The uproar was that with computers long term storage the IRS could do things like make you pay taxes on something your parents did 60 years ago, or use the power of tagging to harass specific organizations based on political leanings. What absurd notions those people of ancient times had!
Chuckle.
What could be worse than food!?
Taco Bell
Well YES! That's the Democrat (the politicians, not the voters) Party for you.
If you see the Demoncrats or the Leeeeeburuls as the source of every problem, I have this awesome bridge in New yourk to sell you.
So, the more appropriate method is to ask (nicely, or send some guys with guns) the cell service providers to shut down all towers in the required area.
They are not going to do that because a cell tower covers a lot more area than any protest.
Consider the protest in Nevada recently over the Bundy Ranch cattle being taken by armed federal agents. If you shut down cell access for that group, you are shutting down cell access for a potentially very large area of I-15. That's just not going to happen.
The reason why the kill switch would be used is that it cuts off video/image feeds from newer devices, the older phones that still might work would not be as much of a concern. As long as the government can prevent video and images escaping real time they have a lot more latitude in dealing with civilians.
Yeah, but looking a homeless person in the eye and then giving them spare change is worse for them than donating to a charity on your computer since the spare change just goes to alcohol and drugs.
And the Charity has a lot of expenses that dilute the hell out of your "donation". I'll bet you get pissed off at the homeless people outside the McDonald's near me, and people buy them a meal. The ignorant bastards! That money could have gone to the CEO of the United Way!
Bite me, if I feel like giving the homeless dude some money, and they get their drink on, that's not what I wish, but it's their money then, not the CEO of your charity.
Shanty towns were made illegal, the homeless would not be all over the streets if we allowed shantytowns down near the river or elsewhere.
I suppose concentration camps or snipers might fit your "I don't want to see the poor ppl." That would be kind of evil though.
Shantytowns are symbolic of failure,
In San Francisco you "have to see the poor" daily as well. Hows that working out for them?
The trouble with the homeless is that they are not just poor, there are usually multiple problems at work including mental issues... so seeing them and giving them money is usually not helping much.
If you really want to help the poor I suggest going to Modest Needs, that is the best place I've found to help the truly poor directly before they fall off the bottom rung of the ladder.
Fuel. You've been bitching about the use of the word "power" when you're the one who's using it wrong. The word you want is fuel.
Thermoelectrics generate power in the presence of heat.
Internal combustion engines deliver power when shit explodes inside them.
Gasoline is a fuel, not a power source.
If you built a car engine that delivered power by causing fuel to explode, you'd change the world. Car engines work through deflagration, not detonation. Detonation releases way, way more power. It's hoped that it will be the replacement for scramjet engines... envision a jet being driven by a series of explosions. No one has admitted to successfully making one, though. I've spent years doodling different ideas about how you might make one if we had the materials necessary, but it's like building a space elevator... fun to think about, but you'd need materials far stronger than anything we have available.
Car engines run on boring old combustion. The difference in scale between combustion and detonation is not dissimilar to the difference between a compost heap and a bonfire.
> by giving an unreadable version of the encrypted keys
My only real nitpick is... hardly unreadble. Small yes, but its not like they don't easily posess the technology to deal with such a minor inconvinence. A bit childish yes, but nothing more than a symbolic statement. I consider them claiming anything otherwise quite disingenuine.
They just didn't like that he didn't roll over when they snapped their fingers and that he would rather shut down than help them. In the end they both may have acted childish but, they acted childish on our dime, whereas he has every right to be a childish asshole.
So please take your "standard" USB on one
I do every day and charge iOS devices with it all the time. The cable hardly matters, and in fact it's easier to find an Apple cable in a store if you've forgotten one than the "wrong" kind of Micro-USB cable (since there are a few different types).
You are on the wrong side of standards on this one.
The fact that you can plug anything into USB is enough.
point granted, the "powered by" slope is a slippery one. but saying the car is powered by thermoelectrics is like saying it's powered by suspensions.
If it was pointed out to you that thermoelectrics operate anywhere there is a heat differential, and that you could technically "fuel" your car by pouring liquid nitrogen into the tank and have the thermoelectrics exploit the heat differential between the liquid nitrogen and the ambient temperature to generate work over time, aka power, would that be enough for you to concede that thermoelectrics are indeed what is generating the power?
That is a big reason, but it also mattered that the device itself was not OSX shrunk to a touch-screen tablet (some people thought that's what it would be instead of using IOS). That was the mistake Microsoft made.
But it's also related, Apple had the luxury of not just plopping desktop OSX on a tablet because they knew iOS developers could produce a good range of software out of the gate. Microsoft apparently never trusted in the development community enough to take that leap of faith.
They cant realistically kill the line ( "you cant stop the signal" ), but if you disable every access device known to man it would have the same effect... Killing every phone ( and soon tablets ) in one swoop would go a long way towards that goal.
This also gets around adhoc and private mesh networks that the feds have no real access to control.
There were many tablets released before the iPad that did not sell that well.
Yes, Microsoft made them, they ran Windows, and since applications were not designed for touch they sucked compared to laptops.
What Apple did was not marketing, but make a tablet that was usage because everything from OS to software was made for a tablet, not a PC.
It also relied heavily on many IPhone developers being able to quickly write software for the tablet before it was even launched - we could only test apps on the simulator before they went into the iPad App Store on day one! Kind of insane if you think about it, but it generally worked because the devices were similar in OS. If there had not been a good base of software from day one, sales would probably not have been as good... oddly parallel to a console launch come to think of it.
Done right digital versions offer some advantages print cannot. Does print offer any advantage over digital beyond not needing a powered device?
One small disadvantage: When I was a kid, I remember a HUGE stack of National Geographic magazines that stat around my grandparents' house. Many of them dated back to IIRC the 1940's and 50's, and some older still... I could sit around as a kid in the 1970's and leaf through them, no problem.
Would we be able to, 30-40 years hence, be able to even open some of these digital mags without paying (again) for the privilege of doing so? What if the website dies off? What if archive.org didn't, well, archive it?
Paper may be inefficient at many things, but even magazine publishers that died off a long-assed time ago likely still have one or two copies of their editions floating around somewhere (even if it's sitting in a flea market or antique store...)
Scientists will study your brain to learn more about your distant cousin, Man.
