You're misrepresenting my point. I didn't say I COULD get onto an aircraft with box cutters, I'm saying I SHOULD be able to do so.
"In this day and age, box cutters on a flight are just as dangerous as a stick of dynamite"
Nothing changed on September 11. Dangerous people are still dangerous. Tools can still be misused. Banning tools won't change the fact that dangerous people are dangerous.
"It's much more efficient to take that person aside, confiscate the offending item and be off with it."
It is NOT ACCEPTABLE that I'm detained because I'm carrying a pocket knife. I don't carry a pocket knife on airplanes any more, and every time I land I'm always needing one. It's a totally ridiculous situation.
"you can see where people's minds are going."
Yeah, they're going into an incorrect mindset that by detaining photographers any fewer people are going to be killed by terrorists.
"By the way you sound, it seems like you're ok with letting box cutters back onto flights now?"
DING DING DING. YES. Emphatically. Hell, if they've got a concealed carry license, I've got no issue with people carrying handguns on aircraft. Or swords. Or freakin' sharks with laser beams on their heads, assuming they're in a carry-on sized container.
See, that's where you're wrong. It's NOT a big deal. Box cutters are not a threat. People who use box cutters (or butter knives or straightened pieces of heavy gauge wire) to do horrible things are the threat.
I'm much more likely to use a pair of nail scissors to cut a piece of moleskin to put on a blister than use said nail scissors to bring down a commercial jet.
Keeping box cutters and nail clippers out of airplanes, and harassing photographers, is not in any way going to improve security. These practices absolutely do decrease our individual liberties, and that is totally unacceptable.
Fortunately for the powers that be, people who value their liberties are in the vanishing minority.
Exactly my point. Questioning people who take photographs and carry nail clippers does not improve security: It is paranoia. And, in my mind, unacceptable.
Of course. But if you want to use Apple's logo, and Apple's engineering support, and sell through Apple's web site, I think you shouldn't be surprised if Apple wants a cut.
You're free to not give it, and they're free to not help you. No harm, no foul.
Right, because the authorities always take the suspect at their word. They never just want to throw any old person they can put together a threadbare case in jail for years.
How do you figure? If I'm free to speak, but free to get hounded by the FBI/fired/audited by the IRS if I say something that the authorities don't like, that's a pretty thin kind of freedom.
"We don't want the world flooded with forged documents"
Says you. I don't really think that it's as much of a problem as you do.
"Deal with it."
Ah. That must be in the hidden text in the 10th Amendment. You know, the one written in invisible yellow dots.
I try to cultivate the habit of not over-generalizing. Sometimes I do a good job, sometimes I don't. Discussions on/. are often a good place to practice. : )
Go in peace! Think hard! Sound reasoning does not take short cuts!
Yeah, those Grados are supposed to be excellent. However, they're inconvenient for me. Now that I've found a set of earbuds that a) sound "good enough" and b) fit my skull, I'm happy. Unfortunately, I think I've broken the seal on the right phone that makes it work properly.
I'm looking at the Shure E2C's, and the Etymotic ER-6's as replacements. The Sony some-incomprehensible-number earbuds are good as well, I understand.
Nevertheless, the stock earbuds are a lot farther from "crap" than most pack-in headphones.
Slashdot Mirror
You're misrepresenting my point. I didn't say I COULD get onto an aircraft with box cutters, I'm saying I SHOULD be able to do so.
"In this day and age, box cutters on a flight are just as dangerous as a stick of dynamite"
Nothing changed on September 11. Dangerous people are still dangerous. Tools can still be misused. Banning tools won't change the fact that dangerous people are dangerous.
"It's much more efficient to take that person aside, confiscate the offending item and be off with it."
It is NOT ACCEPTABLE that I'm detained because I'm carrying a pocket knife. I don't carry a pocket knife on airplanes any more, and every time I land I'm always needing one. It's a totally ridiculous situation.
"you can see where people's minds are going."
Yeah, they're going into an incorrect mindset that by detaining photographers any fewer people are going to be killed by terrorists.
"By the way you sound, it seems like you're ok with letting box cutters back onto flights now?"
DING DING DING. YES. Emphatically. Hell, if they've got a concealed carry license, I've got no issue with people carrying handguns on aircraft. Or swords. Or freakin' sharks with laser beams on their heads, assuming they're in a carry-on sized container.
See, that's where you're wrong. It's NOT a big deal. Box cutters are not a threat. People who use box cutters (or butter knives or straightened pieces of heavy gauge wire) to do horrible things are the threat.
I'm much more likely to use a pair of nail scissors to cut a piece of moleskin to put on a blister than use said nail scissors to bring down a commercial jet.
Keeping box cutters and nail clippers out of airplanes, and harassing photographers, is not in any way going to improve security. These practices absolutely do decrease our individual liberties, and that is totally unacceptable.
Fortunately for the powers that be, people who value their liberties are in the vanishing minority.
Uh, because that's the way the continent is shaped?
You're going to have to help me out here. I'm just a dumb American, and I have no idea what you're asking...
There there what?
You know you're not spelling that right, don't you?
"It's just that they're acting on their particular interests"
No, it's just that they've got enough money to buy whoever the citizens happen to vote for.
How nice for you. Fiber is not available to me for any price. How is that an alternative for me?
Exactly my point. Questioning people who take photographs and carry nail clippers does not improve security: It is paranoia. And, in my mind, unacceptable.
"Nope, I buy my computers part by part."
Me too. So you, I, and the four other people like us were not affected. The overwhelming majority of PC purchasers were.
"And Apple eventually will if they continue down that road."
Uh huh. Whatever. There's no reason Apple should give advertising and manufacturing support to other companies for free.
But if you bought a PC, you paid Microsoft, regardless of whether you wished to or not.
Here's the difference between Apple and Microsoft: Microsoft has been found guilty of abusive monopoly practices in a court of law. Apple has not.
No, they get sued by the printer manufacturers instead.
Except for the fact that the RIAA already gets more than 70% of iTunes proceeds, you're absolutely right.
So, in other words, you're absolutely wrong.
Why does it matter?
Of course. But if you want to use Apple's logo, and Apple's engineering support, and sell through Apple's web site, I think you shouldn't be surprised if Apple wants a cut.
You're free to not give it, and they're free to not help you. No harm, no foul.
Right, because the authorities always take the suspect at their word. They never just want to throw any old person they can put together a threadbare case in jail for years.
Never happen, right?
"Free speech is not free *anonymous* speech."
How do you figure? If I'm free to speak, but free to get hounded by the FBI/fired/audited by the IRS if I say something that the authorities don't like, that's a pretty thin kind of freedom.
"We don't want the world flooded with forged documents"
Says you. I don't really think that it's as much of a problem as you do.
"Deal with it."
Ah. That must be in the hidden text in the 10th Amendment. You know, the one written in invisible yellow dots.
I try to cultivate the habit of not over-generalizing. Sometimes I do a good job, sometimes I don't. Discussions on /. are often a good place to practice. : )
Go in peace! Think hard! Sound reasoning does not take short cuts!
I hate Joe McCarthy too. Same problem, different decade.
Jack Thompson should be free to speak his mind. He should not be free to intimidate people into silence by his legal bullying.
Naw, he just got confused and pasted in the first entry from his AOL Favorites list.
Yeah, those Grados are supposed to be excellent. However, they're inconvenient for me. Now that I've found a set of earbuds that a) sound "good enough" and b) fit my skull, I'm happy. Unfortunately, I think I've broken the seal on the right phone that makes it work properly.
I'm looking at the Shure E2C's, and the Etymotic ER-6's as replacements. The Sony some-incomprehensible-number earbuds are good as well, I understand.
Nevertheless, the stock earbuds are a lot farther from "crap" than most pack-in headphones.
Hmm. Ender's Game talks about a young boy. Ender's Shadow talks about a young boy. The other books? Not so much with the young boys.
"Adult situations"? Clearly, not the sort of "adult situations" that would be totally inappropriate.
You're broadly overgeneralizing the work, and making fairly specious claims.
"Well again, VOD is already quite popular..."
Bullshit.
How many people in America have access to video on demand of any episode they want of network TV shows?
It may come at some point in the future, but it's sure not here now. Wake me up when I can get a la carte cable service.
Well, 'cuz YOU said so....
no, not really.
The stock headphones sound good, but they're not comfortable in my skull. The Apple in-ear headphones sound great, and fit great.
Having said all that, I am very proud to note that I am not an audiophile. Those guys (they're ALL guys) are wack.
Since he is a grown-up, don't you think he's capable of making his own decisions about who he wants to have running his company?
You forgot to include your, uh, I mean, the RIAA's address. How will he know where to send the check?
That was clearly your implication. Don't dodge it: Defend it.