When I load up my SUV to the point where I can't see anything in the rear-view mirror, I purposely turnon my backup camera and use it as a means to look behind my car, while driving.
I dare, I double-dare all law enforcement to ticket me, and I'll drag your ass in front of the Supreme Court.
Since we cannot differentiate between someone holding a phone while driving at 75 mph down the interstate and someone texting with a phone while driving at 75 mph down the interstate
You miss one very important aspect of Criminal Law here: the presumption of innocence. You are arguing that a driver must proof their innocence by being prohibited to enjoy his property in a legal manner, such as using a Smartphone as a GPS navigation device. That is the world upside-down. Innocent until proven guilty of texting or talking on the phone, not guilty by default for just holding it.
Citizenship is just a title. Don't ever delude yourself to think that you earned it, or that it is something that you deserve because of some virtue you maintain.
I am a legal immigrant. After years of hard work I earned my permanent residency. And in a few years from now, I will apply for citizenship.
I think it's pretty fair to say that once I am naturalized, I will have earned it. I spend years in getting an education which allowed me to get hired by a US company. I worked hard to be moved to the US. I worked hard while the company applied for permanent residency. And I continue to work hard as an LPR.
Being pushed out by your mom in the right place does not make you earn anything. However, working hard to be part of the society that you came into (whether that was as a legal immigrant or by birth) does.
The legal avenue only exists for people with education, money,
Bullshit. The visa bulletin lists three categories: family-based (you could marry a US citizen), employment based (which is your pet peeve) and then there is always the diversity lottery. And you can always apply for political asylum, if you meet the requirements.
and/or an H1-B sponsor.
More bullshit. The H1B visa is a non-immigrant visa. Your H1B is useless if your employer won't file an I-140 on your behalf.
FAA Advisory Circular 91 57, defines "model aircraft", they are not aircraft, nor are they required to operate under aircraft rules.
I beg to differ. A model aircraft is a toy version of a "real" aircraft. UAVs are in general not a toy, nor a model version of a real aircraft. They have no full-scale counterpart.
Furthermore, here is a quote from TFA:
Although small, the FAA considers it an "unmanned aircraft system."
The only thing you need to thank Obama for is to address the FAA's inability to enforce the existing regulations.
UAVs are already regulated under existing rules. For example, the term aircraft is defined as follows:
A device that is used or intended to be used for flight in the air.
A "drone" is a such a device. In theory, all aircraft (except toys, of course) are required to have an airworthiness certificate, as per FAR 91.203. And since the FAA requires a pilot's certificate for UA operation (see this), it is in practice impossible to legally fly a civilian drone for the simple reason that there is no certification category for such aircraft:
Is a FAA issued pilot certificate required to operate civil UAS?
Yes. If the aircraft is issued an airworthiness certificate a pilot certificate is required.
Summarizing: the regulations are there, they're just not enforced yet.
Late last year, Research In Motion Ltd. chief executive officer Thorsten Heins sat down with the board of directors at the companyâ(TM)s Waterloo, Ont., headquarters to review plans for the launch of a new phone designed to turn around the companyâ(TM)s fortunes.
So I guess this meeting became their.. Uhm... Waterloo:-)
What about a drone pilot who doesn't even know what a transponder is
Well... They should not be piloting an aircraft anyway.
I agree with you that relying on transponders is a bad idea, but the main point of my argument was to counter the thought that "detection equipment" would be too bulky or expensive. I was trying to point out that for a few hundred dollars and less than 12oz of weight, one can have a relatively reliable detection mechanism.
In the real world, I do realize that my PCAS has limits. It doesn't protect me against aircraft without a transponder, and I've seen those quite a lot in class E airspace.
Either drones get their own airspace/altitude and NOTAM'd restricted areas so they can take off and land, and VFR pilots are kept out of that altitude, or I don't see it working at all.
I would not be surprised if that would happen indeed.
You seem to think all aircraft fly above 30,000 feet. GA fliers spend a great deal of tine between 1,000 and 10,000 AGL. These fliers generally are flying under VFR (visual flight rules) where they are expected to see and avoid other aircraft visually.
You are right. However, a lot of airspace requires, and a lot of airplanes have, transponders. With the roll-out of ADS-B, all aircraft will be visible in the future.
When I fly GA, I have a little device called a PCAS in my cockpit. It passively monitors the transponders from other aircraft and will alert me if someone is nearby. This is a very light weight piece of technology, about the size of my cellphone. Easy to use in a drone...
And then someone make a firefox plugin that always transmit the same ID
Ha, I already see myself browsing dildo's and kinky sex toys for a few nights. Imagine the look on your wife's face when she sees all the ads on your machine that are "related" to my browsing. Muhahahahahaha!
And you'll soon be out of business. Truth of the matter is, that a business simply cannot sustain by providing unlimited broadband internet for the prices that the average consumer is willing to pay.
For example, my connection via Charter is great. I pay for 30Mbps but actually get 45Mbps. If I were to suck up 30Mbps 24/7, that would mean that Charter would have to reserve 30Mbps of bandwidth on their network, and to their transits. So 33 customers like me would fill up a Gigabit Ethernet link. With an average price of ~$4 per Megabit, transit traffic alone will cost approx $4000/month, or roughly $120 per customer. Cut that in half, because my ISP will likely peer a lot, and you're still left with $60 per customer.
And then we're not even discussing the cost of the access, core and edge network gear, installation and operational costs. I'm paying less than $60/month.
So, what do ISPs do? They oversubscribe. Since I'm not using my link 24/7 at full speed, it is easy to "share" my bandwidth. The last time I worked for an access-ISP, the oversubscription rates were between 1:35 and 1:50 for consumer-grade access. And in order to make sure that everyone gets a fair share, they'll have to include some type of limitation.
So all in all, the numbers just don't add up. You can't expect premium service for a bargain price and as long as the ISP is transparent about it, I don't have a problem with bandwidth caps. In the end I can still choose to pay for the premium service and not be subject to a cap.
I remember an article in which it discussed that Climate Change denying is an American problem.
Climate change by itself is not under dispute. The question is: what causes climate change. And then there are three sides:
- It must be us, the human population, burning all those fossil fuels causing CO2 levels to rise;
- It can't be us, we are to insignificant. Climate change is caused by increased solar activity and oceans releasing vast amounts of CO2;
- It is a combination of both: we can slow it down but it is inevitable;
To be honest, I'm not a scientist and I don't give a rats ass who is correct. What I do care about is that we start taking the necessary measures to ensure that my daughter and her future children still have a place to live once I'm long gone..
No, we are less retarded because I can't think of anything we are doing today that beats the stupidity level of executing people for witchcraft.
How about creating weapons that can remove all life from this planet? How about creating an economy so dependent on fossil fuels that we destroy our children's ability to live on Earth?
And for what it's worth, "we" are still on that level. Many people get executed for witchcraft each year around the world. Source.
When did MPLS become a tunneling protocol instead of a switching protocol? You can't exactly use it outside of your own network.
MPLS stands for multi-protocol label switching. That is a technique to forward packets, not to specify a protocol. MPLS is in fact more a tunneling protocol than a switching protocol. All traditional forms of tunneling will add additional headers around the original frame. MPLS does something similar: a 32 bit header is inserted between the layer 2 and layer 3 headers. Many implementations allow a network operator to specify which LSP a specific route must follow (static routing into an LSP is perfectly fine). This would justify the classification of MPLS as a tunneling protocol.
Additionally, many MPLS implementations allow the operator to alter the default behavior of TTL propagation, effectively hiding the use of MPLS to the end-user. It is quite trivial to statically reroute certain traffic into an MPLS L3VPN towards a monitor server which conducts a man-in-the-middle attack, and subsequently reroute the traffic back to its original location. I have designed such a network as part of a centralized transparent internet caching solution. In that case, I used policy based forwarding to reroute packets destined for or originating from port 80 into my LSP towards a transparent cache.
You won't be able to know that you have been rerouted, and if the L3VPN is very remote, your latency will increase significantly.
What a nightmare! When I reported the situation to the managing stuff, there were no emergency to handle the situation because the decision maker was not available during the week end and it was a Saturday.
Instead they offered to transfer my son and I to a hotel nearby where a room was available because they were concerned I was going to cause Mayhem
They finally offered to investigate the room despite the 4 BED BUGS I had contained in a glass and pictures and videos I had showed them.
I was supposed to stay one more night but instead chose to move to a hotel nearby; turned out to be cleaner-up to date-bigger room- and cheaper rate and that was the Holiday Inn Express down the road at 3145 Avenue de Hotels.
Beware of BED BUGS! If you are looking for a scratch free night sleep, stay elsewhere, you will be doing you and your loved ones a favour! Trust me...and that's why the Internet is a great tool!
Any couple that has four children is already doing more harm to the population than one person living forever. Should we force-sterilize people at two or three kids per couple?
If only my modpoints would not have expired yesterday.
You, sir, are 100% spot on. I have 1 child, exactly for this reason. We can slice the world population in half within a generation and save the earth, rather than this energy conservation bullshit. There is enough to support 3 billion people.
My point is that you don't have to have to practice a specific flying task to be proficient enough to do it, you just need to be able to know what the proper way to do something is.
When it comes to landing an airplane, I strongly disagree. After my first 10 landings, I knew pretty much what to do. Approach at 65mph, level off at 3 feet above the runway and throttle to idle. Slowly pull back on the yoke to make a smooth landing. Yet it took me approx 120 practice landings before my instructor let me go solo.
Sully has way, way, way more experience than the average busdriver in the left-hand seat of a 777.
Remember the flight that landed in the Hudson river a few years ago? How many engine out water landings do you suppose the pilots had actually flown?
It may interest you that Capt Sullenberger is not your average pilot. Not only was he a flight instructor, he also holds a commercial glider pilot license. On top of that, he was the ALPA's local safety expert and was involved in several air crash accidents.
In short, to compare that pilot to the average airline bus driver is not fair. Check PPRUNE if you like to hear hands-on stories from check captains being forced to pass pilots who are incapable of hand-flying an airliner.
You do realize that *nobody* is going to be flying a 777 with 250 hours right
Yes, that's not the point that I'm trying to make. My point is, that once a future airline pilot has a (frozen) ATP(L), the automation dependencies start. The type-ratings for their first job (let's say a 737) will usually based on their companies SOPs, which in turn will convert the pilot from a nice CPL-level hands-on pilot to a computer-dependent button-pusher with a magenta addiction. So all in all, your 10k hours captain will have 250 hours of real flying, 15-20 years ago.
What is a problem is that ATC many times asks pilots to do really dangerous things. Flying short, steep and unstabilized approaches makes automation pretty much useless. Given this new revelation, it seem to me that ATC procedures contributed to this accident. I don't think that we have a case where dependance on automation is a problem. What we have is ATC asking pilots to do dangerous things when low and slow. This accident isn't about the ILS being turned off. The weather was clear, nobody would have used the ILS had it been on anyway.
When ATC gives you a clearance which you can't comply with, any PIC has just one answer: "unable".
Many of these carriers are mandating their pilots to use automation, so the ILS being turned off is a major issue, regardless of them having 250 hours in a SEP/MEP.
And again, the only person responsible for the safety of any flight in a servicable aircraft is the captain. He can override ATC at any time, of the safety of the flight dictates him to do so. All he needs is to declare an emergency.
Slashdot Mirror
Back up cameras / displays do fit.
When I load up my SUV to the point where I can't see anything in the rear-view mirror, I purposely turnon my backup camera and use it as a means to look behind my car, while driving.
I dare, I double-dare all law enforcement to ticket me, and I'll drag your ass in front of the Supreme Court.
Since we cannot differentiate between someone holding a phone while driving at 75 mph down the interstate and someone texting with a phone while driving at 75 mph down the interstate
You miss one very important aspect of Criminal Law here: the presumption of innocence. You are arguing that a driver must proof their innocence by being prohibited to enjoy his property in a legal manner, such as using a Smartphone as a GPS navigation device. That is the world upside-down. Innocent until proven guilty of texting or talking on the phone, not guilty by default for just holding it.
Citizenship is just a title. Don't ever delude yourself to think that you earned it, or that it is something that you deserve because of some virtue you maintain.
I am a legal immigrant. After years of hard work I earned my permanent residency. And in a few years from now, I will apply for citizenship.
I think it's pretty fair to say that once I am naturalized, I will have earned it. I spend years in getting an education which allowed me to get hired by a US company. I worked hard to be moved to the US. I worked hard while the company applied for permanent residency. And I continue to work hard as an LPR.
Being pushed out by your mom in the right place does not make you earn anything. However, working hard to be part of the society that you came into (whether that was as a legal immigrant or by birth) does.
The legal avenue only exists for people with education, money,
Bullshit. The visa bulletin lists three categories: family-based (you could marry a US citizen), employment based (which is your pet peeve) and then there is always the diversity lottery. And you can always apply for political asylum, if you meet the requirements.
and/or an H1-B sponsor.
More bullshit. The H1B visa is a non-immigrant visa. Your H1B is useless if your employer won't file an I-140 on your behalf.
Come back, come back!
Nice try, Dan, nice try.
:-)
(insider joke, I just left JNPR and my manager's name was Dan
FAA Advisory Circular 91 57, defines "model aircraft", they are not aircraft, nor are they required to operate under aircraft rules.
I beg to differ. A model aircraft is a toy version of a "real" aircraft. UAVs are in general not a toy, nor a model version of a real aircraft. They have no full-scale counterpart.
Furthermore, here is a quote from TFA:
Although small, the FAA considers it an "unmanned aircraft system."
In short, you haven't convinced me yet.
yeah, thanks obama.
The only thing you need to thank Obama for is to address the FAA's inability to enforce the existing regulations.
UAVs are already regulated under existing rules. For example, the term aircraft is defined as follows:
A device that is used or intended to be used for flight in the air.
A "drone" is a such a device. In theory, all aircraft (except toys, of course) are required to have an airworthiness certificate, as per FAR 91.203. And since the FAA requires a pilot's certificate for UA operation (see this), it is in practice impossible to legally fly a civilian drone for the simple reason that there is no certification category for such aircraft:
Is a FAA issued pilot certificate required to operate civil UAS?
Yes. If the aircraft is issued an airworthiness certificate a pilot certificate is required.
Summarizing: the regulations are there, they're just not enforced yet.
Late last year, Research In Motion Ltd. chief executive officer Thorsten Heins sat down with the board of directors at the companyâ(TM)s Waterloo, Ont., headquarters to review plans for the launch of a new phone designed to turn around the companyâ(TM)s fortunes.
So I guess this meeting became their.. Uhm... Waterloo :-)
Mod parent up. Is funny, not troll.
You'll still fail your IFR check ride if its 0 visibility and you keep your head down on the dash the entire time you're flying.
As someone currently training towards an IFR rating, thanks for that tip :-)
What about a drone pilot who doesn't even know what a transponder is
Well... They should not be piloting an aircraft anyway. I agree with you that relying on transponders is a bad idea, but the main point of my argument was to counter the thought that "detection equipment" would be too bulky or expensive. I was trying to point out that for a few hundred dollars and less than 12oz of weight, one can have a relatively reliable detection mechanism.
In the real world, I do realize that my PCAS has limits. It doesn't protect me against aircraft without a transponder, and I've seen those quite a lot in class E airspace.
Either drones get their own airspace/altitude and NOTAM'd restricted areas so they can take off and land, and VFR pilots are kept out of that altitude, or I don't see it working at all.
I would not be surprised if that would happen indeed.
Seems ridiculous, they have a lot to do on take off and landing already.
During take-off and landing they are usually strapped in their seats.
But seriously, they're their to save your ass, not to kiss it.
You seem to think all aircraft fly above 30,000 feet. GA fliers spend a great deal of tine between 1,000 and 10,000 AGL. These fliers generally are flying under VFR (visual flight rules) where they are expected to see and avoid other aircraft visually.
You are right. However, a lot of airspace requires, and a lot of airplanes have, transponders. With the roll-out of ADS-B, all aircraft will be visible in the future.
When I fly GA, I have a little device called a PCAS in my cockpit. It passively monitors the transponders from other aircraft and will alert me if someone is nearby. This is a very light weight piece of technology, about the size of my cellphone. Easy to use in a drone...
And then someone make a firefox plugin that always transmit the same ID
Ha, I already see myself browsing dildo's and kinky sex toys for a few nights. Imagine the look on your wife's face when she sees all the ads on your machine that are "related" to my browsing. Muhahahahahaha!
or start your own provider without a cap.
And you'll soon be out of business. Truth of the matter is, that a business simply cannot sustain by providing unlimited broadband internet for the prices that the average consumer is willing to pay.
For example, my connection via Charter is great. I pay for 30Mbps but actually get 45Mbps. If I were to suck up 30Mbps 24/7, that would mean that Charter would have to reserve 30Mbps of bandwidth on their network, and to their transits. So 33 customers like me would fill up a Gigabit Ethernet link. With an average price of ~$4 per Megabit, transit traffic alone will cost approx $4000/month, or roughly $120 per customer. Cut that in half, because my ISP will likely peer a lot, and you're still left with $60 per customer. And then we're not even discussing the cost of the access, core and edge network gear, installation and operational costs. I'm paying less than $60/month.
So, what do ISPs do? They oversubscribe. Since I'm not using my link 24/7 at full speed, it is easy to "share" my bandwidth. The last time I worked for an access-ISP, the oversubscription rates were between 1:35 and 1:50 for consumer-grade access. And in order to make sure that everyone gets a fair share, they'll have to include some type of limitation.
So all in all, the numbers just don't add up. You can't expect premium service for a bargain price and as long as the ISP is transparent about it, I don't have a problem with bandwidth caps. In the end I can still choose to pay for the premium service and not be subject to a cap.
I remember an article in which it discussed that Climate Change denying is an American problem.
Climate change by itself is not under dispute. The question is: what causes climate change. And then there are three sides:
- It must be us, the human population, burning all those fossil fuels causing CO2 levels to rise;
- It can't be us, we are to insignificant. Climate change is caused by increased solar activity and oceans releasing vast amounts of CO2;
- It is a combination of both: we can slow it down but it is inevitable;
To be honest, I'm not a scientist and I don't give a rats ass who is correct. What I do care about is that we start taking the necessary measures to ensure that my daughter and her future children still have a place to live once I'm long gone..
No, we are less retarded because I can't think of anything we are doing today that beats the stupidity level of executing people for witchcraft.
How about creating weapons that can remove all life from this planet? How about creating an economy so dependent on fossil fuels that we destroy our children's ability to live on Earth?
And for what it's worth, "we" are still on that level. Many people get executed for witchcraft each year around the world. Source.
When did MPLS become a tunneling protocol instead of a switching protocol? You can't exactly use it outside of your own network.
MPLS stands for multi-protocol label switching. That is a technique to forward packets, not to specify a protocol. MPLS is in fact more a tunneling protocol than a switching protocol. All traditional forms of tunneling will add additional headers around the original frame. MPLS does something similar: a 32 bit header is inserted between the layer 2 and layer 3 headers. Many implementations allow a network operator to specify which LSP a specific route must follow (static routing into an LSP is perfectly fine). This would justify the classification of MPLS as a tunneling protocol.
Additionally, many MPLS implementations allow the operator to alter the default behavior of TTL propagation, effectively hiding the use of MPLS to the end-user. It is quite trivial to statically reroute certain traffic into an MPLS L3VPN towards a monitor server which conducts a man-in-the-middle attack, and subsequently reroute the traffic back to its original location. I have designed such a network as part of a centralized transparent internet caching solution. In that case, I used policy based forwarding to reroute packets destined for or originating from port 80 into my LSP towards a transparent cache.
You won't be able to know that you have been rerouted, and if the L3VPN is very remote, your latency will increase significantly.
Quote:
âoeBed bugs in our bedâ 1 5 étoiles Avis écrit le 27 avril 2013 Google Traduction At first this hotel looks ok....until you wake up in the middle of the night at 3:00AM because you've been scratching all over and realize your bed is infested with BED BUGS!
What a nightmare! When I reported the situation to the managing stuff, there were no emergency to handle the situation because the decision maker was not available during the week end and it was a Saturday.
Instead they offered to transfer my son and I to a hotel nearby where a room was available because they were concerned I was going to cause Mayhem
They finally offered to investigate the room despite the 4 BED BUGS I had contained in a glass and pictures and videos I had showed them.
I was supposed to stay one more night but instead chose to move to a hotel nearby; turned out to be cleaner-up to date-bigger room- and cheaper rate and that was the Holiday Inn Express down the road at 3145 Avenue de Hotels.
Beware of BED BUGS! If you are looking for a scratch free night sleep, stay elsewhere, you will be doing you and your loved ones a favour! Trust me...and that's why the Internet is a great tool!
Séjour du Avril 2013 - voyage en famille
Any couple that has four children is already doing more harm to the population than one person living forever. Should we force-sterilize people at two or three kids per couple?
If only my modpoints would not have expired yesterday.
You, sir, are 100% spot on. I have 1 child, exactly for this reason. We can slice the world population in half within a generation and save the earth, rather than this energy conservation bullshit. There is enough to support 3 billion people.
My point is that you don't have to have to practice a specific flying task to be proficient enough to do it, you just need to be able to know what the proper way to do something is.
When it comes to landing an airplane, I strongly disagree. After my first 10 landings, I knew pretty much what to do. Approach at 65mph, level off at 3 feet above the runway and throttle to idle. Slowly pull back on the yoke to make a smooth landing. Yet it took me approx 120 practice landings before my instructor let me go solo.
Sully has way, way, way more experience than the average busdriver in the left-hand seat of a 777.
Remember the flight that landed in the Hudson river a few years ago? How many engine out water landings do you suppose the pilots had actually flown?
It may interest you that Capt Sullenberger is not your average pilot. Not only was he a flight instructor, he also holds a commercial glider pilot license. On top of that, he was the ALPA's local safety expert and was involved in several air crash accidents.
In short, to compare that pilot to the average airline bus driver is not fair. Check PPRUNE if you like to hear hands-on stories from check captains being forced to pass pilots who are incapable of hand-flying an airliner.
hope they have documents
If they don't just ask your local NSA guy, I'm sure he'll be able to help out with some diagrams and backdoors to your systems.
You do realize that *nobody* is going to be flying a 777 with 250 hours right
Yes, that's not the point that I'm trying to make. My point is, that once a future airline pilot has a (frozen) ATP(L), the automation dependencies start. The type-ratings for their first job (let's say a 737) will usually based on their companies SOPs, which in turn will convert the pilot from a nice CPL-level hands-on pilot to a computer-dependent button-pusher with a magenta addiction. So all in all, your 10k hours captain will have 250 hours of real flying, 15-20 years ago.
What is a problem is that ATC many times asks pilots to do really dangerous things. Flying short, steep and unstabilized approaches makes automation pretty much useless. Given this new revelation, it seem to me that ATC procedures contributed to this accident. I don't think that we have a case where dependance on automation is a problem. What we have is ATC asking pilots to do dangerous things when low and slow. This accident isn't about the ILS being turned off. The weather was clear, nobody would have used the ILS had it been on anyway.
When ATC gives you a clearance which you can't comply with, any PIC has just one answer: "unable".
Many of these carriers are mandating their pilots to use automation, so the ILS being turned off is a major issue, regardless of them having 250 hours in a SEP/MEP.
And again, the only person responsible for the safety of any flight in a servicable aircraft is the captain. He can override ATC at any time, of the safety of the flight dictates him to do so. All he needs is to declare an emergency.