Take the Poll, then discuss.
Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!
We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).
Broadway Bridge closing for movie production work
01:43 PM PDT on Monday, March 19, 2007
By DAVID KROUGH, kgw.com Staff
The Broadway Bridge will be closed Monday night into Tuesday morning for a movie screw.
One traffic lane will be closed from 8 p.m. until 9 p.m. and after that all traffic lanes on the bridge and westside ramps will be closed until 5 a.m. Tuesday.
Crews will be working on the bridge for the film "Untraceable" later this month, according to transportation officials.
The bridge closure will not affect bicyclists, pedestrians or river traffic.
Later in the month, the bridge will be closed several other times for filming and production.
Also, the picture captioned is actually the Hawthorne bridge, not the Broadway Bridge.
Also note, that the news guy who answered the phone at KGW was rude to The Rick Emerson show.
Also note, that they have already corrected the story, but I have the whole thing quoted as it was originally posted.
I just set up a wireless router, and want to log into it so I can set up security features as well as change the default password, but when I try to pull up the default IP address in a web browser as it has in the instructions it doesn't come up.
The assume that you are connecting the wireless router directly to the broadband "modem", but I got a firewall and a switch first. I am guessing because of this that my firewall is assigning an IP address via DHCP or something, instead of the wifi router assigning its own IP address.
How do I scan my LAN for IP addresses?
Is there a general command for this in linux/unix, or program that you would recommend for this?
Or when my laptop running Windows XP connects to the WIFI router, is there a way to find out from that?
I need to get a cell phone, and I need to get one soon, and with unlimited use.
From what I understand, $45 a month with no contracts is a decent deal.
I especially like the no-contract part.
But does anyone know if they have good coverage?
Without a contract there is a lot less risk, but it would be nice to know if people have had good or bad experiences with them, or their friends. I don't like wasting money.
Anyone know of a good site for TV Listings?
I used to use tv.yahoo.com but a while back they "upgraded" it and now it is almost completely useless.
At best it is slow and clumsy, and shows everything at an incorrect time. Part of the problem is that they are now trying to do everything in Java or Active X or something so it takes forever for it to do anything. It really pisses me off when someone breaks something because they think more complicated equals better.
So, does anyone know of any TV listing sites that actually work and not a complete pain is the butt?
I must now listen to Disposable Heroes to cancel out the banality of this post.
I've created a few new polls over at misterpoll:
And if you somehow missed my old poll, please go vote for Anti-Christ.
And now I have a new poll, but not enough for me to want to create another JE yet.... Which decisions of George W Bush do you support?
Yes, I know the election is over, sort of, and I never liked Kerry but whatever. It is still a free country. I think.
OK, I have yet another poll, I did create a new JE, but I don't feel like changing the links in all my polls, so I'm linking to the new poll and JE here:
- Which News Program has more accurate News?
- More Accurate News JE
- The Loudspeaker spoke up and said....
- Opinions on John McCain his possible canidacy for president
- John McCain slashdot journal entry
- The Politicians are Scumbags Poll
- How many answers are there to a Yes or No question?
- The Droopy Drawers Poll
- How much do you support our troops?
- The Pirates and Zombies poll
Aug 17, 2006 9:45 pm US/Pacific
TSA Bans Gel Filled Bras
The Gel Bra May Provide A Lift, But TSA Is Not "Supporting" It
(AP) It's underwear that's not fun to wear at the airport, especially ones that contain gel filled inserts.
As we all know a new layer security means a new ban on certain liquids and gels, but banning certain bras?
Some say it's going too far.
"I just feel ridiculous..I mean, I feel like they're already invading my privacy by patting me down a million times. I mean, you wearing a gel bra, ma'am? I mean, it just seems ridiculous, you know."
The TSA is saying tonight if you wear a gel bar for prosthetic purposes they will be allowed through security and on planes, but if you were them for cosmetic reasons you'll have to pack them in a checked luggage.
(© 2006 The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.)
But is it OK to shout at the top of your lungs "Snakes! Snakes! There are Motherfucking Snakes on the Motherfucking Plane!!!"
And will the terrorists start using snakes as a weapon of mass destruction?
(Context, I occasionally listen to Randi Rhodes, a lot of times she just gives a lot of boring liberal/conservative rhetoric, but sometimes she is entertaining and/or informative. The last couple days she has been questioning the efficacy of Airport Security profiling for Muslims, as advocated by pundits. This is a satire that I wrote on the Randi Rhodes forum, that was deleted within the hour for violating the boards rules. The rules say nothing about satire or sarcasm, so I am guessing the admin has judged it to be "hate speech." Sheesh, even when you are agreeing with the liberals they still have their heads up their ass. I will try to email it to her direct, and hope that she has more intelligence than her forum's admins. (or maybe they are just very conservative about enforcing the forum rules.) I guess it was a good idea to not use the same signature on her forum that I use on slashdot.)
Well, the easy way to tell who is a muslim is by food preferences. Anyone requesting Halal food gets extra scrutiny from security. One problem with this is, the rules for Kosher food is very similar to the rules for Halal food. I have heard that Manischewitz is very popular among muslims. So lets add everyone who requests a Kosher meal to the profile too.
Then again, muslims, like jews, have holidays where they fast, so they are used to fasting. So they could put down "bacon souffle" as their food preference when they buy their tickets, but when the meal cart goes by can just say they are not hungry. (I am not kosher, but I almost never eat airplane food anyway.)
Maybe Ms. Rhodes was on to something when she suggested people prove that they are not a muslim.
It reminds me that during Japan's feudal period, Christianity was outlawed, and people had to prove they were not Christian by trampling a cross or other christian iconography.
So all we need to do is line the security checkpoint floor with Islamic iconography. Anyone who refuses has to go through the special muslim security checkpoint with full body/cavity search.
Then again, when that whole Mohammad Cartoon thing came up, I got the impression that iconography is generally frowned upon in Islam in the first place, so I don't know if there really is much in the way of iconography that we can use to line the Good, Loyal, Non-Terrorist American security checkpoint with.
I know! Lets have everyone who passes by the normal people checkpoint desecrate the Koran as they pass through. Everyone is given a Koran as they get in line, and then after they go through the metal detector, and right on the other side is a toilet. Everyone has to flush their copy of the Koran down the toilet before they get their shoes and carry-on back. Anyone refusing to flush a Koran down the toilet, and anyone who's Koran clogs the toilet gets to go through the Evil-Terrorist-But-We-Are-Going-To-Let-Them-Fly-Anyway-With-Just-A-Little-Extra-Security security checkpoint.
Article discusses the feasibility of using binary explosives to blow up an airplane. Apparently, it is not trivial.
Better killing through chemistry
Making a quantity of TATP sufficient to bring down an airplane is not quite as simple as ducking into the toilet and mixing two harmless liquids together.
First, you've got to get adequately concentrated hydrogen peroxide. This is hard to come by, so a large quantity of the three per cent solution sold in pharmacies might have to be concentrated by boiling off the water. Only this is risky, and can lead to mission failure by means of burning down your makeshift lab before a single infidel has been harmed.
But let's assume that you can obtain it in the required concentration, or cook it from a dilute solution without ruining your operation. Fine. The remaining ingredients, acetone and sulfuric acid, are far easier to obtain, and we can assume that you've got them on hand.
Now for the fun part. Take your hydrogen peroxide, acetone, and sulfuric acid, measure them very carefully, and put them into drinks bottles for convenient smuggling onto a plane. It's all right to mix the peroxide and acetone in one container, so long as it remains cool. Don't forget to bring several frozen gel-packs (preferably in a Styrofoam chiller deceptively marked "perishable foods"), a thermometer, a large beaker, a stirring rod, and a medicine dropper. You're going to need them.
It's best to fly first class and order Champagne. The bucket full of ice water, which the airline ought to supply, might possibly be adequate - especially if you have those cold gel-packs handy to supplement the ice, and the Styrofoam chiller handy for insulation - to get you through the cookery without starting a fire in the lavvie.
Easy does it
Once the plane is over the ocean, very discreetly bring all of your gear into the toilet. You might need to make several trips to avoid drawing attention. Once your kit is in place, put a beaker containing the peroxide / acetone mixture into the ice water bath (Champagne bucket), and start adding the acid, drop by drop, while stirring constantly. Watch the reaction temperature carefully. The mixture will heat, and if it gets too hot, you'll end up with a weak explosive. In fact, if it gets really hot, you'll get a premature explosion possibly sufficient to kill you, but probably no one else.
After a few hours - assuming, by some miracle, that the fumes haven't overcome you or alerted passengers or the flight crew to your activities - you'll have a quantity of TATP with which to carry out your mission. Now all you need to do is dry it for an hour or two.
The genius of this scheme is that TATP is relatively easy to detonate. But you must make enough of it to crash the plane, and you must make it with care to assure potency. One needs quality stuff to commit "mass murder on an unimaginable scale," as Deputy Police Commissioner Paul Stephenson put it. While it's true that a slapdash concoction will explode, it's unlikely to do more than blow out a few windows. At best, an infidel or two might be killed by the blast, and one or two others by flying debris as the cabin suddenly depressurizes, but that's about all you're likely to manage under the most favorable conditions possible.
We believe this because a peer-reviewed 2004 study in the Journal of the American Chemical Society (JACS) entitled "Decomposition of Triacetone Triperoxide is an Entropic Explosion" tells us that the explosive force of TATP comes from the sudden decomposition of a solid into gasses. There's no rapid oxidizing of fuel, as there is with many other explosives: rather, the substance changes state suddenly through an entropic process, and quickly releases a respectable amount of energy when it does. (Thus the lack of ingredients typically associated with explosives makes TATP, a white crystalline powder resembling sugar, difficult to detect with conventional bomb sniffing gear.)
Dean served as Nixon's White House lawyer for the last 1,000 days of his presidency and was among the White House staffers implicated in covering up the 1972 break-in of the Democratic National Headquarters inside the Watergate Hotel.
AMY GOODMAN: Talk about your research, going back in time, what social science you drew from.
JOHN DEAN: Right. What happened in looking for answers, I first went down a lot of bad alleys, where nothing was there. Then I ran into this body of research that really commenced after World War II, where social scientists were trying to figure out if we could ever have in the United States what had happened in Italy and Germany under Hitler and Mussolini. And the short answer was, they found, yes, we could have that. There is clearly an authoritarian personality.
The initial research was very Freudian-based. Other researchers quickly, who debated that and didn't think that was the most solid, began asking empirical questions, asking surveys of people, and developing scales to determine, you know, which personalities were more likely to become followers and those that are leaders.
So they did develop -- now we have 40 years of this material, and it has been replicated time and time again, and we know an awful lot about this type of personality. There are people who submit very easily to an authority figure. They do it because they're frightened. 9/11 drove an awful lot of people into submitting to authoritarianism, and they're very aggressive once they submit. This explains a lot of the incivility, the nastiness, the mean-spiritedness. They're not self-critical, and they become true advocates, not unlike the clips you saw earlier in the show, of whatever position they're advocating and pushing.
AMY GOODMAN: It's interesting that the latest news of the Bush administration attempting to quietly rewrite the War Crimes Act.
JOHN DEAN: Unbelievable. You know, I've thought about this. I thought, you know, Richard Nixon in his darkest day, in his worst mood, I can't imagine endorsing or recommending torture. He was in World War II. I watched him handle My Lai and how he felt about that and how he was horrified by it. And yet we have a presidency today that is indeed embracing and still pushing for torture as the norm for how we treat detainees. And it is to me just a classic example of a conservative without conscience. It's the authoritarian at his worst.
I am not going to quote the whole thing, but here are some excepts:
And if you look at what John Hagee has written in his books, like Jerusalem Countdown, his most recent book, which cites 17 unnamed Israeli intelligence sources to claim that Iran is producing nuclear suitcase bombs and that Israel must engage in a "nuclear showdown" with Iran or risk committing national suicide, if you look at what he's written, he does have an Armageddon-based agenda. And so I think what this lobby does, it plays an instrumental PR role on behalf of the Christian Zionist movement in preventing legitimate criticism of their motives for supporting Israel, and they are bolstering what AIPAC is doing and possibly even radicalizing what AIPAC is doing, by providing them a grassroots base in the heartland.
The majority of America's 60 million evangelicals are premillenial dispensationalists. They believe that the end times could come at any moment, and they're looking for signs of that, so they're sympathetic to supporting Israel for these reasons. And so they provide a strong grassroots base. This is the Republican base. This is the only component of the Republican base that still supports Bush's policies in Iraq without question, unconditionally, and supports Israel's expansionism. While the American Jewish community is willing to, you know, stand for Israel and show solidarity for Israel, they also support a peace process, and they support a sovereign Palestinian state. But this group doesn't.
You know, for instance, Pat Robertson went on the 700 Club and said that Ariel Sharon's descent into a comatose state was punishment for dividing the land for the Gaza withdrawal, for pulling 9,000 extremist settlers out of a huge swath of land. And, you know, then last week, Pat Robertson was flown to Israel to pray with Ehud Olmert and go on the 700 Club and tell his viewership that the Lebanese civilians, the Lebanese society was harboring terrorists, and therefore, civilian casualties were justified. So they play a PR role on behalf of the extremist wing of Israeli political culture. They're very connected to people like Benjamin Netanyahu, who's positioning himself to succeed Ehud Olmert in the wake of Olmert's possibly imminent resignation. So I think there's a real danger here.
Well, I was listening on July 21 to Janet Parshall, who's one of the leading evangelical and Republican broadcasters. She can get Dick Cheney on her show in a heartbeat. And she said, "As soon as the missiles started flying between Israel and Hezbollah," she said a voice just brimming with glee, "these are the times we've been waiting for. This is straight out of a Sunday school lesson." So the Christian Zionists have a tendency to celebrate things that most Israelis consider tragic. You know, I question whether John Hagee agonizes over the dozens of deaths of Israeli soldiers. I question whether he agonizes over the Israelis, the thousands of Israelis who had to spend the last month in bomb shelters. I don't think he does agonize. I think what Hagee and the Christian Zionists want is to fight a battle to the last Jew.
Read the rest:
It is about freaking time I get myself a freak.
Is it just that much harder to offend people these days or what?
Anyway, now that I finally have a freak I feel all warm and squishy inside.
Also, I got moderated Troll, for posting this:
There is a warning label on most toothpastes (the ones with fluoride anyway) that says (reading from my toothpaste):
Keep out of reach of children under 6 years of age. If more than used for brushing is accidentally swallowed, get medical help or contact a Poison Control Center right away.
Now, Offtopic I could understand, I wouldn't agree with it because I was replying to a comment about toothpaste, but I would at least understand it.
What is the moderator trying to say by moderating that a troll? Are they trying to say that there isn't a warning label on most toothpastes?
Check for yourself. Unless you are using stupid hippie toothpaste without fluoride, you will find a warning label like the one I quoted.
Panic now and avoid the rush.
Yesterday Michael Schiavo came here to Connecticut to campaign with Ned Lamont against Joe Lieberman, one of the senators who voted for legislation last year to keep Schiavo's wife Terri on life support so federal courts could decide her fate. (Remember when Bush flew to Washington in an emergency to sign this bill?)
"I don't think that Joe Lieberman should have gone on every single talk show saying that it's the responsibility of the federal government to make life-and-death decisions like that," Mr. Lamont said. "He not only voted for it, but he championed it."...
Mr. Lamont wove the Schiavo case into a broader narrative of out-of-control government, linking it to issues as diverse as abortion rights and law enforcement wiretapping.
He also reiterated that the Schiavo case had helped propel him into the Senate race and said it remained "central to his campaign."
"It just says an awful lot about where you want your government and where you don't want your government," he said.
Lieberman's response? It's time "for politicians to let Terri Schiavo rest in peace."
More here and here.
Posted by Mike Alissi at July 29, 2006 08:53 AM