ReallyBigFeet
Mar 17, 09:04 AM
I think its pretty obvious the OP just made this whole story up to get attention.
Nonetheless, the way HR policies work anymore, people won't have their paychecks "docked" for cash shortages. Loss Prevention will investigate the cash shortage, the kid will most likely be exonerated of theft and given a "first and final warning." BB is a big company and they won't typically fire someone for a first offense...although the kids day certainly would have been ruined with the stress of the investigation and implied allegations.
So while I personally believe the OP just did this to get a rise, the amount of absolute ignorance and naivete of the remaining posters here is laughable. You people really need to put away your pitchforks and torches and get some common sense.
Bull. I had a girlfriend in high school get fired from OfficeMax for being $100 off where she had been working for almost a year.
News for you. Your girlfriend didn't get fired for that ONE instance. You just were totally biased about the facts....inclusive of the ones she didn't give you about all the other things she had done wrong prior that made this the proverbial straw on the camels back.
Nonetheless, the way HR policies work anymore, people won't have their paychecks "docked" for cash shortages. Loss Prevention will investigate the cash shortage, the kid will most likely be exonerated of theft and given a "first and final warning." BB is a big company and they won't typically fire someone for a first offense...although the kids day certainly would have been ruined with the stress of the investigation and implied allegations.
So while I personally believe the OP just did this to get a rise, the amount of absolute ignorance and naivete of the remaining posters here is laughable. You people really need to put away your pitchforks and torches and get some common sense.
Bull. I had a girlfriend in high school get fired from OfficeMax for being $100 off where she had been working for almost a year.
News for you. Your girlfriend didn't get fired for that ONE instance. You just were totally biased about the facts....inclusive of the ones she didn't give you about all the other things she had done wrong prior that made this the proverbial straw on the camels back.
Amnak
Apr 25, 12:30 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_7 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8E303 Safari/6533.18.5)
I definitly think this is a good idea, The screen the size it is now is fine , however the most important part is the phones physical sizes which is perfect
I definitly think this is a good idea, The screen the size it is now is fine , however the most important part is the phones physical sizes which is perfect
Plymouthbreezer
Oct 25, 05:07 PM
Obviously, you can understand the confusion.
:rolleyes:
:rolleyes:
KnightWRX
Mar 13, 12:45 PM
They also helped create an entire new software development industry
Which software development industry would this be ? Embedded systems ? Mobile devices ?
Nope, nothing new there. They expanded maybe, but they did not create.
I'm not talking about the lower levels of computing. I'm talking about the parts of computing that End Users, who will never see an IDE in their entire lives. This is where computing is being redefined. They're shifting the way people use the "input. Process. Output.Store".
Again for the people wanting very much to redefine computing, "shifting the way people use" is not redefining computing. At least qualify it properly as a shift in usability, not in computing. You are talking about the lower levels when you use the word computing.
Why are some of you uninitiated insisting on using "computing" and claiming it is redefined ? Is it because a shift in usability doesn't sound as great accomplishment and you want to make what Apple did much bigger than it really is ? Stay objective please, don't involve emotions you have for a corporation in this discussion.
Which software development industry would this be ? Embedded systems ? Mobile devices ?
Nope, nothing new there. They expanded maybe, but they did not create.
I'm not talking about the lower levels of computing. I'm talking about the parts of computing that End Users, who will never see an IDE in their entire lives. This is where computing is being redefined. They're shifting the way people use the "input. Process. Output.Store".
Again for the people wanting very much to redefine computing, "shifting the way people use" is not redefining computing. At least qualify it properly as a shift in usability, not in computing. You are talking about the lower levels when you use the word computing.
Why are some of you uninitiated insisting on using "computing" and claiming it is redefined ? Is it because a shift in usability doesn't sound as great accomplishment and you want to make what Apple did much bigger than it really is ? Stay objective please, don't involve emotions you have for a corporation in this discussion.
more...
erratikmind
Mar 17, 08:27 AM
Enjoy your new iPad. Based on your comments, you conscience is clear and unencumbered. Personally, I do not agree nor practice your way of thinking/living. However, to each his/her own methods.
Any means to justify a self serving end . . . Quite sad actually.
When the messenger of Misery comes knocking at your door, it will be of your own doing.
Any means to justify a self serving end . . . Quite sad actually.
When the messenger of Misery comes knocking at your door, it will be of your own doing.
Ardency
Mar 17, 10:26 AM
Your probably on camera and your probably going to get Banned from Best buy or if the see you in their they will ask for their money or call the cops. You knew you were getting it cheaper then the price it sells for so it's basically you stole from them. so if I were you I would not go into that Best buy ever again. The security guy probably knows who you are now.
Actually he won't, the OP has a receipt that says he paid for the item in full. They have him on camera paying cash. Those two items match up and the OP would be able to use that as evidence to fight it. With the amount of transactions a cashier does it makes it more difficult to pinpoint which transaction the error occurred on.
To those saying the cashier will have his pay docked you're wrong. It is illegal for companies to dock pay for a cash shortage there are exceptions, but in this case the company has no right to it. The only recourse of action is to fire him. Which may or may not happen.
Actually he won't, the OP has a receipt that says he paid for the item in full. They have him on camera paying cash. Those two items match up and the OP would be able to use that as evidence to fight it. With the amount of transactions a cashier does it makes it more difficult to pinpoint which transaction the error occurred on.
To those saying the cashier will have his pay docked you're wrong. It is illegal for companies to dock pay for a cash shortage there are exceptions, but in this case the company has no right to it. The only recourse of action is to fire him. Which may or may not happen.
more...
MattSepeta
Apr 27, 04:19 PM
am I the only one to think that separate restroom from men and women are an obsolete relic of the past?
put stalls in. that should be enough for privacy. full separate facility don't make any sense logically, technically and economically.
Interesting take, but I can see in 1080p the impending sexual harassment lawsuits.
put stalls in. that should be enough for privacy. full separate facility don't make any sense logically, technically and economically.
Interesting take, but I can see in 1080p the impending sexual harassment lawsuits.
Lone Deranger
Apr 2, 11:49 AM
MS still playing catchup by the looks of the feature list in my opinion.
Nothing there to tempt me away from OSX. Not even tempting enough to make me upgrade my W7 license.
(And my god that desktop background image looks hideous).
Nothing there to tempt me away from OSX. Not even tempting enough to make me upgrade my W7 license.
(And my god that desktop background image looks hideous).
more...
h00ligan
Mar 17, 12:53 AM
Good luck with this thread, you better get your flame suit at the ready.
dejo
Apr 25, 03:39 PM
I declared timer as an instance method:
- (IBAction) cancelTime: (id) sender;
- (void) cancelIt:(NSTimer*) timer;
@end
No, you didn't. You declared cancelTime: and cancelIt: as instance methods, one of which happens to have a timer parameter.
As such, I'm not sure you have a proper grasp of the fundamental concepts of Objective-C programming so I would suggest you step away from the real coding and go (re)learn those before you come back to this issue.
- (IBAction) cancelTime: (id) sender;
- (void) cancelIt:(NSTimer*) timer;
@end
No, you didn't. You declared cancelTime: and cancelIt: as instance methods, one of which happens to have a timer parameter.
As such, I'm not sure you have a proper grasp of the fundamental concepts of Objective-C programming so I would suggest you step away from the real coding and go (re)learn those before you come back to this issue.
more...
Unspeaked
Mar 24, 04:37 PM
Can anyone remember the name of the iTunes player in the pic from 2001? it had LOADS of skins and the particular one in the pic! used to sink into the desktop when you clicked the screen or on another program, does anyone know if they brought it back to life? I miss that player SOOOOO MUCHHHHH :(
I think that's Audion.
http://www.panic.com/audion/
I think that's Audion.
http://www.panic.com/audion/
LightSpeed1
Apr 14, 01:52 AM
So, on the left side of the above linked page it says they're $120 and on the right side of the same page it says they're $140! So, which is it?Shipping is $20 on the right side they have all ready added it in. on the white set it says $120 on left and right, but if you notice it also says for local pick up. It's only when you hit the shipping tab that you can set it from local pick up to UPS ground. After that, both the white set and the black set are $140 after shipping. No Tax.
more...
someguy
Jul 24, 09:39 AM
<--micropod image-->
Absolutely hilarious! Thanks for the laugh!
Absolutely hilarious! Thanks for the laugh!
.jpg "wallpaper islamic free.")
zin
Apr 5, 04:05 PM
I wanted to download this but it's not available from my country's App Store.
more...
Scott6666
Apr 8, 02:45 PM
I bet it is simply..."We have the iPad 2 in stock and no one else does. Come get one."
If they wanted to hold stock, they could keep them in the warehouse until their special promo. It's weird shipping them to the store and telling them to hold.
If they wanted to hold stock, they could keep them in the warehouse until their special promo. It's weird shipping them to the store and telling them to hold.
mubo
Apr 16, 09:50 AM
The silent button is wrong, wrong, wrong.
it comes to far forward, it would need to be level with the volume rocker which is also too far back,
I like the ipad version tho....
it comes to far forward, it would need to be level with the volume rocker which is also too far back,
I like the ipad version tho....
more...
gocardsfan1
May 3, 09:31 PM
So is this meant to be an ad for the iPad 2 or the future generations? All it does is make me more excited for upcoming models, not the iPad 2 itself. I don't doubt that it will be effective though.
Jaymes
Mar 28, 03:16 PM
In other words, it is now more fair to everyone because you just need to be in the App Store rather than having to submit your app specifically to be considered.
In other words, it's less fair to everyone, because you have to fork over $0.30 of every $1.00 you make to Apple in order to be part of the Mac App store just to be in the running for the design award.
It's going to be interesting to see if open-source products win any awards whatsoever this year. In the past, several have brought home awards.
But I digress, as the new Big Brother on the block, I had almost forgot that "Apple knows best".
In other words, it's less fair to everyone, because you have to fork over $0.30 of every $1.00 you make to Apple in order to be part of the Mac App store just to be in the running for the design award.
It's going to be interesting to see if open-source products win any awards whatsoever this year. In the past, several have brought home awards.
But I digress, as the new Big Brother on the block, I had almost forgot that "Apple knows best".
NAG
May 3, 01:48 PM
And why is this on mac rumors.
Does it really matter what the competition does.
It shows you how superior their open os is. Because if it wasn't open it would be controlled by evil Apple who would force you to use tethering.
Does it really matter what the competition does.
It shows you how superior their open os is. Because if it wasn't open it would be controlled by evil Apple who would force you to use tethering.
StuPidQPid
Jan 13, 01:34 PM
I beg to differ.:)
Actually he's right! I just tilt my PowerBook screen and can read the white on color #FAFAFA with no problem :-)
Actually he's right! I just tilt my PowerBook screen and can read the white on color #FAFAFA with no problem :-)
al85
Sep 12, 10:57 AM
Even if the video ipod is released, whats the chance it will let u just drag and drop files into it e.g .avi.
puuukeey
Jan 9, 01:39 PM
I promise promise promise its not a spoiler.
lindamartin88
Apr 6, 08:56 AM
Its a rediculous app...i mean who would want to see an app that is just to make you see adds...no use
disappointed in apple for sure...
disappointed in apple for sure...
CalBoy
Apr 14, 10:50 PM
I understand the point you are trying to make (re: enhanced security measures] but technically those two incidents had nothing to do with the TSA since they both flew from non-USA airports - that is, the TSA didn't screen them at all.
While this is true, we can't allow that technicality to wipe the slate clean. Our security as a whole is deficient, even if the TSA on its own might not be responsible for these two particular failures. Our tax dollars are still going to the our mutual safety so we should expect more.
I guess that depends on how you define "not much trouble". We can't know the actual number, since we will never know many actually get through. But they are catching over half the weapons that their own agents try to smuggle through on test/training runs. So that counts as being "some trouble". How much "trouble" is enough? Read my post above about how much risk a "bad person" organization is willing to take on 50/50 odds. My late father made his career "gaming" situations, so I have a bit of a passing knowledge of it. I am certain that the TSA has "gamed" the odds, and the TSA believe that they have reached a reasonable balance between costing the public time, money, and indignities - and - ensuring a reasonable level of safety for the flying public. They may be wrong.... but I would bet money that, to the best of their ability, they believe they have reached a balance.
Well when a fanatic is willing to commit suicide because he believes that he'll be rewarded in heaven, 50/50 odds don't seem to be all that much of a deterrent. What's worse is that we've only achieved that with a lot of our personal dignity, time, and money. I don't think we can tolerate much more. We should be expecting more for the time, money, and humiliation we're putting ourselves (and our 6 year-old children) through.
If this is the TSA's best effort and what it believes is the best balance, I want a new TSA.
OK, then why are hijackings down? I have my working hypothesis. I cited some evidence to support it. If you don't agree, then it is up to you to state an alternative one that is supported by more than unsupported statements.
I am not saying the TSA (or in my case CATSA) is perfect or haven't mucked things up sometimes. I'm just saying that I believe that they have been mostly responsible for a dramatic drop in airline hijackings. I cited some statistics. Now it's your turn.....
Your statistics don't unequivocally prove the efficacy of the TSA though. They only show that the TSA employs a cost-benefit method to determine what measures to take.
Since you believe in the efficacy of the TSA so much, the burden is yours to make a clear and convincing case, not mine. I can provide alternative hypotheses, but I am in no way saying that these are provable at the current moment in time. I'm only saying that they are rational objections to your theory.
My hypothesis is essentially the same as Lisa's: the protection is coming from our circumstances rather than our deliberative efforts.
Terrorism is a complex thing. My bet is that as we waged wars in multiple nations, it became more advantageous for fanatics to strike where our military forces were. Without having to gain entry into the country, get past airport security (no matter what odds were), or hijack a plane, terrorists were able to kill over 4,000 Americans in Iraq and nearly 1,500 in Afghanistan. That's almost twice as many as were killed on 9/11.
If I were the leader of a group intent on killing Americans and Westerners in general, I certainly would go down that route rather than hijack planes.
ps there is no proof that it wasn't Lisa's rock. There are some very weird causal relationships in the world. Like shooting wolves causes the Aspen to die off in Wyoming. Or .... overfishing the Salmon in the Pacific changes the mix of trees along the rivers of the BC coast.....
It's pretty clear that it was not the rock. Ecosystems are constantly finding new equilibriums; killing off an herbivore's primary predator should cause a decline in vegetation. That is not surprising, nor is it difficult to prove (you can track all three populations simultaneously). There is also a causal mechanism at work that can explain the effect without the need for new assumptions (Occam's Razor).
The efficacy of the TSA and our security measures, on the other hand, are quite complex and are affected by numerous causes. Changes in travel patterns, other nations' actions, and an enemey's changing strategy all play a big role. You can't ignore all of these and pronounce our security gimmicks (and really, that's what patting down a 6 year-old is) to be so masterfully effective.
While this is true, we can't allow that technicality to wipe the slate clean. Our security as a whole is deficient, even if the TSA on its own might not be responsible for these two particular failures. Our tax dollars are still going to the our mutual safety so we should expect more.
I guess that depends on how you define "not much trouble". We can't know the actual number, since we will never know many actually get through. But they are catching over half the weapons that their own agents try to smuggle through on test/training runs. So that counts as being "some trouble". How much "trouble" is enough? Read my post above about how much risk a "bad person" organization is willing to take on 50/50 odds. My late father made his career "gaming" situations, so I have a bit of a passing knowledge of it. I am certain that the TSA has "gamed" the odds, and the TSA believe that they have reached a reasonable balance between costing the public time, money, and indignities - and - ensuring a reasonable level of safety for the flying public. They may be wrong.... but I would bet money that, to the best of their ability, they believe they have reached a balance.
Well when a fanatic is willing to commit suicide because he believes that he'll be rewarded in heaven, 50/50 odds don't seem to be all that much of a deterrent. What's worse is that we've only achieved that with a lot of our personal dignity, time, and money. I don't think we can tolerate much more. We should be expecting more for the time, money, and humiliation we're putting ourselves (and our 6 year-old children) through.
If this is the TSA's best effort and what it believes is the best balance, I want a new TSA.
OK, then why are hijackings down? I have my working hypothesis. I cited some evidence to support it. If you don't agree, then it is up to you to state an alternative one that is supported by more than unsupported statements.
I am not saying the TSA (or in my case CATSA) is perfect or haven't mucked things up sometimes. I'm just saying that I believe that they have been mostly responsible for a dramatic drop in airline hijackings. I cited some statistics. Now it's your turn.....
Your statistics don't unequivocally prove the efficacy of the TSA though. They only show that the TSA employs a cost-benefit method to determine what measures to take.
Since you believe in the efficacy of the TSA so much, the burden is yours to make a clear and convincing case, not mine. I can provide alternative hypotheses, but I am in no way saying that these are provable at the current moment in time. I'm only saying that they are rational objections to your theory.
My hypothesis is essentially the same as Lisa's: the protection is coming from our circumstances rather than our deliberative efforts.
Terrorism is a complex thing. My bet is that as we waged wars in multiple nations, it became more advantageous for fanatics to strike where our military forces were. Without having to gain entry into the country, get past airport security (no matter what odds were), or hijack a plane, terrorists were able to kill over 4,000 Americans in Iraq and nearly 1,500 in Afghanistan. That's almost twice as many as were killed on 9/11.
If I were the leader of a group intent on killing Americans and Westerners in general, I certainly would go down that route rather than hijack planes.
ps there is no proof that it wasn't Lisa's rock. There are some very weird causal relationships in the world. Like shooting wolves causes the Aspen to die off in Wyoming. Or .... overfishing the Salmon in the Pacific changes the mix of trees along the rivers of the BC coast.....
It's pretty clear that it was not the rock. Ecosystems are constantly finding new equilibriums; killing off an herbivore's primary predator should cause a decline in vegetation. That is not surprising, nor is it difficult to prove (you can track all three populations simultaneously). There is also a causal mechanism at work that can explain the effect without the need for new assumptions (Occam's Razor).
The efficacy of the TSA and our security measures, on the other hand, are quite complex and are affected by numerous causes. Changes in travel patterns, other nations' actions, and an enemey's changing strategy all play a big role. You can't ignore all of these and pronounce our security gimmicks (and really, that's what patting down a 6 year-old is) to be so masterfully effective.
No comments:
Post a Comment