No, the simplest fix is to not patronize AliExpress.

The idiots canceling their contracts over this don't realize that they are making the case for its necessity better than Anthropic ever could.

Flock cameras are contracted almost exclusively by local municipalities, not the federal government.

While I suppose that Congress could pass a bill banning federal agencies for paying for access to their data, if you want to keep the cameras out of your neighborhood, the place to do it is at your local council meeting.

Which would be at all germane if Flock cameras were traffic enforcement/speed cameras.

They are not.

"The graphics suck, and I can't eat Cheetohs at my desk. I'm going back to work at Best Buy."

This is literally the first time I have ever seen a /. article on climate change when no AGW skeptics have comments modded +1 or higher. Guess the writing is finally on the wall even for the dead-enders.

U.S. Secretary of DEFENSE Pete Hegseth doesn't believe in germs because he "can't see them" and claimed he hadn't washed his hands in 10 years. NO JOKE. Best and brightest, indeed.

Despite your moral panic, the fact is that violent crime rates in the U.S. are currently at the lowest rate they have been in 50 years.

Hahahahaha. Couldn't have happened to a nicer group of assholess than Bimmer drivers.

Thhe strategy you suggest is pretty much exactly what the Trump administration has been doing to the world for a year and a half.

The other irony is that it says "let freedom ring" but features a bell that hasn't been rung since 1846 due to the large crack in it.

This is not exactly uncharted ground here. These jurisdictional issues are literally covered in the first week (often the very first day) of the first class of the first year of law school (Civil Procedure).

Google "International Shoe Co. v. Washington" and edify yourself.

Except that's not how it works at all, because a) risk doesn't scale linearly with exposure, b) there's a huge difference between external and internal exposure, and c) you seem to be assuming that all cancer/cancer is can be traced to radiation exposure, which is nowhere close to the truth. In fact, it's a tiny fraction, far behind things like chemical exposure and plain old random genetic mis-transcription.

Heck, even in the hardest hit areas in Japan from the Fukushima disaster, the WHO estimates only a 4% increase in the lifetime risk of hard tumor occurrence for female children (the highest risk group) with significant internal exposure to radioisotopes. And to clarify, that's a 4% increase to the rate, not an additional 4% likelihood of getting cancer.

The same study estimates the highest change would be in the rate of thyroid cancer, an increase of 70%, but even there, the change in the absolute chances lifetime occurrence is only estimated to go from like .5% to .8%. And that's a cancer that's particularly linked to internal exposure, so not particularly germane to the scenario being discussed here.

I'm pretty shocked that this is the first design receiving commercial approval. I recall having heard about this approach for decades and assumed it was deployed years ago. Guess it's a good illustration of the challenges of working in a marine environment.

Yeah, and there are other cancers than can be triggered by transmissible viruses as well. HPV/cervical cancer comes to mind.

But what appears they are saying is novel about these conditions are that the cancer cells themselves are what's jumping from individual to individual.