They didn't state a restriction but given size of the plane demonstrated, its likely there is an obvious restriction which makes the Zephyr just plain silly to bring into the conversation. Most tactically deployed UAVs are carried and launched in the area where they are to be used. That's simply impossible with an 18m plane.
His statement should likely be framed within context of what's being evaluated and how its to be used. That context was likely lost in the article - or they presumed the reader wasn't an idiot.
Something else you seem to ignore is large wings, while providing for lots of lift, directly translate into higher drag and and typically speed constraints without much higher energy inputs - and a structure capable to support it - which adds yet more weight. Very, very, very, very likely the Zephyr is designed to fly at altitudes above 30k, if not higher, where it can begin to offset its huge drag from thinner air, while this aircraft is clearly designed to fly much, much, much lower to the ground - thusly silence being the important attribute.
At every face, it appears to be a blatant and pointless apples to oranges comparison. Realistically, the point you bring up is, well, stupid. Bluntly, the Zephyr is clearly intended to be a poor man's, strategic satellite while the Ion Tiger is intended for tactical deployments - or some combination of the two. Current strategic AUVs used by the US include, for example, the Global Hawk. Note the size differences and then continue to search on your own on how their mission profiles drastically differ. Again, apples and oranges.
But if I make CRAP and try to sell five thousand copies and noone buys it because it is CRAP, then can I claim lost revenues for the unsold copies, or do I have to admit that the world does not owe me success in business?
Since its crap, that means no one will pirate it. In the end, its real simple. If an application is being pirated, by definition, it is not crap. If its pirated, pirates are attributing some value to it. Otherwise pirates wouldn't want it. The mere fact someone pirated the application means the application is valued. "Crap" is not valued.
Furthermore, like a real dumb ass, you seem to associate being victimized to "the world owing you something." What a completely fucked up notion. And completely wrong! It goes a long way toward revealing the selfishness that pirates have. After all, its PIRATES that are walking around saying that the world owes them something - in this case, stolen software, music, movies, etc.
You're world is pretty messed up when victims are somehow at fault - even after having done absolutely nothing wrong - I guess those raped women had it coming after all. Wow. That's sad. And yet, that's *exactly* your deranged mentality.
So what exactly is your point? Oh that's right - you don't have one that makes any sense in the least.
"Everyone" is not stealing the applications. I don't know a single Android phone user that's stolen applications. (I don't know any that have downloaded any commercially sold apps without paying for them either.)
That's called anecdotal. It doesn't prove anything. I've spoken with several developers (those that have left and are leaving) who have "phone home" in their apps. Thousands of installs and less than twenty sales. Its repeated time and time again. The FACTS are, piracy is killing Android. Period. Granted, what I'm saying is also anecdotal, but at least it has facts to support the position - unlike yours.
There are over a dozen web sites which specialize in ONLY pirating android applications. Some of those sites track download stats for the illegal files. Contrasting those downloads against sales typically leaves the developer both furious and sick. The simple FACT is, piracy is killing android.
Why do you think so many adware applications are being developed?!? Its the only fucking way to make money on the platform. Your refusal to accept fact doesn't change the facts.
Android, on the other hand, is an open platform designed to work on a wide variety of devices. This means that developers have to design their apps for the lowest common denominator of all these devices, or create different versions for each device depending on its capabilities. This means they can't effectively take advantage of advanced features or greater available resources in the high end phones, because they'll lose out on all of the potential customers with the lower end models. This is much more akin to developing for PCs rather than consoles.
Wow. I don't know where to begin with that because most of it is not true.
Android is an open platform and can work on a variety of devices, but the framework (known as Android) which sits between the device and the application is abstracted. This means if you use the provided SDK, you don't care what the nature of the device is. Its not a problem, its a big, big plus. It is, however, a serious problem for Apple and their iPhone/iPod. Interestingly, what you deem to be a negative for Android is factually a huge positive and likewise, a huge negative for Apple. That's the entire point of using Java/Dalvik for the platform.
The sole exception to the above is OpenGL ES development, but Apple devs are in exactly the same boat here. Besides, ultimately it doesn't matter at all. Between OpenGL and framework interfaces, its generally not a constraint or problem in the least - unless you want it to be. That is, unless you want to work around (as in not use) the facilities natively provided by the platform.
The only other corner case is the layout management, but that's not really an issue either. Layouts generally translate fine, without issue, and without requiring any additional effort on the part of developers. Generally speaking, this is actually more powerful because if you want to take advantage of larger displays (example, fit more stuff on screen) , you're free to do so with a specialized layout - otherwise, it works proportionately in size - without any effort from the developer.
The thing most hurting the Android store is piracy. Period. Even worse, many users, for the cost of $0.99, of which.60 went to the developer, demand $20k/year level support and if they don't get it, bad mouth the hell out of the developer and the application. Hell, most of the time users just leave shitty comments on the market and refuse to even report a bug. Any developer or user who has spent much time on the market will verify this fact.
Simple fact - pirates are killing the android market. Period. Entitled users are number two. Number three is Google's complete indifference.
Also, to the masses, please stop with the idiocy of, "get rich", comments and, "size the market". The FACTS are, the market is already plenty big for many developers to make a living - if only that. This isn't about getting rich. The market size is plenty big - and growing very fast. Period. The problem is, everyone is stealing the applications and its making it impossible for developers to make any money what so ever. This is why more and more (vast majority now) are ONLY developing adware based applications because even with extreme piracy they are able to make buck. This in turn is creating backlash for developers - but pirates have left absolutely no other options for developers. Because of pirates, the only options are, abandon the platform or try with adware applications.
If you like the Android platform, kick the holy shit out of any pirates you know because THEY are destroying the entire platform. Without professional developers, with the ability to make a living, or hell, even work for greater than third world wages, by in large the platform is going to remain mired in third rate applications and will likely cause the platform to die before it can ever reach "developer critical mass."
Piracy is so extreme on Android because of all the platforms, its by far the easiest to pirate apps on. Made worse is Google's lie that would provide copy protection. To date, they have not. Google's current "copy protection" is the same concept as the infamous "evil bit" for IP. Bluntly, its all but useless and Google seems more than content to be flipped with developers.
This means the only rescue for Android is to lock down the platform - not likely - or for people the kick, every pirate they know, in the nuts for destroying what was to be the an excellent mobile platform. I already know two developers how have been forced to leave the platform. A third isn't far away. Simply put - pirates suck.
Wow....some dumbass, uneducated troll moderator. Pull your head from your ass you piece of shit. This is a freebie given fucked up nature of your worthless moderations. Holy shit you're stupid.
There is no such thing as "stopping power". Period. That's the facts. Suck it.
If you incorrectly believe there is such a thing, please inform the rest of the scientific world on how your nose picking proves. Seriously, there is no fucking thing.
Because you can get hit with a 9mil round and still keep running. Not so much with the.40. From what I understand DHS also switched to the.357 and the.40.
That's completely untrue. Every study shows its false. ALL rounds either stop/drop someone or they keep running. Period. There are only ever two reasons people drop. Dropping is a trained behavior or a fear response. The other case happens when an organ is disabled - bone breaks, tendons severed, etc. There are no exceptions. Period.
I'd be interested in numbers on those outcomes. Did police agencies who switched from 9mm to a larger caliber have measurably better outcomes, under some relevant measure (controlling for other variables, of course), after the switch than before? Do agencies in comparable situations that use different calibers have anything measurably different about their outcomes?
No. That's why the majority of LE still use 9mm.
The various failures and complaints you've heard about 9mm, and often thrown around by its detractors, are for a variety of causes. More often than not, its failure is actually the choice of bullet rather than the caliber. Believe it or not, there was a period where police where forced to use light grained, low powered rounded to protect the public from over penetration. Many blamed 9mm for its failure. That many would be idiots. Believe it or not, the bullet manufacturers have been developing various high tech rounds over the years. Some have proved successful. Some have not. Many blamed 9mm for its failure. That many would be idiots. Believe it or not, even trained "professionals" have trouble shooting straight in a crisis. Some of these professionals blame 9mm for their inability to shoot straight. The list goes on. Realistically, using police grade ammunition, 9mm has a 90+%, single shot torso, kill rate, and that's with full metal jacket.
Anyone who says 9mm is a bad round is either ignorant of the facts or trying to justify their overcompensation. That doesn't mean 9mm is the best round for all purposes, but it is the best round, by far, for general purpose and self defense.
Then why are there so many more stories of the 9mm failing to stop determined aggressors than there are of other calibers?
Because its the most prevalent round. Because police have used various experimental bullets (new and improved) over the years which have failed. You know, all those high tech bullets which are available now - you can thank 9mm and police. And lastly, because police have to blame their own failure to shoot straight on something other than themselves. It's called bravado and is very much alive in most arms of law enforcement. The FBI's own stats show they are full of, well, bravado.
The.40 and.357SIG are newer calibers so you can explain them away as not having been around long enough to accumulate such stories,
That's an extremely common misconception..357 is NOT a new caliber. In fact, is literally a 9mm parabellum bullet.
Except that the US forces who are most likely to need to use their handguns don't use the 9mm. They use the.45. Marine Force Recon, Delta Force and the Navy Seals all use.45s. So does the FBI Hostage Rescue Team and LA SWAT team. If the 9mm is so great then why aren't these pros using it?
You're confusing many issues here. Its common. In no way, shape, or form, can you compare NATO FMJ to what is commonly used by police and/or people for self defense. So for starters, what the military uses is completely irrelevant. They have no choice in legal ammunition - save only sub-sonic variants. Because of this, their only legal option is a larger caliber. Because of this, new 9mm rounds are currently being tested. Current tests show this new 9mm round to be as effective, if not more effective than a NATO.40 FMJ in actual combat performance. Go figure.
If the 9mm is so great then why aren't these pros using it?
The pros are using 9mm. Every day. And in much larger quantities than the exceptions above. A minority exception does not a rule make. Furthermore, some people actually require over penetration capabilities. Squads such as you point out are more likely to need this capability whereas, you don't. You think you'll need to shoot someone through a car door? Through a wall? Not likely you will. Very possible these guys will.
I know this stuff is hotly debated, but just in case you don't know, here are some interesting facts for you.
.357 SIG
That is *literally* a 9mm round - the exact same you reload 9mm pistols. Most people don't know that. Yes, literally 9mm. And several studies have show it tends to over penetrate. Meaning, it tends to pass through without delivering maximum damage to its target. I guess that's good if you tend to get into shootouts where you need to shoot though doors and cars, etc...and FBI does, moreso than police. But for typical law enforcement, this is certainly not required and doesn't happen often. Stats, by a wide measure, support this fact.
Besides +P and +P+ (ya I know, no official +P+ standard and its barrel of monkeys) rounds actually deliver spitting distance of the same energy as.40SW. The caliber difference between 9mm and.40sw is generally not worth talking about. Even the statistics by the FBI, once you account for noise, show there isn't much difference between a 9mm and.40sw for single shot, torso kills. You find most quality personal defense rounds, including what police typically use, are +P or +P+ rounds. The only way a.40sw makes a real difference compared to a 9mm is if you use a +P(+) with the maximum grain bullet you can load in a.40sw - in which case you'll likely find it harder to control and at night will be far more blinding. Which makes it, generally speaking, an inferior choice compared to 9mm.
Personally, I'm not married to the.45. I have one, because I love the 1911 platform, but I'd also trust my life to a.40S&W,.357 magnum or 10mm. I've just read about too many spectacular failures of the 9mm to be willing to trust my life to it. To each their own though.
Bluntly, 9mm is about the perfect compromise for a general purpose, all environment round. If you want to specialize because of your likely encounter or are a highly trained marksman in combat situations, then you should consider using something else. But for the masses, 9mm is by far, ideal. Realistically,.357 Sig is a crappy choice, save for a select few who require its over penetration capabilities. And once you get into.357mag,.44M, or 10mm, you're trying to compensate for something because they are horrible defense rounds, if for no other reason second shot accuracy is going to **horribly** suffer - and in confined space you'll lose situational awareness from being temporarily deafened.
Realistically, people who knock 9mm are simply ignorant of the facts or are operating well outside of the general self defense environment. Or worse, trying to compensate for something. Realistically, 9mm is a very deadly round and more than capable of doing its job (90%, single shot, torso hit, kill stat, using +P FMJ - use of HP/frag, etc was not reported).
Doesn't this mean we'd all be using Google as a proxy for all internet traffic? That means they'd know about all of your traffic rather than just searches. I guess that means they'd know you want to see Goatse twice as fast without you having to search for it.
Turns out Inspector Gadget is programmed in a combination of the two. Seems he earned some coin from Google every time he stated his catch phrase. Now it all makes sense!
Pretty clearly you need to learn to read. It absolutely is theft. Now take that comment, learn to read, and re-read my original post. You'll quickly find you look like a complete douche bag given the context of your reply. If it still doesn't click after that, you're dumber than a bag of hammers. Seriously.
It isn't like you denied the copyright holder any of their possessions
You denied them their money; which absolutely is something of value. Furthermore, you devalued the work as a whole. See stock market for a better lesson in reality.
Simple fact is, piracy is a form of stealing. Pirates are thieves. They harm large and small businesses which trickles down to everyone. In turn, just like all theft, others are left to pay higher prices to cover the losses incurred by scumbag thieves. That's the facts. That's reality.
If you need to lie to yourself to make yourself feel better, so you can continue to rationalize theft, then do so, but stop lying to everyone else. It just makes you look like an idiot.
Copyright infringement is not stealing. No mater who does it.
Copyright infringement IS stealing - it just has a different legal definition. It literally fits the non-legal definition. Stealing stocks is a called fraud or embezzlement. Stealing property from a home is called burglary. Stealing cars is called grand theft auto. Stealing copyrighted works is called copyright infringement. Stealing is stealing. Period.
Please stop purposely trying to mislead people by attempting to craft mind share. You're purposely attempting to confuse the morale and plain English definition and implications with that of the legal definition. The fact is, stealing is stealing. If you take something to which you have no right to do so, you are a thief - regardless of its exact legal classification.
Pirates need to come to terms with the fact they are thieves - no better than the scum they likely condemn.
The only way that will happen is if there's a ballot initiative forcing the police to implement it. And it will be fought tooth and nail all the way. There's too much money in traffic enforcement for anyone on the receiving end to want to change things.
Its even worse. Such requirements would be ignored because in most states, police are officers of the court. Anything they state is considered fact unless it can be directly refuted. As such, most states don't require any record whatsoever that a radar gun was even used. If a police officer wants to ticket you, they do. Period. They are not required to prove they actually used the game. As such, lots of tickets a are written by police after never having even touching a radar gun. Its great excuse to allow police to pull over anyone they want and at the same time, its carte blanche for police revenues. Its not hard to figure out why quotas are not required - they can ticket anyone they want for speeding at will by simply stating the person was speeding whatever speed they want to declare.
Even worse, in some states, county judges actually receive the proceeds from ticket revenue, as a salary bonus, so its in their own best interest to look the other way for police corruption. Many of the southern states are especially well known for this type of abuse. Oddly enough, in some jurisdictions, you actually make checks payable directly to the judge, and yet the general public doesn't see this as a conflict of interest.
So absolutely yes, traffic enforcement fraud is rampant in the US. Many traffic police are more corrupt than the petty criminals they attempt to catch, yet because they have a tin badge they see themselves as above the law. Literally. Never mind the drugs and weapons which are confiscated which never seem to make it to the evidence room or submitted for proper disposal....and people don't think its odd when a police officer lives, making $50k/year lives in a $180,000 house with a new $40k car for himself and his wife (who doesn't work) every two years and $40k bass boat parked on the side. You would be surprised how often this occurs. In these cases, even with overtime and side jobs, the numbers typically don't add up.
Exactly. Which means distribution of the keys, under both the DCMA and existing precedent, can be viewed as a circumvention device.
To be clear, I'm don't really have an opinion one way or another - don't know enough - just that it doesn't sound like its simply a malicious take down.
For example, Texas Instruments is trying to use DMCA notices to get people to take down some OS signing keys for their calculators. These are not covered by any portion of the DMCA, because a) you cannot copyright a pair of numbers, and b) knowing the numbers does not allow you to circumvent anything. The EFF is representing the guys who received the notices.
But do you think TI will get penalized for the false DMCA claims? Of course not. Therein lies the problem. These things don't result in penalties even when they're already in the legal system, so what incentive do media companies have to actually check the validity of their takedown notices?
I'm not sure that's a good example as there is already ample precedent to support keys can be used as a circumvention device and would therefore be protected under the DCMA. Clearly I don't know all of the facts but keys are used to protect an entity. In this case, as you provided, they are used to protect the OS. Providing those keys are clearly to allow for circumvention of the mechanisms they have in place. Even ignoring established precedent, as stated, that seems to easily fall within the protection provided by the DCMA. In short, even if TI loses, I can see that any type of penalty would be appropriate.
You also forgot to acknowledge the example of Michael Savage. That was a clear example of DMCA abuse.
I think the original comment squarely addressed your concern... abuse has happened but its really not worth talking about compared to the rampant level of piracy which takes place every day.
The original quote:
Yes, we all know invalid take downs have been issued and some abuse exists, but that's a far cry from "disaster." Using his definition, the US Constitution is c complete and utter disaster on a scale the world has never known before. More bullshit and scare tactics.
In other words, our rights to travel, freedom of speech, etc., have all been abused...that doesn't make those rights wrong! And frankly, at it applies here, such DCMA abuses would never had occurred if people would stop stealing shit - after all, the DCMA only exists because so many are so willing to steal from so many others - and feel entitled while they do it. You want to be mad at someone, blame your local pirate for being a complete douche bag - worthy of at least a dozen kicks in the crotch. After all, their selfish stealing never hurt anyone.... you just identified one of thousands they have hurt.
You want to be pissed at someone about the DCMA - kick your local pirate in the crotch. It may not fix things, but at least the right person is being blamed.
As long as a site follows this procedure, they are not open to a suit themselves, this is what's known as the "Safe Harbor" provision.
Except it does not provide any safe harbor clauses and does not indemnify the provider; after all they have been legally notified of illegal sharing, to which they are now a fully notified contributor. If the property rights own wins against the original claimant, they can no go after the provider too. This is why people simply take them down and are done with it.
Ultimately, the number of abuses are not worth discussion because they pale in comparison the level of rampant piracy which otherwise takes place. Its simply not cost effective (legally or labor) to wade through tens of thousands of claims every day to find that less than one percent of one percent of one percent which was incorrectly withdrawn.
Slashdot Mirror
They didn't state a restriction but given size of the plane demonstrated, its likely there is an obvious restriction which makes the Zephyr just plain silly to bring into the conversation. Most tactically deployed UAVs are carried and launched in the area where they are to be used. That's simply impossible with an 18m plane.
His statement should likely be framed within context of what's being evaluated and how its to be used. That context was likely lost in the article - or they presumed the reader wasn't an idiot.
Something else you seem to ignore is large wings, while providing for lots of lift, directly translate into higher drag and and typically speed constraints without much higher energy inputs - and a structure capable to support it - which adds yet more weight. Very, very, very, very likely the Zephyr is designed to fly at altitudes above 30k, if not higher, where it can begin to offset its huge drag from thinner air, while this aircraft is clearly designed to fly much, much, much lower to the ground - thusly silence being the important attribute.
At every face, it appears to be a blatant and pointless apples to oranges comparison. Realistically, the point you bring up is, well, stupid. Bluntly, the Zephyr is clearly intended to be a poor man's, strategic satellite while the Ion Tiger is intended for tactical deployments - or some combination of the two. Current strategic AUVs used by the US include, for example, the Global Hawk. Note the size differences and then continue to search on your own on how their mission profiles drastically differ. Again, apples and oranges.
Different resolutions, wildly varying performance characteristics and other things hamper Android.
Are you talking about OpenGL ES? If not, that's simply not true - as I clearly pointed out.
If you are talking about OpenGL ES, then its as much a problem for Android as it is for any other platform.
But if I make CRAP and try to sell five thousand copies and noone buys it because it is CRAP, then can I claim lost revenues for the unsold copies, or do I have to admit that the world does not owe me success in business?
Since its crap, that means no one will pirate it. In the end, its real simple. If an application is being pirated, by definition, it is not crap. If its pirated, pirates are attributing some value to it. Otherwise pirates wouldn't want it. The mere fact someone pirated the application means the application is valued. "Crap" is not valued.
Furthermore, like a real dumb ass, you seem to associate being victimized to "the world owing you something." What a completely fucked up notion. And completely wrong! It goes a long way toward revealing the selfishness that pirates have. After all, its PIRATES that are walking around saying that the world owes them something - in this case, stolen software, music, movies, etc.
You're world is pretty messed up when victims are somehow at fault - even after having done absolutely nothing wrong - I guess those raped women had it coming after all. Wow. That's sad. And yet, that's *exactly* your deranged mentality.
So what exactly is your point? Oh that's right - you don't have one that makes any sense in the least.
"Everyone" is not stealing the applications. I don't know a single Android phone user that's stolen applications. (I don't know any that have downloaded any commercially sold apps without paying for them either.)
That's called anecdotal. It doesn't prove anything. I've spoken with several developers (those that have left and are leaving) who have "phone home" in their apps. Thousands of installs and less than twenty sales. Its repeated time and time again. The FACTS are, piracy is killing Android. Period. Granted, what I'm saying is also anecdotal, but at least it has facts to support the position - unlike yours.
There are over a dozen web sites which specialize in ONLY pirating android applications. Some of those sites track download stats for the illegal files. Contrasting those downloads against sales typically leaves the developer both furious and sick. The simple FACT is, piracy is killing android.
Why do you think so many adware applications are being developed?!? Its the only fucking way to make money on the platform. Your refusal to accept fact doesn't change the facts.
Android, on the other hand, is an open platform designed to work on a wide variety of devices. This means that developers have to design their apps for the lowest common denominator of all these devices, or create different versions for each device depending on its capabilities. This means they can't effectively take advantage of advanced features or greater available resources in the high end phones, because they'll lose out on all of the potential customers with the lower end models. This is much more akin to developing for PCs rather than consoles.
Wow. I don't know where to begin with that because most of it is not true.
Android is an open platform and can work on a variety of devices, but the framework (known as Android) which sits between the device and the application is abstracted. This means if you use the provided SDK, you don't care what the nature of the device is. Its not a problem, its a big, big plus. It is, however, a serious problem for Apple and their iPhone/iPod. Interestingly, what you deem to be a negative for Android is factually a huge positive and likewise, a huge negative for Apple. That's the entire point of using Java/Dalvik for the platform.
The sole exception to the above is OpenGL ES development, but Apple devs are in exactly the same boat here. Besides, ultimately it doesn't matter at all. Between OpenGL and framework interfaces, its generally not a constraint or problem in the least - unless you want it to be. That is, unless you want to work around (as in not use) the facilities natively provided by the platform.
The only other corner case is the layout management, but that's not really an issue either. Layouts generally translate fine, without issue, and without requiring any additional effort on the part of developers. Generally speaking, this is actually more powerful because if you want to take advantage of larger displays (example, fit more stuff on screen) , you're free to do so with a specialized layout - otherwise, it works proportionately in size - without any effort from the developer.
The thing most hurting the Android store is piracy. Period. Even worse, many users, for the cost of $0.99, of which .60 went to the developer, demand $20k/year level support and if they don't get it, bad mouth the hell out of the developer and the application. Hell, most of the time users just leave shitty comments on the market and refuse to even report a bug. Any developer or user who has spent much time on the market will verify this fact.
Simple fact - pirates are killing the android market. Period. Entitled users are number two. Number three is Google's complete indifference.
Also, to the masses, please stop with the idiocy of, "get rich", comments and, "size the market". The FACTS are, the market is already plenty big for many developers to make a living - if only that. This isn't about getting rich. The market size is plenty big - and growing very fast. Period. The problem is, everyone is stealing the applications and its making it impossible for developers to make any money what so ever. This is why more and more (vast majority now) are ONLY developing adware based applications because even with extreme piracy they are able to make buck. This in turn is creating backlash for developers - but pirates have left absolutely no other options for developers. Because of pirates, the only options are, abandon the platform or try with adware applications.
If you like the Android platform, kick the holy shit out of any pirates you know because THEY are destroying the entire platform. Without professional developers, with the ability to make a living, or hell, even work for greater than third world wages, by in large the platform is going to remain mired in third rate applications and will likely cause the platform to die before it can ever reach "developer critical mass."
Piracy is so extreme on Android because of all the platforms, its by far the easiest to pirate apps on. Made worse is Google's lie that would provide copy protection. To date, they have not. Google's current "copy protection" is the same concept as the infamous "evil bit" for IP. Bluntly, its all but useless and Google seems more than content to be flipped with developers.
This means the only rescue for Android is to lock down the platform - not likely - or for people the kick, every pirate they know, in the nuts for destroying what was to be the an excellent mobile platform. I already know two developers how have been forced to leave the platform. A third isn't far away. Simply put - pirates suck.
How the fuck is stating FACT flamebait?!?
What is wrong with these fucking idiotic moderators?!?! Holy shit they are stupid!
Wow....some dumbass, uneducated troll moderator. Pull your head from your ass you piece of shit. This is a freebie given fucked up nature of your worthless moderations. Holy shit you're stupid.
There is no such thing as "stopping power". Period. That's the facts. Suck it.
If you incorrectly believe there is such a thing, please inform the rest of the scientific world on how your nose picking proves. Seriously, there is no fucking thing.
no stopping power.
He is misinformed, likely parroting the same misinformation he was told.
"Stopping power" is a proven myth. It doesn't exist. Period.
Because you can get hit with a 9mil round and still keep running. Not so much with the .40. From what I understand DHS also switched to the .357 and the .40.
That's completely untrue. Every study shows its false. ALL rounds either stop/drop someone or they keep running. Period. There are only ever two reasons people drop. Dropping is a trained behavior or a fear response. The other case happens when an organ is disabled - bone breaks, tendons severed, etc. There are no exceptions. Period.
Whoever told you the above is full of shit.
I'd be interested in numbers on those outcomes. Did police agencies who switched from 9mm to a larger caliber have measurably better outcomes, under some relevant measure (controlling for other variables, of course), after the switch than before? Do agencies in comparable situations that use different calibers have anything measurably different about their outcomes?
No. That's why the majority of LE still use 9mm.
The various failures and complaints you've heard about 9mm, and often thrown around by its detractors, are for a variety of causes. More often than not, its failure is actually the choice of bullet rather than the caliber. Believe it or not, there was a period where police where forced to use light grained, low powered rounded to protect the public from over penetration. Many blamed 9mm for its failure. That many would be idiots. Believe it or not, the bullet manufacturers have been developing various high tech rounds over the years. Some have proved successful. Some have not. Many blamed 9mm for its failure. That many would be idiots. Believe it or not, even trained "professionals" have trouble shooting straight in a crisis. Some of these professionals blame 9mm for their inability to shoot straight. The list goes on. Realistically, using police grade ammunition, 9mm has a 90+%, single shot torso, kill rate, and that's with full metal jacket.
Anyone who says 9mm is a bad round is either ignorant of the facts or trying to justify their overcompensation. That doesn't mean 9mm is the best round for all purposes, but it is the best round, by far, for general purpose and self defense.
not more effective than a NATO .40 FMJ in actual combat performance.
Opps. That should have read, "not more effective than a NATO .45 FMJ in actual combat performance."
Then why are there so many more stories of the 9mm failing to stop determined aggressors than there are of other calibers?
Because its the most prevalent round. Because police have used various experimental bullets (new and improved) over the years which have failed. You know, all those high tech bullets which are available now - you can thank 9mm and police. And lastly, because police have to blame their own failure to shoot straight on something other than themselves. It's called bravado and is very much alive in most arms of law enforcement. The FBI's own stats show they are full of, well, bravado.
The .40 and .357SIG are newer calibers so you can explain them away as not having been around long enough to accumulate such stories,
That's an extremely common misconception. .357 is NOT a new caliber. In fact, is literally a 9mm parabellum bullet.
Except that the US forces who are most likely to need to use their handguns don't use the 9mm. They use the .45. Marine Force Recon, Delta Force and the Navy Seals all use .45s. So does the FBI Hostage Rescue Team and LA SWAT team. If the 9mm is so great then why aren't these pros using it?
You're confusing many issues here. Its common. In no way, shape, or form, can you compare NATO FMJ to what is commonly used by police and/or people for self defense. So for starters, what the military uses is completely irrelevant. They have no choice in legal ammunition - save only sub-sonic variants. Because of this, their only legal option is a larger caliber. Because of this, new 9mm rounds are currently being tested. Current tests show this new 9mm round to be as effective, if not more effective than a NATO .40 FMJ in actual combat performance. Go figure.
If the 9mm is so great then why aren't these pros using it?
The pros are using 9mm. Every day. And in much larger quantities than the exceptions above. A minority exception does not a rule make. Furthermore, some people actually require over penetration capabilities. Squads such as you point out are more likely to need this capability whereas, you don't. You think you'll need to shoot someone through a car door? Through a wall? Not likely you will. Very possible these guys will.
I know this stuff is hotly debated, but just in case you don't know, here are some interesting facts for you.
.357 SIG
That is *literally* a 9mm round - the exact same you reload 9mm pistols. Most people don't know that. Yes, literally 9mm. And several studies have show it tends to over penetrate. Meaning, it tends to pass through without delivering maximum damage to its target. I guess that's good if you tend to get into shootouts where you need to shoot though doors and cars, etc...and FBI does, moreso than police. But for typical law enforcement, this is certainly not required and doesn't happen often. Stats, by a wide measure, support this fact.
Besides +P and +P+ (ya I know, no official +P+ standard and its barrel of monkeys) rounds actually deliver spitting distance of the same energy as .40SW. The caliber difference between 9mm and .40sw is generally not worth talking about. Even the statistics by the FBI, once you account for noise, show there isn't much difference between a 9mm and .40sw for single shot, torso kills. You find most quality personal defense rounds, including what police typically use, are +P or +P+ rounds. The only way a .40sw makes a real difference compared to a 9mm is if you use a +P(+) with the maximum grain bullet you can load in a .40sw - in which case you'll likely find it harder to control and at night will be far more blinding. Which makes it, generally speaking, an inferior choice compared to 9mm.
Personally, I'm not married to the .45. I have one, because I love the 1911 platform, but I'd also trust my life to a .40S&W, .357 magnum or 10mm. I've just read about too many spectacular failures of the 9mm to be willing to trust my life to it. To each their own though.
Bluntly, 9mm is about the perfect compromise for a general purpose, all environment round. If you want to specialize because of your likely encounter or are a highly trained marksman in combat situations, then you should consider using something else. But for the masses, 9mm is by far, ideal. Realistically, .357 Sig is a crappy choice, save for a select few who require its over penetration capabilities. And once you get into .357mag, .44M, or 10mm, you're trying to compensate for something because they are horrible defense rounds, if for no other reason second shot accuracy is going to **horribly** suffer - and in confined space you'll lose situational awareness from being temporarily deafened.
Realistically, people who knock 9mm are simply ignorant of the facts or are operating well outside of the general self defense environment. Or worse, trying to compensate for something. Realistically, 9mm is a very deadly round and more than capable of doing its job (90%, single shot, torso hit, kill stat, using +P FMJ - use of HP/frag, etc was not reported).
Doesn't this mean we'd all be using Google as a proxy for all internet traffic? That means they'd know about all of your traffic rather than just searches. I guess that means they'd know you want to see Goatse twice as fast without you having to search for it.
Two "Go"'s considered harmful.
Turns out Inspector Gadget is programmed in a combination of the two. Seems he earned some coin from Google every time he stated his catch phrase. Now it all makes sense!
Pretty clearly you need to learn to read. It absolutely is theft. Now take that comment, learn to read, and re-read my original post. You'll quickly find you look like a complete douche bag given the context of your reply. If it still doesn't click after that, you're dumber than a bag of hammers. Seriously.
It isn't like you denied the copyright holder any of their possessions
You denied them their money; which absolutely is something of value. Furthermore, you devalued the work as a whole. See stock market for a better lesson in reality.
Simple fact is, piracy is a form of stealing. Pirates are thieves. They harm large and small businesses which trickles down to everyone. In turn, just like all theft, others are left to pay higher prices to cover the losses incurred by scumbag thieves. That's the facts. That's reality.
If you need to lie to yourself to make yourself feel better, so you can continue to rationalize theft, then do so, but stop lying to everyone else. It just makes you look like an idiot.
Copyright infringement is not stealing. No mater who does it.
Copyright infringement IS stealing - it just has a different legal definition. It literally fits the non-legal definition. Stealing stocks is a called fraud or embezzlement. Stealing property from a home is called burglary. Stealing cars is called grand theft auto. Stealing copyrighted works is called copyright infringement. Stealing is stealing. Period.
Please stop purposely trying to mislead people by attempting to craft mind share. You're purposely attempting to confuse the morale and plain English definition and implications with that of the legal definition. The fact is, stealing is stealing. If you take something to which you have no right to do so, you are a thief - regardless of its exact legal classification.
Pirates need to come to terms with the fact they are thieves - no better than the scum they likely condemn.
The only way that will happen is if there's a ballot initiative forcing the police to implement it. And it will be fought tooth and nail all the way. There's too much money in traffic enforcement for anyone on the receiving end to want to change things.
Its even worse. Such requirements would be ignored because in most states, police are officers of the court. Anything they state is considered fact unless it can be directly refuted. As such, most states don't require any record whatsoever that a radar gun was even used. If a police officer wants to ticket you, they do. Period. They are not required to prove they actually used the game. As such, lots of tickets a are written by police after never having even touching a radar gun. Its great excuse to allow police to pull over anyone they want and at the same time, its carte blanche for police revenues. Its not hard to figure out why quotas are not required - they can ticket anyone they want for speeding at will by simply stating the person was speeding whatever speed they want to declare.
Even worse, in some states, county judges actually receive the proceeds from ticket revenue, as a salary bonus, so its in their own best interest to look the other way for police corruption. Many of the southern states are especially well known for this type of abuse. Oddly enough, in some jurisdictions, you actually make checks payable directly to the judge, and yet the general public doesn't see this as a conflict of interest.
So absolutely yes, traffic enforcement fraud is rampant in the US. Many traffic police are more corrupt than the petty criminals they attempt to catch, yet because they have a tin badge they see themselves as above the law. Literally. Never mind the drugs and weapons which are confiscated which never seem to make it to the evidence room or submitted for proper disposal. ...and people don't think its odd when a police officer lives, making $50k/year lives in a $180,000 house with a new $40k car for himself and his wife (who doesn't work) every two years and $40k bass boat parked on the side. You would be surprised how often this occurs. In these cases, even with overtime and side jobs, the numbers typically don't add up.
merely used to sign
Exactly. Which means distribution of the keys, under both the DCMA and existing precedent, can be viewed as a circumvention device.
To be clear, I'm don't really have an opinion one way or another - don't know enough - just that it doesn't sound like its simply a malicious take down.
For example, Texas Instruments is trying to use DMCA notices to get people to take down some OS signing keys for their calculators. These are not covered by any portion of the DMCA, because a) you cannot copyright a pair of numbers, and b) knowing the numbers does not allow you to circumvent anything. The EFF is representing the guys who received the notices.
But do you think TI will get penalized for the false DMCA claims? Of course not. Therein lies the problem. These things don't result in penalties even when they're already in the legal system, so what incentive do media companies have to actually check the validity of their takedown notices?
I'm not sure that's a good example as there is already ample precedent to support keys can be used as a circumvention device and would therefore be protected under the DCMA. Clearly I don't know all of the facts but keys are used to protect an entity. In this case, as you provided, they are used to protect the OS. Providing those keys are clearly to allow for circumvention of the mechanisms they have in place. Even ignoring established precedent, as stated, that seems to easily fall within the protection provided by the DCMA. In short, even if TI loses, I can see that any type of penalty would be appropriate.
Thanks for the clarification. Its been a while since I last read the document and didn't remember a SH clause existing in that context.
This fact underscores people are blaming the DCMA for company policy.
You also forgot to acknowledge the example of Michael Savage. That was a clear example of DMCA abuse.
I think the original comment squarely addressed your concern... abuse has happened but its really not worth talking about compared to the rampant level of piracy which takes place every day.
The original quote:
Yes, we all know invalid take downs have been issued and some abuse exists, but that's a far cry from "disaster." Using his definition, the US Constitution is c complete and utter disaster on a scale the world has never known before. More bullshit and scare tactics.
In other words, our rights to travel, freedom of speech, etc., have all been abused...that doesn't make those rights wrong! And frankly, at it applies here, such DCMA abuses would never had occurred if people would stop stealing shit - after all, the DCMA only exists because so many are so willing to steal from so many others - and feel entitled while they do it. You want to be mad at someone, blame your local pirate for being a complete douche bag - worthy of at least a dozen kicks in the crotch. After all, their selfish stealing never hurt anyone.... you just identified one of thousands they have hurt.
You want to be pissed at someone about the DCMA - kick your local pirate in the crotch. It may not fix things, but at least the right person is being blamed.
As long as a site follows this procedure, they are not open to a suit themselves, this is what's known as the "Safe Harbor" provision.
Except it does not provide any safe harbor clauses and does not indemnify the provider; after all they have been legally notified of illegal sharing, to which they are now a fully notified contributor. If the property rights own wins against the original claimant, they can no go after the provider too. This is why people simply take them down and are done with it.
Ultimately, the number of abuses are not worth discussion because they pale in comparison the level of rampant piracy which otherwise takes place. Its simply not cost effective (legally or labor) to wade through tens of thousands of claims every day to find that less than one percent of one percent of one percent which was incorrectly withdrawn.