If it's stuck with its solar panels tilted towards the sun, it will stay "alive". And they can carry on trying to figure out how they might get it unstuck. But if it's stuck with its solar panels *not* aimed at the sun, its batteries will run down and it will "die". And that'll be the end of the mission.
Stuck and alive is better than stuck and dead. As any wildebeest in quicksand would tell you (if wildebeest's could speak).
So you reckon doctors should dish out antibiotics and encourage the spread of superviruses because otherwise people might stop going to see doctors? Riiight, that's a good idea. Cos then there'll be even more MRSA-type cases clogging up the hospitals all incurable and infectious. And that'll increase confidence in doctors no end, right?
In this sense the softcore/bikini stuff is almost worse, because most people have enough sense to not print out torture porn and pin it up all over their cubical.
We're not a large company by any stretch of the imagination (~6k employees) and I didn't mean to imply we were "large as you think you are" whatever that means.
He was talking about the size of your dicks not the companies you work for. Reading comprehension: E-
Wouldn't VPN or TOR make this sort of surveillance moot?
It would make surveillance more difficult. Which makes this crap even crappier. You'd think that the people who really are up to no good are busy covering their tracks. So who are the spies spying on exactly?
I've seen stuff about people using woks and TV satellite dishes to boost signal power, so there's nothing surprising about saucepans doing it too. I'd be interested to see a comparison of these improvised devices with "proper" boosters. Would I be better off saving my money and just rigging up an old wok instead?
A lot of print news is ridiculously formulaic; eg. the red-tops in the UK. I can certainly envisage a near-future where a sub-editor feeds in the answers to the Five Ws and out pops a story indistinguishable from a lot of the crap churned out today.
There'll still be a market for human-written journalism for some time to come. But there's a hell of a lot of stuff in some papers that it's hard to imagine was written by a sentient being. If it already looks like it was written by an unattended typewriter, why bother employing someone to sit at the keyboard?
A trilingual translator. Impressive, I suppose. But how long will it be before we get the universal translator of Star Trek and Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy (babelfish) fame? I might be tempted to pay $5 for such a beast.
Plus, with a MS Office contract, you have a software vendor to fall back to when things go wrong. You don't get this to the same extent with OSS, which is why business is often slow to adopt it.
What precisely does an "MS Office contract" get you, other than software updates? Perhaps Microsoft send someone round to type your letters for you?
Is bhagwad someone famous, or someone with particular insight into the Indian ISP situation, or someone who has some other qualification that would make it worth having most of the submission be his blithering speculation on the subject?
It would be really nice of Slashdot were to hire some editors to actually edit the submissions.
So being famous is qualification to pontificate on search engine censorship? Celebrity culture is truly wonderful. Next, Paris Hilton on advances in fusion research...
Actually, no. One of the meanings of "effect" is as a transitive verb: to bring about; to produce as a result; to cause. Eg. to effect a compromise. Or indeed, to effect change. See http://www.yourdictionary.com/effect
This is different to "to affect change", which means "to have an effect on change".
It is difficult to understand India, unless you have visited and lived for some time. There is a great level of hypocrisy in India about everything including sex.
Same as everywhere else. Hypocrisy is part of the human condition.
There's got to be a reason. Why commercial aircraft? In spite of all the failures in the system, and the gaps when it does function, they're much harder targets than most places. If my goal was to kill lots of people spectacularly, I'm sure it would be easier to use a lower powered bomb and just drive it into a daycare center at pick up time. It seems like a good question to ask, and I've heard very few answers that seem to make sense.
But terrorists do drive truck bombs into buildings. And they plant bombs on trains and roadsides, and they storm hotels with automatic weapons and shoot people indiscriminately, and they blow themselves up in crowded markets. Targeting planes is just another part of their strategy. They don't just want to kill and maim people: they want to make us feel insecure everywhere we go, and they want to harm commercial interests. A plane is just another target, albeit a very high value target. And there's also the fact that, if a terrorist succeeds in blowing up a plane, you can be pretty sure there will be lots of victims and no survivors.
airports typically being a long way away from the city centers where SWAT teams (which are themselves a new invention) operate
What exactly do you mean by "new"? The first SWAT team in the USA was formed in 1968 in Los Angeles. In the 1970s, there was a TV show called "SWAT", about a SWAT team. Do you really believe that a 40-year old idea is "new"?
The people performing these acts are suicidal cultists and by definition *are* deranged
You're making a common mistake in assuming that someone with religious convictions is fruit-loopily insane. The fact is there are many people who are sensible, realistic and down-to-earth and are also religious. You may believe that belief in a god is delusional, but that doesn't mean the "deluded" man is a mad-eyed biter off of chicken heads.
Or maybe you think it's okay to have a "sensible" faith like Christianity; but if someone follows a non-western religion he must be a nutter? I suppose I shouldn't be surprised if people think that. I mean, the USA and Europe are the only rational regions in the world. Everyone else is some kind of savage. Right?
If your name is on a no-fly list, you send a different guy who's name is not on the list.
But how do you know if your name is on a no-fly list? I'm pretty sure the authorities don't tell you. You won't know until you actually try to fly. But if you use fake ID belonging to an utterly unradical person, it doesn't matter if you're on the list or not.
How about we treat the problem instead of the symptom. Give them something to loose or care about. When you have nothing you have nothing to loose.
I assume you're talking about Islamic terrorists. What the hell are you on about, that the terrorists have nothing to care about? Do you honestly believe that a terrorist would blow himself to bits for a cause he doesn't care about?
Just because a man doesn't care about the same stuff you care about, doesn't mean he has nothing to care about. Stop being so blinkered and self-centred..
The fact is, the people of the US were better off when we were mostly isolationist and had extremely limited foreign trade partners. We were certainly better off before our government let our corporations sell us out to cheap 3rd world labor.
If you look at the numbers, that's just not true. For example, the census bureau has per capita money income data here:
http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/income/histinc/incpertoc.html
Look at the first one - you can see that between 1967 & 2008 per capita money income, adjusted to 2008 dollars, doubled. And the years leading up to 1967 were ones of unprecedented growth in the US. The fact is, the people of the US would be much worse off if we were "mostly isolationist" and limited our trade.
Thanks for corroborating my stance that we can sustain growth as isolationists.
Duh! That isn't what you said. You claimed that the USA would be better off with more isolationist policies. B0bby demonstrated that you're full of crap. That ain't what I'd call "corroboration". Idiot.
"A tad racist"? Yeah, that's one way of putting it. Another would be that the owner of guestworkerfraud.com is using the recession and the attendant fear of unemployment to stir up racist hatred against Indians.
Take for instance the current top item, "Christmas airline bomber got on plane with help from an Indian national". Why cover this story on a website apparently dedicated to criticize the US guest worker scheme? The only thing that links this item to others on the site is that it's blaming an Indian for something. I think it might be total fabrication too: I haven't seen anything elsewhere about an Indian helping the bomber; is it really credible that this anti-Indian poster happened to be there when one of the hated Indians helped a terrorist?
Don't get me wrong, I'm not suggesting that the site's racism somehow justifies the censorship. I'm just saying that the site is run by a racist, for racist purposes. And anyway, as far as I can tell the site hasn't been taken down. At 1930 GMT the site was still up.
So the border guards interrogate this woman for 2 hours, X-ray her laptop, see her laptop working, and still decide to shoot it... and that's okay because a terrorist detonated a bomb in Egypt?
I'm not trying to play down the horror of terrorist bombings. I'm just saying that security concerns do not justify harrassing innocent tourists just because you don't like the look of her.
In some countries, you know you have to be careful what you say, what literature or pictures you carry, etc, because you know the local police will arrest/deport/torture/kill critics of their regime. Such countries are usually dictatorships where no one has expectations of rights and freedom.
Israel isn't supposed to be one of those countries. Israel portrays itself as a democracy, where concepts like freedom of speech are respected. If someone who disagrees with the current government's policies wants to visit a free democracy, she should be afforded the courtesy of toleration.
Interrogating such a visitor for 2 hours is not very courteous. Shooting her laptop is extremely discourteous. The reason for this treatment: because she disagrees with the policies of a democratic country's policies, and presumably has sympathies with Arab Israelis (ie Israeli citizens) as well as Palestinians. There's nothing in this story to indicate that the border guards actually suspected her of being a terrorist. They didn't like her, and wanted to "teach her a lesson". So she's been/going to be recompensed for the laptop - so what? She's still gone through the trauma of its destruction and the inconvenience of being deprived of it during her travels. The guards responsible for shooting the laptop won't be punished - they were "just doing their job".
It's just sad that in a so-called democracy, the duties of a border guard include traumatizing tourists who disagree with a government's policies.
Slashdot Mirror
And how do *you* know how many rovers the Martians have landed on Earth?
If it's stuck with its solar panels tilted towards the sun, it will stay "alive". And they can carry on trying to figure out how they might get it unstuck. But if it's stuck with its solar panels *not* aimed at the sun, its batteries will run down and it will "die". And that'll be the end of the mission. Stuck and alive is better than stuck and dead. As any wildebeest in quicksand would tell you (if wildebeest's could speak).
Yeah, cos Norwegian hospitals don't have any heating. And they operate with the windows open so all the superbugs can just fly away.
Well update it then. Jeez
So you reckon doctors should dish out antibiotics and encourage the spread of superviruses because otherwise people might stop going to see doctors? Riiight, that's a good idea. Cos then there'll be even more MRSA-type cases clogging up the hospitals all incurable and infectious. And that'll increase confidence in doctors no end, right?
FYI, they have put alcoholic handwash dispensers in UK hospitals now, but the tramps come in and drink it.
Yeah right, and they wash their hands with fucking sherry. Dick.
In this sense the softcore/bikini stuff is almost worse, because most people have enough sense to not print out torture porn and pin it up all over their cubical.
Obviously you haven't worked where I've worked...
We're not a large company by any stretch of the imagination (~6k employees) and I didn't mean to imply we were "large as you think you are" whatever that means.
He was talking about the size of your dicks not the companies you work for. Reading comprehension: E-
Wouldn't VPN or TOR make this sort of surveillance moot?
It would make surveillance more difficult. Which makes this crap even crappier. You'd think that the people who really are up to no good are busy covering their tracks. So who are the spies spying on exactly?
I've seen stuff about people using woks and TV satellite dishes to boost signal power, so there's nothing surprising about saucepans doing it too. I'd be interested to see a comparison of these improvised devices with "proper" boosters. Would I be better off saving my money and just rigging up an old wok instead?
A lot of print news is ridiculously formulaic; eg. the red-tops in the UK. I can certainly envisage a near-future where a sub-editor feeds in the answers to the Five Ws and out pops a story indistinguishable from a lot of the crap churned out today. There'll still be a market for human-written journalism for some time to come. But there's a hell of a lot of stuff in some papers that it's hard to imagine was written by a sentient being. If it already looks like it was written by an unattended typewriter, why bother employing someone to sit at the keyboard?
A trilingual translator. Impressive, I suppose. But how long will it be before we get the universal translator of Star Trek and Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy (babelfish) fame? I might be tempted to pay $5 for such a beast.
Plus, with a MS Office contract, you have a software vendor to fall back to when things go wrong. You don't get this to the same extent with OSS, which is why business is often slow to adopt it.
What precisely does an "MS Office contract" get you, other than software updates? Perhaps Microsoft send someone round to type your letters for you?
Is bhagwad someone famous, or someone with particular insight into the Indian ISP situation, or someone who has some other qualification that would make it worth having most of the submission be his blithering speculation on the subject?
It would be really nice of Slashdot were to hire some editors to actually edit the submissions.
So being famous is qualification to pontificate on search engine censorship? Celebrity culture is truly wonderful. Next, Paris Hilton on advances in fusion research...
PPS: the word you're looking for is "affect".
Actually, no. One of the meanings of "effect" is as a transitive verb: to bring about; to produce as a result; to cause. Eg. to effect a compromise. Or indeed, to effect change. See http://www.yourdictionary.com/effect This is different to "to affect change", which means "to have an effect on change".
It is difficult to understand India, unless you have visited and lived for some time. There is a great level of hypocrisy in India about everything including sex.
Same as everywhere else. Hypocrisy is part of the human condition.
There's got to be a reason. Why commercial aircraft? In spite of all the failures in the system, and the gaps when it does function, they're much harder targets than most places. If my goal was to kill lots of people spectacularly, I'm sure it would be easier to use a lower powered bomb and just drive it into a daycare center at pick up time. It seems like a good question to ask, and I've heard very few answers that seem to make sense.
But terrorists do drive truck bombs into buildings. And they plant bombs on trains and roadsides, and they storm hotels with automatic weapons and shoot people indiscriminately, and they blow themselves up in crowded markets. Targeting planes is just another part of their strategy. They don't just want to kill and maim people: they want to make us feel insecure everywhere we go, and they want to harm commercial interests. A plane is just another target, albeit a very high value target. And there's also the fact that, if a terrorist succeeds in blowing up a plane, you can be pretty sure there will be lots of victims and no survivors.
airports typically being a long way away from the city centers where SWAT teams (which are themselves a new invention) operate
What exactly do you mean by "new"? The first SWAT team in the USA was formed in 1968 in Los Angeles. In the 1970s, there was a TV show called "SWAT", about a SWAT team. Do you really believe that a 40-year old idea is "new"?
The people performing these acts are suicidal cultists and by definition *are* deranged
You're making a common mistake in assuming that someone with religious convictions is fruit-loopily insane. The fact is there are many people who are sensible, realistic and down-to-earth and are also religious. You may believe that belief in a god is delusional, but that doesn't mean the "deluded" man is a mad-eyed biter off of chicken heads. Or maybe you think it's okay to have a "sensible" faith like Christianity; but if someone follows a non-western religion he must be a nutter? I suppose I shouldn't be surprised if people think that. I mean, the USA and Europe are the only rational regions in the world. Everyone else is some kind of savage. Right?
If your name is on a no-fly list, you send a different guy who's name is not on the list.
But how do you know if your name is on a no-fly list? I'm pretty sure the authorities don't tell you. You won't know until you actually try to fly. But if you use fake ID belonging to an utterly unradical person, it doesn't matter if you're on the list or not.
How about we treat the problem instead of the symptom. Give them something to loose or care about. When you have nothing you have nothing to loose.
I assume you're talking about Islamic terrorists. What the hell are you on about, that the terrorists have nothing to care about? Do you honestly believe that a terrorist would blow himself to bits for a cause he doesn't care about? Just because a man doesn't care about the same stuff you care about, doesn't mean he has nothing to care about. Stop being so blinkered and self-centred..
The fact is, the people of the US were better off when we were mostly isolationist and had extremely limited foreign trade partners. We were certainly better off before our government let our corporations sell us out to cheap 3rd world labor.
If you look at the numbers, that's just not true. For example, the census bureau has per capita money income data here: http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/income/histinc/incpertoc.html Look at the first one - you can see that between 1967 & 2008 per capita money income, adjusted to 2008 dollars, doubled. And the years leading up to 1967 were ones of unprecedented growth in the US. The fact is, the people of the US would be much worse off if we were "mostly isolationist" and limited our trade.
Thanks for corroborating my stance that we can sustain growth as isolationists.
Duh! That isn't what you said. You claimed that the USA would be better off with more isolationist policies. B0bby demonstrated that you're full of crap. That ain't what I'd call "corroboration". Idiot.
"A tad racist"? Yeah, that's one way of putting it. Another would be that the owner of guestworkerfraud.com is using the recession and the attendant fear of unemployment to stir up racist hatred against Indians. Take for instance the current top item, "Christmas airline bomber got on plane with help from an Indian national". Why cover this story on a website apparently dedicated to criticize the US guest worker scheme? The only thing that links this item to others on the site is that it's blaming an Indian for something. I think it might be total fabrication too: I haven't seen anything elsewhere about an Indian helping the bomber; is it really credible that this anti-Indian poster happened to be there when one of the hated Indians helped a terrorist? Don't get me wrong, I'm not suggesting that the site's racism somehow justifies the censorship. I'm just saying that the site is run by a racist, for racist purposes. And anyway, as far as I can tell the site hasn't been taken down. At 1930 GMT the site was still up.
So the border guards interrogate this woman for 2 hours, X-ray her laptop, see her laptop working, and still decide to shoot it... and that's okay because a terrorist detonated a bomb in Egypt? I'm not trying to play down the horror of terrorist bombings. I'm just saying that security concerns do not justify harrassing innocent tourists just because you don't like the look of her.
In some countries, you know you have to be careful what you say, what literature or pictures you carry, etc, because you know the local police will arrest/deport/torture/kill critics of their regime. Such countries are usually dictatorships where no one has expectations of rights and freedom. Israel isn't supposed to be one of those countries. Israel portrays itself as a democracy, where concepts like freedom of speech are respected. If someone who disagrees with the current government's policies wants to visit a free democracy, she should be afforded the courtesy of toleration. Interrogating such a visitor for 2 hours is not very courteous. Shooting her laptop is extremely discourteous. The reason for this treatment: because she disagrees with the policies of a democratic country's policies, and presumably has sympathies with Arab Israelis (ie Israeli citizens) as well as Palestinians. There's nothing in this story to indicate that the border guards actually suspected her of being a terrorist. They didn't like her, and wanted to "teach her a lesson". So she's been/going to be recompensed for the laptop - so what? She's still gone through the trauma of its destruction and the inconvenience of being deprived of it during her travels. The guards responsible for shooting the laptop won't be punished - they were "just doing their job". It's just sad that in a so-called democracy, the duties of a border guard include traumatizing tourists who disagree with a government's policies.