Pinckney

>If there's nothing but religious stigma at work, why aren't the Mormons still polygamists?

The Federal government gave them hell about it, going so far as to seize any assets of the LDS church. Utah wouldn't have been granted statehood if they hadn't condemned it.

My comment was meant to be a bit tongue-in-cheek. Sorry I didn't convey that well.

I do think the boardgame community has enough subniches that it's not immune to this problem, though.

Suggesting all boardgames are similar? Those are fighting words.

Personally, I write off Gloomhaven because it's a tactical miniatures game (something I've never cared for). There are other high ranked games, like Caverna, which I write off for similar reasons.

Gun rights.

Why should I care about looking respectable to a bunch of bible-thumpers who've spent the last decades loudly screaming about how much they hate me and everyone like me?

Police spend more time driving than the average person, due to the nature of the job. Writing tickets on the side of the road is also hazardous. The job increases their risk of dying in a car accident.

Do you own property in an affected jurisdiction?

If you don't, you won't be compelled to pay. Pack up and move somewhere that's not fucked.

If, OTOH, you bought property, you took on this risk in doing so. You should have priced in the pension shortfall, and the expected future tax repercussions, when you made your purchase, and the seller should have born the cost of their jurisdiction's mismanagement in the form of a reduced property value.

From user Katie_Pornhub on reddit:

> We've joked about doing something like this in the past but now it's becoming more and more realistic and not so crazy. We'll see!

...

> It would be very difficult to be profitable, one of the main hesitations.

https://www.reddit.com/user/Katie_Pornhub/overview

Amusingly, InRangeTV and C&RArsenal have both responded by using pornhub as an alternate distribution platform.

Other countries can try to block that content, or they can try to punish their own residents for viewing it.

Why would residents of the permissive country comply with a foreign court order?

How much of this subsidy will be captured by workers, vs captured by employers?

Play around with NUKEMAP:

http://nuclearsecrecy.com/nukemap/

If you are hit directly, you're fucked no matter what. But the fireball has relatively small radius compared to the other zones.

Ducking underneath something solid is to protect you if the building collapses, which is likely to occur in the large air-blast radius. This is much like ducking under a desk in an earthquake.

Cover will save you if you're within the larger thermal radiation radius. Even clothing can be enough to protect you from burns, so any cover you can get is good.

Consider just the launch cost of an Apollo type mission. S-IVB is 110 Mg, the Command/Service module was 30 Mg, and the lunar module was 16 Mg. That gives us about 150 metric tonnes as a reasonable estimate of the payload to LEO needed for a lunar trip.

Right now, you're looking at about $340M (at $2200/kg) on two falcon heavies to boost that.

If we handwave R&D and engineering costs, you're still looking at around $170M per person on the moon.

Of the not-so-many people who can afford that, how many people do you think will actually do so?

This seems to be mostly about skynet scenarios, which is an entirely different problem.

IMHO, unless you want to use this as part of some larger script, ncdu is far superior for this particular problem.

How do appeals work with circuit splits? Suppose I lose a case, appeal to the supreme court, and am rejected. Years later, a different case in a different circuit reaches a contradictory conclusion, but the losing side declines to appeal. Can I now re-appeal to the supreme court in light of the split, or am I SOL?

I think it's useful to view these laws as a way to get around the standard of "beyond a reasonable doubt."

The actual societal problem -- the one that's been illegal forever -- is robbery. But it's hard to catch robbers. If they aren't caught in the first few minutes, there's a good chance they get away for good.

When the police stop somebody and find a knife on them, they might think "this person is probably using this to stick people up." The legislature can't pass a law that says "conviction for robbery requires now requires only probable cause", but they can try to achieve the same effect by making it illegal to carry a knife.

The courts haven't yet decided whether or not the "bear arms" part of the second amendment means you have a right to carry arms outside your home.

Wrenn v. DC recently ruled in favor of that interpretation, and DC is now deciding if they want to try to take it to the supreme court. The 9th circuit found otherwise in Peruta v San Diego, so there's a good chance SCOTUS takes it if appealed.

What assurance do I have that the HW wallet vendor doesn't have my seed written down for when they decide to retire?

>It is a commonplace that the history of civilisation is largely the history of weapons. In particular, the connection between the discovery of gunpowder and the overthrow of feudalism by the bourgeoisie has been pointed out over and over again. And though I have no doubt exceptions can be brought forward, I think the following rule would be found generally true: that ages in which the dominant weapon is expensive or difficult to make will tend to be ages of despotism, whereas when the dominant weapon is cheap and simple, the common people have a chance. Thus, for example, tanks, battleships and bombing planes are inherently tyrannical weapons, while rifles, muskets, long-bows and hand-grenades are inherently democratic weapons. A complex weapon makes the strong stronger, while a simple weapon — so long as there is no answer to it — gives claws to the weak.

>The great age of democracy and of national self-determination was the age of the musket and the rifle. After the invention of the flintlock, and before the invention of the percussion cap, the musket was a fairly efficient weapon, and at the same time so simple that it could be produced almost anywhere. Its combination of qualities made possible the success of the American and French revolutions, and made a popular insurrection a more serious business than it could be in our own day. After the musket came the breech-loading rifle. This was a comparatively complex thing, but it could still be produced in scores of countries, and it was cheap, easily smuggled and economical of ammunition. Even the most backward nation could always get hold of rifles from one source or another, so that Boers, Bulgars, Abyssinians, Moroccans — even Tibetans — could put up a fight for their independence, sometimes with success. But thereafter every development in military technique has favoured the State as against the individual, and the industrialised country as against the backward one. There are fewer and fewer foci of power. Already, in 1939, there were only five states capable of waging war on the grand scale, and now there are only three — ultimately, perhaps, only two.

George Orwell, You and the Atomic Bomb.

http://orwell.ru/library/articles/ABomb/english/e_abomb

Probably a spring-loaded striker which is released once the lozenge has dissolved sufficiently. British WWII limpet mines used a similar system.

It's a well-known attack on tubular locks.

That's probably what I would say too, if my job required me to have a good working relationship with police.

I'm far from an expert, but the common ratings to look for are UL RSC, TL-15, or TL-30 depending on what level of protection you want. The ratings are expensive, so generally vendors show them off prominently.

Not bolting it down does make it much easier to steal. A small safe like this can be carried off pretty easily. Even with a large safe, being able to move it can make it easier to use a pry-bar or to cut through a side-panel.

It's a cool robot, but auto-dialers are a known tool in safecracking.

Additionally, the safe in question seems to be a SentrySafe SF082CS, which caries NO security rating from UL. The lowest test rating, RSC, only requires the safe survive a 5 minute attack with hand tools.

>I believe the grip safety of a 1911 or the standard safety lever on a modern pistol would thwart a toddler as well.

Counting on either of those alone to stop a toddler would be grossly irresponsible.

Why does anyone think the magnet attack matters? The wireless safety is designed to defeat a child, or an assailant who manages to wrestle the gun away from you. The idea that they're going to pull out a big-ass rare earth magnet and fire it that way just doesn't make any sense in real-world scenarios.

The problem with the iP1 is that it can be jammed, and this should be a surprise to absolutely nobody.

People get pissed off about smart guns because state such as New Jersey want to shove them down everyone's throat, regardless of whether they have children present in their homes, whether they already have a safe they're happy with, or whether the guns are affordable or effective.

Most of us aren't opposed to this technology existing; the problem is that New Jersey law will require all handguns sold there to incorporate this technology shortly after they're available for sale anywhere in the US. We're also concerned other jurisdictions will try to mandate this tech once it's more widely available.

The iP1, in particular, is also weird simply because it doesn't seem to know what it wants to be. It's not a defensive handgun, the caliber is totally inadequate. But barely anybody uses a compact pistol like this for recreation.