Slashdot Mirror


Adam Savage Revises Claim of Lawyer-Bullying On RFID Show

Nick writes "A few weeks ago a video of a talk given by Adam Savage of the television show MythBusters spread across the internet (including a mention on Slashdot.) On the video, Savage stated that the show was unable to produce an episode about previously known RFID vulnerabilities due to a conference call to Texas Instruments that unexpectedly included several credit card companies' legal counsel. TI (via a spokesperson talking with cnet.com) stated that only one lawyer was on the call and that the majority of the people on the call were product managers from the Smart Card Alliance (SCA) invited by TI to speak. Then Savage (via a Discovery Communications statement) reaffirmed that he was not on the call himself and that the decision was not made by Discovery or their advertising sales department but rather MythBuster's production company, Beyond Productions."

74 of 301 comments (clear)

  1. so by thermian · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Ok, so they told him to revise his story to make them seem nicer or get the boot?

    Methinks this is likely.

    --
    A learning experience is one of those things that say, 'You know that thing you just did? Don't do that.' - D. Adams
    1. Re:so by Ogive17 · · Score: 4, Informative

      Boot him where? Without Adam Savage "Mythbusters" loses quite a bit of its' luster. I would be willing to bet "Mythbusters" is one of Discovery Channel's more popular shows.

      --
      "Action without philosophy is a lethal weapon; philosophy without action is worthless."
    2. Re:so by Mashiki · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Very possible that it got enough public traction and that's exactly what happened. Now they're hoping it'll quietly slip under the radar, which it'll probably do.

      I distrust lawyers, and I don't trust TV shows or their hosts. So is it fair to be at odds with the entire thing still? Yep. Is it more fair to believe that security through obscurity is fair? Probably.

      --
      Om, nomnomnom...
    3. Re:so by Shakrai · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Is it more fair to believe that security through obscurity is fair?

      Security through obscurity is nothing new to Mythbusters. How many times have we seen them censor themselves when talking about explosives or chemicals when you can easily obtain the censored information in all of 30 seconds with a Google search?

      My guess is that it's something the lawyers make them do.

      --
      I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
      We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
    4. Re:so by Otter · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Savage's original claim ("Texas Instruments comes on along with chief legal counsel for American Express, Visa, Discover, and everybody else...") is preposterous on its face. You might get those guys to show up for the finalization of a merger, but not for a meeting between some TI engineers and a TV producer.

    5. Re:so by BobMcD · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Boot him where? Without Adam Savage "Mythbusters" loses quite a bit of its' luster. I would be willing to bet "Mythbusters" is one of Discovery Channel's more popular shows.

      True, but not so popular that they wouldn't just kill it and run re-runs while they scrambled for a replacement.

      When the entire network is at stake, NO ONE is THAT irreplaceable.

    6. Re:so by Ron_Fitzgerald · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I agree. Whatever they may say, there most important people are the sponsors, not the viewers.

      One episode in particular was where they were not allowed to say 'sperm'. They had to replace a prefectly fine medical term with 'genetic material'.

      It is a science show for pete's sake!

      --
      ~ Ron Fitzgerald
    7. Re:so by jayhawk88 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      When the entire network is at stake, NO ONE is THAT irreplaceable.

      Good point. Can you imagine what the Discovery suits did when AmEx, Visa, Discover, etc said to them "Well if you think our cards are so insecure, perhaps we should just pull our credit card processing from your web and retail stores". Probably it never came to this exactly but I'm sure the message was clear: You don't bite the hand that feeds you.

    8. Re:so by s1lhouette · · Score: 2, Insightful

      compared to dirty jobs, tougher in Alaska, ice road truckers, ax men, and deadliest catch, Mythbusters is a show for the gods.

    9. Re:so by MobyDisk · · Score: 4, Insightful

      As a programmer, I've been on calls that were supposed to be technical, but due to miscommunications or management concerns managers and even the CEO was on the call. Having legal council there to hear the proposal from the Discovery team seems possible to me.

    10. Re:so by VeNoM0619 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Tell him to go on "Penn and Tellers' Bullshit" where they bring to light all types of issues. For anyone who loves Mythbusters, I also recommend that show.

      In fact, I hope that would be their next episode (or possibly already is, since I'm only halfway through season 2)

      --
      Disclaimer: I am not god.
      We may not be created equal
      But we can be treated equal.
    11. Re:so by bigstrat2003 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      "Well if you think our cards are so insecure, perhaps we should just pull our credit card processing from your web and retail stores".

      Wouldn't Discovery have an excellent basis for a lawsuit here? I imagine that pulling someone's merchant account just because you don't like what they said wouldn't be allowed, but then again, IANAL.

      --
      "16MB (fuck off, MiB fascists)" - The Mighty Buzzard
    12. Re:so by jellomizer · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Any replacement just wouldn't work well. There is a particular chemistry between Adam and Jamie (in a non gay way) that makes the show interesting. Jamie alone would just be to intimating of a character, too overbearing. Just as Adam alone the show would be to chaotic and wild. Both together really help moderate both. Taking Jamie's edge off, and actually making Adam seem like he knows what he is doing.
      While the 3 stooges Karie, Grant and Tory, can probably pull it off but they are not really known for the big builds.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    13. Re:so by SuiteSisterMary · · Score: 5, Funny

      seems possible to me.

      In this context, you'd need to use the word 'plausible.'

      --
      Vintage computer games and RPG books available. Email me if you're interested.
    14. Re:so by SuiteSisterMary · · Score: 3, Funny

      Actually, I'd say those merchant accounts improve the standing of the CC companies.

      "The ToS you signed clearly says you won't try to circumvent the security features on the Credit Card systems we let you use, and you're making a FREAKING TELEVISION SHOW about it?"

      --
      Vintage computer games and RPG books available. Email me if you're interested.
    15. Re:so by Minwee · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Boot him where? Without Adam Savage "Mythbusters" loses quite a bit of its' luster. I would be willing to bet "Mythbusters" is one of Discovery Channel's more popular shows.

      Right. And no network would dare cancel a show that people around here like. That's why shows like Firefly, Emeril Live and Stargate SG-1, to say nothing of Jericho, Babylon 5, Futurama, Family Guy, and The Office, have been airing non-stop on their original networks for years.

      And let's not even mention how Star Trek is still on the air fourty years later.

    16. Re:so by mugnyte · · Score: 4, Insightful

        Regardless of who was in on the meeting and how it happened - it was political, not scientific. This leaves standing the elephant in the room: RFID is simplistic to mimic.

        If one understands the radio wave effects (backscatter or modulation), one could use a scanner to capture all the RFID's within a zone.

        Then, essentially building a device tuned to emit an identical signal (for passive, this is secretive but not impossible as Adam alludes to), (for active, I'm unsure how difficult this is) and then this clone can be used in lieu of the original tag.

        This means for RFID-cards using passive technology, cloning them is allegedly a education measure, not a true security measure. Like unlocking cell phones and other corner-store concepts, one could imagine RFID signatures built-to-order based on scanner values (one need not have the original RFID, just a response from it).

    17. Re:so by cthulu_mt · · Score: 5, Funny

      I'm imagining Karie pulling it off.

      I'll be in my bunk if anyone needs me.

      --
      Virginia is for lovers. EVE is for griefers.
    18. Re:so by BobMcD · · Score: 2

      The entire telling was hyperbole, and his tone of voice labeled it as such. The details weren't meant to be a factual recap. When he talks about how white the staffer gets retelling the story, that's a big clue.

    19. Re:so by Trespass · · Score: 2, Funny

      compared to dirty jobs, tougher in Alaska, ice road truckers, ax men, and deadliest catch, Mythbusters is a show for the gods.

      Compared to being shot or stabbed, a toothache feels great as well.

    20. Re:so by The_Wilschon · · Score: 2, Informative

      I doubt it. RFIDs that need to be secure (credit card, not product tag) can easily incorporate some sort of cryptographic mechanism to prevent cloning. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RFID#Security_concerns, third paragraph. Of course, that paragraph lacks a reference. Trust at your own risk.

      --
      SIGSEGV caught, terminating

      wait... not that kind of sig.
    21. Re:so by elrous0 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Hey, Deadliest Catch was a great show in its first season. But then Alaska changed the fishing rules and went to a quota system instead of a "grab what you can until we sound the horn" system. From the second season onward it got pretty boring. I don't even know why they still do the "crab count" thing. After the first season, it's meaningless.

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    22. Re:so by maxume · · Score: 3, Informative

      You are delirious. Amex makes (that's income to shareholders) about $250 million dollars a *month*:

      http://finance.yahoo.com/q/ks?s=AXP

      Mastercard makes about $30 million a month:

      http://finance.yahoo.com/q/ks?s=MA

      The ownership of Discovery is sort of opaque:

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discovery_Communications

      But some numbers are available (this holding company does not represent 100% of the Discovery channel and related operations):

      http://finance.yahoo.com/q/ks?s=DISCA

      (they lost money on about $700 million in revenues)

      Beyond Productions is a little more open:

      http://www.beyond.com.au/corporate/reports.html
      http://www.beyond.com.au/pdf/bil2008_accounts.pdf

      The made about $5 million (Australian dollars) last year.

      The credit card companies are not going to enter into a protracted legal battle with significant PR consequences chasing after a few tens of millions of dollars.

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
    23. Re:so by moxley · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It's not like they would say:

      "Oh, wel pulled your merchant account because we didn't like what you said."

      No, that isn't how it works. Standard practice is to pick some other reason or infraction (of which there will be many, which 99% of the time would be overlooked or not mentioned).

      Believe me, they have more than one way of dropping somebody for a reason which will provide no recourse.

    24. Re:so by SatanicPuppy · · Score: 5, Interesting

      There is this thing called a "printing press" and it was invented in 1439, and has been commonly used to print news and other sorts of pamplets.

      The first newspaper in this country was started in 1704. The one I work for isn't quite 200, but I assure you, it's been dealing with irate advertisers for all 180 years of its existence. When the first medical research came out that corsets caused health problems, you bet your ass the corset makers screamed bloody murder when the news made it into the papers.

      If someone gives you money, they think they have a right to tell you what to print. This is not the case in the better publications.

      --
      ad logicam Claiming a proposition is false because it was presented as the conclusion of a fallacious argument.
    25. Re:so by Spy+der+Mann · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Probably it never came to this exactly but I'm sure the message was clear: You don't bite the hand that feeds you.

      Nope. You bite the OTHER hand.

    26. Re:so by argux · · Score: 3, Funny

      Yeah, I'm agree one hundred per... did you say Family Guy?

    27. Re:so by LWATCDR · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Not bloody likely ore even smart, they would never pull the merchant accounts.
      What they would do is pull their advertising. Totally legal plus far more effective.
      They would also threaten to sue for any "damages" that the show caused since they are teaching people how to break the cards.
      So they could do a show that ticks off their customers BTW you the viewer are not their customer, you are their product. Or run a show that a few people will like. Not doing the show is just good business.
      Oh and not watching Mythbusters anymore? That will just hurt the cast and crew. They will just take it off the air and put on "When Sharks Go Bad".
      Simple but none to comforting truth.

      --
      See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
    28. Re:so by blair1q · · Score: 3, Informative

      They won't can Adam. Where would they find someone who's simultaneously so devious and so ignorant of scientific fact?

      They tried to un-stupid the show a little when they brought in Grant, who actually seems to have passed a science class at some time in his past, but even he seems to have lost the ability to keep them from walking straight into unphysical presumptions.

      All that production budget and they can't spend a few minutes a week phoning a real scientist to ask if their ideas to prove/disprove the myths aren't just more myths? They only seem to spend on "explosives experts", but that's their insurance company talking. I guess the insurance company cares if someone gets blown up, but not if someone gets stupider thinking it's being made smarter.

      Still. The show is too much fun to stop watching.

    29. Re:so by ildon · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Watch the first couple seasons. They do call people and have people do research (and often times do a lot of math on their own beforehand). The problem is that A) doing match and research is boring for television and B) it pretty much gives away the ending before they've even built anything.

      A lot of times they already know for an absolute fact what is going to happen, either because it's blatantly obvious to anyone with a minimal physics background (i.e. they paid attention in high school) or because it actually did happen to a real person with witnesses. But the fun part of the show is them building shit and blowing shit up, and the "reveal" of the result near the end of the segment.

      The show is cut the way it is because if it weren't it wouldn't be nearly as interesting or fun. I honestly believe the show would not have been nearly as successful if it was just them doing research and math and the audience knowing the result way ahead of time before they even built anything.

      A successful show that gets people INTERESTED in science or at least questioning the world around them is better than a show that has real "hard" science/research/math and gets canceled in one season.

    30. Re:so by mugnyte · · Score: 2, Informative

        I cannot dispute that reference, that's true for active tags. See the reference link, and subsequent quote:

      September 26, 2006 - Passive RFID Tagging Update

      The Department of Defense remains committed to the implementation of Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) technology as outlined in our July 30, 2004 policy memorandum. Since the publication of this initial policy memorandum, ongoing technology developments, updated IT investment strategies, and business process improvements within the DoD have clarified passive RFID requirements within the Department. The DoD July 30, 2004 RFID Policy stated that passive RFID tagging by DoD suppliers would apply to all locations worldwide. The term "all locations" in the July 30, 2004 policy refers to all major receiving locations across the world. The DoD is investing in appropriate passive RFID infrastructure in all locations that are deemed major receiving locations; the majority of those locations are already called out in the current DFARS clause. The DoD requirement will expand to tactical locations as those locations become RFID-enabled. The DoD will not require suppliers to apply passive RFID tags to the unit pack of UID items during the 2007 calendar year. The Department will continue to evaluate the appropriate time frame to begin tagging at the unit pack level for UID items and will promulgate this requirement in advance of future issuances.

      In the passive RFID deployments, there's nothing changing in the signature. Essentially, you only need the know the scanner signal and the RFID response. If a scanner signal is captured without any RFID feedback, you have the clean signal (1st pass). Then, with a valid RFID, you have the response you want to mimic. Tiers of this may be applied, still passively, but essentially the logic is the same.

        I believe the US government is attempting to keep things secure by using specialized scanners, and probably complex modulations and tiered signals to perform this. Again, I must reiterate: This is security from not knowing the mechanics, not actually from presenting the challenger with a problem they cannot solve within limited time. The scanner tech is fixed once the RFID chips are in flight.

        Thus, reverse engineering them has unlimited time- and if I had to guess, will arrive to the world via a former contracted supplier going bankrupt and liquidating assets, or perhaps someone stealing one. Either way, its only a matter of time before the RFID layer is worth nothing more than the falsified signature, or magic paper, etc, of a passport.

    31. Re:so by phoenix0783 · · Score: 2, Informative

      I don't even know why they still do the "crab count" thing. Uh, so they don't catch too many?

    32. Re:so by Shakrai · · Score: 3, Informative

      That was the ep where they tested boxers Vs briefs if I remember right.

      Actually it was cooler than that. They were testing a myth about a woman in the Civil War that supposedly got impregnated by a bullet that hit her and which had previously hit the family jewels of some poor bastard.

      They actually set up this rig downrange with (you guessed it) ballistics gel. Halfway downrange they had a bag of "genetic material" (semen) in the line of fire. They had a marksman fire through the bag and into the ballistics gel. Then they tried to find "genetic material" with a microscope.

      They busted the myth as I recall.

      --
      I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
      We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
    33. Re:so by mapsjanhere · · Score: 2, Insightful

      and with the same lousy science as Mythbusters... A "graduate degree" in industrial design seems to be the highest qualification among them. So that beats Hyneman's Russian literature degree.

      --
      I'm aging rapidly, I bought a new game and had no idea if my machine was good for it.
    34. Re:so by NickCatal · · Score: 3, Funny

      I have 2 in my wallet right now

      American Express Clear and Chase Freedom

      Nice at McDonalds, 7/11 and CVS when I want to confuse the hell out of the cashier.

      --
      -nick
    35. Re:so by jesterzog · · Score: 3, Informative

      For the record, I do work for a merchant service provider (aka - a credit card processor). In the many years I have been here, we have never offered a point-of-sale system that supports contactless payment (RFID), and I have never seen a credit card that had an RFID (other than in commercials).

      My bank tried to get me to use one some time ago. They claimed it was "more secure" but they also tried to charge me an extra $50/year for the privilege of having it, and I couldn't see any change to the laws that made them responsible for money mysteriously disappearing from my account. As far as I was concerned, if they wanted to run a "more secure" system (without commenting about whether it was actually more secure), they shouldn't have been offering it to consumers as an optional extra.

    36. Re:so by Mr+Z · · Score: 3, Informative

      and I couldn't see any change to the laws that made them responsible for money mysteriously disappearing from my account.

      I think you mean "made them less responsible." I thought consumers are protected from all charges beyond the first $50 in the case of fraud. (Scroll to bottom.)

      So, $50/year is a total ripoff unless you get defrauded more than once a year. It's basically guaranteeing you lose that $50 bucks annually, even if you never experience any fraud. Nice.

    37. Re:so by blair1q · · Score: 2, Informative

      I think you're overstating that. They're talking about a logistics system for simplifying tracking of material, similar to slapping a bar-code sticker on it, that works when you have a whole truckful of stuff to check-in to a location and don't want to unload it first. That doesn't need any more security than the bar-code or even a printed box label would.

      For secure applications they will have defined a secured system and if it is RFID then it will be a secured system using RFID as a transport for the properly encrypted data, with a means to defeat risks created by the obvious openness of that transmission. They're the DoD. They do that stuff for a living to keep from dying.

      Your credit-card company, however, is just stupid enough to put sensitive data on a chip on a credit card with dumb encryption and allow it to be stolen, replicated, and used by anyone with a walkie-talkie and a speak-n-spell, then call it a "security device". Then jack up your annual fee and reduce your minimum monthly payment to make you pay for it. They do that stuff for a living because you think credit is cash.

    38. Re:so by Mike+Buddha · · Score: 4, Informative

      Only if you don't understand how the quota system works. Once you fill your quota, you can lease quota from less successful fishing boats. That's why they do the crab count. It's not a mad dash like it was in the first season but it's still a race. Once the quotas are leased to another vessel they're theirs to harvest, but it's not as cut and dried as you think. In fact I believe one of the vessels was doing so poorly this year they ended up leasing their quota out and cutting their season short this last season.

      --
      by Mike Buddha -- Someday the mountain might get him, but the law never will.
    39. Re:so by The+Yuckinator · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I couldn't agree more. I set up an ecommerce site for a client and she uses Moneris as her transaction processor. So we got the enormous Moneris manual and got to work - it turns out that they have several specific items that must be present in each transaction over and above the card number, the expiry date, the amount and the person's name.

      Yet what baffled me is that in every single "sample" transaction presented in the manual, at least 4 or 5 "must-have" items according to their list, were absent. Calling them on it produced something of a "do as we say, not as we do" response.

    40. Re:so by mrchaotica · · Score: 3, Informative

      Am I incorrect in thinking that many passports are using RFID, such that the owner can pass through customs uninhibited (or receive other advantages) with the correct credentials?

      You are incorrect, but probably not in the way you imagined: the passports do use RFID, but not to confer advantages to the owner. If that were the case, then they'd make it optional and charge extra for it! Instead, RFID in passports confers liabilities to the owner and advantages to the government: it allows the government to surreptitiously track the owner more easily.

      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

    41. Re:so by LarsWestergren · · Score: 2, Funny

      One episode in particular was where they were not allowed to say '*****'. They had to replace a prefectly fine medical term with 'genetic material'.
      It is a ******* show for pete's sake!

      Potentially offensive words have been removed from your post for the sake of the children. Have a nice day.

      --

      Being bitter is drinking poison and hoping someone else will die

    42. Re:so by Atario · · Score: 2, Informative

      Agreed, in spades. That balance is hard to get right, judging by how other attempts have fared. If you ever had a chance to check out Patent Bending , you can see a perfect example of the same idea gone wrong.

      The premise of the show is actually pretty promising: dig up old patents that never went anywhere and attempt to build them for real, to see if the ideas work. Then try to improve on them, if possible.

      The problem is that the "grounded guy" is a milquetoast whose building instincts aren't quite there; the "wacky guy" is completely useless, even as comedy relief; and a third "serious guy" who they pull in from time to time knows what he's doing but has no tolerance at all for the crap coming from the other two, thus coming off as curt and/or angry.

      It's a Canadian show, though, so maybe some enterprising and more competent American outfit will pick up the concept and run with it.

      --
      "A great democracy must be progressive or it will soon cease to be a great democracy." --Theodore Roosevelt
  2. I reject your reality and substitute my own! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    I reject your reality and substitute my own!

  3. Translation by jayhawk88 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "I really, really like my job."

  4. Everyone say it together, now... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    SmartCard Bullying myth...

    BUSTED!

    That said, I'm amused that all it took was one lawyer and a bunch of product managers (no bias here, right?) to cow a production company into submission.

  5. I smell lawyers... by Coraon · · Score: 2, Insightful

    This sounds like the kind of statement someone was forced to read to avoid a PR problem, usually this occurs because a lawyer told him "you can't say that we will get in trouble!" to be honest I'm more likely to believe his first statement.

    --
    -Ours is the wisdom of Solomon, the magic of Merlyn, the fall of Icaris.
  6. So what has changed is... nothing by MobyDisk · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It sounds like the blame has shifted, but the point is still the same: they would like to do a show on RFID, but they were politically motivated not to.

  7. If Mythbusters wants to continue, they'll have to by TenBrothers · · Score: 3, Funny

    become a cartoon. Maybe like Rocky & Bullwinkle. "Hey Jamie! Watch me pull our show's credibility out of a hat!"

  8. hmmm by tool462 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I think it's safe to say that if he didn't have an intimidating phone call with a bunch of lawyers before, he HAS now. :)

  9. In other words by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 5, Insightful

    TI is obviously hoping that by quibbling over details, people will manage not to notice that the core of the story hasn't changed.

    --
    #DeleteChrome
  10. Re:Retraction? heh by Chris+Burke · · Score: 4, Interesting

    No, no, that's probably true! Discovery didn't make the decision, they just presented the choice to the production company to either not produce the show, or take a long walk off a short pier.

    Beyond Productions made the decision of which option to take entirely on their own.

    --

    The enemies of Democracy are
  11. Other than That by sycodon · · Score: 4, Funny

    ...the story was accurate.

    --
    When Fascism comes to America, it will call itself Anti-Fascism, and tell you to give up your guns.
  12. Why? by Armakuni · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Why was there even a single lawyer in on such an innocent call?

    --
    That's not Picasso, that's Kandinsky!
  13. Sooo ... by MattGS · · Score: 2, Interesting

    ... the lawyers put the thumbscrews on the production company and not on Discovery then? Wow, what a difference that makes. Boy, I feel the sudden urge to get an RFID implant.

  14. legal counsel = cancer - they show up everywhere by olddotter · · Score: 4, Informative

    Dude, have you worked with the legal department for a fortune 500 company? Our company policy is that if something is to be recorded, it must be scripted and the script approved by the legal department first.

  15. Its not the first time... by Quantus347 · · Score: 5, Informative

    Its not the first time that Mythbuster's has had obviously politically motivated skews on their production and/or results.

    Like the time they were testing all the various myths involved in beating alcohol tests (Breathalyzer, etc) and were very careful to word their statements to say that no one method managed to beat all the different tests, and never specifying which methods beat which tests. Or the time they tested the fuel efficiency of drafting behind a big rig truck and spent most of the episode hamming up the potential dangers of tailgating.

    To be fair though, in those cases it was more about Safety (translate Liability) as they could heavily damage road safety and Law Enforcement's ability to police it. Its like how in most fiction Ive seen, they always misquote the proportions of charcoal, sulfur, and salt peter that go into gunpowder, so the young and/or stupid won't go out and blow off fingers.

    --
    Common Sense isn't as Common as people think...
    1. Re:Its not the first time... by rtechie · · Score: 2, Informative

      The one that got me was the completely non-representative red light camera tests. They had cooperation for law enforcement but weren't given any details on the equipment they were using so we have NO IDEA if the tests were representative of anything you'd see on the street. I know for a fact that they use many different kind of cameras with wildly varying specs in these red light cameras. I also know for a fact that some red light cameras can be easily blinded by glare, I've seen the photos.

  16. OK, we get it by mlwmohawk · · Score: 3, Informative

    The decision was made by the Mythbuster staff in much the same way a man with a gun directed at him volunteers.

    Anyone see "Wrong Trousers?" Gromit puts down the bat when feathers points the gun.

    (Instant karma for using Wallace & Gromit!)

     

  17. Re:legal counsel = cancer - they show up everywher by Otter · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Counsel, absolutely. Chief counsel? Of all those companies? Unlikely.

  18. Re:of course it did by bigstrat2003 · · Score: 2, Funny

    How the fuck did you arrive at the conclusion that debit cards are somehow more evil than credit cards?

    --
    "16MB (fuck off, MiB fascists)" - The Mighty Buzzard
  19. Re:Retraction? heh by nospam007 · · Score: 3, Informative

    >Discovery didn't make the decision, they just presented the choice to the production company to either not produce the show, or take a long walk off a short pier.

    Beyond Productions is an independent Australian company and sells sometimes different versions to the UK and other countries (which also don't have the 'don't try this at home' stuff and where you can say things like 'sperm' on TV), they could very well do it in this case as well.
    Different network, same torrent.

  20. Re:Gutless by Mr.+Slippery · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Making multi minute phone calls from 30k ft with 2001 phone tech and no onboard plane phones (I already know its not possible, but would love to see them try)

    You know that's not possible? So you tried it, eh? Please, post the details of your experiment.

    Getting a 767 sim and attempt to fly the same path as pentagon plane

    Why would you try it with a sim for a plane of a different model than the one that hit the Pentagon? Flight 77 (with a former co-worker of mine and his whole family on board) was a 757.

    Of course, why let facts get in the way of a good batshit conspiracy theory?

    --
    Tom Swiss | the infamous tms | my blog
    You cannot wash away blood with blood
  21. Re:legal counsel = cancer - they show up everywher by m.ducharme · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I can see it happening if the Companies in question wanted underline how serious the issue is. Nothing says "we're gonna stomp you" better than saying "This is George, he's chief legal counsel for my Company. Now what were you saying?"

    --
    Rule of Slashdot #0: You and people like you are not representative of the larger population. - A.C.
  22. Re:of course it did by RubberDuckie · · Score: 2, Informative

    It's harder to dispute fraudulent charges on a debit card.

  23. Re:Gutless by smellsofbikes · · Score: 2, Informative

    >attempt to fly the same path as pentagon plane (Including being in ground effect for 1km before hitting the building),

    Gotta say, when you're in ground effect, the problem isn't the flying, but the opposite: you can't get the dumb plane on the ground. It just floats merrily along. But if there's something that sticks up in your way, boy howdy there's no problem running into it (like, say, the runway edge lights.)

    --
    Nostalgia's not what it used to be.
  24. RFID credit cards by Chris+Pimlott · · Score: 3, Informative

    Really? You've never seen a MasterCard with PayPass? My bank replaced my old debit card with one over two years ago.

    Granted, the only place I've seen that accepted PayPass was at a Sheetz, and it didn't seem to work. But they're definitely out there.

    1. Re:RFID credit cards by NeoTerra · · Score: 2, Informative

      I am seeing quite a few of these pop up, and I live in (relatively) rural Kansas. Several stores, especially fast food are getting them with new registers. I think there's even one at a gas pump nearby, though I was up past 2 am... The point is, they exist, and it's not just in 'select markets'.

  25. Re:Gutless by Nodlehs · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I just gotta say, Beyond 2000 was an awesome show! I miss it.

  26. Re:"stepping back"? by tertrures · · Score: 2, Funny

    In the city of Fortaleza, a local newspaper once declared that half the councilmen were disonest. However, due to the strong political reaction (and a number of threats), the same newspaper decided to "step back" the following day, by declaring that half the councilmen were honest.

    More precisely this event happened in 1965 and those that can read Portuguese may check it out here.

  27. Re:batshit my butt by Mr.+Slippery · · Score: 5, Informative

    why there was NO remainder of anything a passenger plane crash leaves in a crash site, and there were NO bodies, passenger belongings, pieces of bodies, ANYTHING but fairly intact TWO bodies in the scene.

    Are you saying there were no bodies, or were you saying there were two?

    Allyn E. Kilsheimer, CEO of KCE Structural Engineers (a company involved in providing emergency engineering and post-collapse assistance) said "I held parts of uniforms from crew members in my hands, including body parts."

    Of course, once you reach the level of batshitness you've achieved, you can simply ignore his testimony by saying "they got to him too!"

    And I'm sure you simply don't accept the claim that the remains of 184 people were identified; surely "they" got to all 102 DNA analysts, sample processors, logistics staff, and administrative personnel at the Armed Forces DNA Identification Laboratory. It's a DOD facility, after all.

    Are you saying there was no debris from the plane? That's simply incorrect; hell, you can even see photos of a bunch of it at this batshit conspiracy site. And photos of the plane debris inside the building (where, in answer to your question about the lawn, most of it ended up, in agreement with conservation of momentum) can be seen at this somewhat less batshit crazy site. And some more photos here. And more photos, with amazingly detailed analysis, here

    But I'm sure "they" got to the owners of all of those sites.

    tell me where the hell did the 767's huge tail has vanished.

    757. If you can't get that much right after being corrected, I don't see any point in talking to you further.

    Like most of the plane, the tail and wings got shredded, and ended up inside the building. As Mete Sozen, a structural engineer who studied the impact in computer simulation, put it, "At that speed, the plane itself is like a sausage skin. It doesn't have much strength and virtually crumbles on impact."

    It's like shooting an aluminum foil origami crane out of an air cannon at high speed, through a stack of steel cheese graters, and then demanding "where's the crane's tail? There must be a trick!"

    please, spare the bullshit. as if the world has never seen a passenger liner crash.

    Into a building? One as hardened as the part of the Pentagon that was hit? Please, name me one similar crash.

    Oh, and by the way, regarding your original question about simulating the piloting of the crash, see this:

    Brian also consulted with a pair of commercial airline pilots who decided to try this kind of approach in a flight training simulator. Although the pilots were not sure the simulator models such scenarios with complete accuracy, they reported no significant difficulties in flying a 757 within an altitude of tens of feet at speeds between 350 and 550 mph (565 to 885 km/h) across smooth terrain. The only issue they encountered was constant warnings from the simulator about flying too fast and too low. These warnings were expected since the manufacturer does not recommend and FAA regulations prohibit flying a commercial aircraft the way Flight 77 was flown. These restrictions do not mean it is impossible for a plane to fly at those conditions but that it is extremely hazardous to do so, and safety was obviously not a concern to the terroris

    --
    Tom Swiss | the infamous tms | my blog
    You cannot wash away blood with blood
  28. OBLG: Family Guy Quote by powerlord · · Score: 2, Funny

    Peter Griffin: [after "Family Guy" returns to Fox with new episodes, after a few years off the air] Everybody, I got bad news. We've been canceled.

    Lois Griffin: Oh, no! Peter, how could they do that?

    Peter Griffin: Well, unfortunately, Lois, there's just no more room on the schedule. We've just got to accept the fact that Fox has to make room for terrific shows, like "Dark Angel", "Titus", "Undeclared", "Action", "That '80s Show", "Wonder Falls", "Fastlane", "Andy Richter Controls the Universe", "Skin", "Girls Club", "Cracking Up", "The Pitts", "Firefly", "Get Real", "Freaky Links", "Wanda at Large", "Costello", "The Lone Gunmen", "A Minute with Stan Hooper", "Normal, Ohio", "Pasadena", "Harsh Realm", "Keen Eddie", "The Street", "American Embassy", "Cedric the Entertainer", "The Tick", "Louie", and "Greg the Bunny".

    Lois Griffin: Is there no hope?

    Peter Griffin: Well, I suppose if all those shows go down the tubes, we might have a shot.

    --
    This space for rent. All reasonable inquiries will be entertained at proprietors discretion.
  29. speedpass by yodleboy · · Score: 2, Insightful

    i thought it was awesome, until i lost my keys on a bike ride and some tool promptly spent $200 at the gas station. and i mean PROMPTLY, the transactions all happened while it was still out riding. anyway, i was put off by it at that point. the concept that possession of that little stick means verification of identity is kinda scary. i mean, i have ASK FOR ID on the back of my credit/debit cards and usually give a little "you gonna read the back" if they forget. with the speedpay/RFID model, they never see the card, i just wave it like a magic money wand. RFID has lots of great uses, but i don't really want my money tied to it...

  30. New Mythbusters Disclaimer! by jameskojiro · · Score: 2, Funny

    Adam: Don't do anything like piss off the credit card companies at home.

    Jamie: EVER!!

    --
    Tsukasa: All I really want, is to be left alone...