It's a simple cost-benefit analysis. You think there's a 50% chance of snow: so if the cost to shut down the city is less than half the cost of damage that may occur you shut down. Half the time you'll be wrong, but you'll be paid off the other half. Taking into account some of the softer metrics like the damage to your reputation after an incident like this, makes it quite a simple decision to play it safe.
You are indeed free to disagree with people, but you should be aware that in many cases, you will be wrong. You have freedom of speech to be wrong all day, but the rest of us also have freedom of speech to tell you that you're wrong.
It's also because you want to buy too much shit. You could afford good tools, but not when you're also paying off your new car, paying the rent for the house that's 3x as big as you need, and paying for the big screen plasmas in each room.
How would that happen? If people go from beef to soylent, then there's less market for the beef, so prices will fall. There'll never be enough people using their crock-pots to affect the price of meat.
If the hackers decide to use a dictionary attack, then an xckd-style password is about as good as one 4 characters long. It needs to create randomness in the domain where the hackers might be looking for it. Of course, the old method of switching out letters for number or whathaveyou don't really fare well either.
Maybe not deliberately, but a fault in the pay-per use features could contribute to an accident. What if the key to the radio gets scrambled so it starts making some random noise, causing me to look at the radio, and while I'm distracted I crash into something. Sure, you'll come back and say that radios malfunction anyway and I shouldn't have taken my eyes off the road, but there's still no sense introducing failure modes that don't need to be there.
Target are willing to take the risk of chargebacks because they trust Visa not to do chargebacks without a good reason. They are not willing to trust bitcoin because they have no experience with most of the people coming through the store and believe that there is a higher likelihood of getting scammed.
Sometimes I have trouble telling if people are just trolling about libertarianism, or if they actually believe the words coming out of their fingers. The credit reporting agencies are far enough oft of the public eye, that there's basically nothing the free market can do to them,
YumoolaJohn implied that when he said that even if the NSA wiretaps were preventing terrorism they would still be unacceptable. I would offer you 2 IQ points, but I'm sure you wouldn't know what to do with them.
Doesn't the anti-hydrogen have negative mass, so the combined mass of the hydrogen and anti-hydrogen would be 0? I understand that two photons are created, but I'm not quite sure where the energy comes from.
Well, yeah, of course you could put the cure for cancer into potato chips. But you'd have to actually know the cure first. No matter how much leadership you have, you can't simply change the laws of physics.
Please state exactly which "civil rights" were violated and how they were violated.
He was detained for 5 hours, so he lost the right of security in his person.
by falsely reporting his medical equipment as being something criminal,
False report? Excuse me, but are you an idiot? Google Glass is not medical equipment. Google Glass does have a video recording function and, this is the important part, using a video camera to record a moving being shown in a movie theater is a federal crime, it often says so before the movie begins to play.
Using a camera to record a movie is indeed a crime, but using it as a set of prescription glasses is not.
they had no evidence of a crime,
Except for him pointing a video recording device at a movie screen
Which he had to do in order to be able to see the movie he paid to see.
and could have cleared with a simple conversation.
Which is not part of their job. That is the job of law enforcement.
So every time I think someone might be breaking the law, I should fulfill my civil duty and call the cops on them, rather than trying to resolve the situation peacefully?
They had every right to ask him to leave, but not to make a false report.
Oh, they had every right to ask him to leave. But, they had every right to call law enforcement when they saw him pointing a video camera, in the form of Google Glass, at the movie screen.
Perhaps you should actually LEARN what the law before commenting on it.
I think that you're the one who needs to learn the law.
1. It is when it's a set of prescription glasses. 2. Sure. 3. Why are rights only available to people who know what to do? Shouldn't everyone have basic rights without having to say some magic words?
Slashdot Mirror
It's a simple cost-benefit analysis. You think there's a 50% chance of snow: so if the cost to shut down the city is less than half the cost of damage that may occur you shut down. Half the time you'll be wrong, but you'll be paid off the other half. Taking into account some of the softer metrics like the damage to your reputation after an incident like this, makes it quite a simple decision to play it safe.
If you're going to reply to something, can you make sure your reply isn't in a quote block?
No.
You're not trying very hard, are you?
Look
I
hate
you
Everyone knows you can't wrap a hamster in magnetic tape.
I think we still need the Mythbusters to investigate.
Unhappy Inkmouth
I'll organise them into groups of the same type of particle. Then we can count them each separately. That should save some time.
You are indeed free to disagree with people, but you should be aware that in many cases, you will be wrong. You have freedom of speech to be wrong all day, but the rest of us also have freedom of speech to tell you that you're wrong.
It's also because you want to buy too much shit. You could afford good tools, but not when you're also paying off your new car, paying the rent for the house that's 3x as big as you need, and paying for the big screen plasmas in each room.
How would that happen? If people go from beef to soylent, then there's less market for the beef, so prices will fall. There'll never be enough people using their crock-pots to affect the price of meat.
If the hackers decide to use a dictionary attack, then an xckd-style password is about as good as one 4 characters long. It needs to create randomness in the domain where the hackers might be looking for it. Of course, the old method of switching out letters for number or whathaveyou don't really fare well either.
From my experience, blocking expertsexchange is a good thing from any perspective.
But, when the NSA tracks you, they'll find out that you're not really Joe Biden, and charge you with fraud.
Maybe not deliberately, but a fault in the pay-per use features could contribute to an accident. What if the key to the radio gets scrambled so it starts making some random noise, causing me to look at the radio, and while I'm distracted I crash into something. Sure, you'll come back and say that radios malfunction anyway and I shouldn't have taken my eyes off the road, but there's still no sense introducing failure modes that don't need to be there.
Target are willing to take the risk of chargebacks because they trust Visa not to do chargebacks without a good reason. They are not willing to trust bitcoin because they have no experience with most of the people coming through the store and believe that there is a higher likelihood of getting scammed.
Sometimes I have trouble telling if people are just trolling about libertarianism, or if they actually believe the words coming out of their fingers. The credit reporting agencies are far enough oft of the public eye, that there's basically nothing the free market can do to them,
I'm kinda surprised that anyone, regardless of their achievements wouldn't realise the point: http://news.slashdot.org/comme...
I'm shocked that anyone, regardless of their /.id wouldn't realise the point: http://news.slashdot.org/comme...
I'm not sure what you think contact means, or what you think traders are, but traders are a good example of contact.
YumoolaJohn implied that when he said that even if the NSA wiretaps were preventing terrorism they would still be unacceptable. I would offer you 2 IQ points, but I'm sure you wouldn't know what to do with them.
You're an idiot. Just because you have an enormous coffee cup, does not make the very large coffee cup any smaller.
Oh, I guess I need to do some more reading. I had the impression that anti-particles were basically the opposite of regular particles in every way.
Doesn't the anti-hydrogen have negative mass, so the combined mass of the hydrogen and anti-hydrogen would be 0? I understand that two photons are created, but I'm not quite sure where the energy comes from.
Well, yeah, of course you could put the cure for cancer into potato chips. But you'd have to actually know the cure first. No matter how much leadership you have, you can't simply change the laws of physics.
Violating his civil rights
Please state exactly which "civil rights" were violated and how they were violated.
He was detained for 5 hours, so he lost the right of security in his person.
by falsely reporting his medical equipment as being something criminal,
False report? Excuse me, but are you an idiot? Google Glass is not medical equipment. Google Glass does have a video recording function and, this is the important part, using a video camera to record a moving being shown in a movie theater is a federal crime, it often says so before the movie begins to play.
Using a camera to record a movie is indeed a crime, but using it as a set of prescription glasses is not.
they had no evidence of a crime,
Except for him pointing a video recording device at a movie screen
Which he had to do in order to be able to see the movie he paid to see.
and could have cleared with a simple conversation.
Which is not part of their job. That is the job of law enforcement.
So every time I think someone might be breaking the law, I should fulfill my civil duty and call the cops on them, rather than trying to resolve the situation peacefully?
They had every right to ask him to leave, but not to make a false report.
Oh, they had every right to ask him to leave. But, they had every right to call law enforcement when they saw him pointing a video camera, in the form of Google Glass, at the movie screen.
Perhaps you should actually LEARN what the law before commenting on it.
I think that you're the one who needs to learn the law.
1. It is when it's a set of prescription glasses.
2. Sure.
3. Why are rights only available to people who know what to do? Shouldn't everyone have basic rights without having to say some magic words?
Specifically, have perfect vision so you don't need to wear glasses to be able to see.