Indeed. Could it not operate as a replacement for the CRV - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crew_Return_Vehicle, or would it be too difficult/dangerous to leave with all the necessary nasties like Hydrazine and the like on board for a long period?
"To claim that without soldiers there would be no war is just silly." Why is that silly? Wars are large scale conflicts fought by soldiers, hence without soldiers the cannot be war. There can be plenty violence and generally nasty things, but categorically not war. "Unless you classify a "soldier" any person who decides to take up arms against his neighbor." If lots of them do in any organised fashion, of course they are soldiers. What else? Nuns??
There may well be other factors needed to cause war. But soldiers are a pre-requisite.
"Soldiers will be 'created' if none exist..."
Ignoring the movies, how? Conscription? Unwilling conscripts make lousy soldiers, which is why it's so out of favour with most "advanced" militaries these days.
Anyway, there does seem to be a ready supply of volunteer "professional soldiers" willing to fight these wars, despite what the OP said.
Typically in business if a plan goes Pete Tong all those who were involved in the approval process play a game of musical chairs of "well I always said there were risks". There may be only two things that can save Ballmer now; if the Yahoo deal is not yet dead, or if Gates & Allen fear there are worse problems to come for MS, and they may need him to take the blame for them.
Some of them pull up to 6 gees, and all they have is a height restriction and warning notice! Yes, it's for a shorter time, but 4.5 gees seems high - ISTR the STS only gets up to 3.5 gees.
It's easy to charge low prices when you don't actually pay the people who make the music. You really think that's why "legit" music is so much more expensive?
Remember, gov't collusion with big business, buying (and usually writing) of legislation by large companies, and mountains of regulations designed to thwart entrepeneurs is NOT capitalism.
I guess we all have true stories like these....my favourite is as follows. An update to users' PCs was sent round in an email which basically said "click on the icon in this email to start the process, then do the following...you may want to print off this email to refer to the instructions as you go along." One user, at a remote office (naturally!) just couldn't get this to work. Several different people tried to talk her through it over the phone, but eventually someone had to drive over to see what was going on. It's obvious really; she'd printed out the email and was carefully putting the mouse on the print out, on top of the image of the icon, and clicking....
Factually you are right, but what's more important in the long run, what the manufacturer can get away with in the small print, or getting what (at least part of) the market clearly wants? Too many companies seem to have forgotten just who it is that pays for their products these days...
Science and Faith can co-exist - not.
on
Why Myths Persist
·
· Score: 1
I don't see how. If you accept the rational basis of science, I really can't see how you can put a limit on applying it to religious belief.
I can understand that people who have "faith" can believe they accept science, but they are (without meaning to be unpleasant) deluding themselves. Science and rationalism is about questioning everything; faith is about NOT questioning something. If they are not diametrically opposite, they are certainly close to it.
If organisations like the BBC are allowed to get away with adding restrictions like this to media that is free when broadcast in other ways, and is paid for via a compulsory licence, is it reasonable to expect the purely commercial organisations like Sony and the like to be more flexible on DRM? It ought to be possible to get the BBC to back down on DRM, even if that means some "bought in" content has to be skipped. On the basis of their charter if nothing else.
This argument needs to be won, to avoid a future with even more DRM all over the place.
Quite right. Home taping didn't "kill music", video recorders didn't prevent DVDs (which were launched later) being a success. Similarly, DRM will not help DVD sales, or the TV industry in general; p*ssing off your customers is not, generally, a good sales tactic.
Don't use DRM. As a licence payer, UK tax-payer and voter I want my state broadcaster to, well, broadcast the media, not spend my money on restricting who can see it, and probably inconveniencing the people they WANT to see it in the process.
Slashdot Mirror
Indeed. Could it not operate as a replacement for the CRV - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crew_Return_Vehicle, or would it be too difficult/dangerous to leave with all the necessary nasties like Hydrazine and the like on board for a long period?
Biggles will save him!
"To claim that without soldiers there would be no war is just silly." Why is that silly? Wars are large scale conflicts fought by soldiers, hence without soldiers the cannot be war. There can be plenty violence and generally nasty things, but categorically not war. "Unless you classify a "soldier" any person who decides to take up arms against his neighbor." If lots of them do in any organised fashion, of course they are soldiers. What else? Nuns??
There may well be other factors needed to cause war. But soldiers are a pre-requisite. "Soldiers will be 'created' if none exist..." Ignoring the movies, how? Conscription? Unwilling conscripts make lousy soldiers, which is why it's so out of favour with most "advanced" militaries these days. Anyway, there does seem to be a ready supply of volunteer "professional soldiers" willing to fight these wars, despite what the OP said.
"If you want to meet a person who abhors war, talk to a soldier." Then why do they join up? If there were no soldiers, how could there be any wars?
Typically in business if a plan goes Pete Tong all those who were involved in the approval process play a game of musical chairs of "well I always said there were risks". There may be only two things that can save Ballmer now; if the Yahoo deal is not yet dead, or if Gates & Allen fear there are worse problems to come for MS, and they may need him to take the blame for them.
Some of them pull up to 6 gees, and all they have is a height restriction and warning notice! Yes, it's for a shorter time, but 4.5 gees seems high - ISTR the STS only gets up to 3.5 gees.
In Soviet Russia You own... Hang on a minute!
I guess we all have true stories like these....my favourite is as follows. An update to users' PCs was sent round in an email which basically said "click on the icon in this email to start the process, then do the following...you may want to print off this email to refer to the instructions as you go along." One user, at a remote office (naturally!) just couldn't get this to work. Several different people tried to talk her through it over the phone, but eventually someone had to drive over to see what was going on. It's obvious really; she'd printed out the email and was carefully putting the mouse on the print out, on top of the image of the icon, and clicking....
And these are the clowns I'm supposed to trust with all my personal information in their joined-up-mega-database-and-ID-card scheme?
Factually you are right, but what's more important in the long run, what the manufacturer can get away with in the small print, or getting what (at least part of) the market clearly wants? Too many companies seem to have forgotten just who it is that pays for their products these days...
Yes, but a different distribution and development team from the Linux they're looking to put on the phones. So the synergy is limited at best.
...who arguably invented the smartphone, and announced they were moving to a Linux-based OS in 2005 (from memory) are now saying they won't get there for another 12-18 months - http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2007/sep/13/guardianweeklytechnologysection.it. A bit sad really. I blame Foleo.
I don't see how. If you accept the rational basis of science, I really can't see how you can put a limit on applying it to religious belief. I can understand that people who have "faith" can believe they accept science, but they are (without meaning to be unpleasant) deluding themselves. Science and rationalism is about questioning everything; faith is about NOT questioning something. If they are not diametrically opposite, they are certainly close to it.
Just cat 5! (OK, I'll get my coat)
If organisations like the BBC are allowed to get away with adding restrictions like this to media that is free when broadcast in other ways, and is paid for via a compulsory licence, is it reasonable to expect the purely commercial organisations like Sony and the like to be more flexible on DRM? It ought to be possible to get the BBC to back down on DRM, even if that means some "bought in" content has to be skipped. On the basis of their charter if nothing else. This argument needs to be won, to avoid a future with even more DRM all over the place.
Quite right. Home taping didn't "kill music", video recorders didn't prevent DVDs (which were launched later) being a success. Similarly, DRM will not help DVD sales, or the TV industry in general; p*ssing off your customers is not, generally, a good sales tactic.
Don't use DRM. As a licence payer, UK tax-payer and voter I want my state broadcaster to, well, broadcast the media, not spend my money on restricting who can see it, and probably inconveniencing the people they WANT to see it in the process.
It's trolling to point out that Apple are already doing what was suggested would be bad in MS were to do? The RDF is strong in this one :-/
Is when the iPhone is released, which effectively does just that.