Not that difficult. Just induce feedback on the line and the phone will disconnect the call and give you a new dialtone.
I had a friend that I called a lot in the early 70s, during the Watergate hearings in the summer (74?) as I recall when there was nothing better for a teen to do. He and I found out that if you whistled the correct tone, the call would hang up. I can't recall if you got a dial tone, but it definately hung up the call. As I was tone deaf and could not reproduce the exact tone, I could do it by whistling a rising tone and when it matched, the call was disconnected. Since I knew he was going to call back, I also found out that if I continually pushed up and down on the, uh, what do you call those two little buttons on the cradle? -- the "hanger-up-buttons"? If I pushed pushed and released them over and over I could answer the call before it rang. As soon as he dialled the last number, there I was and said "hello." It freaked him out the first time.
How about starting a war against a nation that post no clear and present danger to the US of A. Misuse of the military would certainly be an impeachable offense.
You are of course referring to Bill Clinton's use of the military to attack Serbia, a clear case of attack on "a nation that post no clear and present danger to the US of A"? Right?
Maybe this sounds silly, but perhaps you simply don't know what you are missing, which isn't surprising since the "gems" are buried under tons and tons of crap. But they are there (I'm not naming anything since I'll just elicit a "How can you like that?" response).
One of which was the series "Tribal Life" on the Travel Channel depicting the life of the Bunlap tribe on Pentecost Island in Vanuatu.
All cellphones are radios. It's not like they are wired into the network after all. They emit and receive radio waves same as any other two-way radio, like a CB or walkie-talkie. They just operate on a higher frequency and use more complex modulation schemes.
The whole concept of people not being able to make decisions for themselves is what is so scary.
The whole concept of people not being able to make decisions for themselves is what is called "childhood." That's the one crucial difference between children and adults you know. You don't want 4-year olds deciding that they can wander off to go down to the lake and play on the spillway all by themselves with no one around and no one knowing where they are.
For an example of how you now need less crew for the same mission using modern weaponry, just look at the manned bomber. The B-17 flew with a crew of 10. The modern B-2 flies with a crew of 2. Indeed, it only takes one B-2 with a crew of 2 to take out with GPS-guided smart bombs a particular ball-bearing factory say, whereas in 1944 it took multiple air wings of say 300 to 400 aircraft with 10 crew each to take out that same factory on one mission -- and you weren't sure you would get it. With the B-2 you have mission surety, as well as risking only 2 aircrew versus risking 3,500 aircrew to get bombs accurately on target.
I suspect most of the naval fatalities over the last 30 years are due primarily to ship-board accidents. The USS Forrestal (CVA 59) was nearly lost due to an accidental misfire on the deck which killed 134 people.
It was John McCain's (yes, the Senator) aircraft fuel tank that exploded. Someone else's missile hit it though.
Re:The moon may be more difficult than Mars
on
US Plans Lunar Motel
·
· Score: 1
Now, why would a moon base be completely useless when you can launch and receive vessels without having to worry about such an enormous escape velocity? You could guide asteroids down onto the moon and mine them for metals, fuel, water, and other materials. You could build spaceships on the moon, eventually. You could launch them towards mars with a fraction of the fuel they would need if they left from earth. So please, don't say a moon base would be useless...
I'll say it. A moon base would be useless. Given the level of technology you describe you could just as easily beam the men and equipment directly from Earth to Mars via a teletransporter. Our current level of technology would only allow us to duct-tape a couple of rocks together on the surface of the moon and throw them towards Mars by hand. That's the level of fabrication of space-ships using lunar materials that we could achieve presently. Going to the moon as a stopover on the way to Mars just adds an additional gravity well that spaceships from Earth have to go into and out of on the way, all the while expending earth resources to do so.
I have my eyes peeled for a bio-drive, something noxious smelling that you feed with potato rinds which stores your data directly in its DNA.
That already exists. It's called a "child." Geeks might think they are hard to obtain, but in fact they tend to pop up unexpectedly quite often. They also have an audio interface, are touch-sensitive, run off of bio-mass fuel, and can even do the dishes after they have been around for a few years. They can be attached to a Playstation or an iPod too. When you first get them they are quite noisy and smelly with a few leaks, but that goes away after the break-in period. They don't come with a users manual though. Documentation is sparse. You have to get a third-party handbook.
Of course the opposide POV on this is a scene on board the USS Californian on April 14th, 1912 at a little after midnight.
Crewman1: "Look at that big passenger liner firing rockets over there about 6 miles to the south. Whaddya think that's all about?"
Crewman2: "Dunno. Maybe they are having a party. Looks like a lot of fun. Rich buggers. All we have to do is stand watch here in the cold."
Crewman1: "Should we wake Captain Lord and tell him?"
Crewman2: "For what? Cuz we saw a bunch of party rockets?"
Crewman1: "That's why we're standing watch. To watch for stuff ya know. I gonna go tell 'im."
A few minutes later.
Crewman1: "He told me to go away and tell him in the morning when he wakes."
After 2:30 am
Crewman1: "That ship where the party was is now gone. I guess it musta sailed away."
Crewman2: "Rich bastards, probably asleep in their ornate staterooms by now. I wish I had enough money to live like that instead of being stuck on this rusty piece of junk on a freezing night like this."
And in fact, the documents were never proven to be forgeries.
The documents were proven to be forgeries by Peter Tytell, proof of which was even included in CBS's own Thornburgh-Boccardi report. It's in Appendix 4.
Who's the moron? I never said nor implied they were not design patents. I said they were "Star Trek patents" -- which they are. The "real" in the subject doesn't refer to them being patents on working machines, it refers to them being actually filed in the patent office. They are real design patents as opposed to photoshop fakery patents. Moron. Is English not your first language?
The patent system is definitely broken. It is bogging down innovation with lawsuits and silly claims.
This didn't happen accidently. It's a deliberate strategy. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think it was in the Reagan administration that the then-current administration decided that the USPTO would not decide on every patent's validity anymore -- that they would essentially grant everything submitted and "let the courts decide" the validity of a patent since the courts had more resources to devote to it than did the "faceless bureaucrats" in the USPTO (and you know how the Reagan administration was opposed to bureaucrats).
So name a network TV drama that illustrated the death of Iraqi children by showing their deaths. It hasn't happened. The other half of your argument is nonexistent.
You always had a choice in the matter via the "X-noarchive" flag. It would have made an interesting case if he had set "X-noarchive: yes" in his posting and Google (and DejaNews before them) had ignored it.
If you're living in a free society, that society does not restrict 'offensive' or 'indecent' speech. This is Christian fundamentalism, right-wing Republican bullshit, and is actually one of the telling signs of Fascism, not Democracy.
So the University of Chicago is run by right-wing, conservative, fundamentalist fascist bullshitting Republicans? The French newspaper France Soir is under their spell too? Along with the Finnish magazine, "Kaltio"? Boy those Republicans get around! Damn those right-wing, conservative, fundamentalist fascist bullshitting Republicans!
Umm dude, isn't that what happened here? They fined the individual stations the complaints were about rather than the network as a whole. And holding individual stations accountable was the point of the Supreme Court's ruling about "community standards" for determining what is or is not indecent.
Quote from the story (you did RTFA, right?): "Notably, the FCC backed away from an effort to impose higher fines by holding all network affiliates responsible for a broadcast, instead of just the stations that had been flagged by a viewer in a complaint."
Let me get this this right. US has gone to war against a nation with no real proof that that nation had any intent of means to harm the US, with the result being thousands of innocent people being killed
You're talking about Serbia right? I'm not sure why Clinton went to war against Serbia, but what does that have to do with an FCC fine?
Slashdot Mirror
I had a friend that I called a lot in the early 70s, during the Watergate hearings in the summer (74?) as I recall when there was nothing better for a teen to do. He and I found out that if you whistled the correct tone, the call would hang up. I can't recall if you got a dial tone, but it definately hung up the call. As I was tone deaf and could not reproduce the exact tone, I could do it by whistling a rising tone and when it matched, the call was disconnected. Since I knew he was going to call back, I also found out that if I continually pushed up and down on the, uh, what do you call those two little buttons on the cradle? -- the "hanger-up-buttons"? If I pushed pushed and released them over and over I could answer the call before it rang. As soon as he dialled the last number, there I was and said "hello." It freaked him out the first time.
Even the venerable "2001: A Space Odyssey" does that.
http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/1998/08/17/time/cli nton.html
You are of course referring to Bill Clinton's use of the military to attack Serbia, a clear case of attack on "a nation that post no clear and present danger to the US of A"? Right?
One of which was the series "Tribal Life" on the Travel Channel depicting the life of the Bunlap tribe on Pentecost Island in Vanuatu.
I can never find George M. Cohan to explain the unintelligible "witty" headlines to me when I come across them.
All cellphones are radios. It's not like they are wired into the network after all. They emit and receive radio waves same as any other two-way radio, like a CB or walkie-talkie. They just operate on a higher frequency and use more complex modulation schemes.
The whole concept of people not being able to make decisions for themselves is what is called "childhood." That's the one crucial difference between children and adults you know. You don't want 4-year olds deciding that they can wander off to go down to the lake and play on the spillway all by themselves with no one around and no one knowing where they are.
Wasn't that the old saying? Something like that anyway.
AF!
For an example of how you now need less crew for the same mission using modern weaponry, just look at the manned bomber. The B-17 flew with a crew of 10. The modern B-2 flies with a crew of 2. Indeed, it only takes one B-2 with a crew of 2 to take out with GPS-guided smart bombs a particular ball-bearing factory say, whereas in 1944 it took multiple air wings of say 300 to 400 aircraft with 10 crew each to take out that same factory on one mission -- and you weren't sure you would get it. With the B-2 you have mission surety, as well as risking only 2 aircrew versus risking 3,500 aircrew to get bombs accurately on target.
It was John McCain's (yes, the Senator) aircraft fuel tank that exploded. Someone else's missile hit it though.
I'll say it. A moon base would be useless. Given the level of technology you describe you could just as easily beam the men and equipment directly from Earth to Mars via a teletransporter. Our current level of technology would only allow us to duct-tape a couple of rocks together on the surface of the moon and throw them towards Mars by hand. That's the level of fabrication of space-ships using lunar materials that we could achieve presently. Going to the moon as a stopover on the way to Mars just adds an additional gravity well that spaceships from Earth have to go into and out of on the way, all the while expending earth resources to do so.
That already exists. It's called a "child." Geeks might think they are hard to obtain, but in fact they tend to pop up unexpectedly quite often. They also have an audio interface, are touch-sensitive, run off of bio-mass fuel, and can even do the dishes after they have been around for a few years. They can be attached to a Playstation or an iPod too. When you first get them they are quite noisy and smelly with a few leaks, but that goes away after the break-in period. They don't come with a users manual though. Documentation is sparse. You have to get a third-party handbook.
Of course the opposide POV on this is a scene on board the USS Californian on April 14th, 1912 at a little after midnight.
Crewman1: "Look at that big passenger liner firing rockets over there about 6 miles to the south. Whaddya think that's all about?"
Crewman2: "Dunno. Maybe they are having a party. Looks like a lot of fun. Rich buggers. All we have to do is stand watch here in the cold."
Crewman1: "Should we wake Captain Lord and tell him?"
Crewman2: "For what? Cuz we saw a bunch of party rockets?"
Crewman1: "That's why we're standing watch. To watch for stuff ya know. I gonna go tell 'im."
A few minutes later.
Crewman1: "He told me to go away and tell him in the morning when he wakes."
After 2:30 am
Crewman1: "That ship where the party was is now gone. I guess it musta sailed away."
Crewman2: "Rich bastards, probably asleep in their ornate staterooms by now. I wish I had enough money to live like that instead of being stuck on this rusty piece of junk on a freezing night like this."
The documents were proven to be forgeries by Peter Tytell, proof of which was even included in CBS's own Thornburgh-Boccardi report. It's in Appendix 4.
Who's the moron? I never said nor implied they were not design patents. I said they were "Star Trek patents" -- which they are. The "real" in the subject doesn't refer to them being patents on working machines, it refers to them being actually filed in the patent office. They are real design patents as opposed to photoshop fakery patents. Moron. Is English not your first language?
Paramount Pictures Corp - USS Enterprise - Patent D260789
http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PT O1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PALL&p=1&u=/netahtml/srchnum.htm &r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=D260789.WKU.&OS=PN/D260789&RS=PN/ D260789
Paramount Pictures Corp. Star Trek Phaser - Patent D259939
http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PT O1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PALL&p=1&u=/netahtml/srchnum.htm &r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=D259939.WKU.&OS=PN/D259939&RS=PN/ D259939
Paramount Pictures Corp. Star Trek Insignia Pin - Patent D261872
http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PT O1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PALL&p=1&u=/netahtml/srchnum.htm &r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=D261872.WKU.&OS=PN/D261872&RS=PN/ D261872
Paramount Pictures Corp. Star Trek Uniform - D279135
http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PT O1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PALL&p=1&u=/netahtml/srchnum.htm &r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=D279135.WKU.&OS=PN/D279135&RS=PN/ D279135
Paramount Pictures Corp. Star Trek Font - Patent D262037
http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PT O1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PALL&p=1&u=/netahtml/srchnum.htm &r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=D262037.WKU.&OS=PN/D262037&RS=PN/ D262037
Paramount Pictures Corp. Star Trek - Klingon Battle Crusier - Patent
D263856
http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PT O1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PALL&p=1&u=/netahtml/srchnum.htm &r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=D263856.WKU.&OS=PN/D263856&RS=PN/ D263856
Paramount Pictures Corp. Star Trek - Miranda Class Starship - Patent
D272839
http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PT O1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PALL&p=1&u=/netahtml/srchnum.htm &r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=D272839.WKU.&OS=PN/D272839&RS=PN/ D272839
Paramount Pictures Corp. Star Trek Wrath of Khan parasite - Patent
D275777
http://patft.usp
This didn't happen accidently. It's a deliberate strategy. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think it was in the Reagan administration that the then-current administration decided that the USPTO would not decide on every patent's validity anymore -- that they would essentially grant everything submitted and "let the courts decide" the validity of a patent since the courts had more resources to devote to it than did the "faceless bureaucrats" in the USPTO (and you know how the Reagan administration was opposed to bureaucrats).
One wheel dragging huh? Must be that the Mars rovers are manufactured by the same company that make the shopping carts for Walmart.
So name a network TV drama that illustrated the death of Iraqi children by showing their deaths. It hasn't happened. The other half of your argument is nonexistent.
You always had a choice in the matter via the "X-noarchive" flag. It would have made an interesting case if he had set "X-noarchive: yes" in his posting and Google (and DejaNews before them) had ignored it.
So the University of Chicago is run by right-wing, conservative, fundamentalist fascist bullshitting Republicans? The French newspaper France Soir is under their spell too? Along with the Finnish magazine, "Kaltio" ? Boy those Republicans get around! Damn those right-wing, conservative, fundamentalist fascist bullshitting Republicans!
Umm dude, isn't that what happened here? They fined the individual stations the complaints were about rather than the network as a whole. And holding individual stations accountable was the point of the Supreme Court's ruling about "community standards" for determining what is or is not indecent.
Quote from the story (you did RTFA, right?): "Notably, the FCC backed away from an effort to impose higher fines by holding all network affiliates responsible for a broadcast, instead of just the stations that had been flagged by a viewer in a complaint."
You're talking about Serbia right? I'm not sure why Clinton went to war against Serbia, but what does that have to do with an FCC fine?