About the only thing I can see here as far as this being helpful is the fact that a lot of students depending on what their primary education was actually like are surprised by how much higher the bar at University might be.

So getting a D after being in some HS where they hand out As as participation trophies might be rather shocking. So being able to go ok 'well this one does not really count I still passed' does afford that student who

1) simply cares about getting high marks
2) needs to keep a scholarship
3) hopes to earn some kind of honors diploma

a little space to adjust their expectations and effort level before being told after their first semester, you dug a deep hole for yourself and might be well and truly f***ed as far having a decent GPA, graduating Cum laude, not losing their merit monies, and so on.

So as far as a marking system goes I don't think is bad and maybe it is even more 'fair'. I don't really see this doing much for mental heath though.

A lot of the things you listed there can be determined by watching the parking lot for a few days.

Which I have absolutely know investors to do. The bar to proving insider trading is as the parent suggested actually higher than most people expect.

That facilities guy if he got dragged into court, is going to argue that anyone living near by could tell you the number of Cintas and Granger trucks in and out lately made the situation clear to anyone watching. He is a facilities guy nobody tells him what the plans are, he can guess because all the work order entries he has put in for basic repairs for the last eight weeks have been declined, but he does not actually know..either as far as the law is concerned.

Re-Inusrance would be a swap, primary insurance is very much regulated by states. Your interpretation would absolutely upend the insurance industry.

I would also not be so sure the administration is "wrong" here about CFTC authority. If we consider the down right radical determine the courts have embrace for a century regarding the commerce clause, if you read this clause in the same expansive way, just about anything does have commercial potential ... consequence. The word potential there can do a lot of work. I mean if we bet on the number of concerts Taylor Swift will have on her next tour that has potential commercial consequences for anyone in the business of screen printing t-shirts; you never know they could *potentially* land the order and the number of show might determine how big the order is..

If we really had a functioning legal system 7 USC Â 1a(47)(A) - would be struck down as 'void for vagueness'

"associated with a potential financial, economic, or commercial consequence" is so broad it should never have been legally acceptable language; but that describes half the US code now days... In short the law is whatever the politically motivated judge you venue shop for decides now..

That seems inappropriate.

Certainly the feds should assert their legal supremacy if they truly believe federal law covers the activity. It would be reasonably for them petition the state court to stay any orders requiring a business to cease operation while Feds seek to settle who the regulatory authority lays with.

However outside of defense production like situations I don't think federal government should be ordering anyone to operate anything. Clearing the way for the do so sure, but if say Kalshi simply does not want to deal with NY and NY customers until matter is settled they should be entirely free to simply exit the state.

Right it is a lack of understanding as far as the security model is concerned.

You are captive in a metal can and the authorities control the exists. It is not even like a bus or train where you might force the operators to top and you could run off into the woods or someone could meet you with a car, even if you hijack the thing by the time you land it, the authorities are there waiting for you.

There is little room for mischief on an airline because anything you might to try to escape mostly won't work and will mostly only dig a deeper hole...

Duh the in air wifi isn't running the very most hardened configuration and attacks like evil twin are possible. of course that is the posture because if it wasnt lots of older devices would not be able to connect and flyers would get upset.

The assumption is if you are smart enough to understand what deauth + evil twin attacks look like, you are smart enough to not do it on a commercial airliner because it is probably one of the FEW places you are nearly certain to get busted..

It was is all lazy lego stick together. Which I am not even sure is wrong entirely except for the lazy part.

I have looks a number of larger drone systems land, sea, and air. The state of the art is mostly off the self components, especially where it comes to scientific equipment and sensors because redesign of that stuff would blow the budget out and modification would risk function and invalidation of a tested tool.

So what you get is a drone with an Ethernet lan aboard along with the usual NAT router and some kinda of wan link, usually satellite but often mobile/cellular. Depending on the level of actual sophistication / development that router might sweep up and store the sensor data (or have partner server that does) and republish it or the router might just expose the individual components to some VPN.

When I first was asked to start looking at some of these 'platforms' I really expected more automotive-like engineering, thought I'd see CAN bus and body-module like patterns and you do but it is typically restricted to motor/servo controls, and navigational equipment that actually drive/fly/sail the things around.

so we are only optimizing for economic output consumption - f*** the planet

thanks for being honest Archie.

Half the stuff shipped in that packaging is destine to be waste in a short time horizon if it isn't before it is even delivered.

The real problem is we have to much disposable crap and the economics of that are ultimately driven by materials being cheap relative to labor to do things like invest in maintenance, upgrades, and repairs.

but tariffs are bad I am told ...

I am not writing in support of flock cameras. You and Compact Disk Reader are are deeply stupid. I don't even know where to start. You all can call me whatever names you want and brigade with your disagree mods but it does not change the fact that everything you support hands dangerous people more power.

You fools can run around going derp derp derp "flock" all you like but at the end of the day. Even if you get them taken down, big if, Target corporation and friends will just put them up. Someone will buy and aggregate the data. The police will have it again, and this time with LESS accountability.

I am trying to help you, by pointing out the problem is the unique identifiers, and people having 'to much freedom' to photo anyone and everything because it happens to be outdoors and do whatever they like with it.

But sure call me names or whatever. Don't worry I usually dismiss everything you two dipshits have to say too. At least drinkypoo says something smart every now and again. You two on the other hand never contribute anything useful.

So to be clear the issue isn't really about privacy at all. That is just noise. People trying to make it about privacy are liars.

The issues are:
1) A lot of people are intentionally commiting crimes of various severity and they don't actually want police to have a more effective enforcement tool

2) Some fear about false positives. Which I think is also over blown. Sure one woman was pulled from her car, and yes laziness and lack of understanding about how the system works lead to that. So sure the incident involved Flock but really policy have pulling people over or doing things like stop and frisk and getting overly aggressive for stupid reasons as long as we have had police. Flock isn't new here and really does not change anything.

The real problem is license plates at all. THAT should have never been accepted. Nobody plated up their horse or their horse cart. You can't in 2026 go around with a unique identifier being displayed or transmitted and NOT expect to be tracked everyone. You won't prevent government from collecting that data and using for things you both do and do not support. You certainly won't prevent other private parties from acquiring it and doing abusive things with it.

Flock is the symptom not the disease. People either need to demand anonymity and insist we stop displaying things like plates at all, and actually limit public photography, or just accept we will be tracked everywhere. There is no middle ground to be had.

So OpenAI "accidentally" lets their internal agents under test hack some third parties, and not to be out done Anthropic rushes out to say ours too!

I mean nothing says invest-able business like 'hi our products are dangerous and despite positioning ourselves as a leading tech firms we can't competently implement internet access controls'

We really are living in the dumbest universe

dude just hurl the abuse back at them. It is way more fun

He probably sees perfectly clearly unlike you, who can't see thru the constant tears.

What a sad sack

You sounds like an obese bitch

That is certainly true. However I also don't think this lawsuit should be entertained. Nothing here rises to the level real harassment, except in the head of this former employer, if even there as it just as like they are suing some with deep pockets because they can.

Cases like this need to be tossed, quickly and loudly to cut the bullshit.