Damnit...I hit the button before writing my entire post. Basically, I'm glad you included the MIPS, because as many of us recall from the PC wars, companies were constantly advertising their clock rates, and the masses were buying it as a valid indication of more powerful machines.
Considering that it's 85 years old, one of the busiest airports in the world, and had to put up with anti-expansion efforts from locals, it's not that bad. I recommend reading a bit of the history (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Los_Angeles_International_Airport#History).
No sane company executive is going to approve it because it would make them libel. Humans come with a variety of skill levels, and while I'd likely "plow ahead" in my AWD Jeep, I'd more likely telecommute if I only had a less capable vehicle. It's all about judgement, and that's why the human should have some say.
I live in the Washington DC (northern Virginia) area. We've had school closures here when it's just predicted to get a little snow. Having grown up driving on the roads in Michigan, I'm always amused by this, but when you actually get on snowy roads here, you realize how many people have absolutely no clue how to handle a vehicle in inclement weather. The area is a melting pot of people from everywhere, so it's somewhat understandable. But still, if you don't know what you're doing, stay the fuck off the road.
"The vast majority of the government consists of unelected bureaucrats."
True, but it doesn't matter because they WORK FOR the elected bureaucrats.
Actually, it does matter, because those who are elected hold little power over the career bureaucrats. Non-elected bureaucrats have huge amounts of power here (I live in the DC burbs).
Says you (and many others), but until it's settled in the legal system, the other side of the coin is... To use their wifi, you're stepping back into their property. You are interacting (not just receiving) with someone else s property. If something owned by me leaves my property, it doesn't become fair game, it's still owned by me. I'm not saying I want it this way, but that it might just end up like that.
Yeah, you've defiantly found the authority on the topic, not.
The SCOTUS doesn't just step in, ever. Cases are brought to them, and almost always by already having been tried through a lower court and then appealed.
The same ones who believe that if their front door is unlocked, it doesn't give you the right to come on in. I'm not saying it's right, I'm saying your viewpoint isn't the only one.
Unencrypted RF comms *are* fair game for anyone to receive, though recording them is often illegal (notably, recording cell phone calls off the air is, quite reasonably, prohibited). This ruling results from judges being experts in the law but ignorant of the facts of modern radio technology. I rather expect this to be appealed to the Nine In Black, who may or may not have a clue, but who are at least much better briefed than some appeals judges. Perverse and head-banging court rulings are unavoidable in even the best judicial systems, alas.
So, let's draw an analogy. And, disclaimer: I'm not advocating one side or the other.
I own a field that doesn't have a fence around it. Does that make it legal for people to come and play in that field? Do I have to fence it off and post no trespassing signs to make it illegal? IANAL, but I think the answer is no. How about if my front door has a welcome mat and is wide open. Can you come in and use my bathroom?
The FCC long held that you could legally receive RF comms, but WI-FI connections are not simply a reception...you handshake, and establish a connection. So, using an open one isn't the same thing (yes, this isn't what Google did).
I don't think the laws and courts have kept up with the technologies, and this all needs clarification. I've personally always assumed that an open wifi was fair game for use.
The debate is complicated by the media's lack of reporters with any level of scientific training or competence.
Or scientists with the skill to communicate the issues at the general public's level of ability to grasp it. The community needs a new Carl Sagan, and Neil DeGrasse Tyson is doing well, but this isn't really his area of expertise.
The real question is why would anyone want a Top Secret clearance? Is the pay really so great to be worth the trouble?
... Is it a wonder that people will go through security clearance to get a cushy government [contractor] job where pay is not dependent upon performance?
Ah, now you're just being a jackass because you're either lying, or you've never been in the environment to know anything about government contract work. If you believe contract work isn't competitive, you're a complete idiot.
I suppose the only big deal would be what do you tell your friends and family when they go to you telling you the government questioned them about you.
It's a big deal when we spend all this money to keep secrets from our own citizenry.
And how do you suppose you keep secrets from your enemies? If you have a secret, should you just let all your citizens know? Surely, it would be safe with them. Maybe right before the D-Day invasion, they should have broadcast the plan across the US and Britain.
Slashdot Mirror
Unless you remove the battery, is your phone really ever off?
Damnit...I hit the button before writing my entire post. Basically, I'm glad you included the MIPS, because as many of us recall from the PC wars, companies were constantly advertising their clock rates, and the masses were buying it as a valid indication of more powerful machines.
Clock speed != power
There are roughly 400 nations connected to the internet
I've seen counts of 189 to 195, but 400 is a new record. Is there an alternate world?
fbobraga (1612783) to houghi (78078)
"U must be new here..."
Oh, the irony.
Considering that it's 85 years old, one of the busiest airports in the world, and had to put up with anti-expansion efforts from locals, it's not that bad. I recommend reading a bit of the history (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Los_Angeles_International_Airport#History).
No sane company executive is going to approve it because it would make them libel. Humans come with a variety of skill levels, and while I'd likely "plow ahead" in my AWD Jeep, I'd more likely telecommute if I only had a less capable vehicle. It's all about judgement, and that's why the human should have some say.
I live in the Washington DC (northern Virginia) area. We've had school closures here when it's just predicted to get a little snow. Having grown up driving on the roads in Michigan, I'm always amused by this, but when you actually get on snowy roads here, you realize how many people have absolutely no clue how to handle a vehicle in inclement weather. The area is a melting pot of people from everywhere, so it's somewhat understandable. But still, if you don't know what you're doing, stay the fuck off the road.
I would even go so far as to say that 9/11 may actually have been a conspiracy
You lost all credibility right there. No point in reading anything else posted by you, ever.
Please pull your head out of your anus.
YMMV. Every state registration is different. In Virginia, we don't have to declare at all.
By lawyers, and a lawsuit happy public.
FTFY
Okay, back to the reading comprehension class. Yes, I missed the fact that they're assuming a much smaller "infected population".
will kill 2 percent of the infected population, or about 2 million people
Current US population is well over 300million, so that's 6 million+, not 2 million.
(Cue the older Slashdot members calling me a youngin' and proclaiming that parenting from the 60's, 50's, etc would be better.)
'58, now gtfo(ff) my lawn.
"The vast majority of the government consists of unelected bureaucrats."
True, but it doesn't matter because they WORK FOR the elected bureaucrats.
Actually, it does matter, because those who are elected hold little power over the career bureaucrats. Non-elected bureaucrats have huge amounts of power here (I live in the DC burbs).
Says you (and many others), but until it's settled in the legal system, the other side of the coin is...
To use their wifi, you're stepping back into their property. You are interacting (not just receiving) with someone else s property.
If something owned by me leaves my property, it doesn't become fair game, it's still owned by me.
I'm not saying I want it this way, but that it might just end up like that.
Yeah, you've defiantly found the authority on the topic, not.
The SCOTUS doesn't just step in, ever. Cases are brought to them, and almost always by already having been tried through a lower court and then appealed.
What idiot thinks unsecured wifi is private?
The same ones who believe that if their front door is unlocked, it doesn't give you the right to come on in. I'm not saying it's right, I'm saying your viewpoint isn't the only one.
Unencrypted RF comms *are* fair game for anyone to receive, though recording them is often illegal (notably, recording cell phone calls off the air is, quite reasonably, prohibited). This ruling results from judges being experts in the law but ignorant of the facts of modern radio technology. I rather expect this to be appealed to the Nine In Black, who may or may not have a clue, but who are at least much better briefed than some appeals judges. Perverse and head-banging court rulings are unavoidable in even the best judicial systems, alas.
So, let's draw an analogy. And, disclaimer: I'm not advocating one side or the other.
I own a field that doesn't have a fence around it. Does that make it legal for people to come and play in that field? Do I have to fence it off and post no trespassing signs to make it illegal? IANAL, but I think the answer is no. How about if my front door has a welcome mat and is wide open. Can you come in and use my bathroom?
The FCC long held that you could legally receive RF comms, but WI-FI connections are not simply a reception...you handshake, and establish a connection. So, using an open one isn't the same thing (yes, this isn't what Google did).
I don't think the laws and courts have kept up with the technologies, and this all needs clarification. I've personally always assumed that an open wifi was fair game for use.
No it isn't. Government is elected officials
BZZZZZZT. False. The vast majority of the government consists of unelected bureaucrats.
I see you slept through Civics class.
Bravo! First insightful AC post I've seen in months.
The debate is complicated by the media's lack of reporters with any level of scientific training or competence.
Or scientists with the skill to communicate the issues at the general public's level of ability to grasp it. The community needs a new Carl Sagan, and Neil DeGrasse Tyson is doing well, but this isn't really his area of expertise.
The real question is why would anyone want a Top Secret clearance? Is the pay really so great to be worth the trouble?
... Is it a wonder that people will go through security clearance to get a cushy government [contractor] job where pay is not dependent upon performance?
Ah, now you're just being a jackass because you're either lying, or you've never been in the environment to know anything about government contract work. If you believe contract work isn't competitive, you're a complete idiot.
I suppose the only big deal would be what do you tell your friends and family when they go to you telling you the government questioned them about you.
It's a big deal when we spend all this money to keep secrets from our own citizenry.
And how do you suppose you keep secrets from your enemies? If you have a secret, should you just let all your citizens know? Surely, it would be safe with them. Maybe right before the D-Day invasion, they should have broadcast the plan across the US and Britain.