Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop


Forgot your password?
Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! No Flash necessary and runs on all devices. ×

Comment Re:It's already known (Score 1) 227

The FAA has statutory authority over every bit of US (and territorial) air space from 1mm above the ground. They are exactly who defines who can fly where. That has nothing to do with things like privacy laws - that's about what you do with, for example, images taken while flying. Right now, that's a patchwork of local and state laws. But who (and what) can fly where and how high: that's FAA turf, entirely.

Comment Re:Look a bit higher (Score 1) 227

The over .55, under 55 pound RC aircraft must carry a registration number in plain site. If you own four of them, all four must carry that number. If you operate under part 107, all of your RC devices need their own unique registration codes. These aren't "guidelines," these are rules now formally in place with serious consequences should you blow them off.

Comment Re:The blame can be shared (Score 1) 196

"hottest years on record"

For how long have we had relatively accurate temperature measurement? Anything before that is proxy. And "hottest" by how much - tenths of a degree while we emerge from an ice age? After data-fiddling from selected sources? CO2 output up over the past 20 years and temperatures are stable. Game over, now let's stop throwing money away on this taxpayer-funded hysteria.

Comment Re:Y'know... Actually... (Score 0) 196

Well, they do willfully ignore any and all evidence that contradicts their hypothesis. And there's too much (taxpayer) money, virtue-signalling and too many opportunities for false moral superiority personal attacks to let go. Some people get a kick out of abusing others and if you can do it with government support, all the better!

Comment Re:And What Will Come of It? (Score 1) 71

but there is nothing intrinsically different about police officers that makes them honest.

And yet we apply this on a professional scale quite often. e.g. Australian government documents often need signatures witnessed. The gold standard is by a justice of the peace, a judge, or an attorney. However then we get down to medical professions such as doctor, chiropractor, physio, nurse, etc. To the questionable such as an engineer who is a registered member of engineers Australia excluding student members, police officer, sheriff, or a permanent employee of the Australian postal service with at least 5 years continuous service. All the way to the down right hilarious such as a member of parliament or the local government.

The only thing that's intrinsically different about the people on the list is that their employment contract or membership contract requires swearing to be truthful and act in good faith. At least this applies to everyone except the last example. E.g. If I in bad faith breath the trust placed in me, it may not only get me fired but also de-registered as an engineer. The same should *in theory* apply to police and that *in theory* should keep them honest.

Slashdot Top Deals

It is much easier to suggest solutions when you know nothing about the problem.