Presumably if social upheavals gather momentum through social media you could dampen, redirect, or prevent them through censorship or propoganda.
Or allowing a conveniently-timed terrorist attack to occur when they had foreknowledge and warnings well ahead of time, and/or causing or allowing someone or some group to cause a major blackout, or inciting a *different* group to violence against the group(s) that stand in the way of more power & control, or simply to keep the first group out of the 24-hr news cycle long enough for them to lose steam. It's already been proven that they've used government agencies like the IRS to illegally harass and obstruct individuals and groups that stand in the way of them increasing their power & control.
There's a lot more those in the US government can do besides social media propaganda/psyops/censorship to combat their political opponents and others that want to rein-in government power, scope, size, and cost when they have an unlimited ability to reach into everybody's pockets and no consequences to themselves even if caught red-handed. As a result, they have few fears or limits concerning what they can do or how far they can go.
The real division in the US is not among political parties, races/ethnicities, sexes/sexual-identities, or any other cultural/societal 'subgroup' like that.
There are now only two classes in the US that matter. The ruling political class and their cronies, and then everyone else. The US mafia never died, it simply moved to Washington D.C.
The two major political parties are Kabuki theater, nothing more. They agree on almost everything except a few wedge-issues designed to incite strong emotions and create strong divisions among the populace, which then allows them to pit groups against each other. Meanwhile, they can ride to the rescue with lots of new restrictions on freedom to 'solve' these societal problems they, themselves, created, often by design.
You mean like when Clinton's State Dept. was arranging through US Ambassador Stevens for further arms shipments (illegally) to Syrian rebels (who later turned out...oopsies!...to be ISIS fighters) at a place called Benghazi?
Who then used those US-provided arms to massively expand their territories and rape, kill, burn to death in cages, behead, enslave, and sell as chattel/sex-slaves thousands upon thousands of innocent people, including children?
And, oh yeah, along the way these Syrian rebels/ISIS fighters murdered Ambassador Stevens while Clinton and Obama refused to send help because it would uncover their illegal arms smuggling operations, even going so far as to tell the next of kin it was a YouTube video to blame.
Progressive/establishment Republicans have been bad in the past (Iran-Contra, Air America, etc) don't get me wrong, but don't go acting like Progressive/establishment Democrats are any less lawbreaking/corrupt. It's a race to the bottom and no matter who wins, we all lose.
But, keep on believing in and voting for the (R)s and (D)s the parties select while dismissing any other options out of hand. Look how well that's worked so far!
Don't worry. Mark Zuckerberg and Washington DC politicians are working on a plan to solve all your problems.
Business and government working together...controlling mass communication and information platforms...I know there's a name for that! Something that started with an 'F', I think...
Betting the acronym TANSTAAFL never even thinks of coming close to these discussions
Of course TANSTAAFL. There is always a price to pay. But for a poor person with no Internet, is it worth seeing some ads to get it? I think most poor people would say yes. I use plenty of ad supported services, even though I am not poor, just cheap.
The issue for myself and many others is not so much the advertising but the data aggregation and control/censorship-by-exclusion inherent in such a system. It will literally become FBInet in more ways than one.
I see this as a way to corral the masses living on entitlements into an internet 'safe space' ("safe" as defined by TPTB) where information can be controlled and individuals and their communications monitored.
Once such a system was rolled out and the masses flood to it and away from regular ISPs, the rates ISPs would have to charge with a massive reduction in customers would necessarily have to skyrocket, thus forcing even more people onto the 'free but "managed"' internet. The result? A gradually increasing balkanization of the internet divided between the proles and members of the oligarchy with the proles receiving the "government-approved, FB-friendly, child-safe, terrist/pedo-free, RIAA/MPAA-approved" version.
Yahoo was directed to capture only messages that matched that signature, and turn those over to the government, resulting in a high probability that only the foreign targets' messages would be collected by the investigators.
That's the current story. Like many of these stories, this one may turn out to be untrue or only a partial truth. Maybe they actually showed some respect for the rule of law, as out of character as that may seem given past and recent revelations.
Numerous other programs such as the ones revealed by Snowden do grossly violate the civil rights of US citizens so my comment, even if it may not be true in this individual case, stands.
The only thing FAA 702 covers......and its sole and entire reason for being:
Non US Persons outside the US.
Foreign intelligence targets don't magically imbue themselves with US Constitutional protections simply because their communications enters, traverses, or otherwise touches something within the United States.
But it is being used to collect data on domestic targets which puts it in breach regardless of how many foreigners it's used on/for.
The prohibition against general warrants would also apply.
Sorry, but "compelling national interest" is not sufficient reason to violate the restrictions on government power in the US Constitution. Nearly every tyrant and authoritarian regime through history thought, at least in the beginning, that what they were doing by violating the mutual agreement between government and the governed was good and necessary for their national interest and their people. The road to Hell is paved with good intentions.
You seem to have some thorough and strong opinions. Please explain to me why a 50cal is OK, but grenades, fully automatics, silencers, and tactical nukes are not?
You'd have to ask those who decided those things don't fall under the 2nd Amendment.
My opinion is that any weapons normally carried by a current US infantry soldier as basic battlefield infantry loadout is protected. That means M4 carbines w/select-fire, grenades, etc should be protected and legal to own. The whole point of the 2nd Amendment besides self-defense is to create a civilian military force to repel threats to the nation from either foreign invaders or as a disincentive to domestic tyranny which would require a rough equivalence in weaponry to the regular army in order to be effective.
Since the 2nd Amendment deals with individuals, crew-served weapons like heavy machine guns, howitzers, mortars, and large explosive/area-effect weapons such as tactical nukes and ballistic missiles are outside the 2nd-A's purview, as are landmines and nerve gas.
Most of them can't even articulate a valid and actually factual reason why they hate that organization.
I have no particular love for the ACLU. They seem to be only interested in protecting *some* rights. Others, like the 2nd Amendment's noninfringable right for individuals to keep and bear arms for self defense and as part of the many disincentives towards tyranny built into the Constitution...not so much.
Be that as it may, I still call this a good move by the ACLU and hope they prevail. I will cheer them when they are right and chide them when they are wrong the same as anyone else regardless of party or ideology.
People need to stop thinking in terms of groups and group rights and concentrate on what is right for individuals. That's the real problem. TPTB have spent the last 60 years dividing people into subgroups and ethnicities and pitting them against each other to create the emotional tension to create partisan followers fueled by hate and resentment for their fellow Americans.
Let's just worry about what is *good*. Those basic principles that built the US and made it the most prolifically-generous and charitable nation to have ever existed. Just look out for your neighbor. Lend a hand if you can. Don't let them play Emperor Palpatine; "Yes!...Let the hate flow through you!"
"With malice toward none, with charity for all, with firmness in the right as God gives us to see the right, let us strive on to finish the work we are in, to bind up the nation's wounds, to care for him who shall have borne the battle and for his widow and his orphan, to do all which may achieve and cherish a just and lasting peace among ourselves and with all nations." - President Abraham Lincoln, Second Inaugural Address
Don't let the hate-merchants who want to divide us all up, stir up hatred, and pit us against each other like Roman Coliseum gladiator-slaves, win.
I bet their business will pick up with a sterling endorsement from the ACLU.
s/ Yeah, those sneaky bastards having the unmitigated gall to actually stand by principles to protect their users when challenged which tends to engender trust in return from their users!
I mean, how low will some people go, right? 'Principles' are nothing but unscrupulous marketing tools and obstacles to the smooth and efficient functioning of the government, and therefor should be abolished!/s
I don't know what scares me more, the two candidates, or people like you that are so willingly blind to such obvious and documented corruption.
It's a lifetime of exposure to cultural and ideological propaganda combined with careful mass media/information and educational system manipulation and a culturally-encouraged individual intellectual laziness & apathy towards studying history or learning how to think critically. Many spend their entire lives operating almost exclusively from emotion and impulse and have little balance between logical, critical thought and emotional impulse when certain emotional keys are triggered. The spread of the same phenomenon may have also partly contributed to the increasing unemployment, incarceration, and recidivism numbers over the past few decades.
"Show me on the doll where the authenticator touched you."
Future News:
"With the rapidly growing use of this new means of transmitting data, the US government embarks today on a program of mass alteration of the human genome through the release of artificial viruses for targeted DNA mutation to make human bodies CALEA-compliant as is the law for all mass communications systems. SCOTUS rules LEO roadside 'reach-arounds' a 'valid data-gathering investigatory method'. Video at 11."
Big brother can find out what banking transactions I issued. Big brother cannot authenticate as me and issue transactions and then claim I issued them.
Why not if they have the motivation to do so?
What's to stop them from making fraudulent financial transactions or even placing CP on a target's computer/phone other than the same legal, ethical, and Constitutional limits and standards that they've shown a solid track record of totally ignoring when it suits them?
Strong encryption is the *only* effective defense realistically possible against this kind of criminal behavior by authorities and that is exactly why criminal scumbags like Comey want it neutered for non-government users. There is no logical argument for weakening/back-dooring common encryption standards/algorithms *other* than desiring the ability to spy on and incriminate/imprison anyone for any reason they wish.
I "registered" my drone as required and nowhere in the process was there anything to identify my drone. In other words, my drone isn't registered; I am registered as a drone owner. What good is that? If someone misuses their drone the FAA sends out a list of local drone owners?
They just want a list of houses to SWAT if some politician is video recorded porking their illegal-alien Mexican maid's 14-yo daughter by the swimming pool.
Coincidentally, last weekend I was visiting with a friend who owns/flies small drones. I went with him to a local park that's a popular spot for local drone owners to fly and spent most of a Saturday there. We'd actually been discussing 'drone licensing' and decided to take an informal poll among the drone owners that showed up at the park. Every single one (of 28 drone owners we asked that day) laughed at the idea of registering their toys, and some of these drones were a couple feet across in size.
The genie is out of the bottle, the horses have left the barn regarding small personal hobby drones. Nobody is taking the FAA seriously regarding drone registration as well they should not.
Safety is just an excuse to attempt to regulate/control drones because TPTB see them as a potential vector to having their corruption and criminality exposed for the world to see. There are no realistic safety issues here that any laws or regulations can fix. If there was there would be a long list of horrors that would get trotted out in discussions such as this.
The powerful people pushing for registering/regulating hobby drones aren't worried about someone mounting a gun or bomb to a drone, the real threat to those in power is the *camera*. One picture has the power to take down an entire regime. *That* is what scares them. They don't give a rat's ass about your or your kid's safety or privacy. Protecting themselves from accountability for their criminal actions is what motivates these drone laws and regulations, nothing else.
Can you imagine hacking the system and sending out an alert with a link to malware, beautiful.
It's better than that.
The system itself is malware!
The only ones who get these typically-useless/out-of-locational-context alerts anyways are people with smartphones. Good luck warning Grandma or the poor with this waste of tax money who don't and likely will never have a smartphone. But thank God Mr. & Mrs. BMW get alerts at Starbucks paid for by the working-poor while they sit and sip their $8 lattes!
In a thread and on a topic that desperately needed it before comas set in!
With no intent to belittle or harm anyone. With all the *other* kind of mean & hurtful jokes out there, I'm sure Snoop would get a chuckle here on jokingly assigning him 'comic-book-superhero powers of partying' status.
somehow I doubt you *need* 2 hours of flight time.
Well.. actually I do. At the moment I have to have 2-4 battery packs for some jobs, which is a hassle I would not mind getting rid of. It might be suitable for someone who wants to record sliding down a snowy mountain or a short jog on the beach... but if you want to _use_ it, that 20 minutes is not much. The best I can make out of that 20 minutes regarding useful imagery is around 12-14 minutes, and that is the best case scenario. So, bottom line, I would love if they put that much effort in battery longevity they are putting into other areas.
I'd like to use drones for live video shots of bands performing on stage for both a 'jumbotron' style live feed for the venue and for recording purposes, but actual practical flight endurance times are still too short, particularly when loaded down with a good camera and the extra battery weight needed for it as well.
Much better than a bunch of guys in black running around with bulky steady-cams and blocking the live audience's view and being a distraction as an obstacle in the performer's way on stage. Not practical or safe under some conditions (outdoors/windy/no 'buffer' safety zone between stage & audience, etc) but still, those aren't huge restrictions.
The authorities will have a dim view of the small drones in TFS. In their minds it gives the 'bad guys' a powerful tactical tool that goes a decent ways towards leveling the information playing field ('bad guys' these days also include those who would expose wrongdoing by the authorities, as authority detests accountability as strongly as criminals and for the same reasons).
There are two planned missions to Jupiter will be looking at Europa that I know of, ESA's JUICE, and NASA's Europa Clipper. Is it too late to modify either of these to add an instrument for sampling these plumes?
Pfft!
Just mount a sensor suite on Snoop Dogg before his next weed party and have him hit 'record' as he passes by on the outbound trip.
Downside: Getting Snoop to remember to hit the 'record' button.
Upside: With Snoop's usage rates there's always the opportunity for a rapid repeat fly-by if he forgets!
I think you have that backwards. Snyder is saying that the historical record shows that the sensitivity of temperature to carbon dioxide is much HIGHER than the GISS estimates.
Gavin Schmidt's comment is, basically, that her data shows correlation, not causation.
I took away from her study that, as far as she could extrapolate from the available data on climate/temperature cycles going back 2 million years, that we were pretty much smack at the point of the two curves one would expect during this point in time, so to speak, on both CO2 and temperature, and from that lack of deviation from expected norms then suggesting that humans have had little if any significant effect on global temperature averages, and that the warming that is occurring and will continue for a long time at pretty much the same average rate is pretty well inevitable given past history with or without human industrialization.
Seeing as how industrialization in it's entirety has failed to have been shown to appreciably affect global temperature changes then massive, costly, and punitive CO2 mitigation schemes become pointless and wasteful. The problem being that a non-existent 'climate crisis' allows governments, politicians, and their bureaucracies unprecedented powers and control that they will never willingly give up.
"The point of writing a religious book is to control people"
That's a rather narrow way of looking at it. Ignoring the possibility that authors sometimes write what they believe to be true to inform others is convenient for the denier, but that does not, by itself, make their assertion true.
The trouble is that often the denier solves this 'lack-of-truthful-assertion' problem by attacking/ostracizing/persecuting/killing any who dare disagree with their assertions, and nearly as often, that includes said author.
There have been voices already calling for jailing 'climate deniers' if they publish opinions, arguments, and evidence opposing 'Established Science!' on AGW.
Of course, it may be that she is right and he is wrong.
I hope not...
Wait, what?
Why would you hope that he is right and she is wrong?
If he and GISS are right it means that in order to even have any measurable effect on global temperatures would require in practice an immense forced downsizing of industrialization and population/agriculture resulting in huge conflicts, rebellions, forced famines, wars, etc and with those actions cripple the advancement of civilization. If he's wrong, we've wasted unimaginable wealth, resources, and lives for nothing.
If she's right it means we can concentrate our efforts and resources more on the gradual adaptation necessary and having a pretty good model of the time curve and likely temperature rise boundaries to work with, thus saving immense wealth, resources, and lives and restricting freedom the least.
Didn't realize forced famines and wars were that popular on/.
Slashdot Mirror
Presumably if social upheavals gather momentum through social media you could dampen, redirect, or prevent them through censorship or propoganda.
Or allowing a conveniently-timed terrorist attack to occur when they had foreknowledge and warnings well ahead of time, and/or causing or allowing someone or some group to cause a major blackout, or inciting a *different* group to violence against the group(s) that stand in the way of more power & control, or simply to keep the first group out of the 24-hr news cycle long enough for them to lose steam. It's already been proven that they've used government agencies like the IRS to illegally harass and obstruct individuals and groups that stand in the way of them increasing their power & control.
There's a lot more those in the US government can do besides social media propaganda/psyops/censorship to combat their political opponents and others that want to rein-in government power, scope, size, and cost when they have an unlimited ability to reach into everybody's pockets and no consequences to themselves even if caught red-handed. As a result, they have few fears or limits concerning what they can do or how far they can go.
The real division in the US is not among political parties, races/ethnicities, sexes/sexual-identities, or any other cultural/societal 'subgroup' like that.
There are now only two classes in the US that matter. The ruling political class and their cronies, and then everyone else. The US mafia never died, it simply moved to Washington D.C.
The two major political parties are Kabuki theater, nothing more. They agree on almost everything except a few wedge-issues designed to incite strong emotions and create strong divisions among the populace, which then allows them to pit groups against each other. Meanwhile, they can ride to the rescue with lots of new restrictions on freedom to 'solve' these societal problems they, themselves, created, often by design.
Strat
...arms mongering kind of neocon.
You mean like when Clinton's State Dept. was arranging through US Ambassador Stevens for further arms shipments (illegally) to Syrian rebels (who later turned out...oopsies!...to be ISIS fighters) at a place called Benghazi?
Who then used those US-provided arms to massively expand their territories and rape, kill, burn to death in cages, behead, enslave, and sell as chattel/sex-slaves thousands upon thousands of innocent people, including children?
And, oh yeah, along the way these Syrian rebels/ISIS fighters murdered Ambassador Stevens while Clinton and Obama refused to send help because it would uncover their illegal arms smuggling operations, even going so far as to tell the next of kin it was a YouTube video to blame.
Progressive/establishment Republicans have been bad in the past (Iran-Contra, Air America, etc) don't get me wrong, but don't go acting like Progressive/establishment Democrats are any less lawbreaking/corrupt. It's a race to the bottom and no matter who wins, we all lose.
But, keep on believing in and voting for the (R)s and (D)s the parties select while dismissing any other options out of hand. Look how well that's worked so far!
Strat
Don't worry. Mark Zuckerberg and Washington DC politicians are working on a plan to solve all your problems.
Business and government working together...controlling mass communication and information platforms...I know there's a name for that! Something that started with an 'F', I think...
Oh well, I'm sure it's nothing to worry about!
Strat
The issue for myself and many others is not so much the advertising but the data aggregation and control/censorship-by-exclusion inherent in such a system. It will literally become FBInet in more ways than one.
I see this as a way to corral the masses living on entitlements into an internet 'safe space' ("safe" as defined by TPTB) where information can be controlled and individuals and their communications monitored.
Once such a system was rolled out and the masses flood to it and away from regular ISPs, the rates ISPs would have to charge with a massive reduction in customers would necessarily have to skyrocket, thus forcing even more people onto the 'free but "managed"' internet. The result? A gradually increasing balkanization of the internet divided between the proles and members of the oligarchy with the proles receiving the "government-approved, FB-friendly, child-safe, terrist/pedo-free, RIAA/MPAA-approved" version.
Goebbels or Stalin would be SO jealous!
Strat
Yahoo was directed to capture only messages that matched that signature, and turn those over to the government, resulting in a high probability that only the foreign targets' messages would be collected by the investigators.
That's the current story. Like many of these stories, this one may turn out to be untrue or only a partial truth. Maybe they actually showed some respect for the rule of law, as out of character as that may seem given past and recent revelations.
Numerous other programs such as the ones revealed by Snowden do grossly violate the civil rights of US citizens so my comment, even if it may not be true in this individual case, stands.
Strat
The only thing FAA 702 covers... ...and its sole and entire reason for being:
Non US Persons outside the US.
Foreign intelligence targets don't magically imbue themselves with US Constitutional protections simply because their communications enters, traverses, or otherwise touches something within the United States.
But it is being used to collect data on domestic targets which puts it in breach regardless of how many foreigners it's used on/for.
The prohibition against general warrants would also apply.
Sorry, but "compelling national interest" is not sufficient reason to violate the restrictions on government power in the US Constitution. Nearly every tyrant and authoritarian regime through history thought, at least in the beginning, that what they were doing by violating the mutual agreement between government and the governed was good and necessary for their national interest and their people. The road to Hell is paved with good intentions.
Strat
You seem to have some thorough and strong opinions. Please explain to me why a 50cal is OK, but grenades, fully automatics, silencers, and tactical nukes are not?
You'd have to ask those who decided those things don't fall under the 2nd Amendment.
My opinion is that any weapons normally carried by a current US infantry soldier as basic battlefield infantry loadout is protected. That means M4 carbines w/select-fire, grenades, etc should be protected and legal to own. The whole point of the 2nd Amendment besides self-defense is to create a civilian military force to repel threats to the nation from either foreign invaders or as a disincentive to domestic tyranny which would require a rough equivalence in weaponry to the regular army in order to be effective.
Since the 2nd Amendment deals with individuals, crew-served weapons like heavy machine guns, howitzers, mortars, and large explosive/area-effect weapons such as tactical nukes and ballistic missiles are outside the 2nd-A's purview, as are landmines and nerve gas.
Strat
Most of them can't even articulate a valid and actually factual reason why they hate that organization.
I have no particular love for the ACLU. They seem to be only interested in protecting *some* rights. Others, like the 2nd Amendment's noninfringable right for individuals to keep and bear arms for self defense and as part of the many disincentives towards tyranny built into the Constitution...not so much.
Be that as it may, I still call this a good move by the ACLU and hope they prevail. I will cheer them when they are right and chide them when they are wrong the same as anyone else regardless of party or ideology.
People need to stop thinking in terms of groups and group rights and concentrate on what is right for individuals. That's the real problem. TPTB have spent the last 60 years dividing people into subgroups and ethnicities and pitting them against each other to create the emotional tension to create partisan followers fueled by hate and resentment for their fellow Americans.
Let's just worry about what is *good*. Those basic principles that built the US and made it the most prolifically-generous and charitable nation to have ever existed. Just look out for your neighbor. Lend a hand if you can. Don't let them play Emperor Palpatine; "Yes!...Let the hate flow through you!"
"With malice toward none, with charity for all, with firmness in the right as God gives us to see the right, let us strive on to finish the work we are in, to bind up the nation's wounds, to care for him who shall have borne the battle and for his widow and his orphan, to do all which may achieve and cherish a just and lasting peace among ourselves and with all nations." - President Abraham Lincoln, Second Inaugural Address
Don't let the hate-merchants who want to divide us all up, stir up hatred, and pit us against each other like Roman Coliseum gladiator-slaves, win.
Strat
I bet their business will pick up with a sterling endorsement from the ACLU.
s/ Yeah, those sneaky bastards having the unmitigated gall to actually stand by principles to protect their users when challenged which tends to engender trust in return from their users!
I mean, how low will some people go, right? 'Principles' are nothing but unscrupulous marketing tools and obstacles to the smooth and efficient functioning of the government, and therefor should be abolished! /s
Strat
I don't know what scares me more, the two candidates, or people like you that are so willingly blind to such obvious and documented corruption.
It's a lifetime of exposure to cultural and ideological propaganda combined with careful mass media/information and educational system manipulation and a culturally-encouraged individual intellectual laziness & apathy towards studying history or learning how to think critically. Many spend their entire lives operating almost exclusively from emotion and impulse and have little balance between logical, critical thought and emotional impulse when certain emotional keys are triggered. The spread of the same phenomenon may have also partly contributed to the increasing unemployment, incarceration, and recidivism numbers over the past few decades.
Strat
"Show me on the doll where the authenticator touched you."
Future News:
"With the rapidly growing use of this new means of transmitting data, the US government embarks today on a program of mass alteration of the human genome through the release of artificial viruses for targeted DNA mutation to make human bodies CALEA-compliant as is the law for all mass communications systems. SCOTUS rules LEO roadside 'reach-arounds' a 'valid data-gathering investigatory method'. Video at 11."
Strat
Big brother can find out what banking transactions I issued. Big brother cannot authenticate as me and issue transactions and then claim I issued them.
Why not if they have the motivation to do so?
What's to stop them from making fraudulent financial transactions or even placing CP on a target's computer/phone other than the same legal, ethical, and Constitutional limits and standards that they've shown a solid track record of totally ignoring when it suits them?
Strong encryption is the *only* effective defense realistically possible against this kind of criminal behavior by authorities and that is exactly why criminal scumbags like Comey want it neutered for non-government users. There is no logical argument for weakening/back-dooring common encryption standards/algorithms *other* than desiring the ability to spy on and incriminate/imprison anyone for any reason they wish.
Strat
I "registered" my drone as required and nowhere in the process was there anything to identify my drone. In other words, my drone isn't registered; I am registered as a drone owner. What good is that? If someone misuses their drone the FAA sends out a list of local drone owners?
They just want a list of houses to SWAT if some politician is video recorded porking their illegal-alien Mexican maid's 14-yo daughter by the swimming pool.
Coincidentally, last weekend I was visiting with a friend who owns/flies small drones. I went with him to a local park that's a popular spot for local drone owners to fly and spent most of a Saturday there. We'd actually been discussing 'drone licensing' and decided to take an informal poll among the drone owners that showed up at the park. Every single one (of 28 drone owners we asked that day) laughed at the idea of registering their toys, and some of these drones were a couple feet across in size.
The genie is out of the bottle, the horses have left the barn regarding small personal hobby drones. Nobody is taking the FAA seriously regarding drone registration as well they should not.
Safety is just an excuse to attempt to regulate/control drones because TPTB see them as a potential vector to having their corruption and criminality exposed for the world to see. There are no realistic safety issues here that any laws or regulations can fix. If there was there would be a long list of horrors that would get trotted out in discussions such as this.
The powerful people pushing for registering/regulating hobby drones aren't worried about someone mounting a gun or bomb to a drone, the real threat to those in power is the *camera*. One picture has the power to take down an entire regime. *That* is what scares them. They don't give a rat's ass about your or your kid's safety or privacy. Protecting themselves from accountability for their criminal actions is what motivates these drone laws and regulations, nothing else.
Strat
Why wait for all that?
Just look at who the top execs at KGS donated/bundled campaign/PAC/lobby/'Foundation' money to/for.
Easy-peasy!
Strat
we really want *surviving* a catastrophic event.
They're collectively the "B Ark".
Hairdressers and telephone sanitizers.
Strat
Can you imagine hacking the system and sending out an alert with a link to malware, beautiful .
It's better than that.
The system itself is malware!
The only ones who get these typically-useless/out-of-locational-context alerts anyways are people with smartphones. Good luck warning Grandma or the poor with this waste of tax money who don't and likely will never have a smartphone. But thank God Mr. & Mrs. BMW get alerts at Starbucks paid for by the working-poor while they sit and sip their $8 lattes!
Strat
Oh, c'mon!! 'Offtopic' my shiny!
That was *funny*!
In a thread and on a topic that desperately needed it before comas set in!
With no intent to belittle or harm anyone. With all the *other* kind of mean & hurtful jokes out there, I'm sure Snoop would get a chuckle here on jokingly assigning him 'comic-book-superhero powers of partying' status.
People need to chill on the hyper-sensitivity.
Strat
Of course they do. Funny thing about power, it corrupts. I have little respect for authorities anymore. I miss my country of old...
Authorities resent and avoid accountability as much as criminals and for the same reasons.
Strat
I'd like to use drones for live video shots of bands performing on stage for both a 'jumbotron' style live feed for the venue and for recording purposes, but actual practical flight endurance times are still too short, particularly when loaded down with a good camera and the extra battery weight needed for it as well.
Much better than a bunch of guys in black running around with bulky steady-cams and blocking the live audience's view and being a distraction as an obstacle in the performer's way on stage. Not practical or safe under some conditions (outdoors/windy/no 'buffer' safety zone between stage & audience, etc) but still, those aren't huge restrictions.
The authorities will have a dim view of the small drones in TFS. In their minds it gives the 'bad guys' a powerful tactical tool that goes a decent ways towards leveling the information playing field ('bad guys' these days also include those who would expose wrongdoing by the authorities, as authority detests accountability as strongly as criminals and for the same reasons).
Strat
Pootsky doesn't like Hil'ry because she publicly questioned the legitimacy of his election.
And the Democrats are more worried about the legitimacy of Trump's erection!
They write themselves, folks!
Strat
Everything connected to the net should be held accountable which starts with ISP's holding each other and their customers accountable.
Which is exactly the logic governments will use to justify enforcing licensing and registration for every user and device.
Strat
There are two planned missions to Jupiter will be looking at Europa that I know of, ESA's JUICE, and NASA's Europa Clipper. Is it too late to modify either of these to add an instrument for sampling these plumes?
Pfft!
Just mount a sensor suite on Snoop Dogg before his next weed party and have him hit 'record' as he passes by on the outbound trip.
Downside: Getting Snoop to remember to hit the 'record' button.
Upside: With Snoop's usage rates there's always the opportunity for a rapid repeat fly-by if he forgets!
Strat
I think you have that backwards. Snyder is saying that the historical record shows that the sensitivity of temperature to carbon dioxide is much HIGHER than the GISS estimates.
Gavin Schmidt's comment is, basically, that her data shows correlation, not causation.
I took away from her study that, as far as she could extrapolate from the available data on climate/temperature cycles going back 2 million years, that we were pretty much smack at the point of the two curves one would expect during this point in time, so to speak, on both CO2 and temperature, and from that lack of deviation from expected norms then suggesting that humans have had little if any significant effect on global temperature averages, and that the warming that is occurring and will continue for a long time at pretty much the same average rate is pretty well inevitable given past history with or without human industrialization.
Seeing as how industrialization in it's entirety has failed to have been shown to appreciably affect global temperature changes then massive, costly, and punitive CO2 mitigation schemes become pointless and wasteful. The problem being that a non-existent 'climate crisis' allows governments, politicians, and their bureaucracies unprecedented powers and control that they will never willingly give up.
And so the beat goes on...
Strat
The trouble is that often the denier solves this 'lack-of-truthful-assertion' problem by attacking/ostracizing/persecuting/killing any who dare disagree with their assertions, and nearly as often, that includes said author.
There have been voices already calling for jailing 'climate deniers' if they publish opinions, arguments, and evidence opposing 'Established Science!' on AGW.
I'd say the process seems well underway.
Strat
Wait, what?
Why would you hope that he is right and she is wrong?
If he and GISS are right it means that in order to even have any measurable effect on global temperatures would require in practice an immense forced downsizing of industrialization and population/agriculture resulting in huge conflicts, rebellions, forced famines, wars, etc and with those actions cripple the advancement of civilization. If he's wrong, we've wasted unimaginable wealth, resources, and lives for nothing.
If she's right it means we can concentrate our efforts and resources more on the gradual adaptation necessary and having a pretty good model of the time curve and likely temperature rise boundaries to work with, thus saving immense wealth, resources, and lives and restricting freedom the least.
Didn't realize forced famines and wars were that popular on /.
Strat