There are. There are restricted airspaces around most military bases. DC is a special flight rules area. There are restrictions against flying too close to Airforce 1 or 2, flying over DisneyLand, over NFL stadiums during games, etc.

The airspaces in question are monitored by RADAR and if need be enforced by... well you don't want to find out.

There are tons of buildings that aren't covered by such restricted airspaces of course, but then again there are tons of buildings without car bomb barriers too.

Why do you find it so hilarious? Because your favorite logical fallacy is tu quoque and you enjoy the irony of deploying it?

Just about every GA craft has a radio (or, more likely, multiple radios). The ones that don't are generally really old or experimental or otherwise special. It's like asking if it should be a requirement that cars have a third brake light. Almost a ll do, only in special circumstances would one be absent.

That said, radio-less flight is allowed in certain low activity airports (you could never land at LAX without a radio). Navigational charts will show areas where skydiving takes place, so if the pilot in the radio-less craft has a current chart, he SHOULD know that you're there.

As usual in aviation though - it's best for everyone to keep their heads on a swivel and exercise caution, but it's a big sky which makes it hard to hit things by accident

Your legal brief on this matter seems air-tight. You should contact the judge and inform him that your expertise on the matter is available for his assistance!

iToys. Because something *I* like is a tool and something *YOU* like is a toy. Gag me.

For simpler static pages, a visual editor or CMS will probably be faster.

For anything complicated, you'll want to hand-code. The people that write "web applications" with fancy client-side behavior, server-side databases and things like that are going to be hard-coding everything.

It's like the difference between being a dental assistant and a dentist. They're two different jobs in the same field.

The smaller sites that you can throw together with Dreamweaver or a CMS won't pay as well, but they'll be easier to do and it'll probably be easier to self-employ. If you learn how to code instead of point-and-click, you can do a lot more and make a lot more money, but you'll probably end up doing a lot of it on a team.

YMMV, naturally. For me, I'm a software engineer, so I'm more comfortable coding. So much so that I hand-code whenever a small site design project comes my way. It's never been worth the effort for me to get to know any of the WYSIWIG stuff

What's the difference between a corrupt, monopolistic corporation and the corrupt, monopolistic government? If you want to, you can always stop giving your money to the corporation.

Why would Amazon want to take liability for your data's security? I'm sure they do their best to avoid breaches, but it seems to me that if you want a SLA that guarantees security that you should pay them for it (beyond what you're paying for the basic service). What corporation would ever volunteer to take on extra liability?

Somehow the Swiss seem to manage. They till their own soil and they don't get caught in fucking land wars in Asia. The trick to avoiding super-expensive (in blood and treasure) wars? Quit picking fights! The US military has been involved in operations almost non-stop since WWII, but with the exception of Pearl Harbor, no foreign nation has managed an attack on our borders in over 100 years. If the Department of Defense weren't the Department of Offense, we could save a lot of money.

That's like asking why you'd rent an existing house instead of purchasing a pre-made one, or building one from scratch.

What are your skills? If you can build a house, can you build a better one than the ones available for rent? If not, why would you build your own?

What are your requirements? Do you have 0 children? 3 children? 7 children? Does the amount of people staying in your house vary a lot? If you rent, you can just move to a bigger or smaller house so that you're never too low on rooms and also never paying for an empty room.

Some folks *could* do a better job at the infrastructure level than Amazon. By some, I mean a list of companies that probably could be counted on one hand. Google, Microsoft, IBM, Apple, maybe some others, maybe some of those don't make the list. If you work for somebody not on the list, Amazon is probably going to be better at this than you. Amazon won't be perfect, but they'll be better than you.

Many folks have no idea what their usage is going to be. Is the next game going to be a hit? Is the social site for the TV show going to have heavy traffic during airing hours and none otherwise? Is the business seasonal? For many use cases, we're talking about a house where you mostly have a couple with their child, a few hours a day you have 10 children, and then every so often you'll have a few thousand over. If you're building your own, you'd just have to WAY over purchase capacity in order to avoid the occasional slashdotting. If you're renting, you just launch a bunch more app servers, then release them after the wave. You pay by the hour, or tenth of an hour

What folks are saying is that this isn't a silver bullet. Just because you're in "the cloud" doesn't mean you don't have to think about service levels, redundancy and all that. You still have to do your job - figure out your in-house skills, your budget, your requirements, and solve the problems. It's just that, if you know what you're doing, you can use the cloud to save yourself a fuck-ton of money.

The cameras are there to make money silly, not for safety. If everyone started going the speed limit, they'd just keep lowering the limit until revenue targets were met.

The speed you should drive to be safe is very rarely the speed limit. In some areas it's faster and in some slower. Weather and traffic are huge factors.

The cameras take that judgement out of the hands of those that are present and put it in the hands of those that want to make money rather than encourage safety and efficient flow of traffic. Weather and traffic are ignored.

If you don't trust the people who are operating a motor vehicle to behave in a safe manner, quit giving licenses to the incompetent. That's the system that works in places like Germany, where cars drive faster and have less accidents.

In other news, quit trying to limit the freedom of others because you're scared. Folks like you are wrecking what used to be a free and prosperous nation.

They upgraded the display, the processor, the camera, the antenna, all while keeping battery life, price and (near as makes no difference) size and weight.

What did you want exactly, a free flying car with your purchase of two?

Even if there's no law on the books, you STILL shouldn't be a dick. Why does there need to be a law for folks to act like competent operators of their vehicles?

Do we need a law that you shouldn't drive your car from the back seat? Or wearing stilts? This isn't a legal issue, it's a "don't-be-a-dick" issue.

By "universal law," I meant that it's a custom that's common the world over, whenever roads have marked lanes. A similar example would be that if you are approaching a section of road that's too small for two vehicles and another car is already coming along that stretch, you pull to the side and wait for them to go through. Some states and nations might have an actual law on the books for this, but even if you're in one that doesn't, you should still not do it. Some states don't prohibit driving when too tired, but you shouldn't do that either.

I suppose it's my bad for saying "law" when I meant "convention."

Essentially, highway works out better if there's a gradient in car speed, and that happens when folks move over after passing. I acknowledge that only MOST, but not ALL nations and states have actually spelled out that you should do these things, but non-assholes who are capable drivers will move over whether the law explicitly requires it or not. Just because it make sense.

There are folks that are scared to change lanes, so they just get on the freeway, merge to the leftmost and stay there until they exit. Those people should probably not be driving. To be a bit more charitable, I guess we should say that they should just stay off of freeways.

Some folks might be capable of moving over, but just lane-block to be dicks. Because they want to be vigilante speed limit enforcers or something. If that's the sort of thing that knocks your socks off, go for it I guess, but it won't make me respect you.

TLDR: If at any point you're on a freeway that isn't in a traffic jam, and it's POSSIBLE for someone to be passing you on the right-hand side, you're wrong. From California, to Maine, from Canada to Siberia. Except in commonwealth islands where the exact same story goes but it's the left-hand side. =) You're treating this as a legal issue. While in most places it is, the overarching situation is that this is actually a don't-be-a-dick issue.

HTH.

Heh, my last two companies (~15 person startup and ~200 person tech company) have had something like 2 physical servers between them. Everything else in the cloud. SMB should be in the cloud, because Amazon/Rackspace/etc will be better than any sysadmins that they could otherwise afford. The only orgs that really should be running their own datacenters are the guys that 1) could do better or 2) need to do so for specific privacy/governance/regulatory reasons.