I had a similar thing going on with a clueless manager. He wanted an explanation why projects weren't getting completed on time. I suggested I could do one better and show him why. He agreed. I downloaded I think it was a sample SAT math test. Where ever I got it, it was one of those four or five hour timed math tests.
I gave it to my manager and told him it had to be completed that day. And that just a passing score wasn't acceptable. It had to be returned at 100 percent. No exceptions. But the good news, it was open book. When completed, at his discretion, he could go back over any or every answer and double, triple check, use Google or whatever he wanted. But that no matter what, 100% was needed.
I handed it to him and said your time starts now.
Then I continued taking and mentioned the two meetings we had scheduled. I also told him I'd be needing his help later that day solving an issue we had with a project that was also due that day, etc.
I said I'd be back at the end of the day to see how well he did accomplishing his basic minimum job requirements. I wished him good luck
My goal was to convey that programming is like taking a math test. A math test requiring 100% accuracy. A task requiring full, uninterrupted concentration. That checking every answer when finished was equivalent to testing the code. Even if it was similar to taking the 4 hour test several times. But along with that, meetings, telephone interruptions, being pulled off on unrelated tasks were all part of the job.
Did I mention he was a little clueless? By the end of the day he hadn't even started the math test. And yet he never seemed to 'get it'.
Good for you, asshole. You got to command the fate of a few people based on some non-relevant criteria hawked up in your own tiny-walled head. How about you let the management make the staffing decisions and you stick to browsing Slashdot at work? Don't be surprised if YOU are the one given the axe for 1. thinking you know how to do management's jobs better than they do and 2. for being annoying and obnoxious to your fellow co-workers.
I'm guessing by your tone you're one of those who either clicked the link or replied to "all". I thought he had a good point. I tend to loose a touch of respect for co-workers I get these emails from. My first thought is usually: "Wow, he/she fell for this?".
"I'm tired of kids coming to school and not learning and getting credit for it," said Superintendent Larrie Reynolds in a Daily Record report.
If the student didn't learn anything does that not mean they failed and should get a failing grade? "C" is Average and "D" is below average but still passing. I fail to see the problem with that. "F" means you failed to learn the course material well enough to pass and do not get credit.
But then, I'm not a power hungry, attention seeking, small penis administrator that needs to "shake up the box" for no other reason then to get noticed.
jorgevillalobos (1044924): I'm in charge of the add-on review process at Mozilla, and I personally reviewed and approved the TACO update due to its complexity....I see nothing to be ashamed about.
That's a problem. And thanks for warning us that you're in-charge. This TACO "upgrade" in your face commercialization was a HUGE surprise. If you don't understand what "No Surprises" means... That's a problem. Now unfortunately, because someone like you is in-charge, automatic upgrades are off. 100% will now have to be reviewed before acceptance. You and your supposed function have now become untrusted and thus irrelevant. Although, if you're incapable of understanding "No Surprises" I doubt you comprehend trust either.
I'm reminded of President John F. Kennedy - Man On the Moon Address almost 50 years ago. I'm still waiting for a President to do a "stop our dependency on oil" speech. Not unlike what we did with the atomic bomb.
An all out National effort bringing together the brightest minds our great country has to offer. Lock them away with no limits on budget or cost. Perfect either Solar, Hydrogen, wind, all of the above or whatever and solve this country's energy "crisis" that we've been in my entire life. We put a man on the moon, we built an Atomic Bomb from what was just theory. We can figure out and implement a clean 100% renewable abundant energy source.
Wait a minute. Why am I telling ya'll this... I'm going to cut/paste this in a message to the White House....I wonder how far along we'd already be in this endeavor had President Gore taken office.
Apple also told the police that the publication of Gizmodo's story was "immensely damaging" to the company, because consumers would stop buying current generation iPhones in anticipation of the upcoming product. Asked the value of the phone, Apple told the police "it was invaluable."
As far as I'm concerned they're both thieves. But, that's just me.
So it means no more need for crappy camcorders in the theaters and the consequent risk of the recently legislated crazy-ass sentences for getting caught doing so.
Even better than better. Even if there isn't the capability to break and intercept the output at the signal level now all the camies can sit at home with a HD camcorder recording an HD picture from their HD televisions without the chance of getting caught. No more cam jobs of the crappy theater screen. At worst rather than cam jobs made at a theater we'll get HD versions made at home from an HD image.
If you don't mind, I'd like to see these background checks. I wanna have a solid argument to produce next time my father and I get into a discussion about whether or not Fox is to be listened to. In summary and conclusion: [citation needed]
Why do people do this? Admit they're too fusking lazy to keep up and too inept to find things on their own? Google was invented for a reason ya know.
This isn't Wikipedia. If you're really soooo interested in making a solid argument to a point that is apparent and obvious - get your own facts. As if there are not already enough sites to choose from showing in explicit detail the political hacks at FOX "News". Besides I'm not sure I'd want a man with your "talents" arguing a point anyway.../soapbox. Send your mental opponents to www.thedailyshow.com and move on, or www.moveon.org. You'd be wasting your breath anyway - as I am with you.
I got excited when I glanced and read Supreme Court... I'm thinking NO WAY - they actually did the right thing?!?!?! Then realized it was just the New Jersey Supreme Court.
If this get appealed I'm prepared for it to be overturned by the U.S. Supreme Court. They're not one's to let personal privacy get in the way of well... anything.
Half million injured and six thousand dead? Were are the troops? How come there's no Secretary of State at the U.N. waving vials of a broken IPod next to some charts? Where are the mushroom clouds behind the speakers at podiums?/sarcasm.
Sorry, I only thought about that later after submitting - there would be people who don't start their lists with zero. I was in the middle of a program and was thinking in terms of - figure out the owner by eliminating the non owners...
If requested MySpace/Facebook will grant employers with invisible type "friend" status to any of their employee's account. Employers can monitor their employees page without the user giving individual consent (general consent was given when accepting the user agreements) or knowing they have been friended by their employer. This is not a protection by itself. It could be for this particular service as they claim it only covers "public" information but it isn't if the employer asks directly.
Lately I've been working through a medical issue that requires me to severely restrict my fat intake. I just ate a sandwich and decided to include some Doritos type spicy chips on the side. A luxury, if you can call it that, I haven't had in a while.
I about did a Homer Simpson drooling arrrrr with my first taste. Without question the pleasure centers of my brain were firing with a wow, this tastes great kind of thing.
It wasn't that long ago I was eating freely - maybe a few months. But in that short time limiting my fatty food intake I can definitely tell the difference. Before that I would eat a side of chips and hardly notice. Now? Big difference. I can see what the article is saying. I've tried to quit smoking before and upon failure my first return cigarette had a similar effect. It's more than the chips just tasted good. It was more like satisfying an itch I didn't know I had type of a pleasure satisfaction thing.
That's where I stopped reading. I just spent two days fixing panicked friends PCs after they installed Tuesday's updates and their systems wouldn't boot. Granted they were rooted... but the OS I run, I can click, surf - whatever and never be, how do they say it, pwned.
I don't want a phone that for the sake of walking on to a subway station platform is hacked by the kid standing next to me.
tl;dr: Stumbled upon or unsolicited - fine. Active investigation targeted request - search warrant.
What I'm told (IANAL) is they don't need a search warrant if they walk into a hardware store and ask to see all the receipts for January 12th - so long as the business owner says "sure - here you go..." So, 99% of officers responded that they would like to login and search a site's entire database from their desk. Duh, oh course they want it. Who wouldn't?
In other news 99% of the employees I polled in my office would like to have unfettered access to our payroll system.
I would like to see the rules of evidence tightened to exclude data requested in this manner whether by a generic FAX up to and including a sticky note with the suspects name on it. If police stumble upon evidence in the course of their duties or information is offered to them unsolicited that's one thing. But if they're actively requesting information about a particular suspect - my opinion is it should require a search warrant that's fully vetted by the courts stipulating the search parameters.
This has always been a sticking point with investigators. They want full access to anything and everything at their discretion with zero oversight. No surprise when polled that's what they want. It's my opinion the state should not be able to buy a subscription to a private company like LexisNexis and be able to use that information. Not without a search warrant.
I can tell you what the outcome will be:
"This guy has something to hide. Detain him for 4 hours, search his criminal records, family ties, known affiliates, strip search him, and put him on the Watch list."
What's scary is you're probably right. My best bet is the military silver/copper thread anti-bacterial briefs. I haven't found them yet on the commercial market. There is talk of coatings like this for "active wear" sports gear within the next few years. Although you may be correct - plausible denial on my part will help plus if these products become wide spread all the better.
Your tone read as fear. And perhaps you're right. I'll be inconvenienced. It's one thing to post "they're going to far" and another to actually do something about it. I'm not a lamb willing to go to this slaughter without a fight. Besides I like screwing with the "man". Before my last flight I handled a pack of firecrackers from the previous Fourth of July, then proceeded to pack my carry-on. Funny that even though I and the handles of my carry-on were wiped - I passed inspection.
tl;dr: I'm easily bored. And no, I do not take this theater seriously.
I see a possibility of couple solutions maybe more. On Amazon if you search for "Intimo Men's Liquid Metallic Boxers" I won't put a link as who knows what's in mine (Browser ID, etc.). These or something similar must do something to screw with the backscatter making it useless. Wasn't there military underwear with silver/copper threads or something that kills bacteria?
I travel once every five years or so I won't be able to try these any time soon. But I'm going to search around for something like these have them handy and try them when I do. I won't know if they work until I get scanned and then pulled over after for questioning. If/when I do I'll let the world know the results so everybody else can do the same thing. I believe there must be a simple way with a products like these to give the bird to the government and demand our privacy.
With all the metal it may be tough to get through security but if the wand starts screaming a pat down should solve it. If they're after my junk I don't want some guy in another room - I have the right to look them in the eye and see their look of envy.
All my posts to chill re the Christmas Firecracker incident had attached Ad Hominem attacks from small terrified men. This isn't going away. Statistics don't phase them. Facts just get in the way. They're terrified and nothing is going to help except the comfort of a huge Government blanket of "protection".
Never mind it doesn't exist, is ineffectual and can't be done. These people are not meant to live in a free society. Don't want a free society and are winning because the government is all too pleased to accommodate them. We, Liberals, Progressives, Libertarians {whatever} - all the flavors of people who cherish personal freedoms are screwed. The government wants to listen to this minority of frightened people - and together they have already changed what the USA was all about.
They aren't finished revoking our freedoms through the absence of common sense and have a long way to go. Because what they're looking for doesn't exist and can't be achieved. Already it's the State law in the majority that we must respond to "Papers Please" - as in my state Georgia failure to produce means jail.
The terrorists won. They already won a long time ago. This "continued fight" isn't. We're experiencing the clean-up.
Exactly what I thought after reading your initial post, where you got the facts completely wrong...got the facts completely wrong and slathered your smug...
Yepper, Ad hominem. You're consistent. Call a device that went off, sounded like and did as much damage and was described by witnesses as a firecracker - a firecracker and that's a gotcha.
You people are predictable if not entertaining if nothing else. You wouldn't be listening to these points of view anyway had I called this unknown device a thingamabob, or, maybe you would. I suspect you would understand thingamabob. "wink and a gotcha".
Trust me, you will have lost them way before you even got to the statistics. Not once in your argument did you include a straw-Man, ad hominem or an appeal to probability. As such, you wouldn't come close to achieving your goal of the inevitable blank stare.
The way this works is you'd be interrupted and and thrown an Ad Hominem. Followed by a wink and a "Gotcha". (Been here - tried this).
No, that question didn't answer itself. I don't really believe that cowardism has much to do with it. Astro-turfer is one possibility. Troll is possible. Just lazy is also a possibility.
It does, however, mean that they aren't worth taking seriously. Just don't presume that you know WHY they aren't worth taking seriously. (But making guesses is reasonable, as long as you remember that they are just guesses.)
Wise. You're right. No matter where you start or what direction it takes - this flow chart leads to the same end box - "they aren't worth taking seriously". So, I might as quit wasting time following the links when I know where it will lead. Thank you.
Who said anything about nuclear anything? You also made another lunkheaded rant on this same story and were proven wrong there too. Why don't you shut up until you get a clue and stop being such a little wanker?
little wanker? LoL, sorry to burst your bubble there pal... But, that's for different thread.
Look, maybe it was - just what it was. A couple chemicals that when mixed together generated enough heat to cause severe damage to the individual stupid enough to try this stunt. In fact, that's all it was. In fact, that's all it did. A minor blip resulting in some idiot who's now calling himself Mrs. {whatever}.
If this is the best they can do... I have zero need to watch 24/7 Faux News coverage imagining all the things it "could have been" rather than what it really was. A minor blip on the radar of my day. The nuculr (sic) spin was already covered by Faux news as a "possibility". Their spin? Not this time but it's coming... Oh, and they added to keep watching for future developments, LoL.
Gaud, this country is soooo brain dead. Again, why is it you people always post as cowards? Nevermind. That's one of those questions that answers itself:)
Slashdot Mirror
I had a similar thing going on with a clueless manager. He wanted an explanation why projects weren't getting completed on time. I suggested I could do one better and show him why. He agreed. I downloaded I think it was a sample SAT math test. Where ever I got it, it was one of those four or five hour timed math tests.
I gave it to my manager and told him it had to be completed that day. And that just a passing score wasn't acceptable. It had to be returned at 100 percent. No exceptions. But the good news, it was open book. When completed, at his discretion, he could go back over any or every answer and double, triple check, use Google or whatever he wanted. But that no matter what, 100% was needed.
I handed it to him and said your time starts now.
Then I continued taking and mentioned the two meetings we had scheduled. I also told him I'd be needing his help later that day solving an issue we had with a project that was also due that day, etc.
I said I'd be back at the end of the day to see how well he did accomplishing his basic minimum job requirements. I wished him good luck
My goal was to convey that programming is like taking a math test. A math test requiring 100% accuracy. A task requiring full, uninterrupted concentration. That checking every answer when finished was equivalent to testing the code. Even if it was similar to taking the 4 hour test several times. But along with that, meetings, telephone interruptions, being pulled off on unrelated tasks were all part of the job.
Did I mention he was a little clueless? By the end of the day he hadn't even started the math test. And yet he never seemed to 'get it'.
-[d]-
Good for you, asshole. You got to command the fate of a few people based on some non-relevant criteria hawked up in your own tiny-walled head. How about you let the management make the staffing decisions and you stick to browsing Slashdot at work? Don't be surprised if YOU are the one given the axe for 1. thinking you know how to do management's jobs better than they do and 2. for being annoying and obnoxious to your fellow co-workers.
I'm guessing by your tone you're one of those who either clicked the link or replied to "all". I thought he had a good point. I tend to loose a touch of respect for co-workers I get these emails from. My first thought is usually: "Wow, he/she fell for this?".
This doesn't make a lot of sense to me.
"I'm tired of kids coming to school and not learning and getting credit for it," said Superintendent Larrie Reynolds in a Daily Record report.
If the student didn't learn anything does that not mean they failed and should get a failing grade? "C" is Average and "D" is below average but still passing. I fail to see the problem with that. "F" means you failed to learn the course material well enough to pass and do not get credit.
But then, I'm not a power hungry, attention seeking, small penis administrator that needs to "shake up the box" for no other reason then to get noticed.
-[d]-
jorgevillalobos (1044924): I'm in charge of the add-on review process at Mozilla, and I personally reviewed and approved the TACO update due to its complexity. ...I see nothing to be ashamed about.
That's a problem. And thanks for warning us that you're in-charge. This TACO "upgrade" in your face commercialization was a HUGE surprise. If you don't understand what "No Surprises" means... That's a problem. Now unfortunately, because someone like you is in-charge, automatic upgrades are off. 100% will now have to be reviewed before acceptance. You and your supposed function have now become untrusted and thus irrelevant. Although, if you're incapable of understanding "No Surprises" I doubt you comprehend trust either.
-[d]-
I'm reminded of President John F. Kennedy - Man On the Moon Address almost 50 years ago. I'm still waiting for a President to do a "stop our dependency on oil" speech. Not unlike what we did with the atomic bomb.
An all out National effort bringing together the brightest minds our great country has to offer. Lock them away with no limits on budget or cost. Perfect either Solar, Hydrogen, wind, all of the above or whatever and solve this country's energy "crisis" that we've been in my entire life. We put a man on the moon, we built an Atomic Bomb from what was just theory. We can figure out and implement a clean 100% renewable abundant energy source.
Wait a minute. Why am I telling ya'll this... I'm going to cut/paste this in a message to the White House.
-[d]-
Apple also told the police that the publication of Gizmodo's story was "immensely damaging" to the company, because consumers would stop buying current generation iPhones in anticipation of the upcoming product. Asked the value of the phone, Apple told the police "it was invaluable."
As far as I'm concerned they're both thieves. But, that's just me.
-[d]-
So it means no more need for crappy camcorders in the theaters and the consequent risk of the recently legislated crazy-ass sentences for getting caught doing so.
Even better than better. Even if there isn't the capability to break and intercept the output at the signal level now all the camies can sit at home with a HD camcorder recording an HD picture from their HD televisions without the chance of getting caught. No more cam jobs of the crappy theater screen. At worst rather than cam jobs made at a theater we'll get HD versions made at home from an HD image.
THANK YOU MPAA and FCC!!!
-[d]-
Are you the lab partner who does all the work because everybody else is so stupid and then complains about having to do it all?
If that were the case, then yes, I would complain. Wouldn't you? I get the distinct impression you're still living off someone else's income.
-[d]-
If you don't mind, I'd like to see these background checks. I wanna have a solid argument to produce next time my father and I get into a discussion about whether or not Fox is to be listened to. In summary and conclusion: [citation needed]
Why do people do this? Admit they're too fusking lazy to keep up and too inept to find things on their own? Google was invented for a reason ya know.
This isn't Wikipedia. If you're really soooo interested in making a solid argument to a point that is apparent and obvious - get your own facts. As if there are not already enough sites to choose from showing in explicit detail the political hacks at FOX "News". Besides I'm not sure I'd want a man with your "talents" arguing a point anyway... /soapbox. Send your mental opponents to www.thedailyshow.com and move on, or www.moveon.org. You'd be wasting your breath anyway - as I am with you.
-[d]-
I got excited when I glanced and read Supreme Court... I'm thinking NO WAY - they actually did the right thing?!?!?! Then realized it was just the New Jersey Supreme Court.
If this get appealed I'm prepared for it to be overturned by the U.S. Supreme Court. They're not one's to let personal privacy get in the way of well... anything.
-[d]-
Half million injured and six thousand dead? Were are the troops? How come there's no Secretary of State at the U.N. waving vials of a broken IPod next to some charts? Where are the mushroom clouds behind the speakers at podiums?
-[d]-
I don't Google for others who just cry "Source - because I'm too
In the future - Either keep up or do your own research.
-[d]-
Sorry, I only thought about that later after submitting - there would be people who don't start their lists with zero. I was in the middle of a program and was thinking in terms of - figure out the owner by eliminating the non owners...
I wonder which ISP owns comScore. Who got the worst rating?
If requested MySpace/Facebook will grant employers with invisible type "friend" status to any of their employee's account. Employers can monitor their employees page without the user giving individual consent (general consent was given when accepting the user agreements) or knowing they have been friended by their employer. This is not a protection by itself. It could be for this particular service as they claim it only covers "public" information but it isn't if the employer asks directly.
Lately I've been working through a medical issue that requires me to severely restrict my fat intake. I just ate a sandwich and decided to include some Doritos type spicy chips on the side. A luxury, if you can call it that, I haven't had in a while.
I about did a Homer Simpson drooling arrrrr with my first taste. Without question the pleasure centers of my brain were firing with a wow, this tastes great kind of thing.
It wasn't that long ago I was eating freely - maybe a few months. But in that short time limiting my fatty food intake I can definitely tell the difference. Before that I would eat a side of chips and hardly notice. Now? Big difference. I can see what the article is saying. I've tried to quit smoking before and upon failure my first return cigarette had a similar effect. It's more than the chips just tasted good. It was more like satisfying an itch I didn't know I had type of a pleasure satisfaction thing.
-[d]-
...that is going to work properly...
That's where I stopped reading. I just spent two days fixing panicked friends PCs after they installed Tuesday's updates and their systems wouldn't boot. Granted they were rooted... but the OS I run, I can click, surf - whatever and never be, how do they say it, pwned.
I don't want a phone that for the sake of walking on to a subway station platform is hacked by the kid standing next to me.
-[d]-
tl;dr: Stumbled upon or unsolicited - fine. Active investigation targeted request - search warrant.
What I'm told (IANAL) is they don't need a search warrant if they walk into a hardware store and ask to see all the receipts for January 12th - so long as the business owner says "sure - here you go..." So, 99% of officers responded that they would like to login and search a site's entire database from their desk. Duh, oh course they want it. Who wouldn't?
In other news 99% of the employees I polled in my office would like to have unfettered access to our payroll system.
I would like to see the rules of evidence tightened to exclude data requested in this manner whether by a generic FAX up to and including a sticky note with the suspects name on it. If police stumble upon evidence in the course of their duties or information is offered to them unsolicited that's one thing. But if they're actively requesting information about a particular suspect - my opinion is it should require a search warrant that's fully vetted by the courts stipulating the search parameters.
This has always been a sticking point with investigators. They want full access to anything and everything at their discretion with zero oversight. No surprise when polled that's what they want. It's my opinion the state should not be able to buy a subscription to a private company like LexisNexis and be able to use that information. Not without a search warrant.
-[d]-
I can tell you what the outcome will be: "This guy has something to hide. Detain him for 4 hours, search his criminal records, family ties, known affiliates, strip search him, and put him on the Watch list."
What's scary is you're probably right. My best bet is the military silver/copper thread anti-bacterial briefs. I haven't found them yet on the commercial market. There is talk of coatings like this for "active wear" sports gear within the next few years. Although you may be correct - plausible denial on my part will help plus if these products become wide spread all the better.
Your tone read as fear. And perhaps you're right. I'll be inconvenienced. It's one thing to post "they're going to far" and another to actually do something about it. I'm not a lamb willing to go to this slaughter without a fight. Besides I like screwing with the "man". Before my last flight I handled a pack of firecrackers from the previous Fourth of July, then proceeded to pack my carry-on. Funny that even though I and the handles of my carry-on were wiped - I passed inspection.
tl;dr: I'm easily bored. And no, I do not take this theater seriously.
-[d]-
I see a possibility of couple solutions maybe more. On Amazon if you search for "Intimo Men's Liquid Metallic Boxers" I won't put a link as who knows what's in mine (Browser ID, etc.). These or something similar must do something to screw with the backscatter making it useless. Wasn't there military underwear with silver/copper threads or something that kills bacteria?
I travel once every five years or so I won't be able to try these any time soon. But I'm going to search around for something like these have them handy and try them when I do. I won't know if they work until I get scanned and then pulled over after for questioning. If/when I do I'll let the world know the results so everybody else can do the same thing. I believe there must be a simple way with a products like these to give the bird to the government and demand our privacy.
With all the metal it may be tough to get through security but if the wand starts screaming a pat down should solve it. If they're after my junk I don't want some guy in another room - I have the right to look them in the eye and see their look of envy.
-[d]-
All my posts to chill re the Christmas Firecracker incident had attached Ad Hominem attacks from small terrified men. This isn't going away. Statistics don't phase them. Facts just get in the way. They're terrified and nothing is going to help except the comfort of a huge Government blanket of "protection".
Never mind it doesn't exist, is ineffectual and can't be done. These people are not meant to live in a free society. Don't want a free society and are winning because the government is all too pleased to accommodate them. We, Liberals, Progressives, Libertarians {whatever} - all the flavors of people who cherish personal freedoms are screwed. The government wants to listen to this minority of frightened people - and together they have already changed what the USA was all about.
They aren't finished revoking our freedoms through the absence of common sense and have a long way to go. Because what they're looking for doesn't exist and can't be achieved. Already it's the State law in the majority that we must respond to "Papers Please" - as in my state Georgia failure to produce means jail.
The terrorists won. They already won a long time ago. This "continued fight" isn't. We're experiencing the clean-up.
Exactly what I thought after reading your initial post, where you got the facts completely wrong...got the facts completely wrong and slathered your smug...
Yepper, Ad hominem. You're consistent. Call a device that went off, sounded like and did as much damage and was described by witnesses as a firecracker - a firecracker and that's a gotcha.
You people are predictable if not entertaining if nothing else. You wouldn't be listening to these points of view anyway had I called this unknown device a thingamabob, or, maybe you would. I suspect you would understand thingamabob. "wink and a gotcha".
-[d]-
Here's a tough argument to throw at them:
Trust me, you will have lost them way before you even got to the statistics. Not once in your argument did you include a straw-Man, ad hominem or an appeal to probability. As such, you wouldn't come close to achieving your goal of the inevitable blank stare.
The way this works is you'd be interrupted and and thrown an Ad Hominem. Followed by a wink and a "Gotcha". (Been here - tried this).
No, that question didn't answer itself. I don't really believe that cowardism has much to do with it. Astro-turfer is one possibility. Troll is possible. Just lazy is also a possibility.
It does, however, mean that they aren't worth taking seriously. Just don't presume that you know WHY they aren't worth taking seriously. (But making guesses is reasonable, as long as you remember that they are just guesses.)
Wise. You're right. No matter where you start or what direction it takes - this flow chart leads to the same end box - "they aren't worth taking seriously". So, I might as quit wasting time following the links when I know where it will lead. Thank you.
Who said anything about nuclear anything? You also made another lunkheaded rant on this same story and were proven wrong there too. Why don't you shut up until you get a clue and stop being such a little wanker?
little wanker? LoL, sorry to burst your bubble there pal... But, that's for different thread.
:)
Look, maybe it was - just what it was. A couple chemicals that when mixed together generated enough heat to cause severe damage to the individual stupid enough to try this stunt. In fact, that's all it was. In fact, that's all it did. A minor blip resulting in some idiot who's now calling himself Mrs. {whatever}.
If this is the best they can do... I have zero need to watch 24/7 Faux News coverage imagining all the things it "could have been" rather than what it really was. A minor blip on the radar of my day. The nuculr (sic) spin was already covered by Faux news as a "possibility". Their spin? Not this time but it's coming... Oh, and they added to keep watching for future developments, LoL.
Gaud, this country is soooo brain dead. Again, why is it you people always post as cowards? Nevermind. That's one of those questions that answers itself