"Marissa Taylor says the retail chains' worst nightmare are consumers who come in to take a look at merchandise in-store, but use smartphone apps to shop for cheaper prices online.
This is no different from how I shop for groceries: look at the ads in the Sunday paper, find the coupons, shop for X and one store, Y at another, Z at the third.
Welcome to the 21st century. Get used to it, Target.
Freedom seems to be a lot like pr0n. You know it when you see it, hard to define otherwise.
What I Want My Society To Be
Government has the job of providing a regulated market. Such regulations are very minimal - the very least that we can have and still have a functioning market. As much as possible is done by private organizations. As much as possible is governed locally.
That's it. The rest is details worked out by individuals acting in their own self-interest.
One fellow attempted to detonate the explosives in his shoes. The other the explosives in his underpants. The former didn't blow up so much as set his shoes on fire.
Which is, yes, laughable. These guys are clearly a) zealots and b) ignorant. But they were serious attempts to do a lot of damage and kill people, even if the execution left a lot to be desired.
Congress decided it was reasonable, so how is it a violation?
I think the Supreme Court, not Congress, is in charge of interpreting the law. But just because _they_ say something is right, does not make it forever inviolate. Once upon a time we thought chattel slavery was icky, but legally okay. Later we changed our minds about that.
Times and morals change. Maybe someday we'll decide to live up to the meaning of the Constitution and be a free people.
Don't (he smiled) get me started on the death penalty. I have only a few qualms about it in theory: in practice we seem to spend a lot of time killing people who are innocent, were talked into a confession, or were just plain inconvenient to authority.
Well, we're talking about TSA and airport screening. Do these bombing attempts have anything to do with that?
IIRC at least two of them involved guys walking explosives, or components of explosives, through the checkpoint.
What exactly is your specific argument against airport screenings?
They are ineffective at preventing people from doing harm to others with, or aboard airliners. Incompetently implemented. Violation of the fourth amendment. Granting increased powers to the state.
If it was an effective deterrent there would not have been bombing attempts since 9/11. Also - is the deterrent worth the loss of civil liberties, the growth of yet another federal agency, increase in police powers? Some of us don't think so.
I am not sure how one takes a person quietly into custody: do you mean that they do not have a public hearing, sequester them in jail without recourse to attorneys and deprive an accused person of their civil liberties?
The shoe check is because Richard Reid attempted to ignite explosives in his shoes on a plane December 12, 2001.
A quick reality check demonstrates your two possibilities are false: people have smuggled bombs and bomb making material on airplanes: the underwear bomber, the bombs discovered in cargo planes in 2010. There are also numerous reports of people inadvertently bringing banned materials on airplanes without being detected. Terrorists are still interested in mayhem, the strict procedures don't seem to be effective.
'TSA has never caught one' is shorthand for 'this program is not effective at it's stated goal, is a massive inconvenience to the people it is supposed to be serving, allows gross violations of civil rights, and is a waste of money and resources'. Citizens _should_ bash government programs like this.
because most of those 10,000 pages deal with things like "companies employing less than 100 people and which are located in a depressed neighborhood and which have names ending in a vowel get to deduct the cost of the president's jet."
The idea that there is any legitimate reason why the US has to spend more money on its military than all other countries in the world **COMBINED** is absurd. Effective tools my ass.
The money spent by the DoD buys a lot more than you suggest. The US - for example - put a lot of effort into defending Japan in the Cold War so the Japanese did not have to. Japan spent more on 'stuff', we got Hello Kitty and the Prius in return.
I agree with your conclusion: time to let the rest of the world fend for itself. Now, if this gets the Japanese back into an acquisitive mood, or the Germans get feisty and look to Russia... well hard cheese for their neighbors, I guess.
the only people who fight back would simply rather die than be dictated to.
Not true: look up the theory of 3g and 4g conflict. Briefly: no army in the world can stand up to a US Armored Brigade. So they don't even try: the conflict shifts from tanks and airplanes to economic warfare, unconventional warfare.... anything but where the US Army is current good at.
You forget that there are people that respond to anyone coming to their front door with gunfire.
Say! Now that you mention it I have noticed a large number of pizza delivery guys, salesmen, girl scout cookie pushers, and letter carriers being gunned down, right and left.
because locals don't have the ability to build or buy equipment.
These people don't need open source hooraw: they need good government so can own their land, keep the fruits of their labor, and not kill be slaughtered when the generals are feeling impetuous.
As far as I can tell, this is tying the bonuses of everyone at Google to the efforts of the few people at Google involved in social media crap
Isn't this the way it works for most people?
I work in IT in manufacturing. Our bonus monies are tied to how well the company does, which in turn depends on a whole lot of things, all of them out of my control: marketing, the economy, the bond market and, ultimately, how well the guys in manufacturing are slapping together widgets today.
Slashdot Mirror
Are there any other precautions I could or should take?"
Yeah. Buy yourself a laptop and use _that_ to watch pr0n.
Sorry: "read an ebook".
Less than a grand for a laptop. Worth the hassle, imho.
Depends on the price diff.
A 10-15% diff in price would be worth the the time and gas.
YMMV.
Sure as a dog returns to it's vomit, that will happen. About 2 seconds after they figure out this isn't working for them.
"Marissa Taylor says the retail chains' worst nightmare are consumers who come in to take a look at merchandise in-store, but use smartphone apps to shop for cheaper prices online.
This is no different from how I shop for groceries: look at the ads in the Sunday paper, find the coupons, shop for X and one store, Y at another, Z at the third.
Welcome to the 21st century. Get used to it, Target.
Have you considered Avon?
Set your own hours. Income potential is up to you. Lots of brand recognition.
It's not geeky, or technical, but it's easy to excel, and you're looking for _income_ right?
Email me, I can put you in touch with my wife who is an Avon lady.
brian.dunbar at gmail dot com
Whose meaning? :)
Mine, duh. :)
Freedom seems to be a lot like pr0n. You know it when you see it, hard to define otherwise.
What I Want My Society To Be
Government has the job of providing a regulated market. Such regulations are very minimal - the very least that we can have and still have a functioning market. As much as possible is done by private organizations. As much as possible is governed locally.
That's it. The rest is details worked out by individuals acting in their own self-interest.
Erk. That's not good. How were they found out?
One fellow attempted to detonate the explosives in his shoes. The other the explosives in his underpants. The former didn't blow up so much as set his shoes on fire.
Which is, yes, laughable. These guys are clearly a) zealots and b) ignorant. But they were serious attempts to do a lot of damage and kill people, even if the execution left a lot to be desired.
Congress decided it was reasonable, so how is it a violation?
I think the Supreme Court, not Congress, is in charge of interpreting the law. But just because _they_ say something is right, does not make it forever inviolate. Once upon a time we thought chattel slavery was icky, but legally okay. Later we changed our minds about that.
Times and morals change. Maybe someday we'll decide to live up to the meaning of the Constitution and be a free people.
Don't (he smiled) get me started on the death penalty. I have only a few qualms about it in theory: in practice we seem to spend a lot of time killing people who are innocent, were talked into a confession, or were just plain inconvenient to authority.
It was a hippie philosopher, Leary or Thoreau or one of those guys, that said if you're not worried you're not paying attention.
Well, we're talking about TSA and airport screening. Do these bombing attempts have anything to do with that?
IIRC at least two of them involved guys walking explosives, or components of explosives, through the checkpoint.
What exactly is your specific argument against airport screenings?
They are ineffective at preventing people from doing harm to others with, or aboard airliners.
Incompetently implemented.
Violation of the fourth amendment.
Granting increased powers to the state.
If it was an effective deterrent there would not have been bombing attempts since 9/11. Also - is the deterrent worth the loss of civil liberties, the growth of yet another federal agency, increase in police powers? Some of us don't think so.
As well as the numerous reported incidents of people accidentally bringing contraband right through the checkpoints.
We know the former is not true.
I am not sure how one takes a person quietly into custody: do you mean that they do not have a public hearing, sequester them in jail without recourse to attorneys and deprive an accused person of their civil liberties?
The shoe check is because Richard Reid attempted to ignite explosives in his shoes on a plane December 12, 2001.
A quick reality check demonstrates your two possibilities are false: people have smuggled bombs and bomb making material on airplanes: the underwear bomber, the bombs discovered in cargo planes in 2010. There are also numerous reports of people inadvertently bringing banned materials on airplanes without being detected. Terrorists are still interested in mayhem, the strict procedures don't seem to be effective.
'TSA has never caught one' is shorthand for 'this program is not effective at it's stated goal, is a massive inconvenience to the people it is supposed to be serving, allows gross violations of civil rights, and is a waste of money and resources'. Citizens _should_ bash government programs like this.
Terrorists aren't complete morons.
This is true. Which is why TSA has never caught one.
Perhaps we should re-think this whole airport security thing.
because most of those 10,000 pages deal with things like "companies employing less than 100 people and which are located in a depressed neighborhood and which have names ending in a vowel get to deduct the cost of the president's jet."
Please cite examples.
The idea that there is any legitimate reason why the US has to spend more money on its military than all other countries in the world **COMBINED** is absurd. Effective tools my ass.
The money spent by the DoD buys a lot more than you suggest. The US - for example - put a lot of effort into defending Japan in the Cold War so the Japanese did not have to. Japan spent more on 'stuff', we got Hello Kitty and the Prius in return.
I agree with your conclusion: time to let the rest of the world fend for itself. Now, if this gets the Japanese back into an acquisitive mood, or the Germans get feisty and look to Russia ... well hard cheese for their neighbors, I guess.
Um, where does right enter into this?
Good point. I don't know.
the only people who fight back would simply rather die than be dictated to.
Not true: look up the theory of 3g and 4g conflict. Briefly: no army in the world can stand up to a US Armored Brigade. So they don't even try: the conflict shifts from tanks and airplanes to economic warfare, unconventional warfare .... anything but where the US Army is current good at.
Am I alone in feeling disturbed at the trend to separate the combatants by ever increasing distances?
Giving soldiers effective tools makes war less likely, not more likely.
The idea is that if you're armed forces can mow the opposition down like wheat before a threshing machine, the opposition won't even try it.
Look: war is going to happen. Would you be more afraid of a mob of guys with sticks, or an army than can take you out before you know they're there?
I propose that the best time to use Something Else is before it gets there
Well, duh. My other computers run Linux, BSD, etc.
But I guess if you want to fund Apple's push towards the walled garden, that's your business.
It's a fair trade: in return for some cash, I get a computer that mostly gets out of my way and lets me work. What they do with it ain't none of mine.
You forget that there are people that respond to anyone coming to their front door with gunfire.
Say! Now that you mention it I have noticed a large number of pizza delivery guys, salesmen, girl scout cookie pushers, and letter carriers being gunned down, right and left.
OSX is headed straight to walled garden land
When it gets there it just means it's time to use Something Else.
Political power always and without exception flows from the barrel of a gun
That's what I said.
because locals don't have the ability to build or buy equipment.
These people don't need open source hooraw: they need good government so can own their land, keep the fruits of their labor, and not kill be slaughtered when the generals are feeling impetuous.
As far as I can tell, this is tying the bonuses of everyone at Google to the efforts of the few people at Google involved in social media crap
Isn't this the way it works for most people?
I work in IT in manufacturing. Our bonus monies are tied to how well the company does, which in turn depends on a whole lot of things, all of them out of my control: marketing, the economy, the bond market and, ultimately, how well the guys in manufacturing are slapping together widgets today.
honestly can't think of anything they've done lately, all on their own, that's so blatantly anti-American as this.
Pro-union democrats were ripping up recall petitions two weeks ago in Wisconsin: does that count?