If there's one thing I've learned with software never say never. They could implement a service that sends the URL you want to Google first then Google fires back with the "chip" and only the "chip".
WASHINGTON — A federal judge has dismissed the Federal Aviation Administration’s only fine against a commercial drone user on the grounds that the small drone was no different than a model aircraft, a decision that appears to undermine the agency’s power to keep a burgeoning civilian drone industry out of the skies.
Patrick Geraghty, a National Transportation Safety Board administrative law judge, said in his order dismissing the $10,000 fine that the FAA has no regulations governing model aircraft flights or for classifying model aircraft as an unmanned aircraft.
WASHINGTON — A federal judge has dismissed the Federal Aviation Administration’s only fine against a commercial drone user on the grounds that the small drone was no different than a model aircraft, a decision that appears to undermine the agency’s power to keep a burgeoning civilian drone industry out of the skies.
Patrick Geraghty, a National Transportation Safety Board administrative law judge, said in his order dismissing the $10,000 fine that the FAA has no regulations governing model aircraft flights or for classifying model aircraft as an unmanned aircraft.
Why does anyone use Yahoo? You can't get an email without giving up your cell number, their "answers" section is absurd, they really have nothing to offer IMO. There are far better choices, it seems like a recently beheaded chicken, still running around on autonomic pilot.
Is take a deep breath and enjoy it because if nano particle, tech, wire, and what not becomes main stream we will all have to wear expensive mask to breath or live in sealed domes.
All tiny tech of this nature is an anathema to lungs and various other body parts.
Maybe something proven like mortgage-backed securities (MBS) and collateralized debt obligations (CDO) then we can all don our black tennis shoes and board the mother ship.
The so-called typical "attacking a straw man" implies an adversarial, polemic, or combative debate, and creates the illusion of having completely refuted or defeated an opponent's proposition by covertly replacing it with a different proposition (i.e., "stand up a straw man") and then to refute or defeat that false argument, ("knock down a straw man,") instead of the original proposition.[3][4]
The range I go to has a ban board, ~60% of the banned names are police, police routinely accidentally discharge their weapons because they carry them everyday and "familiarity breeds contempt".
Your reasoning is if a person can't check their batteries/watch they shouldn't carry a gun, my reasoning is "why add another point of failure to something you may depend on for your life".
I submit that your reasoning actually shows you're the one that shouldn't be allowed a weapon, because you have an unrealistic assessment of life and human behavior made from a soft chair in front of a computer. Therefore you can't be expected to make the correct decision come shooting time.
How about a gun with no electronics, I know what my pistol can do right now or a month from now without checking it, because I maintain the weapon, I know whether it's ready to go or not without a daily check.
Why add another point of failure to something you may depend on for your life, only incompetent people think that's a good idea.
Someone else said: "So your argument consists of "I'm not competent enough to perform maintenance on a firearm"." and I would add to that "store your weapon", after all how did someone else or "your son" get a hold of it if you weren't incompetent and leaving it out for that to happen?
I'm trying to come up with an explanation that makes realistic and consistent assumptions about the stupidity of the buying public
Well let me save you the trouble, stupidity defies realistic and consistent assumptions, as Einstein said "Two things are infinite: the Universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the Universe.”
If we are talking about functionality, the simpler the better with a firearm, the last thing I want to worry about is a battery failure, radio interference or "forgetting" to wear my "watch".
Consider that in this case you need 2 devices to talk to each other, so how simple would it be for someone to interfere with the communications between the devices, a jammer of some sort (something the cops would enjoy I'm sure) and in other cases with biometrics involved I would poo to that as well, electronics are not reliable enough for firearms.
Why do you need an app to ignore your phone? Or in the worst case scenarios for you fuckwits that can't how hard is airplane mode? FFS what a whiny POS.
Safe deposit box or storage facility, copy of your passport, birth certificate and other data.
I keep a small water tight aluminium box with my passport, other records, several thousand in cash, some 1/10 ounce gold coins, a pocket pistol and a joint secure and ready to go.
Slashdot Mirror
Common Carrier or GTFO, and Mozilla is showing its true colors now.
Really? My phone is over $700, so it is not an "easily replaced item", however I am too smart to go to the "perp" and demand it back without backup.
A "friend" might comment on your condition and upload your photo as well.
Google could never get rid of the URL entirely
If there's one thing I've learned with software never say never.
They could implement a service that sends the URL you want to Google first then Google fires back with the "chip" and only the "chip".
My first thought is this sounds ripe for exploit.
NSA compliance continues.
http://www.salem-news.com/stim...
WASHINGTON — A federal judge has dismissed the Federal Aviation Administration’s only fine against a commercial drone user on the grounds that the small drone was no different than a model aircraft, a decision that appears to undermine the agency’s power to keep a burgeoning civilian drone industry out of the skies.
Patrick Geraghty, a National Transportation Safety Board administrative law judge, said in his order dismissing the $10,000 fine that the FAA has no regulations governing model aircraft flights or for classifying model aircraft as an unmanned aircraft.
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/ru...
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/ru...
WASHINGTON — A federal judge has dismissed the Federal Aviation Administration’s only fine against a commercial drone user on the grounds that the small drone was no different than a model aircraft, a decision that appears to undermine the agency’s power to keep a burgeoning civilian drone industry out of the skies.
Patrick Geraghty, a National Transportation Safety Board administrative law judge, said in his order dismissing the $10,000 fine that the FAA has no regulations governing model aircraft flights or for classifying model aircraft as an unmanned aircraft.
Why does anyone use Yahoo? You can't get an email without giving up your cell number, their "answers" section is absurd, they really have nothing to offer IMO.
There are far better choices, it seems like a recently beheaded chicken, still running around on autonomic pilot.
Is take a deep breath and enjoy it because if nano particle, tech, wire, and what not becomes main stream we will all have to wear expensive mask to breath or live in sealed domes.
All tiny tech of this nature is an anathema to lungs and various other body parts.
The really good news is if this gets adopted all the other tape products will drop in cost.
Maybe something proven like mortgage-backed securities (MBS) and collateralized debt obligations (CDO) then we can all don our black tennis shoes and board the mother ship.
The so-called typical "attacking a straw man" implies an adversarial, polemic, or combative debate, and creates the illusion of having completely refuted or defeated an opponent's proposition by covertly replacing it with a different proposition (i.e., "stand up a straw man") and then to refute or defeat that false argument, ("knock down a straw man,") instead of the original proposition.[3][4]
Grow the fuck up.
The range I go to has a ban board, ~60% of the banned names are police, police routinely accidentally discharge their weapons because they carry them everyday and "familiarity breeds contempt".
Your reasoning is if a person can't check their batteries/watch they shouldn't carry a gun, my reasoning is "why add another point of failure to something you may depend on for your life".
I submit that your reasoning actually shows you're the one that shouldn't be allowed a weapon, because you have an unrealistic assessment of life and human behavior made from a soft chair in front of a computer.
Therefore you can't be expected to make the correct decision come shooting time.
How about a gun with no electronics, I know what my pistol can do right now or a month from now without checking it, because I maintain the weapon, I know whether it's ready to go or not without a daily check.
Why add another point of failure to something you may depend on for your life, only incompetent people think that's a good idea.
Someone else said: "So your argument consists of "I'm not competent enough to perform maintenance on a firearm"." and I would add to that "store your weapon", after all how did someone else or "your son" get a hold of it if you weren't incompetent and leaving it out for that to happen?
I'm trying to come up with an explanation that makes realistic and consistent assumptions about the stupidity of the buying public
Well let me save you the trouble, stupidity defies realistic and consistent assumptions, as Einstein said "Two things are infinite: the Universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the Universe.”
Engrish plz kthnx.
Depends on the threat, a legal threat sure it is, threaten away with litigation or protest or any of the legal means.
A death threat? Well that's just stupid no matter what the case.
Batteries... *click* you're dead. Done.
If we are talking about functionality, the simpler the better with a firearm, the last thing I want to worry about is a battery failure, radio interference or "forgetting" to wear my "watch".
Consider that in this case you need 2 devices to talk to each other, so how simple would it be for someone to interfere with the communications between the devices, a jammer of some sort (something the cops would enjoy I'm sure) and in other cases with biometrics involved I would poo to that as well, electronics are not reliable enough for firearms.
Why do you need an app to ignore your phone? Or in the worst case scenarios for you fuckwits that can't how hard is airplane mode? FFS what a whiny POS.
I'm still waiting for the metric system to catch on =)
Photocopy
Safe deposit box or storage facility, copy of your passport, birth certificate and other data.
I keep a small water tight aluminium box with my passport, other records, several thousand in cash, some 1/10 ounce gold coins, a pocket pistol and a joint secure and ready to go.
You just never know.