leekohler
May 5, 09:27 PM
Dude. I haven't once suggested banning guns.
These days I'd be satisfied with a hint of awareness.
I was under the impression you had. Here you gave me that impression:
It's impossible to enforce a gun ban when all you have to do is drive to the next town to buy them.
If we were to implement restrictions it would have to be nation-wide, or else it would be too easily thwarted.
Fair enough. It took your statement as referring to bans.
Frankly awareness, or more specifically education, is the only solution. Gun owners need more education, particularly those who arm themselves for home defense or concealed carry. If citizens are expected to demonstrate proficiency in driving a car before being allowed on the road - and further proficiency for special kinds of driving (such as racing licenses, commercial licenses, limousine drivers, police driving training etc etc), then gun owners should get considerably more training in self-defense with firearms. Most hunters agree that mandatory hunter-safety classes are a good idea. If that is the case, self-defense training is even more necessary.
Furthermore, the public at large needs to be more educated about laws, regulations and firearms themselves. Fear of firearms can be healthy. Willfull ignorance towards them, not so much.
Exactly. I have never understood why my more liberal friends want to ban anything. Education is the key to solving the vast majority of our problems, not ignorance or fear. I grew up around guns all my life and had fun with them. I also loved archery.
After starting to play hockey and having skydived for three years, the one thing I've finally learned that is the most helpful thing in life is this- do things that scare you. Learn about them. You'll be better off, and you'll grow immensely as a person. Those things will also bring incredible people into your life.
Go to a firing range and learn about guns, citizenzen- even if it scares and repulses you. Trust me, you'll be all the better for it, and you might learn something about yourself you never knew was there. After all, knowledge is power.
These days I'd be satisfied with a hint of awareness.
I was under the impression you had. Here you gave me that impression:
It's impossible to enforce a gun ban when all you have to do is drive to the next town to buy them.
If we were to implement restrictions it would have to be nation-wide, or else it would be too easily thwarted.
Fair enough. It took your statement as referring to bans.
Frankly awareness, or more specifically education, is the only solution. Gun owners need more education, particularly those who arm themselves for home defense or concealed carry. If citizens are expected to demonstrate proficiency in driving a car before being allowed on the road - and further proficiency for special kinds of driving (such as racing licenses, commercial licenses, limousine drivers, police driving training etc etc), then gun owners should get considerably more training in self-defense with firearms. Most hunters agree that mandatory hunter-safety classes are a good idea. If that is the case, self-defense training is even more necessary.
Furthermore, the public at large needs to be more educated about laws, regulations and firearms themselves. Fear of firearms can be healthy. Willfull ignorance towards them, not so much.
Exactly. I have never understood why my more liberal friends want to ban anything. Education is the key to solving the vast majority of our problems, not ignorance or fear. I grew up around guns all my life and had fun with them. I also loved archery.
After starting to play hockey and having skydived for three years, the one thing I've finally learned that is the most helpful thing in life is this- do things that scare you. Learn about them. You'll be better off, and you'll grow immensely as a person. Those things will also bring incredible people into your life.
Go to a firing range and learn about guns, citizenzen- even if it scares and repulses you. Trust me, you'll be all the better for it, and you might learn something about yourself you never knew was there. After all, knowledge is power.
twoodcc
Apr 3, 11:51 PM
Glad you are back home and getting going again! Yes it seems we should get our numbers up again :)
Thanks! I don't have things exactly like i want, but i will soon. It just may take a week or so
Thanks! I don't have things exactly like i want, but i will soon. It just may take a week or so
Appel
Apr 29, 04:19 PM
Holy ****. Ical looks so f gross.
macenforcer
Nov 24, 05:06 PM
Ohh free junk! I only assume that based upon the free stuff I received when I purchased form them in the past. I have also dealt with that company before, and never again! BTW, their price is not immediate, their discount is in the form of a rebate. :rolleyes:
Tax? Not really an issue for me, I am registered under a non profit org (have been for 3 years now), so because of this I am able to write it off. I just didn't have my paperwork with for me to get the Macbook Tax free today, so I get a $62 rebate from the government in a couple months. ;) .
So in the end, I saved a $1 over the option you brought up, got it today, and I don't have useless junk to deal with on top of it :) .
That is the only thing that interests me from their offer!
Whatever makes you feel better about it. :D
There is one positive to buying from the apple store. If the screen is bad or if you have a problem you can take it back and swap it for a new one.
Tax? Not really an issue for me, I am registered under a non profit org (have been for 3 years now), so because of this I am able to write it off. I just didn't have my paperwork with for me to get the Macbook Tax free today, so I get a $62 rebate from the government in a couple months. ;) .
So in the end, I saved a $1 over the option you brought up, got it today, and I don't have useless junk to deal with on top of it :) .
That is the only thing that interests me from their offer!
Whatever makes you feel better about it. :D
There is one positive to buying from the apple store. If the screen is bad or if you have a problem you can take it back and swap it for a new one.
more...
Surely
Apr 21, 11:18 AM
Who were those two bastards who voted down rdowns' post?
:D
The counter is crap anyway. It goes from -1 to +1 without a 0. And it seems completely random.
My guess is that others have voted while you had already loaded the page, and then when you voted, it updated all votes.
:D
The counter is crap anyway. It goes from -1 to +1 without a 0. And it seems completely random.
My guess is that others have voted while you had already loaded the page, and then when you voted, it updated all votes.
Full of Fail
May 3, 04:14 PM
I'd still argue that communism isn't really open because it's a top down government, but in theory it is more open than it is in reality.
In Texas, people are so ignorant about different forms of government, I forget that other people are more educated.
I am still referring to pure communism, with no top down government. You are referring to the Leninist theory that has become what we commonly think of communism as, which has a vanguard party lead the proletariat. Unfortunately this is not the right thread to continue this discussion.
Back on topic... the bottom line is, does it suck to be charged twice for data? Yes, it does. Is it legal? Yes, you agreed to it, and if you were in the carriers shoes, you would do the same. As cited previously, it does make economic sense as the price for all of us would go up if they allowed it at no additional cost. Are you stealing when you circumvent paying? Yes, and whether or not that matters is up to you.
In Texas, people are so ignorant about different forms of government, I forget that other people are more educated.
I am still referring to pure communism, with no top down government. You are referring to the Leninist theory that has become what we commonly think of communism as, which has a vanguard party lead the proletariat. Unfortunately this is not the right thread to continue this discussion.
Back on topic... the bottom line is, does it suck to be charged twice for data? Yes, it does. Is it legal? Yes, you agreed to it, and if you were in the carriers shoes, you would do the same. As cited previously, it does make economic sense as the price for all of us would go up if they allowed it at no additional cost. Are you stealing when you circumvent paying? Yes, and whether or not that matters is up to you.
more...
COSWORTH
Mar 17, 09:01 AM
what exactly is this Karma everyone speaks of? Who brings down the karma, good or bad? Is there a Karma Fairy? Karma Bunny? Karma Leprechaun?
SynPiekarza
Mar 28, 02:28 PM
I do not think this is a bad move. I mean, Apple seems to believe (and so do I) that App Store will eventually be the best way to distribute apps for developers and to buy/get them for consumers. All they need to do now is get it up to speed. So they force developers to submit their apps to the App Store.
About "App Store only apps on Mac OS X", hmm.. I don't think Apple will make the same mistake twice. They once fell back because of lack of software for their system. They will be forced to have App Store rules flexible enough so that users can easily find all sufficient apps there. If they can't install them, they will switch platforms. If they do, Apple loses.
Either way, the user kind of wins so I wouldn't worry too much about it ;)
About "App Store only apps on Mac OS X", hmm.. I don't think Apple will make the same mistake twice. They once fell back because of lack of software for their system. They will be forced to have App Store rules flexible enough so that users can easily find all sufficient apps there. If they can't install them, they will switch platforms. If they do, Apple loses.
Either way, the user kind of wins so I wouldn't worry too much about it ;)
more...
MacinDoc
Nov 23, 11:56 PM
Apple Canada online store is down for updates now...
edit: Scott beat me to it.
edit: Scott beat me to it.
Mitthrawnuruodo
Aug 1, 10:41 AM
How can a Norwegian law affect Denmark like this?:confused:Gjennom EØS (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Economic_Area)-avtalen... :(
more...
SmileyBlast!
Apr 29, 03:12 PM
Nope.
That iCal is kinda annoying.
That iCal is kinda annoying.
Dreamo84
Mar 19, 12:02 AM
I just got my iPhone 4 on Verizon, and I mentioned it to a guy at work. Just you know, I was excited mentioned I got it. First thing he says "iPhone sucks, Droid is way better."
People are idiots, I could have been happy with a Droid but I made my choice. I dont know why people gotta take it so personal.
People are idiots, I could have been happy with a Droid but I made my choice. I dont know why people gotta take it so personal.
more...
benjayman2
Apr 9, 09:07 PM
thanks
how do you change the weather location .. ive looked everywhere ..
when i click on the actual weather on the lockscreen all i have is maryland and greece ?
http://typoclock.gmtaz.com/
I would just download the 99c app if you don't want to deal with modifying the file in the root folder. Then you're good to go.
how do you change the weather location .. ive looked everywhere ..
when i click on the actual weather on the lockscreen all i have is maryland and greece ?
http://typoclock.gmtaz.com/
I would just download the 99c app if you don't want to deal with modifying the file in the root folder. Then you're good to go.
eggstone
Nov 24, 02:57 PM
Also free Parallels!
It is a shame that apple do not let you combine the thanksgiving discount and education discount together :(
Yeah you should. You could have gotten it cheaper from Macconnection. No tax, free shipping, free carrying case, free mouse and $100 off. Hmmm :rolleyes:
It is a shame that apple do not let you combine the thanksgiving discount and education discount together :(
Yeah you should. You could have gotten it cheaper from Macconnection. No tax, free shipping, free carrying case, free mouse and $100 off. Hmmm :rolleyes:
more...
NebulaClash
Apr 29, 02:07 PM
In another sense, the direction of the consumer PC/tablet/etc. will be where Apple takes it. They can play off of their successes with the iPad and iPhone and use that to shift the market to devices where Apple has a substantial amount of IP, experience, and expertise. It's one thing to be an alternative, as opposed to a shift where everything else becomes a (less desirable) alternative. That's where Apple is trying to go. Obviously not everyone agrees, but they have thus far made substantial inroads. Apple is increasingly a consumer-focussed company, so the utility of an interface in OS X, for instance, may suffer in it's usability for the "power user." It's hard to say though how much compromise will be made, as the dramatic changes in Final Cut Pro's upcoming release indicate a continued commitment to at least one sub-group of power users.
Yes, and given how much copying is going on with other companies, I'd say Apple is being quite successful in getting their gestures to become a standard. Pinch to zoom is now almost universal.
I have to laugh at the people worried that one day Apple will cut off software access in OS X. Apple said they won't do that. That would be bad for business. It makes no sense.
Yes, and given how much copying is going on with other companies, I'd say Apple is being quite successful in getting their gestures to become a standard. Pinch to zoom is now almost universal.
I have to laugh at the people worried that one day Apple will cut off software access in OS X. Apple said they won't do that. That would be bad for business. It makes no sense.
hob
Jan 9, 01:20 PM
The wait is actually killing me. This is the first time I've not followed on MR Live!
I bet they're getting a gazillion hits on that MWSF '07 site...
I'm giving them till 20.00GMT then I'm just gonna spoil the surprise...
I bet they're getting a gazillion hits on that MWSF '07 site...
I'm giving them till 20.00GMT then I'm just gonna spoil the surprise...
more...
3N16MA
Apr 5, 04:27 PM
Celebration of advertising? Seriously?
minnesotamacman
Oct 18, 05:47 PM
It has been said here already, but Apple is smart to back both. I have a feeliing that HD DVD is going to win out in the end. Sure Sony is going to Blu Ray everyone, but not many people over 30 are going to get a PS3...
Abstract
Sep 7, 07:35 PM
George Bush doesn't care about black people, but STEVE DOES!
*Kanye hugs Steve*
Take a photo.
Print the advert.
Done.
*Kanye hugs Steve*
Take a photo.
Print the advert.
Done.
snberk103
Apr 15, 08:03 PM
Well actually we know the TSA methods don't work because both of the incidents were from European airports that mirror what the TSA does. Added to the number of weapons that make it through TSA checkpoints, it's easy to see that the TSA does in fact not work to the extent that it is expected to.
All we know is that increased security screening is not perfect. Perhaps you can extrapolate the European experience (in this case) to the TSA... but that's as far as you can go.
I understood your rather simplistic attempt at game theory just fine. The problem remains that one side is not a rational actor. The command portion of terrorists have virtually nothing to lose with a botched attempt, and neither does the fanatic patsy. A 50/50 ratio isn't good enough for our security because the downside for both command and patsy are much smaller than the upside (from their perspective). The chances of failure need to be much higher in order to effectively deter terrorists.
Do you always start with the insulting tone (see bolding) when the debate isn't going your way? I would argue that both sides are rational actors, though both sides may also employ non-rational players. The higher echelons of terrorist organizations have shown themselves to very worried about being captured by the fact that they are so hard to catch. If they didn't care, they wouldn't be going to a great deal of trouble to avoid it. Therefore, to my mind, they are rational actors. That 50/50 number is one that I threw into the argument as an "for argument's sake". Please don't rely on it for anything factual. The TSA in fact catches more than 50% of their training/testing planted weapons. And yes, I think even if the the number was as low as 50/50 a rational actor would do everything... oh heck... I've already written all that - you've not presented anything else of substance in it's place, so I'll just save my typing finger....
Sacrificing these things is appropriate when there is a tangible gain. There hasn't been much of a tangible gain with TSA, and this is coming from the head of Israeli Security. We're paying a lot and getting almost nothing in return. Every year there's a new "standard" put out there to make it seem like TSA is doing something, but time and again security experts have lambasted TSA and its efforts as a dog and pony show.
Your own opinion of flying should be an example of how ridiculous things have gotten. If people now become disgruntled and irritated every time they fly, for perhaps marginal gains in security, then our methods have failed.
That's the funny thing. I've never actually said that the TSA is the best thing around. All I've said is that the TSA is doing something. That's all - that the TSA is doing something right. Not everything. Just something. Go back and look it up. Even the head of the Israeli security never said they were useless (as in doing nothing right). Just that it wasn't the best use of resources. Oh, and if you know Israelis (and I do), then you'll also know that there is another Israeli who knows just as much as that first fellow, and she thinks the TSA is doing things just fine.
It is difficult to prove, but you can make an educated guess about what the cause is. Other than the correlational evidence, there is no other good data to suggest that TSA has actually been effective. In no field is correlation enough to establish anything but correlation.
That's the problem with 90% of the decisions Governments make. All they have is correlational connections. Or incomplete causal relationships. Or... basically the best they can do is make an educated guess, and hope for the best.
No, that's not how it works. If you want to assert your idea as correct, the burden is on you to show that it is correct. I am going to try to poke holes in your reasoning, and it's up to you to show that my criticisms are invalid on the bases of logic and evidence.
No, on two counts. 1) You asserted "Our attempts at security are at best as good as Lisa's rock...". I countered your assertion by saying that the TSA must be doing something right, and used the stats on hijackings. I (to paraphrase you) "poked hole in your reasoning". You've presented nothing that counters my evidence, except to try mocking it as simplistic. If it is, then show how it is.... If my argument doesn't convince you. Then say so, and then leave it at that. I have my opinion, you have yours. But if you want me to change my opinion you had better do better. 2) I've forgotten - cr*p.
So far you've only cited correlation, which is not sufficient evidence for causation. You ignored my criticism based on military intervention, changing travel patterns, etc, and only want to trumpet your belief that correlation is enough. It's not. If you don't want to do more on Mac Rumors, then don't post anymore on this topic concerning this line of discussion.
You are right correlations don't show causation. But they are evidence for it. If you have evidence that shows otherwise, present it.
All we know is that increased security screening is not perfect. Perhaps you can extrapolate the European experience (in this case) to the TSA... but that's as far as you can go.
I understood your rather simplistic attempt at game theory just fine. The problem remains that one side is not a rational actor. The command portion of terrorists have virtually nothing to lose with a botched attempt, and neither does the fanatic patsy. A 50/50 ratio isn't good enough for our security because the downside for both command and patsy are much smaller than the upside (from their perspective). The chances of failure need to be much higher in order to effectively deter terrorists.
Do you always start with the insulting tone (see bolding) when the debate isn't going your way? I would argue that both sides are rational actors, though both sides may also employ non-rational players. The higher echelons of terrorist organizations have shown themselves to very worried about being captured by the fact that they are so hard to catch. If they didn't care, they wouldn't be going to a great deal of trouble to avoid it. Therefore, to my mind, they are rational actors. That 50/50 number is one that I threw into the argument as an "for argument's sake". Please don't rely on it for anything factual. The TSA in fact catches more than 50% of their training/testing planted weapons. And yes, I think even if the the number was as low as 50/50 a rational actor would do everything... oh heck... I've already written all that - you've not presented anything else of substance in it's place, so I'll just save my typing finger....
Sacrificing these things is appropriate when there is a tangible gain. There hasn't been much of a tangible gain with TSA, and this is coming from the head of Israeli Security. We're paying a lot and getting almost nothing in return. Every year there's a new "standard" put out there to make it seem like TSA is doing something, but time and again security experts have lambasted TSA and its efforts as a dog and pony show.
Your own opinion of flying should be an example of how ridiculous things have gotten. If people now become disgruntled and irritated every time they fly, for perhaps marginal gains in security, then our methods have failed.
That's the funny thing. I've never actually said that the TSA is the best thing around. All I've said is that the TSA is doing something. That's all - that the TSA is doing something right. Not everything. Just something. Go back and look it up. Even the head of the Israeli security never said they were useless (as in doing nothing right). Just that it wasn't the best use of resources. Oh, and if you know Israelis (and I do), then you'll also know that there is another Israeli who knows just as much as that first fellow, and she thinks the TSA is doing things just fine.
It is difficult to prove, but you can make an educated guess about what the cause is. Other than the correlational evidence, there is no other good data to suggest that TSA has actually been effective. In no field is correlation enough to establish anything but correlation.
That's the problem with 90% of the decisions Governments make. All they have is correlational connections. Or incomplete causal relationships. Or... basically the best they can do is make an educated guess, and hope for the best.
No, that's not how it works. If you want to assert your idea as correct, the burden is on you to show that it is correct. I am going to try to poke holes in your reasoning, and it's up to you to show that my criticisms are invalid on the bases of logic and evidence.
No, on two counts. 1) You asserted "Our attempts at security are at best as good as Lisa's rock...". I countered your assertion by saying that the TSA must be doing something right, and used the stats on hijackings. I (to paraphrase you) "poked hole in your reasoning". You've presented nothing that counters my evidence, except to try mocking it as simplistic. If it is, then show how it is.... If my argument doesn't convince you. Then say so, and then leave it at that. I have my opinion, you have yours. But if you want me to change my opinion you had better do better. 2) I've forgotten - cr*p.
So far you've only cited correlation, which is not sufficient evidence for causation. You ignored my criticism based on military intervention, changing travel patterns, etc, and only want to trumpet your belief that correlation is enough. It's not. If you don't want to do more on Mac Rumors, then don't post anymore on this topic concerning this line of discussion.
You are right correlations don't show causation. But they are evidence for it. If you have evidence that shows otherwise, present it.
Frosties
Jul 21, 12:22 PM
don't complain about the iPhone 4 unless YOU ACTUALLY HAVE AN iPHONE 4! Secondly, don't complain cuz you can make your bars disappear on your iPhone 4 unless you've EXPERIENCED PROBLEMS DURING NORMAL USE. Yes i can make my phone drop bars. Yes Apple screwed up some with the design or at least by giving everyone an "X" marks the spot.
It's the typical internet forum user review problem. Any product be it a TV, stereo, vacuum cleaner or now a phone get more positive feedback than it is entitled to because the customer is satisfied and want the product to be perfect. That is why a user review often is "it's the best "named product category" I have ever had!
Reviews are for prospective customers, that is why they exists! Naturally a potential customer wishes a product that he is interested in to be fixed if it has problems and faults as you yourself in the post above claims. Why sweep it under the rug?
It's the typical internet forum user review problem. Any product be it a TV, stereo, vacuum cleaner or now a phone get more positive feedback than it is entitled to because the customer is satisfied and want the product to be perfect. That is why a user review often is "it's the best "named product category" I have ever had!
Reviews are for prospective customers, that is why they exists! Naturally a potential customer wishes a product that he is interested in to be fixed if it has problems and faults as you yourself in the post above claims. Why sweep it under the rug?
davepoint
Aug 14, 01:29 PM
the world sucks
cult hero
Mar 24, 05:56 PM
Hmmm... it occurs to me that OS X is an Aries too. That's a good sign!
Willis
Dec 13, 05:51 PM
need more than a grain of salt for this. These rumours come and go all the time. I doubt it will happen. In the summer? yes, but not now
No comments:
Post a Comment