Then there is a very simple solution: everyone who wants to get into an event must strip completely and put their pile of clothes and things into the x-ray machine before they walk through a metal detector.
Unless you have "something that shouldn't be there" stuffed inside the bodily orifice of your choice.
Remote scanners have this same flaw. So, irradiate everyone in secret, then cavity search them. Problem solved. We're all safe now.
there is an essential choice to make: your modesty (very real) or your safety. If you defend the former, al Qaeda will find a way to use it do damage to the latter. I'm surprised that they haven't already.
Al Qaeda has already used your fear of the latter to do damage to the former. You are mistaking their intent. Killing people is only a lucky side effect if a bomb happens to go off. Unsuccessful attempts resulting in huge expenditures and humiliating searches are a much better plan.
"The USTR has stated repeatedly that ACTA will enter into force in the US as an executive agreement that does not require any congressional role. Thus, USTR argues, the agreement will be binding on the US once Ambassador Kirk, as the US negotiating representative, agrees to it. Congress will not receive the opportunity to review and amend the agreement before it goes into effect, as it would in any traditional international agreement binding on the US. If USTR succeeds in this bold plan, it will dramatically expand presidential power to make law without congressional consent."
You think the terrorists wouldn't be happy just to blow the plane up? They're willing to suicide bomb a market place and kill maybe a dozen people. Making a plane with over a hundred people go ka-boom would be a fine terrorist outcome, even if it were over the middle of Kansas.
Why bother blowing up a plane? Why not just blow up an airport security checkpoint?
In the US, this would include images that could have the following attributes:fully clothed; adult models; computer generated or hand-drawn. Good luck with that, intrepid programmer!
And by that time, it won't matter. We will have been party to an international agreement making the worst parts of the DMCA international law. Say goodbye to any chance of rolling back the DMCA when doing so would violate an international agreement.
The trick with free will vis a vis all-knowing of God is that God is "outside" of space and time. Our consciousness perceives time as a flow, so we speak of past, and are not aware of future. For God, the entire timeline is laid out from start to end.
This assumes that time is a strict progression of cause to effect, but actually from a non-linear, non-subjective viewpoint, it's more like a big ball of wibbly-wobbly, timey-wimey stuff.
In the U.S., porn is that which if it were child porn would be illegal, and therefore the government requires all porn producers to keep massive databases of every image produced and the id's of all the performers in them and where these images can be found, so the FBI can inspect these records for mistakes, and that's how we keep the children safe. So, as a visitor to Australia, do you have anything on your computer that would be illegal if it were child porn? I'll have to see that, please.
Slashdot Mirror
... 3 wolves and a sheep deciding what's for dinner.
That's why you need a constitution that explicitly denies the Federal government the power to eat the citizenry or any portion thereof.
Then there is a very simple solution: everyone who wants to get into an event must strip completely and put their pile of clothes and things into the x-ray machine before they walk through a metal detector.
Unless you have "something that shouldn't be there" stuffed inside the bodily orifice of your choice.
Remote scanners have this same flaw. So, irradiate everyone in secret, then cavity search them. Problem solved. We're all safe now.
I'm Tolkien and so is my wife!
What if you call it The unauthorized Sarah Palin cockbook ?
I'd buy that for a dollar!
We win the wars a bit more handily today,
Cite please.
let alone 4chan.
That's the best idea I've heard in ages.
Pics or it didn't happen.
Laserdiscs are statistical noise. Very few people bought them.
But we who did yelled extremely loudly when we had to repurchase our libraries on DVD.
there is an essential choice to make: your modesty (very real) or your safety. If you defend the former, al Qaeda will find a way to use it do damage to the latter. I'm surprised that they haven't already.
Al Qaeda has already used your fear of the latter to do damage to the former. You are mistaking their intent. Killing people is only a lucky side effect if a bomb happens to go off. Unsuccessful attempts resulting in huge expenditures and humiliating searches are a much better plan.
To wash their hands, they'd have to take off the blue gloves they don't change between gropings.
He's not giving interviews on CNN anymore, just little photos and audio tapes. Here's a snippet from his 2010 interview.
much like osama bin laden.
There oughta be a a mod -1 , Whoosh.
And the money Chertoff's making selling the scanners.
Ask ? Fuck that - regardless of how it was performed, this *is* important research.
Dr. Mengele, is that you?
The U.S. Senate simply needs to not ratify it.
Right?
Maybe, maybe not. From the last link above:
"The USTR has stated repeatedly that ACTA will enter into force in the US as an executive agreement that does not require any congressional role. Thus, USTR argues, the agreement will be binding on the US once Ambassador Kirk, as the US negotiating representative, agrees to it. Congress will not receive the opportunity to review and amend the agreement before it goes into effect, as it would in any traditional international agreement binding on the US. If USTR succeeds in this bold plan, it will dramatically expand presidential power to make law without congressional consent."
"Rapiscan." It's like they're not even trying.
You think the terrorists wouldn't be happy just to blow the plane up? They're willing to suicide bomb a market place and kill maybe a dozen people. Making a plane with over a hundred people go ka-boom would be a fine terrorist outcome, even if it were over the middle of Kansas.
Why bother blowing up a plane? Why not just blow up an airport security checkpoint?
Where are my mod points when I need 'em.
create antivirus scanners which detect child porn
In the US, this would include images that could have the following attributes:fully clothed; adult models; computer generated or hand-drawn. Good luck with that, intrepid programmer!
... the thought of some bureaucrat being able to snoop on my traffic or anything they want without a warrant is to damn Orwellian for my taste.
There oughta be a law against such thoughts.
And by that time, it won't matter. We will have been party to an international agreement making the worst parts of the DMCA international law. Say goodbye to any chance of rolling back the DMCA when doing so would violate an international agreement.
The trick with free will vis a vis all-knowing of God is that God is "outside" of space and time. Our consciousness perceives time as a flow, so we speak of past, and are not aware of future. For God, the entire timeline is laid out from start to end.
This assumes that time is a strict progression of cause to effect, but actually from a non-linear, non-subjective viewpoint, it's more like a big ball of wibbly-wobbly, timey-wimey stuff.
In the U.S., porn is that which if it were child porn would be illegal, and therefore the government requires all porn producers to keep massive databases of every image produced and the id's of all the performers in them and where these images can be found, so the FBI can inspect these records for mistakes, and that's how we keep the children safe. So, as a visitor to Australia, do you have anything on your computer that would be illegal if it were child porn? I'll have to see that, please.
That's why we in the US have such a good deal re-importing expensive prescription drugs from Canada! Oh, wait...
"ACTA is being implemented in the U.S. as a sole executive agreement, and not a treaty of a congressional-executive agreement that would require legislative debate, consent, or approval."
Wait, that's logic. It has no place in this discussion.