Ammo supplies dried up following the shootings at Sandy Hook. There was concern about all sorts of action, from outright banning to exorbitant taxes. People were buying everything they could get their hands on. NOTHING was available in certain areas for several months of 2013.

It's slowly getting back to normal. You can find just about everything except 22, but the prices and selection is not always like it was pre Sandy Hook.

There are a variety of excuses for why 22 remains so difficult to find. I think that following the scare last year, people are still hoarding it, seeing how quickly it disappeared last time. I know that if we every get back to 8-10 cents per round, I'd like to lay in about 10,000 rounds (or more). Just so that I don't have to deal with this again.

Looks like it's Ttuesday.

Seeing as how we don't know how magnets work, I'm not sure we should add them to the mix.

Oh, you must be talking about Alcide's father in True Blood #getoffmylawn

(I rather liked him as the degenerate gambler in The Sopranos)

Don't you mean we've been using PIN numbers on these 'ATM machines' you referred to?

Damnit, time to change the combination on my luggage again...

But, yeah, I'm probably lucky ;-)

Consider yourself lucky, then - SMS spam seems to be pretty common here in the UK. Even my parents occasionally get hit.

I've been fortunate so far - I don't have any fellow iPhone users that I regularly communicate with via said device. I've now turned off iMessage, so hopefully all texts should go out as SMS.

My personal bugbear with my iPhone is the number of steps required to block a number from Messages. As I use my mobile number as a contact for business, my number is public, and as a result I've started getting SMS spam and telemarketer calls. You would think that Apple, of all people, would make it easier to tell the iPhone "block this number from calling me again."

This is a state that bans passive radar detectors. Don't count on common sense prevailing.

That's loser talk.

Thank you sir.

I'll donate an extra 99 cents to the next panhandler I see in your honor.

But, but... That doesn't make any sense!
Using HTTP, the connection isn't encrypted in either direction. If they can see the original request, they can also see the original response, so why not just cache that?

It's an absolutely crazy implementation, I agree (particularly speaking as someone implementing something which analyzes HTTP downloads right now). It's not caching, but some sort content analysis; my guess, and it is only a guess, is that it's intended as a workaround to copyright. Genuine caching is OK, for cacheable content, but I don't think this use would be covered by that copyright exemption: by fetching their own copy from the server like a regular web spider, they're no longer "making a copy". The other possibility is bandwidth: being a major ISP, it might be easier to intercept only the requests in-line, then queue them up for spidering by a separate system; intercepting the downloaded content as well would mean forcing all traffic through the analysis system in realtime.

Mine just hashes and logs the objects as they get fetched. Of course, I'm doing it in the firewall, with the user's knowledge and consent. I just remembered, though, a friend who works for an anti-malware vendor company mentioned to me that their security proxy does the same bizarre duplication rather than scanning in transit, which IIRC screwed up music streaming services, so presumably there's a good reason for that. (Weird, because if I were shipping malware, I'd find that all too trivial to circumvent by serving different content to the client and the scanner.)