CalBoy
Apr 15, 04:21 PM
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 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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
animal cell diagram without
plant cell diagram. plant cell
animal cells diagram. and cell
more...
PLANT CELL DIAGRAM 1
Animal Cell Diagram With
more...
DIAGRAM OF CELL PHONE
Fuel Cell Diagram
more...
aplant cell diagram aplant
Animal Cell Plant Cell Diagram
more...
Schematic diagram
animal cell diagram and
more...
plant cell diagram,
membrane of the neuron.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Northgrove
May 3, 01:49 PM
I don't really get this... You already pay fees for the data - why do they care for how you use it?
skunk
Apr 16, 05:49 PM
It's a common complaint.
twoodcc
May 13, 11:21 AM
well i'm not totally sure yet, but it looks like one of my systems is down already! i'll have a better idea later tonight though. i might look into having a remote login system, so i'd know sooner if something is wrong.
i'm gonna have to cut it back to 3.5 ghz just to be safe i think
i'm gonna have to cut it back to 3.5 ghz just to be safe i think
more...
mkrishnan
Sep 8, 11:30 AM
HAHAHAHAHAHAAAHAHAHAHA
wait, your name is michael bolton?
:p ;) :D
If it was, I'm pretty sure Bush would somehow be responsible.
http://www.my-smileys.de/smileys2/schacka_2.gif
wait, your name is michael bolton?
:p ;) :D
If it was, I'm pretty sure Bush would somehow be responsible.
http://www.my-smileys.de/smileys2/schacka_2.gif
krestfallen
Oct 17, 10:55 AM
Whereas discs last forever, right? ;)
no but the risk is marginal that a disk dies in 10 years.
of course you shouldn't play frisbee with them ;)
no but the risk is marginal that a disk dies in 10 years.
of course you shouldn't play frisbee with them ;)
more...
DeSnousa
May 16, 07:30 AM
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 :)
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 :)
Lynxpoint
Apr 29, 05:13 PM
Sensible defaults. Usability before looks. The iOS scrollbars might look better but they remove usability. Same with the slider, it's not as intuitive.
Apple should not break intuitiveness and usability just to change some esthetics, especially if this is just change for the same of change.
I agree with you completely, but still a part of me always remembers that people don't necessarily like change thrust upon them. Sometimes change is for the better, but the effect is not immediate. I only say this because I have changed the scollbars on Snow Leopard to Lion-like ones as well as using the scroll reverser app, and I have found I prefer these changes and I really like the idea of the bars vanishing when not active.
Apple should not break intuitiveness and usability just to change some esthetics, especially if this is just change for the same of change.
I agree with you completely, but still a part of me always remembers that people don't necessarily like change thrust upon them. Sometimes change is for the better, but the effect is not immediate. I only say this because I have changed the scollbars on Snow Leopard to Lion-like ones as well as using the scroll reverser app, and I have found I prefer these changes and I really like the idea of the bars vanishing when not active.
more...
macMan228
Mar 24, 07:32 PM
Recently switched to OS X in 2008. the real pulling for me was probably the easiness and the speed of the system as a whole
oh yeah, vista sucked. :apple:
oh yeah, vista sucked. :apple:
puuukeey
Jan 9, 04:04 PM
he said he was sorry... I trust him
more...
steve_hill4
Oct 3, 01:14 PM
I think Macbook Pros will be updated at MWSF. Also, doubt the true video iPod will be out by then... all the designs being thrown around look too high-tech for now, and issues with scratches on the touch screen will have to be taken care of as well. I'd say more like Holiday 2007 for that~
If it takes that long before C2D finds its way into the MBP, I think Apple will be laughed at by a lot of the other manufacturers who have already announced models due before the holiday season.
If it takes that long before C2D finds its way into the MBP, I think Apple will be laughed at by a lot of the other manufacturers who have already announced models due before the holiday season.
IJ Reilly
Oct 19, 04:20 PM
Damn, man, I'd hate to see your tax bill when you finally sell!
Anyway, share-dropping is not very gentlemanly, so I'll keep my figures to myself...but at this point I too have to hold back from selling simply to avoid the huge tax hit. Would be nice if Apple issued dividends though, especially now that they're flush. Make some cash without divesting of the principal.
Are you calling me a cad, you cur? :)
Dividends, yes that would be a good idea, what with $10 billion in cash on hand. Microsoft finally decided that their cash horde was becoming a bit of an embarrassment and declared one.
Anyway, share-dropping is not very gentlemanly, so I'll keep my figures to myself...but at this point I too have to hold back from selling simply to avoid the huge tax hit. Would be nice if Apple issued dividends though, especially now that they're flush. Make some cash without divesting of the principal.
Are you calling me a cad, you cur? :)
Dividends, yes that would be a good idea, what with $10 billion in cash on hand. Microsoft finally decided that their cash horde was becoming a bit of an embarrassment and declared one.
more...
rdowns
Apr 16, 04:43 PM
Because the promotion of homosexuality is detrimental to a society and the people who promote it know this. For example, the mere announcement of a gay history curriculum causes conflicts such as the one in this thread and especially moreso in the real world. Instead of fighting about such stupid things as this, our school system should be heavily decentralized so that you can decide whether or not your child learns about homosexual history by simply selecting a non-political, non-psychologically damaging school in your area and everything would be fine and kept separate, but no, the people who run everything love to just mash everybody into one big public school system and slowly change the rules to cause people to fight all because of what is essentially 4% of the population.
Conflict? The only conflict I see is your ilk trying to ignore the facts of life. Some people are gay. Deal with it, it's not hurting anyone.
Conflict? The only conflict I see is your ilk trying to ignore the facts of life. Some people are gay. Deal with it, it's not hurting anyone.
Frosties
Jul 21, 09:41 AM
The Nokia phone have not the same bars/signal ratio as the iphone 4.
more...
Cell Contents Class Diagram
more...
tdhurst
Jan 12, 09:23 PM
See, loaded. You're warping what I'm saying so you can brush me off and continue to scapegoat gizmodo for something completely separate.
Think about this.
Did I ever say gizmodo probably wasn't going to get banned?
Did I actually say the opposite?
Did I bring up Wired anywhere in this thread or link them to various pranks?
Was I actually trying to make you look at the statement that implied blind faith in print media as being a bastion of truth and being isolated from such pranking?
Wait...how am I scapegoating Gizmodo? I was questioning your statement:
Sliver solar cell diagram ANU
more...
Nerve Cell Diagram
Animal Cell Diagram.
plant cell diagram.
Think about this.
Did I ever say gizmodo probably wasn't going to get banned?
Did I actually say the opposite?
Did I bring up Wired anywhere in this thread or link them to various pranks?
Was I actually trying to make you look at the statement that implied blind faith in print media as being a bastion of truth and being isolated from such pranking?
Wait...how am I scapegoating Gizmodo? I was questioning your statement:
dsnort
Aug 1, 03:32 PM
Do not act as stupid ass consumers with no brain. It is your right when you by music to listen to i where ever you want it too.
You payed for it didn't you so now it is yours ....
DRM is ******** and it takes away your rights as a consumers.
Act now stop that ********.
One more thing. At least we have the freedom and our goverment tries too help.
I don't FEEL ignorant and stupid. Maybe that's because I took the time to READ and UNDERSTAND the limitations imposed on me by iTunes/iPod before I BOUGHT in. And maybe because I understand that what I am BUYING is a DIGITAL DATA FILE that must be interpreted by a certain APPLICATION to become music, and that this was EXPLAINED to me before I BOUGHT. That I don't OWN the MUSIC, and that there are LIMITATIONS to what I can do with it. ( And if you think I'm wrong on that last point, let a copyright holder catch you using their music for commmercial gain. Write back to us and describe the world of hurt that descends on you)!
The fact of the matter is that reasonable DRM's protect the artists who are the source of the music. And Apples DRM is one the most reasonable in the industry, both protecting the artist, and allowing fair use by the customer.
You payed for it didn't you so now it is yours ....
DRM is ******** and it takes away your rights as a consumers.
Act now stop that ********.
One more thing. At least we have the freedom and our goverment tries too help.
I don't FEEL ignorant and stupid. Maybe that's because I took the time to READ and UNDERSTAND the limitations imposed on me by iTunes/iPod before I BOUGHT in. And maybe because I understand that what I am BUYING is a DIGITAL DATA FILE that must be interpreted by a certain APPLICATION to become music, and that this was EXPLAINED to me before I BOUGHT. That I don't OWN the MUSIC, and that there are LIMITATIONS to what I can do with it. ( And if you think I'm wrong on that last point, let a copyright holder catch you using their music for commmercial gain. Write back to us and describe the world of hurt that descends on you)!
The fact of the matter is that reasonable DRM's protect the artists who are the source of the music. And Apples DRM is one the most reasonable in the industry, both protecting the artist, and allowing fair use by the customer.
more...
baryon
Apr 29, 04:10 PM
Why are you people talking about scroll bars and scrolling? This article is about the buttons in sub-pane selectors. Not scrolling.
maflynn
Apr 9, 06:53 PM
I guess it depends what you call a "feature." They're not user-facing, and Apple didn't advertise them as features, but frankly I don't see how they're not features, even if they're under-the-hood. Anyway, here (http://arstechnica.com/apple/reviews/2009/08/mac-os-x-10-6.ars/)'s 22 pages worth of new and improved stuff.
I know they made lots of under the hood stuff, but nothing that entices the consumer to upgrade. Look at 10.5 and that had lots of stuff for the consumer.
Now with the all the under the hood stuff that was changed, many of us were expecting more then just the "magic of the iPad" as they call it.
I know they made lots of under the hood stuff, but nothing that entices the consumer to upgrade. Look at 10.5 and that had lots of stuff for the consumer.
Now with the all the under the hood stuff that was changed, many of us were expecting more then just the "magic of the iPad" as they call it.
HawaiiMacAddict
Apr 2, 12:02 PM
It looks like the only way M$ is "catching up" is by copying technologies with which we are already familiar. As Bertrand Serlet suggested, maybe M$ really DID start up their photocopiers :D
I saw a video on YouTube entitled "The Real Windows Vista (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3QdGt3ix2CQ)", in which the audio from a (series of) M$ lecture(s) was combined with video showing a Mac user demonstrating the then-unreleased features of Vista on a Mac. It was originally in three parts, and at the end of each part the specific technologies mentioned were identified, as well as the year in which they were introduced. It appears also that, as Mr. Serlet also mentioned, "if you can't innovate, you must imitate, but it's never quite the same."
I saw a video on YouTube entitled "The Real Windows Vista (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3QdGt3ix2CQ)", in which the audio from a (series of) M$ lecture(s) was combined with video showing a Mac user demonstrating the then-unreleased features of Vista on a Mac. It was originally in three parts, and at the end of each part the specific technologies mentioned were identified, as well as the year in which they were introduced. It appears also that, as Mr. Serlet also mentioned, "if you can't innovate, you must imitate, but it's never quite the same."
ThePoach
Jul 21, 02:52 PM
Seems Apple just keeps on digging themselves deeper and deeper. First they tell their customers to just "deel with it" about the antenna issue.. then they say it's an arroneous calculation of the signal bars (that was a funny one since the bars are now "accurate" and shows how bad AT&T really is lol). Now they are trying to divert the focus of their antenna design flaw by pointing the finger at the other phones., and btw were was the video test of their own iphone? Perhaps if they were more sincere and honest about their own issues then nobody would mind as much.. it's the undercoating and deception that people do not like; )
Chundles
Sep 12, 07:36 AM
hmmmm,
i just tried the same with the swedish store, and its down :)
maby this will be a world event afterall!!
Yeah, but I'll bet it's not the "It's Showtime" splash screen is it? Just the busy connection dialogue box.
i just tried the same with the swedish store, and its down :)
maby this will be a world event afterall!!
Yeah, but I'll bet it's not the "It's Showtime" splash screen is it? Just the busy connection dialogue box.
leekohler
Apr 25, 04:00 PM
I think the OP's point- and I agree- is that they went a lot further then just NOT doing something right. They did something wrong. Its past the point of should have had an armed guard....its now into looking at what they did and maybe holding them accountable for their actions, too.
Yes, they did. They encouraged it and called no one. This went on for a very long time too. Some of you need to go watch the video before you comment. I fixed the link. You will not believe what you see.
Yes, they did. They encouraged it and called no one. This went on for a very long time too. Some of you need to go watch the video before you comment. I fixed the link. You will not believe what you see.
maczter
Nov 17, 01:03 PM
meh. While it may or may not happen soon in the portables, I really would like to see at least the option sometime next year to get an AMD 4x4 based Mac Pro instead of Intel's pseudo quad-core...
http://www.wired.com/news/technology/computers/0,72126-0.html?tw=wn_index_5
I say AMD-based macs will definitely happen. I also say that Apple will not abandon Intel. They will merely offer various machines with your choice based on chips from the two vendors or perhaps some models that use chips from only on of the two vendors while other models let you choose, just as pretty much every single PC maker does these days. All this panic about "Apple wouldn't abandon Intel already", etc. is just silliness. Nobody says they can only work with Intel OR AMD but not both. Working with both is good for everyone as it keeps both suppliers on their toes and more eager to please. Why do you think Hugh Hefner keeps three girfriends these days? ;)
http://www.wired.com/news/technology/computers/0,72126-0.html?tw=wn_index_5
I say AMD-based macs will definitely happen. I also say that Apple will not abandon Intel. They will merely offer various machines with your choice based on chips from the two vendors or perhaps some models that use chips from only on of the two vendors while other models let you choose, just as pretty much every single PC maker does these days. All this panic about "Apple wouldn't abandon Intel already", etc. is just silliness. Nobody says they can only work with Intel OR AMD but not both. Working with both is good for everyone as it keeps both suppliers on their toes and more eager to please. Why do you think Hugh Hefner keeps three girfriends these days? ;)
Daringescape
Nov 16, 04:48 PM
This is off topic, but I was down in San Diego a while ago and saw some iMacs in a hotel lobby with a screen that let you choose between Windows and osX. I have seen boot camp so I know you see 2 different disks when you boot, but these were a windows icon and an osX icon you could click on.
Has anyone else seen this?
Has anyone else seen this?