Until that number reaches 25, my point still stands.
And that's why the mods were wrong to give "insightful" to the guy following you who went to great pains to quantify the day. As long as there's only 24 hours in a day, it doesn't matter what you are using them for if there is competition for all 24 of them. Trying to say there are only 4 hours available is not insightful, it's myopic. It also ignores multitasking, like making dinner while watching TV, or watching videos at work.
The new regulation doesn't make clear if that's allowed though.
Really? From page 1 of the regulation:
"This IFR does not restrict passengers or crew members from bringing personal items or electronic devices containing lithium cells or batteries aboard aircraft..."
If your laptop contains a lithium battery, then it "contains lithium cells or batteries".
It says batteries installed can be brought on,
So if your laptop has a battery installed in it, it has a battery installed in it.
and batteries in devices on cargo flights can be in the cargo hold at 30%
This has been a rule for a long time.
but it doesn't make an exception for batteries in devices in the cargo hold on passenger flights
Other than saying explicitly that it doesn't prohibit them, you're right, it doesn't "make an exception". The sentence just prior to the one I quoted summarizes the rule. It:
prohibits the transport of lithium ion cells and batteries as cargo...
requires lithium ion cells and batteries to be shipped at not more than 30% state of charge aboard cargo-only aircraft when not packed with or contained in equipment, and
limits the use of alternative provisions for small lithium cell or battery shipments to one package per consignment.
Now, read those three things again, and tell me where there is a prohibition on lithium batteries installed in your laptop packed in checked baggage. Note: checked baggage is not "cargo", and passenger aircraft carrying your sorry ass somewhere isn't a "cargo-only aircraft".
https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/site...
How often have you had people stealing your baggage?
I have TSA open my baggage semi-regularly. They are easily confused by simple things. Things that confuse them too much dissappear from my baggage. Or things where the rules change on a regular basis. For example, the original rule was "no lighters carry-on, check them." Now it's "no lighters". I wound up at a site one time with my portable toolkit missing the lighter to start the gas-powered soldering iron. Luckily they didn't notice the soldering iron was gas powered, too.
But a more important question is, how often are really fragile things damaged in checked baggage, and the answer is "a lot more than they are stolen." Now, if you trust the monkeys who handle checked bags not to break your laptop (or any critical parts in it), that's fine for you. I've watched them load airplanes. They make a game out of how high they can toss the bag onto the belt and how loud a thump it makes. Hope you never learn the hard way.
So you're using an unofficial DVD player which is designed to avoid these problems,
The hardware is "official". Who decides what "official" software is? And since you admit I am avoiding the problem of adverts, logo screens, and mandatory menus, you are at least acknowledging that they are only problems when someone chooses not to use the methods that can trivially avoid them.
you may have bought the dvd but by using a player that's not officially blessed the movie distributors consider you just as bad as the pirates.
Oh, that's just absurd. Your argument has just devolved into one where ads, menus and logo pages are a requirement for you to view because someone who put the DVD together decided you should see them. You've just handed control over your life to other people, and you're complaining because they are making decisions for you that you don't like.
The problem is that the line blurs when you being wrong becomes a direct threat to me.
John Smith buying a book from Amazon that talks about dangers of vaccination is not a direct threat to you.
There is an epidemic of ignorance, and that epidemic is now directly responsible for deaths.
So the disease isn't killing people, it's people who read books you don't agree with that are killing people.
As far as I'm concerned, for every measles/polio/etc related death in a community, all the anti-vaxxers in that area should be charged with accessories to murder.
You might have a stronger argument calling for the death penalty for any parent that allows their sick child to infect someone else, instead of trying to get people whose child isn't sick convicted of some crime. It would be wrong-headed to do that, but you'd have a stronger argument at least.
"Once the threat of jail time is held over any CxO position, good fucking luck filling it."
Or, it would only attract those with ethics.
Suppose you have this "ethics". Suppose you know all there is to know about computer security on your first day of the job, which let's say was Jan 1, 2014. You make sure everything is done the best way possible as of Jan 2, 2014. You're "ethical" and "competent".
And then on Apr. 1, 2014, the Heartbleed bug is announced. Thirty minutes later your corporate database is hacked. One hundred fifty million people's identifying information is stolen. You go to jail. (That is the working theory here, "threat of jail time".)
Or Heartbleed doesn't take you down. You didn't get hacked before it was patched. You breathe a sigh of relief. You dodged a bullet there. Then Jan 2018 rolls around. Meltdown and Spectre show up, your database is hacked, you go to jail.
Yeah, people with "ethics" are just going to flock to the jobs where they can be put in jail because hackers find a bug in some software they're using.
The premise of this story is all wrong. Porter didn't need anyone's response to attack the CEO for a privacy breach, she was going to do it no matter what he said. And not wanting to release private details in a public hearing doesn't mean someone wouldn't give that information to a database like Equifax's. In fact, as the CEO, all of his data is already in Equifax databases. And there is no doubt that Porter would not reveal her information the same way and she's not the one being attacked for the privacy problems.
It's virtue signalling on Porter's part. That doesn't say anything about Equifax's actions or lack thereof, it's a comment about the politician involved only.
I've seen MANY, MANY examples where people went on to drive commercial sales of software products, thanks to them having a way to get their hands on free, pirated copies of the programs first.
That may be. My question is still, why did they go to the trouble of pirating that specific piece of software to begin with? If it was because they wanted the experience of that program because it was going to be something they needed to know for later, then it is unwarranted to claim that the purchase was driven by the piracy. The purchase was driven by the need to use that program.
I see that many times, where people pay for Word because they need the interoperability with other people, even though they could have "pirated" OfficeLibre and accomplished the tasks without actual piracy. Or they pay for Photoshop instead of using The Gimp.
Now, when you get to less common software where there is competition, I do believe that having low cost alternatives during the learning phase can drive sales later. That's for things like "Matlab", where The Mathworks has a student version for $100 and then requires LOTS of money for the full, professional version later. But if they don't snag the user as a student, they'll use something else (scipy, numpy, C, FORTRAN, R, etc). Very few people who pirate Photoshop are likely to be writing their own Photoshop in C or python when they get into the workplace.
But once an application has established itself as a "leading" one for the tasks at hand, most people would rather invest their time and energy in learning and mastering it, vs. another product that you may not be able to get help on from anybody else you know if you get stuck.
You've just repeated my point using different words. It was the usability of the product that drove the sale, not the fact that it was pirated early on.
Even when it comes to video game titles though?
I was pretty specific in saying that I was talking about "this category of software" (i.e. commercial utility software), not all software ever produced by anyone at any time ever.
Well, since I see no ads at the start, and I don't bother watching anything past the end credits, it would have to be "in the middle" for any ads to appear for me.
I've never seen a purchased bluray
I've never purchased a Blu-Ray, simply because I don't have the hardware to play one. Good thing that content isn't locked into just Blu-Ray.
Likewise you get to endure a nice title card for the publisher / studio before you get to the menu.
What's a "menu"? I've bought plenty of content that I play on a regular basis that I see no "menu", "adverts", or "logo pages" for.
I guess if you buy the wrong format of content, you are locked into what that format can do. That's not a problem with buying content, per se, just the format you choose. Streaming (which isn't buying content, just access to look at it) or Blu-Ray may lock you into different things. Choose better.
You claim that you've never had this? I call bullshit. The studios even specifically put a requirement into players to make these unskippable for your viewing pleasure.
Really? I put a DVD into my DVD hardware, type "mplayer dvd://1" (or some other number) into the command line, and golly if I don't get to view the content without ads, menus, or logos.
The point is to get what you want when you pay.
Yes, I understand that your goal is to force the providers to sell you their goods the way you want them. But the comment I replied to was about being forced to view adverts and logos and stuff when playing movies, and I'm simply educating you that there are ways to do it other than the ways you choose to do it.
Not talking about movies here.
I'm sorry. I quoted what I was replying to. Here:
Without piracy you don't get the full experience of owning content:
- Movies with adverts
How are "movies with adverts" not talking about movies?
So not sure why you are talking about a streaming service.
Because you also said: "- The privilege of trying to guess which of the 10 streaming services you subscribe to actually has your movie.", which is explicitly talking about both "movies" and "streaming service".
If you buy the DVD, you can play it using many different players, and typically rip it to disk, all without seeing "adverts" or "logo screens".
ahem... bullshit.
Your ignorance is causing you to be profane. Your problem.
Do we acquiesce simply because threat of government is too great? Wouldn't this be prima facie evidence that we already live in a tyranny?
No. You do realize that every law on the books today is an expectation that people will "acquiesce" because the threat of government is too great, I hope. Even such obvious laws like stopping at a stop sign. The expectation is that people will stop at stop signs because the threat of getting a ticket is too great. Unless you want to call "stop signs" prima facie evidence of tyranny...
Think about what we all are saying here, that government can compel you to say things, a violation of 1st and 5th Amendment rights,
The 5th amendment is protection against self-incrimination. Requiring a company to keep saying that they have received no notices is not an issue of self-incrimination, thus the 5th is irrelevant.
Under the 1st, the government can already compel people to say things, like testify in court when they receive a subpoena.
And if that is the case, we've already lost our Republic.
Only for those who think that any law at all is an infringement of their rights and a demonstration of absolute tyranny.
Without piracy you don't get the full experience of owning content:
- Movies with adverts
- Unskippable logo screens
Product placement is the only "adverts" I typically see in any of the movies I buy. I can't recall a purchased movie I have stopping in the middle to show me an ad.
Also, what is a "logo screen"? The movie title? Again, I don't see these and I purchase a lot of content.
- The privilege of trying to guess which of the 10 streaming services you subscribe to actually has your movie.
Oh. You want to purchase content in a way that you don't actually own it or control how it is delivered. That's just silly, isn't it? You're not buying content, you're renting it or buying access to viewing it for the length of time you belong to the streaming service.
Wouldn't you rather part with more money being nickle and dimed with DLC?
The closest I come to being "nickle and dimed" for streaming content is for Amazon Prime, but Prime Video is a secondary source for content I know I haven't actually purchased, and is a side-effect of getting Prime for shipping. It's pretty clear from the source that Prime Video is not a content purchase but just a stream to watch.
If you buy the DVD, you can play it using many different players, and typically rip it to disk, all without seeing "adverts" or "logo screens". So far, I've found one bit of content that won't rip using a simple setup -- the Star Trek "new universe" trilogy disks. Somehow they've messed with the disk structure so badly that it can be played by mplayer but mencoder won't rip it. No big loss, they aren't that good to start with. The movies, I mean.
I learned Photoshop in college, through illicit copies. I can't even guess how many copies I've since paid for, between personal use and work.
This implied causal chain may very well have been true for you. However, I don't believe it is for most.
Did you pirate a copy of Photoshop because it was free, or did you pirate that specific program because it was the leading application in its category and you wanted to learn that specific program? And then, did you buy copies for work because you had learned it in college from the pirated copy, or did you buy and use it because it is the leading application in its category?
Compare this for a moment with The Gimp. The Gimp is free. No piracy necessary. You could have it in college and for work for no money at all. Why didn't you use that program, instead of pirating and then paying for Photoshop?
I would propose that piracy in this category does not generate sales later. Sales are based on using a common, leading program, not just because one could get them for free before needing to buy them. If "free learning" was the true basis for later sales, then The Gimp would be the leading application instead of the alternate.
How many times do I have to say this? You aren't having an "ATC conversation", you're declaring an emergency. One sentence. All of your citations talk about "communicate". That's more than declaring the emergency. It's doing all the other communications that can wait until the aircraft is in control.
It's pretty simple. Too simple, I guess. If ATC tries to "chat" (your description of them responding to an emergency declaration) when you can't talk to them, YOU IGNORE THEM. Is that really that hard? You've just told them you have an emergency. What are they going to do, get the FAA to yank your license because you didn't immediately respond to their questions? ATC aren't idiots. If you've just declared an emergency they're going to realize that you might be too busy to tell them how many souls are on board right this second. But, and this is the critical part, you will have the full, undivided attention of at least two ATC, ready to provide any assistance they can, and ready to call out rescue personnel the moment you leave their radar. They won't have to "pull the tapes" two hours later when you don't show up at your destination, they'll know within a minute where your echo was lost and where to start looking. And if and when you are ready to talk, they will have moved every other aircraft they can to another frequency so you'll have a clear channel and not face the "congested" radio you fear.
If you bothered to understand your citations, you'd notice that they weren't deadly experiences just because someone used the radio to declare an emergency. The "iflyamerica" link which you claims proves what happens if you declare an emergency while handling the emergency doesn't actually prove that. It proves that if NOBODY is flying the plane there is a problem. The PEA link refers to the same accident where the problem was NOBODY WAS FLYING THE PLANE. Again, nobody was flying the plane not because someone made a mayday call, it was because two pilots got engrossed in solving a trivial mechanical problem.
Your AOPA link talks about reading back a long complicated approach clearance before you start a turn and push the "approach mode" button on your autopilot, not you making a simple declaration of an emergency. If you read that clearance you'll notice that it gives you instructions where you will be navigating and aviating all the way to the missed approach point, at a minimum. Before you get there, you may get a clearance to land from tower with a "land short of runway 21". "My God, man, I'm AVIATING and NAVIGATING. I can't COMMUNICATE!" You are starting four miles from the approach fix. If you're at 120 knots, that is two minutes before you are established. Please, the first time you fly a practice approach as an instrument student, if you make it that far, try waiting two minutes to acknowledge a clearance like that and see if ATC buys the "aviate, navigate, communicate" rule #1. Then fail to acknowledge the "land short" instruction before you land and see if your landing clearance isn't revoked and you are told to go around (and, politely, "go away".) Yet, you've obeyed "rule #1" like a good pilot must.
in fact I'm a pretty poor one having very little experience.
I know. You don't think you can push a button that is right under your finger and speak into a mic that is right in front of your face while doing anything else.
So Call me back when the NTSB publishes their final report and you where right...
I where what? Christ almighty, you think the NTSB is going to issue a finding about how easy it is to use a radio? You truly have no clue, do you?
They didn't have TIME to communicate
They had two minutes. That's plenty of time for a mayday. I'm sorry that using a radio is a daunting task that consumes your 100% attention while saying anything, but for most of us it isn't that hard. We know the benefits of letting ATC know (for our safety and the safety of other airspace users) we have an emergency. We know that "rules" like the one you are fixated on have limits and what the words actually mean.
The most likely result of a rebuilt Internet III with full security is that you won't be able to use it because your access will lessen security. It will be the lesser-used cousin to Internet I, just as Usenet II is the lesser-used cousin of Usenet.
Like I said.. The FIRST thing you do is fly. Communicating is way down the priority list.
And like I said, communicating that you have an emergency is a trivial task that can happen in parallel with other high priority things. When you get a bit more experience you'll figure that out. In other words, "FIRST" is not a synonym for "ONLY".
My flight instructor was right. The controllers are going to get chatty,
Jesus, if you cannot ignore a controller while you're trying to aviate, then you really should not be in the cockpit at all. They WILL call you when THEY want to call you, and you might be in the middle of something important. The skill of either simply ignoring them until you can deal with it, or saying "standby" by pushing a button that is, as I already said, right under your finger, speaking into a microphone that is already up next to your mouth, using a radio that is already tuned to the frequency you need to use and has someone you are communicating with at the other end, is critical to your own safety.
No, the controllers aren't going to get "chatty". They're going to go into 'emergency' mode and try to provide you with any help you need. They're not going to chat with you, they're dealing with YOUR flight and YOUR emergency and paying attention to YOU. What do YOU need, what can they do to help YOU. If standing-by is what they can do, a simple "standby" deals with it.
Your flight instructor is right -- clearly you don't have the experience to handle simple radio communications while flying the plane. It's a good thing he's there.
I got on the radio and told the controller (and the traffic around the airport) that I was going to need a really LONG climb out but that I was staying in the pattern and needed to return as soon as I could.
In other words, you gave a "life story" instead of a simple mayday, and other people, hearing you reciting your life story assumed you were in a position to communicate a lot of other things. And you didn't have the experience to ignore them instead of fly the plane. Yes, a 100 hour pilot doesn't have a lot of experience with that kind of stuff.
Here's the point: the pilots of the aircraft that went down weren't 100 hour student pilots, they were commercial pilots with probably thousands of hours. They were on an IFR flight plan (if thunderstorms were nearby) and talking to a TRACON filled with professional controllers. They had plenty of experience with ATC, and they were undoubtedly able to manage "20 questions" with a simple "standby". They would certainly be able to announce an emergency without any significant distraction from dealing with the aircraft.
Someday you may have enough experience to know better. I hope. I would be really pissed if I were called out on a missing aircraft search that could have been prevented because "bobbied" had a mechanical failure in flight, flew the airplane into the ground, but felt he couldn't manage a call to ATC to announce the emergency so they could deal with it when it happened instead of a few hours later when your family calls up wondering where you are.
There is no need to communicate with ATC until you have the aircraft under some semblance of control.
Other than starting a process and alerting the people who might be able to help you land safely, and who may be responsible for routing other aircraft out of your way for THEIR safety, no, there is no reason to tell ATC anything about your emergency. And yes, if you have so little experience dealing with radios and ATC that it is a major process for you to say anything to them until you have recovered from your emergency all by yourself, by all means, don't call them. But please don't project your limited abilities onto others and tell them they shouldn't announce an emergency when it happens because they're supposed to fly first, navigate second, and communicating is absolute last on the list.
When you become a pilot with thousands of hours of experience you might realize that pushing a button that is already under your finger and speaking into a microphone that is already just inches from your mouth to begin reporting an emergency to someone you are already in communication with is not a task that requires 100% concentration on the part of a pilot. It's not like your 100 hour 172 pilot who has to look up the local controller frequency and then reach over to pick up a mic to be able to call someone because you're tooling around the practice area and didn't bother with flight following to start with.
You identify and announce an emergency. That starts the ball rolling. That get the full attention of the controllers. There are now at least two pairs of eyes following you on radar (the controller and a supervisor) if you are still in radar contact. There is now a room full of other controllers who are starting to manage their traffic to give you a clear path to where you need to go. There is a phone in the hand of the supervisor passing info on to emergency responders to get them ready.
If you are a 100 pilot and cannot manage to squeak out a mayday when it happens to you, we can expect that we'll someday be wondering what happened to the plane "bobbied" was piloting that mysteriously didn't appear at the destination. I can tell you, other pilots are able to manage a radio transmission while they are aviating and navigating, too. Someday it won't be a daunting task for you, either.
If you are struggling for control of the aircraft, you don't have time to play 20 questions with ATC.
"Air Flooby thirty two mayday mayday mayday" is not "20 questions." Of course you don't play 20 questions while getting things figured out. But you DO make your initial radio call so everyone is awake and alert when you get around to dealing with them.
Sheesh. Using the radio in a modern airplane is not rocket science.
That's very nice. I live in a "sanctuary city" within a "sanctuary state." You looked it up in, of all fonts of knowledge, Wikipedia. Again, I'm sorry you don't fully grasp what those words mean.
I'm not sure what's illegal about it.
I don't believe this is a discussion of what is illegal or legal. Someone (was it you?) said that states were not free to make laws that were laxer than federal. Since "sanctuary state" laws are effectively repealing immigration law at the state level, they are laxer laws than the federal.
Then I pointed out the obviously laxer marijuana laws that many states have compared to the feds, and that's two strikes for the ignorant claim that states cannot be less strict.
The reason I desire a rooted device is to get access to the content I have purchased, is DRM free from the publisher, but is squirreled away in the/data/data directory by the app that handles it. Linux is irrelevant.
If you're talking about enforcing immigration law, that isn't an issue of setting regulations,
I'm sorry you're not familiar with the concept of "sanctuary state" or "sanctuary city", because it is not (just) an issue of local law enforcement enforcing laws, it is effectively nullifying federal law.
You might also want to consider the legal status of marijuana use at the federal level versus many states. Many states are a LOT less strict about its use these days.
"Microsoft" also says they've detected my computer is infected with malware and I need to type certain things in so they can remotely debug and disinfect it. At least that's what the nice man with the Indian accent says when he calls me several times a week.
Maybe that's the same company that provides Microsoft support that is closing down and needs me to call them back to get a refund on my service contract?
I'm sorry, I wasn't clear, Americans are subject to random drug tests,
I'm sorry, but you are wrong. I am an "American". I am not on any of the lists you gave. I am NOT subject to random drug tests. Ergo, your blanket statement is proven wrong.
They've created a common area in the cafeteria, why should they be able to repress speech?
Because the "common area" as you call it isn't common for you, it belongs to them, and was created for a specific purpose. Which isn't YOU blathering about whatever it is you hate today. You're on private property. The company owes you no first amendment rights.
I'm not going to waste more time correcting you. You hate what you hate and hearing the facts won't fix that.
Slashdot Mirror
Until that number reaches 25, my point still stands.
And that's why the mods were wrong to give "insightful" to the guy following you who went to great pains to quantify the day. As long as there's only 24 hours in a day, it doesn't matter what you are using them for if there is competition for all 24 of them. Trying to say there are only 4 hours available is not insightful, it's myopic. It also ignores multitasking, like making dinner while watching TV, or watching videos at work.
The new regulation doesn't make clear if that's allowed though.
Really? From page 1 of the regulation:
If your laptop contains a lithium battery, then it "contains lithium cells or batteries".
It says batteries installed can be brought on,
So if your laptop has a battery installed in it, it has a battery installed in it.
and batteries in devices on cargo flights can be in the cargo hold at 30%
This has been a rule for a long time.
but it doesn't make an exception for batteries in devices in the cargo hold on passenger flights
Other than saying explicitly that it doesn't prohibit them, you're right, it doesn't "make an exception". The sentence just prior to the one I quoted summarizes the rule. It:
Now, read those three things again, and tell me where there is a prohibition on lithium batteries installed in your laptop packed in checked baggage. Note: checked baggage is not "cargo", and passenger aircraft carrying your sorry ass somewhere isn't a "cargo-only aircraft". https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/site...
This isn't about banning your computer or camera from being in your luggage.
Err no. This is *exactly* about that,
Err, no, it is not. Your computer or camera can still be in your luggage. Nothing in this new rule prohibits that.
and has been a policy in Europe and Asia for a long time now. Here's an excerpt from some airline rules:
Those rules don't ban cameras or laptops from luggage. Read them again. They talk about batteries, not the equipment they are installed in.
Singapore actually allow you to check in devices with lithium batteries,
So do KLM and QANTAS and United and ...
If I check a laptop, it'll either be in a cardboard box with shipping padding, or a pelican case with padding.
And any lithium battery will be installed in it. You'll have to carry spare batteries on-board.
How often have you had people stealing your baggage?
I have TSA open my baggage semi-regularly. They are easily confused by simple things. Things that confuse them too much dissappear from my baggage. Or things where the rules change on a regular basis. For example, the original rule was "no lighters carry-on, check them." Now it's "no lighters". I wound up at a site one time with my portable toolkit missing the lighter to start the gas-powered soldering iron. Luckily they didn't notice the soldering iron was gas powered, too.
But a more important question is, how often are really fragile things damaged in checked baggage, and the answer is "a lot more than they are stolen." Now, if you trust the monkeys who handle checked bags not to break your laptop (or any critical parts in it), that's fine for you. I've watched them load airplanes. They make a game out of how high they can toss the bag onto the belt and how loud a thump it makes. Hope you never learn the hard way.
So you're using an unofficial DVD player which is designed to avoid these problems,
The hardware is "official". Who decides what "official" software is? And since you admit I am avoiding the problem of adverts, logo screens, and mandatory menus, you are at least acknowledging that they are only problems when someone chooses not to use the methods that can trivially avoid them.
you may have bought the dvd but by using a player that's not officially blessed the movie distributors consider you just as bad as the pirates.
Oh, that's just absurd. Your argument has just devolved into one where ads, menus and logo pages are a requirement for you to view because someone who put the DVD together decided you should see them. You've just handed control over your life to other people, and you're complaining because they are making decisions for you that you don't like.
The problem is that the line blurs when you being wrong becomes a direct threat to me.
John Smith buying a book from Amazon that talks about dangers of vaccination is not a direct threat to you.
There is an epidemic of ignorance, and that epidemic is now directly responsible for deaths.
So the disease isn't killing people, it's people who read books you don't agree with that are killing people.
As far as I'm concerned, for every measles/polio/etc related death in a community, all the anti-vaxxers in that area should be charged with accessories to murder.
You might have a stronger argument calling for the death penalty for any parent that allows their sick child to infect someone else, instead of trying to get people whose child isn't sick convicted of some crime. It would be wrong-headed to do that, but you'd have a stronger argument at least.
"Once the threat of jail time is held over any CxO position, good fucking luck filling it."
Or, it would only attract those with ethics.
Suppose you have this "ethics". Suppose you know all there is to know about computer security on your first day of the job, which let's say was Jan 1, 2014. You make sure everything is done the best way possible as of Jan 2, 2014. You're "ethical" and "competent".
And then on Apr. 1, 2014, the Heartbleed bug is announced. Thirty minutes later your corporate database is hacked. One hundred fifty million people's identifying information is stolen. You go to jail. (That is the working theory here, "threat of jail time".)
Or Heartbleed doesn't take you down. You didn't get hacked before it was patched. You breathe a sigh of relief. You dodged a bullet there. Then Jan 2018 rolls around. Meltdown and Spectre show up, your database is hacked, you go to jail.
Yeah, people with "ethics" are just going to flock to the jobs where they can be put in jail because hackers find a bug in some software they're using.
The premise of this story is all wrong. Porter didn't need anyone's response to attack the CEO for a privacy breach, she was going to do it no matter what he said. And not wanting to release private details in a public hearing doesn't mean someone wouldn't give that information to a database like Equifax's. In fact, as the CEO, all of his data is already in Equifax databases. And there is no doubt that Porter would not reveal her information the same way and she's not the one being attacked for the privacy problems.
It's virtue signalling on Porter's part. That doesn't say anything about Equifax's actions or lack thereof, it's a comment about the politician involved only.
I've seen MANY, MANY examples where people went on to drive commercial sales of software products, thanks to them having a way to get their hands on free, pirated copies of the programs first.
That may be. My question is still, why did they go to the trouble of pirating that specific piece of software to begin with? If it was because they wanted the experience of that program because it was going to be something they needed to know for later, then it is unwarranted to claim that the purchase was driven by the piracy. The purchase was driven by the need to use that program.
I see that many times, where people pay for Word because they need the interoperability with other people, even though they could have "pirated" OfficeLibre and accomplished the tasks without actual piracy. Or they pay for Photoshop instead of using The Gimp.
Now, when you get to less common software where there is competition, I do believe that having low cost alternatives during the learning phase can drive sales later. That's for things like "Matlab", where The Mathworks has a student version for $100 and then requires LOTS of money for the full, professional version later. But if they don't snag the user as a student, they'll use something else (scipy, numpy, C, FORTRAN, R, etc). Very few people who pirate Photoshop are likely to be writing their own Photoshop in C or python when they get into the workplace.
But once an application has established itself as a "leading" one for the tasks at hand, most people would rather invest their time and energy in learning and mastering it, vs. another product that you may not be able to get help on from anybody else you know if you get stuck.
You've just repeated my point using different words. It was the usability of the product that drove the sale, not the fact that it was pirated early on.
Even when it comes to video game titles though?
I was pretty specific in saying that I was talking about "this category of software" (i.e. commercial utility software), not all software ever produced by anyone at any time ever.
I didn't say middle.
Well, since I see no ads at the start, and I don't bother watching anything past the end credits, it would have to be "in the middle" for any ads to appear for me.
I've never seen a purchased bluray
I've never purchased a Blu-Ray, simply because I don't have the hardware to play one. Good thing that content isn't locked into just Blu-Ray.
Likewise you get to endure a nice title card for the publisher / studio before you get to the menu.
What's a "menu"? I've bought plenty of content that I play on a regular basis that I see no "menu", "adverts", or "logo pages" for.
I guess if you buy the wrong format of content, you are locked into what that format can do. That's not a problem with buying content, per se, just the format you choose. Streaming (which isn't buying content, just access to look at it) or Blu-Ray may lock you into different things. Choose better.
You claim that you've never had this? I call bullshit. The studios even specifically put a requirement into players to make these unskippable for your viewing pleasure.
Really? I put a DVD into my DVD hardware, type "mplayer dvd://1" (or some other number) into the command line, and golly if I don't get to view the content without ads, menus, or logos.
The point is to get what you want when you pay.
Yes, I understand that your goal is to force the providers to sell you their goods the way you want them. But the comment I replied to was about being forced to view adverts and logos and stuff when playing movies, and I'm simply educating you that there are ways to do it other than the ways you choose to do it.
Not talking about movies here.
I'm sorry. I quoted what I was replying to. Here:
How are "movies with adverts" not talking about movies?
So not sure why you are talking about a streaming service.
Because you also said: "- The privilege of trying to guess which of the 10 streaming services you subscribe to actually has your movie.", which is explicitly talking about both "movies" and "streaming service".
If you buy the DVD, you can play it using many different players, and typically rip it to disk, all without seeing "adverts" or "logo screens".
ahem ... bullshit.
Your ignorance is causing you to be profane. Your problem.
Do we acquiesce simply because threat of government is too great? Wouldn't this be prima facie evidence that we already live in a tyranny?
No. You do realize that every law on the books today is an expectation that people will "acquiesce" because the threat of government is too great, I hope. Even such obvious laws like stopping at a stop sign. The expectation is that people will stop at stop signs because the threat of getting a ticket is too great. Unless you want to call "stop signs" prima facie evidence of tyranny...
Think about what we all are saying here, that government can compel you to say things, a violation of 1st and 5th Amendment rights,
The 5th amendment is protection against self-incrimination. Requiring a company to keep saying that they have received no notices is not an issue of self-incrimination, thus the 5th is irrelevant.
Under the 1st, the government can already compel people to say things, like testify in court when they receive a subpoena.
And if that is the case, we've already lost our Republic.
Only for those who think that any law at all is an infringement of their rights and a demonstration of absolute tyranny.
Without piracy you don't get the full experience of owning content: - Movies with adverts - Unskippable logo screens
Product placement is the only "adverts" I typically see in any of the movies I buy. I can't recall a purchased movie I have stopping in the middle to show me an ad.
Also, what is a "logo screen"? The movie title? Again, I don't see these and I purchase a lot of content.
- The privilege of trying to guess which of the 10 streaming services you subscribe to actually has your movie.
Oh. You want to purchase content in a way that you don't actually own it or control how it is delivered. That's just silly, isn't it? You're not buying content, you're renting it or buying access to viewing it for the length of time you belong to the streaming service.
Wouldn't you rather part with more money being nickle and dimed with DLC?
The closest I come to being "nickle and dimed" for streaming content is for Amazon Prime, but Prime Video is a secondary source for content I know I haven't actually purchased, and is a side-effect of getting Prime for shipping. It's pretty clear from the source that Prime Video is not a content purchase but just a stream to watch.
If you buy the DVD, you can play it using many different players, and typically rip it to disk, all without seeing "adverts" or "logo screens". So far, I've found one bit of content that won't rip using a simple setup -- the Star Trek "new universe" trilogy disks. Somehow they've messed with the disk structure so badly that it can be played by mplayer but mencoder won't rip it. No big loss, they aren't that good to start with. The movies, I mean.
I learned Photoshop in college, through illicit copies. I can't even guess how many copies I've since paid for, between personal use and work.
This implied causal chain may very well have been true for you. However, I don't believe it is for most.
Did you pirate a copy of Photoshop because it was free, or did you pirate that specific program because it was the leading application in its category and you wanted to learn that specific program? And then, did you buy copies for work because you had learned it in college from the pirated copy, or did you buy and use it because it is the leading application in its category?
Compare this for a moment with The Gimp. The Gimp is free. No piracy necessary. You could have it in college and for work for no money at all. Why didn't you use that program, instead of pirating and then paying for Photoshop?
I would propose that piracy in this category does not generate sales later. Sales are based on using a common, leading program, not just because one could get them for free before needing to buy them. If "free learning" was the true basis for later sales, then The Gimp would be the leading application instead of the alternate.
ATC conversations are a hindrance
How many times do I have to say this? You aren't having an "ATC conversation", you're declaring an emergency. One sentence. All of your citations talk about "communicate". That's more than declaring the emergency. It's doing all the other communications that can wait until the aircraft is in control.
It's pretty simple. Too simple, I guess. If ATC tries to "chat" (your description of them responding to an emergency declaration) when you can't talk to them, YOU IGNORE THEM. Is that really that hard? You've just told them you have an emergency. What are they going to do, get the FAA to yank your license because you didn't immediately respond to their questions? ATC aren't idiots. If you've just declared an emergency they're going to realize that you might be too busy to tell them how many souls are on board right this second. But, and this is the critical part, you will have the full, undivided attention of at least two ATC, ready to provide any assistance they can, and ready to call out rescue personnel the moment you leave their radar. They won't have to "pull the tapes" two hours later when you don't show up at your destination, they'll know within a minute where your echo was lost and where to start looking. And if and when you are ready to talk, they will have moved every other aircraft they can to another frequency so you'll have a clear channel and not face the "congested" radio you fear.
If you bothered to understand your citations, you'd notice that they weren't deadly experiences just because someone used the radio to declare an emergency. The "iflyamerica" link which you claims proves what happens if you declare an emergency while handling the emergency doesn't actually prove that. It proves that if NOBODY is flying the plane there is a problem. The PEA link refers to the same accident where the problem was NOBODY WAS FLYING THE PLANE. Again, nobody was flying the plane not because someone made a mayday call, it was because two pilots got engrossed in solving a trivial mechanical problem.
Your AOPA link talks about reading back a long complicated approach clearance before you start a turn and push the "approach mode" button on your autopilot, not you making a simple declaration of an emergency. If you read that clearance you'll notice that it gives you instructions where you will be navigating and aviating all the way to the missed approach point, at a minimum. Before you get there, you may get a clearance to land from tower with a "land short of runway 21". "My God, man, I'm AVIATING and NAVIGATING. I can't COMMUNICATE!" You are starting four miles from the approach fix. If you're at 120 knots, that is two minutes before you are established. Please, the first time you fly a practice approach as an instrument student, if you make it that far, try waiting two minutes to acknowledge a clearance like that and see if ATC buys the "aviate, navigate, communicate" rule #1. Then fail to acknowledge the "land short" instruction before you land and see if your landing clearance isn't revoked and you are told to go around (and, politely, "go away".) Yet, you've obeyed "rule #1" like a good pilot must.
in fact I'm a pretty poor one having very little experience.
I know. You don't think you can push a button that is right under your finger and speak into a mic that is right in front of your face while doing anything else.
So Call me back when the NTSB publishes their final report and you where right...
I where what? Christ almighty, you think the NTSB is going to issue a finding about how easy it is to use a radio? You truly have no clue, do you?
They didn't have TIME to communicate
They had two minutes. That's plenty of time for a mayday. I'm sorry that using a radio is a daunting task that consumes your 100% attention while saying anything, but for most of us it isn't that hard. We know the benefits of letting ATC know (for our safety and the safety of other airspace users) we have an emergency. We know that "rules" like the one you are fixated on have limits and what the words actually mean.
Rebuild the internet (Internet II) from the hardware up, this time do it right, don't just patch it.
Internet 2 already exists.
The most likely result of a rebuilt Internet III with full security is that you won't be able to use it because your access will lessen security. It will be the lesser-used cousin to Internet I, just as Usenet II is the lesser-used cousin of Usenet.
Like I said.. The FIRST thing you do is fly. Communicating is way down the priority list.
And like I said, communicating that you have an emergency is a trivial task that can happen in parallel with other high priority things. When you get a bit more experience you'll figure that out. In other words, "FIRST" is not a synonym for "ONLY".
My flight instructor was right. The controllers are going to get chatty,
Jesus, if you cannot ignore a controller while you're trying to aviate, then you really should not be in the cockpit at all. They WILL call you when THEY want to call you, and you might be in the middle of something important. The skill of either simply ignoring them until you can deal with it, or saying "standby" by pushing a button that is, as I already said, right under your finger, speaking into a microphone that is already up next to your mouth, using a radio that is already tuned to the frequency you need to use and has someone you are communicating with at the other end, is critical to your own safety.
No, the controllers aren't going to get "chatty". They're going to go into 'emergency' mode and try to provide you with any help you need. They're not going to chat with you, they're dealing with YOUR flight and YOUR emergency and paying attention to YOU. What do YOU need, what can they do to help YOU. If standing-by is what they can do, a simple "standby" deals with it.
Your flight instructor is right -- clearly you don't have the experience to handle simple radio communications while flying the plane. It's a good thing he's there.
I got on the radio and told the controller (and the traffic around the airport) that I was going to need a really LONG climb out but that I was staying in the pattern and needed to return as soon as I could.
In other words, you gave a "life story" instead of a simple mayday, and other people, hearing you reciting your life story assumed you were in a position to communicate a lot of other things. And you didn't have the experience to ignore them instead of fly the plane. Yes, a 100 hour pilot doesn't have a lot of experience with that kind of stuff.
Here's the point: the pilots of the aircraft that went down weren't 100 hour student pilots, they were commercial pilots with probably thousands of hours. They were on an IFR flight plan (if thunderstorms were nearby) and talking to a TRACON filled with professional controllers. They had plenty of experience with ATC, and they were undoubtedly able to manage "20 questions" with a simple "standby". They would certainly be able to announce an emergency without any significant distraction from dealing with the aircraft.
Someday you may have enough experience to know better. I hope. I would be really pissed if I were called out on a missing aircraft search that could have been prevented because "bobbied" had a mechanical failure in flight, flew the airplane into the ground, but felt he couldn't manage a call to ATC to announce the emergency so they could deal with it when it happened instead of a few hours later when your family calls up wondering where you are.
There is no need to communicate with ATC until you have the aircraft under some semblance of control.
Other than starting a process and alerting the people who might be able to help you land safely, and who may be responsible for routing other aircraft out of your way for THEIR safety, no, there is no reason to tell ATC anything about your emergency. And yes, if you have so little experience dealing with radios and ATC that it is a major process for you to say anything to them until you have recovered from your emergency all by yourself, by all means, don't call them. But please don't project your limited abilities onto others and tell them they shouldn't announce an emergency when it happens because they're supposed to fly first, navigate second, and communicating is absolute last on the list.
You identify and announce an emergency. That starts the ball rolling. That get the full attention of the controllers. There are now at least two pairs of eyes following you on radar (the controller and a supervisor) if you are still in radar contact. There is now a room full of other controllers who are starting to manage their traffic to give you a clear path to where you need to go. There is a phone in the hand of the supervisor passing info on to emergency responders to get them ready.
If you are a 100 pilot and cannot manage to squeak out a mayday when it happens to you, we can expect that we'll someday be wondering what happened to the plane "bobbied" was piloting that mysteriously didn't appear at the destination. I can tell you, other pilots are able to manage a radio transmission while they are aviating and navigating, too. Someday it won't be a daunting task for you, either.
If you are struggling for control of the aircraft, you don't have time to play 20 questions with ATC.
"Air Flooby thirty two mayday mayday mayday" is not "20 questions." Of course you don't play 20 questions while getting things figured out. But you DO make your initial radio call so everyone is awake and alert when you get around to dealing with them.
Sheesh. Using the radio in a modern airplane is not rocket science.
I looked up Sanctuary City on Wikipedia,
That's very nice. I live in a "sanctuary city" within a "sanctuary state." You looked it up in, of all fonts of knowledge, Wikipedia. Again, I'm sorry you don't fully grasp what those words mean.
I'm not sure what's illegal about it.
I don't believe this is a discussion of what is illegal or legal. Someone (was it you?) said that states were not free to make laws that were laxer than federal. Since "sanctuary state" laws are effectively repealing immigration law at the state level, they are laxer laws than the federal.
Then I pointed out the obviously laxer marijuana laws that many states have compared to the feds, and that's two strikes for the ignorant claim that states cannot be less strict.
The reason I desire a rooted device is to get access to the content I have purchased, is DRM free from the publisher, but is squirreled away in the /data/data directory by the app that handles it. Linux is irrelevant.
If you're talking about enforcing immigration law, that isn't an issue of setting regulations,
I'm sorry you're not familiar with the concept of "sanctuary state" or "sanctuary city", because it is not (just) an issue of local law enforcement enforcing laws, it is effectively nullifying federal law.
You might also want to consider the legal status of marijuana use at the federal level versus many states. Many states are a LOT less strict about its use these days.
A state cannot set regulations that are less strict
Two words: "sanctuary state".
The oxygen, nitrogen and argon, which make up nearly all of the atmosphere have no effect on infrared or visible waves.
Here on Earth they do. Is the sky not blue on your planet?
Thanks for the link. Any info on how easy this is to root?
Maybe that's the same company that provides Microsoft support that is closing down and needs me to call them back to get a refund on my service contract?
I'm sorry, I wasn't clear, Americans are subject to random drug tests,
I'm sorry, but you are wrong. I am an "American". I am not on any of the lists you gave. I am NOT subject to random drug tests. Ergo, your blanket statement is proven wrong.
They've created a common area in the cafeteria, why should they be able to repress speech?
Because the "common area" as you call it isn't common for you, it belongs to them, and was created for a specific purpose. Which isn't YOU blathering about whatever it is you hate today. You're on private property. The company owes you no first amendment rights.
I'm not going to waste more time correcting you. You hate what you hate and hearing the facts won't fix that.