What exactly does having someone's fingerprints gain you in financial security? So Sister embezzles $1m by wiring it to Switzerland... now what? What do those fingerprints get you?
They get you the chance to see if she embezzled at her last job. Somebody with a conviction for any white-collar crime shouldn't work as a programmer for a financial institution. Checking fingerprints is the most reliable way of performing a criminal background check.
Alcaholics are more failures and tend to ruin others lifes too and families, but hey its legal, because the govt gets their cut in taxes and thats good.
Also, the (U.S.) government tried to do away with alcohol use (despite the lucrative taxes it brings in) and the results were even more disastrous than our current War on Drugs.
I run as non-admin in WinXP and running iTunes 7.x as non-admin is less than desirable. I keep getting errors about account information not being stored correctly . ..
I've tried it as admin and it doesn't help. There are a lot of proposed solutions on the support forums on Apple's site, none of which have helped.
Considering that these ships are intended to be used by the coast guard in the gulf of Mexico, I don't see the problem.
It's not a technical problem, a financial one. If the Coast Guard wrote the requirement that the equipment be certified to -40, you can be damn sure LM is charging them the cost of certified components, even though they (allegedly) don't all meet spec.
3. Unshielded cables.
WTF is he talking about? The only way to sniff data from an unshielded cable is if you are right next to it. It is not going to help you when the cable is on a ship in the middle of the ocean. Further, the moment data is transmitted off the ship via radar, all bets are off. Unless you encrypt it *anyone* can listen to it.
Once again, it's a financial issue. Somebody at the Coast Guard decided that the cables needed to be shielded, and paid for shielded cables. If the cables aren't shielded, it's not a security risk, it's fraud.
hypothetically, if you dropped or lost your toaster, would you expect Sunbeam to replace it for free for you?
Sunbeam sold me my toaster, I own it. It's my property, and my responsibility. The game publishers sold me a license to play a game . . . I believe that most of them (the licenses) include a media replacement clase (for a cost almost equal to the selling price of the game at release).
However, I don't see scratching CDs as something that is that big an issue. If you're adult enough to play PC games, handle your CDs like a big boy and don't use them as coasters or frisbees. Most of the time, they'll last forever.
I'll grant you gun control, but copyright laws? The constitution grants congress very broad authority with regard to regulating copyrights and patents. Congress's actions with regard to copyright are stupid and shortsighted, but not unconstitutional.
I don't have a problem with government serving society's interests. My problem is with the fact that they (particularly the Federal Government) don't do a very good job of it.
Also, I don't want to eliminate public education. I just want the Feds out of it. The Dept of Education wasn't created until 1980. We had universal public education for a while before then . . . I don't think there's any danger of returning to 20% education rates.
I have absolutely no financial interest in the price of a 747. My point was that there are incentives other than the FAA to build safe airplanes. I don't understand your other point . . . competition is _bad_ for the aircraft industry? Why is lack of competition good for the aircraft industry and its customers, but bad for the software industry (ref: your sig)? Monopolies (or duopolies) are bad, no matter what the business.
The ASME does not receive any government support. At least, that's what their most recent annual report says.
I am far from complacent in the state of my government. I am doing everything I can to change things. I vote, I lobby my representatives . . . hell, sometimes I even argue with total strangers on the internet. It may not ever change anything, but it's my right and my duty to try.
Anyway, I'm now way off topic. My original point still stands: as long as the Feds are funding space exploration, it will end up being run the way NASA is now. If I could convince myself that it would be otherwise, I'd be all in favor of it.
True, I went to government supported primary and secondary schools. However, evidence shows that as the Federal Government has gotten involved with local education, the quality of that education has declined. More involvement, poorer education. We had good public schools in this country long before the US Department of Education came into the picture. Much of the 'astronomical' cost of education is driven by compliance (and documentation of that compliance) with federal mandates that go with federal money.
I've worked in the aerospace industry for the past several years. I'm familiar with the FAA's standards, etc. Oddly, the more exposure I have (to aerospace in general), the less confident I am when a 747 flies over my head. The FAA's safety mission is nice, but it's bogged down with all sorts of bureaucratic nonsense (no more than any other federal agency, though).
What if there was no FAA? A 747 is an expensive piece of hardware ($205M - $236M depending on configuration). If I were buying one or flying one (or insuring one), I'd do my due dilligence to be sure that it was airworthy (whether or not the design complies with FAA standards). There are precedents for private organizations establishing industry-accepted safety standards. The ASME Boiler Code is the example that comes to mind.
I agree that if the government would just give money to somebody qualified, their involvement could be helpful to space exploration, but I just can't reasonably picture that happening.
. . . you can find a nice little island somewhere and live off coconuts for the rest of your days.
No, I'm in exactly the right place. I refuse to leave my home because the Feds have become too involved in areas where they don't belong.
No, what we need is less governmental hindrance . . .
Government involvement == government hindrance. The (US Federal) government is incapable of 'providing a little budget' for something without attaching all sorts of strings to the money. The fact that the FAA is 'granting' flight time to vehicles is not the government supporting anything. It's the government interfering less than normal.
. . . These people were offered on average $1.7 million
The amount they were offered is irrelevant. If they didn't want to sell, the government shouldn't compel it for commercial development. Schools and roads are one thing, strip malls and hotels are another.
In general the government is only supposed to do this stuff . ..
When has the government (on any level) stopped at what it's supposed to do? In several of the places I've lived, the local government was effectively an extension of the local real-estate developers. Do you expect them to do the right thing? I sure don't.
. . . ou say the same thing when they had to take a few houses in order to start providing running water for people for the first time?
There's a huge difference between providing public services and building a strip mall.
The market WILL NOT solve this problem for everyone.
No system will solve this (or any problem) for everyone. However, a system that attempts to provide a solution for everyone guarantees that many people will rely on it instead of even attempting to provide for themselves.
Damn. The old buggers broke into my mansion and took my HDTV, hocked it, and bought (can you believe it) food.
Yep, some people will resort to theft. Under the current system, it's the government doing the stealing, not individuals. That does not magically change the transaction from 'theft' to 'philanthropy'.
Comparing a gun with cigarettes, booze, hookers and illegal drugs is just not valid. The above do not have many legitimate uses. Guns however can be a hobby.
Cigarettes, booze, hookers, and illegal drugs are my hobbies, you insensitive clod!
Yet Another Wank-Fest . . . if videoblogging were a 'Revolution', we wouldn't need to be told about it on Slashdot. Put aside your delusions of grandeur and _do_something_ revolutionary if you want a revolution.
Suffer? If you definition of 'suffering' includes 'not being able to excercise unlimited unrestricted returns at Best Buy', then I don't have a lot of sympathy for you.
Yes, it's shitty that Best Buy (and other retailers) do things to abuse their customers, but as long as the customers return, they don't care. And I agree that none of your personal behaviors you describe should be punished . ..
If you really want things to change, find a retailer that treats their customers better, and spend your money there.
I'm guesing that this is another case of our administration confusing "National Security" with "Politically Undesirable".
No, somebody in Google's 'risk management' department probably decided that it would be a prudent step to avoid bad publicity or offending shareholders. The minute Google went public, their primary responsibility became looking after the best interests of their shareholders, not being an impartial index of internet sites.
Slashdot Mirror
Are you sure you're in the right place?
What exactly does having someone's fingerprints gain you in financial security? So Sister embezzles $1m by wiring it to Switzerland... now what? What do those fingerprints get you?
They get you the chance to see if she embezzled at her last job. Somebody with a conviction for any white-collar crime shouldn't work as a programmer for a financial institution. Checking fingerprints is the most reliable way of performing a criminal background check.
I would check an entry-level HVAC textbook. If I understand you correctly, there are accepted methods of calculating the things you're asking about.
Alcaholics are more failures and tend to ruin others lifes too and families, but hey its legal, because the govt
gets their cut in taxes and thats good.
Also, the (U.S.) government tried to do away with alcohol use (despite the lucrative taxes it brings in) and the results were even more disastrous than our current War on Drugs.
I run as non-admin in WinXP and running iTunes 7.x as non-admin is less than desirable. I keep getting errors about account information not being stored correctly . . .
I've tried it as admin and it doesn't help. There are a lot of proposed solutions on the support forums on Apple's site, none of which have helped.
When has 'a mix of nations' ever run anything well?
Yeah, he'd have better ratings if he'd flash his tits at the camera while describing the fraud.
2. Equipment not working at -40.
Considering that these ships are intended to be used by the coast guard in the gulf of Mexico, I don't see the problem.
It's not a technical problem, a financial one. If the Coast Guard wrote the requirement that the equipment be certified to -40, you can be damn sure LM is charging them the cost of certified components, even though they (allegedly) don't all meet spec.
3. Unshielded cables.
WTF is he talking about? The only way to sniff data from an unshielded cable is if you are right next to it. It is not going to help you when the cable is on a ship in the middle of the ocean. Further, the moment data is transmitted off the ship via radar, all bets are off. Unless you encrypt it *anyone* can listen to it.
Once again, it's a financial issue. Somebody at the Coast Guard decided that the cables needed to be shielded, and paid for shielded cables. If the cables aren't shielded, it's not a security risk, it's fraud.
You just try and tax my tea, redcoat! 'Superior tools' didn't help you the last time . . .
. . . little Fucknugget Jr. is . . .
Thank you, you just provided me with a name for my first child!
hypothetically, if you dropped or lost your toaster, would you expect Sunbeam to replace it for free for you?
Sunbeam sold me my toaster, I own it. It's my property, and my responsibility. The game publishers sold me a license to play a game . . . I believe that most of them (the licenses) include a media replacement clase (for a cost almost equal to the selling price of the game at release).
However, I don't see scratching CDs as something that is that big an issue. If you're adult enough to play PC games, handle your CDs like a big boy and don't use them as coasters or frisbees. Most of the time, they'll last forever.
Perhaps some ballast in the controller to give the feel you want, without expensive motors. . .
I'll grant you gun control, but copyright laws? The constitution grants congress very broad authority with regard to regulating copyrights and patents. Congress's actions with regard to copyright are stupid and shortsighted, but not unconstitutional.
That's next. The UN will attempt to 'force' control of IHOP. They can have my pancakes when they pry them from my cold dead fingers!
I don't have a problem with government serving society's interests. My problem is with the fact that they (particularly the Federal Government) don't do a very good job of it.
Also, I don't want to eliminate public education. I just want the Feds out of it. The Dept of Education wasn't created until 1980. We had universal public education for a while before then . . . I don't think there's any danger of returning to 20% education rates.
I have absolutely no financial interest in the price of a 747. My point was that there are incentives other than the FAA to build safe airplanes. I don't understand your other point . . . competition is _bad_ for the aircraft industry? Why is lack of competition good for the aircraft industry and its customers, but bad for the software industry (ref: your sig)? Monopolies (or duopolies) are bad, no matter what the business.
The ASME does not receive any government support. At least, that's what their most recent annual report says.
I am far from complacent in the state of my government. I am doing everything I can to change things. I vote, I lobby my representatives . . . hell, sometimes I even argue with total strangers on the internet. It may not ever change anything, but it's my right and my duty to try.
Anyway, I'm now way off topic. My original point still stands: as long as the Feds are funding space exploration, it will end up being run the way NASA is now. If I could convince myself that it would be otherwise, I'd be all in favor of it.
True, I went to government supported primary and secondary schools. However, evidence shows that as the Federal Government has gotten involved with local education, the quality of that education has declined. More involvement, poorer education. We had good public schools in this country long before the US Department of Education came into the picture. Much of the 'astronomical' cost of education is driven by compliance (and documentation of that compliance) with federal mandates that go with federal money.
I've worked in the aerospace industry for the past several years. I'm familiar with the FAA's standards, etc. Oddly, the more exposure I have (to aerospace in general), the less confident I am when a 747 flies over my head. The FAA's safety mission is nice, but it's bogged down with all sorts of bureaucratic nonsense (no more than any other federal agency, though).
What if there was no FAA? A 747 is an expensive piece of hardware ($205M - $236M depending on configuration). If I were buying one or flying one (or insuring one), I'd do my due dilligence to be sure that it was airworthy (whether or not the design complies with FAA standards). There are precedents for private organizations establishing industry-accepted safety standards. The ASME Boiler Code is the example that comes to mind.
I agree that if the government would just give money to somebody qualified, their involvement could be helpful to space exploration, but I just can't reasonably picture that happening.
. . . you can find a nice little island somewhere and live off coconuts for the rest of your days.
No, I'm in exactly the right place. I refuse to leave my home because the Feds have become too involved in areas where they don't belong.
No, what we need is less governmental hindrance . . .
Government involvement == government hindrance. The (US Federal) government is incapable of 'providing a little budget' for something without attaching all sorts of strings to the money. The fact that the FAA is 'granting' flight time to vehicles is not the government supporting anything. It's the government interfering less than normal.
. . . These people were offered on average $1.7 million
.
The amount they were offered is irrelevant. If they didn't want to sell, the government shouldn't compel it for commercial development. Schools and roads are one thing, strip malls and hotels are another.
In general the government is only supposed to do this stuff . .
When has the government (on any level) stopped at what it's supposed to do? In several of the places I've lived, the local government was effectively an extension of the local real-estate developers. Do you expect them to do the right thing? I sure don't.
. . . ou say the same thing when they had to take a few houses in order to start providing running water for people for the first time?
There's a huge difference between providing public services and building a strip mall.
Are you talking about when the Republican Congress forced the Clinton administration to balance the budget?
Too bad the Republican Congress can't force Bush to balance the budget . . .
The market WILL NOT solve this problem for everyone.
No system will solve this (or any problem) for everyone. However, a system that attempts to provide a solution for everyone guarantees that many people will rely on it instead of even attempting to provide for themselves.
Damn. The old buggers broke into my mansion and took my HDTV, hocked it, and bought (can you believe it) food.
Yep, some people will resort to theft. Under the current system, it's the government doing the stealing, not individuals. That does not magically change the transaction from 'theft' to 'philanthropy'.
Comparing a gun with cigarettes, booze, hookers and illegal drugs is just not valid. The above do not have many legitimate uses. Guns however can be a hobby.
Cigarettes, booze, hookers, and illegal drugs are my hobbies, you insensitive clod!
Yet Another Wank-Fest . . . if videoblogging were a 'Revolution', we wouldn't need to be told about it on Slashdot. Put aside your delusions of grandeur and _do_something_ revolutionary if you want a revolution.
How many innocent people will suffer?
.
Suffer? If you definition of 'suffering' includes 'not being able to excercise unlimited unrestricted returns at Best Buy', then I don't have a lot of sympathy for you.
Yes, it's shitty that Best Buy (and other retailers) do things to abuse their customers, but as long as the customers return, they don't care. And I agree that none of your personal behaviors you describe should be punished . .
If you really want things to change, find a retailer that treats their customers better, and spend your money there.
Personally? No, I don't. However, the folks at Google didn't ask for my input on this particular decision.
I'm guesing that this is another case of our administration confusing "National Security" with "Politically Undesirable".
No, somebody in Google's 'risk management' department probably decided that it would be a prudent step to avoid bad publicity or offending shareholders. The minute Google went public, their primary responsibility became looking after the best interests of their shareholders, not being an impartial index of internet sites.