Starvation is too good for Woolsey.
I vote for lingchi.
Starvation is too good for Woolsey.
I vote for lingchi.
Well, yeah, if you can maintain complete control over the information a person has access to, then, yes, over a period of time you could mold the way they think.
Nobody has that ability. Not the US govt, not the Iranian govt, and certainly not Facebook. "Reasonable and intelligent people" are able to recognize when they're being fed propaganda, and take it with the appropriate dosage of salt.
It's the idiots and morons that swallow it hook, line, and sinker. Obviously, that makes these people a very valuable target audience if you're running for political office.
The best thing about AOL was that for several years, I never had to buy floppy disks. I could count on a reliable stream of free ones showing up in my mail box on a regular basis. Sometimes 2 or 3 in a day.
I was quite perturbed when they switched to sending their shit out on CD.....
He said "intelligent and reasonable" people. And he was right.
It is, however, trivial to influence stupid and unreasonable people. And there is no shortage of those.
That's why I said earlier in this thread that I have reinforced my belief that my next car will be a late 60's or early 70's muscle car.
Might not be as "green" as some would like. But it was built without any spy tech, and I could spot any suspicious crap that has been added on after the fact.
Not like today's models, which are basically just computers on wheels. Take out the factory radio to install a superior aftermarket model, and suddenly your heater doesn't work.
You can't tell me there's not a 3 letter agency behind that sort of retarded engineering.
Given our success in the "War on
Given our success in the "War on Drugs", we should declare war on prosperity.
Given our success in the "War on Terror", we should declare war on freedom.
Seems like the only thing we accomplish when we declare "War on" something is to ensure that it will propagate and grow.
(Oh, wait, I already won that war decisively. It was a scorched earth sort of thing. Recovery won't be possible within 10 lifetimes....)
If it is reflecting RF, it is in effect, transmitting.
Well, no. I see what you're trying to say, but... No.
Pretty much by definition transmitting and reflecting are different and separate things.
I suppose it's possible to reflect a signal that you also transmitted, but it would be pointless, since the reflected signal will always be weaker than the transmitted signal.
Like all those "... on a computer" patents...
And then those were all copycatted by "on the Internet" patents.
Which, in turn, are now being copycatted by "in the cloud" patents.
Everyone on the planet can see the absurdity of it except for a very select few morons. Unfortunately, it's those select few morons that we hire to work in the Patent Office.....
There was a time in my life when I believed certain things but was afraid to mention them, lest I be branded paranoid. Two decades having gone by now, it turns out I was actually unrealistically optimistic.
Everything was fine until OnStar...
Well, yeah, now that I think about it, I'd have to agree....
There's absolutely nothing wrong with these systems in your vehicle being able to communicate with each other. I think most of us can agree that there are many benefits to it.
The problems only arise when the systems gain the ability to communicate to systems outside of your car. And especially when they can do it without your consent, or even knowledge. And OnStar was the first and most obvious example of that ability.
The first time I ever really noticed OnStar was back when it first came out. A buddy of mine was driving, and we made a stop and he locked his keys in. This was "back in the day" so I immediately started trying to figure out where I could get my hands on a wire coat hanger. He pulled a card out of his wallet, called an 800 number, and a few seconds later all 4 doors unlocked. My initial reaction was "Damn! That's fuckin' cool!"
About 10 seconds later I thought "Damn! That's fuckin' creepy!"
And now it's not just OnStar that can do that. Now cars have bluetooth and WiFi, so if it's not secure (and they don't build them with security in mind"), any smart guy with a cell phone and access to Google can do similarly creepy things....
SIDE NOTE: There's an alley at work where we all go to smoke (yes, I'm a smoker, get over it). On the other side of the alley is another company's parking lot. There are two nearly identical GM SUV's that park in that lot. One has a broken off OnStar antenna, the other has an intact OnStar antenna. All of us refer to the two vehicles as "the smart one" and "the dumb one".
Don't forget about FidoNet
FidoNet was something different.
I'm not saying it's irrelevant to the conversation. Not by any means. It holds a very important place in history. But it was it's own, separate thing. It wasn't the Internet, and it wasn't the commercial online services.
In a way, it was the first "common man's" global network. Sure, the Internet existed, and ARPAnet before that, but for many years they were only available to the privileged few.
Fido Net was a way for a regular guy to use his computer to communicate with people outside of his home town.
Seems like nothing today. Back then it was a HUGE deal.
IIRC, AOL didn't offer actual internet access until pretty late in the game.
VERY late in the game.
And when it finally happened, that's the day that the Internet transformed from something great into the ghetto of spam, scams, and ads that it is today.
And, yes... GET OFF MY LAWN!!!!
As someone who moved away from BBS's to the Internet before there was such a thing as a "web site", I feel qualified to say that, No, AOL was not the first.
Back then there was no Firefox. We used gopher.
There was no Google. We used archie.
Even Mosaic wasn't around yet.
There was no "click here to download". We used ftp from the command line. And there goddamn sure as fuck weren't any Viagra ads.
You could freely post your email address online for the whole world to see, with no worries of getting on a spam list. It was a beautiful time.
Not only was AOL not the first, I feel comfortable and confident in saying that, by far, the darkest day the Internet has ever seen was the day that AOL unleashed its hordes.
Yup. Are the brakes actually controllable via CAN though?
Old school brakes, like you'd find in a mid-70's muscle car? Nope.
Modern anti-lock brakes, that depend on computer control? You bet your ass they can be fucked with through the onboard computer.
I'm an old-school geek. I've been fascinated and excited by technology for over 40 years now. But in the last half decade, I've been noticing that we're growing way, WAY too fast. We're implementing things and putting them out in the real world as soon as we "can do it". We're not waiting until "we can do it safely".
It's consumer culture gone wild.
Under the deal, all auto companies would make their diagnostic codes and repair data available in a common format by the 2018 model year
If I offer something for sale for the low, low price of $10,000,000, I have complied with the requirement to make it "available". Ain't my problem if you can't afford it.
Meaningful legislation would specify "make available at no cost", or at least set a cap on what they're allowed to charge.
Like the vast majority of legislation these days, this sounds good on the surface, but has too many holes in it to do anyone any good.
CANN Buss which is very similar to old buss
CANN bus as soon as I got it. It was a nightmare. Parts of the dash didn't even work with the factory radio removed! I had to buy an after market CPU to plug into the buss to replicate some of the radios functions just so I could use a standard dinn mount head unit. All of this and the radio I got, that's not on the Buss, has more features.
You must be very insecure and unhappy in your real life.
It's the only reason I can think of that you'd try to put down a very factually correct post based on a few irrelevant typos.....
"You need tender loving care once a week - so that I can slap you into shape." - Ellyn Mustard