It's pretty clear you've never worked in a corporate IT department.
So the issue is: Was there a policy that prohibited use of those systems for that purpose?
Any employer worth his or her salt has an item in the employee handbook that prohibits employees from installing stuff on systems without permission.
Furthermore, and I have to point this out to users ALL the time- the computer they use is not theirs. It belongs to the company, as does the telephone, the power that PC uses, and its internet connection.
Granted, since the machines were taxpayer funded, this should have raised some red-flags for Charles Smith (the fired employee)
That would be an understatement.
, however...... immediate termination rather than a warning seems a bit harsh.
Not if the employee handbook says that's the consequence. Not if Smith was doing other things deserving of termination. Not if his actions endangered adherence to security protocols, placed sensitive data at risk of disclosure, or caused a department to loose certification. As a professional system admin, the mere fact that he considered it appropriate to install stuff like that on government systems shows his judgment is impaired.
Any time you are using publicly funded resources for personal use, there should be extreme caution
I've been a sysadmin for years, and it's pretty much common sense, as in the "don't walk off building tops" kind of common sense, that you do not use your employer's systems for anything you haven't specifically sought authorization for. Reasons, off the top of my head:
potential crashes
potential security risks
resource consumption (power and bandwidth)
availability impact (ie, if that machine also happens to be a backup server, or a DB server...)
I can hear the kids yelling "but commercial software could be insecure too!" Well, that's right- but the difference is that if you're running something the IT department said was OK and the company gets h@x0r3d, they're the ones who take the heat. If it's because you were running some clownish search-for-ET thing or a program that puts a dancing ape on your desktop, well, then you get your ass canned so fast your head spins, and possibly get slapped with a lawsuit for damages as well.
Maybe the IT department has picked that official program because it's more secure, or has been certified by another government agency. Or they've actually tested/explored its security, or an outside consultant says it's more secure, or the maker of the software has signed agreements that their application meets security requirements of the government agency using the software.
Am I the only one who recognized the main graphic for the story as a lifted screencap from the movie Hackers? That movie's SOLE redeeming quality was Angelina Jolie...
Well, ok, that and the laugh factor. Not quite as much fun as MST3K'ing The Mummy with about a half dozen friends though.
considering how Diebold is in his district and will proably crush him with massive donations to his opponent.
As Walmart found with a small town in CA- when a corporate giant leans into the political process that blatantly, people get really pissed.
They won't have to do a thing- if Diebold has enough employees in the county, he'll simply loose because a vote for him will be turned into a vote for putting Diebold employees out of work. Happens allllll the time, and people are dumb enough to fall for it every single time.
...they don't do ANYTHING not in their best interests.
they already own a browser
Yes, but Mozilla/Netscape doesn't given them (I suspect) a boatload of cash from a company that wants marketshare, marketshare, marketshare. AOL desperately needs cash- ever since the merger, they've been hemorrhaging money because the index finger doesn't know what the middle finger is doing- and neither even knows about the thumb.
Or, it could be as simple as "AOL customizations to Mozilla/Netscape take X hours and cost Y dollars, MS is willing to do it all for free".
Needless to say, I'm sure MS thinks they're getting something out of the deal too.
These are the types of advances we need to make the space elevator a reality.
Yeesh. No. There are just a few other problems, as with all ideas hatched by Scifi authors (who need to do little more than make something plausible on the most abstract level. Scifi authors almost always get it WRONG- we don't all use jetpacks and atomic cars to get to work, now do we? No 'death rays'- hell, we haven't even gotten speech recognition down, really).
I know some -other- fanboy will link to a FAQ that "answers"(says, for each issue, "we're aware of it and working on it!") each of these, but:
safety
location
weather
construction
turning an extremely hard object into something useful for a cable which must be flexible
financial backing
insurance
commercial viability
...all of these issues stacked against the relative ease of launching things into space (used to be a big deal. Now it's pretty ho-hum). Nevermind the main benefit everyone always cites (conveniently leaving out all costs except the actual energy needed to lift something- wow, a business like that with no overhead? Cool). Cutting the $/lb price by ten, is not going to mean 10x more stuff in space to put up. God, I hope not, it's cluttered as is...
Let the "flamebait" and "troll" mods who are Space Fanboys begin, for thou shalt not speak out against space development even if it IS a legitimate viewpoint- and one shared by many of us. Let's be a little more, uh, down to earth in our problem solving, please? We've got a lot of problems right here on earth, folks- and I'd much rather you all put that brainpower to them.
'Newton never dies, It only gets new hardware,' mine always died after about an hour of use then I had to change batteries The only new hardware they could add is a solar panel..
Huh? I once tried to intentionally run down my MP2100's battery. After several hours with the backlight on, I gave up.
Of course, now, the battery is probably toast after so many years of disuse...
The fault was a bit of grit or buildup preventing the throttle from closing properly.
Keep your air filter clean and don't buy junk gas.
Oy vey. Chances are your car is fuel injected- in which case, fuel quality has nothing to do with your problem, since fuel injection happens after the throttle (some cars are throttle-body-injected, but that system hasn't been in use for over a decade, and even then, the fuel is injected after the throttle vane).
Second, there's not really any such thing as "junk gas". 87 octane is just as "high quality" as 93. 93 just has octane boosters- that's IT. Common myth perpetuated by gasoline companies by advertising the highest octane gas only.
The problem was most likely oil residue from the crankcase breather. As your filter became more clogged, it increased the vacuum in the intake system. Crankcase gasses (including an oil mist) are sucked back into the intake for emissions reasons, but the oil gums things up. With the clogged air filter, more and more crankcase gasses were sucked in than they were supposed to be. Make sure the dipstick and oil fillter cap seal properly.
Proper maintenance is to buy a can of throttle body cleaner and wipe down all the edges of the throttle and the surface of the throttle body it mates against. You often only need to remove one or two hose clamps on older cars to get to this area- newer cars might require removing covers etc. Cars with electronically controlled throttles shouldn't be touched unless you know what you're doing.
Back in the mid 1980's just before the Audi 5000 thing was in the news, a schoolmate's father bought one of those cars and was able to repeat the symptom by engaging the cruise control, then lightly double-tapping the brake pedal, which is supposed to disengage the cruise. The accelerator pedal would suddenly drop to the floor and the throttle would go wide open due to the cruise control servo pulling it and not releasing even if you turned tried to turn off the cruise. The brakes were not very effective at WOT since the engine was quite strong.
I own a 1991 200 Quattro 20v turbo, which with the updated engine and modified engine computer I have, produces about 120 more HP than you "schoolmate's father's" 5000, assuming it was the 5000 turbo.
So, I can conclusively say you're full of shit. At full boost and hard acceleration in 3rd gear, the brakes will most certainly stop the car- hard.
The cruise control is deactivated by "vent" switches on the clutch and brake; the brake switch is also used for the brake lights. If the brake switch was damaged (an idiot who hasn't read the repair manual won't know they must be replaced if removed), then yes, braking would cause the cruise control to open the throttle because it would only see the car slowing down.
a)put in the clutch b)switch off cruise control on the control stalk c)stop the car firmly d)take the car out of gear e)shut off the ignition (yes, the brakes will continue to work, the car has a hydraulic pressure reservoir). Any of those will stop the acceleration.
Oh, and cruise control doesn't turn on below about 30mph, so it's impossible to have it cause cars to go through garage doors etc.
"ownership" has nothing to do with it; its whether the communication is conducted via a method the user has a "reasonable expectation of privacy" using. "That someone isn't going to go park outside my house with a cantenna, and a laptop equipped with software specifically configured to listen for and capture traffic" is most certainly "reasonable", nevermind they have to be fully aware it's possible for others to very easily listen in. If you're intentionally operating a radio device looking for signals you know are not meant for you, that's called eavesdropping.
In all cases, including "wardriving", there is no legitimate reason to collect the information or listen in. It's none of your goddamn business. That has always been the case, and always will be, no matter what a bunch of pimply faced kids in a car with a pringles can think; the law is not based on whether or not they think their little "hobby" should be legal or not- it's based on decades of case law.
This article describes how residents of an upscale neighborhood in Arizona are worried about wardriving
Maybe they could actually set up their access points properly. It's not hard. Even WEP is far from trivial for a wardriver to get past- they'd have to camp out and wait for "weak" packets...except for certain specific AP's that have faulty WEP key generation. The owner's manuals now cover turning on WEP/WPA quite nicely, have for years, and most of the glaring problems have been fixed long ago as well.
What's next, people complaining about all the crime in their neighborhood but not locking their goddamn front doors? Oh...check.
So, have they predicted when California is going to fall into the ocean?
To quote Laugh In, a show that was so much better than SNL is (or ever was), and was recorded in (sarcastically)"Beautiful downtown Burbank!":
"Good evening- and now, the news. Today, California experienced an earthquake. President Regan (show was recorded when he was still Governor- the audience thought the 'prediction' was hilarious) is concerned that Berkeley will shift even FURTHER to the left."
Also reminds me of the Tom Toles cartoon. A CA Couple watching the news-"The mudslides are over, the earthquakes have stopped, the riots finished." In the ocean nearby, are hundreds of frogs, and one's asking the other, "Now?"
the driver has tried to use the brakes, but he says they quickly heated up and became ineffective.
In almost every car ever produced, the brakes are far more "powerful" than the engine. This is complete bullshit, unless the car was poorly maintained or had a serious defect. You can't ride them- you really have to push hard and bring the vehicle to a stop quickly, or yes, you will overheat the brakes- but even if you do that, you don't have to wait long for them to cool down. You CAN'T use your handbrake- it's a PARKING brake, not an "emergency" brake, and yeah, they tend to not be properly adjusted so they won't do a very good job of stopping the car; since little weight is on them, manufacturers don't make the rear brakes very big. Use the BRAKE pedal, people.
Elizabeth Jordan, a NY EMT who called 911 claiming her car was out of control, became completely hysterical- a cop finally stopped the vehicle by pulling in front of her and using the cruiser's brakes(and rear bumper) to stop.
Funny thing, but they found absafuckingloutly nothing wrong with the car she was driving. The woman was simply a hysterical bitch who wanted attention. Suddenly after being brought to a stop by the cruiser, she could turn off the ignition. Why the fuck didn't she do that in the first place?
99% of the stories about cars going "out of control" are bullshit. It's almost always driver error- or a complete fabrication by the driver to get out of trouble (or for attention).
If y'all would tone down the rhetoric, you would have Bush out of office, but instead you use inflammatory terms like the headline here.
Bush and company called the evidence conclusive and worthy of going to war; it was used as justification to both US citizens and the international community. If you're going to spend hundreds of billions of dollars, kill a thousand plus US troops, trash carefully crafted diplomatic relations...THEN sell all that as a "success" AND the reason you should be elected- you goddamn well better have your I's dotted and your t's crossed.
It was publicly reported that at best the evidence was inconclusive, and now we see that it was quite positively false, and further that they KNEW it wasn't conclusive. Fact is, to date, not a single fucking piece of evidence has been uncovered to support any of Bush's claims that Iraq had any "weapons of mass destruction", and certainly not the claim that Iraq posed an imminent threat to national security.
That fits my definition of "lying" pretty well, thanks.
You still can choose to ignore the warnings, but if you're caught speeding, you'll have to tell the police officer why you refused to slow down
And maybe he/she will have to explain why they use speed "enforcement" as a means of generating revenue and a means of generating an excuse to search people's cars.
MA did a survey of traffic stops and found overwhelmingly black drivers were stopped, searched, and issued tickets more than white drivers. White women had the absolute lowest rates as well. There was one notable exception- the MA state police were almost dead even for all races, genders, and age groups. Town police departments were the worst "offenders".
Speed enforcement is just an excuse for getting into your wallet, and your car. It's extremely selectively enforced; the cops don't pull over everyone(next time you're on the road, look down at your speedo. Notice the car in front of you and behind you and all around you- they're all doing the same speed), they only pull over who they want to. It's extremely abused and results in gender, age, and racial profiling. It has absolutely nothing to do with safety(number one cause of highway deaths? Drunk driving).
Oh, and those laser speed guns? Guess who put them in the hands of your friendly local police officer? Geico. No conflict of interest there, no sir, not an insurance company giving police officers a device that, every time it is used, causes someone's insurance rate to go through the roof, despite no evidence speeding causes accidents. What a great money maker. No increased risk, but lots of increased revenue!
Democratic candidate John Kerry is also a Christian.
Not last time I checked. In fact, the Catholic church came very close to refusing to allow him to attend mass because he isn't rabidly pro-life.
Funny how the catholic church wants to be very much in control of the state. Oh well. At least it's now the second largest non-profit org in the world(1st is harvard, oh boy).
How about people work on something we actually need?
How about you don't tell us photographers what we do/don't need?
We DO need a standard raw file format. Canon, Nikon, Fuji, Sigma, etc all have their own raw formats. This makes developing good raw-file handling software difficult, because you either have to dump lots of time into supporting several file formats, or settle for a small piece of the market and only support certain brands. It's also a royal pain in the ass for media companies who, to maintain some order in their workflow, "standardize" (fancy word for "get locked into") on one camera system maker.
Adobe is the defacto tool for processing digital images; nothing comes close. Knoll and his team have, after several years, picked up quite a bit of experience with what works and what doesn't; what customers need and what they don't, etc. Adobe's status puts them in the position to push a common raw format, and it's likely many of the companies that make decoders will add it in; it will be a case of software support before hardware support no doubt- but eventually camera makers will grumble a little and add it in. They've long since given up trying to make money off their raw format decoders.
Most media companies will no doubt be thrilled, because now they can handle Joe Shmoe's D4X raw file just like they handle Bob Smith's 1Ds Mark 3 raw file, save maybe for some image size differences.
By the way- RAW = Canon, NRF(I think?) = Nikon. Confusing that the style of file is called "raw" but Canon has a format called RAW. Please use capitalization to distinguish between the Canon format and the general style of compressed image.
Google, as much as we love it, is a priviate company,
Uh, no, Google is a publicly traded company. Which means they're now very much influenced by public perception. Investors are exactly the kind of people who would drive this decision, to varying degrees of directness.
Don't get upset with goodle over cencorship, get upset with the government who's laws they must abide.
Google doesn't have to abide to any Chinese law. They did it purely because they knew that if they didn't, the Chinese government would pick some other search engine to be The People's Search Engine, or simply block Google. They'd be kissing goodbye a huge advertising market. China's size makes it a perpetual goldmine for any foreign company- and is the primary reason we're willing to ignore the fact that they're communist (communism is worthy of a decades long blockade for Cuba!) and have massive human rights problems...and sign trade agreements with them.
A car accident could spell disaster if not properly contained...Or am I wrong?
In the unlikely event that the car's structure was intruded enough to damage the tank, the leaking hydrogen would escape upwards and dissipate extremely rapidly. This makes it rather difficult to be ignited by, say, sparking from electrics or hot components in the engine compartment. There is no environmental impact and no cleanup- the hydrogen harmlessly dissipates up into the environment.
In a car accident with gasoline, the gasoline pools on the ground and vapors are heavier than air. That makes them very easy to ignite. Gasoline(especially with MTBE) is cancerous and must be cleaned up, and it takes a while to do so because it's so easily ignited.
Hydrogen also requires a much higher fuel/air ratio; ie there has to be a higher concentration.
The main safety problem with hydrogen is that it is molecularly so small that hoses and seals are very hard to make for it. A balloon full of hydrogen would deflate even faster than one filled with Helium...
The REAL problem with hydrogen as a transport fuel is (repeat after me, kids!)...
HYDROGEN IS A NET LOSS FUEL. IT TAKES MUCH MORE ENERGY TO PRODUCE THAN YOU GET BURNING IT.
Oh, and the fact that the main method of production cited by our really smart President is- surprise- natural gas! Well, guess what folks- you gotta use chemicals to get the H2 out of the complex hydrocarbon of LNG, and you gotta put those leftover Carbon (and other elements) into something. Expect to see hydrogen plants which dump lots of waste in the form of toxic catalysts and leftover byproducts. Or just toss it up a smokestack and make it the problem of whoever is 5,000 miles away.
Still doesn't 'feel' right because there are so many more factors involved
It's because it's still too perfect. Even if he did randomly texture/color it, he didn't randomly change the reflectivity and such.
Several of the poses are also very unnatural, and the expressions just don't seem right.
Special F/X people will tell you that the brain is astoundingly good at picking up when something's wrong. You may not always know what it is- like that the car leaping over the bus didn't have a shadow, or the sun was at the wrong angle for the story- but your brain is on a somewhat subconscious level saying, "What the heck?" and the scene 'bothers' you.
It is a little similar to what I call Stump the Baby. Babies shown a box where two cars go in and two come out will loose interest quick. Show them two going in and only one coming out- or the opposite- and they'll stare at it for much longer...
Like almost all "analysts", it's about as solid as pea soup.
I worked in the IT department for a company that distributed analyst white papers, and these people were dumb as fucking bricks, according to the people in the company who had to deal with them on a daily basis. Like, "well, I can't figure out how to email this so I'm going to print and fax it to you", dumb.
As IT workers we were continuously astounded by how poor the reports were, making ludicrous predictions and giving blatantly bad advice. As others on slashdot have said- people pay for and buy these reports to justify positions, not to learn how to do something. When I googled names of authors on the papers- some of which dealt with hugely complex corporate IT problems- the authors were fresh out of college, often with a degree that had absolutely nothing to do with the subject matter. Ie- INTERNS, people!
It's like the old "it came into my email box, it must be true" adage, only with a real company with a fancy website and a list of clientele a mile long telling you that "sure, it's perfectly ok to dump water on your computers." Everyone's too concerned about looking stupid to admit they're being had.
Personally, I would have liked the logo better if it had shown green(good) messages near the arrow but not pierced - and the red message nailed. Would've been very symbolic. The new logo makes me think "what, it nails both good and bad email?"
The federal penalties for most crimes seem to already be aimed at simply "crushing the perp and ruining him/her forever" rather than anything resembling pursuit of justice.
It's also massively perverted. While the popular example is pot- I'll give you the reverse. In Massachusetts, if you're caught drunk driving, you get a MAXIMUM of 2.5 years, $5k, license suspension for one year (unless you need to get to work- then you're eligible for a limited license after just 3 months, and if you have "hardships" you're allowed to get a limited license in 6 mo).
Keep in mind drunk driving is a HUGE cause of vehicle-related fatalities in the US; about 40%, and I believe that puts it at #1. 1.4 million people are arrested and charged with DUI every year. That is a -staggering- number; almost 1 in every 100 people has been charged with DUI.
Slashdot Mirror
It's pretty clear you've never worked in a corporate IT department. So the issue is: Was there a policy that prohibited use of those systems for that purpose?
Any employer worth his or her salt has an item in the employee handbook that prohibits employees from installing stuff on systems without permission.
Furthermore, and I have to point this out to users ALL the time- the computer they use is not theirs. It belongs to the company, as does the telephone, the power that PC uses, and its internet connection.
Granted, since the machines were taxpayer funded, this should have raised some red-flags for Charles Smith (the fired employee)
That would be an understatement.
, however...... immediate termination rather than a warning seems a bit harsh.
Not if the employee handbook says that's the consequence. Not if Smith was doing other things deserving of termination. Not if his actions endangered adherence to security protocols, placed sensitive data at risk of disclosure, or caused a department to loose certification. As a professional system admin, the mere fact that he considered it appropriate to install stuff like that on government systems shows his judgment is impaired.
Any time you are using publicly funded resources for personal use, there should be extreme caution
I've been a sysadmin for years, and it's pretty much common sense, as in the "don't walk off building tops" kind of common sense, that you do not use your employer's systems for anything you haven't specifically sought authorization for. Reasons, off the top of my head:
I can hear the kids yelling "but commercial software could be insecure too!" Well, that's right- but the difference is that if you're running something the IT department said was OK and the company gets h@x0r3d, they're the ones who take the heat. If it's because you were running some clownish search-for-ET thing or a program that puts a dancing ape on your desktop, well, then you get your ass canned so fast your head spins, and possibly get slapped with a lawsuit for damages as well.
Maybe the IT department has picked that official program because it's more secure, or has been certified by another government agency. Or they've actually tested/explored its security, or an outside consultant says it's more secure, or the maker of the software has signed agreements that their application meets security requirements of the government agency using the software.
Am I the only one who recognized the main graphic for the story as a lifted screencap from the movie Hackers? That movie's SOLE redeeming quality was Angelina Jolie...
Well, ok, that and the laugh factor. Not quite as much fun as MST3K'ing The Mummy with about a half dozen friends though.
As Walmart found with a small town in CA- when a corporate giant leans into the political process that blatantly, people get really pissed.
They won't have to do a thing- if Diebold has enough employees in the county, he'll simply loose because a vote for him will be turned into a vote for putting Diebold employees out of work. Happens allllll the time, and people are dumb enough to fall for it every single time.
...they don't do ANYTHING not in their best interests.
they already own a browser
Yes, but Mozilla/Netscape doesn't given them (I suspect) a boatload of cash from a company that wants marketshare, marketshare, marketshare. AOL desperately needs cash- ever since the merger, they've been hemorrhaging money because the index finger doesn't know what the middle finger is doing- and neither even knows about the thumb.
Or, it could be as simple as "AOL customizations to Mozilla/Netscape take X hours and cost Y dollars, MS is willing to do it all for free".
Needless to say, I'm sure MS thinks they're getting something out of the deal too.
Yeesh. No. There are just a few other problems, as with all ideas hatched by Scifi authors (who need to do little more than make something plausible on the most abstract level. Scifi authors almost always get it WRONG- we don't all use jetpacks and atomic cars to get to work, now do we? No 'death rays'- hell, we haven't even gotten speech recognition down, really).
I know some -other- fanboy will link to a FAQ that "answers"(says, for each issue, "we're aware of it and working on it!") each of these, but:
...all of these issues stacked against the relative ease of launching things into space (used to be a big deal. Now it's pretty ho-hum). Nevermind the main benefit everyone always cites (conveniently leaving out all costs except the actual energy needed to lift something- wow, a business like that with no overhead? Cool). Cutting the $/lb price by ten, is not going to mean 10x more stuff in space to put up. God, I hope not, it's cluttered as is...
Let the "flamebait" and "troll" mods who are Space Fanboys begin, for thou shalt not speak out against space development even if it IS a legitimate viewpoint- and one shared by many of us. Let's be a little more, uh, down to earth in our problem solving, please? We've got a lot of problems right here on earth, folks- and I'd much rather you all put that brainpower to them.
Huh? I once tried to intentionally run down my MP2100's battery. After several hours with the backlight on, I gave up.
Of course, now, the battery is probably toast after so many years of disuse...
Oy vey. Chances are your car is fuel injected- in which case, fuel quality has nothing to do with your problem, since fuel injection happens after the throttle (some cars are throttle-body-injected, but that system hasn't been in use for over a decade, and even then, the fuel is injected after the throttle vane).
Second, there's not really any such thing as "junk gas". 87 octane is just as "high quality" as 93. 93 just has octane boosters- that's IT. Common myth perpetuated by gasoline companies by advertising the highest octane gas only.
The problem was most likely oil residue from the crankcase breather. As your filter became more clogged, it increased the vacuum in the intake system. Crankcase gasses (including an oil mist) are sucked back into the intake for emissions reasons, but the oil gums things up. With the clogged air filter, more and more crankcase gasses were sucked in than they were supposed to be. Make sure the dipstick and oil fillter cap seal properly.
Proper maintenance is to buy a can of throttle body cleaner and wipe down all the edges of the throttle and the surface of the throttle body it mates against. You often only need to remove one or two hose clamps on older cars to get to this area- newer cars might require removing covers etc. Cars with electronically controlled throttles shouldn't be touched unless you know what you're doing.
I own a 1991 200 Quattro 20v turbo, which with the updated engine and modified engine computer I have, produces about 120 more HP than you "schoolmate's father's" 5000, assuming it was the 5000 turbo.
So, I can conclusively say you're full of shit. At full boost and hard acceleration in 3rd gear, the brakes will most certainly stop the car- hard.
The cruise control is deactivated by "vent" switches on the clutch and brake; the brake switch is also used for the brake lights. If the brake switch was damaged (an idiot who hasn't read the repair manual won't know they must be replaced if removed), then yes, braking would cause the cruise control to open the throttle because it would only see the car slowing down.
a)put in the clutch b)switch off cruise control on the control stalk c)stop the car firmly d)take the car out of gear e)shut off the ignition (yes, the brakes will continue to work, the car has a hydraulic pressure reservoir). Any of those will stop the acceleration.
Oh, and cruise control doesn't turn on below about 30mph, so it's impossible to have it cause cars to go through garage doors etc.
"ownership" has nothing to do with it; its whether the communication is conducted via a method the user has a "reasonable expectation of privacy" using. "That someone isn't going to go park outside my house with a cantenna, and a laptop equipped with software specifically configured to listen for and capture traffic" is most certainly "reasonable", nevermind they have to be fully aware it's possible for others to very easily listen in. If you're intentionally operating a radio device looking for signals you know are not meant for you, that's called eavesdropping.
In all cases, including "wardriving", there is no legitimate reason to collect the information or listen in. It's none of your goddamn business. That has always been the case, and always will be, no matter what a bunch of pimply faced kids in a car with a pringles can think; the law is not based on whether or not they think their little "hobby" should be legal or not- it's based on decades of case law.
Maybe they could actually set up their access points properly. It's not hard. Even WEP is far from trivial for a wardriver to get past- they'd have to camp out and wait for "weak" packets...except for certain specific AP's that have faulty WEP key generation. The owner's manuals now cover turning on WEP/WPA quite nicely, have for years, and most of the glaring problems have been fixed long ago as well.
What's next, people complaining about all the crime in their neighborhood but not locking their goddamn front doors? Oh...check.
To quote Laugh In, a show that was so much better than SNL is (or ever was), and was recorded in (sarcastically)"Beautiful downtown Burbank!":
"Good evening- and now, the news. Today, California experienced an earthquake. President Regan (show was recorded when he was still Governor- the audience thought the 'prediction' was hilarious) is concerned that Berkeley will shift even FURTHER to the left."
Also reminds me of the Tom Toles cartoon. A CA Couple watching the news-"The mudslides are over, the earthquakes have stopped, the riots finished." In the ocean nearby, are hundreds of frogs, and one's asking the other, "Now?"
Postgres was the revision of Ingres; PostgreSQL was Postgres with SQL. Minor oversimplification, but good enough.
It's been PostgreSQL for years- please call it by its proper name :-)
It's ok, Jason- we all make mistakes, but at least you've come out and admitted you have a problem, and that's the first step.
Who's next?
In almost every car ever produced, the brakes are far more "powerful" than the engine. This is complete bullshit, unless the car was poorly maintained or had a serious defect. You can't ride them- you really have to push hard and bring the vehicle to a stop quickly, or yes, you will overheat the brakes- but even if you do that, you don't have to wait long for them to cool down. You CAN'T use your handbrake- it's a PARKING brake, not an "emergency" brake, and yeah, they tend to not be properly adjusted so they won't do a very good job of stopping the car; since little weight is on them, manufacturers don't make the rear brakes very big. Use the BRAKE pedal, people.
Elizabeth Jordan, a NY EMT who called 911 claiming her car was out of control, became completely hysterical- a cop finally stopped the vehicle by pulling in front of her and using the cruiser's brakes(and rear bumper) to stop.
Funny thing, but they found absafuckingloutly nothing wrong with the car she was driving. The woman was simply a hysterical bitch who wanted attention. Suddenly after being brought to a stop by the cruiser, she could turn off the ignition. Why the fuck didn't she do that in the first place?
99% of the stories about cars going "out of control" are bullshit. It's almost always driver error- or a complete fabrication by the driver to get out of trouble (or for attention).
Bush and company called the evidence conclusive and worthy of going to war; it was used as justification to both US citizens and the international community. If you're going to spend hundreds of billions of dollars, kill a thousand plus US troops, trash carefully crafted diplomatic relations...THEN sell all that as a "success" AND the reason you should be elected- you goddamn well better have your I's dotted and your t's crossed.
It was publicly reported that at best the evidence was inconclusive, and now we see that it was quite positively false, and further that they KNEW it wasn't conclusive. Fact is, to date, not a single fucking piece of evidence has been uncovered to support any of Bush's claims that Iraq had any "weapons of mass destruction", and certainly not the claim that Iraq posed an imminent threat to national security.
That fits my definition of "lying" pretty well, thanks.
And maybe he/she will have to explain why they use speed "enforcement" as a means of generating revenue and a means of generating an excuse to search people's cars.
MA did a survey of traffic stops and found overwhelmingly black drivers were stopped, searched, and issued tickets more than white drivers. White women had the absolute lowest rates as well. There was one notable exception- the MA state police were almost dead even for all races, genders, and age groups. Town police departments were the worst "offenders".
Speed enforcement is just an excuse for getting into your wallet, and your car. It's extremely selectively enforced; the cops don't pull over everyone(next time you're on the road, look down at your speedo. Notice the car in front of you and behind you and all around you- they're all doing the same speed), they only pull over who they want to. It's extremely abused and results in gender, age, and racial profiling. It has absolutely nothing to do with safety(number one cause of highway deaths? Drunk driving).
Oh, and those laser speed guns? Guess who put them in the hands of your friendly local police officer? Geico. No conflict of interest there, no sir, not an insurance company giving police officers a device that, every time it is used, causes someone's insurance rate to go through the roof, despite no evidence speeding causes accidents. What a great money maker. No increased risk, but lots of increased revenue!
Not last time I checked. In fact, the Catholic church came very close to refusing to allow him to attend mass because he isn't rabidly pro-life.
Funny how the catholic church wants to be very much in control of the state. Oh well. At least it's now the second largest non-profit org in the world(1st is harvard, oh boy).
No, you get NEF files which are raw format files.
"RAW" means Canon's RAW format. Confusing, but there's a reason one is capitalized and the other isn't.
How about you don't tell us photographers what we do/don't need?
We DO need a standard raw file format. Canon, Nikon, Fuji, Sigma, etc all have their own raw formats. This makes developing good raw-file handling software difficult, because you either have to dump lots of time into supporting several file formats, or settle for a small piece of the market and only support certain brands. It's also a royal pain in the ass for media companies who, to maintain some order in their workflow, "standardize" (fancy word for "get locked into") on one camera system maker.
Adobe is the defacto tool for processing digital images; nothing comes close. Knoll and his team have, after several years, picked up quite a bit of experience with what works and what doesn't; what customers need and what they don't, etc. Adobe's status puts them in the position to push a common raw format, and it's likely many of the companies that make decoders will add it in; it will be a case of software support before hardware support no doubt- but eventually camera makers will grumble a little and add it in. They've long since given up trying to make money off their raw format decoders.
Most media companies will no doubt be thrilled, because now they can handle Joe Shmoe's D4X raw file just like they handle Bob Smith's 1Ds Mark 3 raw file, save maybe for some image size differences.
By the way- RAW = Canon, NRF(I think?) = Nikon. Confusing that the style of file is called "raw" but Canon has a format called RAW. Please use capitalization to distinguish between the Canon format and the general style of compressed image.
Uh, no, Google is a publicly traded company. Which means they're now very much influenced by public perception. Investors are exactly the kind of people who would drive this decision, to varying degrees of directness.
Don't get upset with goodle over cencorship, get upset with the government who's laws they must abide.
Google doesn't have to abide to any Chinese law. They did it purely because they knew that if they didn't, the Chinese government would pick some other search engine to be The People's Search Engine, or simply block Google. They'd be kissing goodbye a huge advertising market. China's size makes it a perpetual goldmine for any foreign company- and is the primary reason we're willing to ignore the fact that they're communist (communism is worthy of a decades long blockade for Cuba!) and have massive human rights problems...and sign trade agreements with them.
In the unlikely event that the car's structure was intruded enough to damage the tank, the leaking hydrogen would escape upwards and dissipate extremely rapidly. This makes it rather difficult to be ignited by, say, sparking from electrics or hot components in the engine compartment. There is no environmental impact and no cleanup- the hydrogen harmlessly dissipates up into the environment.
In a car accident with gasoline, the gasoline pools on the ground and vapors are heavier than air. That makes them very easy to ignite. Gasoline(especially with MTBE) is cancerous and must be cleaned up, and it takes a while to do so because it's so easily ignited.
Hydrogen also requires a much higher fuel/air ratio; ie there has to be a higher concentration.
The main safety problem with hydrogen is that it is molecularly so small that hoses and seals are very hard to make for it. A balloon full of hydrogen would deflate even faster than one filled with Helium...
The REAL problem with hydrogen as a transport fuel is (repeat after me, kids!)...
HYDROGEN IS A NET LOSS FUEL. IT TAKES MUCH MORE ENERGY TO PRODUCE THAN YOU GET BURNING IT.
Oh, and the fact that the main method of production cited by our really smart President is- surprise- natural gas! Well, guess what folks- you gotta use chemicals to get the H2 out of the complex hydrocarbon of LNG, and you gotta put those leftover Carbon (and other elements) into something. Expect to see hydrogen plants which dump lots of waste in the form of toxic catalysts and leftover byproducts. Or just toss it up a smokestack and make it the problem of whoever is 5,000 miles away.
It's because it's still too perfect. Even if he did randomly texture/color it, he didn't randomly change the reflectivity and such.
Several of the poses are also very unnatural, and the expressions just don't seem right.
Special F/X people will tell you that the brain is astoundingly good at picking up when something's wrong. You may not always know what it is- like that the car leaping over the bus didn't have a shadow, or the sun was at the wrong angle for the story- but your brain is on a somewhat subconscious level saying, "What the heck?" and the scene 'bothers' you.
It is a little similar to what I call Stump the Baby. Babies shown a box where two cars go in and two come out will loose interest quick. Show them two going in and only one coming out- or the opposite- and they'll stare at it for much longer...
Like almost all "analysts", it's about as solid as pea soup.
I worked in the IT department for a company that distributed analyst white papers, and these people were dumb as fucking bricks, according to the people in the company who had to deal with them on a daily basis. Like, "well, I can't figure out how to email this so I'm going to print and fax it to you", dumb.
As IT workers we were continuously astounded by how poor the reports were, making ludicrous predictions and giving blatantly bad advice. As others on slashdot have said- people pay for and buy these reports to justify positions, not to learn how to do something. When I googled names of authors on the papers- some of which dealt with hugely complex corporate IT problems- the authors were fresh out of college, often with a degree that had absolutely nothing to do with the subject matter. Ie- INTERNS, people!
It's like the old "it came into my email box, it must be true" adage, only with a real company with a fancy website and a list of clientele a mile long telling you that "sure, it's perfectly ok to dump water on your computers." Everyone's too concerned about looking stupid to admit they're being had.
Personally, I would have liked the logo better if it had shown green(good) messages near the arrow but not pierced - and the red message nailed. Would've been very symbolic. The new logo makes me think "what, it nails both good and bad email?"
It's also massively perverted. While the popular example is pot- I'll give you the reverse. In Massachusetts, if you're caught drunk driving, you get a MAXIMUM of 2.5 years, $5k, license suspension for one year (unless you need to get to work- then you're eligible for a limited license after just 3 months, and if you have "hardships" you're allowed to get a limited license in 6 mo).
Keep in mind drunk driving is a HUGE cause of vehicle-related fatalities in the US; about 40%, and I believe that puts it at #1. 1.4 million people are arrested and charged with DUI every year. That is a -staggering- number; almost 1 in every 100 people has been charged with DUI.