i never said there were no incidents. i said there are no incidents that resulted in damage or injury. e.g.,
On March 28, 2008, a "coordinated attack" took place using four green laser pointers aimed at six aircraft landing at the Sydney (New South Wales) Australia airport.[39][40] As a result of this attack plus others, a law was proposed in mid-April 2008 in NSW to ban possession of handheld lasers, even "harmless classroom pointers".[41][42] The Australian state of Victoria has reportedly had a similar ban since 1998, but press reports state that it is easy to buy lasers without a permit.[43]
sounds like a pretty extreme example of an attack. no injuries. what do you make of that? no injuries, but now people are restricted from buying even the lowest power lasers.
Does FDA have a mandatory limit on the power emitted by laser pointers? Yes. Laser products promoted for pointing and demonstration purposes are limited to hazard Class IIIa by FDA regulation.
21 CFR 1040.11(b) and 1040.11(c), limit surveying, leveling, and alignment, and demonstration laser products to Class IIIa. This means that pointers are limited to 5 milliwatts output power in the visible wavelength range from 400 to 710 nanometers. There are also limits for any invisible wavelengths and for short pulses. Pointers may not exceed the accessible emission limits of CDRH Class IIIa or IEC1 Class 3R.
so yes, if you are employing a mounted laser in a scientific or industrial setting, no problem. if you bought a handheld 2w laser from wickedlasers.com and are storing it at your home and you have no reason to own such a device other than "hobby", that's illegal to own.
p.s., wickedlasers.com is out oh HK, so they can ship whatever they want. you can also buy a cell signal scrambler online, and guess what those aren't legal either.
Does FDA have a mandatory limit on the power emitted by laser pointers? Yes. Laser products promoted for pointing and demonstration purposes are limited to hazard Class IIIa by FDA regulation.
21 CFR 1040.11(b) and 1040.11(c), limit surveying, leveling, and alignment, and demonstration laser products to Class IIIa. This means that pointers are limited to 5 milliwatts output power in the visible wavelength range from 400 to 710 nanometers. There are also limits for any invisible wavelengths and for short pulses. Pointers may not exceed the accessible emission limits of CDRH Class IIIa or IEC1 Class 3R.
so yeah, if you own an industrial factory that contains cutting lasers, you are fine. if you have a 2w handheld laser in your home, not so much. the kind that wickedlasers.com (for example) sell are clearly *not* for industrial or scientific use.
I believe the FBI has jurisdiction over aircraft safety not random local snowball throwing.
okay sorry about that. is *anyone* FBI making pleas to the public to report snow ball throwers?
I really hate these "If you can't control everything we should not control anything" statements. Kids throwing snowballs have a much lower injury potential than laser dazzling pilots.
spend your effort on issues that are causing real problem, not hypothetical ones.
Laser dazzle is complete and can last quite a while.
well, snow sightedness can last even longer. see, i can make up fake medical terms as well. search for "laser dazzle" why don't you? you'll get a bunch of references to military grade laser weapons. sort of off topic.
1. Kids that throw snowballs at cars are often reported to the police.
is the FBI making pleas to the public to report snow ball throwers? and btw, if you do report snow ball throwers to the police, you are an idiot and you are wasting our tax dollars.
2. Since when has a snowball temporarily or permanently blinded a driver.
a snow ball couldn't occlude the windshield of a car? seems pretty likely to me.
3. Since when is a driver hauling around hundreds of passengers?
by that logic then, pointing a laser at light aircraft shouldn't be reported to the FBI right?
also, you need to consider the overall potential for mayhem and murder. there's a lot more kids throwing snowballs each day (well, in the winter) than there is laser pointers. also consider not only the driver, but the kids along side the road sledding. won't someone think of the children?
and lasers over 50mw are illegal. that's like saying guns should be illegal because i can buy this AK 47 assault rifle on the black market.
so the issue is not what they are pointing at, it's that they own them to begin with. you don't need to put out an APB on all laser owners and encourage citizens to turn in their neighbors for using a laser.
yes, and those lasers are illegal. then the issue is that they own illegal lasers, period. really no need to spread mass hysteria encouraging people to report anyone with a laser pointer to the FBI.
The *potential* damage could be a few hundred dead people at the end of a runway. It's not that they're damaging to the eye, they're distracting. When cats start flying aircraft, maybe people will be prosecuted.
what about the potential damage of throwing snowballs at cars? very distracting to the driver. should the FBI get involved? turn in your neighbor? i can assure you that the number of snowballs thrown at cars far outweighs the number of laser pointers shined at planes.
we shouldn't be wasting time trying to speculate on potentially harmful actions. we have plenty of real, unquestionable harmful actions to investigate.
p.s., i really hope that between the captain, first officer, and flight engineer, they could avoid crashing the plane in the case of a distracting light.
Red Star LINUX was developed by the Korea Computer Center (KCC), a major center of software programming in Pyongyang, and is based on Linux, the open-source operating system originally developed by Linus Torvalds.
In any case, their stated game plan with Moto wasn't to sell off the hardware handset division.
what, they didn't tell everyone up front they wanted to sell, and let the decent employees and investors leave, and let the business languish for a few years so the stop would drop to a point and they'd have to sell it for a fraction of what they paid?
of course they didn't say that, but it's obvious they didn't want motorola for the hardware business. why would they want to compete in an already saturated mobile device market with the same manufacturers that are making android dominate the world? they stood to make little profit from motorola (at best), and to generate a shit ton of ill-will from the other manufacturers if they really put their heart into it.
if you have a software library that exposes an interface, and you re-implement the library conforming to the same interface, NO ONE would say you just emulated the interface.
people are using the technical definition of an emulator, not the general purpose one you are pulling from the dictionary. you are free to use the general purpose one, but you aren't speaking the same language as every one else in this discussion.
But earning them in game is identical to playing the game!
how is that different than real life? you could live in a ditch, but you chose to "play the game" of getting a job and participating in the economy. you don't have to participate in that "game" either if you don't want to. most of us participate in life beyond living in a ditch because it's FUN and we get ENJOYMENT out of it... how is that different than choosing to participate in a virtual world?
By "time" do you mean the time in "a lot of time, after which you lose a lot", or "a small amount of time, after which you lose a little"?
seriously?
As I'm failing to see how your question and either a yes or no answer to it relates to my point.
you go to work. you make money. you buy a car. you play EVE. you mine and sell it. you buy a ship.
in both cases you exerted work (time, planning, physical work) to earn money and purchased a good with that money. the only difference is that one good is material and one is virtual, and the economies are different.
would you consider anything is lost if you car exploded one day? i'm guessing so. why? you put money in, then eventually, you lost. you had fun "playing" in your car for a while, and you may have even had fun earning the money to purchase the car.
Slashdot Mirror
i never said there were no incidents. i said there are no incidents that resulted in damage or injury. e.g.,
On March 28, 2008, a "coordinated attack" took place using four green laser pointers aimed at six aircraft landing at the Sydney (New South Wales) Australia airport.[39][40] As a result of this attack plus others, a law was proposed in mid-April 2008 in NSW to ban possession of handheld lasers, even "harmless classroom pointers".[41][42] The Australian state of Victoria has reportedly had a similar ban since 1998, but press reports state that it is easy to buy lasers without a permit.[43]
sounds like a pretty extreme example of an attack. no injuries. what do you make of that? no injuries, but now people are restricted from buying even the lowest power lasers.
we have plenty of data. 0 accidents caused by "laser dazzle". that's all you need to know math boy.
1. shine 100 lasers at aircraft (which happens every 9 days according to the FBI)
2. throw ten bricks at bus windows
want to bet me on which causes more harm? AFAIK, there are no complaints of injury, damage, or death from a laser pointed at an aircraft.
Does FDA have a mandatory limit on the power emitted by laser pointers?
Yes. Laser products promoted for pointing and demonstration purposes are limited to hazard Class IIIa by FDA regulation.
21 CFR 1040.11(b) and 1040.11(c), limit surveying, leveling, and alignment, and demonstration laser products to Class IIIa. This means that pointers are limited to 5 milliwatts output power in the visible wavelength range from 400 to 710 nanometers. There are also limits for any invisible wavelengths and for short pulses. Pointers may not exceed the accessible emission limits of CDRH Class IIIa or IEC1 Class 3R.
http://www.fda.gov/Radiation-E...
so yes, if you are employing a mounted laser in a scientific or industrial setting, no problem. if you bought a handheld 2w laser from wickedlasers.com and are storing it at your home and you have no reason to own such a device other than "hobby", that's illegal to own.
p.s., wickedlasers.com is out oh HK, so they can ship whatever they want. you can also buy a cell signal scrambler online, and guess what those aren't legal either.
Does FDA have a mandatory limit on the power emitted by laser pointers?
Yes. Laser products promoted for pointing and demonstration purposes are limited to hazard Class IIIa by FDA regulation.
21 CFR 1040.11(b) and 1040.11(c), limit surveying, leveling, and alignment, and demonstration laser products to Class IIIa. This means that pointers are limited to 5 milliwatts output power in the visible wavelength range from 400 to 710 nanometers. There are also limits for any invisible wavelengths and for short pulses. Pointers may not exceed the accessible emission limits of CDRH Class IIIa or IEC1 Class 3R.
http://www.fda.gov/Radiation-E...
so yeah, if you own an industrial factory that contains cutting lasers, you are fine. if you have a 2w handheld laser in your home, not so much. the kind that wickedlasers.com (for example) sell are clearly *not* for industrial or scientific use.
I believe the FBI has jurisdiction over aircraft safety not random local snowball throwing.
okay sorry about that. is *anyone* FBI making pleas to the public to report snow ball throwers?
I really hate these "If you can't control everything we should not control anything" statements. Kids throwing snowballs have a much lower injury potential than laser dazzling pilots.
spend your effort on issues that are causing real problem, not hypothetical ones.
Laser dazzle is complete and can last quite a while.
well, snow sightedness can last even longer. see, i can make up fake medical terms as well. search for "laser dazzle" why don't you? you'll get a bunch of references to military grade laser weapons. sort of off topic.
1. Kids that throw snowballs at cars are often reported to the police.
is the FBI making pleas to the public to report snow ball throwers? and btw, if you do report snow ball throwers to the police, you are an idiot and you are wasting our tax dollars.
2. Since when has a snowball temporarily or permanently blinded a driver.
a snow ball couldn't occlude the windshield of a car? seems pretty likely to me.
3. Since when is a driver hauling around hundreds of passengers?
by that logic then, pointing a laser at light aircraft shouldn't be reported to the FBI right?
also, you need to consider the overall potential for mayhem and murder. there's a lot more kids throwing snowballs each day (well, in the winter) than there is laser pointers. also consider not only the driver, but the kids along side the road sledding. won't someone think of the children?
and lasers over 50mw are illegal. that's like saying guns should be illegal because i can buy this AK 47 assault rifle on the black market.
so the issue is not what they are pointing at, it's that they own them to begin with. you don't need to put out an APB on all laser owners and encourage citizens to turn in their neighbors for using a laser.
yes, and those lasers are illegal. then the issue is that they own illegal lasers, period. really no need to spread mass hysteria encouraging people to report anyone with a laser pointer to the FBI.
it's happening 11x per day. where's this mass murder? shouldn't it have happened by now?
which wavelength will you block? all?
lasers come in different wavelengths. you could get lenses that block all wavelengths. it's called a blindfold.
The *potential* damage could be a few hundred dead people at the end of a runway. It's not that they're damaging to the eye, they're distracting. When cats start flying aircraft, maybe people will be prosecuted.
what about the potential damage of throwing snowballs at cars? very distracting to the driver. should the FBI get involved? turn in your neighbor? i can assure you that the number of snowballs thrown at cars far outweighs the number of laser pointers shined at planes.
we shouldn't be wasting time trying to speculate on potentially harmful actions. we have plenty of real, unquestionable harmful actions to investigate.
p.s., i really hope that between the captain, first officer, and flight engineer, they could avoid crashing the plane in the case of a distracting light.
can you cite any reference to anything bad happening from pointing a laser at an aircraft?
really, i'm asking. i've never heard of one.
RTFA.
Red Star LINUX was developed by the Korea Computer Center (KCC), a major center of software programming in Pyongyang, and is based on Linux, the open-source operating system originally developed by Linus Torvalds.
Everyone is taught from a very young age that you can't depend on foreigners
sure, except what they "produced" is linux, which is a product of decades of work by largely the west but capitalist pigs throughout the world.
You chose to also ignore that due to that same blind hope.
what did you do, beyond getting all high and mighty on forums like this? further, did it help?
Plug it into the Hotel TV
except the hotel screen is probably worse than your tablet, despite being larger.
In any case, their stated game plan with Moto wasn't to sell off the hardware handset division.
what, they didn't tell everyone up front they wanted to sell, and let the decent employees and investors leave, and let the business languish for a few years so the stop would drop to a point and they'd have to sell it for a fraction of what they paid?
of course they didn't say that, but it's obvious they didn't want motorola for the hardware business. why would they want to compete in an already saturated mobile device market with the same manufacturers that are making android dominate the world? they stood to make little profit from motorola (at best), and to generate a shit ton of ill-will from the other manufacturers if they really put their heart into it.
No, people are making up a technical definition.
no, they aren't. concepts such as interface, implementation, and emulation are well defined and understood in the field.
if you have a software library that exposes an interface, and you re-implement the library conforming to the same interface, NO ONE would say you just emulated the interface.
people are using the technical definition of an emulator, not the general purpose one you are pulling from the dictionary. you are free to use the general purpose one, but you aren't speaking the same language as every one else in this discussion.
... the year of the linux gaming PC.
of course you can. it violates the ToS, just like it violates the ToS in EVE but it can and is done.
But earning them in game is identical to playing the game!
how is that different than real life? you could live in a ditch, but you chose to "play the game" of getting a job and participating in the economy. you don't have to participate in that "game" either if you don't want to. most of us participate in life beyond living in a ditch because it's FUN and we get ENJOYMENT out of it ... how is that different than choosing to participate in a virtual world?
By "time" do you mean the time in "a lot of time, after which you lose a lot", or "a small amount of time, after which you lose a little"?
seriously?
As I'm failing to see how your question and either a yes or no answer to it relates to my point.
you go to work. you make money. you buy a car.
you play EVE. you mine and sell it. you buy a ship.
in both cases you exerted work (time, planning, physical work) to earn money and purchased a good with that money. the only difference is that one good is material and one is virtual, and the economies are different.
would you consider anything is lost if you car exploded one day? i'm guessing so. why? you put money in, then eventually, you lost. you had fun "playing" in your car for a while, and you may have even had fun earning the money to purchase the car.