When he's in police custody, being questioned, how can he be disturbing anyone? Or do the police hold private questioning in the auditorium of the school with all the students invited? Seems much more likely, it was a fabricated charge to hold him for something, and then his family started making a fuss, so the police stuck with it.
No, the teacher thought it would be about ballet. For a non-gun person, they'd likely correct the surname in their brain to a more popular (and commonly biographied person), and even presented with it in writing wouldn't read it correctly.
New Zealand has a military that is outclassed by a number of US police departments. Yet nobody has made an issue of it. In practice, "weak" nations do not get invaded. Singapore has a larger military and has been invaded more, the largest British surrender, once. Didn't stop the invaders.
If the US were to close the military tomorrow, all standing army, all reserves, all Coast Guard, every gun owned by the feds were destroyed tomorrow (not sold, but destroyed), we'd still have a military force in just the local police enough to repel any threat, including the rest of the world combined invading. China may have a larger military, but has no ability to project that force. Sadly, England would be able to do the most damage, but even then, not able to "invade" or hold anything that wasn't right on the coast under near-constant navy bombardment.
A "realistic" disarmament, leaving national guards, Coast Guards and such in place would be able to repel the rest of the world combined in a world war.
Comparatively, the world has had a large decrease in military force, where world wars were a 20-year occurrence. But those mostly ended after WWII. And yes, lots of wars in the 1800s that weren't world wars were still world wars because Spain, England, and France were battling behind the scenes in lots of "local" skirmishes.
Usually when you hire a big company like Oracle you give them the requirements, pay them money and they're supposed to deliver the goods, so Oracle whining that they apparently weren't given good enough management is pathetic.
If Oracle was hired to deliver a database, and they did, but it doesn't work because someone else didn't do their job, then is it really Oracle's fault it doesn't work?
I've stayed away from that side of IT, but I've heard it isn't size, it's performance. *any* database can keep up with a 2 TB database, even a flat-file. The trick is to do so with 10k lookups, and 1k writes per second (or some other number, I'm just pulling some out of thin air). Oracle claims some uptime and resiliency that's impossible with "standard" databases as well.
That's cheap. I tried to add a line to a JDE database, and was told it would be $20k. Yes, having a pull down box go from 1,2,3,4,or 5 to 1,2,3,4,5, or 6 costs $20k from the support that the company I worked for purchased. $1200 was cheap for such a minor change.
And when the car breaks down, you find out that the warranty is void because the tires can only be filled with pure N2, and oxygen in the tires voids the warranty.
And, because the warranty documentation is separate from the manual, it doesn't matter if you read and memorize the manual, you'll never see that suggestion/reocmmendation. Other than the silly "return the car to dealer if the tire pressure is low" comment.
In 2001, I was Avaya's first order on SAP (or so I was told at the time). After delivering the wrong thing 3 times, a tech drove to the depot, and physically selected the correct thing, and hand carried it to the site to install. After the install, relatively easy, once the correct thing was there, the bill was wrong. Eventually, they billed us for $12k for a $110k project (after I sent back the first 4 or so bills for obvious errors). So I paid the $12k, and got the "paid in full" response. Never heard anything to indicate they ever found their error.
I've had multiple people tell me it's unethical to deliberately under-pay, but after months of trying to get a correct bill, should I go to collections over a wrong bill or pay one "in full" to stop the harassment of a billing department that can't get the right numbers?
About 5 years later, I heard is was still wrong more than right, though it did get better. It seemed like it would be difficult to get something so wrong. All the wrong parts showed up. Repeatedly. I saw the "order" and the delivery, and there weren't even the same number of items there, so it wasn't a part number mix up.
The issue with any traffic engineer, is that there's actually no science supporting traffic engineering. It's voodoo. And if you say that to anyone who deals with traffic, they act like you dessicated their shrine. Sure, some individual parts have science (traffic flow). But when proven false (California flows better than stated, other places worse) they will persist on using the proven wrong models, rather than trying to solve for reality.
A human factors study into lights, and having the colors/flashing change to help improve flow/compliance isn't what they do. "Fuck you, red lights are read and solid" is the closest to a discussion they will have with you.
, doesn't make their assumed definition of a word correct. Its still wrong.
For a proscriptive language, you are right. For a descriptive language, like English, you are wrong. The collective wrong definition is the correct one, and the two hold-outs to the "pure" or "original" definition are wrong. That's how language works.
Someone who thinks it's okay that we violate people's fundamental liberties and the highest law of the land in exchange for safety (dubious safety, at that). In other words, morons. I would think freedom-minded individuals would agree that they are nothing more than poison to a free society.
Then I saw nobody post anything in the chain that indicated there were any such people. People who explain the law, as enforced, to you aren't "defending" it or asserting they think it's ok.
You should learn to make such distinctions, or you'll come off looking like the moron.
The capabilities you are describing are impossible in the kill-switches being implemented. They may be technically possible, but not related to the kill switch under discussion.
Someone else posted the types being rejected. They are the ones where the rice generates its own insecticide. So it's food for humans, that's also poisonous to humans. What could possibly go wrong?
Oddly, the permits that are being denied are for Bt rice and phytase corn, but they continue to support Bt corn, so environment or food safety doesn't seem like it would be an actual reason,
That's an assertion, but is it true? Bt [grain] produces poison. Perhaps the poison is still present in the edible rice, but not the edible corn? I don't know, but there may be other reasons, perhaps it's because corn is so low in production, and not a traditional crop with widespread domestic use, so it's not a "health issue"? Just because one is banned and the other not doesn't mean that safety must not be a reason.
Slashdot Mirror
When he's in police custody, being questioned, how can he be disturbing anyone? Or do the police hold private questioning in the auditorium of the school with all the students invited? Seems much more likely, it was a fabricated charge to hold him for something, and then his family started making a fuss, so the police stuck with it.
No, the teacher thought it would be about ballet. For a non-gun person, they'd likely correct the surname in their brain to a more popular (and commonly biographied person), and even presented with it in writing wouldn't read it correctly.
One can hardly say that USA "won" the great war. The American participation was minimal and not decisive in any way.
So you are saying that if the US entered the war on the "other side" that the result would have been the same?
New Zealand has a military that is outclassed by a number of US police departments. Yet nobody has made an issue of it. In practice, "weak" nations do not get invaded. Singapore has a larger military and has been invaded more, the largest British surrender, once. Didn't stop the invaders.
If the US were to close the military tomorrow, all standing army, all reserves, all Coast Guard, every gun owned by the feds were destroyed tomorrow (not sold, but destroyed), we'd still have a military force in just the local police enough to repel any threat, including the rest of the world combined invading. China may have a larger military, but has no ability to project that force. Sadly, England would be able to do the most damage, but even then, not able to "invade" or hold anything that wasn't right on the coast under near-constant navy bombardment.
A "realistic" disarmament, leaving national guards, Coast Guards and such in place would be able to repel the rest of the world combined in a world war.
Comparatively, the world has had a large decrease in military force, where world wars were a 20-year occurrence. But those mostly ended after WWII. And yes, lots of wars in the 1800s that weren't world wars were still world wars because Spain, England, and France were battling behind the scenes in lots of "local" skirmishes.
Usually when you hire a big company like Oracle you give them the requirements, pay them money and they're supposed to deliver the goods, so Oracle whining that they apparently weren't given good enough management is pathetic.
If Oracle was hired to deliver a database, and they did, but it doesn't work because someone else didn't do their job, then is it really Oracle's fault it doesn't work?
I've stayed away from that side of IT, but I've heard it isn't size, it's performance. *any* database can keep up with a 2 TB database, even a flat-file. The trick is to do so with 10k lookups, and 1k writes per second (or some other number, I'm just pulling some out of thin air). Oracle claims some uptime and resiliency that's impossible with "standard" databases as well.
That's cheap. I tried to add a line to a JDE database, and was told it would be $20k. Yes, having a pull down box go from 1,2,3,4,or 5 to 1,2,3,4,5, or 6 costs $20k from the support that the company I worked for purchased. $1200 was cheap for such a minor change.
Madoff is a dual citizen? Of what?
It's horrible sub-standard health care, but still better than what came before.
And when the car breaks down, you find out that the warranty is void because the tires can only be filled with pure N2, and oxygen in the tires voids the warranty.
And, because the warranty documentation is separate from the manual, it doesn't matter if you read and memorize the manual, you'll never see that suggestion/reocmmendation. Other than the silly "return the car to dealer if the tire pressure is low" comment.
In 2001, I was Avaya's first order on SAP (or so I was told at the time). After delivering the wrong thing 3 times, a tech drove to the depot, and physically selected the correct thing, and hand carried it to the site to install. After the install, relatively easy, once the correct thing was there, the bill was wrong. Eventually, they billed us for $12k for a $110k project (after I sent back the first 4 or so bills for obvious errors). So I paid the $12k, and got the "paid in full" response. Never heard anything to indicate they ever found their error.
I've had multiple people tell me it's unethical to deliberately under-pay, but after months of trying to get a correct bill, should I go to collections over a wrong bill or pay one "in full" to stop the harassment of a billing department that can't get the right numbers?
About 5 years later, I heard is was still wrong more than right, though it did get better. It seemed like it would be difficult to get something so wrong. All the wrong parts showed up. Repeatedly. I saw the "order" and the delivery, and there weren't even the same number of items there, so it wasn't a part number mix up.
Maybe it is your anti-American hate that jumped the shark.
Why are you arguing this point? Do you believe the USA is the best country on the planet?
The issue with any traffic engineer, is that there's actually no science supporting traffic engineering. It's voodoo. And if you say that to anyone who deals with traffic, they act like you dessicated their shrine. Sure, some individual parts have science (traffic flow). But when proven false (California flows better than stated, other places worse) they will persist on using the proven wrong models, rather than trying to solve for reality.
A human factors study into lights, and having the colors/flashing change to help improve flow/compliance isn't what they do. "Fuck you, red lights are read and solid" is the closest to a discussion they will have with you.
And when they do "fix" it, they'll charge the hacker with the cost of fixing systems they knew were insecure for 30 years.
And how exactly would a simple password result in a higher price?
The training and SOPs for new processes, at the very minimum. Perhaps new control systems for the "secure" interface, at the cost of billions.
, doesn't make their assumed definition of a word correct. Its still wrong.
For a proscriptive language, you are right. For a descriptive language, like English, you are wrong. The collective wrong definition is the correct one, and the two hold-outs to the "pure" or "original" definition are wrong. That's how language works.
Someone who thinks it's okay that we violate people's fundamental liberties and the highest law of the land in exchange for safety (dubious safety, at that). In other words, morons. I would think freedom-minded individuals would agree that they are nothing more than poison to a free society.
Then I saw nobody post anything in the chain that indicated there were any such people. People who explain the law, as enforced, to you aren't "defending" it or asserting they think it's ok.
You should learn to make such distinctions, or you'll come off looking like the moron.
The capabilities you are describing are impossible in the kill-switches being implemented. They may be technically possible, but not related to the kill switch under discussion.
So, you've never read an MSDS for an insecticide, have you?
I never said it was toxic to humans because it was toxic to insects.
See the error in your logic?
Someone else posted the types being rejected. They are the ones where the rice generates its own insecticide. So it's food for humans, that's also poisonous to humans. What could possibly go wrong?
Oddly, the permits that are being denied are for Bt rice and phytase corn, but they continue to support Bt corn, so environment or food safety doesn't seem like it would be an actual reason,
That's an assertion, but is it true? Bt [grain] produces poison. Perhaps the poison is still present in the edible rice, but not the edible corn? I don't know, but there may be other reasons, perhaps it's because corn is so low in production, and not a traditional crop with widespread domestic use, so it's not a "health issue"? Just because one is banned and the other not doesn't mean that safety must not be a reason.
With no baseband, you don't have the option to use the phone network. And a generic Chinese phone would likely not honor the kill request anyway.
What's "TSA apologist"? Anyone who doesn't share your ideals?