When can we count on that? The whole point being made by many here is that the police focus on victimless non-violent crimes and revenue generating crimes at the expense of minor crimes with actual victims.
They ignore breakins, minor theft, etc. but not a guy smoking a joint in his backyard or a person doing 5 over the limit.
Where does paying farmers to grow nothing, handing out billions to private companies, spending exorbitant amounts of money to build airports in tiny towns, subsidizing tobacco farmers, etc. come into play? Should I still just pay my taxes without complaint simply because politicians managed to buy enough votes to outnumber me and those who agree with/think as I do?
taxation is a powerful and legitimate tool for achieving public policy goals
No, it's not. It's a legitimate tool for funding the operations of the government. Any other use delegitimatizes the arguments constantly thrown out about taxes being a civic duty or how people who argue against certain taxes or the structureitself are against "paying their fair share".
I can get 8 hours with my Alienware M11x with light to moderate web surfing over wireless. I watch a lot of videos and surf more intensely, it's about 6.5-7
From what i've heard, Apple is pretty close with their numbers and they claim their new 13" MacBook pro is good for 10 hours. Lenovo claims something like 12 with one of their smaller offerings (X something or other.)
Not from where I see it. The police have more in common with street gangs than profession of nobility and honesty.
They defend each other without question or inquiry into what's going on. They commit crimes to cover the crimes of others-witness intimidation, falsifying reports, etc. They commit crimes with each other. They all wear similar clothing, use similar language and adopt similar body language and hand gestures. They stake out turf. They (at least attempt to) breed dependency-ie., what would the neighborhood do without us?
How many more isolated incidents from statistically insignificant "bad apples" does it take before people realize that this behavior is closer to rule and not exception?
I have never seen, been inside, or driven an unmodified car that shuts off the headlights when the key is removed or shut off. It is probably possible to make an aftermarket modification to do this.
I have 2005 Subaru Impreza WRX and haven't made any modifications to the electrical system. When you turn the key off, the head and parking lights turn off. There is a separate switch mounted on the top of the steering column for turning on the parking lights without the key. There are no provisions to turn the headlights on without the ignition turned on.
I had a 2000 Infiniti G20 that did this auto-off thing right. When you turned off the ignition, the headlights went out. BUT without the keys in the ignition, you could get still the headlights to come on by turning the headlight switch off and back on (you could actually hear a relay click as you did this). The service manual showed a body ECU that handled the retained accessory power for a short time after the ignition was turned off. Not once in 5 years and 88000 miles did I have an issue where this failed to work exactly as expected.
The whole car-not-doing-what-I-want thing that automakers have introduced over the years is one of the reasons I only look at stick shift cars and am very wary of drive-by-wire accelerators. When I want the car to do something, I want it to do that thing without some faraway engineer second-guessing me by proxy via the ECU.
So, not super secret or anything, just secret enough to hide from all of us who are subject to its provisions. It's also certainly secret enough that those who disseminate it are finding themselves under some level of investigation.
In terms of secret laws this isn't an unwritten law and not impossible to find codified, but it's certainly not transparent enough for an allegedly free society.
Secret laws and policies are one of the most offensive concepts to a free society.
In all actuality, they're just trying to get us to tolerate a much purer police state. In this new kinder, gentler police state, there are no documented rules, thus you have nothing to complain about and no reason to argue-just do as your told.
If users don't like certain privacy policies, they can restore their privacy by leaving the privately owned site whose policy(ies) they disagree with.
Can someone sue because facebook allows photos to be right-clicked and saved? What if they started with some flash based photo system that didn't allow "easy" saving and later transitioned to one that did? Would that warrant a complaint to the FTC?
I believe the whole system was designed around 128bit pointers from the very beginning. It used a 48 bit processor between 1988 and 1995 and did a nearly seamless transition to a 64 bit architecture around 1995.
The AS/400 was one of the first general-purpose computer systems to attain a C2 security rating from the NSA (Gould UTX/C2, a UNIX-based system was branded in 1986[4]), and in 1995 was extended to employ a 64-bit processor and operating system.
In 2000 IBM renamed the AS/400 to iSeries, as part of its e-Server branding initiative. The product line was further extended in 2004 with the introduction of the i5 servers, the first to use the IBM POWER5 processor. The architecture of the system allows for future implementation of 128-bit processors when they become available. Existing applications can use the new hardware without modification.
It's not their product. It's mine. I don't buy things that not only don't function the way I want but also actively deny my ability to change it's function.
If I want to perform differently, I better have the option to turn or ability to modify it do so.
My car (05 WRX) has a vast aftermarket for people who want something different. There's even open source software to alter engine operations www.romraider.com.
My TV can be opened and rewired. Maybe I want more speakers, maybe I want to integrate it into my wall. Whatever.
This doesn't even include the people who have JTAG programmers and alter all sorts of household appliances.
Listening to some police departments and their cities, police are never off duty. They can carry guns in places the average citizen cannot, all while in plain clothes and not being paid.
Cops have gotten second jobs as security guards and are still treated like cops when they make arrests, are assaulted, etc.
The whole off-duty/on-duty distinction seems to exist only when it benefits the police.
This is the problem with many in the "law and order" crowd-they're really statists. They love "law and order" when it's aimed at the average citizen, but never advocate that same brand of "law and order" be applied to the government and its agents.
If this started happening, what would be the point of cooperating with an arrest?
Ie., If the police become known for torturing people or indefinitely detaining people to obtain encryption keys, why wouldn't I just open fire on them and take my chances? I'm dead or badly injured either way, right?
I'm thinking that indefinite detention or torture in order to obtain evidence would lead to a lot of cops getting killed when serving warrants as the person would never know if the police were going to hurt them.
If I lived in such a regime, I'd have no problems killing any police who came to my house or that of my neighbor(s), warrant or not.
Slashdot Mirror
Please. The old guard outlets are guilty of the same exact thing. Look at any "mainstream" print media's coverage of Four Loko for proof.
When can we count on that? The whole point being made by many here is that the police focus on victimless non-violent crimes and revenue generating crimes at the expense of minor crimes with actual victims.
They ignore breakins, minor theft, etc. but not a guy smoking a joint in his backyard or a person doing 5 over the limit.
Hey you know that guy off in whose camper they were whacking?
Car crashes are the number one cause of death of people in/around 4-26. Some years it is 5-27, others 4-24, etc.
Either way, the leading cause of death for all people of school age-from pre-school all the way to college is car crashes.
Turning it into a teen thing is, at best, sloppy reporting; at worst, it's bigoted.
Where does paying farmers to grow nothing, handing out billions to private companies, spending exorbitant amounts of money to build airports in tiny towns, subsidizing tobacco farmers, etc. come into play? Should I still just pay my taxes without complaint simply because politicians managed to buy enough votes to outnumber me and those who agree with/think as I do?
taxation is a powerful and legitimate tool for achieving public policy goals
No, it's not. It's a legitimate tool for funding the operations of the government. Any other use delegitimatizes the arguments constantly thrown out about taxes being a civic duty or how people who argue against certain taxes or the structureitself are against "paying their fair share".
Perhaps multiple wavelengths a la DWDM or something like these 1000BASE-BX10-D and 1000BASE-BX10-U modules from Cisco
I can get 8 hours with my Alienware M11x with light to moderate web surfing over wireless. I watch a lot of videos and surf more intensely, it's about 6.5-7
From what i've heard, Apple is pretty close with their numbers and they claim their new 13" MacBook pro is good for 10 hours. Lenovo claims something like 12 with one of their smaller offerings (X something or other.)
Not from where I see it. The police have more in common with street gangs than profession of nobility and honesty.
They defend each other without question or inquiry into what's going on.
They commit crimes to cover the crimes of others-witness intimidation, falsifying reports, etc.
They commit crimes with each other.
They all wear similar clothing, use similar language and adopt similar body language and hand gestures.
They stake out turf.
They (at least attempt to) breed dependency-ie., what would the neighborhood do without us?
How many more isolated incidents from statistically insignificant "bad apples" does it take before people realize that this behavior is closer to rule and not exception?
Woosh!
Adjust your viewing angle
Don't forget to note, and share with others, the differences between self-sealing stem bolts and warp matrix flux capacitors.
So you're saying that you like your privacy the way it is? A narrow vision.
Why do you resist? We only wish to raise quality of life for all species.
You will adapt to service us. We will add your biological and technological distinctiveness to our own.
We only wish to improve quality of life...
I have never seen, been inside, or driven an unmodified car that shuts off the headlights when the key is removed or shut off. It is probably possible to make an aftermarket modification to do this.
I have 2005 Subaru Impreza WRX and haven't made any modifications to the electrical system. When you turn the key off, the head and parking lights turn off. There is a separate switch mounted on the top of the steering column for turning on the parking lights without the key. There are no provisions to turn the headlights on without the ignition turned on.
I had a 2000 Infiniti G20 that did this auto-off thing right. When you turned off the ignition, the headlights went out. BUT without the keys in the ignition, you could get still the headlights to come on by turning the headlight switch off and back on (you could actually hear a relay click as you did this). The service manual showed a body ECU that handled the retained accessory power for a short time after the ignition was turned off.
Not once in 5 years and 88000 miles did I have an issue where this failed to work exactly as expected.
The whole car-not-doing-what-I-want thing that automakers have introduced over the years is one of the reasons I only look at stick shift cars and am very wary of drive-by-wire accelerators. When I want the car to do something, I want it to do that thing without some faraway engineer second-guessing me by proxy via the ECU.
It's actually a rollover joke.
So, not super secret or anything, just secret enough to hide from all of us who are subject to its provisions. It's also certainly secret enough that those who disseminate it are finding themselves under some level of investigation.
In terms of secret laws this isn't an unwritten law and not impossible to find codified, but it's certainly not transparent enough for an allegedly free society.
Secret laws and policies are one of the most offensive concepts to a free society.
In all actuality, they're just trying to get us to tolerate a much purer police state. In this new kinder, gentler police state, there are no documented rules, thus you have nothing to complain about and no reason to argue-just do as your told.
Yep. We're beating them to their own finish line.
If users don't like certain privacy policies, they can restore their privacy by leaving the privately owned site whose policy(ies) they disagree with.
Can someone sue because facebook allows photos to be right-clicked and saved? What if they started with some flash based photo system that didn't allow "easy" saving and later transitioned to one that did? Would that warrant a complaint to the FTC?
I believe the whole system was designed around 128bit pointers from the very beginning. It used a 48 bit processor between 1988 and 1995 and did a nearly seamless transition to a 64 bit architecture around 1995.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_System_i
The AS/400 was one of the first general-purpose computer systems to attain a C2 security rating from the NSA (Gould UTX/C2, a UNIX-based system was branded in 1986[4]), and in 1995 was extended to employ a 64-bit processor and operating system.
In 2000 IBM renamed the AS/400 to iSeries, as part of its e-Server branding initiative. The product line was further extended in 2004 with the introduction of the i5 servers, the first to use the IBM POWER5 processor. The architecture of the system allows for future implementation of 128-bit processors when they become available. Existing applications can use the new hardware without modification.
It's not their product. It's mine. I don't buy things that not only don't function the way I want but also actively deny my ability to change it's function.
If I want to perform differently, I better have the option to turn or ability to modify it do so.
My car (05 WRX) has a vast aftermarket for people who want something different. There's even open source software to alter engine operations www.romraider.com.
My TV can be opened and rewired. Maybe I want more speakers, maybe I want to integrate it into my wall. Whatever.
This doesn't even include the people who have JTAG programmers and alter all sorts of household appliances.
Listening to some police departments and their cities, police are never off duty. They can carry guns in places the average citizen cannot, all while in plain clothes and not being paid.
Cops have gotten second jobs as security guards and are still treated like cops when they make arrests, are assaulted, etc.
The whole off-duty/on-duty distinction seems to exist only when it benefits the police.
This is the problem with many in the "law and order" crowd-they're really statists.
They love "law and order" when it's aimed at the average citizen, but never advocate that same brand of "law and order" be applied to the government and its agents.
If this started happening, what would be the point of cooperating with an arrest?
Ie., If the police become known for torturing people or indefinitely detaining people to obtain encryption keys, why wouldn't I just open fire on them and take my chances?
I'm dead or badly injured either way, right?
I'm thinking that indefinite detention or torture in order to obtain evidence would lead to a lot of cops getting killed when serving warrants as the person would never know if the police were going to hurt them.
If I lived in such a regime, I'd have no problems killing any police who came to my house or that of my neighbor(s), warrant or not.