"It turns out that the second one actually occurred first."
Oh well. There goes my theory that Mr. Tingey was a "True" subscriber.
The method is right, the goal is wrong... Nothing wrong with using Google to get yourself a walkthrough for tying a tie, or reassembling a keyboard. Cracking a safe? Hmm. It's times like this when you realise how stupid it is to use a shared computer for extremely private business!!
See, if criminals were intelligent, they would look up how to crack a safe BEFORE they actually get to the safe. Maybe even print out directions or something.
Then again, putting criminal(s) and intelligence in the same sentence is kind of an oxymoron, isn't it?
---
Yep. There have been cases of people doing their searches at home -- and their searches have been used as evidence in their trials. It includes a woman who researched poisons online, and used the knowledge to murder her husband. The story didn't make the cut to be included in TRUE. -rc
I didn't see where it was reported that the two burglars were caught. If they weren't caught, then why would anyone say they weren't intelligent. It's wrong to rob, but they were smart enough to find the solution. The unintelligible person is the one who left the computer running without locking it down.
Okay, a challenge; it begs a response.
It's titled Low Brow, High Tech, implying the man was stupid. "The man ran out the back door, but was caught by police nearby." I guess it DOES say that he was caught. And likely he was caught because he had to spend extra time trying to find out how to do the job he wanted to do. Pretty stupid.
The Google; What Can't It Do? story wasn't about the lack of intelligence on the burglar's part, but that Google is so ubiquitous that even criminals use it in their pursuits. Although there was a definite comment about the deductive reasoning of the detective on the case.
Still, how many professionals do you think need to stop in the middle of their work to consult Google? I'd say it does point to a lack of intelligence if they're not already prepared for their job. Would you trust a doctor who needed to consult Google for more information in the middle of your cardiac surgery?
---
"Low brow" is meant to infer low sophistication, not low intelligence. -rc
Echo! (Echo!) - Comments
"It turns out that the second one actually occurred first."
Oh well. There goes my theory that Mr. Tingey was a "True" subscriber.
Posted by: Ken from New York | July 31, 2007 10:41 AM
The method is right, the goal is wrong... Nothing wrong with using Google to get yourself a walkthrough for tying a tie, or reassembling a keyboard. Cracking a safe? Hmm. It's times like this when you realise how stupid it is to use a shared computer for extremely private business!!
Posted by: Chris, Melbourne (AU) | July 31, 2007 10:46 PM
See, if criminals were intelligent, they would look up how to crack a safe BEFORE they actually get to the safe. Maybe even print out directions or something.
Then again, putting criminal(s) and intelligence in the same sentence is kind of an oxymoron, isn't it?
---
Yep. There have been cases of people doing their searches at home -- and their searches have been used as evidence in their trials. It includes a woman who researched poisons online, and used the knowledge to murder her husband. The story didn't make the cut to be included in TRUE. -rc
Posted by: Dan from St. Paul | August 1, 2007 6:18 AM
I didn't see where it was reported that the two burglars were caught. If they weren't caught, then why would anyone say they weren't intelligent. It's wrong to rob, but they were smart enough to find the solution. The unintelligible person is the one who left the computer running without locking it down.
Posted by: Norman, San Francisco, CA | August 4, 2007 1:28 PM
Okay, a challenge; it begs a response.
It's titled Low Brow, High Tech, implying the man was stupid. "The man ran out the back door, but was caught by police nearby." I guess it DOES say that he was caught. And likely he was caught because he had to spend extra time trying to find out how to do the job he wanted to do. Pretty stupid.
The Google; What Can't It Do? story wasn't about the lack of intelligence on the burglar's part, but that Google is so ubiquitous that even criminals use it in their pursuits. Although there was a definite comment about the deductive reasoning of the detective on the case.
Still, how many professionals do you think need to stop in the middle of their work to consult Google? I'd say it does point to a lack of intelligence if they're not already prepared for their job. Would you trust a doctor who needed to consult Google for more information in the middle of your cardiac surgery?
---
"Low brow" is meant to infer low sophistication, not low intelligence. -rc
Posted by: Mike from Dallas | August 5, 2007 9:50 AM
Read the article that everyone's commenting on, or post a comment about it.