Actually, if you were serious about acting against a particular target, then finding out the methods, timing, degree, and flexibility of their response is indeed important, especially if your own resources are particularly limited or if the location is inimical to withdrawal (which actually could be used for a secondary attack against responders, depending on the outcome of the "test" attack). These sorts of things are not nearly so straightforward or intuitive as you imagine. They're not called "strategy" and "tactics" without a reason.

Several teams of terrorists hijacked four different planes on the same day, and that was when the internet wasn't even really involved. It's only a matter of time before somebody organizes a hostile flash mob, though I doubt something as intelligent as utility infrastructure will be the first target. It will probably be some political flashpoint.

"Hey, I have an idea, let's take concepts, deliberately misunderstand and exaggerate them, and then the person who created the concepts will look stupid!

Oh, wait, that's a dumb idea, because we'll end up looking like the stupid ones."

That is the conversation you should have had with yourself before you posted.

In the excerpt one of the chars expresses a begrudged acceptance of the 'gels' because they haven't 'fucked up' which is not, despite the anecdote which precedes the opinion, exclusive to fatalities. The responding party understands this, because he's not a total idiot, and says that he wishes the 'gels' made some kind of mistakes (again, with NO exclusivity to fatalities as you ridiculously assert in your summation).

Make me wonder how people like those in these comments ever passed verbal standardized tests. Reading comprehension is negligible and it seems even actively avoided.

Apparently YOUR reading comprehension isn't so great, since you were replying to where I had just already addressed it in the context of a joke, and you're making claims about me without demonstrating any basis even abstractly.

Nor was I "backing off" of anything, I merely dealt with how the possibility of it being a joke did not ultimately make the scenarios (plural) redeemable, and furthermore we'll never know what would have happened if the conditions had been met, eh?

That ok. Thank you for money. (Signed) China Dictated but not read.

You misunderstood my antecedent, I'm talking about evaluating character by proxy, how people evaluate others is itself a dimension for how they themselves can and should be judged.

And joke or not, it's a pattern (i.e. done more than once) of very irresponsible and tasteless behavior to pretend to offer bulk sexual favors in exchange for political action.

Somebody who is a bad judge of character where it is most important is most likely either a) deficient of character themselves or b) dangerously/irresponsibly naive/gullible. Neither is a quality I want in somebody acting as an intermediary for millions of dollars. Quite frankly it's only the responsibility factor that makes it even important to me. If I was just casually interacting with somebody who had a crazy s/o, I wouldn't even give it a second thought. However I wouldn't want them to be, for instance, my business partner for the reason outlined above.

What I say is not bullshit. The guy's s/o is Tania Derveaux and her 'antics' are well recorded. I have a hard time trusting somebody who gets into a serious relationship with a person on record as trying to buy votes with blowjobs. (Even if that's potentially more honest and ethical than most political behavior.)

I don't know that I would trust this guy. At least Child's Play has an established record, and they've raised $17 million since inception.

Also this guy's s/o is way out there... she tried to trade BJs for votes to get elected to the Belgian senate, and offered to take the virginity of any neckbeard who 'defended net neutrality'.

I think the only reason this has gained any significant traction is the "reward" people get for "donating". Though really all that means is that it's the game publishers who are donating, and the people buying games are just buying games. So... congrats? I guess it's better to buy from a charity than Walmart, but still, given the background of these people I wouldn't be surprised if some scandal emerged eventually.

You may want to work on your logic. Math is based on logic. this does not mean that everything based on logic is math.

Somebody call the Waaahmbulance. Some guy who hates libertarians and loves statism unsurprisingly also hates an option for trading value that states can't really control. Cry me a river. Oh well, luckily the whole system is fire and forget, decentralized and independent. Unstoppable no matter how much anybody stamps and whines.

I visualized that as badly captioned tumblr pr0n and was highly amused.

You're an ass, and likely a wannabe tyrant. And BTW, Re: your sig, "regulated" in 18th century American English meant "well ordered." Furthermore if you bothered to read the Militia Act of 1792, signed into law by George Washington, you'd know that the militia was to consist of everybody who could vote under the age of 45. Gun ownership was mandatory for this group, not owning a gun was, in fact, a crime. Lastly, the 'keep and bear arms clause' is NOT dependent on the 'militia clause,' even if it weren't obvious from the legal and social framework of the time that the whole electorate was the militia anyway.

I'll give you two answers, feel free to pick the one you like.

1) When you are fighting a less-advanced army, they won't have the technology to implement your suggestions.
2) Defense (haha) contracts are written based on what will sell with congress, not necessarily what is useful

Joe, I don't understand why you are screaming on your soap box with an outrageous comparison when you could have bought high-efficiency incandescent light bulb (still producing under the new regulation) to be done with your garage lighting issue! Wrong engineering solution with wrong application don't make any sense! Nobody is saying LED lighting is solution for everything.

http://www.homedepot.com/p/Philips-EcoVantage-43-Watt-60W-Household-Halogen-Light-Bulb-2-Pack-409847/202514341#

All within the new regulation while giving you what you want. Now stop whining and give us the /. back so we can talk about more important stuff (e.g. Linux embedded light bulb)