Buchanan was parodied here with some kind of sketch suggesting installing nonremovable collars on illegal immigrants caught crossing the border. When they would attempt to cross again the collar would explode. It sounded like someone took the idea of the collars from the inmates at the beginning of The Running Man.
Then require the ex-pats to register with their local consulate or the nearest consulate or embassy that does business on behalf of Finland, and set up a regular appointment schedule that they have to keep in order to keep receiving benefits. Also consider the nature of the financial institutions that the government is willing to direct-deposit to, such that they have to be banks that don't work with groups like ISIS.
Heh. OT, but I found it amusing that when Jeb Bush spoke against Donald Trump's derogatory comments, he cited women as 53% of the voters, using the number like it was a significant minority when it's actually the majority.
Hell, I don't like the idea of a cashless economy because it's dependent on too many active systems that all have to work for it to work. A simple power outage could prevent people from purchasing emergency supplies from their local grocery store, which could otherwise take cash, and could even go so far as to tabulate sales tax by hand or with the store's retail supply of battery-operated handheld calculators.
I think that at least with smartphones he misses the point, when they were introduced the point wasn't to track the individual carrying the phone, it was to provide the individual with the ability to communicate and to use applications for productivity. Arguably some of the first smartphones from Qualcomm didn't even have data service, the productivity applications were entirely centered on the phone, and they were essentially Palm Pilots with a telephone function added to them.
Jump to the modern phone, and you find that if people use features that allow them to "check in" from a given location, they only use that feature when they choose to use that feature. They do not state their location everywhere they go, they use it selectively, to essentially boast, or because they earn a living through online connectedness and marketing and it is to their advantage to share far too much information with the rest of us.
As to the data communication between the handset and the carrier, that's an unfortunate necessity of the technology. The frequencies and density of users means that phones have to be tracked in order to remain in communication with them as they roam about a given area and change towers. The average cell user doesn't really understand how that technology works either, but would probably not be happy if their movements were being logged everywhere they went, an that theoretically should be privileged information between the carrier and the subscriber, as in the United States, one Federal Circuit has recently ruled.
Again, not necessarily. Not all nudity is pornography. The definition of pornography is not entirely clear, but it generally requires a degree of intentionally prurient interest.
I predict a lot of whackers driving around in retired cop cars with fake badges and radios, with lightbars on top that are barely legal since they have no red or blue bulbs, with "Umbrella Corporation" painted on where "To Serve and Protect" would normally go, and with "REACT TEAM" and some sketchy homage to an official seal painted on the doors...
If the car is trespassing, operating without driver present, you might actually have grounds. If it's operating on the street then you probably don't have grounds unless it's attempting to run you over.
Why would he have to put down his beer or get out of his lawn chair? A friend of mine was out dove hunting when a flock (?) flew over camp. Sitting in his lawn chair he picked up his.410, took aim, fired, hit one, and it literally fell into his hand.
It might not be that straightforward. Just as using cameras in public places is legal, there are lots of places where public toplessness by both genders is also legal, with the caveat that the toplessness is not for prurient purposes. It already may not be illegal to have incidental nudity caught on camera in public places. Now, if the subject is where they have a reasonable right to privacy then the operator of the camera might be committing voyeurism, which is already illegal, or if the subject exposes themselves in a public place with prurient intent then the subject may be breaking the law. I suspect that in cases where a minor is recorded unclothed, even where the minor is uncovered for prurient purposes, where that minor has a reasonable expectation of privacy, that the charge will be voyeurism against the camera operator.
Or you can fly them either above the 500' floor that commercial aircraft have to remain above, or use the airspace over public property (ie, roads) when making deliveries instead of flying above houses.
Trespassing is also illegal, and since the drone's owner was not present to confront regarding the trespassing, the act of downing the drone may not be a problem, even if the means by which it was downed is.
This guy [...] took a shoot first ask questions later perspective. i'm sure his neighbors appreciate him shooting into the sky at anything that doesn't look normal. I wonder if he'd shoot a humming bird because it hovers for 20 seconds?
Please enlighten us how you're supposed to ask questions first of a remote-controlled device.
I wonder what would happen to the stray bird shot that hit the neighbors house. will he pay for any damages or injuries caused by that?
That's actually part of the advantage to bird shot, it is slowed down by the drag caused by atmosphere, to the point that the terminal velocity of birdshot is probably low enough to not even leave a mark.
I do not advocate shooting into the air in populated areas, but bird shot is probably the safest conventional round that one could fire into the air.
I wonder if a rock-salt load would be enough to take down an RC aircraft?
Ford doesn't make parts for the Model A, but the aftermarket still does. Also, a Ford Model A is a tangible thing. It's something that the average person with a socket set, ratchet, and some end wrenches could work on.
MS-DOS is the Model A of personal computers. There was a whole lot of aftermarket support for DOS operating systems for many years after Microsoft itself stopped contributing to DOS. Additionally there was very little in MS-DOS itself that was broken, at least from an outside-attack perspective, as it lacked the features that are exploited in Windows.
I weigh myself at the same time of day when I do it, probably two or three times a week, in the morning, as I'm getting ready for the day. I know that people fluctuate; that time of day seems to be the least affected by it because of the normalizing effects of sleep. I still observed the weight shift.
We got rid of pay-TV a few years ago when we realized that most of what we watched was reruns of bad police procedurals. The straw that broke the camel's back was their taking Turner Classic Movies off of analog cable (that we had) and putting it exclusively on premium (at the time) HD. We did the math and we figured we could buy a whole season NEW on disc of a TV series for the cost of one month of cable. Used, two or three seasons easily.
Not even accounting for the advantages of streaming it's still a good deal to get rid of cable TV unless you watch live TV like sports and need a live source that's otherwise unavailable.
That's okay. I've looked at my usage and I could get away with DSL speeds or even with cellular if I absolutely had to. Plus Google Fiber will probably end up in my city within the next year or two an I'm planning on getting rid of my cable provider altogether.
Besides, if the recent FCC decision to regulate Internet providers like they regulated telephone companies to fight against the ISPs' attempts to extort fees from content providers sticks, as a common-carrier designation the cable companies might find themselves required to provide Internet access even if that's the only service the customer wants.
If I understand it correctly, the body reacts to some artificial sweeteners similarly to how it reacts to actual sugar though, so being sugar-free doesn't necessarily mean that the body won't experience some of the same results from overconsumption of sugar.
You're right that weight loss is generally a matter of expending calories in as-great or greater a quantity than one consumes them. Soft drink companies seem to be in a do-or-die effort to convince us that their products, often some of the biggest single contributors of calories and sugar to our diets, aren't the problem, when all of the anecdotal evidence that I've seen indicates that simply dropping the soda without making any other lifestyle changes (ie, diet, exercise level, etc) actually causes weight loss. I've experienced it myself in switching from Mountain Dew to coffee, I lost about ten pounds without doing anything else.
We've taken things that were treats and turned them into regular consumption and are surprised that we're having problems, and these companies can't afford for us to relegate these products back to where they belong, as occasional treats.
I think that it's getting to be time to regulate software companies, especially for-profit companies. Their products are defective and they should be forced to correct those defects. And by correct, I don't mean sell you the newer version of their product. I mean doing real, thorough security analysis before shipping, and supporting previous versions for a long time.
Microsoft actually isn't as bad as they used to be but they still have too many post-ship bugs. I don't care how big the project is, there are still too many bugs. Google is who I'm now starting to wonder about, with all of these unpatchable cell phones because they don't want to support Android 2.3 or 4.1 even though the devices with these versions can't run anything newer.
And then there are the embedded systems, like cars...
Slashdot Mirror
So like Pat Buchanan? Got it.
Buchanan was parodied here with some kind of sketch suggesting installing nonremovable collars on illegal immigrants caught crossing the border. When they would attempt to cross again the collar would explode. It sounded like someone took the idea of the collars from the inmates at the beginning of The Running Man.
Then require the ex-pats to register with their local consulate or the nearest consulate or embassy that does business on behalf of Finland, and set up a regular appointment schedule that they have to keep in order to keep receiving benefits. Also consider the nature of the financial institutions that the government is willing to direct-deposit to, such that they have to be banks that don't work with groups like ISIS.
Heh. OT, but I found it amusing that when Jeb Bush spoke against Donald Trump's derogatory comments, he cited women as 53% of the voters, using the number like it was a significant minority when it's actually the majority.
Hell, I don't like the idea of a cashless economy because it's dependent on too many active systems that all have to work for it to work. A simple power outage could prevent people from purchasing emergency supplies from their local grocery store, which could otherwise take cash, and could even go so far as to tabulate sales tax by hand or with the store's retail supply of battery-operated handheld calculators.
Maybe the AC that has been posting that can't bring himself to continue when reality becomes more ridiculous than this appeal to the absurd...
I think that at least with smartphones he misses the point, when they were introduced the point wasn't to track the individual carrying the phone, it was to provide the individual with the ability to communicate and to use applications for productivity. Arguably some of the first smartphones from Qualcomm didn't even have data service, the productivity applications were entirely centered on the phone, and they were essentially Palm Pilots with a telephone function added to them.
Jump to the modern phone, and you find that if people use features that allow them to "check in" from a given location, they only use that feature when they choose to use that feature. They do not state their location everywhere they go, they use it selectively, to essentially boast, or because they earn a living through online connectedness and marketing and it is to their advantage to share far too much information with the rest of us.
As to the data communication between the handset and the carrier, that's an unfortunate necessity of the technology. The frequencies and density of users means that phones have to be tracked in order to remain in communication with them as they roam about a given area and change towers. The average cell user doesn't really understand how that technology works either, but would probably not be happy if their movements were being logged everywhere they went, an that theoretically should be privileged information between the carrier and the subscriber, as in the United States, one Federal Circuit has recently ruled.
Again, not necessarily. Not all nudity is pornography. The definition of pornography is not entirely clear, but it generally requires a degree of intentionally prurient interest.
I predict a lot of whackers driving around in retired cop cars with fake badges and radios, with lightbars on top that are barely legal since they have no red or blue bulbs, with "Umbrella Corporation" painted on where "To Serve and Protect" would normally go, and with "REACT TEAM" and some sketchy homage to an official seal painted on the doors...
If the car is trespassing, operating without driver present, you might actually have grounds. If it's operating on the street then you probably don't have grounds unless it's attempting to run you over.
Why would he have to put down his beer or get out of his lawn chair? A friend of mine was out dove hunting when a flock (?) flew over camp. Sitting in his lawn chair he picked up his .410, took aim, fired, hit one, and it literally fell into his hand.
It might not be that straightforward. Just as using cameras in public places is legal, there are lots of places where public toplessness by both genders is also legal, with the caveat that the toplessness is not for prurient purposes. It already may not be illegal to have incidental nudity caught on camera in public places. Now, if the subject is where they have a reasonable right to privacy then the operator of the camera might be committing voyeurism, which is already illegal, or if the subject exposes themselves in a public place with prurient intent then the subject may be breaking the law. I suspect that in cases where a minor is recorded unclothed, even where the minor is uncovered for prurient purposes, where that minor has a reasonable expectation of privacy, that the charge will be voyeurism against the camera operator.
Or you can fly them either above the 500' floor that commercial aircraft have to remain above, or use the airspace over public property (ie, roads) when making deliveries instead of flying above houses.
He should have just kept his damn mouth shut and declined to make a statement.
Manned aircraft have altitude rules. 500 foot limit if I remember correctly.
Trespassing is also illegal, and since the drone's owner was not present to confront regarding the trespassing, the act of downing the drone may not be a problem, even if the means by which it was downed is.
Bird shot might make for a good warning round before heavier rounds follow it up if the trespasser doesn't leave.
This guy [...] took a shoot first ask questions later perspective. i'm sure his neighbors appreciate him shooting into the sky at anything that doesn't look normal. I wonder if he'd shoot a humming bird because it hovers for 20 seconds?
Please enlighten us how you're supposed to ask questions first of a remote-controlled device.
I wonder what would happen to the stray bird shot that hit the neighbors house. will he pay for any damages or injuries caused by that?
That's actually part of the advantage to bird shot, it is slowed down by the drag caused by atmosphere, to the point that the terminal velocity of birdshot is probably low enough to not even leave a mark.
I do not advocate shooting into the air in populated areas, but bird shot is probably the safest conventional round that one could fire into the air.
I wonder if a rock-salt load would be enough to take down an RC aircraft?
Until other sites mirror it and add a watermark, or change the resolution, or crop the image, or color-shift the image to be artsy...
I'm guessing that the album was from Blind Faith...
I've always wondered how society will react over time as perspectives shift, and things that were previously acceptable become taboo.
Ford doesn't make parts for the Model A, but the aftermarket still does. Also, a Ford Model A is a tangible thing. It's something that the average person with a socket set, ratchet, and some end wrenches could work on.
MS-DOS is the Model A of personal computers. There was a whole lot of aftermarket support for DOS operating systems for many years after Microsoft itself stopped contributing to DOS. Additionally there was very little in MS-DOS itself that was broken, at least from an outside-attack perspective, as it lacked the features that are exploited in Windows.
I weigh myself at the same time of day when I do it, probably two or three times a week, in the morning, as I'm getting ready for the day. I know that people fluctuate; that time of day seems to be the least affected by it because of the normalizing effects of sleep. I still observed the weight shift.
We got rid of pay-TV a few years ago when we realized that most of what we watched was reruns of bad police procedurals. The straw that broke the camel's back was their taking Turner Classic Movies off of analog cable (that we had) and putting it exclusively on premium (at the time) HD. We did the math and we figured we could buy a whole season NEW on disc of a TV series for the cost of one month of cable. Used, two or three seasons easily.
Not even accounting for the advantages of streaming it's still a good deal to get rid of cable TV unless you watch live TV like sports and need a live source that's otherwise unavailable.
That's okay. I've looked at my usage and I could get away with DSL speeds or even with cellular if I absolutely had to. Plus Google Fiber will probably end up in my city within the next year or two an I'm planning on getting rid of my cable provider altogether.
Besides, if the recent FCC decision to regulate Internet providers like they regulated telephone companies to fight against the ISPs' attempts to extort fees from content providers sticks, as a common-carrier designation the cable companies might find themselves required to provide Internet access even if that's the only service the customer wants.
If I understand it correctly, the body reacts to some artificial sweeteners similarly to how it reacts to actual sugar though, so being sugar-free doesn't necessarily mean that the body won't experience some of the same results from overconsumption of sugar.
You're right that weight loss is generally a matter of expending calories in as-great or greater a quantity than one consumes them. Soft drink companies seem to be in a do-or-die effort to convince us that their products, often some of the biggest single contributors of calories and sugar to our diets, aren't the problem, when all of the anecdotal evidence that I've seen indicates that simply dropping the soda without making any other lifestyle changes (ie, diet, exercise level, etc) actually causes weight loss. I've experienced it myself in switching from Mountain Dew to coffee, I lost about ten pounds without doing anything else.
We've taken things that were treats and turned them into regular consumption and are surprised that we're having problems, and these companies can't afford for us to relegate these products back to where they belong, as occasional treats.
...that features will trump security every time.
I think that it's getting to be time to regulate software companies, especially for-profit companies. Their products are defective and they should be forced to correct those defects. And by correct, I don't mean sell you the newer version of their product. I mean doing real, thorough security analysis before shipping, and supporting previous versions for a long time.
Microsoft actually isn't as bad as they used to be but they still have too many post-ship bugs. I don't care how big the project is, there are still too many bugs. Google is who I'm now starting to wonder about, with all of these unpatchable cell phones because they don't want to support Android 2.3 or 4.1 even though the devices with these versions can't run anything newer.
And then there are the embedded systems, like cars...