It's trivial to build a sundial alarm, if you wake up when the sun is up.
Get a bunch of very thin, straight tubes. Like tent poles, but maybe shorter. Shorter will give you more of a ramp up and ramp down period.
Make a big bundle of these, about a square foot cross section. Build a hole on the wall in your bedroom (Or use a window), wait until the correct time to wake up (Otherwise you have to do a lot of math), stick the bundle in the wall so the sunlight comes straight in.
Now cover up the rest of the hole or window. Get a mirror, stick it directly in the line of the tubes, and aim the reflected sunlight at your pillow on your bed. You may want a slightly convex mirror in case your head isn't exactly in the right place.
Place plastic wrap or something over the tubes to keep the air in. Sleep facing the mirror.
The twit you responded to, like various law enforcement agencies, likes to pretend that illegal drugs are somehow different, in general, than legal drugs. For some reason law enforcement use the word is 'narcotic' for this.
It's a form of doublespeak. If they called them illegal drugs, it would be obvious they're illegal drugs because, duh, they're illegal. By calling them narcotics, it implies there's something else going on there.
I would correct people, but calling PCP and cocaine 'narcotics' is completely stupid, so there's a nice warning sign of people who have no clue what they're talking about.
Something that is fun, though, is to always get clarification that they're talking about 'illegal narcotics', as opposed to that 'legal narcotic', caffeine. This confuses the hell out of them.
If people cannot secure a computer, or hire someone to do it for them, they should not be operating a computer where it can harm others. Period.
I don't know why people seem to have a problem with this.
In this society, we don't let people do things that they don't know how to do that could hurt others if they do them wrong. Or we make them do them by themselves, or at least on their own land
I mean, hell, forget the obvious example of driving, look at hairdressers. We require them to know what they are doing when they operate in public. You can't just put up a sign and start cutting hair.
Or restaurants. We not only require they know what they're doing, we actually check them on it. We don't go 'Undercooked chicken? Ha ha ha! Well, good thing no one died this time. You be sure to cook it next time.'.
No one's trying to keep people from operating a computer, just like no one stops parents from cutting their kid's hair or giving them food. It's when you do things that can harm the public that the government gets involved.
Within days of making users responsible for things their computer does and they could have prevented, we'll see software products and ISPs both aimed at protecting people from these fines advertisted the crap out of on TV, with a promise to pay the fine if they don't. And people will go and buy them, and all will be good.
And, hell, no one says the fines have to be crippling. A 100 dollar fine isn't going to kill any household that has an internet connection, but it will make them go out and spend 60 dollars on an antivirus program. In fact, that could even count as a discount towards the fine.
No kidding. That's that new part of the Bible, I guess, the same where it lets people cut their sideburns and get divorced, but still not be gay. I really need to update my copy.
Seriously, Jesus wouldn't run for office, given that he was basically expected to overthrow the government of that time and didn't.
As for his political position on government welfare...well, he didn't do anything, but his follows did organize an organized system of welfare, they just did it within the church. When you joined, you sold off all your extra material goods and donated the money to the church.
Nowadays, that's called a 'commune'.
However, I feel sure he'd fail to join either party if he did come back, as they hold completely incompatible positions on, for example, drug use.
(First person to comment 'That's all just a story' gets a kick in the shins, because it's perfectly possible to comment on what a fictional character would do!)
If that was the point of copyright law, then copyright would never expire.
The point of copyright law isn't some abstract 'Whatever is best for society', it's 'To increase the public domain'. Period. It does this by rewarding manufacture.
Trying to increase the public domain by keeping things out of the public domain is nonsensical.
Religions often have confusing ethical positions. For example, Christian ethics can be summed up in two rules 'Love God completely' and 'Love everyone else as much as yourself'. (Note you don't have to love everyone else unconditionally, just God.)
As love for God is fairly hard for society to even notice, that rule is not that important when relating to others. And the second basically boils down to 'treat everyone as your brother' or 'be excellent to each other', or any one of a million ways that concept has been stated since the dawn of mankind.
But there are literally hundreds of tiny rules that have nothing to do with either of these rules, and I'm not even talking about rules Christians can't agree with, like the homosexuality prohibition. Even things that pretty much all denomications (At least, all the big ones popular in the US) agree on, like the prohibition on consensual 'wife swapping', don't fit.
Whis is interpeted as being against the 7th commandment: Thou shalt not offer the blood of my sacrifice with leavened bread.
Wait, wrong 7th commandment. Here we go: You shall not commit adultery.
It's a rule that no denomination thinks twice about, yet it has nothing whatsoever to do with the 'ethical base' of Christianity.
It's like if Kant had tacked onto his categorical imperative 'Act only according to that maxim whereby you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law. Also don't wear white after labor day, it's unethical.'.
Now, not wearing white after labor day is a fine guideline, but it's not an position on ethical behavior. Likewise, various people in the US use the myrid rules in the Old Testement, and even the New, to attempt to enumerate a list of ethical actions, completely disregarding the fact that the Bible presents an general purpose ethical standard that applies in all circumstances. By ignoring the fact there's a general rule, they can interpet specific rules without following the guidelines of the general rule.
There really are only about a half a dozen basical ethical positions in this world. Kant has the 'What if everyone did that' position, millions of people have 'Whatever I can get I deserve' position, some people do 'I treat people how they treat me', almost every religion says 'You should treat people with compassion, not as a means to an end.', doctors and some buddhists 'do no harm' under any circumstances (At least, medically, for doctors), etc.
The problem is that people wander around 'organizing' religions, aka, codifying explicit examples into the base ethical behavior, and then refuse to change them when they no longer apply. Or, even worse, codifying secular laws or even politicial positions as ethical positions. And currently, instead of codifying new rules, we've gotten such confusing and conflictory texts that we just have people reading whatever they want into them.
Re:If Kerry had won, there'd be no "controversy"
on
Buggy Voting Machines
·
· Score: 1
Hey, fool, there was controversy before the election.
It's isn't battery if you don't hit someone hard enough to hurt them.
Otherwise tapping people on the shoulder would be battery.
And it's also not battery if you didn't intend to do it. For example, hitting someone with a baseball at 100 miles an hour is battery, but not if it comes off the end of a baseball bat and accidently does so.
Don't they teach people anything these days in school?
Cutting down someone's powerline, is, in fact, a DoS (Although obviously not a DDoS). A DoS is anything that denies people access to a companies service. It can be anything from a protest sit-in to a slashdotting to setting their building on fire.
However, 'increasing costs' isn't a DoS under any circumstances, no matter what people here are pretending. Making a company pay more for something doesn't make a DoS, even if you do it with the intent of driving them out of business.
Driving someone out of business isn't even a DoS, a DoS is when they're trying to offer a service but cannot, not when they chose to not offer a service because it's more expensive due to someone else's actions.
Before anyone thinks that not being a DoS make it legal, I'll point out that using extortion to make them to take down their website isn't a DoS, either. Shooting customers walking into the store, however, is a DoS.
I mean, it's not like it's trick, it's called a 'Denial of Service' for a reason. They must be offering a service, and you deny people access to it.
First of all, you're wrong. Almost every single proxy on the net is an owned windows machine.
Second, if you were right, you're a fucking idiot who should be immediately shot for the sake of future generations.
If he could find the IP, that means the spammers are already using it (they've got machine scanning 24/7 for open proxies), and selling it to other spammers.
Worrying about one person who sent fake spam to make a point is completely idiotic when real spammers know where it is and are using it to send real spam.
Some of us in the US can't get Stargate, either SG-1 or Atlantis, or Farscape, because our local cable monopoly doesn't carry Sci-Fi, and, no, we can't get a dish in a dorm room. It is literally impossible for me to legally get said shows without renting a piece of property somewhere and setting up a dish with a VCR, and thus I have no qualms about getting them illegally.
Same with Dead Like Me...stupid-ass cable has HBO and Cimemax, no Showtime.
If they'd stick the shows up on their web sites with commericals and all, I'd probably watch their versions. Until then, I'll watch it however I get it. If they'd look at the shows that are pirated, they'd realize they all have one thing in common:
They have a fanbase that's unable to get their shows, or at least unable to get them until much later.
TV show trading isn't like movie trading, which is basically a way to get free movie rentals, or music trading, which is a way to keep from purchasing CDs, because people rarely purchase TV shows in the first place. TV trading is a way to replace 'viewing shows on TV', which, at last check, was also free, and thus the only people doing it are people who really want to watch a show but can't. Like me.
Instead of whining about piracy, maybe they should figure out a way to get their fucking show to its fans.
Now, of course, there are exceptions, like Babylon 5 or ST:TNG trading, which is a way to keep from purchasing the DVDs. But I'd have to guess that 50% of the TV trading going on are shows that have aired in the last month.
The only reason the clothing industry is getting ripped off is because it's relying on promotion instead of quality.
It really shouldn't be possible to make a profit by making medium quaility tennis shoes in Asia, putting a fake label on them, and reselling them for a profit here, except that that's also what Nike is doing, except that Nike spends a hell of a lot of money promoting its name.
I don't really have an sympathy for Nike or the idiots buying their shoes or the idiots buying knockoffs, and I'd rather my tax dollars didn't go to stopping this 'problem'. It'd be one thing if the knockoffs were poorer quality, I'd feel sorry for purchasers of the fakes, but Nike's aren't sold on quality. The knockoffs are pretty much the same quality.
I couldn't care less if the person making money off your shoes is the person who made you want to have Nikes, or a person who was smart enough to figure out the only reason you were purchasing them was the name.
And pretending multi-nationals don't have the money to go after stuff like this is inane. If the government were less corrupt, I'd express hope that this would help people who couldn't cover the cost of their own lawsuit, like a garage-inventor who patents something and gets ripped off by a large corperatation, but excuse me while I go laugh my head off at the idea of the government actually caring about individual people.
Exactly. Except instead of 'if', it's 'when'. They don't have to break into some top secret security system, they just have to try flying a few times and see who doesn't get searched. That person gets to carry the thermonuclear device in their hearing aid or whatever it is we're supposed to be worried about now that cockpit doors can't be forced open and everyone would immediately attack hijackers and, if worse comes to worst, we'd shoot down the plane. (We have an expression around here, it's 'closing the barndoors after the horses escaped'. It's a waste of time and stops you from catching the damn horses.)
About the same thing applies to the no-fly list. Unless you stop everyone from flying, then some terrorists are going to fly, and it's trivial for them to figure out which ones. Hell, now we've told them which ones we think are terrorists! They can set up some fake terrorist organization for those guys to be a part of.
Luckily, the no-fly list doesn't work at all, so terrorists are not learning who we think are terrorists, and it's possible we might incorrectly stop terrorists we don't know about from flying. The intent isn't to randomly stop random people from flying, but that appears to be the effect.
You know what they call a Faraday cage open at one end, right?
They call it an antenna. You can't block RF by wrapping your head halfway in tin foil. Unless your entire body is covered in tinfoil, you've made it worse for yourself!
Yeah, it's people getting greedy that get caught. Like morons who rob six banks in the same area.
Hello, idiots. They tend to get on guard after the fifth one.
If you're going to commit a crime twice, make sure it's areas that do not have the same law enforcement entity covering them. That's the entire US for counterfeiting.
That reminds me of an idea that I had once in high school
Purchase a very small amount of, say, cocaine. Possibly you can purchase a 'line', that would be the right amount, not that I'm a cocaine expert or anything. Be sure to get rid of the container by fire or something.
Have an envelope that's not tracable to you, make sure to leave no fingerprints. Put the cocaine, about a teaspoon, in it. Don't seal it.
When you get to school, wet a cotton swab. Stick it in the envelope, and spread the cocaine everywhere. On lockers, in classrooms, in the restrooms, everywhere.
Or, if you want to be really clever you can just put it in a few places, like on certain lockers. You can go with the asshole's lockers, to annoy them, or you can hit your own to claim the administration is harrassing you. (Obviously, you want just hit the outside.)
Seal the envelope, not by licking it. Leave it on someone's desk. (Nowadays, of course, you'd want to write 'cocaine' on it, but this idea was thought of when 'Anthrax' was a band we'd vaguely heard of. It's no good if they evacuate the school, you couldn't see the fun.)
Wait for them to discover it. Wait an hour while it's tested. Watch the drug dogs arrive.
Enjoy the fun. The dogs will smell it on you, so hopefully you also marked some other people. Complain strongly when they try to search you. Have a poppy seed bagel on you.
The next day, tell everyone your theory: That the administration spread cocaine all over the place so they'd have an excuse to bring in the drug dogs.
God, I hated those fascists. And I got out before Columbine, it got a lot worse afterwards according to my brothers.
Anyone who's required to watch though metal detectors has my utmost sympathy, and I suggest you start carrying different large lumps of metal, like car tires and boxes of paper clips, through it each day and act surprised when it goes off. (Nothing they could even possibly claim was a weapon, though.) Emptying your pockets while you're obviously holding onto a sink faucet or a clip-on desk lamp will just piss them off, but there obviously are no rules against bringing those to school.
What I was thinking is simply print without any yellow ink at all. I mean, if you're going to do without a color, yellow is probably the least important for printing untraceable political rants or whatever you're trying to do. (It would suck trying to print landscapes without yellow, though, as you'd lose green.)
You'd have to rig the yellow sensor, but that would be trivial.
If you really needed yellow, you could always go back to the days of multi-pass printing, by rigging up special setup with the yellow ink in a different ink well, and running the document through again.
I'm with you. I think people concentrating on a second shooter are being silly. What on earth would it accomplish to prove someone else shot from some other direction? You still don't know who they are.
The real important questions arise when you stop caring about that and look to why people would have shot him, and the behavior of the government after the shooting.
I think the best theory is that Angleton thought JFK was the top Soviet mole he'd been looking for.
Re:Ethanol
on
Hacking Vodka
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
I said in biology. In general chemistry, obviously, you'd care if water got into your stuff.
In biology, though, ingesting water is pretty much completely ignored, just like injecting salt water into the blood is ignored. It has no effect, and it's not included in any calculations. You need to know the amount of alcohol, and, once you do, you couldn't care less about the amount of water.
I don't know what you mean by calling chemistry the 'real world'. When you're talking about the effects of alcohol on the body, you're talking biology. Is this some sort of scientific pissing contest I walked into? You don't explain reactions to alcohol with chemistry anymore than you explain circuit diagrams with quantum theory or bridges with the general theory of relativity. And in biology, water is not generally considered an impurity.
And I think it's obvious what I mean by impurities. Impurities in ethanol are things that aren't ethanol. (Or, explicitly stating something that doesn't really need to be stated in biology, water or air, or, heck, carbon dioxide.)
In general, though, when talking about impurities in alcohol, people are talking about the semi-toxic organic compounds that come with it, and are accidently created by the same thing that created the alcohol.
Instead of, oh, added coloring, which is not specific to alcohol, and thus doesn't have anything to do with hangovers, even though it is technically also an impurity. Vodka doesn't have any such additives, though. It's just alcohol. (And, for those playing along at home, water.)
(Ironically, this one of the few cases in biology where the water does matter, because not having any water would make the alcohol pull water out of you. So it is literally impossible to injest pure ethanol...even if you could get it in your mouth, it would have water in it by the time it hit your stomach by pulling it out of your throat. So, in a way, it's an anti-impurity...it's already there, and removing it will cause effects not expected by ethanol.)
All vodka should be good cold. If it's not, you're probably got it confused with your experiments in drinking urine.
Good vokda is the stuff that tastes good at room temperature. Which is how you're 'supposed' to drink it. (Technically, I think it should be 'chilled'.)
But, hey, they're not the boss of you. If you like vodka cold, then buy the cheap ass stuff. You'll never be able to tell.
Well, not the really cheap stuff. Never purchase alcohol cheaper than bottled water, that's my motto. Also never purchase it in a homemade bottle. Or anything that isn't clearly identified as a traditional liquour, like 'hill lightning', 'thirst remover' or 'zima'.
Re:It is probably to protect the company.
on
Hacking Vodka
·
· Score: 1
An 'experiment' is perfectly safe and meaningless. In fact, you don't need a magical urine desalter.
While drinking urine is basically as harmless as drinking salt water, and probably tastes about the same, the problem isn't ammonia. (If you really had a problem there you could just drink sweat instead.)
The problem is, if you're in an enviroment without water, and you get to the point where you're willing to drink urine or salt water, you're already dehydrated, and you already don't have any water to drink.
At that point, it is vitally important you do not drink salt water or urine, which has salt in it. Pour it on yourself to cool off, but do not drink it. Why? Because the entire reason you're thirsty is that you're trying to get rid your salt inbalance! You have too much salt and not enough water.
Now, yes, if you have some magical water desalter, sure, you could drink it...but I'd drink sweat, instead, personally. Or salt water. But magic water desalters do not exist. If they did, a lot less people would die in liferafts at sea. The only free way to desalt water is to evaporate it (Which, BTW, would probably get rid of the ammonia from urine.) and recondense it. This is very slow.
However, if you do ever get stuck in the middle of the desert, and manage to make a water consender, by all means, urinate next to it or even under it, so the water will condense on that. But there are no circumstances where you could drink straight urine and come out ahead.
Slashdot Mirror
Get a bunch of very thin, straight tubes. Like tent poles, but maybe shorter. Shorter will give you more of a ramp up and ramp down period.
Make a big bundle of these, about a square foot cross section. Build a hole on the wall in your bedroom (Or use a window), wait until the correct time to wake up (Otherwise you have to do a lot of math), stick the bundle in the wall so the sunlight comes straight in.
Now cover up the rest of the hole or window. Get a mirror, stick it directly in the line of the tubes, and aim the reflected sunlight at your pillow on your bed. You may want a slightly convex mirror in case your head isn't exactly in the right place.
Place plastic wrap or something over the tubes to keep the air in. Sleep facing the mirror.
At the equinox, it sets and rises due east and due west (Not vis versa), only at the equator.
It's a form of doublespeak. If they called them illegal drugs, it would be obvious they're illegal drugs because, duh, they're illegal. By calling them narcotics, it implies there's something else going on there.
I would correct people, but calling PCP and cocaine 'narcotics' is completely stupid, so there's a nice warning sign of people who have no clue what they're talking about.
Something that is fun, though, is to always get clarification that they're talking about 'illegal narcotics', as opposed to that 'legal narcotic', caffeine. This confuses the hell out of them.
I don't know why people seem to have a problem with this.
In this society, we don't let people do things that they don't know how to do that could hurt others if they do them wrong. Or we make them do them by themselves, or at least on their own land
I mean, hell, forget the obvious example of driving, look at hairdressers. We require them to know what they are doing when they operate in public. You can't just put up a sign and start cutting hair.
Or restaurants. We not only require they know what they're doing, we actually check them on it. We don't go 'Undercooked chicken? Ha ha ha! Well, good thing no one died this time. You be sure to cook it next time.'.
No one's trying to keep people from operating a computer, just like no one stops parents from cutting their kid's hair or giving them food. It's when you do things that can harm the public that the government gets involved.
Within days of making users responsible for things their computer does and they could have prevented, we'll see software products and ISPs both aimed at protecting people from these fines advertisted the crap out of on TV, with a promise to pay the fine if they don't. And people will go and buy them, and all will be good.
And, hell, no one says the fines have to be crippling. A 100 dollar fine isn't going to kill any household that has an internet connection, but it will make them go out and spend 60 dollars on an antivirus program. In fact, that could even count as a discount towards the fine.
Seriously, Jesus wouldn't run for office, given that he was basically expected to overthrow the government of that time and didn't.
As for his political position on government welfare...well, he didn't do anything, but his follows did organize an organized system of welfare, they just did it within the church. When you joined, you sold off all your extra material goods and donated the money to the church.
Nowadays, that's called a 'commune'.
However, I feel sure he'd fail to join either party if he did come back, as they hold completely incompatible positions on, for example, drug use.
(First person to comment 'That's all just a story' gets a kick in the shins, because it's perfectly possible to comment on what a fictional character would do!)
All you'd have to do is have a parking meter that sent out an infared beam every 30 second or so and bounced it off the car.
The point of copyright law isn't some abstract 'Whatever is best for society', it's 'To increase the public domain'. Period. It does this by rewarding manufacture.
Trying to increase the public domain by keeping things out of the public domain is nonsensical.
As love for God is fairly hard for society to even notice, that rule is not that important when relating to others. And the second basically boils down to 'treat everyone as your brother' or 'be excellent to each other', or any one of a million ways that concept has been stated since the dawn of mankind.
But there are literally hundreds of tiny rules that have nothing to do with either of these rules, and I'm not even talking about rules Christians can't agree with, like the homosexuality prohibition. Even things that pretty much all denomications (At least, all the big ones popular in the US) agree on, like the prohibition on consensual 'wife swapping', don't fit.
Whis is interpeted as being against the 7th commandment: Thou shalt not offer the blood of my sacrifice with leavened bread.
Wait, wrong 7th commandment. Here we go: You shall not commit adultery.
It's a rule that no denomination thinks twice about, yet it has nothing whatsoever to do with the 'ethical base' of Christianity.
It's like if Kant had tacked onto his categorical imperative 'Act only according to that maxim whereby you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law. Also don't wear white after labor day, it's unethical.'.
Now, not wearing white after labor day is a fine guideline, but it's not an position on ethical behavior. Likewise, various people in the US use the myrid rules in the Old Testement, and even the New, to attempt to enumerate a list of ethical actions, completely disregarding the fact that the Bible presents an general purpose ethical standard that applies in all circumstances. By ignoring the fact there's a general rule, they can interpet specific rules without following the guidelines of the general rule.
There really are only about a half a dozen basical ethical positions in this world. Kant has the 'What if everyone did that' position, millions of people have 'Whatever I can get I deserve' position, some people do 'I treat people how they treat me', almost every religion says 'You should treat people with compassion, not as a means to an end.', doctors and some buddhists 'do no harm' under any circumstances (At least, medically, for doctors), etc.
The problem is that people wander around 'organizing' religions, aka, codifying explicit examples into the base ethical behavior, and then refuse to change them when they no longer apply. Or, even worse, codifying secular laws or even politicial positions as ethical positions. And currently, instead of codifying new rules, we've gotten such confusing and conflictory texts that we just have people reading whatever they want into them.
Hey, fool, there was controversy before the election.
It's a parallel in non-Euclidian space.
Otherwise tapping people on the shoulder would be battery.
And it's also not battery if you didn't intend to do it. For example, hitting someone with a baseball at 100 miles an hour is battery, but not if it comes off the end of a baseball bat and accidently does so.
Don't they teach people anything these days in school?
However, 'increasing costs' isn't a DoS under any circumstances, no matter what people here are pretending. Making a company pay more for something doesn't make a DoS, even if you do it with the intent of driving them out of business.
Driving someone out of business isn't even a DoS, a DoS is when they're trying to offer a service but cannot, not when they chose to not offer a service because it's more expensive due to someone else's actions.
Before anyone thinks that not being a DoS make it legal, I'll point out that using extortion to make them to take down their website isn't a DoS, either. Shooting customers walking into the store, however, is a DoS.
I mean, it's not like it's trick, it's called a 'Denial of Service' for a reason. They must be offering a service, and you deny people access to it.
Second, if you were right, you're a fucking idiot who should be immediately shot for the sake of future generations.
If he could find the IP, that means the spammers are already using it (they've got machine scanning 24/7 for open proxies), and selling it to other spammers.
Worrying about one person who sent fake spam to make a point is completely idiotic when real spammers know where it is and are using it to send real spam.
Same with Dead Like Me...stupid-ass cable has HBO and Cimemax, no Showtime.
If they'd stick the shows up on their web sites with commericals and all, I'd probably watch their versions. Until then, I'll watch it however I get it. If they'd look at the shows that are pirated, they'd realize they all have one thing in common: They have a fanbase that's unable to get their shows, or at least unable to get them until much later.
TV show trading isn't like movie trading, which is basically a way to get free movie rentals, or music trading, which is a way to keep from purchasing CDs, because people rarely purchase TV shows in the first place. TV trading is a way to replace 'viewing shows on TV', which, at last check, was also free, and thus the only people doing it are people who really want to watch a show but can't. Like me.
Instead of whining about piracy, maybe they should figure out a way to get their fucking show to its fans.
Now, of course, there are exceptions, like Babylon 5 or ST:TNG trading, which is a way to keep from purchasing the DVDs. But I'd have to guess that 50% of the TV trading going on are shows that have aired in the last month.
It really shouldn't be possible to make a profit by making medium quaility tennis shoes in Asia, putting a fake label on them, and reselling them for a profit here, except that that's also what Nike is doing, except that Nike spends a hell of a lot of money promoting its name.
I don't really have an sympathy for Nike or the idiots buying their shoes or the idiots buying knockoffs, and I'd rather my tax dollars didn't go to stopping this 'problem'. It'd be one thing if the knockoffs were poorer quality, I'd feel sorry for purchasers of the fakes, but Nike's aren't sold on quality. The knockoffs are pretty much the same quality.
I couldn't care less if the person making money off your shoes is the person who made you want to have Nikes, or a person who was smart enough to figure out the only reason you were purchasing them was the name.
And pretending multi-nationals don't have the money to go after stuff like this is inane. If the government were less corrupt, I'd express hope that this would help people who couldn't cover the cost of their own lawsuit, like a garage-inventor who patents something and gets ripped off by a large corperatation, but excuse me while I go laugh my head off at the idea of the government actually caring about individual people.
The law, in its majestic equality, forbids rich and poor alike to sleep under bridges, beg in the streets or steal bread.
-Anatole France
About the same thing applies to the no-fly list. Unless you stop everyone from flying, then some terrorists are going to fly, and it's trivial for them to figure out which ones. Hell, now we've told them which ones we think are terrorists! They can set up some fake terrorist organization for those guys to be a part of.
Luckily, the no-fly list doesn't work at all, so terrorists are not learning who we think are terrorists, and it's possible we might incorrectly stop terrorists we don't know about from flying. The intent isn't to randomly stop random people from flying, but that appears to be the effect.
They call it an antenna. You can't block RF by wrapping your head halfway in tin foil. Unless your entire body is covered in tinfoil, you've made it worse for yourself!
Hello, idiots. They tend to get on guard after the fifth one.
If you're going to commit a crime twice, make sure it's areas that do not have the same law enforcement entity covering them. That's the entire US for counterfeiting.
Purchase a very small amount of, say, cocaine. Possibly you can purchase a 'line', that would be the right amount, not that I'm a cocaine expert or anything. Be sure to get rid of the container by fire or something.
Have an envelope that's not tracable to you, make sure to leave no fingerprints. Put the cocaine, about a teaspoon, in it. Don't seal it.
When you get to school, wet a cotton swab. Stick it in the envelope, and spread the cocaine everywhere. On lockers, in classrooms, in the restrooms, everywhere.
Or, if you want to be really clever you can just put it in a few places, like on certain lockers. You can go with the asshole's lockers, to annoy them, or you can hit your own to claim the administration is harrassing you. (Obviously, you want just hit the outside.)
Seal the envelope, not by licking it. Leave it on someone's desk. (Nowadays, of course, you'd want to write 'cocaine' on it, but this idea was thought of when 'Anthrax' was a band we'd vaguely heard of. It's no good if they evacuate the school, you couldn't see the fun.)
Wait for them to discover it. Wait an hour while it's tested. Watch the drug dogs arrive.
Enjoy the fun. The dogs will smell it on you, so hopefully you also marked some other people. Complain strongly when they try to search you. Have a poppy seed bagel on you.
The next day, tell everyone your theory: That the administration spread cocaine all over the place so they'd have an excuse to bring in the drug dogs.
God, I hated those fascists. And I got out before Columbine, it got a lot worse afterwards according to my brothers.
Anyone who's required to watch though metal detectors has my utmost sympathy, and I suggest you start carrying different large lumps of metal, like car tires and boxes of paper clips, through it each day and act surprised when it goes off. (Nothing they could even possibly claim was a weapon, though.) Emptying your pockets while you're obviously holding onto a sink faucet or a clip-on desk lamp will just piss them off, but there obviously are no rules against bringing those to school.
You'd have to rig the yellow sensor, but that would be trivial.
If you really needed yellow, you could always go back to the days of multi-pass printing, by rigging up special setup with the yellow ink in a different ink well, and running the document through again.
The real important questions arise when you stop caring about that and look to why people would have shot him, and the behavior of the government after the shooting.
I think the best theory is that Angleton thought JFK was the top Soviet mole he'd been looking for.
In biology, though, ingesting water is pretty much completely ignored, just like injecting salt water into the blood is ignored. It has no effect, and it's not included in any calculations. You need to know the amount of alcohol, and, once you do, you couldn't care less about the amount of water.
I don't know what you mean by calling chemistry the 'real world'. When you're talking about the effects of alcohol on the body, you're talking biology. Is this some sort of scientific pissing contest I walked into? You don't explain reactions to alcohol with chemistry anymore than you explain circuit diagrams with quantum theory or bridges with the general theory of relativity. And in biology, water is not generally considered an impurity.
And I think it's obvious what I mean by impurities. Impurities in ethanol are things that aren't ethanol. (Or, explicitly stating something that doesn't really need to be stated in biology, water or air, or, heck, carbon dioxide.)
In general, though, when talking about impurities in alcohol, people are talking about the semi-toxic organic compounds that come with it, and are accidently created by the same thing that created the alcohol.
Instead of, oh, added coloring, which is not specific to alcohol, and thus doesn't have anything to do with hangovers, even though it is technically also an impurity. Vodka doesn't have any such additives, though. It's just alcohol. (And, for those playing along at home, water.)
(Ironically, this one of the few cases in biology where the water does matter, because not having any water would make the alcohol pull water out of you. So it is literally impossible to injest pure ethanol...even if you could get it in your mouth, it would have water in it by the time it hit your stomach by pulling it out of your throat. So, in a way, it's an anti-impurity...it's already there, and removing it will cause effects not expected by ethanol.)
All vodka should be good cold. If it's not, you're probably got it confused with your experiments in drinking urine.
Good vokda is the stuff that tastes good at room temperature. Which is how you're 'supposed' to drink it. (Technically, I think it should be 'chilled'.)
But, hey, they're not the boss of you. If you like vodka cold, then buy the cheap ass stuff. You'll never be able to tell.
Well, not the really cheap stuff. Never purchase alcohol cheaper than bottled water, that's my motto. Also never purchase it in a homemade bottle. Or anything that isn't clearly identified as a traditional liquour, like 'hill lightning', 'thirst remover' or 'zima'.
While drinking urine is basically as harmless as drinking salt water, and probably tastes about the same, the problem isn't ammonia. (If you really had a problem there you could just drink sweat instead.)
The problem is, if you're in an enviroment without water, and you get to the point where you're willing to drink urine or salt water, you're already dehydrated, and you already don't have any water to drink.
At that point, it is vitally important you do not drink salt water or urine, which has salt in it. Pour it on yourself to cool off, but do not drink it. Why? Because the entire reason you're thirsty is that you're trying to get rid your salt inbalance! You have too much salt and not enough water.
Now, yes, if you have some magical water desalter, sure, you could drink it...but I'd drink sweat, instead, personally. Or salt water. But magic water desalters do not exist. If they did, a lot less people would die in liferafts at sea. The only free way to desalt water is to evaporate it (Which, BTW, would probably get rid of the ammonia from urine.) and recondense it. This is very slow.
However, if you do ever get stuck in the middle of the desert, and manage to make a water consender, by all means, urinate next to it or even under it, so the water will condense on that. But there are no circumstances where you could drink straight urine and come out ahead.