You want a technical solution that shields the pilots/airborne vehicle from lasers? That would be technically impossible. So there you go, other than legal, what other solutions do you have?
A military solution, obviously.
If someone pulls a gun or a knife on you then you are (more-or-less) allowed to respond to the threat with deadly force in self defence. If someone shines a laser in your eyes while you are operating a vehicle (more dangerous when done to a car) then the threat is similar and so the same response should be allowed.
Failing that, perhaps a pair of Super Chromatic Peril Sensitive Sunglasses?
If you are religious, you should be prohibited from serving in public office. Further, you should have a guardian assigned to look after your affairs, since obviously you are very weak intellectually.
Probably bring about end of war, famine, disease, poverty, and all evil in the world, if we could just keep the religious from having influence.
I know lots of athiests who are religious about their beliefs (or lack of beliefs, depending on how you want to slice it). In fact I get preached to more by athiests than by any other groups, which is kind of annoying as i'm an athiest anyway and object to being told what to believe (or not believe) by anyone.
I know plenty of Christians who are quite happy to take the creationist view put forward by the bible with a grain of salt (and some who consider it blasphemy to preach creationism when the universe around them was clearly not created that way).
Maybe just keep insane people out of public office? Or at least those where their insanity and delusion will prevent them from doing the job they were hired for.
Personally I would have just backed the data up and carried the hard drives with me if I were moving continents. Computer hardware isn't that expensive to replace.
If you're intent on doing it that way though, it might help to package the stuff in its original boxes, I know many people do keep them. They're suitable for shipping.
Unless the OP was moving to Antarctica or somewhere where wasn't a local computer store or regular freight deliver I'd suggest doing the same thing. Seems odd that the OP didn't mention that as it's the sort of thing most people are going to leap onto without offering any sensible answer to the asked question.
Infinite water here for the same rates no matter what I use, only exception is hosepipe bans when there are water issues. Want to know why? Water is infinite due to natural cycles; with data packets the same is true.
There aren't that many places in the world where this is true. Great to hear that you live in one. We mostly pay per volume for water here (Australia). It's tiered such that the rates go up once you get over a certain threshold in the billing period (and up again past another point).
As with water, I can't imagine what people are doing with the downloaded volumes of data that makes the price point such that an unlimited plan makes better financial sense.
And probably be interfered with by other devices, including appliances like microwaves.
Only if you use the device inside the microwave. While the microwave is running.
While the frequency range labelled microwave goes from something like 1Ghz to 200Ghz (a bit wider than that I think), microwave ovens use frequencies around 2.4Ghz and so shouldn't interfere much with anything at 60GHz.
As long as you actually have sunk the one time cost for infrastructure that support consumer use habits, you don't have to keep generating a product to sell to the customer.
Seriously? It's not a "one time cost". It's an enormous cost and it's ongoing. IT stuff gets old really fast.
I'm tired of this argument because it's well, wrong.
I'm sorry, but it isn't. Want to deliver more data to the home? Invest in better technology. Most of that being a one-time investment, mind you. Want to deliver more water to the home? You had better have a source to get that water from. There'll never be a such thing, for example, as a data drought.
None of these companies are trying to alleviate unexpected network troubles through billing, they're trying to increase their already-generous profit margin. (Notice their use of tiered plans, instead of the reasonable suggestion you made.) It doesn't make sense with data.
The infrastructure for comms isn't cheap. The pipes that were installed to deliver water to my house 10 years ago will probably be just fine in another 10 years. The household usage of water has remained pretty much constant in the last 50 years (eg it hasn't increased 100x). The phone lines that were put in to deliver voice and data to my house 10 years ago are showing their age, and will require fibre if I need more capacity. 50 years ago a phoneline needed bandwith equivalent to 64kbits/second of data. 15 years ago that was probably sufficient too for most households. Now that requirement has increased well over 100x in a very short time.
The infrastructure from comms is expensive and gets old really fast, to the point that it's obsolete by the time a large scale deployment is complete. You just can't dig a trench to lay fibre to every house quickly and cheaply. And then for somewhere like Australia where a large amount of content comes from overseas you have to get it here. Thousands of km of undersea fibre. That isn't cheap either.
I'm sure the ISP's are making a handsome profit, and that's where regulation comes in, but just saying "unlimited internet for all" is stupid because the people who don't use much at all end up subsidising those who push the capacity of the network.
You mean like water, where you pay for what you use? Or electricity, where you pay for what you use? Or gas, where you pay for what you use?
Yes. Exactly like that.
I don't watch movies over the internet very often, and I don't keep my bandwidth at capacity 24/7 downloading stuff, and I certainly don't want to be subsidising those that do.
Screw the business models of those "budding internet video businesses". I'm not (indirectly) paying for a service I don't use just to protect a poorly thought out business plan. This isn't health or something important, it's entertainment, and you can pay for it yourself.
2) I rode a bike for the first 20 years of life without a helmet and lived.
You certainly have the numbers on your side. A quick search through slashdot posts on this page shows not one poster who died because they weren't wearing a helmet. Either helmets really don't save lives, or the dead don't post to slashdot... I wonder which is more likely?
The Australian ISDN network used to charge high rates for voice calls, but even higher rates for data, so a market was created for ISDN modems that signaled to Telstra that the data calls they were making were actually voice.
I believe Telstra's stand on this was "Don't do it. We may choose to use lossy compression on voice calls.", but I never heard of it actually happening.
Voice is lower total bandwidth but requires low latency and no interruptions to be high quality. When data connections are not strained then there is no challenge to provide that but it can become important and thus much more expensive than the data it bears. Personally I do use VOIP and so I know it's not as good as non-voip some of the time.
Personally, I've used VoIP (Skype) so I know it's _way_ better than non-VoIP some of the time.
I agree with the AC. The extent of what the evil little miseryshit did proves it was not just a game to him. I'd wager his show of tears was just that- a show. His brain is miswired. There's a whole section that simply isn't working. Coulseling won't acomplish a damn thing, but he'll be able to make it look like it did.
Sociopaths are the most manipulative people in the world. It's why the alphas go into politics. They thrive there. They are one of the three types of people in this world that you never EVER trust along with junkies and Party loyalist ideologues.
So what are you suggesting? If he as sociopathic as you suggest, then simply pressing charges won't change anything, so you'd have to lock him up to get him out of harms way. You couldn't lock him up forever of course (what court would do that?), so eventually he'd get out again. And if he wasn't really that messed up when he went in, he would be when he got out.
And I bet the tears weren't for show. Even if he is a sociopath and didn't care one way or the other how much pain he'd caused, he would still have been truly upset that he got caught.
I'm disappointed that the author didn't press charges. This kid is probably a sociopath. When he stalks and hurts other people in the future the police won't have the evidence they need of past cases. Sociopaths don't learn how to stop hurting people, they just learn not to get caught the next time.
Or he's a messed up kid who didn't have a clue that his actions were hurting someone.
If it was me being stalked I'd be demanding that the kid doesn't go near a computer for 6 months (or until he's legally an adult) and that he has a curfew at night so he can't just be off at a mates place doing the same thing. It should give him a chance to catch up on Jewish/German history and have some appreciation for what he's ranting and raving about.
I think he should be given another chance, but only one. I'm not sure what it's like in the country where Leo Traynor resides but people have gone to jail over here for less.
>>>Yes, because there is a world of difference between fictional violence and real violence.
Studies have shown the human brain does not distinguish the difference. It has the same chemical reactions to whatever it sees, regardless if it's real or on TV.
Seriously?
I watched the latest Resident Evil last night, and apart from a few startling moments (quiet, then a sudden zombie roar that made me jump) the violence, gore, and the many fictional deaths didn't bother me at all.
A few days ago I was driving and passed an accident. There was a car with obvious collision damage on the front, and a girl lying on the road. No blood or dismemberment, but it really shook me up.
Studies have shown that there is a big difference between the brains reactions to fictional violence and real violence.
"Hi NASA, I heard you like rocks so I took this picture of a rock. Hope it's good. Tell me if you want me to take a photo if I see another alien" - Curiosity
Depends on how dense it is. If you immerse yourself in water at 100C (boiling point for you imperial scumdogs:) you won't last long at all, but in dry air at 100C you can survive for substantially longer. If the gas was so sparse that you might only hit a molecule every few seconds or so then the temperature might not matter so much. The article hints that the density is low "The estimated density of this halo is so low that similar halos around other galaxies would have escaped detection." but that doesn't really help in absolute terms.
(or maybe you're making a joke... i don't get the reference in the first line you posted)
I can third this, but I'm wondering where the antitrust lawsuit is... I think MS were tiptoeing around it by making MSE a separate download, but as soon as they start bundling it with the OS it has antitrust written all over it...
The Android process is OTA, same as iOS - and, unlike iOS, it has been that way since forever. Your phone will tell you that there is an update via the notification drawer. You tap the notification, it asks if you want to install it. You tap "yes", then go make some coffee, and in about 5 minutes or so your phone is updated.
You're talking about it from a theoretical point of view. My phone doesn't even have Jelly Bean available yet (SGII on Optus in Australia) - I could install it via various methods but that doesn't count as OTA. When I first put ICS on it it the install seemed to go okay, but then nothing worked properly until I did a factory reset. I don't know anyone who didn't have to do a factory reset. A few days ago it told me about another update (4.0.4) but it failed to install on the first attempt (after taking the prescribed 5 minutes to fail). After powering off then on again it re-downloaded the update, then failed to install it again. I had to install it using Keis, which took ages (seemed like 30 minutes... maybe it wasn't that long but it was way more than 5). After the update everything seems to be working though.
All the iPhone's i've ever updated (lots) have worked first time every time.
Slashdot Mirror
You want a technical solution that shields the pilots/airborne vehicle from lasers? That would be technically impossible. So there you go, other than legal, what other solutions do you have?
A military solution, obviously.
If someone pulls a gun or a knife on you then you are (more-or-less) allowed to respond to the threat with deadly force in self defence. If someone shines a laser in your eyes while you are operating a vehicle (more dangerous when done to a car) then the threat is similar and so the same response should be allowed.
Failing that, perhaps a pair of Super Chromatic Peril Sensitive Sunglasses?
It's an election year. ... I suspect he'd wear a pink tutu and sing songs from Little Mermaid if he thought he'd get more votes.
OK, I'm game. I'll pitch in $50 for his re election campaign if he'll do that. Even just the tutu.
Where's that going to lead to though? Some sort of America's got talent / American Idol event preceding the election?
If you are religious, you should be prohibited from serving in public office. Further, you should have a guardian assigned to look after your affairs, since obviously you are very weak intellectually.
Probably bring about end of war, famine, disease, poverty, and all evil in the world, if we could just keep the religious from having influence.
I know lots of athiests who are religious about their beliefs (or lack of beliefs, depending on how you want to slice it). In fact I get preached to more by athiests than by any other groups, which is kind of annoying as i'm an athiest anyway and object to being told what to believe (or not believe) by anyone.
I know plenty of Christians who are quite happy to take the creationist view put forward by the bible with a grain of salt (and some who consider it blasphemy to preach creationism when the universe around them was clearly not created that way).
Maybe just keep insane people out of public office? Or at least those where their insanity and delusion will prevent them from doing the job they were hired for.
Personally I would have just backed the data up and carried the hard drives with me if I were moving continents. Computer hardware isn't that expensive to replace.
If you're intent on doing it that way though, it might help to package the stuff in its original boxes, I know many people do keep them. They're suitable for shipping.
Unless the OP was moving to Antarctica or somewhere where wasn't a local computer store or regular freight deliver I'd suggest doing the same thing. Seems odd that the OP didn't mention that as it's the sort of thing most people are going to leap onto without offering any sensible answer to the asked question.
Infinite water here for the same rates no matter what I use, only exception is hosepipe bans when there are water issues. Want to know why? Water is infinite due to natural cycles; with data packets the same is true.
There aren't that many places in the world where this is true. Great to hear that you live in one. We mostly pay per volume for water here (Australia). It's tiered such that the rates go up once you get over a certain threshold in the billing period (and up again past another point).
As with water, I can't imagine what people are doing with the downloaded volumes of data that makes the price point such that an unlimited plan makes better financial sense.
And probably be interfered with by other devices, including appliances like microwaves.
Only if you use the device inside the microwave. While the microwave is running.
While the frequency range labelled microwave goes from something like 1Ghz to 200Ghz (a bit wider than that I think), microwave ovens use frequencies around 2.4Ghz and so shouldn't interfere much with anything at 60GHz.
As long as you actually have sunk the one time cost for infrastructure that support consumer use habits, you don't have to keep generating a product to sell to the customer.
Seriously? It's not a "one time cost". It's an enormous cost and it's ongoing. IT stuff gets old really fast.
I'm tired of this argument because it's well, wrong.
I'm sorry, but it isn't. Want to deliver more data to the home? Invest in better technology. Most of that being a one-time investment, mind you. Want to deliver more water to the home? You had better have a source to get that water from. There'll never be a such thing, for example, as a data drought.
None of these companies are trying to alleviate unexpected network troubles through billing, they're trying to increase their already-generous profit margin. (Notice their use of tiered plans, instead of the reasonable suggestion you made.) It doesn't make sense with data.
The infrastructure for comms isn't cheap. The pipes that were installed to deliver water to my house 10 years ago will probably be just fine in another 10 years. The household usage of water has remained pretty much constant in the last 50 years (eg it hasn't increased 100x). The phone lines that were put in to deliver voice and data to my house 10 years ago are showing their age, and will require fibre if I need more capacity. 50 years ago a phoneline needed bandwith equivalent to 64kbits/second of data. 15 years ago that was probably sufficient too for most households. Now that requirement has increased well over 100x in a very short time.
The infrastructure from comms is expensive and gets old really fast, to the point that it's obsolete by the time a large scale deployment is complete. You just can't dig a trench to lay fibre to every house quickly and cheaply. And then for somewhere like Australia where a large amount of content comes from overseas you have to get it here. Thousands of km of undersea fibre. That isn't cheap either.
I'm sure the ISP's are making a handsome profit, and that's where regulation comes in, but just saying "unlimited internet for all" is stupid because the people who don't use much at all end up subsidising those who push the capacity of the network.
It needs to be regulated like a public utility.
You mean like water, where you pay for what you use? Or electricity, where you pay for what you use? Or gas, where you pay for what you use?
Yes. Exactly like that.
I don't watch movies over the internet very often, and I don't keep my bandwidth at capacity 24/7 downloading stuff, and I certainly don't want to be subsidising those that do.
Screw the business models of those "budding internet video businesses". I'm not (indirectly) paying for a service I don't use just to protect a poorly thought out business plan. This isn't health or something important, it's entertainment, and you can pay for it yourself.
2) I rode a bike for the first 20 years of life without a helmet and lived.
You certainly have the numbers on your side. A quick search through slashdot posts on this page shows not one poster who died because they weren't wearing a helmet. Either helmets really don't save lives, or the dead don't post to slashdot... I wonder which is more likely?
The Australian ISDN network used to charge high rates for voice calls, but even higher rates for data, so a market was created for ISDN modems that signaled to Telstra that the data calls they were making were actually voice.
I believe Telstra's stand on this was "Don't do it. We may choose to use lossy compression on voice calls.", but I never heard of it actually happening.
Voice is lower total bandwidth but requires low latency and no interruptions to be high quality. When data connections are not strained then there is no challenge to provide that but it can become important and thus much more expensive than the data it bears. Personally I do use VOIP and so I know it's not as good as non-voip some of the time.
Personally, I've used VoIP (Skype) so I know it's _way_ better than non-VoIP some of the time.
I agree with the AC. The extent of what the evil little miseryshit did proves it was not just a game to him. I'd wager his show of tears was just that- a show. His brain is miswired. There's a whole section that simply isn't working. Coulseling won't acomplish a damn thing, but he'll be able to make it look like it did.
Sociopaths are the most manipulative people in the world. It's why the alphas go into politics. They thrive there. They are one of the three types of people in this world that you never EVER trust along with junkies and Party loyalist ideologues.
So what are you suggesting? If he as sociopathic as you suggest, then simply pressing charges won't change anything, so you'd have to lock him up to get him out of harms way. You couldn't lock him up forever of course (what court would do that?), so eventually he'd get out again. And if he wasn't really that messed up when he went in, he would be when he got out.
And I bet the tears weren't for show. Even if he is a sociopath and didn't care one way or the other how much pain he'd caused, he would still have been truly upset that he got caught.
I'm disappointed that the author didn't press charges. This kid is probably a sociopath. When he stalks and hurts other people in the future the police won't have the evidence they need of past cases. Sociopaths don't learn how to stop hurting people, they just learn not to get caught the next time.
Or he's a messed up kid who didn't have a clue that his actions were hurting someone.
If it was me being stalked I'd be demanding that the kid doesn't go near a computer for 6 months (or until he's legally an adult) and that he has a curfew at night so he can't just be off at a mates place doing the same thing. It should give him a chance to catch up on Jewish/German history and have some appreciation for what he's ranting and raving about.
I think he should be given another chance, but only one. I'm not sure what it's like in the country where Leo Traynor resides but people have gone to jail over here for less.
>>>Yes, because there is a world of difference between fictional violence and real violence.
Studies have shown the human brain does not distinguish the difference. It has the same chemical reactions to whatever it sees, regardless if it's real or on TV.
Seriously?
I watched the latest Resident Evil last night, and apart from a few startling moments (quiet, then a sudden zombie roar that made me jump) the violence, gore, and the many fictional deaths didn't bother me at all.
A few days ago I was driving and passed an accident. There was a car with obvious collision damage on the front, and a girl lying on the road. No blood or dismemberment, but it really shook me up.
Studies have shown that there is a big difference between the brains reactions to fictional violence and real violence.
Soylent batteries?
Close. Soylent was the name of the company that made food. The product that was "people" was the "green" ration.
If you carbonize it, it's no longer sugar. You could probably use a host of other substances for the same purpose besides sucrose.
Hmmm... there's a lot of carbon in people... when they start making "Green" batteries we may have cause for concern
also electronic waste disposal.
So if I upgrade my computer I just eat the old one?
"Hi NASA, I heard you like rocks so I took this picture of a rock. Hope it's good. Tell me if you want me to take a photo if I see another alien" - Curiosity
Depends on how dense it is. If you immerse yourself in water at 100C (boiling point for you imperial scumdogs :) you won't last long at all, but in dry air at 100C you can survive for substantially longer. If the gas was so sparse that you might only hit a molecule every few seconds or so then the temperature might not matter so much. The article hints that the density is low "The estimated density of this halo is so low that similar halos around other galaxies would have escaped detection." but that doesn't really help in absolute terms.
(or maybe you're making a joke... i don't get the reference in the first line you posted)
I can third this, but I'm wondering where the antitrust lawsuit is... I think MS were tiptoeing around it by making MSE a separate download, but as soon as they start bundling it with the OS it has antitrust written all over it...
I am legally obligated to inform you that I am not a lawyer!
Wait a minute... how would you know that, unless you were a lawyer??
>35.4% adoption of iOS 6, with iOS 5.x holding court at 71.5% adoption
So, iOS 5.x and 6.0 have reached 106.9% adoption on his site? That's impressive.
There are probably some old iPhone 3's (and 2's?) still in service that could never run iOS5, so the numbers become even more impressive!
The Android process is OTA, same as iOS - and, unlike iOS, it has been that way since forever. Your phone will tell you that there is an update via the notification drawer. You tap the notification, it asks if you want to install it. You tap "yes", then go make some coffee, and in about 5 minutes or so your phone is updated.
You're talking about it from a theoretical point of view. My phone doesn't even have Jelly Bean available yet (SGII on Optus in Australia) - I could install it via various methods but that doesn't count as OTA. When I first put ICS on it it the install seemed to go okay, but then nothing worked properly until I did a factory reset. I don't know anyone who didn't have to do a factory reset. A few days ago it told me about another update (4.0.4) but it failed to install on the first attempt (after taking the prescribed 5 minutes to fail). After powering off then on again it re-downloaded the update, then failed to install it again. I had to install it using Keis, which took ages (seemed like 30 minutes... maybe it wasn't that long but it was way more than 5). After the update everything seems to be working though.
All the iPhone's i've ever updated (lots) have worked first time every time.
Parkinson obviously hadn't imagined Slashdot when he proposed his Law of Triviality...