Not sure why you were modded flamebait. I completely agree with you. Part of responsible gun ownership is knowing how to handle, and how to react to situations. If a persons knee jerk reaction is to threaten someone with death, even if it is an empty threat, I do not believe they should be permitted to own any weapon.

I'll play devils advocate here.

Yes, I'm willing to bet the guns that were used against you were purchased legally at one point.

That said, I am not against gun ownership. However, I am for stricter controls on who can purchase weapons, especially the resale market. The 2nd Amendment says you have the right to bear arms. There is no restriction in place however on how easy or hard that should be.

They did not specify the medium in the original contract. They merely specified 45mbit as broadband.. which they weaseled out of by a technicality since LTE does support that speed... but at a cost.

You are correct, she did not go directly to the CTA..

Even worse, she jumped to Comcast 3 months after pushing for the Comcast NBC merger. Bought and paid for by your tax dollars.

This was the restriction placed on her (came from wikipedia, so take with a grain of salt.)

"While Baker may immediately lobby Congress and supervise employees who directly lobby the FCC, to comply with President Barack Obama's ethics pledge, she may not personally lobby any executive branch political appointee (including the FCC) while Obama is in office. However after two years, she may lobby non-political appointees at the FCC. Additionally she may never personally lobby anyone on the Comcast/NBC merger agreement"

The current FCC Chairman was a paid lobbyist for the Telecommunications industry before he became the FCC chair....

As long as our politicians are bought and paid for, things will never change for the better.

I mean the recent issue with Verizon and the state of NJ, NJ let them off the hook for not building out the infrastructure promised in the early 90's by a mere technicality by considering heavily capped LTE as an alternative to wiring the entire state. Then stating that they would wire areas that do not have wireless service, only if 35 or more people request it.. except they know that wireless reaches every spot in NJ where there is no VZ service, so it is a cop out, they know, the PUC knows it, and how anyone in their right mind could possibly think that this is good for consumers. This only benefits the telecoms.

This is what we have in stall for our FCC chairs of the future.. not exactly this scenario, but people that would vote in a similar vein under the pretense it is good for the consumer.

Cars are sold for a profit (regardless of how thin it is). If they want to use this business model, they would have to sell a loaded vehicle at a loss, and hope that customers would then pay for the features at a cost point to make the sale eventually profitable for the manufacturers.

Then there is the used vehicle, sure I might sign an agreement that says I will pay for whatever features I want on a rental basis, but I still bought the car, I can sell the car to anyone I want, and there is no way that the manufacturer can enforce any contract on the second owner, which means he could in theory use alternate methods of reactivating all the disabled options...

Hell, in theory, once I own the car I could just make the features work, this is not a lease, (unless they restrict the rental options to leases only), at most they could void the warranty.. who knows.

Is not the patent itself, or even patent holding companies (to some extent).

What I do have an issue with is those holding companies going after the end users. To me that is double dipping. I purchase a product that does "X" made by "Company Y". Y purchases components and licenses the technology needed to manufacture/perform X, that is the end of it, the patent holder has received his/her pound of flesh.

Going after End users is essentially asking to be paid multiple times for the same product/technology instance.

The Internet was fun while it lasted....

Well, hence my ( ) statement, yes they are operating in the US, but my response was to the poster who rattled off a list of US locations. Once the NSA became aware of a domestic issue, they are supposed to/should have notified the FBI and let the FBI do their thing. The ineptitude of the FBI is also a topic for another time.

As I said earlier, my point was strictly about jurisdiction, not about methods, and who was breaking what laws.

Where did I say that, where did I even imply that. My statement was simply about jurisdiction, not about methods.

And in every one of those places, the NSA has no (well is not supposed to anyways) purview. Domestic issues are meant to be handled by the FBI.

The NSA and CIA mandates are to operate outside the US, so yes, I have no issues whatsoever with the NSA spying on everyone and there mother outside the US, just like those same countries spy on everyone else. We just got caught with our hands in the cookie jar. Operating within the US is supposed to be illegal, although it appears no one in power wants to enforce the mandates.

My bad, I posted before I read the article. I was thinking that they used keys.

There is no need to drill the outer shell, apparently it is not difficult to buy keys for ATM machines online, dress as a repair man and no one thinks twice. Failure by some institutions to utilize maintenance logs and scheduling for ATM repairs.

Google the subject, he performed this attack live at both Blackhat and Defcon 18. It was definately an eye opener, and one of the reasons I tend to avoid those rental ATM's you see in mom and pop stores, and restaurants/bars...

yes I realize that even the major Bank ATM's are susceptible, but at least with a major bank you have some recourse if you have issues.

You are correct, I was actually thinking active suspension which would have helped Senna, but for some reason wrote traction control. Active suspension was banned for level playing ground reasons.