See? I was right all along. I'm gonna make millions on this, I tell you, millions! This will totally make up for my Iridium investment....I can feel it.
1) Train terrorists.
2) Put them in sleeper cells.
3) Set up weapons/equipment/etc. without their knowledge.
4) Run "activation" drills often so they don't know if it's the real thing or not. This will condition them. It can also test detection methods.
5) Activate them for the "real thing", but do not give details until right before they are to execute the attack. Emails, text messages, phone calls, coded written instructions left with equipment or plans can be used.
6) Those caught before receiving last minute instructions provide useless intelligence and can be used as decoys or sacrificial losses to tie up law enforcement and misdirect them. Consider using decoys (unknown to themselves) with false information to delay and confuse law enforcement.
As Frances Cairncross and others have argued, the best way to figure out this whole issue is a carbon tax. Tax fuels based on their carbon content. Refund it back through payroll tax credits (or other means) for lower income people who will feel more of an impact. Direct proceeds to mass transit or basic R&D for fuel efficiency/alternative fuels/etc. Then get the hell out of the way and let the free market work its magic. People saying, "Man, $5/gallon is expensive, maybe I should buy a more fuel efficient car or take the bus" is a hell of a lot more effective than arguing over whether this car or that car should qualify for this tax credit or that HOV lane permission.
I don't know why people don't like this. Conservatives can feel all warm and fuzzy about the free market and liberals can feel all warm and fuzzy about encouraging people to make the most environmentally friendly choices. Warm fuzzies all around.
Something like half of all mergers/acquisitions fail to generate the returns expected. In such cases, it's usually the shareholders of the company being bought that reap the benefit (assuming they can dump whatever stock of the acquiring company they receive as part of their payment).
Think about it. It's basically a coin flip that company A buying company B will result in any benefit to the shareholders of A. If shareholders were truly wise, they'd tell management to just give them the cash they would have spent on acquiring a company. They'd make out better in the long run.
I'm surprised the MPAA hasn't asked for the ability to disable your friends' cars so they can't drive over to watch the movie at your house. That way, they'd have to pay to watch it at their houses. Obviously, for those without cars, they'd need a waiver to cap their knees so they can't walk, bike, or rollerskate over to your house. A waiver to jam sticks in wheelchair spokes should also be granted.
If they use/provide company vehicles, would they test potential employees to see if they know how to change brake pads or replace a timing belt?
Relying on some test to see if people know not to open an email from "Hot Sex Machine" with a "cool app you must see now" is lazy IT administration. I know that small businesses often cannot afford an IT person, but to rely on some test is bad management. Are they going to retest people every year to make sure they're up on the latest scams or social engineering techniques? Will they pay people to take the time to educate themselves on this stuff?
I'm sorry, but this would be like requiring employees to provide their own safety equipment, develop their own lock out/tag out procedures, and maintain their own confined space entry plans. It'd be like saying, "We don't have to implement safety guards because we test whether people know not to stick their fingers in moving machinery." Such things are the responsibility of management. If management provides a tool (a computer, a machine, a car) for an employee to use, it is the responsibility of management to maintain it and provide the proper training on it. Otherwise, it's just pushing the cost off to the employee.
I understand that as a small business, this may be a challenge for them. But if they rely on some test, they're going to end up with a hodge-podge of protection with some minimal baseline. This is not good management.
In other words, to get 1 kg of cocaine from Red Bull would cost $10 billion, not to mention the enormous expense of purification. And all this would only be worth $30,000. It would cost 340,000 times more for the Red Bull than the cocaine would be worth.
Yes, but we have to think of the children. Can you imagine some innocent child distilling all that Red Bull and then snorting the coke? If we save but one child, it would be worth banning Red Bull.....
story where the cast is middle-aged should have the plot that involves the drama that a middle aged person gets involved in -- kids, grandkids, getting old, missed opportunities, rectifying relationships, taking on responsiblities, coming to terms with your life, etc
I can see it now:
I am the Gate Keeper....now get off my goddamn interdimensional lawn, you kids!
To this day, I still credit that experiment where we punched a spike through a board for making me become an engineer....and a successful part time actor in a niche movie industry.
And then you bring in universal health care.
Are you happy about having your pocket picked to rehabilitate those who've turned themselves into potted plants of the sort that they smoke?
Well, we're already dealing with effects of TWOD in the healthcare system: addicts who can't get treatment, people shot/stabbed/etc. in the related turf wars, and so forth. I doubt these people are covered under your friendly neighborhood HMO. These people cost the healthcare system since they a) don't pay for ER visits and/or b) use the ER as a primary healthcare service.
Something tells me we could take the money we spend on enforcement and easily pick up the rehab costs for the few people who are addicts. And we would see a large decrease in related crime that would directly contribute to a reduction in ER visits and thus costs that you and I have to bear right now.
They work out just fine, so long as the Christian can accept that the Bible may not be a 100% accurate portrayal of how God did it.
But that's the crux of the argument. The creationist/IDers/etc. believe in the Bible as the inerrant word of God*. To even entertain the thought you propose is to admit that, well, maybe the Bible isn't entirely, 100%, utterly correct.
The entire modern fundamentalist movement rests upon this belief, and they cling to it at all costs. It'd be like saying to a true scientist that maybe we can use supernatural explanations in our scientific theories. Such an admission is antithetical to the scientific method.
(*They conveniently ignore the fact that one could argue all day about which translations/documents/version one should use to make this claim, but that's another debate.)
Given the right motivation, even dumb cows can be convinced to do the 'right thing' most of the time. Using some technology to reduce the amount of manpower required to convince them is nothing but good.
The sad thing is that I forgot you were talking about cows and thought you were talking about the average person.
The Constitution says that a President shall sign or veto a bill (or not sign it, and it will become law after ten days). Since it says nothing about "signing orders", do you promise to comply with the Constitution by either signing, vetoing, or refusing to sign all bills that come before you and nothing more? Will you refuse to issue "signing orders" since they are not a power specifically given to the President by the Constitution?
I had a customer who once had a meeting with a Wal-Mart rep. Here's how it went (almost verbatim):
Customer (e.g, WM supplier): Hi. How's it going?
Wal-Mart rep: You fucked us in June. You fucked us in July. You ain't fucking us in August.
This was a supplier for store equipment (the physical stuff in the store, not stuff that is sold) that was well run and was about the only supplier for the items they made for Wal-Mart. They ran efficiently and satisfied very big orders that went into new stores.
I'm sure Wal-Mart didn't "ask" for low CD prices. They probably talked to the music companies the same way they talked to my customer. It's how they do business......
but Spira said the problem has grown as technology increases societal expectations for instantaneous response.
This is the major reason for the problem. People who send these emails, text messages, and so forth, expect instantaneous response. It's gotten very bad.
I recently had to deal with an issue at a customer's site. I was asked numerous times when the expert at my company would have an answer. Hell, I was asked every 30 minutes. This was a problem that was beyond my expertise and required an expert at my company to contact the vendor, collect data, run calculations, and engineer a solution that included having prints made up by the supplier (that themselves needed review and approval). In short, it was a problem that would easily take 2 to 3 days to properly design a solution.
I spent 2 days answering questions about why it wasn't ready yet. It got to the point that people were suggesting I run down to Canadian Tire (sort of like Wal-Mart for those unfamiliar) for parts because they wanted an instant answer. And this is a major petrochemical facility!
All this, I'm sure, is a result of those fuckin' Blackberries they all wear that give them instant "answers" and communications.
Unless there's a giant "Made in China" stamped on the bottom of the pyramids or they contain significant levels of lead, whatever is made won't be an "exact" copy. One could bypass this in any number of ways: change the ratio of the dimensions ever so slightly, change the color, and so forth.
I swear I would vote for anyone that said they would restore and enforce the Constitution, who would prosecute those who have subverted and raped it, and who would roll back the stoled powers of the Executive branch.
I don't really care for Ron Paul's politics on abortion (since I consider matters of reproduction an inalienable right), but I feel he's probably the only one who would remotely consider these actions. In fact, as a fairly liberal/libertarian person, he'd earn my vote in a heartbeat if he made prosecuting the guilty scumbags in the current administration his main campaign promise.
Slashdot Mirror
See? I was right all along. I'm gonna make millions on this, I tell you, millions! This will totally make up for my Iridium investment....I can feel it.
So, all this time that IE has been screwing my computer, has it been some form of underage violation?
1) Train terrorists.
2) Put them in sleeper cells.
3) Set up weapons/equipment/etc. without their knowledge.
4) Run "activation" drills often so they don't know if it's the real thing or not. This will condition them. It can also test detection methods.
5) Activate them for the "real thing", but do not give details until right before they are to execute the attack. Emails, text messages, phone calls, coded written instructions left with equipment or plans can be used.
6) Those caught before receiving last minute instructions provide useless intelligence and can be used as decoys or sacrificial losses to tie up law enforcement and misdirect them. Consider using decoys (unknown to themselves) with false information to delay and confuse law enforcement.
As Frances Cairncross and others have argued, the best way to figure out this whole issue is a carbon tax. Tax fuels based on their carbon content. Refund it back through payroll tax credits (or other means) for lower income people who will feel more of an impact. Direct proceeds to mass transit or basic R&D for fuel efficiency/alternative fuels/etc. Then get the hell out of the way and let the free market work its magic. People saying, "Man, $5/gallon is expensive, maybe I should buy a more fuel efficient car or take the bus" is a hell of a lot more effective than arguing over whether this car or that car should qualify for this tax credit or that HOV lane permission.
I don't know why people don't like this. Conservatives can feel all warm and fuzzy about the free market and liberals can feel all warm and fuzzy about encouraging people to make the most environmentally friendly choices. Warm fuzzies all around.
Something like half of all mergers/acquisitions fail to generate the returns expected. In such cases, it's usually the shareholders of the company being bought that reap the benefit (assuming they can dump whatever stock of the acquiring company they receive as part of their payment).
Think about it. It's basically a coin flip that company A buying company B will result in any benefit to the shareholders of A. If shareholders were truly wise, they'd tell management to just give them the cash they would have spent on acquiring a company. They'd make out better in the long run.
for the 15.4 million rats in my basement. I can use them to power a 100 W light bulb.
I'm surprised the MPAA hasn't asked for the ability to disable your friends' cars so they can't drive over to watch the movie at your house. That way, they'd have to pay to watch it at their houses. Obviously, for those without cars, they'd need a waiver to cap their knees so they can't walk, bike, or rollerskate over to your house. A waiver to jam sticks in wheelchair spokes should also be granted.
If they use/provide company vehicles, would they test potential employees to see if they know how to change brake pads or replace a timing belt?
Relying on some test to see if people know not to open an email from "Hot Sex Machine" with a "cool app you must see now" is lazy IT administration. I know that small businesses often cannot afford an IT person, but to rely on some test is bad management. Are they going to retest people every year to make sure they're up on the latest scams or social engineering techniques? Will they pay people to take the time to educate themselves on this stuff?
I'm sorry, but this would be like requiring employees to provide their own safety equipment, develop their own lock out/tag out procedures, and maintain their own confined space entry plans. It'd be like saying, "We don't have to implement safety guards because we test whether people know not to stick their fingers in moving machinery." Such things are the responsibility of management. If management provides a tool (a computer, a machine, a car) for an employee to use, it is the responsibility of management to maintain it and provide the proper training on it. Otherwise, it's just pushing the cost off to the employee.
I understand that as a small business, this may be a challenge for them. But if they rely on some test, they're going to end up with a hodge-podge of protection with some minimal baseline. This is not good management.
In other words, to get 1 kg of cocaine from Red Bull would cost $10 billion, not to mention the enormous expense of purification. And all this would only be worth $30,000. It would cost 340,000 times more for the Red Bull than the cocaine would be worth.
Yes, but we have to think of the children. Can you imagine some innocent child distilling all that Red Bull and then snorting the coke? If we save but one child, it would be worth banning Red Bull.....
story where the cast is middle-aged should have the plot that involves the drama that a middle aged person gets involved in -- kids, grandkids, getting old, missed opportunities, rectifying relationships, taking on responsiblities, coming to terms with your life, etc
I can see it now:
I am the Gate Keeper....now get off my goddamn interdimensional lawn, you kids!
To this day, I still credit that experiment where we punched a spike through a board for making me become an engineer....and a successful part time actor in a niche movie industry.
Chiropractors have had many detractors over the years and have a long history of using political manipulation and legal intimidation in response.
I didn't know L. Ron Hubbard started a medical field.......
Does this mean they'll take the candy out of the vending machines since it's obviously leading to obesity on a galactic scale?
And then you bring in universal health care.
Are you happy about having your pocket picked to rehabilitate those who've turned themselves into potted plants of the sort that they smoke?
Well, we're already dealing with effects of TWOD in the healthcare system: addicts who can't get treatment, people shot/stabbed/etc. in the related turf wars, and so forth. I doubt these people are covered under your friendly neighborhood HMO. These people cost the healthcare system since they a) don't pay for ER visits and/or b) use the ER as a primary healthcare service.
Something tells me we could take the money we spend on enforcement and easily pick up the rehab costs for the few people who are addicts. And we would see a large decrease in related crime that would directly contribute to a reduction in ER visits and thus costs that you and I have to bear right now.
Some of us can't throw away $250M on something like this, we're forced to drink ours le naturale.
Yeah, but here you pay a buck per can and call it "Budweiser".
Oh, man. What's that make Natural Light? I shudder to think of it........
You know, if you really think about it, maybe we don't want Joe Six Pack to be cured of cancer. Thinning out the herd can be good.
They work out just fine, so long as the Christian can accept that the Bible may not be a 100% accurate portrayal of how God did it.
But that's the crux of the argument. The creationist/IDers/etc. believe in the Bible as the inerrant word of God*. To even entertain the thought you propose is to admit that, well, maybe the Bible isn't entirely, 100%, utterly correct.
The entire modern fundamentalist movement rests upon this belief, and they cling to it at all costs. It'd be like saying to a true scientist that maybe we can use supernatural explanations in our scientific theories. Such an admission is antithetical to the scientific method.
(*They conveniently ignore the fact that one could argue all day about which translations/documents/version one should use to make this claim, but that's another debate.)
Given the right motivation, even dumb cows can be convinced to do the 'right thing' most of the time. Using some technology to reduce the amount of manpower required to convince them is nothing but good.
The sad thing is that I forgot you were talking about cows and thought you were talking about the average person.
To both:
The Constitution says that a President shall sign or veto a bill (or not sign it, and it will become law after ten days). Since it says nothing about "signing orders", do you promise to comply with the Constitution by either signing, vetoing, or refusing to sign all bills that come before you and nothing more? Will you refuse to issue "signing orders" since they are not a power specifically given to the President by the Constitution?
No, crime will stop when the second to last person dies.
Not if that last person is into necrophilia.........
Just build a giant wall between our species and the rest. Use lots of high tech things like cameras, UAVs, and the like. That'll work.
I had a customer who once had a meeting with a Wal-Mart rep. Here's how it went (almost verbatim): Customer (e.g, WM supplier): Hi. How's it going? Wal-Mart rep: You fucked us in June. You fucked us in July. You ain't fucking us in August. This was a supplier for store equipment (the physical stuff in the store, not stuff that is sold) that was well run and was about the only supplier for the items they made for Wal-Mart. They ran efficiently and satisfied very big orders that went into new stores. I'm sure Wal-Mart didn't "ask" for low CD prices. They probably talked to the music companies the same way they talked to my customer. It's how they do business......
but Spira said the problem has grown as technology increases societal expectations for instantaneous response.
This is the major reason for the problem. People who send these emails, text messages, and so forth, expect instantaneous response. It's gotten very bad.
I recently had to deal with an issue at a customer's site. I was asked numerous times when the expert at my company would have an answer. Hell, I was asked every 30 minutes. This was a problem that was beyond my expertise and required an expert at my company to contact the vendor, collect data, run calculations, and engineer a solution that included having prints made up by the supplier (that themselves needed review and approval). In short, it was a problem that would easily take 2 to 3 days to properly design a solution.
I spent 2 days answering questions about why it wasn't ready yet. It got to the point that people were suggesting I run down to Canadian Tire (sort of like Wal-Mart for those unfamiliar) for parts because they wanted an instant answer. And this is a major petrochemical facility!
All this, I'm sure, is a result of those fuckin' Blackberries they all wear that give them instant "answers" and communications.
Unless there's a giant "Made in China" stamped on the bottom of the pyramids or they contain significant levels of lead, whatever is made won't be an "exact" copy. One could bypass this in any number of ways: change the ratio of the dimensions ever so slightly, change the color, and so forth.
I swear I would vote for anyone that said they would restore and enforce the Constitution, who would prosecute those who have subverted and raped it, and who would roll back the stoled powers of the Executive branch.
I don't really care for Ron Paul's politics on abortion (since I consider matters of reproduction an inalienable right), but I feel he's probably the only one who would remotely consider these actions. In fact, as a fairly liberal/libertarian person, he'd earn my vote in a heartbeat if he made prosecuting the guilty scumbags in the current administration his main campaign promise.