't have to pay until they get back.
Slashdot Mirror
Please [diety], let this guy be watching bull riding.
Crazy-aside. I'm in Arizona, and I used to work with one of the 100,000 or so people on the planet who speak Navajo, [hick voice] and let me tell you what [/hick] it's a baffling language.
Not only does it requires sounds I can't make...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/N...
Colorless green ideas sleep furiously.
It is because there was no evidence that the slight was enormous.
Now we agree completely.
...7 years ago doesn't seem like that long ago...
April 15, 2005 is almost 9 years ago on the nose. Nearly a decade by most measures. 10 years have made a difference. Cops used to tune people up pretty regularly in the 60's, 70's, 80's... and it tapered off a lot. I know things have happened to good people since then, but picking 2005 cases that went to a jury aren't exactly making a great case.
All the jury had to go on was her testimony and the testimony of 7+ police officers.
Again, they had at least as much information as we had - and they awarded her a small sum, presumably because they thought the slight was minor - cameras and all. They could have awarded the $500,000 she was seeking, but they didn't. Why is our Monday morning quarterbacking of the jury special?
Andrea McCarran was a bad example.
While this won't make the tinfoil-hat people happy, there's almost nothing here.
The PDF is pretty harmless, and the Wired article is 100% speculative bullshit.
CALEA was the law when they built their system, so they built their system to support it. Saying things like "in close conjunction with law enforcement" is just flowery wording to say they made a phone call or two. The PDF is the most boring "meets or exceeds expectations" paper I've ever read.
Nolan, asked about those statements, said, “Despite what the person said in 2009, what I can tell you today and what the truth is today is that we adhere to CALEA and we do everything in conjunction with what law enforcement has asked us to do.” He added that, “There is no ‘super CALEA’ capability. Our capabilities and what we adhere to are exactly what any communications provider, including on the ground networks, adhere to when they abide by CALEA. Nothing more and nothing less.
Yeah, one in 100,000.
Hyperbole FTW.
There's also no indication if 50 of them got pulled off in protest in month 1, and most have remained working since.
A jury awarded her 5k (not 500k), and found the police that officers acted appropriately in conducting a "high-risk" stop .
If you're going to tell the story, at least add the conclusion.
The WTOP article drops the story in 2007.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A...
http://www.washingtonpost.com/...
The Wikipedia article tell us that the case went to court -- you know, like when you feel you've been wronged, and you put the people who wronged you on trial, and the thing is judged by a jury of your peers (normal people not cops), and the jury awarded $5,000 in damages -- the size of some medical bills.
A jury -- of normal people -- thought, after getting much more insight into this case than you or I, that the cops were a little rough on her, and nothing more.
Finally, the case is nearly A DECADE OLD.
What's next? Some cases where a firehose got turned on the colored in Mississippi?
The condo next to mine (conveniently located downtown next to the ballparks) rents short-term.
It's a never-ending parade of assclowns parking in the wrong covered spot, and every other sort of nuisance described by hawguy above.
I enjoy the idea of renting beds to people backpacking across the country.
I despise the idea of having the door next to mine being a rental.
Phoenix AZ and Durango CO both have a plethora of car rental options and a level of public transport that still comes out well ahead of the 5 hours saved.
Even "lowly" Durango has Avis, Herz, Budget, National and Enterprise at their airport - although I suspect at least 2 of those are DBA one of the others under a shared banner.
How many man-hours are spent driving?
How many man-hours are spent flying?
It can't do the things it does without being connected. It might only be a receiver of data, but it's sure as hell connected.
totally separate
We have a word for that. It's "separate."
Anyway, your guess is wrong. While this system may only be a receiver of data, it is most certainly connected to "the stuff that actually matters."
NIST has vastly more accurate clocks - so I don't see what the big deal is.
http://www.nist.gov/pml/div688...
What do we have to reference it against, and isn't it arbitrarily exactly correct?
How the hell would we know if it was wrong?
Or a day trader
You mean, people constantly exchanging them?
Anyone keeping coins in an exchange for any longer than necessary to exchange them is an idiot.
...so the trick becomes -- do you want to write an app where the primary input isn't touch.
I'm a parent. Between the wife and I, we have a 22, a 15, and a 13, one of which is special needs -- the sort that actually lacks the ability to correctly understand and weigh the long-term consequences for his actions (good or bad).
Parenting is very difficult.
It's even more difficult if you don't do the simple task of teaching your children at a young age that actions have consequences. If you do X, Y will happen. Period. End.
It is a simple thing to teach your children that actions have consequences. Getting a child that's "an angel" may sometimes happen by luck, but happens much, much more because parents taught good lessons at an early age.
Why you're at 0 moderation I'll never know.
Pepsi was in from the get-go, and the branding requests were fairly simple. When on camera, please drink from Mountain Dew branded cans and bottles, and wipe off your nail polish. There will be other drinks available, just not on camera, and you'll even be able to drink non-Pepsi products in opaque Pepsi-branded containers. [...but lets be upset about it, `cause water from a Mountain Dew can is somehow a terrible violation of their artistic integrity.] Do you think the Idol judges are drinking Coke in their Coca-Cola glasses? They're all drinking water or coffee, except Tyler, who was clearly drinking Sterno or hand sanitizing fluid. Also...FFS people, it wouldn't kill you to play some ball and smile and drink some Amp on camera, you self-important twits. Spit it out and have water at the craft services table if you're oh, so inconvenienced by YOUR SPONSOR wanting some product placement.
While the "pretty girl" comments were dumb, the whole idea that everyone has to walk away in a huff about them is similarly laughable. You're not that important. Answer the question factually, and move on. It's just a producer looking for some drama. Let him find it in editing, not in you storming off set.
Frankly - and I read all the blogs - it just seems like a bunch of self-important twats who can't play nice with other children, so they took their ball and went home.
For what it's worth, there are, essentially, two major models for taxi companies.
1) Taxi drivers are hourly employees who hustle almost entirely for their tips; requirements for who they pick up or what else they might make per fare vary.
2) Taxi drivers are renters of taxi infrastructure. They pay a daily fee to take a companies cab out, complete with dispatch service, and they hope to make more than the rental fee, which, if they're lucky, they don't have to pay until they get back.
I'm with Russ1642 here.
There's a very simple path to take with disobedient children: Teach them early that actions have consequences.
I've personally tried to accept Bitcoin as payment for some electronics I sold online, but by the time the buyer paid, I actually lost about $5.
My experience was the opposite. I just bought some electronics online, and by the time the seller got my funds, I actually saved about $5.