surrenders them to Chinese authorities without a peep of complaint, and brings them back to the US and is surprised when federal spooks....
None of which has anything to do with border security and customs. Do you really think that anyone cares enough to spy on the mayor of a small town in rural California?
Hate to be a dick, but you DID charge admission using another company's IP.
Whoever posted that is a dick. According to the Gofundme page, he only charged $2, which was intended to cover the cost of prizes for the cosplay contest. No huge profit involved.
To the parent poster: you also are a dick, for posting this drivel, which misrepresents the situation.
This is actually a perfect example on self regulation. The EPA didn't find this but a private clean air organization
I think that you have a strange notion of the concept of "self". As you point out, it wasn't a motor manufacturer who discovered the problem.
Since this went on for several years without being discovered, VW was just unlucky to not get away with the cheat. How many other cheats have happened and not been discovered.
So, yes, this is a perfect example of how self-regulation doesn't work.
US chip cards are set to "prefer signature". Many of them don't have PINs at all.
I have had a chip-and-signature card for over a year now. I don't think it is "prefer signature", I think that it is "signature only".
Shortly after I got the card, during a trip to the UK, it surprised a few people, when the card was inserted into the reader and the reader printed out a paper slip for signature, instead of waiting for a PIN to be entered. There was no option to enter a PIN. On a more recent trip, people in the UK were used to this type of card..
'sharing culture' is one of the most ridiculous terms used today. Uber drivers are not "sharing" their cars any more than a pizza delivery driver is "sharing" his/her car.
Uber drivers are selling rides. They are selling their own time, and the running costs of their cars.
I would still blame the test labs for not doing their jobs which would have been actually testing the thing's performance, rather than trusting the vehicle performs like in their rather unrealistic lab setting.
Exactly how do you propose to design a test that will give a consistent and "realistic" measurement of emissions, yet will defeat attempts to cheat on the test? What is "realistic"? Is it my stop-and-go commute, or your long straight steady-speed highway run? You can't just write a test spec that says "drive down a typical road and measure the emissions", because the road speed and the types of road will have a big impact on the emissions, so the test won't give reproducible results.
The problem with US cars is side-impact protection. It would not require a fundamental change to the design to have different doors fitted to US and EU models, with the EU model doors having more protection.
No, in the USA and UK it's not. Private hire limos are regulated differently from taxis in those countries. This doesn't mean that Uber is following all the laws that are relevant to private hire/limo services. In other words, Uber isn't an illegal taxi service, but it may be an illegal private hire/limo service.
"In the United Kingdom, the name hackney carriage today refers to a taxicab licensed by the Public Carriage Office, local authority (non-metropolitan district councils, unitary authorities) or the Department of the Environment depending on region of the country.
Private limos and vehicles that turn up after a phone call / app message / whatever, but can not pick people up from the street are covered by legislation that refers to taxis. In legal terminology, Uber is providing a taxi service, they just might not be in common usage terminology.
You can flag down an Uber car that drives past? Don't think so. That makes Uber a private hire system.
Uber cars turn up after an appointment is made to pick up a specific person. That's pretty much the definition of a private hire car in the UK. To be clear, in the UK, private hire cars can pick people up from the street -- it's just that the pickup must be arranged in advance.
Private limos are regulated too in California. They have a PUC license to operate and rules they must follow.
Uber ignores those too.
I wasn't stating the Uber is obeying all the relevant laws. Just that the laws governing limos (private hire in other countries) are more relevant to Uber than laws governing taxis.
It's a private hire/limo company? How is Uber any different from someone calling a private hire/limo company, negotiating a price for the journey and then being picked up kerbside? All of which is legal in most cities.
The only difference in the process (from the customer's point of view) is that it is much more efficient.
Google is responsible for policing requests made from VPNs for the French, since it's technologically impossible,
It's not as imposible as you think. Do you have a cellphone that is linked to your Google account? Google sets your location based on where your cellphone is, in preference to where your IP address would imply.
I should have included the crucial paragraph in the story:
CNIL also rejected Google's accusation that it was going beyond its jurisdiction, saying that it just wants non-European companies to respect European laws when offering their services in Europe.
The critical text here is: "when offering services in Europe" . No compliance with the directive is needed when offering serivces outside of Europe.
The story is wrong. The court did not instruct Google to delist worldwide. Rather, the court instructed Google to delist from all Google domains, but Google only needs to delist when the query comes from a European IP address.
The F-35 reminds me of a sci-fi book where alien horde A has primitive ships, but a lot of them.
It doesn't remind me of fiction, but instead, of what really happened during WWII. The allies (USA especially) outproduced Germany with less effective, but more numerous weapons.
For the past 70 years, the USA has been preparing for war against a high-tech opponent, but fighting wars against low-tech opponents.
Common control questions are things like "Have you ever cheated on a test?" and "Have you ever underpaid your taxes?". These are things that nearly everyone has done.
Emphasis on "nearly". What this device does, then, if it works at all, is to proclaim the most honest amongst us as liars. Because, yes, there are people who could answer "no" to both of those questions.
No, no they're not. He had to go out of his way to plug his 'invention' back in during English class in order to get caught.
What level of cognitive dissonance (or just plain stupidity, or bigotry) does it take such that you want to make stuff up in order to support your argument?
Your theory sounds interesting... until we account for weird white bag inside the suitcase and for a simple, yet important fact: the clock's display faces the inside of the suitcase,
You should stop getting your news from Fox news. It wasn't in a suitcase.
He then turned the clock on during class and (apparently) set it up to alarm a few minutes later.
Again, you show your bias. Mostly, clocks are on all the time. And the "apparently" shows clearly that you are condemning him based on something that you assume.
There's a war on law enforcement by the media these days, and this was being used as an example of "overreaching law enforcement" except that it turns out it WASN'T. Ahmed didn't build a clock. He built a PROP. And the police wanted to know what he was planning on doing with prop bomb at school, which Ahmed simply wouldn't answer. And that's why he was arrested.
So, a kid repackages a clock to look like.... a clock. The kid tells anyone who asks that it's a clock. The police believe it is a clock. The whole "prop bomb" idea was invented whole cloth by the police.
What you are accusing the kid of is pure thought crime.
What they never did find out is why he felt the need to pull the parts out of a clock and shove them into a pencil case and bring it to school.
Who cares? It was a clock. He did not display the clock in any manner that would suggest that it was a bomb.
Perhaps the police and school were being trolled. But like the truism "you can't con an honest man", it's clear that the actions of the police were not motivated by rational thought. Instead, they were most likely motivated by racism. Racism that this device demonstrated most effectively.
What this kid built (perhaps deliberately, perhaps inadvertantly) was a racism detector. Perhaps you would advocate a law against "racism detectors"?
Could you please provide an example of an explosive belt (or, as you put it, "bomb vest") with external blinking lights?
I am sure that there are lots of examples to be seen in movies and TV: fictional movies and TV. Real life, not so much
But that's the reality of security and law enforcement in the USA today: they get their ideas about technology and our constitutional rights from Hollywood.
So someone is going to jail for this and the company will soon be bankrupt, right?
Oh wait, none of this will happen, because the government is controlled by corporations. Just like the GM story where the cover-up led to people dying. No one will ever serve any time for killing people in this manner.
Slashdot Mirror
None of which has anything to do with border security and customs. Do you really think that anyone cares enough to spy on the mayor of a small town in rural California?
Whoever posted that is a dick. According to the Gofundme page, he only charged $2, which was intended to cover the cost of prizes for the cosplay contest. No huge profit involved.
To the parent poster: you also are a dick, for posting this drivel, which misrepresents the situation.
Even so, the IRS' budget should be expanded:
I think that you have a strange notion of the concept of "self". As you point out, it wasn't a motor manufacturer who discovered the problem.
Since this went on for several years without being discovered, VW was just unlucky to not get away with the cheat. How many other cheats have happened and not been discovered.
So, yes, this is a perfect example of how self-regulation doesn't work.
And how much of that increase is military spending?
I have had a chip-and-signature card for over a year now. I don't think it is "prefer signature", I think that it is "signature only".
Shortly after I got the card, during a trip to the UK, it surprised a few people, when the card was inserted into the reader and the reader printed out a paper slip for signature, instead of waiting for a PIN to be entered. There was no option to enter a PIN. On a more recent trip, people in the UK were used to this type of card..
'sharing culture' is one of the most ridiculous terms used today. Uber drivers are not "sharing" their cars any more than a pizza delivery driver is "sharing" his/her car. Uber drivers are selling rides. They are selling their own time, and the running costs of their cars.
Exactly how do you propose to design a test that will give a consistent and "realistic" measurement of emissions, yet will defeat attempts to cheat on the test? What is "realistic"? Is it my stop-and-go commute, or your long straight steady-speed highway run? You can't just write a test spec that says "drive down a typical road and measure the emissions", because the road speed and the types of road will have a big impact on the emissions, so the test won't give reproducible results.
Guess what, tests are often not 100% realistic.
The problem with US cars is side-impact protection. It would not require a fundamental change to the design to have different doors fitted to US and EU models, with the EU model doors having more protection.
No, in the USA and UK it's not. Private hire limos are regulated differently from taxis in those countries. This doesn't mean that Uber is following all the laws that are relevant to private hire/limo services. In other words, Uber isn't an illegal taxi service, but it may be an illegal private hire/limo service.
Or how about what Wikipedia thinks
You can flag down an Uber car that drives past? Don't think so. That makes Uber a private hire system.
Uber cars turn up after an appointment is made to pick up a specific person. That's pretty much the definition of a private hire car in the UK. To be clear, in the UK, private hire cars can pick people up from the street -- it's just that the pickup must be arranged in advance.
I wasn't stating the Uber is obeying all the relevant laws. Just that the laws governing limos (private hire in other countries) are more relevant to Uber than laws governing taxis.
It's a private hire/limo company? How is Uber any different from someone calling a private hire/limo company, negotiating a price for the journey and then being picked up kerbside? All of which is legal in most cities.
The only difference in the process (from the customer's point of view) is that it is much more efficient.
It's not as imposible as you think. Do you have a cellphone that is linked to your Google account? Google sets your location based on where your cellphone is, in preference to where your IP address would imply.
The critical text here is: "when offering services in Europe" . No compliance with the directive is needed when offering serivces outside of Europe.
The story is wrong. The court did not instruct Google to delist worldwide. Rather, the court instructed Google to delist from all Google domains, but Google only needs to delist when the query comes from a European IP address.
It doesn't remind me of fiction, but instead, of what really happened during WWII. The allies (USA especially) outproduced Germany with less effective, but more numerous weapons.
For the past 70 years, the USA has been preparing for war against a high-tech opponent, but fighting wars against low-tech opponents.
Emphasis on "nearly". What this device does, then, if it works at all, is to proclaim the most honest amongst us as liars. Because, yes, there are people who could answer "no" to both of those questions.
What level of cognitive dissonance (or just plain stupidity, or bigotry) does it take such that you want to make stuff up in order to support your argument?
If so, how would Google know that the fake certificate exists? Does Chrome report fake certs back to the mothership?
You should stop getting your news from Fox news. It wasn't in a suitcase.
Again, you show your bias. Mostly, clocks are on all the time. And the "apparently" shows clearly that you are condemning him based on something that you assume.
So, a kid repackages a clock to look like .... a clock. The kid tells anyone who asks that it's a clock. The police believe it is a clock. The whole "prop bomb" idea was invented whole cloth by the police.
What you are accusing the kid of is pure thought crime.
Who cares? It was a clock. He did not display the clock in any manner that would suggest that it was a bomb.
Perhaps the police and school were being trolled. But like the truism "you can't con an honest man", it's clear that the actions of the police were not motivated by rational thought. Instead, they were most likely motivated by racism. Racism that this device demonstrated most effectively.
What this kid built (perhaps deliberately, perhaps inadvertantly) was a racism detector. Perhaps you would advocate a law against "racism detectors"?
I am sure that there are lots of examples to be seen in movies and TV: fictional movies and TV. Real life, not so much
But that's the reality of security and law enforcement in the USA today: they get their ideas about technology and our constitutional rights from Hollywood.
So someone is going to jail for this and the company will soon be bankrupt, right?
Oh wait, none of this will happen, because the government is controlled by corporations. Just like the GM story where the cover-up led to people dying. No one will ever serve any time for killing people in this manner.