I would think it would be a matter of how much contrast this thing needs to "see" the counter obvious counter measure would be to "light up" areas where a someone is likely to be a target with light of the same wavelength but from an omnidirectional source. So the bullet can see the spot the laser is painting against the background.

Should be fairly easy for situations like the inside of a car an important person travels in, and the outside of residences and office buildings and such. Now if you are the impoverished kid that is harder to do.

This is a common sentiment, but it has been proven to be a myth. People just think cabs are disproportionately responsible for pedestrian injuries because it's easy to lump them into a group, but you're actually roughly 6 times more likely to be seriously injured or killed in New York City by private cars. (Note that NYC has well over 100 pedestrian fatalities per year.) For more details, see here:

The story notes that at certain times of day, taxis can make up almost 50% of traffic on the streets downtown, so these numbers may imply that cabs are much safer overall than passenger cars.

You didn't read to the end of my post, did you?

Oh ? You don't need to know the orbit, even ?

Nice try at whatever you are attempting to do there, but it is always going to vastly exceed the time going via the much tighter curve of the Earth's surface even if it's as low as Iridium which is about as low as you get for a long term circularish orbit. (Spy sats get lower for short periods but have very elliptical orbits and don't last long).

So to sum up ping times are going to vary from bad (Iridium) to very bad (nearly half way the the moon for geostationary), thus if ping times are a criteria at all it's always going to look bad.

Thanks. When I heard it was a Soyuz launched this week I assumed it was the South American launch and didn't check to see if there were any others. I was too far north to see it but apparently it was very bright.

... as are Android and Windows Phone devices, they do the same kind of tracking and leeching of personal data.

News at 11!!!

No. No it is not. It's because they have amazing food down there. In California, 9/10ths of all restaurants are total fucking shit food with total fucking shit service. I can outcook them any and every day of the week, and I do, and I have no formal training whatsoever. In Texas, 9/10ths of all restaurants are at least basically competent. I think it's because Texans will tell you just what they think of you, and all the incompetents have fled for California, or committed suicide.

It's also because it's stupid hot, and you can't go outside.

Put the two together and you have a lot of driving from restaurant to restaurant with precious little fat-burning in between. That's what happened to me, anyway. Gained 100 lbs in a year and a half. The weight's off now, but ugh.

If you couldn't step outside without tripping over a chicken fried steak, you'd be fat, too.

You mean like taxicab drivers? No. We should do away with them immediately.

So your argument against permitting people to hire their services is that it will threaten others' wages? Congratulations, you just cast your vote for no progress ever. Please move back into a cave, and give up your PC.

No, and only a someone who does not understand English at all could possibly come to that conclusion without being a prevaricating prickwad. They complained about the nature, not the number.

Cabbies drive like fuckheads because they have no competition, because of bullshit protectionist restraint of trade.

I remember some 20 years ago a friend of mine was telling me that sooner or later, your microwave would have a whole operating system on it, even though it only performed simple tasks. It was already cheaper even then to use a MCU over discrete logic for many devices which were not staggeringly complex. It's about development time. As long as we fail to demand quality, we will continue to get what is convenient to produce in quantity. Pity about quality.

Correct -- and the smartphone that isn't capable of actively tracking a person is?

Don't claim copyright on every video, this will make you guilty of perjury under the DMCA. Claim copyright on one video and then claim that every other video appears to be a derived work of that video. This is exactly the mechanism that the big studios use.

The perjury clause doesn't say what you think it says. If I own the rights on work A, to file a notice on work B, I claim that work B infringes work A. The perjury clause kicks in only if I do not own the rights to work A (or represent the person who does). If work B doesn't infringe, then that's a matter for the courts. This is quite annoying, but it does make sense. It's clear cut if works A and B are the same, but not in the case that B is a derived work of A. A court has to decide whether the use of A in B counts under fair use or not.

The counterbalance for this is that the DMCA does indemnify YouTube if they respond to a counternotice and reinstate the work. If you, the owner of work B, think it does not infringe then you send such a notice to YouTube. I then have no further recourse against YouTube and must take you to court directly.

The problem here is that it's very easy to automate sending takedown notices, but very hard to automate sending counter-notices. Mass-sending of automated takedown notices was something that the authors of the DMCA didn't foresee and the act probably needs amending to require the notice to explicitly state (under penalty of perjury) the person who has compared the works and their reason for believing that they are infringing.

That was me. Russian oligarch's are the "it" boys which maldives so attractive to Russians with money. And once again. They became oligarchs before Putin tightened the screws. The fact that they survived and thrived in the environment in which murder and fraud were par for the course of doing business should tell you that they are prepared for almost any contingency. Their wealth is virtually guaranteed to be impossible to connect to them or to trace in its entirety. The only real restrictions on them is that they cannot receive US visas at the moment. But 5-50 people having visa restrictions is hardly rises to the level of what is called "sanctions."

Sounds like to me a prime opportunity to re-open one, and tout "american or canadian made" with "staff from inside the country" along with "rigorous QC."