There might have been a more complex set of circumstances leading up to this. According to TFA, the job involved installing a second source of power to the servers. And one source was kept live to maintain data center operations while the other was under construction. There was also a live test being conducted on the new gear and some mis-communication with regard to the system status.
Parts of the system were hot at certain times per their plan. But this appears not to have been communicated to everyone involved with the work.
TFA states that some people may try to refuse the fix if it affects performance. So perhaps they don't care so much.
Unlike the cock-suckers who buy old ass cars to get around emissions checks.
When its all over, VW might have to buy back the cars from people who won't accept the performance hit. The market for pre-smog muscle cars is heating up and the people with refunds in hand might just opt out of the whole emissions rat race for a nice 454 V8.
Like contacting those credit counseling services for help. Just a front for the credit industry to collect intelligence on who might be ready to fall over the edge. These are the people that get put into the 'special emphasis' database.
You do know that many deadbeats, when asked to please put their phone number on a check or provide one on a loan application, just put down someone else's.
The government is there to be the final insurer against credit defaults just so the banks can run a zero risk business. Getting into the actual banking business* would create an entity that would have to balance default risk against loan profits. So they would be motivated to attract lower risk lending customers by offering better terms.
*The next time a bank like Washington Mutual fails, have the Federal Reserve take it over. Then just swap the WaMu signs on the branches with FedReserve signs. Continue taking deposits and making loans, with the operating profit going to offset the cost of carrying private banks' risk portfolios.
Why does every "problem" warrant a federal solution?
Because the dealership lobby has locked in their preferred business model through state laws. And anyone who tries a different business model will have to fight it out 50 times in state legislatures. Better to have the feds lay down some nationwide requirements (mandatory warranty service, etc.) and let some people try different marketing schemes.
There was a cowboy and a carpetbagger riding on a train in the old west. At one stop, a beautiful lady boarded and sat across from the two of them. After a while, the salesman asked the lady, "Ma'am, would you sleep with me for ten dollars?" She paid him no attention.
After some time had passed, he asked again, "Would you have sex with me for twenty dollars?" She just stared at him, angrily. As did the cowboy.
Later, he asked, "Would you sleep with me for fifty dollars?" At this point, the cowboy stood up, drew his pistol and shot the man.
The lady addressed the cowboy, thanking him for defending her honor.
"Shucks, it wasn't that ma'am. I just didn't want some damned Yankee bidding up the price of prostitutes in Texas."
Rush Limbaugh answers to conservative business interest groups who need people like him to keep the blue collar working class entertained and distracted. Beer, football and occasionally beating the wife are all OK. But don't get any ideas about changing the economic status quo.
And that judge was just pandering to local sentiments. It's not likely this case will be apealed, so she just sided with the "I hate drones" people. I don't like them much either. But I don't want to have a precedent set to allow rednecks to go hunting for things that they disapprove of.
We did that with black people some time ago. And quite a few local judges looked the other way.
Yeah. But shooting (down) anything is only a legitimate response to an iminent threat. Just like shooting an intruder in your house vs shooting them when you encounter them in town the next day.
If the drone returned and proceeded to fly low the second time, then go ahead and shoot. Otherwise its just vigilante justice.
The IRS works with it's own court system and probably has it's own rules of evidence. So it would make sense for the FBI and IRS to run seperate surveilance operations.
It is if you are a corporation. Been there, seen it happen.
One department signs a document promising a regulatory agency "Nope. We don't do that." The next department goes right ahead and does it. An individual would have to claim multiple personality disorder to get away with this. But companies do it all the time.
Slashdot Mirror
There might have been a more complex set of circumstances leading up to this. According to TFA, the job involved installing a second source of power to the servers. And one source was kept live to maintain data center operations while the other was under construction. There was also a live test being conducted on the new gear and some mis-communication with regard to the system status.
Parts of the system were hot at certain times per their plan. But this appears not to have been communicated to everyone involved with the work.
They don't want their fucking car's polluting.
TFA states that some people may try to refuse the fix if it affects performance. So perhaps they don't care so much.
Unlike the cock-suckers who buy old ass cars to get around emissions checks.
When its all over, VW might have to buy back the cars from people who won't accept the performance hit. The market for pre-smog muscle cars is heating up and the people with refunds in hand might just opt out of the whole emissions rat race for a nice 454 V8.
I'm going to dodge that question.
Within 15 years
We've told you a million times: Don't exaggerate.
has ended by fiat.
Bad Car Analogy in 3 ... 2 ... 1 ...
But that's only one fight. And if someone like Tesla has public sentiment in their favor, they can push things in the right direction.
n/t.
Your IP address is not on the whitelist of campaign contributors.
Preparing to file for bankruptcy
Like contacting those credit counseling services for help. Just a front for the credit industry to collect intelligence on who might be ready to fall over the edge. These are the people that get put into the 'special emphasis' database.
You do know that many deadbeats, when asked to please put their phone number on a check or provide one on a loan application, just put down someone else's.
so why shouldn't the government try it?
Conflict of interest.
The government is there to be the final insurer against credit defaults just so the banks can run a zero risk business. Getting into the actual banking business* would create an entity that would have to balance default risk against loan profits. So they would be motivated to attract lower risk lending customers by offering better terms.
*The next time a bank like Washington Mutual fails, have the Federal Reserve take it over. Then just swap the WaMu signs on the branches with FedReserve signs. Continue taking deposits and making loans, with the operating profit going to offset the cost of carrying private banks' risk portfolios.
Why does every "problem" warrant a federal solution?
Because the dealership lobby has locked in their preferred business model through state laws. And anyone who tries a different business model will have to fight it out 50 times in state legislatures. Better to have the feds lay down some nationwide requirements (mandatory warranty service, etc.) and let some people try different marketing schemes.
At least, according to Limbaugh.
This made me remember an old joke:
There was a cowboy and a carpetbagger riding on a train in the old west. At one stop, a beautiful lady boarded and sat across from the two of them. After a while, the salesman asked the lady, "Ma'am, would you sleep with me for ten dollars?" She paid him no attention.
After some time had passed, he asked again, "Would you have sex with me for twenty dollars?" She just stared at him, angrily. As did the cowboy.
Later, he asked, "Would you sleep with me for fifty dollars?" At this point, the cowboy stood up, drew his pistol and shot the man.
The lady addressed the cowboy, thanking him for defending her honor.
"Shucks, it wasn't that ma'am. I just didn't want some damned Yankee bidding up the price of prostitutes in Texas."
Rush Limbaugh answers to conservative business interest groups who need people like him to keep the blue collar working class entertained and distracted. Beer, football and occasionally beating the wife are all OK. But don't get any ideas about changing the economic status quo.
And that judge was just pandering to local sentiments. It's not likely this case will be apealed, so she just sided with the "I hate drones" people. I don't like them much either. But I don't want to have a precedent set to allow rednecks to go hunting for things that they disapprove of.
We did that with black people some time ago. And quite a few local judges looked the other way.
New section to be added to the People of Walmart web page : aerial reconnaissance photos.
There may be limits on where and at whom you may fire them.
Yeah. But shooting (down) anything is only a legitimate response to an iminent threat. Just like shooting an intruder in your house vs shooting them when you encounter them in town the next day.
If the drone returned and proceeded to fly low the second time, then go ahead and shoot. Otherwise its just vigilante justice.
The IRS works with it's own court system and probably has it's own rules of evidence. So it would make sense for the FBI and IRS to run seperate surveilance operations.
are stingrays illegal to purchase?
The Harris Corporation branded Stingray IMSI catcher is restricted for sale to law enforcement agencies.
are they difficult to build?
Quite easy. There are also some other brands on the market available for sale to anyone.
ignorance of the law is no excuse.
It is if you are a corporation. Been there, seen it happen.
One department signs a document promising a regulatory agency "Nope. We don't do that." The next department goes right ahead and does it. An individual would have to claim multiple personality disorder to get away with this. But companies do it all the time.
The civilian economy of the US is critically dependent upon the Internet
The infrastructure of which resides mainly within the USA. So I won't be able to get to EU web sites. And GITMO will be completely cut off. Boo Hoo.
Mexicans.
Nice picture, but it looks like it has a bunch of blue specks in it.