You're confused. Just because someone in IT journalism calls it the "CEO scam" doesn't mean it's the CEO who falls for the phishing scheme that compromises their email account. It could be someone in the A/P side of procurement, it could be someone in the CTO's office, or the company's comptroller. If you think those people aren't all highly motivated to be cautious, you've never worked with any of them. Especially not those who work for publicly traded (and highly scrutinized) companies. You're pointing out that the CEO doesn't handle financial transactions and then wondering how someone "that dumb" gets the job. Well which is it?
You're confusing "guidelines" with "laws" (or "regulations"). In fact the FAA has NOT put anything formal into place, and the FAA modernization act explicitly prevents the FAA from doing so with regard to recreational use. The rulemaking that's currently pending applies only to prospective commercial use. Otherwise, the only thing that's actually proscribed is no different than it is with kites or weather balloons or anything else: stay out of the airspace used by actual airplanes, stay away from airports, etc. If someone's doing something objectively dangerous, there are already a thousand local statutes that deal with reckless endangerment regardless of the object being played with.
Just for record-keeping purposes, it would be super handy if you could link to the many reported cases of injuries that comes from the millions of people who are now flying little quad copters around. I'm sure you've got lots to go to with all of the mayhem you're thinking about, considering what you want to be able to do them. And for fun, compare that to the number of people who are hurt annually by other people riding bicycles or walking their dogs. Those things should NOT be out in public. People with bicycles should be confined to club areas where it's safe to operate them. Do you have any idea how much energy can be transferred to a kid walking on a sidewalk when some other kid (plus the mass of the bike) connects with them at, say, 10mph? A horror show.
We MUST round up anything recreational and confine it to safety zones. Especially now that we have so many examples of serious injuries and deaths from flying toy model aircraft around... on which you're now about to cite statistics, right? Right?
Tell that to the guy who lost his job in the DC city government for using it in exactly the right context and without a hint of irony, satire, or some sort of double entendre. Only in DC. Fired for other people's limited vocabulary.
Yes, because that worked so well for the first 150 years America was a country...
Which is a completely specious, pointless comparison. Which you know.
So the question is, why would you compare present day things like the lowering of test standards to allow in people to meet an HR skin color quota with the exact opposite sort of segregation policy 50 years ago?
The Republicans who want to ban evolution from schools, kill abortus doctors and who will never allow an atheist to become the President are closer to liberals than Sharia lovers? Give me a break...
Right, because they are representative of "Republicans" enough for someone like you to say that's what that party is all about are just like people who vote Democrat, but who are espouse pure, confiscatory communism or burning down medical research facilities are representative of "Democrats" enough to say that's what that party is all about. Right? Right. Sure.
The difference is that, unlike ISIS, there aren't tens of thousands of insane anti-vaccine lefties (or righties, whatever - they both exist) rounding up school nurses and lopping their heads off for YouTube videos. There aren't squads of militant atheists burning Unitarians (or Buddhists or anyone else) alive in cages in Ohio. There aren't fiscal conservatives planting IEDs along school bus routes to kill dozens of people at a time to show how upset they are that some school districts have officials who write contracts with corrupt public employee unions. There aren't "occupy" groups with enough gumption to do much more than be persistently annoying about the fact they want to shut down businesses of which they disapprove (as opposed to shooting RPGs into the windows of those office buildings).
No, there's a huge, huge difference between they way people debate and go about resolving their differences in the US, than in places like much of the middle east. And the theocratic thugs who want to run the whole world in that model would be happy to kill you for disagreeing with them. See the difference? I think you're wrong, but I'd buy you a beer to talk about it. They'd kill you for having a beer because Allah doesn't like beer.
I see. So, the fact that crazy Islamists are butchering whole villages full of people on multiple continents, or China is positioning itself to control the entire coast of Asia, or that Putin is taking over former Soviet victims... that's the US, at it again! Sure enough, that's us promoting inequality again. When Pakistan sends their Taliban proxies to go village to village burning down schools and shooting school teachers who dare to educate girls, and we try to stop that... that's us promoting inequality again! We're horrible that way.
Endless war is the new normal, and you didn't even notice.
No, it's the OLD (and continuing) normal. Squabbles over borders, religion, resources and even personality cults have been ongoing, pretty much without interruption, throughout all of human history. The huge eruptions of the "world" wars were the aberrations. Things like (for a current example) the ongoing slaughter over Islamic culture clash (whether with IEDs in the Middle East or machetes in some contested village in Africa) have always been the norm. Things like Putin rolling forces into Ukraine while telling everyone he's helping them - that's the historical norm. If the US is continually involved, it's because just like the rest of the world, we have a demonstrable vested interest in the outcome of such things. Pretending we don't is just silly.
Re:False dichotomy of the guilty conscience
on
Twilight of the Bomb
·
· Score: 1
Incorrect. They did 'quit'. Immediately.
Yes, other than the whole "not surrendering" part.
The comparison with a full scale invasion of Japan is a false dichotomy.
Why, because you'd like to pretend that the countless examples of Japan's willingness to put its own people through the meat grinder of conventional war, including shrugging off the fiery destruction of Tokyo, wasn't real? Are you so anxious to lazily do your whole time-traveling armchair conflict resolution that your urge to re-imagine the actual history of the conflict and Japan's demonstrated behavior is strong enough to make you look past how ridiculous you sound? Apparently.
By your logic, the Nazis would have been perfectly justified to begin obliterating American cities
What? How would they have been justified? They were the aggressors, just like Japan. We were justified in taking actions to STOP the aggression of those two countries. Careful, your moral relativism is showing. How do you not walk in front of traffic with your moral compass twirling around like that?
On the other hand, the US continues to try to antagonize Russia
It's true. Russia normally wouldn't feel the need to roll tanks into and kill people in Ukraine, but they just can't help it. They're so stressed out over being antagonized. Luckily for us, we had a stellar person as our nation's top diplomat, and she had a big red plastic "reset" button that she brought with her to Russia to make everything better. And if the Russians DID hack into DoD mail servers, at least we know they could never have hacked into her mail server, in her house... because, she knows a guy who told her it was all nice and secure, not to worry.
Which twisted sort of racism is in your head, that you think the expectation that people be prepared to finance and rear their own offspring should somehow be different depending on skin pigment? As usual, the people who recoil and spit venom at the mere mention of personal accountability... turn out, under the hood, to be the real racists.
Have you ever watched some old-school rail guys fix that? They pour some charcoal along the rail, throw some gasoline on it, and let it cook for about 30 minutes - no bellows, no special fuel, no oxy-flames. The rails (despite never even glowing red) become so pliable that they can use sledgehammers or simple chain come-alongs to bend them back into shape.
Why does that matter? Every one of those transactions is mirrored in near real time to off-site datacenters that AmEx runs for disaster recovery. There's no Aliens and Bin Laden Used My Credit Cards conspiracy.
Probably because you took it completely out of context. Likewise, if you're talking about events that early, you're talking about the condition of that building BEFORE it was badly damaged by high-energy flying multi-ton debris from the collapsing nearest tower - which badly damaged supporting beams made weaker in the subsequent fire (just as happened with the airplanes hitting the taller towers).
Did the decide a run a test by blasting a commercial airliner through the structure, majorly damaging key support beams? And, just how tall was the building in question? Please be specific on both counts.
No you don't, you're an anonymous coward trying to pretend you have one. But just the fact of your terrible writing skills shows you've got no such academic achievement under your belt. And the fact that you've just carefully tap-danced around the fact that large commercial aircraft slashed right through the structures of those buildings and tremendously compromising multiple floors of the towers means that you don't even begin to think like an actual engineer.
On the off chance you are an actual civil engineer, please don't work on any projects that involve public safety. Thanks.
Reports of which were highly exaggerated, and the reality of which has been explained many times by people who don't have a need to cartoon-quality conspiracy theories in order to distract them from their boring existence.
Buildings that size don't tip over sideways. You understand that, right? Especially when, like that one, high-speed (and very large) debris from the collapsed big tower closest had flown straight across just above ground level, and seriously compromised its structure, just like with the taller buildings. It also damaged (and spilled) internal fuel tanks used to power an array of backup generators. There was a high temperature fuel/paper/building-materials fire in the center of that building, and it had many central supports clipped by tons of flying metal. What's fairly remarkable was that it took as long as it did to collapse.
But don't let some basic facts get in the way of your entertaining fantasy.
And more to the point, people are confused about what needed to happen. The steel beams didn't need to "melt," per se. They just needed to soften enough to then buckle, and that's that.
Slashdot Mirror
You're confused. Just because someone in IT journalism calls it the "CEO scam" doesn't mean it's the CEO who falls for the phishing scheme that compromises their email account. It could be someone in the A/P side of procurement, it could be someone in the CTO's office, or the company's comptroller. If you think those people aren't all highly motivated to be cautious, you've never worked with any of them. Especially not those who work for publicly traded (and highly scrutinized) companies. You're pointing out that the CEO doesn't handle financial transactions and then wondering how someone "that dumb" gets the job. Well which is it?
You're confusing "guidelines" with "laws" (or "regulations"). In fact the FAA has NOT put anything formal into place, and the FAA modernization act explicitly prevents the FAA from doing so with regard to recreational use. The rulemaking that's currently pending applies only to prospective commercial use. Otherwise, the only thing that's actually proscribed is no different than it is with kites or weather balloons or anything else: stay out of the airspace used by actual airplanes, stay away from airports, etc. If someone's doing something objectively dangerous, there are already a thousand local statutes that deal with reckless endangerment regardless of the object being played with.
Just for record-keeping purposes, it would be super handy if you could link to the many reported cases of injuries that comes from the millions of people who are now flying little quad copters around. I'm sure you've got lots to go to with all of the mayhem you're thinking about, considering what you want to be able to do them. And for fun, compare that to the number of people who are hurt annually by other people riding bicycles or walking their dogs. Those things should NOT be out in public. People with bicycles should be confined to club areas where it's safe to operate them. Do you have any idea how much energy can be transferred to a kid walking on a sidewalk when some other kid (plus the mass of the bike) connects with them at, say, 10mph? A horror show.
We MUST round up anything recreational and confine it to safety zones. Especially now that we have so many examples of serious injuries and deaths from flying toy model aircraft around... on which you're now about to cite statistics, right? Right?
Tell that to the guy who lost his job in the DC city government for using it in exactly the right context and without a hint of irony, satire, or some sort of double entendre. Only in DC. Fired for other people's limited vocabulary.
Where as you, personally, always seek ways to pay more taxes, right? Yeah.
Yes, because that worked so well for the first 150 years America was a country...
Which is a completely specious, pointless comparison. Which you know.
So the question is, why would you compare present day things like the lowering of test standards to allow in people to meet an HR skin color quota with the exact opposite sort of segregation policy 50 years ago?
The Republicans who want to ban evolution from schools, kill abortus doctors and who will never allow an atheist to become the President are closer to liberals than Sharia lovers? Give me a break...
Right, because they are representative of "Republicans" enough for someone like you to say that's what that party is all about are just like people who vote Democrat, but who are espouse pure, confiscatory communism or burning down medical research facilities are representative of "Democrats" enough to say that's what that party is all about. Right? Right. Sure.
The difference is that, unlike ISIS, there aren't tens of thousands of insane anti-vaccine lefties (or righties, whatever - they both exist) rounding up school nurses and lopping their heads off for YouTube videos. There aren't squads of militant atheists burning Unitarians (or Buddhists or anyone else) alive in cages in Ohio. There aren't fiscal conservatives planting IEDs along school bus routes to kill dozens of people at a time to show how upset they are that some school districts have officials who write contracts with corrupt public employee unions. There aren't "occupy" groups with enough gumption to do much more than be persistently annoying about the fact they want to shut down businesses of which they disapprove (as opposed to shooting RPGs into the windows of those office buildings).
No, there's a huge, huge difference between they way people debate and go about resolving their differences in the US, than in places like much of the middle east. And the theocratic thugs who want to run the whole world in that model would be happy to kill you for disagreeing with them. See the difference? I think you're wrong, but I'd buy you a beer to talk about it. They'd kill you for having a beer because Allah doesn't like beer.
I see. So, the fact that crazy Islamists are butchering whole villages full of people on multiple continents, or China is positioning itself to control the entire coast of Asia, or that Putin is taking over former Soviet victims ... that's the US, at it again! Sure enough, that's us promoting inequality again. When Pakistan sends their Taliban proxies to go village to village burning down schools and shooting school teachers who dare to educate girls, and we try to stop that ... that's us promoting inequality again! We're horrible that way.
Aggressors. Oh god. That was funny.
You're right. Germany's rolling over Poland, or Japan's rape-fest through Asia - that was just friendly foreign relations banter. You're so wise!
Endless war is the new normal, and you didn't even notice.
No, it's the OLD (and continuing) normal. Squabbles over borders, religion, resources and even personality cults have been ongoing, pretty much without interruption, throughout all of human history. The huge eruptions of the "world" wars were the aberrations. Things like (for a current example) the ongoing slaughter over Islamic culture clash (whether with IEDs in the Middle East or machetes in some contested village in Africa) have always been the norm. Things like Putin rolling forces into Ukraine while telling everyone he's helping them - that's the historical norm. If the US is continually involved, it's because just like the rest of the world, we have a demonstrable vested interest in the outcome of such things. Pretending we don't is just silly.
Incorrect. They did 'quit'. Immediately.
Yes, other than the whole "not surrendering" part.
The comparison with a full scale invasion of Japan is a false dichotomy.
Why, because you'd like to pretend that the countless examples of Japan's willingness to put its own people through the meat grinder of conventional war, including shrugging off the fiery destruction of Tokyo, wasn't real? Are you so anxious to lazily do your whole time-traveling armchair conflict resolution that your urge to re-imagine the actual history of the conflict and Japan's demonstrated behavior is strong enough to make you look past how ridiculous you sound? Apparently.
By your logic, the Nazis would have been perfectly justified to begin obliterating American cities
What? How would they have been justified? They were the aggressors, just like Japan. We were justified in taking actions to STOP the aggression of those two countries. Careful, your moral relativism is showing. How do you not walk in front of traffic with your moral compass twirling around like that?
Truly beautiful.
That is all.
On the other hand, the US continues to try to antagonize Russia
It's true. Russia normally wouldn't feel the need to roll tanks into and kill people in Ukraine, but they just can't help it. They're so stressed out over being antagonized. Luckily for us, we had a stellar person as our nation's top diplomat, and she had a big red plastic "reset" button that she brought with her to Russia to make everything better. And if the Russians DID hack into DoD mail servers, at least we know they could never have hacked into her mail server, in her house ... because, she knows a guy who told her it was all nice and secure, not to worry.
I fully support your eugenics program.
Which twisted sort of racism is in your head, that you think the expectation that people be prepared to finance and rear their own offspring should somehow be different depending on skin pigment? As usual, the people who recoil and spit venom at the mere mention of personal accountability ... turn out, under the hood, to be the real racists.
Have you considered getting some help for your delusions, racism, and hatred of old people?
Have you ever watched some old-school rail guys fix that? They pour some charcoal along the rail, throw some gasoline on it, and let it cook for about 30 minutes - no bellows, no special fuel, no oxy-flames. The rails (despite never even glowing red) become so pliable that they can use sledgehammers or simple chain come-alongs to bend them back into shape.
Why does that matter? Every one of those transactions is mirrored in near real time to off-site datacenters that AmEx runs for disaster recovery. There's no Aliens and Bin Laden Used My Credit Cards conspiracy.
Probably because you took it completely out of context. Likewise, if you're talking about events that early, you're talking about the condition of that building BEFORE it was badly damaged by high-energy flying multi-ton debris from the collapsing nearest tower - which badly damaged supporting beams made weaker in the subsequent fire (just as happened with the airplanes hitting the taller towers).
Did the decide a run a test by blasting a commercial airliner through the structure, majorly damaging key support beams? And, just how tall was the building in question? Please be specific on both counts.
I have a graduate degree in civil engineering
No you don't, you're an anonymous coward trying to pretend you have one. But just the fact of your terrible writing skills shows you've got no such academic achievement under your belt. And the fact that you've just carefully tap-danced around the fact that large commercial aircraft slashed right through the structures of those buildings and tremendously compromising multiple floors of the towers means that you don't even begin to think like an actual engineer.
On the off chance you are an actual civil engineer, please don't work on any projects that involve public safety. Thanks.
Reports of which were highly exaggerated, and the reality of which has been explained many times by people who don't have a need to cartoon-quality conspiracy theories in order to distract them from their boring existence.
Buildings that size don't tip over sideways. You understand that, right? Especially when, like that one, high-speed (and very large) debris from the collapsed big tower closest had flown straight across just above ground level, and seriously compromised its structure, just like with the taller buildings. It also damaged (and spilled) internal fuel tanks used to power an array of backup generators. There was a high temperature fuel/paper/building-materials fire in the center of that building, and it had many central supports clipped by tons of flying metal. What's fairly remarkable was that it took as long as it did to collapse.
But don't let some basic facts get in the way of your entertaining fantasy.
And more to the point, people are confused about what needed to happen. The steel beams didn't need to "melt," per se. They just needed to soften enough to then buckle, and that's that.