Funny, this thread, as they all involve the same chemical. And yes, I knew the friend fucked it up by the physical description. Still had them destroy it, just to be safe. Enough to wake me up in the middle of the night. Try doing all those variables on being woken up from a dead sleep with 20 year old chemistry knowledge without getting anyone killed.
Had a nephew's friend make 1.75L of that shit! Field that call at at 2am! Nephew had a "four wall" conversation with him after (as my instructions included how not to be arrested by the cops).
Fireworks is a very common thing that looks like your making explosives (because, well, YOU ARE!) but, has no nefarious purpose other than legal fireworks suck.
Actually black powder and gunpowder are very sticky legal subjects in the US. Know your state and federal laws well before even looking into playing with them.
I smell BULLSHIT! . Even if AI does end up creating jobs, most of those are going to be on either the high IQ or high education variety, or both. The problem right now in the job market tends to be that there are not enough jobs for people of average intelligence with a highschool diploma to earn a living wage. If you're a crack genius with a high IQ and a masters degree in a high tech field, you likely have no problem unless you have no idea how to talk to people in a professional environment. For everyone else right now, they're screwed and they're going to continuously get screwed more and more until something changes. AI is just going to speed this trend.
It sounds like the police installed this with no oversight, guidelines or privacy protections. The public backlash caused the network to be shut down until such policies were made and, instead of making the policies and protections, the police decided they didn't want it anymore. Whether this is because they didn't want the restrictions or because they didn't find it useful, there's no information here.
When numbers are that skewed on something, it always warrants an investigation into the cause to see if action is needed. In this case, to see if companies are intentionally, and possibly illegally, exploiting 0.19% of the population to make their bottom line. Now, like I said, it needs to be investigated to be sure, but, given the fact that the companies are most likely patterning their games specifically to take advantage of people with a gambling addiction problem by making their games a very exploitive form of gambling, well then, that would make it illegal even in every state and country that allows gambling as they have specific risk/reward requirements and they have to be registered and closely monitored to insure compliance with the law.
Simple, to use some of your examples: In WoW and Diablo Online, whether you pay a yearly subscription or farm gold to pay for your account, you face the same random number generator and there's no extra cash, extra possible reward. The extra items that are available for real money, likes battle pets and mounts in WoW, are a fixed price given in real dollars. In OverWatch, it may not be "pay to win" (something I do very much give Blizzard credit for) but, instead of their cosmetic items being a fixed price, which would be fine, instead you pay for "boxes" that give you the possibility of winning (this is the magic word) the item you want. Any time that a game asks for real money to give you the chance to win the item(s) you want, they're crossing the line, even if they give you an alternative method to earn the item.
The company behind Farmville and a massive number of "free to play" games hired a team of specialists on addiction and compulsive behaviors but, not to make sure their game wasn't addictive, of course, but to make sure that their games were as addictive as possible so that you would spend the maximum amount of time and money on their games. If it destroys someone's life, that's not their problem; they got their money.
It took me a bit to figure out his argument but, he's not against having virtual accounts in a game that you can earn rewards from. He's saying that if the virtual amount can be purchased with cash that the real dollar (euro, etc.) value must always be shown. If the currency is completely virtual and cannot be purchased with cash then, they can most do what they want.
Ok, it took me a bit to figure out where you were going with this. It sounds like you're seeing the virtual currencies as a shell game to hide the real cost of transactions. So you not against allowing to put a fixed amount into a game as a "fill up," for lack of a better term, but saying that the amount should always be shown in real dollars (or other local national currency) so that people always know the real cost of an item they're purchasing.
I think you have something with this because, I didn't realize it until now, that the amount of virtual currencies is fluid depending on the amount you purchase and they never match up to a real dollar value (ex: a star berry will never equal $.01, $.02, etc. [ok, Slashdot can't do the cent sign *sigh*] ). This makes it where, unless you sit down with a calculator, or are one, and figure out the amount of star berries you purchased for cash, figure out the cost per star berry and then multiply by the number of star berries required, there is no way to know the real price of the item. And it will also vary according to how many star berries you originally purchased.
Ok, thinking that through, I can back you on this idea. At first, I was against your argument but, you won me over.
The earning them in game without cash is not the problem and likely never will be (watch, there is a game company already saying "hold my beer"). It's the fact that they also sell the loot boxes and separately, at much greater cost for the contents you actually want, for cash that's the problem. You may get that item that's "worth" $40, if you were to purchase it directly, for $5 worth of loot boxes, but you probably will not. That's why it's gambling.
Despite the ridiculous amount of capital it takes, a lot. The number one place that there are issues is utility poles. Right now, most municipalities have regulations that you must wait for the incumbent player to move their cables to make room for yours. Typically, there is no required turnaround time, or it's a ridiculously long time like 90 days per pole and they can charge you whatever they want for the "service." Some municipalities passed what a are called "one touch make ready" regulations but, the incumbents have sued every time, with varied results but, if nothing else, you had to wait for the lawsuit to conclude before you could proceed. One touch make ready is a regulation that allows a new players to move aside existing cables to make room for their own on the condition that they do not harm existing cables or interfere with the competitor's service. Google fiber required that one touch make ready laws were passed before they would consider your city for their service.
Yes, but right now, it requires specialized equipment and skill. Not something commonly available. Plus, right now, many of the chemicals will get you on a DEA watchlist. If this is normalized, the chemicals will become commonplace. However, if they turn out to actually work, the pharmaceutical industry will shut it down. Most likely by paying their pet congressmen to make them illegal because they could make undesirable substances.
Well, as things are going now, the "traditional" automakers will build and sell the electric cars but, Tesla will sell them the batteries and rent them the supercharger stations.
Slashdot Mirror
Funny, this thread, as they all involve the same chemical. And yes, I knew the friend fucked it up by the physical description. Still had them destroy it, just to be safe. Enough to wake me up in the middle of the night. Try doing all those variables on being woken up from a dead sleep with 20 year old chemistry knowledge without getting anyone killed.
Had a nephew's friend make 1.75L of that shit! Field that call at at 2am! Nephew had a "four wall" conversation with him after (as my instructions included how not to be arrested by the cops).
Naw, just Slashdot readers know that's the mulligan answer. You get one per quiz.
Fireworks is a very common thing that looks like your making explosives (because, well, YOU ARE!) but, has no nefarious purpose other than legal fireworks suck.
Actually black powder and gunpowder are very sticky legal subjects in the US. Know your state and federal laws well before even looking into playing with them.
That was a way better burn than I expected it to be. Well played.
Sounds like a Mac problem, not a vim problem.
*Ding* *Ding* *Ding* "We have a winner!" (From someone on the inside watching this mess.)
I smell BULLSHIT! . Even if AI does end up creating jobs, most of those are going to be on either the high IQ or high education variety, or both. The problem right now in the job market tends to be that there are not enough jobs for people of average intelligence with a highschool diploma to earn a living wage. If you're a crack genius with a high IQ and a masters degree in a high tech field, you likely have no problem unless you have no idea how to talk to people in a professional environment. For everyone else right now, they're screwed and they're going to continuously get screwed more and more until something changes. AI is just going to speed this trend.
It sounds like the police installed this with no oversight, guidelines or privacy protections. The public backlash caused the network to be shut down until such policies were made and, instead of making the policies and protections, the police decided they didn't want it anymore. Whether this is because they didn't want the restrictions or because they didn't find it useful, there's no information here.
Did you miss the part of the story that this network was purchased and installed by the police department using "anti-terrorist" funds.
That's a nice, and in this case, very accurate addition to the "under the bus" analogy.
Yes. I was not amused.
When numbers are that skewed on something, it always warrants an investigation into the cause to see if action is needed. In this case, to see if companies are intentionally, and possibly illegally, exploiting 0.19% of the population to make their bottom line. Now, like I said, it needs to be investigated to be sure, but, given the fact that the companies are most likely patterning their games specifically to take advantage of people with a gambling addiction problem by making their games a very exploitive form of gambling, well then, that would make it illegal even in every state and country that allows gambling as they have specific risk/reward requirements and they have to be registered and closely monitored to insure compliance with the law.
Simple, to use some of your examples: In WoW and Diablo Online, whether you pay a yearly subscription or farm gold to pay for your account, you face the same random number generator and there's no extra cash, extra possible reward. The extra items that are available for real money, likes battle pets and mounts in WoW, are a fixed price given in real dollars. In OverWatch, it may not be "pay to win" (something I do very much give Blizzard credit for) but, instead of their cosmetic items being a fixed price, which would be fine, instead you pay for "boxes" that give you the possibility of winning (this is the magic word) the item you want. Any time that a game asks for real money to give you the chance to win the item(s) you want, they're crossing the line, even if they give you an alternative method to earn the item.
The company behind Farmville and a massive number of "free to play" games hired a team of specialists on addiction and compulsive behaviors but, not to make sure their game wasn't addictive, of course, but to make sure that their games were as addictive as possible so that you would spend the maximum amount of time and money on their games. If it destroys someone's life, that's not their problem; they got their money.
It took me a bit to figure out his argument but, he's not against having virtual accounts in a game that you can earn rewards from. He's saying that if the virtual amount can be purchased with cash that the real dollar (euro, etc.) value must always be shown. If the currency is completely virtual and cannot be purchased with cash then, they can most do what they want.
Ok, it took me a bit to figure out where you were going with this. It sounds like you're seeing the virtual currencies as a shell game to hide the real cost of transactions. So you not against allowing to put a fixed amount into a game as a "fill up," for lack of a better term, but saying that the amount should always be shown in real dollars (or other local national currency) so that people always know the real cost of an item they're purchasing.
I think you have something with this because, I didn't realize it until now, that the amount of virtual currencies is fluid depending on the amount you purchase and they never match up to a real dollar value (ex: a star berry will never equal $.01, $.02, etc. [ok, Slashdot can't do the cent sign *sigh*] ). This makes it where, unless you sit down with a calculator, or are one, and figure out the amount of star berries you purchased for cash, figure out the cost per star berry and then multiply by the number of star berries required, there is no way to know the real price of the item. And it will also vary according to how many star berries you originally purchased.
Ok, thinking that through, I can back you on this idea. At first, I was against your argument but, you won me over.
The earning them in game without cash is not the problem and likely never will be (watch, there is a game company already saying "hold my beer"). It's the fact that they also sell the loot boxes and separately, at much greater cost for the contents you actually want, for cash that's the problem. You may get that item that's "worth" $40, if you were to purchase it directly, for $5 worth of loot boxes, but you probably will not. That's why it's gambling.
What the hell is up with all the idiotic troll posts on this article? Who moved the rock?
He's sending his car to Mars because he's planning on moving there in a little over a decade. He's just sending his stuff in advance.
I'm pretty sure that's what this is actually about. Proof of concept for space advertising so they can get a big $$$ contract.
Despite the ridiculous amount of capital it takes, a lot. The number one place that there are issues is utility poles. Right now, most municipalities have regulations that you must wait for the incumbent player to move their cables to make room for yours. Typically, there is no required turnaround time, or it's a ridiculously long time like 90 days per pole and they can charge you whatever they want for the "service." Some municipalities passed what a are called "one touch make ready" regulations but, the incumbents have sued every time, with varied results but, if nothing else, you had to wait for the lawsuit to conclude before you could proceed. One touch make ready is a regulation that allows a new players to move aside existing cables to make room for their own on the condition that they do not harm existing cables or interfere with the competitor's service. Google fiber required that one touch make ready laws were passed before they would consider your city for their service.
Yes, but right now, it requires specialized equipment and skill. Not something commonly available. Plus, right now, many of the chemicals will get you on a DEA watchlist. If this is normalized, the chemicals will become commonplace. However, if they turn out to actually work, the pharmaceutical industry will shut it down. Most likely by paying their pet congressmen to make them illegal because they could make undesirable substances.
Well, as things are going now, the "traditional" automakers will build and sell the electric cars but, Tesla will sell them the batteries and rent them the supercharger stations.