I'D RATHER GO NAKED!

NewsWithViews.com ^ | March 13, 2003 | Mary Starrett

[L,TOWM]

It all depends on the tone of the thread and poster...I affirm that it is just me here. I do generally ascribe to Rule #112 and its cousin, Rule #147.

[berserker]

That's enough to create a 64 character ID # (or 4 16 character #s) which can be puched into a database full of all kinds of goodies. SS#, medical, criminal, credit card #s etc. Think about it.

I have thought about it. Wow, what an excellent plan. Just don't wear someone else's shirt. < /sarcasm > I hope you are not goofy enough to actually be worried about this.

[AAABEST]

I have thought about it.

No you didn't or you wouldn't have made the following statement:

Stores 512 bits of info? Hardly worth the effort.

1/4 of that would be all anyone needs to tag anyone with any data, well intended or ill-intended.

Yet when that's pointed out to you logically and politely, you make smart-assed remarks and continue to insist there are no possible downsides.

You must have made some engineer, if you ever were one.

[packrat01]

Citing rules with no link to the rulebook is one of those fox-passes Rush happens to mention on occasion.

???

[L,TOWM]

I'm sorry. Let me elaborate:

Rule #112="Don't take yourself so d@mm seriously."

Rule #147="Anything worth taking seriously is also worth AT LEAST one or two jokes."

Once I saw that freeeee had a sense of humor, I stopped trying to get his goat, and started having a discussion. I do not minimize the entertainment value of this site OR the availability of having a good discussion, perhaps even a full fledged wordwar. But, I try to avoid people that are wound up too tight.


(BTW, if the camera everywhere police state is coming, just make sure you volunteer. Draftees will get assigned to the Women's Bathroom cameras which will monitor nursing homes. {shudder} One of the UNseen Overlords told me so...)

[berserker]

you make smart-assed remarks and continue to insist there are no possible downsides

Have you ever worked where visitors get "visitor" or "guest" stickers to put on their clothing? Or places with ID tags that have clips for attachment to your outer clothing? And what happens? People take off the jacket or coat, and the tracking mechanism doesn't work anymore. That's why this is stupid to worry about - the clothing plan isn't effective enough to really work.

Plus, the government has easier ways to track people: There already is a government number on the outside of my car! And anyone can see it and track where I go! My god, 1984 is here now!

Why would the government try to track people by putting threads in their clothing when they have face-recognition technology on the shelf?

Another problem: How can the government ensure that the correct right-wing person they want to keep tabs on buys the clothing with the tracking threads? Answer: Stock only at Walmart.

[packrat01]

Done did the camera monitoring thing at the YWCA. Seems the managers were quite concerned that someone was stealing soap from the showers. But the only thing showing was T&A on a 40" monitor, none covering the soap dishes. Too often, there'd only be two girls alone; and they happened to "like" each other.

I was never able to determine who stole the soap.

[L,TOWM]

>>>>>>Too often, there'd only be two girls alone; and they happened to "like" each other<<<<<<<

And how much did you pay the YMCA for this chore? (Or {BLECH!} if there is a woman behind your screen name...)

;-)

[packrat01]

It was an eye-opener the first time or two. Dude, how long does it take to wash each others, um... and the grinding and gyrating and the Rule#69: on the shower floor. Not to mention the unmentionable things they'd do to each other with, um; stuff.



Rule#69: You can fool most of the people some of the time...

;-)