innocentfelon

Seems plausible. 1000mi of mostly rural interstate highways (how NJ gets its goods from points west), plus nuclear weapons development, testing, and disposal are popular enough with the NM locals, as are anti-poverty programs, but yank the federal funding, and the locals would be far less friendly to NJ telling NM to supply or pay for these things on its own.

Be very unlucky. Then the networking happens against your will.

The divulging comes in the form of an indictment, or, if you decide your integrity is not for sale and you turn down a plea offer, multiple days of hearings, trial, and sentencing.

Val Kilmer did the same thing to a coffee vending machine in the movie Real Genius.

Instead of using Android, he used a freezer and a small hacksaw to section off coin-sized slugs from a frozen rod.

Have to give the points to Kilmer’s character because in addition to doing it first, his crime left almost no trail and didn’t come with felony exposure (most juries would not believe ice slugs are counterfeiting)

Making a daily habit of getting free hacked coffee could result in felony convictions and imprisonment in many countries for violating electronic data laws. I know FBI agents happy to bring charges for matters this trivial. This is where they’d rather spend their time instead of pursuing big league criminals.

Still a great article to read.

This latest batch of census numbers still hinges on the subset of structures considered to be rental housing or owner-occupied housing.

And I believe the census goes by what the property owner claims. “My 120-unit condo building with nobody living in it? Yeah, that’s not housing, Ms. census taker.” “Ok.”

And even that doesn’t include industrial, commercial, and office properties that should be converted to housing in response to fair market demand, artificially withheld to make them more liquid as stores of value. The town is full of these and few people notice because they’re not housing and they’re not for rent.

There needs to be a similar moratorium on this red herring of an argument.

Buildings off the rental market don’t count as vacant rentals. Failure to understand this normally subtle distinction retards the progress of this discussion.

If I said there are very few single women in SF because 98% of marriage-minded women are married, you’d see the flaw in the reasoning I’m talking about.

It’s time we passed a moratorium on building articles like this that fail to address the real villain in this affair: vacant properties deliberately kept vacant, because tenants drive property values way down.

San Francisco bears way too much resemblance to an end-stage game of Monopoly, where one player owns almost all the properties, there’s no more paper money in the bank, and there are no more houses or hotels left in the box. That last $150 house on Marvin Gardens (the only misspelled property) isn’t getting built to generate a good ROI- it’s built to either ruin the competition when they stay there (driving them to the poor house- sound familiar?), or because there’s literally no more places to stash your wealth.

Tossing the game board sure sounds like the only good move left to make. That, or getting up to leave.

The term for this situation is ”streetlighting”, where the possible reigns over the correct.

“It’s dark in that alley. I’d never find my keys there.”

Doesn’t matter if it’s extremely difficult to get good data here. What matters is we can’t substitute bad data if that’s all we can come up with.

And although I stated it as smokers lying, the implication is that the nonsmokers are lying (by claiming to smoke).

The biggest flaw in this study has gone unmentioned: smokers lie.

No one’s following these kids around to verify their responses are accurate. A sizable percentage of high school kids lie about anything for any number of reasons. Yeah man, I vape, can I go now? Yeah man, I smoke, are we done?

That alone is plenty to throw out this data. The agenda here is clear: more research funding to justify harebrained regulations supported by halfassed written surveys.

I read it again, twice. That is exactly what they’re doing.

Their starting material is CO2-source cement, not some natural “rock”.

Counterexamples are substantially more helpful than downvotes.

I wish more people realized the concrete thing is snake oil.

When you make cement, you heat up natural CaCO3 -> CaO + CO2. The heat itself also requires combustion, so more CO2.

Some cements have perhaps 10% CaCO3 added to their mix. It’s not so much desirable as cheap filler.

What the media fails to realize is pumping CO2 into curing cement reverses the CaO reaction. In other words, every CO2 molecule you capture releases 2 or more. You’d be better off using less CaO and more CaCO3 to begin with.

Everyone seems to misunderstand photosynthesis. It can’t occur without water, and in fact, the oxygen plants release is from the water, not the CO2.

The smart money on useful compounds is CO and O2, made possible with high temperatures, CO2, and not much else.

Using similar logic, you could argue all countries need to get with the program and speak English.

Or use US dollars.

Or (yikes) Microsoft Windows.

America’s quaint and annoying reliance on feet, inches, miles, and pounds is culturally important, even if it makes engineering a pain.

CIGS, like CdTe, has always been limited by material economics. As demand goes up, the world economy’s limited production of these exotic byproducts can’t keep up.

Believe it or don’t, the last time I crunched the numbers, it was the Selenium in CIGS that they’re having the most trouble unlocking more of.

Let’s not forget that many thin-film amorphous silicon devices use multiple junctions as well.

Try dichroic if you don’t mean translucent.

The government did modify the spreadsheet, and we alleged as much multiple times.

They didn’t even gave us one SQL query like that. All we got was a typo-ridden excel spreadsheet, with multiple authors, no chain of custody, no queries, and a random list of accounts that can hop state lines in minutes, and they told the courts that was how the information came out of the computer.

If that SQL query was what they actually produced, everything would be fine. We asked them for the queries they used, but they refused.

The quote is what they call “dicta”, or in passing. If you follow the cited opinions in this brief you will find them all totally inappropriate. They don’t say what the circuit judge says they say. It’s like the judge just had his clerk do it and didn’t check the work.

It won’t let me respond as fast as you all are attacking me, so you’ll have to bear with me.

Succinctly isn’t the word I would choose. A 9-page opinion with this number of issues brought is sloppy.

Check the sound bytes under exhibit B on the evidence page to hear the author of that opinion and tell me with a straight face that he got it right.

Your first link, while from the case, has little to do with the appeal. To illustrate, that document (#177) happened long before the trial, and now we’re up to #485. The rest of the response makes faulty assumptions.

Amazing how “fabricated evidence” goes in one ear and out the other. “Of course you’re guilty- the fabricated evidence proves it!”

There are no outside, reasonable news sources. If you can make an intro to a journalist on my behalf, that’d help.

Otherwise, your advice is like telling a poor person they should have more money.

Check profile.

Happy to answer specifics.

Wow, EFF.

I knew when you turned me down for an amicus brief, my only hope of staying out of prison, that it was you were too busy doing more important things.

Then I see this.

Invalidating stupid patents is obviously far more important to society than writing a little note to protect the accused against rampant government misconduct and technophobia. Who needs a sixth amendment right to confrontation, anyway?

That’s definitely not what Gilmore, Barlow, and Kapor set out to do, but as I rot, at least I’ll be secure in the knowledge that patent abuse will not go unnoticed by the people I trusted in but who were too busy to help me.

Don’t be so sure. Even though summer gives you more direct sunlight and longer days, it also knocks down your efficiency (and weather patterns in some areas will be more inclined to cloud over those months).

In the US the same is true with wind as in Europe. Places with good summer wind resources are uncommon, but California has a few of them.

Suffice it to say, [1] is not what was being referred to (though it’s still a fair point).

Let’s talk about the costs of this case. It’s been dragging on for 7+ years now and I’d love to share an official accounting of what it cost every party involved, but no such accounting will ever exist. I’m sure it’s immense and well into the 7 figures by now.

We’ve been unable to afford our own counsel (a situation verified by, and kinda forced by, the government) so our defense has been paid for by your tax dollars. The 4 prosecutors in this case have been paid for by your tax dollars. The judge and jury? Yep, you guessed it. (BTW, judge earns more each day than the entire 14-member jury does). The 17+ agent FBI assault team armed with M4 assault rifles and hundreds of hours of “billable” phone hours by certain agents who couldn’t recall under oath the names of the people they spent those hours talking to? Your tax dollars.

Even if that company gets that amount of money from us (and gets to keep it), I’m certain the amount they’ve paid their own people to tilt at this particular windmill will make it a loss even to the company. That’s before the upcoming news of the consumer data leak makes it out there.

Dear taxpayer, you’re not done paying. The only question left is whether the bureau of prisons or yours truly, or both, will be cashing those checks.

Given the limitations of this messaging forum and your interest in the discussion, I hope it’s all right if I continue this discussion directly. For the benefit of everyone else on the thread, they can likewise reach me directly.

I understand the coder’s urge to distill the argument down to a missed OR operator, but it wrongly oversimplifies a matter that can take hours to fully get across.

As to the wisdom of the publicity, it remains to be seen. If you were wrongfully convicted, how quiet would you be?

The evidence in this case to support that indictment was fabricated (its author even disavowed its authorship under oath).

Many judges feel that if a computer is used to produce evidence, it is self-authenticating. This is the issue we plan to take up, since we (and our experts) were never allowed access to the evidence against us.

At first glance, that filing is indeed from this case.

Being from the US doesn’t help it make any more sense.

Corporations can use the US government as bill collectors, when they’d lose in civil court.

The joke is that any prosecutor worth her salt can indict a ham sandwich. The sad fact is convicting a ham sandwich is almost as easy.

This is absolutely not satire. The case is 1:13-CR-00966-JCH-KK-1.