The government won't let me and the employees hate it. There's a reason that only (mostly) unskilled labor is paid at piece-rates (think migrant farm workers...not exactly IP stuff).
No, that's not the way the world works, and quite honestly can't work. Would you take a job to support a family if it was based on the work that you completed, and was dependent on the company getting outside commissions? You may as well go into business for yourself and take that kind of risk. No, most employees want a day's pay for a day's attendance. If you ever want to get a loan or rent an apartment (and most people need shelter and don't come out of school with a 6 or 7 figure bank account), you'll need a steady income and piece work doesn't count. How about benefits? Shall I offer you health insurance based on your output? Sorry, you didn't meet the quota I set, your daughter will have to have to have that broken bone set with a 2x4 and an ace bandage.
I suggest you go out and start few businesses that rely on actual work being done. Sevice for government (T&M with guaranteed payment) and any type of sales (commission based work) doesn't count. Deal with employees and payroll, benefits, work flow fluctuations (both high and low). Then come back and reopen the discussion. I've worked both sides, and the view from this side is decidedly different. Having limited access to the internet for 8 hours a day in return for the lifestyle to which you have become accustomed is, quite honestly, a small price to pay.
You mised the part of the patent application that specified "on the internet." That makes it both unique and non-obvious, because doing anything on the internet is completely different than doing it off the internet. Hasn't/. taught you anything about the USPTO this past decade?;-)
That said, nobody (well, very few people) are 100% productive for four hours straight. Still, I don't provide magazine racks, several daily newspapers, or televisions in the office area. The internet can be a real time sink - it's like going into a well stocked library, it's very easy to get distracted and lose 30-40 minutes. I'm just as guilty (hell, I'm on/. at 9:30 am, right?). I happen to be out of the office this week, but it's not uncommon for me to chekc/. twice a day. My admin checks cnn two or three times a day(I know, she tells me if something interesting is happening). I know one of the CAD guys likes to see what's on (hmmm, can't remember the name). I don't mind it for down time, and we do have it, but it can easily become a waste of time for all but the most dedicated.
Occasional use is okay, just as we used to bring the morning paper into work and read an article with a cup of coffee mid mornng. There are a lot of folks who really get caught up in the internet, and don't realize that they're wasting 60-120 minutes in an 8 hour day. For what its worth, I have no limitations on my (or my employees) internet connections - it is not a problem - however I can see the need in a large organization for controls.
I've considered actually turning off net access to all the desktops (yes, even in my office) and putting a stand-up web terminal in the library area. If you need to look something up, look it up and trnasfer the pdf to the library on the internal server. If you want to surf or chat on IM, stand there and surf - at least it's honest, and you're not alt-tabbing back to your work every time somebody walks past your cube.
Go waste somebody else's money. I don't want a bunch of slackers "working" for me, taking my money, and doing other things when they should be productive. I don't ask my people to work overtime becuase we schedule so that things get done in the alloted schedule. If you are so addicted to the internet that you can't put in 4 hours before lunch and 4 hours after lunch without access to all of it, you're not going to do what I need you to do.
Oh, and you'd better not spend a bunch of time on your cell phone in my office either. Everybody has emergencies...nobody has them so often that I should know which ringtone your girlfriend is.
Oh, and get off my lawn you damned whippersnappers.
hey can just steal your passport and then do anything with it that they want
(faraday cage covers aside) But that's not the point, really. If they steal your passport, you'll find out it's missing and report it as such. If they steal your information and clone it, then they will need to have active data correlation on your movement that will ferret out a cloned passport. Your passport could sit dormant for years and then just show up suddenly for a one-time use (ack-terrorism), such as illegal entry (no, not necessarily for terrorism).
These are actually very good points. I suspect that the time and effort spent on both hardware and software for functions implemented which are not phone related could/should be spent on better cell handoffs (you know, ones that are user-advantageous instead of trnasmitter-owner-advantageous). Same with ruggedness. Whomever designed the power interface (hell, the data interface, too) on Motorola phones should be eviscerated in public for such a bad connector design.
3" from the "designed" reading equipement, not from a "modified" directional antenna. Besides, if someone can get clsoe enough to pick your pocket, they can be close enough for a walk-by reading.
Consumer electronics is required, by law, to respect Macrovision(R) protection, and is so specific that Macrovision(R) is actually part of the language of the law. I can't remember or cite it, but I was floored to find that they (Macrovision(R)) had managed to codify their protection by name. I want their lobbiests next time I need something done in congress.
No, it doesn't. It specifically exempts normal protected actions under law, including fair use (and specifically mentions it). What it does do it make it illegal to help anyone else circumvent the encryption. That means (in theory) everyone has to get the key and code or build a box themselves to get around the encryption. But posessing the code or a box to do it is not illegal, though the person who gave or sold it to you would be in trouble.
This is a very fine distinction, and nasty to the core. They have made it legal, but impracticable for most of the population.
Actually, I was thinking about a set of explosives with a simple inductive couple for detonation, simlar to the initiation method for fireworks developed by Disney for their pneumatically fired shows. A small enough device in a suitably protected sheathing which was swallowed by the terrorist (thinking of cocaine mules using condoms full of the powder here) would likely get through security undetected. I mean, they're going to die anyway, why not initiate an internal device. Hell, it could just be a timed explosive for that matter - if the plane were seriously delayed, they could still take out most of the people waiting on the concourse.
If you live on a damned fault line, don't ask me for help when you have two houses on the same lot, separated by a brand new ditch.
North Carolina coast? Heck, the barrier islands have been moving for eons. Don't build your new castle on sand and then ask me to pay to keep the beach in place.
Florida? Please...you knew there were hurricanes when you moved there. Build solid, put aside extra money for cleanup after the storm. Don't ask me to foot the bill. Hey, here's an Idea - how about using the STATE money you DON'T spend on snow plows and heating oil to pay for the cleanup.
I'm not adverse to helping folks out. Really. Everybody needs help now and then. Don't you think for the cost of the recovery and the future levies and storm damage, we could just condemn the area and tell eveyone to get the hell out? There are more stable places to build. Those who were smart got insurance, and they'll be reimbursed for unusable property. Those who didn't, well, short of saying tough luck, how about a $5k stipend and a map of the US with places that aren't under sea level highlighted.
Bad things happen all the time, and to be honest, it's not my fault. I'm all for helping get people back moving again. If you build a 100 story building and it's so tall it falls down, you are free to build another one. But I'm not going to pay you to do it. I'm going to tell you to go build ten 10 story buildings. Just because you want to live in a place that can only have 100 story buildings is not my fault.
Virginia, in the mountains. Yes, we get hurricanes. Yes, we get flooding. Yes we get earthquakes (well, techincally - the worst was back in the 1860s and it was only a 5.9). It's actually pretty stable here, to be honest, but it doesn't take Uncle Sam's untold Billions just to keep us out of trouble. And I don't really expect "disaster relief" on the order of $150,000 per person. (Estimates of the total federal tab are as high as $300B for Katrina, and news sources have quoted 2 million people were displaced)
I'm not saying people shouldn't live there, I'm saying I don't want my FEDERAL dollars spent on propping it up. If you want to live somewhere that mother nature hates, be my guest - just pay for the levies and disaster cleanup with your own damned money. Buy insurance if you think you could have a big event.
And I can't believe there are people actually implying that it's a race thing. I know, some were joking. It's just a good thing I didn't mention any mid-west casinos being in the red, oops...sorry - that was a bit off color, but hey, my favorite football team plays in DC;-) Seriously, I don't really give a damned who lives there - you could put the new headquarters for the Swedish Bikini Team there and I'd say let 'em drown.
Let the ocean take it and live somewhere else. Or, at the least, quit asking for my tax dollars to bail your sorry asses out and hold back the gulf.
I think it is a collosal waste of money, and investing $B in infrastructure is just going to encourage people to move to an area which is inherently unsafe and very expensive to make livable.
Oh, go ahead, hit that troll button, but there are an awful lot of us that are getting sick and tired of people spending an inordinate amount of taxpayer money on projects that keep "beautiful" places in the black. I'm okay with the occasional monument or historic home, but forking over billions of dollars to artifically change the landscape for a commercial venture is not my idea of good government. That goes for all you weenies on the east coast, too. I'm tired of paying the Army Corps of Engineers to put the beach back so your oceanfront home keeps its value. You want beach, you pay for it.
Oh, but they will argue that they don't (need to keep track of every citizen). They only need to keep track of the troublemakers. The problem is that they don't know they're troublemakers right now. By keeping records on ice, they can go back and really dig out everything they need on someone after they have the first inkling of trouble. If there's no history, they get a closer watch, and will likely fall of the monitoring eventually. If they _do_ have a history, then it's a massive score for them (well, potentially). Then they can go forward.
See, this is why you should never let women have any position in power. She is clearly power tripping, and feels that it's her "woman's right" to nay say the clearly supeior men who run this country. She has absolutly no authority to make such a sweeping condemnation of the administrations policies, and she should be removed from the bench. It's this type of female that we must guard against in all decisions. You know, if it were me, women, except those who have sworn a loyalty to the cause of the administration and pledged their souls to keep us on the right track, and have proven it in service.
You see, this is exactly why we can't let anyone but the Republicans run anything. This is the kind of back water, Jimmy Carter, "School for Girls" kind of crap that happen to our once proud country when we let down our guard.
Sorry, I was pretending I was going to interview for Rush's new show "I'm so right, I'm wrong".
"The government argued that the program is well within the president's authority, but said proving that would require revealing state secrets."
What about the President's authority is secret? Is there some part of the constitution that you have to be TS/SCI to read? If the law exists that allows the President such powers, then let's take a look at it. I think the "state secrets" trump is going to fail them this time. It's not about the purpose for what's being done, but the authority to do so, and this judge has (thank goodness) made a sensible call that the President does not have the power to authorize this invasion of privacy, even to combat terrorism or while thinking of the childern.
It's god damned terrorists, I tell you. They're trying to take out all our satellite communications. How better to strike at the heart of Americans than to deprive them of their DirecTV, their Dish, they're Cable TV*. Oh, this is truly despicable.
We must hunt them down and stop them from destroying our way of life. Please, if you won't think of the children, think of the parents who will have no TV to use as a babysitter 10 hours a day. Tragedy, I tell you.
*preemptive troll clarification: Yes, much of the content on cable TV still comes in over satellite before they push it to your home over wires.
Its always a dollar call. How much extra does it cost to package and ship with 4 extra inches of air on the shortest side? How much does it cost to stock different boxes for different models (smallest-largest). How many get damaged in transit, and what is your margin on each one?
I have no doubt that the numbers have been run, and if they lose $5 of merchandise for each unit, on average, then that might be 8% profit at Dell but only 4-5% profit at Apple or HP. That alone could be the difference in the value of packaging. Alternately, as mentioned in onother post, there is both a mass weight and a volume weight. Increasing the box size may not appreciably increase the cost to ship, and adding a 4" strip of box is also not a large increase. It may have been determined to be worth the fractional increase in total shipping costs to reduce the OOTB failure rate. Operations that big have the data and can afford to make those decisions based on small fractions, because at that scale they really add up.
Let me clarify..."liberating" the middle east is not one of my favorite US policies. I belive that _most_ of the people around Israel, including Israel itself, would prefer to work together. The problem is that there are a few people who will always hate Israel (do you hear that phrase from Tom Lehrer's National Brotherhood Week in the back of your mind?), and will forever call for their annihilation. That will never change no matter what the US attitude is.
Terrorists hate us so much that after 8 years of the "cut and run" party being in the drivers seat, they flew four planes into US landmarks (okay 3, technically). It doesn't matter. They hate us because we are different (to put it insimple terms).
And as for planes, they have been hijacked for as long as I can remember. It's a big news thing. One plane and you get headlines. You have to blow up a lot of trains to get that kind of press. They will always be targets for those wishing to go out in a flash of media.
Again, I'm not suggesting that we continue our imperialistic ways, just that our cessation of any contact will not stop the terrorism.
It won't work. It won't work because they will never see the positive side of the western world. Just as some people in this country will never call them anything nicer than "towel head" or "macaca" (hey, a Daily Show reference to my home state! Allen is such as ass).
Whether we do anything or not at this point is irrelevent. There are people who really, really hate us, and they have taught their children the same values. I know people who won't go some places because black people frequent it. I know some people who won't even go into a shop because they *think* that one of the employees is gay. (Virginia, gotta love it!). Those prejudices are passed from generation to generation. When you combine that with a social structure with very little upward mobility potential, you get hate. And hate takes a long time to die out. Just ask the Palestinians and the Jews how long it takes for everyone to set past wrongs aside.
Slashdot Mirror
The government won't let me and the employees hate it. There's a reason that only (mostly) unskilled labor is paid at piece-rates (think migrant farm workers...not exactly IP stuff).
No, that's not the way the world works, and quite honestly can't work. Would you take a job to support a family if it was based on the work that you completed, and was dependent on the company getting outside commissions? You may as well go into business for yourself and take that kind of risk. No, most employees want a day's pay for a day's attendance. If you ever want to get a loan or rent an apartment (and most people need shelter and don't come out of school with a 6 or 7 figure bank account), you'll need a steady income and piece work doesn't count. How about benefits? Shall I offer you health insurance based on your output? Sorry, you didn't meet the quota I set, your daughter will have to have to have that broken bone set with a 2x4 and an ace bandage.
I suggest you go out and start few businesses that rely on actual work being done. Sevice for government (T&M with guaranteed payment) and any type of sales (commission based work) doesn't count. Deal with employees and payroll, benefits, work flow fluctuations (both high and low). Then come back and reopen the discussion. I've worked both sides, and the view from this side is decidedly different. Having limited access to the internet for 8 hours a day in return for the lifestyle to which you have become accustomed is, quite honestly, a small price to pay.
You mised the part of the patent application that specified "on the internet." That makes it both unique and non-obvious, because doing anything on the internet is completely different than doing it off the internet. Hasn't /. taught you anything about the USPTO this past decade? ;-)
Actually, I'm dead serious.
/. at 9:30 am, right?). I happen to be out of the office this week, but it's not uncommon for me to chekc /. twice a day. My admin checks cnn two or three times a day(I know, she tells me if something interesting is happening). I know one of the CAD guys likes to see what's on (hmmm, can't remember the name). I don't mind it for down time, and we do have it, but it can easily become a waste of time for all but the most dedicated.
That said, nobody (well, very few people) are 100% productive for four hours straight. Still, I don't provide magazine racks, several daily newspapers, or televisions in the office area. The internet can be a real time sink - it's like going into a well stocked library, it's very easy to get distracted and lose 30-40 minutes. I'm just as guilty (hell, I'm on
Occasional use is okay, just as we used to bring the morning paper into work and read an article with a cup of coffee mid mornng. There are a lot of folks who really get caught up in the internet, and don't realize that they're wasting 60-120 minutes in an 8 hour day. For what its worth, I have no limitations on my (or my employees) internet connections - it is not a problem - however I can see the need in a large organization for controls.
I've considered actually turning off net access to all the desktops (yes, even in my office) and putting a stand-up web terminal in the library area. If you need to look something up, look it up and trnasfer the pdf to the library on the internal server. If you want to surf or chat on IM, stand there and surf - at least it's honest, and you're not alt-tabbing back to your work every time somebody walks past your cube.
Go waste somebody else's money. I don't want a bunch of slackers "working" for me, taking my money, and doing other things when they should be productive. I don't ask my people to work overtime becuase we schedule so that things get done in the alloted schedule. If you are so addicted to the internet that you can't put in 4 hours before lunch and 4 hours after lunch without access to all of it, you're not going to do what I need you to do.
Oh, and you'd better not spend a bunch of time on your cell phone in my office either. Everybody has emergencies...nobody has them so often that I should know which ringtone your girlfriend is.
Oh, and get off my lawn you damned whippersnappers.
hey can just steal your passport and then do anything with it that they want
(faraday cage covers aside)
But that's not the point, really. If they steal your passport, you'll find out it's missing and report it as such. If they steal your information and clone it, then they will need to have active data correlation on your movement that will ferret out a cloned passport. Your passport could sit dormant for years and then just show up suddenly for a one-time use (ack-terrorism), such as illegal entry (no, not necessarily for terrorism).
These are actually very good points. I suspect that the time and effort spent on both hardware and software for functions implemented which are not phone related could/should be spent on better cell handoffs (you know, ones that are user-advantageous instead of trnasmitter-owner-advantageous). Same with ruggedness. Whomever designed the power interface (hell, the data interface, too) on Motorola phones should be eviscerated in public for such a bad connector design.
3" from the "designed" reading equipement, not from a "modified" directional antenna. Besides, if someone can get clsoe enough to pick your pocket, they can be close enough for a walk-by reading.
Consumer electronics is required, by law, to respect Macrovision(R) protection, and is so specific that Macrovision(R) is actually part of the language of the law. I can't remember or cite it, but I was floored to find that they (Macrovision(R)) had managed to codify their protection by name. I want their lobbiests next time I need something done in congress.
No, it doesn't. It specifically exempts normal protected actions under law, including fair use (and specifically mentions it). What it does do it make it illegal to help anyone else circumvent the encryption. That means (in theory) everyone has to get the key and code or build a box themselves to get around the encryption. But posessing the code or a box to do it is not illegal, though the person who gave or sold it to you would be in trouble.
This is a very fine distinction, and nasty to the core. They have made it legal, but impracticable for most of the population.
Well, that just about sums it up.
Actually, I was thinking about a set of explosives with a simple inductive couple for detonation, simlar to the initiation method for fireworks developed by Disney for their pneumatically fired shows. A small enough device in a suitably protected sheathing which was swallowed by the terrorist (thinking of cocaine mules using condoms full of the powder here) would likely get through security undetected. I mean, they're going to die anyway, why not initiate an internal device. Hell, it could just be a timed explosive for that matter - if the plane were seriously delayed, they could still take out most of the people waiting on the concourse.
If you live on a damned fault line, don't ask me for help when you have two houses on the same lot, separated by a brand new ditch.
North Carolina coast? Heck, the barrier islands have been moving for eons. Don't build your new castle on sand and then ask me to pay to keep the beach in place.
Florida? Please...you knew there were hurricanes when you moved there. Build solid, put aside extra money for cleanup after the storm. Don't ask me to foot the bill. Hey, here's an Idea - how about using the STATE money you DON'T spend on snow plows and heating oil to pay for the cleanup.
I'm not adverse to helping folks out. Really. Everybody needs help now and then. Don't you think for the cost of the recovery and the future levies and storm damage, we could just condemn the area and tell eveyone to get the hell out? There are more stable places to build. Those who were smart got insurance, and they'll be reimbursed for unusable property. Those who didn't, well, short of saying tough luck, how about a $5k stipend and a map of the US with places that aren't under sea level highlighted.
Bad things happen all the time, and to be honest, it's not my fault. I'm all for helping get people back moving again. If you build a 100 story building and it's so tall it falls down, you are free to build another one. But I'm not going to pay you to do it. I'm going to tell you to go build ten 10 story buildings. Just because you want to live in a place that can only have 100 story buildings is not my fault.
Virginia, in the mountains. Yes, we get hurricanes. Yes, we get flooding. Yes we get earthquakes (well, techincally - the worst was back in the 1860s and it was only a 5.9). It's actually pretty stable here, to be honest, but it doesn't take Uncle Sam's untold Billions just to keep us out of trouble. And I don't really expect "disaster relief" on the order of $150,000 per person. (Estimates of the total federal tab are as high as $300B for Katrina, and news sources have quoted 2 million people were displaced)
;-) Seriously, I don't really give a damned who lives there - you could put the new headquarters for the Swedish Bikini Team there and I'd say let 'em drown.
I'm not saying people shouldn't live there, I'm saying I don't want my FEDERAL dollars spent on propping it up. If you want to live somewhere that mother nature hates, be my guest - just pay for the levies and disaster cleanup with your own damned money. Buy insurance if you think you could have a big event.
And I can't believe there are people actually implying that it's a race thing. I know, some were joking. It's just a good thing I didn't mention any mid-west casinos being in the red, oops...sorry - that was a bit off color, but hey, my favorite football team plays in DC
Let the ocean take it and live somewhere else. Or, at the least, quit asking for my tax dollars to bail your sorry asses out and hold back the gulf.
I think it is a collosal waste of money, and investing $B in infrastructure is just going to encourage people to move to an area which is inherently unsafe and very expensive to make livable.
Oh, go ahead, hit that troll button, but there are an awful lot of us that are getting sick and tired of people spending an inordinate amount of taxpayer money on projects that keep "beautiful" places in the black. I'm okay with the occasional monument or historic home, but forking over billions of dollars to artifically change the landscape for a commercial venture is not my idea of good government. That goes for all you weenies on the east coast, too. I'm tired of paying the Army Corps of Engineers to put the beach back so your oceanfront home keeps its value. You want beach, you pay for it.
...fake news story...
Use the Preview Button! Check those URLs!
(damn it all)
Oh, but they will argue that they don't (need to keep track of every citizen). They only need to keep track of the troublemakers. The problem is that they don't know they're troublemakers right now. By keeping records on ice, they can go back and really dig out everything they need on someone after they have the first inkling of trouble. If there's no history, they get a closer watch, and will likely fall of the monitoring eventually. If they _do_ have a history, then it's a massive score for them (well, potentially). Then they can go forward.
Lest you think I support the program, I don't. But I'm sure that the above logic is what will be used and, with a little polish and shine (and maybe a few fake news storiewy to really drive the positives home) the congresspeople and most of their constituents will find the idea quite paletable. Remember - if they never look at your data, it's not an invasion of privacy! *cough*BULLSHIT*cough*
Doh! Got me. I was going somwhere else with that sentence when I thought to add cable tv. Honest...I'm usually more careful with that sort of stuff.
And, for the record, YES, they are terrorists. I used to cower in the corner every month when the bill came.
See, this is why you should never let women have any position in power. She is clearly power tripping, and feels that it's her "woman's right" to nay say the clearly supeior men who run this country. She has absolutly no authority to make such a sweeping condemnation of the administrations policies, and she should be removed from the bench. It's this type of female that we must guard against in all decisions. You know, if it were me, women, except those who have sworn a loyalty to the cause of the administration and pledged their souls to keep us on the right track, and have proven it in service.
You see, this is exactly why we can't let anyone but the Republicans run anything. This is the kind of back water, Jimmy Carter, "School for Girls" kind of crap that happen to our once proud country when we let down our guard.
Sorry, I was pretending I was going to interview for Rush's new show "I'm so right, I'm wrong".
FTFA
"The government argued that the program is well within the president's authority, but said proving that would require revealing state secrets."
What about the President's authority is secret? Is there some part of the constitution that you have to be TS/SCI to read? If the law exists that allows the President such powers, then let's take a look at it. I think the "state secrets" trump is going to fail them this time. It's not about the purpose for what's being done, but the authority to do so, and this judge has (thank goodness) made a sensible call that the President does not have the power to authorize this invasion of privacy, even to combat terrorism or while thinking of the childern.
It's god damned terrorists, I tell you. They're trying to take out all our satellite communications. How better to strike at the heart of Americans than to deprive them of their DirecTV, their Dish, they're Cable TV*. Oh, this is truly despicable.
We must hunt them down and stop them from destroying our way of life. Please, if you won't think of the children, think of the parents who will have no TV to use as a babysitter 10 hours a day. Tragedy, I tell you.
*preemptive troll clarification: Yes, much of the content on cable TV still comes in over satellite before they push it to your home over wires.
Its always a dollar call. How much extra does it cost to package and ship with 4 extra inches of air on the shortest side? How much does it cost to stock different boxes for different models (smallest-largest). How many get damaged in transit, and what is your margin on each one?
I have no doubt that the numbers have been run, and if they lose $5 of merchandise for each unit, on average, then that might be 8% profit at Dell but only 4-5% profit at Apple or HP. That alone could be the difference in the value of packaging. Alternately, as mentioned in onother post, there is both a mass weight and a volume weight. Increasing the box size may not appreciably increase the cost to ship, and adding a 4" strip of box is also not a large increase. It may have been determined to be worth the fractional increase in total shipping costs to reduce the OOTB failure rate. Operations that big have the data and can afford to make those decisions based on small fractions, because at that scale they really add up.
Let me clarify..."liberating" the middle east is not one of my favorite US policies. I belive that _most_ of the people around Israel, including Israel itself, would prefer to work together. The problem is that there are a few people who will always hate Israel (do you hear that phrase from Tom Lehrer's National Brotherhood Week in the back of your mind?), and will forever call for their annihilation. That will never change no matter what the US attitude is.
Terrorists hate us so much that after 8 years of the "cut and run" party being in the drivers seat, they flew four planes into US landmarks (okay 3, technically). It doesn't matter. They hate us because we are different (to put it insimple terms).
And as for planes, they have been hijacked for as long as I can remember. It's a big news thing. One plane and you get headlines. You have to blow up a lot of trains to get that kind of press. They will always be targets for those wishing to go out in a flash of media.
Again, I'm not suggesting that we continue our imperialistic ways, just that our cessation of any contact will not stop the terrorism.
You have to get everyone else to not watch TV.
I feel my longstanding sig is particularly appropriate today, though "stupid" could be replaced with "gullible" and fit the story that much better.
The computer isn't at issue, the key is at issue, and if you've memorized that key, they can't (legally) compel you to reveal it.
I know, don't feed the trolls. But still...
It won't work. It won't work because they will never see the positive side of the western world. Just as some people in this country will never call them anything nicer than "towel head" or "macaca" (hey, a Daily Show reference to my home state! Allen is such as ass).
Whether we do anything or not at this point is irrelevent. There are people who really, really hate us, and they have taught their children the same values. I know people who won't go some places because black people frequent it. I know some people who won't even go into a shop because they *think* that one of the employees is gay. (Virginia, gotta love it!). Those prejudices are passed from generation to generation. When you combine that with a social structure with very little upward mobility potential, you get hate. And hate takes a long time to die out. Just ask the Palestinians and the Jews how long it takes for everyone to set past wrongs aside.