Yes, I can pronounce it, but are you sure you know what that means? Also, do you know what an outlet cover plate is? Because I'm pretty sure you don't cover all the outlets in your house with phone chargers and if you do you might want to look into switching as it's probably the reason your little kids keep dying from electrocution.
Did you notice all of those things you claimed as indicators would have achieved some sort of goal and required some form of finesse, whereas a DDoS attack on a site with many mirrors AFTER the leak and weeks after the documents had already been given to the press would not? I mean you're pointing to someone that you believe is capable to overthrow entire democratic governments from the shadows and claiming they're behind a pointless DDoS attack, the same type of thing people do when they are pissed off that Minecraft isn't getting updated by Notch fast enough. It's like pointing to a professional assassin's long list of contract killings and saying CLEARLY he's exactly the person who would sneak into my elementary school and steal my lunch money for no reason. Talk about suspending disbelief.
Are you talking about America? Were you here during the presidential election? Did you read any sites not dedicated to discussing copyright law reform? We were fighting 2 wars, the economy was in the toilet, our world reputation was damaged and there was the chance to elect the first African American president. Who the fuck was talking about ACTA/copyright reform? If promises were made the vast majority of people neither knew nor cared which leads straight back to the educating the public issue. Or you could go on believing that everyone simply must already care about the same issues you care about and it's just that the system keeps the collective will of the people down.
Worse yet, did you know there's a cabinet level position accountable to essentially NOBODY with access to the ARMY, AIR FORCE, NAVY, MARINES and COAST GUARD?!?!?! Fucking Bush, right?
This again? I'll never understand how people think that the victim getting rewarded is "asking for the system to be abused" and then in the next breath suggest we instead give the one party that is not only supposed to be neutral but has the most power to affect case outcomes, the government and thereby it's subsidiaries the courts, the reward instead thus giving them a motive to decide or help cases be decided in favor of large punitive damages.
I mean, are you even thinking through anything other then the knee-jerk reaction of "Boy, 1.9 million, why does that jerk deserve to get it?" In what way does a victim getting rewarded beg the system to be abused? People who are victimized have more motivation to try to hold companies accountable?
Or hell, just because you don't want to give 27 forms of ID before they'll even listen to your problem (I personally love that one - God forbid anyone actually use 911 for a real emergency, you'd die before the operator stops asking for details like your college roommate's pet chinchilla's name)?
That's not really true. I had to run a few miles before I could find someone with service to call 911 for a hiker that had fallen onto rocks in a ravine and they definitely asked about the situation, status, and location of the injured person first and foremost and only at the end of the call collected my name and number to call me back if needed. After running the trail to get service the call seemed like the fastest and most efficient thing in the world. The park ranger and the helicopter took significantly longer unfortunately but that's the woods.
Seems like an extraordinarily risky method for a planned Op, hoping that the shoes don't get jostled going in, that the officer and passengers around you don't see you slip the knife under the shoes, ect ect so I wouldn't write off the effectiveness of security checkpoints simply because of that.
And as much as I'd like to dismiss it all as theater I honestly don't think the TSA really cares deeply about keeping sharp objects off the plane, because they are simply too easy to come by or even make, too hard to detect, and unlikely to be effective against the security of the plane itself anymore. Explosives/guns should be the main concern.
Re:What's the deal with the rush of TSA stories re
on
TSA Pats Down 3-Year-Old
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
I'm confused. In what airport in America are you allowed to wear your shoes through the metal detector? Or were they hiding the knife in their shoes when they put it through the x-ray? Or was someone just bullshitting you or telling you a story from years ago? If you set the metal detector off it's never a "oh, must be your shoes, you can go." It's always, take whatever you have on off, and if you set it off a 2nd time you get the full pat down.
I don't understand, you've taken 5 words from an If/then statement out of context and argued about something completely irrelevant. OP was saying if Wikipedia doesn't tell customers WHY they can't edit Wikipedia they won't complain to Verizon and nothing will happen because customers will think it's a problem with Wikipedia and not with their ISP. OP isn't doubting Wikipedia's power or influence over end customers he's just stating that the message needs to be clearly communicated to the end customers so they know they should go complain to Verizon instead of writing it off as a fluke or a problem with Wikipedia.
I tried reading the first article on the Tar Heels, and as much as I hate reading anything about the Tar Heels the sentences just don't flow together. It's disjointed and mentally uncomfortable to read. I can't imagine anyone using it as an actual replacement for even semi well-written content.
I know I'm just an American so my sense of irony is sorely lacking, but how does one blame not being entitled to free speech online on being exposed to our citizen's overinflated sense of entitlement?
I think you are confusing Catholicism with a subset of American protestants. Catholics are decidedly not 'young earth' and already agree with the majority of what you just said. It's easy to peg all Christians together based on the ones that scream the loudest and the silliest but in that case you should avoid calling out a particular subset so it's clear you are generalizing.
I'm not Catholic but why would the Vatican need to revise positions based upon the discovery of other earth-like planets? Haven't they been saying for a awhile now that it's entirely possible other intelligent life could exist? One would assume intelligent life would likely come from some sort of habitable planet right? Or is there some fine grained difference between allowing for the the possibility of intelligent life and allowing for the possibility of earth-like planets that I'm missing?
That's like arguing airplanes would be safer if we installed anti-personal mines in each person's seat so if at any point during the flight they tried to stand up to take control of the cockpit they'd explode. I'm all for the 2nd amendment but when one bullet has the possibility to take down 300 people w/o a fight the risk far outweighs any reward.
I think your blowing things out of proportion, I've flown several times in the last week and I haven't gotten a full body scan. I did set off the sniffer by the metal detector once so they did quick swab of my hands, put in in a machine and sent me on my way in like 30 seconds.
What American bank were you using and in what year? All the ones I've used have offered all the online services (other than free transactions between banks) including viewing old account transactions and statements in PDF format and viewing scanned copies of checks that you have written and have been cashed against your account. They also mostly all offer online bill pay so you don't have to mail the checks yourself, even to just a friends address if you owe them some money for a bachelor party or something.
The rarity of free online transfers between banks is somewhat annoying, but I think it's starting to catch on so hopefully it will become more common. But if you use ING you can use them as a go-between but it just takes longer so you have to plan things ahead of time.
Cost of living, and therefore salary, varies WIDELY based upon location. In some areas in this country you would be very hard pressed to scrape by a living off of 40k while others you could live in a comfortable apartment and still be saving up enough to buy a house in a few years.
But across the board the cost of education has risen 4-6% versus 2% for inflation (Understanding Rising Costs of Education), and with skilled/degreed workers like any product, when the cost of production increases that cost is passed on to the consumer, in this case, employers.
From your numbers given a 2% inflation rate I assume you started work 15 years ago at $30,000 a year to come up with an adjusted salary of 40k. However, if you use the rate of inflation of 6% for the cost of education you get around 72k. Since education is a one time cost (unless you need to get further degrees to continue advancing) then a reasonable salary would be somewhere between those figures so 60K isn't unreasonable at all depending upon location and the supply/demand for graduates with the specific degree in question.
What if they programmed the missiles to roll a D100 simulated maintenance check every month and if they roll a hard one they detonate right there, ON SITE?!?!?!
I mean, while we're dreaming up ridiculous programming scenarios we might as well make it interesting.
I'm saying it's absurd to blame the causation of search and seizures at the border and the lack of privacy there on a modern day issue when the symptoms have been present since the inception of the country. It's like blaming diabetes on the introduction of Wifi signals and suggesting attacking that will solve the problem completely ignoring the fact that that disease has existed long before wireless routers. Nowhere did I make any claim either in support of or against any sort of border policy I merely pointed out the fact that your theory that privacy rights dealing with search and seizure at the border have suddenly been lost in the drug war is incorrect as the symptoms have been present long before the war on drugs. But apparently pointing out privacy rights on the border in an article about search and seizures on the border is considered "offtopic" these days.
You never had any privacy rights against search when entering the country. This has been true since our country was first founded and merchant ships entering port could be inspected to check their cargo. But if suddenly blaming searches at the border on your cause of the day makes you feel better why let facts get in your way?
There's a slideshow at the top of the article showing vehicles and packages with things hidden in them, for packages comparing the backscatter to conventional scans.
Yes, when Fox reports on something that conservatives likes to hear about it's conservative propaganda and when it reports on something liberals like to hear about it's just being insanely hypocritical. Of course there's always the off chance that some member of it's gigantic staff is simply...reporting news?
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, I can pronounce it, but are you sure you know what that means? Also, do you know what an outlet cover plate is? Because I'm pretty sure you don't cover all the outlets in your house with phone chargers and if you do you might want to look into switching as it's probably the reason your little kids keep dying from electrocution.
Did you notice all of those things you claimed as indicators would have achieved some sort of goal and required some form of finesse, whereas a DDoS attack on a site with many mirrors AFTER the leak and weeks after the documents had already been given to the press would not? I mean you're pointing to someone that you believe is capable to overthrow entire democratic governments from the shadows and claiming they're behind a pointless DDoS attack, the same type of thing people do when they are pissed off that Minecraft isn't getting updated by Notch fast enough. It's like pointing to a professional assassin's long list of contract killings and saying CLEARLY he's exactly the person who would sneak into my elementary school and steal my lunch money for no reason. Talk about suspending disbelief.
Are you talking about America? Were you here during the presidential election? Did you read any sites not dedicated to discussing copyright law reform? We were fighting 2 wars, the economy was in the toilet, our world reputation was damaged and there was the chance to elect the first African American president. Who the fuck was talking about ACTA/copyright reform? If promises were made the vast majority of people neither knew nor cared which leads straight back to the educating the public issue. Or you could go on believing that everyone simply must already care about the same issues you care about and it's just that the system keeps the collective will of the people down.
Worse yet, did you know there's a cabinet level position accountable to essentially NOBODY with access to the ARMY, AIR FORCE, NAVY, MARINES and COAST GUARD?!?!?! Fucking Bush, right?
This again? I'll never understand how people think that the victim getting rewarded is "asking for the system to be abused" and then in the next breath suggest we instead give the one party that is not only supposed to be neutral but has the most power to affect case outcomes, the government and thereby it's subsidiaries the courts, the reward instead thus giving them a motive to decide or help cases be decided in favor of large punitive damages.
I mean, are you even thinking through anything other then the knee-jerk reaction of "Boy, 1.9 million, why does that jerk deserve to get it?" In what way does a victim getting rewarded beg the system to be abused? People who are victimized have more motivation to try to hold companies accountable?
Or hell, just because you don't want to give 27 forms of ID before they'll even listen to your problem (I personally love that one - God forbid anyone actually use 911 for a real emergency, you'd die before the operator stops asking for details like your college roommate's pet chinchilla's name)?
That's not really true. I had to run a few miles before I could find someone with service to call 911 for a hiker that had fallen onto rocks in a ravine and they definitely asked about the situation, status, and location of the injured person first and foremost and only at the end of the call collected my name and number to call me back if needed. After running the trail to get service the call seemed like the fastest and most efficient thing in the world. The park ranger and the helicopter took significantly longer unfortunately but that's the woods.
Seems like an extraordinarily risky method for a planned Op, hoping that the shoes don't get jostled going in, that the officer and passengers around you don't see you slip the knife under the shoes, ect ect so I wouldn't write off the effectiveness of security checkpoints simply because of that.
And as much as I'd like to dismiss it all as theater I honestly don't think the TSA really cares deeply about keeping sharp objects off the plane, because they are simply too easy to come by or even make, too hard to detect, and unlikely to be effective against the security of the plane itself anymore. Explosives/guns should be the main concern.
I'm confused. In what airport in America are you allowed to wear your shoes through the metal detector? Or were they hiding the knife in their shoes when they put it through the x-ray? Or was someone just bullshitting you or telling you a story from years ago? If you set the metal detector off it's never a "oh, must be your shoes, you can go." It's always, take whatever you have on off, and if you set it off a 2nd time you get the full pat down.
I don't understand, you've taken 5 words from an If/then statement out of context and argued about something completely irrelevant. OP was saying if Wikipedia doesn't tell customers WHY they can't edit Wikipedia they won't complain to Verizon and nothing will happen because customers will think it's a problem with Wikipedia and not with their ISP. OP isn't doubting Wikipedia's power or influence over end customers he's just stating that the message needs to be clearly communicated to the end customers so they know they should go complain to Verizon instead of writing it off as a fluke or a problem with Wikipedia.
I tried reading the first article on the Tar Heels, and as much as I hate reading anything about the Tar Heels the sentences just don't flow together. It's disjointed and mentally uncomfortable to read. I can't imagine anyone using it as an actual replacement for even semi well-written content.
I know I'm just an American so my sense of irony is sorely lacking, but how does one blame not being entitled to free speech online on being exposed to our citizen's overinflated sense of entitlement?
I think you are confusing Catholicism with a subset of American protestants. Catholics are decidedly not 'young earth' and already agree with the majority of what you just said. It's easy to peg all Christians together based on the ones that scream the loudest and the silliest but in that case you should avoid calling out a particular subset so it's clear you are generalizing.
I'm not Catholic but why would the Vatican need to revise positions based upon the discovery of other earth-like planets? Haven't they been saying for a awhile now that it's entirely possible other intelligent life could exist? One would assume intelligent life would likely come from some sort of habitable planet right? Or is there some fine grained difference between allowing for the the possibility of intelligent life and allowing for the possibility of earth-like planets that I'm missing?
That's like arguing airplanes would be safer if we installed anti-personal mines in each person's seat so if at any point during the flight they tried to stand up to take control of the cockpit they'd explode. I'm all for the 2nd amendment but when one bullet has the possibility to take down 300 people w/o a fight the risk far outweighs any reward.
I think your blowing things out of proportion, I've flown several times in the last week and I haven't gotten a full body scan. I did set off the sniffer by the metal detector once so they did quick swab of my hands, put in in a machine and sent me on my way in like 30 seconds.
Says the guy bragging about his TS clearance to a largely foreign audience on the internet.
What American bank were you using and in what year? All the ones I've used have offered all the online services (other than free transactions between banks) including viewing old account transactions and statements in PDF format and viewing scanned copies of checks that you have written and have been cashed against your account. They also mostly all offer online bill pay so you don't have to mail the checks yourself, even to just a friends address if you owe them some money for a bachelor party or something.
The rarity of free online transfers between banks is somewhat annoying, but I think it's starting to catch on so hopefully it will become more common. But if you use ING you can use them as a go-between but it just takes longer so you have to plan things ahead of time.
Cost of living, and therefore salary, varies WIDELY based upon location. In some areas in this country you would be very hard pressed to scrape by a living off of 40k while others you could live in a comfortable apartment and still be saving up enough to buy a house in a few years.
But across the board the cost of education has risen 4-6% versus 2% for inflation (Understanding Rising Costs of Education), and with skilled/degreed workers like any product, when the cost of production increases that cost is passed on to the consumer, in this case, employers.
From your numbers given a 2% inflation rate I assume you started work 15 years ago at $30,000 a year to come up with an adjusted salary of 40k. However, if you use the rate of inflation of 6% for the cost of education you get around 72k. Since education is a one time cost (unless you need to get further degrees to continue advancing) then a reasonable salary would be somewhere between those figures so 60K isn't unreasonable at all depending upon location and the supply/demand for graduates with the specific degree in question.
What if they programmed the missiles to roll a D100 simulated maintenance check every month and if they roll a hard one they detonate right there, ON SITE?!?!?!
I mean, while we're dreaming up ridiculous programming scenarios we might as well make it interesting.
I'm saying it's absurd to blame the causation of search and seizures at the border and the lack of privacy there on a modern day issue when the symptoms have been present since the inception of the country. It's like blaming diabetes on the introduction of Wifi signals and suggesting attacking that will solve the problem completely ignoring the fact that that disease has existed long before wireless routers. Nowhere did I make any claim either in support of or against any sort of border policy I merely pointed out the fact that your theory that privacy rights dealing with search and seizure at the border have suddenly been lost in the drug war is incorrect as the symptoms have been present long before the war on drugs. But apparently pointing out privacy rights on the border in an article about search and seizures on the border is considered "offtopic" these days.
You never had any privacy rights against search when entering the country. This has been true since our country was first founded and merchant ships entering port could be inspected to check their cargo. But if suddenly blaming searches at the border on your cause of the day makes you feel better why let facts get in your way?
There's a slideshow at the top of the article showing vehicles and packages with things hidden in them, for packages comparing the backscatter to conventional scans.
Yes, when Fox reports on something that conservatives likes to hear about it's conservative propaganda and when it reports on something liberals like to hear about it's just being insanely hypocritical. Of course there's always the off chance that some member of it's gigantic staff is simply...reporting news?
The Council of Wool, being the governing body of Sheep, never signed onto that treaty due to the long history of conflict in sheep-whale relations.
God catch ;)