Light from common lightsources is unpolarized, but that does NOT mean that it is not polarized, That means, it containes a mix of light polarized in every possible direction. So even if your cover lets through some specific polarization, this wil be visible and the cover would not appear opaque.
His point was that he never installed a BIOS update, because it isn't delivered through regular OS update channels.
As probably everyone here hasn't installed a BIOS update if your system is running without problems.
But he (and no one here) suffered from no mystery-chinese BIOS attack. So how could the NSA have done that mystery feat? Protecting a nation from BIOS attacks withiout making sure that BIOSes are updated?
Makes this whole story sound quite unbelievable. More like "Wag the dog"-like spin-doctoring.
Which leads us to the strange point that german unions think that the same job (running around a warehouse taking stuff from shelves, wrap them in cardboard) should be paid diffferently depending on the field the company operates in - mail order or general logistics.
And here's the punch line: workers of both fields are part of the same union!
So why, instead of fighting to raise the general payment for logistics worker to the level that amazon pays them (which is above the logistics level), do they single out amazon as a high profile target? More publicity.
Just as an example: my current car has a very distracting audible and visual warning when it detects ice on the road. The problem is: this warning delivers 99% false positives (in fact, it seems to be triggered simply by the thermometer crossing a temperature threshold (3C), in either direction). So - yes - it is a dangerous distraction. However, if the manufacturer had actually gotten it right, it would have been very valuable.
Opel/Vauxhall or other GM brand?
I alweays had the feeling the engineers only included this because they could add another feature to the ads without adding any new hardware. There is no use in a warning light if it becomes NORMAL between November and Febuary. THANK YOU, I KNOW IT'S WINTER!
That's why my standard example for ergonomic design is a cockpit: Even with that overwhelming number of buttons, leversand displays and whatnots, there is one simple rule: 1 button = 1 function
In theory, you can control everything with three buttons: select, confirm, back/up/exit (like most computer monitors do; select up/down is a bonus) and many designers tell us that cleaner interfaces are simpler to use. But compare changing the picture brightness on an old fashioned CRT knob to finding your way through seven layers of settings menues you need to FIND that setting.
Terror isn't the goal, but the means. Their goal is to convert the world to Islam.
Maybe, but what makes you think that?
This?
Look back to the age of Muslim conquest for a better understanding.
That would be outright stupid. By that logic you could also conclude by looking back to the age of crusades that violently converting the world to christianity is the goal of christians.
Yep. Osama bin Laden, for all that he's dead, basically won. And his biggest ally was the US security industry.
Are you a Muslim? Has the US replaced the Constitution with Sharia law? If the answer is No and No, then Bin Laden didn't win, or anything thing close to it. His demand was the US convert to Islam and implement Sharia law.
Confusion on this point is potentially dangerous, and frankly stupid.
Terrorists want to spread fear and terror. Hence the name. And by that measure, his plan worked.
The answer to that question is obvious. Here's what they say "We aren't spying on Grandma. Sure, we're gathering up her information along with all the rest, but we don't actually look at it, or use it.
Yes. If someone is able to not call gathering grandmas phone calls "spying", then that's the finest example of doublethink.
Suggesting that the intelligence agencies both can and must be involved in domestic politics is a quick route to +5 insightful because everybody just "knows" it happens, indeed it must be happening right now! To get there you have to look past all the laws, regulations, background checks, norms, and other controls to prevent such a thing from occurring, the minimal payoff if it occurs, and the substantial consequences if caught, and the lack of evidence that it is happening. What I find interesting is that this same power of "just knowing" on the part of most people here both indicates that the intelligence agencies interfere with domestic politics while denying that Snowden could be a bad actor. There seems to be some sort of calibration problem there.
In a democracy, the gouvernment has the burden of proof that their actions are well within the limits of the constitution (or however the constitution may be called in any given country) Secret police forces and other secret gouvernent operations are usually a trademark of totalitarian regimes.
Transparancy and public control of the gouvernment is a pillar of democracy. And given the track record of what has been done under the guise of "secrecy for national security", claims that something has to be done in secret should ring a whole set of alarms. (Though I acknowledge that there probably are quite a few tings regarding foreign intelligence that would be difficult to do in puiblic. But please also acknowledge that I'm not the least making any US specific points here.)
The bulk of the NSA controversy is about the NSA's domestic surveillance program. It is not controversial that the NSA is spying on enemies of war.
If I may offer a bit of an outside view: The bulk of the controversy about NSA over here is about a long chain of US presidents doing lip service by talking to the outside world of "friendship" and "trust" and "working together" as an "international community" and behind their backs let the NSA loose to spy on their so-called friends as if they *WERE* enemies of war.
Yes, yes, I know: "trust, but verify", but it is still slightly ironic that the US would go by a motto that is usually attributed to Lenin's as one of his signature phrases.
Go to Canada without having to carry my passport like we could do for 99% of American history.
What? You ONLY have to show a passport to go to Canada?
Have you ever seen the hoops other people have to jump through to visit YOUR COUNTRY? Hint: Even for those nations where there is no visa requirement, a passport is not enough. I've yet to see another country that you need to buy a $15 admission ticket first... if you don't need a visa to begin with.
Slashdot Mirror
How can anything have a shape that turns into an electromagnetic wave when you're not watching...
Doesn't the reflection from most materials remove any polarization? But I agree, very little light would be reflected back then.
Now that you mention it... which retared marketing droid hat the idea of calling the 3rd generation of someting "One" to begin with?
Light from common lightsources is unpolarized, but that does NOT mean that it is not polarized, That means, it containes a mix of light polarized in every possible direction. So even if your cover lets through some specific polarization, this wil be visible and the cover would not appear opaque.
Stick with the IR wavelengths...
Learn to READ before comment!
His point was that he never installed a BIOS update, because it isn't delivered through regular OS update channels.
As probably everyone here hasn't installed a BIOS update if your system is running without problems.
But he (and no one here) suffered from no mystery-chinese BIOS attack. So how could the NSA have done that mystery feat? Protecting a nation from BIOS attacks withiout making sure that BIOSes are updated?
Makes this whole story sound quite unbelievable. More like "Wag the dog"-like spin-doctoring.
Which leads us to the strange point that german unions think that the same job (running around a warehouse taking stuff from shelves, wrap them in cardboard) should be paid diffferently depending on the field the company operates in - mail order or general logistics.
And here's the punch line: workers of both fields are part of the same union!
So why, instead of fighting to raise the general payment for logistics worker to the level that amazon pays them (which is above the logistics level), do they single out amazon as a high profile target? More publicity.
...in front of a pharmacy.
you missed the important part...
I'd say rather fine than pretty fine.
Just as an example: my current car has a very distracting audible and visual warning when it detects ice on the road. The problem is: this warning delivers 99% false positives (in fact, it seems to be triggered simply by the thermometer crossing a temperature threshold (3C), in either direction). So - yes - it is a dangerous distraction. However, if the manufacturer had actually gotten it right, it would have been very valuable.
Opel/Vauxhall or other GM brand?
I alweays had the feeling the engineers only included this because they could add another feature to the ads without adding any new hardware. There is no use in a warning light if it becomes NORMAL between November and Febuary. THANK YOU, I KNOW IT'S WINTER!
That's why my standard example for ergonomic design is a cockpit: Even with that overwhelming number of buttons, leversand displays and whatnots, there is one simple rule: 1 button = 1 function
In theory, you can control everything with three buttons: select, confirm, back/up/exit (like most computer monitors do; select up/down is a bonus) and many designers tell us that cleaner interfaces are simpler to use. But compare changing the picture brightness on an old fashioned CRT knob to finding your way through seven layers of settings menues you need to FIND that setting.
Terror isn't the goal, but the means. Their goal is to convert the world to Islam.
Maybe, but what makes you think that?
This?
Look back to the age of Muslim conquest for a better understanding.
That would be outright stupid. By that logic you could also conclude by looking back to the age of crusades that violently converting the world to christianity is the goal of christians.
Yep. Osama bin Laden, for all that he's dead, basically won. And his biggest ally was the US security industry.
Are you a Muslim? Has the US replaced the Constitution with Sharia law? If the answer is No and No, then Bin Laden didn't win, or anything thing close to it. His demand was the US convert to Islam and implement Sharia law.
Confusion on this point is potentially dangerous, and frankly stupid.
Terrorists want to spread fear and terror. Hence the name. And by that measure, his plan worked.
Technology is neutral - it can be put to purposes both good or evil.
Except for Second Life, that never had a purpose whatsoever...?
Or even easier: Just click on the &/&%" doodle!
I guess that depends on country and time period.
Why do we need a "dual intent" visa?
Beats me. Probably because you want to have another type of visa that strictly forbids any steps that might least to immigration?
And I hope you feel smug about wasting tax money for his overtime after calling him in on a sunday...
The answer to that question is obvious. Here's what they say "We aren't spying on Grandma. Sure, we're gathering up her information along with all the rest, but we don't actually look at it, or use it.
Yes. If someone is able to not call gathering grandmas phone calls "spying", then that's the finest example of doublethink.
Despite my former comments, I still doubt your statement.
I believe that most of NSA employees work with the best on intents. And if you believe that your work is for a greater good, it's easy to believe that
spying on potential terrorists
justifies spying on millions of grandmas also. That's why we all know what the road to hell is paved with.
Suggesting that the intelligence agencies both can and must be involved in domestic politics is a quick route to +5 insightful because everybody just "knows" it happens, indeed it must be happening right now! To get there you have to look past all the laws, regulations, background checks, norms, and other controls to prevent such a thing from occurring, the minimal payoff if it occurs, and the substantial consequences if caught, and the lack of evidence that it is happening. What I find interesting is that this same power of "just knowing" on the part of most people here both indicates that the intelligence agencies interfere with domestic politics while denying that Snowden could be a bad actor. There seems to be some sort of calibration problem there.
In a democracy, the gouvernment has the burden of proof that their actions are well within the limits of the constitution (or however the constitution may be called in any given country) Secret police forces and other secret gouvernent operations are usually a trademark of totalitarian regimes.
Transparancy and public control of the gouvernment is a pillar of democracy. And given the track record of what has been done under the guise of "secrecy for national security", claims that something has to be done in secret should ring a whole set of alarms. (Though I acknowledge that there probably are quite a few tings regarding foreign intelligence that would be difficult to do in puiblic. But please also acknowledge that I'm not the least making any US specific points here.)
That's irony. I doubt that the people who do read our email have those stickers.
The bulk of the NSA controversy is about the NSA's domestic surveillance program. It is not controversial that the NSA is spying on enemies of war.
If I may offer a bit of an outside view: The bulk of the controversy about NSA over here is about a long chain of US presidents doing lip service by talking to the outside world of "friendship" and "trust" and "working together" as an "international community" and behind their backs let the NSA loose to spy on their so-called friends as if they *WERE* enemies of war.
Yes, yes, I know: "trust, but verify", but it is still slightly ironic that the US would go by a motto that is usually attributed to Lenin's as one of his signature phrases.
since when is blue collar a problem?
Perhaps the problem is rather "blue collar with no benefits" and perhaps no unions that would pave the way to a new manchester capitalism.
Not expressis verbis. But it is a dual intent visa. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dual_intent
Go to Canada without having to carry my passport like we could do for 99% of American history.
What? You ONLY have to show a passport to go to Canada?
Have you ever seen the hoops other people have to jump through to visit YOUR COUNTRY? Hint: Even for those nations where there is no visa requirement, a passport is not enough. I've yet to see another country that you need to buy a $15 admission ticket first... if you don't need a visa to begin with.