Is this what people want? I mean, I know a lot of people like their wireless ones... but I prefer wired. I hate charging the stupid things. I hate pairing the stupid things. I like just being able plug them in and go. I like that by being plugged in the headphones stay with the phone; and don't get left behind. I like that they are cheap and easy to replace.
Plus I still occasionally connect it to aux inputs and such in cars. My daughter uses headphones with her iphone all the time. Everyone i know has wired headsets and headphones... only a handful prefer wireless/bluetooth solutions.
Thus will you be sucked into the hole that is the apple ecosystem, which can no longer offer innovation and so will remove the hole forcing you to buy all new stuff if you want to play their game.
Well the last idiot that got voted in (not once but twice) ended up starting an illegal and unjustified war in Iraq, the results of which the we and the rest of the developed world are still cleaning up after.
Typically American, to look only at your own country's law.
"The then United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annan said in September 2004 that: "From our point of view and the UN Charter point of view, it [the war] was illegal." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Trump may come in on a wave of fear and flag waving but his power will be limited by his office. I predict that once he is in office he will accomplish little to nothing because the other branches will reign him in. I predict that trump will be a one time president who's term in office will be little more than a foot note on history.
Well the last idiot that got voted in (not once but twice) ended up starting an illegal and unjustified war in Iraq, the results of which the we and the rest of the developed world are still cleaning up after.
So yes, I am afraid of this walking mouth who says anything that anyone wants to hear at that moment and who has run into the ground at lest half of every business in his life, full financial support from his father notwithstanding. Times Top 10 Trump Failures http://content.time.com/time/s...
He's a gambler who gambles with other people's money - and as a president he will gamble not only with our money but with every aspect of our lives.
If you think you can believe anything this man says - or count on him to do ANYTHING he says that he's going to do, then you deserve the snake oil you're buying.
As far as Bernie, he's not quite out of the game yet but the more people say things like "doesn't have a real shot' the worse it gets for him. He's an underdog but he's not out of the race.
Value of something is based on perception of value, not on cost of business.
As we've been short of car analogies on/. lately: If I own an old but in very good condition classic car, that car is worth more now due to people's perception of it's value, than it was when it was new.
So like it or not, products are going to be priced based on what people are willing to pay - and that includes digital products.
You've just reiterated my point. The cost to the consumer must take production cost into account, anything above that is perception of value. This is exactly why you see a 200 page hardbound story book sell for $35, while the 200 page hardbound art book for Capcom goes for $60. Piggybacking on your car analogy, look at some book that's out of print, such as the original japanese prints of Akira... those are now collectors items. Though we are still talking about physical objects.
Once you make the jump to digital, you have no production cost and rarity is never an issue. Therefore you will likely never see some eBay sale of "ULTRA-RARE eBook!". Sure, prices are going to be set on what publishers believe people are willing to pay, and that depends on the content and creator of the media. I'd expect to pay a little more for a known author like Stephen King versus some no-namers first book. What publishers haven't realized is that they can widen their customer base by chopping a few dollars off the price. Why would I spend $60 to bring the family to a movie theater when we can rent a movie to watch at home for $5?
Maybe we're saying the same thing, I'm not sure.
I'm saying that price has nothing to do with cost of production today, and never will, because people are still willing to pay to go to the theater.
You may not but there are those who do, else movie theaters wouldn't be in business, which is why things are priced the way they're priced.
"Apple is just an example.My mom's ipad nags her to upgrade every single day. Where are the stories that apple is pushing unwanted upgrades with no way to shut them off?"
I get nagged every few days to upgrade my iphone and a simple touch of the screen puts the annoying box away.
I clicked yes once by mistake and got a confirmation box, where I clicked no.
There was no automatic installing at random hours. There was no installing anyway when I clicked anywhere other than 'no'. When I clicked yes by mistake, a verification gave me the chance to say 'no' again.
So no, it isn't the same thing that Windows 10 (aka Windows Shaft) has been doing to users - including my father in law the doctor who clicked on the x and had his system upgraded anyway, resulting in his medical applications no longer running.
Facebook and Microsoft are laying a massive cable across the middle of the Atlantic. Dubbed MAREA—Spanish for “tide”—this giant underwater cable will stretch from Virginia to Bilbao, Spain, shuttling digital data across 6,600 kilometers of ocean. Providing up to 160 terabits per second of bandwidth—about 16 million times the bandwidth of your home Internet connection—it will allow the two tech titans to more efficiently move enormous amounts of information between the many computer data centers and network hubs that underpin their popular online services. “If you look at the cable systems across the Atlantic, a majority land in the Northeast somewhere,” says Najam Ahmad, Facebook’s vice president of network engineering. “This gives us so many more options.” The project expands the increasingly enormous computer networks now being built by the giants of the Internet as they assume a role traditionally played by telecom companies. Google has invested in two undersea cables that stretch from the West Coast of the United States to Japan, another that connects the US and Brazil, and a network of cables that connect various parts of Asia. Rather than just leasing bandwidth on undersea cables and terrestrial connections operated by telecoms, the likes of Google, Facebook, and Microsoft are building their own networking infrastructure both on land and across the seas. The fact that these Internet giants are laying their own cables—at their own expense—shows just how much data these giants must move. Consider the services they run: Google offers its eponymous search engine, Gmail, Google Docs, Google Maps, and so many more. Microsoft offers Bing, Office365, and its Azure cloud services. Facebook has its social network along with Facebook Messenger, WhatsApp, and Instagram. The data moved by just a few online giants now dwarfs that of most others, so much so that, according to telecommunications research firm Telegeography, more than two thirds of the digital data moving across the Atlantic is traveling on private networks—namely networks operated by the likes of Google, Microsoft, and Facebook. That’s up from 10 percent just a few years ago. “It’s a tremendous change,” says Telegeography analyst Tim Stronge. With so much data flowing across their systems, these companies are scrambling to build new infrastructure. In addition to building its own undersea cable, Facebook is buying up what’s called “dark fiber”—unused terrestrial cables—so that it can control how its data moves from place to place and move it more efficiently. According to Ahmad, Facebook is now using dark fiber “pretty much everywhere” as the company expands its network into new regions. And the same likely goes for Google and Microsoft. “We’re starting to see more of the large Internet content providers looking to build more of their own networks—whether they are leasing dark fiber or laying down new cables to build new routes,” says Michael Murphy, president and CEO of telecom consultancy NEF. “It makes sense.” In the past, Facebook has joined consortia that operate other undersea cables—groups typically made up of telecom companies—but this project is different. Rather than letting a group build and control the cable—that is, rather than sharing lines with others—the company is laying its own dedicated lines and it has the power to use them however it sees fit. In the end, this allows Facebook to expand its online empire much quicker than in the past. “The consortium model is much slower than what we would like,” Ahmad says. Much the same applies to Microsoft. That said, the two Internet giants aren’t abandoning the telecom industry altogether. The pair have brought in another partner: Telxius, a subsidiary of Spanish telecom Telefónica. Telxius will operate the cable, and Facebook and Microsoft services w
The obvious answer to this problem is to provide easy, inexpensive access to the content that people want. It's possible to make money through quantity when the cost to reproduce something is negligible. If it cost $0.10 for the CD, plus $0.15 for shipping, plus $4 for design/print/publish... I would expect the CD to cost over $4 just for that small portion of profit that goes to the artist. With digital distribution, there's no "shipping", no "printing", and no physical media to account for. Make the e-book some set fraction of the paper price. Hardback is $50? PDF is 10 (or less). I don't think any artist or author would complain about "What do you mean my stuff was bought by 3 million people?" instead of "10,000 copies sold!" The only rationale I can see for keeping e-book prices equivalent to paper is to either keep printing presses operational, or (more likely) to milk as much money from the consumer as they think they can get away with.
Value of something is based on perception of value, not on cost of business.
As we've been short of car analogies on/. lately: If I own an old but in very good condition classic car, that car is worth more now due to people's perception of it's value, than it was when it was new.
So like it or not, products are going to be priced based on what people are willing to pay - and that includes digital products.
Except we aren't talking about theft here. We're talking about the resale of something that should be treated as property. It really is a double standard you're pushing there because an individual end user license is no more less of a fiction than an actual copyright. If you can't own one, then you shouldn't be able to own the other.
The idea of being able to own and transfer partial rights to something is actually terribly mundane outside of the area of entertainment products.
I should be able to transfer the ownership of my iTunes copy of Age of Ultron just as easily as I can transfer ownership of the physical copy.
Of course this triggers an interesting engineering problem but it doesn't nullify the basic idea of personal property.
Something is not personal property if you're renting it.
A government agency should right up a generic TOS, with appropriate safeguards for consumer rights as well as for the corporation. Even include a reasonable requirement for arbitration (one that works both ways - they can't sue you if you can't sue them).
Then we could say that you can only get consent by click if the TOS was approved by the agency. Otherwise, you would need a real, actual ink on paper signature to get consent for TOS.
Nice compromise - corps can still create bullshit TOS, but they need to get you to sign paper to use that.
Arbitration is much better for suppliers than for consumers especially where it protects said suppliers from class action suits.
These are the average 33 apps the average citizen has installed. You need to know ALL OF THEM as they are not perfectly identical, and you need to somehow remember which T&C is connected to which app.
I summarize all Ts&Cs the same way, so I only have to keep one concept in mind:
- You the consumer sign away all rights to anything and we the supplier own whatever data comes within grabbing reach of our app. No part of this Ts&Cs can be invalidated even if the great majority of it is illegal horseshit. Sign here:
If anything is less evil than this, great - if not then I will never be unhappily surprised.
CPA and former auditor here. I'd be shocked if a publicly traded company was actually able to materially misstate cash. It's one of the easiest balance sheet items to audit, and publicly traded companies are required to be audited. You literally pull the bank statements as of the end of the year. The cash is either there or it isn't. There are a few reconciling items such as deposits in transit or checks that haven't cleared, but it's typically not a lot. I haven't read Anonymous' report, but it doesn't pass the smell test.
Does it have to?
What matters to the market is what the market thinks others in the market will do, which often has nothing to do with reality.
The basic problem with McDonalds is that it's the same generic pseudo-food everywhere.
This generic pseudo-food concept is, actually, once of the keys to their success.
McDonalds' marketers found that a *lot* people often want to go to a place where they know exactly what they're going to get (i.e. familiarity and uniformity) and they've capitalized on that. A place where you order "X" and you'll get "X" just like you do in the next town over, or the next country over.
One time when we were tired and wrecked from traveling we went to a McDonalds in Vietnam....and we got *exactly* the same familiar food we'd have gotten in Seattle or Denver or Memphis. Yes, it was shit food but it was familiar and that was a kind of comfort all in itself.
McDonalds knows this, they understand this bit of food psychology, and that's why they're soooooooo big on everything being exactly the same in every restaurant (food-wise, anyway). You go there and you know what you're gonna get, no surprises. It's one of their keys to success.
Well I hope he has siblings then, as otherwise it must be a pretty lonely time.
He does, but he also plays with friends. Either they come here, or they play at the bounce house (a local business that has way cool massive bounce toys), or we take them to the mall (which has a kids play area), etc.
My point is that he doesn't play with other kids in their homes without our supervision.
As far as "forbidden", keep in mind that my son already has his own rifle and I've let him shoot my handgun as well. These are not "forbidden", they are just serious things that require a serious approach and are not toys.
Even my 5 year old has been able to shoot his brothers rifle once (with Dad's help of course), it takes the fear and mystery out of it. It also allows me to explain the difference between video games and real life, because I can't put the watermelon back together again after we destroy it with a gun.
You do realize that is an even bigger waste, as it isn't hard to rent a small jet attack the pilot after take off and crash it into a building. Private planes don't have TSA screeners.
a gulf jet full of fuel will do a number on a skyscraper.
As of today, they aren't doing anything illegal. There's been no charge, nothing filed in court, no judgment made. But that's OK, go ahead and jump to conclusions...
No and yes.
They haven't been charged so far but that doesn't mean that what they've been doing is legal, thus the investigation to determine if what they've done is legal or not.
Slashdot Mirror
"and the headphone jack will be removed"
Is this what people want? I mean, I know a lot of people like their wireless ones... but I prefer wired. I hate charging the stupid things. I hate pairing the stupid things. I like just being able plug them in and go. I like that by being plugged in the headphones stay with the phone; and don't get left behind. I like that they are cheap and easy to replace.
Plus I still occasionally connect it to aux inputs and such in cars. My daughter uses headphones with her iphone all the time. Everyone i know has wired headsets and headphones... only a handful prefer wireless/bluetooth solutions.
Thus will you be sucked into the hole that is the apple ecosystem, which can no longer offer innovation and so will remove the hole forcing you to buy all new stuff if you want to play their game.
It's debatable whether or not action against Iraq was unjustified, but you can't seriously claim it was illegal. The Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002 passed both the House (296 - 133) and Senate (77 - 23) with bi-partisan support.
Typically American, to look only at your own country's law.
"The then United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annan said in September 2004 that: "From our point of view and the UN Charter point of view, it [the war] was illegal."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
So no, it was illegal.
Trump may come in on a wave of fear and flag waving but his power will be limited by his office. I predict that once he is in office he will accomplish little to nothing because the other branches will reign him in. I predict that trump will be a one time president who's term in office will be little more than a foot note on history.
Well the last idiot that got voted in (not once but twice) ended up starting an illegal and unjustified war in Iraq, the results of which the we and the rest of the developed world are still cleaning up after.
So yes, I am afraid of this walking mouth who says anything that anyone wants to hear at that moment and who has run into the ground at lest half of every business in his life, full financial support from his father notwithstanding.
Times Top 10 Trump Failures http://content.time.com/time/s...
He's a gambler who gambles with other people's money - and as a president he will gamble not only with our money but with every aspect of our lives.
Oddly enough, Trump is the only front-runner clearly and vehemently opposed to the current H1B abuse that's going on right now.
Trump flip flops on every issue out there except for his believe that he is THE BEST.
Here is is flip flopping on H1B
http://uk.businessinsider.com/...
If you think you can believe anything this man says - or count on him to do ANYTHING he says that he's going to do, then you deserve the snake oil you're buying.
As far as Bernie, he's not quite out of the game yet but the more people say things like "doesn't have a real shot' the worse it gets for him. He's an underdog but he's not out of the race.
Daddy Trump bought $3M in poker chips to bail out The Donald when a bond payment was due.
After reading this, I actually went looking to see what he got arrested for...
Going to get a coffee now.
""This is the most fascinating thing I've heard in this courtroom in a long time," Pooler said on Friday.
This just clicked with me in the way that judges are portrayed in The Good Wife.
Are judges really as bored, biased and even sometimes childish as so portrayed?
No, it really isn't the same thing at all.
On the other hand, Microsoft makes it easy to roll back to your existing version of windows after you update; good luck doing that with Apple.
Fair point but I still don't class it up there with surprise unstoppable upgrades of the OS.
If Apple does go that route then I'll be screaming right along with the rest.
Okay thanks
Value of something is based on perception of value, not on cost of business.
As we've been short of car analogies on /. lately:
If I own an old but in very good condition classic car, that car is worth more now due to people's perception of it's value, than it was when it was new.
So like it or not, products are going to be priced based on what people are willing to pay - and that includes digital products.
You've just reiterated my point. The cost to the consumer must take production cost into account, anything above that is perception of value. This is exactly why you see a 200 page hardbound story book sell for $35, while the 200 page hardbound art book for Capcom goes for $60. Piggybacking on your car analogy, look at some book that's out of print, such as the original japanese prints of Akira... those are now collectors items. Though we are still talking about physical objects.
Once you make the jump to digital, you have no production cost and rarity is never an issue. Therefore you will likely never see some eBay sale of "ULTRA-RARE eBook!". Sure, prices are going to be set on what publishers believe people are willing to pay, and that depends on the content and creator of the media. I'd expect to pay a little more for a known author like Stephen King versus some no-namers first book. What publishers haven't realized is that they can widen their customer base by chopping a few dollars off the price. Why would I spend $60 to bring the family to a movie theater when we can rent a movie to watch at home for $5?
Maybe we're saying the same thing, I'm not sure.
I'm saying that price has nothing to do with cost of production today, and never will, because people are still willing to pay to go to the theater.
You may not but there are those who do, else movie theaters wouldn't be in business, which is why things are priced the way they're priced.
Doesn't this disable all Windows updates, including those one might wish to install?
This was their only functioning workstation
This is why Microsoft doesn't give a shit if your customer is angry or not.
"Apple is just an example.My mom's ipad nags her to upgrade every single day. Where are the stories that apple is pushing unwanted upgrades with no way to shut them off?"
I get nagged every few days to upgrade my iphone and a simple touch of the screen puts the annoying box away.
I clicked yes once by mistake and got a confirmation box, where I clicked no.
There was no automatic installing at random hours.
There was no installing anyway when I clicked anywhere other than 'no'.
When I clicked yes by mistake, a verification gave me the chance to say 'no' again.
So no, it isn't the same thing that Windows 10 (aka Windows Shaft) has been doing to users - including my father in law the doctor who clicked on the x and had his system upgraded anyway, resulting in his medical applications no longer running.
No, it really isn't the same thing at all.
To the submitter: Please do not put links to a paywall site because it is absolutely fucking useless for the vast majority of people here.
"You've reached a subscriber-only article."
They didn't do the needful.
No problem.
Facebook and Microsoft are laying a massive cable across the middle of the Atlantic.
Dubbed MAREA—Spanish for “tide”—this giant underwater cable will stretch from Virginia to Bilbao, Spain, shuttling digital data across 6,600 kilometers of ocean. Providing up to 160 terabits per second of bandwidth—about 16 million times the bandwidth of your home Internet connection—it will allow the two tech titans to more efficiently move enormous amounts of information between the many computer data centers and network hubs that underpin their popular online services.
“If you look at the cable systems across the Atlantic, a majority land in the Northeast somewhere,” says Najam Ahmad, Facebook’s vice president of network engineering. “This gives us so many more options.”
The project expands the increasingly enormous computer networks now being built by the giants of the Internet as they assume a role traditionally played by telecom companies. Google has invested in two undersea cables that stretch from the West Coast of the United States to Japan, another that connects the US and Brazil, and a network of cables that connect various parts of Asia. Rather than just leasing bandwidth on undersea cables and terrestrial connections operated by telecoms, the likes of Google, Facebook, and Microsoft are building their own networking infrastructure both on land and across the seas.
The fact that these Internet giants are laying their own cables—at their own expense—shows just how much data these giants must move. Consider the services they run: Google offers its eponymous search engine, Gmail, Google Docs, Google Maps, and so many more. Microsoft offers Bing, Office365, and its Azure cloud services. Facebook has its social network along with Facebook Messenger, WhatsApp, and Instagram. The data moved by just a few online giants now dwarfs that of most others, so much so that, according to telecommunications research firm Telegeography, more than two thirds of the digital data moving across the Atlantic is traveling on private networks—namely networks operated by the likes of Google, Microsoft, and Facebook. That’s up from 10 percent just a few years ago. “It’s a tremendous change,” says Telegeography analyst Tim Stronge.
With so much data flowing across their systems, these companies are scrambling to build new infrastructure. In addition to building its own undersea cable, Facebook is buying up what’s called “dark fiber”—unused terrestrial cables—so that it can control how its data moves from place to place and move it more efficiently. According to Ahmad, Facebook is now using dark fiber “pretty much everywhere” as the company expands its network into new regions. And the same likely goes for Google and Microsoft.
“We’re starting to see more of the large Internet content providers looking to build more of their own networks—whether they are leasing dark fiber or laying down new cables to build new routes,” says Michael Murphy, president and CEO of telecom consultancy NEF. “It makes sense.”
In the past, Facebook has joined consortia that operate other undersea cables—groups typically made up of telecom companies—but this project is different. Rather than letting a group build and control the cable—that is, rather than sharing lines with others—the company is laying its own dedicated lines and it has the power to use them however it sees fit. In the end, this allows Facebook to expand its online empire much quicker than in the past. “The consortium model is much slower than what we would like,” Ahmad says.
Much the same applies to Microsoft. That said, the two Internet giants aren’t abandoning the telecom industry altogether. The pair have brought in another partner: Telxius, a subsidiary of Spanish telecom Telefónica. Telxius will operate the cable, and Facebook and Microsoft services w
The obvious answer to this problem is to provide easy, inexpensive access to the content that people want. It's possible to make money through quantity when the cost to reproduce something is negligible.
If it cost $0.10 for the CD, plus $0.15 for shipping, plus $4 for design/print/publish... I would expect the CD to cost over $4 just for that small portion of profit that goes to the artist.
With digital distribution, there's no "shipping", no "printing", and no physical media to account for. Make the e-book some set fraction of the paper price. Hardback is $50? PDF is 10 (or less). I don't think any artist or author would complain about "What do you mean my stuff was bought by 3 million people?" instead of "10,000 copies sold!"
The only rationale I can see for keeping e-book prices equivalent to paper is to either keep printing presses operational, or (more likely) to milk as much money from the consumer as they think they can get away with.
Value of something is based on perception of value, not on cost of business.
As we've been short of car analogies on /. lately:
If I own an old but in very good condition classic car, that car is worth more now due to people's perception of it's value, than it was when it was new.
So like it or not, products are going to be priced based on what people are willing to pay - and that includes digital products.
Except we aren't talking about theft here. We're talking about the resale of something that should be treated as property. It really is a double standard you're pushing there because an individual end user license is no more less of a fiction than an actual copyright. If you can't own one, then you shouldn't be able to own the other.
The idea of being able to own and transfer partial rights to something is actually terribly mundane outside of the area of entertainment products.
I should be able to transfer the ownership of my iTunes copy of Age of Ultron just as easily as I can transfer ownership of the physical copy.
Of course this triggers an interesting engineering problem but it doesn't nullify the basic idea of personal property.
Something is not personal property if you're renting it.
A government agency should right up a generic TOS, with appropriate safeguards for consumer rights as well as for the corporation. Even include a reasonable requirement for arbitration (one that works both ways - they can't sue you if you can't sue them).
Then we could say that you can only get consent by click if the TOS was approved by the agency. Otherwise, you would need a real, actual ink on paper signature to get consent for TOS.
Nice compromise - corps can still create bullshit TOS, but they need to get you to sign paper to use that.
Arbitration is much better for suppliers than for consumers especially where it protects said suppliers from class action suits.
You are missing the point.
These are the average 33 apps the average citizen has installed. You need to know ALL OF THEM as they are not perfectly identical, and you need to somehow remember which T&C is connected to which app.
I summarize all Ts&Cs the same way, so I only have to keep one concept in mind:
- You the consumer sign away all rights to anything and we the supplier own whatever data comes within grabbing reach of our app. No part of this Ts&Cs can be invalidated even if the great majority of it is illegal horseshit. Sign here:
If anything is less evil than this, great - if not then I will never be unhappily surprised.
CPA and former auditor here. I'd be shocked if a publicly traded company was actually able to materially misstate cash. It's one of the easiest balance sheet items to audit, and publicly traded companies are required to be audited. You literally pull the bank statements as of the end of the year. The cash is either there or it isn't. There are a few reconciling items such as deposits in transit or checks that haven't cleared, but it's typically not a lot. I haven't read Anonymous' report, but it doesn't pass the smell test.
Does it have to?
What matters to the market is what the market thinks others in the market will do, which often has nothing to do with reality.
Time to tax the sale, use and maintenance of robots to support the minimum basic income then.
Goes doubly for companies that shift their profits out of the country to avoid paying tax.
The basic problem with McDonalds is that it's the same generic pseudo-food everywhere.
This generic pseudo-food concept is, actually, once of the keys to their success.
McDonalds' marketers found that a *lot* people often want to go to a place where they know exactly what they're going to get (i.e. familiarity and uniformity) and they've capitalized on that. A place where you order "X" and you'll get "X" just like you do in the next town over, or the next country over.
One time when we were tired and wrecked from traveling we went to a McDonalds in Vietnam....and we got *exactly* the same familiar food we'd have gotten in Seattle or Denver or Memphis. Yes, it was shit food but it was familiar and that was a kind of comfort all in itself.
McDonalds knows this, they understand this bit of food psychology, and that's why they're soooooooo big on everything being exactly the same in every restaurant (food-wise, anyway). You go there and you know what you're gonna get, no surprises. It's one of their keys to success.
Inaccurate - you will not get the same thing everywhere:
http://www.foodnetwork.co.uk/a...
India's a good example, as they don't sell anything with beef :
http://www.mcdonaldsindia.com/
Well I hope he has siblings then, as otherwise it must be a pretty lonely time.
He does, but he also plays with friends. Either they come here, or they play at the bounce house (a local business that has way cool massive bounce toys), or we take them to the mall (which has a kids play area), etc.
My point is that he doesn't play with other kids in their homes without our supervision.
As far as "forbidden", keep in mind that my son already has his own rifle and I've let him shoot my handgun as well. These are not "forbidden", they are just serious things that require a serious approach and are not toys.
Even my 5 year old has been able to shoot his brothers rifle once (with Dad's help of course), it takes the fear and mystery out of it. It also allows me to explain the difference between video games and real life, because I can't put the watermelon back together again after we destroy it with a gun.
Sounds reasonable to me.
Cheers
You do realize that is an even bigger waste, as it isn't hard to rent a small jet attack the pilot after take off and crash it into a building. Private planes don't have TSA screeners.
a gulf jet full of fuel will do a number on a skyscraper.
Word
As of today, they aren't doing anything illegal. There's been no charge, nothing filed in court, no judgment made. But that's OK, go ahead and jump to conclusions...
No and yes.
They haven't been charged so far but that doesn't mean that what they've been doing is legal, thus the investigation to determine if what they've done is legal or not.