There is no reason at all we can't still have "time zones" and use UTC. Things like computers could still have a "local offset for when sun is directly overhead" to use for adjusting things like alarms and things that should run end of business day etc.
All he needs on his phone is a little tick box on the alarm settings tab with something to the effect of "adjust for regional daylight hours"
Well what gets me is e-mails that go out that say "Conference call at 4pm EDT" and well its November 8th today. So I have to wonder does this person really mean 4pm EST? or do they mean 5pm EST? I don't know if they are mistaken about their time zone. If everyone would just agree to provide both UTC and local time when they are communicating with folks in multiple timezones it would be possible for people to "correct" errors.
Yes I would. If someone wants spout nonsense they should be allowed to spout nonsense. Its incumbent on the rest of us to act like responsible thinking people and ignore their obviously counter factual nonsense.
This happening to FB is ironic in that they advocated for the hand over, but this is how the rest of the world is going to treat freedom of speech online.
It was shameful shameful thing we did handing off the control to the UN.
This is a good example of where our state department ought to stand up for an American company. The message to Germany ought to be
"Screw you guys its an American website, Zuck can publish whatever the hell he wants and if you try to come after him or his assets we would be forced to retaliate against German citizens and German companies with assets in the USA. If you don't like his website, firewall it"
There is a difference between lending material support and holding / advocating the opinion that the other side should win. Is supporting the enemy of ones own nation adopted or otherwise disgraceful? I would I think agree with you that it is. I would have some pretty choice words for anyone suggesting there is one iota of goodness in ISIS and what they stand for, but I would not seek jail them.
Giving moral support to the enemy is on par with helping them get weapons. That really is the way war works.
No its not there is no moral equivalence there at all in fact! The right to question your own people/nations motives and the justification or lack there of for a war is crucial part of democracy. I am not suggesting at all there won't be am impact in doing so but the right to speak out is one of the core western values we should be fighting to up hold. Yes even when the occasional moron wants to make the argument we should reform our society into violent extremist Islamic theocracy. The correct response isn't to jail them, its to ignore their position if you are confident they will be dismissed as a crank or argue against it, perhaps to shout in their face or even organize a group of people to drown them out, but not take away their right to speak.
Its one thing for your local Applebees to bust out the hand held check pad for the evening if the computers are down.
The worst that happens is someone screws up and few meals have to get comped, maybe some supplies don't get reordered etc. As long as they get it mostly right things will be fine.
Its different in a Hospital, mostly right is often not only not good enough but deadly. You don't want staff suddenly using a fall back procedure they have comparatively little training and practice with! If its an emergency and you have a triage situation because of a disaster that is one thing, but you would be foolish to do anything that is elective or can be safely postponed.
Yes well we have public records laws that applied to Hillary that do not apply to the rest of us. Being Secretary of State is a privilege, you get all kinds of opportunity afterward to enrich yourself thru public speaking and consulting as well as other legal grey areas around what is and isn't insider trading etc. All that before you consider all the fine meals out at the worlds fanciest eateries and stays at the best hotels etc.
In exchange for all this you give up a little privacy, I don't feel bad for her she knew what she was getting herself into. She could have had a nice career back home in Arkansas as an attorney and enjoyed all kinds of privacy if that is what she wanted. She chose public life, and that means the rest of us have a right to know what she was up to!
This is a good a point. If you want protection you should hire your own yard bulls. That is how the rail road companies did it. The public should not be forced to foot the bill.
Well that is what they ought to do! Isn't it. I mean this facebook checkin business is about thwarting police investigation, its not really about protest is it?
People have a right to protest, I would say in fact the right to protest on public property is frequently and wrongly trodden on. Good examples are protests outside the G8, or when states try to pass laws keeping people of public sidewalks because they happen to be to near an abortion clinic, or when a political convetion is held and protesters are kept off the streets and forces to some location often miles away. This is all wrong an unjust.
That isn't what is happening here though, here we have protesters trespassing on private property and in many cases damaging a defacing private property, even the Green Party candidate. These are actually people who haven't any rights to be where they are. These facebook posters are now willfully and deliberately interfering with police investigations. They probably should be charged with evidence tampering or obstruction! I actually don't approve the no fly list though because there is no due process there, which is BS. If the government is going to restrict your right to travel it should only be able to do so after you have been convicted of an actual felony of some kind and had your day before a fair and impartial court with representation before a jury of peers if you so desire.
Sex is an act with a defined purpose, well its actually two fold, its first to procreate and second to strengthen and forge the bond between the patriarch and matriarch of the family.
When you use it differently than that less favorable outcomes occur. Just like if you try to use a chisel for an application that calls for a screw driver. Misuse of a thing has consequences. Even if you can remove the unwanted pregnancy risk you still have not addressed all the STDs, and you add the risk of all kinds of side effects from the birth control. All hormone bases birth controls in women do carry non negligible risks of impacting decision making, and possibly elevated risks for certain cancers and other disease. Even condoms may trigger an allergy.
There is way to enjoy sex safely, that is inside a permeate, monogamous, committed relationship, where children while possibly unplanned will not be unwanted.
No that isn't why. He committed behavior that was defined by law to be felonious is why, if it was a misdemeanor he probably would be looking at community service and or a fine.
Also Sheriff Joe is not in a position to make the decision anyway the most he can is recommend to the prosecutor the kid be charged with this or that, the ultimate decision is not his. Its the local prosecutor who does that. The most Sheriff Joe can do is make him miserable while he is waiting to be formally charged and while he awaits trial. If the court decides he should serve any part of his sentence in county lockup rather than a prison or juvenile facility, than Sheriff Joe can make him miserable for the duration.
Seriously if you are going to complain about the abuses Arpaio might be committing at least get your facts strait. Arpaio might indeed be over stepping with his apparently harsh treatment of people who in many cases have not even been convicted yet. When you get the basic facts wrong like this though the rest of us are forced to assume you have been brain washed with "conservatives == bad".
To add to this I think there is a valid question of demographics as well. Advertisers want young people with disposable income for the most part. What is the average age of Yahoo!'s audience? I bet it skews older now. I mean who created yahoo mail accounts after Gmail was available without an invite?
Fine but that isn't what this is about. This about a weapon that can nuke all of Texas. It does not take but a few of these devices to leave us effectively without a country.
This isn't you 60's era device here that would use to target your opponents own ICBM capability. This really is a nation killer. The point of this type of weapon is that you'd use it when your back is against the wall, so the message to your enemies is don't put my back against the wall or we will all regret it. Its a slight variation on MAD, but you might possible use this as a response to an impending invasion you don't think your forces can repel etc, not just a nuclear counter attack.
Simple its the most cost effective way to counter our aggressive behavior. Its a non starter given Russia's GDP relative to ours to develop and field a conventional army with current technology and man power on the scale of ours.
It is DIRT CHEAP by comparison to develop a vanguard nuclear weapons program. Being in possession of a weapon that has a high probability of being able to wipe out much of the Eastern United States for which we do not have a reliable counter measure, renders our convention force impotent once the stakes are raised high enough for Russia to consider using such a weapon. If we decided to undertake a military intervention in Ukraine for example.
Personally as someone who does not think we should be getting so involved in others fights around the globe I think we should go the same route. We should close our foreign bases and withdraw our troops. I would suggest we mostly don't need the army. We should probably up size the marines and maintain the navy as is so we have the option of conventional force projection when needed, for short term conflicts that might be in our interest to fight out. Our general policy ought to be 'sleeping giant' leave America and her territories alone and we leave you alone. If you fail to leave us alone we vaporize our palace and most of the capital city around with an nuclear tipped ICBM.
Oh I am fully aware the 'earth' will 'fix' the problem. I am also aware the "earth's solution" will mean the mass death of humanity though starvation and war. No thank you, I consider myself a misanthrope and I still think people deserve better than that!
Well why is that I wounder? Could it because because most of the leading authority figures and potential candidates are embroiled in scandal after scandal. Could it because by and large authority HAS screwed over the common man. Whatever your politics are at least in the USA the fact is there has been tremendous wealth consolidation over the past 40 years and it has occurred under both left wing and right wing administrations, under both left wing and right wing majority Congresses.
By any reasonably account pretty much all post WWII authorities have 'screwed us over' I don't see why they should be trusted. Technocrats were running the financial centers during the global crisis. Technocrats have overseen what has been the slowest recovery in history. I think its abundantly clear these people ARE NOT in fact any more fit to lead than the usual poster here. Fancy degrees and acronyms don't change that.
That *was* an option, now it isn't for two reasons.
1) lots of distributed application depend on open circuit (in terms of carbon) power solutions. Its cost prohibitive to really fix that. By contrast carbon removal could be centralized at a comparative small number of points.
2) We may be already in a positive feedback loop in terms of global temperatures and so you must break the loop, conservation will not achieve that.
I agree with you the time for conservation is past. We are at least if we want to continue to enjoy the standard of living we do beyond the natural carrying capacity of the globe. The answer is geo-engineering. I don't agree with your assessment we can remove carbon in sufficient quantities from the atmosphere. Do you have any evidence to site? I would argue the opposite, given we have been able to put a sufficient amount of carbon into the atmosphere to account for at least some of the temperature and ocean acidification changes we are seeing, it stands to reason we should be capable of removing it as well.
Technologies exist to efficiently (in terms of volume) remove carbon from air today. It just requires lots of input energy. There are a sources that could provide such energy at hand. Fission as well as that big fusion ball we call the sun could provide a enough power. We just need to get serious about doing it. We should reallocate the resources currently being used on carbon reduction to carbon removal efforts. It would go a long way.
It's been years since new car buyers would have to worry about things that could actually render their vehicle undrivable. But those concerns are coming back, Fisher said.
Yep so great we live in a nation were we have choice and freedom.
Don't be ignorant yourself there is not and was never a push to get more men into nursing, there was a push get more PEOPLE into nursing. Nursing is a case where there were at least at one point a lot of job openings and not a lot of licensed nurses to fill them. The result at least for a while was sky high wages, and employees did not want that. Employees wanted warm bodies with the required licenses they cared not one whit what was between their legs or how it got there. Which is exactly why the whole 'pink sourcing' video a while back is so crazy stupid. If your typical large corporation really though hiring women meant they could pay 74 cents on the dollar no man would ever get a job offer again! One or both of the following is true the method of measurement is not accurate and does silly things like lump in general practitioners with heat surgeons into over broad categories like 'medical doctor' or women are receiving alternative compensation in the form of more flexible hours, greater time off, higher insurance costs etc that accounts for the difference in cash.
It never had anything to do with the idea than men were being somehow unfairly excluded and barred from the profession. I never once heard anyone suggest that was a possibility.
Lets say I buy one of those little PLUG computers from china with no operating system or even perhaps it just ships with a bone stock debian arm distribution on it.
What are their obligations here? Do they have make sure I get debian updates for X years. What if debian retires that release? Does debian have to support that release for X years because someone might have put it on a device.
What happens if I configure it as a router + HTTP proxy for someone using COTS software. Is it a 'computer' or and IoT device? Am I obligated to continue to 'support' it?
Do I become a vendor because I charged someone $50 for one hours time and configured a system for them?
The devil is naturally where he may always be found in the details. I don't think you can legislate what people are allowed to connect to the Internet.
What you can do is legislate where the responsibility falls. I think you have to put this on the individual. YOU are responsible for what your machines do on the internet. Yes if you are hacked that person might be subject to criminal prosecution but YOU should still have some cival and possibly criminal exposure for some crime like 'enabled malicious network activity' with a mens rea of 'negligence'.
That would place the burden on the owner to keep stuff patched, be able to show they keep stuff patched, if you want to run stuff that is outa of support be able to show you placed other effective controls in place. IE that webserver has a non overflow bug, so I put a WAF in front. If you can't and your device is used in an attack its YOUR problem at least partly.
If only it were that easy. So much of security is a case of people abusing behavior of a complex system. Its difficult to image how some of these complex interactions might be exploited ahead of time.
This is a case where for the most part the system is working as designed. A high amount of traffic is detected so the system pushes the devices to fall back on legacy resources so the system of call handling over all can continue to function. It just so happens the high traffic isn't a bunch of devices all wanting voice and data at one but a basically a DOS attack. There isn't much you can do about DOS attacks on over the air media. If someone wants to jam a signal they can. This is basically that but they happen to be doing some protocol participation as well.
Availability is part of security, should the system just fall over under high load instead? Would that be 'more secure' in your estimation or less?
Honestly what should probably happen is the handset should ask.. "LTE fallback requested, voice and data privacy not assured, do you wish to proceed?" Now you are back to a human problem where they have to make a judgement call. They also have to be savvy about the situation, and ask themselves is this likely happening because of some congestion event or is this an attempt to MITM me?
Slashdot Mirror
There is no reason at all we can't still have "time zones" and use UTC. Things like computers could still have a "local offset for when sun is directly overhead" to use for adjusting things like alarms and things that should run end of business day etc.
All he needs on his phone is a little tick box on the alarm settings tab with something to the effect of "adjust for regional daylight hours"
Well what gets me is e-mails that go out that say "Conference call at 4pm EDT" and well its November 8th today. So I have to wonder does this person really mean 4pm EST? or do they mean 5pm EST? I don't know if they are mistaken about their time zone. If everyone would just agree to provide both UTC and local time when they are communicating with folks in multiple timezones it would be possible for people to "correct" errors.
Yes I would. If someone wants spout nonsense they should be allowed to spout nonsense. Its incumbent on the rest of us to act like responsible thinking people and ignore their obviously counter factual nonsense.
This happening to FB is ironic in that they advocated for the hand over, but this is how the rest of the world is going to treat freedom of speech online.
It was shameful shameful thing we did handing off the control to the UN.
This is a good example of where our state department ought to stand up for an American company. The message to Germany ought to be
"Screw you guys its an American website, Zuck can publish whatever the hell he wants and if you try to come after him or his assets we would be forced to retaliate against German citizens and German companies with assets in the USA. If you don't like his website, firewall it"
There is a difference between lending material support and holding / advocating the opinion that the other side should win. Is supporting the enemy of ones own nation adopted or otherwise disgraceful? I would I think agree with you that it is. I would have some pretty choice words for anyone suggesting there is one iota of goodness in ISIS and what they stand for, but I would not seek jail them.
Giving moral support to the enemy is on par with helping them get weapons. That really is the way war works.
No its not there is no moral equivalence there at all in fact! The right to question your own people/nations motives and the justification or lack there of for a war is crucial part of democracy. I am not suggesting at all there won't be am impact in doing so but the right to speak out is one of the core western values we should be fighting to up hold. Yes even when the occasional moron wants to make the argument we should reform our society into violent extremist Islamic theocracy. The correct response isn't to jail them, its to ignore their position if you are confident they will be dismissed as a crank or argue against it, perhaps to shout in their face or even organize a group of people to drown them out, but not take away their right to speak.
Its one thing for your local Applebees to bust out the hand held check pad for the evening if the computers are down.
The worst that happens is someone screws up and few meals have to get comped, maybe some supplies don't get reordered etc. As long as they get it mostly right things will be fine.
Its different in a Hospital, mostly right is often not only not good enough but deadly. You don't want staff suddenly using a fall back procedure they have comparatively little training and practice with! If its an emergency and you have a triage situation because of a disaster that is one thing, but you would be foolish to do anything that is elective or can be safely postponed.
Yes well we have public records laws that applied to Hillary that do not apply to the rest of us. Being Secretary of State is a privilege, you get all kinds of opportunity afterward to enrich yourself thru public speaking and consulting as well as other legal grey areas around what is and isn't insider trading etc. All that before you consider all the fine meals out at the worlds fanciest eateries and stays at the best hotels etc.
In exchange for all this you give up a little privacy, I don't feel bad for her she knew what she was getting herself into. She could have had a nice career back home in Arkansas as an attorney and enjoyed all kinds of privacy if that is what she wanted. She chose public life, and that means the rest of us have a right to know what she was up to!
This is a good a point. If you want protection you should hire your own yard bulls. That is how the rail road companies did it. The public should not be forced to foot the bill.
Well that is what they ought to do! Isn't it. I mean this facebook checkin business is about thwarting police investigation, its not really about protest is it?
People have a right to protest, I would say in fact the right to protest on public property is frequently and wrongly trodden on. Good examples are protests outside the G8, or when states try to pass laws keeping people of public sidewalks because they happen to be to near an abortion clinic, or when a political convetion is held and protesters are kept off the streets and forces to some location often miles away. This is all wrong an unjust.
That isn't what is happening here though, here we have protesters trespassing on private property and in many cases damaging a defacing private property, even the Green Party candidate. These are actually people who haven't any rights to be where they are. These facebook posters are now willfully and deliberately interfering with police investigations. They probably should be charged with evidence tampering or obstruction! I actually don't approve the no fly list though because there is no due process there, which is BS. If the government is going to restrict your right to travel it should only be able to do so after you have been convicted of an actual felony of some kind and had your day before a fair and impartial court with representation before a jury of peers if you so desire.
Sex is an act with a defined purpose, well its actually two fold, its first to procreate and second to strengthen and forge the bond between the patriarch and matriarch of the family.
When you use it differently than that less favorable outcomes occur. Just like if you try to use a chisel for an application that calls for a screw driver. Misuse of a thing has consequences. Even if you can remove the unwanted pregnancy risk you still have not addressed all the STDs, and you add the risk of all kinds of side effects from the birth control. All hormone bases birth controls in women do carry non negligible risks of impacting decision making, and possibly elevated risks for certain cancers and other disease. Even condoms may trigger an allergy.
There is way to enjoy sex safely, that is inside a permeate, monogamous, committed relationship, where children while possibly unplanned will not be unwanted.
No that isn't why. He committed behavior that was defined by law to be felonious is why, if it was a misdemeanor he probably would be looking at community service and or a fine.
Also Sheriff Joe is not in a position to make the decision anyway the most he can is recommend to the prosecutor the kid be charged with this or that, the ultimate decision is not his. Its the local prosecutor who does that. The most Sheriff Joe can do is make him miserable while he is waiting to be formally charged and while he awaits trial. If the court decides he should serve any part of his sentence in county lockup rather than a prison or juvenile facility, than Sheriff Joe can make him miserable for the duration.
Seriously if you are going to complain about the abuses Arpaio might be committing at least get your facts strait. Arpaio might indeed be over stepping with his apparently harsh treatment of people who in many cases have not even been convicted yet. When you get the basic facts wrong like this though the rest of us are forced to assume you have been brain washed with "conservatives == bad".
To add to this I think there is a valid question of demographics as well. Advertisers want young people with disposable income for the most part. What is the average age of Yahoo!'s audience? I bet it skews older now. I mean who created yahoo mail accounts after Gmail was available without an invite?
Fine but that isn't what this is about. This about a weapon that can nuke all of Texas. It does not take but a few of these devices to leave us effectively without a country.
This isn't you 60's era device here that would use to target your opponents own ICBM capability. This really is a nation killer. The point of this type of weapon is that you'd use it when your back is against the wall, so the message to your enemies is don't put my back against the wall or we will all regret it. Its a slight variation on MAD, but you might possible use this as a response to an impending invasion you don't think your forces can repel etc, not just a nuclear counter attack.
Sure that might be true but so what. If someone nukes the home land what is left to defend?
Simple its the most cost effective way to counter our aggressive behavior. Its a non starter given Russia's GDP relative to ours to develop and field a conventional army with current technology and man power on the scale of ours.
It is DIRT CHEAP by comparison to develop a vanguard nuclear weapons program. Being in possession of a weapon that has a high probability of being able to wipe out much of the Eastern United States for which we do not have a reliable counter measure, renders our convention force impotent once the stakes are raised high enough for Russia to consider using such a weapon. If we decided to undertake a military intervention in Ukraine for example.
Personally as someone who does not think we should be getting so involved in others fights around the globe I think we should go the same route. We should close our foreign bases and withdraw our troops. I would suggest we mostly don't need the army. We should probably up size the marines and maintain the navy as is so we have the option of conventional force projection when needed, for short term conflicts that might be in our interest to fight out. Our general policy ought to be 'sleeping giant' leave America and her territories alone and we leave you alone. If you fail to leave us alone we vaporize our palace and most of the capital city around with an nuclear tipped ICBM.
Really,
Tell me how do you do enough concentrated agriculture to feed the 8B people without nitrogen fertilizer?
Oh I am fully aware the 'earth' will 'fix' the problem. I am also aware the "earth's solution" will mean the mass death of humanity though starvation and war. No thank you, I consider myself a misanthrope and I still think people deserve better than that!
I'd like to see us at least try.
Well why is that I wounder? Could it because because most of the leading authority figures and potential candidates are embroiled in scandal after scandal. Could it because by and large authority HAS screwed over the common man. Whatever your politics are at least in the USA the fact is there has been tremendous wealth consolidation over the past 40 years and it has occurred under both left wing and right wing administrations, under both left wing and right wing majority Congresses.
By any reasonably account pretty much all post WWII authorities have 'screwed us over' I don't see why they should be trusted. Technocrats were running the financial centers during the global crisis. Technocrats have overseen what has been the slowest recovery in history. I think its abundantly clear these people ARE NOT in fact any more fit to lead than the usual poster here. Fancy degrees and acronyms don't change that.
That *was* an option, now it isn't for two reasons.
1) lots of distributed application depend on open circuit (in terms of carbon) power solutions. Its cost prohibitive to really fix that. By contrast carbon removal could be centralized at a comparative small number of points.
2) We may be already in a positive feedback loop in terms of global temperatures and so you must break the loop, conservation will not achieve that.
I agree with you the time for conservation is past. We are at least if we want to continue to enjoy the standard of living we do beyond the natural carrying capacity of the globe. The answer is geo-engineering. I don't agree with your assessment we can remove carbon in sufficient quantities from the atmosphere. Do you have any evidence to site? I would argue the opposite, given we have been able to put a sufficient amount of carbon into the atmosphere to account for at least some of the temperature and ocean acidification changes we are seeing, it stands to reason we should be capable of removing it as well.
Technologies exist to efficiently (in terms of volume) remove carbon from air today. It just requires lots of input energy. There are a sources that could provide such energy at hand. Fission as well as that big fusion ball we call the sun could provide a enough power. We just need to get serious about doing it. We should reallocate the resources currently being used on carbon reduction to carbon removal efforts. It would go a long way.
It's been years since new car buyers would have to worry about things that could actually render their vehicle undrivable. But those concerns are coming back, Fisher said.
Yep so great we live in a nation were we have choice and freedom.
Don't be ignorant yourself there is not and was never a push to get more men into nursing, there was a push get more PEOPLE into nursing. Nursing is a case where there were at least at one point a lot of job openings and not a lot of licensed nurses to fill them. The result at least for a while was sky high wages, and employees did not want that. Employees wanted warm bodies with the required licenses they cared not one whit what was between their legs or how it got there. Which is exactly why the whole 'pink sourcing' video a while back is so crazy stupid. If your typical large corporation really though hiring women meant they could pay 74 cents on the dollar no man would ever get a job offer again! One or both of the following is true the method of measurement is not accurate and does silly things like lump in general practitioners with heat surgeons into over broad categories like 'medical doctor' or women are receiving alternative compensation in the form of more flexible hours, greater time off, higher insurance costs etc that accounts for the difference in cash.
It never had anything to do with the idea than men were being somehow unfairly excluded and barred from the profession. I never once heard anyone suggest that was a possibility.
Its conceptually simple, practically hard.
Lets say I buy one of those little PLUG computers from china with no operating system or even perhaps it just ships with a bone stock debian arm distribution on it.
What are their obligations here? Do they have make sure I get debian updates for X years. What if debian retires that release? Does debian have to support that release for X years because someone might have put it on a device.
What happens if I configure it as a router + HTTP proxy for someone using COTS software. Is it a 'computer' or and IoT device? Am I obligated to continue to 'support' it?
Do I become a vendor because I charged someone $50 for one hours time and configured a system for them?
The devil is naturally where he may always be found in the details. I don't think you can legislate what people are allowed to connect to the Internet.
What you can do is legislate where the responsibility falls. I think you have to put this on the individual. YOU are responsible for what your machines do on the internet. Yes if you are hacked that person might be subject to criminal prosecution but YOU should still have some cival and possibly criminal exposure for some crime like 'enabled malicious network activity' with a mens rea of 'negligence'.
That would place the burden on the owner to keep stuff patched, be able to show they keep stuff patched, if you want to run stuff that is outa of support be able to show you placed other effective controls in place. IE that webserver has a non overflow bug, so I put a WAF in front. If you can't and your device is used in an attack its YOUR problem at least partly.
If only it were that easy. So much of security is a case of people abusing behavior of a complex system. Its difficult to image how some of these complex interactions might be exploited ahead of time.
This is a case where for the most part the system is working as designed. A high amount of traffic is detected so the system pushes the devices to fall back on legacy resources so the system of call handling over all can continue to function. It just so happens the high traffic isn't a bunch of devices all wanting voice and data at one but a basically a DOS attack. There isn't much you can do about DOS attacks on over the air media. If someone wants to jam a signal they can. This is basically that but they happen to be doing some protocol participation as well.
Availability is part of security, should the system just fall over under high load instead? Would that be 'more secure' in your estimation or less?
Honestly what should probably happen is the handset should ask.. "LTE fallback requested, voice and data privacy not assured, do you wish to proceed?" Now you are back to a human problem where they have to make a judgement call. They also have to be savvy about the situation, and ask themselves is this likely happening because of some congestion event or is this an attempt to MITM me?