Well, around here the police department spoofs their caller ID info. Any time you get a call from anyone at the police station downtown, it only shows four zeros as the caller ID. It is different from when it says ID unavailable.
That's functionally equivalent to saying ID unavailable. It's clearly not the caller's phone number or name, and it's clearly not an attempt to pretend to be someone else's.
The University of Washington is heavily subsidized by the government. While you are correct that tuition fees only make up 12% of the budget, according to the (PDF) University of Washington's 2006 Report (PDF) (Page 20), State funds amount to only 11% (capital and operating combined).
The students aren't paying for bandwidth, taxpayers are paying for bandwidth, and I can guarantee you that they aren't paying for the bandwidth so that college students can distribute the latest pop albums. As another poster mentioned, students also pay for internet access. At U of W, it would appear to be included with rent.
Maybe it's just my age showing, but I think it's absolutely ridiculous to think that a library would offer anything other than the most rudimentary support 24-7, or that they would allow students to use their facilities for recreation. Actually, at the University of Ottawa, they moved about a fifth of the books in the main library to storage (mainly old periodicals that were rarely checked out; they can still be requested on a day's notice). With the remaining space, they added more sitting/reading/studying area, and added wifi zones.
They also extended the hours so they're open until 2am most nights (though the circulation desk still closes at 10pm).
Along the theme of changing positions in this discussion, I change mouse hands many times during a sitting. It's one thing to pay a little extra for a lefty mouse, but buying one mouse for each hand just wouldn't work for me.
Someone can yell and scream and claim all they like (in legit media, much less anonymously on/.) that they do illegal stuff all the time, but that's not actual evidence that anything's actually happened.
For example, a guy could claim on slashdot that his wife doesn't know he's having an affair with another woman...
the practical upshot of this is that many more folks in that community will become victims of Police "misconduct" due to their conspicuous wielding of cameras.
Well hopefully they'll have it on tape.
I'd hope that self-respecting police chiefs would appreciate the extra incentive for my officers to keep in line, even if it risks greater exposure of misconduct. I know there is a growing movement of officers in my local police department who want just as much as I do for the bad cops to be rooted out, and who greatly appreciate it when people are monitoring officers on the street.
As has been mentioned, he didn't say he doesn't know how to use e-mail; he said he doesn't use it.
I would expect that he probably does have an e-mail address (if not a business one, at least a personal one), but denying its existence helps keep people from looking for it.
Could someone please indulge me as to why there is such a dire focus on child pornography?
My take is that it has to do with (a) consent, and (b) reasonable doubt.
With snuff films, torture, and brutal rape, all of these things can be simulated to one degree or another with the consent of the "receiver" (for lack of a better term). Just look at all the S&M videos and photos there are out there. It can look a lot like it is being done without the receiver's consent, but there are at least some cases where the receiver endures no permanent damage and they do give their consent (presumably because they find it pleasurable).
With children, it is assumed that there is no possible case where they can consent to such activity. Therefore photos of real children undergoing such treatment is inherently victimization.
The grey area turns to whether simulations of either of these brutal acts should be illegal. If it is inherently illegal for activity involving real children, then should simulations (i.e. photos, videos) with real children also be banned, since they still cannot give consent to the simulation? What about cartoon depictions of children?
Even with consenting adults, should it be legal to simulate something that is brutal? Does that encourage it? (I personally don't think so)
Petty point-scoring over the university aside, sooner or later you're going to have to
* get a grown-up job that doesn't pay in cash
* get a loan
* get a mortgage
Even with a good credit score and a highly paying job, some people simply can't get mortgages. For example, musicians.
Banks will refuse to give a mortgage, even if you've made $100,000 in each of the last ten years, because there's no guarantee that you will be able to make that amount again in the future.
Our cash-loving friend might just have to stick to renting.
Slashdot Mirror
That's functionally equivalent to saying ID unavailable. It's clearly not the caller's phone number or name, and it's clearly not an attempt to pretend to be someone else's.
- RG>
I wanna go too, but just to see the product demo.
- RG>
- RG>
I don't know why there wasn't a link to Parallels Coherence in the article summary (Youtube demo on page following).
I just updated my version of Parallels the other day, and didn't even notice the buttons for Coherence. It is extremely cool!
- RG>
You joke, but it's a very serious and disconcerting issue.
If ID can't get into the curriculum, how can pirate-based theories make it in?
(Do I even need to link that one?)
- RG>
So the power comes in the form of steam, the fuel comes in the form of Liquefied Petroleum Gas.
Not quite an alternative fuel.
- RG>
They also extended the hours so they're open until 2am most nights (though the circulation desk still closes at 10pm).
The library is now more used than ever.
- RG>
Along the theme of changing positions in this discussion, I change mouse hands many times during a sitting. It's one thing to pay a little extra for a lefty mouse, but buying one mouse for each hand just wouldn't work for me.
- RG>
(I meant to reply with this:)
Maybe in your country they can't vote.
Up here in Canada, that was ruled unconstitutional a few years ago.
- RG>
Maybe in your country they do.
Up here in Canada, that was ruled unconstitutional a few years ago.
- RG>
I'll start paying taxes for virtual goods when my character can vote.
- RG>
So that's why politicians are always voting themselves pay raises!
- RG>
Someone can yell and scream and claim all they like (in legit media, much less anonymously on /.) that they do illegal stuff all the time, but that's not actual evidence that anything's actually happened.
For example, a guy could claim on slashdot that his wife doesn't know he's having an affair with another woman...
- RG>
Some can, but be sure to make sure that it blocks both UVA and UVB spam.
- RG>
- RG>
Well hopefully they'll have it on tape.
I'd hope that self-respecting police chiefs would appreciate the extra incentive for my officers to keep in line, even if it risks greater exposure of misconduct. I know there is a growing movement of officers in my local police department who want just as much as I do for the bad cops to be rooted out, and who greatly appreciate it when people are monitoring officers on the street.
- RG>
As has been mentioned, he didn't say he doesn't know how to use e-mail; he said he doesn't use it.
I would expect that he probably does have an e-mail address (if not a business one, at least a personal one), but denying its existence helps keep people from looking for it.
- RG>
Hey, self-censorship is censorship too, man!
- RG>
My take is that it has to do with (a) consent, and (b) reasonable doubt.
With snuff films, torture, and brutal rape, all of these things can be simulated to one degree or another with the consent of the "receiver" (for lack of a better term). Just look at all the S&M videos and photos there are out there. It can look a lot like it is being done without the receiver's consent, but there are at least some cases where the receiver endures no permanent damage and they do give their consent (presumably because they find it pleasurable).
With children, it is assumed that there is no possible case where they can consent to such activity. Therefore photos of real children undergoing such treatment is inherently victimization.
The grey area turns to whether simulations of either of these brutal acts should be illegal. If it is inherently illegal for activity involving real children, then should simulations (i.e. photos, videos) with real children also be banned, since they still cannot give consent to the simulation? What about cartoon depictions of children?
Even with consenting adults, should it be legal to simulate something that is brutal? Does that encourage it? (I personally don't think so)
- RG>
- RG>
When you actually RTFA?
- RG>
One citizen, two "persons".
- RG>
Even with a good credit score and a highly paying job, some people simply can't get mortgages. For example, musicians.
Banks will refuse to give a mortgage, even if you've made $100,000 in each of the last ten years, because there's no guarantee that you will be able to make that amount again in the future.
Our cash-loving friend might just have to stick to renting.
- RG>
- RG>
Probably, as was implied in the summary, to avoid being accused of tax fraud (or willful blindness thereto).
If my boss would let me buy stuff with a tax-free corporate card, I'd go for that too.
- RG>