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?
AP_piano295
Apr 25, 03:35 PM
You expect employees who make minimum wage to break up a fight? They should call the cops, but for sure not break up a fight.
Your damn right I do, I've kicked people out of stores before for being rude to employees, shouting at each other, behaving inappropriately and refusing to respond to reasonable requests.
If people started fighting in my place of work i would absolutely get involved, probably starting with dumping a bucket of mop water over them.
I've broke up a fight between 14 and 15 years old siblings while I was teaching a ski lesson. And I wouldn't have hesitated if it had been two 20 year olds.
When did we become so bloody apathetic and wimpy that were afraid of breaking up a fight between a group of girls. As far as I'm concerned I could give a damn about trans gender or not.
If you work somewhere you have a position of authority and that makes it your job to protect all people in your store, sack up and diffuse the situation.
Your damn right I do, I've kicked people out of stores before for being rude to employees, shouting at each other, behaving inappropriately and refusing to respond to reasonable requests.
If people started fighting in my place of work i would absolutely get involved, probably starting with dumping a bucket of mop water over them.
I've broke up a fight between 14 and 15 years old siblings while I was teaching a ski lesson. And I wouldn't have hesitated if it had been two 20 year olds.
When did we become so bloody apathetic and wimpy that were afraid of breaking up a fight between a group of girls. As far as I'm concerned I could give a damn about trans gender or not.
If you work somewhere you have a position of authority and that makes it your job to protect all people in your store, sack up and diffuse the situation.
the Rebel
May 4, 12:14 AM
FYI, I just looked up the US Department of Transportation statistics.
Trucks outnumber cars in some states, but cars outnumber trucks in other states. Overall they say that passenger vehicles in the United States are 58% cars and 42% trucks, but the total number of trucks continues to increase whereas the total number of cars has actually decreased slightly.
Trucks outnumber cars in some states, but cars outnumber trucks in other states. Overall they say that passenger vehicles in the United States are 58% cars and 42% trucks, but the total number of trucks continues to increase whereas the total number of cars has actually decreased slightly.
lordonuthin
May 16, 02:04 PM
Thought I would post here instead of starting a new thread. How do I get bonus points, all I am reading is -advmethods and setting up a passkey. Would it be worth it on a i7 720qm at 1.66ghz? Would it complete a wu in 4 days?
This passkey sounds like a big deal should I be using it on all me machines?
With the console client for windows, is there a way I can close the window with out it stopping folding, kind of pointless having the window constantly open. Surely it can fold in the background?
Thanks guys :)
On an i7 720 you won't get bigadv units done in time to get bonus points also I have an i7 980x that hasn't gotten any bigadv units even though I have it set up to get them. I suspect some recent changes on the server end are allowing only certain cpu's to get bigadv units and i7's probably aren't getting them. as far as the passkey I'm not sure it makes any difference for someone like you, I don't think there are any other wu's that get a bonus...
You can minimize the window and it will keep folding...
This passkey sounds like a big deal should I be using it on all me machines?
With the console client for windows, is there a way I can close the window with out it stopping folding, kind of pointless having the window constantly open. Surely it can fold in the background?
Thanks guys :)
On an i7 720 you won't get bigadv units done in time to get bonus points also I have an i7 980x that hasn't gotten any bigadv units even though I have it set up to get them. I suspect some recent changes on the server end are allowing only certain cpu's to get bigadv units and i7's probably aren't getting them. as far as the passkey I'm not sure it makes any difference for someone like you, I don't think there are any other wu's that get a bonus...
You can minimize the window and it will keep folding...
more...
ChazUK
Apr 22, 08:41 AM
The biggest problem with Windows is Microsoft doesn't design Windows for consumers. The biggest chunk of their cash-cow comes from the enterprise. And the Windows desktop platform reflects that.
An excellent post but you may be overlooking the fact that the more Microsoft bundle in with the OS, the more competitors will complain in a similar vein to the netscape/IE days.
I bet that Microsoft would love to include more with the OS but the easiest way they can do so is to add it as a completely optional download but still giving the competition a look in and aleviating any cries of monopoly tactics.
It is astounding the amount of my Windows using friends that don't know what Microsoft have on offer as extras. I think they offer some great additional software for their customers. Still, its refreshing to see someone with valid points and good knowledge of what MS have to offer! :)
An excellent post but you may be overlooking the fact that the more Microsoft bundle in with the OS, the more competitors will complain in a similar vein to the netscape/IE days.
I bet that Microsoft would love to include more with the OS but the easiest way they can do so is to add it as a completely optional download but still giving the competition a look in and aleviating any cries of monopoly tactics.
It is astounding the amount of my Windows using friends that don't know what Microsoft have on offer as extras. I think they offer some great additional software for their customers. Still, its refreshing to see someone with valid points and good knowledge of what MS have to offer! :)
tdhurst
Jan 10, 05:10 PM
Wow...and the world wonders why the tech blogger crowd is having a hard time being taken seriously as journalists.
more...
Nekbeth
Apr 26, 07:04 PM
Easy fellows.. :) .. those are not pointers ... they have "//" to indicate it's a comment.(you should both know this) I usually use ** as comments. It's an obvious miss understanding. They are just there to indicate you that Timer1 is the 1st Timer, ITS NOT PART OF THE CODE.
I lack fundamentals, but not that much.. so hold your horses. dejo, please stay out of it, go to check some Pro Forums and cut some slack, what I don't like to hear is people trying to discourage new developers to stay off real code cause they miss a fundamental.
wlh99, I'll step back when ever I want to, this is a public Forum and people are here to discuss and learn new stuff.
Any way.. if you guys can't help me, just go to another thread.
I lack fundamentals, but not that much.. so hold your horses. dejo, please stay out of it, go to check some Pro Forums and cut some slack, what I don't like to hear is people trying to discourage new developers to stay off real code cause they miss a fundamental.
wlh99, I'll step back when ever I want to, this is a public Forum and people are here to discuss and learn new stuff.
Any way.. if you guys can't help me, just go to another thread.
applemacdude
Jan 12, 06:56 PM
He didn't do it by himself. There was a whole company working on things. The difference is that he had a vision of what should be happening.
It took smart people in all areas to make Apple what it is today.
What about all the former Apple CEO's. They had a company behind him too, but he simply could not lead like Jobs can.
It took smart people in all areas to make Apple what it is today.
What about all the former Apple CEO's. They had a company behind him too, but he simply could not lead like Jobs can.
more...
darh
Sep 12, 08:14 AM
and...i've found this http://www.apple.com/movies
old news:p
old news:p
balamw
Oct 3, 12:14 AM
charcoal gray.
That was my point, until it's thoroughly tested in court (or repealed or modified) it remains up to interpretation, which makes most encryption/DRM reverse engineering related work in the US (somewhat) risky business.
DVD Jon may have found a way around this in that he's not currently trying to circumvent the access control, he appears to be trying to apply a compatible access control to files that would not otherwise have one.
B
That was my point, until it's thoroughly tested in court (or repealed or modified) it remains up to interpretation, which makes most encryption/DRM reverse engineering related work in the US (somewhat) risky business.
DVD Jon may have found a way around this in that he's not currently trying to circumvent the access control, he appears to be trying to apply a compatible access control to files that would not otherwise have one.
B
more...
Al Coholic
Mar 28, 02:46 PM
The people have already voted...
It's called the "Top Grossing" category.
It's called the "Top Grossing" category.
phineas
Oct 7, 09:04 AM
Surprised this hasn't been noted here yet...
USAToday interviewed (http://www.usatoday.com/tech/wireless/2009-10-06-verizon-google-android_N.htm)the Verizon Wireless CEO about their new Android partnership, and got an extra comment:
Real, or just pushing ATT's buttons so they have to pay Apple more? Who knows.
Hopefully its real, and Apple does bring the iPhone over too Verizon.
USAToday interviewed (http://www.usatoday.com/tech/wireless/2009-10-06-verizon-google-android_N.htm)the Verizon Wireless CEO about their new Android partnership, and got an extra comment:
Real, or just pushing ATT's buttons so they have to pay Apple more? Who knows.
Hopefully its real, and Apple does bring the iPhone over too Verizon.
more...
someguy
Jul 24, 09:39 AM
<--micropod image-->
Absolutely hilarious! Thanks for the laugh!
Absolutely hilarious! Thanks for the laugh!
PghLondon
Apr 30, 08:25 AM
All you've shown me is you are as utterly clueless as they come. :cool:
Software and computer engineering have zero to do with anything I said, BTW. The business angle of combining iOS with OSX proper is subjective to say the least since we have not seen a market reaction to it yet. In other words, I don't know what you've been smoking, but where can I get some? :p
The fact that you say they have "zero to do with anything I said" shows just how little you understand. You really think that locking down an OS has nothing to do with software or computer engineering? I can't even begin to come up with a response, as your level of shared knowledge is just too low.
Software and computer engineering have zero to do with anything I said, BTW. The business angle of combining iOS with OSX proper is subjective to say the least since we have not seen a market reaction to it yet. In other words, I don't know what you've been smoking, but where can I get some? :p
The fact that you say they have "zero to do with anything I said" shows just how little you understand. You really think that locking down an OS has nothing to do with software or computer engineering? I can't even begin to come up with a response, as your level of shared knowledge is just too low.
more...
Cagle
Apr 5, 03:22 PM
Am I the only one not finding this on the App Store?
no, but you're the only one looking...
no, but you're the only one looking...
iJawn108
Oct 3, 05:20 PM
Steve Jobs.... retiring?:eek:
I would honestly cry. And that makes me sound pathetic.
I don't think that will happen yet... but it sometime in the near future. :(
I would honestly cry. And that makes me sound pathetic.
I don't think that will happen yet... but it sometime in the near future. :(
more...
Rt&Dzine
Apr 22, 09:49 AM
+1 I'm all for it!
teach our kids why rome fell etc.
Christianity?
teach our kids why rome fell etc.
Christianity?
slffl
Jan 5, 04:35 PM
This is a great idea for those that would like this option. MR rocks as always!
Me though, I prefer the frequent frantic checks to the site as I try to get all my 'real work' done at the office.
One year everyone was going out to lunch and I lied and said I had too much work to do...just so I could eat at my desk and get all the late-breaking news. My co-workers would think I was weird if I said why I really wasn't going...
Yes, I'm a geek. :p
LOL, so I'm not the only one. Every apple event I get a nice latte and bagel sandwich and eat at my desk too. Macworld has replaced christmas for me :)
Me though, I prefer the frequent frantic checks to the site as I try to get all my 'real work' done at the office.
One year everyone was going out to lunch and I lied and said I had too much work to do...just so I could eat at my desk and get all the late-breaking news. My co-workers would think I was weird if I said why I really wasn't going...
Yes, I'm a geek. :p
LOL, so I'm not the only one. Every apple event I get a nice latte and bagel sandwich and eat at my desk too. Macworld has replaced christmas for me :)
tvguru
Sep 25, 11:41 AM
Rev. B Intel but Rev. A Core 2 Duo
Confusing isn't it?
Potato, Potahto. :D
Confusing isn't it?
Potato, Potahto. :D
alexryans
Apr 29, 07:28 PM
Anyone else having trouble getting the new update on a 2011 MBP?
I've tried twice to install and on reboot, my MBP hangs on the spinning progress indicator. Doesn't make any difference whether I boot in normal mode or safe mode, it just hangs.
Only way to get back to a normal service is to completely reinstall the OS, but not upgrade to the new version.
Anyone else had this problem?
I've tried twice to install and on reboot, my MBP hangs on the spinning progress indicator. Doesn't make any difference whether I boot in normal mode or safe mode, it just hangs.
Only way to get back to a normal service is to completely reinstall the OS, but not upgrade to the new version.
Anyone else had this problem?
Branskins
Apr 29, 05:04 PM
To stay ahead of the 6 in 10.6. When the XBOX 2 was released, the rumor was that it was called the 360, as to put it on equal naming as the Playstation 3. Microsoft did not want to be '2' and them '3', so they added a number that started with 3.
And at the time the Wii was known as the Revolution, which is 360 degrees. So they tackled the PS3 with the 3, and the "Revolution" with 360. Kind of funny.
Anyways, I really hope they bring back the sliders. They are/were one of my favorite parts of Lion! It was funny to press a button while holding shift to see it move very slllllooooowwwwllly!
And at the time the Wii was known as the Revolution, which is 360 degrees. So they tackled the PS3 with the 3, and the "Revolution" with 360. Kind of funny.
Anyways, I really hope they bring back the sliders. They are/were one of my favorite parts of Lion! It was funny to press a button while holding shift to see it move very slllllooooowwwwllly!
tristangage
Apr 21, 02:35 PM
I still think the "thanks" system like at RedFlagDeals.com is a better representation of what a good "point" system looks like. Certain people are very helpful in answering other people's questions or providing useful information. When someone answers your question or provides a technical explanation (or even a snappy comeback or an informed opinion) that people find insightful, they can "thank" the user for the post. Everyone who sees the post then can quickly see that this post has been helpful to others ("6 people thanked Mad Mac Maniac for this post"). And the cumulative total stays with the user, so you can also see at a quick glance that this user has a reputation for being helpful ("Mad Mac Maniac has been thanked 4,134 times.")
I prefer this idea too. I would rate your post positively if it hadn't been disabled :p
I prefer this idea too. I would rate your post positively if it hadn't been disabled :p
JAT
May 2, 11:20 PM
Wow, I finally got a reply! Didn't expect that, I appreciate it. ;)
Sure. That was one of few worthwhile posts in this thread. I just hope this update actually helps. I've been trying to analyze it myself. It seems like 4.2.7 is worse than 4.2.6 for battery life, but not positive.
Sure. That was one of few worthwhile posts in this thread. I just hope this update actually helps. I've been trying to analyze it myself. It seems like 4.2.7 is worse than 4.2.6 for battery life, but not positive.
snberk103
Apr 15, 12:29 PM
While this is true, we can't allow that technicality to wipe the slate clean. Our security as a whole is deficient, even if the TSA on its own might not be responsible for these two particular failures. Our tax dollars are still going to the our mutual safety so we should expect more.
As I said, I understood the point you were trying to make. But.... you can't take two non-TSA incidents and use those to make a case against the TSA specifically. All you can do is say that increased security, similar to what the TSA does, can be shown to not catch everything. I could just as easily argue that because the two incidents (shoe and underwear bombers) did not occur from TSA screenings then that is proof the TSA methods work. I could, but I won't because we don't really know that is true. Too small a sample to judge.
Well when a fanatic is willing to commit suicide because he believes that he'll be rewarded in heaven, 50/50 odds don't seem to be all that much of a deterrent.
Did you not read my post above? Or did you not understand it? Or did I not write clearly? I'll assume the 3rd. Past history is that bombs are not put on planes by lone wolf fanatics. They are placed there by a whole operation involving a number of people... perhaps a dozen, maybe? The person carrying the bomb may be a brainwashed fool (though, surprisingly - often educated) - but the support team likely aren't fools. The team includes dedicated individuals who have specialized training and experience that are needed to mount further operations. The bomb makers, the money people, the people who nurture the bomb carrier and ensure that they are fit (mentally) to go through with a suicide attack. These people, the support crew, are not going to like 50/50 odds. Nor, are the support teams command and control. The security forces have shown themselves to be quite good at eventually following the linkages back up the chain.
What's worse is that we've only achieved that with a lot of our personal dignity, time, and money. I don't think we can tolerate much more. We should be expecting more for the time, money, and humiliation we're putting ourselves (and our 6 year-old children) through.
You are right. There has been a cost to dignity, time and money. Most of life is. People are constantly balancing personal and societal security/safety against personal freedoms. In this case what you think is only part of the balance between society and security. You feel it's too far. I can't argue. I don't fly anymore unless I have to. But, I also think that what the TSA (and CATSA, & the European equivalents) are doing is working. I just don't have to like going through it.
....
Your statistics don't unequivocally prove the efficacy of the TSA though. They only show that the TSA employs a cost-benefit method to determine what measures to take.
Give the man/woman/boy a cigar! There is no way to prove it, other than setting controlled experiments in which make some airports security free, and others with varying levels of security. And in some cases you don't tell the travelling public which airports have what level (if any) of security - but you do tell the bad guys/gals.
In other words, in this world... all you've got is incomplete data to try and make a reasonable decisions based on a cost/benefit analysis.
Since you believe in the efficacy of the TSA so much, the burden is yours to make a clear and convincing case, not mine. I can provide alternative hypotheses, but I am in no way saying that these are provable at the current moment in time.
I did. I cited a sharp drop-off in hijackings at a particular moment in history. Within the limits of a Mac Rumours Forum, that is as far as I'm going to go. If you an alternative hypothesis, you have to at least back it up with something. My something trumps your alternative hypothesis - even if my something is merely a pair of deuces - until you provide something to back up your AH.
I'm only saying that they are rational objections to your theory.
Objections with nothing to support them.
My hypothesis is essentially the same as Lisa's: the protection is coming from our circumstances rather than our deliberative efforts.
Good. Support your hypothesis. Otherwise it's got the exactly the same weight as my hypothesis that in fact Lisa's rock was making the bears scarce.
Terrorism is a complex thing. My bet is that as we waged wars in multiple nations, it became more advantageous for fanatics to strike where our military forces were.
US has been waging wars in multiple nations since.... well, lets not go there.... for a long time. What changed on 9/11? Besides enhanced security at the airports, that is.
Without having to gain entry into the country, get past airport security (no matter what odds were), or hijack a plane, terrorists were able to kill over 4,000 Americans in Iraq and nearly 1,500 in Afghanistan. That's almost twice as many as were killed on 9/11.
Over 10 years, not 10 minutes. It is the single act of terrorism on 9/11 that is engraved on people's (not just American) memories and consciousnesses - not the background and now seemingly routine deaths in the military ranks (I'm speaking about the general population, not about the families and fellow soldiers of those who have been killed.)
Terrorism against military targets is 1) not technically terrorism, and b) not very newsworthy to the public. That's why terrorists target civilians. Deadliest single overseas attack on the US military since the 2nd WW - where and when? Hint... it killed 241 American serviceman. Even if you know that incident, do you think it resonates with the general public in anyway? How about the Oklahoma City bombing? Bet you most people would think more people were killed there than in .... (shall I tell you? Beirut.) That's because civilians were targeted in OK, and the military in Beirut.
If I were the leader of a group intent on killing Americans and Westerners in general, I certainly would go down that route rather than hijack planes.
You'd not make the news very often, nor change much public opinion in the US, then.
It's pretty clear that it was not the rock.
But can you prove it? :)
Ecosystems are constantly finding new equilibriums; killing off an herbivore's primary predator should cause a decline in vegetation.
I'm glad you got that reference. The Salmon works like this. For millennia the bears and eagles have been scooping the salmon out of the streams. Bears, especially, don't actually eat much of the fish. They take a bite or two of the juiciest bits (from a bear's POV) and toss the carcass over their shoulder to scoop another Salmon. All those carcasses put fish fertilizer into the creek and river banks. A lot of fertilizer. So, the you get really big trees there.
That is not surprising, nor is it difficult to prove (you can track all three populations simultaneously). There is also a causal mechanism at work that can explain the effect without the need for new assumptions (Occam's Razor).
The efficacy of the TSA and our security measures, on the other hand, are quite complex and are affected by numerous causes.
But I think your reasoning is flawed. Human behaviour is much less complex than tracking how the ecosystem interacts with itself. One species vs numerous species; A species we can communicate with vs multiples that we can't; A long history of trying to understand human behaviour vs Not so much.
Changes in travel patterns, other nations' actions, and an enemey's changing strategy all play a big role. You can't ignore all of these and pronounce our security gimmicks (and really, that's what patting down a 6 year-old is) to be so masterfully effective.
It's also why they couldn't pay me enough me to run that operation. Too many "known unknowns".
We can't deduce anything from that footage of the 6 year old without knowing more. What if the explosives sniffing machine was going nuts anytime the girl went near it. If you were on that plane, wouldn't you want to know why that machine thought the girl has explosives on her? We don't know that there was a explosives sniffing device, and we don't know that there wasn't. All we know is from that footage that doesn't give us any context.
If I was a privacy or rights group, I would immediately launch an inquiry though. There is a enough information to be concerned, just not enough to form any conclusions what-so-ever. Except the screener appeared to be very professional.
As I said, I understood the point you were trying to make. But.... you can't take two non-TSA incidents and use those to make a case against the TSA specifically. All you can do is say that increased security, similar to what the TSA does, can be shown to not catch everything. I could just as easily argue that because the two incidents (shoe and underwear bombers) did not occur from TSA screenings then that is proof the TSA methods work. I could, but I won't because we don't really know that is true. Too small a sample to judge.
Well when a fanatic is willing to commit suicide because he believes that he'll be rewarded in heaven, 50/50 odds don't seem to be all that much of a deterrent.
Did you not read my post above? Or did you not understand it? Or did I not write clearly? I'll assume the 3rd. Past history is that bombs are not put on planes by lone wolf fanatics. They are placed there by a whole operation involving a number of people... perhaps a dozen, maybe? The person carrying the bomb may be a brainwashed fool (though, surprisingly - often educated) - but the support team likely aren't fools. The team includes dedicated individuals who have specialized training and experience that are needed to mount further operations. The bomb makers, the money people, the people who nurture the bomb carrier and ensure that they are fit (mentally) to go through with a suicide attack. These people, the support crew, are not going to like 50/50 odds. Nor, are the support teams command and control. The security forces have shown themselves to be quite good at eventually following the linkages back up the chain.
What's worse is that we've only achieved that with a lot of our personal dignity, time, and money. I don't think we can tolerate much more. We should be expecting more for the time, money, and humiliation we're putting ourselves (and our 6 year-old children) through.
You are right. There has been a cost to dignity, time and money. Most of life is. People are constantly balancing personal and societal security/safety against personal freedoms. In this case what you think is only part of the balance between society and security. You feel it's too far. I can't argue. I don't fly anymore unless I have to. But, I also think that what the TSA (and CATSA, & the European equivalents) are doing is working. I just don't have to like going through it.
....
Your statistics don't unequivocally prove the efficacy of the TSA though. They only show that the TSA employs a cost-benefit method to determine what measures to take.
Give the man/woman/boy a cigar! There is no way to prove it, other than setting controlled experiments in which make some airports security free, and others with varying levels of security. And in some cases you don't tell the travelling public which airports have what level (if any) of security - but you do tell the bad guys/gals.
In other words, in this world... all you've got is incomplete data to try and make a reasonable decisions based on a cost/benefit analysis.
Since you believe in the efficacy of the TSA so much, the burden is yours to make a clear and convincing case, not mine. I can provide alternative hypotheses, but I am in no way saying that these are provable at the current moment in time.
I did. I cited a sharp drop-off in hijackings at a particular moment in history. Within the limits of a Mac Rumours Forum, that is as far as I'm going to go. If you an alternative hypothesis, you have to at least back it up with something. My something trumps your alternative hypothesis - even if my something is merely a pair of deuces - until you provide something to back up your AH.
I'm only saying that they are rational objections to your theory.
Objections with nothing to support them.
My hypothesis is essentially the same as Lisa's: the protection is coming from our circumstances rather than our deliberative efforts.
Good. Support your hypothesis. Otherwise it's got the exactly the same weight as my hypothesis that in fact Lisa's rock was making the bears scarce.
Terrorism is a complex thing. My bet is that as we waged wars in multiple nations, it became more advantageous for fanatics to strike where our military forces were.
US has been waging wars in multiple nations since.... well, lets not go there.... for a long time. What changed on 9/11? Besides enhanced security at the airports, that is.
Without having to gain entry into the country, get past airport security (no matter what odds were), or hijack a plane, terrorists were able to kill over 4,000 Americans in Iraq and nearly 1,500 in Afghanistan. That's almost twice as many as were killed on 9/11.
Over 10 years, not 10 minutes. It is the single act of terrorism on 9/11 that is engraved on people's (not just American) memories and consciousnesses - not the background and now seemingly routine deaths in the military ranks (I'm speaking about the general population, not about the families and fellow soldiers of those who have been killed.)
Terrorism against military targets is 1) not technically terrorism, and b) not very newsworthy to the public. That's why terrorists target civilians. Deadliest single overseas attack on the US military since the 2nd WW - where and when? Hint... it killed 241 American serviceman. Even if you know that incident, do you think it resonates with the general public in anyway? How about the Oklahoma City bombing? Bet you most people would think more people were killed there than in .... (shall I tell you? Beirut.) That's because civilians were targeted in OK, and the military in Beirut.
If I were the leader of a group intent on killing Americans and Westerners in general, I certainly would go down that route rather than hijack planes.
You'd not make the news very often, nor change much public opinion in the US, then.
It's pretty clear that it was not the rock.
But can you prove it? :)
Ecosystems are constantly finding new equilibriums; killing off an herbivore's primary predator should cause a decline in vegetation.
I'm glad you got that reference. The Salmon works like this. For millennia the bears and eagles have been scooping the salmon out of the streams. Bears, especially, don't actually eat much of the fish. They take a bite or two of the juiciest bits (from a bear's POV) and toss the carcass over their shoulder to scoop another Salmon. All those carcasses put fish fertilizer into the creek and river banks. A lot of fertilizer. So, the you get really big trees there.
That is not surprising, nor is it difficult to prove (you can track all three populations simultaneously). There is also a causal mechanism at work that can explain the effect without the need for new assumptions (Occam's Razor).
The efficacy of the TSA and our security measures, on the other hand, are quite complex and are affected by numerous causes.
But I think your reasoning is flawed. Human behaviour is much less complex than tracking how the ecosystem interacts with itself. One species vs numerous species; A species we can communicate with vs multiples that we can't; A long history of trying to understand human behaviour vs Not so much.
Changes in travel patterns, other nations' actions, and an enemey's changing strategy all play a big role. You can't ignore all of these and pronounce our security gimmicks (and really, that's what patting down a 6 year-old is) to be so masterfully effective.
It's also why they couldn't pay me enough me to run that operation. Too many "known unknowns".
We can't deduce anything from that footage of the 6 year old without knowing more. What if the explosives sniffing machine was going nuts anytime the girl went near it. If you were on that plane, wouldn't you want to know why that machine thought the girl has explosives on her? We don't know that there was a explosives sniffing device, and we don't know that there wasn't. All we know is from that footage that doesn't give us any context.
If I was a privacy or rights group, I would immediately launch an inquiry though. There is a enough information to be concerned, just not enough to form any conclusions what-so-ever. Except the screener appeared to be very professional.