Main Entry: racketeering Pronunciation: "ra-k&-'tir-i[ng] Function: noun 1 : the extortion of money or advantage by threat or force 2 : a pattern of illegal activity (as extortion and murder) that is carried out in furtherance of an enterprise (as a criminal syndicate) which is owned or controlled by those engaged in such activity --see also Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act in the IMPORTANT LAWS section --compare ORGANIZED CRIME
Well, the company that makes them is lobbying to move things in the direction of making them compulsory for all. They may not ever succeed at this. But does that make it okay that they're trying?
I don't have any problem with a company making a product attempting to promote it. Viewed in a vacuum, as I said, these products, like many others, could have positive applications. That they would try to promote the product in such a fashion as it would be used as widely as possible comes as no surprise to me.
That's bullshit. Lobbying the government to force people to use their product is not promotion of said product. It's racketeering.
Let me get this straight, they developed this tech with my tax dollars, and are licensing said tech to a company(probably some ex-employee) to make a profit off me, for R&D I paid for in the first place. Yeah, that makes sense. They should release the tech and let the best implementer win.
Bullshit. I recieved a 20 gauge shotgun for my 5th birthday. I knew what it was capable of doing. I knew a gunshot was not like cartoons and movies where the person would limp it off and pretty much act like nothing happened. Why? The person who gave me the shotgun took me outside and stuck a 2x4 into the ground and shot it from about 3 feet away. Big hole. The only thing he said was, "it'll put a bigger hole in YOU. Respect it." I got my first rifle at 7 and first pistol at 10. Guns are dangerous around kids when you just tell them, "don't touch," and nothing else. That's like saying, "don't look in the cookie jar." EDUCATE them, do not attempt to instill fear.
On the other had, it's just plain impossible to respect the speed limits with any stock supersport bike these days. ( I used to have a Suzuki TL-1000 R, standard 138 hp, but after carefull tuning it got up to about 150 hp, and reached speeds of around 290 kph ) Going slower then about 80-90 per hour is impossible with this bike
I own a Tiller (TL1000R), and you are full of shit. From the factory it has a hair over 100rwhp. Full exhaust, K&N filter, and a remap later it has 127rwhp. Unless your "careful" tuning involved cams/overbore/pistons, your bike did not have 150hp. Also, if you tuned it, it would not be stock correct?
I have no problem cruising around at 35-40mph. You merely have to control your right wrist. Do you choke the chicken everytime you see a good looking woman? No? Oh, you have self restraint right?
My favorite part is that a PhD in ethics is passing the buck onto an inanimate machine. I take it personal responsibility was not part of the course?
If it were me, I would have pointed out the polo grounds was only 258 ft to right. Granted it expanded out to 455 in center rather quickly. Or that 3 Rivers was 335 to right. My point was not one of their specific home parks, but of stadiums in general. Even then, not so much as distance in the corners, but in the power alleys. Look at pictures of the older stadiums. There is much more of an arc to the fence than most newer parks. http://www.ballparksofbaseball.com
Ok, so the mound and stadiums you argee favor the latter day hitters.
watered down pitching Less teams. Also you didn't have the NHL, NBA, and NFL watering down the 'white guy' talent pool. A check of league leaders in starting pitching shows exactly one person of color in the top five in wins or era(Pedro Martinez), and 4 out of 10 in the top ten for closers. Closers are a moot point, as they weren't used in Ruth's era. Do I think white dudes are better pitchers? No, I think athletes of color are more likely to play Basketball or Football. In the case of Latinos, most MLB stars of that ethnic group could have pitched or played a position in the field(much as Ruth started off as a pitcher), but for whatever reason ended up playing in the field. Pitching on 3 days rest is not an acient concept(well maybe to you, I'm an old fart). Seaver and Koufax pitched on 3 days rest. They threw hard. I don't see why it would be any different in Ruth's time. Hard doesn't matter anyway. Go ask Mark Wohlers. He threw 100mph fastballs, too bad they didn't move any at all. He had a couple good seasons once he developed a splitfinger. As to the high pitch counts, they didn't care about longevity in those days. If their careers were cut short, it was an expected side effect. They probably did fade more in Sept. though. But the season was shorter then as well.
hot baseball I have a video of Nolan Ryan talking about that(as part of a career retrospective). He says he noticed a difference not in weight or hardness, but with the cover. He said he used to be able to 'crease' the cover, but the ball was too tight for that now. While that wouldn't affect the distance, it would affect the break of the ball greatly. That's modern day. In the dead ball era the center of the ball was all rubber, in 1920 it changed to rubber/cork. Ruth hitting 29 in 1919 is more amazing to me than Mac's 70 or Bond's 72.
strike zone Yeah, toss one game out there for a proof of fact. When is the last time you saw a strike called above the belt? How about the inside corner? Most times a ball 3 inches above the knee was being called a ball before I quit watching baseball.
Ruth Numbers? Hell, lets go dig him up and put him in the batter's box and find out. There is no scientific way Ruth's modern day numbers can be proven. Still, that isn't going to stop people from arguing the point. Difference of opinion is what makes horse races.
Yeah, with watered down pitching, a shorter mound, a 'hot' baseball, a postage stamp strike zone, body armor(never mind the umps have taken the inside 1/8 of the plate away from the pitchers), and walls less than 330 in the corners. Hell if Ruth were playing today, he'd hit 100 HR's.
The companies that have consulted IBM most certainly do not have an old view of IBM. The reason IBM is interesting is because of their turnaround from near ruin in the late 80's. IBM changed it's core focus of business to meet new demand very quickly for a large corporation. Other companies want to see how they did it, and take away the good parts.
I too speak from experience. I lived in Japan for 3 years(albeit in the military at the time), and currently work for a Japanese automotive electronics company. Hint: They are very closely associated with Toyota.
It begs the question though, if the company you work for almost exclusively works with other Japanese companies, and this is where your opinion is developed, how can you possibly know anything about current American business practices? Sounds like you are merely repeating the old stereotypes.
My point still stands however. IBM has always been run, from an outsider's viewpoint at least, as an American company. That's the way they did business too, until the mid 80's when they went in the shitter. They have rebuilt themselves, almost completely changing their business focus and planning to respond to market changes. They could have went the way of DEC, but they didn't. That is why they are asked to consult companies all over the world. IBM was just an example however. You can add Boeing(I personally wouldn't ask them how to tie my shoes), GE, Wal-Mart, and SUN, along with many others to the list.
Are you this dense naturally or do you have to work at it? It's not about copying. It's about taking the things that work. Of your ten, I'd bet 9 are still working from an 80's view of american business.
Kaizen is Japan's strong point, but a weakness as well. Taking existing methods/processes and refining them for efficiency and quality boxes their way of thinking into refining, not inventing. In the US the opposite is true. We invent all sorts of things, but quickly lose interest and look to invent something else. That's why I don't get the Japanese/US bashing that goes on back and forth. The two cultures seem to compliment each other quite well.
Mode 4 IFF is a totally different box. It feeds though the main IFF however. IFF is NOT a military only application. Every commercial airliner has an IFF transponder. Modes 1, 2, & 3/C help the air traffic controllers immensely. Mode 4 is military only, but, again a totally separate electronics package.
Right on. In the book it was Denver. Also their 3 stage nuke fizzled. Loss of life in the book wasn't outrageus, but there was a hell of a mess to clean up.
On a side note, WTF did they screw up the timeline so badly? Ryan was 10 years older in the book, married with 2 kids. Also DaFoe sucked as Mr. Clark in Clear and Present Danger, and the dude in this one was better, but about 15 years too young. The movie was set in 2004, kinda hard to find a 30 YO vietnam vet ya know?
cause submissions to get auto rejected? I've submitted 3 stories, each time all I have to do is refresh the submit page and it is already rejected. Guess I didn't only get fucked in the moderation department.
The vast majority here a/. have never seen the *real* HP so many of us remember fondly. They haven't seen HP quality. They haven't seen HP support.
At the last place I worked we were still using 9825 calculators as GPIB controllers. They'd been in use since 1982. Most of them have never had the cover removed. The ones that had to be repaired, we could still get parts and support 15 years after they stopped making them.
No apologies necessary. In retrospect, you assumed(as do 90% of the folks in the world) that the 'insert universe statement here' was a basic and universal mantra of all atheists, and therefore applied in this case. I on the otherhand, looking from the other side of the fence thought I smelled a troll. Both circumstances are just a by-product of the forum.
I think what the original poster was getting at was a jammer does no good. You'd still be getting radiated. Probably got EMI and EMF mixed up. It could be argued I suppose, that RF is EMF since an antenna is a LC tuned load.
Slashdot Mirror
I think it does. See entry 1 from dictionary.com:
Main Entry: racketeering
Pronunciation: "ra-k&-'tir-i[ng]
Function: noun
1 : the extortion of money or advantage by threat or force
2 : a pattern of illegal activity (as extortion and murder) that is carried out in furtherance of an enterprise (as a criminal syndicate) which is owned or controlled by those engaged in such activity --see also Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act in the IMPORTANT LAWS section --compare ORGANIZED CRIME
I don't have any problem with a company making a product attempting to promote it. Viewed in a vacuum, as I said, these products, like many others, could have positive applications. That they would try to promote the product in such a fashion as it would be used as widely as possible comes as no surprise to me.
That's bullshit. Lobbying the government to force people to use their product is not promotion of said product. It's racketeering.
Let me get this straight, they developed this tech with my tax dollars, and are licensing said tech to a company(probably some ex-employee) to make a profit off me, for R&D I paid for in the first place. Yeah, that makes sense. They should release the tech and let the best implementer win.
Bullshit. I recieved a 20 gauge shotgun for my 5th birthday. I knew what it was capable of doing. I knew a gunshot was not like cartoons and movies where the person would limp it off and pretty much act like nothing happened. Why? The person who gave me the shotgun took me outside and stuck a 2x4 into the ground and shot it from about 3 feet away. Big hole. The only thing he said was, "it'll put a bigger hole in YOU. Respect it." I got my first rifle at 7 and first pistol at 10. Guns are dangerous around kids when you just tell them, "don't touch," and nothing else. That's like saying, "don't look in the cookie jar." EDUCATE them, do not attempt to instill fear.
On the other had, it's just plain impossible to respect the speed limits with any stock supersport bike these days. ( I used to have a Suzuki TL-1000 R, standard 138 hp, but after carefull tuning it got up to about 150 hp, and reached speeds of around 290 kph ) Going slower then about 80-90 per hour is impossible with this bike
I own a Tiller (TL1000R), and you are full of shit. From the factory it has a hair over 100rwhp. Full exhaust, K&N filter, and a remap later it has 127rwhp. Unless your "careful" tuning involved cams/overbore/pistons, your bike did not have 150hp. Also, if you tuned it, it would not be stock correct?
I have no problem cruising around at 35-40mph. You merely have to control your right wrist. Do you choke the chicken everytime you see a good looking woman? No? Oh, you have self restraint right?
My favorite part is that a PhD in ethics is passing the buck onto an inanimate machine. I take it personal responsibility was not part of the course?
If it were me, I would have pointed out the polo grounds was only 258 ft to right. Granted it expanded out to 455 in center rather quickly. Or that 3 Rivers was 335 to right. My point was not one of their specific home parks, but of stadiums in general. Even then, not so much as distance in the corners, but in the power alleys. Look at pictures of the older stadiums. There is much more of an arc to the fence than most newer parks.
http://www.ballparksofbaseball.com
Ok, so the mound and stadiums you argee favor the latter day hitters.
watered down pitching
Less teams. Also you didn't have the NHL, NBA, and NFL watering down the 'white guy' talent pool. A check of league leaders in starting pitching shows exactly one person of color in the top five in wins or era(Pedro Martinez), and 4 out of 10 in the top ten for closers. Closers are a moot point, as they weren't used in Ruth's era. Do I think white dudes are better pitchers? No, I think athletes of color are more likely to play Basketball or Football. In the case of Latinos, most MLB stars of that ethnic group could have pitched or played a position in the field(much as Ruth started off as a pitcher), but for whatever reason ended up playing in the field. Pitching on 3 days rest is not an acient concept(well maybe to you, I'm an old fart). Seaver and Koufax pitched on 3 days rest. They threw hard. I don't see why it would be any different in Ruth's time. Hard doesn't matter anyway. Go ask Mark Wohlers. He threw 100mph fastballs, too bad they didn't move any at all. He had a couple good seasons once he developed a splitfinger. As to the high pitch counts, they didn't care about longevity in those days. If their careers were cut short, it was an expected side effect. They probably did fade more in Sept. though. But the season was shorter then as well.
hot baseball
I have a video of Nolan Ryan talking about that(as part of a career retrospective). He says he noticed a difference not in weight or hardness, but with the cover. He said he used to be able to 'crease' the cover, but the ball was too tight for that now. While that wouldn't affect the distance, it would affect the break of the ball greatly. That's modern day. In the dead ball era the center of the ball was all rubber, in 1920 it changed to rubber/cork. Ruth hitting 29 in 1919 is more amazing to me than Mac's 70 or Bond's 72.
strike zone
Yeah, toss one game out there for a proof of fact. When is the last time you saw a strike called above the belt? How about the inside corner? Most times a ball 3 inches above the knee was being called a ball before I quit watching baseball.
Ruth
Numbers? Hell, lets go dig him up and put him in the batter's box and find out. There is no scientific way Ruth's modern day numbers can be proven. Still, that isn't going to stop people from arguing the point. Difference of opinion is what makes horse races.
John Kruk, Philadelphia Phillies
Yeah, with watered down pitching, a shorter mound, a 'hot' baseball, a postage stamp strike zone, body armor(never mind the umps have taken the inside 1/8 of the plate away from the pitchers), and walls less than 330 in the corners. Hell if Ruth were playing today, he'd hit 100 HR's.
The companies that have consulted IBM most certainly do not have an old view of IBM. The reason IBM is interesting is because of their turnaround from near ruin in the late 80's. IBM changed it's core focus of business to meet new demand very quickly for a large corporation. Other companies want to see how they did it, and take away the good parts.
I too speak from experience. I lived in Japan for 3 years(albeit in the military at the time), and currently work for a Japanese automotive electronics company. Hint: They are very closely associated with Toyota.
It begs the question though, if the company you work for almost exclusively works with other Japanese companies, and this is where your opinion is developed, how can you possibly know anything about current American business practices? Sounds like you are merely repeating the old stereotypes.
My point still stands however. IBM has always been run, from an outsider's viewpoint at least, as an American company. That's the way they did business too, until the mid 80's when they went in the shitter. They have rebuilt themselves, almost completely changing their business focus and planning to respond to market changes. They could have went the way of DEC, but they didn't. That is why they are asked to consult companies all over the world. IBM was just an example however. You can add Boeing(I personally wouldn't ask them how to tie my shoes), GE, Wal-Mart, and SUN, along with many others to the list.
Are you this dense naturally or do you have to work at it? It's not about copying. It's about taking the things that work. Of your ten, I'd bet 9 are still working from an 80's view of american business.
EXAMPLE
SAMPLE
Both apply. Take your pick.
Kaizen is Japan's strong point, but a weakness as well. Taking existing methods/processes and refining them for efficiency and quality boxes their way of thinking into refining, not inventing. In the US the opposite is true. We invent all sorts of things, but quickly lose interest and look to invent something else. That's why I don't get the Japanese/US bashing that goes on back and forth. The two cultures seem to compliment each other quite well.
HAHAHAHAHA, yeah dipshit.
Panasonic
Toyota
Nissan
Sony
Honda
Denso
Mitsubishi
Who'd they all consult when the Japanese economy when to shit and the home markets got tight?
IBM.
Mode 4 IFF is a totally different box. It feeds though the main IFF however. IFF is NOT a military only application. Every commercial airliner has an IFF transponder. Modes 1, 2, & 3/C help the air traffic controllers immensely. Mode 4 is military only, but, again a totally separate electronics package.
Right on. In the book it was Denver. Also their 3 stage nuke fizzled. Loss of life in the book wasn't outrageus, but there was a hell of a mess to clean up.
On a side note, WTF did they screw up the timeline so badly? Ryan was 10 years older in the book, married with 2 kids. Also DaFoe sucked as Mr. Clark in Clear and Present Danger, and the dude in this one was better, but about 15 years too young. The movie was set in 2004, kinda hard to find a 30 YO vietnam vet ya know?
The Qu'ran is about as intact as the bible.
Which is to say not very.
The reason: they nolonger see themselves as our representatives, they see themselves as our rulers.
Oh, but for the $rtbl flag. This should be about +341.
For once, this is new that matters!
cause submissions to get auto rejected? I've submitted 3 stories, each time all I have to do is refresh the submit page and it is already rejected. Guess I didn't only get fucked in the moderation department.
Exactly.
/. have never seen the *real* HP so many of us remember fondly. They haven't seen HP quality. They haven't seen HP support.
The vast majority here a
At the last place I worked we were still using 9825 calculators as GPIB controllers. They'd been in use since 1982. Most of them have never had the cover removed. The ones that had to be repaired, we could still get parts and support 15 years after they stopped making them.
All that is gone.
No apologies necessary. In retrospect, you assumed(as do 90% of the folks in the world) that the 'insert universe statement here' was a basic and universal mantra of all atheists, and therefore applied in this case. I on the otherhand, looking from the other side of the fence thought I smelled a troll. Both circumstances are just a by-product of the forum.
--Alex
i.e. A 1 watt transmission at 1 Ghz will have as much of a heating effect as 1 watt at 2Ghz (assuming equal tissue absortion characteristics).
AFAIK, around the microwave range, higher frequencies have less of a heating effect on human tissue.
So which is it?
I think what the original poster was getting at was a jammer does no good. You'd still be getting radiated. Probably got EMI and EMF mixed up. It could be argued I suppose, that RF is EMF since an antenna is a LC tuned load.