If a thousand people look at a picture of a circle, and 80 percent say 'it's a circle,' and 20 percent say 'it's a square,' you throw it in the 'probably a circle' pile.
The idea here, I think, isn't to make positive identifications and what not, but to pre-sort or vet the things to allow the real experts to direct their time and attention more efficiently.
Note that this is how computers in space tend to work, where you have to worry about a stray cosmic particle flipping a bit in a processor; you have at least three processors all do the same calculation, and you take the consensus answer.
'Social Media' in Victorian times consisted of going to the right parties and slagging the person off to the correct ears. It was slower than a facebook post, but not much.
"Hey, you guys in the front, here? Keep an eye on each other, alright? If you see someone going down, help them out, alright? That's what you're here to do, help each other out. This is a song called WAAAAR ENSAMMMMMBLLLLEEEEE!"
Seconded. I remember people were marveling at the time about what a wonderfully polished PC version it had, while Arkham Origins still has issues with vastly overspeced PCs.
On the other hand, the LPC got a pretty clear mandate, and one of their clear campaign promises was, gasp, to pull out of combat against ISIS.
Remember, the LPC won a handy majority, WITH the left vote being split between two parties, AGAINST the incumbent party, with ZERO vote splitting on the right. That's a clear mandate.
Let alone Alberta going NDP. It was interesting listening to hard-right wingers complain bitterly about the right splitting the vote, then immediately turning around and lambasting the Liberal proposal to do away with first-past-the-post voting.
I vaguely remember, when the 'India Windows Help Scam' story originally started, somebody saying his response was always to announce that he was a member of such-and-such caste, presumably one of the lower ones, like the Eta or Burakumin type, and the Indian on the phone would always immediately hang up.
Nope. Navstar was designed to allow for sub-launched nukes to hit enemy nuke sites, from around the planet. You need rapid, precise strikes to eliminate enemy launch capability.
Or, to put it another way, and probably horribly inaccurately to boot, 'quantized' gravity is like constantly throwing a ball at something, only when that ball hits the object, it casues the object to move towards, instead of away from, the direction of impact.
Non-quantized gravity is like everything being attached to everything with ropes, constantly pulling on everything.
No, not deliberate. And I'm not American. I'm Canadian. A Canadian liberal, and possibly Liberal, who happens to also have a problem with the banning of 'guns' to reduce 'crime'.
Up here, in Canada, if you're shot, there's an 80 percent chance you shot yourself on purpose, a five percent chance of an accident, and a 15 percent chance somebody tried to kill you. If you're purposefully shot with a handgun, there's a greater than even chance you're in a gang. If you're purposefully shot with a handgun, there's a 94% chance that handgun is already illegally owned, generally smuggled in from the states.
Banning things that are already illegal doesn't help reduce crime.
Huh. You're right. I must have misread that top part. It went from "If you are under 18 you will no longer able to buy any type of knife, including kitchen knives or knives for school or work," at the bottom of the page for 2011, to "A disposable knife made of plastic, bamboo or wood and designed for, and utilised exclusively for eating purposes is not included in the definition of a controlled weapon. Therefore, these items are not restricted and can be used, purchased, or sold to individuals under 18 years of age."
Which means that after five years of 'ban the plastic knives!' they realized that was stupid. So, good job, Australia.
Still doesn't alter the base fact, though, which is that with banning of guns, 'violent crime' simply changed it's tool enough that they had to ban a new tool, and the root problem, violent crime, remains unresolved.
Given that most successful shootings in the civilian world are within bat/knife range, I don't think so. Cops and criminals both routinely dump magazines at ranges of less than thirty feet, many times FAR less.
Would you give up your gun in favor of a knife to protect your home?
In favour of a knife? Well, depends on the knife.
I advocate, and always have, that a firearm is the worst choice for home defense, unless you take regular and specific 'shoot-house' style training with full-on simunition. The order of operations for home defense, at least in the more civilized parts of the western world, is dogs, followed distantly by shotgun, and very distantly, handgun. Shotgun is mainly there because the sound of a shotgun being racked is unmistakable, and will scare away a lot of people. Unless you have a lot of training and stress inoculation, though, you're likely to freeze up if/when the time comes. Dogs, on the other hand, won't. Especially if they're well trained.
For home defense, I have two very large dogs. If I was *really* worried about home defense, they'd be professionally trained in protective services. I also have a sword on the wall. In the bedroom corridor, somebody might try to grab your shotgun barrel. Nobody's going to grab your sword blade. But I'm also fully aware that, even then, it's far more for intimidation than any actual killing power.
Now, in my basement, in a gun safe, trigger locked, I have a pump action 20ga shotgun, and yes, I keep a side saddle on it with #2 buckshot. I also have, in the same safe, several handguns. No charged mags in the safe, though, and the ammo is locked up separately. Several rifles, too, but they're also unsuitable for in-house work.
That said, pulling out, say, a Spyderco Civilian knife and casually cleaning your fingernails can have an impressively salutary effect on belligerent people.
How so? Shot, stabbed, slashed or bludgeoned, what's the difference?
"Oh, but you can kill so many people with mag-fed firearms." Sure, but if you can't get one of those, you can get a car. Or some diesel and fertilizer. Or a propane tank. Or just walk through the between-class crowds and start slashing/swinging.
but you can stop someone with a gun from pulling the trigger.
Ah, but you haven't stopped the bad act, you've only changed the tool used. Take away his gun, he picks up a knife. Take away his knife, he gets a baseball bat. Take away his baseball bat, he gets a rock.
Address the criminal, and the crime, not the tool used.
He's saying you underestimate the ingenuity of a toddler.
For example, bracing the slide against a table and leaning on it.
I say this as a fellow gun owner; if a toddler can lay hands on a firearm that is loaded, you've failed as a gun owner. Separately, if a toddler can lay hands on a firearm that isn't trigger locked, you've failed as a firearm owner.
Slashdot Mirror
To be fair, witnesses should have zero credibility.
Start here: Intro to Eyewitness Identification, still ongoing. Then go back to the beginning, it's a good read.
If a thousand people look at a picture of a circle, and 80 percent say 'it's a circle,' and 20 percent say 'it's a square,' you throw it in the 'probably a circle' pile.
The idea here, I think, isn't to make positive identifications and what not, but to pre-sort or vet the things to allow the real experts to direct their time and attention more efficiently.
Note that this is how computers in space tend to work, where you have to worry about a stray cosmic particle flipping a bit in a processor; you have at least three processors all do the same calculation, and you take the consensus answer.
Criticism: When you harass somebody.
Harassment: When somebody criticizes you.
Newspaper, broadsheet, simple social gossip.
'Social Media' in Victorian times consisted of going to the right parties and slagging the person off to the correct ears. It was slower than a facebook post, but not much.
"Hey, you guys in the front, here? Keep an eye on each other, alright? If you see someone going down, help them out, alright? That's what you're here to do, help each other out. This is a song called WAAAAR ENSAMMMMMBLLLLEEEEE!"
Shit, Optimius Prime fit onto a damn floppy disk.
Seconded. I remember people were marveling at the time about what a wonderfully polished PC version it had, while Arkham Origins still has issues with vastly overspeced PCs.
Only if they get rid of the sewer section. Which is sage advice that applies to ANY game with a 'sewer section.'
On the other hand, the LPC got a pretty clear mandate, and one of their clear campaign promises was, gasp, to pull out of combat against ISIS.
Remember, the LPC won a handy majority, WITH the left vote being split between two parties, AGAINST the incumbent party, with ZERO vote splitting on the right. That's a clear mandate.
Canada has freedom of speech. It just thinks that there are other freedoms that trump it.
A homosexual's right to live as they are trumps a bigot's right to harass said homosexual.
Let alone Alberta going NDP. It was interesting listening to hard-right wingers complain bitterly about the right splitting the vote, then immediately turning around and lambasting the Liberal proposal to do away with first-past-the-post voting.
I vaguely remember, when the 'India Windows Help Scam' story originally started, somebody saying his response was always to announce that he was a member of such-and-such caste, presumably one of the lower ones, like the Eta or Burakumin type, and the Indian on the phone would always immediately hang up.
Maybe 'shamaatah'?
Nope. Navstar was designed to allow for sub-launched nukes to hit enemy nuke sites, from around the planet. You need rapid, precise strikes to eliminate enemy launch capability.
And yet blue water navies managed to fight wars for centuries before the development of GPS, INS, or anything along those lines.
GPS was designed for targeting nukes to allow for first-strike capability. No more, no less. Navigation was a happy secondary use.
Or, to put it another way, and probably horribly inaccurately to boot, 'quantized' gravity is like constantly throwing a ball at something, only when that ball hits the object, it casues the object to move towards, instead of away from, the direction of impact.
Non-quantized gravity is like everything being attached to everything with ropes, constantly pulling on everything.
Being poor is also stressful, but for different reasons.
No, not deliberate. And I'm not American. I'm Canadian. A Canadian liberal, and possibly Liberal, who happens to also have a problem with the banning of 'guns' to reduce 'crime'.
Up here, in Canada, if you're shot, there's an 80 percent chance you shot yourself on purpose, a five percent chance of an accident, and a 15 percent chance somebody tried to kill you. If you're purposefully shot with a handgun, there's a greater than even chance you're in a gang. If you're purposefully shot with a handgun, there's a 94% chance that handgun is already illegally owned, generally smuggled in from the states.
Banning things that are already illegal doesn't help reduce crime.
"The flush toilet DEVELOPED and POPULARIZED."
He didn't invent the idea, he DEVELOPED A VERSION and POPULARIZED it.
If OP meant to say Crapper invented the toilet, he'd have said 'The flush toilet INVENTED and popularized by Thomas Crapper."
Ford didn't INVENT the automobile, but he DEVELOPED and POPULARIZED them.
No, it just explains perfectly why the market for old cars isn't based on 'safety.'
Huh. You're right. I must have misread that top part. It went from "If you are under 18 you will no longer able to buy any type of knife, including kitchen knives or knives for school or work," at the bottom of the page for 2011, to "A disposable knife made of plastic, bamboo or wood and designed for, and utilised exclusively for eating purposes is not included in the definition of a controlled weapon. Therefore, these items are not restricted and can be used, purchased, or sold to individuals under 18 years of age."
Which means that after five years of 'ban the plastic knives!' they realized that was stupid. So, good job, Australia.
Still doesn't alter the base fact, though, which is that with banning of guns, 'violent crime' simply changed it's tool enough that they had to ban a new tool, and the root problem, violent crime, remains unresolved.
Given that most successful shootings in the civilian world are within bat/knife range, I don't think so. Cops and criminals both routinely dump magazines at ranges of less than thirty feet, many times FAR less.
In favour of a knife? Well, depends on the knife.
I advocate, and always have, that a firearm is the worst choice for home defense, unless you take regular and specific 'shoot-house' style training with full-on simunition. The order of operations for home defense, at least in the more civilized parts of the western world, is dogs, followed distantly by shotgun, and very distantly, handgun. Shotgun is mainly there because the sound of a shotgun being racked is unmistakable, and will scare away a lot of people. Unless you have a lot of training and stress inoculation, though, you're likely to freeze up if/when the time comes. Dogs, on the other hand, won't. Especially if they're well trained.
For home defense, I have two very large dogs. If I was *really* worried about home defense, they'd be professionally trained in protective services. I also have a sword on the wall. In the bedroom corridor, somebody might try to grab your shotgun barrel. Nobody's going to grab your sword blade. But I'm also fully aware that, even then, it's far more for intimidation than any actual killing power.
Now, in my basement, in a gun safe, trigger locked, I have a pump action 20ga shotgun, and yes, I keep a side saddle on it with #2 buckshot. I also have, in the same safe, several handguns. No charged mags in the safe, though, and the ammo is locked up separately. Several rifles, too, but they're also unsuitable for in-house work.
That said, pulling out, say, a Spyderco Civilian knife and casually cleaning your fingernails can have an impressively salutary effect on belligerent people.
How so? Shot, stabbed, slashed or bludgeoned, what's the difference?
"Oh, but you can kill so many people with mag-fed firearms." Sure, but if you can't get one of those, you can get a car. Or some diesel and fertilizer. Or a propane tank. Or just walk through the between-class crowds and start slashing/swinging.
Ah, but you haven't stopped the bad act, you've only changed the tool used. Take away his gun, he picks up a knife. Take away his knife, he gets a baseball bat. Take away his baseball bat, he gets a rock.
Address the criminal, and the crime, not the tool used.
He's saying you underestimate the ingenuity of a toddler.
For example, bracing the slide against a table and leaning on it.
I say this as a fellow gun owner; if a toddler can lay hands on a firearm that is loaded, you've failed as a gun owner. Separately, if a toddler can lay hands on a firearm that isn't trigger locked, you've failed as a firearm owner.