First, IANAL.

27602. (a) A person shall not drive a motor vehicle if a television receiver, a video monitor, or a television or video screen, or any other similar means of visually displaying a television broadcast or video signal that produces entertainment or business applications, is operating and is located in the motor vehicle at a point forward of the back of the driver's seat, or is operating and the monitor, screen, or display is visible to the driver while driving the motor vehicle.

Key words are "IS OPERATING". If the Google Glasses were off or he did not see them ON then the ticket should be thrown out. According to what I read the monitor must be turned ON and visible to the driver to be a violation.

Go to Gibson Research Corporation ShieldsUP! website ( https://www.grc.com/x/ne.dll?bh0bkyd2 ) and scan your connection. Plug all the holes so that you have a full stealth on all ports.

While it is stated: "... technology has advanced and now the images are processed and displayed on a large screen in high-definition video.", the cost of the technology and the "overage" in cost per procedure goes hand in hand. It may now only take 15 minutes to preform what used to take 75 minutes, but if the doctors are only reimbursed for their time for the procedure, they would never be able to afford the technology which would put them back to 75 minute procedures.

This technology not only helps to produce more accurate test results, but allows more patients to be able to have these tests each day. That all comes at a cost. If a procedure is reimbursed $100 for a supposed 60 minute procedure using older technology, and that procedure now only takes 15 minutes using newer technology, More of the $100 has just been shifted from doctor salary to technology cost.

Instead of cutting the cost of the procedures, they need to find the doctors and facilities that are scamming the system, billing for procedures that aren't actually performed. (Like Columbia/HCA that Governor Rick Scott of Florida resigned from as Chief Executive in 1997 amid a controversy over the company's business and Medicare billing practices. He was not implicated, but the company ultimately admitted to fourteen felonies and agreed to pay the federal government over $600 million.)

I am VERY conscience of the light and have NEVER delayed moving once the light changes. Most of the typing is done while I'm watching the light and I only need to glance down to make sure I haven't made any laughable mistakes that may end up on some webpage of texting errors.

I didn't vote to ban texting in cars because that statement is too broad. That unfortunately covers passengers and that is just idiotic. It also covers while the car is stopped and turned off. If I want to text someone while I am driving, I will hand my phone over to the passenger and have them do it for me, or wait until I am stopped at a red light or in a parking lot. (If the light changes before I am finished sending my text, I place the phone on the passenger seat until I am stopped again before finishing.) Now if the choice was to ban drivers from texting while the car is in motion, then I would choose that option.

I have no problem with the carriers having 1 year retention of SMS messages if law enforcement have no problem with getting a court ordered warrant before they can access them. The warrant needs to be narrowed to a particular phone number and for a specific date/time range and not a blanket "everything in this zip code during the month of July".

More than 1 year retention required by Law enforcement and they aren't doing their jobs properly. And sorry Columbo, no peeking without probable cause.

Unfortunately, it isn't who you vote for, it is who do you vote against? I seriously feel that a lot of people aren't actually voting FOR a candidate because they like him or her. They vote for the candidate that has the best chance of beating the one they don't want to win.

The driver of the car in front of you jams on his brakes. The road is wet and your car can't stop in time. There is a truck to the left so your brand new intelligent car decides to swerve to the right because there is only a small object there and won't cause as much damage. Too bad for the student walking home from school.

This idea, while the concept has good intentions, just sounds like a disaster waiting to happen with a huge lawsuit for an ending.

I use multiple programs on my PCs as not every program will detect everything. I currently use Microsoft Security Essentials, SpyBot Search and Destroy, and the free AVG antivirus. The 3 of these run continuously and can be configured to auto update. I don't usually see much of a hit in CPU usage as I have MSE and AVG set for different scheduled scan times and updates.

A couple of times a month, depending on my Internet usage, I will also run the free versions of SuperAntiSpyware and Malwarebytes' Anti-Malware. As stated in previous comments, a few of these will detect keygens as malware. I usually set all of these programs to ask me what I want to do with detected files.

As with any new antivirus program you install, take the time to immediately update and run a full scan.

Good luck.

Can't the TSA just have the people scanned twice? The 1st scan has the person facing the scanner to get the view as shown in the videos, and then the 2nd scan with the person turned 90 degrees. This would make it much harder to get something through the scanner without it showing up. Of course the body is usually wider side to side than it is front to back, but looking at the different body types that go through the scanner now, I don't think that would be an issue for most people.

This method would take twice as long to process a person, but is still faster than a pat-down and more secure than a metal scanner. Better yet, place the metal scanner at the exit of the Body Scanner as well as using the 2 scan method and it would be all the more secure.

From the Indictment:

1. KIM DOTCOM, MEGAUPLOAD LIMITED, VESTOR LIMITED, FINN BATATO, JULIUS BENCKO, SVEN ECHTERNACH, MATHIAS ORTMANN, ANDRUS NOMM, and BRAM VAN DER KOLK, the defendants, and others known and unknown to the Grand Jury, were members of the “Mega Conspiracy,” a worldwide criminal organization whose members engaged in criminal copyright infringement and money laundering on a massive scale with estimated harm to copyright holders well in excess of $500,000,000 and reported income in excess of $175,000,000.

All throughout the Indictment the defendants are referred to as the Mega Conspiracy. Isn't that a bit unprofessional? Do they indict people being accused of murder as "The Murderer" as if that person has already been found guilty? I would hope that the jurors don't have access to this document as I would find it quite slanted. If I couldn't trust the writers to print facts as opposed to opinion, then I would as a juror find it my duty to consider jury nullification as an option to balance the justice scales.

I don't encourage copyright infringement but I do believe in a fair trial and use of the term "Mega Conspiracy" throughout the indictment to refer to the defendants doesn't sound quite fair to me.

While this list is a good start to see which companies to avoid doing business with, I would like to see a list of companies that are vocal about being against SOPA so that I can direct my spending dollars towards them. If a lot of people shifted their spending dollars towards those companies against SOPA, maybe the loss of income may change the pro-SOPA mentality.

My IE7 doesn't render correctly either. The menu that should be on the left side (at least it does in my firefox browser) shows up way on the right on IE7. The stories are partially covered on the right side by my karma and poll boxes. The horizontal scroll bar thinks there is stuff way off to the right, even though it appears to be empty. The webpage doesn't seem to size correctly to the actual browser size. (My Firefox browser seems to render everything better.)

From the cnet article:

"RIAA lawyers have told the judge that LimeWire costs the record labels about $500 million in lost music sales every month."

So with LimeWire shut down, will record sales increase by $500 million every month? Hopefully they will use current sales figures including the 2 months AFTER the shutdown to calculate the lost sales prior to the shutdown and not just take the RIAA lawyers word for it. My guess is they will see little, if any, sales difference after the shutdown.