> terrorist would simply hijack a plane that was going to the city he wanted to crash into
But the ATCs are in pretty regular contact with the pilot before entering the city/nearing the airport, and if the pilot stops responding, or says something is wrong, they can take steps to avoid this. Granted, the pilot could be at gunpoint to say everything is fine, but at least it's better than nothing at all...
So, if I have a convertible and I put the top down, I wonder if trees/clouds, tall buildings, or any combination thereof could be seen as a gesture by the computer? Not too darn likely, I know, but what if...
Until this happens and they sue for equal rights. But then again, if they are smart enough to hire an attorney, the defense could argue that they aren't THAT stupid, since they knew to go legal. Or the argument could be the other way... "You filed a lawsuit that you are discriminated because you are stupid? Wow, you really ARE stupid! You win!?"
> Most computers in the office I am now sitting in do not have speakers
I get your point, but if there is both video & Audio authentication on the site, the person can use either one. If they have speakers (and I imagine most blind people w/ computers have speakers) they can use them, otherwise they use the original method.
> pay them and their clients money for asinine stuff. Compassion? Hell, it's bordering Euthanasia at the moment.
I didn't realize we were compassionately killing the blind people. What? Were you trying to use a word other than Euthanasia? 'cuz I have no idea what you meant. But, I agree with the general idea of your post.
> you americans and your lawyers make me bloody sick.
Fuck you, it's a worldwide problem, not the U.S., and few of us really like them (until someone wants to make a quick million for a paper cut on their toe). Unfortunately they are a necessary evil that has gone too far.
> We should make an active effort not to exclude people
Yes, it's unfortunate that someone is blind, but that's not my fault. I should not be required to make sure the cars that I make are driveable by parapalegics. A computer is mainly a visual tool, if a blind person can operate one, GREAT! I'm all for it. But to force people to change the way they do business just so a very very small percentage of people can use it is asinine. There are plenty of other services that do not use this exact method, and so there are still options. Hell, maybe the blind person should be more accomodating. Usually there will be at least one person around who knows how to see, and they can tell them the three numbers on the screen. If not, it's probably not that important that it can't wait until the next day when a sight-enabled person CAN be found to read it for them.
> Any momentum gained by reflecting photons on one side is balanced by the emission of these "thermal" photons on the other.
Welcome, Mr. Physicist! If the photons are reflected, how would they be coming out the other side? What the heck is a thermal photon? Does the photon break apart when hitting the mirror and the visible part of it breaks off & reflects, while the thermal part continues through it? If it does go "through" the mirror, wouldn't that just add extra propellant energy (err, I guess that would be momentum... IANAP, obviously)?
And, since I have your attention, I have heard of photons as particles & waves. Is this some mysterious phenomenon, or is it just that particles happen to move/travel in a wave-like path?
> we can only see as a particle or a wave because of how we look at it
So it is different (sort of) depending on how it is observed. Is that related to Quantum Physics? Granted I know very little about QP... (unless it's a quarter-pound, and I ain't talking about burgers)
> [...] it [...] is [...] a perpetual motion machine because the light used by the machine is not diminished in any way by its use.
What was all that spacing about? Dramatic effect?:)
Anyway, it CAN'T be considered a PMM by any reasonable scientist, so I don't think they are trying to present that idea at all. If photons act just like regular (albeit very small), observable, matter (which I have no logical reason to doubt), by exerting a force on an object in one direction, wouldn't the photon lose some momentum before being reflected back?
> I said down with the banks, not down with the police.
After money is worthless how do we pay the police? What incentive do they have to continue "fighting crime?" Moral responsibility? If the dollar is suddenly devalued to 0, much looting & chaos would ensue, leading to the police being harassed, killed, or quitting out of fear. Hence anarchy.
> The statement [...] is clearly equally applicable to written letters, email[...]
Of course THAT statement is, but without reading or already knowing the entire text to put it into context, we don't know that it is applicable. OTOH, I agree with you that that is the way it should be, but reality & wishes for reality are entirely separate.
Try learning about something before ranting on it. There are maybe 2000 active members of the KKK in the U.S. While that's still too many, it's a small portion of 265 million people. A much smaller percentage of the population as opposed to some organizations in Europe.
> But you are a brainwashed fool who thinks anyone who doesn't praise Ariel Sharon is an anti-Semite
You are a brainwashed fool that thinks American=KKK.
See? I can make fucked-up off-the-wall statements just like you!
> A case was filed against Yassir Arafat under Belgium's human rights violation legislation >... Fidel Castro, Paul Kagame and Sadam Hussein
And that obviously did more good than just being a P.R. stunt to gain popularity? Were any of those people found guilty? If so, were they punished? What? Nothing real came of it? I wonder why.
> Americans seem to think that providing a public health system [...means...] they're not allowed to go private if you want to
No, Americans seem to think it's stupid to FORCE them to pay for public health care when they would PREFER to buy private insurance, but would not do so because then they are paying for a gov service they don't want, as well as the same (actually much better) service from a private company. Don't assume ignorance when logic makes just as much sense. In typical/. tradition, however, I will now contradict myself by saying that a lot of Americans ARE stupid, but not much more or less (by %, not numbers, duh) than the rest of the world.
> Would you want your local hospital to be in the hands of private corporations?
YES! Thankfully, I work for a private (corporate, as you say) hospital and the quality of care here is MUCH better than the much larger public hospital in the nearest "city" (which is 45 minutes away, but I live in the city anyway). Private/Public means very little when it comes to quality -- it's the people involved that make the difference.
> there's not all that much you can do with someone's credit card number
WTF? In that case, can I have yours, as mine appears to be broken.
> If all this does is increase the number of people able to steal from credit card companies
No, they are stealing from people. Have you ever had your CC stolen? Many CC companies will harass you to no end to pay the charge you didn't make (unless, of course, you are rich enough to actually pay for the false charges -- then the CC company will take it off ASAP), or else file charges. This is not a solution
> I'm on paypal's side on this one
Umm, it's eBay that they're talking about. Paypal, while owned by the same company, does not fall under this.
> Bring down the banks
Dumbass. I love when people make stupid remarks like this. It proves you haven't got a fucking clue. If the banks are "brought down," your money is worthless. Welcome to anarchy, and you'll be one of the first to die (what's your address again?).
> And RTFM... do you expect some TV tech help dude or a sitcom actor to say the F word on TV
No, I expect them to not use it at all. RTFM means what it means, and if the meaning of it offends someone, then don't use it at all, instead of trying to look smart by using acronyms (incorrectly).
"In order to give you details about credit-card transactions, I have to see a court order. I suggest that you get one, if that's what you're looking for."
> Unless of course, you happen not to be living in California.
In which case you find your state law that makes impersonating an officer a crime. I guarantee there is one in at least 48 states' lawbooks, although the description of the crime and the punishment may vary wildly.
> Laws do nothing to prevent crime. They only provide for punishment after the fact and keep honest people honest.
Okay, Beavis, if laws keep honest people honest, then without laws you are implying they would be dishonest, therefore crime ensues. DUH. Your conclusion contradicts your statement of fact. Sounds like you listen to too much Choking Victim.
Slashdot Mirror
> terrorist would simply hijack a plane that was going to the city he wanted to crash into
But the ATCs are in pretty regular contact with the pilot before entering the city/nearing the airport, and if the pilot stops responding, or says something is wrong, they can take steps to avoid this. Granted, the pilot could be at gunpoint to say everything is fine, but at least it's better than nothing at all...
So, if I have a convertible and I put the top down, I wonder if trees/clouds, tall buildings, or any combination thereof could be seen as a gesture by the computer? Not too darn likely, I know, but what if...
> The stupid are not a protected group...
Until this happens and they sue for equal rights. But then again, if they are smart enough to hire an attorney, the defense could argue that they aren't THAT stupid, since they knew to go legal. Or the argument could be the other way... "You filed a lawsuit that you are discriminated because you are stupid? Wow, you really ARE stupid! You win!?"
> Most computers in the office I am now sitting in do not have speakers
I get your point, but if there is both video & Audio authentication on the site, the person can use either one. If they have speakers (and I imagine most blind people w/ computers have speakers) they can use them, otherwise they use the original method.
> pay them and their clients money for asinine stuff. Compassion? Hell, it's bordering Euthanasia at the moment.
I didn't realize we were compassionately killing the blind people. What? Were you trying to use a word other than Euthanasia? 'cuz I have no idea what you meant. But, I agree with the general idea of your post.
> The way I heard it was...
I believe your version is more likely correct, but never underestimate stupid politicians.
> you americans and your lawyers make me bloody sick.
Fuck you, it's a worldwide problem, not the U.S., and few of us really like them (until someone wants to make a quick million for a paper cut on their toe). Unfortunately they are a necessary evil that has gone too far.
> We should make an active effort not to exclude people
Yes, it's unfortunate that someone is blind, but that's not my fault. I should not be required to make sure the cars that I make are driveable by parapalegics. A computer is mainly a visual tool, if a blind person can operate one, GREAT! I'm all for it. But to force people to change the way they do business just so a very very small percentage of people can use it is asinine. There are plenty of other services that do not use this exact method, and so there are still options. Hell, maybe the blind person should be more accomodating. Usually there will be at least one person around who knows how to see, and they can tell them the three numbers on the screen. If not, it's probably not that important that it can't wait until the next day when a sight-enabled person CAN be found to read it for them.
> Any momentum gained by reflecting photons on one side is balanced by the emission of these "thermal" photons on the other.
Welcome, Mr. Physicist! If the photons are reflected, how would they be coming out the other side? What the heck is a thermal photon? Does the photon break apart when hitting the mirror and the visible part of it breaks off & reflects, while the thermal part continues through it? If it does go "through" the mirror, wouldn't that just add extra propellant energy (err, I guess that would be momentum... IANAP, obviously)?
And, since I have your attention, I have heard of photons as particles & waves. Is this some mysterious phenomenon, or is it just that particles happen to move/travel in a wave-like path?
Thanks!
> we can only see as a particle or a wave because of how we look at it
So it is different (sort of) depending on how it is observed. Is that related to Quantum Physics? Granted I know very little about QP... (unless it's a quarter-pound, and I ain't talking about burgers)
> [...] it [...] is [...] a perpetual motion machine because the light used by the machine is not diminished in any way by its use.
:)
What was all that spacing about? Dramatic effect?
Anyway, it CAN'T be considered a PMM by any reasonable scientist, so I don't think they are trying to present that idea at all. If photons act just like regular (albeit very small), observable, matter (which I have no logical reason to doubt), by exerting a force on an object in one direction, wouldn't the photon lose some momentum before being reflected back?
> equivalent to a perpetual motion machine
How do you figure? There is incoming energy from the sun, so it does not supply itself with power. Wouldn't a PM Machine require no radiation input?
> I said down with the banks, not down with the police.
After money is worthless how do we pay the police? What incentive do they have to continue "fighting crime?" Moral responsibility? If the dollar is suddenly devalued to 0, much looting & chaos would ensue, leading to the police being harassed, killed, or quitting out of fear. Hence anarchy.
> The statement [...] is clearly equally applicable to written letters, email[...]
Of course THAT statement is, but without reading or already knowing the entire text to put it into context, we don't know that it is applicable. OTOH, I agree with you that that is the way it should be, but reality & wishes for reality are entirely separate.
> Can't we convince someone to hunt them down for us?
Hey, for the right amount of money, I'll hunt anyone down for you. No, I'm not joking, but it's a lot of money.
> Ku Klux Klan in AmeriKKKa right?
Try learning about something before ranting on it. There are maybe 2000 active members of the KKK in the U.S. While that's still too many, it's a small portion of 265 million people. A much smaller percentage of the population as opposed to some organizations in Europe.
> But you are a brainwashed fool who thinks anyone who doesn't praise Ariel Sharon is an anti-Semite
You are a brainwashed fool that thinks American=KKK.
See? I can make fucked-up off-the-wall statements just like you!
> A case was filed against Yassir Arafat under Belgium's human rights violation legislation ... Fidel Castro, Paul Kagame and Sadam Hussein
>
And that obviously did more good than just being a P.R. stunt to gain popularity? Were any of those people found guilty? If so, were they punished? What? Nothing real came of it? I wonder why.
> Americans seem to think that providing a public health system [...means...] they're not allowed to go private if you want to
/. tradition, however, I will now contradict myself by saying that a lot of Americans ARE stupid, but not much more or less (by %, not numbers, duh) than the rest of the world.
No, Americans seem to think it's stupid to FORCE them to pay for public health care when they would PREFER to buy private insurance, but would not do so because then they are paying for a gov service they don't want, as well as the same (actually much better) service from a private company. Don't assume ignorance when logic makes just as much sense. In typical
> Would you want your local hospital to be in the hands of private corporations?
YES! Thankfully, I work for a private (corporate, as you say) hospital and the quality of care here is MUCH better than the much larger public hospital in the nearest "city" (which is 45 minutes away, but I live in the city anyway). Private/Public means very little when it comes to quality -- it's the people involved that make the difference.
> there's not all that much you can do with someone's credit card number
WTF? In that case, can I have yours, as mine appears to be broken.
> If all this does is increase the number of people able to steal from credit card companies
No, they are stealing from people. Have you ever had your CC stolen? Many CC companies will harass you to no end to pay the charge you didn't make (unless, of course, you are rich enough to actually pay for the false charges -- then the CC company will take it off ASAP), or else file charges. This is not a solution
> I'm on paypal's side on this one
Umm, it's eBay that they're talking about. Paypal, while owned by the same company, does not fall under this.
> Bring down the banks
Dumbass. I love when people make stupid remarks like this. It proves you haven't got a fucking clue. If the banks are "brought down," your money is worthless. Welcome to anarchy, and you'll be one of the first to die (what's your address again?).
> And RTFM... do you expect some TV tech help dude or a sitcom actor to say the F word on TV
No, I expect them to not use it at all. RTFM means what it means, and if the meaning of it offends someone, then don't use it at all, instead of trying to look smart by using acronyms (incorrectly).
> Well, You would if you worked at Microsoft
Then I'm not discriminating against those I like. If I worked at MS, I'd have to hate everyone.
Paragraph 5 of the article:
"In order to give you details about credit-card transactions, I have to see a court order. I suggest that you get one, if that's what you're looking for."
> Unless of course, you happen not to be living in California.
In which case you find your state law that makes impersonating an officer a crime. I guarantee there is one in at least 48 states' lawbooks, although the description of the crime and the punishment may vary wildly.
> Laws do nothing to prevent crime. They only provide for punishment after the fact and keep honest people honest.
Okay, Beavis, if laws keep honest people honest, then without laws you are implying they would be dishonest, therefore crime ensues. DUH. Your conclusion contradicts your statement of fact. Sounds like you listen to too much Choking Victim.