Actually, Jim Crow laws were mostly enacted by Democrats. Not that you care; you're just looking for cheap & easy anti-Republican points, and what better way to do that than expressing an absolute and total ignorance of history.
Imagine how funny it would have been if their truck modifications included removing the steering wheel, gas, shifter, and brake and wiring an xbox 360 controller in their place.
In other news, car analogies are 100% on-topic here.
don't cross the state line except at the highest level
So they do indeed cross state lines. And they carry traffic that crosses state lines. As a matter of fact, I'd bet that regardless of the extent of their local networks, most or nearly all traffic they carry crosses a state line at some point. And unlike some of the more specious claims of "regulating interstate commerce" that the Fed dreams up, many people actually are conducting interstate commerce over Comcast's tubes (Ebay, Amazon, online banking, etc.). On top of that, carrying internet traffic depends on peering relationships with other carriers, which is another commercial interstate relationship.
Believe me, I hate when government overreaches its legitimate and limited powers, but I can't agree with you here..
I applaud the guy for trying to help. But if you stop in a live fire area with kids in the car, your priorities are fucked up.
If it were me driving the van, and I had kids with me, I would have gotten the hell out of there. Maybe I would have come back as soon as I dropped the kids off in relative safety.
Without kids in the van, I probably would have stopped to help. I'd like to think I would, anyway.
It's easy to be an armchair quarterback and second-guess the decisions made in the air and on the ground from the safety of our cozy little offices and homes based on our happy little ideal world, but the people involved didn't have that luxury.
Given that the Apache was likely in a CAS role, hesitation would likely (in the case of real danger) have killed his people on the ground, not the gunner himself. Although to be fair, an RPG is certainly capable of taking down an Apache, if an attacker could hit it.
Lead lifejackets reminds me of a Navy joke I heard once. A new recruit was an absolutely useless swimmer, despite the repeated attempts to train him. Eventually his Drill Instructor yelled at him in frustration "Sailor, if your ship ever goes down, your best chance is to sink straight to the bottom as fast as you can and run towards the nearest coastline".
From the point of view of the pilot and gunner, hesitation kills. Even if they had waited, I wonder if they would have seen that the "guns" were cameras and perhaps tripods. When the human mind expects to see something, it is remarkably good at interpreting what it sees as what it expects. The objects look like bags and cameras to us, but we have the benefit if foreknowledge, and the luxury to assess the video in safety, with no lives on the ground hanging on our judgement.
But they weren't "medics" from what I could tell. They were just some passing civilians, trying to help a wounded man.
In hindsight, yes. But it's kind of hard to tell the good samaritans from the insurgents if they all wear the same clothes. I would presume that it's not uncommon for the insurgents to carry away their wounded, and perhaps the dead as well, to prevent intel from falling into their enemies' hands. Obviously the guy in the passing van had a heart of gold to try to help the guy, but why the hell would he stop in a war zone with kids in the car?
The video shows b&w low-def footage of several people in civilian dress walking in the open, a couple of whom are carrying items by their sides by straps slung over their shoulder. One of the US servicemen IDs the items as weapons, likely AK47s. Shortly after (about 3:39 - 3:45), 2 different men in the same group have items in their hands that appear to be weapons. From what I gather from the recorded conversation among the US servicemen, the group appears to be approaching the general location a group of US soldiers on the ground, which later rolls up after the shooting to assess the damage. Later in the footage, as one of the men crouches in cover and holds out what is likely a telephoto lens, it is misidentified as an RPG.
The pilot and gunner in the Apache request and receive permission to fire. After they finish, one man is still crawling away. An unmarked van pulls up and attempts to pick up the wounded man. Again the gunner requests and receives permission to fire. The van and surrounding area is hit. Minutes after the firing stops US forces arrive, secure the area, and request medical evac for the wounded kids. Reply later comes back that the kids will be taken by Iraqi Police to a local hospital, but no reason is given.
My take on it is simple. It's an accident. The soldiers aren't targeting civilians, they are targeting an enemy that disguises themselves as civilians in a civilian area. The transcript makes it clear that they believe they are hitting insurgents. Target misidentification isn't uncommon in war, and despite the tech level of an Apache, the video feed doesn't allow a crisp view of the objects the group of men is holding. The brain of the gunner interprets what it sees as what it is accustomed to seeing - a hand-held weapon.
No matter the reasons, explanations, or speculations, it's not easy to watch. Especially the part at the end when the soldiers are picking up the wounded kids and taking them to a Bradley for first aid. Absolutely fucking tragic.
Wait, I suppose it could be a botnet, if MS's IT department distributed the required software by exploiting security holes in the victim OS instead of just using admin rights to install the new app. Come to think of it, that might be easier... [me scurries off to develop new easy-to-use set of malware-based admin tools].
A) Because there's no list category for "malicious moron".
B) Because he actually did knowingly and wilfully download and possess it (d/l on victim's PC, copied HDD to his own PC). Whether he actually "enjoyed" the collection is a separate matter.
He is a risk to the rest of society. Framing someone for kiddie porn is not a victimless crime. He may or may not be a pedophile, but consider that he is well-informed enough to know where to find kiddy porn. I don't know how easy it is to find that sort of thing, but my guess is that LE efforts have increased the amount of work required for John Q. Public to stumble across it. Given the idiots that do manage to find it, it probably doesn't require a PhD either, but my guess is that it's more than a simple google away.
Unless, like McBride and the lawyers, "the others" form a business model of privately profiting from running a company into the ground, in which case they win either way.
I'd posit the following corollaries to TFA's proposition:
The safe speed for a road depends on the engineering factors they are reducing (visibility, road width, room to maneuver, etc.). Hence, engineering for a speed reduction of 10% probably results in a safety reduction of about 10%, and a net change of zero except for longer travel times.
The drivers who are driving safely after re-engineering the roads probably weren't the ones who needed to increase their driving safety in the first place.
The law of unintended consequences will kick in after hundreds of millions of dollars have been invested in this ridiculousness. For example, in areas crowded with cars because of roadside parking, snow removal and emergency response will be more difficult, time-consuming, and costly.
The drivers who need to slow down won't give a rat's ass, and will continue to bomb through stop signs in school zones while reading and applying makeup while texting.
"doesn't want to export rare earths, but loves to export lead and melamine"
Maybe it's time to try some reverse psychology. If we can somehow convince them that we need lead and melamine for our latest high-tech products, but would prefer they keep all that awful neodymium to themselves, I'm sure we can fix the imbalance.
Why is Windows so expensive? Search that up in Microsoft’s search engine, Bing, and you’ll see this:
That’s right, the first result that shows up is a “ Why are Mac’s So Expensive?” Yahoo Answers page. The person who created this page posted a question asking why Mac’s are so expensive, and that he was fed up of Windows and...
Bing still sucks, but at least it's funny while it sucks.
Slashdot Mirror
Odd that Thomas Jefferson July 4, 1826, isn't it?
Actually, Jim Crow laws were mostly enacted by Democrats. Not that you care; you're just looking for cheap & easy anti-Republican points, and what better way to do that than expressing an absolute and total ignorance of history.
Imagine how funny it would have been if their truck modifications included removing the steering wheel, gas, shifter, and brake and wiring an xbox 360 controller in their place.
In other news, car analogies are 100% on-topic here.
their in-car skills translate to in-game as well.
Okay. But that doesn't mean that the inverse is true.
don't cross the state line except at the highest level
So they do indeed cross state lines. And they carry traffic that crosses state lines. As a matter of fact, I'd bet that regardless of the extent of their local networks, most or nearly all traffic they carry crosses a state line at some point. And unlike some of the more specious claims of "regulating interstate commerce" that the Fed dreams up, many people actually are conducting interstate commerce over Comcast's tubes (Ebay, Amazon, online banking, etc.). On top of that, carrying internet traffic depends on peering relationships with other carriers, which is another commercial interstate relationship.
Believe me, I hate when government overreaches its legitimate and limited powers, but I can't agree with you here..
I applaud the guy for trying to help. But if you stop in a live fire area with kids in the car, your priorities are fucked up.
If it were me driving the van, and I had kids with me, I would have gotten the hell out of there. Maybe I would have come back as soon as I dropped the kids off in relative safety.
Without kids in the van, I probably would have stopped to help. I'd like to think I would, anyway.
It's easy to be an armchair quarterback and second-guess the decisions made in the air and on the ground from the safety of our cozy little offices and homes based on our happy little ideal world, but the people involved didn't have that luxury.
Given that the Apache was likely in a CAS role, hesitation would likely (in the case of real danger) have killed his people on the ground, not the gunner himself. Although to be fair, an RPG is certainly capable of taking down an Apache, if an attacker could hit it.
Lead lifejackets reminds me of a Navy joke I heard once. A new recruit was an absolutely useless swimmer, despite the repeated attempts to train him. Eventually his Drill Instructor yelled at him in frustration "Sailor, if your ship ever goes down, your best chance is to sink straight to the bottom as fast as you can and run towards the nearest coastline".
From the point of view of the pilot and gunner, hesitation kills. Even if they had waited, I wonder if they would have seen that the "guns" were cameras and perhaps tripods. When the human mind expects to see something, it is remarkably good at interpreting what it sees as what it expects. The objects look like bags and cameras to us, but we have the benefit if foreknowledge, and the luxury to assess the video in safety, with no lives on the ground hanging on our judgement.
On a battlefield it's ok to shoot anything that looks like it has a gun that moves, in a city it's not.
When the battlefield is a city, expect those lines to get blurry.
But they weren't "medics" from what I could tell. They were just some passing civilians, trying to help a wounded man.
In hindsight, yes. But it's kind of hard to tell the good samaritans from the insurgents if they all wear the same clothes. I would presume that it's not uncommon for the insurgents to carry away their wounded, and perhaps the dead as well, to prevent intel from falling into their enemies' hands. Obviously the guy in the passing van had a heart of gold to try to help the guy, but why the hell would he stop in a war zone with kids in the car?
Troll? Really? He's absolutely right. Mods, please RTFA and WTFV before you mod, and check your politics at the door.
The video shows b&w low-def footage of several people in civilian dress walking in the open, a couple of whom are carrying items by their sides by straps slung over their shoulder. One of the US servicemen IDs the items as weapons, likely AK47s. Shortly after (about 3:39 - 3:45), 2 different men in the same group have items in their hands that appear to be weapons. From what I gather from the recorded conversation among the US servicemen, the group appears to be approaching the general location a group of US soldiers on the ground, which later rolls up after the shooting to assess the damage. Later in the footage, as one of the men crouches in cover and holds out what is likely a telephoto lens, it is misidentified as an RPG.
The pilot and gunner in the Apache request and receive permission to fire. After they finish, one man is still crawling away. An unmarked van pulls up and attempts to pick up the wounded man. Again the gunner requests and receives permission to fire. The van and surrounding area is hit. Minutes after the firing stops US forces arrive, secure the area, and request medical evac for the wounded kids. Reply later comes back that the kids will be taken by Iraqi Police to a local hospital, but no reason is given.
My take on it is simple. It's an accident. The soldiers aren't targeting civilians, they are targeting an enemy that disguises themselves as civilians in a civilian area. The transcript makes it clear that they believe they are hitting insurgents. Target misidentification isn't uncommon in war, and despite the tech level of an Apache, the video feed doesn't allow a crisp view of the objects the group of men is holding. The brain of the gunner interprets what it sees as what it is accustomed to seeing - a hand-held weapon.
No matter the reasons, explanations, or speculations, it's not easy to watch. Especially the part at the end when the soldiers are picking up the wounded kids and taking them to a Bradley for first aid. Absolutely fucking tragic.
When you start asking questions like that.
It's distributed computing.
... [me scurries off to develop new easy-to-use set of malware-based admin tools].
Wait, I suppose it could be a botnet, if MS's IT department distributed the required software by exploiting security holes in the victim OS instead of just using admin rights to install the new app. Come to think of it, that might be easier
A) Because there's no list category for "malicious moron".
B) Because he actually did knowingly and wilfully download and possess it (d/l on victim's PC, copied HDD to his own PC). Whether he actually "enjoyed" the collection is a separate matter.
He is a risk to the rest of society. Framing someone for kiddie porn is not a victimless crime. He may or may not be a pedophile, but consider that he is well-informed enough to know where to find kiddy porn. I don't know how easy it is to find that sort of thing, but my guess is that LE efforts have increased the amount of work required for John Q. Public to stumble across it. Given the idiots that do manage to find it, it probably doesn't require a PhD either, but my guess is that it's more than a simple google away.
They can't do that to our users. Only we can do that to our users.
Unless, like McBride and the lawyers, "the others" form a business model of privately profiting from running a company into the ground, in which case they win either way.
I wonder if he has a sensitivity to radon ...
Assuming high noon on the equator, it's a regular window mounted vertically in the wall. The trick is you need a pool mounted at 45 degrees.
"There isn't enough thrust in Christendom to fix this plane"
Admiral Thomas Connolly, speaking to Congress about the shortcomings of the F-111
'07-'09 ... wow, that's recent.
"doesn't want to export rare earths, but loves to export lead and melamine"
Maybe it's time to try some reverse psychology. If we can somehow convince them that we need lead and melamine for our latest high-tech products, but would prefer they keep all that awful neodymium to themselves, I'm sure we can fix the imbalance.
Second answer:
Bing still sucks, but at least it's funny while it sucks.