The odds that the absurd methods they used to recreate the recipe have anything to do with how beer tasted 5000 years ago is exactly the same as the odds that anything else in a history book about people 5000 is remotely realistic. Exactly Zero.
It isn't noted in anything I can find, but its almost certain that they determined the ingredients via proteomics and chromatography. The vegetable matter used in the process would have left proteins that would have been identifiable. The vessel used would give a good clue as to the purpose of putting those things in the vessel. Nothing is 100 percent sure, But Occam's razor will give you a good idea that a liquid holding vessel that contained the products that were determined by their protein signatures was probably used for making an alcoholic beverage.
None of anything you said is terribly relevant for a large enterprise. Windows is far from trouble free. That's why you need experts to deal with it so that the rank and file employees don't have to waste their time.
Ahh,that brings up something else. I've always been intrigued by the Windows is less expensive crowd. Where I was, there was an army of people supporting Windows, and 1 person supporting OSX - me. And I supported Windows as needed. If everyone switched to OSX, the department would lose almost everyone. Yet they always chanted the mantra that Windows was the cheapest OS to use. As long as you didn't count the employees, the managers, and the division head, that is.
This discussion is like talking about socialism or religion. Logic has no place in the discussion. Yes, those that have done it know that Linux is far more stable and reliable for the average user but those that shout the loudest will convince people that they cannot live without Windows.
That's because Linux OS people aren't paid to yell.
I use 'em all, I know what is best, more stable, and easiest to use. I don't really care what people whose argument's main point is that if you aren't on Windows think., you're a moron.
I'm not sure how to tell you this, but quite a few casual users I've dealt with have walked off with Linux live disks taken from my emergency stack because of Microsoft's UI decisions from Win8 on--and most seem to be pretty happy with the move.
Admittedly, the flavors in my stack of Linux live disks are deliberately picked to be luser-friendly--it exists so I don't have to be bothered by others' needing data off a hosed OS, or who can't even tell if it's a software or hardware problem.
Microsoft shills have become the next generation of denialists. They experience cognitive dissonance when faced with the truth. My wife has less problems with her Minty laptop than I do with my brand New W10 Envy. I run my database and spreadsheet on my iMac on AO that I take from the Mac to AO on Linux, and AO on My new machine. 100 percent compatible. On Windows Office, it isn't even compatible from Windows to MacOS, and nothing on Linux. Well, except that I can open Microsoft Office files.
My guess, outside of the paid shills, is people who maybe tried Linux in early days and went through dependency hell, people who tried to impose Windows on Linux, and maybe people who only run server farms. Certainly for some of my more exotic work, I need to use the terminal, and make, compile and install my own applications, but my Wife who uses Linux exclusively (Mint) maintains her own computer, and doesn't even know what the terminal is. She uses the typical emsil Browsing and AO office suite.
Anal ventriloquism; impressive. I've switched over hundreds of my clients [who are casual users] from Winblows to Mint over the past six years or so and the less technically adept they are, the more likely they are to benefit.
Darth Nadella has just felt a shift in the force, and the ShillTroopers will be coming after you.
Speak to me of the superiority of the Windows office suite. An office suite that isn't even compatible with itself is only superior to people who have been paid to use it, or paid to shill it.
Linux is mainly for servers and embedded systems. On the desktop it's for people that enjoy tinkering with computers rather than getting work done.
While that is a popular impression of Linux, the past several years has been allowing people who have no idea of what they are doing to use Linux. It is now simpler to use than Windows by a wide margin. My wife was so pissed off at Windows 8, she refused to use the nice laptop I bought her. I installed Mint, and she hasn't looked back, and even does her system maintenance now.
Perhaps http://www.microsoft.com/en-us... has something to do ith it. Politicians are easily purchased. And I am certain that Redmond has been having a hissy fit since Munich betrayed them, so the right number of Deutschmarks to the right people and all your problems go away. Because there are no problems with Windows 10 - it's the best OS ever!
Personally, I hope that they do, so that they can experience the joy of Windows 10.
Researchers have already tested the gene drive in a similar way (although not with mammals AFAIK). It is frighteningly effective. With the method they are proposing you don't need to make genetically superior mice that will out breed the others. By making the engineered mice only have male offspring they will be exploiting the delicate balance of ecology.
There was some ethical discussion regarding humans choosing the sex of their offspring. While no one argued that extinction would take place, surprisingly small swings acn have huge ramifications. Let's say that a lot of people wanted boys. Perhaps because of sports prowess - who knows, but there are definitely cultures where it can be downright dangerous to be born female. So if enough males are born it changes the social dynamic, as more men will not reproduce The opposite is also true. If there was a choice to have more female children born, it would mean much mor ecompetition for the fewer number of males to reproduce with.
It is almost certainly a self correcting problem for humans, hwo can presumably think, but for some animals, a small alteration will be disastrous over time, if it is a dominant trait.
Some guy: use bluetooth. I don't see any possible problems with it
Me: it's another thing to charge
You: you're a moron. I've never taken a plane and don't realize there is only one usb port provided for your seat on a plane, but you're stupid. planes should have two. And you should use the wired headphones and carry 2 pairs at all times.
you have problems with English, don't you. When people say "no problems with bluetooth" and you reply that problems with bluetooth can be solved by not using bluetooth... you're the moron.
There's an old saying - when you are in a hole, the first thing is to quit digging. You just keep coming up with more Precious snowflake reasons.
Protip 1: have all of your shit charged before you get on the airplane.
and if fish had fur they'd have lice. the problem of having a charged device run out of battery exists with bluetooth, and does not with wired.
If you cannot keep your Bluetooth headset charged, you'll probably forget to charge your laptop or your phone as well.They also have batteries. So many problems for you, Precious Snowflake!
really? you are too dumb to figure out in what situations having battery-powered headphones would be bad? here's one: I'm getting off the plane. I have a conference call with some people as I am getting into the rental car. I put on my headphones, and bam - they are not charged. I have to be at a client site in 40 minutes, and that's how long it takes to drive. I can
1) make everyone on the call listen to car noise and sound unprofessional
2) drive with one hand, meaning I will show up w/o having breakfast, and get a ticket
3) be like you and work at mcdonalds. because I'd be a moron.
What a precious, special, and fragile snowflake you are.
1. If you are not able to charge your devices, and know what state of charge they are in, you have no business calling me a moron.
2. If I knew that you were so disorganized and incapable of keeping your needed equipment ready, well than I suspect that you would be pretty unprepared for the presentation as well. Unpreparedness is not a thing that manifests itself in only one area.
and by the way, the chord going from my fucking pocket to my ears has caused Zero problems for the last 40 years.
You must have the oldest smartphone ever made, in 1977!
He would be disqualified for several reasons. His navel is exposed. His breasts are aggressively exposed, his shorts are higher than 4 inches above his knees, and he is almost naked.
I suspect a lot of people might find his size, muscle and bulk making them uncomfortable, so he'd probably get a safe room complaint total boot form teh conference
But the big question - are we sexually aroused? I suppose there is a rule 34 for Sumo wrestlers, but it must be small.
It's a fucking security conference, how is "act like a grown up, not a frat house" even controversial?
Because that isn't what they are saying. They are saying that a bellybutton is not allowed - bringing back memories of Barbara Eden's navel being spackled in order to get past the censors. Dresses or shorts more than 4 inches above the knee are banned! Aggressive cleavage is banned. Whatever that means. Cosplay must be approved. They have enforcers, they have safe rooms for the "uncomfortable". Incredibly ambiguous rules that mean that anyone who is offended can have anyone they find offensive removed from the conference
There are only two groups I know who would outlaw sex to this extent. Oddly enough, they are on opposite sides in all other matters.
I don't want women running around naked or giving free oral sex in return for a sale, and I think that most of us know what the social mores are as to what is acceptable or not. But these rules are not that at all, they are implemented according to groups that have an agenda. At least that is a reasonable conjecture. Because I know of no one other than radicals who are offended by a skirt that is 4.0000000001 inches above the knees. Well maybe the Amish, but they aren't behind this at all.
So when you retire, are you going to demand to be euthanized because of your lack of productivity
Is that really the same idea? I don't see that. Just because you want to maximize the total usefulness of existing people may not mean you'll optimize the average by removing the bottom outliers.
Hey now! It was a bit of dumb humor. In fact, My retirement "take home" isn't an actual outlier level. For what it's worth, I'm pumping a good deal of money back into the economy - been on a long vacation in the deep south, living in hotels and eating out every day. Which is all a part of one of my different outlooks on money, that instead of enabling to make a few people really wealthy, we should be trying to make as meany people as possible wealthy. People without money don't spend money that makes other people money - at least not for long. But that's a whole different subject.
I made a rather long reply to dbill, so don't want to wear out my keyboard again. Look, if you are offended and need a safe area if you see a woman with a skirt or shorts more than 4 inches above her knees, if seeing a naval upsets you, be happy that PAX supplies a safe area for you to go to until they eject the offensive person, and you can go about your life without being offended. I'll support that.
Will we soon be banning attractive women because they are attractive
Obviously not, it's just a sign that these conferences are "growing up" and getting more like the conferences of other industries.
There's a bit of a difference between having salesfolk who are dressed appropriately and look good or blatantly hiring a bunch of strippers that don't even strip.
Well, since I have been accused of not reading the rules, therefore I have no right to comment, let's dicuss the rules:
I'll even write them here, so you can rteell me how stupid and wrong I am I'll interject my obviously incorrect viewpoints.
Since the early beginnings of the show, PAX has been proactive about creating and implementing policies that ensure a safe and fun environment for attendees, speakers, exhibitors, and Enforcers alike. Many of you have seen the condensed “Six Rules of PAX” circulated each and every show, but this page is dedicated to explaining each of them in their intent and use as well as our other safety and security policies, including our Booth Babe Policy, our Weapons Check policy, and our policies specific to the Expo Hall.
If at any point you feel unsafe at PAX or that any of the rules have been broken, we ask that you inform an Enforcer or member of PAX staff immediately. Your safety is our primary concern, and if you feel that safety has been compromised, we will do everything in our power to rectify the issue. Issues of violence and harassment are addressed immediately, with guarded “Safe Areas” being designated in case any incidents do arise.
Okay. Safe areas? Seriously? These scantily clad booth babes have been making people feel unsafe and we must protect men and women from them. They are the equivalent of bringing in firearms. If you want to declare my position null and void - take it up with them, Safe areas because you saw a scantily clad woman. Hilarious. Good to see my argument demolished fro the get-go.
Following that is some common sense rules about drugs and harassment and theft. No problem there. Now we get into the meat of my argument
AX has a strict ‘no booth babe’ policy with the purpose of creating an environment where everyone can feel comfortable and welcome, and the focus is on games, not hired booth staff.
Booth babes are defined as staff of ANY gender used by exhibitors to promote their products at PAX by using overtly sexual or suggestive methods. Partial nudity, the aggressive display of cleavage and the navel, and shorts/skirts higher than 4” above the knee are not allowed. If for any reason an exhibit and/or its contents are deemed objectionable to PAX management, the exhibitor will be asked to alter the attire of its staff.
I wonder if they will kick out any woman who dares to wear a skirt more than 4 inches above the knee? I wonder if they will have their "Enforcers" check this rule. Taking these trollops in the back room and measuring their offensive skirts - Keep in mind that Enforcer is their terminology, not mine. My better half oten wears skirts that are more than 4 inches above the knees. That doesn't even get to miniskirt, and obviously party dresses that we see on prime time TV are . are verboten. Petty, and pointless.
While we are at it, please define "partial nudity". My Grandparents were people who demanded that a woman's skirt be no higher than mid calf, because anything higher and "she might as well be naked." We can call that an extreme position all day, but some people hold it, and partial nudity is a very vague term. I consider partial nudity as unclothed visibility of either the genital area or breasts, but not both. A whole lot of variability in there, from Burkhas to bikinis to fully naked.
And just what in the unholy hot taint of Beelzebub is aggressive display of cleavage or naval? And if we engaged in the practice like they did
USC 18 793. Her crimes specifically fit sub paragraphs (e) or (f). If (e), it's often referred to as deliberate security compromise, if (f) it's failure to protect/mishandling of Classified Information. (f) is most likely to be charged as it requires no intent. You mishandle classified information, you have violated this law.
Both (e) and (f) carry a fine of up to $10,000 and a sentence of up to 10 years. She should face a count for each email sent from her account. For any emails containing classified information originating from someone else, that person faces the same charge and she could face another count of (f) for failure to report a violation.
Sure. However if the situation that you desire was to be implemented, we'd have a lot of people in prison - and many of them would not be people you hate. As well, I know that there is no way I would ever work on classified areas if my carreer and life could be destroyed by someone sending me classified mail on an open system. I've read the declassified FBI investigation into the Clinton server fiasco, https://vault.fbi.gov/hillary-... and after wading through a lot of it, there were people around her who did the actual transgressions.
Any violation is a violation. Are you prepared to go to prison for 10 years for someone else making a mistake?
Or are you trying to claim that the FBI is simultaneously supporting and not supporting Clinton? They in fact are lying about their investigation and making a huge cover-up? This rises to the level of a security violation and letter of reprimand, and a debatable action of temporarily losing clearance for some amount of time.
The poiunt on my part is that the people yelling the loudest are not yelling because they know the law, but that they hate the lady. As I recall, a few years back, an agent working out of the white house was selling arms to Iran via a money laundering type scheme, when he was nearing caught he and his assistant went on a classified document destruction spree, and his lovely assistant concealed classified documents upon her person and left the building. It wasn't any people set up a email server and maield stuff back and forth, but some pretty egregious stuff, sending arms to an acknowledged enemy of the US, and deliberate destruction and theft of classified documents.
The results?
Caspar Weinberger, Secretary of Defense, was indicted on two counts of perjury and one count of obstruction of justice on June 16, 1992. Weinberger received a pardon from George H. W. Bush on December 24, 1992, before he was tried.
Robert C. McFarlane, National Security Adviser, convicted of withholding evidence, but after a plea bargain was given only two years of probation. Later pardoned by President George H. W. Bush.
Elliott Abrams, Assistant Secretary of State, convicted of withholding evidence, but after a plea bargain was given only two years probation. Later pardoned by President George H. W. Bush.
Alan D. Fiers, Chief of the CIA's Central American Task Force, convicted of withholding evidence and sentenced to one year probation. Later pardoned by President George H. W. Bush.
Clair George, Chief of Covert Ops-CIA, convicted on two charges of perjury, but pardoned by President George H. W. Bush before sentencing.
Oliver North, member of the National Security Council convicted of accepting an illegal gratuity, obstruction of a congressional inquiry, and destruction of documents, but the ruling was overturned since he had been granted immunity.
Fawn Hall, Oliver North's secretary, was given immunity from prosecution on charges of conspiracy and destroying documents in exchange for her testimony.
Jonathan Scott Royster, Liaison to Oliver North, was given immunity from prosecution on charges of conspiracy and destroying documents in exchange for his testimony.
National Security Advisor John Poindexter was convicted of five count
So you limit what you do with your phone just to make the battery last. That's a compromise.
Limit is such a limiting word. I have had a lifelong tendency to use devices that best fit the purpose.
So it's mobile. Mobile. I see people out at breakfast squinting at their little smartphones. While all of the things a smartphone can do are impressive in such a small form factor, we have to face it - for anything other than phone calls, they are pretty shitty. They are only marginal at texting even. But the small screen, the constant switching between WiF and 4G to avoid blowing the data cap, they are a "world's tallest midget" solution.
And that's why I have an array of devices. I have my iPhone because it integrates with my Mac which I use because Windows does not have the software I need to use, I have a Samsung Android Tablet in the living room, I have a good Windows Laptop that I need to run some SDR software I use, and Some Linux machines I use for some other RF implementations. And a cheap Chromebook I use at breakfast because I don't give a damn if someone spills a coffee in it.
While I don't expect people to go to my lengths of different equipment, It should be pretty obvious to anyone with a little experience that a smartphone of any make or model of any price range, when reduced to it's nature, is nothing more than a toy at best. Something that might do a lot of things, yet none of them very well.
Ahh poor baby wanted to see boobs at a security conference....
Worst extrapolation ever! Booth babes are silly. But some people like them, and while whoever it is you think wants to see boobs can see tons of them (literally) on the internet, or the full monty live and in person at a gentleman's club, there is no mistaking that some ladies are being put out of work.
Only democrat's claim there was nothing actionable, but ask the people been jailed for mishandling classified information if they feel the same?
I see. Name the specific law and the statutes involved and the punishments as prescribed by law. Also, give us the citations of the names of the people who are in jail for mishandling classified information. Up to the challenge, You can even use alternate truths as long as you cite them.
I take it you don't play many games on your phone?
Some of the games will eat an iPhones battery in 3 hours. So if you sit down of an evening after a full days work then you may only have 30 minutes of play time on the phone. So people plug in. You can't do that with wireless charging.
Think about how many millions of those battery packs have been sold. That is so people can charge on the move.
Games on your phone. Best post all day. I can't use my phone as fishing bait either.
By the way - how's that custom audio jack working out for you?
It doesn't bother me at all. Some whiners complain about not being able to charge the phone and listen to music at the same time. Hell, I'm rocking my tunes and posting this from my new iPhone as we speak. I don't see what the b
If you are serious, you have some severe time management issues. As well, isn't listening to music on a smartphone and bragging about it a little silly? The world's tallest midget concept. I listened to my iPhone 7 with a cheap pair of real headphones, the ones Slashdot users cite and apparently see as the gold standard. Meh. I listened with my iphones plugged into the charging port. Sounded pretty good. Then I plugged in my Studio headset. Sounded similar, a little better. (that one went through two of the dreaded dongles, a 1/4 to 1/8th inch, and the spawn of hell Apple dongle. Then I listened to it through a Bluetooth headset. I prefer the Bluetooth for one main reason. The entire concept of the cord. I think I understand why so many people have cracked screens, when tehy move and pull teh phone and it hits the floor.
Then I listened to my music through a computer system put the phone aside, and allowed it to be a phone. I also use my bluetooth headset for my Samsung, for the same reason. This is asilly argument, and I reply mostly to annoy people who adhere to it.
My wife's Samsung has had wireless charging for a couple years now. So has my Nexus 5. Several other Android phones as well.
Apple's not even "in the money" on this one - just an "also ran". By the way - how's that custom audio jack working out for you?
There are plenty of reasons that wireless charging is a really bad and inferior technical solution. So if you like it - fine. Use it, But you're strutting around like you own the world. Would you like the explanation?
Slashdot Mirror
The odds that the absurd methods they used to recreate the recipe have anything to do with how beer tasted 5000 years ago is exactly the same as the odds that anything else in a history book about people 5000 is remotely realistic. Exactly Zero.
It isn't noted in anything I can find, but its almost certain that they determined the ingredients via proteomics and chromatography. The vegetable matter used in the process would have left proteins that would have been identifiable. The vessel used would give a good clue as to the purpose of putting those things in the vessel. Nothing is 100 percent sure, But Occam's razor will give you a good idea that a liquid holding vessel that contained the products that were determined by their protein signatures was probably used for making an alcoholic beverage.
Here's a site with a very short example http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com... So let's all relax and have a beer!
None of anything you said is terribly relevant for a large enterprise. Windows is far from trouble free. That's why you need experts to deal with it so that the rank and file employees don't have to waste their time.
Ahh,that brings up something else. I've always been intrigued by the Windows is less expensive crowd. Where I was, there was an army of people supporting Windows, and 1 person supporting OSX - me. And I supported Windows as needed. If everyone switched to OSX, the department would lose almost everyone. Yet they always chanted the mantra that Windows was the cheapest OS to use. As long as you didn't count the employees, the managers, and the division head, that is.
This discussion is like talking about socialism or religion. Logic has no place in the discussion. Yes, those that have done it know that Linux is far more stable and reliable for the average user but those that shout the loudest will convince people that they cannot live without Windows.
That's because Linux OS people aren't paid to yell.
I use 'em all, I know what is best, more stable, and easiest to use. I don't really care what people whose argument's main point is that if you aren't on Windows think., you're a moron.
I'm not sure how to tell you this, but quite a few casual users I've dealt with have walked off with Linux live disks taken from my emergency stack because of Microsoft's UI decisions from Win8 on--and most seem to be pretty happy with the move.
Admittedly, the flavors in my stack of Linux live disks are deliberately picked to be luser-friendly--it exists so I don't have to be bothered by others' needing data off a hosed OS, or who can't even tell if it's a software or hardware problem.
Microsoft shills have become the next generation of denialists. They experience cognitive dissonance when faced with the truth. My wife has less problems with her Minty laptop than I do with my brand New W10 Envy. I run my database and spreadsheet on my iMac on AO that I take from the Mac to AO on Linux, and AO on My new machine. 100 percent compatible. On Windows Office, it isn't even compatible from Windows to MacOS, and nothing on Linux. Well, except that I can open Microsoft Office files.
My guess, outside of the paid shills, is people who maybe tried Linux in early days and went through dependency hell, people who tried to impose Windows on Linux, and maybe people who only run server farms. Certainly for some of my more exotic work, I need to use the terminal, and make, compile and install my own applications, but my Wife who uses Linux exclusively (Mint) maintains her own computer, and doesn't even know what the terminal is. She uses the typical emsil Browsing and AO office suite.
Anal ventriloquism; impressive. I've switched over hundreds of my clients [who are casual users] from Winblows to Mint over the past six years or so and the less technically adept they are, the more likely they are to benefit.
Darth Nadella has just felt a shift in the force, and the ShillTroopers will be coming after you.
Especially since you are right.
Speak to me of the superiority of the Windows office suite. An office suite that isn't even compatible with itself is only superior to people who have been paid to use it, or paid to shill it.
Linux is mainly for servers and embedded systems. On the desktop it's for people that enjoy tinkering with computers rather than getting work done.
While that is a popular impression of Linux, the past several years has been allowing people who have no idea of what they are doing to use Linux. It is now simpler to use than Windows by a wide margin. My wife was so pissed off at Windows 8, she refused to use the nice laptop I bought her. I installed Mint, and she hasn't looked back, and even does her system maintenance now.
Perhaps http://www.microsoft.com/en-us... has something to do ith it. Politicians are easily purchased. And I am certain that Redmond has been having a hissy fit since Munich betrayed them, so the right number of Deutschmarks to the right people and all your problems go away. Because there are no problems with Windows 10 - it's the best OS ever!
Personally, I hope that they do, so that they can experience the joy of Windows 10.
Researchers have already tested the gene drive in a similar way (although not with mammals AFAIK). It is frighteningly effective. With the method they are proposing you don't need to make genetically superior mice that will out breed the others. By making the engineered mice only have male offspring they will be exploiting the delicate balance of ecology.
There was some ethical discussion regarding humans choosing the sex of their offspring. While no one argued that extinction would take place, surprisingly small swings acn have huge ramifications. Let's say that a lot of people wanted boys. Perhaps because of sports prowess - who knows, but there are definitely cultures where it can be downright dangerous to be born female. So if enough males are born it changes the social dynamic, as more men will not reproduce The opposite is also true. If there was a choice to have more female children born, it would mean much mor ecompetition for the fewer number of males to reproduce with.
It is almost certainly a self correcting problem for humans, hwo can presumably think, but for some animals, a small alteration will be disastrous over time, if it is a dominant trait.
It is also possible that natural selection will cause androgynous mice to be the norm.
Did you just assume their gender?
Some guy: use bluetooth. I don't see any possible problems with it Me: it's another thing to charge You: you're a moron. I've never taken a plane and don't realize there is only one usb port provided for your seat on a plane, but you're stupid. planes should have two. And you should use the wired headphones and carry 2 pairs at all times.
you have problems with English, don't you. When people say "no problems with bluetooth" and you reply that problems with bluetooth can be solved by not using bluetooth... you're the moron.
There's an old saying - when you are in a hole, the first thing is to quit digging. You just keep coming up with more Precious snowflake reasons.
Protip 1: have all of your shit charged before you get on the airplane.
and if fish had fur they'd have lice. the problem of having a charged device run out of battery exists with bluetooth, and does not with wired.
If you cannot keep your Bluetooth headset charged, you'll probably forget to charge your laptop or your phone as well.They also have batteries. So many problems for you, Precious Snowflake!
really? you are too dumb to figure out in what situations having battery-powered headphones would be bad? here's one: I'm getting off the plane. I have a conference call with some people as I am getting into the rental car. I put on my headphones, and bam - they are not charged. I have to be at a client site in 40 minutes, and that's how long it takes to drive. I can
1) make everyone on the call listen to car noise and sound unprofessional 2) drive with one hand, meaning I will show up w/o having breakfast, and get a ticket 3) be like you and work at mcdonalds. because I'd be a moron.
What a precious, special, and fragile snowflake you are.
1. If you are not able to charge your devices, and know what state of charge they are in, you have no business calling me a moron.
2. If I knew that you were so disorganized and incapable of keeping your needed equipment ready, well than I suspect that you would be pretty unprepared for the presentation as well. Unpreparedness is not a thing that manifests itself in only one area.
and by the way, the chord going from my fucking pocket to my ears has caused Zero problems for the last 40 years.
You must have the oldest smartphone ever made, in 1977!
That seems to be something made up by the author of the article, not an actual policy.
That is true, although he isn't wrong. Here's thePAX site with teh rules: http://east.paxsite.com/safety...
The Sumo Wrestler would be disqualified for many reasons. Here is a typical sumo wrestler http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-OujS...
He would be disqualified for several reasons. His navel is exposed. His breasts are aggressively exposed, his shorts are higher than 4 inches above his knees, and he is almost naked.
I suspect a lot of people might find his size, muscle and bulk making them uncomfortable, so he'd probably get a safe room complaint total boot form teh conference But the big question - are we sexually aroused? I suppose there is a rule 34 for Sumo wrestlers, but it must be small.
Booth babes are, ultimately, soft porn.
It's a fucking security conference, how is "act like a grown up, not a frat house" even controversial?
Because that isn't what they are saying. They are saying that a bellybutton is not allowed - bringing back memories of Barbara Eden's navel being spackled in order to get past the censors. Dresses or shorts more than 4 inches above the knee are banned! Aggressive cleavage is banned. Whatever that means. Cosplay must be approved. They have enforcers, they have safe rooms for the "uncomfortable". Incredibly ambiguous rules that mean that anyone who is offended can have anyone they find offensive removed from the conference
There are only two groups I know who would outlaw sex to this extent. Oddly enough, they are on opposite sides in all other matters.
I don't want women running around naked or giving free oral sex in return for a sale, and I think that most of us know what the social mores are as to what is acceptable or not. But these rules are not that at all, they are implemented according to groups that have an agenda. At least that is a reasonable conjecture. Because I know of no one other than radicals who are offended by a skirt that is 4.0000000001 inches above the knees. Well maybe the Amish, but they aren't behind this at all.
(gets shifty eyes)...... "Or are they?"
So when you retire, are you going to demand to be euthanized because of your lack of productivity
Is that really the same idea? I don't see that. Just because you want to maximize the total usefulness of existing people may not mean you'll optimize the average by removing the bottom outliers.
Hey now! It was a bit of dumb humor. In fact, My retirement "take home" isn't an actual outlier level. For what it's worth, I'm pumping a good deal of money back into the economy - been on a long vacation in the deep south, living in hotels and eating out every day. Which is all a part of one of my different outlooks on money, that instead of enabling to make a few people really wealthy, we should be trying to make as meany people as possible wealthy. People without money don't spend money that makes other people money - at least not for long. But that's a whole different subject.
Let me simplify your statements:
I made a rather long reply to dbill, so don't want to wear out my keyboard again. Look, if you are offended and need a safe area if you see a woman with a skirt or shorts more than 4 inches above her knees, if seeing a naval upsets you, be happy that PAX supplies a safe area for you to go to until they eject the offensive person, and you can go about your life without being offended. I'll support that.
Some folks need safe areas.
Obviously not, it's just a sign that these conferences are "growing up" and getting more like the conferences of other industries.
There's a bit of a difference between having salesfolk who are dressed appropriately and look good or blatantly hiring a bunch of strippers that don't even strip.
Well, since I have been accused of not reading the rules, therefore I have no right to comment, let's dicuss the rules:
I'll even write them here, so you can rteell me how stupid and wrong I am I'll interject my obviously incorrect viewpoints.
Since the early beginnings of the show, PAX has been proactive about creating and implementing policies that ensure a safe and fun environment for attendees, speakers, exhibitors, and Enforcers alike. Many of you have seen the condensed “Six Rules of PAX” circulated each and every show, but this page is dedicated to explaining each of them in their intent and use as well as our other safety and security policies, including our Booth Babe Policy, our Weapons Check policy, and our policies specific to the Expo Hall.
If at any point you feel unsafe at PAX or that any of the rules have been broken, we ask that you inform an Enforcer or member of PAX staff immediately. Your safety is our primary concern, and if you feel that safety has been compromised, we will do everything in our power to rectify the issue. Issues of violence and harassment are addressed immediately, with guarded “Safe Areas” being designated in case any incidents do arise.
Okay. Safe areas? Seriously? These scantily clad booth babes have been making people feel unsafe and we must protect men and women from them. They are the equivalent of bringing in firearms. If you want to declare my position null and void - take it up with them, Safe areas because you saw a scantily clad woman. Hilarious. Good to see my argument demolished fro the get-go.
Following that is some common sense rules about drugs and harassment and theft. No problem there. Now we get into the meat of my argument
AX has a strict ‘no booth babe’ policy with the purpose of creating an environment where everyone can feel comfortable and welcome, and the focus is on games, not hired booth staff.
Booth babes are defined as staff of ANY gender used by exhibitors to promote their products at PAX by using overtly sexual or suggestive methods. Partial nudity, the aggressive display of cleavage and the navel, and shorts/skirts higher than 4” above the knee are not allowed. If for any reason an exhibit and/or its contents are deemed objectionable to PAX management, the exhibitor will be asked to alter the attire of its staff.
I wonder if they will kick out any woman who dares to wear a skirt more than 4 inches above the knee? I wonder if they will have their "Enforcers" check this rule. Taking these trollops in the back room and measuring their offensive skirts - Keep in mind that Enforcer is their terminology, not mine. My better half oten wears skirts that are more than 4 inches above the knees. That doesn't even get to miniskirt, and obviously party dresses that we see on prime time TV are . are verboten. Petty, and pointless.
While we are at it, please define "partial nudity". My Grandparents were people who demanded that a woman's skirt be no higher than mid calf, because anything higher and "she might as well be naked." We can call that an extreme position all day, but some people hold it, and partial nudity is a very vague term. I consider partial nudity as unclothed visibility of either the genital area or breasts, but not both. A whole lot of variability in there, from Burkhas to bikinis to fully naked.
And just what in the unholy hot taint of Beelzebub is aggressive display of cleavage or naval? And if we engaged in the practice like they did
It's this whole neo-Victorian era. We'll be back to putting skirts on table legs soon enough.
Demanded by ultra-liberals no less!
USC 18 793. Her crimes specifically fit sub paragraphs (e) or (f). If (e), it's often referred to as deliberate security compromise, if (f) it's failure to protect/mishandling of Classified Information. (f) is most likely to be charged as it requires no intent. You mishandle classified information, you have violated this law.
Both (e) and (f) carry a fine of up to $10,000 and a sentence of up to 10 years. She should face a count for each email sent from her account. For any emails containing classified information originating from someone else, that person faces the same charge and she could face another count of (f) for failure to report a violation.
Sure. However if the situation that you desire was to be implemented, we'd have a lot of people in prison - and many of them would not be people you hate. As well, I know that there is no way I would ever work on classified areas if my carreer and life could be destroyed by someone sending me classified mail on an open system. I've read the declassified FBI investigation into the Clinton server fiasco, https://vault.fbi.gov/hillary-... and after wading through a lot of it, there were people around her who did the actual transgressions.
Any violation is a violation. Are you prepared to go to prison for 10 years for someone else making a mistake?
Or are you trying to claim that the FBI is simultaneously supporting and not supporting Clinton? They in fact are lying about their investigation and making a huge cover-up? This rises to the level of a security violation and letter of reprimand, and a debatable action of temporarily losing clearance for some amount of time.
The poiunt on my part is that the people yelling the loudest are not yelling because they know the law, but that they hate the lady. As I recall, a few years back, an agent working out of the white house was selling arms to Iran via a money laundering type scheme, when he was nearing caught he and his assistant went on a classified document destruction spree, and his lovely assistant concealed classified documents upon her person and left the building. It wasn't any people set up a email server and maield stuff back and forth, but some pretty egregious stuff, sending arms to an acknowledged enemy of the US, and deliberate destruction and theft of classified documents.
The results?
Caspar Weinberger, Secretary of Defense, was indicted on two counts of perjury and one count of obstruction of justice on June 16, 1992. Weinberger received a pardon from George H. W. Bush on December 24, 1992, before he was tried.
Robert C. McFarlane, National Security Adviser, convicted of withholding evidence, but after a plea bargain was given only two years of probation. Later pardoned by President George H. W. Bush.
Elliott Abrams, Assistant Secretary of State, convicted of withholding evidence, but after a plea bargain was given only two years probation. Later pardoned by President George H. W. Bush.
Alan D. Fiers, Chief of the CIA's Central American Task Force, convicted of withholding evidence and sentenced to one year probation. Later pardoned by President George H. W. Bush.
Clair George, Chief of Covert Ops-CIA, convicted on two charges of perjury, but pardoned by President George H. W. Bush before sentencing.
Oliver North, member of the National Security Council convicted of accepting an illegal gratuity, obstruction of a congressional inquiry, and destruction of documents, but the ruling was overturned since he had been granted immunity.
Fawn Hall, Oliver North's secretary, was given immunity from prosecution on charges of conspiracy and destroying documents in exchange for her testimony.
Jonathan Scott Royster, Liaison to Oliver North, was given immunity from prosecution on charges of conspiracy and destroying documents in exchange for his testimony.
National Security Advisor John Poindexter was convicted of five count
So you limit what you do with your phone just to make the battery last. That's a compromise.
Limit is such a limiting word. I have had a lifelong tendency to use devices that best fit the purpose.
So it's mobile. Mobile. I see people out at breakfast squinting at their little smartphones. While all of the things a smartphone can do are impressive in such a small form factor, we have to face it - for anything other than phone calls, they are pretty shitty. They are only marginal at texting even. But the small screen, the constant switching between WiF and 4G to avoid blowing the data cap, they are a "world's tallest midget" solution.
And that's why I have an array of devices. I have my iPhone because it integrates with my Mac which I use because Windows does not have the software I need to use, I have a Samsung Android Tablet in the living room, I have a good Windows Laptop that I need to run some SDR software I use, and Some Linux machines I use for some other RF implementations. And a cheap Chromebook I use at breakfast because I don't give a damn if someone spills a coffee in it.
While I don't expect people to go to my lengths of different equipment, It should be pretty obvious to anyone with a little experience that a smartphone of any make or model of any price range, when reduced to it's nature, is nothing more than a toy at best. Something that might do a lot of things, yet none of them very well.
Ahh poor baby wanted to see boobs at a security conference....
Worst extrapolation ever! Booth babes are silly. But some people like them, and while whoever it is you think wants to see boobs can see tons of them (literally) on the internet, or the full monty live and in person at a gentleman's club, there is no mistaking that some ladies are being put out of work.
Only democrat's claim there was nothing actionable, but ask the people been jailed for mishandling classified information if they feel the same?
I see. Name the specific law and the statutes involved and the punishments as prescribed by law. Also, give us the citations of the names of the people who are in jail for mishandling classified information. Up to the challenge, You can even use alternate truths as long as you cite them.
I take it you don't play many games on your phone?
Some of the games will eat an iPhones battery in 3 hours. So if you sit down of an evening after a full days work then you may only have 30 minutes of play time on the phone. So people plug in. You can't do that with wireless charging.
Think about how many millions of those battery packs have been sold. That is so people can charge on the move.
Games on your phone. Best post all day. I can't use my phone as fishing bait either.
By the way - how's that custom audio jack working out for you?
It doesn't bother me at all. Some whiners complain about not being able to charge the phone and listen to music at the same time. Hell, I'm rocking my tunes and posting this from my new iPhone as we speak. I don't see what the b
If you are serious, you have some severe time management issues. As well, isn't listening to music on a smartphone and bragging about it a little silly? The world's tallest midget concept. I listened to my iPhone 7 with a cheap pair of real headphones, the ones Slashdot users cite and apparently see as the gold standard. Meh. I listened with my iphones plugged into the charging port. Sounded pretty good. Then I plugged in my Studio headset. Sounded similar, a little better. (that one went through two of the dreaded dongles, a 1/4 to 1/8th inch, and the spawn of hell Apple dongle. Then I listened to it through a Bluetooth headset. I prefer the Bluetooth for one main reason. The entire concept of the cord. I think I understand why so many people have cracked screens, when tehy move and pull teh phone and it hits the floor.
Then I listened to my music through a computer system put the phone aside, and allowed it to be a phone. I also use my bluetooth headset for my Samsung, for the same reason. This is asilly argument, and I reply mostly to annoy people who adhere to it.
My wife's Samsung has had wireless charging for a couple years now. So has my Nexus 5. Several other Android phones as well.
Apple's not even "in the money" on this one - just an "also ran". By the way - how's that custom audio jack working out for you?
There are plenty of reasons that wireless charging is a really bad and inferior technical solution. So if you like it - fine. Use it, But you're strutting around like you own the world. Would you like the explanation?