That is absolutely preposterous. However, if you model the stone blocks as frictionless point masses.....
A while back I tried to turn the tables on a scammer who royally pissed me off.
I posted an ad looking for a roomate and I got interest from someone claiming to be relocating from spain with moving costs paid by her company. Sounded good to me....after a quick exchange I took down my ad and a day later got the bad news "I will be sending a money order, can you cash it and forward on the difference too...."
I immediately recognized the scam and put my ad back up, but I was mad.
So I said "Sure sounds good".... the money order came, I said "never got it, when is it coming?"....got another one.... then I decided to have fun with it.... I sent a url for some pictures on my webserver and asked questions that would requiore looking at them to answer...about the room of course.... soon as I had an IP, I looked it up and told "her"
"I have seen better fakes, you wont fool me" I told "her" and that I knew she was somewhere outside Lagos Nigeria. Suddenly she admitted to being a he, and had a new tune.... he was trying to recruit me. Too easy.
Pretty quickly it shaped up what he wanted...someone with a US addrss to remail packages. I would get a package of papers to send out, all I had to do was put them in envelopes, slap postage on, and that would be $500 for me, each time.
So I figured....no way I am helping this scammer who tried to scam me, but, lets see if I can scam him out of $500 by getting him to pay up front. He mentioned counterfit bills, so I was like yes, cool, I will take counterfit bills, then I can report you directly to the Secret Service oooh fun.....
in the end we could never work out a deal that sounded good to him and I was willing to burn him on so, it never happened. Oh well.....
AND its worth noting.....should anything ever go to court....
NOTHING you said can be used to help you. While anything you say can be considered a confession and used against you, anything you say that is not used against you is hearsay.
So you have nothing to gain by speaking if it ever does go to court.
Except, the system is setup to prevent the government from printing money directly for their own use.
Lets not forget how it works, the semi-independent federal reserve prints the money and then offers it out as no recourse loans to their industry cronies (or whoever is a most convininet front...like their wives: http://www.rollingstone.com/po... )
Then, those people, now with money in hand that they only have to pay back if they make a profit, they loan it to everyone else, with interest.
Does that work with full disk luks encryption? Because not encrypting the disk is not an option for me.
Besides, after I put the luks password in, its not like I am going to get right to work when my coffee cup needs filling still.
Needless efficiency really, wouldn't actually save much time.
What's funny is it actually has the ability, and nobody uses it except for gettys.
This. Actually, in RHEL/CentOS, you can simply run
You can see this in Development vs Operations, Bay Area Startup Hipster Programmers vs System Administrators Who Have To Carry The Pager, Big Data vs Simpler Analysis, and a lot of other places in the industry right now....
There's an influx of talent that doesn't seem to understand the fundamentals of system architecture, or assumes they have all the answers and can/should hard-code them into the design, preventing "the Unix Philosophy" from being applied by the operator who's trying to deal with the crisis at 3 in the morning. "whatcouldpossiblygowrong", ergo I shall design this in C, and if you need more flexibility than I'm offering then You're Doing It Wrong.
What they don't understand is that they don't have all the answers... Nobody does. The only solution is to leave as much flexibility available as far down the stack as possible to allow the folks who have to deal with this (eg, system administrators) the ability to do their jobs. Replacing shell scripts with C code and the unix toolkit with monolithic binary blobs does not help the situation.
systemd does a few things right (cgroup management, for one), and promotes the state of the art in a few areas that probably only could be dealt with at the PID1 level... Also, as the original article admits, there's nothing inherently wrong with working to speed up boot times across the board. All of these things are irrelevant and outweighed by enforcing declarative styles on system configuration, and the sheer philosophical hazard of taking all these disparate functions and putting them into a program.
It makes absolute sense for Android, and perhaps an embedded system that just needs systemd and busybox. For a regular Linux userland, it takes us in the wrong direction.
That, I must say, is one of the arguments that turns me off to it. I really could not possibly care less how long it takes any system other than my laptop to boot. My laptop does run a distro with systemd, and I do like that it boots fast....I would not hesistate for a second to give that speed up if I needed to for something I do once a day usually and twice a day at most.
The majority of systems I deal with are servers. They mostly have plenty of CPU and memory available and typically run very few services..... they boot plenty fast without systemd.
Really the most annoying thing about it for me isn't going to be learning it, its going to be training other people to deal with it and supporting them when they find the software they are installing isn't setup for it properly and they need to troubleshoot and fix it.
If there was some real benefit, I am all for it but....boot speed? Talk about not worth it if that is the "benefit"
Except not everyone reading this knows that and the very fact that there is difficulty in detection calls some question on the "1 case in 14 years" claim; since we should expect false negatives due to the pharmacology of one of the drugs in question.
It is quite understandable to day that many tests for GHB would be false positives or false negatives so its not worth doing, but, that means the case is inconclusive, and saying "1 case in 14 years" means all inconclusive cases are bing lumped with all the true negatives which, is misleading at best.
I would, be shocked if the numbers were high given how rare this sort of crime really is compared to more mundane versions of the same; however, I have trouble believing it is quite this cut and dry simple.
> Why nail-polish? Why not just use the strips?
Easy, it reduces the steps required between returning to your drink or realizing you have forgotten to watch it, and doing the test. It removes....barriers. If you have to go into your pocket or purse to remove test strips, you are less likely to want to do it as often as you should....it could also be seen as insulting to whoever you are with that you don't trust them.
> doesn't anyone see a problem with sticking your fingers in your drink?
Not to me, but I understand that there are people grossed out by such things however, your body evolved to process far worst than whatever your fingers are likely to harbor, even after a night out drinking and touching doorknobs.
well wouldn't you expect GHB to be hard to detect since it occurs naturally anyway in the body and the body is excellent at eliminating it? I have taken it myself, it onsets in 10 minutes if the dose is large enough, and is pretty much back to baseline within an hour, its doubtful anyone in real disress makes it there fast enough to be reliably tested.
That said, I have little doubt you are mostly correct that its very few. Having personally gotten myself to debilitated states on both GHB and Alcohol, I would be hard pressed to really differentiate the effects (aside from GHBs lack of a hangover but, if you are doing both anyway....) from such a state.
I suspect the majority of such cases are really people who got drunker than they realized, and may have trouble believing that they drank that much.
Which brings up a very legitimate question: Do these nail polishes give a false sense of security when out drinking? Or, on the other hand, will simply having a "string on ones finger" itself help to remind the wearer to be more careful by inducing her to take conscious steps towards recognizing danger?
I suspect the former but.... I can't really say that the second is implausible either. Regardless, I am doubtful that their main effect of detecting these substances will, in and of itself, be of much use.
It is really, really difficult to protect ourselves from every abuse to which a corporation might subject us.
It's important in this conversation to understand that batteries have limited lifetimes, perhaps as little as 2 years, or less if defective.
I was standing in a store thinking of buying a top-of-the-line unlocked HTC phone for $750. Then the salesperson told me that the battery is not replaceable! That caused me to try to avoid buying anything from HTC. I don't like helping abusers.
I never would have guessed that an expensive phone would be considered a throwaway.
HTC CEO: If you learn that I have joined the board of directors of HTC, I will try to convince the other board members that abuse is bad practice. If I am successful, leave the building immediately. You are fired! It's unlikely I would be asked to join the board of directors, but that is a way of expressing the intensity of my dislike for abuse.
Why buy an unlocked phone? Travelers in other countries buy local SIM cards for GSM phones. That means anyone you meet can call you at a local number while you are in the area.