Why didn't you all blame Neil Diamond when his new CD was one of the ones with the Sony rootkit fiasco tied into it?
I did blame Neil Diamond and the others when their CDs were involved with the Sony rootkit incident. They listed with Sony, are collecting money from Sony, and will probably re-list with Sony. If Neil Diamond was somebody from whom I might buy a CD then I would send his people a polite little note saying "thank you for the memories, but until you leave the Sony family I won't buy any more of your albums". But he isn't so I won't. But you get the idea.
If Neil (and others) refused to deliver more music to Sony then Sony wouldn't have anything to rootkit - so Neil is at least partly to blame.
Re:My C64 floppy could do that!
on
Scanjet Music
·
· Score: 1
The Timex Sinclair 1000's basic compiler supported some basic sound commands even though it didn't have any sort of audio out capability. However, you could put the box near a radio tuned between stations and hear the music just fine.
Picasa is nice, but doesn't hold a candle to the free paint.net - the most powerful non-GIMP free image editor I've seen that is amazingly easy to use and intuitive - IIRC you can even extend it with plugins (not that many out (yet?)).
Ghandi disagreed. Martin Luther and Martin Luther King, Jr disagreed. Rosa Parks disagreed. Various locales in Scandanavia disagreed while the Nazis were hanging out in town. Thomas Paine wasn't all that thrilled with the concept, either.
If Microsoft refuses to comply with Chinese laws concerning censorship, do you really think it will affect those laws?
Nope, but it would be the morally correct thing to do. But Bill Gates values money above all else. That's the American way.
And, in the meanwhile, Microsoft would almost certainly lose traction...traction which can later help in influencing laws when there's a snowball's chance in hell of accomplishing anything on that front.
This is one of the dumber concepts ever posted on/. - that MS is secretly planning to effect social change in China. Ain't in the works - Bill doesn't value freedom or individual rights: if the RIAA/MPAA started to care about freedom and rights then Bill may give a rat's uvula but otherwise, never.
Microsoft can't do a damned thing about the Chinese government's oppression of free speech and they know it
They could always pay ~cough~ "fines", wink wink, to satisfy the officials... but they don't.
their next duty is to avoid doing harm to themselves, their employees, and their stockholders all in the name of futility.
Or they could pull out of the market. But that would cost MS too much money. MS is seeking money first - as corporations should do - but are helping prevent the spread of freedom. That's the choice MS made. It sucks and is wrong. Just admit it and don't try to justify Bill.
Which is something everyone here at/. should be doing, standing up in their communities for what they beleive in.
Seriously. Why bother? Any token victory today will be immediately eliminated tomorrow. Consider the way congress repeatedly attempts to sneak the broadcast flag into being. Most Americans don't care. Being an activist is more likely to get you on covert surveilance lists and spark warrantless searches and wiretaps than actually accomplishing anything. In America the masses don't care. The masses don't want freedom, only beer, unlimited sex and to never be held accountable for or offended by anything.
Standing up for our online rights for example.
Your rights are wholely contingent upon the will of the ISPs and the backbone owners. And the government. And the United Nations. You get the crumbs.
Sure the only legal thing we can do directly to stop the restrictions of our rights is using our brains when we go to the polls.
For every individual who actually uses a brain in the polling place there are 50 who vote as a bloc and 500 lawyers ready to sue. In Chicago you can expect your vote to be competing with several dead people. In California and Texas you can expect your vote to compete with thousands of illegal aliens. Brains are irrelevant during elections - money and corruption are the only factors.
But we can also use whatever influence we have to educate the public and motivate others.
I'd thank you for your sense of humor, but you're being serious.
And we need to start doing this BEFORE it is too late.
You're several years too late for before it being too late.
In other words you are a strong advocate of relative justice. That don't cut it. People with suspended licenses had their licenses suspended because they were a danger to others (or, in some cases, wouldn't pay child support - since this story was about a woman I guarantee that her conviction was substance-related). In this particular case, a woman who had a history of being a danger to others repeatedly thumbed her nose at the legal system and go away with it. This particular article mentioned how the judge said the woman belonged in jail but because the jail was filled (and the judge objects to letting anybody out early, whether they pose a threat to others or not) simply added additional hours of community service.
So unless you understand the
It is SOP for lawyers to actively lobby to prevent juries from understanding. Stone cold drunk when you get into an accident and cause some serious damage to your body? Can't tell the jury - it may lead them to (rightfully) award something less than $150,000,000 pain and suffering. The Phen-Fen and breast implant class actions hinged upon excluding significant and relevant information from the juries. And sometimes the judge acts alone, with callous disregard for the facts: review recent events regarding RIM/Blackberry patents.
Truth and justice are supposed to be fixed and constant. Leave the wishy washy to GE and my jeans.
Can't you people leave politics out of anything? This has nothing to do with "the radical right". NOTHING.
Prime example: in May of 2004 Nancy Seaman got into a shouting match with her husband of 30 years, left the house, drove to a local Home Depot where she purchased a hatchet, drove back home and hacked her husband to death. She claimed self defense. The jury didn't buy it and returned a conviction of first degree murder. Some time after the verdict Judge John McDonald said that he disagreed with the jury's verdict and simply declared that they should have convicted for second degree murder instead and altered the conviction.
Slightly tangential here, but I do not advocate elimination of the jury system (that has already been accomplished). I say that all of the power needs to be restored to the juries and that the jury's verdict should stand sacrosanct. If there were procedural errors then the lawyer/judge to committed them should be punished. If a lawyer/judge can't follow the law then said judge/lawyer should not be allowed to practice. As it stands a lot of mistakes seem to be allowed to stand with the anticipation of "oh well... we'll take care of that during the appeal". This has resulted in the utter and complete de facto elimination of the jury system. I hope I'm never called to sit on a jury (I've gone for duty twice but never actually got onto a panel) because the entire time I would have the thought in the back of my mind "what difference does it make if I'm here, wasting my time? No matter what I think or so, no matter how much time is thrown away some judge somewhere is going to say that my deliberations were worthless."
"CIS acknowledged that it is unlikely to see any of the judgment money but said that it was time that spammers learnt that their actions would result in an economic death penalty"
By economic death penalty they must refer to something that is never actually carried out, delayed by infinite appeals and more for show than anything else. They'll never get a dime of those billions, the spammer will continue to spam (check out http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=200 5601040360 - if the legal system won't do anything about a woman who was caught three times driving with a suspended license to her probation officer they won't do anything significant about a spammer) and people like me will lose ever more faith in the system.
We have people awarding impossible fines with full knowledge that they will never be recovered (ie: they knowingly refused to mete out justice since their "justice" is only something that exists on paper and in their fantasy world). We have judges who order restraining orders against David Letterman because somebody claimed he was using psychic powers to harass her. We have people who will devote months of their lives to sit on juries and render verdict even though everybody knows from the start that what the jury says is irrelevant because everything gets rewritten on appeal anyway.
The system is broke. The overlords of the system don't care; these people have much less respect for the law than the criminals they try in their courts.
Would somebody please tell me why nobody is going to jail over this? %%!@$* it torques me off when nobody in corporate america is ever held accountable for outright fraud and are allowed to continue to draw seven and eight figure salaries + infinite perks and incentives at the expense of employees, stockholders and customers.
Manufacturers have ZERO responsibility to do anything more than create a product that their customers are willing to pay for.
Great freaking zork. You must be a lawyer: your declaration that nuclear power plants have no responsibility to ensure that they don't release radiation is monstrous prima facie. Your claim that corporations have every right in the world to dump toxic waste in your neighbor's backyard because somebody is willing to pay them to do so is about as indecent as I have ever seen on slashdot.
Are you this obtuse? Monsanto has to sell you what you want -- if you want those guarantees, don't buy a product that doesn't meet them. If enough farmers say no, Monsanto goes under. I guess farmers aren't saying no.
Actually, you are the dense one. Well, you would be if your head wasn't shoved far enough up your backside that you're sucking tonsil. Monsanto is a cruel and ruthless beast: haven't you been paying attention to the world you claim to be traveling? They have no right to sue farmer B just because farmer A couldn't keep his pollen to himself. None whatsoever.
If you want non-GM foods, there are thousands of grocery stores for you. Go shop there. Problem solved!
Until Monsanto's wander pollen drives everybody out of business except for those who pay for their product.
Don't create laws to control me. Leave me alone.
Let me refresh your memory - Manufacturers have ZERO responsibility to do anything more than create a product that their customers are willing to pay for.. I want to pay somebody for a product that does nothing more than create laws to control you. Now sit down, shut up, and accept that whenever this provider appears you have no right to whine about it.
Weird factors come into play. The BlueZ project used to have a very nice list of working hardware, but that list was pulled down as a result of objections from the "Bluetooth Qualification Administrator."
See that @bluetooth.com bit? That's called a domain. Since these bits of email are going to people @bluetooth.com it is safe to assume that they are involved with the website that appears at http://www.bluetooth.com/ - let's go there, shall we?
There is a very prominent link "about the SIG" that appears on this page. Since TFA was about "a registered member of the Bluetooth SIG" it is fairly probably that this is the SIG in question. Let's click on the 'about the SIG' link, shall we?
The Bluetooth Special Interest Group (SIG) is a trade association comprised of leaders in the telecommunications, computing, automotive, industrial automation and network industries that is driving the development of Bluetooth wireless technology, a low cost short-range wireless specification for connecting mobile devices and bringing them to market.
The Bluetooth SIG is a privately held trade association and is not publicly traded. The Special Interest Group, whose name was inspired by the Danish King Harald Bluetooth, known for unifying Denmark and Norway in the 10th century, was founded in September 1998. Now, in the 21st century, unification is a guiding principle of Bluetooth wireless technology, as it connects innovative products and companies to consumer aspirations. The Bluetooth SIG has established its global headquarters in Bellevue, Washington, USA . The staff is comprised of Executive Director Michael Foley, Ph.D., Marketing Director Anders Edlundand a small staff of Marketing, Engineering, and Operations professionals. In addition to the Bluetooth SIG Staff, volunteers from member companies play key roles in running the Bluetooth SIG organization. The Bluetooth SIG includes promoter member companies Agere, Ericsson, IBM, Intel, Microsoft , Motorola, Nokia and Toshiba, and thousands of Associate and Adopter member companies.
Nothing would please me more than being able to hire ten programmers and deluge the hobby market with good software.
I dunno... he sure seems pretty pleased to have hired thousands of programmers and attempt to deluge the market with Micro-Soft Bob and Windows ME. (I always find it amusing that Bill rewarded the manager of MS' biggest market flop - Bob - with an engagement ring.)
I also support spending as much on TennCare as it takes to cover everyone who can't afford traditional health insurance.
You are certainly welcome to contribute 95% of your salary to TennCare. Oh... wait... something tells me you aren't that willing to contribute to the expense. Correct me if I'm wrong. But please hurry... I can't hold my breath very long.
It was a great concept - provide health care for everyone in Tennessee who couln't afford it otherwise - and it requires money to do that.
Providing unlimited university education free of charge is a great concept. Providing free housing is a great concept. Providing free cars to every citizen every year is a great concept. Unfortunately you can't provide such things with out money that belongs to somebody else, and you simply don't have the moral right to demand that they give up what they have earned to give something to somebody who hasn't earned it.
Don't think for a single second that I am opposed to free, universal and blanket health care - I am. But I am also incredibly realistic (and rational) about the costs required. You see, new taxes will always hurt the middle class more than anybody else will will tend to enrich only the wealthy class. What most people fail to realize is that by increasing health coverage they are increasing health spending - and who benefits from said spending? Doctors, hospital administrators and pharmy suits. The money will flow uphill and since they are awarded what is essentially tax caps they will simply take home more money. That simple.
Of course, you could always try to strike a blow against them: instead of taxing copies of MS Excel, Oracle or SAP try taxing IP held by a corporation. Try taxing the patent on Viagra - how long do you think Pfizer would remain in the state if it was tried? Taxes are only effective when levied against people who a) have enough money so it can be taken and b) aren't quite powerful enough or self-sufficient enough to viably either convince the local government to grant an exemption or relocate to a jurisdiction that doesn't want to simply take more money without earning it. (The biggest problem is that government is never required to earn its revenue - there is no incentive to actually produce a fair ROI).
Among other things, the release of additional radiation creates a direct and immediate threat to human health and safety. 30 growlights in the basement pose no threat to the neighors, but a spike to 500 MSv would be considered to lean towards a bad thing (tm).
And it isn't just the bad guys one needs to fear - is a good read. I really would have no objection if the local LEOs had detection devices in every vehicle - this would have been picked up much sooner, nor would it construe an illegal search any more than keeping the windows rolled down in case somebody screamed "help! police!".
But they don't just park across the street with a geiger counter. There are unmarked vehicles prowling the streets all the time taking samples: it isn't just a question of a dirty bomb... there is a real, present and clear danger that the bad guys have actual nuclear weapons in this country. There have been rumors that spetsnaz troops brought in large caches of conventional and possibly biological and/or nuclear weapons during the cold war (back when the Mexican border was even more open than it is today - they could have driven tanks across the border and nobody would have noticed). Furthermore, my confidence in the ability of the US government to keep suitcase nukes out of the country (several units from the former Soviet stockpile are rumored to be missing while China and North Korea are already nuclear powers thanks to the direct and personal involvement of former president Clinton) and I have no doubts that either would be more than happy to part with a weapon or three for the low low price of $1E+10 or so (and who knows what Brazil would be willing to put up on eBay).
Personally, I would prefer a massively interlinked network of radiation detectors: every bridge, tunnel, stoplight, rail crossing, overpass, underpass and a few other randomly selected sites, as well as every police car, ambulance and fire engine should all have network detectors. Not only would the bad guys be unable to move any bad stuff without being caught, the not-so-bad guys who simply move radioactive waste along inappropriate routes (or on the way to illegal dumping) would be caught as well, and the relative exposures would be of massive benefit to a variety of sciences as well.
If you were shouting across the street about your plans and a cop overhears it, its fair game. The same goes for Cellphones or any kind of transmission over radio. There is no reasonable expectation of privacy.
Incorrect. The standard by which "shouting across the street" is not afforded a reasonable expectation of privacy clearly does not apply when considering the prohibition of using a scanner to intercept cellular communications. As written in Bartnicki v. Vopper the US Supreme Court recognizes that US Code Title 18, Part I, Chapter 119 is valid:
any person who:
(a)intentionally intercepts, endeavors to intercept, or procures any other person to intercept or endeavor to intercept, any wire, oral, or electronic communication;
(yadda yadda yadda... you can read the rest for yourself).
The interception of a cellular communication is, in fact, subject to a warrant specifically because it is designed and intended to be used as person-to-person communications unless specifically used otherwise - dialing into a group party line, for example.
Heres a little conundrum to go with this debate. Its also been revealed that administration has authorized the monitoring of mosques, homes of foreign nationals, homes of americans with terrorist connections, and other possible targets for radiation associated with a nuclear weapon. No break ins, no entering the property, just passive radiation detection. How should the 4th ammendment relate to this.
I have no objections: in my book parking across the street with a geiger counter does not reasonably constitute a search; furthermore it is a reasonable and expected function of the government to monitor air quality. This is entirely different than the use of thermal imaging which was used to detect grow-lights within residential homes: a practice which was prudently struck down by the Supreme Court (a rare correct decision).
Children need to understand that understanding the prevailing scientific theories and their underlying data is not the same as adopting a new worldview. That's the deficiency--not the fact that some scientific results conflict with some religious beliefs.
If it were presented as this, then fine. But schools are teaching the material as absolute, established fact - they went to court over a sticker that simply read "This textbook contains material on evolution. Evolution is a theory, not a fact, regarding the origin of living things. This material should be approached with an open mind, studied carefully and critically considered." The judge ruled that calling evolution a theory was to the satisfaction of creationist parents and for no other reason was a violation of church/state separation.
And yes, the biology/geology classes come out and say "this is how the world was formed. This is how man evolved from apes." The words this is how make the clear declaration that said concept is absolute fact beyond question. This is. Consider the people who trolled me down -2 for no reason other than disagreeing with my stance: do you think for a moment that they would ever accept a teacher being instructed to preface the course material with "most biologists believe" or "it appears that it happened like this"?
VoIP packets don't have to be encrypted because a) one only needs to know if it is VoIP traffic and b) simply listening in without a warrant is illegal.
I lack the math for a detailed explanation, but consider the various types of traffic that one would see from an internet user:
A steady stream of a download
Short bursts intermixed with relatively long pauses of IM
load/pause/load/pause of surfing
Now imagine what a telephone call might appear: a steady flow of essentially half duplex traffic where one side transmits then starts to receive almost immediately. I don't know what needs to be said, only that there is a handfull of megs going out followed immediately by a handful of megs coming in.
Slashdot Mirror
I did blame Neil Diamond and the others when their CDs were involved with the Sony rootkit incident. They listed with Sony, are collecting money from Sony, and will probably re-list with Sony. If Neil Diamond was somebody from whom I might buy a CD then I would send his people a polite little note saying "thank you for the memories, but until you leave the Sony family I won't buy any more of your albums". But he isn't so I won't. But you get the idea.
If Neil (and others) refused to deliver more music to Sony then Sony wouldn't have anything to rootkit - so Neil is at least partly to blame.
The Timex Sinclair 1000's basic compiler supported some basic sound commands even though it didn't have any sort of audio out capability. However, you could put the box near a radio tuned between stations and hear the music just fine.
Picasa is nice, but doesn't hold a candle to the free paint.net - the most powerful non-GIMP free image editor I've seen that is amazingly easy to use and intuitive - IIRC you can even extend it with plugins (not that many out (yet?)).
Ghandi disagreed. Martin Luther and Martin Luther King, Jr disagreed. Rosa Parks disagreed. Various locales in Scandanavia disagreed while the Nazis were hanging out in town. Thomas Paine wasn't all that thrilled with the concept, either.
Nope, but it would be the morally correct thing to do. But Bill Gates values money above all else. That's the American way.
This is one of the dumber concepts ever posted on /. - that MS is secretly planning to effect social change in China. Ain't in the works - Bill doesn't value freedom or individual rights: if the RIAA/MPAA started to care about freedom and rights then Bill may give a rat's uvula but otherwise, never.
They could always pay ~cough~ "fines", wink wink, to satisfy the officials... but they don't.
Or they could pull out of the market. But that would cost MS too much money. MS is seeking money first - as corporations should do - but are helping prevent the spread of freedom. That's the choice MS made. It sucks and is wrong. Just admit it and don't try to justify Bill.
Seriously. Why bother? Any token victory today will be immediately eliminated tomorrow. Consider the way congress repeatedly attempts to sneak the broadcast flag into being. Most Americans don't care. Being an activist is more likely to get you on covert surveilance lists and spark warrantless searches and wiretaps than actually accomplishing anything. In America the masses don't care. The masses don't want freedom, only beer, unlimited sex and to never be held accountable for or offended by anything.
Your rights are wholely contingent upon the will of the ISPs and the backbone owners. And the government. And the United Nations. You get the crumbs.
For every individual who actually uses a brain in the polling place there are 50 who vote as a bloc and 500 lawyers ready to sue. In Chicago you can expect your vote to be competing with several dead people. In California and Texas you can expect your vote to compete with thousands of illegal aliens. Brains are irrelevant during elections - money and corruption are the only factors.
I'd thank you for your sense of humor, but you're being serious.
You're several years too late for before it being too late.
It is SOP for lawyers to actively lobby to prevent juries from understanding. Stone cold drunk when you get into an accident and cause some serious damage to your body? Can't tell the jury - it may lead them to (rightfully) award something less than $150,000,000 pain and suffering. The Phen-Fen and breast implant class actions hinged upon excluding significant and relevant information from the juries. And sometimes the judge acts alone, with callous disregard for the facts: review recent events regarding RIM/Blackberry patents.
Truth and justice are supposed to be fixed and constant. Leave the wishy washy to GE and my jeans.
Prime example: in May of 2004 Nancy Seaman got into a shouting match with her husband of 30 years, left the house, drove to a local Home Depot where she purchased a hatchet, drove back home and hacked her husband to death. She claimed self defense. The jury didn't buy it and returned a conviction of first degree murder. Some time after the verdict Judge John McDonald said that he disagreed with the jury's verdict and simply declared that they should have convicted for second degree murder instead and altered the conviction.
2. go here
There. You have seen a vehicle that can travel faster than light.
(By the way, check out http://www.fija.org/)
By economic death penalty they must refer to something that is never actually carried out, delayed by infinite appeals and more for show than anything else. They'll never get a dime of those billions, the spammer will continue to spam (check out http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=200 5601040360 - if the legal system won't do anything about a woman who was caught three times driving with a suspended license to her probation officer they won't do anything significant about a spammer) and people like me will lose ever more faith in the system.
We have people awarding impossible fines with full knowledge that they will never be recovered (ie: they knowingly refused to mete out justice since their "justice" is only something that exists on paper and in their fantasy world). We have judges who order restraining orders against David Letterman because somebody claimed he was using psychic powers to harass her. We have people who will devote months of their lives to sit on juries and render verdict even though everybody knows from the start that what the jury says is irrelevant because everything gets rewritten on appeal anyway.
The system is broke. The overlords of the system don't care; these people have much less respect for the law than the criminals they try in their courts.
Would somebody please tell me why nobody is going to jail over this? %%!@$* it torques me off when nobody in corporate america is ever held accountable for outright fraud and are allowed to continue to draw seven and eight figure salaries + infinite perks and incentives at the expense of employees, stockholders and customers.
Same concept.
Great freaking zork. You must be a lawyer: your declaration that nuclear power plants have no responsibility to ensure that they don't release radiation is monstrous prima facie. Your claim that corporations have every right in the world to dump toxic waste in your neighbor's backyard because somebody is willing to pay them to do so is about as indecent as I have ever seen on slashdot.
Actually, you are the dense one. Well, you would be if your head wasn't shoved far enough up your backside that you're sucking tonsil. Monsanto is a cruel and ruthless beast: haven't you been paying attention to the world you claim to be traveling? They have no right to sue farmer B just because farmer A couldn't keep his pollen to himself. None whatsoever.
Until Monsanto's wander pollen drives everybody out of business except for those who pay for their product.
Let me refresh your memory - Manufacturers have ZERO responsibility to do anything more than create a product that their customers are willing to pay for.. I want to pay somebody for a product that does nothing more than create laws to control you. Now sit down, shut up, and accept that whenever this provider appears you have no right to whine about it.
TFA links to http://lwn.net/Articles/163266/
On that page we read:
On that page there are two mailto: links - mailto:bqa@bluetooth.com and mailto:member.relations@bluetooth.com
See that @bluetooth.com bit? That's called a domain. Since these bits of email are going to people @bluetooth.com it is safe to assume that they are involved with the website that appears at http://www.bluetooth.com/ - let's go there, shall we?
There is a very prominent link "about the SIG" that appears on this page. Since TFA was about "a registered member of the Bluetooth SIG" it is fairly probably that this is the SIG in question. Let's click on the 'about the SIG' link, shall we?
http://tinyurl.com/e4olu
Who hangs out near Belelvue, WA and would object to anything linux-related?
I dunno... he sure seems pretty pleased to have hired thousands of programmers and attempt to deluge the market with Micro-Soft Bob and Windows ME. (I always find it amusing that Bill rewarded the manager of MS' biggest market flop - Bob - with an engagement ring.)
You are certainly welcome to contribute 95% of your salary to TennCare. Oh... wait... something tells me you aren't that willing to contribute to the expense. Correct me if I'm wrong. But please hurry... I can't hold my breath very long.
Providing unlimited university education free of charge is a great concept. Providing free housing is a great concept. Providing free cars to every citizen every year is a great concept. Unfortunately you can't provide such things with out money that belongs to somebody else, and you simply don't have the moral right to demand that they give up what they have earned to give something to somebody who hasn't earned it.
Don't think for a single second that I am opposed to free, universal and blanket health care - I am. But I am also incredibly realistic (and rational) about the costs required. You see, new taxes will always hurt the middle class more than anybody else will will tend to enrich only the wealthy class. What most people fail to realize is that by increasing health coverage they are increasing health spending - and who benefits from said spending? Doctors, hospital administrators and pharmy suits. The money will flow uphill and since they are awarded what is essentially tax caps they will simply take home more money. That simple.
Of course, you could always try to strike a blow against them: instead of taxing copies of MS Excel, Oracle or SAP try taxing IP held by a corporation. Try taxing the patent on Viagra - how long do you think Pfizer would remain in the state if it was tried? Taxes are only effective when levied against people who a) have enough money so it can be taken and b) aren't quite powerful enough or self-sufficient enough to viably either convince the local government to grant an exemption or relocate to a jurisdiction that doesn't want to simply take more money without earning it. (The biggest problem is that government is never required to earn its revenue - there is no incentive to actually produce a fair ROI).
And it isn't just the bad guys one needs to fear - is a good read. I really would have no objection if the local LEOs had detection devices in every vehicle - this would have been picked up much sooner, nor would it construe an illegal search any more than keeping the windows rolled down in case somebody screamed "help! police!".
Personally, I would prefer a massively interlinked network of radiation detectors: every bridge, tunnel, stoplight, rail crossing, overpass, underpass and a few other randomly selected sites, as well as every police car, ambulance and fire engine should all have network detectors. Not only would the bad guys be unable to move any bad stuff without being caught, the not-so-bad guys who simply move radioactive waste along inappropriate routes (or on the way to illegal dumping) would be caught as well, and the relative exposures would be of massive benefit to a variety of sciences as well.
Incorrect. The standard by which "shouting across the street" is not afforded a reasonable expectation of privacy clearly does not apply when considering the prohibition of using a scanner to intercept cellular communications. As written in Bartnicki v. Vopper the US Supreme Court recognizes that US Code Title 18, Part I, Chapter 119 is valid:
(yadda yadda yadda... you can read the rest for yourself).
The interception of a cellular communication is, in fact, subject to a warrant specifically because it is designed and intended to be used as person-to-person communications unless specifically used otherwise - dialing into a group party line, for example.
I have no objections: in my book parking across the street with a geiger counter does not reasonably constitute a search; furthermore it is a reasonable and expected function of the government to monitor air quality. This is entirely different than the use of thermal imaging which was used to detect grow-lights within residential homes: a practice which was prudently struck down by the Supreme Court (a rare correct decision).
Rumors have it that information obtained by the NSA is routinely passed along to US corporations to assist them in obtaining contracts. Read here.
"No Tax or Duty shall be laid on Articles exported from any State."
Article I, section 9
If it were presented as this, then fine. But schools are teaching the material as absolute, established fact - they went to court over a sticker that simply read "This textbook contains material on evolution. Evolution is a theory, not a fact, regarding the origin of living things. This material should be approached with an open mind, studied carefully and critically considered." The judge ruled that calling evolution a theory was to the satisfaction of creationist parents and for no other reason was a violation of church/state separation.
And yes, the biology/geology classes come out and say "this is how the world was formed. This is how man evolved from apes." The words this is how make the clear declaration that said concept is absolute fact beyond question. This is . Consider the people who trolled me down -2 for no reason other than disagreeing with my stance: do you think for a moment that they would ever accept a teacher being instructed to preface the course material with "most biologists believe" or "it appears that it happened like this"?
I lack the math for a detailed explanation, but consider the various types of traffic that one would see from an internet user:
Now imagine what a telephone call might appear: a steady flow of essentially half duplex traffic where one side transmits then starts to receive almost immediately. I don't know what needs to be said, only that there is a handfull of megs going out followed immediately by a handful of megs coming in.