Red Defiant
Mar 25, 04:09 AM
10 years is a long time
Konz
Oct 6, 02:33 PM
Looks more deceptive than factual. I'm sure Verizon is being very generous with the definition of "3G coverage" for their own network while doing just the opposite with AT&T's.
Neither carrier actually has a 3G coverage map available on their website.
A little fishy? Me thinks.... :confused:
Neither carrier actually has a 3G coverage map available on their website.
A little fishy? Me thinks.... :confused:
eggstone
Nov 24, 09:29 AM
In store you should be able to get both discounts.
I am looking forward to hear the follow up on this story. I really doubted you can get both EDU and Thanksgiving discount together, even in store.
Maybe one can just ask the question to a on-line apple-store-chat staff?
I am looking forward to hear the follow up on this story. I really doubted you can get both EDU and Thanksgiving discount together, even in store.
Maybe one can just ask the question to a on-line apple-store-chat staff?
STLSigns
Oct 3, 03:02 PM
Just 97 days to go. :)
That could be a fun Widget, can I get one of those please.
That could be a fun Widget, can I get one of those please.
more...
bmustaf
Dec 13, 05:07 PM
I'm not buying it (either in terms of the story, or in terms of a supposed hybrid phone if it does make it to market).
The baseband chipsets don't exist as mass market components (either in supply or feature set).
If they did, they'd suck down battery faster than you could keep the damn thing charged. I think it is pretty clear where Apple plays - technology that is applicable, relevant, and usable.
I don't think 4G is there yet, unless Qualcomm et al are hiding some major hybrid CDMA/LTE chipsets (the LTE-only chipsets themselves are power hogs - why do you think VZW hasn't rolled out handsets, they've limited 4G use to people hooking USB cards into a 3000mAh battery that can feed that 500mAh - 1000mAh draw).
Battery technology is getting better, and the chipsets are getting better, but not in time for a device in January. Maybe I'll eat crow, but I doubt it. If this happens (and it might), it's not going to be a great device that everyone is expecting (read: keep the 4G radio off and use it as a CDMA iPhone 4) or it's simply not going to exist. It's possible VZW needed a retort to ATT's simultaneous voice & data ploy so they included it to check that off the list and the phone will stick to EVDO for nearly everything...but the EVDO<->LTE carrier handoff isn't transparent (far worse than EDGE<->3G), so that is a usability issue in and of itself that I think Apple would not like.
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com/2010/12/13/4g-verizon-iphone-to-debut-after-christmas/)
MacDailyNews reports (http://www.macdailynews.com/index.php/weblog/comments/exclusive_verizons_iphone_rumored_to_be_lte_device_coming_right_after_xmas/) that it has received information from a "source that we believe to be credible" regarding management training for the Verizon iPhone offered by the company last week. According to the report, the Verizon iPhone will launch immediately after Christmas and is in fact an LTE 4G device.The report also claims that the Verizon iPhone is already shipping to Verizon warehouses, and the carrier will maintain control over all stock until launch in order to control information leaks.
Finally, the source indicates that the iPhone 5 was intended to be LTE-only at its debut next summer, but Steve Jobs and Apple are upset that the carriers are not building out their LTE infrastructure quickly enough to make that happen.
Verizon's 4G network launched last week (http://www.macrumors.com/2010/12/01/verizons-4g-network-to-launch-next-week-no-handsets-until-mid-2011/) for mobile broadband customers, but the carrier noted that it does not expect to debut 4G-capable handsets until the middle of next year.
MacDailyNews is not a frequent source of rumors, and has a mixed record on the information it has published in the past. In addition, we are skeptical that Apple had ever seriously planned for the fifth-generation iPhone 5 to be "LTE-only", given that even the most aggressive LTE build-out schedules from the carriers have long planned for it to be several years before their entire networks are upgraded to the standard. In fact, other sources (http://www.macrumors.com/2010/10/11/mid-2011-iphone-to-utilize-dual-mode-gsm-cdma-chip-skip-4g/) have indicated that the fifth-generation iPhone won't support LTE at all, a move which would follow Apple's precedent with not supporting 3G in the original iPhone as it waited for greater availability and more advanced technology for utilizing the standard.
Consequently, we are publishing this rumor on Page 2 for interest and discussion.
Article Link: 4G Verizon iPhone to Debut After Christmas? (http://www.macrumors.com/2010/12/13/4g-verizon-iphone-to-debut-after-christmas/)
The baseband chipsets don't exist as mass market components (either in supply or feature set).
If they did, they'd suck down battery faster than you could keep the damn thing charged. I think it is pretty clear where Apple plays - technology that is applicable, relevant, and usable.
I don't think 4G is there yet, unless Qualcomm et al are hiding some major hybrid CDMA/LTE chipsets (the LTE-only chipsets themselves are power hogs - why do you think VZW hasn't rolled out handsets, they've limited 4G use to people hooking USB cards into a 3000mAh battery that can feed that 500mAh - 1000mAh draw).
Battery technology is getting better, and the chipsets are getting better, but not in time for a device in January. Maybe I'll eat crow, but I doubt it. If this happens (and it might), it's not going to be a great device that everyone is expecting (read: keep the 4G radio off and use it as a CDMA iPhone 4) or it's simply not going to exist. It's possible VZW needed a retort to ATT's simultaneous voice & data ploy so they included it to check that off the list and the phone will stick to EVDO for nearly everything...but the EVDO<->LTE carrier handoff isn't transparent (far worse than EDGE<->3G), so that is a usability issue in and of itself that I think Apple would not like.
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com/2010/12/13/4g-verizon-iphone-to-debut-after-christmas/)
MacDailyNews reports (http://www.macdailynews.com/index.php/weblog/comments/exclusive_verizons_iphone_rumored_to_be_lte_device_coming_right_after_xmas/) that it has received information from a "source that we believe to be credible" regarding management training for the Verizon iPhone offered by the company last week. According to the report, the Verizon iPhone will launch immediately after Christmas and is in fact an LTE 4G device.The report also claims that the Verizon iPhone is already shipping to Verizon warehouses, and the carrier will maintain control over all stock until launch in order to control information leaks.
Finally, the source indicates that the iPhone 5 was intended to be LTE-only at its debut next summer, but Steve Jobs and Apple are upset that the carriers are not building out their LTE infrastructure quickly enough to make that happen.
Verizon's 4G network launched last week (http://www.macrumors.com/2010/12/01/verizons-4g-network-to-launch-next-week-no-handsets-until-mid-2011/) for mobile broadband customers, but the carrier noted that it does not expect to debut 4G-capable handsets until the middle of next year.
MacDailyNews is not a frequent source of rumors, and has a mixed record on the information it has published in the past. In addition, we are skeptical that Apple had ever seriously planned for the fifth-generation iPhone 5 to be "LTE-only", given that even the most aggressive LTE build-out schedules from the carriers have long planned for it to be several years before their entire networks are upgraded to the standard. In fact, other sources (http://www.macrumors.com/2010/10/11/mid-2011-iphone-to-utilize-dual-mode-gsm-cdma-chip-skip-4g/) have indicated that the fifth-generation iPhone won't support LTE at all, a move which would follow Apple's precedent with not supporting 3G in the original iPhone as it waited for greater availability and more advanced technology for utilizing the standard.
Consequently, we are publishing this rumor on Page 2 for interest and discussion.
Article Link: 4G Verizon iPhone to Debut After Christmas? (http://www.macrumors.com/2010/12/13/4g-verizon-iphone-to-debut-after-christmas/)
Mattie Num Nums
Apr 8, 01:12 PM
This is standard practice by their SOP (Standard operating platform) according to company policy. I know, because I used to work at Best Buy. Trust me, there are a lot of other shady things that happen when they say they "hold" for the Sunday ad. Things such as holding the product for friends and family and using the EPPI application. Although, the iPad is already at Cost, so there is really no discount on the product but rather for the accessories.
Just buy online and not through Best Buy. I refuse to buy anything from Best Buy because of their ethics and practices.
You must not buy ANYTHING than.
Just buy online and not through Best Buy. I refuse to buy anything from Best Buy because of their ethics and practices.
You must not buy ANYTHING than.
more...
vixapphire
Jan 15, 05:05 PM
I think the best is the Apple TV. I mean seriously. They did all that and didn't require you to get new hardware. Good one for Apple.
that's only because it was a largely useless p.o.s. product out of the gate, and they've only just gotten around to "repurposing" it in the itunes rental scheme.
that's only because it was a largely useless p.o.s. product out of the gate, and they've only just gotten around to "repurposing" it in the itunes rental scheme.
Aperture
Jan 8, 09:34 PM
Sales/growth update
Ultra portable notebook
iTunes movie rentals & DVD digital copies
Updated/Refreshed Apple TV - Perhaps a slight price drop (To promote iTunes movie rentals)
Look into the iPhone SDK - available to developers in Feb. as planned
Ultra portable notebook
iTunes movie rentals & DVD digital copies
Updated/Refreshed Apple TV - Perhaps a slight price drop (To promote iTunes movie rentals)
Look into the iPhone SDK - available to developers in Feb. as planned
more...
bloodycape
Jul 26, 11:47 PM
http://www.groupereflect.net/IMG/jpg/image_blog5
I will say that is pretty funny but the odd thing is Apple's formart support isn't the best either, especially for video. If it had or gets divx support that is another story.
I will say that is pretty funny but the odd thing is Apple's formart support isn't the best either, especially for video. If it had or gets divx support that is another story.
CplBadboy
Jul 21, 05:10 PM
LOL! Yeah it might drop a few bars but it doesnt show no service like the iP4.
The iP4 drops calls and shows no service thats the issue not how many bars it drops.
makes me laugh that Apple are doing everything they can to divert everyones attention away from the REAL ISSUE - HARDWARE DESIGN FAILURE.
And Apple know that everyone will get bored posting soon on this issue and therefore it will really become an non issue.
Apple aint gonna do sht about this.
The iP4 drops calls and shows no service thats the issue not how many bars it drops.
makes me laugh that Apple are doing everything they can to divert everyones attention away from the REAL ISSUE - HARDWARE DESIGN FAILURE.
And Apple know that everyone will get bored posting soon on this issue and therefore it will really become an non issue.
Apple aint gonna do sht about this.
more...
Leoff
Oct 2, 03:55 PM
Think about this: Apple is in hot water with some European countries for the "monopoly" Apple has with its iPod and iTunes Store.
Could DVD Jon's venture help alleviate some of those country's worries?
-Aaron-
Not really. Apple isn't in "hot water" with "some European countries", France has very strict regulations as far as their TV broadcast formats go and they wanted to try and cross that over into the music territory.
Could DVD Jon's venture help alleviate some of those country's worries?
-Aaron-
Not really. Apple isn't in "hot water" with "some European countries", France has very strict regulations as far as their TV broadcast formats go and they wanted to try and cross that over into the music territory.
briand05
Mar 28, 04:52 PM
That is so crazy it's ridiculous. There is no evidence to support your statement. Mac OS X is not headed towards the "walled garden" universe that everyone seems to freak out over. Apple's just giving people who don't know anything about computers an easy way to purchase and find applications.
I do agree, however, that by not including applications outside of the Mac App Store Apple is diminishing the value of the award. I believe it is within their right to do so, although I don't like it.
I honestly wouldn't put it past Jobs. I really believe he wants the Mac to be a walled garden just like iOS.
I do agree, however, that by not including applications outside of the Mac App Store Apple is diminishing the value of the award. I believe it is within their right to do so, although I don't like it.
I honestly wouldn't put it past Jobs. I really believe he wants the Mac to be a walled garden just like iOS.
more...
Aeolius
Oct 4, 09:05 PM
Fair enough. Three of my children were born in China, while a fourth was born in Taiwan. I have seen plenty of families living in ruins, huts, and caves in my journeys.
z4n3
Mar 24, 04:46 PM
I think that's Audion.
http://www.panic.com/audion/
Thanks... :D
I wish it was still around.
Found this link (https://www.panic.com/extras/audionstory) that is quite interesting regarding iTunes beginnings
http://www.panic.com/audion/
Thanks... :D
I wish it was still around.
Found this link (https://www.panic.com/extras/audionstory) that is quite interesting regarding iTunes beginnings
more...
storage
Oct 10, 06:09 PM
Wireless YouTubePod! ;)
SchneiderMan
Apr 9, 01:21 AM
How did you get beats for $80?
Probably knockoffs. Or as many here would say, the owner just wanted to get rid of them because no one wanted to purchase them :p
Got my MacBook Air 13" an ultra-violet RadTech Sleevz sleeve.
http://www.gadgetmac.com/storage/product-images/Screen%20shot%202011-04-07%20at%2010.56.42%20PM.png?__SQUARESPACE_CACHEVERSION=1302299615195
Probably knockoffs. Or as many here would say, the owner just wanted to get rid of them because no one wanted to purchase them :p
Got my MacBook Air 13" an ultra-violet RadTech Sleevz sleeve.
http://www.gadgetmac.com/storage/product-images/Screen%20shot%202011-04-07%20at%2010.56.42%20PM.png?__SQUARESPACE_CACHEVERSION=1302299615195
more...
SMM
Oct 2, 09:21 PM
Well, he currently eyeing selling the tech to companies, presumably some of which are willing to spend big bucks to jam their way into the iPod + iTunes ecosphere. At least now, it's clear it's mostly about making moola.
Yes, we all know the moral high-ground corporations take. Regardless of any moral principals involved, it is 'can we get away with it?', or even more disgusting, 'can we make enough profit to justify the legal settlement?'. It is truly a sorry state of affairs we find ourselves in; where the moral fiber of our country is solely based on the personal pursuit of wealth. Personally, I find this individual loathsome.
Yes, we all know the moral high-ground corporations take. Regardless of any moral principals involved, it is 'can we get away with it?', or even more disgusting, 'can we make enough profit to justify the legal settlement?'. It is truly a sorry state of affairs we find ourselves in; where the moral fiber of our country is solely based on the personal pursuit of wealth. Personally, I find this individual loathsome.
arn
Apr 21, 10:51 AM
Good feature! The look doesn't match much of the rest of the forum theme, though.
Quick edit: what now? Can we filter a thread for only positive posts? Only posts above N points? Can we search for posts above a certain rating?
we'll be tweaking things and seeing about using the scores in more useful ways
arn
Quick edit: what now? Can we filter a thread for only positive posts? Only posts above N points? Can we search for posts above a certain rating?
we'll be tweaking things and seeing about using the scores in more useful ways
arn
emotion
Nov 16, 01:16 PM
I don't know where this assertion that AMD are rubbish comes from. The integrated memory controller technology that AMD have currently is beter than Intels offering (for the moment).
That said, they'd be daft to go with AMD. It's nice that they have this stick to poke Intel with though.
That said, they'd be daft to go with AMD. It's nice that they have this stick to poke Intel with though.
dgree03
May 3, 04:00 PM
They are offering you more bandwidth to use a higher bandwidth service like tethering.
The consideration is very clear. Thanks for quoting the premise for contract law, but claiming there is no consideration there is ridiculous.
People who tether use more bandwidth, so the cost associated with their usage is more expensive. The carriers can either charge those people for tethering or they can raise the price for EVERYONE.
They choose to charge the people who tether. It is a perfectly reasonable choice on their part.
Hey a cable line comes into my house with all the channels on it. I can just jimmy off a filter and get all the channels without paying any more. They are already delivering it to my house, why can't I just get all of them since they are there anyways and I am paying for cable right?
You are not paying for tethering unless you are paying for tethering. The math is simple. People who tether use more bandwidth. Wireless providers set their data prices based on AVERAGE usage. Tethering makes the average usage go up, so the revenue to cover those costs has to come from somewhere.
So they can either charge EVERYONE more or charge the people who tether more.. Again they choose the later.
Are you seriously defending charging for tethering!? What do you mean MORE bandwidth?
I am paying for a 25 dollar 2gb plan for my phone. 2gb, is 2gb, is 2gb. If I tether it DOES NOT MATTER MY BANDWIDTH, once i use up 2gb i pay overages. It is that simple... I dont have to tether to use 2gb.
Your cable example is weak. On cable you are paying for the content on that line. On your data plan there is no content to pay for.. it is just straight internet.
A better cable example would be a cable company charging you monthly to extend your cable to each seperate room.
The consideration is very clear. Thanks for quoting the premise for contract law, but claiming there is no consideration there is ridiculous.
People who tether use more bandwidth, so the cost associated with their usage is more expensive. The carriers can either charge those people for tethering or they can raise the price for EVERYONE.
They choose to charge the people who tether. It is a perfectly reasonable choice on their part.
Hey a cable line comes into my house with all the channels on it. I can just jimmy off a filter and get all the channels without paying any more. They are already delivering it to my house, why can't I just get all of them since they are there anyways and I am paying for cable right?
You are not paying for tethering unless you are paying for tethering. The math is simple. People who tether use more bandwidth. Wireless providers set their data prices based on AVERAGE usage. Tethering makes the average usage go up, so the revenue to cover those costs has to come from somewhere.
So they can either charge EVERYONE more or charge the people who tether more.. Again they choose the later.
Are you seriously defending charging for tethering!? What do you mean MORE bandwidth?
I am paying for a 25 dollar 2gb plan for my phone. 2gb, is 2gb, is 2gb. If I tether it DOES NOT MATTER MY BANDWIDTH, once i use up 2gb i pay overages. It is that simple... I dont have to tether to use 2gb.
Your cable example is weak. On cable you are paying for the content on that line. On your data plan there is no content to pay for.. it is just straight internet.
A better cable example would be a cable company charging you monthly to extend your cable to each seperate room.
wolfshades
Mar 24, 03:25 PM
I think Apple has a reason to stand proud on this anniversary.
My daughter hated computers with a passion. She had no patience for the questions they asked of her ("are you sure you want to finkle the crichtenstein? Y/Ok") It was all a foreign language to her and she never knew when the beasts would just up and quit on her - which they often did, usually at critical moments.
Enter the boyfriend. He had a Mac. She sat down to go into her email, smiled, and never looked back. No weird questions, no failures. As SJ says "it just works".
Congratulations Apple!
My daughter hated computers with a passion. She had no patience for the questions they asked of her ("are you sure you want to finkle the crichtenstein? Y/Ok") It was all a foreign language to her and she never knew when the beasts would just up and quit on her - which they often did, usually at critical moments.
Enter the boyfriend. He had a Mac. She sat down to go into her email, smiled, and never looked back. No weird questions, no failures. As SJ says "it just works".
Congratulations Apple!
BBEmployee
Apr 8, 06:29 PM
You do know that BBY is their ticker symbol, right? Same reason the "stock holders" here say AAPL instead of Apple. Its not exactly top secret info.
Sure, but the point had more to do with use of internal acronyms outside of internal Best Buy world. I found it amusing that he suggested that there was no way I could be a Best Buy employee because I wrote BB instead of BBY which is indeed used quite often internally. I don't generally associate it firsthand with the stock, and I don't expect people to have knowledge of Best Buys stock ticker generally, even on an Apple forum. You say BBY to 1000 people and the few that will recognize it will either be former/current Best Buy employees and/or tech-stock enthusiasts.
Sure, but the point had more to do with use of internal acronyms outside of internal Best Buy world. I found it amusing that he suggested that there was no way I could be a Best Buy employee because I wrote BB instead of BBY which is indeed used quite often internally. I don't generally associate it firsthand with the stock, and I don't expect people to have knowledge of Best Buys stock ticker generally, even on an Apple forum. You say BBY to 1000 people and the few that will recognize it will either be former/current Best Buy employees and/or tech-stock enthusiasts.
peas
Sep 28, 12:56 PM
sweet, guess i need to read between the lines more.
i just noticed on the box cover it had a monster sticker on it that said
NO UPDATES ON ACADEMIC VERSIONS so i figured this .5 update wouldnt be allowed.
thanks for the heads up
i just noticed on the box cover it had a monster sticker on it that said
NO UPDATES ON ACADEMIC VERSIONS so i figured this .5 update wouldnt be allowed.
thanks for the heads up
snberk103
Apr 13, 12:03 PM
I would prefer the cheaper and more effective way; profiling.
Also, you can't say security has been working well-- look at the number of incidences of things going through security accidentally via negligence (knives, guns, etc)-- while there's no official numbers, the anecdotal evidence is quite moving.
Actually, there is documented evidence (which I'm not going to look up, because it supports your contention). The TSA does publish numbers (though buried deep in their reports) on the number of times undercover agents are able to slip weapons through security on training/testing runs. The number is quite high, if you look at it in a "Sky is falling way". But that is the incomplete picture.
Suppose, just for argument's sake, you actually have a 50/50 chance of slipping something through security. Is that "good enough" to mount an operation? Consider that there are at least a dozen people involved, to support just one operative. You can try to separate them into cells - but that doesn't mean that they are entirely hidden... it just gives them time to try to escape while their links are followed. Plus, there is a lot of money involved.
Do you risk those 12 people, plus a large chunk of scarce resources, on a venture that only has a 50/50 chance of getting something onto the plane. (we haven't even considered that most bombs on planes lately have not gone off properly, eg. shoe bomber and underwear bomber)... or that if the intent is to forcibly take over the plane there might be sky marshall - or just a plane load of passengers who are not going to sit idly by.
So you try and reduce that risk by making the plan more "fool proof" and sophisticated - but this adds complexity ...and complex things/plans breakdown and require more resources and more people. More people means adding people with doubts, and the chances of leaking. Plus more resources, which brings attention to the operation. And as you add more people and resources, the "downside" to being caught gets bigger, so you try to reduce that risk by making it even more "foolproof".
If you are one of the 12+ people supporting the operative, and you have a 50/50 chance of being caught and spending a very long and nasty session in jail - even before you get your day in court - and you have no chance of the "ultimate reward" .... don't you think you might start having doubts, and talking to people? Sometimes the wrong people?
I don't buy for a minute all of the stories of traffic cops stopping a car for a routine check and finding "bad things" that were going to be used. The intelligence services have, imho, a pretty good idea of what is happening in these groups, and use these innocent looking traffic stops (and other coincidental discoveries) so that their undercover agents aren't suspected.
That is the value, imo, of the security checks. The barriers are are high enough to get the "bad" operations big and cumbersome, and to make the plans too complex to escape notice by the authorities. It's the planning and organization of getting past the security checks that the authorities are looking for. Once that "bad thing" is in the airport, the authorities have already lost most of the game. Then the security screening is just a last ditch attempt to catch something.
The real danger is the single lone-wolf person with a grudge, who hasn't planned in advance, and doesn't really care if they get caught. They have a 50/50 chance of getting through because the only security layer at that point is the security checkpoint. The intelligence services will not have picked them up, nor will the no-fly list incidentally.
.... all of this is just mho, of course..... read the later john lecarre though, for more chilling details....
Also, you can't say security has been working well-- look at the number of incidences of things going through security accidentally via negligence (knives, guns, etc)-- while there's no official numbers, the anecdotal evidence is quite moving.
Actually, there is documented evidence (which I'm not going to look up, because it supports your contention). The TSA does publish numbers (though buried deep in their reports) on the number of times undercover agents are able to slip weapons through security on training/testing runs. The number is quite high, if you look at it in a "Sky is falling way". But that is the incomplete picture.
Suppose, just for argument's sake, you actually have a 50/50 chance of slipping something through security. Is that "good enough" to mount an operation? Consider that there are at least a dozen people involved, to support just one operative. You can try to separate them into cells - but that doesn't mean that they are entirely hidden... it just gives them time to try to escape while their links are followed. Plus, there is a lot of money involved.
Do you risk those 12 people, plus a large chunk of scarce resources, on a venture that only has a 50/50 chance of getting something onto the plane. (we haven't even considered that most bombs on planes lately have not gone off properly, eg. shoe bomber and underwear bomber)... or that if the intent is to forcibly take over the plane there might be sky marshall - or just a plane load of passengers who are not going to sit idly by.
So you try and reduce that risk by making the plan more "fool proof" and sophisticated - but this adds complexity ...and complex things/plans breakdown and require more resources and more people. More people means adding people with doubts, and the chances of leaking. Plus more resources, which brings attention to the operation. And as you add more people and resources, the "downside" to being caught gets bigger, so you try to reduce that risk by making it even more "foolproof".
If you are one of the 12+ people supporting the operative, and you have a 50/50 chance of being caught and spending a very long and nasty session in jail - even before you get your day in court - and you have no chance of the "ultimate reward" .... don't you think you might start having doubts, and talking to people? Sometimes the wrong people?
I don't buy for a minute all of the stories of traffic cops stopping a car for a routine check and finding "bad things" that were going to be used. The intelligence services have, imho, a pretty good idea of what is happening in these groups, and use these innocent looking traffic stops (and other coincidental discoveries) so that their undercover agents aren't suspected.
That is the value, imo, of the security checks. The barriers are are high enough to get the "bad" operations big and cumbersome, and to make the plans too complex to escape notice by the authorities. It's the planning and organization of getting past the security checks that the authorities are looking for. Once that "bad thing" is in the airport, the authorities have already lost most of the game. Then the security screening is just a last ditch attempt to catch something.
The real danger is the single lone-wolf person with a grudge, who hasn't planned in advance, and doesn't really care if they get caught. They have a 50/50 chance of getting through because the only security layer at that point is the security checkpoint. The intelligence services will not have picked them up, nor will the no-fly list incidentally.
.... all of this is just mho, of course..... read the later john lecarre though, for more chilling details....
0 comments:
Post a Comment