blottsie

> The article compares the Russian jamming of Viasat with the compromise of a Starlink UT. No, no, no... This is really wrong!

This is a bit misleading. The article mentions the Viasat hack in the next-to-last paragraph of the article before the update in the context of satellite security more broadly:

> "As an increasing amount of satellites are launched—Amazon, OneWeb, Boeing, Telesat, and SpaceX are creating their own constellations—their security will come under greater scrutiny. In addition to providing homes with internet connections, the systems can also help to get ships online, and play a role in critical infrastructure. Malicious hackers have already shown that satellite internet systems are a target. As Russian troops invaded Ukraine, alleged Russian military hackers targeted the Via-Sat satellite system, deploying wiper malware that bricked people’s routers and knocked them offline. Around 30,000 internet connections in Europe were disrupted, including more than 5,000 wind turbines."

That's not really the point of this article tho. It's about the public release of the documents Frances Haugen provided to Congress and the media. Also, people make the argument you're making fairly regularly—indeed, it's been Zuckerberg's basic stance for a while.

The reason they don't include the roles of the people who resigned is likely because those people are anonymous sources, and revealing their position risks revealing their identities.

Here's the full report: http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-16-696T

The taste of wine is not the only quality of wine.

Like 2001, The Great Gadsby, The Dark Side of the Moon, or Guernica, wine can embody life beyond how much (or little) you enjoy it. The details—"hints of cassis, subtle earthiness, and jammy notes"—do not determine its quality either.

It is its history, its vigor, the revealed clues of its past—the flavors and smells that drive you to wildness and longing. A good wine makes your reminisce; a great wine makes you question.

The author assumes that a pleasurable taste trumps all, and that price comes in a close second. And it likely does for most buyers—but that says more about us than it does about wine. People are not art.

Can you get a cheap wine that tastes good? Of course. But expect to get a poster of the Mona Lisa rather than the real thing.

There aren't many instances of actual fines, but this is the most prominent one: The FAA tried to fine drone pilot Raphael Pirker $10,000 [1] for being paid by the University of Virginia Medical Center to film a promo video with a drone. Pirker challenged the fine and won. The FAA changed its rules after that decision and Pirker eventually settled for $1,100.

[1] http://kernelmag.dailydot.com/issue-sections/features-issue-...

Full disclosure: I was an editor on this report.

This is a misleading headline. It approved BP to use a drone for pipeline surveillance over land in Alaska—that's it. It's not a blanket approval for all commercial uses.

The reason the NYTimes author (and others) compared 'The Day We Fight Back" to the SOPA protests is likely because 'The Day We Fight Back' used the success against SOPA as its primary example of what online protests can do. The campaign set SOPA as the benchmark, not The New York Times. Its website, before the current updated version, repeatedly evoked the defeat of SOPA as the measuring stick. It did so in the text on the site and the promotional video.

Even the name "The Day We Fight Back" implies that this is a fight that can be won in a day. Supporters later pointed out that this is a long war, not a fight for a day. But the initial promotion of this campaign did little to encourage people to take this fight and make it part of their lives for the foreseeable future. And the fact that supporters are justifying the legitimacy and effectiveness of this campaign by citing one-day numbers only furthers the notion that a single day can make a difference in what will inevitably be an ongoing battle for the rest of our lives.

The conflict has nothing to do with the federal government requiring the state government to outlaw marijuana. The conflict is, possessing, selling, or in any other way distributing marijuana is a federal offense. From the Controlled Substances Act [1]

"§ 844. Penalties for simple possession.

"(a) Unlawful acts; penalties "It shall be unlawful for any person knowingly or intentionally to possess a controlled substance unless such substance was obtained directly, or pursuant to a valid prescription or order, from a practitioner, while acting in the course of his professional practice, or except as otherwise authorized by this subchapter or subchapter II of this chapter. Any person who violates this subsection may be sentenced to a term of imprisonment of not more than 1 year, and shall be fined a minimum of $1,000, or both, except that if he commits such offense after a prior conviction under this subchapter or subchapter II of this chapter, or a prior conviction for any drug or narcotic offense chargeable under the law of any State, has become final, he shall be sentenced to a term of imprisonment for not less than 15 days but not more than 2 years, and shall be fined a minimum of $2,500, except, further, that if he commits such offense after two or more prior convictions under this subchapter or subchapter II of this chapter, or two or more prior convictions for any drug or narcotic offense chargeable under the law of any State, or a combination of two or more such offenses have become final, he shall be sentenced to a term of imprisonment for not less than 90 days but not more than 3 years, and shall be fined a minimum of $5,000. Notwithstanding the preceding sentence, a person convicted under this subsection for the possession of a mixture or substance which contains cocaine base shall be imprisoned not less than 5 years and not more than 20 years, and fined a minimum of $1,000, if the conviction is a first conviction under this subsection and the amount of the mixture or substance exceeds 5 grams, if the conviction is after a prior conviction for the possession of such a mixture or substance under this subsection becomes final and the amount of the mixture or substance exceeds 3 grams, or if the conviction is after 2 or more prior convictions for the possession of such a mixture or substance under this subsection become final and the amount of the mixture or substance exceeds 1 gram. The imposition or execution of a minimum sentence required to be imposed under this subsection shall not be suspended or deferred. Further, upon conviction, a person who violates this subsection shall be fined the reasonable costs of the investigation and prosecution of the offense, including the costs of prosecution of an offense as defined in sections 1918 and 1920 of title 28, except that this sentence shall not apply and a fine under this section need not be imposed if the court determines under the provision of title 18 that the defendant lacks the ability to pay."

1. http://www.fda.gov/regulatoryinformation/legislation/ucm1487...

CGI is a Canadian company, but CGI Federal is a wholly-owned U.S. subsidiary.