1) RTFS 2) RTFA 3) Discover that existence of anything more than tiny pockets of congestion is just a bunch of bullshit, and that not only have you been lied to about P2P being a problem, you've been lied to about the whole goddamned problem 4) PRICELESS
You are of course correct. I was jumbling together the requirement for residents of 2 different states with what applies to licensees.
I can defend myself only by saying I just grilled 3 dozen chicken breasts and my eyes are welded shut with charcoal smoke, whatever temporary mental disability that might cause.
Which is of course how we've determined the meaning of all the other Amendments and or the necessary parts of the constitution, and pretty much every law we have.
The best you can do is read the Federalist Papers with a clear head and an open mind, which is about as likely as going back in time to speak directly to Thomas Jefferson.
There is really very little stopping one entity from suing another for any frivolous thing. Or from making a habit of it. So we get articles like this, or like the one not too long ago where that judge sued the dry cleaner for losing his pants, and people get really worked up about the litigation culture we have.
The problem is that few people pay attention long enough to see who wins what. While there are no doubt silly awards handed out every day, and even sillier settlements outside the courts, it isn't any kind of epidemic and there is no way 'most' companies use this as a business model. Simple math should show that situation isn't sustainable.
People who talk about product liability still bring up the old-lady-vs-McDonalds coffee lawsuit as an example, and that went down something like 15 years ago. Listen to them and you'd think that kind of thing happens every day.
There are several people writing the same thing as you in this thread. And I've always been amused by that sort of thing.
If you are indeed the type who doesn't place too much value on material goods, why does it bother you when other people do? If anything, what you describe will only hasten the general downfall of that culture so you should be encouraging those who follow it. Ranting about them comes off as envy.
Where did you get that figure, from the South Africans? As an Angolan, let me assure you, they are at times less than truthful. This puts it at $5 billion, and that is using quite a bit of technology and manpower donated from Israel and doesn't include the cost of all of the support operations already in place for SA's nuclear power reactors bought from France.
And while 'a number' certainly includes the numbers 6 and 7, the casual reader probably thinks of something higher. 6 or 7 bombs never proven to work and at least $5 billion spent by a country that already had massive uranium mining operations and plenty of knowledgable nuclear scientists working in energy is still not enough to make me fret too much.
And based on those same principles, must be less than nothing preventing a terrorist from using Ebola, since he could fit enough in his shirt pocket to kill as many people as a backpack full of nuclear bomb.
The reality of nuclear weapons (and biological ones alluded to above) is that while it is technically possible to make one it is exceedingly difficult. And I don't mean 'kids today don't know how to solder' difficult. Entire countries spend hundreds of millions of dollars to fake the possibility that they might have the theoretical capability to build a low yield device, because actually building one would cost hundreds of billions. The idea that a terrorist group could do it on their own is preposterous. Doubly so considering the actual geographic footprint the facilities they'd have to build have.
Of course there is still the possibility that they could steal one from the few places that actually have them. That can't be proven false, or even nearly as hard as building one from scratch, but based on the fact that no one has done it yet it must be pretty damn hard. I was in Afghanistan 3 years ago and most of the roadside bombs were gunpowder and shrapnel. I'm told by people who are there now that this is the case in Iraq as well. A bomb like this is many many levels less sophisticated than even the typical HE bombs the Army uses to clear obstacles in roads and even with their Swiss cheese stockpile guarding you don't see their shit for sale on every street corner.
None of this means nuclear proliferation shouldn't be policed. It does mean that actively fretting over backpack nukes is silly.
Most modern firearms share some lineage with models originally designed for military use. If you read the military specifications you'll see no mention of killing anything in connection with the design of the firearms itself. You will see it for the cartridge design, so you can make a case there.
This is splitting hairs and bogging ourselves down in pointless technicalities, but if we didn't enjoy doing that we wouldn't be at Slashdot in the first place.
For instance: Like it is a good idea to keep your guns out of sight, even though the law doesn't require it, because some hoplophobes are likely to get too worked up about seeing them and make a big deal out of it.
To have done the kind of work that earns a Nobel takes a lot of time and effort over many years Absolutely false.
Al Gore won one for putting together a slide show. Even if he isn't particularly 'good at computers' that thing couldn't have taken more than a couple of days to make.
It isn't at all ironic if you understand the point the parent is making.
A right (what we're calling freedom in this case) is something you already have, it doesn't require anyone to give you anything. People who are too broke to buy an internet connection still have all of the listed rights. Government and corporations cannot give you rights, they can only take them away.
This seems like pedantic nitpicking but it is a critical thing to understand when talking about rights, and losing them. The sentence in question cheapens them by equating their existence with a live internet connection.
You base a lot of your assertions on wages. Increasingly, wages are a becoming a smaller percentage of the cost of a good. This is especially the case in heavy industry. Much of this progress is due to automation.
There are still plenty of places where wages are so low the capital cost of automation can't be justified, but the technology is getting cheaper and developing workforces are getting more demanding. There is nothing to indicate that those trends will change, so saying that manufacturing is never coming back to the US is silly.
Indeed, as fuel drives up transportation costs leanness in manufacturing will depend even more on smartly locating an operation near raw materials sources and the customer base. The days of 10,000 employee assembly plants are what is truly behind us.
The point is, based on my conversations with people who do what the GP described, is that when someone mentions a movie title they can say "I have that movie".
I think that actual watching the movie part is completely secondary. Just the having of all of them is enough.
The control/safety system shut down because it stopped getting "safe" indications from the monitoring/input system. It seems pretty clear that the input system itself correctly logged the reason for the error. No, at least not according to the article.
According to the article a business network computer reset data on the control network, thus the safety system shut the plant down. The control system was not relying on data from the business network, but it was possible to alter control system data from the business network, which is the part that is bad.
Later in the article it is noted that all physical connections between the business and control networks have been removed, which further supports the idea that the control side doesn't rely on receiving data from the business side.
And any error logic to deal with bad field devices or high tank levels or whatever else probably looks more like:
|--[I:3.0 > 62]------------------(O:4.4) alarm---------------| |--[/]I:3.1------(O:4.5) permissive to safety system-|
Or as best I can ASCII draw ladder logic with this stupid fucking lameness filter.
Alaska is great. I usually make a trip or 2 there every year to hunt.
I can see how the fragmentation helps protect the data, but I'm not sure whether the benefits outweigh the risks. I'd like it if an ambulance crew could pull my records up in some protable terminal and see "Allergic to Sulfa" in a prominent position.
As it is, if I forget or can't communicate that or whatever else, it would probably never be known because the last time I was given sulfa I was about 6 years old and I lived in Angola (Africa). I imagine the records from that hospital visit are long gone, I know the hospital is.
Certainly I wouldn't want my records to be available to the public in trade for that, but we are communicating most of this stuff via fax machines as it is. A motivated party could probably get hold of it anyway. Only recently has the US put any teeth into laws to keep it private, especially for anyone who might be peripherally involved, like most employers outside the healthcare industry.
But if you take the time to go over medical records, even just to sift the important from the trivial, I applaud you. My experience indicates that that doesn't happen often.
I welcome the idea that those with healthy lifestyles shouldn't be subsidizing those with unhealthy lifestyles You should drop your health insurance then. Or at least get into an HDHP.
Or go to work for a drug company, or a healthcare provider. They see an economic incentive in keeping people in poor health.
If you are indeed a physician, where are you? I ask because here in the US there is absolutely no wau any physician I've ever met would take the time to read my entire medical history, because there is no way an insurance company would pay them to do it.
I've seen large parts of mine and most of seems worthless to me. Lots of redundancy, lots of unreadable scratching. Medications and treatments that didn't work but contain no follow up that would communicate that.
And I'm not very old and I've been in relatively good health my entire life.
Healthcare companies can already ruin your life, literally and figuratively. If one of their people incorrectly transcribes 1 character of your personal info your insurance company will deny the $35,000 invoice they send and it will fall entirely on you to sory out. That same transcription error can result in your new doctor not getting your medical records from your old doctor, who probably doesn't have a complete set anyway because to get them you'd have to put in a request from every single medical provider you've ever visited.
It doesn't have to be this way. I'm usually a big free market believer, but I'm also a vet who has been through the VA healthcare system (unfortunately named VistA). Here is a good piece that mentions the VA's system and how it is being used by an FOSS project to get some of this under control.
I don't particularly like Google, but I like the US healthcare system even less.
That would seem like a silly thing to do, about as silly as when US Congressional Rep Randy Cunningham wrote the fee schedule for bribes on a page from his office notepad, complete with his own letterhead.
If that happens, signing some *AA-sponsored bill is... not exceptionally likely. If that type of thing was a decision between a President and his advisor that might be true, but of course it isn't. And that is only if they both bother to read the bill rather than just the executive summary written by who knows who.
There are many other considerations, support or opposition to future legislation being a big one among the various government employed players. And on the private side, lobbyists can wield that same power. I know Obama has made a point that he doesn't take money from lobbyist groups but they didn't put all their eggs in that one basket, they have plenty of others ways to exercise control.
Given the level of integration many 'media' companies enjoy it may be that the general tone of news about a given President might depend on his signature on a particular bill. And maybe Larry Lessig could find that the situation is the same for him. I think the American public would want to know if their President and his closest advisor were responsible for the cancellation of American Idol due to piracy. Seriously. Congress passed the 'Patriot's TV Freedom' act to guarantee that all your favorite shows were available 24 hours a day in crystal clear HD, but the President refused to sign it over some sillyness about Fair Use? What's fair about no American Idol?
Anyway, one of countless scenarios. I don't doubt that a great many people have gotten involved in politics with the purest of intentions. I can't imagine how any of those people would be allowed to rise to any critical office anywhere without the system getting its hooks into them.
Slashdot Mirror
1) RTFS
2) RTFA
3) Discover that existence of anything more than tiny pockets of congestion is just a bunch of bullshit, and that not only have you been lied to about P2P being a problem, you've been lied to about the whole goddamned problem
4) PRICELESS
You are of course correct. I was jumbling together the requirement for residents of 2 different states with what applies to licensees.
I can defend myself only by saying I just grilled 3 dozen chicken breasts and my eyes are welded shut with charcoal smoke, whatever temporary mental disability that might cause.
Which is of course how we've determined the meaning of all the other Amendments and or the necessary parts of the constitution, and pretty much every law we have.
The best you can do is read the Federalist Papers with a clear head and an open mind, which is about as likely as going back in time to speak directly to Thomas Jefferson.
Yes, one of your rifles. Any long gun actually.
Handguns, by Federal law, require a NICS check.
I've rickrolled a guy who rolled a bard, does my card get stamped for that?
It is a news story in the same way that Taco Bell's new additions to their Extra Value Menu is a news story.
I'm going to start submitting links to all the cool banner ads I run across. Next up on Slashdot: Dude You're Getting a Dell!
You are being a bit dramatic.
There is really very little stopping one entity from suing another for any frivolous thing. Or from making a habit of it. So we get articles like this, or like the one not too long ago where that judge sued the dry cleaner for losing his pants, and people get really worked up about the litigation culture we have.
The problem is that few people pay attention long enough to see who wins what. While there are no doubt silly awards handed out every day, and even sillier settlements outside the courts, it isn't any kind of epidemic and there is no way 'most' companies use this as a business model. Simple math should show that situation isn't sustainable.
People who talk about product liability still bring up the old-lady-vs-McDonalds coffee lawsuit as an example, and that went down something like 15 years ago. Listen to them and you'd think that kind of thing happens every day.
There are several people writing the same thing as you in this thread. And I've always been amused by that sort of thing.
If you are indeed the type who doesn't place too much value on material goods, why does it bother you when other people do? If anything, what you describe will only hasten the general downfall of that culture so you should be encouraging those who follow it. Ranting about them comes off as envy.
Where did you get that figure, from the South Africans? As an Angolan, let me assure you, they are at times less than truthful. This puts it at $5 billion, and that is using quite a bit of technology and manpower donated from Israel and doesn't include the cost of all of the support operations already in place for SA's nuclear power reactors bought from France.
And while 'a number' certainly includes the numbers 6 and 7, the casual reader probably thinks of something higher. 6 or 7 bombs never proven to work and at least $5 billion spent by a country that already had massive uranium mining operations and plenty of knowledgable nuclear scientists working in energy is still not enough to make me fret too much.
And based on those same principles, must be less than nothing preventing a terrorist from using Ebola, since he could fit enough in his shirt pocket to kill as many people as a backpack full of nuclear bomb.
The reality of nuclear weapons (and biological ones alluded to above) is that while it is technically possible to make one it is exceedingly difficult. And I don't mean 'kids today don't know how to solder' difficult. Entire countries spend hundreds of millions of dollars to fake the possibility that they might have the theoretical capability to build a low yield device, because actually building one would cost hundreds of billions. The idea that a terrorist group could do it on their own is preposterous. Doubly so considering the actual geographic footprint the facilities they'd have to build have.
Of course there is still the possibility that they could steal one from the few places that actually have them. That can't be proven false, or even nearly as hard as building one from scratch, but based on the fact that no one has done it yet it must be pretty damn hard. I was in Afghanistan 3 years ago and most of the roadside bombs were gunpowder and shrapnel. I'm told by people who are there now that this is the case in Iraq as well. A bomb like this is many many levels less sophisticated than even the typical HE bombs the Army uses to clear obstacles in roads and even with their Swiss cheese stockpile guarding you don't see their shit for sale on every street corner.
None of this means nuclear proliferation shouldn't be policed. It does mean that actively fretting over backpack nukes is silly.
No.
Most modern firearms share some lineage with models originally designed for military use. If you read the military specifications you'll see no mention of killing anything in connection with the design of the firearms itself. You will see it for the cartridge design, so you can make a case there.
This is splitting hairs and bogging ourselves down in pointless technicalities, but if we didn't enjoy doing that we wouldn't be at Slashdot in the first place.
Maybe.
For instance: Like it is a good idea to keep your guns out of sight, even though the law doesn't require it, because some hoplophobes are likely to get too worked up about seeing them and make a big deal out of it.
Al Gore won one for putting together a slide show. Even if he isn't particularly 'good at computers' that thing couldn't have taken more than a couple of days to make.
I don't particularly want 1 billion colors, I actually just want 1 new one: black.
Not a very slightly gray-black, but silver-print-face-of-the-half-dome black.
It isn't at all ironic if you understand the point the parent is making.
A right (what we're calling freedom in this case) is something you already have, it doesn't require anyone to give you anything. People who are too broke to buy an internet connection still have all of the listed rights. Government and corporations cannot give you rights, they can only take them away.
This seems like pedantic nitpicking but it is a critical thing to understand when talking about rights, and losing them. The sentence in question cheapens them by equating their existence with a live internet connection.
You base a lot of your assertions on wages. Increasingly, wages are a becoming a smaller percentage of the cost of a good. This is especially the case in heavy industry. Much of this progress is due to automation.
There are still plenty of places where wages are so low the capital cost of automation can't be justified, but the technology is getting cheaper and developing workforces are getting more demanding. There is nothing to indicate that those trends will change, so saying that manufacturing is never coming back to the US is silly.
Indeed, as fuel drives up transportation costs leanness in manufacturing will depend even more on smartly locating an operation near raw materials sources and the customer base. The days of 10,000 employee assembly plants are what is truly behind us.
The point is, based on my conversations with people who do what the GP described, is that when someone mentions a movie title they can say "I have that movie".
I think that actual watching the movie part is completely secondary. Just the having of all of them is enough.
According to the article a business network computer reset data on the control network, thus the safety system shut the plant down. The control system was not relying on data from the business network, but it was possible to alter control system data from the business network, which is the part that is bad.
Later in the article it is noted that all physical connections between the business and control networks have been removed, which further supports the idea that the control side doesn't rely on receiving data from the business side.
And any error logic to deal with bad field devices or high tank levels or whatever else probably looks more like:
|--[I:3.0 > 62]------------------(O:4.4) alarm---------------|
|--[/]I:3.1------(O:4.5) permissive to safety system-|
Or as best I can ASCII draw ladder logic with this stupid fucking lameness filter.
And further, Ebay payment site Paypal will not allow transactions for the items you mention even if the sale doesn't involve Ebay.
If you leave any clues in your Paypal description that the money is for, say, a DIAS module, they'll cancel the transaction.
If you frequent the for sale forums at places like Sniper's Hide you'll see many posts asking for 'discreet Paypal'.
Alaska is great. I usually make a trip or 2 there every year to hunt.
I can see how the fragmentation helps protect the data, but I'm not sure whether the benefits outweigh the risks. I'd like it if an ambulance crew could pull my records up in some protable terminal and see "Allergic to Sulfa" in a prominent position.
As it is, if I forget or can't communicate that or whatever else, it would probably never be known because the last time I was given sulfa I was about 6 years old and I lived in Angola (Africa). I imagine the records from that hospital visit are long gone, I know the hospital is.
Certainly I wouldn't want my records to be available to the public in trade for that, but we are communicating most of this stuff via fax machines as it is. A motivated party could probably get hold of it anyway. Only recently has the US put any teeth into laws to keep it private, especially for anyone who might be peripherally involved, like most employers outside the healthcare industry.
But if you take the time to go over medical records, even just to sift the important from the trivial, I applaud you. My experience indicates that that doesn't happen often.
Or go to work for a drug company, or a healthcare provider. They see an economic incentive in keeping people in poor health.
If you are indeed a physician, where are you? I ask because here in the US there is absolutely no wau any physician I've ever met would take the time to read my entire medical history, because there is no way an insurance company would pay them to do it.
I've seen large parts of mine and most of seems worthless to me. Lots of redundancy, lots of unreadable scratching. Medications and treatments that didn't work but contain no follow up that would communicate that.
And I'm not very old and I've been in relatively good health my entire life.
Healthcare companies can already ruin your life, literally and figuratively. If one of their people incorrectly transcribes 1 character of your personal info your insurance company will deny the $35,000 invoice they send and it will fall entirely on you to sory out. That same transcription error can result in your new doctor not getting your medical records from your old doctor, who probably doesn't have a complete set anyway because to get them you'd have to put in a request from every single medical provider you've ever visited.
It doesn't have to be this way. I'm usually a big free market believer, but I'm also a vet who has been through the VA healthcare system (unfortunately named VistA). Here is a good piece that mentions the VA's system and how it is being used by an FOSS project to get some of this under control.
I don't particularly like Google, but I like the US healthcare system even less.
That would seem like a silly thing to do, about as silly as when US Congressional Rep Randy Cunningham wrote the fee schedule for bribes on a page from his office notepad, complete with his own letterhead.
There are many other considerations, support or opposition to future legislation being a big one among the various government employed players. And on the private side, lobbyists can wield that same power. I know Obama has made a point that he doesn't take money from lobbyist groups but they didn't put all their eggs in that one basket, they have plenty of others ways to exercise control.
Given the level of integration many 'media' companies enjoy it may be that the general tone of news about a given President might depend on his signature on a particular bill. And maybe Larry Lessig could find that the situation is the same for him. I think the American public would want to know if their President and his closest advisor were responsible for the cancellation of American Idol due to piracy. Seriously. Congress passed the 'Patriot's TV Freedom' act to guarantee that all your favorite shows were available 24 hours a day in crystal clear HD, but the President refused to sign it over some sillyness about Fair Use? What's fair about no American Idol?
Anyway, one of countless scenarios. I don't doubt that a great many people have gotten involved in politics with the purest of intentions. I can't imagine how any of those people would be allowed to rise to any critical office anywhere without the system getting its hooks into them.