And pedantic is not funny.

You can passively block it, yes. There's nothing preventing you from building a Faraday cage around your home. You cannot ACTIVELY block it though (i.e. broadcast signals to intentionally interfere with it).

Ironic... yours was the last comment on this post just now, and the silly quote below the Slashdot logo at the bottom says "Are you having fun yet?"

Crap. Ok, what's your address? And is that $100 Canadian, or $100 Canadian Tire?

If I order a drone through Amazon, will it deliver itself?

I agree 100% - even today, recordings from cop cars only see to be available when it's in the police's interest, and are destroyed or not working otherwise.

The best solution I heard was in the book Lockstep - where police were actually remote controlled robots. One robot was always controlled by an independent 3rd party operator, a civilian. That would ensure accountability and fairness.

The NSA has not only undermined our trust in the government (well... that's assuming there was any to begin with), but it's also wreaking huge devastation on our economy. How many US-based companies have lost huge amounts of foreign business due to these revelations?

It's NOT Snowden's fault for revealing these actions. It's the US Government's fault for having their fingers in every conceivable cookie jar in the world, and forcing US-based companies to assist them with it (willingly, unwillingly, and even unknowingly).

So what if all the privately-held weapons in the USA were of this type? do you think that someone (... some 3-letter acronym, maybe... ahem) might design a gun jamming system? What good is the right to bear arms if someone else can simply shut them off on you? Sorry, no go - at least from a mandated-use standpoint. Sure, I can see it being nice for some people who CHOOSE to use it, but not if it's mandated by law.

It's good PR for Sparkfun too. They're getting way more value already than $30k of publicity usually gives you.

And there are others... not in the car industry though, and probably never really broadcast.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

(NSFW, sorry)

No, I'm not arguing that Apple shouldn't be paying more taxes. Not just Apple, but many large, profitable companies that don't pay much or any tax should pay more.

However, the problem is NOT WITH APPLE. It's with the laws that let them do this. Fix the damn laws, don't blame the companies that use the current laws to ensure they do THEIR job properly (i.e. make money).

Great... then prosecute them.

If you can't, then it's legal.

If you don't like it, change the law. More specifically, if the taxpayers (and politicians) in that area don't like it, then they should change the law. Otherwise, what's the fucking story here?

Apple - nor any corporation - is not a charity. It's not their job to pay more taxes than they legally have to. Their job is specifically the opposite - generate as much value for shareholders as they can.

Any company that pays more than they have to by law should be questioned, or the shareholders should revolt. Actually... I can't think of any example of one that does, intentionally at least.

So - the issue is NOT with Apple - TFS even says that the Australian tax office agrees this is all above board - but the issue is with their tax system. It's structured to allow that, intentionally or not. There are all kinds of tax incentives in the world, and they're all there to encourage the right mix of business development and growth that the region needs. Essentially, tax is used as an incentive to offset the disadvantages that would otherwise naturally be there (labor cost, non-ideal locations, skill levels, etc.).

Don't be mad at Apple... EVERY company does this. Haters be hat'n, I guess. :)

I'm curious what qualifies as a medical reason to avoid the scanners? I opt out of them always, but it'd be nice to be able to at least occasionally avoid the pat downs too...

Care to share your ailment?

I travel FREQUENTLY, and always opt out of the naked scanners at the airport... partially because of safety concerns, partly because of my view that they're security theatre and ineffective, and partly in protest. After all - as inconvenient as a hand pat-down is, I KNOW that won't give me cancer in 20 years. 4-5 scans a week or more over 20 years... what's that going to do to me?

Question: do the TSA agents hate me? :)