Its only an ongoing conspiracy theory in the UK because car modding isn't as popular there. The engine in my mustang is modded and tuned to an extent where it will no longer run on 87 octane fuel. It'll only run on 91 with some octane boosters added to get it up to 93. There would be an incredibly large law suit involved from folks who DO mod cars if the gas stations were mis-representing their octane content.
For anyone thats actually reading this on slashdot, step #1 after buying any new laptop is 1) Format the HDD. Potentially followed by 2)Replace with SSD and 3) Install OS of choice.
Actually EA is losing money hand over fist because they bought a bunch of studios that make games that specifically appeal to people like those in the slashdot readership.
Bioware as a studio was a STRONG company for over a decade before EA took them over, and a decade is a long ass time in the video game industry. They're still a money maker but the titles they produce are selling less and less due to EA fingers creeping in.
One of the most telling things about EA is that they had to make fucking press statements that they weren't going to mess with biowares internal structure when they purchased it just to try to keep their brand from ruining a good thing.
They're losing a shitload of sales to people like me who won't buy their crap anymore. The last EA title I bought was dragon age II because the girlfriend begged me. Before that it was DA:O... I haven't purchased ME2 or 3 even though I want to because Bioware is now owned by EA.
Its a culture of willful ignorance on widely understood and EASILY comprehended issues.
Your point is extremely moot. This doesn't happen in any other country I've been in, but "I don't know" is a cool answer for some idiotic reason in a lot of places in the US now.
Its not that they are outright idiots, its just that there is a massive culture of willful ignorance gaining popularity in the US over the last couple of decades.
This has a side effect of making a lot of them seem too stupid to even talk to.
Cell phones, jewelry, ipods... there are lots of small valuable items that would be better off out of sight and not easily found if one has a reason to leave them in their car.
Adrenaline maybe, that combined with the fact that I'd never do it anyways, but I can place 10/10 shots inside a 6" target from 100 feet no problem at all from any decent handgun... its not bluster. 100 feet IS low double digit yards. Roughly 33 yards to be more precise. I chose that number specifically because hand guns get really really bad beyond 100 feet. At least for me. I have also seen people who I assume are first time shooters not hit 2'x3' target sheets at ALL from 20 feet, so ymmv.
I think that will actually continue with the iOS trend. People that buy iPhones are buying appliances, appliances used mostly for media consumption on the move that also happen to be phones.
I bought a Samsung Note II because I needed to do work with it, and the stylus and large screen are bloody fantastic for my work.
I'm not an american, but tell me what the hell the difference between whoever is teaching your children now vs the same person + a gun. Probably the best bet would be a thumbprint desk safe for it, not actually carrying it on their person but you get the idea.
Its not really a outlaw fantasy or anything, its just facts. Crime in the U.K. involving guns actually increased after their gun ban.
Note: The following is based entirely on my own experience shooting and hunting LEGALLY. The entire scenario is hypothetical and I would never actually do any of the things mentioned hereafter with the exception of hunting and target shooting.
I'm not special forces, but I do hunt semi-regularly and I've fired off maybe 2-300 handgun rounds throughout my lifetime. If maximum fatalities is my goal I can guarantee you a minimum of 6-7 deaths from 10 rounds from a handgun inside 100 feet. Give me a rifle and I'll make it 8-9 out of 10 inside 100 yards. Reloading a pre-loaded mag into a gun takes maybe 5 seconds. With my aim and fire time thats maybe 1 person that I wouldn't have shot in that time frame.
The rifle isn't the most likely culprit however. Rifles are easy to see and easy to control. Handguns should be banned outright without special licenses. The magazine size on a rifle has little to no bearing on what will happen if someone decides to go on a mass shooting spree.
Shit, give me an M1 Garand and I'll get that reload time down to 3 seconds and make 7-8 kills out of an 8 round clip at 100 yards. Probably more in a crowded room where you'll get second victims on a single bullet. Do you feel safer than if I was using a 30 round mag? Do think someone planning a pre-meditated killing spree is actually going to be significantly worse at shooting and completely ignore the fact that accuracy really really matters? You'd probably be better off if he had a full auto weapon and just sprayed. I know I'd only be able to hit 2, maybe 3 out of a 30 round mag for sure on full auto just spraying. Limiting him to semi-auto is just going to make him more conscious of accuracy.
Thats not to mention that if you banned handguns except with special licenses, he'd be less likely to have one, and someone pretty responsible, like say, a teacher, should be encouraged to go get their license and carry a handgun. Yes, they should have a handgun around your children. Oh the danger of it all! You're already trusting the safety and minds of your children to these people for 5 days of the week. They should have all available tools to help them maintain that safety. You know what most all of the mass shootings have in common? A single somewhat practiced handgun owner could have put them down in a matter of minutes and cut the death toll by half or more.
Some restrictions should be in place, but most of those are already.
Even if I'm a bit of an outlier... theres no way in hell that 2-3 out of a 10 round clip in a semi-auto rifle is accurate. They'd have to be firing an AK-47 semi-auto just to get down to 3-4. They could bump-fire the thing and still get 2-3.
Yes. Depending on the actual strength and other factors you may be able to make it lighter than air by sealing it into an air-tight membrane of some sort and removing all of the air. If it retains its structure it would then be lighter than air.
"One of these men lost his job as a result of this incident, and we are seeing numerous people blame Adria for that. This is a clear example of a culture we live in, where it is more appropriate to blame the victim than to blame any other offenders."
What the everliving fuck?
She wasn't a "victim" of anything. These guys didn't rape her. They didn't assault her. They didn't slander her, they didn't harass her they didn't DO anything to her. They told a joke meant for each other and happened to be within earshot of her. That was the reason she got fired. She's claiming to be some sort of victim and framing all women as victims of "this sort of behavior" and its just bullshit. You do not have a right to not be offended. As long as that person isn't directly talking about you, thats where your rights end.
Now if they had said "I bet this chick in front of us here would love it if the presenters had bigger dongles" or something of that nature, she'd have a bit of a case here as that could very easily be considered harassment.
As someone outside of america looking in, but seeing all of these stations from time to time...
MSNBC is as much total bullshit as fox news is, they fail, but they fail less hard because they frame their bullshit as what it is, bullshit. Fox puts on 'reporting' programs supposedly reporting facts but often the facts are distorted and they've got commentary that destroys what truth there was in the report.
CNN is the only halfway decent major news network in the U.S. They shift back and forth from 25% bullshit to 75% bullshit depending on what current events are going on, but their news reporting IS news reporting and their bullshit is framed as such. Its actually not a terrible station even on an international comparison.
I'm not that terribly sensitive. In a bar situation she'd have been approached immediately, it was the job thing that threw a wrench into it.
Whats actually happened since that incident years ago though is that I've become financially secure and just turned into a bit of an asshole. If I think she's cute she's going to get a fairly blunt come on, probably wrapped in a few jokes, and if she shoots me down, well, whatever.
The most important thing to remember is that I'm NOT sensitive and in most situations I'm not terribly socially awkward(While a bit of an asshole I don't get shot down very often when I put my mind to it... ) and this is STILL a problem for me in any sort of work situation. Keeping romance etc out of the workplace just isn't an option, we're human, and the most LIKELY place to find someone you have some common interests with is IN the workplace.
In case no one else RTFA's, the author of this Twitter shaming at least learned that there IS such a thing as a measured and appropriate response. What she did was nothing of the sort.
Quoted from one of the linked articles:
"Richards' supporters may be disappointed to learn that her employer, SendGrid, announced on Facebook that she has been terminated: "Effective immediately, SendGrid has terminated the employment of Adria Richards. While we generally are sensitive and confidential with respect to employee matters, the situation has taken on a public nature. We have taken action that we believe is in the overall best interests of SendGrid, its employees, and our customers. As we continue to process the vast amount of information, we will post something more comprehensive.""
Don't usually respond to AC's... but this post is incredibly misleading and part of the problem.
The woman can very easily ask me to stop making crude jokes around her. I will comply. If I don't, at that point it IS harassment, which we have many laws to cover.
The same thing goes for the person that may be offended by a nigger joke.
Whats fucking ridiculous is that this guy got FIRED for making a JOKE. The guy likely wouldn't have been fired for the nigger joke unless it was pretty damned bigoted and followed a pattern of behavior... This was apparently a joke about a dongle... how the hell that could possibly be misogynistic enough to warrant firing I'll never understand.
However crude the joke, unless its actually harassment, it shouldn't be any sort of grounds for anything beyond a "don't do that again" reprimand. This woman publicly crucified the man in the name of her "cause" and is being APPLAUDED for it when she should be ridiculed.
Some, but not all, of the creepy stalker behavior is being generated by this type of shit.
I myself have been in the situation before. I like to joke a lot. My jokes aren't usually terribly offensive, but the funniest jokes usually offend SOMEONE. Thats part of what makes them funny. So I was interested in this girl, but while I didn't work with her, her boss knew my boss and so on. So I ended up walking around completely frustrated because if I walked over and was my usual self it could go off fantastically, but if it went wrong and she turned out to be some kind of total psycho-bitch(without seeing the joke the man made I can't state outright that this adria woman is one such, but I would deem it likely) I would have gotten fired, which I couldn't afford to do at the time. I ended up staring at her a bit too much apparently because I was trying to figure out what the fuck to do with it and then she got offended because I was apparently being "stalkery" with my staring.
So what the fuck is a man supposed to do in this day and age? Never leave the house? Its getting to that point for a lot of men already. Most of us just aren't as socially wired as women. The males of our species are hunters, warriors and workers. None of those things lend themselves to being able to read someones emotions and mind just by looking at them, which women seem to have a knack for doing. It completely BOGGLES me what women think is NORMAL for you to be able to see about someone just by looking at them.
Now outright misogyny, abuse, attempting to limit womens rights etc I'm totally against... but for fuck sake's... STOP TRYING TO NEUTER EVERY LIVING MALE.
There are a lot of people out there arguing for free speech and the "you do NOT have a right to not be offended" line comes up a lot. Why the hell doesn't it apply to women too?
In this case he was actually better than the alternative. The choice in your last election wasn't a choice for most people, it was choosing the best of two bad options.
Slashdot Mirror
Its only an ongoing conspiracy theory in the UK because car modding isn't as popular there. The engine in my mustang is modded and tuned to an extent where it will no longer run on 87 octane fuel. It'll only run on 91 with some octane boosters added to get it up to 93. There would be an incredibly large law suit involved from folks who DO mod cars if the gas stations were mis-representing their octane content.
For anyone thats actually reading this on slashdot, step #1 after buying any new laptop is 1) Format the HDD. Potentially followed by 2)Replace with SSD and 3) Install OS of choice.
Um... I use my AMD E-Series laptop for quite a bit of gaming.
I have no idea what you're talking about for poor performance >_>.
Actually EA is losing money hand over fist because they bought a bunch of studios that make games that specifically appeal to people like those in the slashdot readership.
Bioware as a studio was a STRONG company for over a decade before EA took them over, and a decade is a long ass time in the video game industry. They're still a money maker but the titles they produce are selling less and less due to EA fingers creeping in.
One of the most telling things about EA is that they had to make fucking press statements that they weren't going to mess with biowares internal structure when they purchased it just to try to keep their brand from ruining a good thing.
They're losing a shitload of sales to people like me who won't buy their crap anymore. The last EA title I bought was dragon age II because the girlfriend begged me. Before that it was DA:O... I haven't purchased ME2 or 3 even though I want to because Bioware is now owned by EA.
Its a culture of willful ignorance on widely understood and EASILY comprehended issues.
Your point is extremely moot. This doesn't happen in any other country I've been in, but "I don't know" is a cool answer for some idiotic reason in a lot of places in the US now.
Its not that they are outright idiots, its just that there is a massive culture of willful ignorance gaining popularity in the US over the last couple of decades.
This has a side effect of making a lot of them seem too stupid to even talk to.
As mentioned below... beaches, malls.
These secret compartments were large enough to contain a laptop or any other number of things it might be more convenient to leave where they are.
Hell, F-150's come with a pretty well-hidden compartment that anyone who's never seen it opened probably wouldn't realize is there.
Cell phones, jewelry, ipods... there are lots of small valuable items that would be better off out of sight and not easily found if one has a reason to leave them in their car.
Honestly I would subscribe to HBO if I could do it WITHOUT paying like $150 to the cable company for the everything else I don't want first.
I wonder where we might find a population of people familiar with hebrew, well-educated and who love money.... oh wait.
Effectively its quite similar to a dual core CPU, except since the calculations are all so similar the workload is evenly split by the card & drivers.
Adrenaline maybe, that combined with the fact that I'd never do it anyways, but I can place 10/10 shots inside a 6" target from 100 feet no problem at all from any decent handgun... its not bluster. 100 feet IS low double digit yards. Roughly 33 yards to be more precise. I chose that number specifically because hand guns get really really bad beyond 100 feet. At least for me. I have also seen people who I assume are first time shooters not hit 2'x3' target sheets at ALL from 20 feet, so ymmv.
I think that will actually continue with the iOS trend. People that buy iPhones are buying appliances, appliances used mostly for media consumption on the move that also happen to be phones.
I bought a Samsung Note II because I needed to do work with it, and the stylus and large screen are bloody fantastic for my work.
I'm not an american, but tell me what the hell the difference between whoever is teaching your children now vs the same person + a gun. Probably the best bet would be a thumbprint desk safe for it, not actually carrying it on their person but you get the idea.
Its not really a outlaw fantasy or anything, its just facts. Crime in the U.K. involving guns actually increased after their gun ban.
http://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepavlich/2012/12/11/gun-crime-soars-in-england-where-guns-are-banned-n1464528
You should inform yourself instead of making knee-jerk emotional reactionary decisions.
It depends on the gun but most of the ones I've used 5 seconds IS a bit generous. I basically went high to stop bitching from people.
The M1 garand with pre-loaded clips in an ammo pouch can get to sub 1 second reload times if you're good enough. That thing was a masterpiece.
2 or 3??? Who are you calling a fucking idiot?
Note: The following is based entirely on my own experience shooting and hunting LEGALLY. The entire scenario is hypothetical and I would never actually do any of the things mentioned hereafter with the exception of hunting and target shooting.
I'm not special forces, but I do hunt semi-regularly and I've fired off maybe 2-300 handgun rounds throughout my lifetime. If maximum fatalities is my goal I can guarantee you a minimum of 6-7 deaths from 10 rounds from a handgun inside 100 feet. Give me a rifle and I'll make it 8-9 out of 10 inside 100 yards. Reloading a pre-loaded mag into a gun takes maybe 5 seconds. With my aim and fire time thats maybe 1 person that I wouldn't have shot in that time frame.
The rifle isn't the most likely culprit however. Rifles are easy to see and easy to control. Handguns should be banned outright without special licenses. The magazine size on a rifle has little to no bearing on what will happen if someone decides to go on a mass shooting spree.
Shit, give me an M1 Garand and I'll get that reload time down to 3 seconds and make 7-8 kills out of an 8 round clip at 100 yards. Probably more in a crowded room where you'll get second victims on a single bullet. Do you feel safer than if I was using a 30 round mag? Do think someone planning a pre-meditated killing spree is actually going to be significantly worse at shooting and completely ignore the fact that accuracy really really matters? You'd probably be better off if he had a full auto weapon and just sprayed. I know I'd only be able to hit 2, maybe 3 out of a 30 round mag for sure on full auto just spraying. Limiting him to semi-auto is just going to make him more conscious of accuracy.
Thats not to mention that if you banned handguns except with special licenses, he'd be less likely to have one, and someone pretty responsible, like say, a teacher, should be encouraged to go get their license and carry a handgun. Yes, they should have a handgun around your children. Oh the danger of it all! You're already trusting the safety and minds of your children to these people for 5 days of the week. They should have all available tools to help them maintain that safety. You know what most all of the mass shootings have in common? A single somewhat practiced handgun owner could have put them down in a matter of minutes and cut the death toll by half or more.
Some restrictions should be in place, but most of those are already.
Even if I'm a bit of an outlier... theres no way in hell that 2-3 out of a 10 round clip in a semi-auto rifle is accurate. They'd have to be firing an AK-47 semi-auto just to get down to 3-4. They could bump-fire the thing and still get 2-3.
Yes. Depending on the actual strength and other factors you may be able to make it lighter than air by sealing it into an air-tight membrane of some sort and removing all of the air. If it retains its structure it would then be lighter than air.
"One of these men lost his job as a result of this incident, and we are seeing numerous people blame Adria for that. This is a clear example of a culture we live in, where it is more appropriate to blame the victim than to blame any other offenders."
What the everliving fuck?
She wasn't a "victim" of anything. These guys didn't rape her. They didn't assault her. They didn't slander her, they didn't harass her they didn't DO anything to her. They told a joke meant for each other and happened to be within earshot of her. That was the reason she got fired. She's claiming to be some sort of victim and framing all women as victims of "this sort of behavior" and its just bullshit. You do not have a right to not be offended. As long as that person isn't directly talking about you, thats where your rights end.
Now if they had said "I bet this chick in front of us here would love it if the presenters had bigger dongles" or something of that nature, she'd have a bit of a case here as that could very easily be considered harassment.
As someone outside of america looking in, but seeing all of these stations from time to time...
MSNBC is as much total bullshit as fox news is, they fail, but they fail less hard because they frame their bullshit as what it is, bullshit. Fox puts on 'reporting' programs supposedly reporting facts but often the facts are distorted and they've got commentary that destroys what truth there was in the report.
CNN is the only halfway decent major news network in the U.S. They shift back and forth from 25% bullshit to 75% bullshit depending on what current events are going on, but their news reporting IS news reporting and their bullshit is framed as such. Its actually not a terrible station even on an international comparison.
I'm not that terribly sensitive. In a bar situation she'd have been approached immediately, it was the job thing that threw a wrench into it.
Whats actually happened since that incident years ago though is that I've become financially secure and just turned into a bit of an asshole. If I think she's cute she's going to get a fairly blunt come on, probably wrapped in a few jokes, and if she shoots me down, well, whatever.
The most important thing to remember is that I'm NOT sensitive and in most situations I'm not terribly socially awkward(While a bit of an asshole I don't get shot down very often when I put my mind to it... ) and this is STILL a problem for me in any sort of work situation. Keeping romance etc out of the workplace just isn't an option, we're human, and the most LIKELY place to find someone you have some common interests with is IN the workplace.
In case no one else RTFA's, the author of this Twitter shaming at least learned that there IS such a thing as a measured and appropriate response. What she did was nothing of the sort.
Quoted from one of the linked articles:
"Richards' supporters may be disappointed to learn that her employer, SendGrid, announced on Facebook that she has been terminated: "Effective immediately, SendGrid has terminated the employment of Adria Richards. While we generally are sensitive and confidential with respect to employee matters, the situation has taken on a public nature. We have taken action that we believe is in the overall best interests of SendGrid, its employees, and our customers. As we continue to process the vast amount of information, we will post something more comprehensive.""
Don't usually respond to AC's... but this post is incredibly misleading and part of the problem.
The woman can very easily ask me to stop making crude jokes around her. I will comply. If I don't, at that point it IS harassment, which we have many laws to cover.
The same thing goes for the person that may be offended by a nigger joke.
Whats fucking ridiculous is that this guy got FIRED for making a JOKE. The guy likely wouldn't have been fired for the nigger joke unless it was pretty damned bigoted and followed a pattern of behavior... This was apparently a joke about a dongle... how the hell that could possibly be misogynistic enough to warrant firing I'll never understand.
However crude the joke, unless its actually harassment, it shouldn't be any sort of grounds for anything beyond a "don't do that again" reprimand. This woman publicly crucified the man in the name of her "cause" and is being APPLAUDED for it when she should be ridiculed.
Some, but not all, of the creepy stalker behavior is being generated by this type of shit.
I myself have been in the situation before. I like to joke a lot. My jokes aren't usually terribly offensive, but the funniest jokes usually offend SOMEONE. Thats part of what makes them funny. So I was interested in this girl, but while I didn't work with her, her boss knew my boss and so on. So I ended up walking around completely frustrated because if I walked over and was my usual self it could go off fantastically, but if it went wrong and she turned out to be some kind of total psycho-bitch(without seeing the joke the man made I can't state outright that this adria woman is one such, but I would deem it likely) I would have gotten fired, which I couldn't afford to do at the time. I ended up staring at her a bit too much apparently because I was trying to figure out what the fuck to do with it and then she got offended because I was apparently being "stalkery" with my staring.
So what the fuck is a man supposed to do in this day and age? Never leave the house? Its getting to that point for a lot of men already. Most of us just aren't as socially wired as women. The males of our species are hunters, warriors and workers. None of those things lend themselves to being able to read someones emotions and mind just by looking at them, which women seem to have a knack for doing. It completely BOGGLES me what women think is NORMAL for you to be able to see about someone just by looking at them.
Now outright misogyny, abuse, attempting to limit womens rights etc I'm totally against... but for fuck sake's... STOP TRYING TO NEUTER EVERY LIVING MALE.
There are a lot of people out there arguing for free speech and the "you do NOT have a right to not be offended" line comes up a lot. Why the hell doesn't it apply to women too?
In this case he was actually better than the alternative. The choice in your last election wasn't a choice for most people, it was choosing the best of two bad options.