He didn't just not help. After being asked to tell them to leave, he told them to keep coming, and that the singer was inside signing autographs already, when in fact he had already left after seeing the dangerous crowd of rioting teenage girls. He was arrested because this tweet caused the mostly controlled crowed to surge and riot, smashing barricades and so on.
There's a difference between just refusing to text people that an appearance has been canceled, and texting to tell them to ignore the singer's twitter account, because the appearance has NOT been canceled after all, and to hurry inside! He was arrested for the latter. Slashdot wants you filled with blind rage at THE MAN, so they put up a fictional summary and hoped that, as expected, nobody would read TFA and find nothing in the summary was in there.
According to police, the crowd was broken up after safety concerns were raised, but Bieber's record exec, James Roppo, Tweeted that the singer was still signing. This caused fans to go berzerk and rush forward, breaking down barriers.
Roppo continued to tweet about the autograph signing even after it was canceled and ended up being arrested for reckless endangerment among other crimes.
He was already in trouble for planning an event without any form of crowd control, but when he defied police attempts to break it up, then he got arrested. He himself says its for blatently unconstitutional bs about being coerced into texting against his will. But it's reasonable. If you shout on the bullhorn "FREE CANDY EVERYBODY RUSH INSIDE" the police are within their rights to ask you to use it to say "SORRY I WAS LYING" to calm them down. Especially since a police officer can just use the bullhorn themselves, but nobody but the exec could push the retraction to his twitter account...
Yeah, previous posters, there's a legitimate source of information. You could read the god damn article, but that's way too hard, just read the comments and assume the ones you like were in the article. If you read TFA, the crowds were contained by police, who errected barricades to try and hold them back. The singer tweeted them all that it was off, and not to show up. They started dispursing without a story on the national news, so the record exec tweeted and told them it was still on, mixup, he's inside RIGHT NOW RUN HURRY! And they rioted, smashing through barricades. Yeah, you're totally right, teenagers don't bring cellphones when they go outside, and those few that do don't fucking use twitter. Idiot, every last one was subscribed, that's why they showed up in the first place, twitter flashcrowd. So the guy got arrested because, instead of doing what he was asked, telling them it was canceled, because it was, he told them it's still on, and urged them to break through police barricades.
That's the singer. The record exec was told by police to break it up, and they started putting up barricades to keep the crowds out of the mall. That's why the singer wasn't allowed in, and had to leave, and that's why he tweeted that. Meanwhile, the exec was still tweeting telling people no no no, it's still on, bring your friends! The police told him to stop, and he said no, it's a free country, etc, so they arrested his ass. At one point, he tweeted that the singer was there now, signing as we speak, causing the crowds to surge forward bowling over police and barricades trying to get in. So yeah, also, to all the idiots saying the crowds wouldn't have brought their fucking phones...brilliant guys, brilliant, but apparently they did, because within seconds they went from mostly contained to riot mode...
Global warming is hardly unprecedented. Things get warmer and warmer and plant life spreads. Eventually the entire world is dense dense jungle, like you imagine when you think of dinosaurs. Then something happens. Scientists don't agree on what. Some say global cooling is caused by all that plant life pulling most of the CO2 out of the air. Some say it's due to the orbit of the earth. Some say volcanos cloud the sky with dust on a clockwork schedule. Either way, global cooling leads to ice age. Ice ages are positive feedback. As it gets colder, more ice, higher albedo, more light reflected, colder temps. So once again, scientists disagree on why ice ages end, but they eventually always do. Some say it's the sun again. Some say all the dead plants rotting eventually release enough green house gases to get the ball rolling again. Some say volcanoes again.
The important part is that global warming of intense amounts has happened several times before, its what pulls us out of ice ages. Scientists don't know why, the models are far too complex, they tell us. Only now they're not complex? We can't even predict that past using the powers of hindsight, and we can predict the future? Anywho, the highly advanced science of "it happened 4 times at least so it should happen 5" tells us that temperatures should continue to rise for another 1-10 centuries, then we'll plunge into another ice age. The question isn't "Global warming?" it's "Anthropomorphic Global Warming?". We KNOW temperatures will almost certainly increase until we hit the next ice age causing event, and we KNOW they occur like clockwork with stunning precision. The real question, always ignored, is how much are we altering things? Pro and anti global warming "sides" both seem to agree on the patently false assumption that the environment is static without human intervention.
It's probably not a health hazard issue, but the techs took one look, saw that the greasy shit ruined the fans and broke the machine, and said "fuck you, intentional damage, warranty void". And then the answering droids on the phone took their best guess as to why, since the form just said warranty void. There's a difference between paying some schmuck to fix the shit your negligence broke, and expecting it for free.
Bullshit, in 6 months I build up enough shit on my air vents to almost partially block them (almost), and most of it is dust, not cat hair. Meanwhile, a buddy in highschool had two smoking parents. They got their first computer and within a month it was crashing. Opened it up, entire thing was coated in yellow greasey shit that smells like smoke, and dust sticks to it. Tried using canned air, nope, had to wipe it off by hand. Nastiest thing ever, and no shit it's a health hazard to get near it. But even wiping it doesn't get the greasy tar off, it's on there forever, and more dust will just cement to it immediately. Smoking near a computer should void the warranty, as you're intentionally causing damage to the cooling components.
The prosecutors job is to prove beyond all reasonable doubt. If he contends a piece of evidence is invalid, he has to prove it is so beyond all reasonable doubt. You're the one who doesn't understand. He would have had to go up there and contend that "All of the other guests lied about him being there, and on top of that, he had one of them leave a facebook message in order to exonerate him, and yes, that seems to me a reasonable setup prior to a fucking MUGGING." To repeat. If you're charged with a crime, and your father and other family members all swear you were with them, that's a tenuous alibi, they might by lying to cover you. If somebody from your father's house was updating facebook just minutes prior to the crime, that means either he's not lying, or it means he was engaged with a conspiracy prior to the crime. That is, the accused planned it all out prior to mugging some fucking strangers in his own apartment complex! That's absurd. On top of this...the prosecutor refuses to comment on what evidence there was. There probably wasn't any, they just grabbed the guy who "looked most guilty" when they were canvasing the neighbors, and hoped he'd be too poor to fight it. He lived in the projects, after all. "He's guilty of something, might as well be this."
"Seems like you're very willing to invite a man you only know from the Internet over to your house -- have you done it before, or do they usually invite you to their house?"
That's the anonymous abuse. How horrific. The poster said that after the son told the poster to come over and criticize his moms politics to his face...basically, the poster was complaining about the policies of a politician, and the son instigated a fight, then cried.
Nobody is saying he's a rapist and a murderer, they're just pointing out that he's never denied.it. He attacked an Arab-American senator, saying that they've never gone on record stating they aren't a terrorist, and never really presented any solid proof they aren't working for Al Quaida, so basically the website is operating under the assumption that if he can give it, he can take it.
Not only, as they say, does he refuse to deny having raped and murdered a girl in 1990, but he tries to sue to get the story buried? That does not sound like the act of an innocent man! And, time and again, Glenn Beck has declined to use his show to publicly deny, on the record, that he routinely BBQs and eats babies, saying minorities taste the best, as some reports indicate*.
Well, I read your link you titled "read it and weep". It disagrees with everything you say, so I'm not sure I read the parts of it you were hoping to? First, it says that both NASA and the ESA think that a 50-100x decrease in costs is possible in the near future. Further, it estimates that only 12x is needed for a solar sat to be economically sound when compared with a conventional, terrestrial power plant, a cost decrease about the same as what you admit may be possible, and far less than both NASA and the ESA are estimating. Sure, some of the tech isn't there yet, but to say that since it isn't there yet, it couldn't possible ever be, is moronic at best. On top of the extra light from being above the atmosphere, you get almost 24 hours of light, an argument you call vapid. Well, whatever, its a lot more than 2x the amount of solar power, so even with existing, inefficient microwave crap, it's still more power and less land usage on earth. And even though you plug your ears and scream no, NASA and the ESA both say you're wrong, launch costs WILL get cheaper in the next few decades, making this economically feasible, so long as in TWENTY YEARS the tech improves, which they say it will, even pessimistically. So, you fall into the usual Slashbot poster category of "NASA IS FULL OF MORONS I AM FAR SMARTER THAN THEY CAN EVER HOPE". Yawn city.
He didn't give them a list of suggestions, he sent them a letter demanding they come up with their own ideas. The "suggestions" were in the form of the lawsuit mentioning that some games can be played by visually impaired people. But prior to suing them, he made no suggestions of his own, merely demands that they make it so he can play Everquest without being able to see.
If you're hosting? Comcast TOS agreement prohibits using their service to run a server, where server is defined as any program that accepts incoming connections. Every ISP has this clause, as far as I know.
This isn't genetic engineering as in gene splicing, it's genetic engineering as in selective breeding. Fucking fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck. Just like those cows bred to produce less methane. whatcouldpossiblygowrong. Well, the same things that could always possibly go wrong, I guess? A random mutation between one generation and the next turns their meat into poison? Which would happen with or without selective breeding. When that article got posted about women getting shorter and heavier due to natural selection, did you post "men are genetically engineering women without their consent? whatcouldpossiblygowrong?"
Actually, it's less potent by 5x. It has a bigger effect on the atmosphere because there is 40 times as much of it in the air...also as the other poster pointed out, it falls out of the air all of the time. You may be familiar with the effect, even if you live in a desert. And the article is about NOx. That's 1500 as strong a greenhouse gas as water vapor. Still so absolutely positive that gardens are the true and only cause of the greenhouse effect? Your argument makes sense, right? Who uses greenhouses? Gardeners! QED, BITCHES. Burn down all of the fields and forrests, trees cause global warming, that's why things keep cooling off as we cut them down! Temperatures only started rising again as damn hippies made us plant trees! CRUEL IRONY.
So...you're advocating cutting down every plant on the entire planet? If you take the Wikipedia numbers, Michael Moore style, the maximum effect of water is 72% from 2% of the atmosphere. The minimum effect of CO2 is 8% from 0.04% of the atmosphere. So, CO2 gives 1/9 the effect, but from 1/50 the amount. If you make 5 tonnes of water vapor and lock away 1 tonne of CO2, you come even. Also, water vapor precipitates out of the air very fast, while CO2 tends to just sit there. Also, the article isn't about CO2, it's about Nitrous Oxide and Sulfur Dioxide. Nitrous is 300x as powerful a greenhouse gas as CO2. So that's about 1500x as much as water. If it they even absorb a total of one tonne of nitrous per 1500 tonnes of water vapor, they break even. And again, that water will precipitate back down fairly easily, whereas nitrous will just float up there breaking down the ozone layer, for a double whammy of reflecting heat back at us, and also increasing incoming radiance.
Now, when I say that the water will fall out eventually, I mean all of it, and extremely quickly. It's only a consideration on the page you linked, because the amount the air will hold is a function of its temperature. But almost all of it comes from evaporation in the ocean. Plants are nothing. The atmosphere is already basically fully saturated almost everywhere. No matter how many plants you grow, you'll have absolutely no effect. Because the air won't hold it, it will float up, turn into a cloud, then rain a bit more. The end. Don't fucking link Wikipedia articles to "prove your point" without even reading them. If the temperature goes up, more water will be held from the oceans. You can't up the temperature, and then say "oh good thing Toyota didn't grow any fucking flowers, or that extra heat would mean more water staying in the atmosphere instead of raining." No, the ocean absolutely and unequivocally dwarfs any plant based effect on Earth, let alone any plant based effect humans can cause that we haven't already undone many times over by unchecked deforestation.
Or you can read the article and see that CO2 helps anaerobic bacteria that also happen to be nitrogen fixers...guess the journalists know more than you, after all.
It's nice that you're so sure actual scientists know less than you, and that there's no such thing as nitrogen fixing bacteria, and that they sure aren't fucking anaerobic and like CO2. Christ.
Yeah, well, coffee isn't a "handheld electronic device with a readable screen" so the law doesn't apply, even through the submitter said so;) Must be a fucking awesome cup of coffee! Yeah, note that dashmount GPS devices aren't hand-held either. If it's not in your hand, you can use it.
Slashdot Mirror
He didn't just not help. After being asked to tell them to leave, he told them to keep coming, and that the singer was inside signing autographs already, when in fact he had already left after seeing the dangerous crowd of rioting teenage girls. He was arrested because this tweet caused the mostly controlled crowed to surge and riot, smashing barricades and so on.
He was already in trouble for planning an event without any form of crowd control, but when he defied police attempts to break it up, then he got arrested. He himself says its for blatently unconstitutional bs about being coerced into texting against his will. But it's reasonable. If you shout on the bullhorn "FREE CANDY EVERYBODY RUSH INSIDE" the police are within their rights to ask you to use it to say "SORRY I WAS LYING" to calm them down. Especially since a police officer can just use the bullhorn themselves, but nobody but the exec could push the retraction to his twitter account...
Yeah, previous posters, there's a legitimate source of information. You could read the god damn article, but that's way too hard, just read the comments and assume the ones you like were in the article. If you read TFA, the crowds were contained by police, who errected barricades to try and hold them back. The singer tweeted them all that it was off, and not to show up. They started dispursing without a story on the national news, so the record exec tweeted and told them it was still on, mixup, he's inside RIGHT NOW RUN HURRY! And they rioted, smashing through barricades. Yeah, you're totally right, teenagers don't bring cellphones when they go outside, and those few that do don't fucking use twitter. Idiot, every last one was subscribed, that's why they showed up in the first place, twitter flashcrowd. So the guy got arrested because, instead of doing what he was asked, telling them it was canceled, because it was, he told them it's still on, and urged them to break through police barricades.
That's the singer. The record exec was told by police to break it up, and they started putting up barricades to keep the crowds out of the mall. That's why the singer wasn't allowed in, and had to leave, and that's why he tweeted that. Meanwhile, the exec was still tweeting telling people no no no, it's still on, bring your friends! The police told him to stop, and he said no, it's a free country, etc, so they arrested his ass. At one point, he tweeted that the singer was there now, signing as we speak, causing the crowds to surge forward bowling over police and barricades trying to get in. So yeah, also, to all the idiots saying the crowds wouldn't have brought their fucking phones...brilliant guys, brilliant, but apparently they did, because within seconds they went from mostly contained to riot mode...
Cry about the term WASP next. "Wah, you don't have to be a White Anglo-Saxon Protestant to be bland and indistinguishable! Call the racism police!"
Report, a statement or announcement. Doesn't have to be original!
This isn't a software patent.
Global warming is hardly unprecedented. Things get warmer and warmer and plant life spreads. Eventually the entire world is dense dense jungle, like you imagine when you think of dinosaurs. Then something happens. Scientists don't agree on what. Some say global cooling is caused by all that plant life pulling most of the CO2 out of the air. Some say it's due to the orbit of the earth. Some say volcanos cloud the sky with dust on a clockwork schedule. Either way, global cooling leads to ice age. Ice ages are positive feedback. As it gets colder, more ice, higher albedo, more light reflected, colder temps. So once again, scientists disagree on why ice ages end, but they eventually always do. Some say it's the sun again. Some say all the dead plants rotting eventually release enough green house gases to get the ball rolling again. Some say volcanoes again.
The important part is that global warming of intense amounts has happened several times before, its what pulls us out of ice ages. Scientists don't know why, the models are far too complex, they tell us. Only now they're not complex? We can't even predict that past using the powers of hindsight, and we can predict the future? Anywho, the highly advanced science of "it happened 4 times at least so it should happen 5" tells us that temperatures should continue to rise for another 1-10 centuries, then we'll plunge into another ice age. The question isn't "Global warming?" it's "Anthropomorphic Global Warming?". We KNOW temperatures will almost certainly increase until we hit the next ice age causing event, and we KNOW they occur like clockwork with stunning precision. The real question, always ignored, is how much are we altering things? Pro and anti global warming "sides" both seem to agree on the patently false assumption that the environment is static without human intervention.
It's probably not a health hazard issue, but the techs took one look, saw that the greasy shit ruined the fans and broke the machine, and said "fuck you, intentional damage, warranty void". And then the answering droids on the phone took their best guess as to why, since the form just said warranty void. There's a difference between paying some schmuck to fix the shit your negligence broke, and expecting it for free.
Bullshit, in 6 months I build up enough shit on my air vents to almost partially block them (almost), and most of it is dust, not cat hair. Meanwhile, a buddy in highschool had two smoking parents. They got their first computer and within a month it was crashing. Opened it up, entire thing was coated in yellow greasey shit that smells like smoke, and dust sticks to it. Tried using canned air, nope, had to wipe it off by hand. Nastiest thing ever, and no shit it's a health hazard to get near it. But even wiping it doesn't get the greasy tar off, it's on there forever, and more dust will just cement to it immediately. Smoking near a computer should void the warranty, as you're intentionally causing damage to the cooling components.
The prosecutors job is to prove beyond all reasonable doubt. If he contends a piece of evidence is invalid, he has to prove it is so beyond all reasonable doubt. You're the one who doesn't understand. He would have had to go up there and contend that "All of the other guests lied about him being there, and on top of that, he had one of them leave a facebook message in order to exonerate him, and yes, that seems to me a reasonable setup prior to a fucking MUGGING." To repeat. If you're charged with a crime, and your father and other family members all swear you were with them, that's a tenuous alibi, they might by lying to cover you. If somebody from your father's house was updating facebook just minutes prior to the crime, that means either he's not lying, or it means he was engaged with a conspiracy prior to the crime. That is, the accused planned it all out prior to mugging some fucking strangers in his own apartment complex! That's absurd. On top of this...the prosecutor refuses to comment on what evidence there was. There probably wasn't any, they just grabbed the guy who "looked most guilty" when they were canvasing the neighbors, and hoped he'd be too poor to fight it. He lived in the projects, after all. "He's guilty of something, might as well be this."
That's the anonymous abuse. How horrific. The poster said that after the son told the poster to come over and criticize his moms politics to his face...basically, the poster was complaining about the policies of a politician, and the son instigated a fight, then cried.
Nobody is saying he's a rapist and a murderer, they're just pointing out that he's never denied.it. He attacked an Arab-American senator, saying that they've never gone on record stating they aren't a terrorist, and never really presented any solid proof they aren't working for Al Quaida, so basically the website is operating under the assumption that if he can give it, he can take it.
Not only, as they say, does he refuse to deny having raped and murdered a girl in 1990, but he tries to sue to get the story buried? That does not sound like the act of an innocent man! And, time and again, Glenn Beck has declined to use his show to publicly deny, on the record, that he routinely BBQs and eats babies, saying minorities taste the best, as some reports indicate*.
*Well, just this one.
Well, I read your link you titled "read it and weep". It disagrees with everything you say, so I'm not sure I read the parts of it you were hoping to? First, it says that both NASA and the ESA think that a 50-100x decrease in costs is possible in the near future. Further, it estimates that only 12x is needed for a solar sat to be economically sound when compared with a conventional, terrestrial power plant, a cost decrease about the same as what you admit may be possible, and far less than both NASA and the ESA are estimating. Sure, some of the tech isn't there yet, but to say that since it isn't there yet, it couldn't possible ever be, is moronic at best. On top of the extra light from being above the atmosphere, you get almost 24 hours of light, an argument you call vapid. Well, whatever, its a lot more than 2x the amount of solar power, so even with existing, inefficient microwave crap, it's still more power and less land usage on earth. And even though you plug your ears and scream no, NASA and the ESA both say you're wrong, launch costs WILL get cheaper in the next few decades, making this economically feasible, so long as in TWENTY YEARS the tech improves, which they say it will, even pessimistically. So, you fall into the usual Slashbot poster category of "NASA IS FULL OF MORONS I AM FAR SMARTER THAN THEY CAN EVER HOPE". Yawn city.
What's taught in psych 101 is that babies recognize their mothers voices. Recognizing a voice vs. learning language skills is quite different.
He didn't give them a list of suggestions, he sent them a letter demanding they come up with their own ideas. The "suggestions" were in the form of the lawsuit mentioning that some games can be played by visually impaired people. But prior to suing them, he made no suggestions of his own, merely demands that they make it so he can play Everquest without being able to see.
If you're hosting? Comcast TOS agreement prohibits using their service to run a server, where server is defined as any program that accepts incoming connections. Every ISP has this clause, as far as I know.
This isn't genetic engineering as in gene splicing, it's genetic engineering as in selective breeding. Fucking fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck. Just like those cows bred to produce less methane. whatcouldpossiblygowrong. Well, the same things that could always possibly go wrong, I guess? A random mutation between one generation and the next turns their meat into poison? Which would happen with or without selective breeding. When that article got posted about women getting shorter and heavier due to natural selection, did you post "men are genetically engineering women without their consent? whatcouldpossiblygowrong?"
Actually, it's less potent by 5x. It has a bigger effect on the atmosphere because there is 40 times as much of it in the air...also as the other poster pointed out, it falls out of the air all of the time. You may be familiar with the effect, even if you live in a desert. And the article is about NOx. That's 1500 as strong a greenhouse gas as water vapor. Still so absolutely positive that gardens are the true and only cause of the greenhouse effect? Your argument makes sense, right? Who uses greenhouses? Gardeners! QED, BITCHES. Burn down all of the fields and forrests, trees cause global warming, that's why things keep cooling off as we cut them down! Temperatures only started rising again as damn hippies made us plant trees! CRUEL IRONY.
So...you're advocating cutting down every plant on the entire planet? If you take the Wikipedia numbers, Michael Moore style, the maximum effect of water is 72% from 2% of the atmosphere. The minimum effect of CO2 is 8% from 0.04% of the atmosphere. So, CO2 gives 1/9 the effect, but from 1/50 the amount. If you make 5 tonnes of water vapor and lock away 1 tonne of CO2, you come even. Also, water vapor precipitates out of the air very fast, while CO2 tends to just sit there. Also, the article isn't about CO2, it's about Nitrous Oxide and Sulfur Dioxide. Nitrous is 300x as powerful a greenhouse gas as CO2. So that's about 1500x as much as water. If it they even absorb a total of one tonne of nitrous per 1500 tonnes of water vapor, they break even. And again, that water will precipitate back down fairly easily, whereas nitrous will just float up there breaking down the ozone layer, for a double whammy of reflecting heat back at us, and also increasing incoming radiance.
Now, when I say that the water will fall out eventually, I mean all of it, and extremely quickly. It's only a consideration on the page you linked, because the amount the air will hold is a function of its temperature. But almost all of it comes from evaporation in the ocean. Plants are nothing. The atmosphere is already basically fully saturated almost everywhere. No matter how many plants you grow, you'll have absolutely no effect. Because the air won't hold it, it will float up, turn into a cloud, then rain a bit more. The end. Don't fucking link Wikipedia articles to "prove your point" without even reading them. If the temperature goes up, more water will be held from the oceans. You can't up the temperature, and then say "oh good thing Toyota didn't grow any fucking flowers, or that extra heat would mean more water staying in the atmosphere instead of raining." No, the ocean absolutely and unequivocally dwarfs any plant based effect on Earth, let alone any plant based effect humans can cause that we haven't already undone many times over by unchecked deforestation.
Or you can read the article and see that CO2 helps anaerobic bacteria that also happen to be nitrogen fixers...guess the journalists know more than you, after all.
It's nice that you're so sure actual scientists know less than you, and that there's no such thing as nitrogen fixing bacteria, and that they sure aren't fucking anaerobic and like CO2. Christ.
Why bother? Just tell your media to announce that the enemy is on the offensive. They wouldn't dare contradict you in a time of war, would they?
Yeah, well, coffee isn't a "handheld electronic device with a readable screen" so the law doesn't apply, even through the submitter said so ;) Must be a fucking awesome cup of coffee! Yeah, note that dashmount GPS devices aren't hand-held either. If it's not in your hand, you can use it.