A lot of the information that has been released, most notably employee emails and internal company documents, couldn't possibly have also been on the servers that held the databases for the AM site. So either (1) the hackers thoroughly penetrated the company and got *everything*, or (2) the people running AM were stupider than I believe possible (actually you would have to *work* to put all of your eggs in one basket that way), or (3) someone swiped backup tapes when they were on their way out the door.
Well, compromise a Domain Admin account, and you pretty much own all of the servers an all-Microsoft shop. Lazy Linux administration can lead to a similar fate (excepting Exchange email, perhaps). Given the sorry state of security I've seen pretty much everywhere, once you get a foot in the door, it's not hard to expand your reach.
Would be nice if we could have 2-3 National ID numbers of varying security so that we could give the low security one to places like that, reserving the high security one for things like finances.
No, we need to fundamentally change the system so that its "security" doesn't rely on the secrecy of a few widely distributed numbers.
I know how software is made. I know how buggy and unreliable it is. In my car, I want things that are rock solid, or that at least fail gracefully. Also, I don't want distractions, like screens changing their content, or having to fiddle with a display while I am driving. I want fixed controls that are simple and display a single thing. Also, I don't want my car second-guessing what I want - there is nothing more annoying that the car deciding, "He pushed the window button to go down, but it is cold outside so he must only want it half way down" - I want my car to do exactly what I tell it: I don't want it to try to be "smart".
This! Even something like automatic climate control annoys the hell out of me. My 2001 Solara has one knob to control how hard the air blows, one to control the temp of the blowing air, and one to control where the air blows from, as well as recirc and a/c toggles. Takes about half a second to configure it to be comfortable, without having to look at it. My 2008 Boxster (bought used, so I couldn't be too picky about minor features) has an automatic system that I have to constantly battle with to get it to do what I want.
But at least the Boxster has dedicated buttons. Screen-driven systems are worse. My GF's 2014 Fusion had such a thing, and you had to navigate through two layers of dialogs to set up a/c vents. She literally had to pull over to adjust her climate control safely.
Fortunately, the Solara has well and truly earned it's "Old Faithful" moniker, because I dread having to replace it, given what's currently available.
Of course it is easy to show how blind management is, However it IT guys are not blame less. IT has a history of the following bad behavior, that would make management want to find a way to slim its IT Staff. 1. Personal pet projects: This is often a business related project, however there are alternatives that may work better, however it IT worker is too emotionally interested in keeping it going, then giving it up for a better solution. Hanging on to the couple features that has that the others do not.
Strangely, my experience has been that our devs test-driving "the cloud" has made them appreciate the level of support they get from the in-house IT even more. Almost without fail, every dev team has gone through a phase of "ooh! we can pop up a server without waiting on IT!" Followed by "This isn't *exactly* what we need, and we can't change it from the canned offerings," and "hey, IT support us! Sorry, we can't do anything for you past general advice, you have to work with $CLOUD_VENDOR." And eventually, they come back in-house where we can give them what they need, and have a team of subject-matter experts that can immediately jump on any problems.
Of course, we're fortunate not to have the IT dept staffed entirely by imbeciles, which probably makes a big difference.
I wonder if this Skylake can be considered an upgrade path..
That would violate Intels strategy, which is never allow a realistic upgrade path.
I'm not even entirely sure you *need* one any more. I'm writing this on a first-gen i7-920 - not overclocked - I put together in 2009. It's STILL "fast enough" for pretty much anything, even without a GPU upgrade in the past three years. And I use it primarily for games (the only one that utterly crushed it was ARK:SE).
I am planning to upgrade within the next few months, now that Skylake and Win 10 are here, but the primary driver for that is moving from spinning disks to a good NVMe-based system, not because the CPU is too slow.
If you're careful building your system, they'll last long enough that virtually the entire system is outdated, anyway (except for stuff like the case and power supply, which you can usually re-use), so updating just one component isn't really worth doing.
From my own experience, about 20 years ago I was setting up an exhibit at a tradeshow in New York. Most of the exhibitors were big companies who paid for union labor to put together their displays. I was a one person operation and had one tiny booth in a large hall with one table covered by a tablecloth. All I had to do was drape the tablecloth and set up my flyers and inventory--nothing elaborate. The table I had ordered from the convention service was at an angle near the entrance to the booth. I started to move the table towards the back of the booth--about six feet total--and you would have thought I was starting a nuclear war. Several of the union staff ran over yelling that I wasn't allowed to move anything and I had to wait for an authorized laborer to move the table for me. I had to wait over two hours until the floor boss had someone come over and move my table five feet. Like you, I had no idea what I had done and was baffled by the response. I could have been out of there in ten minutes if I had flipped them some cash...
Having gone to many tradeshows across the country since then, the convention handling unions have been greatly reduced over the last 20 years.
I would have told them to move it now of fsck off and complain to someone who cares. Seriously, I've never understood what they can do other than complain at you. Assault you to keep you from moving it? I'd love that. The lawsuit would bankrupt the union. Maybe there's something in the agreement you signed to have a booth there, but if not...
... and they know that... which means they're inserting ads in shit because "fuck you"... and that's cool. So long as we're on the same page. I'll respond by redirecting the DNS entries of their ad domains to localhost. And then go around systematically replacing, kneecapping, or tweaking all their shit to make it do what I want it to do.
Why?
First law of computer security.
I'm taking bets on how long until they put their ad servers, required updates, etc. behind the same domain/IP as their activation servers, so it eventually stops working entirely (or nags you incessantly) if you try to block it that way.
55 miles on a track isn't really even that bad... but it would be a terrible track day car. I had to fill my 911 twice last time I took it to a track, and then again to get it home. But a complete fill on my car takes less than 5 minutes at the gas station next to the track. A tesla owner would not have that luxury.
That actually sounds like an opportunity for Tesla. 55 miles would be really close to what you'd need for a typical 20-30 minute run session on track. I bet it would be feasible to have a "Tesla track day support" truck with a mobile version of the battery-swap machinery, and a semi-trailer full of charged batteries. They just set it up in the pit lane. At the start of the day/weekend, you swap out your "road" pack for one of the rentals, and then again every time you come off the track. The events I've been to, you'd need 4-8 batteries per car (depending on if it's a one or two-day event).
It would probably take 5-10 owners together to get the cost down to something reasonable, and still be more expensive than a gas fill-up, but I'll bet it could be done (and allow Tesla to proof their battery-swap technology in a more controlled environment).
They should have added a lot more of them, clearly. It's not like struts have any mass.
At least keep adding them until the high part count causes the avionics software frame rate to drop...
Wait... maybe that's what happened. The lag that caused them to crash on the barge last time was caused by too many struts, but now they've removed too many.
It's possible that the Google car is not giving out "body language" that telegraphs behavior before it happens. If you are about to slow down, you might move your head to check your mirrors, let off the gas a little bit, possibly maneuver in the lane, little things that humans could detect subconsciously. If the Google car just enters a slowing-down event, it might be undetectable.
I know as a motorcycle rider, I've suspected someone was about to do something stupid just before they did and it's saved me a few times.
That's actually a really good point. After 20 years of driving, it seems like I have about 90+% accuracy in predicting what people will do over the next 5 seconds or so. I'm guessing that's not atypical for anyone that actually pays attention while they're driving. A robot isn't going to give up a lot of those clues.
On the other hand, though, the robot *should* be fairly deterministic, so it might be possible to predict it based on what's going on around it (or actually force it to react how you want it to! For example, it would be easy to cheat traffic by cutting off robotic cars, because you know you'll win the game of chicken.).
If Google's self-driving car was able to track the car that rear-ended it, I wonder if there are ways to mitigate this kind of "predictable" crash. Maybe letting off the brakes a tad to lessen the impact, or (out of left field idea) deploy air bags on the bumpers?
Seems like if the real issue is "everyone else" in driving you would think Google could come up with ways to reduce the impact level of inevitable crashes.
Letting off the brakes would make things better for the people in the car hitting you, but *worse* for you, as well as increasing the chances of continuing a chain reaction.
Sitting stopped at a light/stop sign (usually boxed in) is pretty much the only time when the rear-endee has absolutely no control of the situation. If you're moving, a good driver will try to keep some space available to bail out into, as well as enough space in front of them so that they don't have to slam on their brakes and fall victim to a tailgater.
So, do really pale "white" people get mis-labeled as ghosts? Inquiring minds are somewhat concerned because they are rather pale....
One of the articles I saw about this mentioned that in the past, light-skinned people had been identified as dogs and seals. Strangely, there was no outrage about that.
There's no reason why the infotainment system can't have read-only access to the engine control module (with write access physically prevented by the hardware). You won't be able to modify the engine management without physical access to the car, but that's the way it should be anyway.
The problem with this logic is that "read-only" access still implies that the unprivileged system can poke the privileged one and cause it to do something. It will probably also have to pass some kind of data to the privileged system as well. Read-only or not, that opens the door to several kinds of exploits (buffer overflow, etc.).
Yeah, the idea is idiotic. You blow up the NEO. Wonderful. The million pieces still have the same mass, velocity and therefore kinetic energy heading towards the planet.
You don't blow up threatening space objects. Space is really big. All you do is give the object a little nudge while it's still far enough away. The little nudge is all it takes to miss the planet by a very large margin.
OK, I'm going to stand 50 meters away from you and shoot you with a shotgun. I'll give you a choice: would you prefer me to use a slug, or an equivalent mass of birdshot?
Also, blow it up far enough away, and the center of mass of the object could pass right through Earth without any of the bits actually hitting us.
In this case, the legal industry will welcome the plethora of deep-pocketed targets available to be sued when an accident occurs with a self-driving vehicle.
haha... you think you'll be allowed to buy one without signing a EULA transferring all liability from the manufacturer to you?
The reason a lot of these devices use outdated OSes is that it has to be FDA approved. I used to work on some hospital networks, and not only were some of these systems running out-dated operating systems, they couldn't have any security updates applied without losing their FDA approval. We kept these systems locked in solitary confinement behind firewalls (with no Internet access), but you still have to be able to get to them over the network to actually use them (and worse, occasionally by remote radiologists coming in over a VPN from who knows where).
Re:Could you tell a difference at distance?
on
Stormtrooper Arrested
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
So, if you DON'T report it you can be fined and prosecuted at least for a misdemeanor according to the last paragraph. So the principal is screwed both ways and cannot use common sense like the rest of us would...
No he's not... There's a world of difference between: Operator: 911, do you have an emergency? Overreacting principal: OMG! There's a guy with a gun on campus!!!1!one! Help! I have the school on lockdown!
and
Operator: 911, do you have an emergency? Reasonable principal: There's some guy wearing a Star Wars costume here. He has what's probably a prop/toy gun, but I'm required by law to report firearms on campus. Can you send an officer to make contact and make sure it's just a toy?
Don't forget that after the camera is off and nobody is watching you will resist arrest, get physically assaulted and tazed because you know you resisted. In the end resisting arrest will stick and see it was all justified.
Cops need body camera's and a hard and fast law that anything not captured on body camera the cop can not testify to. Were past the time where we need to or should trust the cops word as to visible facts, technology is capable of giving an impartial viewpoint.
What we need are cheap and ubiquitous "cop panic button" recorders. They would work like this: - Simple hardware - microphone, flash storage, battery, USB port, button, sealed case. - Upon pressing the button, it starts recording. It CAN NOT be shut off until it's destroyed or the battery dies. - USB port allows read-only access to anyone, but requires a key file (not just a password) to modify/delete
This presents cops with a tough situation. They can't order you to do something physically impossible (turn it off). If they take it with them, it records everything they're doing (radio conversations, talk to other officers, etc.), potentially for the rest of their shift. If they destroy it, they're destroying evidence. About the only thing they could do is "lose" it and claim it never existed.
Ever tried to get HR to pass your resume along if they spot any clue that you are 50+?
On the other hand, the older you are, the more time you've had to build your professional network, and the less you care about HR drones and what they think of your resume...
"Texas". That's really the only part of that sentence you need. I would be surprised if the people attending and local homes weren't about as well armed as the police in the article.
Unfortunately, the Curtis Culwell Center where the event took place is owned by the Garland ISD. I don't think it's a school, but as a TX CHL holder myself, I'd be very leery about carrying there without some serious research (it's either owned by the city, in which case it's illegal for them to prohibit licensed concealed carry, or it's a school, in which case it's illegal to CC regardless of whether it's posted - being a test case would be an expensive proposition).
Gotta love those "(legally carried) gun-free" zones...
But otherwise, yeah... in TX, in any gathering of 100 or more people in a place where it's legal to CC, there are going to be at least one or two armed, statistically speaking...
Given the uses for a gun exactly what use would you have for one that would merit bringing it to work with you?
If you are so afraid that you need to carry a gun to work with you, then you may want to consider moving to a safer area.
Life long gun owner here, but I see no reason to bring one to work with me.
As a TX CHL holder, the main reason I'd have a pistol at work is that I'd like to have it with me before and after work. Those two times are when most of the running around/errands get done, and if I can't have it at work, it would mean driving home, getting it, and going back out again. I don't particularly like leaving it in the car (secured or not), because it's just too easy to break into, and too difficult to get an IWB holster on and off unseen while sitting in a car.
Other explanations might include buying SUVs to tow new recreational toys such as a boats, snow mobiles, etc. There aren't many hybrids on the market that are set up for towing.
This is actually a really good point about new "normal" cars these days. I drive a 2001 Toyota Solara (2-door Camry, basically), which has a 2000lb tow rating. It works great to pull my single PWC trailer (~1250lb wet), or other smallish utility trailers around (and, BTW, gives me way more hauling capacity than an SUV or pickup on the few occasions that I need it, not to mention that FWD is better than RWD on slippery boat ramps). Most of its contemporaries also had 1000-2000lb ratings.
Most new cars these days don't seem to have any tow rating any more (which I would guess translates to warranty denials if you have a hitch installed), leaving your only option to buy some kind of truck or SUV.
And why is it that the bigger the pickup, the greater the odds that they will back into parking spaces?
Because backing in makes it easier to get large/longer vehicles parked straight. Going head-in, you constrain your steering to the space between neighboring vehicles, while backing in lets you position the rear of the vehicle, then steer it in straight. This goes for parking ANY vehicle in tight quarters. Generally, the people that actually know how to drive their large trucks are the ones you see backed in. The others are the ones parked crooked head-in.
Plus, it's safer to back OUT of traffic, than to back into it.
Slashdot Mirror
This whole thing screams "inside job".
A lot of the information that has been released, most notably employee emails and internal company documents, couldn't possibly have also been on the servers that held the databases for the AM site. So either (1) the hackers thoroughly penetrated the company and got *everything*, or (2) the people running AM were stupider than I believe possible (actually you would have to *work* to put all of your eggs in one basket that way), or (3) someone swiped backup tapes when they were on their way out the door.
Well, compromise a Domain Admin account, and you pretty much own all of the servers an all-Microsoft shop. Lazy Linux administration can lead to a similar fate (excepting Exchange email, perhaps). Given the sorry state of security I've seen pretty much everywhere, once you get a foot in the door, it's not hard to expand your reach.
Would be nice if we could have 2-3 National ID numbers of varying security so that we could give the low security one to places like that, reserving the high security one for things like finances.
No, we need to fundamentally change the system so that its "security" doesn't rely on the secrecy of a few widely distributed numbers.
I know how software is made. I know how buggy and unreliable it is. In my car, I want things that are rock solid, or that at least fail gracefully. Also, I don't want distractions, like screens changing their content, or having to fiddle with a display while I am driving. I want fixed controls that are simple and display a single thing. Also, I don't want my car second-guessing what I want - there is nothing more annoying that the car deciding, "He pushed the window button to go down, but it is cold outside so he must only want it half way down" - I want my car to do exactly what I tell it: I don't want it to try to be "smart".
This! Even something like automatic climate control annoys the hell out of me. My 2001 Solara has one knob to control how hard the air blows, one to control the temp of the blowing air, and one to control where the air blows from, as well as recirc and a/c toggles. Takes about half a second to configure it to be comfortable, without having to look at it. My 2008 Boxster (bought used, so I couldn't be too picky about minor features) has an automatic system that I have to constantly battle with to get it to do what I want.
But at least the Boxster has dedicated buttons. Screen-driven systems are worse. My GF's 2014 Fusion had such a thing, and you had to navigate through two layers of dialogs to set up a/c vents. She literally had to pull over to adjust her climate control safely.
Fortunately, the Solara has well and truly earned it's "Old Faithful" moniker, because I dread having to replace it, given what's currently available.
Of course it is easy to show how blind management is, However it IT guys are not blame less.
IT has a history of the following bad behavior, that would make management want to find a way to slim its IT Staff.
1. Personal pet projects: This is often a business related project, however there are alternatives that may work better, however it IT worker is too emotionally interested in keeping it going, then giving it up for a better solution. Hanging on to the couple features that has that the others do not.
Strangely, my experience has been that our devs test-driving "the cloud" has made them appreciate the level of support they get from the in-house IT even more. Almost without fail, every dev team has gone through a phase of "ooh! we can pop up a server without waiting on IT!" Followed by "This isn't *exactly* what we need, and we can't change it from the canned offerings," and "hey, IT support us! Sorry, we can't do anything for you past general advice, you have to work with $CLOUD_VENDOR." And eventually, they come back in-house where we can give them what they need, and have a team of subject-matter experts that can immediately jump on any problems.
Of course, we're fortunate not to have the IT dept staffed entirely by imbeciles, which probably makes a big difference.
I wonder if this Skylake can be considered an upgrade path..
That would violate Intels strategy, which is never allow a realistic upgrade path.
I'm not even entirely sure you *need* one any more. I'm writing this on a first-gen i7-920 - not overclocked - I put together in 2009. It's STILL "fast enough" for pretty much anything, even without a GPU upgrade in the past three years. And I use it primarily for games (the only one that utterly crushed it was ARK:SE).
I am planning to upgrade within the next few months, now that Skylake and Win 10 are here, but the primary driver for that is moving from spinning disks to a good NVMe-based system, not because the CPU is too slow.
If you're careful building your system, they'll last long enough that virtually the entire system is outdated, anyway (except for stuff like the case and power supply, which you can usually re-use), so updating just one component isn't really worth doing.
From my own experience, about 20 years ago I was setting up an exhibit at a tradeshow in New York. Most of the exhibitors were big companies who paid for union labor to put together their displays. I was a one person operation and had one tiny booth in a large hall with one table covered by a tablecloth. All I had to do was drape the tablecloth and set up my flyers and inventory--nothing elaborate. The table I had ordered from the convention service was at an angle near the entrance to the booth. I started to move the table towards the back of the booth--about six feet total--and you would have thought I was starting a nuclear war. Several of the union staff ran over yelling that I wasn't allowed to move anything and I had to wait for an authorized laborer to move the table for me. I had to wait over two hours until the floor boss had someone come over and move my table five feet. Like you, I had no idea what I had done and was baffled by the response. I could have been out of there in ten minutes if I had flipped them some cash...
Having gone to many tradeshows across the country since then, the convention handling unions have been greatly reduced over the last 20 years.
I would have told them to move it now of fsck off and complain to someone who cares. Seriously, I've never understood what they can do other than complain at you. Assault you to keep you from moving it? I'd love that. The lawsuit would bankrupt the union. Maybe there's something in the agreement you signed to have a booth there, but if not...
... and they know that... which means they're inserting ads in shit because "fuck you"... and that's cool. So long as we're on the same page. I'll respond by redirecting the DNS entries of their ad domains to localhost. And then go around systematically replacing, kneecapping, or tweaking all their shit to make it do what I want it to do.
Why?
First law of computer security.
I'm taking bets on how long until they put their ad servers, required updates, etc. behind the same domain/IP as their activation servers, so it eventually stops working entirely (or nags you incessantly) if you try to block it that way.
55 miles on a track isn't really even that bad... but it would be a terrible track day car. I had to fill my 911 twice last time I took it to a track, and then again to get it home. But a complete fill on my car takes less than 5 minutes at the gas station next to the track. A tesla owner would not have that luxury.
That actually sounds like an opportunity for Tesla. 55 miles would be really close to what you'd need for a typical 20-30 minute run session on track. I bet it would be feasible to have a "Tesla track day support" truck with a mobile version of the battery-swap machinery, and a semi-trailer full of charged batteries. They just set it up in the pit lane. At the start of the day/weekend, you swap out your "road" pack for one of the rentals, and then again every time you come off the track. The events I've been to, you'd need 4-8 batteries per car (depending on if it's a one or two-day event).
It would probably take 5-10 owners together to get the cost down to something reasonable, and still be more expensive than a gas fill-up, but I'll bet it could be done (and allow Tesla to proof their battery-swap technology in a more controlled environment).
They should have added a lot more of them, clearly. It's not like struts have any mass.
At least keep adding them until the high part count causes the avionics software frame rate to drop...
Wait... maybe that's what happened. The lag that caused them to crash on the barge last time was caused by too many struts, but now they've removed too many.
It's possible that the Google car is not giving out "body language" that telegraphs behavior before it happens. If you are about to slow down, you might move your head to check your mirrors, let off the gas a little bit, possibly maneuver in the lane, little things that humans could detect subconsciously. If the Google car just enters a slowing-down event, it might be undetectable.
I know as a motorcycle rider, I've suspected someone was about to do something stupid just before they did and it's saved me a few times.
That's actually a really good point. After 20 years of driving, it seems like I have about 90+% accuracy in predicting what people will do over the next 5 seconds or so. I'm guessing that's not atypical for anyone that actually pays attention while they're driving. A robot isn't going to give up a lot of those clues.
On the other hand, though, the robot *should* be fairly deterministic, so it might be possible to predict it based on what's going on around it (or actually force it to react how you want it to! For example, it would be easy to cheat traffic by cutting off robotic cars, because you know you'll win the game of chicken.).
If Google's self-driving car was able to track the car that rear-ended it, I wonder if there are ways to mitigate this kind of "predictable" crash. Maybe letting off the brakes a tad to lessen the impact, or (out of left field idea) deploy air bags on the bumpers?
Seems like if the real issue is "everyone else" in driving you would think Google could come up with ways to reduce the impact level of inevitable crashes.
Letting off the brakes would make things better for the people in the car hitting you, but *worse* for you, as well as increasing the chances of continuing a chain reaction.
Sitting stopped at a light/stop sign (usually boxed in) is pretty much the only time when the rear-endee has absolutely no control of the situation. If you're moving, a good driver will try to keep some space available to bail out into, as well as enough space in front of them so that they don't have to slam on their brakes and fall victim to a tailgater.
So, do really pale "white" people get mis-labeled as ghosts? Inquiring minds are somewhat concerned because they are rather pale....
One of the articles I saw about this mentioned that in the past, light-skinned people had been identified as dogs and seals. Strangely, there was no outrage about that.
There's no reason why the infotainment system can't have read-only access to the engine control module (with write access physically prevented by the hardware). You won't be able to modify the engine management without physical access to the car, but that's the way it should be anyway.
The problem with this logic is that "read-only" access still implies that the unprivileged system can poke the privileged one and cause it to do something. It will probably also have to pass some kind of data to the privileged system as well. Read-only or not, that opens the door to several kinds of exploits (buffer overflow, etc.).
Yeah, the idea is idiotic. You blow up the NEO. Wonderful. The million pieces still have the same mass, velocity and therefore kinetic energy heading towards the planet.
You don't blow up threatening space objects. Space is really big. All you do is give the object a little nudge while it's still far enough away. The little nudge is all it takes to miss the planet by a very large margin.
OK, I'm going to stand 50 meters away from you and shoot you with a shotgun. I'll give you a choice: would you prefer me to use a slug, or an equivalent mass of birdshot?
Also, blow it up far enough away, and the center of mass of the object could pass right through Earth without any of the bits actually hitting us.
In this case, the legal industry will welcome the plethora of deep-pocketed targets available to be sued when an accident occurs with a self-driving vehicle.
haha... you think you'll be allowed to buy one without signing a EULA transferring all liability from the manufacturer to you?
The reason a lot of these devices use outdated OSes is that it has to be FDA approved. I used to work on some hospital networks, and not only were some of these systems running out-dated operating systems, they couldn't have any security updates applied without losing their FDA approval. We kept these systems locked in solitary confinement behind firewalls (with no Internet access), but you still have to be able to get to them over the network to actually use them (and worse, occasionally by remote radiologists coming in over a VPN from who knows where).
So, if you DON'T report it you can be fined and prosecuted at least for a misdemeanor according to the last paragraph. So the principal is screwed both ways and cannot use common sense like the rest of us would...
No he's not... There's a world of difference between:
Operator: 911, do you have an emergency?
Overreacting principal: OMG! There's a guy with a gun on campus!!!1!one! Help! I have the school on lockdown!
and
Operator: 911, do you have an emergency?
Reasonable principal: There's some guy wearing a Star Wars costume here. He has what's probably a prop/toy gun, but I'm required by law to report firearms on campus. Can you send an officer to make contact and make sure it's just a toy?
Given the amount of sense I've come to expect from regulators, I'm sure sugar is about to become a controlled substance...
Don't forget that after the camera is off and nobody is watching you will resist arrest, get physically assaulted and tazed because you know you resisted. In the end resisting arrest will stick and see it was all justified.
Cops need body camera's and a hard and fast law that anything not captured on body camera the cop can not testify to. Were past the time where we need to or should trust the cops word as to visible facts, technology is capable of giving an impartial viewpoint.
What we need are cheap and ubiquitous "cop panic button" recorders.
They would work like this:
- Simple hardware - microphone, flash storage, battery, USB port, button, sealed case.
- Upon pressing the button, it starts recording. It CAN NOT be shut off until it's destroyed or the battery dies.
- USB port allows read-only access to anyone, but requires a key file (not just a password) to modify/delete
This presents cops with a tough situation. They can't order you to do something physically impossible (turn it off). If they take it with them, it records everything they're doing (radio conversations, talk to other officers, etc.), potentially for the rest of their shift. If they destroy it, they're destroying evidence. About the only thing they could do is "lose" it and claim it never existed.
Ever tried to get HR to pass your resume along if they spot any clue that you are 50+?
On the other hand, the older you are, the more time you've had to build your professional network, and the less you care about HR drones and what they think of your resume...
The fortunate part of suicide missions is that there is a very small percentage of repeat offenders.
Suicide bomber instructor to class: Now, pay attention. I'm only going to show you this once!
"Texas". That's really the only part of that sentence you need. I would be surprised if the people attending and local homes weren't about as well armed as the police in the article.
Unfortunately, the Curtis Culwell Center where the event took place is owned by the Garland ISD. I don't think it's a school, but as a TX CHL holder myself, I'd be very leery about carrying there without some serious research (it's either owned by the city, in which case it's illegal for them to prohibit licensed concealed carry, or it's a school, in which case it's illegal to CC regardless of whether it's posted - being a test case would be an expensive proposition).
Gotta love those "(legally carried) gun-free" zones...
But otherwise, yeah... in TX, in any gathering of 100 or more people in a place where it's legal to CC, there are going to be at least one or two armed, statistically speaking...
Given the uses for a gun exactly what use would you have for one that would merit bringing it to work with you?
If you are so afraid that you need to carry a gun to work with you, then you may want to consider moving to a safer area.
Life long gun owner here, but I see no reason to bring one to work with me.
As a TX CHL holder, the main reason I'd have a pistol at work is that I'd like to have it with me before and after work. Those two times are when most of the running around/errands get done, and if I can't have it at work, it would mean driving home, getting it, and going back out again. I don't particularly like leaving it in the car (secured or not), because it's just too easy to break into, and too difficult to get an IWB holster on and off unseen while sitting in a car.
Other explanations might include buying SUVs to tow new recreational toys such as a boats, snow mobiles, etc. There aren't many hybrids on the market that are set up for towing.
This is actually a really good point about new "normal" cars these days. I drive a 2001 Toyota Solara (2-door Camry, basically), which has a 2000lb tow rating. It works great to pull my single PWC trailer (~1250lb wet), or other smallish utility trailers around (and, BTW, gives me way more hauling capacity than an SUV or pickup on the few occasions that I need it, not to mention that FWD is better than RWD on slippery boat ramps). Most of its contemporaries also had 1000-2000lb ratings.
Most new cars these days don't seem to have any tow rating any more (which I would guess translates to warranty denials if you have a hitch installed), leaving your only option to buy some kind of truck or SUV.
And why is it that the bigger the pickup, the greater the odds that they will back into parking spaces?
Because backing in makes it easier to get large/longer vehicles parked straight. Going head-in, you constrain your steering to the space between neighboring vehicles, while backing in lets you position the rear of the vehicle, then steer it in straight. This goes for parking ANY vehicle in tight quarters. Generally, the people that actually know how to drive their large trucks are the ones you see backed in. The others are the ones parked crooked head-in.
Plus, it's safer to back OUT of traffic, than to back into it.