I can't speak to security, but that strikes me as being true of almost anything. You're an employee of a bank and you're trusted OR you're not. You're a cop, and your testimony is gold in court, OR you're a criminal and probably lying. You're a doctor/pharmacist OR you're a drug seeker/sadist/incompetent person. You're a pilot OR a potential terrorist. On some level, trust is necessary for a functioning society, even though there's no real reason any of those things can't be replaced with ANDs.
(Though to be fair, banks are probably the least trusting of their employees compared to other professions.)
First, there is no such thing as an "assault rifle." There are bolt action, semi-auto, full auto, and (as you mentioned), 3-round bursts, trigger mechanisms, none of which are exclusive to rifles. Assault is something you can do with a firearm (or knife, or hands), not a characteristic of the weapon itself. Calling something an assault rifle is almost as ridiculous as calling a children "suicide bomb delivery platforms." I say almost because there's no question that the firearms people often think of as "assault rifles" are primarily designed for shooting other people. But so are most pistols, yet nobody calls them "assault pistols."
Second, the so-called assault weapon ban was enacted in 1994 and expired in 2004. It had nothing to do with fully automatic weapons and, in fact, only applied to semi-automatic weapons. It drew a rather arbitrary line as to what was and was not an assault weapon, like where the magazine attaches, and whether the stock extends (which is silly, since people have different arm lengths.)
Third, what you're thinking of is the restriction on fully automatic weapons, which does not ban said weapons, only regulates their transfer to varying degrees depending on whether they were in private hands before 1986. It's perfectly legal to buy a fully automatic weapon manufactured before that date, though there are a lot of hoops to jump through, and they're not cheap. One can also purchase a new fully automatic weapon if he obtains a Federal Firearms License. People who go through the legal process have, almost by definition, demonstrated that they are trustworthy. Criminals tend to just modify cheap weapons to make them fully automatic anyway, or make do with other weapons.
None of this is to say what the laws should be, only what they are. I have my opinions, but I respect those who disagree, because I feel that there are valid arguments on both sides, even if I think the other side's arguments don't outweigh my own personal views. Firearm regulations are something that I feel very strongly should be decided democratically. I don't think there is a "right" answer, only varying strategies to keep as many people safe as possible, which I think both sides want. I tend to favor empirical data, but in the absence of that, we have to make the best decisions we can, hopefully in a reasonable and rational way.
It's worth it though. Streaming audio just feels so much "warmer" than the harsh sound from transistor-based transceivers. The soundstage feels much more natural, and I can distinguish characteristics of the music that just aren't there on other devices. The tubes recreate the missing detail from lossy encoding, and I can hear the faint heartbeat of the musician, and even perceive what kind of mood the musicians were in during the recording. (Spoiler alert: The Lumineers are actually seething with rage in "Ho Hey.") If you place an earbud into a nostril instead, you can literally smell the aromas present in the studio, like the haze of Jamaican Gold during No Woman No Cry, or the remnants of Ringo's bio break wafting after him as he sneaks back into the studio on Hey Jude. Really powerful stuff. This works for highly compressed video too. If I watch a video of some Mario Bros. gameplay on YouTube, I can see the individual hairs in Mario's 'stache, or the wet spot on the ground after the Goomba's guts get squished out.
Pro tip: to double the detail, use 5 GHz instead of 2.4 GHz.
Depends who you believe, I guess. This says the FBI was able to identify the first "ad" for the site, and build from there, both by other posts made by a user with the same name, and a gmail address they were able to subpoena.
Really? Because the right to counsel is specified in the 6th Amendment, and even that protection only applied in federal courts until Gideon v. Wainwright in the 60s. In other words, because people fought long and hard for the right, much like many of the other rights that we, quite literally, take for granted these days. That's why.
You just said they weren't the same thing, which is valid, and then went on to specify a culture using race, which is not. Just curious where you were trying to go with that.
I liked how your post was concisely packed into a single sentence. It took up just the right amount of room on my screen, and I could scroll it up or down using my mouse wheel.
Wow, really? Project S.H.A.M.E.? I'm no Gladwell supporter, but everything there is attacking the messenger instead of the message(s). It's argumentum ad hominem. It doesn't really matter who pays him or educated him, or paid for his education. I, for one, would *happily* take money from anyone in order to speak at their events. In fact, the less support or respect I have for them, the happier I would be to take their money. If I supported them, I'd probably waive my fee. (Assuming I had a fee and/or anyone wanted to pay me to talk.)
Nonetheless, the "evidence" that he's a corporate shill is quite conspiratorial, and looks a lot more like choosing the facts to fit the theory instead of the other way around. That the name of the site itself is a backronym, choosing the words to fit the desired name, is just dripping with irony.
If by "suck the coffers dry" you mean "earn something resembling a private enterprise salary," then yes, that's exactly what they're doing. True, some earn more than the industry average, but they've also got the credentials and/or the clearances to justify their price, or they're working on short term 3 to 6 month contracts with zero likelihood of follow-on work. They're trading stability of employment for cash.
Besides, if the government wants competent contractors (OR employees) who work on mind-numbing, soul-sucking (and typically ill defined and managed) projects, then they have to cough up the dough to woo the talent. Most government software is not at all sexy, and there are plenty of private industries which pay very handsomely to work on unsexy software. Supply and demand.
They actually devised a solution to the problem of storing data on or passing data through an untrusted source quite some time ago. It's called encryption.
Possible, but I will need more evidence that a single speaker on NPR with no sources or evidence to bolster his claim, especially when the obvious meaning was probably the intended meaning by Congress, regardless of what Lincoln meant.
From your description, "they" were an individual customer service representative. As soon as one starts giving you pushback, take the operator's advice: hang up and try your call again.
That's just not true. Microwaves do not cook "from the inside out." That's almost literally an old wives tale. At 2GHz, almost all radiation would be absorbed in the outer layer of skin and re-radiated as heat. Even for EM that can better penetrate solid/fleshy objects, the energy that penetrates will be attenuated because some portion will be absorbed at the exterior, and if the energy at the surface wasn't enough to trigger a pain response, then you probably (definitely) have nothing to worry about.
That said, there are two items of note: 1) EM may travel better along bones as they may be less dense (in birds, for example) or natural conductors (nerves), but fortunately nerves are the things we *want* to be stimulated, and unless you have a bone sticking out, the radiation must still pass through the skin, which has nerve endings. 2) Exposure to an extremely high EM energy source might be enough to cause thermal damage before you can react, but that's not a risk that's unique to electromagnetic radiation -- any energy in quantity can kill you.:)
Mostly false. On a color CRT, there are phosphors embedded in the screen, either in a vertically alternating triangular array (traditional) or in vertical stripes (trinitron). The quantity of each phosphor limits the maximum resolution of the screen. As with an LCD, a CRT can display resolutions lower than its ideal, or maximum resolution, through pixel doubling and/or more complicated processes, but no higher. If you had a screen coated in a single colored phosphor, as with some oscilloscopes, then your resolution would indeed be limited by beam width and minimum beam deflection angle, but I'll limit our discussion to color TVs since there are no monochrome LCD displays (that I'm aware of).
Surely there'd be more than one trigger for an electronic throttle to shut down, and using the emergency brake should be number 1 or 2 on the priority list.
Uh, no. I have an electronic throttle and I've driven for almost a block before realizing I forgot to release the parking brake.
Also his vehicle was specially modified for disabled drivers according to, ahem, *the fucking article.* No details are given as to the modifications though. If it was a typical vehicle, the answer is to throw it in neutral, and if that doesn't work (which it would), then just rear-end the car in front of you and you'll come to a stop eventually. Usually better than careening out of control for 125 miles over the course of an hour.
This should be obvious, but he's not facing more jail time than murder on a per-count basis. If you go out and assault 100 people at random before you're caught, you're probably facing a longer sentence than a single count of murder as well. If you can't do the time, don't do the crime(s).
Better known by his stage name "The Amazing Randi"
I think at this point he's really better known as James Randi. Maybe back in the 60s and 70s when he was actually performing, but many Slashdotters may not have even been born then.
Slashdot Mirror
I can't speak to security, but that strikes me as being true of almost anything. You're an employee of a bank and you're trusted OR you're not. You're a cop, and your testimony is gold in court, OR you're a criminal and probably lying. You're a doctor/pharmacist OR you're a drug seeker/sadist/incompetent person. You're a pilot OR a potential terrorist. On some level, trust is necessary for a functioning society, even though there's no real reason any of those things can't be replaced with ANDs.
(Though to be fair, banks are probably the least trusting of their employees compared to other professions.)
And for hundreds of millions of dollars (do you realize how many programmer hours that buys?!)
One, if you do it right.
Hey, if you can't beat 'em...
First, there is no such thing as an "assault rifle." There are bolt action, semi-auto, full auto, and (as you mentioned), 3-round bursts, trigger mechanisms, none of which are exclusive to rifles. Assault is something you can do with a firearm (or knife, or hands), not a characteristic of the weapon itself. Calling something an assault rifle is almost as ridiculous as calling a children "suicide bomb delivery platforms." I say almost because there's no question that the firearms people often think of as "assault rifles" are primarily designed for shooting other people. But so are most pistols, yet nobody calls them "assault pistols."
Second, the so-called assault weapon ban was enacted in 1994 and expired in 2004. It had nothing to do with fully automatic weapons and, in fact, only applied to semi-automatic weapons. It drew a rather arbitrary line as to what was and was not an assault weapon, like where the magazine attaches, and whether the stock extends (which is silly, since people have different arm lengths.)
Third, what you're thinking of is the restriction on fully automatic weapons, which does not ban said weapons, only regulates their transfer to varying degrees depending on whether they were in private hands before 1986. It's perfectly legal to buy a fully automatic weapon manufactured before that date, though there are a lot of hoops to jump through, and they're not cheap. One can also purchase a new fully automatic weapon if he obtains a Federal Firearms License. People who go through the legal process have, almost by definition, demonstrated that they are trustworthy. Criminals tend to just modify cheap weapons to make them fully automatic anyway, or make do with other weapons.
None of this is to say what the laws should be, only what they are. I have my opinions, but I respect those who disagree, because I feel that there are valid arguments on both sides, even if I think the other side's arguments don't outweigh my own personal views. Firearm regulations are something that I feel very strongly should be decided democratically. I don't think there is a "right" answer, only varying strategies to keep as many people safe as possible, which I think both sides want. I tend to favor empirical data, but in the absence of that, we have to make the best decisions we can, hopefully in a reasonable and rational way.
It's worth it though. Streaming audio just feels so much "warmer" than the harsh sound from transistor-based transceivers. The soundstage feels much more natural, and I can distinguish characteristics of the music that just aren't there on other devices. The tubes recreate the missing detail from lossy encoding, and I can hear the faint heartbeat of the musician, and even perceive what kind of mood the musicians were in during the recording. (Spoiler alert: The Lumineers are actually seething with rage in "Ho Hey.") If you place an earbud into a nostril instead, you can literally smell the aromas present in the studio, like the haze of Jamaican Gold during No Woman No Cry, or the remnants of Ringo's bio break wafting after him as he sneaks back into the studio on Hey Jude. Really powerful stuff. This works for highly compressed video too. If I watch a video of some Mario Bros. gameplay on YouTube, I can see the individual hairs in Mario's 'stache, or the wet spot on the ground after the Goomba's guts get squished out.
Pro tip: to double the detail, use 5 GHz instead of 2.4 GHz.
Depends who you believe, I guess. This says the FBI was able to identify the first "ad" for the site, and build from there, both by other posts made by a user with the same name, and a gmail address they were able to subpoena.
The smartest Americans know better than to go into politics, which leaves the politicians we have.
Really? Because the right to counsel is specified in the 6th Amendment, and even that protection only applied in federal courts until Gideon v. Wainwright in the 60s. In other words, because people fought long and hard for the right, much like many of the other rights that we, quite literally, take for granted these days. That's why.
You just said they weren't the same thing, which is valid, and then went on to specify a culture using race, which is not. Just curious where you were trying to go with that.
Indeed. In French, for example, the word for "do" and "make" are the same.
http://translate.google.com/#en/fr/What%20are%20you%20doing%3F%20What%20are%20you%20making%3F
I liked how your post was concisely packed into a single sentence. It took up just the right amount of room on my screen, and I could scroll it up or down using my mouse wheel.
Wow, really? Project S.H.A.M.E.? I'm no Gladwell supporter, but everything there is attacking the messenger instead of the message(s). It's argumentum ad hominem. It doesn't really matter who pays him or educated him, or paid for his education. I, for one, would *happily* take money from anyone in order to speak at their events. In fact, the less support or respect I have for them, the happier I would be to take their money. If I supported them, I'd probably waive my fee. (Assuming I had a fee and/or anyone wanted to pay me to talk.)
Nonetheless, the "evidence" that he's a corporate shill is quite conspiratorial, and looks a lot more like choosing the facts to fit the theory instead of the other way around. That the name of the site itself is a backronym, choosing the words to fit the desired name, is just dripping with irony.
If by "suck the coffers dry" you mean "earn something resembling a private enterprise salary," then yes, that's exactly what they're doing. True, some earn more than the industry average, but they've also got the credentials and/or the clearances to justify their price, or they're working on short term 3 to 6 month contracts with zero likelihood of follow-on work. They're trading stability of employment for cash.
Besides, if the government wants competent contractors (OR employees) who work on mind-numbing, soul-sucking (and typically ill defined and managed) projects, then they have to cough up the dough to woo the talent. Most government software is not at all sexy, and there are plenty of private industries which pay very handsomely to work on unsexy software. Supply and demand.
They actually devised a solution to the problem of storing data on or passing data through an untrusted source quite some time ago. It's called encryption.
Possible, but I will need more evidence that a single speaker on NPR with no sources or evidence to bolster his claim, especially when the obvious meaning was probably the intended meaning by Congress, regardless of what Lincoln meant.
From your description, "they" were an individual customer service representative. As soon as one starts giving you pushback, take the operator's advice: hang up and try your call again.
That particular episode was written by Conan O'Brien. Phil, while brilliant in his own right, just read the line. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0701189/fullcredits?ref_=tt_ov_wr#writers
That's just not true. Microwaves do not cook "from the inside out." That's almost literally an old wives tale. At 2GHz, almost all radiation would be absorbed in the outer layer of skin and re-radiated as heat. Even for EM that can better penetrate solid/fleshy objects, the energy that penetrates will be attenuated because some portion will be absorbed at the exterior, and if the energy at the surface wasn't enough to trigger a pain response, then you probably (definitely) have nothing to worry about.
That said, there are two items of note: 1) EM may travel better along bones as they may be less dense (in birds, for example) or natural conductors (nerves), but fortunately nerves are the things we *want* to be stimulated, and unless you have a bone sticking out, the radiation must still pass through the skin, which has nerve endings. 2) Exposure to an extremely high EM energy source might be enough to cause thermal damage before you can react, but that's not a risk that's unique to electromagnetic radiation -- any energy in quantity can kill you. :)
The tweet was accurate, but North Korea accidentally the missile.
Mostly false. On a color CRT, there are phosphors embedded in the screen, either in a vertically alternating triangular array (traditional) or in vertical stripes (trinitron). The quantity of each phosphor limits the maximum resolution of the screen. As with an LCD, a CRT can display resolutions lower than its ideal, or maximum resolution, through pixel doubling and/or more complicated processes, but no higher. If you had a screen coated in a single colored phosphor, as with some oscilloscopes, then your resolution would indeed be limited by beam width and minimum beam deflection angle, but I'll limit our discussion to color TVs since there are no monochrome LCD displays (that I'm aware of).
Surely there'd be more than one trigger for an electronic throttle to shut down, and using the emergency brake should be number 1 or 2 on the priority list.
Uh, no. I have an electronic throttle and I've driven for almost a block before realizing I forgot to release the parking brake.
Also his vehicle was specially modified for disabled drivers according to, ahem, *the fucking article.* No details are given as to the modifications though. If it was a typical vehicle, the answer is to throw it in neutral, and if that doesn't work (which it would), then just rear-end the car in front of you and you'll come to a stop eventually. Usually better than careening out of control for 125 miles over the course of an hour.
Foot off the gas is almost exactly the opposite of WOT.
This should be obvious, but he's not facing more jail time than murder on a per-count basis. If you go out and assault 100 people at random before you're caught, you're probably facing a longer sentence than a single count of murder as well. If you can't do the time, don't do the crime(s).
Better known by his stage name "The Amazing Randi"
I think at this point he's really better known as James Randi. Maybe back in the 60s and 70s when he was actually performing, but many Slashdotters may not have even been born then.
Yes, they exist. I should get one, but the idea of doing all the work to set it up, only to do more work while I work, is somewhat off-putting.
Pro tip: The boring, stupid assholes generally don't leave.