According to the TSA (but not what they tell you at the airport), their full body scanners use both X-ray and microwaves (err, millimeter waves). I don't see a lot of shielding around any of their equipment. When I've looked at x-ray exam rooms (where I had the luxury to examine the space in detail), they use lead lined wallboard and doors to shield the space.
According to L3, their "ProVision" unit uses only microwaves, but they don't specify the frequency nor power. I'd rather not stand in front of a 1000W transmitter, even if it's just for a few seconds. I seriously doubt that they're transmitting in the mW range. According to Wiki, they're in the EHF range (30Ghz to 300Ghz).
The USAF has the Active Denial System, made by Raytheon, which also uses millimeter waves. It will cause a burning sensation on the skin, and can cause blistering. Clearly, that frequency does not pass through, or bounce off harmlessly.
Further testing would be required to determine if the units at the airports are really safe. That testing has not been done.
So, ionizing (X-ray) or non-ionizing (millimeter wave), it's not necessarily good for you. At least with X-rays, we do know the effects. Unfortunately, there is no group responsible for calibrating or verifying the machines.
Testing such equipment on such a broad scale would normally be illegal. At very least it is negligent.
If you're going to change it to their intended toll, get it right.
The WTC towers were capable of falling over onto Wall Street. It wasn't just the buildings, it was the collateral damage. If all 4 planes were targeted for the WTC, Pentagon, and White House, and they had been as destructive as believed, and all the required people were in the right places (Bush was out of town) that would have crippled the US economy, military, and executive branch of the government.
The incurred death toll, including those who died due to lack of infrastructure later, would have been millions.
The stated goal from bin Laden was the destruction of the capitalist monster that is the United States. He wanted 330 million people dead, regardless of our position or purpose in this country.
In recent history, Russia, Germany, and Japan also wanted the same for us, as well as all kinds of fringe groups. Even some Americans want death and destruction for us, and have attempted it.
Anyone who's familiar with history knows that there's always some group that wants to kill some other group. Luckily, most don't have the resources to accomplish it. Those who do have the resources usually realize that such actions will result in mutually assured destruction.
I don't have sleepless nights worrying about terrorists killing me. The odds I'll be in a fatal car accident are higher. I avoid what I can, but if something happens that is beyond my control, it will happen.
Fair enough.:) That used to be my reason, until they kept escalating the dangerousness of the equipment being used.
I just spent a few days in the hospital, and got dosed with probably as much radiation as I should be exposed to in a year. At least at the hospital I know they're generally monitored, but they have failures too. At least the hospitals will eventually figure out they have errors. They also aren't hitting millions of people per year, and only checking to make sure they get an image back once a year at best. It reminds me of the fluoroscopes, except they're hitting virtually everyone that travels.
I've asked TSA agents about the people they've caught. So far, none. At one airport, the agent told me that he heard about someone at an airport 100 miles away that was caught carrying a gun in her purse, but he couldn't confirm it.
I was early for the first flight of the day at another airport. I had a good conversation with an agent there. We were discussing the futility of their jobs. There are so many ways to accomplish the same general idea (mass destruction). The TSA having their high visibility job simply means that most likely If a terrorist did attack, they wouldn't use a commercial airliner.
For $500k you can get a working airliner.. You can squeeze in 20 tons of your favorite explosive (say 2,500 gallons of diesel fuel, and 20,000 pounds of fertilizer), and put it wherever you want. Knowing that bad guys intending to commit a crime aren't the most law abiding individuals, you can knock the price down to $0 on the aircraft if it's stolen.
But why an airliner. They need specialized training to operate. How about a boat. Or a truck. Or why bring the explosion to the target, when there are so many other choices. An abandon building with gas service could be deadly. It doesn't need to be the building though. Natural gas could be pumped into a sewage system, but is less than ideal since it's lighter than air. Propane on the other hand could be catastrophic for a large area.
I think the only reason the gov't doesn't hire me as a scenario designer is, I'd give them way too many things to worry about. It's easier to focus on "bad guy wants to get on a plane", and it creates the illusion of security, where lots of civilians have to endure the worthless security checks. Roughly 7 in 10 attempts by the FBI are missed when they've covertly audited the TSA's security. But sure as hell, they still want to touch my penis.
But this year they did spend another $8.1 billion dollars. Or as of May 2011 it was $835.9 billion. Or about $281 million dollars for each person who died in the 9/11 attacks. That doesn't include the defense budget used to bomb the shit out of the middle east.
$8.1 billion, and the only thing I've gotten out of it was felt up at the airport. And I didn't even get a "happy ending" with it... Come on, they make the privacy rooms for a reason, do it right.
They wanted a revolution. They just didn't realize the extent that was required.
They had indistinct goals, and unrealistic expectations. "We are the 99% and we are poor. We are being oppressed by the 1%." Ok, what would you like? For them to close their multibillion dollar enterprises? Distribute their wealth to the 99%? Which ones? Everyone? Should the 1% stop their predatory business practices? Why should they? Because dozens of people are in a park down the road? Because thousands of people spread across hundreds of locations said so?
Asking people to close their bank accounts was impractical. The banks did a better job of it, by increasing fees, and other unfriendly practices. They lost more accounts to smaller banks, through adding fees, than any protests did.
They gathered some people together. They expressed their vague intent. When confronted by the opposition, they accepted whatever happened. They were told to leave or be arrested. A few got arrested. The rest went home.
They weren't prepared or equipped to complete a revolution. They had a generally nameless, faceless target. They had signs, and made noise. The resulting opinion was "so what?"
Skirmishes, including police using paramilitary tactics, were not responded to in kind. They simply weren't prepared or willing to handle any sort of offensive. Was there even one incident where police fired tear gas canisters or rubber bullets, and they were disarmed and then returned fire? To the best of my knowledge, no.
Your cycle of protests seems accurate. OWS came and went. Historically, if it is even remembered, it will be background noise.
I've taken kids to the movie when it's something we'd both be interested in. Having kids around, either your own, or otherwise (belonging to significant other, but not yours) changes your lifestyle. We'd go to the movies because we all wanted to see it. I'd make concessions to watch kid movies, but I'd still watch, because they'll want to talk about it afterwards. And I'm not going to waste money to get into a movie, and not watch it. Some of the kid crap isn't half bad.
Kids seem to consider me the "cool" adult. Like cool step-dad or cool mom's boyfriend.:) They've never been embarrassed for me to be with them.
Hmmm.. actually, I can't think of a movie that I've wanted to see, that I *had* to see in the theater. We did go see Paul in the theater though. The trailer looked hillarious, and I really liked it, but I can't say that it was worth the cost. Financially, it would have been more cost effective to buy the DVD upon release, and I could watch it again. I did miss 10 minutes of the damned movie, because I drank the bladder buster soda too fast.
The pre-movie advertisements have really gotten out of hand. 30 minutes of ads, with a captive audience, is just obnoxious. Between all the reasons I mentioned earlier, and the forced advertising, I won't be going to a theater again any time soon.... and ya, it was pouring rain when we left the theater, and I was drenched for the drive home.
Redbox is $1.00 + tax. At least it was last time I rented one from there. Their site doesn't say what the current rental fee is, but if you reserve the movie online first, it's only $1.00.
The nearby Redbox machines are in front of gas stations and grocery stores. I can generally pull my car up within a few feet of the box. Worst case, I'd have to park on the other side of the parking lot, and walk 100 feet or so.
As has been pointed out to me, "bluebox" movies are free. Well, assuming that someone dropped a Netflix return in that mailbox.:)
It was easier to estimate the food cost. I couldn't find the theater menu pricing online, and I'm not driving down to the theater to write them down.
The at-home costs are easier.
A 2-liter bottle of soda is $1.25. Adding just a bit of ice, that means we each can have a 40oz cup. So $0.62/ea. In reality, we'd more likely not drink more than a pint glass. With ice, that 2 liter bottle is easily 6 pint glasses full. So that brings the actual consumed price down to $0.21/ea. We'll use the 40oz cup as the example.
For the home price, the individual food serving would easily be $1.20/ea. Since we're not absolute pigs, we'd probably each have a pint glass of soda, and share a popcorn. That comes to an even $1 for two people, or $0.50/ea. Well, not including tax.:)
I don't go to the movies much at all any more. A while back I did. For 3 of us, I expected to spend $80, and I rarely spent less than that. I'm not even including gas and wear and tear on my car getting to and from the theater.:)
I'm sorry that you have such a twisted view of the world. Or maybe you're just a troll.
If I'm going to see a movie, it shouldn't be an exercise experience. I'm not obese. I'm actually in good shape. BMI 24, and despite back injuries, I exercise regularly. I can walk miles, but reserve that for places that aren't potentially deadly.
Sometimes I assume people know something about me. We have a very predictable weather report. So much so, that anyone who's lived here for a while already know the weather report is always the same. From April through November, the high temperatures range from 85F to 105F. The relief we get is when it rains. that's a "50% chance of thunderstorms". I'm in the "lightning capital of the US". That was generally considered the world, until in 2002 NASA found that Rwanda receives more lightning strikes. The weather changes very quickly. If you go in a theater and the skies are clear, you still have a 50% chance that you'll come out in blinding rain and heavy lightning strikes.
Nothing celebrates the end of your date like "hey honey, lets take a 1/4 mile walk in a thunderstorm". You'll end up drenched. You might end up dead. As it will usually work out, that'll leave me sprinting 1/4 mile to the car, to drive it up to the theater doors.
So no, parking 1/4 mile away is not generally a good idea, unless you have somewhere to wait for the weather to clear.
I do rather enjoy this time of year. This week, our highs are in the 70's, and lows in the 30's. I really don't mind walking. I do still mind spending $80 for a $1.25 experience.
I've picked an arbitrary theater in my area, which is the easiest to get to. It has 10 screens.
If we go to the theater, we usually end up with crappy parking. So a 1/4 mile hike, unless we get lucky.
Say it's $10 per ticket, plus $10 per person for popcorn and soda (depending on your local market), the per-person price can be $20. That makes $40 for a couple, or close to $80 if you're bringing two kids.. Lets not forget, cost on the popcorn and soda are under $1 per person.
I don't even care about crying babies, noisy teenagers, people who forgot to shower sitting beside us, sticky floors, or people sending text messages.
Back when there were an abundance of video rental places, you could cut that $80 down to something more like $5. Now you can rent at Redbox for something like $1.25.
$80 vs $1.25.. That's a difficult one. So I don't get to see the movie today, I'll be able to see it in a few months. I don't have to be the first to see it. If I want popcorn, pizza, or anything to eat while I'm watching at home, I can. If I find the need to go to the bathroom, I can pause it. If someone calls that I want to talk to, the same.
In my last house, I had a home theater setup. $1,500 projector, about $4,000 in sound gear. That's roughly 70 movies at home before it breaks even. It also gave me the luxury of watching TV, or playing video games on it.. It's hooked to a cheap PC with DVI output, so we can even watch via Netflix, Hulu, or whatever.
In my own theater, we always have premium seating. The surround sound is set up for optimal sound on the couch. The couch is at the right distance, so we have the proper field of view. We won't end up with sore necks, like you'd have in the front rows. We aren't offset one way or another, so we only really hear half of the sound, or a sideways view a the movie.
All that is not necessary for a good viewing experience, but it's nice.:) I'd rather spend the $1.25 over $80 to watch on your average TV.
I can't find a good reason to go to a theater to watch a movie. The only exception is, to get a movie on release day. We can save the discussion of pirated screeners for another time. We don't watch those. Your piracy habits are your own concern.
I can't say if they do or not. It's really up to them how they manage things. They may try to play hard ball, to avoid "buyers remorse". It may feel good to donate a bunch of money. The person may realize later that it was more than they could afford. If they confirm that the purchase was legitimate, it becomes a more difficult task to get the chargeback. I say difficult, but not impossible.
We just chose to take the path that is best for the customer. We'd rather please the consumer, who may then appreciate that we do in fact act honestly. They may become regular customers later on.
The worst chargeback I was ever involved in was with Western Union. I sent money online for a friend (they gave me cash, I wired money to a second person who we both knew in another state). When they went to retrieve the money, it wasn't there. When I called, they said they had no record of it. I was basically told to go to tell. My bank showed the transaction was successful, and Western Union had received the full amount.
I went to my bank, and they asked me to contact Western Union. My bank was very cooperative though. I was friendly with the whole staff there, and they knew I was honest. I sat in the branch managers office, and we called with the phone on speaker so we could both hear. It was a short conversation. They told me the transaction didn't exist, and to fuck off. The branch manager took over the call, verified the transaction, and she was told to go to hell. She immediately refunded my transaction, and they took over fucking with Western Union. It took them a couple months, but they got the money back.
To the best of my knowledge, I'm still blacklisted with Western Union. I'm fine with that.
That's the route businesses can go. They can play rough. If your bank doesn't know you personally, and/or doesn't know that you're totally honest with them, it can be a long drawn out process, where you have to prove that you're the victim of the fraud. I've gone through that with credit card companies. They mail me dispute papers. I filled them out and returned them. They give a 90 day window to start any proceedings. If you're lucky, you'll get the problem corrected.
I'm lucky that I haven't had to deal with any of these cases in a few years. Banks that I don't have a personal relationship with can be very difficult. It's virtually impossible to have a "personal relationship" with most credit card companies, since they don't have local offices. You'll only ever speak with a call center in another state or country, and never meet a CSR face to face.
It doesn't matter if they're a charity or not. They may have managed to talk the bank out of some of the fines, but that'd be about it.
One place I worked, which did high volume CC transactions, the typical sale was $25. A chargeback resulted in the bank taking back the full amount ($25) plus fine ($35).
We worked hard to avoid chargebacks. As I recall, you can lose your merchant account if you exceed 1% chargebacks. Before the chargeback is done, the merchant is given a "chargeback notification". At that point, we can dispute, refund, or ignore it. Since we were an online company, we didn't have a physically signed receipt to prove that the person was actually the purchaser.
With a signed receipt and someone to confirm that they visually verified the identification, you can dispute.
We opted to refund, and cancel their account. That way, we simply didn't make the value of the sale, but there were no fines applied. So +$25 on the transaction. -$25 on the refund. $0 total.
Finally, is the option of ignoring it. +25 transaction, -$25 refund, -$35 fine. -$35 total.
Typically, the consumer would call first, before the chargeback. We'd assist them in finding out the details of the transaction. We'd give them the time, date, information about the IP, and email address used with it. Most of the time, we could positively say that the transaction occurred in their location (by the IP and ISP). They'd recognize the email address as belonging to someone else in their household. If they wanted, we would cancel the account and refund the full amount. I'd say refunds occurred about 50% of the time. They'd talk to their family members, and find out that they had done the transaction, the card holder just didn't know, but they allowed it anyways.
For us, it didn't matter that much. We handled millions of dollars a year. Who cared about a few dozen refunds in the same period. It was cheaper to refund and make the consumer happy, than dispute and risk incurring the fines, and risking our merchant account status.
I know people will stolen card information will test it by donating a small amount to charity. People won't generally notice a $1 or $5 charge on their card, if it's frequently used. They'll catch on when the card is used the second time for a high dollar transaction. The idea of the test transaction is only to verify the card. It's easy, and they don't have to provide a valid delivery address for merchandise. They aren't doing it out of good will, they're exploiting the system a bit more.
If you mean that as an absolute statement, it is demonstrably false: Who taught the first person to believe in a deity? And why does belief in a deity exist in every single human culture in existence, both historical and current?
It is well recorded throughout history that religion has been used to control the general populace. It allows for the explanation of things they don't understand, which comforts people. It allows for control over the people, with the threat of an unfavorable afterlife, next incarnation, etc. It also allows for the general population, under guidance from their leaders, to believe that non-believers are less moral or less human, because they don't believe.
That argument only sort of works because you have made a fake classification which excludes YOUR beliefs. Why are your beliefs any more likely to be correct than the other 10,001?
I'm waiting for documented and tested evidence. I don't fall into *any* of the groups, because I simply don't believe in fairy tales. Once upon a time, I did, because I was raised with it. I was told the wonders of God, Jesus, the holy spirit, and all the stories in the old books. As a young teenager, I started looking for answers to the gaping holes. I looked for the "right" religion. I compared religions. I found none to be based in reality. I could have adopted any of them. I could have become Jewish, Buddhist, or even Scientology. I could have decided to follow Druidism, or even be a follower of Norse Mythology. Greek and Norse mythology definitely have better stories. Druidism and other ancient pagan religions are harder to follow, as much of their history was destroyed when more modern religions moved in. Destroy all those old traditions, the new one is in charge now.
Some of those traditions have been destroyed, leaving almost nothing. Stonehenge is a great example. We know it's there. A couple hundred years ago, it was a pile of rocks. Now, it's a mostly reconstructed site of some sort of significance. Another is Gobekli Tepe. It's amazingly well preserved because it was buried for millenia. We don't really know anything about their traditions.
We're lucky we've even figured out what we know about the ancient Egyptian religions. I don't believe a man entombed in a big ass pyramid is god, but plenty of people did when they put him in there. Well, hims, hers, and even royal pets... To the best of my knowledge, they are the oldest "gods" that we have any evidence of. Even then, all we have is evidence that someone was buried in their tombs, and now they're a dessicated bag of skin and bones, wrapped in cloth. Disappearing gods are just a plot device for authors to excuse the fact that they have no evidence.
Perl too.:) I had it on my Android phone, before I wiped it for another install. I don't remember right off where to get it, but it wasn't hard to find for those who have heard of a search engine.:)
All the hooks for using the system are in place for interacting with the hardware in Java. That's probably the biggest reason for development to be done in Java. I believe it was at least partially implemented in Perl. At least that's what I remember from a year ago.
Oh look, the link for SL4A. Perl, Python, Lua, Beanshell (?), and Rhino (?). I wanted to do my own GPS tracking program to update my own web site. Since there are plenty of apps that are already written, and mostly did what I wanted, I really haven't looked too hard at continuing. I may revisit it eventually, if I find that I have too much spare time on my hands. One of the things that I got hung up on was the speed and altitude limitations. 11 miles (18 kilometers) and/or (1,853 kilometers per hour).
One of the things I wanted to eventually try is an air launch rocket (as opposed to the typical ground launch), with the ability to bring itself home. Prevailing winds where I live would put touchdown of a high altitude flight of any significant duration about 20 miles out into the Atlantic. Besides the fact I don't have a boat, I don't want to spend the time explaining to the US Navy or US Coast Guard why I'm in a rented boat, 20 miles off shore, with a big freakin' rocket. I'd rather violate FAA rules, than be tied up in a DHS interrogation for days. If it does manage to get up to speed or altitude, it'd be lost until it dropped enough speed and altitude, which may put it way off course for coming home. I'd love to be lazy enough to just put an android phone in to handle tracking. I may have to look at gray market components, which will add to the overall weight.
There is no way to prove a lack of it. I'm not the one who made up any sort of religion. The burden of proof is with the anyone making the assertion that things exist.
Here's an example that may be easier to understand. You can't prove there is no such things as Big Foot. If someone makes the assertion that Big Foot exists, it is up to them to prove that their assertion is true. If, one day, someone brings forward positive evidence that can be peer reviewed, that shows Big Foot does exist, then I will believe it.
The best evidence for Big Foot was one that was killed, and frozen in a chest freezer. They insisted it was real. They had a block of ice with something furry inside, which was real. When the evidence was reviewed, it was shown to be a gorilla costume in a block of ice.
If God were to twinkle his way down to Times Square, announce his presence. Do a few impossible things, and explain even a small part of how the universe got here, sure I'd believe in it. As long as it's just people ranting about some old book... well... not so much. The Christian god doesn't have a monopoly (or even majority) on the planet. It would seem to be in his best interest to drop by and say "Hi guys, I'm here. Lets talk."
This is a fake argument you have created. Just because Joe says Sally is lying, and Sally says Jeff is lying, and Jeff says Joe is lying, doesnt mean that ONE of them isnt right.
Well, you're right. Someone could be right. None of them have any solid evidence. There are *over* 10,000, but we'll go with your lowered number of just 10,002. That means, I have a 1 in 10,002 chance of picking the right one, should I decide to do so.
Lack of evidence does not make a deity real. Evidence would.
There is no inherent belief in humans that there is a deity of any sort. That is a trained belief. These beliefs are taught to them from day 1. If you took a group of children, and never introduced he idea of a deity to them, one (or some) may make up stories to explain what they don't understand, but the stories will be so separated from any known religion, that they wouldn't be recognizable.
Or... Every child is born an atheist. Religion is forced upon them after that.
They are fables; mythology; legends; fictional stories that we have made to comfort ourselves.
I take comfort in knowledge and exploration. We have the possibility of educating ourselves to such great extents, why do people feel it's necessary to fall back to these works of fiction.
In that every religion is different should be enough explanation that none are right. If there were a higher power that created humanity and guides us, wouldn't they clearly outline even the basic notions of the deity and belief systems? If I have to pick, I'll chose the Norse gods. And when I die, I'm heading for Valhalla.
I just have a hard time reconciling the fact that there are over 10,000 religions on this planet, and the cultists in each believe that they are right, and want you to convert to their way. No matter what, it's a lose-lose situation. If you don't believe their way, you're wrong. If you do finally accept their way, that means you are wrong in the minds of the thousands of others groups.
I guess that's part of why holy wars work. Unless one group manages to gain 100% acceptance, they'll always have someone to fight against.
Re:Santa of course is not an effin elf.
on
The Science of Santa
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
Shhh... You're screwing with the religious zealots. They'll start quoting fire and brimstone passages out of their holy books. Then they'll flip through the peaceful and loving parts, and find reasons to kill you in very uncomfortable ways.
You and I know perfectly well that there is no invisible friend running the universe, and the only kind of divine intervention that happens is choreographed and executed by a flesh and blood humans.
Some of these people actually believe it. Most of their holy books say that by doubting them, you are their evil, and you must be punished.... and you may say you have an elephant in your bathtub, but I have an undetectable transdimensional leprechaun in a box. Don't ever try to open the box, or he'll immediately move to another dimension. Once you believe in him, I'll introduce you to the invisible dragon in the garage. My girlfriend told me that he's there. He sucks the life out of car batteries, and changes my preset radio stations when I'm out of town.
The word you're grasping for is "colloquialism". They are not always defined by national geographic boundaries either.
"Soda", "cola", "pop", "coke", "coca", "pepsi", "tonic", "soft drink", "soda water", "fizzy drink", and "refresco", are common colloquialisms used as generic descriptions of carbonated sugary drinks, regardless of name brand similarities.
As in your example, "cigarette", "fag", and "smoke" are common colloquialisms.
Those are just ones I'm familiar with, and can think of right off, because they're used in places I've been.
If my company goes down, it hurts law enforcement across the country. It could be the difference between raiding the right house to catch a murderer, or going to his residence from 3 years ago.
Plenty of jobs have similar levels of responsibility. Do you want everyone at your credit card company heading out Friday at 5pm, disconnected til 8am Monday? I like the idea that their fraud department does work, and if my card is compromised, I may get a call regarding it. IT at the same company is important. There may be a few upset customers and vendors, if Visa goes down Friday afternoon, and can't process any transactions until Monday morning.
Nah, I didn't say it for the XKCD reference. I'm just kinda blunt.:) If I want to steal your credit card, I'm not going to call you up, and try to get it from you gracefully. I'd probably kick you in the nuts, and follow that up with... well... a $5 wrench to which ever part looked like it wanted to be hit. Then I'd say "May I have your credit card please?"
"... and your cell phone..."
"... and your car keys..."
"... and do you mind holding my wrench with your head? Thank you."
See, please *and* thank you. I do well with the social graces.
I found my kindergarten report card. Under "Socialization" it had the box checked "does not play well with others."
I see "social engineering" as being "social" (with others), and then it's an engineering challenge.
But hey, I see a Rubik's cube as being an engineering challenge too. I can solve one in about a minute, if they use the regular attachment method. 45 degree twist, and push at the corner. Now it's like a 3d jigsaw puzzle. People only say it's cheating, because my way is faster than theirs.
Slashdot Mirror
I wouldn't decline the handjob, even if they're doing it where the other passengers can see. My complaint is that I don't get a "happy ending".
X-rays are though.
According to the TSA (but not what they tell you at the airport), their full body scanners use both X-ray and microwaves (err, millimeter waves). I don't see a lot of shielding around any of their equipment. When I've looked at x-ray exam rooms (where I had the luxury to examine the space in detail), they use lead lined wallboard and doors to shield the space.
According to L3, their "ProVision" unit uses only microwaves, but they don't specify the frequency nor power. I'd rather not stand in front of a 1000W transmitter, even if it's just for a few seconds. I seriously doubt that they're transmitting in the mW range. According to Wiki, they're in the EHF range (30Ghz to 300Ghz).
The USAF has the Active Denial System, made by Raytheon, which also uses millimeter waves. It will cause a burning sensation on the skin, and can cause blistering. Clearly, that frequency does not pass through, or bounce off harmlessly.
Further testing would be required to determine if the units at the airports are really safe. That testing has not been done.
So, ionizing (X-ray) or non-ionizing (millimeter wave), it's not necessarily good for you. At least with X-rays, we do know the effects. Unfortunately, there is no group responsible for calibrating or verifying the machines.
Testing such equipment on such a broad scale would normally be illegal. At very least it is negligent.
If you're going to change it to their intended toll, get it right.
The WTC towers were capable of falling over onto Wall Street. It wasn't just the buildings, it was the collateral damage. If all 4 planes were targeted for the WTC, Pentagon, and White House, and they had been as destructive as believed, and all the required people were in the right places (Bush was out of town) that would have crippled the US economy, military, and executive branch of the government.
The incurred death toll, including those who died due to lack of infrastructure later, would have been millions.
The stated goal from bin Laden was the destruction of the capitalist monster that is the United States. He wanted 330 million people dead, regardless of our position or purpose in this country.
In recent history, Russia, Germany, and Japan also wanted the same for us, as well as all kinds of fringe groups. Even some Americans want death and destruction for us, and have attempted it.
Anyone who's familiar with history knows that there's always some group that wants to kill some other group. Luckily, most don't have the resources to accomplish it. Those who do have the resources usually realize that such actions will result in mutually assured destruction.
I don't have sleepless nights worrying about terrorists killing me. The odds I'll be in a fatal car accident are higher. I avoid what I can, but if something happens that is beyond my control, it will happen.
Fair enough. :) That used to be my reason, until they kept escalating the dangerousness of the equipment being used.
I just spent a few days in the hospital, and got dosed with probably as much radiation as I should be exposed to in a year. At least at the hospital I know they're generally monitored, but they have failures too. At least the hospitals will eventually figure out they have errors. They also aren't hitting millions of people per year, and only checking to make sure they get an image back once a year at best. It reminds me of the fluoroscopes, except they're hitting virtually everyone that travels.
I've asked TSA agents about the people they've caught. So far, none. At one airport, the agent told me that he heard about someone at an airport 100 miles away that was caught carrying a gun in her purse, but he couldn't confirm it.
I was early for the first flight of the day at another airport. I had a good conversation with an agent there. We were discussing the futility of their jobs. There are so many ways to accomplish the same general idea (mass destruction). The TSA having their high visibility job simply means that most likely If a terrorist did attack, they wouldn't use a commercial airliner.
For $500k you can get a working airliner.. You can squeeze in 20 tons of your favorite explosive (say 2,500 gallons of diesel fuel, and 20,000 pounds of fertilizer), and put it wherever you want. Knowing that bad guys intending to commit a crime aren't the most law abiding individuals, you can knock the price down to $0 on the aircraft if it's stolen.
But why an airliner. They need specialized training to operate. How about a boat. Or a truck. Or why bring the explosion to the target, when there are so many other choices. An abandon building with gas service could be deadly. It doesn't need to be the building though. Natural gas could be pumped into a sewage system, but is less than ideal since it's lighter than air. Propane on the other hand could be catastrophic for a large area.
I think the only reason the gov't doesn't hire me as a scenario designer is, I'd give them way too many things to worry about. It's easier to focus on "bad guy wants to get on a plane", and it creates the illusion of security, where lots of civilians have to endure the worthless security checks. Roughly 7 in 10 attempts by the FBI are missed when they've covertly audited the TSA's security. But sure as hell, they still want to touch my penis.
Wrong person, wrong story.
Please return your computer to the place of purchase for a full refund.
I pick groped every time. They're asking me more often why I refuse the radiation. X-rays, microwaves, whatever, I'm not going to stand in your uncertified, uncalibrated ionizing emitting equipment.
HAHAHAHAHA!
Nope.
But this year they did spend another $8.1 billion dollars. Or as of May 2011 it was $835.9 billion. Or about $281 million dollars for each person who died in the 9/11 attacks. That doesn't include the defense budget used to bomb the shit out of the middle east.
$8.1 billion, and the only thing I've gotten out of it was felt up at the airport. And I didn't even get a "happy ending" with it... Come on, they make the privacy rooms for a reason, do it right.
They wanted a revolution. They just didn't realize the extent that was required.
They had indistinct goals, and unrealistic expectations. "We are the 99% and we are poor. We are being oppressed by the 1%." Ok, what would you like? For them to close their multibillion dollar enterprises? Distribute their wealth to the 99%? Which ones? Everyone? Should the 1% stop their predatory business practices? Why should they? Because dozens of people are in a park down the road? Because thousands of people spread across hundreds of locations said so?
Asking people to close their bank accounts was impractical. The banks did a better job of it, by increasing fees, and other unfriendly practices. They lost more accounts to smaller banks, through adding fees, than any protests did.
They gathered some people together. They expressed their vague intent. When confronted by the opposition, they accepted whatever happened. They were told to leave or be arrested. A few got arrested. The rest went home.
They weren't prepared or equipped to complete a revolution. They had a generally nameless, faceless target. They had signs, and made noise. The resulting opinion was "so what?"
Skirmishes, including police using paramilitary tactics, were not responded to in kind. They simply weren't prepared or willing to handle any sort of offensive. Was there even one incident where police fired tear gas canisters or rubber bullets, and they were disarmed and then returned fire? To the best of my knowledge, no.
Your cycle of protests seems accurate. OWS came and went. Historically, if it is even remembered, it will be background noise.
I've taken kids to the movie when it's something we'd both be interested in. Having kids around, either your own, or otherwise (belonging to significant other, but not yours) changes your lifestyle. We'd go to the movies because we all wanted to see it. I'd make concessions to watch kid movies, but I'd still watch, because they'll want to talk about it afterwards. And I'm not going to waste money to get into a movie, and not watch it. Some of the kid crap isn't half bad.
Kids seem to consider me the "cool" adult. Like cool step-dad or cool mom's boyfriend. :) They've never been embarrassed for me to be with them.
Hmmm.. actually, I can't think of a movie that I've wanted to see, that I *had* to see in the theater. We did go see Paul in the theater though. The trailer looked hillarious, and I really liked it, but I can't say that it was worth the cost. Financially, it would have been more cost effective to buy the DVD upon release, and I could watch it again. I did miss 10 minutes of the damned movie, because I drank the bladder buster soda too fast.
The pre-movie advertisements have really gotten out of hand. 30 minutes of ads, with a captive audience, is just obnoxious. Between all the reasons I mentioned earlier, and the forced advertising, I won't be going to a theater again any time soon. ... and ya, it was pouring rain when we left the theater, and I was drenched for the drive home.
Redbox is $1.00 + tax. At least it was last time I rented one from there. Their site doesn't say what the current rental fee is, but if you reserve the movie online first, it's only $1.00.
The nearby Redbox machines are in front of gas stations and grocery stores. I can generally pull my car up within a few feet of the box. Worst case, I'd have to park on the other side of the parking lot, and walk 100 feet or so.
As has been pointed out to me, "bluebox" movies are free. Well, assuming that someone dropped a Netflix return in that mailbox. :)
It was easier to estimate the food cost. I couldn't find the theater menu pricing online, and I'm not driving down to the theater to write them down.
The at-home costs are easier.
A 2-liter bottle of soda is $1.25. Adding just a bit of ice, that means we each can have a 40oz cup. So $0.62/ea. In reality, we'd more likely not drink more than a pint glass. With ice, that 2 liter bottle is easily 6 pint glasses full. So that brings the actual consumed price down to $0.21/ea. We'll use the 40oz cup as the example.
Picking an arbitrary popcorn, it's 6 bags for $3.48, or $0.58/ea.
For the home price, the individual food serving would easily be $1.20/ea. Since we're not absolute pigs, we'd probably each have a pint glass of soda, and share a popcorn. That comes to an even $1 for two people, or $0.50/ea. Well, not including tax. :)
I don't go to the movies much at all any more. A while back I did. For 3 of us, I expected to spend $80, and I rarely spent less than that. I'm not even including gas and wear and tear on my car getting to and from the theater. :)
I'm sorry that you have such a twisted view of the world. Or maybe you're just a troll.
If I'm going to see a movie, it shouldn't be an exercise experience. I'm not obese. I'm actually in good shape. BMI 24, and despite back injuries, I exercise regularly. I can walk miles, but reserve that for places that aren't potentially deadly.
Sometimes I assume people know something about me. We have a very predictable weather report. So much so, that anyone who's lived here for a while already know the weather report is always the same. From April through November, the high temperatures range from 85F to 105F. The relief we get is when it rains. that's a "50% chance of thunderstorms". I'm in the "lightning capital of the US". That was generally considered the world, until in 2002 NASA found that Rwanda receives more lightning strikes. The weather changes very quickly. If you go in a theater and the skies are clear, you still have a 50% chance that you'll come out in blinding rain and heavy lightning strikes.
Nothing celebrates the end of your date like "hey honey, lets take a 1/4 mile walk in a thunderstorm". You'll end up drenched. You might end up dead. As it will usually work out, that'll leave me sprinting 1/4 mile to the car, to drive it up to the theater doors.
So no, parking 1/4 mile away is not generally a good idea, unless you have somewhere to wait for the weather to clear.
I do rather enjoy this time of year. This week, our highs are in the 70's, and lows in the 30's. I really don't mind walking. I do still mind spending $80 for a $1.25 experience.
I think he pretty much hit it...
I've picked an arbitrary theater in my area, which is the easiest to get to. It has 10 screens.
If we go to the theater, we usually end up with crappy parking. So a 1/4 mile hike, unless we get lucky.
Say it's $10 per ticket, plus $10 per person for popcorn and soda (depending on your local market), the per-person price can be $20. That makes $40 for a couple, or close to $80 if you're bringing two kids.. Lets not forget, cost on the popcorn and soda are under $1 per person.
I don't even care about crying babies, noisy teenagers, people who forgot to shower sitting beside us, sticky floors, or people sending text messages.
Back when there were an abundance of video rental places, you could cut that $80 down to something more like $5. Now you can rent at Redbox for something like $1.25.
$80 vs $1.25.. That's a difficult one. So I don't get to see the movie today, I'll be able to see it in a few months. I don't have to be the first to see it. If I want popcorn, pizza, or anything to eat while I'm watching at home, I can. If I find the need to go to the bathroom, I can pause it. If someone calls that I want to talk to, the same.
In my last house, I had a home theater setup. $1,500 projector, about $4,000 in sound gear. That's roughly 70 movies at home before it breaks even. It also gave me the luxury of watching TV, or playing video games on it.. It's hooked to a cheap PC with DVI output, so we can even watch via Netflix, Hulu, or whatever.
In my own theater, we always have premium seating. The surround sound is set up for optimal sound on the couch. The couch is at the right distance, so we have the proper field of view. We won't end up with sore necks, like you'd have in the front rows. We aren't offset one way or another, so we only really hear half of the sound, or a sideways view a the movie.
All that is not necessary for a good viewing experience, but it's nice. :) I'd rather spend the $1.25 over $80 to watch on your average TV.
I can't find a good reason to go to a theater to watch a movie. The only exception is, to get a movie on release day. We can save the discussion of pirated screeners for another time. We don't watch those. Your piracy habits are your own concern.
They could.
I can't say if they do or not. It's really up to them how they manage things. They may try to play hard ball, to avoid "buyers remorse". It may feel good to donate a bunch of money. The person may realize later that it was more than they could afford. If they confirm that the purchase was legitimate, it becomes a more difficult task to get the chargeback. I say difficult, but not impossible.
We just chose to take the path that is best for the customer. We'd rather please the consumer, who may then appreciate that we do in fact act honestly. They may become regular customers later on.
The worst chargeback I was ever involved in was with Western Union. I sent money online for a friend (they gave me cash, I wired money to a second person who we both knew in another state). When they went to retrieve the money, it wasn't there. When I called, they said they had no record of it. I was basically told to go to tell. My bank showed the transaction was successful, and Western Union had received the full amount.
I went to my bank, and they asked me to contact Western Union. My bank was very cooperative though. I was friendly with the whole staff there, and they knew I was honest. I sat in the branch managers office, and we called with the phone on speaker so we could both hear. It was a short conversation. They told me the transaction didn't exist, and to fuck off. The branch manager took over the call, verified the transaction, and she was told to go to hell. She immediately refunded my transaction, and they took over fucking with Western Union. It took them a couple months, but they got the money back.
To the best of my knowledge, I'm still blacklisted with Western Union. I'm fine with that.
That's the route businesses can go. They can play rough. If your bank doesn't know you personally, and/or doesn't know that you're totally honest with them, it can be a long drawn out process, where you have to prove that you're the victim of the fraud. I've gone through that with credit card companies. They mail me dispute papers. I filled them out and returned them. They give a 90 day window to start any proceedings. If you're lucky, you'll get the problem corrected.
I'm lucky that I haven't had to deal with any of these cases in a few years. Banks that I don't have a personal relationship with can be very difficult. It's virtually impossible to have a "personal relationship" with most credit card companies, since they don't have local offices. You'll only ever speak with a call center in another state or country, and never meet a CSR face to face.
It doesn't matter if they're a charity or not. They may have managed to talk the bank out of some of the fines, but that'd be about it.
One place I worked, which did high volume CC transactions, the typical sale was $25. A chargeback resulted in the bank taking back the full amount ($25) plus fine ($35).
We worked hard to avoid chargebacks. As I recall, you can lose your merchant account if you exceed 1% chargebacks. Before the chargeback is done, the merchant is given a "chargeback notification". At that point, we can dispute, refund, or ignore it. Since we were an online company, we didn't have a physically signed receipt to prove that the person was actually the purchaser.
With a signed receipt and someone to confirm that they visually verified the identification, you can dispute.
We opted to refund, and cancel their account. That way, we simply didn't make the value of the sale, but there were no fines applied. So +$25 on the transaction. -$25 on the refund. $0 total.
Finally, is the option of ignoring it. +25 transaction, -$25 refund, -$35 fine. -$35 total.
Typically, the consumer would call first, before the chargeback. We'd assist them in finding out the details of the transaction. We'd give them the time, date, information about the IP, and email address used with it. Most of the time, we could positively say that the transaction occurred in their location (by the IP and ISP). They'd recognize the email address as belonging to someone else in their household. If they wanted, we would cancel the account and refund the full amount. I'd say refunds occurred about 50% of the time. They'd talk to their family members, and find out that they had done the transaction, the card holder just didn't know, but they allowed it anyways.
For us, it didn't matter that much. We handled millions of dollars a year. Who cared about a few dozen refunds in the same period. It was cheaper to refund and make the consumer happy, than dispute and risk incurring the fines, and risking our merchant account status.
I know people will stolen card information will test it by donating a small amount to charity. People won't generally notice a $1 or $5 charge on their card, if it's frequently used. They'll catch on when the card is used the second time for a high dollar transaction. The idea of the test transaction is only to verify the card. It's easy, and they don't have to provide a valid delivery address for merchandise. They aren't doing it out of good will, they're exploiting the system a bit more.
It is well recorded throughout history that religion has been used to control the general populace. It allows for the explanation of things they don't understand, which comforts people. It allows for control over the people, with the threat of an unfavorable afterlife, next incarnation, etc. It also allows for the general population, under guidance from their leaders, to believe that non-believers are less moral or less human, because they don't believe.
I'm waiting for documented and tested evidence. I don't fall into *any* of the groups, because I simply don't believe in fairy tales. Once upon a time, I did, because I was raised with it. I was told the wonders of God, Jesus, the holy spirit, and all the stories in the old books. As a young teenager, I started looking for answers to the gaping holes. I looked for the "right" religion. I compared religions. I found none to be based in reality. I could have adopted any of them. I could have become Jewish, Buddhist, or even Scientology. I could have decided to follow Druidism, or even be a follower of Norse Mythology. Greek and Norse mythology definitely have better stories. Druidism and other ancient pagan religions are harder to follow, as much of their history was destroyed when more modern religions moved in. Destroy all those old traditions, the new one is in charge now.
Some of those traditions have been destroyed, leaving almost nothing. Stonehenge is a great example. We know it's there. A couple hundred years ago, it was a pile of rocks. Now, it's a mostly reconstructed site of some sort of significance. Another is Gobekli Tepe. It's amazingly well preserved because it was buried for millenia. We don't really know anything about their traditions.
We're lucky we've even figured out what we know about the ancient Egyptian religions. I don't believe a man entombed in a big ass pyramid is god, but plenty of people did when they put him in there. Well, hims, hers, and even royal pets... To the best of my knowledge, they are the oldest "gods" that we have any evidence of. Even then, all we have is evidence that someone was buried in their tombs, and now they're a dessicated bag of skin and bones, wrapped in cloth. Disappearing gods are just a plot device for authors to excuse the fact that they have no evidence.
Perl too. :) I had it on my Android phone, before I wiped it for another install. I don't remember right off where to get it, but it wasn't hard to find for those who have heard of a search engine. :)
All the hooks for using the system are in place for interacting with the hardware in Java. That's probably the biggest reason for development to be done in Java. I believe it was at least partially implemented in Perl. At least that's what I remember from a year ago.
Oh look, the link for SL4A. Perl, Python, Lua, Beanshell (?), and Rhino (?). I wanted to do my own GPS tracking program to update my own web site. Since there are plenty of apps that are already written, and mostly did what I wanted, I really haven't looked too hard at continuing. I may revisit it eventually, if I find that I have too much spare time on my hands. One of the things that I got hung up on was the speed and altitude limitations. 11 miles (18 kilometers) and/or (1,853 kilometers per hour).
One of the things I wanted to eventually try is an air launch rocket (as opposed to the typical ground launch), with the ability to bring itself home. Prevailing winds where I live would put touchdown of a high altitude flight of any significant duration about 20 miles out into the Atlantic. Besides the fact I don't have a boat, I don't want to spend the time explaining to the US Navy or US Coast Guard why I'm in a rented boat, 20 miles off shore, with a big freakin' rocket. I'd rather violate FAA rules, than be tied up in a DHS interrogation for days. If it does manage to get up to speed or altitude, it'd be lost until it dropped enough speed and altitude, which may put it way off course for coming home. I'd love to be lazy enough to just put an android phone in to handle tracking. I may have to look at gray market components, which will add to the overall weight.
There is no way to prove a lack of it. I'm not the one who made up any sort of religion. The burden of proof is with the anyone making the assertion that things exist.
Here's an example that may be easier to understand. You can't prove there is no such things as Big Foot. If someone makes the assertion that Big Foot exists, it is up to them to prove that their assertion is true. If, one day, someone brings forward positive evidence that can be peer reviewed, that shows Big Foot does exist, then I will believe it.
The best evidence for Big Foot was one that was killed, and frozen in a chest freezer. They insisted it was real. They had a block of ice with something furry inside, which was real. When the evidence was reviewed, it was shown to be a gorilla costume in a block of ice.
If God were to twinkle his way down to Times Square, announce his presence. Do a few impossible things, and explain even a small part of how the universe got here, sure I'd believe in it. As long as it's just people ranting about some old book ... well ... not so much. The Christian god doesn't have a monopoly (or even majority) on the planet. It would seem to be in his best interest to drop by and say "Hi guys, I'm here. Lets talk."
Well, you're right. Someone could be right. None of them have any solid evidence. There are *over* 10,000, but we'll go with your lowered number of just 10,002. That means, I have a 1 in 10,002 chance of picking the right one, should I decide to do so.
Lack of evidence does not make a deity real. Evidence would.
There is no inherent belief in humans that there is a deity of any sort. That is a trained belief. These beliefs are taught to them from day 1. If you took a group of children, and never introduced he idea of a deity to them, one (or some) may make up stories to explain what they don't understand, but the stories will be so separated from any known religion, that they wouldn't be recognizable.
Or... Every child is born an atheist. Religion is forced upon them after that.
They are fables; mythology; legends; fictional stories that we have made to comfort ourselves.
I take comfort in knowledge and exploration. We have the possibility of educating ourselves to such great extents, why do people feel it's necessary to fall back to these works of fiction.
In that every religion is different should be enough explanation that none are right. If there were a higher power that created humanity and guides us, wouldn't they clearly outline even the basic notions of the deity and belief systems? If I have to pick, I'll chose the Norse gods. And when I die, I'm heading for Valhalla.
You're probably right.
I just have a hard time reconciling the fact that there are over 10,000 religions on this planet, and the cultists in each believe that they are right, and want you to convert to their way. No matter what, it's a lose-lose situation. If you don't believe their way, you're wrong. If you do finally accept their way, that means you are wrong in the minds of the thousands of others groups.
I guess that's part of why holy wars work. Unless one group manages to gain 100% acceptance, they'll always have someone to fight against.
Shhh... You're screwing with the religious zealots. They'll start quoting fire and brimstone passages out of their holy books. Then they'll flip through the peaceful and loving parts, and find reasons to kill you in very uncomfortable ways.
You and I know perfectly well that there is no invisible friend running the universe, and the only kind of divine intervention that happens is choreographed and executed by a flesh and blood humans.
Some of these people actually believe it. Most of their holy books say that by doubting them, you are their evil, and you must be punished. ... and you may say you have an elephant in your bathtub, but I have an undetectable transdimensional leprechaun in a box. Don't ever try to open the box, or he'll immediately move to another dimension. Once you believe in him, I'll introduce you to the invisible dragon in the garage. My girlfriend told me that he's there. He sucks the life out of car batteries, and changes my preset radio stations when I'm out of town.
The word you're grasping for is "colloquialism". They are not always defined by national geographic boundaries either.
"Soda", "cola", "pop", "coke", "coca", "pepsi", "tonic", "soft drink", "soda water", "fizzy drink", and "refresco", are common colloquialisms used as generic descriptions of carbonated sugary drinks, regardless of name brand similarities.
As in your example, "cigarette", "fag", and "smoke" are common colloquialisms.
Those are just ones I'm familiar with, and can think of right off, because they're used in places I've been.
It's not just infrastructure.
If my company goes down, it hurts law enforcement across the country. It could be the difference between raiding the right house to catch a murderer, or going to his residence from 3 years ago.
Plenty of jobs have similar levels of responsibility. Do you want everyone at your credit card company heading out Friday at 5pm, disconnected til 8am Monday? I like the idea that their fraud department does work, and if my card is compromised, I may get a call regarding it. IT at the same company is important. There may be a few upset customers and vendors, if Visa goes down Friday afternoon, and can't process any transactions until Monday morning.
Nah, I didn't say it for the XKCD reference. I'm just kinda blunt. :) If I want to steal your credit card, I'm not going to call you up, and try to get it from you gracefully. I'd probably kick you in the nuts, and follow that up with ... well ... a $5 wrench to which ever part looked like it wanted to be hit. Then I'd say "May I have your credit card please?"
"... and your cell phone ..."
"... and your car keys ..."
"... and do you mind holding my wrench with your head? Thank you."
See, please *and* thank you. I do well with the social graces.
I found my kindergarten report card. Under "Socialization" it had the box checked "does not play well with others."
I see "social engineering" as being "social" (with others), and then it's an engineering challenge.
But hey, I see a Rubik's cube as being an engineering challenge too. I can solve one in about a minute, if they use the regular attachment method. 45 degree twist, and push at the corner. Now it's like a 3d jigsaw puzzle. People only say it's cheating, because my way is faster than theirs.
That'd be $5 at a yard sale. :) The price is what you pay for it. The supply chain and vendor aren't significant.