... that would pretty much sum up the announcement!

...let me reiterate this:
* so in a country with a liberal gun ownership regime, choosing your own method for ordering lenses has to be government-controlled?

So, what's the original problem we were trying to solve?!

bollocks. Yes, that.

Any security organization which relies on a single individual's action or inaction to remain in good standing is simply fairytale.
Every good process which involves a human in the loop, should always ensure that at least one more is present to enforce check-and-balance objectives.
There is a good reason why all commercial flights have two pilots as a default.

Let me state this: when you see management pointing one single downstream individual for such an event, there are at least TWO levels of management at fault.

Salvation Army? here you go:
http://www.arrl.org/news/salva...

First things first: I'm an Eur Ing certified Engineer (practicing and whatever) and hope that people become more conscious about what the fuss is about.

* Society does not (and should not) grant exclusive professional titles and rights for fun, it does so because it protects citizens' life(-state) and property.
I guess we would all hope society continues to do so: Doctors, Lawyers, Engineers are meant to help human life.

1)
In this particular case, there is no much struggle to consider that this gentleman comes with a case worthy of discussion and he should be heard.
If he is registered engineer or not, that's irrelevant per se. The technical case needs to be discussed regardless and I personally believe/bet he has a point.

2)
Furthermore, under certain circumstances he could be qualified to be called Engineer - it seems not so in Oregon - and the following is to be examined:
https://www.usaopps.com/govern...
In that, you may observe that an Oregon address is used as base for "Engineering Services", under his name; oops, that _may_ be regulated!
It IS his responsibility to ensure that he is complying with the local law - there is simply no excuse for that, if he is advertising engineering services.
fi. building code changes from place to place, there is no excuse for not adhering to it!

3)
This is obviously a "negotiation" that went out of hand from both sides;
the language below appears appropriate and respectful -not abnormal of a regulatory authority- however between the lines there is some confrontation:
https://lintvkoin.files.wordpr...
Hey, that's not how to build bridges - pun intended!

The case also highlights that the engineering community could benefit from some norms about how to solicit feedback from both licensed engineers and the wider public, and be held accountable, if there are omissions; there will be something to learn out of all this process.
fi. regular car drivers have plenty to confess about near-misses, which COULD and SHOULD shape the opinions within formal traffic engineering bodies.

The discussion is going to be interesting and it's great this takes publicity, because it will force some healthy debate.

So, let's not be too quick to circumvent the lawyers and judges, they are specialists under a protected profession, exactly for that kind of thing ;-)

I am a night owl (I go to sleep about the time you wake up :-P ) and I don't drink coffee nearly ever, due to the bio causes explained by others.
btw. I have written the Linux Coffee-Howto - but this is purely incidental: it's about how to *make* coffee, not how to *drink* it!

wow, this is super interesting.

iff it proves to be the case that the same event causes G.W. & G.R.B observations and there is a relationship that connects the speed of the two arrivals,
like in an earthquake's P&S waves, this is a whole new tool to trace events in the cosmos, as they occur. Combining with an extra handful of observations points,
it would be possible to easily find the source point via triangulation, at distances which are mind-glowing (pun intended!). Good luck with this - literally!

... to troll together straight in the source?!

Yes, THIS.

"Sorry, my memory has failed me. What are you going to do? will you fire me? ;-)"

That clause is so ridiculous, that this kind of response would make even the judge chuckle with content!

I don't know where you got this from but it's not even remotely plausible. A muon beam intense enough to produce lethal levels of neutrinos would be intense enough to burn a hole through the Earth, and would have killed everyone via perfectly ordinary Bremsstralhung radiation long before neutrinos came into play.
 

fyi. I've done both EA & sysadmin roles at different times.

This should be the norm for a EA position, who acts more as a consultant in relation to stakeholders' needs.
You may ask for your own isolated playground if you need so but, what exactly do you need root access for in this role?

Why exactly skip the, intentionally slower, "sudo" step?

This has been coming for decades, and yet governments have been far too busy lining the pockets of members of the party in power to do anything about it. Donald Kingsbury predicted home-built cruise missiles in the '80's (in "The Moon Goddess and the Son").

It's been obvious since the early 90's that computing costs and hardware costs were falling so rapidly that anyone could do this on a budget of a few thousand dollars. That's now a few hundred dollars. And fully autonomous operation is not far in the future: it's just not that hard.

So the reason no one has done anything about this is that hardly anyone has been paying attention, and those of us who have believe that drone technology is worth the price of the risk posed by machines like this. There was simply no way to not get to this point without cutting off development of half-a-dozen technologies that are too important for too many things to ignore, not even counting the economic benefits of drones themselves.

Writing code is human action. As someone pointed about above, it would literally appear that a weapon fired by a loop would count as an automatic, but a weapon fired by a sequence of individual calls to the "pullTrigger" method would not be, because the act of writing each one of those "pullTrigger" calls would be an individual human action that resulted in the gun firing.

I'm not suggesting this would stand up in court--for all I know it might, but that's not knowable until it does--but serves as a nice illustration of how our categories start to break down in the face of new technology.

I've seen many claims that being a human with autism somehow gives you some special access to animal experiences. Since no one knows what animals actually experience, and pretty much everything we know about both animal evolution and autism tells us that a human with autism is if anything less likely than a neurotypical human to have sound insight into the lived experience of a domesticated harem-keeping herbivorous prey-animal with completely different evolved responses to external stimuli--since neurotypical humans are generally better than humans with autism at building models of other minds--does it bother you as a scientist to see these completely unfounded, unjustified and likely false claims made, despite the huge benefits they have had to marketing your personal brand, and the likely good your prominence in the field has done regarding the humane treatment of animals?

Agreed: if this work was identical in every respect but said nothing about climate, no one would pay any attention to it. Instead, it "must be false" because it has been used by Denialists (somehow... it isn't clear to me how, but Denialists are insane so I guess it doesn't have to be).

My favorite response to this story from Warmists has been statements along the lines of, "The Little Ice Age was local to Europe and in any case caused by volcanic eruptions" (which result in global cooling.) It's a bit like the old Russian joke about "It was a long time ago and in any case it never happened."

It is possible but quite tricky to reconcile the claims that the Little Ice Age was both local and caused by volcanoes, but the people putting forward these arguments don't even try. They just spout whatever contradiction sustains their faith.

This is not to say AGW isn't real and doesn't deserve a significant policy response, including rapid building of modern nuclear plants to replace base-load coal, shifting of taxes from income to carbon emissions, and public money spent to support solar, storage and smarter grids. But many people who "believe in global warming" have decoupled themselves from the science, such that almost anything that happens will be spun in support of their beliefs.