Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!
We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).
I think that the best idea in this sub-thread is that in a post by funwithBSD, an immobilizer.(Presumably similar to a breathalyzer. If you are convicted of texting-while-driving you must put a device in your car that will disable the car/cell phone of the car occupant. A cell phoen app won't do the trick, but maybe a car-based device would.)
I guess your post and my post prove how typically polarizing these cell phone issues are. I am not a nanny state fan, but I am infuriated by how stupid and inattentive people are hurting others and the toothless laws that currently exist. I don't have a cell phone glued to my ear and would rather not be wacked in traffic by someone who does. Other people see it differently, and flip if they can't use their cell phone everywhere all the time.
The same issue comes up if a private party wants to block cell phones in their movie theater, for the benefit of other patrons. Half the of everyone loves the idea, the other half hate it.
I am shocked at the scope of the distracted driving problem and that nothing effective is being done to deter and punish violators. And I'm concerned that the problem will probably get worse.
I looked it up a few months ago, a bit over half as many people are killed each year by distracted drivers as by alcohol involved accidents, which amounts to about 35000 people per year (about 60000 per year die in alcohol related accidents, at least according to MADD). Fun fact, removing health related deaths (smoking, heart disease, etc.), it's the number two cause of death in the US, behind drunk driving. Yup, more people are killed by idiots not paying attention while driving than by firearms. Impressive, since firearms are designed to destroy things.
I think the statistics above, if accurate, indicate that we would be justified having the cell companies knock down all voice and data on moving cell phones.
My two cents: GPS apps can sync data before you are rolling. You can pull over to download new data, or call/text someone. You can read a book on the train or listen/watch any of your local data (32+ gigs, right?). I don't think that anybody whining about not being connected/addicted while a passenger outweighs the loss of life. That's just as wrong as me justifying a road trip after six beers. You'all didn't have a cell phone 20 years ago!
I have a script that can setup a bootable partitioned usb drive, set it up to be encrypted, then dd/rsync all my system and data files to it.
I keep a couple of these bootable-backups around, one of them off-site.
I can connect the usb drive to another pc and boot my system up on it. If I need to I can run the script and have it copy everything from the usb drive to the new pc internal drive.
This system has served me well for a number of years, and a number of computers.
I'm running Freebsd and I use GEOM for encryption. I did do a new system install to go from 32 bit to 64 bit. Otherwise this system has served me well for a number of years, through a number of computers, with minimal effort.
Why do you think the commies were an different? At the time I remember the word was that they were led in lockstep by a bunch of megalomaniacs that wouldn't stop until they ruled the world.
It is a bit far-out to say that Iran would commit suicide by launching a first strike. How often does a country commit obvious suicide? Sure, we don't want them to have nukes. But they live in a dangerous world. Much more dangerous (to them) then our world.
And don't forget that the US has been the only country that has used nuked another country. We've destroyed a number of countries in other ways, too.
No, this stuff is pure risk analysis. Are they really crazy enough to destroy another country? If so, then it makes sense to be able to defend yourself at all costs. And this is what Iran is trying to do!
I'm with ARP Networks and I have a US $10 per month VPS with 256 megs memory, 4 gigs of drive space, and 100 gigs of network use on a 100 meg ethernet. (All upgradable, for a cost.)
I installed a current version of OpenBSD from a list of system images they have. I have console access, a fixed ip, and root. I run ssh and a web server, etc. I've been running this VPS for a couple of years and I'm very happy with it.
carrier un-detectable tethering
Hard to do, unless you do everything though ssh - which is fun!. I'm able to run ssh server and client apps on my cyanogen mod'd rooted Samsung Galaxy II S (with some quirks, but supporting tunneling and both ipv4 and ipv6).
I start an ssh client from my phone to desktop. The vnc port from my desktop is forwarded to my phone. I ipv6 ssh from my tethered laptop to my phone, forwarding that vnc port to my laptop. The from the laptop I vnc to my pc. All the phone company would see is ssh from the phone to my pc. They wouldn't see the encapsulated forwarded traffic. There would be no leaking dns traffic - nothing (only vnc inside of ssh). The packet sizes may reveal tethering (i.e. fragmented encapsulated packets, perhaps? unless the mtu's were adjusted, which might be possible a couple of ways but might be inconvenient...)
I have not had a problem with AT&T. I have a pay as you go plan. I pay for my data, and I get what they sell me. They've never asked me what I'm doing with it. A few years ago T-Mobile changed the price of my data plan when I told them the model of my phone - because it was a smart phone. I left T-Mobile over that.
Data is data - tethered or not.
> Iran knows the clock is ticking and if they don't have the bomb some neocon is gonna come into power and squash them like a bug, if for no other reason than they don't get along with Israel and too many neocons are of the "Jesus won't come back if there aren't Jews in Zion! Come back Jesus come back!" variety. i don't know what is scarier, the Mullahs wanting a bomb or the fact that one of the most highly weaponized countries in the west have a large power base that believes the ME policy should be based on 1800 year old words written on a sheep's ass by goat herders about some 2000+ year old dead guy and how he needs a certain race in a certain place so he has a spot to park his fluffy white cloud.
>> What you seem to disregard is that Iran is now ruled exclusively by a religious leader [wikipedia.org], and that his dog Ahmadinejad doesn't just not get along with Israel, but calls out for the destruction of Israel pretty much any time there's an open microphone nearby. He does so even though Israel has never done anything bad to Iran and the two countries even had strong military relations prior to 1979.
Sounds like both countries have issues.
I think that's a great idea, if the decision is made on a city-by-city basis. I'm in favor of each municipality making this decision for themselves.
I'm opposed to a federal mandate to do this. It should be a local decision. This avoids a lot of potential future problems.
If it's a good thing, it will be copied. Just like the article says is already happening.