I don't recall having ever done this before, but for once I've gotta complain about moderation. +3 Insightful, really? Really?
Do our troops consider the long-term impacts of their ammo? Does it matter? They don't get to pick their ammo. They don't even get to pick how much of it they use. They don't even necessarily get to pick what gun they use.
If you want to criticize someone for it, by all means, do it, but go after the people who are actually responsible. Soldiers are just uniformed victims of war.
There's a "material" tag on the story pointing out an apparent typo. I can't ever seem to get tags to behave for me, so I'll post a reply instead. In military talk, "materiel" is a specific term to refer to the stuff we need to fight a battle. It has specific and distinct connotations in supply management, and it used correctly in this article's summary.
A good friend of mine and his wife went to China and they found something rather interesting. They were young folks right out of college and went to China to teach English for the Chinese government. They were taken to a military medical research facility, put in a room with black mold, given "military escorts", and followed everywhere. The first night locked in their room they could hear the screams of people being "researched" on. They got out, evaded the guards, fled the city, snuck onto a truck and then a bus and a train back to the regional airport and then bribed an airline to take them to Beijing, where they went to the American embassy to arrange medical evacuation to the US. And they had an adventure that they'll remember for the rest of their lives.
I'm neither disagreeing with you nor arguing that Air Marshalls are ineffective, just thought you'd find the article interesting, since it's the only place I've even seen a suggestion of how many flights are actually covered. FWIW my LEO friends have heard similar (though not exactly the same) things from friends and trainers who exited the Air Marshall program because of lack of support from the organization. If you ever get the chance to check out how the Israelis train for hijacking situations on a plane, it's pretty impressive to see how they adapated some hand-to-hand techniques for that specific CQB.
2. If it detects a terrorist attack, what can anyone do about it while the plane is in the air?
Oh, I dunno...drop the cabin pressure precipitously so our hijackers have to decide between passing out and using an oxygen mask...have the stewardesses block access to the cockpit with their handy trolley...have their gun out and be in position if they're part of the cockpit carry program...call the closest tower to warn the ground so we can scramble jets this time...start dumping fuel so the plane can't be used as a missile...put the plane into an uneven roll, which sucks for anyone without a seatbelt...signal the airmarshal if they're on one of the lucky.01% of flights...
I guess about half of those are things that the hijackers did on Flight 93 when the passengers tried to take it back, and it worked; the passengers couldn't take it back. And there we're talking 20+ people, not 4.
Don't get me wrong. Facecrime is just another way to measure thoughtcrime; I think it's bullshit, and I won't ride on a plane that has this. I'm already curtailing my travel (I wonder if anyone else is?) because I can't trust Homeland Security. We have full-body scanners at my airport now. Full-body scanners. I used to be afraid of what would happen when the government finally figured out how to tap into the databases at my bank, my phone company, my insurance company...now I'm afraid of what will happen when the private sector figures out how to get information out of the government.
I second (third?) the two parents here. When I did debate in high school (yeah, yeah), we always hoped to be seeded as the last speaker in any given round, because then we'd be the last person the judges had seen, and so the freshest in their memory when they went to judge. Do your most high-profile and professional work now, leave on a high note. Makes them a solid reference, may leave a door open in case your new gig doesn't work (unlikely, yes, but the work is well worth the option), and you'll leave with no regrets. Also, ten years from now, who knows which person there will be laying down the groundwork for a new startup and need a CTO. (Just keep up your people-to-people networking with your former bosses and coworkers.)
Well, now I can confirm everything you guys did, which sucks, since I was totally on the right track. I just missed the linebreak spaces (or lack thereof sometimes), which made my ternary all go wrong halfway through.
Ya, I agree. Seems like there's a bit of a pointer there to the 2nd stanza, but what do we do with the two halves of it? "S"+ "FC" = S252, is that a full employee number? Seems short at best.
III II III II III III III III I I I II I III II
III III III II III I III II II I II III III I II I I I III III I I III II III I II II III III
III III III II I II I II III II I III I I III
III I I III III III III I III III III I I I I II I I III III III III II III II III II II I I II III II III I III III III I I II I II III I II III II III I III I II
"D i - L O T D ^ D 8 R >"
F 0 B E 5 8 F 2 F D 6 3
"R Y P H 8 ^ L % H > L R"
6 C 7 9 D 2 E 4 9 3 E 6
"S D Y"
I I I II I II I I II I II I II I II I II I I II I II I II I II I I I II I II I I II I
I I II I I II I I II I II I I I II I II I I II I I I II I II I I II I I I II I I I I I I I I II I II I II I I II I I II I II I I I II I II I II I II I I I II I I I II I I
II I I I II I II I I II I I II I I I II I I I II I I I II I I I II I I I II I I I II
I I I II I I II I I I II I I I II I II I I II I I I II I II I I II I I I II I II I I I II I II I I II I I I II I I I II I I I II I I II I I I II I II I II I I I II I I I II I I II I I II I I I II I I II I I I II I I II I I I II I II I I II I I I II I II I I II I II I II I I
###
Center section: Quotes indicate symbols (see key below) rather than recognizable alphanumeric.
Bottom section: "II?" indicates that it may be a single line or a double line; it seems likely that it's a single line since there are no other places where a double line follows a double line.
D = isoceles right triangle, its hypotenuse vertical and the 90d point extending left. i = the letter i - = a dash L = two lines like a backwards L with a long leg and a spine on the right side of the leg; there is a small dot opposite the spine at the top. O = a circle with two small dashes extruding from its top and bottom on the right side T = A skinny "T" with a dot at the bottom right ^ = a small angle, draw high with respect to the other characters (like the round part of a P, but angled) 8 = a vertical figure-eight with a small circle inscribed in the lower portion R = two lines like the top right corner of a rectangle, drawn high with respect to the other characters, the vertical leg shorter than the horizontal leg, with a dot opposite the corner of the figure > = an acute angle, its mouth facing up and left Y = a small upside-down "T", its legs slightly canted down P = a circle with a vertical, serifed line drawn through it (an uppercase phi) H = two parallel vertical lines, offset vertically from one another % = three small circles arranged in a triangle with a vertical line to their right S = a symbol that looks exactly like a lowercase S
I've posted a transcribed text version of the document on my journal here. (Sorry I couldn't post it directly here, but there's too much repetition for it to make it past the lameness filter, which is itself lame.)
http://slashdot.org/~Starlet+Monroe/journal/202986
It totally deserved being modded up. Funny was the wrong tag for it, I think; comedy needs distance from tragedy, which we don't have. It's like making Columbine or 9/11 jokes while the event is still happening.
In my opinion, those are -exactly- the things missing from our national rhetoric now. So do I agree with them? Of course. Do I know why our media and politicians, apparently, gave up on these things sometime in my life? No. But, (see #7), my mission is to not only question, but change Authority to at least bring us back to a playing field that includes discussion.
Poster is too involved in RealPolitik to actually make a REAL fucking difference. Refuses to "unshackle" own mind, must conform to groupthink. Hypothesis: Suspect communistic tendancies coupled with a covering label that says "Republican". Further research required to validate as Theorem.
So...if you use a pretend scientific method as a debate framework, you win?
Sorry, bud. Try: Stringent Democrat whose version of "making a real fucking difference" is by running for office and founding a replicator/assembler tech company and bootstrapping counter-institutional arts organizations.
The picture painted here of an isolationist individual escaping from an isolationist society is fascinating, yet, I believe, irresponsible. The strength of our culture comes from the building blocks of intrapersonal relationships. The destiny of our culture will come from individuals who refuse to believe that they cannot make a difference. It is attitudes of social angst like this that cause so many people to give up on larger ideals and goals and focus [selfishly] on their own lives.
"Fall from sight", indeed. This is a bit too existential for my taste; Camus never seemed anything but frightening to me.
I am small, compared to a corporation and a government, as just a biological entity. But as a struggling businessman or a candidate for office, I make can waves. I can use my intelligence and build a corporation of my own and fight for the things that I think matter...I can seek to change the tone of the political rhetoric...I can use what resources I have to assist the people around me...or I can go play in the woods and pretend I'm alone.
We can all make a difference in the world around us. The real question is, are you going to get off your ass and do something, or just sink below the surface forever?
Slashdot Mirror
...how about Caylee Anthony?
Why is this modded flamebait?
I don't recall having ever done this before, but for once I've gotta complain about moderation. +3 Insightful, really? Really?
Do our troops consider the long-term impacts of their ammo? Does it matter? They don't get to pick their ammo. They don't even get to pick how much of it they use. They don't even necessarily get to pick what gun they use.
If you want to criticize someone for it, by all means, do it, but go after the people who are actually responsible. Soldiers are just uniformed victims of war.
There's a "material" tag on the story pointing out an apparent typo. I can't ever seem to get tags to behave for me, so I'll post a reply instead. In military talk, "materiel" is a specific term to refer to the stuff we need to fight a battle. It has specific and distinct connotations in supply management, and it used correctly in this article's summary.
A good friend of mine and his wife went to China and they found something rather interesting. They were young folks right out of college and went to China to teach English for the Chinese government. They were taken to a military medical research facility, put in a room with black mold, given "military escorts", and followed everywhere. The first night locked in their room they could hear the screams of people being "researched" on. They got out, evaded the guards, fled the city, snuck onto a truck and then a bus and a train back to the regional airport and then bribed an airline to take them to Beijing, where they went to the American embassy to arrange medical evacuation to the US. And they had an adventure that they'll remember for the rest of their lives.
I'm neither disagreeing with you nor arguing that Air Marshalls are ineffective, just thought you'd find the article interesting, since it's the only place I've even seen a suggestion of how many flights are actually covered. FWIW my LEO friends have heard similar (though not exactly the same) things from friends and trainers who exited the Air Marshall program because of lack of support from the organization. If you ever get the chance to check out how the Israelis train for hijacking situations on a plane, it's pretty impressive to see how they adapated some hand-to-hand techniques for that specific CQB.
Man, there was some news story about this recently. Lemme see if I can find it. ...and, here: http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/04/16/griffin.marshal.training/index.html
Check that out.
2. If it detects a terrorist attack, what can anyone do about it while the plane is in the air?
.01% of flights...
Oh, I dunno...drop the cabin pressure precipitously so our hijackers have to decide between passing out and using an oxygen mask...have the stewardesses block access to the cockpit with their handy trolley...have their gun out and be in position if they're part of the cockpit carry program...call the closest tower to warn the ground so we can scramble jets this time...start dumping fuel so the plane can't be used as a missile...put the plane into an uneven roll, which sucks for anyone without a seatbelt...signal the airmarshal if they're on one of the lucky
I guess about half of those are things that the hijackers did on Flight 93 when the passengers tried to take it back, and it worked; the passengers couldn't take it back. And there we're talking 20+ people, not 4.
Don't get me wrong. Facecrime is just another way to measure thoughtcrime; I think it's bullshit, and I won't ride on a plane that has this. I'm already curtailing my travel (I wonder if anyone else is?) because I can't trust Homeland Security. We have full-body scanners at my airport now. Full-body scanners. I used to be afraid of what would happen when the government finally figured out how to tap into the databases at my bank, my phone company, my insurance company...now I'm afraid of what will happen when the private sector figures out how to get information out of the government.
Shitty.
I second (third?) the two parents here. When I did debate in high school (yeah, yeah), we always hoped to be seeded as the last speaker in any given round, because then we'd be the last person the judges had seen, and so the freshest in their memory when they went to judge. Do your most high-profile and professional work now, leave on a high note. Makes them a solid reference, may leave a door open in case your new gig doesn't work (unlikely, yes, but the work is well worth the option), and you'll leave with no regrets. Also, ten years from now, who knows which person there will be laying down the groundwork for a new startup and need a CTO. (Just keep up your people-to-people networking with your former bosses and coworkers.)
Final cipher I had was:
abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz
mnlp o k wuy xstrdec hfab
in case anyone wants to repeat the steps like I did.
Well, now I can confirm everything you guys did, which sucks, since I was totally on the right track. I just missed the linebreak spaces (or lack thereof sometimes), which made my ternary all go wrong halfway through.
Very nice work. Very very nice.
Ya, I agree. Seems like there's a bit of a pointer there to the 2nd stanza, but what do we do with the two halves of it? "S"+ "FC" = S252, is that a full employee number? Seems short at best.
I get that I may be missing a joke, but can you validate this at all?
Text version second try:
###
III II III II III III III III I I I II I III II
III III III II III I III II II I II III III I
II I I I III III I I III II III I II II III III
III III III II I II I II III II I III I I III
III I I III III III III I III III III I I I I
II I I III III III III II III II III II II I I
II III II III I III III III I I II I II III I
II III II III I III I II
"D i - L O T D ^ D 8 R >"
F 0 B E 5 8 F 2 F D 6 3
"R Y P H 8 ^ L % H > L R"
6 C 7 9 D 2 E 4 9 3 E 6
"S D Y"
I I I II I II I I II I II I II I II I II I I II I II I II I II I I I II I II I I II I
I I II I I II I I II I II I I I II I II I I II I I I II I II I I II I I I II I I I I
I I I I II I II I II I I II I I II I II I I I II I II I II I II I I I II I I I II I I
II I I I II I II I I II I I II I I I II I I I II I I I II I I I II I I I II I I I II
I I I II I I II I I I II I I I II I II I I II I I I II I II I I II I I I II I II I I
I II I II I I II I I I II I I I II I I I II I I II I I I II I II I II I I I II I I I
II I I II I I II I I I II I I II I I I II I I II I I I II I II I I II I I I II I II
I I II I II I II I I
###
Center section: Quotes indicate symbols (see key below) rather than recognizable alphanumeric.
Bottom section: "II?" indicates that it may be a single line or a double line; it seems likely that it's a single line since there are no other places where a double line follows a double line.
D = isoceles right triangle, its hypotenuse vertical and the 90d point extending left.
i = the letter i
- = a dash
L = two lines like a backwards L with a long leg and a spine on the right side of the leg; there is a small dot opposite the spine at the top.
O = a circle with two small dashes extruding from its top and bottom on the right side
T = A skinny "T" with a dot at the bottom right
^ = a small angle, draw high with respect to the other characters (like the round part of a P, but angled)
8 = a vertical figure-eight with a small circle inscribed in the lower portion
R = two lines like the top right corner of a rectangle, drawn high with respect to the other characters, the vertical leg shorter than the horizontal leg, with a dot opposite the corner of the figure
> = an acute angle, its mouth facing up and left
Y = a small upside-down "T", its legs slightly canted down
P = a circle with a vertical, serifed line drawn through it (an uppercase phi)
H = two parallel vertical lines, offset vertically from one another
% = three small circles arranged in a triangle with a vertical line to their right
S = a symbol that looks exactly like a lowercase S
First stanza converted from ternary to binary to hex:
bf e2 34 8f ba 05 c4 7b 69 ab cd 81 34 02 f9 44 36 fe 20 16 13 f9 01
I've posted a transcribed text version of the document on my journal here. (Sorry I couldn't post it directly here, but there's too much repetition for it to make it past the lameness filter, which is itself lame.) http://slashdot.org/~Starlet+Monroe/journal/202986
Yes, and if nothing else there will be a few crack whores around to help you through those cold winter nights.
Never winter nights!
Here's my add to that:
Don't play interview games; talk to me like I'm a person. How I'm treated in the interview is how I'll expect to be treated as an employee.
He means the people in Congress who will vote to support the impeachment are significantly in the minority. Bad phraseage.
It totally deserved being modded up. Funny was the wrong tag for it, I think; comedy needs distance from tragedy, which we don't have. It's like making Columbine or 9/11 jokes while the event is still happening.
Please mod parent unfunny or insightful.
Any police chief who supplies his force with inferior, useless tools deserves to be shot... ...with a weapon borrowed from a different precinct.
mmmhmmm....monarchy. No, wait.
:)
In my opinion, those are -exactly- the things missing from our national rhetoric now. So do I agree with them? Of course. Do I know why our media and politicians, apparently, gave up on these things sometime in my life? No. But, (see #7), my mission is to not only question, but change Authority to at least bring us back to a playing field that includes discussion.
See, that's some #5 for ya.
Poster is too involved in RealPolitik to actually make a REAL fucking difference. Refuses to "unshackle" own mind, must conform to groupthink. Hypothesis: Suspect communistic tendancies coupled with a covering label that says "Republican". Further research required to validate as Theorem.
So...if you use a pretend scientific method as a debate framework, you win?
Sorry, bud. Try: Stringent Democrat whose version of "making a real fucking difference" is by running for office and founding a replicator/assembler tech company and bootstrapping counter-institutional arts organizations.
The picture painted here of an isolationist individual escaping from an isolationist society is fascinating, yet, I believe, irresponsible. The strength of our culture comes from the building blocks of intrapersonal relationships. The destiny of our culture will come from individuals who refuse to believe that they cannot make a difference. It is attitudes of social angst like this that cause so many people to give up on larger ideals and goals and focus [selfishly] on their own lives.
"Fall from sight", indeed. This is a bit too existential for my taste; Camus never seemed anything but frightening to me.
I am small, compared to a corporation and a government, as just a biological entity. But as a struggling businessman or a candidate for office, I make can waves. I can use my intelligence and build a corporation of my own and fight for the things that I think matter...I can seek to change the tone of the political rhetoric...I can use what resources I have to assist the people around me...or I can go play in the woods and pretend I'm alone.
We can all make a difference in the world around us. The real question is, are you going to get off your ass and do something, or just sink below the surface forever?