It's not like they are shutting down porn sites here. They are shutting down pages that many people will get 'trapped' by when they mistype a web address. And since many of the sites targeted are children-oriented, not adult oriented. Are these children "fully capable of making [their] own choices in life"?
And as far as you not being allowed to access something, when was the last time you tried to access one of his "41 variations on the name of pop star Britney Spears"? Never? Yeah, I thought so. When was the last time you tried to access the sewer system in LA, and were not allowed to crawl through the piles of shit? Again never? And you are complaining about being denied access to something. Get real. The only thing being denied is the pleasure of being deluged with hundred of porno images that link to crappy porno sites, or even crappier "free porno" sites that link to crappy porno sites. Just like they can't paste Playboy or Hustler pages all over the front window of the local market.
For the record, I think the government should leave all businesses alone. But they don't. So I am not going to climb on my highhorse over one selfish pig that gives the rest of us pigs a bad name.
Quoted for those who can't see 0 scores. Leif_Bloomquist wrote "Our operation runs completely on Windows 2000. However, I have set up one old PC with Linux (Redhat 7.1) so that everyone who wants to can give it a spin. "
For this he was modded down to 0, and tagged Redundant. How can it be redundant if noone else has ever posted how many computer Leif_Bloomquist has running Windows and Linux? It might not directly answer the posted question, which wants the most Linux desktops, but at least let the guy have a voice.
Have the moderators gotten lousy in the last month, or is this a cyclical thing? (I've been reading and posting for about 4 months now.) Seems every topic lately has posts modded down to 0 and tagged either Flamebait or Redundant, when they don't deserve it. They may not be the most informative and in-depth posts, but they're not trashing anyone or pasting diatribes either.
Hell, I'm glad this guy cares about Linux enough that he setup a Linux box for his Windows-only co-workers to tryout. Again, how is this information Redundant? Plus, it's not an Anonymous Coward posting, it's someone who is putting his name on his post, and possibly his real name at that. This kind of stuff makes me want to stop reading Slashdot and get back to work. A sentiment I have seen others mention several times in the last two weeks. Maybe it should be a topic in itself.
Good point about the drivers license, I should have included it. But the government (state government in the US) does still own your car. Basically, the title and drivers license are both a EULA between the government and yourself.
There is a legal procedure you can go through to get the actual legal ownership of your car. It involves some very technical forms, and is defined in international agreements. But unless you do, you don't own it.
Ever try to buy a car from a junkyard? Not just a door, or engine, but the whole vehicle? In most states it is not allowed. Let's say that I sell my 1967 Camaro to a junkyard because the transmission is shot, and I don't have the money to fix it. The body and frame are in good shape, but no one at the time wants to buy it, so I junk it. They put it out in the junkyard with the other junk cars, and a year later you see it while looking for a fender for your 1970 Corvette. You see the Camaro is in good shape, and the note on the dashboard says "Bad transmission", but everything else looks great. You ask about buying it, and are told that they can't legally sell any vehicle in the junkyard. They can only sell parts from the vehicles, because the title has been turned in to the state.
The junkyard owns the 'physical instance' of the 1967 Camaro, with its unrusted fenders, beautifully smooth leather seats, and working engine. It can sell any of these objects as used parts. But it cannot sell the 'vehicle' that is the 1967 Camaro, because the state owns it, and by law says it cannot be resold as a car.
There are two different things that are being owned here, but they are the same physical items. Only lawyers could come up with something so complicated. Now, some states do allow junkyards to sell 'vehicles', so I am not saying the above situation pertains to everyone. But it is the case in some states, from my personal experience. I was looking for parts for one of my cars once, and saw a beautiful car (I forget the model), no rust, engine was clean, seats/dash/uphosltry was perfect. Note said "Bad tranny" (which meant the car's transmission in that case, not a personal reference). Everything else being OK, I asked if I could buy it for $1000 to work on, and was told that they couldn't because the state owned the title. They could sell everything from the vehicle except the VIN plates, but not the vehicle itself. Again, this is not the case in every state, but it is in most.
I just posted this in another response, but it is needed here too, I guess.
"Obviously cars aren't software, particularly since when you buy a car, you buy the car. "
Actually,... you don't legally own your car. The government does. They provide a 'service' that allows you to use their car, and call it yours, but not transfer ownership of it without their permission. The title is their EULA, and it the only thing that makes speeding tickets and DUI fines enforcible. Since you agree to use their car on their roads, they can punish you how they wish for violating the license.
sphealey said: "Also, please note that if you lose the title to your car, you will have a devil of a time selling it, even if you have the car in your possession. "
Actually, this is because you don't legally own your car. The government does. They provide a 'service' that allows you to use their car, and call it yours, but not transfer ownership of it without their permission. The title is their EULA, and it the only thing that makes speeding tickets and DUI fines enforcible. Since you agree to use their car on their roads, they can punish you how they wish for violating the license.
I just figured he opened up his "My Computer" icon, saw Drives A:, C:, D:, E:, F:, etc:, and decided that the letter B stopped existing when the single-floppy PC was introduced.
I would agree with you 100%, except for one thing. I haven't heard of Superaudio. Is it a real music format, or just some cool sounding name you made up for your post? Seriously.
I noticed that line in the original post too, and thought the guy is either stupid, or the "audiophiles" he knows are the ones who think a test of a stereo system is to see how loud they can crank the volume before the speakers blow.
A few years back I was reading one of the home stereo mags, and the article mentioned that real audiophiles always preferred the reel-to-reel tape format. Low noise, true sound curves, and other things you can't get from cassettes or CDs, and certainly not from MP3s. Too bad the reel-to-reel format went away.
So, is Superaudio real, and if so, what format is it? Just curious. I'm not planning on buying any system right now, but always interested in learning about stuff I don't know yet.
So, explain how a "barnstormer" plane can fly upside-down. If their wing has a curved top surface, and a flat bottom surface, when they are upside down the "lift" would be in the Earthward direction. They would bury themselves into the dirt within seconds.
(I am not a pilot or barnstormer, but asked a pilot about this a few months ago after an air-race. This is the gist of his answer.)
To avoid this, barnstorming planes use a different wing. Their wings are shaped symetrically, top-to-bottom. Both surfaces are the same, and give the same flight characteristics, no matter which way they are oriented. It is up to the pilot to keep the right angle so that the passing air pushes the plane up. No easy job when your upside-down, going 60 mph (??), with that long scarf flapping around your head.
Not saying the lift principle of an asymmetric wing is not valid, but it is not the only wing shape in use.
What laws for free speech are you referring to?
The only thing I can think of that supposedly guarantees freedom of speech is the First Amendment of the US Constitution. That isn't a law, it's the Constitution. All other laws regarding speech are actually placing limits on that freedom of speech, despite the Constitution. Can't say hateful things, can't say pornographic things, can't shout Fire in a theater, can't tell the Ruskies how to build a nuclear bomb, can't make a prank phone call threatening the President, can't etc.
Same for freedom of the press, which would seem more appropriate in this case.
There are all kinds of agreements that "restrict" your right to free speech. Many companys have non-disclosure agreements. You can find out about their most secret new products and ad campaigns, but you can't blab to their competitors about it, or even to your spouse. Noone complains about that. This doesn't violate the First amendment, because Congress has nothing to do with it.
An AC wrote:
"100% retard to ***-out the "uck" in FUCKEDCOMPANY.COM !
Long live the fuck and the uck !
Free speech for everyone ! "
You would be a lot more convincing if you weren't posting anonymously. (Shit, I had to look below to spell that word.) And if you looked at the link in the status bar, it points to F---kedCompany.com so it's doubly censored, eh.
Well, we've been bloodthirsty idiots for years, and it's worked ok until now.
Yeah, I know that's in poor taste, but you asked for it.;^)
But you're right, we are the only country to have used nukes against anyone. Hopefully we don't decide to use them again. They won't work very well, and will turn most of the world away from our cause.
Actually, Rush Limbaugh plays many of these songs as the lead-in and fade-out (?) music on his program. That is one thing I wondered about for a while. He is obviously against the "really bad" songs, that advocate violence or anti-christian thoughts, but plays some very cool music after commercial breaks. Guess we will hear all country songs for a while.
At least they didn't list AC/DC's "Night Prowler" this time. It was believed to be the cause of that psycho Night Stalker in LA in the 80's. But it doesn't cause terrorism, so it's OK.
One. Mondale lost the popular vote by the largest margin in US History. He also lost the electoral vote by the largest margin.
Two. As far as the winning candidate losing the popular vote 'by the largest margin', it only happened twice before, in over 200 years, so it's not like there are a lot of elections to compare it to.
Three. The margin was larger than the other two times, because there were over 100 million people voting last fall. In the other elections, there were considerably fewer.
Four. Nationwide, there were over one million ballots that were not counted for one reason or another. Many absentee ballots from military were dismissed because they were not postmarked with a date. On ships, they don't use postmarks with dates, they just throw all the mail in a bag and send it off. How many of those were for Bush?
Five. The electoral college votes for the president. You would have the votes in a few counties of one state be recounted for months to try to give Florida's electors to Gore.
Six. The Supreme Court said that re-counting a select group of ballots was not equal representation concerning the other ballots. Plus there was no way to guarantee that the recount would be conducted fairly. So the recount would either have to be done for the entire state of Florida, by hand, and be totally impartial, or it would have to be stopped. The vote was 7 to 2.
Seven. The liberal media did the recount on their own, and found that Bush still won by several hundred legitimate votes.
Eight. All this is pointless argument, since you obviously don't care about reality and facts. You just want your mother to hold you and tell you it will be alright in 2004.
Actually, I was mentioning this to my wife last week. Who says you need to bring weapons onboard in the first place. These groups are not a bunch of couch potatoes who decided to steal a plane for fun. They are trained combatants. Maybe they wouldn't do well in a karate tournament, but do you doubt they could grab a stewardess and break her neck? And threaten the pilots that they will kill more if the pilots don't give up the plane? Then kill the pilots the same way? (Actually in a karate tournament, their problem might be trying not to kill their opponent.)
And even beside that, they have silverware on planes for the meal. And if they brought a glass bottle of juice with them, that would make a good weapon too. Break it over someone's head, and you have a nice sharp edge.
So, no the search doesn't do much for safety, but it's better than nothing. I just got the feeling that he thought he was 'above' that sort of thing. Having to wait in line with the commoners and all. When I have a flight I show up early, stand in line for whatever, and wait in the terminal for boarding time. No big deal. Hardly an inconvenience since I am going to be on a plane for a few hours anyway. Not like I am going to go to the movies at my destination.
But the only "rights" you can possibly have are those that are laid out by the governing body in a region. In the US, that is the Federal Government as established by the Constitution, and especially as enumerated in the Bill of Rights, and other Amendments.
In other "civilized" countries, rights are based on their government. In "developing" countries, rights are based on local warlords. In the backwoods of Columbia, your rights are decided by the rebel leaders and drug lords. If you go into that area, you must accept the fact that there are no "human rights" in effect. If the local rebels don't like you, they will kill you. They won't even bother to hold you hostage for ransom, since they make plenty of money from the drug trade.
And in the US, even visitors have the right to remain silent, the right to not be searched unreasonably, and the right to a lawyer. About the only time this is routinely overlooked would be with illegal immigrants, who are processed and sent back home with little concern for their rights. But the alternative is for the government to bring them to court and throw them in prison for a few years. For expediency sake, that is not done.
You don't have your Constitutionally guaranteed rights abroad. They only apply within the borders, territories, and possessions of the US. In European countries, you have the rights they give you.
And our Constitutionally guaranteed rights apply to all people, not just US Citizens or residents. Someone from Japan who is vacationing in California has those same rights.
I have seen this same argument in other threads. Why doesn't it sink in.
Perhaps you missed the news articles about the recounts conducted for three months after Bush was sworn into office. Of course no one read them since only about four newspapers in the country had the nerve to print the results. Bush won Florida. The exact numbers are unclear, but the winner isn't. And this was with the counting done by the most liberally-biased people they could find. They still couldn't force a Gore victory.
Granted that butterfly ballot probably cost Gore thousands of votes, more than enough to ensure victory. But the ballot was designed by a Democrat county clerk, so who are you going to blame for it?
And as if Clinton didn't "hasten to war" whenever another liberal-controlled newspaper found out about another scandal he was in. Didn't you notice that every time he had to apologize for something, someone got bombed. If you want to confuse correlation and causation, start there. How many times did we bomb Osama bin Laden because Slick Willy was caught with his dick in someone? Do you think that may have been a part of the cause?
First, he says baggage checks at the airport are simply an "inconvenience", as if he has something better to do than wait in line for a little while before waiting in the terminal for half an hour or more. Sorry if safety checks "inconvenience" you Mr. Stallman. Hell, just for your "convenience" we won't even do the periodic maintenance or pre-flight checklist on the jet before letting you board it, that may slow you down too much.
Second, who is he to have the gall to call Bush our "unelected president" at a time like this. Maybe he better drop his fragile ego down a notch, and realize that right now Bush is THE PRESIDENT of the US. Just because his favorite darling didn't win last year, doesn't mean he still has to whimper about it. I would stand behind Gore right now if he had won the election, even though I don't care for the man, personally or policy-wise.
Other than that, the article makes a good point. And I am sure that several ISP's are giving the FBI any info they request, including locking accounts and letting them read all email or anything else they can get. This would include AOL, MSN, AT&T, and any smaller ISP's that may be included. It will happen whether it's legal or not, because this is a national emergency; laws are conveniently ignored at time like this. I'm not saying it's 'right' or 'wrong', it just is.
Whether they will be able to pass a law about backdoors in encryption, or enforce one, or have one stand up to Constitutional scrutiny by the Supreme Court is another matter. There are many people who read this site who would start programming their own encryption scheme if such a law is passed and held to be valid. So one way or another that is the least of my worries right now.
From the article on MSNBC: "Commercial light simulators..."
Because you need the best light experience you can get.
Seriously, the guy has a very good point. The flight sims could be used to practice this type of attack. And how many people who use these flight sims have never targeted a building? (I don't use them, not my type of game.) But no one is going to call for a boycott of them. Most people wouldn't even understand the issues he brought up, like realistic 3-d maps of Manhattan.
Re:Your sig about liberty and security
on
Handling the Loads
·
· Score: 1
We've seen that quote from Franklin a lot lately, with about four different wordings. But I think that this week, there are a lot of people who are doing the first half without a care to the second half.
If the FBI/CIA/FAA/ETC walked into the AOL or MSN datacenters, and asked to review usage or email from accounts 'suspected' of being involved in this attack, I think they would be handed the passwords without a moments hesitation. And I wouldn't blame AOL or MSN for giving up the info.
I think that the FBI messed up with Ruby Ridge and Waco, and the CIA messed up other situations, and normally I wouldn't give them anything without a warrant. But this makes the niceties of personal freedom a little less important.
Remember in WWII, there were rations for food, gas, and supplies. Who says I can't buy 2 dozen eggs this week? The government says. At times of emergencies, liberty isn't a given. It's still a right, it just isn't allowed for the common good.
I don't know about that tack. If I am in space, with only a thin wall separating me from the hard vacuum, I want all the important tools premade and stowed in a toolkit that fits neatly out of the way. Several toolkits in fact. Ever see the movies, where there is a great big problem, and the idiots have everything they need to fix it, but it is all in the other section of spaceship, or something?
If this is used for non-critical items, fine. But if I _might_ need a wrench in space, I am going to have one, if I have to smuggle it there myself.
Slashdot Mirror
It's not like they are shutting down porn sites here. They are shutting down pages that many people will get 'trapped' by when they mistype a web address. And since many of the sites targeted are children-oriented, not adult oriented. Are these children "fully capable of making [their] own choices in life"?
And as far as you not being allowed to access something, when was the last time you tried to access one of his "41 variations on the name of pop star Britney Spears"? Never? Yeah, I thought so. When was the last time you tried to access the sewer system in LA, and were not allowed to crawl through the piles of shit? Again never? And you are complaining about being denied access to something. Get real. The only thing being denied is the pleasure of being deluged with hundred of porno images that link to crappy porno sites, or even crappier "free porno" sites that link to crappy porno sites. Just like they can't paste Playboy or Hustler pages all over the front window of the local market.
For the record, I think the government should leave all businesses alone. But they don't. So I am not going to climb on my highhorse over one selfish pig that gives the rest of us pigs a bad name.
Quoted for those who can't see 0 scores. Leif_Bloomquist wrote "Our operation runs completely on Windows 2000. However, I have set up one old PC with Linux (Redhat 7.1) so that everyone who wants to can give it a spin. "
For this he was modded down to 0, and tagged Redundant. How can it be redundant if noone else has ever posted how many computer Leif_Bloomquist has running Windows and Linux? It might not directly answer the posted question, which wants the most Linux desktops, but at least let the guy have a voice.
Have the moderators gotten lousy in the last month, or is this a cyclical thing? (I've been reading and posting for about 4 months now.) Seems every topic lately has posts modded down to 0 and tagged either Flamebait or Redundant, when they don't deserve it. They may not be the most informative and in-depth posts, but they're not trashing anyone or pasting diatribes either.
Hell, I'm glad this guy cares about Linux enough that he setup a Linux box for his Windows-only co-workers to tryout. Again, how is this information Redundant? Plus, it's not an Anonymous Coward posting, it's someone who is putting his name on his post, and possibly his real name at that. This kind of stuff makes me want to stop reading Slashdot and get back to work. A sentiment I have seen others mention several times in the last two weeks. Maybe it should be a topic in itself.
Good point about the drivers license, I should have included it. But the government (state government in the US) does still own your car. Basically, the title and drivers license are both a EULA between the government and yourself.
There is a legal procedure you can go through to get the actual legal ownership of your car. It involves some very technical forms, and is defined in international agreements. But unless you do, you don't own it.
Ever try to buy a car from a junkyard? Not just a door, or engine, but the whole vehicle? In most states it is not allowed. Let's say that I sell my 1967 Camaro to a junkyard because the transmission is shot, and I don't have the money to fix it. The body and frame are in good shape, but no one at the time wants to buy it, so I junk it. They put it out in the junkyard with the other junk cars, and a year later you see it while looking for a fender for your 1970 Corvette. You see the Camaro is in good shape, and the note on the dashboard says "Bad transmission", but everything else looks great. You ask about buying it, and are told that they can't legally sell any vehicle in the junkyard. They can only sell parts from the vehicles, because the title has been turned in to the state.
The junkyard owns the 'physical instance' of the 1967 Camaro, with its unrusted fenders, beautifully smooth leather seats, and working engine. It can sell any of these objects as used parts. But it cannot sell the 'vehicle' that is the 1967 Camaro, because the state owns it, and by law says it cannot be resold as a car.
There are two different things that are being owned here, but they are the same physical items. Only lawyers could come up with something so complicated. Now, some states do allow junkyards to sell 'vehicles', so I am not saying the above situation pertains to everyone. But it is the case in some states, from my personal experience. I was looking for parts for one of my cars once, and saw a beautiful car (I forget the model), no rust, engine was clean, seats/dash/uphosltry was perfect. Note said "Bad tranny" (which meant the car's transmission in that case, not a personal reference). Everything else being OK, I asked if I could buy it for $1000 to work on, and was told that they couldn't because the state owned the title. They could sell everything from the vehicle except the VIN plates, but not the vehicle itself. Again, this is not the case in every state, but it is in most.
I just posted this in another response, but it is needed here too, I guess.
... you don't legally own your car. The government does. They provide a 'service' that allows you to use their car, and call it yours, but not transfer ownership of it without their permission. The title is their EULA, and it the only thing that makes speeding tickets and DUI fines enforcible. Since you agree to use their car on their roads, they can punish you how they wish for violating the license.
"Obviously cars aren't software, particularly since when you buy a car, you buy the car. "
Actually,
IANAL, but I listen to them sometimes
sphealey said: "Also, please note that if you lose the title to your car, you will have a devil of a time selling it, even if you have the car in your possession. "
Actually, this is because you don't legally own your car. The government does. They provide a 'service' that allows you to use their car, and call it yours, but not transfer ownership of it without their permission. The title is their EULA, and it the only thing that makes speeding tickets and DUI fines enforcible. Since you agree to use their car on their roads, they can punish you how they wish for violating the license.
IANAL, but I listen to them sometimes.
I just figured he opened up his "My Computer" icon, saw Drives A:, C:, D:, E:, F:, etc:, and decided that the letter B stopped existing when the single-floppy PC was introduced.
I would agree with you 100%, except for one thing. I haven't heard of Superaudio. Is it a real music format, or just some cool sounding name you made up for your post? Seriously.
I noticed that line in the original post too, and thought the guy is either stupid, or the "audiophiles" he knows are the ones who think a test of a stereo system is to see how loud they can crank the volume before the speakers blow.
A few years back I was reading one of the home stereo mags, and the article mentioned that real audiophiles always preferred the reel-to-reel tape format. Low noise, true sound curves, and other things you can't get from cassettes or CDs, and certainly not from MP3s. Too bad the reel-to-reel format went away.
So, is Superaudio real, and if so, what format is it? Just curious. I'm not planning on buying any system right now, but always interested in learning about stuff I don't know yet.
Not much on this page about linux, but at least it is stable with no error messages.
So, explain how a "barnstormer" plane can fly upside-down. If their wing has a curved top surface, and a flat bottom surface, when they are upside down the "lift" would be in the Earthward direction. They would bury themselves into the dirt within seconds.
(I am not a pilot or barnstormer, but asked a pilot about this a few months ago after an air-race. This is the gist of his answer.)
To avoid this, barnstorming planes use a different wing. Their wings are shaped symetrically, top-to-bottom. Both surfaces are the same, and give the same flight characteristics, no matter which way they are oriented. It is up to the pilot to keep the right angle so that the passing air pushes the plane up. No easy job when your upside-down, going 60 mph (??), with that long scarf flapping around your head.
Not saying the lift principle of an asymmetric wing is not valid, but it is not the only wing shape in use.
What laws for free speech are you referring to?
The only thing I can think of that supposedly guarantees freedom of speech is the First Amendment of the US Constitution. That isn't a law, it's the Constitution. All other laws regarding speech are actually placing limits on that freedom of speech, despite the Constitution. Can't say hateful things, can't say pornographic things, can't shout Fire in a theater, can't tell the Ruskies how to build a nuclear bomb, can't make a prank phone call threatening the President, can't etc.
Same for freedom of the press, which would seem more appropriate in this case.
There are all kinds of agreements that "restrict" your right to free speech. Many companys have non-disclosure agreements. You can find out about their most secret new products and ad campaigns, but you can't blab to their competitors about it, or even to your spouse. Noone complains about that. This doesn't violate the First amendment, because Congress has nothing to do with it.
An AC wrote:
"100% retard to ***-out the "uck" in FUCKEDCOMPANY.COM !
Long live the fuck and the uck !
Free speech for everyone ! "
You would be a lot more convincing if you weren't posting anonymously. (Shit, I had to look below to spell that word.) And if you looked at the link in the status bar, it points to F---kedCompany.com so it's doubly censored, eh.
Well, we've been bloodthirsty idiots for years, and it's worked ok until now.
;^)
Yeah, I know that's in poor taste, but you asked for it.
But you're right, we are the only country to have used nukes against anyone. Hopefully we don't decide to use them again. They won't work very well, and will turn most of the world away from our cause.
Actually, Rush Limbaugh plays many of these songs as the lead-in and fade-out (?) music on his program. That is one thing I wondered about for a while. He is obviously against the "really bad" songs, that advocate violence or anti-christian thoughts, but plays some very cool music after commercial breaks. Guess we will hear all country songs for a while.
At least they didn't list AC/DC's "Night Prowler" this time. It was believed to be the cause of that psycho Night Stalker in LA in the 80's. But it doesn't cause terrorism, so it's OK.
One. Mondale lost the popular vote by the largest margin in US History. He also lost the electoral vote by the largest margin.
Two. As far as the winning candidate losing the popular vote 'by the largest margin', it only happened twice before, in over 200 years, so it's not like there are a lot of elections to compare it to.
Three. The margin was larger than the other two times, because there were over 100 million people voting last fall. In the other elections, there were considerably fewer.
Four. Nationwide, there were over one million ballots that were not counted for one reason or another. Many absentee ballots from military were dismissed because they were not postmarked with a date. On ships, they don't use postmarks with dates, they just throw all the mail in a bag and send it off. How many of those were for Bush?
Five. The electoral college votes for the president. You would have the votes in a few counties of one state be recounted for months to try to give Florida's electors to Gore.
Six. The Supreme Court said that re-counting a select group of ballots was not equal representation concerning the other ballots. Plus there was no way to guarantee that the recount would be conducted fairly. So the recount would either have to be done for the entire state of Florida, by hand, and be totally impartial, or it would have to be stopped. The vote was 7 to 2.
Seven. The liberal media did the recount on their own, and found that Bush still won by several hundred legitimate votes.
Eight. All this is pointless argument, since you obviously don't care about reality and facts. You just want your mother to hold you and tell you it will be alright in 2004.
Actually, I was mentioning this to my wife last week. Who says you need to bring weapons onboard in the first place. These groups are not a bunch of couch potatoes who decided to steal a plane for fun. They are trained combatants. Maybe they wouldn't do well in a karate tournament, but do you doubt they could grab a stewardess and break her neck? And threaten the pilots that they will kill more if the pilots don't give up the plane? Then kill the pilots the same way? (Actually in a karate tournament, their problem might be trying not to kill their opponent.)
And even beside that, they have silverware on planes for the meal. And if they brought a glass bottle of juice with them, that would make a good weapon too. Break it over someone's head, and you have a nice sharp edge.
So, no the search doesn't do much for safety, but it's better than nothing. I just got the feeling that he thought he was 'above' that sort of thing. Having to wait in line with the commoners and all. When I have a flight I show up early, stand in line for whatever, and wait in the terminal for boarding time. No big deal. Hardly an inconvenience since I am going to be on a plane for a few hours anyway. Not like I am going to go to the movies at my destination.
That was my point.
But the only "rights" you can possibly have are those that are laid out by the governing body in a region. In the US, that is the Federal Government as established by the Constitution, and especially as enumerated in the Bill of Rights, and other Amendments.
In other "civilized" countries, rights are based on their government. In "developing" countries, rights are based on local warlords. In the backwoods of Columbia, your rights are decided by the rebel leaders and drug lords. If you go into that area, you must accept the fact that there are no "human rights" in effect. If the local rebels don't like you, they will kill you. They won't even bother to hold you hostage for ransom, since they make plenty of money from the drug trade.
And in the US, even visitors have the right to remain silent, the right to not be searched unreasonably, and the right to a lawyer. About the only time this is routinely overlooked would be with illegal immigrants, who are processed and sent back home with little concern for their rights. But the alternative is for the government to bring them to court and throw them in prison for a few years. For expediency sake, that is not done.
You don't have your Constitutionally guaranteed rights abroad. They only apply within the borders, territories, and possessions of the US. In European countries, you have the rights they give you.
And our Constitutionally guaranteed rights apply to all people, not just US Citizens or residents. Someone from Japan who is vacationing in California has those same rights.
I have seen this same argument in other threads. Why doesn't it sink in.
Perhaps you missed the news articles about the recounts conducted for three months after Bush was sworn into office. Of course no one read them since only about four newspapers in the country had the nerve to print the results. Bush won Florida. The exact numbers are unclear, but the winner isn't. And this was with the counting done by the most liberally-biased people they could find. They still couldn't force a Gore victory.
Granted that butterfly ballot probably cost Gore thousands of votes, more than enough to ensure victory. But the ballot was designed by a Democrat county clerk, so who are you going to blame for it?
And as if Clinton didn't "hasten to war" whenever another liberal-controlled newspaper found out about another scandal he was in. Didn't you notice that every time he had to apologize for something, someone got bombed. If you want to confuse correlation and causation, start there. How many times did we bomb Osama bin Laden because Slick Willy was caught with his dick in someone? Do you think that may have been a part of the cause?
First, he says baggage checks at the airport are simply an "inconvenience", as if he has something better to do than wait in line for a little while before waiting in the terminal for half an hour or more. Sorry if safety checks "inconvenience" you Mr. Stallman. Hell, just for your "convenience" we won't even do the periodic maintenance or pre-flight checklist on the jet before letting you board it, that may slow you down too much.
Second, who is he to have the gall to call Bush our "unelected president" at a time like this. Maybe he better drop his fragile ego down a notch, and realize that right now Bush is THE PRESIDENT of the US. Just because his favorite darling didn't win last year, doesn't mean he still has to whimper about it. I would stand behind Gore right now if he had won the election, even though I don't care for the man, personally or policy-wise.
Other than that, the article makes a good point. And I am sure that several ISP's are giving the FBI any info they request, including locking accounts and letting them read all email or anything else they can get. This would include AOL, MSN, AT&T, and any smaller ISP's that may be included. It will happen whether it's legal or not, because this is a national emergency; laws are conveniently ignored at time like this. I'm not saying it's 'right' or 'wrong', it just is.
Whether they will be able to pass a law about backdoors in encryption, or enforce one, or have one stand up to Constitutional scrutiny by the Supreme Court is another matter. There are many people who read this site who would start programming their own encryption scheme if such a law is passed and held to be valid. So one way or another that is the least of my worries right now.
The subject says I have to say on this idiot. but when i his the submit button this message came back.
... like the body or the subject!)
Cat got your tongue? (something important seems to be missing from your comment
so this is just to get my subject line out, but please don't read the body above.
From the article on MSNBC: "Commercial light simulators..."
Because you need the best light experience you can get.
Seriously, the guy has a very good point. The flight sims could be used to practice this type of attack. And how many people who use these flight sims have never targeted a building? (I don't use them, not my type of game.) But no one is going to call for a boycott of them. Most people wouldn't even understand the issues he brought up, like realistic 3-d maps of Manhattan.
We've seen that quote from Franklin a lot lately, with about four different wordings. But I think that this week, there are a lot of people who are doing the first half without a care to the second half.
If the FBI/CIA/FAA/ETC walked into the AOL or MSN datacenters, and asked to review usage or email from accounts 'suspected' of being involved in this attack, I think they would be handed the passwords without a moments hesitation. And I wouldn't blame AOL or MSN for giving up the info.
I think that the FBI messed up with Ruby Ridge and Waco, and the CIA messed up other situations, and normally I wouldn't give them anything without a warrant. But this makes the niceties of personal freedom a little less important.
Remember in WWII, there were rations for food, gas, and supplies. Who says I can't buy 2 dozen eggs this week? The government says. At times of emergencies, liberty isn't a given. It's still a right, it just isn't allowed for the common good.
I don't know about that tack. If I am in space, with only a thin wall separating me from the hard vacuum, I want all the important tools premade and stowed in a toolkit that fits neatly out of the way. Several toolkits in fact. Ever see the movies, where there is a great big problem, and the idiots have everything they need to fix it, but it is all in the other section of spaceship, or something?
If this is used for non-critical items, fine. But if I _might_ need a wrench in space, I am going to have one, if I have to smuggle it there myself.