Slashdot Mirror
How Do I Prevent Lan Party Theft?
DragonTHC writes "I'm thinking about hosting a lan party open to the public. I'm aiming for approximately 60 people to attend. I can handle all the logistics of operation. The only thing I can't wrap my head around is: how do I prevent theft at the lan party? Do I hire security guards? Do I need security cameras? I don't know the people who will attend, and I don't know if they're trustworthy enough to not steal other people's equipment. What do I do?"
I'm just waiting for a bunch of smartass mods to swoop in and mark all of this graybeard talk as "Offtopic".
How often do you get to downmod a 4- or 5-digit UID?
I can't imagine what a dull life it would be still having my first ID here...
Because not everyone treats user accounts on like alt characters in World of Warcraft?
The only thing I'm really worried about is the prospect of oil prices coming back down. I don't think that's going to happen to any real degree (growing demand in China and India) but if it did then I'd worry that people would forget about it and go back to driving gas-guzzlers. If we are lucky they will stay in the neighborhood of where they are now -- high enough that it hurts but not so high that the rug is pulled out from under the developed world.
I think that's true. With them as high as they are, people are abandoning gas guzzlers in droves, but otherwise are carrying on as normal. Personally, my wife and I haven't really noticed the fuel cost increase that much since we both drive 30+mpg cars, and weren't dumb enough to live 40 miles away from work. I do see a huge amount of new interest in electric vehicles and hybrids which wasn't there before.
You are advocating for a course of action that would literally ruin the lives of millions of people around the world.
This is the whole problem with globalization, IMO. It makes people too interdependent, and when something goes wrong, it affects the whole planet, instead of the effects being contained. People, regions, and countries need to be more self-sufficient
and weren't dumb enough to live 40 miles away from work.
My commute is 29 miles one way because my employer is located in the middle of nowhere. I could move closer -- but then I'd just be driving every single time I want a gallon of milk or to see a movie. I do what I can to mitigate this -- carpool four days a week (can't on Fridays because our schedules don't mesh up) and telecommute whenever possible.
This is the whole problem with globalization, IMO. It makes people too interdependent, and when something goes wrong, it affects the whole planet, instead of the effects being contained. People, regions, and countries need to be more self-sufficient
It's a toss up. In theory free trade results in people producing the goods that they can make most efficiently and trading for those goods that others can produce more efficiently, thus increasing production. In theory this results in a higher standard of living for everybody. Of course reality doesn't always work out this way and trade isn't really "free" (even Adam Smith said that free trade should take a back seat to national security.... I wonder what he would think of our dependence on imported oil?) but on balance I think that free trade has benefited a lot of countries.
Of course if oil keeps going up this might be a moot point. Economists disagree on the exact number but most think that at a certain point (anywhere from $200 - $400/barrel depending on whose figures you believe) energy costs will make it uneconomical to ship a lot of goods halfway across the world. If that happens I think you'll still see free trade and interdependent countries -- but it will be more regional in scope, i.e.: we'd be buying our cheap imported crap from Latin/South America instead of China.
I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
It's a toss up. In theory free trade results in people producing the goods that they can make most efficiently and trading for those goods that others can produce more efficiently, thus increasing production. In theory this results in a higher standard of living for everybody. Of course reality doesn't always work out this way and trade isn't really "free" (even Adam Smith said that free trade should take a back seat to national security.... I wonder what he would think of our dependence on imported oil?) but on balance I think that free trade has benefited a lot of countries.
I think free trade is generally good for things like consumer electronics and other cheap things which aren't necessities for a modern society, and can be replaced by other sources. But for things which economies and national security are dependent on, like oil, I wonder if more regulation is necessary. For instance, Mexico's oil production is nationalized, and Mexicans pay only around $2/gallon for gasoline, as the price is set by the government. Of course, they're a net exporter unlike us, so their situation is a little different. I would also argue that food production is another thing that maybe shouldn't be subject to unfettered free trade; shouldn't we be feeding ourselves before others?
The idea of free trade sounds good in theory, but I don't think the theory accounts for complexities like wars and other hostilities between nations, or the fact that some goods are more vital than others. Should a poor country allow private interests to buy up all the fertile land and grow bananas for export to rich countries, leaving the people there to starve because they can't afford to compete with the people in rich countries, whose currency is more valuable? I don't think so; that's a matter of national security. This theory seems to assume everyone is on a level playing field, so to speak, and that simply isn't the case.