On Friday 07 Nov 2008 1:20:55 am Perry E. Metzger wrote:
> Do you believe that so long as I continue to brush my teeth, the
> volcanos will be kept at bay?
>
>
> Perry
>
> PS as a child I was less diligent about dental hygiene and, at the
> same time, Mount Saint Helens violently erupted.
You hav
ss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Tuesday 28 Oct 2008 1:08:11 am Perry E. Metzger wrote:
>> Your claim, reproduced above, is that somehow the US has patched its
>> weak spots in its security and that we are therefore now more
>> secure. Neither activity you cite has any actual value in increasin
On Sun, Nov 2, 2008 at 2:38 PM, Rishab Aiyer Ghosh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> they indeed show causation. since they will
> all include correlation in their results as one of the pieces of
> evidence for causation, well causation and correlation would correlate.
Rishab! NOT a paragraph to spri
On Thu, 2008-10-30 at 16:45 +0530, Sirtaj Singh Kang wrote:
> Sorry sir but you have been misled, correlation does indeed imply
> causation. Here is the proof:
>
> http://ghill.customer.netspace.net.au/correlation-causation.html
heh thanks for that article :-)
of course it's a joke, but if it
On Thursday 30 October 2008, Ramakrishnan Sundaram wrote:
> And this is your official position on this matter, is it?
I'm new to the internet and this multiple-email-accounts thing.
This would have never happened with mutt.
-Taj.
2008/10/30 Sirtaj Singh Kang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> Sirtaj Singh Kang
> Chief Technology Officer
> Direct: 512.696.1418
> Mobile: +91-98180-8372
>
> www.mpowermobile.com
>
> This email is subject to the confidentiality terms at :
> http://www.mpowermobile.com/confidentiality.html
>
And this is y
On Thursday 30 October 2008, Rishab Aiyer Ghosh wrote:
[snip]
> when i read shiv's original post i thought he was being sarcastic, and
> didn't really think the US measures were any good, just that they looked
> good to people. maybe he still is? otherwise this is classic confusion
> between causa
hint? they ASK here, and haggle if they think their diwali bonus is too low
Charles Haynes [30/10/08 09:01 +1100]:
On Wed, Oct 29, 2008 at 6:27 PM, Deepa Mohan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
But Charles...if you are spinning counter-clockwise in Australia, isn't that
clockwise Up Here or something
>
> One has to marvel at the kind of fight put up by people like Galileo or
> Semmelweiss (in medicine) fighting against easy conclusions that are
> reached
> regarding causality.
>
I'm thinking of Sisyphus, actually.
--
Amit Varma
http://www.indiauncut.com
On Thursday 30 Oct 2008 4:53:53 am Rishab Aiyer Ghosh wrote:
> classic confusion
> between causality and correlation. and not even good correlation,
I really don't know about the US but among Indians in India this is rampant.
It is a huge problem in medical practice because there are a large num
On Wed, 2008-10-29 at 10:08 +0530, ss wrote:
> But the fact remains that the US has seen virtually no terorist acts since it
> undertook thse emasuers as opposed to India wheer terrorism continues
> unabated. The obvious conclusion that one can reach, despite your
> disagreement is that the meas
On Wed, Oct 29, 2008 at 6:27 PM, Deepa Mohan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> But Charles...if you are spinning counter-clockwise in Australia, isn't that
> clockwise Up Here or something?!
> It's like that Hitler's Swastika Is The Reverse of The Hindu Swastika
> thingy
The Sydney Public Library
On Wednesday 29 Oct 2008 3:17:35 pm Eugen Leitl wrote:
> Have you ever considered a career in politics?
Exactly!
I think you hit the nail on the head. Looking at shampoo bottles may be a
completely useless exercise, but as long as there are no more terrorist
attacks on the US mainland everyon
On Wed, Oct 29, 2008 at 03:24:22PM +0530, Deepa Mohan wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 29, 2008 at 3:17 PM, Eugen Leitl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >
> > Are you familiar with the cargo cult?
>
>
>
> No, *I* am not...would rather ask you than google...what IS the cargo cult?
Asking Google is never wron
On Wed, Oct 29, 2008 at 3:17 PM, Eugen Leitl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Are you familiar with the cargo cult?
No, *I* am not...would rather ask you than google...what IS the cargo cult?
Deepa.
On Wed, Oct 29, 2008 at 10:08:25AM +0530, ss wrote:
> But the fact remains that the US has seen virtually no terorist acts since it
> undertook thse emasuers as opposed to India wheer terrorism continues
Your sample size is nil. You don't know who orchestrated the
attacks. In general no conclus
On Wed, Oct 29, 2008 at 11:51 AM, Charles Haynes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
>
>
>
> I have been spinning counterclockwise three times each morning in
> order to prevent domestic terrorism. Seem to be working.
But Charles...if you are spinning counter-clockwise in Australia, isn't that
clockwise Up
On Wed, 29 Oct 2008, Charles Haynes wrote:
On Wed, Oct 29, 2008 at 3:38 PM, ss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Tuesday 28 Oct 2008 1:08:11 am Perry E. Metzger wrote:
Your claim, reproduced above, is that somehow the US has patched its
weak spots in its security and that we are therefore now more
On Wed, Oct 29, 2008 at 3:38 PM, ss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tuesday 28 Oct 2008 1:08:11 am Perry E. Metzger wrote:
>> Your claim, reproduced above, is that somehow the US has patched its
>> weak spots in its security and that we are therefore now more
>> secure. Neither activity you cite ha
On Tuesday 28 Oct 2008 1:00:03 am Perry E. Metzger wrote:
> So I take it you thus cannot present information for the original
> claim that you "knew for a fact".
This is correct.
I cannot present information for the original claim that I still claim that i
know for a fact.
At least - YOU will
On Tuesday 28 Oct 2008 1:08:11 am Perry E. Metzger wrote:
> Your claim, reproduced above, is that somehow the US has patched its
> weak spots in its security and that we are therefore now more
> secure. Neither activity you cite has any actual value in increasing
> security,
But the fact remains t
ss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Tuesday 21 Oct 2008 1:09:18 am Perry E. Metzger wrote:
>> > "The US had a brief period when terrorist attacks seemed to become
>> > frequent. But the US security agencies clamped down so effectively
>> > on the weak spots that were open to misuse by terrorists
> A cardiologist was asked to attend urgently to a patient who had
> developed cardiac tamponade (vitals were stable at this point). She
> refused to put in a needle until a 'code' was called because in a
> code whatever you do you cannot be sued.
I don't know how the particular individual behave
Suresh Ramasubramanian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> It is rather complex ..
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Good_Samaritan_law
Those apply to private individuals, typically without medical
training. The reason for them is to eliminate the previous precedent
based situation in which an ordinary
ss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Tuesday 21 Oct 2008 1:03:06 am Perry E. Metzger wrote:
>> I doubt it. You can't sue the government, unless it specifically
>> allows you to. Sovereign immunity. Mostly, the security theater is
>> there because it provides cover for politicians and bureaucrats.
>
ss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Tuesday 21 Oct 2008 1:03:06 am Perry E. Metzger wrote:
>> You know this for a fact, eh? I think you would have your medical
>> license pulled for doing something like that.
>
> LOL this is precisely what I am talking about. The loosely wielded threat
> that "yo
On Tue, Oct 21, 2008 at 7:07 AM, ss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[...]
> Yes but the government could outsource airport security to a private agency
> that can get sued. Unless I am mistaken.
Blackwater's done just fine being a government sanctioned mercenary
terrorist outfit.
Cheeni
On Tuesday 21 Oct 2008 7:41:40 am Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote:
> It is rather complex ..
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Good_Samaritan_law
>
> Perry E. Metzger [20/10/08 15:33 -0400]:
> >> I know for a fact that even doctors sometimes delay emergency medical
> >> treatment in the US until a pati
It is rather complex ..
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Good_Samaritan_law
Perry E. Metzger [20/10/08 15:33 -0400]:
I know for a fact that even doctors sometimes delay emergency medical
treatment in the US until a patient with a particular emergency is certified
by peers as suffering from a probl
On Tuesday 21 Oct 2008 1:03:06 am Perry E. Metzger wrote:
> I doubt it. You can't sue the government, unless it specifically
> allows you to. Sovereign immunity. Mostly, the security theater is
> there because it provides cover for politicians and bureaucrats.
Yes but the government could outsourc
On Tuesday 21 Oct 2008 1:09:18 am Perry E. Metzger wrote:
> > "The US had a brief period when terrorist attacks seemed to become
> > frequent. But the US security agencies clamped down so effectively
> > on the weak spots that were open to misuse by terrorists that the US
> > made itself relativel
On Tuesday 21 Oct 2008 1:03:06 am Perry E. Metzger wrote:
> You know this for a fact, eh? I think you would have your medical
> license pulled for doing something like that.
LOL this is precisely what I am talking about. The loosely wielded threat
that "you can have your medical license pulled".
Eugen Leitl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Actually, there is no way of preventing terrorism. Absolutely none,
There is one. If all life is exterminated, we will be free of
terrorism as well.
Perry
--
Perry E. Metzger[EMAIL PROTECTED]
ss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Looked at from one particular perspective, what you have written and
> what I wrote are not mutually incompatible. Let me tell the story
> this way:
>
> "The US had a brief period when terrorist attacks seemed to become
> frequent. But the US security agencies cla
ss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Somehow, I suspect that lawyers in the US are inextricably intertwined with
> this.
I doubt it. You can't sue the government, unless it specifically
allows you to. Sovereign immunity. Mostly, the security theater is
there because it provides cover for politicians
On Sun, Oct 19, 2008 at 06:19:13AM +0530, ss wrote:
> "The US had a brief period when terrorist attacks seemed to become frequent.
The US had never any serious (as compared to other sources of mortality)
terrorist attacks, period.
http://www.casi.org.uk/discuss/2002/msg02096.html
> But the US
On Fri, 2008-10-17 at 13:10 -0400, Perry E. Metzger wrote:
> So what exactly do you disagree with? You believe that searching
> people for shampoo before letting them on airplanes is of critical
> importance to society? You think randomly assembled "watch lists" of
> names with millions of entries
On Saturday 18 Oct 2008 2:44:36 pm Charles Haynes wrote:
> > The US has never really faced concerted serious terrorist attacks within
> > its own heartland like India, or for that matter Britain, Germany and
> > Spain. Or Russia.
>
> I guess that depends on what you consider "serious" or "concerted
Charles Haynes [18/10/08 20:14 +1100]:
I guess that depends on what you consider "serious" or "concerted."
I'd think everyone would agree that the Oklahoma City bombing, the
first World Trade Center bombing, and the anthrax attacks were
"serious." Whether there have been "concerted" attacks or no
On Sat, Oct 18, 2008 at 3:30 PM, ss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> There is a perception problem that is affectng security agencies in the US
> (IMVHO of course).
> The US has never really faced concerted serious terrorist attacks within its
> own heartland like India, or for that matter Britain, G
On Fri, Oct 17, 2008 at 10:49:46PM +0530, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote:
> Let us put it this way. I think security theater is dumb. But bruce moves to
> the opposite extent .. his arguing that all this is solely caused by
> groupthink of the sort that drives inner city kids into gangs is missing th
On Sat, Oct 18, 2008 at 10:00 AM, ss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Saturday 18 Oct 2008 8:38:30 am Gautam John wrote:
>> Just saw this:
>>
>> http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/print/200811/airport-security
>
> There is a perception problem that is affectng security agencies in the US
> (IMVHO of cou
On Saturday 18 Oct 2008 8:38:30 am Gautam John wrote:
> Just saw this:
>
> http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/print/200811/airport-security
There is a perception problem that is affectng security agencies in the US
(IMVHO of course).
The US has never really faced concerted serious terrorist attacks
Just saw this:
http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/print/200811/airport-security
We took our shoes off and placed our laptops in bins. Schneier took
from his bag a 12-ounce container labeled "saline solution."
"It's allowed," he said. Medical supplies, such as saline solution for
contact-lens clean
On Friday 17 Oct 2008 10:40:51 pm Perry E. Metzger wrote:
> So what exactly do you disagree with?
It is possible that I am disagreeing with a Max Abrahms rather than the author
I disagree with fundamental statements about "Who are the terrorists". This
statement suggests that the author (or Max
Alok G. Singh [17/10/08 23:22 +0530]:
I don't think he was arguing that this was _solely_ groupthink. Or were
you saying that groupthink has no significant role to play in terrorist
organisations ?
At a very low level possibly. The manipulation of that thought process, and
its careful channelin
Perry E. Metzger [17/10/08 14:16 -0400]:
Perhaps, but it is probably of value that we ask the question "what
causes all of this" rather than simply deciding the solution is to put
more concrete barriers up in the middle of our towns. Clearly what
we're doing now isn't of much help -- asking funda
"Suresh Ramasubramanian" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Let us put it this way. I think security theater is dumb. But bruce
> moves to the opposite extent .. his arguing that all this is solely
> caused by groupthink of the sort that drives inner city kids into
> gangs is missing the forest for the
On 17 Oct 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> his arguing that all this is solely caused by groupthink of the sort
> that drives inner city kids into gangs is missing the forest for the
> trees.
I don't think he was arguing that this was _solely_ groupthink. Or were
you saying that groupthink has no
; From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
> Of Perry E. Metzger
> Sent: Friday, October 17, 2008 10:41 PM
> To: silklist@lists.hserus.net
> Subject: Re: [silk] The Seven Habits of Highly Ineffective Terrorists
>
>
> "Suresh Ramasubramanian" &
"Suresh Ramasubramanian" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Generally speaking, if he was talking about IT security, fine -
> though even there there's a bit of a libertarian colored view
Bruce is not a libertarian (though I am).
> of things that might lead to a slightly divergent version of reality
such, well, I tend
to disagree.
srs
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
> Of Perry E. Metzger
> Sent: Friday, October 17, 2008 10:02 PM
> To: silklist@lists.hserus.net
> Subject: Re: [silk] The Seven Habits of Hig
ss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Wednesday 15 Oct 2008 7:50:49 pm Deepa Mohan wrote:
>> Shiv hasn't jumped into this conversation yet?
>
> Will do. No time now but the first reading suggests idiocy and
> blinkers on the part of the author.
Bruce is one of the smarter guys I know, and general
On Wednesday 15 Oct 2008 7:50:49 pm Deepa Mohan wrote:
> Shiv hasn't jumped into this conversation yet?
Will do. No time now but the first reading suggests idiocy and blinkers on the
part of the author.
He says terrorists are swayed by a blog or conversion weeks before.
Fine. But he misses the
> On Wed, Oct 15, 2008 at 6:39 PM, Suresh Ramasubramanian
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
>
>> Udhay Shankar N [15/10/08 18:35 +0530]:
>> The idea of jihad is well.. flexible. And you can wage jihad wherever
>> you
>> like - which would explain why saudis land in kashmir, british convert
>> muslims lan
On Wed, Oct 15, 2008 at 6:39 PM, Suresh Ramasubramanian
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
> Udhay Shankar N [15/10/08 18:35 +0530]:
> The idea of jihad is well.. flexible. And you can wage jihad wherever you
> like - which would explain why saudis land in kashmir, british convert
> muslims land in afghani
Udhay Shankar N [15/10/08 18:35 +0530]:
Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote, [on 10/15/2008 6:04 PM]:
Terror as a means to rule, rather than as a groupthink / social bonding
exercise.
The two aren't mutually exclusive, are they?
Depends, as long as you dont oversimplify it like the study schneier q
Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote, [on 10/15/2008 6:04 PM]:
> Terror as a means to rule, rather than as a groupthink / social bonding
> exercise.
The two aren't mutually exclusive, are they?
Udhay
--
((Udhay Shankar N)) ((udhay @ pobox.com)) ((www.digeratus.com))
Badri Natarajan [15/10/08 13:21 +0100]:
Interesting rebuttal:
http://www.cambridgeblog.org/2008/10/can-terror-be-understood/
Interesting article by Schneier. But the rebuttal..I spent 5 mins (trying)
to read it and couldn't understand anything he said - it sounds like
complete gibberish. Can so
>
> Interesting rebuttal:
> http://www.cambridgeblog.org/2008/10/can-terror-be-understood/
>
Interesting article by Schneier. But the rebuttal..I spent 5 mins (trying)
to read it and couldn't understand anything he said - it sounds like
complete gibberish. Can someone please summarize it in Englis
Bruce Schneier on "The Seven Habits of Highly Ineffective Terrorists" -
worth reading.
Thoughts?
Udhay
** *** * *** *** *
The Seven Habits of Highly Ineffective Terrorists
Most counterterrorism policies fail, not because of tactical problems,
but because of
61 matches
Mail list logo
