These were chemical weapons found in Iraq, the reason the new york times was interested in the story was the fact that ISIS has somehow developed chemical weapons using Iraq's existing infrastructure.
This means there were active facilities, materials and know how even after the war
My grandfather had these hedge like bushes with giant red flowers lining the front windows that always had bumblebees. Im not great with identifying flowers; looked like Hibiscus maybe, but in a somewhat dense bush or hedge structure. Anyway, the bumblebees loved that. Didn't notice them anywhere else on the property, and the first time I saw them (4-5yo) I was quite terrified and would have remembered. They were huge and fury with bold colors and not afraid me, but not so scary after I learned about paper wasp from playing around in the wood-shed.
> ...but shared time with that person would have been more
Sticking to the philosophical arguments, having the kid at any other time, even earlier would not guarantee more time with them. It would have drastically shifted your life events which could include ones that possibly shorten it.
Time and guarantees are oil and water, it’s without saying. I don’t even know if you’ve lived long enough to witness this message I’m writing. I’m writing it anyway.
Maybe he was born 10 years earlier and I die in a car crash on the way to the hospital. It’s possible of course I only am alive because I wasn’t on the way to the hospital. While I agree with you on a philosophical point, sure, the fact is I was the one actively choosing to not have kids yet and waiting for some later date. So, I was in much more control of the situation than this philosophical hypothetical or alternate timeline. So, having regret or sharing what I learned from choices I have made still seems like the best choice. I don’t live by thought exercises.
But you live with regret and rumination and thinking up possible future scenarios; that and "living by thought exercises" are two sides of the same coin -- if not the same side. Which is what the argument was meant to playfully point out, in its round-a-bout philosophical way. You can get up to thinking of all the sci-fi timeline altering stuff of the past the same as you can carry regret from thought exercises directed toward future events, thus getting in your feels and self-berating.
It is all thought exercises. The other option is to release the burden of guilt and simply enjoy the timeline you have now. Kids sense these things that their parents carry. Anyway, in no way was I implying your experience or feelings or sharing is wrong or judged
> the TSA agent not facing repercussions and the system not having a feedback loop to improve is the actual problem.
They do. A group of them play in the local co-ed sports leagues, including one in upper management. I had an issue at a different airport, filed a minor claim, and when I next saw them mentioned it wondering if it will just get filed away in the bin. They said I most likely just got someone fired. Later I heard that manager mentioned the story in a meeting reminding them of diligence and professionalism. Though, I've never had issues at my home airport where they work -- and they take issue with agents at airports like the other one that make their job more difficult/unpleasant. They take a lot of abuse.
> Can objects like expensive precision optics be insured against damage from the TSA?
"You may file a claim if you are injured or your property is lost or damaged during the screening process."
It takes ~6 months or so, and you need to be very thorough and provide as much info as you can (like receipts to prove the cost). And they do actually investigate, even for minor claims and will send a check if they were at fault (ie, not the airline losing your stuff).
> Are there any less obviously aggressive tactics we can use?
If you are in the US, and hopefully in a state that is open to blocking this sort of thing, be very vocal and persistent with your state reps about the issue. Get others to join. I am curious if this will be legal within the Illinois Biometric Information Privacy Act or a couple other states with similar laws
You have to specifically identify and name the people in the photos, otherwise all it knows is that it's a person and throws it into that folder. And if you don't use icloud none of it leaves your device. It does the photo processing locally on the phone. It only knows what you tell it.
I've never took any action it just recognizes faces of those ive taken a good amount of pics with and shows them in my network including automatically naming some of them. Tho not all of them seen under People & Pets have their name automatically listed. But and again it automatically already knows whose in my network so if I take a pic of them using my Apple Glasses the glasses tech or app on iPhone could have the pic focused on them and either blur out others in public or anonmyize/randomize all other faces. This is just an idea that would help solve people's concern with smart glasses and Apple is the privacy company.
> Of course with all new technology people fight against it.
People have been fighting against smart glasses since 2012.
Apple may end up with a feature to post-edit others out, and versions down the road from that one they may have a feature where you can register faces for a current session and then it auto-blurs others. Making its own assumptions about in-network or not and who should be blurred would be a bad user experience with all it gets wrong; more than a "privacy" company, apple spends a lot more marketing their optimized UX -- "it just works" -- for the average person
Google glass was a joke of a technology in terms of being useful. Meta's when they are working are actual a useful product especially for those who already wear sunglasses and use their phone to take pics/vids. Besides normal pic/videography you can now capture moments when your hands arent free (skiing, rollercoaster, tubing, kayaking, etc)
> "These weapons were not part of an active arsenal. They were remnants from Iraq’s arms program in the 1980s during the Iran-Iraq war."
These are not the "WMD" that led to or had any involvement with 2003, it's dishonest to suggest so
reply