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).
2) Can you develop a system in such a way that it can't be removed or bypassed?
The gun is a fairly simple machine. I can't think of a way to prevent the removal of such a complex system. And if the argument is going to be "it'll be legally mandated that all guns have this," you run into the same problem that gun control laws run into right now. Criminals - especially those who are planning on committing multiple murders and probably killing themselves in the process - really don't give a crap about following the law.
As important as dollars are to research, so are minds.
1) The glasses are not a recording device. The only reason they maintained images was because they were damaged, and new images did not arrive to fill the buffer.
2) Anyone who attempts to rip someone's "recording device" off their head only to find out that it is SCREWED INTO THEIR SKULL is an idiot if they don't realize after that fact that this is not the same situation as some guy with a digital camera. You could make the analogy that while pets are banned from many places, service animals are welcome.
3) Destryoing someone's documentation about their medical device is spiteful and childish at best, and legally questionable at worst.
4) One would not attempt to hide their identity while taking a perfectly legal action in accordance with company policy.
5) Obviously, the gentleman was angry enough to want to go to the top of the food chain (no pun intended). So even if this McDonald's was in France, the corporate HQ is in the US. So yes, attempting to get the corporate information from a US/English Language page makes perfect sense, rather than going to a "french-language" website where he can perhaps try to talk to the manager of that particular store.
He'd already been served his food - if the restaurant wanted him to leave, their best course of action would have been to wait a few minutes and let him finish up. It certainly would have caused less hassle and embarrassment to everyone.
Now, the nickname of the time was to call rugby "Rugger." Because of this, "Association Football" acquired the nickname of "Assoccer." Which was rapidly replaced with "Soccer."
As to your class statement, it's not nearly that simple. Both rugby and soccer were originally upper class sports in their organized form. Soccer caught on with the lower economic classes more so than rugby, and it was at this time, nearly 20 years later, that the formal name "Association Football" went a different direction and became simply "football" to your blue collar Brits.
There is actually a British saying, “Soccer is a gentleman’s game played by ruffians and Rugby is a ruffian’s game played by gentlemen.” That said, your statement about it being called football because it was played on foot rather than mounted is strictly correct, it just doesn't apply to the particular evolution of the modern sport.
Companions the creator seeks, not corpses, not herds and believers. Fellow creators the creator seeks--those who write new values on new tablets. Companions the creator seeks, and fellow harvesters; for everything about him is ripe for the harvest.
Don't worry, some of us who believe in some sort of God also believe that we have brains and logic for a reason. And that any human attempt to simplify something as complex as a true divinity is ultimately going to be speaking in paraphrase and vast approximation. Heck, some of us even understand that the Bible is not necessarily literal truth in all instances, but rather a way of teaching religious and moral truths!
In the end though, I agree. There's too many planets and celestial bodies out there, period, for life of some sort not to have developed elsewhere. Will it be discovered in my lifetime? Maybe, maybe not.