You don't need a tinfoil hat to know the theory is entirely within the realms of possibility. VHF ACARS could certainly be received by a LEO bird. It could also be received by a passive ground source just as easily. You can even build your own receiver for a few hundred $USD.
And you seem to have forgotten how to follow the money. Those profits don't come out of thin air. Public opinion is entirely within the interests of stockholders and company owners. When shareholders become absolute greedy fucks they need a smack upside the head so they get some perspective.
Cave Johnson should be an inspiration to us all.
They could, trivially, some do this quite well already. The problem is that android permissions are non-configurable without root so you either accept what you're told the app will use, or you don't install it. Thus developers make assumptions about what their application can do, they don't bother to catch exceptions because they assume (right or wrong) they don't need to.
Now let me demystify your comment good sir, this time with some actual facts: The FCC order doesn't explicitly require phones with GPS at all, it requires the telco ultimately provide 50ft accuracy on location, then by 2018 they'll issue a deadline on when any device capable of calling 911 requires GPS.
Correct. But, you could flip that around and ask yourself how many times during the last decade or so have you done things the harder way, or reinvented the wheel, because you didn't understand HTTP headers well enough to leverage existing functionality?
I write medical imaging software, most MR / CT studies have anywhere from one to a few thousand images, every server call you can avoid makes for a happy radiologist. This might mean wedging various DICOM fields in the headers when thumbnails are downloaded so you can rapidly populate the UI, build up annotation layers, sort thumbnail stacks, all kinds of cool stuff.
This comment comes up every single time there is anything vaguely related to weather. The drooling idiot is usually quite open minded with valid questions about the direction of change - warmer, colder, more extreme, is it natural, how much impact do humans have, and so on. (Sure, there is the odd troll too) Just in the past year it seems anyone that would question these predictions quickly gets tagged as a denier. I really don't get it.
All of this presumes a single timeline where those events occurred in the same way for all observers. What if there are a large number of parallel universes that follow through on all of those possible threads? It seems to me this would make the probability of detecting evidence of time travel so close to zero that it simply wouldn't be found.
Even if you could jump through time instantly, the earth isn't going to be where you left it anyway, tricky business to be in...
Who watches the watchers? The same people that like to tell us there are checks and balances in place to prevent domestic spying? What makes you believe every device has an audit trail - or that every login is recorded?
Think of it this way, if a system was created in the 90's or 00's (On, for example, Solaris, or various flavors of UNIX) and still works perfectly fine, would you replace it? Would you disable things like RSH? Harden NIS / NFS and friends - there's a very long list of exploitable software. Or would you just do your best on the technical side and simply trust that the people you give positive vetted TS security clearances to are not going to do what Snowden did?
It's entirely conceivable that the NSA truly has no clue what the man had access to, and maybe never will.
There is nothing idiotic about allowing newline in a form field, just that most user interfaces are likely to have an event listener that does something a little more logical with \r, \n, or \r\n making it difficult or simply not possible to use.
Perfect computer mouse balance - seriously? - for $100 I'd be wanting a triple ring laser intertial navigation unit built in for mousing through air or across rugged terrain. It'd also have to have some flavor of android running on it with its own touchscreen so I could get rid of the desktop and just mouse over the internet directly from the mouse. : )
In my day job I write medical imaging software, I'm not a radiologist though having seen tens of thousands of studies I think the image on the right was cherry picked. (Might be this immediately disqualifies my opinion, but something isn't right here : ) It almost looks like they didn't inject any iodine at all - The window levels are different, they both look like they came from different modalities with different slice thicknesses. The PDF has a lot of information about power levels, but no DICOM, no details about the imaging devices. It seems like a bit of an unfair comparison, certainly the gallium gives a more detailed result, but I'm not sure how useful that actually is over regular iodine.
This is how a more typical idoine image looks, some are more detailed, some worse, I guess my point is that you don't actually have any trouble seeing the iodine.
What else is there to say? I would start by telling your telecommunications carrier to encrypt every single SS7 link they own. Different keys on every channel, in every trunk, everywhere, all of them. That one act would be utterly blinding. This 'meta data' problem could be solved easily and permanently, there is just no incentive to do so when your arms are tied or there is money to be made.
Any accident that has enough force to utterly destroy the driver / passenger safety cell of an exceptionally well built sports car was, by definition, being driven inappropriately on public roads.
If you already have flash installed it will periodically ask if you want to update, if you click yes, it does a drive by install of McAfee, no opt-out at all. That's pretty evil behavior.