I don't see any arguing, I see a statement of facts. The U.S. government does not have the constitutional powers to legislate local law enforcement policy nor legislate any other matter having local jurisdiction. Ironically, U.S. citizens traditionally look to the federal government to ensure liberties, equality, and welfare even though local governments, not federal, have the jurisdiction to do anything about it.
Where would you like the populations found within these population centers to go? Did you want a few more neighbors in your rural backwater? I thought the rural folks were already up in arms about losing their land to suburban sprawl.
I'm not saying it isn't stupid, but the engineers did provide a way for the Corvette. Refer to 2-11 and 2-14 of the owner's manual
For Teslas should your battery pack ever completely discharge, gaining entry to your vehicle is the least of your problems. Your car is "bricked" until you replace your very expensive battery pack. Fortunately, a dead battery pack for a Tesla isn't as easy to achieve as a dead battery in other cars. e.g. parking your car for a few months while not connected to a charger.
Actually, I'm afraid this is just a case of stupid/ignorant people. Keyless entry systems have a mechanical key--which is normally built into the fob--that will fit a nice little mechanical lock on at least the driver-side door. Keyless-go (start) systems normally have an RFID reader slot--which is unlikely to be affected by the pirate radio station--that you can insert your fob into. Could the engineers have made their keyless systems less susceptible to interference? Probably. Could the car owners have still have unlocked and driven off in spite of the pirate radio? Almost certainly. Are the towing companies going to tell save their customers the expense of a tow by telling them this? Doubt it.
There's a difference between keyless "entry" and keyless "starting". I am unaware of any manufacturer that has keyless "entry" that does not provide for manual entry. Most keyless entry fobs have the mechanical key built into the fob and a traditional mechanical lock on at least the driver-side door. As for keyless "start" otherwise known as keyless-go, there is normally a fallback, reader slot that you can put your fob into. This works off of a different, passive technology such that even if the fob battery is dead and unable to transmit its own radio pulse (the signal being interfered with), the fob will bounce back the reader's signal. I suppose it's possible to technically "jam" the reader, but it would be from a purposed, deliberate attack not a pirate radio station.
Not quite. Software developers hated switching back and forth yes, but the suite wasn't originally nor primarily for software developers. It was for UX engineers/graphic artists. That was the part that failed to catch hold. In large part I think due to the MS' inability to abstract away enough of the technical complexities of the underlying technology. Now, having given up on the UX crowd I fear they're going to cheapen the tool with the VS roll up.
No, the notion of "secure" computing is ridiculous. The U.S. DoD is on both the giving and taking end of firmware exploits which made me smirk when you mentioned LPS.
On a side note. Has anyone ever mentioned to you that you come across as having a bit of a belligerent personality?
The judge prevented Samsung from entering all manner of evidence for the purpose of demonstrating prior art. The whole damn proceeding seemed pretty heavily biased against Samsung. The b*tchy demeanor of the judge towards both parties seemed to me to be more of a cover for the bias than anything.
I don't understand. In America I vote for a plan, but end up with a plan imposed upon me whose makeup--after passing through the hands of politicians from "don't tread on me" rural states--carries with it the costs of the plan voted on but none of the benefits remain intact. Somehow it just ends up as a funding bill for Blackwater, ATK, and Lockmart.
Why would our government care if its citizens participate in activities intended to stop insurgencies? Could we maybe sensationalize this a bit more? I mean seriously, why did you leave even a modicum of hard-fact in this summary?
I see you have some deeply held emotional convictions about the U.S. military but I believe you are in need of a knowledge update. This ain't your Grand Pappy's DoD. The notion of "my bomb is bigger than your bomb" doesn't have as much to do with the ability to wage war as one might conceive. Are you familiar with the concept of asymmetric warfare...? If not I'd brush up on the idea. The U.S. has not been in a military conflict with a major world power since WWII. Amusingly enough though it has a history of having it's a** handed to it by spear throwing savages in places such as Japan, Vietnam and the Korean peninsula. U.S. "force multiplier" hardware are also an exponential "cost multiplier" that are a significant economic stress even in conflicts with the puny spear throwing savages of the middle east, even when the economy is otherwise unimpeded. In a total war scenario this becomes a substantial liability.
I'm also not rightly sure why you'd separate military from consumer manufacturing either. During WWII for instance, consumer manufacturing capacity was converted and became the backbone of military hardware production throughout the war. China has a working age population of roughly 950 million people. The U.S. has roughly 200 million people of working age. This is a crucial number when considering attrition related notions. Also, I'd check into where DoD contractors are getting their parts from and consider what the consequences of that might be.
Force projection also doesn't quite have the same composition as it once did. The relevance of navies are coming into question more and more as traditional limitations cease to exist an vulnerabilities rise. Likewise with forward bases.
The US is already the dominate military power on the planet, bar none
I know I'm not going to be terribly popular with what I'm about to say but I think it bares saying anyway. The power of a nation's military is not in its present inventory of weapons. They are here one day and blow to bits the next. The power of a nation's military is in its manufacturing capability and the ability to maintain the supply of raw goods to them in a time of war. All of these high-tech weapons are nothing but a flash in the pan if they cannot be replaced at the pace at which they are consumed, or faster. Bleeding edge, billion dollar bombers are worthless if there's no fuel to get them into the air. Blueprints for matchless weapons are worthless if manufacturing capacity cannot supply but a trickle to a rapidly depleting inventory. A gun without bullets becomes peer to a steel pipe in the hands of the person that wields it.
Now tell me, who has the largest and most rapidly expanding manufacturing and logistics capability in the world? It sure as hell isn't the US. Take a random sample of the objects presently surrounding you and look at their "made in" label. Notice a theme? What oil field does your fuel come from? There are strong odds against it being Texas.
Defense contractors--at least with respect to hardware--are on board, they have and are NASA's primary contractors. Lockheed, ATK, Boeing, etc.. I really don't think they would care much at all what they're put to work on building. Most Republicans and a large chunk of Democrats in Congress along with their emotionally charged, "put a boot int their a**" constituents would rather see the M.I.C. put to work "making us safe", which is more accurately read, "making weapons and putting craters in the middle-east". If you want to get any serious investment in space technology you're going to have to concede to weaponizing space, invent an evil "X" which seeks to destroy the American way of life from the Moon, etc..
I think the "problem" is that not "everything" was disclosed to "investors." Kind of like a car dealer telling you that a certain car gets 35 M.P.G. but not telling you that it has a 1.5L 4-cylinder engine. That the dealer didn't tell you about the engine may slant your decision regarding the car and its 35 M.P.G. performance. Or for the more vilified version, a car ad describing a "red" interior but not explaining that the color is derived from blood stains of a murder victim. I'm not claiming the SEC rule makes sense. I certainly cannot see how the bureaucrats are adhering to the spirit of the rule. I just see a proud CEO touting an impressive figure outside of the context of an investor prospectus.
Oh you mean nuclear reprocessing? On an economics basis it's dead in the water if the 2004 Japanese report about costs compared with storage. Realistically I think what needs to happen going forward are the usage of breeder reactors which are two orders of magnitude more efficient than LWRs. They're more expensive to build (about 25%) but if you're playing the long game they're the obvious winner given present nuclear technologies.
Slashdot Mirror
Affraid someone else was the pilot. Bush was in the back seat.
I'm reminded of Bush Jr.'s "bring it on".
That's not social security.
As an individualist I'm certain you will feel quite at home away from us collectivist apes were you to transfer your residence to Somalia.
no more retirees getting 300k/y off the rest of us
Citation required.
I don't see any arguing, I see a statement of facts. The U.S. government does not have the constitutional powers to legislate local law enforcement policy nor legislate any other matter having local jurisdiction. Ironically, U.S. citizens traditionally look to the federal government to ensure liberties, equality, and welfare even though local governments, not federal, have the jurisdiction to do anything about it.
Where would you like the populations found within these population centers to go? Did you want a few more neighbors in your rural backwater? I thought the rural folks were already up in arms about losing their land to suburban sprawl.
I'm not saying it isn't stupid, but the engineers did provide a way for the Corvette. Refer to 2-11 and 2-14 of the owner's manual
For Teslas should your battery pack ever completely discharge, gaining entry to your vehicle is the least of your problems. Your car is "bricked" until you replace your very expensive battery pack. Fortunately, a dead battery pack for a Tesla isn't as easy to achieve as a dead battery in other cars. e.g. parking your car for a few months while not connected to a charger.
Actually, I'm afraid this is just a case of stupid/ignorant people. Keyless entry systems have a mechanical key--which is normally built into the fob--that will fit a nice little mechanical lock on at least the driver-side door. Keyless-go (start) systems normally have an RFID reader slot--which is unlikely to be affected by the pirate radio station--that you can insert your fob into. Could the engineers have made their keyless systems less susceptible to interference? Probably. Could the car owners have still have unlocked and driven off in spite of the pirate radio? Almost certainly. Are the towing companies going to tell save their customers the expense of a tow by telling them this? Doubt it.
There's a difference between keyless "entry" and keyless "starting". I am unaware of any manufacturer that has keyless "entry" that does not provide for manual entry. Most keyless entry fobs have the mechanical key built into the fob and a traditional mechanical lock on at least the driver-side door. As for keyless "start" otherwise known as keyless-go, there is normally a fallback, reader slot that you can put your fob into. This works off of a different, passive technology such that even if the fob battery is dead and unable to transmit its own radio pulse (the signal being interfered with), the fob will bounce back the reader's signal. I suppose it's possible to technically "jam" the reader, but it would be from a purposed, deliberate attack not a pirate radio station.
Not quite. Software developers hated switching back and forth yes, but the suite wasn't originally nor primarily for software developers. It was for UX engineers/graphic artists. That was the part that failed to catch hold. In large part I think due to the MS' inability to abstract away enough of the technical complexities of the underlying technology. Now, having given up on the UX crowd I fear they're going to cheapen the tool with the VS roll up.
No, the notion of "secure" computing is ridiculous. The U.S. DoD is on both the giving and taking end of firmware exploits which made me smirk when you mentioned LPS.
On a side note. Has anyone ever mentioned to you that you come across as having a bit of a belligerent personality?
Only useful if you can trust your firmware...
If you are the type that buys your PC at a brick-and-mortar it hardly matters...
The judge prevented Samsung from entering all manner of evidence for the purpose of demonstrating prior art. The whole damn proceeding seemed pretty heavily biased against Samsung. The b*tchy demeanor of the judge towards both parties seemed to me to be more of a cover for the bias than anything.
And a senate.
I don't understand. In America I vote for a plan, but end up with a plan imposed upon me whose makeup--after passing through the hands of politicians from "don't tread on me" rural states--carries with it the costs of the plan voted on but none of the benefits remain intact. Somehow it just ends up as a funding bill for Blackwater, ATK, and Lockmart.
Why would our government care if its citizens participate in activities intended to stop insurgencies? Could we maybe sensationalize this a bit more? I mean seriously, why did you leave even a modicum of hard-fact in this summary?
I see you have some deeply held emotional convictions about the U.S. military but I believe you are in need of a knowledge update. This ain't your Grand Pappy's DoD. The notion of "my bomb is bigger than your bomb" doesn't have as much to do with the ability to wage war as one might conceive. Are you familiar with the concept of asymmetric warfare...? If not I'd brush up on the idea. The U.S. has not been in a military conflict with a major world power since WWII. Amusingly enough though it has a history of having it's a** handed to it by spear throwing savages in places such as Japan, Vietnam and the Korean peninsula. U.S. "force multiplier" hardware are also an exponential "cost multiplier" that are a significant economic stress even in conflicts with the puny spear throwing savages of the middle east, even when the economy is otherwise unimpeded. In a total war scenario this becomes a substantial liability.
I'm also not rightly sure why you'd separate military from consumer manufacturing either. During WWII for instance, consumer manufacturing capacity was converted and became the backbone of military hardware production throughout the war. China has a working age population of roughly 950 million people. The U.S. has roughly 200 million people of working age. This is a crucial number when considering attrition related notions. Also, I'd check into where DoD contractors are getting their parts from and consider what the consequences of that might be.
Force projection also doesn't quite have the same composition as it once did. The relevance of navies are coming into question more and more as traditional limitations cease to exist an vulnerabilities rise. Likewise with forward bases.
The US is already the dominate military power on the planet, bar none
I know I'm not going to be terribly popular with what I'm about to say but I think it bares saying anyway. The power of a nation's military is not in its present inventory of weapons. They are here one day and blow to bits the next. The power of a nation's military is in its manufacturing capability and the ability to maintain the supply of raw goods to them in a time of war. All of these high-tech weapons are nothing but a flash in the pan if they cannot be replaced at the pace at which they are consumed, or faster. Bleeding edge, billion dollar bombers are worthless if there's no fuel to get them into the air. Blueprints for matchless weapons are worthless if manufacturing capacity cannot supply but a trickle to a rapidly depleting inventory. A gun without bullets becomes peer to a steel pipe in the hands of the person that wields it.
Now tell me, who has the largest and most rapidly expanding manufacturing and logistics capability in the world? It sure as hell isn't the US. Take a random sample of the objects presently surrounding you and look at their "made in" label. Notice a theme? What oil field does your fuel come from? There are strong odds against it being Texas.
Defense contractors--at least with respect to hardware--are on board, they have and are NASA's primary contractors. Lockheed, ATK, Boeing, etc.. I really don't think they would care much at all what they're put to work on building. Most Republicans and a large chunk of Democrats in Congress along with their emotionally charged, "put a boot int their a**" constituents would rather see the M.I.C. put to work "making us safe", which is more accurately read, "making weapons and putting craters in the middle-east". If you want to get any serious investment in space technology you're going to have to concede to weaponizing space, invent an evil "X" which seeks to destroy the American way of life from the Moon, etc..
Only when there is a perceived need for the bureaucrats to justify their jobs/funding.
I think the "problem" is that not "everything" was disclosed to "investors." Kind of like a car dealer telling you that a certain car gets 35 M.P.G. but not telling you that it has a 1.5L 4-cylinder engine. That the dealer didn't tell you about the engine may slant your decision regarding the car and its 35 M.P.G. performance. Or for the more vilified version, a car ad describing a "red" interior but not explaining that the color is derived from blood stains of a murder victim. I'm not claiming the SEC rule makes sense. I certainly cannot see how the bureaucrats are adhering to the spirit of the rule. I just see a proud CEO touting an impressive figure outside of the context of an investor prospectus.
Oh you mean nuclear reprocessing? On an economics basis it's dead in the water if the 2004 Japanese report about costs compared with storage. Realistically I think what needs to happen going forward are the usage of breeder reactors which are two orders of magnitude more efficient than LWRs. They're more expensive to build (about 25%) but if you're playing the long game they're the obvious winner given present nuclear technologies.
This seems even more interesting though...