I don't think the Goodyear hoses are the same quality...but I could be mistaken...I believe they are the infamous blue colour, right? Anyway, the green hoses have never caused me any issues, which is actually nice to experience considering that almost every consumer product is designed to fail. And about the clamps...yeah, they tend to make the hoses squish their their slits.
I'm not into Crown Vics at all, though I give them a bit of respect. It's too bad they rust so quickly...but I suppose it doesn't really matter, there's a bazillion of them around...
The removal is not unlawful, the reason (that I'm in possession of stolen property) is. Plain English. I understand the point you're trying to make, but you should have picked someone who was actually failing to make that distinction.
WRONG! GP completely failed. Holy fuck, you and every other goddamn anti-privacy/rights mouthpiece on this board is WRONG!
The REASON for removing the tracking system is "I DON'T WANT TO BE TRACKED". Your "reason" is irrelevant. Until you get that through your well insulated concrete filled skull, you'll lay on your stomach with your ass in the air waiting for the long pole of the law to slide its barbed truncheon in nice and slow while you beg for more.
(If you are not anti-privacy/rights, ignore the 'you' parts...those parts only apply to them)
I know it has been said over, and over, and over again. For whatever reason (actually, I know the reason), people seem to think that anyone that asserts their rights must be on the shady side of the law. If you had any idea how hard the men and women of the U.S. had to fight for the rights you are pissing all over, you'd smarten the fuck up.
You have no clue. Let's say I'm part of that database, and I'm a political opponent. Now, anywhere I go will be suspect. Anyone in proximity will be suspect. You don't even realize the genius move that Google made by requiring Gmail be invite only for the first few years. Google now has a database that shows everyone's inner circle. A full and complete social web. Your lack of imagination is dwarfed only by your lack of interest in holding your rights.
Year after year, your rights are being eroded, and when they are gone, you will be a prisoner. -You- will not even notice, and for that reason I am sorry for you.
To an extent I disagree, the school I got my most recent certification from offered it both online and in the classroom with the credits issued by an accredited institution. Anybody inquiring about my credentials would have no way of knowing whether the classes were online or in class without actually seeing my transcript.
That being said, be careful, not all certificates and degrees are equal and make sure that the accrediting body is going to be recognized by people that you're likely to be applying to.
Hmmm...true...until they ask you. Whenever I get around to hiring somebody, I'll have to ask the pointed question: "Did you acquire your cert while studying online?".
I wish I could impart upon you the reality that exists beyond corporate sponsored media. "I want to enforce my right to privacy" does not equal "I am a terrorist" for god's sake! I am neither young or old. I am, also, far from the support of any other on this planet. Attempting to defame my character in an attempt to divert your argument proves your complete lack of intellectual articulation.
You don't even understand that your lack of attention to such things is by design. Consider that...and if you realize that society is setup so that the lower and middle class is perpetually distracted by issues that don't effect them, you will only be at the beginning.
Oh, and you sound just like every other ignorant lemming I try to offer insight to the actual workings of society. I'm not wasting another minute on you.
I'll suggest that they bite the bullet and go to a classroom. I don't think I know anyone that would respect any ticket obtained on the Internet. I wouldn't. I'm willing to bet that most others in a position to discriminate between such things will feel the same. Consider this: we all know how easy it is to cheat in a 'supervised' classroom. Imagine how easy it is across the world on the other side of a computer monitor...
I understood perfectly, but thank you for explaining for those that may not see.
Consider this: the reason to want privacy may consist of illegal activities, but wanting privacy is not illegal in the slightest, and should never -ever- be construed as such.
...Even knowing they are, I'm not sure I really care. I guess on a theoretical level it's annoying, But I have too many other things to worry about to get worked up over this....
Congratulations...you're apathy is deep enough to drown in. Not only that, but this is precisely why these companies a) do this, and b) get away with this.
What's really going to fuck with your head is when you realize that OnStar is *always* on, weather or not you have (ever had) a subscription. Just hit the button twice for an operator.
Uhm...it's probably "always available" more than "always on". But I agree with you, it's likely that they've been collecting data all this time...it's only just now that they're us now.
If you cancel the OnStar service and later sell your car, they are tracking a vehicle you no longer own or drive and are gathering data that is not applicable to you.
Nice.
Now that is useless data.
So you think that any interested party won't have access to a VIN/Owner Name and address database?
60K miles is low.:) Last time I bought a cop car, I got one with 154K miles - and the lowest at the auction was like 85K miles. But cop cars are awesome because of the scheduled maintenance; there's no way I'd get any other fleet car.
+1...acutally, +2 (I've owned 2 cop cars). Both purchased at 200,000km. Cop cars have so many important longevity upgrades (thick suspension, aircraft hoses (green!), and are very well maintained. I sent one to pasture at 320,000km due to nasty rust in the trunk, and a VERY intermittent brake issue (happened twice)...the other is still going strong at 313,000km...almost no rust...solid car. I will scour the earth for another once this one is done.
find a fleet vehicle and it won't have OnStar installed, but at least in my case, all the other features you might want.
Like 60,000 miles driven by someone who knew it wasn't their car?
Hah...so true...but to tell you the truth, people aren't -that- reckless. As long as the maintenance is kept up-to-date, mid- and full-sized GMs usually last quite a while (I've owned 5, 3 of which easily went over 310,000km)
There is a booming industry in removing the GPS and other OnStar components fro GM vehicles. Sure, most of it is for less than legal reasons, but still... More jobs!
Read what you posted again. Tell me one illegal reason to remove a leaky location tracking device.
The only reason I can think of is: I don't want anyone to know where I am/track me without my knowledge.
There have been a bunch of posts so far, and none of them were 1, 2, 3, ???, 4 Profitt?!
For shame Slashdot, for shaaaaaaame.
1. Develop efficient video codec.
2. Patent the Hell out it.
3. Release to the world under "reasonable" license.
4. Sue anyone who doesn't comply.
5. Wait a few years.
6. Change license agreement.
7. Sue anyone who doesn't comply.
8. Profit!!!!
Most excellent! With one exception. I was poking fun at the name quoted (Profitt)...two Ts...I don't think anyone caught that...
The part that is most important...is that you'll be spending time with your family. Spend as much time with your family as you possibly can. You can always get more money, more things, more education, more technology, more of almost anything else...once a time or event has passed, it is irreplaceable.
Nah, it's just the requirements of the search engines that visitors from the search engine see what the search engine sees. If you try to come in without that, you will see the paywall. Folks have to make money...big web sites aren't free to run anymore.
So you mean to say that Yahoo is telling Experts-Exchange to open up their pay wall just so that Experts-Exchange doesn't get removed from Yahoo's search index? That doesn't really make sense...because then Experts-Exchange would simply not show "answers" to the search engine's spider (which would be the default behaviour of any pay wall).
I can't imagine Experts-Exchange would bend to Google or Yahoo in such a way...I do, however, believe that Yahoo would want users to use their engine to search Experts-Exchange rather than go off and use Google's (or whomever else) which may have cached responses. (In fact, I recall a time whereby the search index/chached copy contained Experts-Exchange answers, but when a searcher visited the actually KB page, the answer wouldn't be there.
Anyway, this is all conjecture...the simple fact remains that if a searcher uses Google or Yahoo to find information on Experts-Exchange, they will see the answer. If a user follows a link without being referred to Experts-Exchange by either aforementioned search engine, no answer is listed (another fact is the page CSS is different as well).
Slashdot Mirror
Read my post in parallel to this one...motive is irrelevant.
I don't think the Goodyear hoses are the same quality...but I could be mistaken...I believe they are the infamous blue colour, right? Anyway, the green hoses have never caused me any issues, which is actually nice to experience considering that almost every consumer product is designed to fail. And about the clamps...yeah, they tend to make the hoses squish their their slits.
I'm not into Crown Vics at all, though I give them a bit of respect. It's too bad they rust so quickly...but I suppose it doesn't really matter, there's a bazillion of them around...
The removal is not unlawful, the reason (that I'm in possession of stolen property) is. Plain English. I understand the point you're trying to make, but you should have picked someone who was actually failing to make that distinction.
WRONG! GP completely failed. Holy fuck, you and every other goddamn anti-privacy/rights mouthpiece on this board is WRONG!
The REASON for removing the tracking system is "I DON'T WANT TO BE TRACKED". Your "reason" is irrelevant. Until you get that through your well insulated concrete filled skull, you'll lay on your stomach with your ass in the air waiting for the long pole of the law to slide its barbed truncheon in nice and slow while you beg for more.
(If you are not anti-privacy/rights, ignore the 'you' parts...those parts only apply to them)
I know it has been said over, and over, and over again. For whatever reason (actually, I know the reason), people seem to think that anyone that asserts their rights must be on the shady side of the law. If you had any idea how hard the men and women of the U.S. had to fight for the rights you are pissing all over, you'd smarten the fuck up.
You have no clue. Let's say I'm part of that database, and I'm a political opponent. Now, anywhere I go will be suspect. Anyone in proximity will be suspect. You don't even realize the genius move that Google made by requiring Gmail be invite only for the first few years. Google now has a database that shows everyone's inner circle. A full and complete social web. Your lack of imagination is dwarfed only by your lack of interest in holding your rights.
Year after year, your rights are being eroded, and when they are gone, you will be a prisoner. -You- will not even notice, and for that reason I am sorry for you.
To an extent I disagree, the school I got my most recent certification from offered it both online and in the classroom with the credits issued by an accredited institution. Anybody inquiring about my credentials would have no way of knowing whether the classes were online or in class without actually seeing my transcript.
That being said, be careful, not all certificates and degrees are equal and make sure that the accrediting body is going to be recognized by people that you're likely to be applying to.
Hmmm...true...until they ask you. Whenever I get around to hiring somebody, I'll have to ask the pointed question: "Did you acquire your cert while studying online?".
I wish I could impart upon you the reality that exists beyond corporate sponsored media. "I want to enforce my right to privacy" does not equal "I am a terrorist" for god's sake! I am neither young or old. I am, also, far from the support of any other on this planet. Attempting to defame my character in an attempt to divert your argument proves your complete lack of intellectual articulation.
You don't even understand that your lack of attention to such things is by design. Consider that...and if you realize that society is setup so that the lower and middle class is perpetually distracted by issues that don't effect them, you will only be at the beginning.
Oh, and you sound just like every other ignorant lemming I try to offer insight to the actual workings of society. I'm not wasting another minute on you.
I'll suggest that they bite the bullet and go to a classroom. I don't think I know anyone that would respect any ticket obtained on the Internet. I wouldn't. I'm willing to bet that most others in a position to discriminate between such things will feel the same. Consider this: we all know how easy it is to cheat in a 'supervised' classroom. Imagine how easy it is across the world on the other side of a computer monitor...
I understood perfectly, but thank you for explaining for those that may not see.
Consider this: the reason to want privacy may consist of illegal activities, but wanting privacy is not illegal in the slightest, and should never -ever- be construed as such.
No.
End of discussion.
How thick are your glasses? Just curious, because you are pretty myopic there...
...Even knowing they are, I'm not sure I really care. I guess on a theoretical level it's annoying, But I have too many other things to worry about to get worked up over this....
Congratulations...you're apathy is deep enough to drown in. Not only that, but this is precisely why these companies a) do this, and b) get away with this.
What's really going to fuck with your head is when you realize that OnStar is *always* on, weather or not you have (ever had) a subscription. Just hit the button twice for an operator.
Uhm...it's probably "always available" more than "always on". But I agree with you, it's likely that they've been collecting data all this time...it's only just now that they're us now.
If you cancel the OnStar service and later sell your car, they are tracking a vehicle you no longer own or drive and are gathering data that is not applicable to you.
Nice.
Now that is useless data.
So you think that any interested party won't have access to a VIN/Owner Name and address database?
Go back to sleep.
60K miles is low. :) Last time I bought a cop car, I got one with 154K miles - and the lowest at the auction was like 85K miles. But cop cars are awesome because of the scheduled maintenance; there's no way I'd get any other fleet car.
+1...acutally, +2 (I've owned 2 cop cars). Both purchased at 200,000km. Cop cars have so many important longevity upgrades (thick suspension, aircraft hoses (green!), and are very well maintained. I sent one to pasture at 320,000km due to nasty rust in the trunk, and a VERY intermittent brake issue (happened twice)...the other is still going strong at 313,000km...almost no rust...solid car. I will scour the earth for another once this one is done.
find a fleet vehicle and it won't have OnStar installed, but at least in my case, all the other features you might want.
Like 60,000 miles driven by someone who knew it wasn't their car?
Hah...so true...but to tell you the truth, people aren't -that- reckless. As long as the maintenance is kept up-to-date, mid- and full-sized GMs usually last quite a while (I've owned 5, 3 of which easily went over 310,000km)
Off topic, but...why is 2005 your cutoff? (Electronic throttle?) Just curious...my cutoff seems to be 1996...
Learn to do research first before opening your mouth.
Maybe you'll land a job making $12K *DAILY* like me once you learn how to do that.
Too bad money can't buy tact, eh? If it could though, you'd need to spend your $12K DAILY!OMFG on it.
There is a booming industry in removing the GPS and other OnStar components fro GM vehicles. Sure, most of it is for less than legal reasons, but still... More jobs!
Read what you posted again. Tell me one illegal reason to remove a leaky location tracking device.
The only reason I can think of is: I don't want anyone to know where I am/track me without my knowledge.
There is nothing illegal about that.
There have been a bunch of posts so far, and none of them were 1, 2, 3, ???, 4 Profitt?! For shame Slashdot, for shaaaaaaame.
1. Develop efficient video codec.
2. Patent the Hell out it.
3. Release to the world under "reasonable" license.
4. Sue anyone who doesn't comply.
5. Wait a few years.
6. Change license agreement.
7. Sue anyone who doesn't comply.
8. Profit!!!!
Most excellent! With one exception. I was poking fun at the name quoted (Profitt)...two Ts...I don't think anyone caught that...
Alright...and now for the grammar Nazis.
There have been a bunch of posts so far, and none of them were 1, 2, 3, ???, 4 Profitt?!
For shame Slashdot, for shaaaaaaame.
The part that is most important...is that you'll be spending time with your family. Spend as much time with your family as you possibly can. You can always get more money, more things, more education, more technology, more of almost anything else...once a time or event has passed, it is irreplaceable.
Farewell.
Holy crap...you weren't joking. I think I'm going to be ill.
Someone else?
:B
Tee hee.
Sorry, couldn't resist...
Nah, it's just the requirements of the search engines that visitors from the search engine see what the search engine sees. If you try to come in without that, you will see the paywall. Folks have to make money...big web sites aren't free to run anymore.
So you mean to say that Yahoo is telling Experts-Exchange to open up their pay wall just so that Experts-Exchange doesn't get removed from Yahoo's search index? That doesn't really make sense...because then Experts-Exchange would simply not show "answers" to the search engine's spider (which would be the default behaviour of any pay wall).
I can't imagine Experts-Exchange would bend to Google or Yahoo in such a way...I do, however, believe that Yahoo would want users to use their engine to search Experts-Exchange rather than go off and use Google's (or whomever else) which may have cached responses. (In fact, I recall a time whereby the search index/chached copy contained Experts-Exchange answers, but when a searcher visited the actually KB page, the answer wouldn't be there.
Anyway, this is all conjecture...the simple fact remains that if a searcher uses Google or Yahoo to find information on Experts-Exchange, they will see the answer. If a user follows a link without being referred to Experts-Exchange by either aforementioned search engine, no answer is listed (another fact is the page CSS is different as well).