have to leave the country to renew the visa etc etc
But you only have to renew the visa if you leave the country.
Confused? The visa in the passport is not directly connected to being lawfully in the U.S. If your petition expires, the employer can file for an extension. If the petition is extended, the alien is legally present, despite having an expired visa. The visa is only relevant when applying for admission in a port of entry (read: when coming back to the U.S. from a foreign trip).
In short, if the alien is not planning any trips abroad, the visa expire without any problem.
How fortunate for these candidates opponents who will soon be receiving contributions in response.
Yes, especially since he was elected with a staggering 50,188 votes, with his opponent receiving 40,220 votes (source). So, less than 10.000 farmers in California got him his seat. Shouldn't be too difficult to get him out at his next election.
Substantial resources? Seriously? That's a basic shell script to run a bunch of DNS resolutions and then add the addresses into an existing Firewall drop policy. That's sys/net management 100 level stuff.
You have no clue what you are talking about.
Hundreds of thousands of websites can share an IP address.
The only way to properly block a particular website is by intercepting the protocols (HTTP and HTTPS, by forcing SNI) and then permit or deny access. And that will definitely need a substantial amount of resources.
You have obviously never been part of a union, or are even willing to consider them.
I have been part of one. One that was run by babyboomers and that made sure that babyboomers could still benefit from babyboomer benefits. One that made it difficult for me to get a promotion because it had to be cleared by the union first. One that made it difficult to run a company because they felt that they needed to be involved.
Yes, working for a sexy brand my get folks to accept a slightly lower salary offer
On the contrary. Those brands usually offer better compensation packages.
I remember the first time I get recruited by a headhunter. When I asked how the salary negotiations would go, his reply was simple: "usually, negotiations are not necessary".
Should have listened when some of us were calling for unionization to help restore some semblance of a balance of power.
No thanks. Unions only advocate on their own behalfs. Unions are bad for the tech industry.
I don't need a union to take money out of my paycheck under the cover of "mandatory union dues". In normal language, that's called theft, or racketeering.
Your kit plane needs an airworthiness certificate.
Your pilot need a pilots certificate.
Your plane will seen on radar without a transponder.
Yes, you are totally right on that. But that was not my point.
My point is that very few people will be able to stop me from going airborne in my home-built aircraft without any registration, certification or me having any flight experience. Just as the FAA can't stop an unregulated UAV to be flown. It can only fine people after the fact.
And while my theoretical plane can be seen on radar without a transponder, if I'm in uncontrolled airspace outside of a mode C area, nobody will do anything about it.
Nothings stops someone from buying a kit-airplane and taking off. As long as you stay out of controlled airspace, or airspace where you'd need a transponder, the FAA won't even have you on their radar (pun intended).
Bonuses? For engineers?
Must be a German thing; we don't have anything like that in America these days. Those days ended with the dot-com implosion.
You'r either in the wrong line of work or working for the wrong company. I had my Q1 and Q2 bonuses paid out at 115% and 125% after surpassing company expectations.
Management may have ordered the crime but the engineers were the ones that carried it out.
How about management did not order anything? How about engineers were trying to keep the engine within EPA standards so they would receive their bonuses? Not a single manager would need to know this if a small group of engineers (two, maybe three) decided to conspire in order to make their bonus targets.
Not all managers are bad, and it only takes a few rogue engineers to insert something like this. If an engineer is skilled enough to cheat on stuff like this, he or she is probably skilled enough to obscure the evidence and hide it from peers or co-workers.
And don't get me wrong, I'm not blaming anyone. All I'm saying is that I read a lot of armchair investigation here, from people who don't know the facts. At this time everything is possible, from a direct order from the CEO, to a rogue engineer.
I believe it was the NYT (but it could have been the WSJ or one of those other big pappers) was sued in Melbourne, Australia for defemation (or libel, I forget and can't be bothered Googling) for making statements about an Australian man. They successfully argued jurisdiction due to having Australian digital subscribers.
That may be fine on the island of prisoners, but that doesn't make any judgment enforcable in the U.S.
I hate jurisdiction shopping, but I do think that the laws of where you live/are incorporated probably should apply as much as the ones where the person committing the act is.
and one of those is Canada, where AM is based, and where this lawsuit is being filed. In America, the truth is an absolute defense against libel. Under Canadian Defamation Law, it is not.
First, no lawsuit is being filed. A lawyer just sent a warning letter.
Second, Canadian Defamation Laws do not apply to a U.S. newspaper. So why should they apply to a U.S. journalist, writing on a website written in and hosted in the U.S. by a U.S. company (Akamai)?
Third, even if the idiot can get a Canadian judgement against the U.S. person, that judgement must first go through the U.S. court system in order to be enforceable.
So, all in all, the guy can scream whatever he wants, but all he is achieving is invoking the Streisand Effect.
Actually, I cannot conceive of any situation in which I'd want drones to fly over my property, whether loitering or whizzing.
Well, it doesn't really matter what you want. It has been established by the courts that you don't control the airspace above 83 feet of altitude. Here is a reference for that: https://supreme.justia.com/cas...
Furthermore, this AB and other State's laws, are preempted by the federal law mandating the FAA to control all airspace from 83ft and higher. Here is a reference for that: http://www.americanbar.org/con...
So, as long as the UAV operator has been certified by the FAA, it looks like you will have to tolerate unmanned (or manned, for that matter) aircraft hovering over your property at and above altitudes of 83ft AGL.
most Arabs are already prevented from entering the US
Fixed that for you. Not all Arabs are Muslims, as not all Muslims are Arabs. At the same time, all they need to do is undergo a little bit of additional screening and get a redress number. It's not that bad.
For what it's worth, I voluntarily accepted additional pre-screening and am now a member of Global Entry and TSA Pre, and it only makes my life easier. It saves a lot of time when entering the US, or passing airport security. It saves the CBP and TSA a lot of time, knowing that I'm a low threat to security. And the information I had to give up was no more or less than what I already provide on a international flight to the U.S. anyway. Oh, except the fingerprints, but they government already had them (which is also true for most Arabs, as they at least once applied for a U.S. visa).
In fact, if the U.S. embassy would just add a little option to the visa application that said:
[ ] Send all information to the TSA and CBP for expedited services.
A lot of problems would have been solved. DHS handles visas anyway, and CBP and TSA are both subdivisions.
I'm quite sure the Brits were banned from the U.S. a couple hundred years ago. Please go back to your CCTV-invested shithole that you'd like to call a country.
I will just assume that it didn't happen as it is more likely that the police wouldn't do something that would taint all the evidence of the crime occurring.
No you don't. It would take you an hour or more to read them all for many flights, maybe more.
Perhaps you need to learn how to select NOTAMs.
This is a list of the current NOTAMs for a simple flight from Dallas to Austin. There is zero chance that you read all that before such a flight.
I do, and you can easily skip 80% of those based on the first few characters. There were only a few relevant ones in your long list, mostly crane obstacles.
For my VFR flight, I don't care about lights being U/S, SID/STAR issues etc, so I skip reading the entire NOTAM as soon as I see the subject. But that does not mean I don't check the NOTAM for relevance to my flight. I know a guy who flew right into a presidential TFR, and shit like that won't happen to me if I can avoid it.
Our club routinely gets 5,000-15,000 foot waivers for medium-to-high-power launches, and it doesn't stop nimrods from flying over the launch area in general aviation aircraft.
That's because you get a waiver, not a TFR. GA is allowed to fly in airspace where there is no restriction and it's up to you to avoid manned aircraft.
Now, if you get a TFR for your hobby and someone still flies in there, you have the right to complain.
Anyone who says they read every single NOTAM every time before flying is lying to you.
Total utter bullshit. I read every notam associated with my anticipated flight. Everyone who doesn't should chop up their pilot's certificate and mail it to the local FSDO.
Slashdot Mirror
have to leave the country to renew the visa etc etc
But you only have to renew the visa if you leave the country.
Confused? The visa in the passport is not directly connected to being lawfully in the U.S. If your petition expires, the employer can file for an extension. If the petition is extended, the alien is legally present, despite having an expired visa. The visa is only relevant when applying for admission in a port of entry (read: when coming back to the U.S. from a foreign trip).
In short, if the alien is not planning any trips abroad, the visa expire without any problem.
How fortunate for these candidates opponents who will soon be receiving contributions in response.
Yes, especially since he was elected with a staggering 50,188 votes, with his opponent receiving 40,220 votes (source). So, less than 10.000 farmers in California got him his seat. Shouldn't be too difficult to get him out at his next election.
Government allows a union to take over all employees, not just those who freely join.
Which is exactly why I hate unions (and keep getting modded down for it). Unions are destroying jobs, and even cities. Want an example? Detroit.
And yes, you can mod me down, but that doesn't make you right.
Substantial resources? Seriously? That's a basic shell script to run a bunch of DNS resolutions and then add the addresses into an existing Firewall drop policy. That's sys/net management 100 level stuff.
You have no clue what you are talking about.
Hundreds of thousands of websites can share an IP address.
The only way to properly block a particular website is by intercepting the protocols (HTTP and HTTPS, by forcing SNI) and then permit or deny access. And that will definitely need a substantial amount of resources.
You have obviously never been part of a union, or are even willing to consider them.
I have been part of one. One that was run by babyboomers and that made sure that babyboomers could still benefit from babyboomer benefits. One that made it difficult for me to get a promotion because it had to be cleared by the union first. One that made it difficult to run a company because they felt that they needed to be involved.
Unions suck. Industry associations rule.
There's nothing that says you have to be Teamster or SEUI.
Yet why do we have the Supreme Court taking on a case on mandatory union dues even for workers who don't want to have any part of it?
We don't need a union. We need an industry association. Kind of like what AOPA is for general avation.
Yes, working for a sexy brand my get folks to accept a slightly lower salary offer
On the contrary. Those brands usually offer better compensation packages.
I remember the first time I get recruited by a headhunter. When I asked how the salary negotiations would go, his reply was simple: "usually, negotiations are not necessary".
He was right.
The dollar is so weak overseas it's laughable.
USDxEUR now: 0.93. A year ago: 0.79
USDxCAD now: 1.33. A year ago: 1.12
USDxINR now: 66. A year ago: 61.
Your facts are so off, it's laughable.
Should have listened when some of us were calling for unionization to help restore some semblance of a balance of power.
No thanks. Unions only advocate on their own behalfs. Unions are bad for the tech industry.
I don't need a union to take money out of my paycheck under the cover of "mandatory union dues". In normal language, that's called theft, or racketeering.
Your kit plane needs an airworthiness certificate. Your pilot need a pilots certificate. Your plane will seen on radar without a transponder.
Yes, you are totally right on that. But that was not my point.
My point is that very few people will be able to stop me from going airborne in my home-built aircraft without any registration, certification or me having any flight experience. Just as the FAA can't stop an unregulated UAV to be flown. It can only fine people after the fact.
And while my theoretical plane can be seen on radar without a transponder, if I'm in uncontrolled airspace outside of a mode C area, nobody will do anything about it.
Nothings stops someone from buying a kit-airplane and taking off. As long as you stay out of controlled airspace, or airspace where you'd need a transponder, the FAA won't even have you on their radar (pun intended).
But the Netherlands is a pretty regulated country
Not it is not. It is an overly regulated country. On the other hand, "country" is a bit overrated for this little dent in Germany.
Which reminds me of what an old preacher once said: "and as a finishing touch, God took a huge crap and created the Dutch".
Bonuses? For engineers? Must be a German thing; we don't have anything like that in America these days. Those days ended with the dot-com implosion.
You'r either in the wrong line of work or working for the wrong company. I had my Q1 and Q2 bonuses paid out at 115% and 125% after surpassing company expectations.
Management may have ordered the crime but the engineers were the ones that carried it out.
How about management did not order anything? How about engineers were trying to keep the engine within EPA standards so they would receive their bonuses? Not a single manager would need to know this if a small group of engineers (two, maybe three) decided to conspire in order to make their bonus targets.
Not all managers are bad, and it only takes a few rogue engineers to insert something like this. If an engineer is skilled enough to cheat on stuff like this, he or she is probably skilled enough to obscure the evidence and hide it from peers or co-workers.
And don't get me wrong, I'm not blaming anyone. All I'm saying is that I read a lot of armchair investigation here, from people who don't know the facts. At this time everything is possible, from a direct order from the CEO, to a rogue engineer.
I believe it was the NYT (but it could have been the WSJ or one of those other big pappers) was sued in Melbourne, Australia for defemation (or libel, I forget and can't be bothered Googling) for making statements about an Australian man. They successfully argued jurisdiction due to having Australian digital subscribers.
That may be fine on the island of prisoners, but that doesn't make any judgment enforcable in the U.S.
I hate jurisdiction shopping, but I do think that the laws of where you live/are incorporated probably should apply as much as the ones where the person committing the act is.
Which in this case both are in the U.S.
and one of those is Canada, where AM is based, and where this lawsuit is being filed. In America, the truth is an absolute defense against libel. Under Canadian Defamation Law, it is not.
First, no lawsuit is being filed. A lawyer just sent a warning letter.
Second, Canadian Defamation Laws do not apply to a U.S. newspaper. So why should they apply to a U.S. journalist, writing on a website written in and hosted in the U.S. by a U.S. company (Akamai)?
Third, even if the idiot can get a Canadian judgement against the U.S. person, that judgement must first go through the U.S. court system in order to be enforceable.
So, all in all, the guy can scream whatever he wants, but all he is achieving is invoking the Streisand Effect.
save the trouble and hire a Chinese!
Or just save the trouble of begging USCIS for a non-immigrant petition and hire local.
Actually, I cannot conceive of any situation in which I'd want drones to fly over my property, whether loitering or whizzing.
Well, it doesn't really matter what you want. It has been established by the courts that you don't control the airspace above 83 feet of altitude. Here is a reference for that: https://supreme.justia.com/cas...
Furthermore, this AB and other State's laws, are preempted by the federal law mandating the FAA to control all airspace from 83ft and higher. Here is a reference for that: http://www.americanbar.org/con...
So, as long as the UAV operator has been certified by the FAA, it looks like you will have to tolerate unmanned (or manned, for that matter) aircraft hovering over your property at and above altitudes of 83ft AGL.
This is in the US. I'm pretty sure it doesn't work like that here.
Well, you're wrong.
most Arabs are already prevented from entering the US
Fixed that for you. Not all Arabs are Muslims, as not all Muslims are Arabs. At the same time, all they need to do is undergo a little bit of additional screening and get a redress number. It's not that bad.
For what it's worth, I voluntarily accepted additional pre-screening and am now a member of Global Entry and TSA Pre, and it only makes my life easier. It saves a lot of time when entering the US, or passing airport security. It saves the CBP and TSA a lot of time, knowing that I'm a low threat to security. And the information I had to give up was no more or less than what I already provide on a international flight to the U.S. anyway. Oh, except the fingerprints, but they government already had them (which is also true for most Arabs, as they at least once applied for a U.S. visa).
In fact, if the U.S. embassy would just add a little option to the visa application that said:
[ ] Send all information to the TSA and CBP for expedited services.
A lot of problems would have been solved. DHS handles visas anyway, and CBP and TSA are both subdivisions.
It costs me £32 a month.
I'm quite sure the Brits were banned from the U.S. a couple hundred years ago. Please go back to your CCTV-invested shithole that you'd like to call a country.
I will just assume that it didn't happen as it is more likely that the police wouldn't do something that would taint all the evidence of the crime occurring.
Ignorance really is bliss, right?.
No you don't. It would take you an hour or more to read them all for many flights, maybe more.
Perhaps you need to learn how to select NOTAMs.
This is a list of the current NOTAMs for a simple flight from Dallas to Austin. There is zero chance that you read all that before such a flight.
I do, and you can easily skip 80% of those based on the first few characters. There were only a few relevant ones in your long list, mostly crane obstacles.
For my VFR flight, I don't care about lights being U/S, SID/STAR issues etc, so I skip reading the entire NOTAM as soon as I see the subject. But that does not mean I don't check the NOTAM for relevance to my flight. I know a guy who flew right into a presidential TFR, and shit like that won't happen to me if I can avoid it.
Our club routinely gets 5,000-15,000 foot waivers for medium-to-high-power launches, and it doesn't stop nimrods from flying over the launch area in general aviation aircraft.
That's because you get a waiver, not a TFR. GA is allowed to fly in airspace where there is no restriction and it's up to you to avoid manned aircraft.
Now, if you get a TFR for your hobby and someone still flies in there, you have the right to complain.
Anyone who says they read every single NOTAM every time before flying is lying to you.
Total utter bullshit. I read every notam associated with my anticipated flight. Everyone who doesn't should chop up their pilot's certificate and mail it to the local FSDO.