So are you claiming that for some reason a protoboard COULDN'T be used as part of a bomb's triggering circuitry? Or that your typical TSA screener with a room-temperature IQ is even going to know what a protoboard IS?
For once, I actually have to come down on the side of the security people here. This had to have been a monumentally STUPID piece of political theater/performance art or possibly a "suicide by cop" attempt. How else could someone presumably intelligent enough to get into the EE program at MIT not realize that walking around an airport covered with random electronic parts and lumps of putty ISN'T going to attract unwanted attention?
A cheap wristwatch uses the same type of crystal found in a PC's clock, but the body heat from your wrist tends to keep the internals of the watch at a nice constant temperature.
Even the cheapest watches that I have seen have an internal trimmer for adjustment, as well.
The component that actually determines the stability and accuracy of the real-time clock in your PC is the timebase crystal, not the RTC chip itself.
Like every other component in mass-market electronic gear, it is chosen with minimum cost as the primary consideration. Such "value engineering" also has done away with the tiny trimmer capacitor that used to be present on most motherboards, which could be used (along with a frequency counter) to tweak the oscillator frequency for better accuracy.
For real accuracy, the timebase oscillator needs to be kept at a constant temperature, which isn't possible in a PC that gets turned on and off. Ideally, the crystal (or the entire oscillator circuit) is enclosed in a package equipped with a heater element and temperature sensor, and kept at a constant temperature. Such a circuit is called an OCXO, or Oven Compensated Crystal Oscillator, and is standard equipment on laboratory grade equipment like frequency counters and signal generators.
Re:The Saddam/911 myth persists because powerful
on
Why Myths Persist
·
· Score: 1
I don't believe that anyone in the administration actually made the link explicitly, probably in the name of "plausible deniability".
What administration officials and the president did repeatedly was to mention Saddam, al Qaida, and 9/11 in the same sentence as often as possible, relying on the "sound bite" style of the media and poor attention span of the average citizen to create the association in the minds of the public.
The Saddam/911 myth persists because powerful
on
Why Myths Persist
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
interests within our government and defense industry worked VERY HARD on inventing and perpetuating it. And our corporate media did their usual lapdog routine, and went along without questioning anything.
[quote]Maybe you'd like to share your idea's on how a shop might better secure themselves against theft? [/quote]
Seeing as how the receipt/bag check ritual is targeted to catch theft committed with the help of store employees (cashiers who slip unpaid items into an accomplice's bag), perhaps paying their cashiers somewhat more than minimum wage might be a step in the right direction. Unless you truly believe that customer's rights should be violated because the store can't trust its own employees.
Other that that, additional/better qualified employees on the sales floor, watching the security monitors, and in other security positions could only help.
All of these cost more money than a minimum wage flunkie harassing customers at the exit, though....
[quote]Submitting to a search is completely different to digging through your pocket for a receipt to show a concerned shopkeeper.[/quote]
A difference in degree only.
If opening your bag or being forced to dig the receipt out of your wallet is ok, then why not emptying all your pockets? Take off your coat? Pat down search? Polygraph? Body cavity search?
The store has NO RIGHT to compel you to submit to a search of your person or belongings. Even something as "minor" as looking in the bag you were handed 15 feet away by the checkout clerk. Sure, they can ASK, but the customer is free to refuse to participate in their "security theater" production.
He was being detained against his will by someone who was not a law enforcement officer.
IANAL, but that seems to fit the legal definition of KIDNAPPING. That is not only a felony, but a federal one. A call to 911 to report a felony crime in progress seems reasonable, no?
Perhaps, in addition to 911, he might have called the FBI, as well.
Rosa Parks actually BROKE A LAW, requiring blacks to sit in the back of the bus. Of course, the law was unconstitutional, and deserved to be broken as a matter of principle. But there was actually a law broken in her case.
In this case, the man in question didn't break any law. He was not legally obligated to submit to the bag search, and wasn't legally required to give a driver's license to the cop. The only illegal acts here were the store employee detaining the customer without evidence of him having stolen anything from the store, and the cop illegally requiring him to turn over his driver's license and then fabricating an "obstruction" charge once he realized that there was no legal grounds for an arrest.
I hope this guy goes to court and ends up owning that cop, the security twit, and Circuit City.
, as well as being responsible for the militarization of local police departments since the 1980s. And the enabling technologies and legislation (and their abuse potential) would seem to be very much on-topic in a forum like slashdot.
From sewage sniffing to thermal imaging, from utilities logging "unusual" domestic power consumption to genetically engineered viruses targeting drug crops, from internet censorship proposals to amateur scientists being unable to buy chemicals and glassware for their experiments, the drug war effects EVERYONE who gives a damn about freedom, including those who have never used an illegal substance in their lives.
is a GREAT example of what a comprehensive, reliable source of drug information looks like.
Unfortunately, it (and other sites like it) are regularly condemned by prohibitionist politicians and their mouthpieces in the mainstream media because providing information other than "Just Say NO!" is deemed to be "pro-drug", and we all need to think of the children....
I've submitted a few other stories in the past dealing with the War on (some) Drugs, and they never seem to make it.
For a site populated by as many privacy advocates and libertarian types as/., there always seemed to be a big blind spot as far as the drug war is concerned.
The 4th amendment (or the 5th, for that matter) hasn't stopped the more usual types of drug testing, so what makes you think that it would be successfully applied here?
to get decent coverage of a shuttle launch. I was watching the NASA-TV internet streaming video of the launch, and also turned on ABC network news hoping to see some better video. The network coverage:
Didn't even START until T-30 seconds.
The commentator kept talking OVER the astronauts and CAPCOM voice feed. Heaven forbid the blow-dried talking head SHUT UP for a few minutes!
>, and completely seal away from the media any talk of damage or problems.
I was completely in agreement with you up until you dropped this one.
The last thing we need is further adoption of the "Bush Doctrine" of suppressing any information that a government agency decides that the public doesn't need to know. I actually think it admirable that NASA is now so open concerning potential problems with shuttle flights, and would like to see it continue.
Besides, if they were to hide such information, and an accident occurred, the inside information IS going to get out (like it did after Challenger and Columbia), giving the agency even more of a black eye than they would have had if the problems were disclosed.
Yes, the media will continue to overhype every glitch in an attempt to grab attention and ratings. Sensationalism and lack of technical analysis are part and parcel of the corporate media these days. But that is no reason for NASA, possibly the most open and honest government agency we have left, to start deciding what information the public has a right to know.
Also, launching the shuttle with "pre-patched" tiles would mean that NASA still wouldn't have any data on the feasibility of applying the repair materials during the flight. Working in the cargo bay is one thing, but trying to repair tiles on the belly while attached to the end of the robotic arm is yet another.
>>Because they weren't all that worried about Columbia either. Seven astronauts died because of that.
In all fairness, nobody at NASA knew the extent of the damage to Columbia prior to reentry. There were engineers who suspected that there might be some, and wanted photography to be sure, which NASA disallowed. If the existence of a large hole in the leading edge of the wing was known, some type of rescue operation could possibly have been put into place, as there was no repair possibility at that time.
In this case, NASA had detailed imagery of the damaged area several days before the return. That allowed for detailed analysis and laboratory testing, which have apparently convinced NASA that the extent of damage is limited enough that no repairs are required prior to reentry.
I would like to know what assumptions were used in making the "no repair" decision, nonetheless. It would seem to me that even if the damage was not severe enough to REQUIRE the repair, this situation provided a chance to test out the newly developed repair techniques and materials in a "real world" setting, allowing engineers and future crews to gain more confidence in the repairs if and when they are required on a future mission. Is the risk of an EVA/repair causing further damage really high enough to justify throwing away what could be a very valuable "learning experience"?
I attended a Vo-Tech HS in the early-mid '80s, and students were required to choose a major at the end of their freshman year, after a series of 6-week "exploratory" classes to give exposure to various career areas. I already knew what area I wanted to pursue (electronics), but also got exposure to areas from auto repair to graphic arts, in addition to all the standard HS curriculum.
Upon leaving HS, you received a standard HS diploma, along with the equivalent of an associate's degree in your chosen technical area. Many graduates went right into the job market, but some of us (myself included) went on to college/university, where we were that much more secure in our chosen major (mine was EE), where we had much more practical, hands-on experience that most of the students who came out of ordinary high schools. I now work for a university, doing design/prototyping of instrumentation for scientific research.
Slashdot Mirror
So are you claiming that for some reason a protoboard COULDN'T be used as part of a bomb's triggering circuitry? Or that your typical TSA screener with a room-temperature IQ is even going to know what a protoboard IS?
For once, I actually have to come down on the side of the security people here. This had to have been a monumentally STUPID piece of political theater/performance art or possibly a "suicide by cop" attempt. How else could someone presumably intelligent enough to get into the EE program at MIT not realize that walking around an airport covered with random electronic parts and lumps of putty ISN'T going to attract unwanted attention?
They used to advertise themselves as "Capitalist Tool", so the anti-F/OSS bias is not exactly surprising coming from them...
[quote]to the astonishment of NASA a titleist was found at the bottom of the crater[/quote]
Wow, ol' Alan Shepard really whacked that one, I guess....
http://www.pasturegolf.com/archive/shepard.htm
You wouldn't drop a laptop off for repairs with your personal data on it, right?
If they really feel the need to boot the machine in order to replace the hinges, their tech should have access to a suitable HDD to swap in.
I think we're parked, man...
A cheap wristwatch uses the same type of crystal found in a PC's clock, but the body heat from your wrist tends to keep the internals of the watch at a nice constant temperature.
Even the cheapest watches that I have seen have an internal trimmer for adjustment, as well.
The component that actually determines the stability and accuracy of the real-time clock in your PC is the timebase crystal, not the RTC chip itself.
Like every other component in mass-market electronic gear, it is chosen with minimum cost as the primary consideration. Such "value engineering" also has done away with the tiny trimmer capacitor that used to be present on most motherboards, which could be used (along with a frequency counter) to tweak the oscillator frequency for better accuracy.
For real accuracy, the timebase oscillator needs to be kept at a constant temperature, which isn't possible in a PC that gets turned on and off. Ideally, the crystal (or the entire oscillator circuit) is enclosed in a package equipped with a heater element and temperature sensor, and kept at a constant temperature. Such a circuit is called an OCXO, or Oven Compensated Crystal Oscillator, and is standard equipment on laboratory grade equipment like frequency counters and signal generators.
I don't believe that anyone in the administration actually made the link explicitly, probably in the name of "plausible deniability".
What administration officials and the president did repeatedly was to mention Saddam, al Qaida, and 9/11 in the same sentence as often as possible, relying on the "sound bite" style of the media and poor attention span of the average citizen to create the association in the minds of the public.
interests within our government and defense industry worked VERY HARD on inventing and perpetuating it. And our corporate media did their usual lapdog routine, and went along without questioning anything.
[quote]Maybe you'd like to share your idea's on how a shop might better secure themselves against theft? [/quote]
Seeing as how the receipt/bag check ritual is targeted to catch theft committed with the help of store employees (cashiers who slip unpaid items into an accomplice's bag), perhaps paying their cashiers somewhat more than minimum wage might be a step in the right direction. Unless you truly believe that customer's rights should be violated because the store can't trust its own employees.
Other that that, additional/better qualified employees on the sales floor, watching the security monitors, and in other security positions could only help.
All of these cost more money than a minimum wage flunkie harassing customers at the exit, though....
[quote]Submitting to a search is completely different to digging through your pocket for a receipt to show a concerned shopkeeper.[/quote]
A difference in degree only.
If opening your bag or being forced to dig the receipt out of your wallet is ok, then why not emptying all your pockets? Take off your coat? Pat down search? Polygraph? Body cavity search?
The store has NO RIGHT to compel you to submit to a search of your person or belongings. Even something as "minor" as looking in the bag you were handed 15 feet away by the checkout clerk. Sure, they can ASK, but the customer is free to refuse to participate in their "security theater" production.
He was being detained against his will by someone who was not a law enforcement officer.
IANAL, but that seems to fit the legal definition of KIDNAPPING. That is not only a felony, but a federal one. A call to 911 to report a felony crime in progress seems reasonable, no?
Perhaps, in addition to 911, he might have called the FBI, as well.
Rosa Parks actually BROKE A LAW, requiring blacks to sit in the back of the bus. Of course, the law was unconstitutional, and deserved to be broken as a matter of principle. But there was actually a law broken in her case.
In this case, the man in question didn't break any law. He was not legally obligated to submit to the bag search, and wasn't legally required to give a driver's license to the cop. The only illegal acts here were the store employee detaining the customer without evidence of him having stolen anything from the store, and the cop illegally requiring him to turn over his driver's license and then fabricating an "obstruction" charge once he realized that there was no legal grounds for an arrest.
I hope this guy goes to court and ends up owning that cop, the security twit, and Circuit City.
perhaps you meant patchouli?
http://www.oldamericancentury.org/14pts.htm
, as well as being responsible for the militarization of local police departments since the 1980s. And the enabling technologies and legislation (and their abuse potential) would seem to be very much on-topic in a forum like slashdot.
From sewage sniffing to thermal imaging, from utilities logging "unusual" domestic power consumption to genetically engineered viruses targeting drug crops, from internet censorship proposals to amateur scientists being unable to buy chemicals and glassware for their experiments, the drug war effects EVERYONE who gives a damn about freedom, including those who have never used an illegal substance in their lives.
http://www.cannabisculture.com/articles/2783.html
is a GREAT example of what a comprehensive, reliable source of drug information looks like.
Unfortunately, it (and other sites like it) are regularly condemned by prohibitionist politicians and their mouthpieces in the mainstream media because providing information other than "Just Say NO!" is deemed to be "pro-drug", and we all need to think of the children....
I've submitted a few other stories in the past dealing with the War on (some) Drugs, and they never seem to make it.
/., there always seemed to be a big blind spot as far as the drug war is concerned.
For a site populated by as many privacy advocates and libertarian types as
The 4th amendment (or the 5th, for that matter) hasn't stopped the more usual types of drug testing, so what makes you think that it would be successfully applied here?
to get decent coverage of a shuttle launch. I was watching the NASA-TV internet streaming video of the launch, and also turned on ABC network news hoping to see some better video. The network coverage:
Didn't even START until T-30 seconds.
The commentator kept talking OVER the astronauts and CAPCOM voice feed. Heaven forbid the blow-dried talking head SHUT UP for a few minutes!
Ended even before SRB separation.
>, and completely seal away from the media any talk of damage or problems.
I was completely in agreement with you up until you dropped this one.
The last thing we need is further adoption of the "Bush Doctrine" of suppressing any information that a government agency decides that the public doesn't need to know. I actually think it admirable that NASA is now so open concerning potential problems with shuttle flights, and would like to see it continue.
Besides, if they were to hide such information, and an accident occurred, the inside information IS going to get out (like it did after Challenger and Columbia), giving the agency even more of a black eye than they would have had if the problems were disclosed.
Yes, the media will continue to overhype every glitch in an attempt to grab attention and ratings. Sensationalism and lack of technical analysis are part and parcel of the corporate media these days. But that is no reason for NASA, possibly the most open and honest government agency we have left, to start deciding what information the public has a right to know.
Also, launching the shuttle with "pre-patched" tiles would mean that NASA still wouldn't have any data on the feasibility of applying the repair materials during the flight. Working in the cargo bay is one thing, but trying to repair tiles on the belly while attached to the end of the robotic arm is yet another.
>>Because they weren't all that worried about Columbia either. Seven astronauts died because of that.
In all fairness, nobody at NASA knew the extent of the damage to Columbia prior to reentry. There were engineers who suspected that there might be some, and wanted photography to be sure, which NASA disallowed. If the existence of a large hole in the leading edge of the wing was known, some type of rescue operation could possibly have been put into place, as there was no repair possibility at that time.
In this case, NASA had detailed imagery of the damaged area several days before the return. That allowed for detailed analysis and laboratory testing, which have apparently convinced NASA that the extent of damage is limited enough that no repairs are required prior to reentry.
I would like to know what assumptions were used in making the "no repair" decision, nonetheless. It would seem to me that even if the damage was not severe enough to REQUIRE the repair, this situation provided a chance to test out the newly developed repair techniques and materials in a "real world" setting, allowing engineers and future crews to gain more confidence in the repairs if and when they are required on a future mission. Is the risk of an EVA/repair causing further damage really high enough to justify throwing away what could be a very valuable "learning experience"?
I attended a Vo-Tech HS in the early-mid '80s, and students were required to choose a major at the end of their freshman year, after a series of 6-week "exploratory" classes to give exposure to various career areas. I already knew what area I wanted to pursue (electronics), but also got exposure to areas from auto repair to graphic arts, in addition to all the standard HS curriculum.
Upon leaving HS, you received a standard HS diploma, along with the equivalent of an associate's degree in your chosen technical area. Many graduates went right into the job market, but some of us (myself included) went on to college/university, where we were that much more secure in our chosen major (mine was EE), where we had much more practical, hands-on experience that most of the students who came out of ordinary high schools. I now work for a university, doing design/prototyping of instrumentation for scientific research.