 
|
This board is closed to new users and new posts. Thank you to all our great mods and users over the years. Details here.
|
|
The Free Talk Live BBS
Profile of Temper
Show Posts Topics
Show Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Pages: [1]
1
General / What is more important?
« on: January 22, 2014, 02:57:54 PM »
Than PoughkeepsieGuy?
Anything.
Just trying to remove all his OBSCENE posts from page #1...
Anything.
Just trying to remove all his OBSCENE posts from page #1...
2
General / Pro-life or Pro-choice?
« on: January 22, 2014, 02:56:38 PM »
I have always leaned towards being pro-life unless there is a good medical reason to terminate a pregnancy.
However, since meeting PoughkeepsieGuy, I have become completely pro-choice and wish his mother would have aborted him long ago..
However, since meeting PoughkeepsieGuy, I have become completely pro-choice and wish his mother would have aborted him long ago..
3
General / How do I block PM messages from a specific person?
« on: January 22, 2014, 02:52:44 PM »
4
General / AHHAHA Dave locks his posts
« on: January 20, 2014, 02:42:12 PM »
In true hypocrite fashion, Dave "locks" his post.
So the guy who fucking loses it on the forum when he is excluded, excludes people..
So the guy who fucking loses it on the forum when he is excluded, excludes people..
5
General / SHHHH No one tell Dave about this forum section!
« on: January 20, 2014, 11:22:20 AM »
Hey I found a section dave hasn't overrun with posts...
6
General / Why I do not get along with dave
« on: January 18, 2014, 09:52:39 PM »
[20:39] *** Now talking to HUDSONVALLEYGUY
[20:39] <HUDSONVALLEYGUY> by wear and tear
[20:39] HUDSONVALLEYGUY is ~webchat@ool-4352f00f.dyn.optonline.net http://chat.mixxnet.net/
[20:39] HUDSONVALLEYGUY on #LRN
[20:39] HUDSONVALLEYGUY using calihop.ca.us.mixxnet.net MIXXnet San Diego - Hosted By CaliHop.net
[20:39] <HUDSONVALLEYGUY> b
[20:39] <HUDSONVALLEYGUY> http://www.mixcloud.com/hudsonvalleysounds/called-ftl-about-quitting-my-phone-book-job-1-18-14/
[20:39] <Temper> ummm..
[20:39] <Temper> all use of your car then "ruins it"
[20:39] <HUDSONVALLEYGUY> i saw ur vid about talking computers, ment nothing to me
[20:40] <Temper> well watch it again
[20:40] <Temper> read the links
[20:41] <Temper> you have to make some kind of effort
[20:41] <HUDSONVALLEYGUY> and yes i DO talk TO PPL and not AT THEM
[20:41] <Temper> no you don't
[20:41] <HUDSONVALLEYGUY> yes i do
[20:41] <Temper> i asked twice "HOW" it would ruin your car...
[20:41] <HUDSONVALLEYGUY> and i told you
[20:41] <Temper> you just repeated that you weren't going to ruin your car
[20:42] <HUDSONVALLEYGUY> ITS WEAR AND TEAR listen to the show http://www.mixcloud.com/hudsonvalleysounds/called-ftl-about-quitting-my-phone-book-job-1-18-14/
[20:42] <Temper> "wear and tear" is not an answer
[20:42] <HUDSONVALLEYGUY> yes it is
[20:42] <Temper> what kind of car do you have?
[20:42] <HUDSONVALLEYGUY> im driving all overe the earyh to deleevr phone books
[20:42] <HUDSONVALLEYGUY> NOT
[20:42] <HUDSONVALLEYGUY> IM NOT gunna drive from NY to CONNECTICT and then BACK to NY to delever PHONE BOOKS, fuck it
[20:42] <Temper> how far is that?
[20:43] <HUDSONVALLEYGUY> how far is what
[20:43] <Temper> ny to connectict
[20:43] <HUDSONVALLEYGUY> (facepalm) look on a map
[20:43] <Temper> so you don't know?
[20:44] <HUDSONVALLEYGUY> dude..
[20:44] <Temper> how could you realistically weigh the offer without knowing?
[20:44] <HUDSONVALLEYGUY> it would be like DRIVING FROM CHICAGO TO FLORIDA TO DELEVER SHIT
[20:44] <Temper> no it's not
[20:44] <Temper> its 3 hours 1 min
[20:44] <HUDSONVALLEYGUY> http://www.mixcloud.com/hudsonvalleysounds/called-ftl-about-quitting-my-phone-book-job-1-18-14/ just give a listen
[20:44] <HUDSONVALLEYGUY> http://www.mixcloud.com/hudsonvalleysounds/called-ftl-about-quitting-my-phone-book-job-1-18-14/
[20:44] <Temper> 167 miles
[20:44] <HUDSONVALLEYGUY> bye
[20:45] <Temper> $25.05 in gass
[20:45] HUDSONVALLEYGUY no such nick/channel
So 6 hours of driving and $25.05 in gas. For $75? that's $8.325/hr wage. You would be a fool to refuse such an offer with 0 money!
Now, here's an option. Most places will rent out a truck, or some other company will. For one day you can guess it would be $60, and 2x-3x as much gas. However, you would be able to haul 10x as much easy! So if they would pay you $750 for 10x as much load you would make like $3000/mo
That would be your own place, internet, tv, etc.
You usually are right where you want to be...
[20:39] <HUDSONVALLEYGUY> by wear and tear
[20:39] HUDSONVALLEYGUY is ~webchat@ool-4352f00f.dyn.optonline.net http://chat.mixxnet.net/
[20:39] HUDSONVALLEYGUY on #LRN
[20:39] HUDSONVALLEYGUY using calihop.ca.us.mixxnet.net MIXXnet San Diego - Hosted By CaliHop.net
[20:39] <HUDSONVALLEYGUY> b
[20:39] <HUDSONVALLEYGUY> http://www.mixcloud.com/hudsonvalleysounds/called-ftl-about-quitting-my-phone-book-job-1-18-14/
[20:39] <Temper> ummm..
[20:39] <Temper> all use of your car then "ruins it"
[20:39] <HUDSONVALLEYGUY> i saw ur vid about talking computers, ment nothing to me
[20:40] <Temper> well watch it again
[20:40] <Temper> read the links
[20:41] <Temper> you have to make some kind of effort
[20:41] <HUDSONVALLEYGUY> and yes i DO talk TO PPL and not AT THEM
[20:41] <Temper> no you don't
[20:41] <HUDSONVALLEYGUY> yes i do
[20:41] <Temper> i asked twice "HOW" it would ruin your car...
[20:41] <HUDSONVALLEYGUY> and i told you
[20:41] <Temper> you just repeated that you weren't going to ruin your car
[20:42] <HUDSONVALLEYGUY> ITS WEAR AND TEAR listen to the show http://www.mixcloud.com/hudsonvalleysounds/called-ftl-about-quitting-my-phone-book-job-1-18-14/
[20:42] <Temper> "wear and tear" is not an answer
[20:42] <HUDSONVALLEYGUY> yes it is
[20:42] <Temper> what kind of car do you have?
[20:42] <HUDSONVALLEYGUY> im driving all overe the earyh to deleevr phone books
[20:42] <HUDSONVALLEYGUY> NOT
[20:42] <HUDSONVALLEYGUY> IM NOT gunna drive from NY to CONNECTICT and then BACK to NY to delever PHONE BOOKS, fuck it
[20:42] <Temper> how far is that?
[20:43] <HUDSONVALLEYGUY> how far is what
[20:43] <Temper> ny to connectict
[20:43] <HUDSONVALLEYGUY> (facepalm) look on a map
[20:43] <Temper> so you don't know?
[20:44] <HUDSONVALLEYGUY> dude..
[20:44] <Temper> how could you realistically weigh the offer without knowing?
[20:44] <HUDSONVALLEYGUY> it would be like DRIVING FROM CHICAGO TO FLORIDA TO DELEVER SHIT
[20:44] <Temper> no it's not
[20:44] <Temper> its 3 hours 1 min
[20:44] <HUDSONVALLEYGUY> http://www.mixcloud.com/hudsonvalleysounds/called-ftl-about-quitting-my-phone-book-job-1-18-14/ just give a listen
[20:44] <HUDSONVALLEYGUY> http://www.mixcloud.com/hudsonvalleysounds/called-ftl-about-quitting-my-phone-book-job-1-18-14/
[20:44] <Temper> 167 miles
[20:44] <HUDSONVALLEYGUY> bye
[20:45] <Temper> $25.05 in gass
[20:45] HUDSONVALLEYGUY no such nick/channel
So 6 hours of driving and $25.05 in gas. For $75? that's $8.325/hr wage. You would be a fool to refuse such an offer with 0 money!
Now, here's an option. Most places will rent out a truck, or some other company will. For one day you can guess it would be $60, and 2x-3x as much gas. However, you would be able to haul 10x as much easy! So if they would pay you $750 for 10x as much load you would make like $3000/mo
That would be your own place, internet, tv, etc.
You usually are right where you want to be...
7
General / Quantum Computing
« on: January 18, 2014, 04:05:56 AM »
Quantum Computers - The Ultimate Encryption Backdoor?
I made this video to try to explain why I don't think Quantum Computers will be cracking encryption anytime soon!
Please leave your scorn and ridicule below!
I made this video to try to explain why I don't think Quantum Computers will be cracking encryption anytime soon!
Please leave your scorn and ridicule below!
8
General / Ylisium - Not your RESPONSIBILITY
« on: January 05, 2014, 01:46:30 AM »
I hate it when people are so naive when it comes to big words.
Here is a big word. Responsibility.
Responsibility is those things that you must do for your own welfare. Earning for your clothes, shelter, and food is a responsibility. Planning for the future is your responsibility. And making restitution is your responsibility.
--- AND THAT IS WHERE THE WORD AND RESPONSIBILITY ENDS ---
If I say I am going to do x if you do y, you accepting the outcome of X when you do Y is not your responsibility. That is my action of enforcement.
Ylisium - Do you see the difference? RESPONSIBILITY cannot have ENFORCEMENT. It is something you do by yourself and for yourself.
Here is a big word. Responsibility.
Responsibility is those things that you must do for your own welfare. Earning for your clothes, shelter, and food is a responsibility. Planning for the future is your responsibility. And making restitution is your responsibility.
--- AND THAT IS WHERE THE WORD AND RESPONSIBILITY ENDS ---
If I say I am going to do x if you do y, you accepting the outcome of X when you do Y is not your responsibility. That is my action of enforcement.
Ylisium - Do you see the difference? RESPONSIBILITY cannot have ENFORCEMENT. It is something you do by yourself and for yourself.
9
General / Board is infected with some sort of PoughkeepsieGuy virus..
« on: January 03, 2014, 01:50:57 AM »
LOL, it has taken over the board. Like over 70% of the posts on the first page are made by PoughkeepsieGuy..
10
General / Is Mark full of shit when it comes to DUI?
« on: January 02, 2014, 04:52:13 PM »
So yesterday, we embarked on a debate topic I am very opinionated about. First, I resent my elders over this issue. They seem to be pussified in fear of death but condone the active destruction of the good name of people.
To qualify this, I graduated from high school in 2000. Yep, i was somehow luckly to get 3 0's. Yay me. But today I am 31. I haven't kept i touch with all my high school friends. But I can say this, there isn't one that I know, or can think of readily except myself and that is only because i beat my charge, that does not have a DUI on their record. This includes my brother, my best friends, my not so good friends, and my not friends. Each of them has a DUI.
All these people cannot go to Canada, work in many government or prestigious companies, and will carry the shame of conviction for the rest of their life. To this end, Mark should know and understand my words so painfully aware of the impact of forever. My point is, their skies are forever tarnished is the outlook of the future.
That is the carnage. The impact. The cost. It's value in numerical productivity lost is insurmountable. And therefor immeasurable.
Now lets look at the facts, and the true nature of the assertions.
But first, lets setup some explicit statistical maximums.
The subset of a class should follow the same characteristics as it's class. Otherwise the difference is statistically significant. For example, all members of the class Americans must go to school. Out of the American population, x% of it is homosexual. So in any high school the odds are that x% will me homosexual. That does not mean that their are not statistical outliers. In a small high school the statistical significance may not be effectual. AKA at 8% there may not be a homosexual in a group of 10 or even 20. However, in a school of 1000 if there is a significant deviation it is significant. For example, if the school of 1000 was a catholic school, then it is either that the religion prevents homosexuality or ,more likely, your information is not accurate because the sample is not being honest. But no matter what, the subset should mimic the characteristics of the bigger sample, or you have a difference. In stead of homosexuality, you could replace that with any characteristic, including race, ethnic group, or religion. Like x% of Americans are catholic, so x% of a high school classroom should be catholic.
So, the first question is, what does our population look like?
To answer this we will ask 2 questions: 1) On the daily average, how many people are drunk. 2) On the daily average, how many people die in an automobile.
The first question is going to be factually skewed. This is because there is stigma associated with the affirmative response to the first question.
However, according to this study (http://www.andjrnl.org/article/S2212-2672(12)02048-5/abstract) carried by this newspaper here (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/02/25/american-alcohol-guidelines-habits_n_2756004.html) - 36% of men and 21% of women consumed alcohol.
So, with http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0884102.html we will normalize these numbers to ((36%*49.2)+(22%*50.
)/100 = 28.8% of Americans should be drunk when they die in an automobile. All things equal.
Luckily (: we have the number of people who have died in autos and when anyone dies - drug testing is mandatory. So all these numbers are concrete. This is also, Mark's "worst case scenario". However, I would rather die in a car then never walk again or use my arms again after getting out of one. But these numbers we have.. anyways
SEE http://www-fars.nhtsa.dot.gov/Main/index.aspx
So according to the government, (i hear an objection, over-ruled!)
In 2011 there were 29,757 fatalities on the road.
In 1994 there were 36,254 fatalities on the road.
Between the years of 1994 and 2011 (17 years), 653,782 people died for an average of 38457.8 people per year.
So it stands to statistical inference, that 28.8% of 38457 or 11,109 people should be drunk.
Yes, I know, times matter, you think. Etc, etc. But that is not your argument. Your argument is getting people who drink off the road will save lives.
So what does FARS at NHTSA say?
If we query 2011, at "Option 3 (Crash / Vehicle / Driver / Precrash / Occupant)" Choose "Condition (Impairment) At Time of Crash" we get:
Under the Influence of Alcohol, Drugs or Medication 6103 out of 44,153 or 13.82% of the drivers in an accident with a fatality were impaired. Now there were:
Not Reported 1342
Unknown if Impaired 7187
But it is clearly statistically significant that people who drive do not do so while impaired.
But let's just look at BAC.
Now at the "Legal limit" of 0.08% or more, 7,737 people out of 25,217 "occupants" would be arrested or (30.7%) However, conveniently, there i no data for just the drivers. They include the BAC of all occupants. In fact, there are 52643 occupants but only around 43,000 drivers. So without doing the painful work of normalizing all the data I can easily tell you that being drunk does not give significant rise to the number dead on the road by a vehicle.
Statistically, charging people for a DUI because DUI's cause accidents is just not supported by data. If you move the legal limit to 0.1% (where it once was) then the numbers are worse, at 7154/25217=28.4% which is around my population size. It is also around 2-3 beers etc or what I would call a normal drinker or OUR POPULATION REPRESENTATION!
So I hereby conclude Mark is a statist scum bag
LOL And he is advocating the hurting of people without benign justification.
He did come up with some good points, like for example, if i swing to hit your face but stop just before impact, there is no victim so there is no crime. This is a clear fallacy for there is clearly a victim, the one who had emotional and psychological distress thrust upon them. So as long as you don't drive around in a car with a big sign that says "HAHAHA I AM DRUNK YOU BETTER WATCH OUT!" then this is not a good analogy.
I of course, await his response (and yours).
To qualify this, I graduated from high school in 2000. Yep, i was somehow luckly to get 3 0's. Yay me. But today I am 31. I haven't kept i touch with all my high school friends. But I can say this, there isn't one that I know, or can think of readily except myself and that is only because i beat my charge, that does not have a DUI on their record. This includes my brother, my best friends, my not so good friends, and my not friends. Each of them has a DUI.
All these people cannot go to Canada, work in many government or prestigious companies, and will carry the shame of conviction for the rest of their life. To this end, Mark should know and understand my words so painfully aware of the impact of forever. My point is, their skies are forever tarnished is the outlook of the future.
That is the carnage. The impact. The cost. It's value in numerical productivity lost is insurmountable. And therefor immeasurable.
Now lets look at the facts, and the true nature of the assertions.
But first, lets setup some explicit statistical maximums.
The subset of a class should follow the same characteristics as it's class. Otherwise the difference is statistically significant. For example, all members of the class Americans must go to school. Out of the American population, x% of it is homosexual. So in any high school the odds are that x% will me homosexual. That does not mean that their are not statistical outliers. In a small high school the statistical significance may not be effectual. AKA at 8% there may not be a homosexual in a group of 10 or even 20. However, in a school of 1000 if there is a significant deviation it is significant. For example, if the school of 1000 was a catholic school, then it is either that the religion prevents homosexuality or ,more likely, your information is not accurate because the sample is not being honest. But no matter what, the subset should mimic the characteristics of the bigger sample, or you have a difference. In stead of homosexuality, you could replace that with any characteristic, including race, ethnic group, or religion. Like x% of Americans are catholic, so x% of a high school classroom should be catholic.
So, the first question is, what does our population look like?
To answer this we will ask 2 questions: 1) On the daily average, how many people are drunk. 2) On the daily average, how many people die in an automobile.
The first question is going to be factually skewed. This is because there is stigma associated with the affirmative response to the first question.
However, according to this study (http://www.andjrnl.org/article/S2212-2672(12)02048-5/abstract) carried by this newspaper here (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/02/25/american-alcohol-guidelines-habits_n_2756004.html) - 36% of men and 21% of women consumed alcohol.
So, with http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0884102.html we will normalize these numbers to ((36%*49.2)+(22%*50.
)/100 = 28.8% of Americans should be drunk when they die in an automobile. All things equal.Luckily (: we have the number of people who have died in autos and when anyone dies - drug testing is mandatory. So all these numbers are concrete. This is also, Mark's "worst case scenario". However, I would rather die in a car then never walk again or use my arms again after getting out of one. But these numbers we have.. anyways
SEE http://www-fars.nhtsa.dot.gov/Main/index.aspx
So according to the government, (i hear an objection, over-ruled!)
In 2011 there were 29,757 fatalities on the road.
In 1994 there were 36,254 fatalities on the road.
Between the years of 1994 and 2011 (17 years), 653,782 people died for an average of 38457.8 people per year.
So it stands to statistical inference, that 28.8% of 38457 or 11,109 people should be drunk.
Yes, I know, times matter, you think. Etc, etc. But that is not your argument. Your argument is getting people who drink off the road will save lives.
So what does FARS at NHTSA say?
If we query 2011, at "Option 3 (Crash / Vehicle / Driver / Precrash / Occupant)" Choose "Condition (Impairment) At Time of Crash" we get:
Under the Influence of Alcohol, Drugs or Medication 6103 out of 44,153 or 13.82% of the drivers in an accident with a fatality were impaired. Now there were:
Not Reported 1342
Unknown if Impaired 7187
But it is clearly statistically significant that people who drive do not do so while impaired.
But let's just look at BAC.
Alcohol Test Result Total
0.00 % BAC 15964
0.01 % BAC 273
0.02 % BAC 231
0.03 % BAC 206
0.04 % BAC 186
0.05 % BAC 186
0.06 % BAC 246
0.07 % BAC 188
0.08 % BAC 312
0.09 % BAC 271
0.10 % BAC 297
0.11 % BAC 367
0.12 % BAC 348
0.13 % BAC 413
0.14 % BAC 396
0.15 % BAC 410
0.16 % BAC 450
0.17 % BAC 404
0.18 % BAC 457
0.19 % BAC 406
0.20 % BAC 409
0.21 % BAC 416
0.22 % BAC 376
0.23 % BAC 307
0.24 % BAC 302
0.25 % BAC 243
0.26 % BAC 202
0.27 % BAC 186
0.28 % BAC 151
0.29 % BAC 121
0.30 % BAC 95
0.31 % BAC 78
0.32 % BAC 49
0.33 % BAC 54
0.34 % BAC 48
0.35 % BAC 32
0.36 % BAC 30
0.37 % BAC 24
0.38 % BAC 12
0.39 % BAC 12
0.40 % BAC 10
0.41 % BAC 9
0.42 % BAC 9
0.43 % BAC 3
0.44 % BAC 2
0.45 % BAC 5
0.46 % BAC 3
0.47 % BAC 2
0.48 % BAC 1
0.50 % BAC 1
0.51 % BAC 2
0.54 % BAC 3
0.59 % BAC 1
0.60 % BAC 1
0.61 % BAC 1
0.63 % BAC 2
0.65 % BAC 2
0.66 % BAC 1
0.74 % BAC 1
Not Reported 945
Test Not Given 23908
AC Test Performed,Results Unknown 1101
Positive Reading With No Actual Value 32
Unknown if tested 1440
Now at the "Legal limit" of 0.08% or more, 7,737 people out of 25,217 "occupants" would be arrested or (30.7%) However, conveniently, there i no data for just the drivers. They include the BAC of all occupants. In fact, there are 52643 occupants but only around 43,000 drivers. So without doing the painful work of normalizing all the data I can easily tell you that being drunk does not give significant rise to the number dead on the road by a vehicle.
Statistically, charging people for a DUI because DUI's cause accidents is just not supported by data. If you move the legal limit to 0.1% (where it once was) then the numbers are worse, at 7154/25217=28.4% which is around my population size. It is also around 2-3 beers etc or what I would call a normal drinker or OUR POPULATION REPRESENTATION!
So I hereby conclude Mark is a statist scum bag
LOL And he is advocating the hurting of people without benign justification.He did come up with some good points, like for example, if i swing to hit your face but stop just before impact, there is no victim so there is no crime. This is a clear fallacy for there is clearly a victim, the one who had emotional and psychological distress thrust upon them. So as long as you don't drive around in a car with a big sign that says "HAHAHA I AM DRUNK YOU BETTER WATCH OUT!" then this is not a good analogy.
I of course, await his response (and yours).
11
General / Information Security
« on: October 03, 2013, 10:09:08 PM »
I called in on 10/03/2013 at about 8:25-8:30PM CST. I was talking about data security on computers. I just wanted to show my sources.
Wear Leveling Devices (SSDs, Flash, USB Thumb Drives, ETC)
http://www.truecrypt.org/docs/wear-leveling#Y397
http://www.kingston.com/us/community/articledetail?ArticleId=10
http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9211519/Can_data_stored_on_an_SSD_be_secured_
http://nvsl.ucsd.edu/index.php?path=projects/sanitize
So again, if the drive support the method of securely erasing data and it is implemented properly there is not a problem. The problem is you will never know if this is true!
And on Intel vPro:
What is Intel vPro Technology
Module 1: Introduction to Intel® vPro™ Technology
Intel vPro Demo Anti Theft
http://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/remote-support/remote-support-solutions-for-laptops-and-desktops.html
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/vpro-anti-theft-management-sba,3266.html
http://www.bomgar.com/products/features/intel-vpro
Wear Leveling Devices (SSDs, Flash, USB Thumb Drives, ETC)
http://www.truecrypt.org/docs/wear-leveling#Y397
http://www.kingston.com/us/community/articledetail?ArticleId=10
http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9211519/Can_data_stored_on_an_SSD_be_secured_
http://nvsl.ucsd.edu/index.php?path=projects/sanitize
So again, if the drive support the method of securely erasing data and it is implemented properly there is not a problem. The problem is you will never know if this is true!
And on Intel vPro:
What is Intel vPro Technology
Module 1: Introduction to Intel® vPro™ Technology
Intel vPro Demo Anti Theft
http://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/remote-support/remote-support-solutions-for-laptops-and-desktops.html
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/vpro-anti-theft-management-sba,3266.html
http://www.bomgar.com/products/features/intel-vpro
12
The Show / What the heck Mark?!
« on: August 13, 2013, 03:05:17 AM »
You really don't think it is fair for someone to modify a contract sent from a bank to negotiate better terms?
In reference to: http://www.minyanville.com/business-news/editors-pick/articles/A-Russian-Bank-Is-Sued-for/8/7/2013/id/51205 and your comments at the end of FTL on 08/12/2013...
What did you say? Something along the lines of they don't have to provide that level of service as to negotiate a contract?
Well I am just one person and I get about 15 pieces of mail a day. That's like.. umm.. 5475 pieces of mail a year. I have to sort all that, respond when "demanded", etc etc. I think that is a lot. At an average of just 30 seconds per piece to "handle" thats 45.6 hours per year.
To pretend that a company, in this case a bank, doesn't have to honor the principles that in a contract:
1) Both parties are equal
2) Both parties have to agree willingly
3) Both parties have the power to negotiate to get a better deal
For someone that seems to be for a free state, or what not, it seemed like you were saying that people are subordinate to corporations. I think that is nonsense. If ANYONE has the ability to READ every contract the get returned it is a corporation or bank.
Can I post and get some website or something that has my "standard contractual terms" and then enforce them!? I doubt it. If people could do that, as corporations seem to be able to, they probably all would.
No if I am expected to read everything and handle all my affairs, then a bank or corporation should too.
Anyways, just my opinion - feel free to blast me for it.
In reference to: http://www.minyanville.com/business-news/editors-pick/articles/A-Russian-Bank-Is-Sued-for/8/7/2013/id/51205 and your comments at the end of FTL on 08/12/2013...
What did you say? Something along the lines of they don't have to provide that level of service as to negotiate a contract?
Well I am just one person and I get about 15 pieces of mail a day. That's like.. umm.. 5475 pieces of mail a year. I have to sort all that, respond when "demanded", etc etc. I think that is a lot. At an average of just 30 seconds per piece to "handle" thats 45.6 hours per year.
To pretend that a company, in this case a bank, doesn't have to honor the principles that in a contract:
1) Both parties are equal
2) Both parties have to agree willingly
3) Both parties have the power to negotiate to get a better deal
For someone that seems to be for a free state, or what not, it seemed like you were saying that people are subordinate to corporations. I think that is nonsense. If ANYONE has the ability to READ every contract the get returned it is a corporation or bank.
Can I post and get some website or something that has my "standard contractual terms" and then enforce them!? I doubt it. If people could do that, as corporations seem to be able to, they probably all would.
No if I am expected to read everything and handle all my affairs, then a bank or corporation should too.
Anyways, just my opinion - feel free to blast me for it.
13
Free Radio Forum / Way not to get caught?
« on: August 12, 2013, 04:03:22 AM »
I don't know much about radio, so I just wanted to ask:
What if you had 3 or 4 transmitters, separated by a mile or more, hooked up to the internet that were connected together each with their own FM transmitter on the same channel. Then, randomly, 1 node would be selected as the master and would start broadcasting while the others would power down the transmitter. Then say every 5 or 10 minutes a new node would be randomly selected making it the new master and the others would power down.
A) What would be the effect on the listener? Would this just make the station unusable!?
B) Could this be triangulated?
Cause with a battery, solar panel, and a prepaid GPRS modem - I think this would be a good way of giving the FCC the proverbial FINGER!
Just an idea.
What if you had 3 or 4 transmitters, separated by a mile or more, hooked up to the internet that were connected together each with their own FM transmitter on the same channel. Then, randomly, 1 node would be selected as the master and would start broadcasting while the others would power down the transmitter. Then say every 5 or 10 minutes a new node would be randomly selected making it the new master and the others would power down.
A) What would be the effect on the listener? Would this just make the station unusable!?
B) Could this be triangulated?
Cause with a battery, solar panel, and a prepaid GPRS modem - I think this would be a good way of giving the FCC the proverbial FINGER!
Just an idea.
Pages: [1]