Furthermore, everyone who's cared to pay attention in the last twenty years already believed the strong but indirect evidence of exactly this sort of spying.
You mean the conspiracy nuts. Everyone knows they are just crazy and anything they say is just ridiculous lies. [end sarcasm]
If you look at the direction parking meters are going it would not appear to be the case. They have reduced them to one per block rather than the one per space as they used to be. And a meter is self contained without a need for power source like the charging stations will need. I guess the new one per block meters do need power as they are all computerized now, but it is a much smaller power draw than chargers will take. It would be a very large undertaking to put chargers at every parking spot in the city. And the side streets in residential areas don't even currently have meters, it's just park wherever you can find enough room for your car. Adding chargers will regiment that into static sized spaces and leave very large charging cables laying all over the curbs. I don't see that as an improvement to the city landscape. I would rather see rapid charging or battery swap as the needed charging method for people who don't have a garage to park in and charge overnight. I would think most city politicians would not want to spend the money either and the people would probably agree. Let the market sort it out.
There's one HUGE flaw in your logic. You are basing your figures on how many people are currently filling up their gasoline cars, and then extrapolating that out to electric. However, how many of those people have a gasoline pump at their house that could fill their car up overnight? If people could easily fill up their cars at home each night, do you think there would still be 30 people at the pump at any given time? Or do you think that more than 80% of them would never need to visit a gas station during their normal daily driving?
You make a very good point. But you also have a flaw in your thinking. Many people, especially in large cities, live in apartments with no parking. If you need to park your car on the street you will need to use filling stations to recharge it. Yes, people with homes and garages can plug in at night, but many people will not be able to do that.
To me it sounds like complaining that there is no way everyone could have broadband at their home because the phone lines could not handle that much data. When there is demand for it there will be solutions developed.
So if we are supposed to accept the NSA recording our phone meta-data and storing email and internet traffic so they can stop terrorists, why is it they didn't stop these people? It always seems that it's regular people on the plane noticing someone trying to light their underwear or whatever. Nobody stopped the Boston bombers. But at least we have this backtrack of meta-data to look at. Who cares about the dead, we give up the freedom so we can have the full picture after the fact. That way the movies made years later can be accurate.
It seems obvious now that we have seen it. But we must remember that even Google's first version was that huge backpack thing. So it wasn't that obvious even to them when they started mapping trails and such.
A car manufacturer doesn't get sued if the driver gets into an accident. An autonomous car manufacturer would if their car gets into one. That's a big difference. Plus, why would the politicians let their buddies and lobbyists down. That's less money they could get from payoffs. It has worked for vaccine makers and now genetically modified plant makers. Any harm caused by these companies is immune from lawsuit. I guess that is how the free market works now, do what you want and if it turns out to be a bad idea you pay no consequences due to the laws you paid to get passed.
These are very good points. The redundancy is great and I can see the value in that. Plus if they do make them mobile then that should help out a lot. I guess I don't have much faith that they will implement it right, in a way that will be durable and helpful when they continue to fail at the things they are already doing.
And why do we assume that these solar panel charging stations will still be working in the advent of a disaster? Rain and flooding can short out the batteries. Wind and falling branches can destroy the solar panels. I guess the fact that each is independant will mean that hopefully some of them survived the storm. But it seems to me that rather than spending the money on these storm proof kiosks you could strengthen the infrastructure. So you can charge your iPad, but you have no lights or heat at home, great improvement!
Show me a credible validation plan for a truck tractor that can deal with a high-side load like a moving van, filled to maximum legal weight, going down the western slope of the Sierra Nevada on I-80, in the rain, coming to a curve at the bottom of a 6% grade, dealing with a jack-ass driver in a light hatch-back returning from a ski trip cutting off the truck.
That particular scenario does not sound like one most human truck drivers could reliably handle, either. I fear the trucking company may be willing to accept the risk. Policymakers seem all too ready to shrug say "that doesn't sound like it will happen very often" instead of actually considering the low-probability scenarios. Considering the political pressure fleet owners (including but not limited to Wal-Mart) can bring to bear, and the knee-jerk anti-regulatory sentiment that was created by a lot of excessive and/or ill-considered regulation, I do not expect validation requirements on robot trucks to be as strict as an engineer would want them to be.
Yep, I think this is going to be the case. They will just pass a Monsanto-like law that says you can't sue automatic cars or trucks or the companies that make them. Problem solved, done deal!
I thought of the Uglies series. Microbes destroy the words fuel and spread in the burning fires to other tanks of fuel. Cars stop running while people are trying to leave the cities and society collapses.
Sony may have screwed up in the past, but they also generated a metric fuckton of goodwill at E3. That press conference was a marvel of modern brand messaging. It convinced a lot of people not at all interested in this generation of console, myself included, to seriously consider a PS4.
There's principle, and there's bloody-mindedness for the sake of itself. It's okay to change your mind.
Right!!! Because Sony has lied to us many times in the past, we think they have to be telling the truth this time! It's not like they might just push down an update a few months later that takes away the right to play used games. I seem to remember them talking about developing that and then got all quiet about it. I think their strategy is to let MS take the fall for the public announcements and then they can just follow in their wake afterwards when everybody has already bought the PS4. What are you going to do, vow to never buy Sony again? Yeah, that worked out so badly for them last time!
We are discussing a mechanism by which a text message can be sent during a Presidentially recognized state of emergency. That seems a little different from from standard email. When the President starts sending out Viagra ads I'll give your point more credence.:-)
If the president wants to send out Viagra ads on the emergency channel, then that is his constitutionally granted power. If the president does it, it isn't illegal. Haven't you been listening to his words lately.
Well argued, but unfortunately from the viewpoint of the abductor.
I'll keep noticing vehicle types like I always do when I'm driving (certain types like pony cars tend to dangerous behavior). As a parent, I'd appreciate such behavior more than excusing warnings as useless.
If you really want to argue the viewpoint of the abductor, then the Amber alerts will let them know they need to change cars and dye the kids hair.
But you cannot sell yourself to someone else, that is indentured servitude or slavery and is illegal. So how can the owners of a corporation (a legal person) sell that corporation off. Isn't that a form of slavery then?
note, they were all married guys and those people tend to 'think of the children!' more than us single folk. they don't think rationally if they think their little snowflakes could be harmed, someday, even if its the most remote chance, less likely than being hit by an asteroid.
I don't understand why people like this don't think the government might be a danger to their little snowflakes. I fear the government and police forces much more than I do any terrorist or common criminal. So far I have had numerous run-ins with police. I have only had my house broken into once. And the police didn't even help with that except to give the the paperwork for insurance filing. I am sure many of those police I have dealt with are breaking laws each and every day. And if they aren't, then they are keeping quiet about their coworkers that are. Just because I haven't been a victim of police or government abuse yet, doesn't mean it won't happen. You can sure bet that my little snowflake will understand her rights and have the proper (dis)respect for our government.
Companies don't need to be held to the Constitution. If the government is buying this information then they are breaking the highest law of the land and need to be held accountable.
It is pretty obvious to anybody with a sense of logic that it is a rubber stamp process. The warrants that are issued are invalid and illegal, especially these recently exposed "grab everybody in the country's data" ones. Your own quote spells out what a warrant is.
To obtain a warrant, law enforcement officers must show that there is probable cause to believe a search is justified. Officers must support this showing with sworn statements (affidavits), and must describe in particularity the place they will search and the items they will seize.
A warrant must show probable cause. How can you show probable cause on the entire country? You can't! A warrant must describe the place to search and the items or people they will seize. Saying you will take everything is not specific enough for a valid warrant. The government is acting illegally and unconstitutionally. The day that they have to pay for their crimes is the day I will rejoice. Until then I will continue to detest what this country has become.
People did try to bring a court case. I don't remember if it was ACLU or EFF or who it was. The case was thrown out because they could not prove they were targeted in the phone monitoring. At that time all we knew was phone calls where one party was foreign were being monitored. So now that this document is out the ACLU is bring a case as they are a Verizon customer and can now prove they are targeted by this.
Slashdot Mirror
No, you can't drill your own well unless the city allows it in your area.
Furthermore, everyone who's cared to pay attention in the last twenty years already believed the strong but indirect evidence of exactly this sort of spying.
You mean the conspiracy nuts. Everyone knows they are just crazy and anything they say is just ridiculous lies. [end sarcasm]
Shame the space race died once America made target and the USSR fell apart. If that had kept going, we'd be living in apartments on Mars by now.
Or perhaps deploying weapons on Mars by now...
Why? Is there oil on Mars?
No oil there. But there are some terrorists we must stop at all costs!
If you look at the direction parking meters are going it would not appear to be the case. They have reduced them to one per block rather than the one per space as they used to be. And a meter is self contained without a need for power source like the charging stations will need. I guess the new one per block meters do need power as they are all computerized now, but it is a much smaller power draw than chargers will take. It would be a very large undertaking to put chargers at every parking spot in the city. And the side streets in residential areas don't even currently have meters, it's just park wherever you can find enough room for your car. Adding chargers will regiment that into static sized spaces and leave very large charging cables laying all over the curbs. I don't see that as an improvement to the city landscape. I would rather see rapid charging or battery swap as the needed charging method for people who don't have a garage to park in and charge overnight. I would think most city politicians would not want to spend the money either and the people would probably agree. Let the market sort it out.
There's one HUGE flaw in your logic. You are basing your figures on how many people are currently filling up their gasoline cars, and then extrapolating that out to electric. However, how many of those people have a gasoline pump at their house that could fill their car up overnight? If people could easily fill up their cars at home each night, do you think there would still be 30 people at the pump at any given time? Or do you think that more than 80% of them would never need to visit a gas station during their normal daily driving?
You make a very good point. But you also have a flaw in your thinking. Many people, especially in large cities, live in apartments with no parking. If you need to park your car on the street you will need to use filling stations to recharge it. Yes, people with homes and garages can plug in at night, but many people will not be able to do that.
To me it sounds like complaining that there is no way everyone could have broadband at their home because the phone lines could not handle that much data. When there is demand for it there will be solutions developed.
So if we are supposed to accept the NSA recording our phone meta-data and storing email and internet traffic so they can stop terrorists, why is it they didn't stop these people? It always seems that it's regular people on the plane noticing someone trying to light their underwear or whatever. Nobody stopped the Boston bombers. But at least we have this backtrack of meta-data to look at. Who cares about the dead, we give up the freedom so we can have the full picture after the fact. That way the movies made years later can be accurate.
It seems obvious now that we have seen it. But we must remember that even Google's first version was that huge backpack thing. So it wasn't that obvious even to them when they started mapping trails and such.
A car manufacturer doesn't get sued if the driver gets into an accident. An autonomous car manufacturer would if their car gets into one. That's a big difference. Plus, why would the politicians let their buddies and lobbyists down. That's less money they could get from payoffs. It has worked for vaccine makers and now genetically modified plant makers. Any harm caused by these companies is immune from lawsuit. I guess that is how the free market works now, do what you want and if it turns out to be a bad idea you pay no consequences due to the laws you paid to get passed.
These are very good points. The redundancy is great and I can see the value in that. Plus if they do make them mobile then that should help out a lot. I guess I don't have much faith that they will implement it right, in a way that will be durable and helpful when they continue to fail at the things they are already doing.
And why do we assume that these solar panel charging stations will still be working in the advent of a disaster? Rain and flooding can short out the batteries. Wind and falling branches can destroy the solar panels. I guess the fact that each is independant will mean that hopefully some of them survived the storm. But it seems to me that rather than spending the money on these storm proof kiosks you could strengthen the infrastructure. So you can charge your iPad, but you have no lights or heat at home, great improvement!
That particular scenario does not sound like one most human truck drivers could reliably handle, either. I fear the trucking company may be willing to accept the risk. Policymakers seem all too ready to shrug say "that doesn't sound like it will happen very often" instead of actually considering the low-probability scenarios. Considering the political pressure fleet owners (including but not limited to Wal-Mart) can bring to bear, and the knee-jerk anti-regulatory sentiment that was created by a lot of excessive and/or ill-considered regulation, I do not expect validation requirements on robot trucks to be as strict as an engineer would want them to be.
Yep, I think this is going to be the case. They will just pass a Monsanto-like law that says you can't sue automatic cars or trucks or the companies that make them. Problem solved, done deal!
I thought of the Uglies series. Microbes destroy the words fuel and spread in the burning fires to other tanks of fuel. Cars stop running while people are trying to leave the cities and society collapses.
Sony may have screwed up in the past, but they also generated a metric fuckton of goodwill at E3. That press conference was a marvel of modern brand messaging. It convinced a lot of people not at all interested in this generation of console, myself included, to seriously consider a PS4.
There's principle, and there's bloody-mindedness for the sake of itself. It's okay to change your mind.
Right!!! Because Sony has lied to us many times in the past, we think they have to be telling the truth this time! It's not like they might just push down an update a few months later that takes away the right to play used games. I seem to remember them talking about developing that and then got all quiet about it. I think their strategy is to let MS take the fall for the public announcements and then they can just follow in their wake afterwards when everybody has already bought the PS4. What are you going to do, vow to never buy Sony again? Yeah, that worked out so badly for them last time!
We are discussing a mechanism by which a text message can be sent during a Presidentially recognized state of emergency. That seems a little different from from standard email. When the President starts sending out Viagra ads I'll give your point more credence. :-)
If the president wants to send out Viagra ads on the emergency channel, then that is his constitutionally granted power. If the president does it, it isn't illegal. Haven't you been listening to his words lately.
I would certainly hope you are not watching TV while driving down the road in such bad weather then.
Well argued, but unfortunately from the viewpoint of the abductor.
I'll keep noticing vehicle types like I always do when I'm driving (certain types like pony cars tend to dangerous behavior). As a parent, I'd appreciate such behavior more than excusing warnings as useless.
If you really want to argue the viewpoint of the abductor, then the Amber alerts will let them know they need to change cars and dye the kids hair.
Well... seeing as the NSA has said that they've only looked at the meta-data of 300 people that's not exactly a vast government conspiracy.
It's still unconstitutional and they still have everybody's meta-data stored for future use.
We need a warrant to listen to calls.
Just like I need a licence to drive a car. If I don't have one the car refuses to let me drive it, right?
But, in general as a society, we can respect women enough that we don't have to use them as sex objects and walking billboards.
So those people who stand along the street acting as a walking billboard are really being abused. Let's ban all sign waving jobs!!!
no escape from reality
But you cannot sell yourself to someone else, that is indentured servitude or slavery and is illegal. So how can the owners of a corporation (a legal person) sell that corporation off. Isn't that a form of slavery then?
note, they were all married guys and those people tend to 'think of the children!' more than us single folk. they don't think rationally if they think their little snowflakes could be harmed, someday, even if its the most remote chance, less likely than being hit by an asteroid.
I don't understand why people like this don't think the government might be a danger to their little snowflakes. I fear the government and police forces much more than I do any terrorist or common criminal. So far I have had numerous run-ins with police. I have only had my house broken into once. And the police didn't even help with that except to give the the paperwork for insurance filing. I am sure many of those police I have dealt with are breaking laws each and every day. And if they aren't, then they are keeping quiet about their coworkers that are. Just because I haven't been a victim of police or government abuse yet, doesn't mean it won't happen. You can sure bet that my little snowflake will understand her rights and have the proper (dis)respect for our government.
Companies don't need to be held to the Constitution. If the government is buying this information then they are breaking the highest law of the land and need to be held accountable.
It is pretty obvious to anybody with a sense of logic that it is a rubber stamp process. The warrants that are issued are invalid and illegal, especially these recently exposed "grab everybody in the country's data" ones. Your own quote spells out what a warrant is.
To obtain a warrant, law enforcement officers must show that there is probable cause to believe a search is justified. Officers must support this showing with sworn statements (affidavits), and must describe in particularity the place they will search and the items they will seize.
A warrant must show probable cause. How can you show probable cause on the entire country? You can't! A warrant must describe the place to search and the items or people they will seize. Saying you will take everything is not specific enough for a valid warrant. The government is acting illegally and unconstitutionally. The day that they have to pay for their crimes is the day I will rejoice. Until then I will continue to detest what this country has become.
People did try to bring a court case. I don't remember if it was ACLU or EFF or who it was. The case was thrown out because they could not prove they were targeted in the phone monitoring. At that time all we knew was phone calls where one party was foreign were being monitored. So now that this document is out the ACLU is bring a case as they are a Verizon customer and can now prove they are targeted by this.