You might ask, why do you think that? And I would answer with, you don't need to listen to government propaganda to find this out. Al Qeada releases video often saying what they would be looking to do.
Whoopty do. Al Queda isn't enough of a threat to justify half the shit done in its name. They've managed one (admittedly very well done) terrorist attack and killed a few thousand. That's a month's worth of driving deaths. If we implemented the locking doors in cockpits, that'd be enough to stop repeats - we already had bomb sniffing equipment in the airports. The bulk of the TSA stuff is completely pointless.
America lost it's balls because they take steps at the airport to make sure someone isn't getting on and blowing the plane up or taking it over just to turn it into a guided missile.
We already have nitrate detectors, and nobody's going to be hijacking a plane anytime soon. America lost its balls when we started being constantly told to be afraid and we listened.
It means that there needs to be a reason why they are looking at you and you need to be adjudicated before punished.
Which means that they need PC before spraying you down. Being in the airport isn't really enough. You seem to be advocating a blanket policy, which isn't justified by the threat and would screw airports even more.
if there are 10 false positives a day, it wouldn't be that troublesome either. Why? Because no one it suggesting using this stuff as definitive proof of wrong doing.
No, you just get to gamble on being detained by some HS dropout for 3 hours because you had some fertilizer on your jacket.
I mean just because we have been proactive at a time when we know something could happen because we have enemies who claim to want to do something bad to us but haven't succeeded doesn't mean they won't try at some point in time.
Current methods are working fine. Why harrass people even more for no gain? We don't really have that many enemies, but not for lack of effort.
Ahh yea, they would be questioning them because of normal security procedures, you spray their hands and shirt, nothing changed color and you can say "I'm sorry, you can go now". Big deal.
Don't wear anything nice to the airport.
I mean seriously, if we didn't do this stuff, do you think it would seem like an unattainable target to the terrorist?
Absolutely. Nobody really takes the threat seriously because it isn't real.
the world is different now.
The world is the same. It's america that's lost its balls.
Swat doesn't get called unless there is a barricade, ongoing threat
Like some moron that caught by 'To Catch a Prevert'?
If you do something and they make it illegal, and then commit that illegal act, suddenly you can get hassled by the cops. So what, your doing something illegal. Now there are ways to contest unjust laws and unconstitutional laws. If you think the answer is to just violate the law instead of taking care of it properly, then you deserve what you get.
That is the way to contest the law. Feeling lucky?
Lie detector tests have been around for a while, you don't see people getting pulled over randomly to see if they broke a law and then attempt to pull which law out of them.
1. Lie detectors aren't admissable in a court and 2. presumption of innocence.
Well, wake up alice, this isn't wonderland. You live in the real world. And if what you just said is even remotely true, do you understand the amount of people that would have to be lieing to you in order to keep it secrete enough to be effective?
Newsflash: we trained a lot of the current terrorists; bin Ladin and all the guys that went through the school of the americas.
An extension that fails code or obstructs a view, or is awfully conceived from an architectural point of view (basically, it should integrate with the rest of the house and avoid angry fruit salad sorts of things). It could also be constructed in a much cheaper fashion, thus making the house look disjointed or slapdash.
Freakanomics cites a study about Chicago students suddenly given the chance to enroll in any school. Since more people asked for the best schools than were given them, and surprisingly, neither winners nor losers of the resulting lottery did better than the other. However, they both did better than those who didn't ask to change schools.
So the motivated students did better? This would explain the study results, but don't kid yourself - it's the parents who have a direct role in shaping their children who will end up setting the groundwork for ambition.
Freakanomics suggests it has more to do with who you are, than what you do.
And who makes you who you are? Your parents have a lot of influence there. I'll mention a different study I read about last month (or thereabouts). Some rich black parents live in a fairly exclusive neighborhood with good schools. They're concerned that their kids aren't doing as well as the others, so the hire an african ethnographer. He studies the kids for a few years and concludes that the largest factor in the kids' failure is a lack of parental demands, not racism.
Naturally, the parents roasted the guy - they even said he wasn't black enough. Apparently some people actually do believe that 'it's a black thing, you wouldn't understand'.
I don't follow - every bit of research I've found has shown that involvement from the parents is absolutely crucial to a kid's success and that it overrides almost every other factor.
Birth control is far closer to a necessity than video games, especially if it's the morning after variety. Being refused a game will in no case result in an unwanted child. In addition, Pharmacists are licensed by the state and , in small towns, are often the only show in town.
This is another situation where standardization saves money - standard size packets are just fine and a fair bit cheaper than other packet sizes of similar effecacy. More important to general welfare is the ability to run and hide - if you're considering using your packet transmission devices against larger groups, the ability to choose the ground is paramount, and being in good shape is necessary.
Which is it? Absolute right to publish or restrictions on hate speech? I have no problem with people being able to publish a book that says that the Holocaust never happened because the laws that restrict that would also restrict publication of non-mainstream accounts of history.
The point that everybody else has been making is that there were a lot of explorers, not just the few famous ones, and the fact that the closest thing to success was a 3 year odyssey should support the original claim just fine. The massive icemelt is really unprecedented in human history.
No, more a suggestion that the local politicos stocked key positions with people that they owed favors too rather than selecting for competence. Also, at the time, there wasn't much of a high tech worker base - a billion people won't help you of half or more are illiterate and 80% haven't been to college.
China is a sovereign country and they will run their afairs how they choose. You will never win with "forcing" China to comply.
And we are a sovereign nation, too - nobody is forcing us to buy from them. We are adding a proviso to the trade agreement and China is free to take it or leave it. I think they'll take it.
There is no need to "regulate" it per se so long imported products are inspected for safety and the information is passed on to consumers, the market will take care of the problem itself.
No, people that get burned will have bad publicity, while the public will fail utterly to generalize and demand higher standards because that's what they don't do. It won't force anyone to start demanding increased standards, but the USA as a whole demanding it will probably work. China wants to save face, so this is a good time for it.
markets work and governments don't.
This is true, although I'll caution that markets work at providing goods cheaply. They don't necessarily provide good goods.
LA is also in a geological formation that accumulates smoke - before there was a city there, the valley was smokey. I'm sure that some of the entries on the list in TFA are from a bit north, though - Silicon vally has a big pile of superfund sites.
Slashdot Mirror
You might ask, why do you think that? And I would answer with, you don't need to listen to government propaganda to find this out. Al Qeada releases video often saying what they would be looking to do.
Whoopty do. Al Queda isn't enough of a threat to justify half the shit done in its name. They've managed one (admittedly very well done) terrorist attack and killed a few thousand. That's a month's worth of driving deaths. If we implemented the locking doors in cockpits, that'd be enough to stop repeats - we already had bomb sniffing equipment in the airports. The bulk of the TSA stuff is completely pointless.
America lost it's balls because they take steps at the airport to make sure someone isn't getting on and blowing the plane up or taking it over just to turn it into a guided missile.
We already have nitrate detectors, and nobody's going to be hijacking a plane anytime soon. America lost its balls when we started being constantly told to be afraid and we listened.
It means that there needs to be a reason why they are looking at you and you need to be adjudicated before punished.
Which means that they need PC before spraying you down. Being in the airport isn't really enough. You seem to be advocating a blanket policy, which isn't justified by the threat and would screw airports even more.
if there are 10 false positives a day, it wouldn't be that troublesome either. Why? Because no one it suggesting using this stuff as definitive proof of wrong doing.
No, you just get to gamble on being detained by some HS dropout for 3 hours because you had some fertilizer on your jacket.
I mean just because we have been proactive at a time when we know something could happen because we have enemies who claim to want to do something bad to us but haven't succeeded doesn't mean they won't try at some point in time.
Current methods are working fine. Why harrass people even more for no gain? We don't really have that many enemies, but not for lack of effort.
Ahh yea, they would be questioning them because of normal security procedures, you spray their hands and shirt, nothing changed color and you can say "I'm sorry, you can go now". Big deal.
Don't wear anything nice to the airport.
I mean seriously, if we didn't do this stuff, do you think it would seem like an unattainable target to the terrorist?
Absolutely. Nobody really takes the threat seriously because it isn't real.
the world is different now.
The world is the same. It's america that's lost its balls.
Swat doesn't get called unless there is a barricade, ongoing threat
Like some moron that caught by 'To Catch a Prevert'?
If you do something and they make it illegal, and then commit that illegal act, suddenly you can get hassled by the cops. So what, your doing something illegal. Now there are ways to contest unjust laws and unconstitutional laws. If you think the answer is to just violate the law instead of taking care of it properly, then you deserve what you get.
That is the way to contest the law. Feeling lucky?
Lie detector tests have been around for a while, you don't see people getting pulled over randomly to see if they broke a law and then attempt to pull which law out of them.
1. Lie detectors aren't admissable in a court and 2. presumption of innocence.
Well, wake up alice, this isn't wonderland. You live in the real world. And if what you just said is even remotely true, do you understand the amount of people that would have to be lieing to you in order to keep it secrete enough to be effective?
Newsflash: we trained a lot of the current terrorists; bin Ladin and all the guys that went through the school of the americas.
An extension that fails code or obstructs a view, or is awfully conceived from an architectural point of view (basically, it should integrate with the rest of the house and avoid angry fruit salad sorts of things). It could also be constructed in a much cheaper fashion, thus making the house look disjointed or slapdash.
Nifong did no wrong, he got railroaded by a well-connected kid.
Heh. Your jib. I like its cut.
Forget lojack - build it into the firmware so that you can turn the thing into a brick once it's stolen.
SGI didnt adjust.
Sure they did - they're called Nvidia now.
Freakanomics cites a study about Chicago students suddenly given the chance to enroll in any school. Since more people asked for the best schools than were given them, and surprisingly, neither winners nor losers of the resulting lottery did better than the other. However, they both did better than those who didn't ask to change schools.
So the motivated students did better? This would explain the study results, but don't kid yourself - it's the parents who have a direct role in shaping their children who will end up setting the groundwork for ambition.
Freakanomics suggests it has more to do with who you are, than what you do.
And who makes you who you are? Your parents have a lot of influence there. I'll mention a different study I read about last month (or thereabouts). Some rich black parents live in a fairly exclusive neighborhood with good schools. They're concerned that their kids aren't doing as well as the others, so the hire an african ethnographer. He studies the kids for a few years and concludes that the largest factor in the kids' failure is a lack of parental demands, not racism.
Naturally, the parents roasted the guy - they even said he wasn't black enough. Apparently some people actually do believe that 'it's a black thing, you wouldn't understand'.
2.09 children born/woman (2007 est.)
Replacement level is generally considered to be 2.1 children/woman.
I don't follow - every bit of research I've found has shown that involvement from the parents is absolutely crucial to a kid's success and that it overrides almost every other factor.
We are below replacement for our native population (that being people that have been here a while). Without immigration, we'd be going down.
Birth control is far closer to a necessity than video games, especially if it's the morning after variety. Being refused a game will in no case result in an unwanted child. In addition, Pharmacists are licensed by the state and , in small towns, are often the only show in town.
No it doesn't. It takes parents. If the parents want junior to have the game, they can go buy it for them.
Nope. Grades are based on absolute achievement -- otherwise they're meaningless. What backwards school did you go to?
Law schools do this to make the students more ctthroat, but I haven't heard of anyone in K-12 doing it.
What's this got to do with morality? You think that movies are immoral because people that fail calculus can buy a dvd?
How long does a wipe/install take, anyway?
you do realize that, discounting immigration, we don't have population growth, right?
This is another situation where standardization saves money - standard size packets are just fine and a fair bit cheaper than other packet sizes of similar effecacy. More important to general welfare is the ability to run and hide - if you're considering using your packet transmission devices against larger groups, the ability to choose the ground is paramount, and being in good shape is necessary.
Which is it? Absolute right to publish or restrictions on hate speech? I have no problem with people being able to publish a book that says that the Holocaust never happened because the laws that restrict that would also restrict publication of non-mainstream accounts of history.
The point that everybody else has been making is that there were a lot of explorers, not just the few famous ones, and the fact that the closest thing to success was a 3 year odyssey should support the original claim just fine. The massive icemelt is really unprecedented in human history.
No, more a suggestion that the local politicos stocked key positions with people that they owed favors too rather than selecting for competence. Also, at the time, there wasn't much of a high tech worker base - a billion people won't help you of half or more are illiterate and 80% haven't been to college.
My understanding was that Bhopal happened becaused the Indians insisted on local talent to run the place, but didn't hire competent people.
If an Asian guy goes into shoe manufacturing, he is probably not giving up a career in biotech.
Maybe if he's in Taiwan. Not so much in Tokyo.
How about less goods and services from China?
That would be one effect, yes.
China is a sovereign country and they will run their afairs how they choose. You will never win with "forcing" China to comply.
And we are a sovereign nation, too - nobody is forcing us to buy from them. We are adding a proviso to the trade agreement and China is free to take it or leave it. I think they'll take it.
There is no need to "regulate" it per se so long imported products are inspected for safety and the information is passed on to consumers, the market will take care of the problem itself.
No, people that get burned will have bad publicity, while the public will fail utterly to generalize and demand higher standards because that's what they don't do. It won't force anyone to start demanding increased standards, but the USA as a whole demanding it will probably work. China wants to save face, so this is a good time for it.
markets work and governments don't.
This is true, although I'll caution that markets work at providing goods cheaply. They don't necessarily provide good goods.
LA is also in a geological formation that accumulates smoke - before there was a city there, the valley was smokey. I'm sure that some of the entries on the list in TFA are from a bit north, though - Silicon vally has a big pile of superfund sites.