Rectal scans? I heard somewhere that mouth prints are as unique as fingerprints. Sadly enough, my mind is now wondering if anal prints are similarly unique. At the same time, I'm more happily wondering if vaginal lip prints are unique as well...
In/around 1999, I was a dishwasher at a new casino in Biloxi. We had all sorts of issues with lukewarm water. The engineers came around and began looking at the overhead sprayer we used-on the business end, it had a single control lever on it for pressure control and at the opposite end it had seperate hot and cold controls. They told us that the hot water had lower pressure then the cold and by having both valves essentially opening into another restriction that allowed the hot/cold to 'interact', cold water was flushing back into the hot system. I don't know far back into the system, but enough that all kitchens on the barge were eventually effected (turns out all kitchens did this:) )
My apartment shower starts with the knob facing 6 o'clock, turning the knob counterclockwise to the 9 o'clock position gives seemingly only hot water, easing the knob clockwise begins to dial in the cold water and brings up the power of the shower. Continue clockwise and you get all cold water and then the pressure begins to drop to 0. The fun part is I've been to hotels that did this only they started right away with ramping up the hot water, and continuing dialed in the cold water.
Mine not only beeps 5 times when it's done, it beeps INFINITELY at timed intervals after that to let you know it's finished (says "END" on the display). Even dumber is if you yank the door with any time left, it beeps infinitely at a timed interval and displays 'DOOR OPEN' on the display.
If you set the timer, it beeps after the end about every 30 seconds to let you know it's done.
Personally, I would vote to ban not-smoking both in the presence of nearby non-consenting smokers (this means most public areas both indoors and outdoors) and minors.
I guess you're not very familiar with the US of A, but children aren't free here. Can't vote, can't drive, can't smoke, can't drink, mandatory education.
The fact that our country restricts juveniles in one fashion doesn't justify more restrictions. If it does, then the reverse applies as well: -kids are free to pay the same taxes as adults at the same (or higher) rate -kids are free to be tried and punished just like adults should they ever try to reenact a violent video game
people forget this one because it would eliminate most of the justification to barring young people from buying certain types of video games. If they're to be treated as adults for reenacting a video game, what right do we have to treat them anything but adults when they're not?
Now imagine if all you classmates, with their celebrity loving subculture, had the same right to vote. Imagine what would happen if Madonna (Paris Hilton is too young) got into the White House.
Yeah, because we know that ALL teens would vote for a superstar and would have enough votes to override all adult voters.
I get 10 down/1 up in Las Vegas and I usually see full speed.
The data rate of 802.11b might be 11mbps, but the throughput is most certainly not. With no security, I got around 6.5mbps. Turning WEP or WPA on brought this down into the mid 5s. I've never ever gotten 7 or more mbps throughput with my 802.11b equipment.
For the record, my current access point (Cisco 1242AG) nets me around 26mbps throughput (with 100% quality and strength) on the a/g sides when copying large files across my network.
I'm not skimming, but I have to wonder, are you blind?
Just because they're being narrow about this now doesn't mean this entire plan of attack can't be replicated with other forms of artistic mediums.
I suppose we should all wait until the full out attack on artistic mediums in general, that is, whichever mediums are left after they've gone after them one by one paying careful attention to scope creep each and every time.
The government is supposed to be in the business of whatever the people tell it to be in the business of. That's a democracy. Keep pushing the all-or-nothing standpoint on this issue and we'll see a backlash that will gain sufficient political power to mop the floor with the/. types. You are on the side of censorship in the way that Pat Robertson is on the side of liberals.
No, it's not. The government is supposed to be in the business of what the constitution says it can be in-NOTHING more. We're not a democracy ruled by mob, we're supposed to be a constitutional republic with strict limits on the government that cannot be superseded because 50.1% of the people think it ought to be.
The all or nothing stand is a valid and principled one and can survive if those making it are not willing to give into the tricks of the other side. Every compromise "for the children" opens a hole in with from which the other side can exploit.
I feel the need point out that the other side rarely compromises and shows no shame in such a position.
Everytime some group dislikes something they start with pushing for bans on sale to children. Not wanting to be seen as rigid or stubborn, the other side compromises and agrees on bans on sale to those under 18/21.
Then it grows-see, you said you were against selling to people under 18 yet, (pick one or more): you advertise in magazines that kids read you have billboards where kids might see them you show commericials when kids might see them you're clerks don't check IDs thoroughly enough you sell your product near schools,daycares,churches,arcades,swimming pools and/or teen dancehalls. ETC ETC
They use this "in" to slowly grind away the rights of everyone teen and adult to enjoy some activity. They have no problem with scope creep and they have no problem with rigidity and lack of compromise.
The ESRB was originally a voluntary solution to ADVISE parents about what their kids brought home and/or wanted them to buy. Now it's turned into mandates on clerks, prohibitions on kids, and a form of scarlet letter on parents who dare not to follow the proclamations of strangers when it comes to their kids entertainment choices.
Where all these addendums that say people under 18 are ineligible and/or should be denied protection under any given section of the constitution. I see nothing in amendments 1-25 or 27 nor the body of the constitution that would allow the government to deny people under 18 their rights. Yes, the constitution is a limit on government, not the people.
The 26th prohibits the government from infringing upon the rights of people over 18 in regards to voting, but makes no such prohibition regarding people under 18. I might argue that because the government is granted no such power, they have no right to deny people under 18 the right to vote, but that's for another time.
In fact, aside from the 26th amendment, the only places I see age mentioned is in the establishment of minimum age to hold office for president (35) and senator (25).
Basically, that's the true limits of the government's special ability to deny young people rights-they can be denied the ability to hold two offices, and they may be able to be denied the right to vote. Nothing else is permitted.
Why is it considered the mark of a bad parent that they ignored and/or rejected the opinions and/or advice of a group of strangers that know neither them nor their kids and base their advice solely on the kid's birthday?
A parent can ignore all ratings if they choose, this doesn't make them a bad parent anymore then rigidly following the ratings makes them a good parent. I love this idea that parents who choose to allow their kids to buy whatever media they want rather then following the age based standards of some third party are "not being parents" ie., they're being "bad" parents. Using this line of logic, the only way parent can avoid scorn and ridicule is to turn over decision power to some third party, effectively abdicating their power as parents to a group of people who don't even know their kid's name(s).
I really love the reaction from many people about the hot coffee hack/hidden content reveal.
The game was rated "M" which was the movie equivalent of "R", yet people got twisted in pretzels because of a hokey 'sex' scene. This is like complaining about and threatening lawsuits because the Pulp Fiction DVD has an 'easter egg' in it where you see Fabian's breasts and/or ass. As far I know there is no such scene, it's just an example.
I guess it's OK to have rampant fake violence but not OK to have 30 seconds of hard to find fake sort-of-sex.
What other areas are Google going to add structures where none exist? This seems like a great way to destroy the integrity of Google Earth and will invariably spawn questions regarding accuracy of the images.
This is like a library rewriting books or adding content to "balance" controversial books due to the fact that they're so "sensitive".
No time like the present for Nick Nolte to step in and fulfill his destiny.
They could even act is as if nothing had happened, like when TV shows just replace the actor that plays a certain character-Becky in Roseanne comes to mind.
On the other hand, nuclear power plants don't stop producing power when the clouds come out or the sun goes down. This can offset the purchase and maintenance costs of the storage system required for saving solar energy for a rainy day...
Setting aside issues of what is a "sex offender" vs what I think the public perception of one is, are all "sex offenders" not allowed to use MySpace?
This is a little like cross referencing a list of library card holders and comparing it to the list of "sex offenders" and waxing hysterical that there are "sex offenders" in the library. Do the same with Blockbuster cards, or the phone book. Geee gads, there are "sex offenders" in the city...
Yes, there are young people on MySpace, but not all MySpace users are young. Some people are well into their 30s and 40s and use it to connect with other 30 and 40 year olds.
The mere presence of "sex offenders" should not be cause for concern anymore then if they were in a library, Wal-Mart, mall, grocery store, etc. This is reinforced with the fact that many "sex offenders" really aren't-people who were 18 and their partner was 15, public urinators, that guy that grabbed that girl to yell at her for jaywalking or whatever, etc.
Some cities criminalize a theater allowing a person under 18 into a movie rated "X" by the MPAA or a person under 17 into a movie rated "R" by the MPAA.
I came across two cities in Alaska when I was looking for info on other laws. They were in one of the codification databases-ordlink.com, municode.com, etc. I don't remember what the city's names were though...
"Person" is defined, for the purposes of Sections 9.20.040 and 9.20.050, as any individual, owner, employee, agent, corporate officer or manager who is working as or for an exhibitor of motion pictures in an area during and wherein "X"rated or "R"rated motion pictures are being exhibited. (Prior code 8.40.030)
9.20.040 Motion picture admittance--"X" rating.
No person shall knowingly permit anyone under the age of eighteen years to enter into or remain in any enclosed or open area where motion pictures are being exhibited which have been given an "X" rating according to the rating standards established by the Motion Picture Association of America. (Prior code 8.40.010)
9.20.050 Motion picture admittance-- "R" rating.
No person shall knowingly permit anyone under the age of seventeen years who is not accompanied by a parent or adult guardian to enter into or remain in any enclosed or open area where motion pictures are being exhibited which have been given an "R" rating according to the rating standards established by the Motion Picture Association of America. (Prior code 8.40.020)
Someone probably already brought this up, but what about security? Unless I'm mistaken, and please let me know if I am, this will basically be acting like a cable/DSL modem. Will each user get an internet addressable IP address, or will we be 10/172/192 NATed at the node or beyond?
Will I be an island unto myself, or will I be able to browse my subnet like some people I know with cable modems used to do?
What type of security will these devices use? I don't really feel like sharing my network's traffic with everyone around who builds/buys a sniffer. Will their be some sort of pre-established key setup like WEP/WPA or will I/my device need to authenticate EAP style?
Also, what kind of node distribution issues will there be? I'm assuming that the 384/128 is per node. 5 people all watching a cheesy low bandwith video could eat that up pretty quick.
This doesn't "delete" online predators, it "deletes" online young people who've done nothing wrong.
In reality, online predators will still flourish, young people will get around blocks, and the government will come back asking for a law that places new burdens on individual sites a la COPPA.
Why are young people who've done nothing wrong shouldering all of the burden? In terms of victimization when compared to the real world, myspace is paradise for teens. Sociologist Mike Males discusses this hysteria here http://home.earthlink.net/~mmales/yt-myspa.htm
The Massachusetts AG wanted myspace to raise its age to 18 to "protect young people from predators". Given that the overwhelming majority of predators are over 21 and many are over 30, why not suggest banning people over 30 and limit people 21-30 if "protecting teens" is the goal?
Items will be confiscated and may be returned to parents at the discretion of the principal/designee.
The "discretion" part sounds like theft. I wonder if there's any cases on the legality of a principal or other school employee taking legally owned property and refusing to return it.
Slashdot Mirror
Rectal scans? I heard somewhere that mouth prints are as unique as fingerprints. Sadly enough, my mind is now wondering if anal prints are similarly unique. At the same time, I'm more happily wondering if vaginal lip prints are unique as well...
I was considering going with Cingular for cell phone and a laptop card. Scratch that idea.
I guess it's a tossup between Sprint and Verizon. Oh well...
Sadly enough, there may be some reason for that.
:) )
In/around 1999, I was a dishwasher at a new casino in Biloxi. We had all sorts of issues with lukewarm water. The engineers came around and began looking at the overhead sprayer we used-on the business end, it had a single control lever on it for pressure control and at the opposite end it had seperate hot and cold controls. They told us that the hot water had lower pressure then the cold and by having both valves essentially opening into another restriction that allowed the hot/cold to 'interact', cold water was flushing back into the hot system. I don't know far back into the system, but enough that all kitchens on the barge were eventually effected (turns out all kitchens did this
My apartment shower starts with the knob facing 6 o'clock, turning the knob counterclockwise to the 9 o'clock position gives seemingly only hot water, easing the knob clockwise begins to dial in the cold water and brings up the power of the shower. Continue clockwise and you get all cold water and then the pressure begins to drop to 0. The fun part is I've been to hotels that did this only they started right away with ramping up the hot water, and continuing dialed in the cold water.
Even better:
Mine not only beeps 5 times when it's done, it beeps INFINITELY at timed intervals after that to let you know it's finished (says "END" on the display). Even dumber is if you yank the door with any time left, it beeps infinitely at a timed interval and displays 'DOOR OPEN' on the display.
If you set the timer, it beeps after the end about every 30 seconds to let you know it's done.
Personally, I would vote to ban not-smoking both in the presence of nearby non-consenting smokers (this means most public areas both indoors and outdoors) and minors.
I guess you're not very familiar with the US of A, but children aren't free here. Can't vote, can't drive, can't smoke, can't drink, mandatory education.
The fact that our country restricts juveniles in one fashion doesn't justify more restrictions. If it does, then the reverse applies as well:
-kids are free to pay the same taxes as adults at the same (or higher) rate
-kids are free to be tried and punished just like adults should they ever try to reenact a violent video game
people forget this one because it would eliminate most of the justification to barring young people from buying certain types of video games. If they're to be treated as adults for reenacting a video game, what right do we have to treat them anything but adults when they're not?
Not all CCWs, in fact very few states do that. Off the top of my head, only CA,NV,NY,MA, and NJ do that
Now imagine if all you classmates, with their celebrity loving subculture, had the same right to vote. Imagine what would happen if Madonna (Paris Hilton is too young) got into the White House.
Yeah, because we know that ALL teens would vote for a superstar and would have enough votes to override all adult voters.
I get 10 down/1 up in Las Vegas and I usually see full speed.
The data rate of 802.11b might be 11mbps, but the throughput is most certainly not. With no security, I got around 6.5mbps. Turning WEP or WPA on brought this down into the mid 5s. I've never ever gotten 7 or more mbps throughput with my 802.11b equipment.
For the record, my current access point (Cisco 1242AG) nets me around 26mbps throughput (with 100% quality and strength) on the a/g sides when copying large files across my network.
I use Noscript to block javascript. The exploit didn't work until I allowed javascript for that site.
New/unknown sites won't be able to do this, but my previously "trusted" ones will.
Ground up and in the freezer?
I'm not skimming, but I have to wonder, are you blind?
Just because they're being narrow about this now doesn't mean this entire plan of attack can't be replicated with other forms of artistic mediums.
I suppose we should all wait until the full out attack on artistic mediums in general, that is, whichever mediums are left after they've gone after them one by one paying careful attention to scope creep each and every time.
The government is supposed to be in the business of whatever the people tell it to be in the business of. That's a democracy. Keep pushing the all-or-nothing standpoint on this issue and we'll see a backlash that will gain sufficient political power to mop the floor with the /. types. You are on the side of censorship in the way that Pat Robertson is on the side of liberals.
No, it's not. The government is supposed to be in the business of what the constitution says it can be in-NOTHING more. We're not a democracy ruled by mob, we're supposed to be a constitutional republic with strict limits on the government that cannot be superseded because 50.1% of the people think it ought to be.
The all or nothing stand is a valid and principled one and can survive if those making it are not willing to give into the tricks of the other side. Every compromise "for the children" opens a hole in with from which the other side can exploit.
I feel the need point out that the other side rarely compromises and shows no shame in such a position.
Everytime some group dislikes something they start with pushing for bans on sale to children. Not wanting to be seen as rigid or stubborn, the other side compromises and agrees on bans on sale to those under 18/21.
Then it grows-see, you said you were against selling to people under 18 yet,
(pick one or more):
you advertise in magazines that kids read
you have billboards where kids might see them
you show commericials when kids might see them
you're clerks don't check IDs thoroughly enough
you sell your product near schools,daycares,churches,arcades,swimming pools and/or teen dancehalls.
ETC
ETC
They use this "in" to slowly grind away the rights of everyone teen and adult to enjoy some activity. They have no problem with scope creep and they have no problem with rigidity and lack of compromise.
The ESRB was originally a voluntary solution to ADVISE parents about what their kids brought home and/or wanted them to buy. Now it's turned into mandates on clerks, prohibitions on kids, and a form of scarlet letter on parents who dare not to follow the proclamations of strangers when it comes to their kids entertainment choices.
Amen.
Where all these addendums that say people under 18 are ineligible and/or should be denied protection under any given section of the constitution. I see nothing in amendments 1-25 or 27 nor the body of the constitution that would allow the government to deny people under 18 their rights. Yes, the constitution is a limit on government, not the people.
The 26th prohibits the government from infringing upon the rights of people over 18 in regards to voting, but makes no such prohibition regarding people under 18. I might argue that because the government is granted no such power, they have no right to deny people under 18 the right to vote, but that's for another time.
In fact, aside from the 26th amendment, the only places I see age mentioned is in the establishment of minimum age to hold office for president (35) and senator (25).
Basically, that's the true limits of the government's special ability to deny young people rights-they can be denied the ability to hold two offices, and they may be able to be denied the right to vote. Nothing else is permitted.
That is their prerogative as well.
Why is it considered the mark of a bad parent that they ignored and/or rejected the opinions and/or advice of a group of strangers that know neither them nor their kids and base their advice solely on the kid's birthday?
A parent can ignore all ratings if they choose, this doesn't make them a bad parent anymore then rigidly following the ratings makes them a good parent. I love this idea that parents who choose to allow their kids to buy whatever media they want rather then following the age based standards of some third party are "not being parents" ie., they're being "bad" parents. Using this line of logic, the only way parent can avoid scorn and ridicule is to turn over decision power to some third party, effectively abdicating their power as parents to a group of people who don't even know their kid's name(s).
I really love the reaction from many people about the hot coffee hack/hidden content reveal.
The game was rated "M" which was the movie equivalent of "R", yet people got twisted in pretzels because of a hokey 'sex' scene.
This is like complaining about and threatening lawsuits because the Pulp Fiction DVD has an 'easter egg' in it where you see Fabian's breasts and/or ass. As far I know there is no such scene, it's just an example.
I guess it's OK to have rampant fake violence but not OK to have 30 seconds of hard to find fake sort-of-sex.
This is the asinine part.
What other areas are Google going to add structures where none exist?
This seems like a great way to destroy the integrity of Google Earth and will invariably spawn questions regarding accuracy of the images.
This is like a library rewriting books or adding content to "balance" controversial books due to the fact that they're so "sensitive".
No time like the present for Nick Nolte to step in and fulfill his destiny.
They could even act is as if nothing had happened, like when TV shows just replace the actor that plays a certain character-Becky in Roseanne comes to mind.
On the other hand, nuclear power plants don't stop producing power when the clouds come out or the sun goes down.
This can offset the purchase and maintenance costs of the storage system required for saving solar energy for a rainy day...
When 400 phones show up in a club with a capacity rating of 350, can cops and fire marshals be far behind?
Nope. I usually have two on me-my company issued Blackberry and my personal cell phone. I know lots of people who have two phones with them.
Setting aside issues of what is a "sex offender" vs what I think the public perception of one is, are all "sex offenders" not allowed to use MySpace?
This is a little like cross referencing a list of library card holders and comparing it to the list of "sex offenders" and waxing hysterical that there are "sex offenders" in the library. Do the same with Blockbuster cards, or the phone book. Geee gads, there are "sex offenders" in the city...
Yes, there are young people on MySpace, but not all MySpace users are young. Some people are well into their 30s and 40s and use it to connect with other 30 and 40 year olds.
The mere presence of "sex offenders" should not be cause for concern anymore then if they were in a library, Wal-Mart, mall, grocery store, etc. This is reinforced with the fact that many "sex offenders" really aren't-people who were 18 and their partner was 15, public urinators, that guy that grabbed that girl to yell at her for jaywalking or whatever, etc.
True.
Some cities criminalize a theater allowing a person under 18 into a movie rated "X" by the MPAA or a person under 17 into a movie rated "R" by the MPAA.
I came across two cities in Alaska when I was looking for info on other laws. They were in one of the codification databases-ordlink.com, municode.com, etc. I don't remember what the city's names were though...
I did find this for Bethel, AK:
http://www.cityofbethel.org/
9.20.030 Motion picture admittance--Person defined.
"Person" is defined, for the purposes of Sections 9.20.040 and 9.20.050, as any individual, owner, employee, agent, corporate officer or manager who is working as or for an exhibitor of motion pictures in an area during and wherein "X"rated or "R"rated motion pictures are being exhibited. (Prior code 8.40.030)
9.20.040 Motion picture admittance--"X" rating.
No person shall knowingly permit anyone under the age of eighteen years to enter into or remain in any enclosed or open area where motion pictures are being exhibited which have been given an "X" rating according to the rating standards established by the Motion Picture Association of America. (Prior code 8.40.010)
9.20.050 Motion picture admittance-- "R" rating.
No person shall knowingly permit anyone under the age of seventeen years who is not accompanied by a parent or adult guardian to enter into or remain in any enclosed or open area where motion pictures are being exhibited which have been given an "R" rating according to the rating standards established by the Motion Picture Association of America. (Prior code 8.40.020)
Someone probably already brought this up, but what about security? Unless I'm mistaken, and please let me know if I am, this will basically be acting like a cable/DSL modem.
Will each user get an internet addressable IP address, or will we be 10/172/192 NATed at the node or beyond?
Will I be an island unto myself, or will I be able to browse my subnet like some people I know with cable modems used to do?
What type of security will these devices use? I don't really feel like sharing my network's traffic with everyone around who builds/buys a sniffer. Will their be some sort of pre-established key setup like WEP/WPA or will I/my device need to authenticate EAP style?
Also, what kind of node distribution issues will there be? I'm assuming that the 384/128 is per node. 5 people all watching a cheesy low bandwith video could eat that up pretty quick.
This doesn't "delete" online predators, it "deletes" online young people who've done nothing wrong.
In reality, online predators will still flourish, young people will get around blocks, and the government will come back asking for a law that places new burdens on individual sites a la COPPA.
Why are young people who've done nothing wrong shouldering all of the burden? In terms of victimization when compared to the real world, myspace is paradise for teens. Sociologist Mike Males discusses this hysteria here http://home.earthlink.net/~mmales/yt-myspa.htm
The Massachusetts AG wanted myspace to raise its age to 18 to "protect young people from predators". Given that the overwhelming majority of predators are over 21 and many are over 30, why not suggest banning people over 30 and limit people 21-30 if "protecting teens" is the goal?
Items will be confiscated and may be returned to parents at the discretion of the principal/designee.
The "discretion" part sounds like theft. I wonder if there's any cases on the legality of a principal or other school employee taking legally owned property and refusing to return it.