Security provided by the airports was ineffective enough to allow 9/11 to happen.
Only somebody who was too lazy to look up the facts would say something that fucking stupid - they didn't have reason to stop them at the time, the intelligence agencies could have stopped this and failed, the mindset about hijackings was to let them do what they want / you'll live, and the FAA - which controlled things allowed on a plane - allowed the boxcutters they used. How in the FUCK is that, AT ALL, analogous to private security being entirely to blame? Do you people spouting that crap even TRY to look intelligent, and actually back up your assertion? [er.... if you did, you wouldn't make that point, would you?:P]
I thought there already was precedent supporting a slam against a TOS being agreed to when you only get to see it AFTER opening it, don't remember tho.
Insightfull?
If they had, they would gloat about it as they always do. Fact is, it is impossible to tell if it is the TSA - or a combination of them. DHS, non-govt, ACTUAL law enforcement, or the terrorists not targeting planes in that fashion anymore. It is easy, given their record however, to doubt the TSA playing a big role in it. Not to mention, you could look at all the time BEFORE the TSA, BEFORE 9-11 where we went without a 9-11, and look at your point, and go "so what?
Well, it depends on the analogy, there is no way to really make a "general rule" that can outright declare an analogy flawed like that without said rule being flawed.
Of course anybody with a hint of scientific curiosity, as I define as a genuine adherence to the search of knowledge through science/the scientific method, should conclude that this would only further SUPPORT the idea that no such thing exists [as opposed to adhering to the idea that it PROVES it outright exists, or doesn't exist], given how we don't know what methodology and technology will come out in the future, and what they will show about the human brain, or other areas of scientific study - look at our study of our universe, and how what we thought was proven before was contradicted in many areas.
tl:dr: Remember the difference between outright proving, and providing strong support for and idea
Theft of a purchase?
What a crock of shit. I'm not sorry, but you don't own a sale before you get it, and not making a sale is not the same as somehow having one taken from you that you already had - that defies reasonability on all levels.
First off, - PEOPLE WILL ALWAYS make money off their works, find a way to - even overcoming problems. Second, when in fuck's name is that scenario EVER happened? Somebody creating a work, nobody buying it -> failure -> starving? [Not to mention, if it DID happen, how do you know the guy wasn't working on other projects to keep him from starving, or that it was 100% due to piracy in the first place given all the other variables]? Most importantly, that does jack shit to actually address his point.
By reality, you mean the reality where a quote rightfully is only applicable to some but not all situations? Oh the irony. Your post doesn't debunk anything, it does make it clear that that is a very likely outcome, but get off your high horse for Christ's sake
You fail at logic.
Really.
Saying what we have now is BS != saying we should have nothing, and your statements avoid the FACT that they are NOT doing the most efficient/effective methods.
*yawn* Another moronic attempt to create a false contradiction that ignores the fact that SLASHDOT IS NOT ONE FUCKING ENTITY, BUT A GROUP OF POEPLE WITH DIFFERING OPINONS, dipshit.
TBH though, licensing scheme or not - I find it hard to not liken it to timeshifting, since there you have a license to watch/listen, but it is still legal to capture for personal use said bits of data.
How in fuck's name is this even remotely insightful? You just said people are spineless/don't pay for content because they oppose DRM, which is an idiotic and demonstrably false dichotomy.
Another interpretation is that it's an enormous CYA activity: when, not if, the next awful terrorist attack happens and people are snorting and yelling about "why couldn't you tell that these 10 goons who, in a country of 300 million people all doing strange things, happened to take classes on how to fly but not how to land: how much more obvious could their plot have been?!!?"
If that WERE the case, they'd be doing REAL things, and LISTENING to the advice of countries like Israel, who have both criticized the U.S TSA and been under real threats and inter-country threats regularly - not the bullshit they're doing now.
What if you figure out the computations that need to be done, and modify the code to do that off-dongle? Granted, figuring that out would be a ginormous challenge.
Pretty much anyone who has ever written even a small computer program can just search for the relevant text and delete it from the binary. It gets a bit tougher if you add checking code to see if the text has been changed.
What if you then change the checking code, and what it checks for?:P
Slashdot Mirror
*sell, not seel - damn typos :P
Mimic SOME apple fans, right? If you believe that attitude represents everyone, I've got a bridge to seel you.
Oh the irony. Grow up yourself.
Security provided by the airports was ineffective enough to allow 9/11 to happen.
Only somebody who was too lazy to look up the facts would say something that fucking stupid - they didn't have reason to stop them at the time, the intelligence agencies could have stopped this and failed, the mindset about hijackings was to let them do what they want / you'll live, and the FAA - which controlled things allowed on a plane - allowed the boxcutters they used. How in the FUCK is that, AT ALL, analogous to private security being entirely to blame? Do you people spouting that crap even TRY to look intelligent, and actually back up your assertion? [er.... if you did, you wouldn't make that point, would you? :P]
It is another POSSIBILITy, but not likely enough in my opinion of course to be seriously considered.
I thought there already was precedent supporting a slam against a TOS being agreed to when you only get to see it AFTER opening it, don't remember tho.
Insightfull?
If they had, they would gloat about it as they always do. Fact is, it is impossible to tell if it is the TSA - or a combination of them. DHS, non-govt, ACTUAL law enforcement, or the terrorists not targeting planes in that fashion anymore. It is easy, given their record however, to doubt the TSA playing a big role in it. Not to mention, you could look at all the time BEFORE the TSA, BEFORE 9-11 where we went without a 9-11, and look at your point, and go "so what?
Well, it depends on the analogy, there is no way to really make a "general rule" that can outright declare an analogy flawed like that without said rule being flawed.
To further simplify that code slightly, would
if(!var)
{
return;
}
doSomething();
be as equally valid as the latter example you showed?
Of course anybody with a hint of scientific curiosity, as I define as a genuine adherence to the search of knowledge through science/the scientific method, should conclude that this would only further SUPPORT the idea that no such thing exists [as opposed to adhering to the idea that it PROVES it outright exists, or doesn't exist], given how we don't know what methodology and technology will come out in the future, and what they will show about the human brain, or other areas of scientific study - look at our study of our universe, and how what we thought was proven before was contradicted in many areas.
tl:dr: Remember the difference between outright proving, and providing strong support for and idea
Theft of a purchase? What a crock of shit. I'm not sorry, but you don't own a sale before you get it, and not making a sale is not the same as somehow having one taken from you that you already had - that defies reasonability on all levels.
First off, - PEOPLE WILL ALWAYS make money off their works, find a way to - even overcoming problems. Second, when in fuck's name is that scenario EVER happened? Somebody creating a work, nobody buying it -> failure -> starving? [Not to mention, if it DID happen, how do you know the guy wasn't working on other projects to keep him from starving, or that it was 100% due to piracy in the first place given all the other variables]? Most importantly, that does jack shit to actually address his point.
... No, it's in an attempt to maintain the difference that exists that saying it isn't theft occurs... *facepalm*
Private security. So what? Anybody who knows the ACTUAL FACTS knows to blame them is retarded, ignorant, short sighted, all of the above.
By reality, you mean the reality where a quote rightfully is only applicable to some but not all situations? Oh the irony. Your post doesn't debunk anything, it does make it clear that that is a very likely outcome, but get off your high horse for Christ's sake
Opinion != fact -> your reasoning is a common PERCEPTION, but it is NOT static, and it still CAN be changed.
Never mind that we don't know HOW much is being given off for real, and the difference between the various types of radiation.
You fail at logic.
Really.
Saying what we have now is BS != saying we should have nothing, and your statements avoid the FACT that they are NOT doing the most efficient/effective methods.
*yawn* Another moronic attempt to create a false contradiction that ignores the fact that SLASHDOT IS NOT ONE FUCKING ENTITY, BUT A GROUP OF POEPLE WITH DIFFERING OPINONS, dipshit.
TBH though, licensing scheme or not - I find it hard to not liken it to timeshifting, since there you have a license to watch/listen, but it is still legal to capture for personal use said bits of data.
How in fuck's name is this even remotely insightful? You just said people are spineless/don't pay for content because they oppose DRM, which is an idiotic and demonstrably false dichotomy.
Another interpretation is that it's an enormous CYA activity: when, not if, the next awful terrorist attack happens and people are snorting and yelling about "why couldn't you tell that these 10 goons who, in a country of 300 million people all doing strange things, happened to take classes on how to fly but not how to land: how much more obvious could their plot have been?!!?"
If that WERE the case, they'd be doing REAL things, and LISTENING to the advice of countries like Israel, who have both criticized the U.S TSA and been under real threats and inter-country threats regularly - not the bullshit they're doing now.
What if you figure out the computations that need to be done, and modify the code to do that off-dongle? Granted, figuring that out would be a ginormous challenge.
youhavedownloaded.com, from what I've seen, is a flawed site, that to be taken seriously needs work.
Pretty much anyone who has ever written even a small computer program can just search for the relevant text and delete it from the binary. It gets a bit tougher if you add checking code to see if the text has been changed.
What if you then change the checking code, and what it checks for? :P