"I don't think you understand the magnitude of the problem." Banks told Cook, "There are fundamental physical limits to the amount of food we can take and the amount of money available to either of us."
Cook wasn't really listening, just looking through the window, already enamouring the feel of the audacious idea. Seeing his friend take but little to no appreciation from his words of warning, Banks continued.
"Literally, the only chance we have of finding another continent is to build an entirely new ship that somehow makes this kind of journey feasible. Probably the best bet is to copy it from the Dutch, if any ever bother to visit."
The fire kept glowing steadily as they both stood, looking outside the window. Neither of them knew how wrong they were in their expectations.
I'll reply to you, but the same is valid for most people who've replied to my comment:
It's interesting to see that all of you up to this point have concentrated on the fact of kicking him out of the country only. Why?
The whole point of the pentitentiary system is to try and get people to behave correctly, right? Well, to punish them too, but so that they "pay their debt to society". But which society are we talking about? The US or the country he'll end up in? The guy knows that he is going to be kicked out of the country, so there in his mind, he has no real gain to behave nicely, and try to understand what he did is wrong.
What if instead of kicking him out, you left him to do his few years in prison, and then released him in the US? Now, he has incentive to behave properly: if he's not a dick, he'll be able to remain in the country. The guy obviously has skills (technical or otherwise) that could help the country if only he was encouraged a bit. He saw an opportunity to make money, and did. I know more than one person in history who did exactly the same. Heck, half the country is built on that. Some stories are more or less legal; maybe he just took the "land of opportunity" moto a bit too seriously.
Now though, he's going to rot in jail for ten years, knowing that no matter what he does, he'll be kicked out of the country for good, and has absolutely no reason to even attempt and make his wrongs right.
Really interesting to see that nobody thought of the "put him in prison but allow him to remain in the country". Now the nice multi-hundred-thousand-dollar "investment" your government and justice system is taking on behalf of the taxpayers will have absolute zero interest.
Except for the fact that the US judiciary system fails, once again? Not only are they spending a few hundred thousand dollars on making him pay in prison, his sentence his heftier than what a good bunch of rapists and cold blooded murderers would get, but after the supposed rehabilitation process, they're kicking him out of the country.
Being blind doesn't mean there's nothing to see, it just means there's something wrong with the way you see things.
Indeed. We heard the same kind of critics when the electric wheelchairs came out, saying that they would cost more than hiring someone to push the person around.
Truth is that if this means a carer can take care of another patient during the 20-40 minutes this machine is massaging disabled person A, then that's 40-80 minutes gained; or some 10-20GBP. If this machine is installed in a home or institute, that would conservatively account for some 60GBP a day.
Well, first of all, because watching people is a lot more interesting than reading things. We've been doing it (watching people talk, and understanding a lot more than from paper) for literally millions of years. Reading? Not so much. Maybe a few hundred years.
Chris Anderson recently had a talk at TED describing why video is so important. There are many things you just cannot describe easily with words or graphs. I'm pretty sure that all the information imparted in those videos is readily available in a bunch of papers, RFCs or... papers. But in one easy-to-read page that will get people motivated? Probably not.
Except it isn't. Having the riot police interview an elephant based on what the spoon told them with regards to the crash of a helicopter that decided to kill itself during a full moon afternoon because its turbo-girlfriend was dry humping a humvee; now that would be surreal.
This is just a story about a helicopter crash with a few coincidences. Absolutely nothing surreal.
I was a security consultant for various governments around the world. One CEO or high-flying officer once talked to our CTO, saying "I want an army of one-armed consultants!"
Not understanding, the CTO asked him why, to which the guy replied, "Because I'm so frigging tired of hearing 'On the other hand,...'!"
It's often a lot easier to get modded (at all) when your post is within the first 20-30 posts on a page. If that means responding to a parent when the comment really has nothing to do with what the parent said, so be it.
PS: I've been getting 15 mod points very frequently lately. As in, I had them some 2 days ago, gave away about 7 or 8 until today, and bam, 15 again. The FAQ only mentions about getting 10 mod points when we're part of the 1% of moderators who get 'em or something. What's with 15? Has been going on for a couple of months now.
The system we've used for (nearly) decades where when a system stops responding, we know there's some kind of failure, and we send out alerts is absolutely impossible to utilise with fibre...
Correct me if I'm wrong, but don't some aspects of US law (and many other countries in comparable situations) also apply to it's citizens when they're living and acting outside of the US.
Again, really has nothing to do with anything. WikiLeaks is hardly run by US citizens.
Though, I'll reply to the question.
Generally, no. You are not liable for trespassing laws when you are not in a country that follows those laws. Obviously, if you're on a US military base, yes, US law applies. Heck, I even seem to recall that some countries' military personnel are under the jurisdiction of their mother country, regardless of their current geographical location.
There are specific issues, such as the Australian guy who got extradited for downloading US-copyrighted material, but I think that's more of an exception than a rule.
It is against the law in France to cover your face in public. It is against the law for a woman in specific countries to show her face in public. Obviously, the right thing to do is to always follow the laws of the country you're visiting. Regardless of your nationality.
To complete the metaphor, in this specific case the "art" is clearly labeled with the information that displaying it publicly is a felony according to US law.
Which only applies on US territory. Though, you are misleading my point.
I wasn't trying to justify what Wikileaks is doing. I was trying to understand whether they should stop doing so not based on law, but rather because someone is allegedly getting in trouble due to it being displayed. I don't think removing it would stop that person from being in trouble, anyway.
Actually, they ensure they don't know who released some kind of information. If they ever happen to discover the identity of the whistleblower, they usually delete the information on the spot.
They don't have any reason to suspect some guy is in jail because he indeed released the information. It's really outside of their vision. They have information, released to them by an anonymous person. If someone goes to prison because of that information should they stop spreading it?
Put another way:
I'm given an amazing piece of art, by someone who left it on my doorstep with a note "This is for you", and I display it in my museum. A lot of people enjoy it, and a lot of people get direct benefit from it because of things it teaches our society. Some guy on the other side of the planet is imprisoned because he allegedly stole a piece of art that looks the same as what I have on display; should I prevent people from accessing the piece of art?
Jobs was wrong. Look at all the games written in flash. They don't need tons of bandwidth, and its something people want.
Was he know?
I don't know, but mid-90s graphics using up 80% of a mid-00s CPU doesn't feel right to me. How come that playing any flash game will absolutely drain your battery if you're on a laptop? I wouldn't mind Flash so much if it didn't constantly make me pray to find a power socket in the airport.
Heck, on my macbook pro from end 2009, most flash games yield less battery time than Starcraft 2.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, and this is from my logs, I've seen 'Free Public Wifi' in ad-hoc mode:
2009-03-29 LHR
2009-03-29 LAX
2009-04-03 LAX
2009-04-05 DTW
2009-04-06 LHR
2009-04-06 LGW
2009-04-12 LGW
2009-04-18 LHR
2009-04-18 LAX
2009-04-29 DFW
And that's just over the course of one month.
Looking at another random month:
2010-01-04 LGW
2010-01-04 LHR
2010-01-06 BKK
2010-01-06 SYD
2010-01-06 BNE
2010-01-14 BNE
2010-01-14 LHR
2010-01-18 LHR
2010-01-18 LAX
I'd pretty much say this exactly confirms what the article spells out. (For the record, I was a Consultant, getting drunk in airplanes was my job).
Australia's ABC channel made this little clip, which is really quite interesting in this regard.
Before flaming, please pay close attention to what it says, written at the end of the video.
"I don't think you understand the magnitude of the problem." Banks told Cook, "There are fundamental physical limits to the amount of food we can take and the amount of money available to either of us."
Cook wasn't really listening, just looking through the window, already enamouring the feel of the audacious idea. Seeing his friend take but little to no appreciation from his words of warning, Banks continued.
"Literally, the only chance we have of finding another continent is to build an entirely new ship that somehow makes this kind of journey feasible. Probably the best bet is to copy it from the Dutch, if any ever bother to visit."
The fire kept glowing steadily as they both stood, looking outside the window. Neither of them knew how wrong they were in their expectations.
We're fucked.
I'll reply to you, but the same is valid for most people who've replied to my comment:
It's interesting to see that all of you up to this point have concentrated on the fact of kicking him out of the country only. Why?
The whole point of the pentitentiary system is to try and get people to behave correctly, right? Well, to punish them too, but so that they "pay their debt to society". But which society are we talking about? The US or the country he'll end up in? The guy knows that he is going to be kicked out of the country, so there in his mind, he has no real gain to behave nicely, and try to understand what he did is wrong.
What if instead of kicking him out, you left him to do his few years in prison, and then released him in the US? Now, he has incentive to behave properly: if he's not a dick, he'll be able to remain in the country. The guy obviously has skills (technical or otherwise) that could help the country if only he was encouraged a bit. He saw an opportunity to make money, and did. I know more than one person in history who did exactly the same. Heck, half the country is built on that. Some stories are more or less legal; maybe he just took the "land of opportunity" moto a bit too seriously.
Now though, he's going to rot in jail for ten years, knowing that no matter what he does, he'll be kicked out of the country for good, and has absolutely no reason to even attempt and make his wrongs right.
Really interesting to see that nobody thought of the "put him in prison but allow him to remain in the country". Now the nice multi-hundred-thousand-dollar "investment" your government and justice system is taking on behalf of the taxpayers will have absolute zero interest.
When you're aware of a trademark issue you have to defend it or you loose it.
Trademarks have been loose for a very long time.
Except for the fact that the US judiciary system fails, once again? Not only are they spending a few hundred thousand dollars on making him pay in prison, his sentence his heftier than what a good bunch of rapists and cold blooded murderers would get, but after the supposed rehabilitation process, they're kicking him out of the country.
Being blind doesn't mean there's nothing to see, it just means there's something wrong with the way you see things.
Then why bother spending some $800k on him in the first place if he's not wanted? So the next country gets a nice guy? Yeah. Right.
Either give him a few years and make a good citizen out of him, or kick him out of the country. Doing both is just plain stupid.
Indeed. We heard the same kind of critics when the electric wheelchairs came out, saying that they would cost more than hiring someone to push the person around.
Truth is that if this means a carer can take care of another patient during the 20-40 minutes this machine is massaging disabled person A, then that's 40-80 minutes gained; or some 10-20GBP. If this machine is installed in a home or institute, that would conservatively account for some 60GBP a day.
Not so ludicrous after all.
Crosby would be proud. 33 years after his death, he's finally made the Pirate team.
Well, first of all, because watching people is a lot more interesting than reading things. We've been doing it (watching people talk, and understanding a lot more than from paper) for literally millions of years. Reading? Not so much. Maybe a few hundred years.
Chris Anderson recently had a talk at TED describing why video is so important. There are many things you just cannot describe easily with words or graphs. I'm pretty sure that all the information imparted in those videos is readily available in a bunch of papers, RFCs or... papers. But in one easy-to-read page that will get people motivated? Probably not.
Well, if they really watched a transmission, they shouldn't be worrying about the nukes, the RIAA is about to fuck them, without lube.
Except it isn't. Having the riot police interview an elephant based on what the spoon told them with regards to the crash of a helicopter that decided to kill itself during a full moon afternoon because its turbo-girlfriend was dry humping a humvee; now that would be surreal.
This is just a story about a helicopter crash with a few coincidences. Absolutely nothing surreal.
I was a security consultant for various governments around the world. One CEO or high-flying officer once talked to our CTO, saying "I want an army of one-armed consultants!"
Not understanding, the CTO asked him why, to which the guy replied, "Because I'm so frigging tired of hearing 'On the other hand, ...'!"
It's often a lot easier to get modded (at all) when your post is within the first 20-30 posts on a page. If that means responding to a parent when the comment really has nothing to do with what the parent said, so be it.
PS: I've been getting 15 mod points very frequently lately. As in, I had them some 2 days ago, gave away about 7 or 8 until today, and bam, 15 again. The FAQ only mentions about getting 10 mod points when we're part of the 1% of moderators who get 'em or something. What's with 15? Has been going on for a couple of months now.
It's not going to have any cameras or projectors because the cameras will be embedded in the device itself.
So... it doesn't have cameras because it has cameras?
That's a whole new level of whoosh for me.
The system we've used for (nearly) decades where when a system stops responding, we know there's some kind of failure, and we send out alerts is absolutely impossible to utilise with fibre...
Correct me if I'm wrong, but don't some aspects of US law (and many other countries in comparable situations) also apply to it's citizens when they're living and acting outside of the US.
Again, really has nothing to do with anything. WikiLeaks is hardly run by US citizens.
Though, I'll reply to the question.
Generally, no. You are not liable for trespassing laws when you are not in a country that follows those laws. Obviously, if you're on a US military base, yes, US law applies. Heck, I even seem to recall that some countries' military personnel are under the jurisdiction of their mother country, regardless of their current geographical location.
There are specific issues, such as the Australian guy who got extradited for downloading US-copyrighted material, but I think that's more of an exception than a rule.
It is against the law in France to cover your face in public. It is against the law for a woman in specific countries to show her face in public. Obviously, the right thing to do is to always follow the laws of the country you're visiting. Regardless of your nationality.
To complete the metaphor, in this specific case the "art" is clearly labeled with the information that displaying it publicly is a felony according to US law.
Which only applies on US territory. Though, you are misleading my point.
I wasn't trying to justify what Wikileaks is doing. I was trying to understand whether they should stop doing so not based on law, but rather because someone is allegedly getting in trouble due to it being displayed. I don't think removing it would stop that person from being in trouble, anyway.
Actually, they ensure they don't know who released some kind of information. If they ever happen to discover the identity of the whistleblower, they usually delete the information on the spot.
They don't have any reason to suspect some guy is in jail because he indeed released the information. It's really outside of their vision. They have information, released to them by an anonymous person. If someone goes to prison because of that information should they stop spreading it?
Put another way:
I'm given an amazing piece of art, by someone who left it on my doorstep with a note "This is for you", and I display it in my museum. A lot of people enjoy it, and a lot of people get direct benefit from it because of things it teaches our society. Some guy on the other side of the planet is imprisoned because he allegedly stole a piece of art that looks the same as what I have on display; should I prevent people from accessing the piece of art?
If it hasn't made pilots redundant, then it has not made co-pilots redundant, either.
I thought the whole point about the pilot-co-pilot thingie was so they would be redundant.
Lets hear it for freedom and capitalization!
I'M FREE?
n/t
Jobs was wrong. Look at all the games written in flash. They don't need tons of bandwidth, and its something people want.
Was he know?
I don't know, but mid-90s graphics using up 80% of a mid-00s CPU doesn't feel right to me. How come that playing any flash game will absolutely drain your battery if you're on a laptop? I wouldn't mind Flash so much if it didn't constantly make me pray to find a power socket in the airport.
Heck, on my macbook pro from end 2009, most flash games yield less battery time than Starcraft 2.
I guess we'll just have to pick a fight with the people who live there.
Worlds War III (sic) should be motivation enough to invent the equivalent of nuclear power for propulsion.