Unfortunately, considering that most corporations would be considered sociopaths were they to be psychoanalyzed, the possibility that they will do the right thing because it's the right thing is slim-to-none; hence, fear of legal (or rather, financial) repercussion is about the only way to get their attention.
There are two ways to this thinking. The dude asking the question (TFS) is not the company, he's a manager in some company. He's a goddam human being, so he should be able to feel compassion.
I think, perhaps, we've found the root of this problem: sociopaths being promoted to management positions.
Barrel shrouds serve very useful purposes, or they would not exist on military rifles. For one thing (the original AR-15 with its poorly-designed shroud nothwithstanding), they provide a forward grip while keeping the your hands off the hot barrel. For another, they provide mounting points for sights and other gadgetry.
Yea. I know. I was responding to parent's quandary as though it were hypothetical, as it was phrased in that manner (i.e., "IF part X is cosmetic...").
However, the point must be made that on many consumer firearms, barrel shrouds ARE nothing more than cosmetic, and using barrel shrouds as an important criterion for determining whether something is an "assault weapon" is ridiculous.
Aware of that as well.
Some years ago, for example, New Jersey banned certain types of guns. The venerable Ruger Mini-14 was not a banned gun... if it had the wooden stock. But the same gun with the optional plastic stock was banned. Functionally the rifles were identical, but they outlawed the one they thought was nasty-looking.
Well, if I may quote Yahtzee Croshaw, that's pants-on-head retarded
The reason you shouldn't let this happen should not be the fear of a lawsuit, but the welfare of your employees.
100% correct - companies should do the right thing because it's the right thing, not because they might get sued for not doing the right thing.
Unfortunately, considering that most corporations would be considered sociopaths were they to be psychoanalyzed, the possibility that they will do the right thing because it's the right thing is slim-to-none; hence, fear of legal (or rather, financial) repercussion is about the only way to get their attention.
It's sad and stupid, but thus is the world we inhabit.
They're not burying the cables? Is wind not a problem out there? I thought they had tornadoes...
Not so much in the city, especially downtown KC. You do get a fair amount of straightline winds coming out of Kansas, but again, the large footprint of KC suburbs help defray the winds significantly before they hit the city proper.
In the same way that an American bombsmith making his own bombs with his kitchen supplies is also circumventing the law
If he holds the proper certifications, than no, he is not 'circumventing the law,' he's doing what he has been legally allowed to do. FWIW, building an explosive device isn't illegal, per say - deploying and/or detonating one above a certain yield (without holding the right certifications) is. To that end, a person can buy impact explosives from a website, needing nothing more than a shipping address and means of payment.
Guns are only designed to kill things. That makes them different from most other things. Unless you recognize that basic truth, then you're not going to have an honest discussion on gun rights and gun regulation.
Something tells me, judging from the obviously false and highly uninformed statements you've made thus far, that "an honest discussion" isn't part of your agenda.
The NRA says that guns don't kill people, people kill people.
And the NRA, for once, is right.
but when was there a case where a dude stabbed 50 people to death?
During the February 1980 New Mexico State Penitentiary riot, 33 inmates were killed. Most of the dead, 23, lived in the Protective Custody Unit, and were killed by other inmates using knives, axes and being burnt alive
Considering that one can purchase an AR-15 lower from any of more than a dozen manufacturers, I don't think patent/copyright applies in this particular instance.
I would not want to own a plastic AR receiver. If you look at the picture in TFA, I would worry about the threaded portion in the front where the barrel goes. 200 rounds might be OK, but I would not want to put 2000 through it.
Plus, according to TFA, he set it up as a.22 caliber.
200 rounds of.22 ammo, sure, but bump that up to.223 or 5.56...
No gun license required? Why would anyone need a license to exercise a right guaranteed by the law of the land? Do you need a license to vote? Do you need a license to be safe from being enslaved? Do you need a license to own a printing press and open a newspaper? I'm totally lost here. What sort of brain structure causes this mental vomit to occur?
anti-gun pussies
think every gun is a crime
law does not matter
You do realize that I was responding specifically to someone who was making a claim against Mountain Lion, right? This particular comment thread is about Mountain Lion and the fact that it's unaffected. He claimed otherwise. I disputed.
The backdoor component calls home to the IP address 176.58.100.37 every five minutes, awaiting instructions. The threat was created in a way that is intended to make reverse engineering more difficult...
However, blocking the threat is as simple as an ACL on your router...
Assuming the only access your machine has to the internet is via said router...
Slashdot Mirror
Unfortunately, considering that most corporations would be considered sociopaths were they to be psychoanalyzed, the possibility that they will do the right thing because it's the right thing is slim-to-none; hence, fear of legal (or rather, financial) repercussion is about the only way to get their attention.
There are two ways to this thinking. The dude asking the question (TFS) is not the company, he's a manager in some company. He's a goddam human being, so he should be able to feel compassion.
I think, perhaps, we've found the root of this problem: sociopaths being promoted to management positions.
As for the fix, that is beyond me...
Barrel shrouds serve very useful purposes, or they would not exist on military rifles. For one thing (the original AR-15 with its poorly-designed shroud nothwithstanding), they provide a forward grip while keeping the your hands off the hot barrel. For another, they provide mounting points for sights and other gadgetry.
Yea. I know. I was responding to parent's quandary as though it were hypothetical, as it was phrased in that manner (i.e., "IF part X is cosmetic...").
However, the point must be made that on many consumer firearms, barrel shrouds ARE nothing more than cosmetic, and using barrel shrouds as an important criterion for determining whether something is an "assault weapon" is ridiculous.
Aware of that as well.
Some years ago, for example, New Jersey banned certain types of guns. The venerable Ruger Mini-14 was not a banned gun... if it had the wooden stock. But the same gun with the optional plastic stock was banned. Functionally the rifles were identical, but they outlawed the one they thought was nasty-looking.
Well, if I may quote Yahtzee Croshaw, that's pants-on-head retarded
Harassment should take intent into account, just like many other crimes.
"But your Honor, I didn't mean to offend her when I said she had nice tits! Hell, it was supposed to be a compliment!"
Good luck with that defense, Jack.
True. Not from Texas. Just visited. Some of the politest people I've met.
Yea, heavily armed populaces trend that way.
The reason you shouldn't let this happen should not be the fear of a lawsuit, but the welfare of your employees.
100% correct - companies should do the right thing because it's the right thing, not because they might get sued for not doing the right thing.
Unfortunately, considering that most corporations would be considered sociopaths were they to be psychoanalyzed, the possibility that they will do the right thing because it's the right thing is slim-to-none; hence, fear of legal (or rather, financial) repercussion is about the only way to get their attention.
It's sad and stupid, but thus is the world we inhabit.
They're not burying the cables? Is wind not a problem out there? I thought they had tornadoes...
Not so much in the city, especially downtown KC. You do get a fair amount of straightline winds coming out of Kansas, but again, the large footprint of KC suburbs help defray the winds significantly before they hit the city proper.
In the same way that an American bombsmith making his own bombs with his kitchen supplies is also circumventing the law
If he holds the proper certifications, than no, he is not 'circumventing the law,' he's doing what he has been legally allowed to do. FWIW, building an explosive device isn't illegal, per say - deploying and/or detonating one above a certain yield (without holding the right certifications) is. To that end, a person can buy impact explosives from a website, needing nothing more than a shipping address and means of payment.
Guns are only designed to kill things. That makes them different from most other things. Unless you recognize that basic truth, then you're not going to have an honest discussion on gun rights and gun regulation.
Something tells me, judging from the obviously false and highly uninformed statements you've made thus far, that "an honest discussion" isn't part of your agenda.
The NRA says that guns don't kill people, people kill people.
And the NRA, for once, is right.
but when was there a case where a dude stabbed 50 people to death?
Here:
During the February 1980 New Mexico State Penitentiary riot, 33 inmates were killed. Most of the dead, 23, lived in the Protective Custody Unit, and were killed by other inmates using knives, axes and being burnt alive
I can also cite at least one case where a determined psycho managed to kill almost 1000 people simultaneously with fucking Kool-Aid.
This case may not be a good example, but I can see criminals buying 3d printers to print guns.
I can see criminals buying X to print tools for crime Y
This is why that's considered a logical fallacy.
And they do indeed do a tentacle themed toy: http://bad-dragon.com/products/tentacle (HIGHLY NSFW!).
Considering the subject, nay, the composition of that sentence, do you really think the NSFW disclaimer is necessary?
Considering that one can purchase an AR-15 lower from any of more than a dozen manufacturers, I don't think patent/copyright applies in this particular instance.
Plus, according to TFA, he set it up as a .22 caliber.
.22 ammo, sure, but bump that up to .223 or 5.56...
200 rounds of
Guns don't kill people; physics does! - Dick Solomon, Third Rock From The Sun
So, if the barrel shroud and forward grip are purely cosmetic, why are they so popular?
Same reason 20" rims and body kits are popular on cars, even though they do nothing to help performance (and in some cases, diminish it).
No gun license required? Why would anyone need a license to exercise a right guaranteed by the law of the land? Do you need a license to vote? Do you need a license to be safe from being enslaved? Do you need a license to own a printing press and open a newspaper? I'm totally lost here. What sort of brain structure causes this mental vomit to occur?
anti-gun pussies
think every gun is a crime
law does not matter
Try ordering a barrel or bolt without a FFL (Federal Firearms License). You won't get very far.
That's a big negative, Ghostrider.
How is an American gunsmith creating a gun part with a 3d printer an example of someone circumventing the law?
What if your cell phone has a data-only plan and you rely on VOIP for your calls? :3
Then you lose a few nerd points for not having a backup system ready and waiting.
You do realize that I was responding specifically to someone who was making a claim against Mountain Lion, right? This particular comment thread is about Mountain Lion and the fact that it's unaffected. He claimed otherwise. I disputed.
*reads post title*
...
I do now.
If all our insults
were in the form of haiku
life would be awesome
You are very welcome, always happy to brighten someone else's day.
The backdoor component calls home to the IP address 176.58.100.37 every five minutes, awaiting instructions. The threat was created in a way that is intended to make reverse engineering more difficult... However, blocking the threat is as simple as an ACL on your router...
Assuming the only access your machine has to the internet is via said router...
Gatekeeper is a new Mountain Lion feature
RTFS; Mountain Lion is not the distro being compromised.
For 1-2$ tops, sure. Without a keyboard and mouse, who's going to pay dozens of dollars for a game?
Console owners.
Valve helped establish the closed system model with Steam. And now they're bringing that shit to Linux. Thanks for nothing, Valve.
A haiku:
your big vagina
it is filled with lots of sand
please go rinse it out
one of these
Not being defeatist, just pointing out the obvious.
Educating people, as you said.