Slashdot Mirror

The following is a segment of an excellent series which ran on PBS last year (and will run again this may) called "The Commanding Heights" which discussed and explained the battle between soviet style central planning in the 20th century and the free market economy and also the promise and perils of the new globalization. There are interviews with economists, politicians, businessmen and others who discuss firsthand their experiences with the various economic principles of macro and micro economics. Despite the emphasis on economics the series is interesting and it is designed to get average people thinking about the market forces which exist in this world and control the fate of nations and people. The following is a segment which discusses TARIFS and their effects upon an economy. As many other people have already said, TARIFS are almost certainly the wrong way to protect the American software and IT industry. Here is the link; the entire series is available via the internet as well for those who are interested.

Latin American Dependencia

Want to know why US is at war now?

Two words: Wolfowitz Doctrine

Interestingly, that topic has been discussed more in non-US media. Our beloved CNN, Fox, and MSNBC seem intent to entertain us more than educate us.

This war is not just about oil or "liberating" the Iraqi people. This war is about maintaining the US's political, economic and military dominance in the world.

If we are succesful, the conflict won't end. There is a group who would see the US taking a first strike policy to keep our dominance, whether the rest of the world agrees or not.

--
hecubas

I will add to this if you please. The portion I am adding reads like a conspiracy theory. Its not. It has been documented in many places, including PBS and the White House itself.

I wont go into details here, I will allow one to read the material themselves. You can also watch the video as PBS online is currently hosting a story frontline did about the mess.

In brief:

The Project for the New American Century is a DC based think tank that has imagined a world under complete US military and economic domination (or "freedom" as it were). They have fiddled with and written documents concerning a post cold war world where the USA has become the Worlds Only Superpower and what that means from a Strategic viewpoint.

In the early days, Paul Wolfowitz produced a document that detailed the expansion of the American empire that seemed too radical at the time and was cleaned up and rewritten and stowed away. Over time, and through the most recent Coup by this incredibly radical group of men, this updated document, with the help of the PNAC, became the National Security Strategy Of the United States. Most chilling about this turn of eventls and policy is the new found policy of "pre-emption". Which I think we are seeing now in the creation of the 51st state.

Also chilling (to me anyway) is the fact that this is the "official story", the one being reported by the obviously biased media.

Anyway.. some more links..

CBC.ca's take.

More Canadian Insight

The Frontline Special

This timeline gives the birth of stars at occuring roughly 1 billion years after the big bang, which this article in January gives at between 11.2 and 20 billion years ago...

Wouldn't this hole place a lower limit of 14 billion years on the bang? And if last year's Hubble estimate of 13-14 billion years ago for the bang is right, wouldn't it pin it AT 14 billion years ago?

-T

Basically, it's challenge/response, with the response being via telephone

I replied to him with the following:

I like your idea, I think it'll work. It's a variation of the challenge/response scheme, with the response being via a sender-paid phone call.

Here's a story: 2 years ago, we moved, so I had to change ISPs. I took the opportunity to do an experiment - my new email address I only divulge to people I know; everything else I use a Hotmail account for. In 2 years I have NEVER received spam on my "private" account, and I don't even have a filter enabled. Hotmail, on the other hand, is a different story, but is handy for internet purchases and emailing pundits.

Some points to ponder

- Your forum is a good way to get the ball rolling. Once a reasonable scheme is agreed upon, you could post it (maybe as an RFC) and the practice could spread virus-like from there. Even post instructions for Outlook users (rules wizard). If this catches on, a setup.exe for this filter would be a hot download!

- When subscribing to mailing lists, one might forget to add the address to your address book, thereby flooding the list with the "challenge" email. There should be a standard tag in the challenge that mailing list servers can filter on, and even automatically take you off the list.

- Since an auto-reply confirms to the spammer the address, the filter should ALWAYS delete the email. Once this practice is known, this might even prompt spammers to take you *off* his list. Saving the message would lead some spammers to continue on the off chance you might look through your spam folder later on.

- Using this scheme with bob@cringely.com obviously is not going to work (if you posted a controversial article, it would give new meaning to "slashdotting"). However few email users have a web site that invites comments. If a spammer loses a large percentage of his address list, he'll close up shop completely (here's a question: what is that percentage? How many email addresses make spamming a worthwhile income generator?)

- Registering with sites like NYtimes.com should be done with a disposable address, because forgetting the password requires an email be sent from some unknowable sender (forgot@lga2.nytimes.com)

So that's the new email reality. Get a private address equipped with the challenge/telephone response. Get a disposable address for shopping, or reading the news. And backup your address book.

Sample template for the challenge message:

I don't know who you are. If you want me to read your message, call me at xxx-xxx-xxxx and we can arrange to allow future messages to come straight through.

The message you sent was automatically deleted. I did not see it. Sorry for the inconvenience.

<SPAM CHALLENGE> this tag is for mail list managers </SPAM CHALLENGE>

Any system that relies on the receiver paying is doomed to failure.

Cringley has been thinking about the problem for the past few weeks and has come to the conclusion that the sender must pay.

I'm not sure that I agree with his implementation, but the general idea is a sound one. The barrier to entry must be raised...

I believe their real motive in offering such a course would be to teach programmers to code for security the Microsoft way, so that things continue to get worse. Their definition of security of your machine is much like their definition of digital rights of your machine; they are not looking after your digital rights, and they are not looking after your security.

Saddam's music videos and his hit number "Who's yo fadda?".

Damn freedom of speech can't live with it... can't shoot it...

Heck its almost like the government forcing you to give a concert or some such shite. Which is it do we hates em or does we luvs em'? Difficult concept for redneck brain...

To the first two points have a look here:

http://www.newamericancentury.org/

PNAC is a rather conservative Think Tank who has interresting articles titled:

Richard Perl on Iraq

The UN trap?

A Necessary War

And much much more, read it, it is almost a blue print for the current US foreign policy.

"So what?" You might ask, it's a Think Tank they're supposed to do something like that. True but members of that Think Tank include:

Richard Cheney

Richard Perle

Both of them quite clearly influence american policy, wouldn't you agree?

Chirac said that under no circumstances would the use of force be appropriate, and they would oppose any resolution setting a deadline. That eliminated any incentive for Saddam to disarm or truly cooperate with inspectors. France also opposed a stronger inspection regime than the one led by Hans Blix, again weakening inspections.

Yes he did, because it was clear at that point in time that this was the only thing the US wanted: To use force.

The US also careered quite niecly around on what they actually wanted:

First it was inspections, then it was disarmament, then all of the sudden that wasn't good enough either and it was clear they wanted to oust Saddam.

Someone has agendas here and if you read on the PNAC website you'll realize that it is about power. Oil might not be the number one reason for them to go in, but I am sure it is a nice price once they get it.

www.takebackthemedia.com
www.gnn.tv
www.pbs.org/now/
disinfo.com
www.truthout.org
www.propagandamatrix.com
www.indymedia.org
www.rense.com
www.infowars.com

Where's any proof that Iraq has funded Terrorism?

areal photos of camp

terrorist links

more ammo

washington times article

links to Al Qaeda

Is that enough? or do you need more?

maeryk

That's what those neo conservatives and hawks want you to believe. http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/iraq /

Check out Cringley's recent article. Says basically the same thing, I believe.

This weeks Cringley column points out a variation on this that makes even more sense to me. His plan is, instead of a tax, the money goes to the recipient, a la PayPal. And, as he states, For most people, their payments and receipts would probably balance out, so only the spammers would really be paying, which would create the equivalent of postal junk mail except in this case the postage goes to the reader, not to the Post Office. And it doesn't require legislation, you could join voluntarily. And you could still use the "white list" as described by Scott Fahlman.

I have found both PBS and National Public Radio to be professional and complete in their coverage. (Both these are public US networks.) I don't know about unbiased, but not being biased is idealistic in the media. About all the media can do is to present as many sides of an issue as possible as accurately as possible.

Why is it that so many people forget to put any sort of blame on Saddam and his government?

The reasons that the sanctions have been in place for so long is that Saddam has never cooperated with the UN resolutions passed regarding Iraq and disarmament. And he has not used the money he has gotten from aid programs to help his own people.

I'm digging up a bunch of links on this now. This PBS link has has a lot of info and viewpoints.

http://www.pbs.org/frontlineworld/stories/iraq/san ctions.html

-prator

and here's another reason for techies to like France:
Part of their popularity comes from the fact that scientists and engineers have a much higher status in France than in America. Many high ranking civil servants and government officials trained as scientists and engineers (rather than lawyers, as in the United States), and, unlike in the U.S. where federal administrators are often looked down upon, these technocrats form a special elite.

Back to email, this past weekend's Cringely is about an email system where the recipient sets a price that the sender must pay in order for the message to get through. You can set Grannie's price to $0.00 and funwithfarmanimals.com or whoever to $5.00 or $10.00 or however high you want to either turn a profit or turn them away. Unfortunately he suggests letting PayPal handle the payment transfers.

I'd say that the government and people of the US have stated again and again what our aims are. Here are some examples, if you want:

• Here's Bush's speech on the subject to the United Nations, given September 12, 2002.
• Here's the Joint Congressional Resolution which almost the entire Senate, and about 75% of the house voted for.
• Here's the statement of the nations of Spain, Portugal, Italy, the United Kingdom, Hungary, Poland, Denmark, and the Czech Republic.
• Here's the statement of the nations of Albania, Bulgaria, Croatia, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Macedonia, Romania, Slovakia and Slovenia.

Of course, to hear you tell it, all of these people are just in it to make some money for President Bush's father. Is that really your claim?

Wow did you rip that from an "I, Cringely" Coulmn?

When Is 64 Not Two Times 32?

Bob's Predictions for 2003 (15 looks well on it's way to completion)

Wow did you rip that from an "I, Cringely" Coulmn?

When Is 64 Not Two Times 32?

Bob's Predictions for 2003 (15 looks well on it's way to completion)

PBS has several internship slots open this summer, including ones for CS or EE students.

Didn't Cringely give them a bit longer than that here

I suggest that you research John F. Kennedy's tax cuts in the early 60s. He cut the top marginal rate from 91% to 70%. Imagine paying 90% of your annual income as tax. Cutting the tax rate certainly did boost the economy in the 60s, and in the 80s when Reagan cut taxes again. The truth is that taxing people a reasonable amount is what is fair and keeps the government from being too large of a burden to the working population.

If you think the economy trends change monthly, you may also want to learn a tad more about economics than CNN reports. For info on when the current economic slowdown was first reported, check here and read this article. Wow! It was already starting in January 2001, before Bush took office. Add the 9/11 attack and additional slowdown, then the revelations of large corporate accounting scandals, which actually happened during Clintons watch and his lapses of honesty. The cumulative economic effects have been devestating in the US. I've been If you just want to bash Bush, then just admit it, no problem. I have been unemployed for a while now myself and am very anxious for recovery too, but share blame everywhere it is deserved.

...and I can tell you that while it's astonishingly easy to think of fascinating ideas for science films, it's damned tough to think up a format that is fresh, emotionally engaging, and revelatory. Everytime I go the bookstore or the library and wander around for a few hours, I leave with my head swimming with ideas that make me feel passionate and excited, ideas that make me want to run up to strangers and say "Jeezus this world is mad cool." Yet, in the course of a year, if I can turn six of these ideas into show treatments, and three of those into shows, I am beating the game.

The reality is, it simply doesn't matter how "good" a show is if no one watches it. In fact, an otherwise high-quality show that fails to be interesting to millions of people can poison the well for other shows down the line. Discovery, PBS, National Geographic, take your pick; they're all in a perpetual scramble for eyeballs. No one at any of these places has yet figured out a fail-safe algorithm for finding and producing shows that people will watch without clicking through to the next channel. All they know is that the most-watched shows hook viewers emotionally. If they don't see the potential for that in your proposal, it ends up in the circular file.

I don't lament this. We live in an economically free, market-driven society. Ideas and stories, like other products, compete among each other for our money and (especially in television) our time. A lot of the comments I read above implied that if we as a society could only impose, from the top down, a grand realignment of the values we place on science and knowledge, our science journalism would become both smarter and more mainstream. Fine, as long as we're at it, let's also impose from the top down a hunger for good government, spiritual advancement, and healthy living. All admirable goals, but unfortunately, utopias are far easier to applaud than they are to implement. Kind of like software development schedule utopias. (*cough, cough*)

So back here on planet Earth, pragmatists chip away at problems from the bottom up. Successful science shows and journalism seek to tap the emotions of viewers, knowing that if you win their hearts, their minds follow. To that end, these are the goals of a good science journalist: to not only inform, but reveal; to not only show how things work, but to incite strong feelings that this knowledge is important and sometimes even miraculous; to make clear that this world of disconnected parts is actually connected beneath the surface by beautiful and unifying principles; to show that if you understand why a whip cracks you also understand why an F15 booms and a nuclear reactor glows in blue Cherenkov light under water. And just as importantly, to also make science seem as much a natural and exciting part of life as getting laid, carving on a snowboard, fighting with your brother, and watching Shawshank Redemption for the third time. Connection.

I did a show and a website on El Nino for NOVA a few years back. (Yes, it told a human story as well as a scientific story.) It was re-broadcast in Germany last year, and four million people watched it. I sit here at my desk sometimes and think about that kind of thing, and I have never gotten used to it. I read, I think, I drink coffee, and then I type while I play mp3s. In other words, I'm pretty much like the rest of the crowd here on Slashdot. Yet sometimes, the ideas embodied in those keystrokes end up being injected into four million skulls. Trust me, the responsibility you feel to use that privilege wisely and effectively is enormous. Maybe that's what evangelical Christians feel when they hear the "good news" and want to spread it.

It's knee-jerk easy to say we need less Joe Millionaire and Britney, and more NOVA and JYW. However, this ignores the reality that we are complex social primates driven far more by emotion than Western science has traditionally admitted. Even a solitary, consuming interest in science is ultimately an emotional urge. Are you hankering to prove Fermat's Last Theorem, uncover the faint traces of Pluto somewhere among fifty thousand starfield photographs, or invent a way of copying fragments of DNA? Andrew Wiles, Clyde Tombaugh, and Kary Mullis each threw themselves into science not because they were excited by university labs, jargon, and academic papers, but because they fell in love with their ideas, pined and trembled for them, stayed up late and got up early in hopes of seeing if they could use them to recast the way we see the world. The rest of it is just window dressing.

Unfortunately, many people were inoculated against science in school the way they were inoculated against Shakespeare. After something's been forced down your throat like cod liver oil, you lose your taste for it. (I still remember my old physics teacher's dandruff, droning voice, and drudgerous lab assignments.)

There is an antidote. I said it earlier, but it bears repeating. If you win their hearts, their minds will follow. The best science shows are the ones that make viewers feel caught up, and emotionally invested in, the underlying science story. If you're a good writer, you find a way to do this naturally, from the bottom up. It turns out that Aristotle's dramatic principles apply to science stories like any other flavor of story. The shitty shows I've seen (and they are legion) try to fake it. You can tell when the people who made them did it for money, not love. Ultimately, in this business, you either love what you're writing about...or you're a hack.

So the question was, "Can science journalism be entertaining and responsible?" In other words, can science journalism thrill your heart as well as your head? Kinda like asking if your girlfriend can be both entertaining and responsible, can give your, ummm, heart a shiver as well as your mind. If she can't...better change the channel.

Can anyone else see where this is going?

Yes, into tighter birth control laws, better management of available resources and the legalization of abortion. Don't forget that people like Paul Ehrlich and Lester Brown also (wrongly) predicted a global catastrophe caused by population growth during the 1960s and early 1970s -- and they still continue to publish books containing predictions of global disaster due to overpopulation nowadays.

Don't understimate humanity.

Definitely not an expert but sheps idea sounds good. Especially when combined with a cheap tower in downtown B.F.E. .

If you know the bandwidth you can build your own antennas (maybe even your own repeater). Of course you could always build the thing (things?) and just nail it in an appropriately located treen on the high ground.

"The phrase "high tech" doesn't spring out at me here."

anonymous coward

The Cato Institute has a long study (actually an exeprt from a book -- see link below) documenting the systematic increase in the use of the SSN as a national identifyer. A summary of the paper is here or you can just grab the 166kb PDF

For the click-shy, here's the text of the executive summary:

To combat terrorism, Attorney General John Ashcroft has asked Congress to "enhance" the government's ability to conduct domestic surveillance of citizens. The Justice Department's legislative proposals would give federal law enforcement agents new access to personal information contained in business and school records. Before acting on those legislative proposals, lawmakers should pause to consider the extent to which the lives of ordinary Americans already are monitored by the federal government.

Over the years, the federal government has instituted a variety of data collection programs that compel the production, retention, and dissemination of personal information about every American citizen. Linked through an individual's Social Security number, these labor, medical, education and financial databases now empower the federal government to obtain a detailed portrait of any person: the checks he writes, the types of causes he supports, and what he says "privately" to his doctor. Despite widespread public concern about preserving privacy, these data collection systems have been enacted in the name of "reducing fraud" and "promoting efficiency" in various government programs.

Having exposed most areas of American life to ongoing government scrutiny and recording, Congress is now poised to expand and universalize federal tracking of citizen life. The inevitable consequence of such constant surveillance, however, is metastasizing government control over society. If that happens, our government will have perverted its most fundamental mission and destroyed the privacy and liberty that it was supposed to protect.

If you're curious, I originally bumped into this somewhere in Bill Moyer's archive

- a somewhat A, AC

I would heartily agree that increased "top-down" adult supervision is killing innovation. See Robert Cringly's excellent article for a good description of the problem.

In addition, I would say we are also seeing The Peter Principal in action. The growth of the 90's has left us with people in charge who aren't capable of much more than lobbying politicians to pass anti-competitive laws to protect them.

well, i didn't see anyone mention this as i scanned through so i might as well.

merchants of cool is a frontline show and it's pretty darn good. it, dare i say exposes, nay, since quite a few people already know of the connections with corporate marketing and the media. no, it documents several groups of 'kids' and how they sell out and love it. a really good watch.

as one who has grown up watching, through the 80's and 90's, the ever growing appetite of the mega-corp, i really can't feel sympathy much for anyone who sells their soul for an advertising buck. there's a lot of dots to connect across our various freedoms and some people have no problem relenquishing their freedom to be anonymous.

but, even though i'm not that old, i'm sure i'm considered 'old skool' to the kids who think corporate advertising like this is cool. somewhow, to me, it just seems like the ultimate loss of self-respect.

I don't think that anyone is reading this except for us, and this is starting to reach the point of rehash. I know where you're coming from, you know where I'm coming from. I'm ready to wrap it up.

Yep, but it sure is interesting to try your arguments against someone, that's why I was continuing... :-)

But OK, I'll just point out a couple of things where you are plain wrong:

Bush has not threatened and will not threaten any country with invasion that is not harboring or supporting terrorists.

Accused of supporting terrorists. That means anybody. He can accuse anybody, and nuke anybody. Unless there is an external body that exists to evaluate the evidence, nobody is safe.

Physics labs use tiny amounts of extremely radioactive sources to deliberately cause small nuclear reactions for study. This produces small amounts of intensely radioactive fission products that escape into the lab environment and wind up in the corners. Industrial uranium enrichment uses large amounts of barely radioactive natural uranium, and produces no highly radioactive fission products. They are not comparable.

Nope, you get radioactive dust from weak sources too. Besides, if there really was industrial facilities on the scale you're talking about, they wouldn't be that hard to discover.

1) Kicked the weapons inspectors out of the country

He didn't. That's plain revisionism. That's one of the worst lies that has been told by the Bush administrations. Just look in your sources from 1998, and you'll see it. They were withdrawn. You'll see that all formal sources today also use the word withdrawn. There's a pretty good PBS interview with Scott Ritter that highlights this. Another lie is that there has been no inspections in Iraq since 1998. IAEA has had annual inspections in Iraq, in january every year. Iraq would have to build entirely new facilities. It is possible that they could do that, though, and that's why IAEA called for a new, intrusive inspections regime.

Millions of Europeans have taken to the streets to protect Hussein and Iraq I can't find a single protest sign calling for Iraq to disarm, or stop using chemical weapons on the Kurds, or stop murdering dissidents. You think we don't see those signs at your protests? Do you think we don't know how little Europeans care about the Iraqi people?

Oh, come on, that just silly. Look, I've come to appreciate you're insights, but this is just below what I've come to expect from you.

If you had looked, you would have seen me with a sign saying that in 1984, when you gave Hussein all the support he needed. US hasn't got any deeper moral authority at all, it is not about the Iraqi people, it is about your own sense of security.

Besides, if you had really looked, you would have found exciled Kurd dissident leaders in the crowd. You would also find many exciled Iraqis in the crowd. I don't think you looked very well... (But I agree that the "peace in our time"-sign was rather stupid...)

Actually, he has stated that he will not hesitate to use them against any country that uses them against us first.

No, there is specifically a first strike policy.

You mean since he was elected,

Even before that. You know, Rumsfeldt and his companions have been out to get Saddam for a very long time. But obviously, the message has been more pronounced since his election.

He said that either your are with us, or you are with the terrorists. This isn't a threat, it's an observation.

I'm not with Bush, but I'm not with the terrorists. This are the words of a religious fanatic. These are the words of someone who is incapable of seeing other solutions than his own. The post-911 actions, I would claim, has had no effect on terrorism whatsoever.

Unfortunately for you, most Americans support Bush, and I think that he is going to be reelected in the next election cycle.

See, told you so, you're unable to get rid of him! ;-)

Lorne Green. Who is Loren Green?

Exactly how it should be.

Perhaps public floggings and other corperal punishment as well.

However I have to wonder if all spammers are really sane ... I just got an email about chicks who crave small penis's and those who crave big penis's and then emails about penis enlargement and viagra online purchases, it just seems weird that there is so much concern for my penis. Perhaps we should just imprison them on an island as they might find tar and feathering a bit kinky and enjoy it.

Tell that to the families that have lost mothers, fathers, children, aunts, and uncles to US foriegn policy. Tell the hundreds of Americans who still have family in Iraq that "history" doesn't matter. Has the US ever made a public apology or offered real long term support to make up for past crimes?

Very well-- lets listen to those Iraqi families. Almost every last Iraqi exile will tell you that we must remove Saddam. That is how we begin to repay the Iraqis. That is how we apologize. We don't do it by leaving him there to kill millions more. You've proved my point for me.

Back this up with real proof. I'm sure the US has proof, but in the interest of maintaining an edge in spying, the president probably decided not to reveal the information.

The burden of proof isn't on me. I'll give you some links to get you started- but this murdering, torturing, genocidal, chemical-weapons using madman has given the world plenty of proof of what he's done. the burden of proof is on those who would protect him-- on YOU. Here's the links: One Two Three That is on the WTC alone. Saddam OPENLY pays families of suicide bombers. Here's one on Salman Pak: Four I could go on forever. Clearly it is you who has not done enough reading. I've fulfilled a burden that wasn't even mine. Now you think we should protect a madman. You present your evidence.

If he was convincing, wouldn't the European nations given their support?

Actually, they all do, with the exception of France and Germany, who are trying to dominate Europe. And instead of just listening to other people, why don't you analyze the facts? If those guys are right, prove it. Don't just base your opinion on their authority. That is no more valid than me basing my opinion on George W. Bush's opinion alone. Chirac, by the way, is the only major world leader to be personal friends with Saddam, dating back to the days when he helped sell Saddam two nuclear reactors. He's also being investigated for corruption, and is only not being prosecuted because of immunity afforded by his office. The argument at the UN isn't about Iraq. They all know he is in violation of the terms of the resolution. This is about constraining US power.

The best way to win the war is to win the hearts and minds of Muslims and have them turn Saddam and Bin Laden in themselves

How about starting by promoting democracy in the region, giving the people political power and economic hope? How about removing these dictators bent on regional domination through WMD, who brutalize their populations and then conveniently blame the US and Jews to deflect criticism from themselves? How about stopping the torture and genocide practiced by Saddam? But you're not really interested in the people, if you were you'd advocate saving them from this monster. Why don't YOU read something instead of telling other people that you're more well-read than them in "philosophy" and "history". And although I asked that we keep this debate civil, every respondent has taken a cheap shot at President Bush. I can't take you guys seriously unless you show that you're interested in whether war is right or wrong-- instead of whether you're more well-read, sophisticated, and "subtle" than the President.

Thus, for example, tanks, battleships and bombing planes are inherently tyrannical weapons, while rifles, muskets, long-bows and hand-grenades are inherently democratic weapons. A complex weapon makes the strong stronger, while a simple weapon -- so long as there is no answer to it -- gives claws to the weak."


At risk of sounding cliched and starry-eyed, I'll say that some of the most powerful weapons these days, particularly communications and the internet, are of the democratic "claws to the weak" variety.

If you think I'm just blowing smoke, go look up the excellent 2002 documentary
Bringing Down a Dictator.

We didn't hear much about it in the US, but after the NATO attacks on Serbia, the forces left and Slobodan Milosevic was ultimately overthrown in 2000 by a revolution started by a few students. They did it by being smarter, faster, and more internet savvy than an old-school despot. In the course of a few months, they went from a few conspirators to a countrywide force with millions of people clogging the streets in peaceful protests. In the final days of the stand-down with the government, Milosevic ultimately acquesced, and only a single person on either side died ... of a heart attack. It was a true, peaceful-yet-successful revolution by the people, with communications and the internet as the only weapon. Now Serbia has a democratic government.

*Very* inspirational film. Makes me think that there's hope for the world yet.

Presumably you're refering to this event at the Homebrew Computer Club back in 1975... (snipped from this article)

The Altair may have been frustrating, but it drove the nerds to experiment, finding real uses for the useless box, turning it from a curiosity to a computer.

Lee Felsenstein
Steve Dumpier set up an Altair, ehm laboriously keyed a program into it. Somebody knocked a plug out of the wall and he had to do that all over again but nobody knew what this was about. After all, was it just going to sit and flash its lights? No.

Roger Melen
You put a little eh transistor radio next to the Altair and he would by manipulating the length of loops in the sofware - could play tunes.

Lee Felsenstein
The radio began playing 'Fool on the Hill'....Da da da, da da da....and the tinny little tunes that you could tell were coming from the noise that the computer was generated being picked up by the radio. Everybody rose and applauded. I proposed that he receive the stripped Philips Screw Award for finding a use for something previously thought useless. But I think everybody was too busy applauding to even hear me.

Roger Melen
It was a very exciting thing, it was probably the first thing the Altair actually did.

On a related note, my old BBC micro used to pick up interference on it's internal speaker, which could actually be used for some basic debugging. You could tell if it had crashed, or whether it was still running round a particularly heavy maths loop, etc...

Cringely seems to think that Sun won't last long though, so will there be long-term benefit to AMD?

how about instead of 500,000 people buying the album, 1 million download it for free and 100,000 of these each donate $5 to the band thus leaving each band member with $125,000 each - instead of the $38 grand each with the current model.

For more details on a donation type music model go here and also suss out MusicLink and also Cringely article on the topic.

And don't forget Sun

Well, the French remember the first Hitler, and they don't see the analogy. They think the United States is pushing for a needless war against a regime that poses no threat to them, let alone to the United States, which, with typical Gallic effrontery and ethnocentrism, they consider to be across the Atlantic, out of reach of Iraq. They see nothing to be gained by such a war, but they see dangers for everyone; and they don't want to be dragged into it. This is now 'anti-Americanism.'

[...]

'Experience keeps a dear school,' Benjamin Franklin said, 'but a fool will learn in no other.' The Europeans have learned bitter lessons in that school; Americans are just now enrolling."

--Joseph Sobran, "The School of Experience"

Before you're so quick to diss the French, you might want to bone up on your history and recall just who saved America's ass at Yorktown.

I am an ever-struggling student of China, and am continually amazed by the quality of music I hear coming out of the Beijing rock scene. Beijing is without doubt one of the most vibrant places for cutting-edge rock and roll, perhaps because no one expects to get rich off CD sales. Even relatively old artists like Cui Jian are still producing great music.

Western record producers can gripe about piracy all they want, but it is simply a fact of life in China, and not just in music. A friend recently gave me a VCD of "Hero" - the new Zhang Yimou / Jet Li film. It is clearly a pirated copy, but is so visually stunning I plan to see it in theaters when I hit Beijing in two weeks (I don't know when it is scheduled to be released here....).

Realistically though, until someone explains to me why Chinese popular music is BETTER in quality and inventiveness than the stuff being played on MTV, I'll remain suspicious of arguments that tight copyright controls provide for better end-products.

p.s. Anyone hunting for good Chinese music should definitely check out Cui Jian. There was a really good documentary on China on PBS about a week ago that can be viewed here. It has a pretty decent soundtrack as well.

Ever see Merchants of Cool on Frontline?

A Report on the Creators & Marketers of Popular Culture for Teenagers

Yeah, that's right. Popular Culture is manufactured -- everything the teenies think is "cool" or "hot" is identified months in advance by a highly sophisticated machine that probes the minds of kids to predict what will be the next trend so that the marketing establishment can gear up to take advantage of the short window where the "thing" is "cool" and can be sold to teens in such a way that they don't even realize what is going on.

Let me actually post the link... *shrug* preview.. grumble grumble. here

there is a large one outside of Great Bend, KS as well. Used to be a huge deal for the B29 Bombers. In fact, they just built a nice B29 Memorial there that Bob Dole helped dedicate.

There has been quite a bit of talk in the past years about the historical value of the town, mainly to generate tourism revenue, but there really is quite a bit of interesting history about it.

If I recall correctly, they have recently begun construction to upgrade some of the old airstrips to amature drag racing-quality strips.

Germany created and flew the first jet fighters.... Commercial jets are descended from those planes.

Not necessarily.....

http://www.midlandairmuseum.org.uk/thejet.html

The first real commercial jet aircraft was the British Comet. The concept of the jet was not solely German and the British engine was developed independently... and in fact the Germans probably used Whittle's research to develop their jet.

However the jet engine was first proven during WWII (though probably it would still have developed) and the 747 was developed first as a military cargo plane - the C5 but Boeing was beaten out by the C5 Galaxy.

I wish people would use the power of google before spouting off on stuff they don't know about - and some links to justify their opinions would be good too.

Bombing a dam is damn hard. seen from the air they are very small targets. And they are concrete and over built. even if you hit the top you have not done much damage. to destroy the dam you have to hit is near the bottom where the water pressure is high. hence the need for a raid on the ground: to hard to hit.

Enter the skip bomb. the Skip bomb is a spinning cyllindric bomb dropped in the water above the dam. it skips, skips, skips and slams in to wall of the dam. but it does not explode. instead the back spin makes it claw its way down the side the dam where it detonates near the bottom.

there's lots on the web on this, including . http://www.pbs.org/wnet/secrets/case_nazidams/

This paper outlines a potential business strategy for Sun Microsystems Inc. that differs from the current strategy by limiting Java's release to Solaris only, open-sourcing Solaris and Sun ONE, and then allowing the cloning of Sun's SPARC architecture. Ideally, the market becomes suffused with inexpensive Sun compatible hardware working with Sun's free Java software (or licensed competitor offerings). To work, this strategy requires developers choose the J2EE platform instead of Microsoft .NET so then industry must use Sun or Sun compatible hardware without the choice of selecting Intel based hardware including those from IBM, HP or Dell, as Java is not available on those platforms. Sun's sustainable advantage comes from owning, implementing, and licensing the Sun SPARC and Java standards. Both of these standards become dependent on each other so that an implementation of each is required in any one system for it to operate correctly. The strategy is possible because Sun is the last vertically integrated computer company, making its own chips, circuit boards and software (Forbes, 2002) while also controlling the popular Java programming language. The strategy partly comes as a response to the speech McNealy on Strategy with the company affliction that it mentions. However, the window of opportunity for this strategy's execution is limited due to the growing enterprise functionality and corporate support of the open-source Linux operating system and the growth of the Microsoft .NET software platform. Not discussed in this paper is the additional possibility of Sun merging with Sony so that the author's GrooveTip entertainment idea may be executed. If you are happy with this strategy to save Sun then please sign the petition.

(Mods: you know you really can't moderate this as "Offtopic", "Flamebait" or a "Troll". If you're going to mod this down, use "Unfunny," and damn you all to hell.)

I mean, the guy's never wrong! Take this article for example:

"If You Can't Beat Him, Join Him
How Microsoft Plans to Drive Linus Torvalds Insane by Introducing MS-Linux"

Let's not forget what a whack job this guy is. After reading his "Windows is not an OS" argument, I can;t take anything he says seriously.