Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system


Forgot your password?

Comment Re: Trust Us, We're the Government (Score 0) 66

Why any doctor would want to use a system which can forge his signature on medical records is beyond me.

Simple. Because any other method gets them fined and possibly imprisoned, or even killed by one of the government's enforcers who are known for their big guns, bad attitudes, institutionalized corruption, and small brains & penises.

[s] But never mind that! Did you hear the latest insane Trump rant and the latest lottery jackpot amount!? [/s]


Comment Understandable, Given.. (Score 1) 151

[Understandable, given]...that California is infamously-corrupt, that those in government want to curtail the public's ability to observe their actions, so that when questions from the public about government actions/policies/procedures/etc arise, what they tell us does not have to match what they do.

Of course, very few of those in government have a problem with government using the same technology to enable them to observe anybody they wish as long as "Department 'A'" (FISA courts, etc) gives permission to "Department 'B'" (TLAs and other government security/intelligence/law-enforcement departments & agencies).

It's all about keeping as many people as possible from thinking about the fact that the *only* use the surveillance web they have already built and continue to expand domestically is suited for is political/societal control through blackmail and/or planting fabricated evidence of a crime.

A horrific 'Weapon of Mass Oppression".


Comment Re:Remember when (Score 1) 139

Can anyone remember when laws were made by elected officials?

It seems like nowadays some federal agency steps in and declares that they're the governing authority on something, that their decisions are law, and everyone should obey.

That doesn't seem to mesh with what we were taught in school.

Aren't our lawmakers elected?

What you're referring to is known as the Doctrine of Nondelegability.

The SCOTUS has gradually all but destroyed any restrictions on the Congressional delegation of it's regulatory/lawmaking powers.

The rationale was that delegability was necessary in order to produce enough Federal laws & regulations quickly enough to be able to control through laws and regulations all the existing and emerging new areas of the economy and society at large that government felt itself entitled to control. A trend which shows no sign of halting or even slowing as there always seems to be more areas of life government feels entitled to control.

The SCOTUS has never to date denied Congress an act of delegation of it's powers.

This has lead to the creation of the Regulatory State, basically rule by unelected bureaucrats in unaccountable, non-transparent agencies, departments, bureaus, commissions, and the like.

The tossing aside of the Doctrine of Nondelegability is one of the biggest methods through which the Federal government has increased in size, scope, power, cost, intrusiveness, corruptness, oppressiveness, and divisiveness.

The Doctrine of Nondelegability was precisely designed and intended to limit the Congress' ability to be able to expand it's ability to create massive amounts of laws and regulations through delegation of Congress' lawmaking and regulatory powers, and prevent unelected bureaucrats from ruling over citizens without accountability directly to the electorate.


Comment Re:Why this is legal (Score 1) 131

The vast majority of drone operators do not belong to the AMA and are not following their safety guidelines.

What about all those who *are* AMA members in good standing and who follow the community standards set forth in AMA rules? "Sorry you were dumb enough to believe the government would follow it's own laws"?

If the government ignores and violates it's own laws whenever it likes why should citizens pay the law any mind? If it's simply a matter of using the threat of deadly force then the government is no better than a criminal gang.

That way leads to the collapse of civil society and rule of law.


Comment Re:It's not just drones (Score 1) 131

It's not just "drones". It's every flying R/C model that weighs more than 250 grams or more. Which is basically every R/C model out there.

The US Congress passed into Federal law the Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 which states in part;

"The Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration may not promulgate any rule or regulation regarding a model aircraft, or an aircraft being developed as a model aircraft."

The FAA has no authority under Federal law, and is in fact prohibited by Federal law, to promulgate rules or regulations of this nature & scope.

FAA can go pound sand.


Comment Re:You don't have to worry about leaks-- (Score 2) 131

... it is yet another example of Federal overreach into jurisdictions the Constitution simply does not allow.

Never mind any Constitutional issues, Congress passed the Modernization and Reform Act of 2012, a set of legal directives in Federal law to the FAA, which state in part;

"The Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration may not promulgate any rule or regulation regarding a model aircraft, or an aircraft being developed as a model aircraft."

Therefor this drone registration program is in direct violation of Federal law.

Until the law is changed or abolished by an act of Congress the FAA can go pound sand.


Comment Re:Good!!! (Score 1) 410

Drones are a menace. Imagine a sport pilot coming in low for a landing at a local airstrip, going about 110mph, and hitting a drone head-on. It would probably smash through the windscreen and kill the pilot, and crash the plane and thus kill everyone else. Get those drones out of the air!!!!!!!!!!

Except that the NTSB & FAA requires aircraft windscreens to be tested for resistance to bird-strikes using dead chickens and/or equivalent substitutes weighing from 2.2 to 8 pounds, far heavier than the vast majority of consumer/entertainment style drones like DJI Phantoms.

The ban in D.C. is based on fear on the part of the government revolving around two main concerns, first of which is politicians and officials being video recorded breaking the laws (like partaking in Saudi sex parties using human-trafficked underage sex-slaves) and secondly (and probably to a much lesser degree) also possible use as a weapons platform for assassinations.

Those in government want to use UAVs/UASs/drones to watch and take out whomever they want but are violently opposed to civilians having even a small portion of the same capability. Heck, it's a safe bet that quite a few politicians and government officials would prefer to be assassinated as opposed to having their worst misdeeds exposed and be forced to face the consequences.


Comment Re:Good! (Score 1) 410

I'm sure glad I have you and the government to help me decide what my hobbies should be and where I should spend my money.

Have you properly registered your intention to exercise First Amendment privileges, checked the map for 1-A exclusion zones, and paid the licensing fees for that comment, comrade?


Gulag for you!


Comment Re:asking nicely. (Score 1) 428

Would government employees be happy with the public having databases of government employees' personal information?

Not a bad idea.

A phone app to upload pics/video with location/time data taken of government officials/employees and other state actors wherever/whenever encountered by average people to a database hosted in multiple locations somewhere out of the US government's reach (short of military action, of course) like Ecuador and others, with facial recognition and other sophisticated search/filter algorithms in place.

Turn the machinery of the panopticon back on them.

They shouldn't worry, though. It's only 'metadata' which is meaningless, right?

"Beware of he who would deny you access to information, for in his heart he dreams himself your master."


Comment "..Able to determine.." ORLY? (Score 3, Informative) 194

Looking out at the distant stars, galaxies and radiation in the Universe today, we've been able to determine not only what it's made out of, but how long it's been since the Big Bang: 13.8 billion years.

Umm, not so much.

Might want to check out other theories like ones that incorporate quantum theories.

"( - The universe may have existed forever, according to a new model that applies quantum correction terms to complement Einstein's theory of general relativity. The model may also account for dark matter and dark energy, resolving multiple problems at once.

The widely accepted age of the universe, as estimated by general relativity, is 13.8 billion years. In the beginning, everything in existence is thought to have occupied a single infinitely dense point, or singularity. Only after this point began to expand in a "Big Bang" did the universe officially begin.

Although the Big Bang singularity arises directly and unavoidably from the mathematics of general relativity, some scientists see it as problematic because the math can explain only what happened immediately afterâ"not at or beforeâ"the singularity.

"The Big Bang singularity is the most serious problem of general relativity because the laws of physics appear to break down there," Ahmed Farag Ali at Benha University and the Zewail City of Science and Technology, both in Egypt, told"


Comment Re:So all actual drone threats have to do is... (Score 1) 61

Wait for their control signal to be jammed then home in on the triangulated source of the disruption and use whatever 'tamper deterrence' measures have been built into them to neutralize the threat?

The missile equivalent's acronym is "HARM" - High speed Anti-Radiation Missile.

Replacing the missile component with a drone makes it a "HARD".

When in operation it would be a HARD-on.

Thanks, I'll be here all week!

Please remember to tip the burgers and try the waitresses!


Comment Re:DHS? (Score 1) 82

Do you realize that "to Brietbart" has entered the lexicon as a verb that means "To lie about by taking statements out of context and/or maliciously editing" after willfully serving as an outlet for James O'Keefe? A thinking person would sooner trust the National Inquirer's latest report on BatBoy.

That said, the DHS is the worst kind of administrative cancer: Instead of overseeing things and keeping them working together (like an administration is supposed to), it has instead become corruptly obsessed with perpetuating infinite amounts of red tape, preventing useful work and demoralizing everyone. You can trace the collapse of the Secret Service to the day the DHS ate it and smothered it in red tape.

Facts are facts regardless of who reports them.

Are you saying that Breitbart made up the interview with former DHS official and whistle-blower Philip Haney? Had him read a script?

Sounds to me more like DHS damage control shills on the job.


Comment Re:DHS? (Score 2) 82

Why the hell would DHS being involved? This seems more like an FBI thing. I don't exactly understand how this is a homeland security issue.

Good thing the perp wasn't Muslim. DHS allowed the San Bernadino attack to happen, yet they're all over this. Listen to the interview of Philip Haney (near the bottom of the page in two parts).

Very telling as to where US government priorities are.


Comment Re:There are US DHS at London Gatwick?? (Score 1) 704

US bound airlines submit lists of passengers to US authorities before departure. Anybody the US won't accept is not allowed to board though the strange thing here is that these people had all applied for visas in advance, and had them approved.

It's a wonder any Muslims are turned away at all from travel to the US regardless of whether or not they may have ties to violent groups.

The San Bernadino, CA killers might have been stopped before they killed 14 people but the US government halted the program that was in place to prevent such attacks because of political correctness.


Comment Re:Accountability seems reasonable here (Score 1) 300

The idea here is to cause the operators to be responsible for their actions.


The idea here is to discourage widespread public ownership & use of drones. This is but the first step.

The US government understands very well the power drones give individuals in observing/recording what the government does not want publicized about what it does and does not do away from the prying eyes of civil rights activists and journalists.


Slashdot Top Deals

It is contrary to reasoning to say that there is a vacuum or space in which there is absolutely nothing. -- Descartes