Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Hunters Shot Down Google Fiber

Soulskill posted more than 4 years ago | from the 30gbps-point-buck dept.

Google 1141

aesoteric writes "Google has revealed that aerial fiber links to its data center in Oregon were 'regularly' shot down by hunters, forcing the company to put its cables underground. Hunters were reportedly trying to hit insulators on electricity distribution poles, which also hosted aerially-deployed fiber connected to Google's $600 million data center in The Dalles. 'I have yet to see them actually hit the insulator, but they regularly shoot down the fiber,' Google's network engineering manager Vijay Gill told a conference in Australia. 'Every November when hunting season starts invariably we know that the fiber will be shot down, so much so that we are now building an underground path [for it].'"

cancel ×

1141 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Well... (0, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33646690)

In civilized countries all cables are put undergrownd, no squirrels, no birds, no drunks hitting the poles causing dozens of houses to freeze to death and so on.

Immature? (2, Insightful)

labcoatless (1902340) | more than 4 years ago | (#33646694)

The combination of guns and immature pranks doesn't sound too good to me.

Re:Immature? (4, Insightful)

thephydes (727739) | more than 4 years ago | (#33646792)

Yep. Give a moron a gun - or anything else for that matter - and you can expect him/her to not use it properly.

Re:Immature? (5, Funny)

CarpetShark (865376) | more than 4 years ago | (#33646830)

The combination of guns and immature pranks doesn't sound too good to me.

To be fair, there's no way Steve could have thrown a chair that high.

Immature and Gun Happy (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33646844)

Hunters were reportedly trying to hit insulators on electricity distribution poles...

It's why non-Americans think the U.S. gun culture is so obviously insane. I remember talking to one person here on Slashdot who recommended that I read the Turner Diaries [wikipedia.org] (which is often sold at gun shows to gun enthusiasts) in order to understand the gun culture in America. The funny thing is he thought the Turner Diaries was a NORMAL and intellectually stimulating thing to read, just like the Bible.

For the rest of us (non-Americans), we think a love of guns and a feeling of necessity to own fire-arms by U.S. citizens is as fucked up as it is in the Middle East for ordinary citizens to own automatic military assault rifles. It's one thing to be Libertarian about gun ownership, and quite another to be fanatical about gun ideology and just plain Gun Happy, as most Americans seem to be.

Re:Immature and Gun Happy (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33647032)

It's why non-Americans think the U.S. gun culture is so obviously insane.

As a European, I don't have a problem with American gun culture at all. Can't fire across the Atlantic, so nobody except Americans get hurt.

On the serious side, though: The way the US government is trending I think it's a really good idea to have a large number of weapons in the populace.

Re:Immature and Gun Happy (4, Funny)

Eunuchswear (210685) | more than 4 years ago | (#33647172)

Oh, come on.

Americans can be irritating, but wanting them to go down in a blaze of self inflicted gunshot wounds is mean.

Re:Immature and Gun Happy (5, Insightful)

couchslug (175151) | more than 4 years ago | (#33647034)

The Turner Diaries etc don't define US gun culture, which is quite diverse.

This guy is no closet Klansman waiting for the Apocalypse:

http://catb.org/esr/guns/ [catb.org]

Nor is she:

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2010/7/4/881431/-Why-liberals-should-love-the-Second-Amendment [dailykos.com]

"For the rest of us (non-Americans), we think a love of guns and a feeling of necessity to own fire-arms by U.S. citizens is as fucked up as it is in the Middle East for ordinary citizens to own automatic military assault rifles. "

Lots of us think your utter submission to your governments, preference for the safety of lawbreakers over personal self-defense, and general sheeple tendencies aren't admirable either. You've traded freedom for (the perception of) security as is your right, but that only works in certain situations and assumes benign government.

The Middle Eastern populace clearly needs them for self-defense, and even the Coalition forces in Iraq allow one per household. If you cannot use force to protect yourself you have no _effective_ right to self-defense.

While those of you who are totally comfortable with your government controlling your lives and who live in areas without violent demographic/sectarian/criminal conflict may not care for firearms, they do go a long way to ensure sovereignty over ones own space.

Americans killed their way to freedom in the Revolution, killed those who supported slavery until they surrendered at Appomattox, and if the government gets bad enough will vote with the bullet again. We tolerate quite a bit of corporate abuse, as do the rest of you, but woe betide the government that goes too far. Mao was right, political power does flow from the barrel of a gun, and the requirement to kill opponents who won't respond to reason means that the tools to do that are worth keeping.

Both self and wife have used firearms in self-defense without firing them. We live in a rural area where the cops can't do more than react (clean up the mess), so relying on the kindness of others isn't a good idea. If you don't have a gun, anyone physicallly superior to you can do what they will.

Re:Immature and Gun Happy (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33647106)

Lots of us think your utter submission to your governments, preference for the safety of lawbreakers over personal self-defense, and general sheeple tendencies aren't admirable either. You've traded freedom for (the perception of) security as is your right, but that only works in certain situations and assumes benign government.

The funny thing is, the person (who recommended the Turner Diaries to me) stated the same themes as you are stating. I haven't read the book yet, but from what this person said the book has those themes that you are so proud of. I don't know why you are stating otherwise.

The Middle Eastern populace clearly needs them for self-defense, and even the Coalition forces in Iraq allow one per household. If you cannot use force to protect yourself you have no _effective_ right to self-defense.

Clearly that is exactly the worldview that gun-enthusiasts in the U.S. have. You yourself have stated demonstrated this to me.

While those of you who are totally comfortable with your government controlling your lives and who live in areas without violent demographic/sectarian/criminal conflict may not care for firearms, they do go a long way to ensure sovereignty over ones own space.

Another theme of the Turner Diaries. I'm still not sure why you are claiming that the Turner Diaries is not applicable to American gun-values.

Americans killed their way to freedom in the Revolution, killed those who supported slavery until they surrendered at Appomattox, and if the government gets bad enough will vote with the bullet again. We tolerate quite a bit of corporate abuse, as do the rest of you, but woe betide the government that goes too far. Mao was right, political power does flow from the barrel of a gun, and the requirement to kill opponents who won't respond to reason means that the tools to do that are worth keeping.

Again, this theme is in the Turner Diaries. I'm again confuzzled as to why you claim "The Turner Diaries etc don't define US gun culture".

Both self and wife have used firearms in self-defense without firing them. We live in a rural area where the cops can't do more than react (clean up the mess), so relying on the kindness of others isn't a good idea. If you don't have a gun, anyone physicallly superior to you can do what they will.

Funny thing is, every U.S. gun enthusiast I've talked to has said the same thing. You'd think that everybody that didn't own a gun (in the U.S.) would be dead already.

If you don't have a gun, anyone physicallly superior to you can do what they will.

You will probably never realize this, but you validated all me points (and there are only 2 "l"s in physically;)).

Re:Immature and Gun Happy (-1, Flamebait)

sco08y (615665) | more than 4 years ago | (#33647088)

I remember talking to one person here on Slashdot who recommended that I read the Turner Diaries [wikipedia.org] (which is often sold at gun shows to gun enthusiasts) in order to understand the gun culture in America.

No, that'd be a skinhead trying to explain the skinhead culture. I'm going to guess you're European, and since you've got a much bigger neo-Nazi problem than the states, I'm surprised you needed a book to understand it.

It's one thing to be Libertarian about gun ownership...

... and people like you are going to call anyone who is a Nazi. Fuck you.

Re:Immature and Gun Happy (4, Informative)

jargon82 (996613) | more than 4 years ago | (#33647092)

I'm an american, and outside law enforcement officers, I've seen perhaps 3 or 4 guns in private possession in my life. I suppose they must be out there somewhere, and I've sure heard stories that make me shake my head, but I think those stories get a little overblown with regards to how many of us own or carry a gun.

Re:Immature and Gun Happy (1)

Mathinker (909784) | more than 4 years ago | (#33647138)

> in the Middle East for ordinary citizens to own automatic military assault rifles

Hmm, which Middle East country are we talking about, exactly? You kind of sound like someone pulling factoids from thin air, but here on Slashdot you never know. Color me curious. Care to cough up some examples?

Re:Immature and Gun Happy (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33647144)

It's one thing to be Libertarian about gun ownership, and quite another to be fanatical about gun ideology and just plain Gun Happy, as most Americans seem to be.

Citation needed. Good luck finding one of these mythical gun-stockpiling creatures in the city... you know, where most people live. Fuck, I don't even know a single person with a carrying permit. If police uncovered a cache of weapons when inspecting an apartment (for whatever reason) it will, 100% of the time, appear on the local news networks -- this shit actually scares people. People are in irrational fear of guns, not idolizing them. I probably live on the wrong coast.

Re:Immature? (0)

Jawnn (445279) | more than 4 years ago | (#33646900)

Hey! Watch what you say about hunters, not to mention most of Texas, you insensitive clod.

Re:Immature? (0)

Bieeanda (961632) | more than 4 years ago | (#33646926)

This is why we send them out to play in the sticks.

Re:Immature? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33647182)

This is what the smart grid initiative is all about: in the future, the grid shoots back at you. I, for one, salute our future back shooting smart grids.

Rednecks (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33646696)

I guess I have cousins in Oregon.

Christ, what assholes (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33646702)

People have to go up in dangerous conditions to repair those insulators. Some people are such pricks.

Why? (2, Funny)

cheekyjohnson (1873388) | more than 4 years ago | (#33646714)

What are they thinking? Also, what kind of hunter can't hit an insulator? Amateurs...

Re:Why? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33646724)

Also, what kind of hunter can't hit an insulator? Amateurs...

And what does this activity say about those who do hit? Idiots...

Re:Why? (2, Insightful)

Thanshin (1188877) | more than 4 years ago | (#33646730)

Exactly my first thought. If they can't hit an insulator, what are they hunting? Barns?

Re:Why? (3, Insightful)

The_mad_linguist (1019680) | more than 4 years ago | (#33646784)

First off, I'm guessing they're thinking about all the shitty beer they just drank.

Actually, that answers the second question too.

Pretty common. (1)

pyster (670298) | more than 4 years ago | (#33646736)

I worked for a ISP that had a POP in the sticks. It's feed would regularly be shot by some stupid hick. There was also only one telco field tech for the area, and it would take him forever to respond and even longer to resolve the issue. The city has its own issues. Once a very large section of copper was stolen from the telco taking out an untold number of consumers.

Re:Pretty common. (1)

labcoatless (1902340) | more than 4 years ago | (#33646768)

Stealing the copper I can understand, as there is some monetary gain for the thief. But vandalism is something I just don't get. And it seems frustrating that there is no chance of catching these guys.

Re:Pretty common. (4, Funny)

Sulphur (1548251) | more than 4 years ago | (#33646834)

During his Beretta days Robert Blake was on the Johnny Carson show.

He told a story of walking in Northern Europe during WWII. They saw some insulators.

"It was wartime. We had guns on us. When we got back to camp, we were told that the Germans had cut the communication lines."

Re:Pretty common. (3, Informative)

Robert Zenz (1680268) | more than 4 years ago | (#33646884)

You think that's bad? In Germany, manhole covers and guard rails are vanishing...but the best one was when they stole 40 tons of rails...yes, the ones where trains run on.

On a sidenote, there are quiet a few stories about that over at the Darwin Awards.

Re:Pretty common. (5, Informative)

A1rmanCha1rman (885378) | more than 4 years ago | (#33646910)

I worked for a ISP that had a POP in the sticks. It's feed would regularly be shot by some stupid hick. There was also only one telco field tech for the area, and it would take him forever to respond and even longer to resolve the issue. The city has its own issues. Once a very large section of copper was stolen from the telco taking out an untold number of consumers.

If you work for telcos that have thousands of miles of fibre traversing farmland, you'll quickly come to appreciate (especially in the hunting season) that shotgun damage is a fact of life.

And no, the hunters are not shooting at the fibre or insulators, but at the pheasant, grouse and other flying game creatures that routinely alight on the overhead cables (usually power lines) that carry the fibre.

I suppose this explains Cheney (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33647090)

I suppose this explains Cheney. FFS, you know that you should check your fire when a target moves in front or behind something you DON'T want shot, don't you? Or is this how so many friendly fire incidents happen with the US?

"Well I was aiming a the enemy who were standing between me and Bob's squad over there..."

CHECK YOUR FIRE.

Re:I suppose this explains Cheney (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33647164)

I suppose this explains Cheney. FFS, you know that you should check your fire when a target moves in front or behind something you DON'T want shot, don't you?

Apparently not. It doesn't surprise me. There's a reason why there are so many accidental shootings every year.

In some ways it would be nice if you had to pass a test before you could own a gun -- after all, nobody has any problems with doing that for cars, even though those are less inherently dangerous and more essential for everyday life. But I guess logic doesn't enter into such debates in the Polarized States of America.

Re: Pretty common. (1)

A1rmanCha1rman (885378) | more than 4 years ago | (#33647170)

I also have some pretty interesting pictures sent by a colleague who is director of a Telecoms carrier in Afghanistan.

In the lawless and war-torn sticks of Helmand Province, their engineers literally dash in and out of their remote stations to respond to and fix faults, and frequently encounter multiplexers and other equipment riddled with bullets - sabotage by insurgents.

Machine-gun damage, never mind shotguns...

Eat what you kill? (5, Funny)

tacarat (696339) | more than 4 years ago | (#33646738)

For our amusement, let's hope they killed somebody's 2g1c download.

Unexpected (3, Insightful)

Joebert (946227) | more than 4 years ago | (#33646762)

I would have expected to hear about something like this in Kentucky, Tennessee, or another southern state, but Oregon? I can't even think of anything Oregon's known for.

Re:Unexpected (2, Interesting)

somersault (912633) | more than 4 years ago | (#33646782)

To me it's now known for being as hicky as the south. People are idiots. Please stop giving them guns..

Re:Unexpected (1)

VoidCrow (836595) | more than 4 years ago | (#33646838)

But, giving them scissors and *then* suggesting they run with them? It just complicates the process.

Re:Unexpected (4, Funny)

stephanruby (542433) | more than 4 years ago | (#33646904)

It's too late for that, now that the humans have guns, let's give some guns to the insulators so that they can at least fight back.

Re:Unexpected (2, Funny)

Thanshin (1188877) | more than 4 years ago | (#33646794)

but Oregon? I can't even think of anything Oregon's known for.

Well, I did a brief search for "Oregon, land of ... " to se if there was something Oregon was known for.

I got: "Oregon: Land of Domestic Abuse Endorsement".

So they can safely add "... and Google fiber hunters" without tarnishing the motto.

Re:Unexpected (1)

zAPPzAPP (1207370) | more than 4 years ago | (#33646864)

Oregon, the home of oregano.

Re:Unexpected (1)

teh kurisu (701097) | more than 4 years ago | (#33646894)

Short Circuit.

Re:Unexpected (1)

The_mad_linguist (1019680) | more than 4 years ago | (#33646896)

Joebert has been bitten by a snake!

Fucktards (2, Insightful)

thegrassyknowl (762218) | more than 4 years ago | (#33646770)

The word "fucktards" comes to mind. This is what you get when you have some kind of right to own a gun combined with a bunch of low-IQ fuckwits.

Take their guns away from them. They are too stupid to have them.

Re:Fucktards (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33646824)

Where I live you can't have guns, but people still find ways to be fucktards. Popular passtimes are throwing pavement tiles from overpasses, cutting or shorting cables and stealing bikes, street signs and street lanterns. No, I don't know what they use the street lanterns for.

Re:Fucktards (5, Informative)

Khyber (864651) | more than 4 years ago | (#33646956)

I do, they're likely HID lights and thus are suitable for indoor horticulture.

Re:Fucktards (-1, Flamebait)

david_bandel (909002) | more than 4 years ago | (#33646850)

Judging from your attitude you're just as dumb as the people you describe.

Re:Fucktards (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33646858)

Go catch them and we'll get right on that.

Guns and chains... (5, Interesting)

Muckluck (759718) | more than 4 years ago | (#33646774)

I work for a large utility holding company. Every new years and 4th of July we have transformers shot out across our system. They make pretty "sparks and arcs" while they die. Another stupid people trick is throwing chains across 2 live high voltage lines. Invariably, at least one person per year forgets to let go of the chain before it makes contact. Stupid people are everywhere. Darwin takes care of some...

Re:Guns and chains... (1)

demonlapin (527802) | more than 4 years ago | (#33647114)

They make pretty "sparks and arcs" while they die.

Do they ever. I had one blow up when I was maybe 15 feet from the pole it was on when I was a kid. Big blue flash - too bad I was looking the other way and just got to see the smoke rising.

Re:Guns and chains... (2, Informative)

omglolbah (731566) | more than 4 years ago | (#33647180)

If you had been staring right at the thing you might have lost your vision permanently... Only temporary damage if lucky.

Electric arcs are not 'fun' unless you know exactly what you are doing an take quite a lot of care not to take permanent damage from it.

so what? (-1, Offtopic)

FuckingNickName (1362625) | more than 4 years ago | (#33646786)

Honestly, I'm beyond caring. I don't like what Google has become and if one thing which will put a dent in its relentless quest for information about everyone is a hick with a rifle, more power to him (I wonder if just saying that counts as the crime of glorifying terrorism in certain European countries?).

And when everyone is fully aware of the ability of Google's services to make a detailed profile about them, and the government has appropriate access to its datastores only with the full consent of all its citizens, I might consider the law having a fair balance between the rights of the individual and the rights of the powerful corporation, and start caring about the property rights of the latter.

Re:so what? (4, Insightful)

smallfries (601545) | more than 4 years ago | (#33646802)

Ah, so an internet company should consider fuckwit withs guns as part of its normal operating procedure, eh? Are you from Oregon perhaps?

Or if you are no, but you are so disturbed by Google that you can't even read a story like this without ranting what bad guys they are then do the obvious thing: fuck off to the opt-out village.

Re:so what? (-1, Troll)

FuckingNickName (1362625) | more than 4 years ago | (#33646828)

Ah, so an internet company should consider fuckwit withs guns as part of its normal operating procedure, eh?

Ah, so a citizen trying to live freely should consider a global information aggregator as a harmless and healthy part of society, eh?

do the obvious thing: fuck off to the opt-out village.

Is cowardly retreat your option when confronting all problems? Did you emigrate the first time you disagreed with your government's policy on some issue?

Re:so what? (5, Insightful)

smallfries (601545) | more than 4 years ago | (#33646892)

Ah, so a citizen trying to live freely should consider a global information aggregator as a harmless and healthy part of society, eh?

Yes. Because unless they are some dumbass redneck there is no way to argue that shooting at their equipment is a good response. In fact even the dumb hicks who did it would probably "argue" that they were just pissing around because they were wasted. It takes a real armchair nutjob like you to claim that they were in the right against some evil global multinational.

Re:so what? (-1, Troll)

FuckingNickName (1362625) | more than 4 years ago | (#33646918)

. In fact even the dumb hicks who did it would probably "argue"

When you are using your prejudices to hypothesise randomly on the motivations of urban gangs, do you use terms like "stupid niggers"?

It takes a real armchair nutjob like you to claim that they were in the right against some evil global multinational.

So are you saying that they are in the wrong because Google it is not evil, or they are in the wrong because it is bad (immoral? ineffective?) to use guerrilla tactics against a powerful enemy?

Re:so what? (2, Funny)

smallfries (601545) | more than 4 years ago | (#33647016)

When you are using your prejudices to hypothesise randomly on the motivations of urban gangs, do you use terms like "stupid niggers"?

No. Because unlike you I am not racist enough to assume that an urban gang is black. Tell me, have you stopped beating your wife yet you redneck hick?

So are you saying that they are in the wrong because Google it is not evil, or they are in the wrong because it is bad (immoral? ineffective?) to use guerrilla tactics against a powerful enemy?

Yes.

Re:so what? (0, Flamebait)

FuckingNickName (1362625) | more than 4 years ago | (#33647048)

Because unlike you I am not racist enough to assume that an urban gang is black.

*golf clap* You assumed that the people doing the shooting were just "dumb hicks". This is like assuming gangs are comprised of "stupid niggers". Congratulations on failing to understand analogy.

Yes.

To which? This isn't a logic class - "or" doesn't have the same meaning in general discourse. Congratulations on failing to understand English.

Why's it always the uneducated who are first to come out with the epithets?

Re:so what? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33647082)

omg. who's taking potshots at the straw men?

they (most likely - "assume" makes an ass of u and me) weren't fighting google. they were sloshed and wanted to see sparks fly.

if that's "guerrilla tactics" then the war on terror would have been over in a week.

Re:so what? (1)

FuckingNickName (1362625) | more than 4 years ago | (#33647152)

they (most likely - "assume" makes an ass of u and me) weren't fighting google. they were sloshed and wanted to see sparks fly.

And your evidence comprises Google PR telling you that this must be so despite the fact that they repeatedly hit Google's fiber and missed the insulators.

if that's "guerrilla tactics" then the war on terror would have been over in a week.

For whose interest would the "war on terror" be over?

Re:so what? (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33646906)

Ah, so a citizen trying to live freely should consider a global information aggregator as a harmless and healthy part of society, eh?

No, but a conscientious citizen shouldn't consider lunatics with guns a great thing either.

Re:so what? (1)

FuckingNickName (1362625) | more than 4 years ago | (#33646942)

And yet Americans continue to pay their taxes to fund their military. Or are there sufficient levels of indirection that the IRS bill you pay doesn't really feel like it's paying for the bomb which kills the mother and maims the kid, 10,000 times over?

The stereotypical hick with the gun is the best of all "lunatics with guns".

Re:so what? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33647066)

Did you emigrate the first time you disagreed with your government's policy on some issue?

Not registering an account at google and not typing their url in the address bar is not the same thing as emigrating.

Re:so what? (1)

FuckingNickName (1362625) | more than 4 years ago | (#33647100)

True. The latter allows me to escape mostly from a country's clutches, while the former still allows me to be tracked by Analytics, AdSense, etc.

Re:so what? (-1, Troll)

FuckingNickName (1362625) | more than 4 years ago | (#33646812)

Odd, it seems the post above was moderated "Offtopic" rather than "Disagree". Or are we assuming that all acts of civil disobedience against any Precious are mindless vandalism rather than a statement of independence?

Re:so what? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33646852)

Odd, it seems the post above was moderated "Offtopic" rather than "Disagree". Or are we assuming that all acts of civil disobedience against any Precious are mindless vandalism rather than a statement of independence?

If you state your independence by shooting out the electricity, then you truly are a fucking moron.

Thanks for raising my electricity bill.

Re:so what? (0, Troll)

FuckingNickName (1362625) | more than 4 years ago | (#33646878)

If you think Google fiber = electricity, then you truly are a fucking moron.

If you think that it is acts of petty vandalism which have a deciding influence on your electricity bill, rather than the whims of a few very powerful energy companies, then I'm not sure how you even managed to crawl out of the slime and onto your computer chair.

Re:so what? (1)

MisaDaBinksX4evah (889652) | more than 4 years ago | (#33646948)

If you think Google fiber = electricity, then you truly are a fucking moron.

If you think that it is acts of petty vandalism which have a deciding influence on your electricity bill, rather than the whims of a few very powerful energy companies, then I'm not sure how you even managed to crawl out of the slime and onto your computer chair.

Let me guess, you're the one encouraging people to ram their small aircraft into government buildings, since that's what really makes a difference.

Re:so what? (1)

FuckingNickName (1362625) | more than 4 years ago | (#33646986)

Equating vandalism with suicide and/or murder?

Obvious troll is obvious, Sir.

Re:so what? (1)

MisaDaBinksX4evah (889652) | more than 4 years ago | (#33647022)

Equating vandalism with suicide and/or murder?

Obvious troll is obvious, Sir.

Nope, I'm just taking your crazy nonsense to its logical conclusion.

I'm guessing if no one is hurt when the piper cub takes out the side of a building you'd be okay with it?

Re:so what? (1)

FuckingNickName (1362625) | more than 4 years ago | (#33647064)

Accepting vandalism does not lead to accepting suicide, murder, bombing (even if "no one is hurt"), etc. The fact that you managed to make the conclusion means that you probably need to seriously review your premises, as a lack of perspective of that magnitude could mean you end up causing considerable harm to yourself or others.

Re:so what? (2, Insightful)

MisaDaBinksX4evah (889652) | more than 4 years ago | (#33647084)

Accepting vandalism does not lead to accepting suicide, murder, bombing (even if "no one is hurt"), etc. The fact that you managed to make the conclusion means that you probably need to seriously review your premises, as a lack of perspective of that magnitude could mean you end up causing considerable harm to yourself or others.

If you can't see how vandalism does harm to normal people, then it's you who needs perspective.

Re:so what? (1)

FuckingNickName (1362625) | more than 4 years ago | (#33647126)

If elephants are pink, I have 10,000 members.

IOW, if I had said that vandalism never causes harm to normal people then your statement would be more than vacuous.

Re:so what? (1)

labcoatless (1902340) | more than 4 years ago | (#33646818)

Shooting down the fiber won't help anyone understand anything. Vandals are no freedom fighters.

Googletroopers (4, Funny)

snookerhog (1835110) | more than 4 years ago | (#33646798)

Google should send a squad of googletroopers to shoot their fucking still.

that'll learn em

Re:Googletroopers (5, Funny)

Vectormatic (1759674) | more than 4 years ago | (#33647004)

i'm not sure brightly colored camo-suits will work...

anyway, googletroopers, expect them to have home-brew equipment which might seem slightly crude, but is actually miles ahead of modern day military hardware, very intuitive to operate... like a railgun (point-click-kill)

(and i just thought of something, if apple ever amassed an army of iTroopers, the black/white color scheme of stormtroopers certainly fits well doesnt it? kind of gives you a whole new perspective on steve's black turtleneck)

Re:Googletroopers (1)

Going_Digital (1485615) | more than 4 years ago | (#33647178)

that'll learn em

Or teach them even.

Hunters and responsibility (3, Informative)

stimpleton (732392) | more than 4 years ago | (#33646806)

On the list of preaching, soap box standing zealots, I have found hunters to be the most vocal. Responsibility, conservation, and a given right to engage said pass-time is delivered in fire-brand like sermons.

From my observations, though, for every 1 responsible hunter there seem to be 10 irresponsible.

15 years ago, I did a stint as a volunteer park warden for 6 months. I noted the following:
- Bringing shot deer down to the nearest clearing, often walking tracks, partially butchering the animal and leaving the rest to rot on the track.
- Pot shots and damage to any and all infrastructure.
- "Boredom Kills" - usually birds shot with high powered rifles.
- Hunting dogs left to roam, sometimes till a following weekend, when the hunter would come back.
- Creepy comments to day hikers such as "I saw you long ago from across the valley, i saw you in my scope".

15 years later and hunters will still defend their pass time with the fervor of a rabid PETA campaigner, or Muslim cleric. Saving the world you know. Thinning pests, and over population of grazing animals...

Re:Hunters and responsibility (1)

migla (1099771) | more than 4 years ago | (#33646868)

Paraphrased, "We only kill the moose because we care" is an often heard argument. Why can't they shoot tranquilizers and neuter them instead if the welfare of the moose is their motive?

Re:Hunters and responsibility (3, Insightful)

LandDolphin (1202876) | more than 4 years ago | (#33647148)

It's their excuse, not motive.

Re:Hunters and responsibility (5, Informative)

Duncan J Murray (1678632) | more than 4 years ago | (#33646890)

All the above sentiments.

When fox-hunting was banned in the UK, there was a pretty huge outcry from the hunting community, with modest support from locals/country folk etc, and ambivalence from most of the rest of us. However, it quickly became apparent that the only real / main reason to keep hunting going was to continue the 'tradition' and to keep a few people employed. I think at this point public opinion swung in support of the government, and I think most of us haven't looked back since.

I'm all for hunting for food, but hunting for sport just seems gratuitous and disrespectful to nature.

Duncan.

Re:Hunters and responsibility (0, Troll)

BenevolentP (1220914) | more than 4 years ago | (#33646978)

Agreed. Just like being a butcher, jailer or actor in Uwe Boll films, Hunting should be a job you hate and simply do it because someone has to (debatable on the latter) or are ordered to. Because taking pride and joy in any of these makes you a bad person by definition.

Re:Hunters and responsibility (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33647136)

From my observations, though, for every 1 responsible hunter there seem to be 10 irresponsible.

What do you expect? Almost all of them just do it to shoot guns and kill something for entertainment.

The whole "hunting" labelling is merely to make it look more acceptable. "assholes who like to kill animals for fun" just doesn't have the same ring to it.

The Race is On, Backhoes, start your engines (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33646808)

You know, they were just trying to avoid the backhoes on the ground, oh well...

An experiment in Social Engineering. (5, Interesting)

KenDiPietro (1294220) | more than 4 years ago | (#33646854)

When I used to work in the wireless Internet world, I had an associate who had much the same problem with idiots shooting at his antennas. After he had been forced to change antennas on several occasions, I told to him that the simple way to fix the problem was to mount a bullseye somewhere else on his towers and give these lunatics something different to aim at. The last time I talked to him his antennas were bullet hole free but he did have to replace a few of the targets due to them taking some serious damage. Come on, Google, put some creative thought into solving these problems..

Re:An experiment in Social Engineering. (1)

giorgist (1208992) | more than 4 years ago | (#33647010)

:-) Sort of like sticking a picture of a fly in a toilet bowl dramaticaly improves your aim

Re:An experiment in Social Engineering. (1)

discord5 (798235) | more than 4 years ago | (#33647150)

I told to him that the simple way to fix the problem was to mount a bullseye somewhere else on his towers and give these lunatics something different to aim at.

I'd say attach a high resolution camera to the bullseye so that it starts taking snapshots once the bullseye is hit, but I'm afraid the camera would become an obvious target.

hmmm (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33646862)

employed by microsoft to fix the google problem ?

What about tractors, cars and houses? (1)

miffo.swe (547642) | more than 4 years ago | (#33646870)

In Sweden hunters have shot dogs, horses, tractors and other strange non-elk looking stuff, not to mention all the people getting killed in hunting related accidents. I knew an old man, still hunting, but he couldnt drive because he couldnt even see the tip of his nose. Crazy people.

If google continues to become evil (1)

assemblerex (1275164) | more than 4 years ago | (#33646882)

have your skiis and a shovel handy.

The hunters can't shoot the insulators... (1)

x0 (32926) | more than 4 years ago | (#33646930)

...but apparently they can shoot the much more difficult to hit cable?

That makes zero sense.I'll challenge anyone on this board to shoot at a cable, strung between poles, and actually hit it.

For those of you without any experience (COD doesn't count)hitting a target that small isn't trivial. Bear in mind the target is what, 10 yards up with either the sky or the trees as a backdrop. If it happens, it's chance I'd blame rather than asshattery.

m

Re:The hunters can't shoot the insulators... (1)

Khyber (864651) | more than 4 years ago | (#33646964)

You give me a properly zeroed scope on a 30.06 and I can nail bell wire.

Re:The hunters can't shoot the insulators... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33647096)

It's not the wire, it's the bird sitting on the wire.

Vandalism (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33646938)

Surely Google could sue anyone who damages their property?

Re:Vandalism (1)

duk242 (1412949) | more than 4 years ago | (#33647028)

That's what I was thinking, set up a nice junction bit that looks slightly more like a target (not intentionally like a target though) and a security camera. All you need to do is catch a few, make it well known that you've caught them and they've been punished and others won't bother to do it.

Explain to me again please, (0, Troll)

Dee Ann_1 (1731324) | more than 4 years ago | (#33646954)

Why "hunters" need guns?

Re:Explain to me again please, (5, Funny)

EmagGeek (574360) | more than 4 years ago | (#33647008)

You can't simply chase down a deer and scream liberal rhetoric at it until it kills itself, now can you?

They're called *VANDALS* not hunters (5, Insightful)

mcheu (646116) | more than 4 years ago | (#33647020)

The article says that HUNTERS regularly TRIED to hit the insulators. That's like those jackasses that shoot up stop signs for fun. It's called VANDALISM, not HUNTING.

I'm guessing the animal rights nuts and anti-gun people are thinking that hunters go in the woods, get bored, and start shooting at random objects to pass the time..

That makes absolutely no sense. Regardless of what game you're going after, if you make any noise at all, any game in the vicinity will take off. If you fire off a shot, you can pretty much pack it up and go home. You're not getting anything that day.

Re:They're called *VANDALS* not hunters (1)

kkissane (1029384) | more than 4 years ago | (#33647116)

Exactly. They not only run off any game near them, but any game with in a mile of them.

Re:They're called *VANDALS* not hunters (4, Insightful)

mikael_j (106439) | more than 4 years ago | (#33647122)

You didn't, for just a second, consider that maybe the hunters shooting at the insulators are hunters who are done for the day? and on their way back they decide to take a couple of shots at the insulators. I know it used to happen a lot here in northern Sweden, and unlike hunters in the US getting a hunting license here isn't just a matter of signing your name on a piece of paper, waiting a couple of weeks and then getting your brand new rifle.

Also, there are plenty of hunters who prefer target practice out in the woods to hanging out at a range, there are plenty of old sandpits around here where you can find cartridge cases strewn about from various hunters either getting some target practice in or simply trying out a new rifle.

Talk vs news (1)

MavEtJu (241979) | more than 4 years ago | (#33647076)

It's funny how a two-three minute talk at a conference can be brought as news.

(I was at the AusNOG conference)

hunters or VANDALS (1)

griff199 (162798) | more than 4 years ago | (#33647146)

IF people are shooting specifically to take down power lines, fiber cables, or insulators, they are vandals and what they are doing is criminal. If you want gun nuts to stop getting all riled up every time something like this happens, we need to quit identifying the entire gun culture as complicit in the crime every time some asshat runs off and does something stupid with a gun.

We wouldn't accept that kind of generalization imposed on us, and we shouldn't do it ourselves.

I have known many hunters in my life, and grew up in MI hunting deer and small game yearly. I never used a rifle for vandalism or in any other irresponsible fashion. I never engaged in "boredom killings" which I think is disgusting. Most people I met through hunting were the same, but there were a few assholes, and to be clear about it, the assholes were assholes irrespective of them being hunters or gun owners, they were assholes in all other contexts as well.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?