and since Germany was the aggressor in the second world war they can hardly be said to owe the US for their intervention in that instance.)
Actually I was thinking of the fact that we staked our blood and treasure on protecting Germans from Russian vengeance. Vengeance that was (IMHO) entirely justified after the Germans raped, pillaged and murdered their way across Mother Russia. I suppose you've heard of the Berlin Airlift and Cold War?
From what I've been told, the Mini-gun was done in Arizona... The Scottsdale Gun Club has a black modified Hummer that you can rent and take out into the wilds; supervised, of course.
Why censor it in that case? Is there a better form of free advertising than an appearance on the Mythbusters?
Problem is, nuts watch Mythbusters and even with that warning, they'd still try to do it.
We did the methane gas into a bucket of soapy water thing after watching that particular episode. It was pretty cool.... scared the hell out of the neighbors though;)
What is the point about censoring the location where you are firing off a minigun?
I always assumed that they censored that particular nugget because they film in the People's Republic of^W^W^W California, which isn't exactly a pro-firearms state. I know they had to get special permission when they were playing around with the.50 rifle during the bullets fired at water episode. I also seem to recall the neighbors of M5 whining when they were doing some other gun myths.
I do agree though that some of the stuff they censor is just plain stupid. I would guess that the lawyers make them do it.
Whenever this happened, he used to come hurtling down the stairs and rip out the Ethernet cable from the mail server in an attempt to stop the mail going out!
At first I thought he was trying to outrun the electron charge as it traversed through the network cabling, but it turns out that at some point in the past, someone had reconfigured the mail server to delay all mail by 30 seconds, just so he had time to rip out the Ethernet cable in an emergency!
It occurs to me that if you laid the Ethernet cable for the mail server across those stairs you could allow him to accomplish his goal of preventing the mail from going out while providing endless amounts of humor for the rest of the office;)
I'd be curious to know if you have any wisdom to share regarding the new direction that RIAA seems to be taking. Namely that of signing agreements with ISPs to get them to do the dirty work instead.
This seems like something that the end user will have very little recourse over. Virtually every ISP agreement I've ever read gives them the right to deny you service for whatever reason they wish -- but how is that remotely just if it's based on the same lack of evidence that RIAA failed to use in the court system?
How (if at all) can the people who inevitably wind up being wrongfully accused fight this?
This is assuming that the information that lead to the take down requests came from the interception of traffic between end-points
You didn't bother to read the text I quoted did you? I was quoting that law in response to someone saying "There may be concerns of privacy (ISP snooping your data, etc)"
Just like you are free to buy internet access from someone who hasn't made a similar arrangement.
For better or worse internet access is usually provided by someone with a governmentally granted monopoly. In exchange for that monopoly it is usually accepted that we can regulate how they can behave. I would agree with your underlying notion if we had anything remotely approaching a free market for internet service but we alas we don't.
So we can either change that and end the granted monopolies (my preference) or we can regulate what the ISPs are allowed to do. In the latter scenario I don't happen to think they should be allowed to terminate customers based solely on the word of an outside party.
The Afghan people have been kicking the ass of world powers for decades now, and if they don't want you there, you can't succeed there
Has it occurred to you that they want us there and don't want to go back to life under the Taliban?
Maybe the Germans recognise this.
The Germans, like many other NATO members, apparently don't take their alliance commitments seriously. As an American I find it extremely disappointing that we've staked our blood and treasure on defending the freedom of our NATO Allies for generations and many of them can't even be bothered to send troops without caveats to Afghanistan. You do recall where Article 5 was invoked right?
Apparently the NATO alliance is a one way street. Thanks Europe.
Slashdot Mirror
Kinda funny that wacky survivalists might have the last laugh in an event like this.
Just as long as the space weather doesn't render my firearms inoperable ;)
Sorry about that. I'm a stoner and like to watch SpongeBob
Fixed that for you. We all know you couldn't have a kid -- that would require sex and you are posting on /.
Perhaps. I suspect it'll just make a new sub-species of fat, lazy whales.
Americans? *rimshot*
Uhh, yeah. Try 1000-fold! You know, since we're just making things up.
That's not true. 95% of all quoted statistics are accurate ;)
and since Germany was the aggressor in the second world war they can hardly be said to owe the US for their intervention in that instance.)
Actually I was thinking of the fact that we staked our blood and treasure on protecting Germans from Russian vengeance. Vengeance that was (IMHO) entirely justified after the Germans raped, pillaged and murdered their way across Mother Russia. I suppose you've heard of the Berlin Airlift and Cold War?
I'm assuming that was just a fart joke, but we "acquired" it from our natural gas supply.
From what I've been told, the Mini-gun was done in Arizona... The Scottsdale Gun Club has a black modified Hummer that you can rent and take out into the wilds; supervised, of course.
Why censor it in that case? Is there a better form of free advertising than an appearance on the Mythbusters?
Speaking of good bangs, is Kari really pregnant?
According to her Wikipedia page, yes, she is. Now all of the geeks can fantasize about preggers sex ;)
They usually have a retired FBI agent who is a specialist in explosives handle the big booms for them. I wonder if they had him along this time too?
Now we know why he's retired ;)
Problem is, nuts watch Mythbusters and even with that warning, they'd still try to do it.
We did the methane gas into a bucket of soapy water thing after watching that particular episode. It was pretty cool.... scared the hell out of the neighbors though ;)
What is the point about censoring the location where you are firing off a minigun?
I always assumed that they censored that particular nugget because they film in the People's Republic of^W^W^W California, which isn't exactly a pro-firearms state. I know they had to get special permission when they were playing around with the .50 rifle during the bullets fired at water episode. I also seem to recall the neighbors of M5 whining when they were doing some other gun myths.
I do agree though that some of the stuff they censor is just plain stupid. I would guess that the lawyers make them do it.
500 pounds of ammonium nitrate according to TFA. I wonder how many watch lists you wind up on when you buy that much at one time? ;)
.... can't wait to see this one air. I wonder what odds Adam gave of shattering windows a mile away from the blast site?
did I really send that email confessing my true feelings to that girl I had a crush on in high school but hadn't talked to in 15 years?"
Yes, you did. Now cut it out before I get a restraining order ;)
Whenever this happened, he used to come hurtling down the stairs and rip out the Ethernet cable from the mail server in an attempt to stop the mail going out!
At first I thought he was trying to outrun the electron charge as it traversed through the network cabling, but it turns out that at some point in the past, someone had reconfigured the mail server to delay all mail by 30 seconds, just so he had time to rip out the Ethernet cable in an emergency!
It occurs to me that if you laid the Ethernet cable for the mail server across those stairs you could allow him to accomplish his goal of preventing the mail from going out while providing endless amounts of humor for the rest of the office ;)
I hope you realize that you are going to get a -1 troll or a +5 funny. There will be no middle ground with your comment ;)
Some people can barely react in that time
Yeah, but most of the people who can't react in <5 seconds are on the roadways in Florida, not behind a computer screen ;)
Wow, I failed it big time :( *goes off into corner to cry to himself*
You had me up until "some of it even good" ;)
I have that option -- at least until Verizon joins the bandwagon -- but how many people don't?
Ray,
I'd be curious to know if you have any wisdom to share regarding the new direction that RIAA seems to be taking. Namely that of signing agreements with ISPs to get them to do the dirty work instead.
This seems like something that the end user will have very little recourse over. Virtually every ISP agreement I've ever read gives them the right to deny you service for whatever reason they wish -- but how is that remotely just if it's based on the same lack of evidence that RIAA failed to use in the court system?
How (if at all) can the people who inevitably wind up being wrongfully accused fight this?
He only has a mission and that mission is to get re-elected.
So in that respect he's like every other politician?
This is assuming that the information that lead to the take down requests came from the interception of traffic between end-points
You didn't bother to read the text I quoted did you? I was quoting that law in response to someone saying "There may be concerns of privacy (ISP snooping your data, etc)"
Just like you are free to buy internet access from someone who hasn't made a similar arrangement.
For better or worse internet access is usually provided by someone with a governmentally granted monopoly. In exchange for that monopoly it is usually accepted that we can regulate how they can behave. I would agree with your underlying notion if we had anything remotely approaching a free market for internet service but we alas we don't.
So we can either change that and end the granted monopolies (my preference) or we can regulate what the ISPs are allowed to do. In the latter scenario I don't happen to think they should be allowed to terminate customers based solely on the word of an outside party.
The Afghan people have been kicking the ass of world powers for decades now, and if they don't want you there, you can't succeed there
Has it occurred to you that they want us there and don't want to go back to life under the Taliban?
Maybe the Germans recognise this.
The Germans, like many other NATO members, apparently don't take their alliance commitments seriously. As an American I find it extremely disappointing that we've staked our blood and treasure on defending the freedom of our NATO Allies for generations and many of them can't even be bothered to send troops without caveats to Afghanistan. You do recall where Article 5 was invoked right?
Apparently the NATO alliance is a one way street. Thanks Europe.