Search is just a command line in disguise. The best interface, as it turns out, is the command line, just not necessarily CMD command line. Most of what people want to do quickly is finding documents and applications and opening them. That's where you can't beat command line. For other things you need a bit more than a search bar, but really the search bar is just a command line with an all-encompassing path and autocompletion. These days you essentially get the same thing on a PC when you press the Windows key vs. a Mac when you press Cmd-Space to bring up spotlight. Heck, there's even more to the similarity: on usual keyboard layouts, you can click the Windows key as well as Cmd-Space just using either of the thumbs. Yep, that's right, on Mac keyboard you can whack Cmd-Space combo just using either of your thumbs, although for me the left thumb is more reliable at hitting Cmd just a bit before Space, as called for.

What you seem to be completely oblivious to is that the external circumstances, once you're in custody, place you at a serious disadvantage. Probably the major point about why you should only talk when and if you want to is that to give answers that have any semblance of truth to them, you must be controlling the circumstances. It's very easy to say things that will be taken to mean something entirely different from what the truth is, when you're under pressure/duress (interrogation just after arrest, etc.).

So, what are the positive outcomes? One positive outcome is that you'll not be asked about stuff in the heat of the moment, and you'll have your lawyer present. Your lawyer will direct you to be specific and to the point so that you don't say things that can be interpreted to mean what you didn't intend.

In other words, you're completely delusional in your belief that human speech is something that has only one meaning, and you're similarly delusional in your belief that you have full control over what you say. Sorry, it doesn't work that way. You are most definitely not in control of what you say when the external circumstances are set up for you not to be in control. When you are arrested or interrogated, you're interfacing with people who are trained to extract the information they want (not the truth!). The positive outcome you're looking for is that by 5th letting you keep your mouth shout you won't implicate yourself in stuff that you didn't even have any idea about.

Basically the whole idea that you're telling the truth is flat out wrong. You think you're telling the truth, but still you will be guided to say it in such a way that it'll be taken to mean precisely what you think is false. Remember, you're dealing with people who don't arrest you to have a chat with you. Once you're in custody, nobody presumes your innocence until you get into the courtroom. It'd make no sense to arrest people who are presumed innocent by the police or prosecutors. Nobody does that. When they arrest you, they think you're guilty, and their job is to prove your guilt in any legal way, and often in any illegal way that you won't object to.

You're naive beyond belief.

Lest we forget that the hop farm used cow manure as fertilizer :)

There are fragments on the curve with no missing integer values. The marks for the individual questions themselves are docile - there's no reason NO ONE would get a particular score, other than tampering. The dips you see in the curves are ZEROES. As in not a single person getting such mark.

The clock needs to show GMT, and the idea that it should take a 100 days to implement that is absurd. A one-second accuracy is probably sufficient and can be done without too much sweat.

At least in the U.S., if you've ever had a ticket, or was a plaintiff or defendant in a court case, or own real estate, or have liens on your property - you're out there already. The system that stole your identity was most likely automated malware that you had on your PC. That's how identities get typically stolen. No one has the time to give you personal attention, let's not be deluded about that. Identity theft by and large is an entirely automated process. What you do on Facebook is pretty much irrelevant.

OK, that's informative. Thanks!

It's better than letting the drone ignore those planes. Normal civilian common carrier traffic has transponders.

The engine is perhaps the most durable part, with many high-strength components inside of it. It wouldn't survive a hit, but it'd act as a very good place to be hit while preserving the rest of the aircraft in a flyable condition. A hit to the empennage would condemn the plane immediately, for example.

An automatic collision prevention system is entirely passive. It doesn't transmit, only receives transponder and possibly ACARS transmissions. There is absolutely no reason why a modern drone, presumably with a fully digital wideband radio shouldn't receive transponder transmissions from civilian airplanes and implement automated collision avoidance as a standard feature.

LOL, this drone's development has cost so far $0.5 billion and was in fact scrapped because of this cost. $2k is 1/250'000th of the total project cost. Peanuts.

Since the testers are a purpose-made TDR/network analyzer, the ones I've seen measure the cable length too. If your entire office seems to be wired with 55.8ft cables, you should get suspicious :)

You're right, of course, there must be some acceptance tests as part of final approval of any job "finished" by contractors. Yet there are some cabling guys who don't even have a tester. They just shrug and say that they use "Cat6 approved parts", LOL.

There are different kinds of "matches". There's a big difference between a marker match (the usual meaning of the phrase "DNA match"), and a full sequence match. That's why, as much as people despise the idea, there should be a push towards full sequencing since then there's really no question about where the DNA came from.

Interesting. I'd have thought that the whole point of slapping a Cisco box on customer premises as the effective demarcation point is to reliably monitor everything up to this point, using some $$$ infrastructure management solution they surely have deployed. Otherwise it would make no sense.

I recall gathering some scorn from a provider by basically taking their fiber and their GBIC from their gateway (figuring the less points of failure, the better), skipping their router, and plugging directly into our L2 switch. That fiber was then trunked over a dedicated VLAN to a linux server that then did the magic necessary to couple this to a soft pbx. It of course worked very well, but they "couldn't" support such a setup. I wonder how effective their "management" was since if they really managed those circuits they should have immediately noticed that their router and gateway have vanished from the face of the planet all the while the fiber link and the SIP trunks are up. I figure if I had never told them about it, they might have been none the wiser, and that's a scary realization.