Transit riders and drivers/pedestrians are all navigating... they're just navigating entirely different sets of routes. The transit rider has a much simpler set of possiblt paths, but with the added complexity of time constraints (i.e. last subway at 3am, this bus line doesn't run on the weekend, if I catch this one I have to wait an extra 45 minutes *here*, etc).
And blaming the driver.
Actually, I think most people are looking at a picture of a lump of scorched metal that used to be a car which was going fast enough to be completely wrapped around a small tree, and blaming the driver.
You don't need to know the technical specs on the engine or the portfolio of the driver to spend a whole lot of time coming to that conclusion.
Looking at the pictures of the scene its hard to imagine that they were driving anywhere close to the 45mph speed limit.
Yeah, that's pretty much my sense of the whole thing without even RTFA. There are relatively few vehicles certified for road use that would be inherently dangerous when driving near posted speeds under typical conditions. That these "experts" are even considering a problem with the car rather than the driver points to a fundamental problem with the "fast car" enthusiast mindset. If you're driving very fast while barely in control outside of a closed track with full safety gear, you're an idiot.
and yet, it bears an uncanny resemblance to the kinds of things that come out of an average politicians orifices.
Surely you're referring to their mouths.
I'd like to think so, but I'm not a xenobiologist.
The above post may contain toxic doses of sarcasm.
Never give personal information to a cold call. Never believe anything you hear from a cold call. If you think it could be legit, conclude the call, look up the *real* number of whatever institution purports to have called you, and call them. Real institutions (even creditors) will understand when you insist on doing this. Do I really have to say, do *not* believe a cold call when they give you a number to call back.
Can't mod you up more than you're at, so I'll say that if this was placed verbatim on a placard stuck to every single device with a connection to the outside world, there'd be a whole lot less of this nonsense.
hmmm....I wonder where they could build it. Oh - I know. Dallas. The tunnel has been dug so all they have to do is drop in a few magnates.
I'm all for putting Donald Trump underground, but shouldn't we cover the hole with dirt afterwards?
Assuming you can tell the difference between Donald Trump and cheap backfill, once you cram him, his toupee, and his ego into that hole then it's pretty much ready to be paved over.
Hey, he managed to Godwin the Streisand Effect
I believe it's called "pulling a Mosley". Or if it wasn't, it is now.
You missed GP's point.
Yes, I'm pretty sure I did.
A guy basically walked into an airport and started shooting, and half the comments on slashdot are bent on discussing the description of the weapon used, how he got it, whether or not it was legal, what kind of magazine he was using, what kind of firing pattern he used, and/or how he acquired the weapon.
I doubt any of that shit mattered much to the shooter, and even less to his victims. So yeah, I don't really get the point.
In which case I'd have to wonder why someone would go through the trouble of procuring an illegal firearm for themselves
... simply to use it in a manner that any legal (and easily obtained) semi-automatic rifle would suffice for.
I might be going out on a limb, but I'd suspect that the details of local firearms laws aren't exactly high on the list of concerns for someone planning to shoot up an airport.
It doesn't need to be much more complicated than "what do I have and what can I get?" although I suppose he might have gone to the trouble of personalizing his weapon like that guy who shot up the Navy yard a while back.
This is a great hack if your intent is to hire a large number of people to pass counterfeit bills at many machines in the same day,
This would be a great hack if your intent was to demonstrate the simplest and least detectable attack against an anti-counterfeiting device, which is a logical follow-through on the "need a few minutes alone with the machine" attack.
I don't find the money-making angle particularly interesting, myself, nor (apparently) do the people who came up with the firmware hack.
The next step in the attack process I'd like to see is a design for a counterfeit bill that'll trigger a bug in the firmware causing it to pass the bill. No need for pesky access to the machines in advance.
It's still better than a SlashBI or Slashdot TV submission.
Granted, it's a low bar.
Didn't we already do this? A new nation that subverts the existing structures, even has a system built-in for making sure we don't have stagnant hierarchical power structures? I believe it was called "the United States of America."
Don't kid yourself into thinking you're "special" and "not like those guys." Please learn from previous generations and previous attempts. "Those who do not study history are doomed to repeat it" is not just a clever bon mot to be dismissed.
Since when did copying an existing work become innovation?
Ah, but it's not just a copy. It's a copy of something "on the Internet" and/or "in a browser", which according to the US Parent Office is almost certainly innovation.