Forgot your password?

typodupeerror

Comment: Re:Gun control however... (Score 1) 856

by Spiked_Three (#43719511) Attached to: California Lawmaker Wants 3-D Printers To Be Regulated
Talk about making shit up as you go; wtf does 5 million members have to do with 5 million manufacturers? I will admit the logic of that totally missed me. Yes I am refering to the NRA. The NRA dictate how congress act. you did notice the failure to pass a 90% approved by public gun background check, at the demand of the NRA didn't you? let's see your facts - $$$ contributed to the NRA, manufacturers versus non manufacturers.

Go away troll.

Comment: Re:Gun control however... (Score 2) 856

by Spiked_Three (#43698597) Attached to: California Lawmaker Wants 3-D Printers To Be Regulated
It is retarded.

You can never regulate it - as you point out, it will not in any way stop criminals.

There are ALREADY laws against owning undetectable guns. We do not need stupid regulations adding nothing.

The republicans are in a pickle. If they support 3D gun printing, they hurt gun manufacturers, which is what they really are supporting ($$$$).

The democrats are in a pickle. If they support banning 3D printing, they are making the case that they are indeed the big government control all party.

How this plays out will be, at worst, hilarious to watch, all the while knowing that nothing can ever really happen, just like DRM.

Comment: Re:Jim, I disagree (Score 1) 171

by Spiked_Three (#43548603) Attached to: An Open Letter To Google Chairman Eric Schmidt On Drones
That, and how do you define a surveillance drone? A balloon with a camera? A kite with a camera. Why not a passenger with a camera, maybe a cell phone, aboard a commercial aircraft? A space telescope? The problem is there is no definitive definition.

So I agree with the previous post - invasion of privacy is already outlawed. We do NOT need new vague rules to mis-define what might invade privacy.

Comment: Re:Closed proprietary software is NEVER secure! (Score 1) 195

by Spiked_Three (#43399059) Attached to: Is the DEA Lying About iMessage Security?
I didn't ask if you considered it secure. I asked if you are insinuating it is not secure. Forget it, the fact that you got modded insightful is an indication the people who read and mod here are clueless, including yourself. If you think you can keep anything from the us government you are seriously delusional. If you ever by accident do, they will pay you a visit the next day, I promise. I spent a career worrying about if the navy could spy on the army could spy on the marines. Whether or not any one of those could spy on the public wasn't even a lunch time conversation - it was a no brainer. But you and the moderators just go ahead and have your fantasies, they depend on it.
The Military

United States Begins Flying Stealth Bombers Over South Korea 567

Posted by samzenpus
from the nice-day-for-a-flight dept.
skade88 writes "The New York Times is reporting that the United States has started flying B-2 stealth bomber runs over South Korea as a show of force to North Korea. The bombers flew 6,500 miles to bomb a South Korean island with mock explosives. Earlier this month the U.S. Military ran mock B-52 bombing runs over the same South Korean island. The U.S. military says it shows that it can execute precision bombing runs at will with little notice needed. The U.S. also reaffirmed their commitment to protecting its allies in the region. The North Koreans have been making threats to turn South Korea into a sea of fire. North Korea has also made threats claiming they will nuke the United States' mainland."

Comment: Re:alcoholics serving alcoholics since 1929 (Score 1) 471

by Spiked_Three (#43136323) Attached to: Seattle Bar Owner Bans Google Glass, In Advance
Ummm, expensive? no, not at all. I fly FPV RC aircraft. Those are the planes that are flown via goggles and an onboard camera. I have three ready to fly aircraft sitting next to me. The video portion for all 3 has a total cost of maybe $600, and that includes a $350 pair of nice goggles, something I would not need if I wanted to record the public.

The public is all ape shit over this privacy thing. How dumb are they to realize there have been security cameras installed in half the transformers on telephone poles for 20+ years. I can stand on a street corner near my house, and count 20+ security cameras capable of watching me. Wake up sheeple, you already have no privacy. Banning Googlge glasses will improve your privacy score from 0 to 0.

But anyhow, I'm not even sure what point you were trying to make. My comment was about trying to ban any technology. We've seen how great that has worked for the movie industry, as your example.

Comment: alcoholics serving alcoholics since 1929 (Score 0) 471

by Spiked_Three (#43133331) Attached to: Seattle Bar Owner Bans Google Glass, In Advance
So, I just came from the Meca in Seattle; http://mecca-cafe.com/

how is it two restaurants coined the exact same phrase "alcoholics serving alcoholics since 1929" ?

Anyhow, WTF? banning tech glasses? Why don't they ban iPhones, see how well that will do. Obvious publicity stunt, and will probably backfire.

Comment: what do you teach? (Score 4, Insightful) 813

by Spiked_Three (#42877715) Attached to: Missouri Legislation Redefines Science, Pushes Intelligent Design
I mean not that I any way believe in any of the ID stuff (flying spaghetti monsters is my bumper sticker), but, even if you do, what do you teach?

"Some super brain/being designed it all. End of story".

This is so wrong on so many levels. The dumbing down of children for fanaticals has to stop, one way or another. People like Rick Sanatorium are destroying this country and need to be run out.

Many are called, few volunteer.

Working...