then I'd have to point to Israel, who has faced terrorist threats much longer than we have. Their system is not cheap to implement or easy to scale up since it hinges on a highly trained workforce (and no one will get rich from hardware sales), but it seems to work well. Those selected for secondary screening may find it much less pleasant than TSA's most invasive screening, and it may even go beyond the bounds of constitutionality)
So, other than it being impractical, expensive, more invasive, and unconstitutional, it's the right solution? Brilliant.
You do that by...scanning their heart to see if it's made of gold? Racially profile? Thought police? Spell it out, man! You're holding back the secrets to fixing our nation's problems.
Bitch bitch bitch. What do you propose as an alternative to what TAS does? Please outline a plan to keep dangerous people/articles off of planes with near certain precision without invasive searches.
FFS, the TSA isn't responsible for catching terrorists anymore than a deadbolt is responsible for catching thieves breaking into my house. TSA catches on average about 5 guns PER DAY at airport screenings, and that's not including knives, explosives, and other prohibited objects.
True. But making more tablets at only $149, as the parent to my original post indicated, where the original price was $399 isn't only profitable, but probably continuing a massive loss. The Kindle Fire, made to lower specs, costs almost exactly as much as it is sold, $200. The Touch Pad must have cost much more than $149 to make.
Considering the multi-billion dollar loss WebOS has been so far, merely selling a few more next year at a slightly higher price doesn't seem like a winning strategy to me. I would love to see it completely open-sourced and become a competitor to Android as a truly open-source OS for phones and tablets, and even netbooks. The brand-name recognition and goodwill generated from that would be worth something to HP if they used it right. That being said, I highly doubt it would happen.
Are you going to come over with a bunch of uneducated hicks, all your guns, in your pickup trucks (also known as the US army) once you know who we are?
I'm happy to see you're above the kind of stereotyping and name-calling you accuse CFBMoo1 of.
You know, if I leave AA batteries just sitting in my drawar doing nothing, they die in about 2 years. How could using them make them last another 8 years?
I think that's an unfair characterization. If a page is controversial and two or more sides engage in a flame war, there are editors who can lock it down until it subsides. I don't think that has anything to do with "stupid people" being controlled by the "smart" people.
Name a single incident of DHS sending someone to GTMO or STFU.
Re:Marine version tripped up the whole program
on
The F-35 Story
·
· Score: 1
The MEUs (I can't believe I spelled that wrong the first time) do lots of operations, most of which are not on the news. Used to be called Military Operations Other Than War (MOOTW), now Stability Operations. Stuff like Non-combatant Evacuation Operation (NEO), like when we need to get our people out of an Embassy somewhere. Helos can only go so far inland and are no match for anything fixed wing, and might not be able to fly above or otherwise evade surface threats. The original invasion of Afghanistan was an amphibious landing, the farthest inland ever done. Helos flew over Pakistan, and everyone else drove. The MEUs are our nation's 911 force, a regiment sized unit with multiple capabilities, able to get anywhere in 72 hours. But if it's not on the water, or in range of helos, not so much. I agree the cost is too much, but having a vstol stealth jet was going to be a huge force multiplier for the Marines. It would mean faster response with better capabilities with longer range and less risk to Marine pilots.
I do believe 'whom' is correct in this usage. Rephrase it as You Do Want to Ask Whom, and you can see it is the direct object, so use the objective form: whom.
Re:Marine version tripped up the whole program
on
The F-35 Story
·
· Score: 1
Because the Marines use Amphib ships that require short takoff. The Navy has their planes on carriers, and there are fewer of them. So the Marine Expeditionary Units (MUEs) would have their own aircraft without having to reply on some carrier 500 miles away.
Slashdot Mirror
then I'd have to point to Israel, who has faced terrorist threats much longer than we have. Their system is not cheap to implement or easy to scale up since it hinges on a highly trained workforce (and no one will get rich from hardware sales), but it seems to work well. Those selected for secondary screening may find it much less pleasant than TSA's most invasive screening, and it may even go beyond the bounds of constitutionality)
So, other than it being impractical, expensive, more invasive, and unconstitutional, it's the right solution? Brilliant.
How do you screen for bombs, like shoe bombs and underwear bombs, without being invasive?
You do that by...scanning their heart to see if it's made of gold? Racially profile? Thought police? Spell it out, man! You're holding back the secrets to fixing our nation's problems.
Bitch bitch bitch. What do you propose as an alternative to what TAS does? Please outline a plan to keep dangerous people/articles off of planes with near certain precision without invasive searches.
This took about 2 minutes on google.
http://www.opposingviews.com/i/society/guns/tsa-weve-stopped-1000-guns-so-far-year
FFS, the TSA isn't responsible for catching terrorists anymore than a deadbolt is responsible for catching thieves breaking into my house. TSA catches on average about 5 guns PER DAY at airport screenings, and that's not including knives, explosives, and other prohibited objects.
True. But making more tablets at only $149, as the parent to my original post indicated, where the original price was $399 isn't only profitable, but probably continuing a massive loss. The Kindle Fire, made to lower specs, costs almost exactly as much as it is sold, $200. The Touch Pad must have cost much more than $149 to make.
Considering the multi-billion dollar loss WebOS has been so far, merely selling a few more next year at a slightly higher price doesn't seem like a winning strategy to me. I would love to see it completely open-sourced and become a competitor to Android as a truly open-source OS for phones and tablets, and even netbooks. The brand-name recognition and goodwill generated from that would be worth something to HP if they used it right. That being said, I highly doubt it would happen.
WTF, was that just a random xkcd?
Are you going to come over with a bunch of uneducated hicks, all your guns, in your pickup trucks (also known as the US army) once you know who we are?
I'm happy to see you're above the kind of stereotyping and name-calling you accuse CFBMoo1 of.
You know, if I leave AA batteries just sitting in my drawar doing nothing, they die in about 2 years. How could using them make them last another 8 years?
What state is that in?
FFS, don't give him any ideas!
When is that going to get added? Hmm?
I would figure most genomes are highly compressible
I know right? I can fit all of my DNA inside of a single cell! When will these people learn?
Version 11 is due out next week and is supposed to be faster.
How are you going to pay bills?
If you look at the pics in TFA, it seems Asimo can also mix drinks, throw up the horns, and hit on multiple chicks at once.
I'm guessing what makes it attractive are the patents. Perhaps Google would buy it for that reason?
I think that's an unfair characterization. If a page is controversial and two or more sides engage in a flame war, there are editors who can lock it down until it subsides. I don't think that has anything to do with "stupid people" being controlled by the "smart" people.
The main reason being that people in general are stupid.
And yet, somehow, Wikipedia works.
Name a single incident of DHS sending someone to GTMO or STFU.
The MEUs (I can't believe I spelled that wrong the first time) do lots of operations, most of which are not on the news. Used to be called Military Operations Other Than War (MOOTW), now Stability Operations. Stuff like Non-combatant Evacuation Operation (NEO), like when we need to get our people out of an Embassy somewhere. Helos can only go so far inland and are no match for anything fixed wing, and might not be able to fly above or otherwise evade surface threats. The original invasion of Afghanistan was an amphibious landing, the farthest inland ever done. Helos flew over Pakistan, and everyone else drove. The MEUs are our nation's 911 force, a regiment sized unit with multiple capabilities, able to get anywhere in 72 hours. But if it's not on the water, or in range of helos, not so much. I agree the cost is too much, but having a vstol stealth jet was going to be a huge force multiplier for the Marines. It would mean faster response with better capabilities with longer range and less risk to Marine pilots.
I do believe 'whom' is correct in this usage. Rephrase it as You Do Want to Ask Whom, and you can see it is the direct object, so use the objective form: whom.
Because the Marines use Amphib ships that require short takoff. The Navy has their planes on carriers, and there are fewer of them. So the Marine Expeditionary Units (MUEs) would have their own aircraft without having to reply on some carrier 500 miles away.