The full article states that .com was not sized. :-)

Its not just the Summary... TFA has the same remark of domain names.

Thanks for your advice. It is truly welcoming and if I am doing something wrong I much rather have someone help me than tear me down.

I have actually been doing the volunteer deal both in a hospital and at some local places teaching computer basics. A lot of people have learned a lot but I doubt it would get me a job. Pay isn't there but it is rewarding to make someone smile.

I will have to try the posting of my resume in my sig. Never thought of it. :)

I live in the United States. The laws, the constitution, the roadway signs, and school is taught in English. With all due respect as long as I live in this great country and when my president and congress people along with every law is written in english I refuse to cater to someone who refuses to learn the language in The US. If I worked in a spanish speaking country I would be excepted to learn the language for them.

It is not right to force me to learn spanish to do business in the US. Maybe I am wrong and I am sure some people out there feel as though I am making myself entitled to not have to learn a foreign language. Which is true I feel that entitlement. But not hiring someone because they will do support / business within the borders of the US and don't speak Spanish is wrong.

Now it is different to say "I need you to learn XX new thing" to which is not learning to talk to another person in the US with a different language I am all for that. I am willing to learn new things.

I love this one. Personally its the best. You know I did have a 2 offers. One of them was below minimum wage and the way they planned to get around it was it was a "contract". I turned that down. The other offer was for a telemarketing position in which I was paid on commission and there was no way to guarantee I would get paid minimum wage even. Plus I am not a sales person never worked in sales.

So if that means I am trying to get my free money then I guess I am. But given that the economy in the area I am in sucks and given that my area of expertise is in computers which in this city unless you speak both English and Spanish you won't get a job. I don't speak spanish and I refuse to learn to.

There are things that are discussed that are not for the public's ears. There is a reason that (at least in this state) you have to go through a course and be certified before you can be a police officer and have access to some of the systems they have access too. Even 911 dispatchers have to get a certain certification before they can run your license plate / DL.

The phone has nothing to do with that. The phone for its use while on duty or off duty is for business only. Yes calling each officer for information is okay. Because enforcing our law is fine we have a court system that handles that. But telling an officer you have to say it on a radio and no more phone for you is out of the picture. Regardless of PSTN use or recording ability. The discussions taking place on there might not be for the recording to record such as personal information (address, registration information, etc) being discussed with another officer. I get that cell phones may not be as secure but there still is that ability to discuss things that are not needed over a radio.

I never once stuck my head in the sand in saying officers are the best and they make no wrongs. Believe me I know they do. I was recently illegal detained and un-arrested (not legal at all). I went through the same steps every other citizen would go through (regardless of who I knew) that ended up in both officers being fired and losing their peace officer status. I am not saying that police officers won't protect their own (New Orleans is a good example). So let's cut that down now. Let's think of how many police officers are out there doing their job. You hear about officers doing the wrong things. But you also hear about other officers catching them doing the wrong and throwing the wrongs butt in a jail cell. There is a way of handling a wronged time. But far more citizens cry that cops are the worst things because they got a traffic ticket.

How is what they are doing hiding? What about when you are in an accident and they need to notify your family? Do you want it recorded or for others to hear "Mr. and Mrs. Bagger Your Son(or Daughter) was involved in an accident." Would you like that number that he dialed recorded so that someone with a Freedom of Information Act Request can get that call and now have your number? I wouldn't think so.

Really?

I don't live in California but I do live in another large state.

I have been unemployed for a year and 5 weeks. I count the weeks not because it is something I enjoy doing but because each week it is another failed week at finding a job to pay for the things that I once used to enjoy. Such as going out to eat 2 times a week. Or the nice house I used to live in. Or buying tires for my car.

The state pays me jack when it comes down to it. The company I worked for years laid me off. For all the years I was working I paid a tax to go to the state government insuring that if I lose my job through no fault of my own that I would be able to collect some money until I found a replacement job. So no the Government isn't a job program but it is in fact there to protect me if I may for the protection.

The state requires me to make 3 job contacts a week. I do about 5 a day so that's 25 M-F and not counting the about 10 or so I may do on a Saturday and Sunday. I don't care if you believe me or not but I don't like having to tell people that I am unemployed when I go into job interviews and they ask me why I haven't worked in the last year. I don't like having to explain to friends that I can't go out and meet them tonight because I don't have the money to pay for drinks or food. I actually don't like the fact that for another Christmas this year all I was able to get someone was a 10.00 Starbucks gift card. So please tell me that the handout I am getting means I am not really trying. Then be lucky you and the GP got a job. Because some of us would love to earn that money and no have to have a taxpayer to fund my paying of bills.

While I may not know the acronyms are for it doesn't change the impact of my statement above.

I have not only worked for LEO's in the past in their IT offices and 911 Centers I also have direct knowledge of what kind of conversations do and have taken place both on the radio and off that radio. I have the knowledge because of not only several rides with the actual police officers but my family has been (Both parents one of which is a retired police officer).

There are times when discussing a situation on the radio to a supervisor is not acceptable because of the questions relating to which charges should be filled or what city ordinances may relate to a certain situation.

These conversations that take place are not always what needs to be going over a radio. Most departments have policies in regards to what channels maybe used for. Some channels are for all people to hear in the field (Fire, Police, EMS) and some are not.

I know for fact that every department going doesn't use APCO-25 (I actually verified at least 3 of the previous departments I worked for and the one my parent works at). So those communications are better held on a cell phone than on the radio.

You loose credibility with me when you make remarks that the police abuse people. While this is the general consensus among those that have some fear of the police it is completely stupid. While there are bad cops out there and cops that sometimes make a bad decision for the most part those cops have families and some of them are really good people. There is no field out there that is perfect and doesn't have bad apples in it. Yup some people get into law enforcement for the power. Some actually do it for the fact they want to keep people safe and make a difference in this world.

You sir have no clue what you are talking about.

It has NOTHING to do with how to make the suspect fall on his face repeatedly. You need to ride along with a police officer. You may be amazed at the level of some work people do. There are things that don't need to be discussed over radio and some of those times they need the radios for other emergencies or possible ones that may come into play. You might be curious to find out the radio use policy of such Law Enforcement Agency has.

I think what a lot of people are missing is what the phones use is for.

I worked for a company in their IT Dept. I handled all the purchasing of new phones and replacement of old ones. Routinely people would ask me to get them a cell phone for "work" related reasons. When I would ask how much are you going to be out of your office per week and the responses was "no that often." Then I wouldn't order it. Costs for cell phones and purchasing some 4800 phones for people that may not need them is excessive. Just because they CAN afford it doesn't mean they SHOULD pay for it.

Another side to this is my friend is a police officer. She is a Asst Supervisor and the city has made it a policy that she and the above her level get cell phones for use by the city. They are to be used for city business only. My mom takes her personal phone to work. Now before she got her phone everyone in their brother would call my mom for help or questions. My mom would reply but only out of respect. It stopped when she got a letter from her supervisor telling her that her review would show that she uses her personal phone a lot. When my mom explained it was city related business not personal she was told to prove it. She provided the bill to the city highlighting all the city related business that came in. When she started using the city phone for everything the chief and the city couldn't believe how much other officers and city officials would call and speak with her or other officers on duty. Before my mom wasn't being paid for her cell phone. Now they see why it is useful.

Another commenter stated that they have radios for that sort of stuff. Sometimes it isn't something you discuss on the radio where someone is asking for information about how to handle a certain charge or whatever. Which is fine the radio waves need to be open for use even though they have several channels they have a use for them.

I agree if the person isn't going to be at their desk like certain police officers or social workers or what have you then we should provide a phone for them. If they spend majority of their time in a desk. Then give the phone back be reasonable and if you have to use your personal phone a few times tough cookies. Remember we went several years without cell phones.

Yes I agree and if the judge doesn't then they need that ability. Now I think that if they can't excuse people then maybe bumping the pay to handle the minimum wage amount if they are on duty for 2 days or more.

I agree with you. Jury duty is an important part of our society obligations and I can't count how many times I have heard people get out of it just because. I have had 4 jury duty notices and each time I get them in all honesty I get happy. 3 of the 4 have been canceled just before trial. So that was always a let down. However, the other jury duty I have had before I was on to be selected but was nixed because my parents were both police officers. While I got 6.00 for being there the pay sucked when I paid 5.00 in parking and used a gallon of gas. I am not complaining about doing the job but the expense of performing were better paid then I think you would have more people WILLING to serve then those ditching to make more money. Hardship or not we should be able to live while serving on a jury. No one on the jury should worry if they will be able to put food on the table because they have to help justice.

I think the challenge to this as well is what if in the end we (BIG IF here folks) defeat the Taliban and they become an ally? I think what we are missing here is that when they become an ally we don't want to continue to make a "war" out of them or have that reminder.

The other side to this is that using a general term (OpFor) gives them the ability to let the gamer choose what/who their enemy is. If we go to war with the penguins well that would cause problems but if we go to war with another country then it is easier to let the gamer see the OpFor as the other side.

One of the things I have learned on Slashdot is someone may say something and define it later. I have also had a pleasure of both learning others sides to issues as well as being lucky to have people comment back professionally or at least not disrespectful. This is much importance to note because I feel and have seen others who get down right rude. I appreciate your respect in your response.

I couldn't agree more with alcohol (honestly my post was a little different to begin with but later revised.). I believe that the control of alcohol should be limited to in a persons home where they can drink all night long but keeping themselves out of general harm to the public. If given outside of the area of ones home then rules and responsibilities to those giving such drinks should be stricter. I do not believe nor do I think it is fair that drunks can get in their cars and drive off without someone ensuring their ability to drive without being a danger to the public. Sadly prohibition didn't work well out as we all know.

I believe that at least with what little knowledge I have (I am not afraid to admit lack of knowledge) that the difference is we failed because of the wide spread popularity of alcohol. This helped in making enforcement harder as so many people were well on their way to work around the system for what they wanted. However, marijuana doesn't fit such a profile and has only gained I feel because so many people are now wanting it and combine some states are allowing "medical" marijuana. Which to me is the equivalent of some areas not even enforcing prohibition or seat belt laws . To me "personally" I feel Marijuana and Alcohol are one and the same as far as effects to the average Joe. While I have never used marijuana, the studying I have done on it for school projects show that the effects can have almost like effects to people. For example drivers driving drunk don't clearly see, have delayed reaction time, and possible blackouts, and those who are high are unable to determine what actions to do, hallucinations, and decreased response time.

I do not for reasons agree with cigarettes (I do however see your point). I have not heard of a person driving after smoking a cigarette have an accident because they couldn't clearly tell the line or had decreased reaction time. Granted those incidents I am sure with people dropping them in their lap may not help the cause it is different to marijuana in the sense of the reactions to one's mental abilities. While I do agree it is addictive (both my parents smoke) the effects are felt by the person and the impact to society from say someone driving is far less. I do support the laws prohibiting smoking from the work place and minimizing the attempt to target minors. I agree on public offices (Government Owned or those dealing with the public) should not allow smoking inside of them. However that is the end of my agreeing. I dislike and feel that the law makers have overstepped the rights of the people by requiring (Here in Texas 3 cities I know of have city ordinances on the books) private business that while deal with the public are required to stop smoking from taking place. If a non-smoker doesn't wish for their health to be impacted that way then their choice to go to a place where such restrictions are in place and spend their money there. Forcing restaurants or bars from allowing smokers to smoke is wrong because they are "privately" owned and no one is required to go to them for a service.

My point was to say your post appeared to have the argument we aren't winning this battle so lets allow it because it would be easier and cheaper at this point. One has to worry if such response were the case then at what point do we have to apply that with other laws.

I think their is a disservice to people and getting the truth out by not having a study on the impact of Marijuana and gathering of stats (if available) to prove and back the point why we have made marijuana illegal. I think everything at some point needs to be revisited to ensure the necessity of due diligence when faced with such situations of lack of scientific proof with drugs.

Well AC I disagree. The police are trained and while accidents of human error happen it would be far more apparent with random stoners and opium addicts. Just think they had their dignity robbed but at least they got the drugs off the street so one day they won't have to worry about someone being so stoned that they end their lives.