What's the difference between this and vehicle mounted cams, as far as privacy goes? If the officer is present, then obviously either one parties consented to him being present or it's being conducted in public place. Unless the officer is hiding in your bedroom closet... And if that's the case... you don't need google glass to record things....
Your're talking about what monkeys get and such, but i'm pretty sure what Stephen Hawking wants, Stephen Hawking gets. If it were possible currently, he would have it if he wanted it.
Also, of course companies put money into what they can get out of it, penis pills and such, otherwise they wouldn't be companies! If you want something better, start lobbying your damn government to take it up and increase your taxes!
Companies are for profit, because they are businesses need to repay their shareholders, otherwise no one will invest and they will stagnate. Government can increase R&D for non profitable research, but someone has to pay for that, and that will be you. And if you want to pay for it, then run for government or vote for someone who will make that happen.
I believe the first sentence of the parent post covers this... "While the FAA has rules regarding electronics usage, cell phones in airplanes are covered specifically by the FCC."
Also, here's a link (pdf) from the FCC describing their take on it: http://transition.fcc.gov/cgb/consumerfacts/cellonplanes.pdf
While the FAA has rules regarding electronics usage, cell phones in airplanes are covered specifically by the FCC. The FCC bans them because of the tax it would put on the system with thousands of cell phones switching cell towers much more rapidly then if those same phones were driving. They were worried about the significant overhead this would cause the cell system. While I've seen and heard many people complain about how much they don't believe that their phones would interfere with any avionics in any way, and they should be allowed to use them, I've never seen anyone address this specifically.
What bothers me even more is that I've heard so many people complain about this, yet a simple wiki search reveals the actual reasoning behind the ban. I'm not saying it's justified or not, but if you're going to complain about something, at least don't be ignorant about it. Even if they didn't interfere with the airplane, there's more to it than that.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mobile_phones_on_aircraft
specifically-
United States:
To prevent disruption to the cell phone network from the effects of fast-moving cell phones at altitude (see discussion below), the FCC has banned the use of cell phones on all aircraft in flight.
I'm guessing one of the numerous problems would be surface area to power requirement. I don't think a commercial aircraft could harness enough sun to sustain itself aloft, regardless of the efficiency.
Also, batteries are heavy.
And night time.
Start putting tariffs on anything made with Chinese rare earths. Since China is a net exporter, they have the most to lose playing these games.
That's ridiculous. The largest purchaser of rare earth minerals are US companies. Tariffs are meant to encourage people to buy products from other countries, mainly the host country. There really are no other producers of rare earth minerals to choose from, not in quantities large enough to satisfy demand. That would be like increasing taxes on oil to encourage people to not buy from the middle east. There's just not enough being produced outside there to satisfy demand. The economy would crumble.
What the US needs to do is encourage production elsewhere of these minerals, so we're not tied to China so much.
I'm not sure why this got moderated as funny. Alot of time and research has already gone into long term food preparation/storage for the military services. I've lived off them solely for a few months, and while that's not three years, it's not unimaginable. Now, they've faced alot of criticism, but they were never intended to replace 5 star restaurants, or even your grandmother's cooking. Also, much of that criticism is from the military... and anyone who's served knows that complaining is most every soldier's favorite pastime (me included). And for christ's sake... you're going to Mars! I'd suffer a little lack of flavoring for that opportunity.
No, because all that computing is being done on machines using rare-earth blood minerals mined in Africa, or composed of parts machined in sweat shops in China.
Seriously, if you're going to claim that level of ethicality, you should be farming your own veggies in a self sufficient, carbon neutral commune.
If it's encrypted at the phone, then the information can be sent over unclassified lines. Once it's encrypted, it can be treated as unclassified assuming the encryption is approved.
Couldn't you just buy it from a Belgian company? I know all phones have to be unlocked in Belgium by law, since I'm stationed in Belgium (US military) and recently bought the new Iphone... I don't know if there are any laws about Belgian companies exporting them though.
I believe that's the point. That's why they're not selling unlimited anymore.
Also, it's hard to hold any company's definition of unlimited a few years ago to today's standards. Everyone should understand system's have tolerances, unlimited NEVER truly means unlimited.
It's not the Military who are screwing up. Their job is to go in and kill things/people. There's a reason they're not allowed to be used as police in the United States, because they're not trained/designed to. Asking them to do that in a different country is just asking for trouble.
Slashdot Mirror
The purpose of the windows in the aircraft is to let light in... not to let it out.
They're comparing Iphones to PCs? How is this parity?
Because everyone is required to have a constant, always on internet connection tethered to them every moment of their lives?
What's the difference between this and vehicle mounted cams, as far as privacy goes? If the officer is present, then obviously either one parties consented to him being present or it's being conducted in public place. Unless the officer is hiding in your bedroom closet... And if that's the case... you don't need google glass to record things....
Your're talking about what monkeys get and such, but i'm pretty sure what Stephen Hawking wants, Stephen Hawking gets. If it were possible currently, he would have it if he wanted it. Also, of course companies put money into what they can get out of it, penis pills and such, otherwise they wouldn't be companies! If you want something better, start lobbying your damn government to take it up and increase your taxes! Companies are for profit, because they are businesses need to repay their shareholders, otherwise no one will invest and they will stagnate. Government can increase R&D for non profitable research, but someone has to pay for that, and that will be you. And if you want to pay for it, then run for government or vote for someone who will make that happen.
I believe the first sentence of the parent post covers this... "While the FAA has rules regarding electronics usage, cell phones in airplanes are covered specifically by the FCC." Also, here's a link (pdf) from the FCC describing their take on it: http://transition.fcc.gov/cgb/consumerfacts/cellonplanes.pdf
While the FAA has rules regarding electronics usage, cell phones in airplanes are covered specifically by the FCC. The FCC bans them because of the tax it would put on the system with thousands of cell phones switching cell towers much more rapidly then if those same phones were driving. They were worried about the significant overhead this would cause the cell system. While I've seen and heard many people complain about how much they don't believe that their phones would interfere with any avionics in any way, and they should be allowed to use them, I've never seen anyone address this specifically. What bothers me even more is that I've heard so many people complain about this, yet a simple wiki search reveals the actual reasoning behind the ban. I'm not saying it's justified or not, but if you're going to complain about something, at least don't be ignorant about it. Even if they didn't interfere with the airplane, there's more to it than that. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mobile_phones_on_aircraft specifically- United States: To prevent disruption to the cell phone network from the effects of fast-moving cell phones at altitude (see discussion below), the FCC has banned the use of cell phones on all aircraft in flight.
I'm guessing one of the numerous problems would be surface area to power requirement. I don't think a commercial aircraft could harness enough sun to sustain itself aloft, regardless of the efficiency. Also, batteries are heavy. And night time.
Start putting tariffs on anything made with Chinese rare earths. Since China is a net exporter, they have the most to lose playing these games.
That's ridiculous. The largest purchaser of rare earth minerals are US companies. Tariffs are meant to encourage people to buy products from other countries, mainly the host country. There really are no other producers of rare earth minerals to choose from, not in quantities large enough to satisfy demand. That would be like increasing taxes on oil to encourage people to not buy from the middle east. There's just not enough being produced outside there to satisfy demand. The economy would crumble. What the US needs to do is encourage production elsewhere of these minerals, so we're not tied to China so much.
I'm not sure why this got moderated as funny. Alot of time and research has already gone into long term food preparation/storage for the military services. I've lived off them solely for a few months, and while that's not three years, it's not unimaginable. Now, they've faced alot of criticism, but they were never intended to replace 5 star restaurants, or even your grandmother's cooking. Also, much of that criticism is from the military... and anyone who's served knows that complaining is most every soldier's favorite pastime (me included). And for christ's sake... you're going to Mars! I'd suffer a little lack of flavoring for that opportunity.
Not sure about the Telegraph's sources, but the entire story is fake: http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-501465_162-57505248-501465/bruce-willis-is-not-suing-apple-over-itunes-inheritance-wife-tweets/ some great flamebait though....
No, because all that computing is being done on machines using rare-earth blood minerals mined in Africa, or composed of parts machined in sweat shops in China. Seriously, if you're going to claim that level of ethicality, you should be farming your own veggies in a self sufficient, carbon neutral commune.
If it's encrypted at the phone, then the information can be sent over unclassified lines. Once it's encrypted, it can be treated as unclassified assuming the encryption is approved.
Couldn't you just buy it from a Belgian company? I know all phones have to be unlocked in Belgium by law, since I'm stationed in Belgium (US military) and recently bought the new Iphone... I don't know if there are any laws about Belgian companies exporting them though.
I believe what he is saying is for the ISP's to stop advertising "All you can eat buffet's" and introduce tier'd systems.
I believe that's the point. That's why they're not selling unlimited anymore. Also, it's hard to hold any company's definition of unlimited a few years ago to today's standards. Everyone should understand system's have tolerances, unlimited NEVER truly means unlimited.
It's not the Military who are screwing up. Their job is to go in and kill things/people. There's a reason they're not allowed to be used as police in the United States, because they're not trained/designed to. Asking them to do that in a different country is just asking for trouble.