The obvious answer to your question might be because it didn't block anything during testing,
The more obvious answer was that the testing wasn't actually done, OR that they are merely speculating that a rag was left and no one has any real clue.
What we do know for sure is that the Government Accountability Office does not have a single employee who is a Rocket Scientist(tm). These are bean counters, forms checkers, and desk jockeys, and blame shifters.
TFA states that they are seeking compensation from Lockheed. Hopefully, that'll happen without an actual suit.
They better hope it happens without a suit, because proving this will be impossible. This is all based on speculation unless someone has pictures.
If the settlement the Air Force demands is too high Lockheed will just deny it happened. Its not like the Air Force can switch contractors in mid program. It would set the program back 4 years to do that.
We can barely measure the star, and we certainly can't measure the atmosphere with any degree of certainty from 150 light years away. At best we can achieve is a few spectroscopic measurements of the absorption of upper atmosphere. This work is based on suspect modeling which in turn is based on a very tiny amount of data and nothing about the surface layers of the atmosphere.
The story is about how a judge interprets french law in favor of a governmentally sponsored company.
I'm quite certain there is nothing in French law that states search engines must make sure the pages they index do not contain a name and an insult on the same page.
Monopolies are held to different standards of the law by governments, in order to ensure fair competition. If the monopoly search engine is calling a business bad names, algorithmically or not, well, apparently France believes that's not fair competition.
Search engines do not call business bad names. They don't call anything.
Search engines simply index the content of pages, and words that appear together on said pages. If thousands of sites routinely place one word next to another how is that Google's problem? Why not go after the web pages that were used to build the search database?
When I googled the quoted phrase "overly critical guy" and appended the word idiot, I came up with a page someone posted about you. Is this something google did? Is a court order in the offing?
This, and TSA appearing at bus terminals to pat down children is just the current administration's way of slowly inuring you to the "your papers please" gestapo tactics they seek to impose on the american public.
With congress rolling over and approving every dime in the TSA budget there seems no likelihood this will stop any time soon.
Flamebait, I know. But if they payload is you (and I'll generously give you 300 lbs for yourself and your laptop) and the vessel weighs 15 times that much. A total waste.
Fuel efficiency isn't the only design criteria for modern cars.
Still the story makes an assertion that simply isn't supported by anything but the authors opinion:
Thus if Americans today were driving cars of the same size and power that were typical in 1980, the country’s fleet of autos would have jumped from an average of about 23 miles per gallon (mpg) to roughly 37 mpg, well above the current average of around 27 mpg.
Vehicles of that vintage couldn't achieve anything near 37mpg once the tougher pollution controls were put in place. A great deal of the weight gain over the years was due to the increase in horse power needed to overcome the pollution control regulations imposed on vehicles while maintaining similar performance.
Again, fuel economy is not the only design criteria. You can't look at an overall improvement in safety, accident survive-ability, comfort, mileage, pollution abatement, vehicle longevity, and dismiss all such improvements as "a total waste" just because all of these improvements didn't fall into one's preferred area of political rabble-rousing.
Well.... I knew someone who was in a car accident.... now.... don't get me wrong, this is one person, in a rather fantastic accident of the kind that doesn't happen every day.... but who escaped serious injury by not wearing it...as she litterally.... saw another car coming to tbone them, and moved aside to another seat....had she stayed where she was, or been belted in.... she would have likely been seriously injured by the impact.
Silly contrived story that has been floating around the internet for years.
If you read thru the data supplied in the linked article (page 4), you will see the Lt Governor did NOT have his seatbelt on, and was protected ONLY by the airbags. He actually had zero injuries.
Had he been wearing the standard belt and impacted at 108mph I doubt you could predict zero injuries.
Let me also dissuade you from the notion that there is money to be made for someone who has just picked up a 5D MkII and intends on holding down the shutter button until the money starts rolling in.
Where was any mention made of making money with this camera?
The topic seems never to have been mentioned until you propped up the straw man and handily beat it down.
The story poster wants a nice camera, he wan't planning to enter the cutthroat business of commercial photography.
I'm pretty sure a voting machine's worth of votes is worth more than an ATM filled with money.
I'm not so sure. There were widespread reports of white vans hauling people from polling place to polling place to vote multiple times for the price of a beer in dozens of Chicago
Even when you get the votes somewhat honestly, by campaigning for them, a vote only costs around 7 bucks according to Slate.
In the contested 2008 House races, the average winner spent $1.3 million and received about 185,000 votes, for a total cost of about $7 per vote. Losers spent an average of $493,000 for 91,000 votes, at a unit cost of $5.42. Neither of those gives an accurate picture of the true cost of a vote, however, since so many people fill in their ballots along party lines, regardless of campaign spending.
I have no idea of the actual amount of money in an ATM or the actual amount of ballots a ballot box holds. But votes can probably be bought easier than easier than breaking into an ATM. As far as I know, you get a wrist slap and a tisk-tisk for selling your vote. Slightly more for buying votes, but only if done on a grand scale.
Who said that they stole ATMs to get customer data? It was a "happy" side effect since the money and the data were stored in the same container. It's like a pickpocket that wants the money in your wallet but also ends up with your swingers club membership card and the pictures of your children.
Are you so sure it actually runs that way, even in Brazil? I've never seen an ATM without a network connection of some sort.
I seriously doubt there is any customer date in the ATM. Refreshing that daily would be a nightmare. Having the system on a VM seems to be necessary because Diebold insists on using Windows in the boxes. Windows, left laying around in public!! Idiots! By having VMware, running, they can give each customer a fresh virtual machine to run the transaction, saving them a whole lot of programming to make sure all cached data is cleared from memory. (In other words saving them from having to do a competent job in the first place).
A simple terminal system would do the same. There never was a valid use case for having any data resident in the cash machine.
The more you read the story the less you are sure that what they are reporting is actually what is happening, because it is so incredibly dumb. But then this is Diebold, so.....
It would seem anyone running around painted this way would attract more police attention than just wearing a slouch hat
Oh? Judging by the first picture in the series, I could probably find someone not unlike that in the downtown of many large cities -- or a mall.
It isn't yet illegal to be eccentric compared to the rest of society.
Nobody said it was illegal. Just that it would attract police attention. Wasn't avoiding that, after all, what the story was about?
Go ask the next person you see if they feel their mode of dress attracts more police attention than the average joe. Be prepared for an ear full, but once you wade thru that, you will they feel it does attract the attention of the average cop.
It would seem anyone running around painted this way would attract more police attention than just wearing a slouch hat. Perhaps it might be easier to just get (make) an Infrared LED Hat. Or maybe, take control of your government and vote them out until they remove the cameras.
An open platform will always have a certain level of fragmentation. It's part of the cost you pay for having an open platform. The benefit is that you get more apps and options. The downside is that they don't always play nice. So - I admit that there are negatives to so-called fragmentation.
Fragmentation is a pejorative, invented by Apple in an attempt to cast diversity in a bad light.
When anyone brings it up when discussing a wide range of options and freedom in the market place you can know they are Apple fanbois. You never see the word applied to any other area, such as Automobiles, where there is even more diversity and choice.
In those areas, phrases like wide selections, lots of choices, wide variety, diversity, freedom, all are positive attributes. Even "clones" and "Forks" have a positive connotation in the areas of computers and software.
Only when speaking of Android is the word fragmentation trotted out.
The Fourteenth Amendment Equal Protection Clause WORDING applies only to state governments, but the REQUIREMENT of equal protection has been read to apply to the federal government as a component of Fifth Amendment due process. The executive branch is held to this standard, and can not tax you more for living in California as opposed to living in Rhode Island. The Judiciary seems to exempt itself from this provision, unwisely IMHO.
You can't claim due process is met everywhere when The Fourth Amendment means different things in different places.
Exactly. The article makes it sound like this judge should have sat on his thumbs until SCOTUS made a decision, when the facts of the matter are somewhat more settled within his jurisdiction. There is no way he can rule based on his perception of what might be decided sometime in the future.
That we have rulings in one circuit that are somehow not binding on other circuits would seem a clear violation of the equal protection clause, showing once again just how little regard most courts have for the constitution.
I suggest you go on line to the theaters near you and check out prices for seating time that are near the same time of day for Alvin and the Chipmunks and Mission impossible. 7.25 for the former, 10 bucks for the latter in most areas near me in the same complex.
The fixed price has more to do with the requirements of running a theater than is has to do with the cost to produce or the popularity of a movie. You have to run your physical plant, your concessions, pay your property taxes, employees, cleaning crew (theoretically), and make payments to your mortgage. The price you pay to the studio distribution chain may or may not vary (I honestly don't know). But in any event it is a fairly small component of the overall ticket price.
The reality is that the less popular shows will hit the video release channels much sooner, as theater owners can't fill their seats. When theater owners can't attract an audience, the stop showing the film and it sooner or later ends up on video/dvds, along with the inevitable price drop to just a few dollars or 99 cents or whatever. The less popular movies often show up on TV well within one year.
With that move to video, the price to view will fall for the average viewer, in spite of the fact that some paid full price to view it in a theater, but more waited to view it at home.
The average viewer may not be interested in some movie at (insert theater price here) PER SEAT, but will spend $3 bucks or less, PER HOUSEHOLD. The theater manager can't afford to let in an entire household (who bring their own popcorn, sodas, squalling kids and yaking on the phone) for 3 bucks.
The mistake here is assuming the movie is the only thing being purchased in the theater.
Go read the story. You don't even have to have a Facebook account to get mentioned by third parties. Next thing you know your ex cites a Facebook posting by someone you dont even know.
But if you read the story you find out its not just what you or your ex posts. Its what all the third party posters say. The he said she said, twice removed. Friends of ex-friends etc.
People are fixating on that phrase "will also steer the car back into the right lane", as if control of the vehicle would be usurped any time it crosses the line.
None of the read TFA (yeah, I know), where it states:
The driver can overcome assistance and vibration at any time by turning the steering wheel, accelerating or braking.
Slashdot Mirror
That is standard in any processed food packaging industry, as well as Fish packaging, meat packaging.
Its FDA required I believe.
Hard to detect a rag on a metal detector.
The obvious answer to your question might be because it didn't block anything during testing,
The more obvious answer was that the testing wasn't actually done, OR that they are merely speculating that a rag was left and no one has any real clue.
What we do know for sure is that the Government Accountability Office does not have a single employee who is a Rocket Scientist(tm). These are bean counters, forms checkers, and desk jockeys, and blame shifters.
TFA states that they are seeking compensation from Lockheed. Hopefully, that'll happen without an actual suit.
They better hope it happens without a suit, because proving this will be impossible. This is all based on speculation unless someone has pictures.
If the settlement the Air Force demands is too high Lockheed will just deny it happened.
Its not like the Air Force can switch contractors in mid program. It would set the program back
4 years to do that.
We can barely measure the star, and we certainly can't measure the atmosphere with any degree of certainty from 150 light years away. At best we can achieve is a few spectroscopic measurements of the absorption of upper atmosphere. This work is based on suspect modeling which in turn is based on a very tiny amount of data and nothing about the surface layers of the atmosphere.
Professionals indeed.
The story is about how a judge interprets french law in favor of a governmentally sponsored company.
I'm quite certain there is nothing in French law that states search engines must make sure the pages they index do not contain a name and an insult on the same page.
So quick to believe anything bad about Google.
Monopolies are held to different standards of the law by governments, in order to ensure fair competition. If the monopoly search engine is calling a business bad names, algorithmically or not, well, apparently France believes that's not fair competition.
Search engines do not call business bad names.
They don't call anything.
Search engines simply index the content of pages, and words that appear together on said pages. If thousands of sites routinely place one word next to another how is that Google's problem? Why not go after the web pages that were used to build the search database?
When I googled the quoted phrase "overly critical guy" and appended the word idiot, I came up with a page someone posted about you. Is this something google did? Is a court order in the offing?
Exactly.
This, and TSA appearing at bus terminals to pat down children is just the current administration's way of slowly inuring you to the "your papers please" gestapo tactics they seek to impose on the american public.
With congress rolling over and approving every dime in the TSA budget there seems no likelihood this will stop any time soon.
Flamebait, I know. But if they payload is you (and I'll generously give you 300 lbs for yourself and your laptop) and the vessel weighs 15 times that much. A total waste.
Earlier today, we had a story on how the Massachusetts Lt. Governor crashed his Crown Vic doing 108mph and walked away with no injuries. Say what you will about the Lt Governor, it is not really a waste when crash survival rates increase dramatically.
Fuel efficiency isn't the only design criteria for modern cars.
Still the story makes an assertion that simply isn't supported by anything but the authors opinion:
Thus if Americans today were driving cars of the same size and power that were typical in 1980, the country’s fleet of autos would have jumped from an average of about 23 miles per gallon (mpg) to roughly 37 mpg, well above the current average of around 27 mpg.
Vehicles of that vintage couldn't achieve anything near 37mpg once the tougher pollution controls were put in place. A great deal of the weight gain over the years was due to the increase in horse power needed to overcome the pollution control regulations imposed on vehicles while maintaining similar performance.
Again, fuel economy is not the only design criteria. You can't look at an overall improvement in safety, accident survive-ability, comfort, mileage, pollution abatement, vehicle longevity, and dismiss all such improvements as "a total waste" just because all of these improvements didn't fall into one's preferred area of political rabble-rousing.
Well.... I knew someone who was in a car accident.... now.... don't get me wrong, this is one person, in a rather fantastic accident of the kind that doesn't happen every day.... but who escaped serious injury by not wearing it...as she litterally.... saw another car coming to tbone them, and moved aside to another seat....had she stayed where she was, or been belted in.... she would have likely been seriously injured by the impact.
Silly contrived story that has been floating around the internet for years.
If you read thru the data supplied in the linked article (page 4), you will see the Lt Governor did NOT have his seatbelt on, and was protected ONLY by the airbags. He actually had zero injuries.
Had he been wearing the standard belt and impacted at 108mph I doubt you could predict zero injuries.
As long as your total claim is under the small claims limit perhaps. Even a Crown Vic exceeds that limit in every state.
Let me also dissuade you from the notion that there is money to be made for someone who has just picked up a 5D MkII and intends on holding down the shutter button until the money starts rolling in.
Where was any mention made of making money with this camera?
The topic seems never to have been mentioned until you propped up the straw man and handily beat it down.
The story poster wants a nice camera, he wan't planning to enter the cutthroat business of commercial photography.
I'm pretty sure a voting machine's worth of votes is worth more than an ATM filled with money.
I'm not so sure.
There were widespread reports of white vans hauling people from polling place to polling place to vote multiple times
for the price of a beer in dozens of Chicago
Even when you get the votes somewhat honestly, by campaigning for them, a vote only costs around .
7 bucks according to Slate
In the contested 2008 House races, the average winner spent $1.3 million and received about 185,000 votes, for a total cost of about $7 per vote. Losers spent an average of $493,000 for 91,000 votes, at a unit cost of $5.42. Neither of those gives an accurate picture of the true cost of a vote, however, since so many people fill in their ballots along party lines, regardless of campaign spending.
I have no idea of the actual amount of money in an ATM or the actual amount of ballots a ballot box holds. But votes can probably be bought easier than easier than breaking into an ATM. As far as I know, you get a wrist slap and a tisk-tisk for selling your vote. Slightly more for buying votes, but only if done on a grand scale.
This is the company that all but flat-out said they were tampering with a US election, right? And we trust them with... anything?
Apparently we trust them with money.
Frightening!
Who said that they stole ATMs to get customer data? It was a "happy" side effect since the money and the data were stored in the same container. It's like a pickpocket that wants the money in your wallet but also ends up with your swingers club membership card and the pictures of your children.
Are you so sure it actually runs that way, even in Brazil? I've never seen an ATM without a network connection of some sort.
I seriously doubt there is any customer date in the ATM. Refreshing that daily would be a nightmare.
Having the system on a VM seems to be necessary because Diebold insists on using Windows in the boxes. Windows, left laying around in public!! Idiots! By having VMware, running, they can give each customer a fresh virtual machine to run the transaction, saving them a whole lot of programming to make sure all cached data is cleared from memory. (In other words saving them from having to do a competent job in the first place).
A simple terminal system would do the same. There never was a valid use case for having any data resident in the cash machine.
The more you read the story the less you are sure that what they are reporting is actually what is happening, because it is so incredibly dumb. But then this is Diebold, so.....
Oh? Judging by the first picture in the series, I could probably find someone not unlike that in the downtown of many large cities -- or a mall.
It isn't yet illegal to be eccentric compared to the rest of society.
Nobody said it was illegal.
Just that it would attract police attention. Wasn't avoiding that, after all, what the story was about?
Go ask the next person you see if they feel their mode of dress attracts more police attention than the average joe. Be prepared for an ear full, but once you wade thru that, you will they feel it does attract the attention of the average cop.
It would seem anyone running around painted this way would attract more police attention than just wearing a slouch hat. Perhaps it might be easier to just get (make) an Infrared LED Hat. Or maybe, take control of your government and vote them out until they remove the cameras.
An open platform will always have a certain level of fragmentation. It's part of the cost you pay for having an open platform. The benefit is that you get more apps and options. The downside is that they don't always play nice. So - I admit that there are negatives to so-called fragmentation.
Fragmentation is a pejorative, invented by Apple in an attempt to cast diversity in a bad light.
When anyone brings it up when discussing a wide range of options and freedom in the market place you can know they are Apple fanbois. You never see the word applied to any other area, such as Automobiles, where there is even more diversity and choice.
In those areas, phrases like wide selections, lots of choices, wide variety, diversity, freedom, all are positive attributes.
Even "clones" and "Forks" have a positive connotation in the areas of computers and software.
Only when speaking of Android is the word fragmentation trotted out.
Convince me that is just coincidental.
The Fourteenth Amendment Equal Protection Clause WORDING applies only to state governments, but the REQUIREMENT of equal protection has been read to apply to the federal government as a component of Fifth Amendment due process. The executive branch is held to this standard, and can not tax you more for living in California as opposed to living in Rhode Island. The Judiciary seems to exempt itself from this provision, unwisely IMHO.
You can't claim due process is met everywhere when The Fourth Amendment means different things in different places.
Exactly. The article makes it sound like this judge should have sat on his thumbs until SCOTUS made a decision, when the facts of the matter are somewhat more settled within his jurisdiction. There is no way he can rule based on his perception of what might be decided sometime in the future.
That we have rulings in one circuit that are somehow not binding on other circuits would seem a clear violation of the equal protection clause, showing once again just how little regard most courts have for the constitution.
Really? No price difference?
I suggest you go on line to the theaters near you and check out prices for seating time that are near the same time of day for Alvin and the Chipmunks and Mission impossible. 7.25 for the former, 10 bucks for the latter in most areas near me in the same complex.
The fixed price has more to do with the requirements of running a theater than is has to do with the cost to produce or the popularity of a movie.
You have to run your physical plant, your concessions, pay your property taxes, employees, cleaning crew (theoretically), and make payments to your mortgage. The price you pay to the studio distribution chain may or may not vary (I honestly don't know). But in any event it is a fairly small component of the overall ticket price.
The reality is that the less popular shows will hit the video release channels much sooner, as theater owners can't fill their seats. When theater owners can't attract an audience, the stop showing the film and it sooner or later ends up on video/dvds, along with the inevitable price drop to just a few dollars or 99 cents or whatever. The less popular movies often show up on TV well within one year.
With that move to video, the price to view will fall for the average viewer, in spite of the fact that some paid full price to view it in a theater, but more waited to view it at home.
The average viewer may not be interested in some movie at (insert theater price here) PER SEAT, but will spend $3 bucks or less, PER HOUSEHOLD.
The theater manager can't afford to let in an entire household (who bring their own popcorn, sodas, squalling kids and yaking on the phone) for 3 bucks.
The mistake here is assuming the movie is the only thing being purchased in the theater.
Go read the story. You don't even have to have a Facebook account to get mentioned by third parties.
Next thing you know your ex cites a Facebook posting by someone you dont even know.
But if you read the story you find out its not just what you or your ex posts.
Its what all the third party posters say. The he said she said, twice removed. Friends of ex-friends etc.
You have no defense against that.
Exactly.
People are fixating on that phrase "will also steer the car back into the right lane", as if control of the vehicle would be usurped any time it crosses the line.
None of the read TFA (yeah, I know), where it states:
The driver can overcome assistance and vibration at any time by turning the steering wheel, accelerating or braking.