Making a gun or hammer is not a crime, so why should they be held liable when they are ot breaking the law?
A hammer is made primarily to bang nails, sheet metal etc. While it may be used for other purposes (such as killing people), that is its primary purpose.
A concealable handgun is made primarily to kill people. While it may be used for other purposes (such as breaking beer bottles), that is its primary purpose.
If you make something that is primarily designed to kill people then you should be held liable. If you are confident that everyone buying and using your product will do so responsibly, then go ahead and make handguns. You'll have nothing to fear WRT liability.
To me, law enforcement would have a leg to stand on if they were also pushing hard for the right to arrest the management of gun and ammunition manufacturers - Those agents-of-death are way more culpable of abetting in the murder of children than some guy making secret compartments.
True - But if you watch season 1 of "The Wire" (great show, BTW) you'll see a tale about how the police track dealers based on their patterns around pager usage.
It's not just laziness - It's financial constraints. The US citizenry has made it clear to the government that there must be no taxes evernever (except when it comes to aircraft carriers and F-35s, then you can spend like a drunk sailor). You can't expect law enforcement to hire skilled investigators to run long programs but not fund them - So they're forced to take shortcuts.
We were able to not only use DTMF tones to make phone calls, but to also patch into a network of linked 2m repeaters to converse with other HAMs throughout the state using VHF.
Even if you pop the CMOS battery the computer will work fine, it's like there is a technology to save the state of the OS in between times when the hardware is powered.
Read the parent. This is for the CLOCK. You 'pop the battery' and the clock will reset.
Nasa isn't science, nasa is throwing trillions at a problem and NEVER ever solving anything or creating anything new..
All I know is it's wonderful showing my son a picture of earthrise from the moon, and watching his eyes go wide in wonder (followed by him running to his big sister's room to grab her globe and start investigating).
What's more, the placebo effect is a lot stronger than a lot of people realize. It can easily outweigh the results of some classes of treatment entirely.
To cure a headache or lower a mild fever? Sure. Pancreatic cancer? Not so much.
It's absolutely not. If you read a few of Patrick's posts, it becomes very apparent very quickly that he says a lot of things the airlines don't want to hear. For example:
If the government don't buy them,I am sure hobbyists and hackers around the world would find use for them if they were only $35 each.
You wouldn't be able to sell them to individuals for $35 - Supply chains, distribution, packaging, returns, payment processing... All would drive up the cost. Price point would probably be $79 or so which, surprise surprise, is what a cheapo consumer Chinese tablet sells for.
Sounds like a company that is going to pick up a lot of customers very quickly.
Not so sure... Imagine if Telus followed a similar pattern -
Customer: How much for a 32 gig iPhone?
Telus: $800
Customer: EIGHT HUNDRED DOLLARS??!! It's only $150 at Rogers!
Telus: Yes, but that price is subsidized.
Customer: What does "subsidized" mean?
Telus: Sigh.
Customer: Bye, I'm heading to Rogers.
Nothing you have in your possession is going to adversely effect any of the systems used for take off and landing. These rules are stupid and were based on the fear of the unknown instead of actual studies and evidence.
These rules are also in place so you are not distracted during the most dangerous periods of your flight - The landing and takeoff. Frankly, I don't understand why this is such a big deal. I flew 67 segments last year. How hard is it to read the inflight magazine during that 10 minutes?
And why should they be taxed if they don't have a physical presence in the state?
Sigh. They proposal isn't to tax Amazon. It's to tax *you*. That's how consumption taxes work. So if you live in California and you order something from Amazon you'll pay CA sales tax, in the same way you would if you walked into Fry's.
That's because the effort required limits use of those technologies.
What do you think about police having radios in their cars? Should they be using call-boxes on the corners instead? The efforts required limits the use of that technology to 'call in' someone acting suspiciously. What about the computers in police cars now? Should they pull them out? After all, the computer means the police officer can run a plate more easily to see if the car in front of them is stolen. What about DNA testing? They should probably stick to fingerprints.
Police should either be able to do something or not be able to do it. Whether or not doing it is 'easy' is irrelevant. That's not a constitutional measure. Surveillance from the air is either allowed or it isn't - Be it in a $10M helicopter or a $10K drone.
The issue I have with all these complaints is it seems like the rule is this: According to Slashdot's readers, the police are allowed to do something if it's hard and expensive, but they're not allowed to do something if it's easy.
For example, the police are allowed to spend thousands upon thousands of dollars secretly tailing Tony Soprano, seeing where he goes and who he meets with. However, they're NOT allowed to put a GPS on Tony's car to do exactly the same thing.
The police are allowed to operate helicopters over a city to help fight crime, complete with HD and nightvision cameras, provided they are multi-million dollar whirlybirds with expensive operators, but they're NOT allowed to operate a remote-control helicopter with a Canon Handycam bolted to it.
I don't really give a flying fuck. Most of it is crap anyway
If you don't care about the sites that run ads to support themselves, why run an ad blocker? Since those sites are all 'crap' you're not visiting them, because they apparently have nothing to offer you, so what do you need to block?
If you're talking about adblocking, the 'proper' place is at your visual cortex where images are processed
Exactly right. None of my computers have adblockers installed. I know ads drive most of Slashdot absolutely batshit crazy, causing them to invest hours and dollars blocking them, but I'm just 'meh' - I tune them out.
Not unlike propaganda in the US made the majority of americans think Sadam Hussein was behind 9/11...
To write such a thing is an insult to oppressed North Koreans. You can watch CNN, Fox News, MSNBC, Al-Jazeera and YouTube. You can listen to Rush & NPR, read blogs, The New York Times and The Onion You can go to a rally or fly to London and visit on Speaker' Corner in Hyde Park. You can call your friend on the phone and say "Man, the government sucks, doesn't it?"
What *I* want to know is when someone is going to implement a system to help we poor Canadians freely access Hulu and US-Netflix. The pain of being unable to view SNL archive clips is unimaginable to the average American.
"Optik TV and Internet"... which is actually satellite and DSL
I'm a very happy Telus "Optik TV and Internet customer", and I assure you it's not satellite - It's IP TV. And yes, my Internet is delivered over a copper pair, but so what? It's fast and reliable - Faster than I was getting from Shaw when I switched.
Most of the commercial, professionally-made films are utter shit too.
You can easily avoid these if you spend 10 seconds reading a review before you head to the theatre. Lincoln, Life of Pi, Skyfall - All were excellent "commercial, professionally-made" films made by people who were paid for their work.
Slashdot Mirror
Making a gun or hammer is not a crime, so why should they be held liable when they are ot breaking the law?
A hammer is made primarily to bang nails, sheet metal etc. While it may be used for other purposes (such as killing people), that is its primary purpose.
A concealable handgun is made primarily to kill people. While it may be used for other purposes (such as breaking beer bottles), that is its primary purpose.
If you make something that is primarily designed to kill people then you should be held liable. If you are confident that everyone buying and using your product will do so responsibly, then go ahead and make handguns. You'll have nothing to fear WRT liability.
To me, law enforcement would have a leg to stand on if they were also pushing hard for the right to arrest the management of gun and ammunition manufacturers - Those agents-of-death are way more culpable of abetting in the murder of children than some guy making secret compartments.
Pagers are receive-only
True - But if you watch season 1 of "The Wire" (great show, BTW) you'll see a tale about how the police track dealers based on their patterns around pager usage.
lazy crime fighting agencies
It's not just laziness - It's financial constraints. The US citizenry has made it clear to the government that there must be no taxes evernever (except when it comes to aircraft carriers and F-35s, then you can spend like a drunk sailor). You can't expect law enforcement to hire skilled investigators to run long programs but not fund them - So they're forced to take shortcuts.
We were able to not only use DTMF tones to make phone calls, but to also patch into a network of linked 2m repeaters to converse with other HAMs throughout the state using VHF.
Kids today wanna send text messages.
Even if you pop the CMOS battery the computer will work fine, it's like there is a technology to save the state of the OS in between times when the hardware is powered.
Read the parent. This is for the CLOCK. You 'pop the battery' and the clock will reset.
Nasa isn't science, nasa is throwing trillions at a problem and NEVER ever solving anything or creating anything new..
All I know is it's wonderful showing my son a picture of earthrise from the moon, and watching his eyes go wide in wonder (followed by him running to his big sister's room to grab her globe and start investigating).
What's more, the placebo effect is a lot stronger than a lot of people realize. It can easily outweigh the results of some classes of treatment entirely.
To cure a headache or lower a mild fever? Sure. Pancreatic cancer? Not so much.
That site is PR for airlines
It's absolutely not. If you read a few of Patrick's posts, it becomes very apparent very quickly that he says a lot of things the airlines don't want to hear. For example:
...Of course he also says a lot of things the flying public doesn't want to hear either. For example:
http://www.askthepilot.com/american-airlines-new-livery/
http://www.askthepilot.com/cheaper-and-safer/
If the government don't buy them,I am sure hobbyists and hackers around the world would find use for them if they were only $35 each.
You wouldn't be able to sell them to individuals for $35 - Supply chains, distribution, packaging, returns, payment processing... All would drive up the cost. Price point would probably be $79 or so which, surprise surprise, is what a cheapo consumer Chinese tablet sells for.
Sounds like a company that is going to pick up a lot of customers very quickly.
Not so sure... Imagine if Telus followed a similar pattern -
Customer: How much for a 32 gig iPhone?
Telus: $800
Customer: EIGHT HUNDRED DOLLARS??!! It's only $150 at Rogers!
Telus: Yes, but that price is subsidized.
Customer: What does "subsidized" mean?
Telus: Sigh.
Customer: Bye, I'm heading to Rogers.
Nothing you have in your possession is going to adversely effect any of the systems used for take off and landing. These rules are stupid and were based on the fear of the unknown instead of actual studies and evidence.
These rules are also in place so you are not distracted during the most dangerous periods of your flight - The landing and takeoff. Frankly, I don't understand why this is such a big deal. I flew 67 segments last year. How hard is it to read the inflight magazine during that 10 minutes?
And why should they be taxed if they don't have a physical presence in the state?
Sigh. They proposal isn't to tax Amazon. It's to tax *you*. That's how consumption taxes work. So if you live in California and you order something from Amazon you'll pay CA sales tax, in the same way you would if you walked into Fry's.
That's because the effort required limits use of those technologies.
What do you think about police having radios in their cars? Should they be using call-boxes on the corners instead? The efforts required limits the use of that technology to 'call in' someone acting suspiciously. What about the computers in police cars now? Should they pull them out? After all, the computer means the police officer can run a plate more easily to see if the car in front of them is stolen. What about DNA testing? They should probably stick to fingerprints.
Police should either be able to do something or not be able to do it. Whether or not doing it is 'easy' is irrelevant. That's not a constitutional measure. Surveillance from the air is either allowed or it isn't - Be it in a $10M helicopter or a $10K drone.
The issue I have with all these complaints is it seems like the rule is this: According to Slashdot's readers, the police are allowed to do something if it's hard and expensive, but they're not allowed to do something if it's easy.
For example, the police are allowed to spend thousands upon thousands of dollars secretly tailing Tony Soprano, seeing where he goes and who he meets with. However, they're NOT allowed to put a GPS on Tony's car to do exactly the same thing.
The police are allowed to operate helicopters over a city to help fight crime, complete with HD and nightvision cameras, provided they are multi-million dollar whirlybirds with expensive operators, but they're NOT allowed to operate a remote-control helicopter with a Canon Handycam bolted to it.
Which is it, Slashdot?
If one of these things is flying over YOUR PROPERTY are you allowed to blast it out of the sky?
If the police are flying over your property in a police helicopter are you allowed to blast it out of the sky?
I don't really give a flying fuck. Most of it is crap anyway
If you don't care about the sites that run ads to support themselves, why run an ad blocker? Since those sites are all 'crap' you're not visiting them, because they apparently have nothing to offer you, so what do you need to block?
If you're talking about adblocking, the 'proper' place is at your visual cortex where images are processed
Exactly right. None of my computers have adblockers installed. I know ads drive most of Slashdot absolutely batshit crazy, causing them to invest hours and dollars blocking them, but I'm just 'meh' - I tune them out.
Not unlike propaganda in the US made the majority of americans think Sadam Hussein was behind 9/11...
To write such a thing is an insult to oppressed North Koreans. You can watch CNN, Fox News, MSNBC, Al-Jazeera and YouTube. You can listen to Rush & NPR, read blogs, The New York Times and The Onion You can go to a rally or fly to London and visit on Speaker' Corner in Hyde Park. You can call your friend on the phone and say "Man, the government sucks, doesn't it?"
North Koreans can do NONE of those things. NONE.
What *I* want to know is when someone is going to implement a system to help we poor Canadians freely access Hulu and US-Netflix. The pain of being unable to view SNL archive clips is unimaginable to the average American.
Go back to when people had web sites as a hobby
How exactly would you fund YouTube as a 'hobby'? I well remember the WWW in 1995. No Thank You.
The problem with Free Speech is that most people have nothing important to say, so they need a gun to make you listen.
Exactly right. Unfortunately, this is /., so you've been immediately modded as "flamebait."
The flame you're baiting me with is the fire of truth.
Yes, 100 million gun owners all have them because they wish their penises were longer.
So, Anonymous Coward, if it has nothing to do with your small penis, if all your guns were bright pink you'd be perfectly find with that?
"Optik TV and Internet" ... which is actually satellite and DSL
I'm a very happy Telus "Optik TV and Internet customer", and I assure you it's not satellite - It's IP TV. And yes, my Internet is delivered over a copper pair, but so what? It's fast and reliable - Faster than I was getting from Shaw when I switched.
Most of the commercial, professionally-made films are utter shit too.
You can easily avoid these if you spend 10 seconds reading a review before you head to the theatre. Lincoln, Life of Pi, Skyfall - All were excellent "commercial, professionally-made" films made by people who were paid for their work.