If you think the GOP is the only problem here, then you're also part of the problem.

Hi. I'm a contractor working for the FAA.

ALL controllers are having their hours reduced by 10%. This comes out to 1 day per 2 week pay period, or the approximately two days per month in the summary. It's not 10% of controllers being affected, it's all controllers being affected by 10%.

And for those of you saying "Why didn't they cut other, less important budgets?"

Well, it doesn't work that way. Every account was cut 10% across the entire FAA. This is incredibly stupid, by the way, since the much of the FAA's labor is paid for via levies on airline tickets, and so it shouldn't be affected by these general fund shenanigans (as an aside, this is why we got furloughed two years ago, because Congress wouldn't renew the airline ticket levies for political reasons). But, hey, Congress... You get what you pay for.

The FAA doesn't have a war budget.

Well, that's Congress for you. It's not like it affects them in any meaningful way. And it's not like we're going to not re-elect them, or that if we elected new representatives they'd be any better.

And in reality nobody ever spent 6 months just writing docs before writing code.

What reality do you live in? I'd really like to move there if that's true, because it sure isn't in mine...

If you don't want people talking on cell phones in your restaurant, then post a sign saying no cell phones and kick people out who disobey.

Don't frickin pollute the already crowded electromagnetic spectrum with a white noise generator, grow a damn spine.

I am teh dumb. Misread what grandparent was saying.

We're running a couple hundred CentOS 6, Fedora 13/16/18 machines. Do we count?

Just like Susan B. Anthony, Rosa Parks, Martin Luther King Jr., etc., etc., etc. "deserved" prosecution.

Did you ever stop to consider, even for a moment, that the reason Aaron Swartz was going to continue this pattern of behavior might just possibly be that he was right?

Fair disclosure, I may be a bit biased here: I work with unmanned aircraft systems on a day-to-day basis. That being said, all of what I'm about to share with you is all publicly available knowledge via wikipedia or shows on the various Discovery Networks...

"Remotely piloted" UASes are ALREADY semi-autonomous. Many of them already don't allow any sort of direct control input from the operator, only taking directives such as "Fly to this point", "orbit this location", or "engage this target" via a point-and-click interface. There are already WORKING systems that make use of autonomous cooperation between multiple units to ensure target coverage for surveillance, or decide which unit will deploy its ordinance for a selected target. UASes have already engaged moving ground targets from beyond visual range via guided missiles, as well.

With all that in mind, yes, I'd say the tech is already there. We don't have (to my knowledge) any UASes currently carrying AIM-9s or AIM-120s and attempting to engage airborne targets, but I think that's more a result of the Fighter Mafia being in charge of the USAF than a lack of technical capability.

As others have said, air-to-air combat has been reduced to push button, beyond-visual-range engagements already. Heck, with newer aircraft they can engage targets not even visible on their own sensors, with the missiles being guided by satellite or AWACS or what have you. When the missile is being fired by a button push from a controller sitting at a RADAR screen somewhere, what does it matter if a manned or unmanned aircraft is carrying it?

You're assuming for some reason that there would be a 1-to-1 ratio between manned and unmanned aircraft. Your example really falls apart when that manned aircraft is facing an order of magnitude more hostile, semi-autonomous aircraft...

Everything you just listed as "bad" about this supposed VR is just as true about daydreams.

Maybe we should heavily regulate them, as well.

P.S. I find it funny you claim not to be a fascist, when in fact the policies you are advocating are surprisingly close to Italian fascism pre-WW2.

Yes, won't someone think of the virtual children.

Except that it has nothing to do with "CanCon" restrictions and everything to do with the stupidity of copyright laws and licensing.

Also, the person I was responding to doesn't seem to give a flip about "protecting Canadian culture". I bet most other Canadians don't, either.