Oh and two things:
- The phone is still communicating with the headset so the MAC is still sniffable. - Additionally the headset IS set to advertise and it does have a MAC.

If they did sniff the wrong car it wouldn't be in the picture at the 2nd camera.
Also a highly directional antenna is child's play.

My patent app is headed out... :p

the city says it cannot connect the MAC address collected to the device owner...until they figure out how to hook a camera with a license plate reader to the Bluetooth sniffer.

[sarcasm] Outlandish as it may seem but someone might have the technology [/sarcasm]

Small new devices are 'cool' but that isn't where MS / Ballmer missed the point. They took Microsoft's flagship OS and optimized the whole user interface to work on 'cool' handheld devices where they don't have a serious foothold in the market. I know that they are salivating looking at Apple's App Store and Google's Play Store but they just thumbed their nose at everyone who uses the most entrenched desktop operating system in the world. It is a train wreck as a desktop UI and they are so obscenely blind that they didn't see it or just plain ignored it.

How many people with a tablet and a PC will sit down and use the tablet for word processing or an spreadsheet? This is the biggest opening for a competitor to jump into the desktop OS market I've ever seen. And for the people who think hand held toys like tablets "are a paradigm shift" then explain to me how that correlates with the number of dual or triple display setups that are being rolled out?
(Ask Oracle how the mas shift to thin computing is working for them!)

The boat has been missed. Let's see if they notice.

Minimalist?

I barely want it to float. I've seen many beautiful ships. There is nothing on that that has any grace to it.

Exactly!

Who cares if you have a huge dropout rate? You'll still have a completion rate that is way more then any conventional class and even the dropouts will have learned something.

The education system has built a big blind process that isn't about learning. It is about the process. If you happen to learn at the rate that the info is fed to you and if the process intersects with your learning style then you are great. If you learn faster or slower or in a different fashion then the accepted process you are screwed.

This is more about the legal department making decisions. Are they going to decide "Let's not do any litigation!"? Of course not. They will always pick a choice that keeps them employed.

It wasn't "to prevent people using it for terrorist activities". This was before the 911 "hide in your closet" era. They were protecting against foreign countries using the system.

How can I be sure? FAA regulations.

The controller could be disciplined for that type of slip up. A flight level does not refer to an altitude. It refers to a pressure altitude. What this means is if you set the altimeter correction to 29.92 inches of mercury (standard sea level pressure) and you fly based on the altitude that gives. That means if you are flying at FL300 you could be actually at an altitude hundreds of feet above or below 30,000 feet because of the variations in pressure from high pressure or low pressure systems. This is really the only way to control high altitude traffic because if two planes were flying with different altimeter corrections they could collide because their altimeters were giving different readings.

The reason there is a "transition altitude" is because when you are closer to the ground it is much more important that you are aware of your actual altitude over obstructions. Flying into the ground is a much higher risk than colliding into another plane. I would assume the reason that 18,000 feet was picked as the transition altitude is that there aren't any 18,000 foot mountains in the lower 48 and of the 4 mountains taller then 18,000 feet; two are in Alaska, one is 15 miles outside of Alaska, and the last is way down in the south end of Mexico.

Here is a wikipedia article explaining it all...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flight_level#Transition_altitude

FLxxx numbers are simply pressure altitude in hundreds of feet. In North America flight levels start at 18,000 feet so the lowest FL number is FL180. (In Europe it is much more complicated...) Below that level it is simply "altitude". A normal cruising altitude would be from FL300 to FL410 and may vary from that based on length of hop, specs of the aircraft, congestion, and weather. Not sure where you are going to find any quantity of aircraft cruising at FL180 and FL280 is definitely not "high".

Cabin pressure is not measured in "Flight Levels". That is just silly.
Common commercial aircraft are pressurized to a pressure equivalent of 8,000 feet. The big exception to this is the new Boeing Dreamliner that is pressurized to 6,000 feet which is hailed as a major improvement in passenger comfort and safety.

That old saw was "Turned off, disconnected from all cables, and locked in a closet."

The article is silly.

I think the submitter of this article (and the approver...) think that this is something new.

They will be horrified if they ever run across standard management modules like iLo2 or DRAC.
This "warning" is like the warnings for dihydrogen monoxide and hydric acid.

The survivors will be buried in the press.

You've never been on BART have you?
BART is the loudest subway I've ever seen and goes over 100 decibels repeatedly.
After riding on quality systems in other places such as Munich I find that BART is just a technical embarrassment.

As far as turning off the cell data coverage... BART consistently has the worst station announcements and the worst station signage. Without the data coverage the only way I can figure out which station I'm at half the time is to get the station map up on the cell and count stops from an identifiable station. I'm really at a loss how a system that big isn't internally audited for simple things like clarity and volume of station announcements. And the lack of clear, obvious, unmistakable station signage is just stupid negligence or apathy on the management's part. 5 minutes on the S-Bahn in Munich will show you how worse then just "Bad" BART is.

If they do manage to make drones and start using them it will just add cover for ours. They won't know what to shoot at.