So you would actually take out the guy trying to save lives in the hope you would like a little longer?
When he's a moron who's going to get a couple hundred people unnecessarily killed? You betcha. Your good intentions aren't worth that kind of loss of life.
Goddammit, I had you pegged as someone who had some common sense, but now I see I was way off. Did you even read that page? Not ONE one the hijackings post-9/11 occurred anywhere in the US.
Yep - clearly an indication that the TSA is doing an AWESOME job!
I'm not sure that you're actually reading what I'm writing, so I figure I may as well return the favor.
Oh, yes, we're definitely agreed on that point. Although, with a $650 price tag, I wouldn't be replacing my phone "every year or two", either:) More realistically the phone might last 2-3 years, while the computer would be good for 4-5, or longer depending on what it's being used for.
The other thing to consider here is that while someone might buy a new cellphone every year or two, or possibly more frequently if you're in the habit of breaking or losing it, a PC tends to be a bigger investment
Not any more. The newest iPhone costs over $650 here. The last computer I put together cost $500.
Wouldn't do much. Big explosions happen from leaking lines - the gas needs time to accumulate in the building. He'd need to rig a device to first rupture the line, wait a while, and then detonate. Even then, the explosion would be contained by the blast-wall they're setting up. And I'm fairly sure that they'll shut off the gas before lighting the fuse. I'd be surprised if there was still gas going through the lines even now.
You scenario isn't analogous because you have the authorities going after the belligerent and accidentally shooting a hostage, whereas, in the actual situation, they are intentionally destroying both the "belligerent" and the "hostage". There's nothing accidental about it.
Moreover, even in your scenario, the Police would get sued for shooting the hostage, and the family of the victim would likely receive a payout. Even in Afghanistan we pay the locals when we kill one of them by accident.
As for these bits:
In the real scenario, the house is being destroyed to reduce the risk of people getting killed. There is a fair chance that a bomb disposal person could trip a booby trap or something else could happen to prematurely set off an explosive.
It's irrelevant. The question at hand isn't the motives of the police - the question is how their actions impact the "hostage". In his scenario the hostage is a person, in the real-life situation it's a house. His example is perfectly analogous, you're just fixating on irrelevant details rather than the overall scenario.
More skilled? Hardly. They have a few, well-defined tweaks to make to an existing codebase. That's quite a ways apart from a finished work. Even the best art vandal who draws a genre-appropriate mustache on every bit of art they can get their hands on is hardly displaying skill compared to someone working from scratch.
it is one thing to say "open the door or I blow this bomb". It is another to say "fly me to Cuba or I blow this bomb"... In how many of those hijackings, did the hijacker demand access to the cockpit?
"Italian Interior Minister Giuliano Amato reported that the hijacker slipped into the cockpit with a package which could have been a bomb when flight attendants opened the cockpit door, and the pilots acted according to the international rules in the matter and did what the hijacker wanted.[6][7] The flight's captain reported in Istanbul that "while the chief stewardess entered the cockpit to ask if we needed anything, the terrorist entered by force. I tried to push him out but he was a big man and I failed to stop him". The captain went on to say that the hijacker said he had three friends and they had explosives.[8] He wanted to go Rome to speak with Pope,[7] and Amoto reported that, the hijacker added there are other hijackers on another unspecified plane, "would blow that plane up if the missive didn't get to the pope"
Botnets exist, and they tend to be based in Russia, which is why I think someone should do the world a solid and drive a backhoe across eastern Europe.
That's a quick way to fame, anyway. You'd always be remembered as the first man to wear an ICBM as a suppository.
However, after 9-11, just about everyone realizes that your choices are certain death now, or certain death later when we crash the plane into a juicy target.
Idiots like you might think that, but if I see a guy with a bomb strapped to him, and some gung-ho moron like you about to try and tackle him, I'm taking you down before you get us all killed.
Notice how there is NO answer that doesn't involve giving the state money through fines and court fees?
Well, there's "don't go out in public while completely fucking smashed". But, really, I think this is more a case of "don't exaggerate and expect my sympathy" or, at the very least, "learn to exaggerate with more credibility".
If one could use sails such as this to save fuel and build speed perhaps a manned Mars mission might not be out of the question
You'd get more speed by sticking your ass out the window and farting. Either that or you'd need a sail that would be... well, "friggin 'UGE" makes it sound too small. We're talking hundreds of miles across.
Hey, if placebo works for you, that's great. It would probably be better if you'd go see a therapist and figure out WHY you have a psychosomatic sexual dysfunction in the first place, but pseudoscience is ok in the meantime.
Now, as for your hair-loss problem, I can whip you up a batch of all-natural homeopathic medicine that will amaze you with it's ability to treat the condition*.
*DISCLAIMER: THE PERFORMANCE EXPERIENCED BY THE USER COMMENTS AND TESTIMONIALS ON THIS PAGE AND/OR OUR WEBSITE IS NOT WHAT YOU SHOULD EXPECT TO EXPERIENCE. COMPANY HAS NOT INVESTIGATED OR SUBSTANTIATED ANY OF THE USER COMMENTS OR CLAIMS. SOME OF THE USERS MAY, IN SOME CASES, BEEN INCENTIVIZED TO SUBMIT THEIR COMMENTS, AND COMPANY HAS NOT VERIFIED THE FIGURES QUOTED IN THEM..
No, the choice is to do what they say, live a bit longer, and possibly survive, or die immediately. And if you don't realize that people will gladly take that teeny chance, you're living in a fantasy land.
I know that the popular thing to say these days is "Oh, in the POST-9/11-WORLD... blah blah blah", but human nature doesn't change. Passengers might be more likely to take small risks these days, but when faced with certain death on one hand and the possibility of survival on the other, most will go with the latter.
The guy stated his personal preference, and you're calling him an idiot? What kind of twit are you? You know who the real idiots are? Those people who think vanilla ice cream is better than chocolate. Fucking morons.
Yesterday, before the Porn Scan and/or Freedom Fondle, I had approximately a 1 in 25,000,000 chance (Soruce: TFA) of dying in a terrorist attack on the plane.
Today, with the Porn Scan and/or Freedom Fondle, I have an approximate 1 in 25,000,000 chance (Source: TFA) of dying in a terrorist attackon the plane.
So between yesterday and today, I have gained nothing & lost my rights.
Yesterday 97.8% (Soruce: SIC) of statistics were pulled out of your ass.
Today 97.8% (Soruce: SIC) of statistics are pulled out of your ass.
So between yesterday and today, you have learned nothing, and lost all credibility.
Sounds like a fair trade to me. Personally, I'd rather die free than live in fear. But that's me.
Go jump off a building then. The rest of us will live on, gladly ignoring your false dichotomy.
Slashdot Mirror
So you would actually take out the guy trying to save lives in the hope you would like a little longer?
When he's a moron who's going to get a couple hundred people unnecessarily killed? You betcha. Your good intentions aren't worth that kind of loss of life.
Goddammit, I had you pegged as someone who had some common sense, but now I see I was way off. Did you even read that page? Not ONE one the hijackings post-9/11 occurred anywhere in the US.
Yep - clearly an indication that the TSA is doing an AWESOME job!
I'm not sure that you're actually reading what I'm writing, so I figure I may as well return the favor.
Oh, yes, we're definitely agreed on that point. Although, with a $650 price tag, I wouldn't be replacing my phone "every year or two", either :) More realistically the phone might last 2-3 years, while the computer would be good for 4-5, or longer depending on what it's being used for.
The other thing to consider here is that while someone might buy a new cellphone every year or two, or possibly more frequently if you're in the habit of breaking or losing it, a PC tends to be a bigger investment
Not any more. The newest iPhone costs over $650 here. The last computer I put together cost $500.
They jump.
Wouldn't do much. Big explosions happen from leaking lines - the gas needs time to accumulate in the building. He'd need to rig a device to first rupture the line, wait a while, and then detonate. Even then, the explosion would be contained by the blast-wall they're setting up. And I'm fairly sure that they'll shut off the gas before lighting the fuse. I'd be surprised if there was still gas going through the lines even now.
You scenario isn't analogous because you have the authorities going after the belligerent and accidentally shooting a hostage, whereas, in the actual situation, they are intentionally destroying both the "belligerent" and the "hostage". There's nothing accidental about it.
Moreover, even in your scenario, the Police would get sued for shooting the hostage, and the family of the victim would likely receive a payout. Even in Afghanistan we pay the locals when we kill one of them by accident.
As for these bits:
In the real scenario, the house is being destroyed to reduce the risk of people getting killed. There is a fair chance that a bomb disposal person could trip a booby trap or something else could happen to prematurely set off an explosive.
It's irrelevant. The question at hand isn't the motives of the police - the question is how their actions impact the "hostage". In his scenario the hostage is a person, in the real-life situation it's a house. His example is perfectly analogous, you're just fixating on irrelevant details rather than the overall scenario.
That's easy - just check the pawn-shops.
They're evacuating the neighbourhood. Unless his booby trap involves thermonuclear weapons, I don't think it will be an issue.
if any landlord tries to write a contract that has 'right to inspect' DENY THEM THIS and point out the actual law
Which will quickly be followed by them pointing out the actual door.
Apparently a bunch of us have real problems. Care to explain where the flaw in his analogy lies?
More skilled? Hardly. They have a few, well-defined tweaks to make to an existing codebase. That's quite a ways apart from a finished work. Even the best art vandal who draws a genre-appropriate mustache on every bit of art they can get their hands on is hardly displaying skill compared to someone working from scratch.
I'm guessing you haven't seen any of their demos.
Trying to outsmart them is an often plausible argument using false or invalid inference?
The answer to your question is twofold:
1 - "A non-zero number"
2 - "Do your own damn research"
it is one thing to say "open the door or I blow this bomb". It is another to say "fly me to Cuba or I blow this bomb" ... In how many of those hijackings, did the hijacker demand access to the cockpit?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turkish_Airlines_Flight_1476
"Italian Interior Minister Giuliano Amato reported that the hijacker slipped into the cockpit with a package which could have been a bomb when flight attendants opened the cockpit door, and the pilots acted according to the international rules in the matter and did what the hijacker wanted.[6][7] The flight's captain reported in Istanbul that "while the chief stewardess entered the cockpit to ask if we needed anything, the terrorist entered by force. I tried to push him out but he was a big man and I failed to stop him". The captain went on to say that the hijacker said he had three friends and they had explosives.[8] He wanted to go Rome to speak with Pope,[7] and Amoto reported that, the hijacker added there are other hijackers on another unspecified plane, "would blow that plane up if the missive didn't get to the pope"
Nice apples to oranges comparison here. Followed by ad-hominem attack
No, actually the ad-hominem was first, so it couldn't have followed anything, and there were no apples or oranges mentioned.
I'm honestly not sure WTF you're bitching about. I get the feeling you either didn't read or didn't understand what was actually being discussed.
Obviously there are cases where one should restrain from desperate measures
Glad we agree. Cheerio!
Botnets exist, and they tend to be based in Russia, which is why I think someone should do the world a solid and drive a backhoe across eastern Europe.
That's a quick way to fame, anyway. You'd always be remembered as the first man to wear an ICBM as a suppository.
You dismiss with the tired, old "placebo" slander.
Yeah, I hear that in I'm-a-crazy-nutbag land, the word "placebo" is slander. Sounds like a really shitty place to live.
The most recent evidence is that anyone trying the above would be mobbed fairly quickly.
The most recent evidence is you don't know what the hell you're talking about:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_aircraft_hijackings#2000s
Pure nonsense.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_aircraft_hijackings#2000s
Stop making shit up.
However, after 9-11, just about everyone realizes that your choices are certain death now, or certain death later when we crash the plane into a juicy target.
Idiots like you might think that, but if I see a guy with a bomb strapped to him, and some gung-ho moron like you about to try and tackle him, I'm taking you down before you get us all killed.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_aircraft_hijackings#2000s
Notice how there is NO answer that doesn't involve giving the state money through fines and court fees?
Well, there's "don't go out in public while completely fucking smashed". But, really, I think this is more a case of "don't exaggerate and expect my sympathy" or, at the very least, "learn to exaggerate with more credibility".
If one could use sails such as this to save fuel and build speed perhaps a manned Mars mission might not be out of the question
You'd get more speed by sticking your ass out the window and farting. Either that or you'd need a sail that would be ... well, "friggin 'UGE" makes it sound too small. We're talking hundreds of miles across.
Hey, if placebo works for you, that's great. It would probably be better if you'd go see a therapist and figure out WHY you have a psychosomatic sexual dysfunction in the first place, but pseudoscience is ok in the meantime.
Now, as for your hair-loss problem, I can whip you up a batch of all-natural homeopathic medicine that will amaze you with it's ability to treat the condition*.
*DISCLAIMER: THE PERFORMANCE EXPERIENCED BY THE USER COMMENTS AND TESTIMONIALS ON THIS PAGE AND/OR OUR WEBSITE IS NOT WHAT YOU SHOULD EXPECT TO EXPERIENCE. COMPANY HAS NOT INVESTIGATED OR SUBSTANTIATED ANY OF THE USER COMMENTS OR CLAIMS. SOME OF THE USERS MAY, IN SOME CASES, BEEN INCENTIVIZED TO SUBMIT THEIR COMMENTS, AND COMPANY HAS NOT VERIFIED THE FIGURES QUOTED IN THEM..
No, the choice is to do what they say, live a bit longer, and possibly survive, or die immediately. And if you don't realize that people will gladly take that teeny chance, you're living in a fantasy land.
I know that the popular thing to say these days is "Oh, in the POST-9/11-WORLD ... blah blah blah", but human nature doesn't change. Passengers might be more likely to take small risks these days, but when faced with certain death on one hand and the possibility of survival on the other, most will go with the latter.
Then you sir are an idiot. No offense.
The guy stated his personal preference, and you're calling him an idiot? What kind of twit are you? You know who the real idiots are? Those people who think vanilla ice cream is better than chocolate. Fucking morons.
Yesterday, before the Porn Scan and/or Freedom Fondle, I had approximately a 1 in 25,000,000 chance (Soruce: TFA) of dying in a terrorist attack on the plane.
Today, with the Porn Scan and/or Freedom Fondle, I have an approximate 1 in 25,000,000 chance (Source: TFA) of dying in a terrorist attackon the plane.
So between yesterday and today, I have gained nothing & lost my rights.
Yesterday 97.8% (Soruce: SIC) of statistics were pulled out of your ass.
Today 97.8% (Soruce: SIC) of statistics are pulled out of your ass.
So between yesterday and today, you have learned nothing, and lost all credibility.
Sounds like a fair trade to me. Personally, I'd rather die free than live in fear. But that's me.
Go jump off a building then. The rest of us will live on, gladly ignoring your false dichotomy.