why would T-Mobile lie... if the FCC does verify thier results they could face some severe penalties (I would hope).
Come on, use your common sense. What basis would they have for fining T-Mobile? It's not illegal to make mistakes in non-mandatory testing, then email your mistaken results to a guy at the FCC expressing your concerns. The fact that it's impossible to prove malice when stupidity is an adequate explanation makes any law prohibiting bad test results highly unlikely.
I know there's a lot of problems involved with getting the public free access to journals, but google has a lot of clout and coudl make a big difference there.
The publishing of scientific journals is a business. No amount of "clout" is sufficient to convince the folks that run these journals that they should give it all away free and go make money working at a hot dog stand or something.
He was killed by a soldier rather than police, but the shooting of Yasser Salihee in 2005 seems relevant.
Not really the same thing. Shot while driving towards a checkpoint alone* by a nervous infantryman in a war zone is a little different from being shot in the head by a cop while handcuffed in the back of a police car after being arrested under questionable pretenses in a supposedly peaceful country.
* Salihee himself had written about the danger of being a solitary man driving in a car in Iraq, not just from nervous US or Iraqi troops, but insurgents as well.
Just for the record - please show sources of "Ossetians shelling Georgian towns". It's a blatant lie.
Ossetians were forced to answer sniper fire from Georgians after August 4th. And the textbook way (I know, I'm a lieutenant of reserve) of suppressing snipers is to use heavy artillery.
A reserve lieutenant in what? The Waffen SS? The good ol' soviet Krasnaya Armiya? What insane textbook did you learn that shit from? Artillery as a response to sniper fire is an all-out war tactic. Dropping 105mm shells on civilian houses to suppress snipers sounds like the kind of crap old-school soviet monsters would order, right up the same alley with rolling tanks over Czechs who thought it might be nice to publish their own newspapers.
I'm a former staff sergeant with actual combat experience. The proper response to sniper fire is counter-sniper fire from your own snipers. I swear, you fucking lieutenants with your textbook knowledge and no practical field experience. You read something out of a goddamn book and you think you're hot shit, god's gift to "educated" warfare.
After watching my boss go through the weekly ritual of trying to get his gold wedding band back into round using channel-lock pliers, I opted for a plain titanium ring with a black diamond coating. Cheap, practical, and incredibly durable. Is there anything more nerdy than that?
There's also the issue of medical emergency. If your finger swells up abruptly, due to injury or allergy, the hospital will need to cut your ring off. They have tools to do this painlessly and quickly with silver/gold/platinum bands, but things get tricky with tougher stuff, like tool-grade steel, titanium, and, I'd imagine, iridium. What was a minor medical procedure is now a medical emergency requiring tools that the hospital may not have.
Not anymore. The proliferation of exotic material rings is such that just about every emergency room has something like this. The snip cutters' days are limited. They keep the old style ones, sure, but the first time you try to cut off a hard ring and snap the blade, that's one less cutter (which might get replaced), but more importantly, one more medical service worker who will always reach for the rotary cutter first every time a ring needs to be cut off.
O yeah, they're written by real humanoids! I used to collect mimeographed/xeroxed screeds that I'd find stapled to telephone poles when I was stationed in Texas in the pre-public internet days. This internet stuff doesn't have the same "single-spaced legal-sized margins packed with additional hand-written material" intensity that those old nail-ups had, but it's the same exact tone of hysterical righteousness. I've always wanted to write a program that'd generate this stuff, but I think it'd be pretty difficult to come up with the right mix of disjointedness and thematic coherence...
Even though it wasn't really an assertion, I actually did support it.
No you didn't. You just asserted it. There's a difference. The difference is supporting arguments.
It's what everyone wants, and, most likely, we aren't getting it because it costs more. Why? Because that's why we don't get most things. Companies are happy to provide anything you want, so long as it doesn't produce a net loss.
OK, great, we've got the basics of economics covered. Now, to get back to my original question, why do you assert that a wider catalog, a selection of formats, and/or quality music must necessarily cost more money. Simply claiming that it must, because if it didn't we'd see lower prices, is ridiculous.
Have you considered that it may not be possible to provide reasonable prices, choice of format, and decent range, and decent music all at the same time?
Which of those things are inherently mutually exclusive or inversely proportional? If you're going to argue a point, you should try to support your assertions SOMEHOW.
Please do me a favor, whenever you have a brilliant and hilarious comment like this one, please don't post it anonymously. I don't mod AC posts because I think it's kind of a waste. This post deserves a +5.
If it's a funny comment it might as well be anonymous, and you might as well go ahead and mod it funny, because "+1 funny" doesn't award karma points.
No, clearly it is you who is the butt-munch. I quote the OP:
"As a mech engineer student it disgusts me how little aptitude I am seeing from fellow students"
He may have been patting himself on the back to some degree, but he was also noting the distinct lack of practical mechanical aptitude amongst his school contemporaries.
Security nut for local network speaking. Since Security is the antithesis of Usability, you are not popular for doing your job. If you introduce a new security regime that makes things "hard" for people to do their jobs you are seen as a roadblock in the road of progress....Now I must get back to writing more policy.
The security policy folks at my organization have me doing development work on a machine so locked down that I can't even go into Admin Tools to reassign a drive letter for a USB drive that keeps colliding with the chosen drive letter mount point of the main network share. Before I was hired, the head of IT sent goons in to confiscate our department's server and put its contents on one of the centralized servers at the downtown office. Access is now consistently slow--- when it even works. To prove the size of his penis, he also took over the MS Access database built by my predecessor and changed all the passwords, including the one needed to add additional records. He now refuses to give us the password, nor have one of his people add records for us. As time goes on, this database becomes increasingly less useful to us. This is the application I'm currently "stealth coding" a replacement for.
At any rate, I think there are some IT security people who like their jobs, and some who don't. The former are probably more likely to be intelligent, know what they're doing, and don't try to make their job the validation for their life's worth. The latter are the ignoramus fucktards like the idiot little caeser where I work.
Well, its a free country, so feel free to not read any warning you like. But I like knowing that the power cable on my blender contains lead and that I should wash my hands after plugging it in and before touching food. I like knowing which products at Home Depot are more likely to cause respiratory problems. And yes, if a building I worked in contained excessive levels of some toxin, I would like to know about it.
You don't get that kind of information though. You get a generic Proposition 95 warning sign that basically says "something sold, kept, or used on these premises has been deemed a cancer risk by borderline hypochondriac bureaucrats at the state level." It's no fucking use at all.
This is what happens when you have nanny state liberals in office.
Let California be a lesson to the remaining 49 on how *NOT* to run a state.
Did you forget to back that up with some compelling statistics you're saving for later? Let's compare housing values in silicon valley vs. detroit to see if you're right.
That's just a comparison of the desirability of living in those places. No, it's more accurate to compare state government fiscal responsibility between California and Ohio. The fact that the economy in California continues to be able to support ruinously idiotic government that continually spends more than it takes in is part of what keeps the idiots in charge, in charge. If California were a marginal rust-belt state, it's residents would have thrown those morons in the legislature out long ago.
The claims about it being controlled demolition misses some points that are important....
One of the most important (which the video points out) is that a controlled demolition would have required explosives... which make a loud noise. Sufficient explosives to bring down WTC7 would have made a 130db noise, which nobody on the scene heard.
Who says? Your idiot tr00fer friends? Planes don't make a cartoon like plane-shaped hole when they hit a reinforced concrete building. Delicate structures like the wings and tail planes practically disintegrate. Hell, most of an aircraft is aluminum, and betrwwen fire and impact, not much remains intact. You wanna see the wreckage of AA flt 77? See here. It's right there, in the pentagon, in small, torn up, fire damaged pieces.
It could also be that anyone who has ever watched a Discovery Channel documentary on professional demolition of large buildings has been led to believe that safely and completely collapsing such a building requires weeks of planning and absolutely precise placement and detonation of lots of explosives.
Or you could just thow some kerosene on it.
You have a bizarre perception of the bounds of "safely". Also, the "controlled" appearance of the collapses is a illusion due to the enormity of the scale. The towers didn't fall over, but neither did they tumble straight down into two neat piles within the bounds of their own foundations. The debris field spread out of several blocks.
Ok so you you got a smaller mass ( the higher collapsing flours) falling over a bigger mass (the lower floors - which were also supported by the ground under them). So now my common sense is suppose to accepts that that smaller mass is able to cause the bigger mass the be pulverized without any resistance?
It didn't pulverize the ENTIRE REMAINING BUILDING simultaneously, genius. The falling, growing, and accelerating mass destroyed the remaining building one floor at a time.
So you're saying that examples of buildings falling over due to unintentional and intentional bottom floor support failure ((the Manila collapse video and the controlled demo photo) prove that internal fires across multiple floors don't make buildings collapse vertically? There's no point in arguing with logic like that.
YES THERE ARE ACCOUNTS OF PEOPLE NOT MAKING IT BACK. Some have died, but many others never make it back whole again. Part of their minds, their soul maybe, never reintegrate with our reality here.
Bullshit. Salivia Divinorum is so non-toxic it has no known LD50. All this woo-woo scary crap about souls "not making it back" is about as credible as a summer camp ghost story. As with any hallucinogen, care must be taken to use it in a controlled environment so as to minimize the unpleasantness and potential for accidents (i.e. don't drive, walk tightropes, or handle rattlesnakes while high) but there's no inherent danger to it.
Imagine, if you will, that you're ignorant. That shouldn't be too hard. Do you complain that your 3D graphics card just adds more 2D pixels, where it should instead show hundreds of 2D pictures next to each other in order to represent 3D space?
Imagine, if you will, that you're also ignorant (or perhaps a member of congress). That shouldn't be too hard...
Do you think that humans actually see in three dimensions? We don't. We see in two dimensions. The retina is a plane. By using two planar sensory arrays, our brains use parallax to calculate depth. This is 2D vision with depth cues. Actual 3D vision would have us able to see the back side of the TV while watching a show on the front. When we talk about "visualizing" dimensions beyond the third, we're not talking about actually seeing things with our eyes. We're talking about mental pictures. We can "visualize" the back of the TV because our sensory system is accustomed to using a series of depth-cued 2D images to construct a model of the 3D world. Pushing that up to four dimensions isn't even remotely the same as drawing a ray traced 2D picture on a fucking computer monitor.
What if they offered their services free of charge in exchange for the box on your grass?
Lifetime internet/VOD/cableTV/phone service in exchange for a box on my lawn? Fuck, I'd be out there pouring the ugly concrete pad myself. But see, that's the whole goddamn point isn't it. They're using municipal easements to crap up people's front yards with nether their consent, nor their input, nor any reimbursement.
They need service access so they can't be sealed solid - some kind of service hatch/door will be a must. Obviously they'd have seals, but these perish and water will get in.
Gimme a break. The phone companies have been burying copper POTS for 100 years without serious water damage issues. See, the trick is, you don't put the equipment rack directly under the manhole cover, and you include a sump pump. Granted, you clearly couldn't think of that, but I guarantee that AT&T has.
Slashdot Mirror
it also rhymes in both Latin and English
why would T-Mobile lie... if the FCC does verify thier results they could face some severe penalties (I would hope).
Come on, use your common sense. What basis would they have for fining T-Mobile? It's not illegal to make mistakes in non-mandatory testing, then email your mistaken results to a guy at the FCC expressing your concerns. The fact that it's impossible to prove malice when stupidity is an adequate explanation makes any law prohibiting bad test results highly unlikely.
I know there's a lot of problems involved with getting the public free access to journals, but google has a lot of clout and coudl make a big difference there.
The publishing of scientific journals is a business. No amount of "clout" is sufficient to convince the folks that run these journals that they should give it all away free and go make money working at a hot dog stand or something.
He was killed by a soldier rather than police, but the shooting of Yasser Salihee in 2005 seems relevant.
Not really the same thing. Shot while driving towards a checkpoint alone* by a nervous infantryman in a war zone is a little different from being shot in the head by a cop while handcuffed in the back of a police car after being arrested under questionable pretenses in a supposedly peaceful country.
* Salihee himself had written about the danger of being a solitary man driving in a car in Iraq, not just from nervous US or Iraqi troops, but insurgents as well.
Just for the record - please show sources of "Ossetians shelling Georgian towns". It's a blatant lie.
Ossetians were forced to answer sniper fire from Georgians after August 4th. And the textbook way (I know, I'm a lieutenant of reserve) of suppressing snipers is to use heavy artillery.
A reserve lieutenant in what? The Waffen SS? The good ol' soviet Krasnaya Armiya? What insane textbook did you learn that shit from? Artillery as a response to sniper fire is an all-out war tactic. Dropping 105mm shells on civilian houses to suppress snipers sounds like the kind of crap old-school soviet monsters would order, right up the same alley with rolling tanks over Czechs who thought it might be nice to publish their own newspapers.
I'm a former staff sergeant with actual combat experience. The proper response to sniper fire is counter-sniper fire from your own snipers. I swear, you fucking lieutenants with your textbook knowledge and no practical field experience. You read something out of a goddamn book and you think you're hot shit, god's gift to "educated" warfare.
After watching my boss go through the weekly ritual of trying to get his gold wedding band back into round using channel-lock pliers, I opted for a plain titanium ring with a black diamond coating. Cheap, practical, and incredibly durable. Is there anything more nerdy than that?
There's also the issue of medical emergency. If your finger swells up abruptly, due to injury or allergy, the hospital will need to cut your ring off. They have tools to do this painlessly and quickly with silver/gold/platinum bands, but things get tricky with tougher stuff, like tool-grade steel, titanium, and, I'd imagine, iridium. What was a minor medical procedure is now a medical emergency requiring tools that the hospital may not have.
Not anymore. The proliferation of exotic material rings is such that just about every emergency room has something like this. The snip cutters' days are limited. They keep the old style ones, sure, but the first time you try to cut off a hard ring and snap the blade, that's one less cutter (which might get replaced), but more importantly, one more medical service worker who will always reach for the rotary cutter first every time a ring needs to be cut off.
O yeah, they're written by real humanoids! I used to collect mimeographed/xeroxed screeds that I'd find stapled to telephone poles when I was stationed in Texas in the pre-public internet days. This internet stuff doesn't have the same "single-spaced legal-sized margins packed with additional hand-written material" intensity that those old nail-ups had, but it's the same exact tone of hysterical righteousness. I've always wanted to write a program that'd generate this stuff, but I think it'd be pretty difficult to come up with the right mix of disjointedness and thematic coherence...
Even though it wasn't really an assertion, I actually did support it.
No you didn't. You just asserted it. There's a difference. The difference is supporting arguments.
It's what everyone wants, and, most likely, we aren't getting it because it costs more. Why? Because that's why we don't get most things. Companies are happy to provide anything you want, so long as it doesn't produce a net loss.
OK, great, we've got the basics of economics covered. Now, to get back to my original question, why do you assert that a wider catalog, a selection of formats, and/or quality music must necessarily cost more money. Simply claiming that it must, because if it didn't we'd see lower prices, is ridiculous.
Have you considered that it may not be possible to provide reasonable prices, choice of format, and decent range, and decent music all at the same time?
Which of those things are inherently mutually exclusive or inversely proportional? If you're going to argue a point, you should try to support your assertions SOMEHOW.
Please do me a favor, whenever you have a brilliant and hilarious comment like this one, please don't post it anonymously. I don't mod AC posts because I think it's kind of a waste. This post deserves a +5.
If it's a funny comment it might as well be anonymous, and you might as well go ahead and mod it funny, because "+1 funny" doesn't award karma points.
No, clearly it is you who is the butt-munch. I quote the OP:
"As a mech engineer student it disgusts me how little aptitude I am seeing from fellow students"
He may have been patting himself on the back to some degree, but he was also noting the distinct lack of practical mechanical aptitude amongst his school contemporaries.
Security nut for local network speaking. Since Security is the antithesis of Usability, you are not popular for doing your job. If you introduce a new security regime that makes things "hard" for people to do their jobs you are seen as a roadblock in the road of progress....Now I must get back to writing more policy.
The security policy folks at my organization have me doing development work on a machine so locked down that I can't even go into Admin Tools to reassign a drive letter for a USB drive that keeps colliding with the chosen drive letter mount point of the main network share. Before I was hired, the head of IT sent goons in to confiscate our department's server and put its contents on one of the centralized servers at the downtown office. Access is now consistently slow--- when it even works. To prove the size of his penis, he also took over the MS Access database built by my predecessor and changed all the passwords, including the one needed to add additional records. He now refuses to give us the password, nor have one of his people add records for us. As time goes on, this database becomes increasingly less useful to us. This is the application I'm currently "stealth coding" a replacement for.
At any rate, I think there are some IT security people who like their jobs, and some who don't. The former are probably more likely to be intelligent, know what they're doing, and don't try to make their job the validation for their life's worth. The latter are the ignoramus fucktards like the idiot little caeser where I work.
Well, its a free country, so feel free to not read any warning you like. But I like knowing that the power cable on my blender contains lead and that I should wash my hands after plugging it in and before touching food. I like knowing which products at Home Depot are more likely to cause respiratory problems. And yes, if a building I worked in contained excessive levels of some toxin, I would like to know about it.
You don't get that kind of information though. You get a generic Proposition 95 warning sign that basically says "something sold, kept, or used on these premises has been deemed a cancer risk by borderline hypochondriac bureaucrats at the state level." It's no fucking use at all.
Which is why it has consistently had the strongest economy in the nation?
As a life-long resident of California, I can guarantee that the success of the economy is in spite of the state government, not because of it.
Did you forget to back that up with some compelling statistics you're saving for later? Let's compare housing values in silicon valley vs. detroit to see if you're right.
That's just a comparison of the desirability of living in those places. No, it's more accurate to compare state government fiscal responsibility between California and Ohio. The fact that the economy in California continues to be able to support ruinously idiotic government that continually spends more than it takes in is part of what keeps the idiots in charge, in charge. If California were a marginal rust-belt state, it's residents would have thrown those morons in the legislature out long ago.
The claims about it being controlled demolition misses some points that are important....
One of the most important (which the video points out) is that a controlled demolition would have required explosives... which make a loud noise. Sufficient explosives to bring down WTC7 would have made a 130db noise, which nobody on the scene heard.
...since at the Pentagon they cannot find:
The wings Any of the seats The tail ...
Who says? Your idiot tr00fer friends? Planes don't make a cartoon like plane-shaped hole when they hit a reinforced concrete building. Delicate structures like the wings and tail planes practically disintegrate. Hell, most of an aircraft is aluminum, and betrwwen fire and impact, not much remains intact. You wanna see the wreckage of AA flt 77? See here. It's right there, in the pentagon, in small, torn up, fire damaged pieces.
Idiot.
It could also be that anyone who has ever watched a Discovery Channel documentary on professional demolition of large buildings has been led to believe that safely and completely collapsing such a building requires weeks of planning and absolutely precise placement and detonation of lots of explosives.
Or you could just thow some kerosene on it.
You have a bizarre perception of the bounds of "safely". Also, the "controlled" appearance of the collapses is a illusion due to the enormity of the scale. The towers didn't fall over, but neither did they tumble straight down into two neat piles within the bounds of their own foundations. The debris field spread out of several blocks.
Ok so you you got a smaller mass ( the higher collapsing flours) falling over a bigger mass (the lower floors - which were also supported by the ground under them). So now my common sense is suppose to accepts that that smaller mass is able to cause the bigger mass the be pulverized without any resistance?
It didn't pulverize the ENTIRE REMAINING BUILDING simultaneously, genius. The falling, growing, and accelerating mass destroyed the remaining building one floor at a time.
So you're saying that examples of buildings falling over due to unintentional and intentional bottom floor support failure ((the Manila collapse video and the controlled demo photo) prove that internal fires across multiple floors don't make buildings collapse vertically? There's no point in arguing with logic like that.
YES THERE ARE ACCOUNTS OF PEOPLE NOT MAKING IT BACK. Some have died, but many others never make it back whole again. Part of their minds, their soul maybe, never reintegrate with our reality here.
Bullshit. Salivia Divinorum is so non-toxic it has no known LD50. All this woo-woo scary crap about souls "not making it back" is about as credible as a summer camp ghost story. As with any hallucinogen, care must be taken to use it in a controlled environment so as to minimize the unpleasantness and potential for accidents (i.e. don't drive, walk tightropes, or handle rattlesnakes while high) but there's no inherent danger to it.
Imagine, if you will, that you're ignorant. That shouldn't be too hard. Do you complain that your 3D graphics card just adds more 2D pixels, where it should instead show hundreds of 2D pictures next to each other in order to represent 3D space?
Imagine, if you will, that you're also ignorant (or perhaps a member of congress). That shouldn't be too hard...
Do you think that humans actually see in three dimensions? We don't. We see in two dimensions. The retina is a plane. By using two planar sensory arrays, our brains use parallax to calculate depth. This is 2D vision with depth cues. Actual 3D vision would have us able to see the back side of the TV while watching a show on the front. When we talk about "visualizing" dimensions beyond the third, we're not talking about actually seeing things with our eyes. We're talking about mental pictures. We can "visualize" the back of the TV because our sensory system is accustomed to using a series of depth-cued 2D images to construct a model of the 3D world. Pushing that up to four dimensions isn't even remotely the same as drawing a ray traced 2D picture on a fucking computer monitor.
What if they offered their services free of charge in exchange for the box on your grass?
Lifetime internet/VOD/cableTV/phone service in exchange for a box on my lawn? Fuck, I'd be out there pouring the ugly concrete pad myself. But see, that's the whole goddamn point isn't it. They're using municipal easements to crap up people's front yards with nether their consent, nor their input, nor any reimbursement.
They need service access so they can't be sealed solid - some kind of service hatch/door will be a must. Obviously they'd have seals, but these perish and water will get in.
Gimme a break. The phone companies have been burying copper POTS for 100 years without serious water damage issues. See, the trick is, you don't put the equipment rack directly under the manhole cover, and you include a sump pump. Granted, you clearly couldn't think of that, but I guarantee that AT&T has.