If you don't like my city, don't come here. I can assure you, you won't be missed.
New York City is on my very short list of places I will avoid if I can. The other place on that list is the U.K.
Why? Because I don't need a nanny. I don't need to have CCTV aimed at me as soon as I exit an aircraft. By the time I've left the airport they (NYC and Queen Elizabeth) will have more footage of me than I have of my entire youth. I don't need the mayor of a city I would potentially visit and spend my hard-earned cash as a tourist telling me I can't get a super-sized soda. Don't get me wrong, I fully appreciate the feelings after 9/11 and the desire to avoid that from ever happening again. But it appears that the NYC is worse than the KGB nowadays, that can not be the Freedom that the U.S. is advertising to the rest of the world.
Of course I won't be missed. But as soon as the rest of the world will think like me, id-10-t's like you will think differently. I vote with my money and I choose not to spend it in your city.
And let me give an example of where this will lead to: I used to live in Amsterdam, one of the most liberal cities ever. Legal prostitution, almost legal marijuana, legal mushrooms and a few museums. That drew a lot (a huge) amount of tourists. The downfall started about 10 years ago with the cab drivers overcharging and treating customers like crap. Then Amsterdam started construction work, which has left the city ruined for 10 years now. The left-wing politicians (not US-left) are closing down the Red Light District and make it impossible to run coffeeshops (you know, where one buys pot). The result? An almost 80% decline in tourism.
New York City was once called New Amsterdam. I guess that still applies, only the results will last a few more years. So stay in your city, as much as you can. Please.
So, they are being tested by the security watchdog in the U.K. Big deal, they load up a specially prepped software image (like they do for all their customers) and pass the test. Next step is to have all operators buy their heavily discounted gear for almost nothing, implement it and have them install a critical software update to avoid exploits. Have that image backdoored and they are one step closer to total world domination.
Now here is the question: would Apple be liable for the damages? Of course, they will have an EULA waiving all liabilities, but in a case like this where it is clearly Apple's failure to adhere to their own security framework, one could argue that Apple would be liable for all damages, plus a bit extra for all the inconvenience. Not to mention the bad press...
This is why I hate it when "security questions" are obvious things that anyone who knows me even slightly can figure out easily.
"What was the name of your first pet?" Hell you can find that with Google.
"What was the name of your Elementary School?" I sometimes talk about my childhood; people might know this.
Really, it's like they're asking for accounts to be hacked. There needs to be more preventing a password reset than weak "security questions".
Perhaps you should go back and read the article (just the summary will do): the "hacker" socially engineered an Apple support "engineer" to bypass the security questions. So he did not even need to google them.
As a forever *nix user (since 80's), I have never been able to get real work done on a windows box. It is completely worthless. Even installing cygwin only makes the experience slightly less painful than an blunt instrument to the eye.
Sorry you used RH, RH is a pretty primitive / painful to use distro (IMO worse than all that came before it), but even still, I don't believe you.
Well, I'm trying not to make it a religious debate so whether or not you believe me is not really an issue here.
The debate should be more about what constitutes "real work". When I was a Linux/Unix admin, that meant being able to write scripts, develop software, run tcpdump etc etc. The funny part is that when I moved from working for ISP's and started working for vendors of network equipment, I was more or less forced to use Windows as it is the corporate tool of choice for most of them.
Trust me, I've tried. However, the incompatibilities between OpenOffice/MS Office, Outlook/Thunderbird, Visio/Dia and other software running on Windows boxes simply make it impossible for me to be productive without MS-tax. The one thing I have been able to avoid is Internet Explorer, except for my weekly time-reporting.
They don't try to make better products, they just try to kill the competition. I see ads for their crap with cool songs, a lizard, and neat apps everywhere but the actual thing doesn't work. Even they can't work it right, as shown by several demos they have done. They seem to recognize it but instead of dealing with it, they just try to eliminate everyone else. Linux has a MUCH better programming environment than anything Microsoft can offer. Even its overall usability (I use Ubuntu) is more intuitive. So Microsoft tries this shit. It's not secure and it's not user-friendly. It's just meant to make Linux harder to install. And I can't support a company that takes this approach. Fuck them. It's a good thing their company is dying. Hopefully more OEMs see this and start offering Linux PC's, but I kind of doubt it.
Ok, I'm probably going to kill my karma and move from Excellent to Suspected Troll, but so be it...
Until 5-6 years ago, I would totally agree with you. I've been a *ix advocate for years and will be for a while. However, with the introduction of Windows XP, I've switched from using *ix (more specifically Red Hat, and later on FreeBSD) on my desktop to Windows. Why? Because things just work out of the box. I was used to googling for hours and hours to find the right dependencies for a certain application I wanted, which then would be conflicting with something that I'd already installed and after being forced to use Windows by my then-employer, I quickly installed it on my PCs at home, too.
When Asus came with their small netbooks, I bought a Linux version. Unfortunately I found it quite unusable so I installed Windows. Again. In my opinion, *ix is perfect, more than perfect in the role of a server. Apache kills IIS just by looking at it. Sendmail outperforms Exchange while picking its nose. SSH is far better than using RDP to administer your server.
As recent as four months ago, I tried switching to Ubuntu on my corporate Windows Vista laptop. After two days of downtime, I found that I was unable to find a decent calendaring tool that would work with the companies Exchange server. No Lync support. Only partial support for Office tools. I returned my laptop to the IT department to have a new Windows image installed and within 3 hours I was back online.
Microsoft sucks when it comes to their business practices, I fully, more than fully agree with you on that. But their products are no longer that bad as they once were.
If they exist they would allow ANYBODY to snoop on users' traffic. What is this, SlashFox? How about "could potentially enable attackers, or PRESIDENT BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA to snoop on users' traffic!." or "could potentially enable attackers, or homesexuals, to snoop on users' traffic".
As the story submitter I find your accusation of racism unfair. Chinese government access to Huawei equipment has been a concern for years, check for example this Wikipedia entry on Huawei.
For future reference, did you ever figure out why your coworker was offended?
Yes, she was very honest about that. The part that she found offensive was the "two Jews walk into a bar" joke by "Achmed". Even though there was an Israeli colleague sitting at the same table who was not offended, she felt offended by it because it could have been offensive for Jewish people. She herself belongs to the Asian-American minority.
Admitted, now that I've been living in the U.S. for almost two years, I can understand why she felt offended. Race seems to be much more of an issue here in the U.S. than in my home country and I took this as a lesson learned. I'm much more cautious with what I'm joking about in the office now (yes, that's after the Respectful Workplace training).
It's what normal, mature human beings do - they handle the situation themselves instead of crying fucking mental rape.
I beg to differ.
In my team I have 12 different nationalities with 12 different cultures. As of now, we have two females in our team. On our office floor we have many more females, and many, many more nationalities with as many different cultures. This is important, because what's seen as relatively normal in one culture, can be seen as sexual harassment in the other. For example, what person A means as a compliment, can be received by person B as harassment. ("wow, your behind looks great in that dress": compliment or harassment?)
Obviously, the "visiting" culture should adhere to the local one, but it does not hurt to train the employees in doing so. At my last two employers (two different countries, including California*), I have received "respectful workplace training", aimed at eliminating sexual harassment and discrimination. For me, this has been very useful, not because I'm a gorilla-type male chauvinist pig, but because it was an eye-opener to learn about the sensitivities that vary between cultures and countries.
A real world example: most of us will remember Jeff Dunham's "Silence I kill you". I was mimicking this play in the office a couple of years ago. This was outside of the U.S., but I had American colleagues present. One of them had not seen the show, and was offended. This also happened to be a female, and by the end of the afternoon, my manager and the local HR were involved, and I had to talk to a crying co-worker who was really, really offended. And I had no clue why.
Moral of the story: what user1 perceives as "It's what normal, mature human beings do" is offensive to user2. At work, everyone should feel save and respected, including that pretty girl who just got hired because of her two special talents (in your opinion, of course).
If you don't drive during "commute hours", your car trip should be much closer to the same 25 minutes. If you're here, you're likely in tech, so can't you work anytime you want? (I can't imagine one would choose to drive during rush hour.)
Good guess. I'm in tech an have pretty flexible hours. Writing this from home, I'll be leaving in 10/15 minutes to be in the office around 10am. However, even at this time, it is likely that:
- The 101 is slowed down northbound starting Capitol or at least Tully
- The exit 101->880 is congested
- 880 northbound itself is congested
But these are not the biggest issues. Try to get onto 237 from 880: im-pos-si-ble under 10 minutes. This is where I get the most out of riding my motorcycle. With a car it takes me 25+ minutes (just to pass the two traffic lights and the metering onto 237).
Were I to choose public transport, I'd first have to walk 2 miles towards the nearest BART station, ride the train to Zanker/Tasman and then walk another 20 minutes or so to the office.
To stay on-topic: even with my current commute, it still makes sense not to move to SF: right now I have options to choose from, that shorten my time. I can take my motorcycle and be in the office within a reasonable time-frame (and cost, for that matter). In SF, even on my motorcycle my benefits of driving a motorcycle are a lot less, due to the ridiculous amount of traffic-lights an almost every intersection. Public transport is a joke, expensive and I prefer not to sit next to some long-haired overweight coder who consumed huge amounts of garlic the day before, and skipped his weekly shower that morning.
I live in the East Bay. I take BART to work everyday. From my stop in the East Bay to my stop in SF, it costs $4.15. Parking at the BART station costs $1. I live 2.4 miles from the BART station. Round trip, it costs me $9.30 to go to and from work.
Were I to be driving, my commute would be nearly 30 miles. I'd be driving across the Bay Bridge ($5 a day) and then parking in San Francisco would cost me a MINIMUM of $10 a day. This isn't even taking into account opportunity cost of time, wear and tear on the car or fuel.
Now the big question, how much time does it cost you to commute? I live in south San Jose (Bernal exit of 101), and work next to Hwy 237, Zanker exit. My commute is exactly 20 miles. Using public transport it would take me at least 1.5 hours. Using a car it would take me approx 40 minutes. Using my motorcycle it costs me 25 minutes (carpool lane joohoo).
With a 9 month old daughter that I'd like to see grow up, I could not care less of saving $200 a year on using public transport, but losing 2 hours a day. Time is also cost, and public transport is almost always more costly than your own transportation.
Same thing will apply in San Francisco. Live next to Golden Gate park, work downtown and you are not happy with your bus/train/subway/lightrail.
Not to mention that I'd never move to San Francisco, the most visitor unfriendly city I've ever seen (and I used to live in Amsterdam).
Excuse me, but unless they have radically changed the SIM specification since the last time I looked at it (just minutes), the password goes with the card. That isn't to say it can't be broken into, just that it is on the SIM.
Yes and no. The SIM can be protected by a pin-code, that is correct. However, that's not what crackbone refers to. He refers to the device password ("password locking the cellphone"), which protects the data on it.
Obviously, it is smart to have both, but most users that I know have only their devices protected, not their SIM cards.
Quite high. For example, one sting in Florida produced:
20 of the 24 men were convicted of using the internet to solicit a child for sex and some were also convicted of sending harmful material to a child, as some of them emailed pornographic pictures to the decoys. Because these are sex crimes, the 20 convicted men had to register as sex offenders for the rest of their lives. Most of them were also put on sex offender probation.
Petaluma, Ca:
This segment resulted in 26 convictions.
Remember, in To Catch A Predator, the police are not operating the sting. The sting itself is operated by Perverted Justice, who then hand over the evidence to law enforcement. After Chris "why don't you have a seat right over there" Hansen, is done with them.
It's a new concept with the inclusion of passwords. By password locking a cellphone somebody knowing your locking it is not under the believe your phone could be stolen like a pager which would not be secured. There are some fundamental differences in the technology that makes it still debatable that this is legal.
I beg to differ. Even if that cellphone is locked, someone engaging in criminal activity can expect to be arrested at any time. Once arrested, cops will try to extract information from a phone. If that fails (i.e., if that phone is secured properly), they can always take out the sim card and put it in a police-owned device.
The sender of the text message can not expect that the text message will be delivered on the recipients phone, only on the recipients subscription.
In your own words, somebody knowing your locking it is not under the believe your phone could be stolen, but should be aware that the sim card could be transferred. End of legal debate with regards to the inclusion of passwords.
Nonsense. I read a number of newspapers and Internet news sites, and this is the first I've heard of it, and like most people, really don't care that much. I frequent Burger King (Home of the Whopper), but I think that realistically, only a very tiny number of McDonald's customers know about this, and of those, few care.
Your first paragraph is entirely hyperbole.
So, you read a number of newspapers? Wow, you are one of the few who actually still read tree-based news. Either way, just put "mcdonalds staff assult professor" in Google, and you'll see hundreds of hits.
This is a PR nightmare for McD. If it were not, Corporate would not have been involved. Stop trolling.
This is a PR nightmare for McDonald's and they're only making it worse. Yes, it is a franchise operation and yes it is the responsibility of the local franchise owner to have his staff treat their customers with respect (even if they throw him out).
What they should do is promptly apologize and sent that staff on customer service training.
(But then again, what can you expect from McDonalds staff? If they were so smart, they'd have my job.)
one word: VACUUM.
Two words: fire triangle
Two words containing a difficult one: fire tetrahedron
Before one will burst into flames one needs oxygen first. In a vacuum there is no hazard of bursting into flames. Remember this, and when you get your first physics lesson on combustion at school you will be mister smartypants!
If there is no oxygen, how on earth do you think the occupants of that vehicle are going to breath? You bet that such a train will need to carry oxygen, one way or the other. And in the event of a crash, that oxygen could be released into the vacuum, and there is your fire triangle, complete.
In that case, you can/should be able to be pre-screened by the TSA. They already have something in place for people with names that are similar to names on the no-fly list
If you work with explosives/chemicals, all you (would) need is a redress number and perhaps a pre-screen and you're done.
I agree with you that the current TSA system is not the best, but it beats the alternative (i.e., letting everyone on an airplane without any checks).
While a lot of people (and trolls) will bash Facebook and its coders, the real issue here is the broken permissions system on Android and Iphone.
When you install an application such as Facebook, you are forced to grant more permissions than is good for you, opening up your phone for bugs like this. Those permission systems should be fixed (as well as the bug).
If you don't understand the legalities, don't make an assumption: In some countries, downloading copyrighted material is legal. It is the uploading part which is prohibited.This makes the request perfectly legal, it is the reply which would be illegal.
Besides the above, there is another thing to consider: not all the court issued warrants to block TPB come from the government in criminal proceedings. For example, in The Netherlands it was the local copyrights-lobby that asked the courts to issue the legal paperwork and this was not even based on criminal law.
Maybe its me, but the last time I checked, a ton is 1000 kilograms. So 440,900 tons equals 440,900,000,000 grams
Oh wait, must be American imperialism:-)
Perhaps you guys should start talking metric, like the rest of the world...
TSA is only in the business of producing a big show for the flying public. Terrorists are not part of their target audience, and they couldn't care less what terrorists might think of the play.
Are you suggesting that we stop screening passengers before they go onboard an aircraft? Bad idea. Someone needs to screen passengers. You might not agree with the TSA's methods and ways of working, but its a job that has to be done. I'm sure they will be open to suggestions for improvement.
Theoretically no, practically yes. Remember the Helios flight that went down in Athens? (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helios_Airways_Flight_522)
One of the flight attendants (but licensed as a pilot) was locked out of the cockpit but eventually found a way in.
Besides that, if a bad guy carries a weapon on board of an airplane, it is pretty easy to take the captains favorite stewardess hostage and force him to open the door. Yes, you may have regulations prohibiting the captain from doing so, but ultimately it is the captains decision.
Slashdot Mirror
If you don't like my city, don't come here. I can assure you, you won't be missed.
New York City is on my very short list of places I will avoid if I can. The other place on that list is the U.K.
Why? Because I don't need a nanny. I don't need to have CCTV aimed at me as soon as I exit an aircraft. By the time I've left the airport they (NYC and Queen Elizabeth) will have more footage of me than I have of my entire youth. I don't need the mayor of a city I would potentially visit and spend my hard-earned cash as a tourist telling me I can't get a super-sized soda. Don't get me wrong, I fully appreciate the feelings after 9/11 and the desire to avoid that from ever happening again. But it appears that the NYC is worse than the KGB nowadays, that can not be the Freedom that the U.S. is advertising to the rest of the world.
Of course I won't be missed. But as soon as the rest of the world will think like me, id-10-t's like you will think differently. I vote with my money and I choose not to spend it in your city.
And let me give an example of where this will lead to: I used to live in Amsterdam, one of the most liberal cities ever. Legal prostitution, almost legal marijuana, legal mushrooms and a few museums. That drew a lot (a huge) amount of tourists. The downfall started about 10 years ago with the cab drivers overcharging and treating customers like crap. Then Amsterdam started construction work, which has left the city ruined for 10 years now. The left-wing politicians (not US-left) are closing down the Red Light District and make it impossible to run coffeeshops (you know, where one buys pot). The result? An almost 80% decline in tourism.
New York City was once called New Amsterdam. I guess that still applies, only the results will last a few more years. So stay in your city, as much as you can. Please.
If it would not have been to capture an armed and dangerous mafia boss..
Oh, wait...
So, they are being tested by the security watchdog in the U.K. Big deal, they load up a specially prepped software image (like they do for all their customers) and pass the test. Next step is to have all operators buy their heavily discounted gear for almost nothing, implement it and have them install a critical software update to avoid exploits. Have that image backdoored and they are one step closer to total world domination.
Now here is the question: would Apple be liable for the damages? Of course, they will have an EULA waiving all liabilities, but in a case like this where it is clearly Apple's failure to adhere to their own security framework, one could argue that Apple would be liable for all damages, plus a bit extra for all the inconvenience. Not to mention the bad press...
This is why I hate it when "security questions" are obvious things that anyone who knows me even slightly can figure out easily.
"What was the name of your first pet?" Hell you can find that with Google.
"What was the name of your Elementary School?" I sometimes talk about my childhood; people might know this.
Really, it's like they're asking for accounts to be hacked. There needs to be more preventing a password reset than weak "security questions".
Perhaps you should go back and read the article (just the summary will do): the "hacker" socially engineered an Apple support "engineer" to bypass the security questions. So he did not even need to google them.
I don't believe you.
As a forever *nix user (since 80's), I have never been able to get real work done on a windows box. It is completely worthless. Even installing cygwin only makes the experience slightly less painful than an blunt instrument to the eye.
Sorry you used RH, RH is a pretty primitive / painful to use distro (IMO worse than all that came before it), but even still, I don't believe you.
Well, I'm trying not to make it a religious debate so whether or not you believe me is not really an issue here.
The debate should be more about what constitutes "real work". When I was a Linux/Unix admin, that meant being able to write scripts, develop software, run tcpdump etc etc. The funny part is that when I moved from working for ISP's and started working for vendors of network equipment, I was more or less forced to use Windows as it is the corporate tool of choice for most of them.
Trust me, I've tried. However, the incompatibilities between OpenOffice/MS Office, Outlook/Thunderbird, Visio/Dia and other software running on Windows boxes simply make it impossible for me to be productive without MS-tax. The one thing I have been able to avoid is Internet Explorer, except for my weekly time-reporting.
They don't try to make better products, they just try to kill the competition. I see ads for their crap with cool songs, a lizard, and neat apps everywhere but the actual thing doesn't work. Even they can't work it right, as shown by several demos they have done. They seem to recognize it but instead of dealing with it, they just try to eliminate everyone else. Linux has a MUCH better programming environment than anything Microsoft can offer. Even its overall usability (I use Ubuntu) is more intuitive. So Microsoft tries this shit. It's not secure and it's not user-friendly. It's just meant to make Linux harder to install. And I can't support a company that takes this approach. Fuck them. It's a good thing their company is dying. Hopefully more OEMs see this and start offering Linux PC's, but I kind of doubt it.
Ok, I'm probably going to kill my karma and move from Excellent to Suspected Troll, but so be it...
Until 5-6 years ago, I would totally agree with you. I've been a *ix advocate for years and will be for a while. However, with the introduction of Windows XP, I've switched from using *ix (more specifically Red Hat, and later on FreeBSD) on my desktop to Windows. Why? Because things just work out of the box. I was used to googling for hours and hours to find the right dependencies for a certain application I wanted, which then would be conflicting with something that I'd already installed and after being forced to use Windows by my then-employer, I quickly installed it on my PCs at home, too.
When Asus came with their small netbooks, I bought a Linux version. Unfortunately I found it quite unusable so I installed Windows. Again. In my opinion, *ix is perfect, more than perfect in the role of a server. Apache kills IIS just by looking at it. Sendmail outperforms Exchange while picking its nose. SSH is far better than using RDP to administer your server.
As recent as four months ago, I tried switching to Ubuntu on my corporate Windows Vista laptop. After two days of downtime, I found that I was unable to find a decent calendaring tool that would work with the companies Exchange server. No Lync support. Only partial support for Office tools. I returned my laptop to the IT department to have a new Windows image installed and within 3 hours I was back online.
Microsoft sucks when it comes to their business practices, I fully, more than fully agree with you on that. But their products are no longer that bad as they once were.
If they exist they would allow ANYBODY to snoop on users' traffic. What is this, SlashFox? How about "could potentially enable attackers, or PRESIDENT BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA to snoop on users' traffic!." or "could potentially enable attackers, or homesexuals, to snoop on users' traffic".
As the story submitter I find your accusation of racism unfair. Chinese government access to Huawei equipment has been a concern for years, check for example this Wikipedia entry on Huawei.
This has nothing to do with racism. This has to do with the companies background and practices. Have you read this article, about a data stealing employee?
For future reference, did you ever figure out why your coworker was offended?
Yes, she was very honest about that. The part that she found offensive was the "two Jews walk into a bar" joke by "Achmed". Even though there was an Israeli colleague sitting at the same table who was not offended, she felt offended by it because it could have been offensive for Jewish people. She herself belongs to the Asian-American minority.
Admitted, now that I've been living in the U.S. for almost two years, I can understand why she felt offended. Race seems to be much more of an issue here in the U.S. than in my home country and I took this as a lesson learned. I'm much more cautious with what I'm joking about in the office now (yes, that's after the Respectful Workplace training).
It's what normal, mature human beings do - they handle the situation themselves instead of crying fucking mental rape.
I beg to differ.
In my team I have 12 different nationalities with 12 different cultures. As of now, we have two females in our team. On our office floor we have many more females, and many, many more nationalities with as many different cultures. This is important, because what's seen as relatively normal in one culture, can be seen as sexual harassment in the other. For example, what person A means as a compliment, can be received by person B as harassment. ("wow, your behind looks great in that dress": compliment or harassment?)
Obviously, the "visiting" culture should adhere to the local one, but it does not hurt to train the employees in doing so. At my last two employers (two different countries, including California*), I have received "respectful workplace training", aimed at eliminating sexual harassment and discrimination. For me, this has been very useful, not because I'm a gorilla-type male chauvinist pig, but because it was an eye-opener to learn about the sensitivities that vary between cultures and countries.
A real world example: most of us will remember Jeff Dunham's "Silence I kill you". I was mimicking this play in the office a couple of years ago. This was outside of the U.S., but I had American colleagues present. One of them had not seen the show, and was offended. This also happened to be a female, and by the end of the afternoon, my manager and the local HR were involved, and I had to talk to a crying co-worker who was really, really offended. And I had no clue why.
Moral of the story: what user1 perceives as "It's what normal, mature human beings do" is offensive to user2. At work, everyone should feel save and respected, including that pretty girl who just got hired because of her two special talents (in your opinion, of course).
If you don't drive during "commute hours", your car trip should be much closer to the same 25 minutes. If you're here, you're likely in tech, so can't you work anytime you want? (I can't imagine one would choose to drive during rush hour.)
Good guess. I'm in tech an have pretty flexible hours. Writing this from home, I'll be leaving in 10/15 minutes to be in the office around 10am. However, even at this time, it is likely that:
- The 101 is slowed down northbound starting Capitol or at least Tully
- The exit 101->880 is congested
- 880 northbound itself is congested
But these are not the biggest issues. Try to get onto 237 from 880: im-pos-si-ble under 10 minutes. This is where I get the most out of riding my motorcycle. With a car it takes me 25+ minutes (just to pass the two traffic lights and the metering onto 237).
Were I to choose public transport, I'd first have to walk 2 miles towards the nearest BART station, ride the train to Zanker/Tasman and then walk another 20 minutes or so to the office.
To stay on-topic: even with my current commute, it still makes sense not to move to SF: right now I have options to choose from, that shorten my time. I can take my motorcycle and be in the office within a reasonable time-frame (and cost, for that matter). In SF, even on my motorcycle my benefits of driving a motorcycle are a lot less, due to the ridiculous amount of traffic-lights an almost every intersection. Public transport is a joke, expensive and I prefer not to sit next to some long-haired overweight coder who consumed huge amounts of garlic the day before, and skipped his weekly shower that morning.
I live in the East Bay. I take BART to work everyday. From my stop in the East Bay to my stop in SF, it costs $4.15. Parking at the BART station costs $1. I live 2.4 miles from the BART station. Round trip, it costs me $9.30 to go to and from work.
Were I to be driving, my commute would be nearly 30 miles. I'd be driving across the Bay Bridge ($5 a day) and then parking in San Francisco would cost me a MINIMUM of $10 a day. This isn't even taking into account opportunity cost of time, wear and tear on the car or fuel.
Now the big question, how much time does it cost you to commute? I live in south San Jose (Bernal exit of 101), and work next to Hwy 237, Zanker exit. My commute is exactly 20 miles. Using public transport it would take me at least 1.5 hours. Using a car it would take me approx 40 minutes. Using my motorcycle it costs me 25 minutes (carpool lane joohoo).
With a 9 month old daughter that I'd like to see grow up, I could not care less of saving $200 a year on using public transport, but losing 2 hours a day. Time is also cost, and public transport is almost always more costly than your own transportation.
Same thing will apply in San Francisco. Live next to Golden Gate park, work downtown and you are not happy with your bus/train/subway/lightrail.
Not to mention that I'd never move to San Francisco, the most visitor unfriendly city I've ever seen (and I used to live in Amsterdam).
Excuse me, but unless they have radically changed the SIM specification since the last time I looked at it (just minutes), the password goes with the card. That isn't to say it can't be broken into, just that it is on the SIM.
Yes and no. The SIM can be protected by a pin-code, that is correct. However, that's not what crackbone refers to. He refers to the device password ("password locking the cellphone"), which protects the data on it.
Obviously, it is smart to have both, but most users that I know have only their devices protected, not their SIM cards.
20 of the 24 men were convicted of using the internet to solicit a child for sex and some were also convicted of sending harmful material to a child, as some of them emailed pornographic pictures to the decoys. Because these are sex crimes, the 20 convicted men had to register as sex offenders for the rest of their lives. Most of them were also put on sex offender probation.
Petaluma, Ca:
This segment resulted in 26 convictions.
Remember, in To Catch A Predator, the police are not operating the sting. The sting itself is operated by Perverted Justice, who then hand over the evidence to law enforcement. After Chris "why don't you have a seat right over there" Hansen, is done with them.
It's a new concept with the inclusion of passwords. By password locking a cellphone somebody knowing your locking it is not under the believe your phone could be stolen like a pager which would not be secured. There are some fundamental differences in the technology that makes it still debatable that this is legal.
I beg to differ. Even if that cellphone is locked, someone engaging in criminal activity can expect to be arrested at any time. Once arrested, cops will try to extract information from a phone. If that fails (i.e., if that phone is secured properly), they can always take out the sim card and put it in a police-owned device.
The sender of the text message can not expect that the text message will be delivered on the recipients phone, only on the recipients subscription.
In your own words, somebody knowing your locking it is not under the believe your phone could be stolen, but should be aware that the sim card could be transferred. End of legal debate with regards to the inclusion of passwords.
Nonsense. I read a number of newspapers and Internet news sites, and this is the first I've heard of it, and like most people, really don't care that much. I frequent Burger King (Home of the Whopper), but I think that realistically, only a very tiny number of McDonald's customers know about this, and of those, few care.
Your first paragraph is entirely hyperbole.
So, you read a number of newspapers? Wow, you are one of the few who actually still read tree-based news. Either way, just put "mcdonalds staff assult professor" in Google, and you'll see hundreds of hits.
This is a PR nightmare for McD. If it were not, Corporate would not have been involved. Stop trolling.
This is a PR nightmare for McDonald's and they're only making it worse. Yes, it is a franchise operation and yes it is the responsibility of the local franchise owner to have his staff treat their customers with respect (even if they throw him out).
What they should do is promptly apologize and sent that staff on customer service training.
(But then again, what can you expect from McDonalds staff? If they were so smart, they'd have my job.)
one word: VACUUM.
Two words: fire triangle
Two words containing a difficult one: fire tetrahedron
Before one will burst into flames one needs oxygen first. In a vacuum there is no hazard of bursting into flames. Remember this, and when you get your first physics lesson on combustion at school you will be mister smartypants!
If there is no oxygen, how on earth do you think the occupants of that vehicle are going to breath? You bet that such a train will need to carry oxygen, one way or the other. And in the event of a crash, that oxygen could be released into the vacuum, and there is your fire triangle, complete.
In that case, you can/should be able to be pre-screened by the TSA. They already have something in place for people with names that are similar to names on the no-fly list
If you work with explosives/chemicals, all you (would) need is a redress number and perhaps a pre-screen and you're done.
I agree with you that the current TSA system is not the best, but it beats the alternative (i.e., letting everyone on an airplane without any checks).
Let me say first that I find Scientology repulsive and a particularly greasy form of pyramid scheme.
[Chris Hansen voice] So, why don't you have a seat right over there and sign up for this free personality test? [/voice]
While a lot of people (and trolls) will bash Facebook and its coders, the real issue here is the broken permissions system on Android and Iphone.
When you install an application such as Facebook, you are forced to grant more permissions than is good for you, opening up your phone for bugs like this. Those permission systems should be fixed (as well as the bug).
If you don't understand the legalities, don't make an assumption: In some countries, downloading copyrighted material is legal. It is the uploading part which is prohibited.This makes the request perfectly legal, it is the reply which would be illegal.
Besides the above, there is another thing to consider: not all the court issued warrants to block TPB come from the government in criminal proceedings. For example, in The Netherlands it was the local copyrights-lobby that asked the courts to issue the legal paperwork and this was not even based on criminal law.
In short: nothing illegal about those requests.
Maybe its me, but the last time I checked, a ton is 1000 kilograms. So 440,900 tons equals 440,900,000,000 grams Oh wait, must be American imperialism :-)
Perhaps you guys should start talking metric, like the rest of the world...
You nailed it, thank you.
TSA is only in the business of producing a big show for the flying public. Terrorists are not part of their target audience, and they couldn't care less what terrorists might think of the play.
Are you suggesting that we stop screening passengers before they go onboard an aircraft? Bad idea. Someone needs to screen passengers. You might not agree with the TSA's methods and ways of working, but its a job that has to be done. I'm sure they will be open to suggestions for improvement.
Theoretically no, practically yes. Remember the Helios flight that went down in Athens? (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helios_Airways_Flight_522) One of the flight attendants (but licensed as a pilot) was locked out of the cockpit but eventually found a way in. Besides that, if a bad guy carries a weapon on board of an airplane, it is pretty easy to take the captains favorite stewardess hostage and force him to open the door. Yes, you may have regulations prohibiting the captain from doing so, but ultimately it is the captains decision.