But hey, thanks for proving my point, with your assertion that main stream expressions like "getting into bed with" somehow equate to and lead to rape.
So when they grab your phone they also get to trawl your dropbox? You'd be better off choosing an upload site out of the country with contribute only access from the phone.
going over land was too disturbing. Too much noise.
Stop that right now. The "Too noisy" meme was started by Boeing to hurt sales of the Concorde, and it worked. You're still repeating it to this day.
A Concorde going overhead at around 1000 feet and normal cruising speed is no more noisy than a normal jet. It's the afterburners that are loud (REALLY VERY LOUD) and those are only used at take-off.
Too noisy was not just a Boeing claim. Early flights were not required to decelerate below mach 1 before reaching land and they sent sonic booms up and down the coast.
Sonic booms cover wide areas. Sitting 40 miles outside of Seattle one day I heard two large booms, and thought it was near by blasting. It turns out it was two F15s scrambling supersonic out of Portland when a small plane wandered into Air Force One's exclusion zone. Such booms leave a trail of 911 calls.
Eventually, every single Concorde route required subsonic descents and approaches for this very reason. For the same reason no country let them fly to interior airports except France and Britain.
The afterburners (reheat they called it) were turned off after getting off the runway before they hit the noise abatement zone. With sufficient runway, they didn't need the afterburners at all except to break through Mach 1.
I wonder if this means Microsoft is going to bring out a lightweight version of Windows Phone.
It's hard to imagine Nokia ditching the market of normal cellphones. There's still a huge market there for them, even if those phones are not as sexy and headline-grabbing.
They aren't ditching the market. Not yet any way. There is just no point in re-doing what feature phones already do. They are entry level phones for people that want entry level phones. Contrary to the story's claim about leaving the upgrade path in question, the upgrade path is to a smartphone. Nobody wants a better feature phone.
Nokia's investment in the code base for its current line of feature phones is still returning a profit and that's not likely to change while there is still a market for that type of device. Its in the can, and paid for, and there is nothing new in the feature phone market that warrants any additional R&D money. The world is going to smartphones.
How do you make sure you don't hire the misogynist assholes or the lawsuit-happy, thin-skinned, man-hating ultra-feminist when even asking the necessary questions is pretty much against the law, and selecting based on the answers to such questions is bound to get you sued?
Call around. There are still places with punch card readers installed, even if they don't turn them on very often. Lots of universities etc. State of Florida.;-) They will probably read them in and email you the file for less than the cost of that crank shaft thingie.
With more and more content being aimed at internet delivery, 75 bucks a month is not unreasonable for a small business that needs a lot of feeds, (bars) or families that do a lot on line. Small web service companies can develop and host for their customers. I can see a lot of people going in for this even at home, but especially for small business that does anything on line.
The night janitor has a better chance of fixing your code than a lawyer has of improving your workplace environment.
There are a lot of causal expressions that are in common usage which if followed to their roots, will be found to have a sexual connotation. And there are just enough female workers looking for any excuse to file a complaint.
In a place I worked, a part failed in a production machine, and the replacement was two states and three days away. The deadline was the next day. The supervisor muttered "We're screwed!" and the woman handling shipping orders filed a complaint.
This kind of thing happens all the time. All. The. Time. The bigger the company and the more aggressive the EEO department, the more it happens.
And by your prescription, there has to be a hearing, lawyers have to be involved, outside mediators, people reprimanded, the whole nine yards. There has to be a better way.
Business people who are trying to sound important will never use a simple word when a three-syllable one will do.
They are simply interfacing with you to build consensus and team cohesion, working toward common goals and meaningful milestones. This requires sharing broad vision and shared sacrifices. By facilitating your gaining context, they hope guide you to greater synergy.
Why is this sort of non-sense continuing to come up? If your audience is highly technical, and knowledgeable in the field then speak the language. If they are not, then bring it down to their level. It's common sense.
There is nothing wrong with educating the reader. In fact, I was under the (apparently mistaken) impression that was the whole point of writing.
When an author needs to explain parts of some THING or some THEORY, using the terms that the reader is likely to encounter in further reading is of benefit to the reader, and shouldn't be avoided. Nothing wrong with explaining your terms. Nothing wrong with providing a quick glossary/appendix (or links thereto) either.
No scientist or college course explained to me what Ullage Motors were. Walter Cronkite did.
I certainly did, and the only thing that's stopping that casing is that thin cotton t-shirt. The outer jacket would be subject the same, er, stresses as the flak jacket.
Spent cases are lightweight. They bounce easily off of a tee shirt.
Even a.50 cal casing, heaver than most, is not going to penetrate a tee shirt. It will just bounce off. Yet he posted she had to "reach down" to get the shell. Clearly out of uniform.
Now if she was rushed from her mess to a combat position due to a sudden attack by pickup trucks or armored vehicles in the middle of the night I might buy it (these guns aren't used against foot solders).
I'd still have to ask what the hell she was doing on the ejection side of a.50 cal with her shirt unbuttoned, but wearing armor.
You still have to provide for re-programming all the locks, which means your putative bolt-over (something hand waived into existence, manufactured in bulk, shipped to all customers, installed by locksmiths) has to be removable, which means a pocket screwdriver defeats it.
Port is located on the bottom. You can barely see it sticking out). Your bolt-over would have to be drilled into the bottom of the assembly, or to the door itself. But it still has to be removable, because these things all get reprogrammed fairly frequently (like after any alleged break-in or change in management, or upon a schedule).
That means screws for removal. Now you've added screws to a lock designed not to have any screws visible.
Installed by handymen? Please. What hotel is going to take THAT risk. You would hire this work done by licensed and bonded locksmiths. Nobody would accept the liability of having their "handyman" do this. You can replace the entire lock in the same time it would take to mount your bolt-over.
Its easy for a tinkerer to imagine a quick and dirty solution that might work for a flea-bag 20 room hotel on the outskirts of nowhere. It won't fly when there are 300 rooms or 3000 rooms, in a venue with a reputation to uphold.
Really? So a 0.3 mm thick cotton shirt is supposed to disperse the heat from a recently ejected 50 cc shell...how exactly? Especially when it's trapped against the chest by what amounts to a stiff board?
How? By not letting the casing down there in the first place. Did you even LOOK at the jpg you included in your quote?
The direct quote was BETWEEN her breasts, not against a breast. There is no way this happens unless she violates combat regs and leaves the shirt off to show off her guns.
But again, given the posters name, Adult film producer, you have to assume the story is totally made up.
She got scarred in a very personal place, as a direct result of serving her country,
She got scarred (if it happened at all) because she was flaunting her boobs instead of wearing a regulation Army uniform. All it takes to stop ejected brass is a tee shirt or buttoned collar. Body armor is not designed for this.
Considering the poster's Slashdot name, the entire story is probably made up. An army issue tee shirt would have prevented ejected brass from finding its way to her boobs.
As an example, my wife has two scars between her breasts from burning hot shells from a 50 cal machine gun while she was in Iraq. Because she's a D-cup the body armor she was wouldn't fit tight against the neck area like it does on a man.. she describes it as nearly impossible to reach down and grab the shell, sometimes there wasn't time to do anything about it.
Body armor was not designed to protect against ejected shells.
A simple Army issued tee shirt would have done that.
There may be quite a number of people who have had items stolen from rooms "secured" by these locks now wondering what really happened. I also wonder whether there are any fired hotel staff who have been wronged in this. As Brocious points out, the hack is rather trivial and he's unlikely to have been the first/only person to have figured it out.
Its FAR FAR more likely that a hotel maid's card or a master card was duplicated by her shady love interest than anyone else detecting this.
I would say its probable that there is NOBODY who discovered this without inside knowledge. After all, who goes around plugging stuff into random sockets in hotel room locks without some inside knowledge of what that socket is for?
He didn't just happened to stumble on a micro-controller out of his TV remote that did this. He had to custom build a processor to do this. He had to know exactly what was on the other side of that socket. He had to dissect the content of the rom he read in, he had to know the content of the key-card to know what he was looking for. He had to know how to play back the information he pulled out of the rom, and he was still successful only 1/4 of the time.
He had inside knowledge. He put it out there that thousands might have discovered this to cover his source of inside knowledge.
Throwing that out there as an excuse is just so much hand waiving the problem away. Murder? Well, you didn't expect your dear brother to live for ever did you?
Hotels don't promise you security against someone with unlimited time an unlimited resources, nor does anyone have enough time or resources unless they are willing to use explosives.
Slashdot Mirror
By definition, casual expressions are harmless.
But hey, thanks for proving my point, with your assertion that main stream expressions like "getting into bed with" somehow equate to and lead to rape.
So when they grab your phone they also get to trawl your dropbox?
You'd be better off choosing an upload site out of the country with contribute only access from the phone.
Stop that right now. The "Too noisy" meme was started by Boeing to hurt sales of the Concorde, and it worked. You're still repeating it to this day.
A Concorde going overhead at around 1000 feet and normal cruising speed is no more noisy than a normal jet. It's the afterburners that are loud (REALLY VERY LOUD) and those are only used at take-off.
Too noisy was not just a Boeing claim. Early flights were not required to decelerate below mach 1 before reaching land and they sent sonic booms up and down the coast.
Sonic booms cover wide areas. Sitting 40 miles outside of Seattle one day I heard two large booms, and thought it was near by blasting. It turns out it was two F15s scrambling supersonic out of Portland when a small plane wandered into Air Force One's exclusion zone. Such booms leave a trail of 911 calls.
Eventually, every single Concorde route required subsonic descents and approaches for this very reason. For the same reason no country let them fly to interior airports except France and Britain.
The afterburners (reheat they called it) were turned off after getting off the runway before they hit the noise abatement zone.
With sufficient runway, they didn't need the afterburners at all except to break through Mach 1.
Go talk to EEO.
You will not get far.
I agree with everything you say.
I just suspect that starting with lawyers always leads to more lawyers,
whereas a quiet word in private generally works wonders.
And the lawyer could probably do a good job of being night janitor.
I wonder if this means Microsoft is going to bring out a lightweight version of Windows Phone.
It's hard to imagine Nokia ditching the market of normal cellphones. There's still a huge market there for them, even if those phones are not as sexy and headline-grabbing.
They aren't ditching the market. Not yet any way.
There is just no point in re-doing what feature phones already do. They are entry level phones for people that want entry level phones.
Contrary to the story's claim about leaving the upgrade path in question, the upgrade path is to a smartphone. Nobody wants a better feature phone.
Nokia's investment in the code base for its current line of feature phones is still returning a profit and that's not likely to change while there is still a market for that type of device. Its in the can, and paid for, and there is nothing new in the feature phone market that warrants any additional R&D money.
The world is going to smartphones.
How do you make sure you don't hire the misogynist assholes or the lawsuit-happy, thin-skinned, man-hating ultra-feminist when even asking the necessary questions is pretty much against the law, and selecting based on the answers to such questions is bound to get you sued?
Call around. There are still places with punch card readers installed, even if they don't turn them on very often. Lots of universities etc. ;-)
State of Florida.
They will probably read them in and email you the file for less than the cost of that crank shaft thingie.
Exactly, but not just limited to gaming.
With more and more content being aimed at internet delivery, 75 bucks a month is not unreasonable for a small business that needs a lot of feeds, (bars) or families that do a lot on line. Small web service companies can develop and host for their customers. I can see a lot of people going in for this even at home, but especially for small business that does anything on line.
True.
Not from Texas. Just visited. Some of the politest people I've met.
The night janitor has a better chance of fixing your code than a lawyer has of improving your workplace environment.
There are a lot of causal expressions that are in common usage which if followed to their roots, will be found to have a sexual connotation. And there are just enough female workers looking for any excuse to file a complaint.
In a place I worked, a part failed in a production machine, and the replacement was two states and three days away. The deadline was the next day. The supervisor muttered "We're screwed!" and the woman handling shipping orders filed a complaint.
This kind of thing happens all the time. All. The. Time. The bigger the company and the more aggressive the EEO department, the more it happens.
And by your prescription, there has to be a hearing, lawyers have to be involved, outside mediators, people reprimanded, the whole nine yards.
There has to be a better way.
Business people who are trying to sound important will never use a simple word when a three-syllable one will do.
They are simply interfacing with you to build consensus and team cohesion, working toward common goals and meaningful milestones. This requires sharing broad vision and shared sacrifices. By facilitating your gaining context, they hope guide you to greater synergy.
Why is this sort of non-sense continuing to come up? If your audience is highly technical, and knowledgeable in the field then speak the language. If they are not, then bring it down to their level. It's common sense.
There is nothing wrong with educating the reader. In fact, I was under the (apparently mistaken) impression that was the whole point of writing.
When an author needs to explain parts of some THING or some THEORY, using the terms that the reader is likely to encounter in further reading is of benefit to the reader, and shouldn't be avoided. Nothing wrong with explaining your terms. Nothing wrong with providing a quick glossary/appendix (or links thereto) either.
No scientist or college course explained to me what Ullage Motors were. Walter Cronkite did.
I certainly did, and the only thing that's stopping that casing is that thin cotton t-shirt. The outer jacket would be subject the same, er, stresses as the flak jacket.
Spent cases are lightweight. They bounce easily off of a tee shirt.
Even a .50 cal casing, heaver than most, is not going to penetrate a tee shirt. It will just bounce off. Yet he posted she had to "reach down" to get the shell. Clearly out of uniform.
Now if she was rushed from her mess to a combat position due to a sudden attack by pickup trucks or armored vehicles in the middle of the night I might buy it (these guns aren't used against foot solders).
I'd still have to ask what the hell she was doing on the ejection side of a .50 cal with her shirt unbuttoned, but wearing armor.
He made it up.
No, it is neither trivial nor cheap.
You still have to provide for re-programming all the locks, which means your putative bolt-over (something hand waived into existence, manufactured in bulk, shipped to all customers, installed by locksmiths) has to be removable, which means a pocket screwdriver defeats it.
Look at these locks: http://img.archiexpo.com/images_ae/press-g/onity-announces-new-ht-rfid-locking-solution-P172014.jpg
Port is located on the bottom. You can barely see it sticking out). Your bolt-over would have to be drilled into the bottom of the assembly, or to the door itself. But it still has to be removable, because these things all get reprogrammed fairly frequently (like after any alleged break-in or change in management, or upon a schedule).
That means screws for removal. Now you've added screws to a lock designed not to have any screws visible.
Installed by handymen? Please.
What hotel is going to take THAT risk. You would hire this work done by licensed and bonded locksmiths. Nobody would accept the liability of having their "handyman" do this. You can replace the entire lock in the same time it would take to mount your bolt-over.
Its easy for a tinkerer to imagine a quick and dirty solution that might work for a flea-bag 20 room hotel on the outskirts of nowhere. It won't fly when there are 300 rooms or 3000 rooms, in a venue with a reputation to uphold.
Ah, No.
There's always a pool and probably a bar in the hotel's I frequent. Both of which are more interesting than some stupid tv or cat5 jack.
And I certainly wouldn't go wandering up and down the halls plugging something in to a jack which is located on the OUTSIDE of the room door.
Really? So a 0.3 mm thick cotton shirt is supposed to disperse the heat from a recently ejected 50 cc shell...how exactly? Especially when it's trapped against the chest by what amounts to a stiff board?
How? By not letting the casing down there in the first place.
Did you even LOOK at the jpg you included in your quote?
The direct quote was BETWEEN her breasts, not against a breast.
There is no way this happens unless she violates combat regs and leaves the shirt off to show off her guns.
But again, given the posters name, Adult film producer, you have to assume the story is totally made up.
She got scarred in a very personal place, as a direct result of serving her country,
She got scarred (if it happened at all) because she was flaunting her boobs instead of wearing a regulation Army uniform.
All it takes to stop ejected brass is a tee shirt or buttoned collar. Body armor is not designed for this.
Take a look at the uniform for that region:
http://www.militaryclothing.com/img/DCU%20Quick%20Find.JPG
The story is apocryphal. A scam. And you bit.
Considering the poster's Slashdot name, the entire story is probably made up.
An army issue tee shirt would have prevented ejected brass from finding its way to her boobs.
As an example, my wife has two scars between her breasts from burning hot shells from a 50 cal machine gun while she was in Iraq. Because she's a D-cup the body armor she was wouldn't fit tight against the neck area like it does on a man.. she describes it as nearly impossible to reach down and grab the shell, sometimes there wasn't time to do anything about it.
Body armor was not designed to protect against ejected shells.
A simple Army issued tee shirt would have done that.
http://media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lqjv5j6CVY1qidtfx.gif
There may be quite a number of people who have had items stolen from rooms "secured" by these locks now wondering what really happened. I also wonder whether there are any fired hotel staff who have been wronged in this. As Brocious points out, the hack is rather trivial and he's unlikely to have been the first/only person to have figured it out.
Its FAR FAR more likely that a hotel maid's card or a master card was duplicated by her shady love interest than anyone else detecting this.
I would say its probable that there is NOBODY who discovered this without inside knowledge. After all, who goes around plugging stuff into random sockets in hotel room locks without some inside knowledge of what that socket is for?
He didn't just happened to stumble on a micro-controller out of his TV remote that did this. He had to custom build a processor to do this. He had to know exactly what was on the other side of that socket. He had to dissect the content of the rom he read in, he had to know the content of the key-card to know what he was looking for. He had to know how to play back the information he pulled out of the rom, and he was still successful only 1/4 of the time.
He had inside knowledge. He put it out there that thousands might have discovered this to cover his source of inside knowledge.
Cute, but trite homily.
Throwing that out there as an excuse is just so much hand waiving the problem away. Murder? Well, you didn't expect your dear brother to live for ever did you?
Hotels don't promise you security against someone with unlimited time an unlimited resources, nor does anyone have enough time or resources unless they are willing to use explosives.
would it kill you to put on the veneer of respectability?
Would it kill you to judge people based on their acts and not their appearances?
Appearance IS AN ACT.