I don't think minors should be allowed to purchase anything without a parent or guardian present.
So, trampling on the human rights of a demographic is fine, just so long as you're not a part of that demographic? Why should my kid be prohibited by law from picking up groceries on the way home? Maybe if you taught your kids to be responsible consumers instead of untrustworthy crybabies, you wouldn't feel the need for a literal nanny-state.
[R]einforced cockpit doors and one USMC MP with a 9mm loaded with low grain bullets solves the chance of another 9/11 and doesn't strip us of our rights or cost us out the ass.
Reinforced cockpit doors combined with a populace aware of the updated hijacking protocol is sufficient.
What is it like to live in a world without humour?
IMO, reasoned response(s) to possibly humorous/absurd statements compliment each other so as to improve the overall quality of the conversation. What's it like to live in a world where this effect doesn't occur?
When actions contradict what you tell yourself, you come up with some fanciful way to make it somehow reinforce what you tell yourself. It's terribly naive to believe that this state of affairs is somehow better, or that you're somehow wiser because of it.
That is the exact opposite of what elrous0's post states. Elrous0 said that before coming to this later state of mind, that they were "great days."
You can't store a 2 gram electric match without a BATFE approved explosives magazine, or make a 60mg flash cracker without a high explosives manufacturing perm[i]t [...]
This holds true, despite the fact that neither of your examples contain high explosives? Does BATFE regard all low explosives as high explosives?
The operative word in your statement is "yet". Before 9/11, no one had committed large scale murder with airplanes. There's always a first time for everything and when a lot of the people looking at this immediately conclude "assassination tool" you bet there will be others that actually will use it like that.
Bruce Schneier holds an annual contest for best movie plot threat. You should submit your entry.
All that setting would do for the [application] maker is generate an angry call/comment from some idiot end user who didn't click on that permission... I agree it would be a cool tool for power users though.
This "cool tool for power users" is basic functionality on BlackBerry's telephones.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm out, see ya.
Don't let the door hit your ass on the way out. =)
I don't think minors should be allowed to purchase anything without a parent or guardian present.
So, trampling on the human rights of a demographic is fine, just so long as you're not a part of that demographic? Why should my kid be prohibited by law from picking up groceries on the way home? Maybe if you taught your kids to be responsible consumers instead of untrustworthy crybabies, you wouldn't feel the need for a literal nanny-state.
Well...it did have liquid in it!
I think the TSA agents should be required to personally inspect the contents of EVERY such bag!
Agreed; TSA agents should also have to taste it to make sure it's not an alcoholic beverage or plastique or something.
[R]einforced cockpit doors and one USMC MP with a 9mm loaded with low grain bullets solves the chance of another 9/11 and doesn't strip us of our rights or cost us out the ass.
Reinforced cockpit doors combined with a populace aware of the updated hijacking protocol is sufficient.
Bruce Schneier wrote about arming pilots: https://www.schneier.com/crypto-gram-0208.html#8
Clearly she fits the terrorist criminal profile.
This community seems to have forgotten the MIT paper showing that profiling is more easily defeated than random screening.
Article: http://tech.mit.edu/V122/N48/48secure.48n.html
Paper: http://groups.csail.mit.edu/mac/classes/6.805/student-papers/spring02-papers/caps.htm
Short version: An organized adversary could probe, model, and defeat a profile, while random screening maintains a constant success/failure rate.
Disclaimer: I'm in favor of minimal pre-"9/11"-style security, combined with reinforced cockpit doors. Refuse to be terrified.
I was seeing regular ads [...]
You're doing it wrong.
What is it like to live in a world without humour?
IMO, reasoned response(s) to possibly humorous/absurd statements compliment each other so as to improve the overall quality of the conversation. What's it like to live in a world where this effect doesn't occur?
Bullshit; what about clown-fish? You wouldn't laugh if you saw a clown-fish right now?
clown-fish: Oy! ...blub... Oy you!... ...bloop...
malkavian: [not laughing] Piss off, wanker.
I'm sorry, but I'm just not buying it.
PRO TIP: Instead of reading articles that don't interest you, try reading articles that interest you.
I'm seeing a banner ad [...]
You're also doing it wrong, unless you're researching malware in the wild.
Breaking in to get information to help political prisoners? White hat.
Breaking in to rescue political prisoners? Hard hat.
What the police do is police business, not yours.
Our cities and governments, our cops, our business.
Here's hoping they get the jail time that they deserve for acting like spoiled teenagers.
Acting like spoiled teenagers is punishable by imprisonment?
It's no joke; ladyboy are serious business.
[F]ind the criminal assholes that are doing this and put them in prison where they belong.
The criminal assholes aren't hard to find; they're in their offices at various Sony regional headquarters.
Singapore... [...] and other sane countries :)
No-consent homosexual BDSM for spitting on the sidewalk is "sane?" I'll stick with American insanity, thanks.
When actions contradict what you tell yourself, you come up with some fanciful way to make it somehow reinforce what you tell yourself. It's terribly naive to believe that this state of affairs is somehow better, or that you're somehow wiser because of it.
That is the exact opposite of what elrous0's post states. Elrous0 said that before coming to this later state of mind, that they were "great days."
How do I determine if I have one of these things on my car?
Probably something plastic and/or cleaner than the undercarriage, within arms' reach from the sides/bumpers.
That... That is a whole lotta derp right there, I tell you what.
Nice post, but you misspelled 'crap'.
Nice correction, but you misspelled "motherfucking bullshit."
You can't store a 2 gram electric match without a BATFE approved explosives magazine, or make a 60mg flash cracker without a high explosives manufacturing perm[i]t [...]
This holds true, despite the fact that neither of your examples contain high explosives? Does BATFE regard all low explosives as high explosives?
The operative word in your statement is "yet". Before 9/11, no one had committed large scale murder with airplanes. There's always a first time for everything and when a lot of the people looking at this immediately conclude "assassination tool" you bet there will be others that actually will use it like that.
Bruce Schneier holds an annual contest for best movie plot threat. You should submit your entry.
I woke up to my phone ringing off the hook.
That's even less probable than me ever finding a low-budget Filipino horror movie filmed in NYC.
Banks do not give a fuck about you. Join a credit union if you want to be treated like a person, instead of an object from which to extract profits.
Look at this photo of the couple [buzzfed.com].
Jesus, look at the size of that lunch bag. What's in there, General Tso's head?
All that setting would do for the [application] maker is generate an angry call/comment from some idiot end user who didn't click on that permission... I agree it would be a cool tool for power users though.
This "cool tool for power users" is basic functionality on BlackBerry's telephones.