The idea is, you cut the cable at point 'A', and make it look like it was an accident (ship anchor, etc). Then, before they fix the cable, you trot on down the cable a few (tens of) miles to point 'B' and cut the cable there, too. But now you splice in a repeater that copies everything sent over that cable and sends it...to you! When the cable is fixed at the original spot, comm traffic starts up, and no one is the wiser.
It would be political suicide indeed, for a politician to start a war shortly before an election -- in which he was running. Bush isn't.
Lets see... Start a war, find a few 'serious terrorist plots' in the USA, declare Martial Law, and sign an Executive Order allowing you to stay in Office 'for the duration'.... and of course, the War on Terror will never end./You think now?//Stranger things have happened.
Pre ban, passengers were most likely carrying 10lbs or more of liquids in their carryons
I call BS.
"A pint's a pound, the world around". Are you seriously saying each airline passenger was carrying 10 pints (a gallon and a quarter!) of water onto the plane?
While the safety of the baby may be important to the parents, I doubt the other 200 people onboard would care about it enough to just sit there while they are flown into a building.
That has got to be one of the lamest arguments I have ever heard.
Google's referencing of copyrighted.torrent files is a small, arguably incidental, part of what it does
I see. So, all I have to do to get away with a crime is prove that that crime is "a small, arguably incidental" part of what I normally do? It's okay to commit a crime, as long as it's just a 'small' part of my total activities??
Just have their lawyers show up in court with a laptop (with wireless connection and the appropriate software installed) and go to Google. Search for "Harry Potter Goblet Fire Torrent" and click a link. Viola- bittorrent starts up. Therefore, Google can be used to search for torrents, therefore they should be charged, too. If they are not charged, then it demonstrates selective prosecution. The same goes for ANY search engine.
And no matter how hard they try to sue me, if I don't have anything of theirs on my computer, there's really not much they can do about it, now, is there?
They can accuse you of deleting the files (Destroying Evidence). They can accuse you of not turning over all your hard drives/CDs/tapes/floppies/ etc.
How about you pour yourself a nice hot cup of 190 degree coffee, and "enjoy it immediately",
People often do. You see, when drinking hot coffee, people 'sip' it. Sipping involves only a small amount of hot liquid, and draws in air along with the hot liquid, cooling it.
The site you mention is about people immersing their entire bodies in a large quantity of hot liquid, not people sipping small quantiites of a hot liquid. I think the difference is obvious.
The National Coffee Association are going to get their asses sued, and good riddance to them.
No reasonable person expects a "hot" cup of coffee to be 190 degrees Fahrenheit; they expect around 140 degrees at most.
Sorry. Wrong.
The National Coffee Association of U.S.A. Inc, (and who better to know coffee, eh?) says : Your brewer should maintain a water temperature between 195 - 205 degrees Fahrenheit for optimal extraction....Brewed coffee should be enjoyed immediately!...If it will be a few minutes before it will be served, the temperature should be maintained at 180 - 185 degrees Fahrenheit. - http://www.ncausa.org/i4a/pages/index.cfm?pageid=71
And even home coffee makers have similar temperatures. Check out some of their online user manuals. For example: http://www.bunn.com/pdfs/retail/usecare/38865.0000_NHBX_U_C_English.pdf Pay attention to page 3: "The water is approximately 50F hotter than what's available from your hot water faucet" (most hot water faucets are 140 deg. + 50 = 190!) and page 7: "BUNN recommends you AVOID:... Re-heating for serving any coffee with a temperature below 175F." oh- almost forgot page 6: "The patented ready-to-brew reservoir keeps water at the ideal brewing temperature of approximately 200F."
So, despite what you think, a 'reasonable' person DOES expect hot coffee to be around 190 degrees. At least, if by 'reasonable' you mean 'can listen to the industry experts' and ' can read the fucking manual'.
Better armed criminals argues for better armed campus police
No- they argue for better armed students. The cops are minutes away. The students are right there. The cops will 'form a perimeter' , then wait for SWAT to show up before going in. This can be many more minutes. The students are right there.
Who should be armed? The people who won't show up for 10 minutes? Or the people who are on the scene?
And how do you verify that you are YOU in order to unfreeze (or freeze) your credit?
What stops the 'bad guys' from getting that info and un-freezing your credit as soon as you freeze it?? Or, alternately, what's to stop a 'bad guy' from going around messing with people by falsely freezing their credit??
I was talking to a friend who has just spent thousands on a very nice looking oven/hobb. To my dismay (but not my surprise) it still has the hobb controls in a straight line, not in any way related to the layout of the hobb rings themselves, meaning that she will still make mistakes turning the wrong ring off or up, burning food and so on, and she'll constantly have to look at the tiny diagrams by each control to try to work out which hobb ring it corresponds to.
1) WTF is a hobb?? 2) Assuming you mean 'stove top burners' or something similar, there is a standard way of setting the controls up-
Burners: 23 14 Controls: 1234
Meanwhile the light switches in her new half-million-pound house are grouped together randomly so you have to experiment by switching lights on and off at random until you hit the right switch.
Well, that's just dumb. But that's what you get when you hire cheap contractors.
Her fridge has a temperature control that goes from '-' to '+'. Is that "more heat" or "more refrigeration"?
The control controls the refrigeration unit, therefore, "+" means more refrigeration. I mean, duh.
all the power sockets in the house are at floor level, not convenient waist or hand height.
When you say 'floor level', do you mean all the way down in the baseboard? Or 18" from the floor, as is standard? Why in gods name would I want a lamp cord plugged into a 4 foot high outlet? The weight of the cord would pull the plug out of the outlet. There are certainly times when higher outlets are desirable (like for a desk), but that's why god created power strips- plug one of those in and put it up on the desk.
So, if I make an illegal tackle in, let's say football, the ref should step in and suspend the 'no dangerous tackling' rule, thus beginning a free-for-all where the players can tackle each other as dangerously as they see fit?
Nope. What I'm saying is, if you make an illegal tackle, don't cry like a baby because someone gives you an illegal faceguard pull. YOU were the one who chose to ignore the rules, don't complain when others don't follow the rules in regards to you.
The rules are a (one-sided) contract between individuals and the state.
Not at all. Rules govern inter-personal relations: ie: how people get along. What I can do to you (and what I cannot), and what you can do to me (and cannot). If one wishes the rules to not apply to them, then the only fair thing to do is suspend BOTH rules (what they can do to others, AND what others can do to them).
There is nothing as unfair as a 'bad guy' who gets away with breaking the rules, and a 'good guy' who is forced to follow them. This is shown time and time again in our entertainment. Look at Batman, Superman, Spiderman. All vigilantes who work OUTSIDE the system to beat bad guys. Look at Death Wish, Lethal Weapon, and Die Hard. People (even Cops!) who break the law to catch the bad guys are HEROS, in our society.
There are liability issues when it comes with unconventional loads. Anything that can be deemed as cruel or meant to inflict injury above what is necessary for self defense can open you up to serious litigation
This a result of the pussy-ification of the American Legal System. Actually, it's the pussy-ification of America.
When I was young, I climbed metal monkey-bars in a sand-covered park. I climbed 6', even 8' high slides made of steel and sheet metal, and slid down them. Today, all the fixtures are low to the ground, plactic, and the ground itself is padded. All because our society (thru the Legal System) won't stand up and say "Too Bad." "It's too bad your kid got hurt when he attempted to run up the slide while you were not supervising him. You should have 1)taught himthe right way to use a slide, and 2) been watching him."
Now we just award the mommy a few million dollars, and the kid learns he can run wild with no consequences.
More on topic- If someone is trying to hijack a plane, quite possibly to kill everyone on board and cause Billions in damage (not to mention the whole 'terror' angle), then it's quite justified in causing them a little pain. This Society has Rules. A criminal, by breaking those Rules, has clearly shown their preference to not have those rules apply to them. But, the Rules go both ways- they regulate how an individual is supposed to act toward everyone else, AND how everyone else is supposed to act toward a given individual. By wanting the Rules to not apply to them, criminals have given up their protection By the Rules. (You want to cheat? Fine- but you can't complain if others cheat back.)
So tell us then, Mr. Genius, how you will prove in a court of law that someone was speeding when they killed someone else in an accident?
There are methods. Skidmark Forensics, for instance. Or the so-called 'black box' that is getting installed in more and more cars these days. It records things like speed, accelerator position, GPS location, turn signal status, etc.
And, you know, there's the minor matter of how increasing penalties doesn't really have much of an effect as a deterrent in the first place.
That is true, IF the penalties are not well known, or not applied consistantly. If everyone who was found guilty of murder was dragged behind the courthouse and shot, I think it'd be more of a deterent than the current system with decades of time between the crime and the punishment. The link between Cause and Effect tends to get blurry if too much time passes between the two.
And that's assuming they are actually put to death. Between the numerous mandatory appeals, the possability of a commutation of sentance by the Seeking-relection-and-needs-the-minority-vote Govenor, etc, I'm surprised anyone gets put to Death for murder at all. And that's assuming the prosecutor actually goes for the DP to begin with.
Because I don't pay anything to watch them. So, for me, they are free to me.
They pay for them with the money they charged for the commercials that are placed in the broadcast, that you have to watch and interupt the show.
Ah, but I never watch commercials. I surf to anothe rchannel, or go to the bathroom, or go to the kitchen for a snack, or talk to someone else in the room. Usually after muting the TV, so I don't even HEAR the ads.
Slashdot Mirror
Or better yet:
http://images.nycsubway.org/trackmap/detail-soferry.png
Two loops for the price of one! The 'outer loop' is the 1 train's South Ferry Station, as well.
The idea is, you cut the cable at point 'A', and make it look like it was an accident (ship anchor, etc). Then, before they fix the cable, you trot on down the cable a few (tens of) miles to point 'B' and cut the cable there, too. But now you splice in a repeater that copies everything sent over that cable and sends it ...to you! When the cable is fixed at the original spot, comm traffic starts up, and no one is the wiser.
It would be political suicide indeed, for a politician to start a war shortly before an election -- in which he was running. Bush isn't.
/You think now? //Stranger things have happened.
Lets see... Start a war, find a few 'serious terrorist plots' in the USA, declare Martial Law, and sign an Executive Order allowing you to stay in Office 'for the duration'.... and of course, the War on Terror will never end.
Well, if we smash into a building at 500mph, the baby'll certainly die anyway.
Pre ban, passengers were most likely carrying 10lbs or more of liquids in their carryons
I call BS.
"A pint's a pound, the world around". Are you seriously saying each airline passenger was carrying 10 pints (a gallon and a quarter!) of water onto the plane?
While the safety of the baby may be important to the parents, I doubt the other 200 people onboard would care about it enough to just sit there while they are flown into a building.
"Everyone else was doing it, and the cops keep arresting ONLY ME".
FTFY.
I propose enforcing the law on ALL offenders, or NONE. /You know, they way it's supposed to be done.
Linking to downloadble copies of copyrighted works is not the primary or even the advertised function of Google
364 days a year, I live a normal life. On the 365th day, I kill someone.
But that's okay, because killing someone is not "the primary" action I commit.
Right?
That has got to be one of the lamest arguments I have ever heard.
.torrent files is a small, arguably incidental, part of what it does
Google's referencing of copyrighted
I see. So, all I have to do to get away with a crime is prove that that crime is "a small, arguably incidental" part of what I normally do? It's okay to commit a crime, as long as it's just a 'small' part of my total activities??
Or let them go.
Just have their lawyers show up in court with a laptop (with wireless connection and the appropriate software installed) and go to Google. Search for "Harry Potter Goblet Fire Torrent" and click a link. Viola- bittorrent starts up. Therefore, Google can be used to search for torrents, therefore they should be charged, too. If they are not charged, then it demonstrates selective prosecution. The same goes for ANY search engine.
And no matter how hard they try to sue me, if I don't have anything of theirs on my computer, there's really not much they can do about it, now, is there?
They can accuse you of deleting the files (Destroying Evidence). They can accuse you of not turning over all your hard drives/CDs/tapes/floppies/ etc.
How about you pour yourself a nice hot cup of 190 degree coffee, and "enjoy it immediately",
People often do. You see, when drinking hot coffee, people 'sip' it. Sipping involves only a small amount of hot liquid, and draws in air along with the hot liquid, cooling it.
The site you mention is about people immersing their entire bodies in a large quantity of hot liquid, not people sipping small quantiites of a hot liquid. I think the difference is obvious.
The National Coffee Association are going to get their asses sued, and good riddance to them.
They haven't been yet (so far as I know).
No reasonable person expects a "hot" cup of coffee to be 190 degrees Fahrenheit; they expect around 140 degrees at most.
...
Sorry. Wrong.
The National Coffee Association of U.S.A. Inc, (and who better to know coffee, eh?) says :
Your brewer should maintain a water temperature between 195 - 205 degrees Fahrenheit for optimal extraction....Brewed coffee should be enjoyed immediately!...If it will be a few minutes before it will be served, the temperature should be maintained at 180 - 185 degrees Fahrenheit.
- http://www.ncausa.org/i4a/pages/index.cfm?pageid=71
And even home coffee makers have similar temperatures. Check out some of their online user manuals. For example:
http://www.bunn.com/pdfs/retail/usecare/38865.0000_NHBX_U_C_English.pdf
Pay attention to page 3: "The water is approximately 50F hotter than what's available from your hot water faucet" (most hot water faucets are 140 deg. + 50 = 190!)
and page 7: "BUNN recommends you AVOID:
Re-heating for serving any coffee with a temperature below 175F."
oh- almost forgot page 6: "The patented ready-to-brew reservoir keeps water at the ideal brewing
temperature of approximately 200F."
So, despite what you think, a 'reasonable' person DOES expect hot coffee to be around 190 degrees. At least, if by 'reasonable' you mean 'can listen to the industry experts' and ' can read the fucking manual'.
a lot of 18 and 19 year old students don't have great judgement on things like shoot / no shoot decisionmaking
So your conclusion is "ban guns" instead of "train them in the proper use of gun handling"??
Do you also think teenagers should be kept away from cars? Or do you allow then to go to Drivers Ed and learn how to drive safely?
Criminals love to target students.
Why?
Because schools are a 'gun-free' zone'.
Better armed criminals argues for better armed campus police
No- they argue for better armed students. The cops are minutes away. The students are right there. The cops will 'form a perimeter' , then wait for SWAT to show up before going in. This can be many more minutes. The students are right there.
Who should be armed? The people who won't show up for 10 minutes? Or the people who are on the scene?
And how do you verify that you are YOU in order to unfreeze (or freeze) your credit?
What stops the 'bad guys' from getting that info and un-freezing your credit as soon as you freeze it?? Or, alternately, what's to stop a 'bad guy' from going around messing with people by falsely freezing their credit??
unauthorized because they have been placed in the share directory. Here's how it breaks down:
A CD ripped to your hard drive for personal use: OK.
What if (thru Windows File Sharing), my hard drive itself is shared?? What about Administrative (C$) shares than many are not aware of?
I was talking to a friend who has just spent thousands on a very nice looking oven/hobb. To my dismay (but not my surprise) it still has the hobb controls in a straight line, not in any way related to the layout of the hobb rings themselves, meaning that she will still make mistakes turning the wrong ring off or up, burning food and so on, and she'll constantly have to look at the tiny diagrams by each control to try to work out which hobb ring it corresponds to.
1) WTF is a hobb??
2) Assuming you mean 'stove top burners' or something similar, there is a standard way of setting the controls up-
Burners:
23
14
Controls:
1234
Meanwhile the light switches in her new half-million-pound house are grouped together randomly so you have to experiment by switching lights on and off at random until you hit the right switch.
Well, that's just dumb. But that's what you get when you hire cheap contractors.
Her fridge has a temperature control that goes from '-' to '+'. Is that "more heat" or "more refrigeration"?
The control controls the refrigeration unit, therefore, "+" means more refrigeration. I mean, duh.
all the power sockets in the house are at floor level, not convenient waist or hand height.
When you say 'floor level', do you mean all the way down in the baseboard? Or 18" from the floor, as is standard? Why in gods name would I want a lamp cord plugged into a 4 foot high outlet? The weight of the cord would pull the plug out of the outlet. There are certainly times when higher outlets are desirable (like for a desk), but that's why god created power strips- plug one of those in and put it up on the desk.
So, if I make an illegal tackle in, let's say football, the ref should step in and suspend the 'no dangerous tackling' rule, thus beginning a free-for-all where the players can tackle each other as dangerously as they see fit?
Nope. What I'm saying is, if you make an illegal tackle, don't cry like a baby because someone gives you an illegal faceguard pull. YOU were the one who chose to ignore the rules, don't complain when others don't follow the rules in regards to you.
The rules are a (one-sided) contract between individuals and the state.
Not at all. Rules govern inter-personal relations: ie: how people get along. What I can do to you (and what I cannot), and what you can do to me (and cannot). If one wishes the rules to not apply to them, then the only fair thing to do is suspend BOTH rules (what they can do to others, AND what others can do to them).
There is nothing as unfair as a 'bad guy' who gets away with breaking the rules, and a 'good guy' who is forced to follow them. This is shown time and time again in our entertainment. Look at Batman, Superman, Spiderman. All vigilantes who work OUTSIDE the system to beat bad guys. Look at Death Wish, Lethal Weapon, and Die Hard. People (even Cops!) who break the law to catch the bad guys are HEROS, in our society.
There are liability issues when it comes with unconventional loads. Anything that can be deemed as cruel or meant to inflict injury above what is necessary for self defense can open you up to serious litigation
This a result of the pussy-ification of the American Legal System. Actually, it's the pussy-ification of America.
When I was young, I climbed metal monkey-bars in a sand-covered park. I climbed 6', even 8' high slides made of steel and sheet metal, and slid down them. Today, all the fixtures are low to the ground, plactic, and the ground itself is padded. All because our society (thru the Legal System) won't stand up and say "Too Bad." "It's too bad your kid got hurt when he attempted to run up the slide while you were not supervising him. You should have 1)taught himthe right way to use a slide, and 2) been watching him."
Now we just award the mommy a few million dollars, and the kid learns he can run wild with no consequences.
More on topic- If someone is trying to hijack a plane, quite possibly to kill everyone on board and cause Billions in damage (not to mention the whole 'terror' angle), then it's quite justified in causing them a little pain. This Society has Rules. A criminal, by breaking those Rules, has clearly shown their preference to not have those rules apply to them. But, the Rules go both ways- they regulate how an individual is supposed to act toward everyone else, AND how everyone else is supposed to act toward a given individual. By wanting the Rules to not apply to them, criminals have given up their protection By the Rules. (You want to cheat? Fine- but you can't complain if others cheat back.)
your right to watch stuff on a plane ends when it starts to offend or disturb those flying with you.
Well, they shouldn't be looking at my screen then!
So tell us then, Mr. Genius, how you will prove in a court of law that someone was speeding when they killed someone else in an accident?
There are methods. Skidmark Forensics, for instance. Or the so-called 'black box' that is getting installed in more and more cars these days. It records things like speed, accelerator position, GPS location, turn signal status, etc.
And, you know, there's the minor matter of how increasing penalties doesn't really have much of an effect as a deterrent in the first place.
That is true, IF the penalties are not well known, or not applied consistantly. If everyone who was found guilty of murder was dragged behind the courthouse and shot, I think it'd be more of a deterent than the current system with decades of time between the crime and the punishment. The link between Cause and Effect tends to get blurry if too much time passes between the two.
And that's assuming they are actually put to death. Between the numerous mandatory appeals, the possability of a commutation of sentance by the Seeking-relection-and-needs-the-minority-vote Govenor, etc, I'm surprised anyone gets put to Death for murder at all. And that's assuming the prosecutor actually goes for the DP to begin with.
What makes you think they are broadcast for free?
Because I don't pay anything to watch them. So, for me, they are free to me.
They pay for them with the money they charged for the commercials that are placed in the broadcast, that you have to watch and interupt the show.
Ah, but I never watch commercials. I surf to anothe rchannel, or go to the bathroom, or go to the kitchen for a snack, or talk to someone else in the room. Usually after muting the TV, so I don't even HEAR the ads.
So... like I said, free.
Shows are not broadcast for free
It's free to me.