I mean how did they trace him back if he used them to "hide his identity"...
By contacting the owners of the machines he was tunneling through and getting them to watch for the next time he connected. This is why you shouldn't reuse tunnels when doing this kind of thing.
The difference is that security companies will have an agreement about how much they're willing to protect, and insurance policies to cover loses up to that amount. Your contract with them will spell out the maximum amount that they will protect or transport for you, and if it goes missing then your losses will be covered.
AT&T is not a security company and has not agreed to protect your valuables. You can certainly sue them for failing to provide the service which you purchased, but expecting them to pay out millions because you were stupid enough to coopt their service as a shitty "security" method... that's not at all reasonable.
In context, this means precisely one thing: that Mr.
Musk, at the time when he made the said statement, had on himself the full amount needed to buy the stock that could potentially end up for sale (about $80 billion), or that he had a contract for this amount coming from elsewhere.
It means no such thing. His tweet merely implies that he had received an offer for the funding, and was considering it. No part of the tweet implied either that he had the money in his possession, nor that any contract had been signed.
Depends on the specifics, but, for example, the camera could be rigged to automatically transfer footage to the onboard computers in the police car. It's much harder to explain how you lost your cruiser off a cliff.
Sounds like the cameras are working as intended, then.
That is to say, police behave better when the cameras are on, which is why the significant majority of cases are found to support police actions.
Homer: Not a bear in sight. The Bear Patrol must be working like a charm. Lisa: Thatâ(TM)s specious reasoning, Dad. Homer: Thank you, dear. Lisa: By your logic I could claim that this rock keeps tigers away. Homer: Oh, how does it work? Lisa: It doesnâ(TM)t work. Homer: Uh-huh. Lisa: Itâ(TM)s just a stupid rock. Homer: Uh-huh. Lisa: But I donâ(TM)t see any tigers around, do you? [Homer thinks of this, then pulls out some money] Homer: Lisa, I want to buy your rock.
must be considered rationally, without recourse to political advocacy or aligned position.
And yet your entire argument is irrational, motivated by an inherently political desire to blame capitalism for deaths in a war started and encouraged by communists. It also conveniently leaves out the millions who have died in North Korea after the war while their neighbours to the South prospered.
And when we do experiments sending in identical CVs, but for a male/female first name, to job advertisements, and the male named applications overwhelmingly get offered interviews... that the life choices women make too, yeah?
We typically find the opposite; women are MORE likely to be offered a job, rather than less.
That said, when you're in your room, lock your doors. Use the deadbolt, use the little chain, and anything else available.
Hilarious. She did nothing wrong but she should have used the deadbolt.
It's sad that you feel the need to preface good advice in that manner, just so you won't get attacked by femenazis. Nobody would ever say "That guy who went flying through the windshield did nothing wrong. But wear your seat belt."
But I am also a realist who understands that everyone has to sleep sometime, and any one person is easily outnumbered by any other person who has at least one friend.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm sorry, all I heard was "blah blah blah, I'm a dirty whore".
It's not just an Indian thing; it's part of Chinese culture also.
"He also promised an all electric car with a 200+ mile range for under $100,000 which hasn't happened yet!"
- Djinn, 2003
I mean how did they trace him back if he used them to "hide his identity"...
By contacting the owners of the machines he was tunneling through and getting them to watch for the next time he connected. This is why you shouldn't reuse tunnels when doing this kind of thing.
The difference is that security companies will have an agreement about how much they're willing to protect, and insurance policies to cover loses up to that amount. Your contract with them will spell out the maximum amount that they will protect or transport for you, and if it goes missing then your losses will be covered.
AT&T is not a security company and has not agreed to protect your valuables. You can certainly sue them for failing to provide the service which you purchased, but expecting them to pay out millions because you were stupid enough to coopt their service as a shitty "security" method ... that's not at all reasonable.
In context, this means precisely one thing: that Mr.
Musk, at the time when he made the said statement, had on himself the full amount needed to buy the stock that could potentially end up for sale (about $80 billion), or that he had a contract for this amount coming from elsewhere.
It means no such thing. His tweet merely implies that he had received an offer for the funding, and was considering it. No part of the tweet implied either that he had the money in his possession, nor that any contract had been signed.
"He also promised an all electric car with a 200+ mile range which hasn't happened yet!"
- Djinn, 2003
Musk made a fraudulent tweet to manipulate his stock price.
Nice allegation. Be a shame if someone asked you to prove it.
Don't bother responding to the apostrophe Nazi; it just encourages him.
How does WiFi fix that problem?
Depends on the specifics, but, for example, the camera could be rigged to automatically transfer footage to the onboard computers in the police car. It's much harder to explain how you lost your cruiser off a cliff.
You can kill anyone with one swing to the head.
You've obviously never met Pope Ratso.
Sounds like the cameras are working as intended, then.
That is to say, police behave better when the cameras are on, which is why the significant majority of cases are found to support police actions.
Homer: Not a bear in sight. The Bear Patrol must be working like a charm.
Lisa: Thatâ(TM)s specious reasoning, Dad.
Homer: Thank you, dear.
Lisa: By your logic I could claim that this rock keeps tigers away.
Homer: Oh, how does it work?
Lisa: It doesnâ(TM)t work.
Homer: Uh-huh.
Lisa: Itâ(TM)s just a stupid rock.
Homer: Uh-huh.
Lisa: But I donâ(TM)t see any tigers around, do you?
[Homer thinks of this, then pulls out some money]
Homer: Lisa, I want to buy your rock.
The only thing I'm advocating is the downmodding of vacuous morons who spam the comments section with useless links.
Of course. It's much easier to mislead the ignorant with flummery.
Do you really think that spamming the same retarded links over and over is going to change anyone's mind about anything?
There are two anecdotes being discussed here, and I'm capable of keeping them both in my head at once
Apparently not.
must be considered rationally, without recourse to political advocacy or aligned position.
And yet your entire argument is irrational, motivated by an inherently political desire to blame capitalism for deaths in a war started and encouraged by communists. It also conveniently leaves out the millions who have died in North Korea after the war while their neighbours to the South prospered.
That's like saying that in WW2 people didn't die because of Nazism, but because of totalitarianism. Let's not be silly.
What reason do you have for assuming that women are tested at a lower rate than men?
And when we do experiments sending in identical CVs, but for a male/female first name, to job advertisements, and the male named applications overwhelmingly get offered interviews ... that the life choices women make too, yeah?
We typically find the opposite; women are MORE likely to be offered a job, rather than less.
A "management consulting firm" finds exactly the results they wanted to find. Shocking.
Something a little more scientific would be nice. Preferably not written by "womens studies" majors and paid consultants.
1. Nobody except you is talking about "advancing"; you're shooting at strawmen.
2. The anecdote being discussed was the guy who was given a key to a room which was already occupied.
Ms. Stone did nothing wrong
...
That said, when you're in your room, lock your doors. Use the deadbolt, use the little chain, and anything else available.
Hilarious. She did nothing wrong but she should have used the deadbolt.
It's sad that you feel the need to preface good advice in that manner, just so you won't get attacked by femenazis. Nobody would ever say "That guy who went flying through the windshield did nothing wrong. But wear your seat belt."
Don't be a retard.
https://www.kellysonline.ca/pr...
But I am also a realist who understands that everyone has to sleep sometime, and any one person is easily outnumbered by any other person who has at least one friend.
That's why god made claymore mines.