in this particular comment i was correlating larger slashdot issues with your comment. i should have been more clear about the distinction.... for that i apologize.
my point is that/.ers have a really bad habit of using ad hominem attacks when a simple factual debate would do. again, i am referring to/.ers in general (of whom i am one) and not you specifically. (see, i learn from my mistakes!)
this is incorrect. it is perfectly plausible that a world government might be liberal and tolerant, like the US or canada or something.
it does not follow that "the bigger the size of the jurisdiction, the more tyrannical the government will be." you seem to be thinking that any world government will be necessarily a totalitarian one. not necessarily true.
i am not in favor of world government, but this argument is specious.
you said: 'This means that our representatives are not exactly a "cross-section" of the population.'
i get really sick and tired about hearing about how stupid our elected officials are, how stupid juries are, how stupid are, etc. then someone claims to want a "cross-section" of the population in congress or running the country, which would put all those "stupid" people in positions of influence.
later on: "At the end of the day, you end up paying taxes when you buy a hard drive..."
so what? i pay taxes when i buy milk at the convenience store. what's the problem?
another interesting fact: some of the d-boys in somalia were using the CAR-15 with carbide-tipped bullets, which penetrated armor, but wasn't particularly effective with unarmored personnel. it is nice to have your enemy catch some of the momentum from an incoming bullet. if it passes through, there's no real kick to the impact, so your enemy can keep running as long as their body will operate. if you have a thicker/flatter bullet, they'll be maybe bowled over by the impact.
the geneva convention's intention is to encourage "humane" warfare, or something in that vein. so, as we all know, you're not allowed to target noncombatants explicitly. but the weapons that you use on combatants during warfare have to be designed for the purpose of a "clean kill", i.e. not meant to maim. i guess the idea is that being maimed is like torture, so weapons that intend to maim should be banned, like torture should be.
when the m-16 was first introduced, there was some controversy over the design. a bullet, when fired from an m-16, would tend to wobble as it flew, making it more messy when it hit a target. when it entered the body, it would tumble, rather than simply spin right through. i think there were some questions of geneva convention-compatibility early in vietnam, but i don't recall the outcome. they might have redesigned the ballistics, but i don't recall.
that's just one example of the kill/maim distinction. hopefully someone else has another example.
disclaimer: i'm not saying i agree with the reversals or the ninth's decisions. but, it is recognized as a *very* activist court, meaning that if it overreaches in the opinion of any higher court, it can find itself reversed quite easily.
heh, the ninth court of appeals is reversed constantly. don't be too optimistic about this ruling standing up in higher courts, since the ninth court has a particularly bad record with reversals.
on the other hand, it would also be trivial to change the MAC address every time you associate with a wireless network. heck, every two minutes if you're paranoid. and there are a lot of available MACs!!!
bingo. this post hits the nail on the head. mod this up. it's all about the fact that software considered illegal by the government is being shipped into the US.
i forgot to mention: blackburn did miss the rope, but it was in the confusion. he got so excited that he just missed the rope on the way out the door. so you're right, it didn't have anything to do with an RPG.
that and the radio man for chalk 4 wasn't actually able to work his radio because he'd taped his mic switch to his rifle, and the ride down the fastrope burned right through the mic cord. so chalk 4 was completely without radio contact and had to ask chalk 1 for their radio help.
the run to the stadium, if i recall correctly, is known among the soldiers there as "the miracle mile". they actually did have to run all the way back from the crash site because the drivers of the malay APCs drove too fast (they wanted to get out of there too!!!). it is definitely accurate.
plus, one of the frustrations vented in the book by one of the rangers, is that the public expects the rangers and delta to do their exceptionally dangerous missions and not take casualties. it is absolutely ridiculous to expect that many, or even most, military operations will be casualty-free.
this fact is less significant than it might be if AOL/TW stock was prone to go up as a result of this announcement.:) although of course it was necessary to put the disclaimer there.
hm. i wish i had bought some red hat last year. rising value in my portfolio is a good thing in my opinion.
heck, i studied economics in school.... now i'm doing UNIX sa work (not hard core programming) at a major investment bank. it's nice when your hobby can become a job.:)
or, since repealing laws is usually too difficult (because it involves admission of a mistake), quietly pass a rider to a spending bill (everybody loves those) that merely edits or reverses the objectionable parts of the DMCA.
probably not. the stock-price-inflater's action qualifies as willful manipulation of financial markets, which, of course, is illegal.:) even if he'd lost money it would have been illegal.
on the other hand, if he'd been making derogatory comments specifically for the purpose of manipulating the markets, and the appeals court said it was okay, then he might get his money back.
is this the 9th appeals court? they seem to have a history of being reversed...
incidentally, george lucas used klaatu and barata as names for things in return of the jedi. klaatooine was an ethnicity, and barata was a skiff guard.
I remember the night in 1995 I first saw Bruce Campbell in any movie or TV show. My cross-country team and I were gathering to watch some movies the night before the Peoria High Invitational, in Peoria, Illinois.
It was a dark and stormy night. Really. So we piled into our captain's house and had a vast dinner of Avanti's gondolas (if you're in PEoria, you HAVE to check out Avanti's and its gondolas!). After dinner we popped in the first video of Evil Dead 2. I had no idea what we were about to watch, so I expected to see some campy movie with scantily-clad women running away from bloodthirsty vampires.
Boy, was I wrong. Instead I got one of the campiest movies ever made: blood gushing from the walls, a good guy with a chainsaw for an arm, demon-possessed humans turning on their families without regard to friendship. It was hilarious.
But then it got better. We next watched the infinitely better-produced Army of Darkness. I laughed so hard I couldn't breathe. "That's called pillow talk, baby." kept me in stitches for about 5 minutes alone... The hands sticking out of the ground, poking Bruce in the eyes, also had me rolling. And my favorite scene: "Klaatu, Barata, [ahemofrifsdfa]. I said the verse, I'm taking the book!" That one was the best.
Wow, it's great remembering those movies. I wish they made more like them.
Slashdot Mirror
in this particular comment i was correlating larger slashdot issues with your comment. i should have been more clear about the distinction.... for that i apologize.
/.ers have a really bad habit of using ad hominem attacks when a simple factual debate would do. again, i am referring to /.ers in general (of whom i am one) and not you specifically. (see, i learn from my mistakes!)
my point is that
jon
this is incorrect. it is perfectly plausible that a world government might be liberal and tolerant, like the US or canada or something.
it does not follow that "the bigger the size of the jurisdiction, the more tyrannical the government will be." you seem to be thinking that any world government will be necessarily a totalitarian one. not necessarily true.
i am not in favor of world government, but this argument is specious.
jon
you said: 'This means that our representatives are not exactly a "cross-section" of the population.'
i get really sick and tired about hearing about how stupid our elected officials are, how stupid juries are, how stupid are, etc. then someone claims to want a "cross-section" of the population in congress or running the country, which would put all those "stupid" people in positions of influence.
later on: "At the end of the day, you end up paying taxes when you buy a hard drive..."
so what? i pay taxes when i buy milk at the convenience store. what's the problem?
jon
another interesting fact: some of the d-boys in somalia were using the CAR-15 with carbide-tipped bullets, which penetrated armor, but wasn't particularly effective with unarmored personnel. it is nice to have your enemy catch some of the momentum from an incoming bullet. if it passes through, there's no real kick to the impact, so your enemy can keep running as long as their body will operate. if you have a thicker/flatter bullet, they'll be maybe bowled over by the impact.
jon
i think the poster's point is that we probably won't see nukes used again on a battlefield. not sure if i agree, but it's a good hope nonetheless.
jon
the geneva convention's intention is to encourage "humane" warfare, or something in that vein. so, as we all know, you're not allowed to target noncombatants explicitly. but the weapons that you use on combatants during warfare have to be designed for the purpose of a "clean kill", i.e. not meant to maim. i guess the idea is that being maimed is like torture, so weapons that intend to maim should be banned, like torture should be.
when the m-16 was first introduced, there was some controversy over the design. a bullet, when fired from an m-16, would tend to wobble as it flew, making it more messy when it hit a target. when it entered the body, it would tumble, rather than simply spin right through. i think there were some questions of geneva convention-compatibility early in vietnam, but i don't recall the outcome. they might have redesigned the ballistics, but i don't recall.
that's just one example of the kill/maim distinction. hopefully someone else has another example.
jon
disclaimer: i'm not saying i agree with the reversals or the ninth's decisions. but, it is recognized as a *very* activist court, meaning that if it overreaches in the opinion of any higher court, it can find itself reversed quite easily.
:)
there, hopefully that will help.
jon
heh, the ninth court of appeals is reversed constantly. don't be too optimistic about this ruling standing up in higher courts, since the ninth court has a particularly bad record with reversals.
some references:
"Let's say this is a court on the cutting edge of jurisprudence," Richards said of the 9th Circuit court. "It may be the most reversed court."
"Of course, this is the Ninth Circuit, the most reversed court in the country, so the road is likely to be bumpy."
"Our final area of concern is that we are talking about the Ninth Circuit. That Circuit is much too large, which has made it difficult to develop any collegiality. As a result, judges have not developed common legal approaches to their decisions, and they are often even unaware of each other's decisions. The case law that has developed from this situation is often conflicting within the Circuit. Further, as judges have learned to act as laws unto themselves, they have frequently made unconstitutional decisions. It is by far the most reversed court in the country."
jon
on the other hand, it would also be trivial to change the MAC address every time you associate with a wireless network. heck, every two minutes if you're paranoid. and there are a lot of available MACs!!!
jon
bingo. this post hits the nail on the head. mod this up. it's all about the fact that software considered illegal by the government is being shipped into the US.
jon
i forgot to mention: blackburn did miss the rope, but it was in the confusion. he got so excited that he just missed the rope on the way out the door. so you're right, it didn't have anything to do with an RPG.
that and the radio man for chalk 4 wasn't actually able to work his radio because he'd taped his mic switch to his rifle, and the ride down the fastrope burned right through the mic cord. so chalk 4 was completely without radio contact and had to ask chalk 1 for their radio help.
jon
the run to the stadium, if i recall correctly, is known among the soldiers there as "the miracle mile". they actually did have to run all the way back from the crash site because the drivers of the malay APCs drove too fast (they wanted to get out of there too!!!). it is definitely accurate.
jon
plus, one of the frustrations vented in the book by one of the rangers, is that the public expects the rangers and delta to do their exceptionally dangerous missions and not take casualties. it is absolutely ridiculous to expect that many, or even most, military operations will be casualty-free.
jon
Disclosure: I have a stake in AOL / Time Warner.
:) although of course it was necessary to put the disclaimer there.
this fact is less significant than it might be if AOL/TW stock was prone to go up as a result of this announcement.
hm. i wish i had bought some red hat last year. rising value in my portfolio is a good thing in my opinion.
-jon
securityfocus has another english-language story on this, which can be found at http://www.securityfocus.com/news/306.
jon
heck, i studied economics in school.... now i'm doing UNIX sa work (not hard core programming) at a major investment bank. it's nice when your hobby can become a job. :)
jon
ooh, ooh, i want to run for office too.
how old do you have to be to run in new jersey? hmmmm.
jon
or, since repealing laws is usually too difficult (because it involves admission of a mistake), quietly pass a rider to a spending bill (everybody loves those) that merely edits or reverses the objectionable parts of the DMCA.
jon
probably not. the stock-price-inflater's action qualifies as willful manipulation of financial markets, which, of course, is illegal. :) even if he'd lost money it would have been illegal.
on the other hand, if he'd been making derogatory comments specifically for the purpose of manipulating the markets, and the appeals court said it was okay, then he might get his money back.
is this the 9th appeals court? they seem to have a history of being reversed...
jon
hey moderators - mod this up. it's hilarious.
-j
obviously the latter...
perhaps i should have said "upside-down football field."
when i first saw the picture, i thought it was a giant football field with goalposts and everything... good thing they have sense.
now, what i want to know is, if it's SO good at monitoring ice flows and mud slides, can it monitor THE BLOB?!?!?!?!?
-j
incidentally, george lucas used klaatu and barata as names for things in return of the jedi. klaatooine was an ethnicity, and barata was a skiff guard.
I remember the night in 1995 I first saw Bruce Campbell in any movie or TV show. My cross-country team and I were gathering to watch some movies the night before the Peoria High Invitational, in Peoria, Illinois.
It was a dark and stormy night. Really. So we piled into our captain's house and had a vast dinner of Avanti's gondolas (if you're in PEoria, you HAVE to check out Avanti's and its gondolas!). After dinner we popped in the first video of Evil Dead 2. I had no idea what we were about to watch, so I expected to see some campy movie with scantily-clad women running away from bloodthirsty vampires.
Boy, was I wrong. Instead I got one of the campiest movies ever made: blood gushing from the walls, a good guy with a chainsaw for an arm, demon-possessed humans turning on their families without regard to friendship. It was hilarious.
But then it got better. We next watched the infinitely better-produced Army of Darkness. I laughed so hard I couldn't breathe. "That's called pillow talk, baby." kept me in stitches for about 5 minutes alone... The hands sticking out of the ground, poking Bruce in the eyes, also had me rolling. And my favorite scene: "Klaatu, Barata, [ahemofrifsdfa]. I said the verse, I'm taking the book!" That one was the best.
Wow, it's great remembering those movies. I wish they made more like them.
http://www.cerastes.org
keep in mind that you have to prove *both* motive *and* intent to prove guilt, not just motive.
jon