1) Is there anything that the TSA does that you consider to be effective and worth doing?
2) Have you ever heard of any TSA precautions actually catching a terrorist planning on attacking a flight - when the TSA were not alerted by another agency?
Besides opening up issues of arresting people to force consent, and the issue of 'non-owners' consenting, it also effectively allows an angry ex-spouse to grant consent.
That, if someone's ex-husband who is still legally a part owner of the house but not a real resident, consents to the search, what happens?
Throw in a motive to plant evidence on the ex, along with reasonable, if limited access, and this leads to some very real problems.
You are engagned in wishfull thinking. We have had just about as many attacks in the 2000's and 2010's as in the 80's and 90's. In particular US embass's have been under multiple terrorist attacks in 20001 - Nairobi, Ben Gahzi, etc. Not to mention the Boston Massacre, shoe bomber, the attack on the Sikh Temple, and the multiple ricin letter attacks - all against civilians for political purposes.
Worse, you have a twisted idea of what a terrorist attack is. USS Cole bombing was not a terrorist attack.It was an act of war. If a country (Sundanese Government officially liable for the attack, as per US judge) attacks a soldier, that is an act of war. If you attack civilians for political purposes, that is an act of terrorism. It doesn't matter if you use a bomb - or if you use a suicide attack. Soldiers are armed and are supposed to be capable of defending themselves (assuming some idiot did not give stupid rules of engagement). Civilians are usually unarmed and usually not capable of defending themselves - which is why attacking civilians is a far worse thing (i.e. a crime called terrorism) than attacking soldiers - which is a bad thing, but only an act of war, not of terrorism.
It would encourage the use of espionage/security methods in criminal cases.
That is, I think it would be more likely to corrupt the FBI than to clean up the NSA's investigation of Americans.
The real problem is priorities more than anything else.
The events of September 11th panicked us Americans, and we decided to overspend and over-allow security.
We need to realize that the number of terrorism related attacks are relatively SMALL and to cut funding for all things that invade our privacy - starting with the TSA.
When you limit their funds, they spend their money wisely on clear and present dangers.
When you give them unlimited funding, as we have been doing, they spend it on any wild-ass crazy possibility, which means they investigate people and cases that are clearly and obviously not terrorism related.
You are missing the fact that the telcos are not smart enough to make txt messaging free. They see it as a money maker, rather than a loss-leader.
Their entire philosophy is screwed up - charging people for things that should be free (leaving a contract) and giving away stuff that should cost money (smart phones).
They hope to confuse people and make money off of their stupidity, rather than to offer a simple, clear, fair deal and make money from intelligent choices.
It seems obvious. WhatsApp, a product designed to kill abusive telephone policy rules (i.e. charge practically nothing per byte for internet access but a huge amount for the text messaging - when internet costs the corp money while the text messaging is free). WhatsApp is specifically anti-advertisement and Facebook is almost entirely about advertisement.
WhatsApp was a great company and it has been bought about by an evil one that clearly intends to subvert it.
But I can hope that the founders of WhatsApp can use Facebook's money more effectively to create a new anti-advertisement business. Hopefully their use will outway the evil that facebook is about to do to WhatsApp
[ironic tag] Look, people, you don't have to go the extreme of irradiating the back seat. In fact you don't have to kill anyone in the limo.
All you need to do is fill the back section with a nice mix of aerosolized drugs.
Use pot, some LSD, whatever you can get your hands on.
In short order the people will be too drugged to operate any camera, while your professional camera operator will have developed a high tolerance and can handle it.
In fact, you can probably convince the camera guy to work just for the free drugs!
2) The most common solution to overpopulation is early death. Death from famine, death from disease, death from war, all directly caused by overpopulation.
3) Recently the developed world created birth control, which is the main reason why America, Japan, Euprope, and no China has underpopulation issues.
4) India has an overpopulation problem mainly because they, unlike Africa, have prevented famine, disease and war.
Only an idiot wants "Overpopulation and resource limitations will work themselves out naturally." See point 2.
Instead, we need to intentionally and with immense planning, use birth control methods.
You clearly are not a fan of the science fiction movies of Duncan Jones. When Warcraft the movie comes out in 2016, I strongly suggest you go back and see Duncan's earlier works, starting with "Moon"
If you think charging to do something is worse than banning it completely, then I have a serious objection to your ethical standards.
Taxes are an established way to ameliorate the "Tragedy of the commons" and this is a prime example of the "Tragedy of the commons" (see wikipedia). Sound is a clear common good that people can abuse, turning silence into a cacophony.
Look, I hate and despise people that are rude enough to use a phone on an airplane.
But when Republicans talk about unwarranted government intrusion on our lives, THIS is what they should mean. Not healthcare, not abortion, not welfare. THIS is exactly the kind of laws that our founders were afraid of.
We should not be making rude behavior, no matter how rude it is, a crime.
What is worse, the same effect could have been done in an ethical manner. Simply require that all phone calls be done next to but not in the bathroom. Or, if you want to make it a money maker, pass a law that requires airlines to collect a $5 per minute tax for phone calls made in flight - and allow the airlines to add their own fee on top of that, up to a maximum of $20 per minute.
The offense part of missile technology is mostly based on the science of rocketry and the mechanics of flight - air flows, material sciences etc.
The defensive part of anti-missile technology is mostly based on IT - detecting what is a threat and what is not a threat and targeting the threats. It also needs the same speed you developed above.
So, which do you think develops quicker - the missile technology or the IT technology? My bet is on IT. It's a newer science with an established higher rate of discovery than rocketry.
Yes, it is possible that the hypersonic missiles are truly better at avoiding our anti-missiles. But that assumes we have ignored the problem, as opposed to secretly creating anti-hypersonic missiles missiles.
Thorium is a lot safer in certain ways - much less likely to have the issues that Japan has in turning it off.
But all power solutions have their own issues.
Look, the problem with fossil fuels isn't that it produces carbon dioxide. Every singly human being produces carbon dioxide when we exhale.
No, the problem is that we use way, way way too much fossil fuels, producing way, way, way too much carbon dioxide.
Nucelar power has problems and if we were to use it as much as we use fossil fuels, it would cause the same problem.
The same problem exists with ALL fuel sources, including so called "renewables". Solar power uses rare metals whose use could be just as bad as fossil fuels. Similarly, if we just used hydroelectric, then we could cause major problems with rivers.
Nuclear is very clearly part of our energy solution, and it is time that we, as green environmentalists, accept that.
For the same reason we can't simply add more batteries to the car itself.
The batteries are heavy.
Worse, unlike gasoline, when you use up the energy, the battery do not get lighter. If you double the number of batteries, you don't double the range, you get something like 25% more range.
Slashdot Mirror
2) Have you ever heard of any TSA precautions actually catching a terrorist planning on attacking a flight - when the TSA were not alerted by another agency?
Studies have shown that hands free mountings do NOT reduce accidents.
Previously, most lawyers assumed that they had to get consent from all owners. So the DA would have thrown out cases like yours.
That, if someone's ex-husband who is still legally a part owner of the house but not a real resident, consents to the search, what happens?
Throw in a motive to plant evidence on the ex, along with reasonable, if limited access, and this leads to some very real problems.
Worse, you have a twisted idea of what a terrorist attack is. USS Cole bombing was not a terrorist attack. It was an act of war. If a country (Sundanese Government officially liable for the attack, as per US judge) attacks a soldier, that is an act of war. If you attack civilians for political purposes, that is an act of terrorism. It doesn't matter if you use a bomb - or if you use a suicide attack. Soldiers are armed and are supposed to be capable of defending themselves (assuming some idiot did not give stupid rules of engagement). Civilians are usually unarmed and usually not capable of defending themselves - which is why attacking civilians is a far worse thing (i.e. a crime called terrorism) than attacking soldiers - which is a bad thing, but only an act of war, not of terrorism.
That is, I think it would be more likely to corrupt the FBI than to clean up the NSA's investigation of Americans.
The real problem is priorities more than anything else.
The events of September 11th panicked us Americans, and we decided to overspend and over-allow security.
We need to realize that the number of terrorism related attacks are relatively SMALL and to cut funding for all things that invade our privacy - starting with the TSA.
When you limit their funds, they spend their money wisely on clear and present dangers.
When you give them unlimited funding, as we have been doing, they spend it on any wild-ass crazy possibility, which means they investigate people and cases that are clearly and obviously not terrorism related.
Their entire philosophy is screwed up - charging people for things that should be free (leaving a contract) and giving away stuff that should cost money (smart phones).
They hope to confuse people and make money off of their stupidity, rather than to offer a simple, clear, fair deal and make money from intelligent choices.
WhatsApp was a great company and it has been bought about by an evil one that clearly intends to subvert it.
But I can hope that the founders of WhatsApp can use Facebook's money more effectively to create a new anti-advertisement business. Hopefully their use will outway the evil that facebook is about to do to WhatsApp
In the end, I decided that star death is not part of a 'planet's history', rather it is part of the star's history.
I also ignored Gamma Ray bursts, blackholes, etc.
This is a good answer that I forgot. Call it #4
1) Super Volcano
2) Asteroid
3) Intelligent life evolves.
All you need to do is fill the back section with a nice mix of aerosolized drugs.
Use pot, some LSD, whatever you can get your hands on.
In short order the people will be too drugged to operate any camera, while your professional camera operator will have developed a high tolerance and can handle it.
In fact, you can probably convince the camera guy to work just for the free drugs!
[/ironic tag]
Suddenly people start being very good at attribution.
But be warned, if you ask for the bounty, they just give your name to the police.
The problem is not that we are mystical idiots, just that we are can not spell and are not sure of the correct pronunciation of words.
2) The most common solution to overpopulation is early death. Death from famine, death from disease, death from war, all directly caused by overpopulation.
3) Recently the developed world created birth control, which is the main reason why America, Japan, Euprope, and no China has underpopulation issues.
4) India has an overpopulation problem mainly because they, unlike Africa, have prevented famine, disease and war.
Only an idiot wants "Overpopulation and resource limitations will work themselves out naturally." See point 2. Instead, we need to intentionally and with immense planning, use birth control methods.
You clearly are not a fan of the science fiction movies of Duncan Jones. When Warcraft the movie comes out in 2016, I strongly suggest you go back and see Duncan's earlier works, starting with "Moon"
Taxes are an established way to ameliorate the "Tragedy of the commons" and this is a prime example of the "Tragedy of the commons" (see wikipedia). Sound is a clear common good that people can abuse, turning silence into a cacophony.
Look, I hate and despise people that are rude enough to use a phone on an airplane.
But when Republicans talk about unwarranted government intrusion on our lives, THIS is what they should mean. Not healthcare, not abortion, not welfare. THIS is exactly the kind of laws that our founders were afraid of.
We should not be making rude behavior, no matter how rude it is, a crime.
What is worse, the same effect could have been done in an ethical manner. Simply require that all phone calls be done next to but not in the bathroom. Or, if you want to make it a money maker, pass a law that requires airlines to collect a $5 per minute tax for phone calls made in flight - and allow the airlines to add their own fee on top of that, up to a maximum of $20 per minute.
I bet we could get Kevin Spacey as the basis for GERTY's voice. :D
The defensive part of anti-missile technology is mostly based on IT - detecting what is a threat and what is not a threat and targeting the threats. It also needs the same speed you developed above.
So, which do you think develops quicker - the missile technology or the IT technology? My bet is on IT. It's a newer science with an established higher rate of discovery than rocketry.
Yes, it is possible that the hypersonic missiles are truly better at avoiding our anti-missiles. But that assumes we have ignored the problem, as opposed to secretly creating anti-hypersonic missiles missiles.
Thorium is a lot safer in certain ways - much less likely to have the issues that Japan has in turning it off. But all power solutions have their own issues.
No, the problem is that we use way, way way too much fossil fuels, producing way, way, way too much carbon dioxide.
Nucelar power has problems and if we were to use it as much as we use fossil fuels, it would cause the same problem.
The same problem exists with ALL fuel sources, including so called "renewables". Solar power uses rare metals whose use could be just as bad as fossil fuels. Similarly, if we just used hydroelectric, then we could cause major problems with rivers.
Nuclear is very clearly part of our energy solution, and it is time that we, as green environmentalists, accept that.
The batteries are heavy.
Worse, unlike gasoline, when you use up the energy, the battery do not get lighter. If you double the number of batteries, you don't double the range, you get something like 25% more range.
I mean really, most people would take the badge off before sitting down at their desk.