For all the mods without brains, this isn't a troll post, if you read the GP you'd see he's using the GP's words and essentially replacing every mention of 'pedo' with 'homo' to expose the faultiness of the reasoning.
It is an odd rationale for you to dislike in others what you (one would hope) like in yourself. How is it you expect others to like you for what you would dislike in others? And to say that geeky girls aren't 'real' is just plain chauvanism. Quite the opposite. The girl that is self-confident and not driven by fads and groups is the 'real' girl. What you want seems like some fake stereotype.
You are of course assuming that the roles of fossil fuels cannot be replaced, that energy can't come from other sources, that other methods of producing materials analogous to plastics are impossible, etc. etc.
In a simple sense, yes, there is only so much material on earth. However, that's still a lot of fucking material, and we still only use a fraction of it, and have only figured out a fraction of the ways in which it can be used. All these Malthusians who keep bawling about limited resources have such a poverty of imagination that I am immeasurably thankful that they are not the ones charged with innovating the efficient use of materials.
It *is* possible for everybody to have the quality of life average for a US citizen (land use excepted, though really that doesn't matter anyway, most US citizens live in cities, not prairies, it's just that open space counts so much against the average), just not by the same *means* that are currently necessary to provide this quality of life to US citizens now.
And to say that the founding fathers wanted an agrarian society is blatantly disingenuously anachronistic. The Industrial Revolution hadn't even occurred yet! The 'agrarian society' of the founders was about a view of civic society embodied in ancient historical figures like Cincinnatus and agrarian reformers like the Gracchi brothers. It was about the power structure, balance, and attitude of the national body politic, not some anachronistic concept of farm vs. factory.
Once you get past the boring intro... damn! That is some fancy drivin'! Drifting through turns at such high speeds on unpaved roads inches away from a cliff-top drop to certain death... Makes me wonder how he can drive comfortably with such enormous balls.
'Meaningless oxymoronic bullshit' is overly-cynical hyperbole. These are obviously mitigating phrases, but if they were unbalanced to the point of being wholly untrue, somebody would call them out. Somebody would say, 'but they're not sensitive/sexy/trusting at all!' There must at least be plausibility in order for the phrasing/framing of the issue not to become a laughingstock and more embarrassing than the 'negative' half of things would be by itself.
I suppose your interpretation may be the author's original perspective. I'm just a little manic and trigger-happy about China because on the one hand the government is a bunch of dangerous, scheming, and authoritarian assholes, but on the other hand I sincerely love and respect the Chinese people and their culture, so I'm always defending the Chinese generally from racists hopping around about the 'yellow peril' while simultaneously attacking the Chinese government. It's hard to balance sometimes.
In any case I was afraid that because Bertrand Russell was sympathetic to the Chinese, and the AC was sympathetic to the Chinese, that abigor was making a negative insinuation about harboring any sympathy toward the Chinese. However in light of your interpretation I can see how this may have been paranoia.
Yes, that's why I mentioned the relationship as I did (I said 'very Chinese' in a cultural way, which is made clear by the parenthetical political contrast), although both the PRC/CCP and the KMT would disagree with you.
It is an attitude based on precedents I've already mentioned in another post. There is no evidence that I know of regarding backdoors in Chinese hardware as yet, but the precedents in malicious software are not something that should just be dismissed.
The fact that you insinuate that Bertrand Russell was a man of weak reasoning or understanding speaks volumes about your own biases. I suspect that you harbor some negativity toward more Chinese than just the government.
That too was not a physical limit, but a limit on the way the data was being handled. Just like LANs over copper. Moving from 10 to 100 to 1000 gb/s is not so much about physical advancements as it is handling the data. This doesn't make things any easier, coming up with algorithms and logic isn't child's play, but it's not like the melting point of a pure element that's just a physical property that can't be changed.
That's the context of the discussion, what are 'the limits' of silicon physically, not what are the design limits of the circuits printed on it.
Yes. All the sources that have found trojans on data storage from Chinese manufacturers are liars perpetrating this insidious 'sham'. Granted many of these problems are unrelated to the Chinese government, but that doesn't change the threat, only the underlying motivation for the threat.
Intel has several fabs in the US, and AMD's spun off fab company Global Foundries is building a US fab. Even the very Chinese (insofar as Taiwan is Chinese) TMSC has a fab in the US.
Modems are a terrible example. 56k was a ceiling codified in law by the FCC not a limit inherent to the technology. Granted using audio to transmit data would not have gone much farther, and infrastructure changes would have been necessary to make higher speeds possible while mitigating the effects of crosstalk, but the FCC regulation was just a lazy way of brushing that aside. When broadband options overtook dial-up, the issue was moot.
Hard drives would be a more interesting example. There is an industry that keeps changing the maximum, from new perpendicular storage now to using heating lasers to increase data density. Barriers keep getting broken on what is essentially the same old media. However once the slow speeds of holographic storage are solved, there is no doubt that 3D storage will overtake magnetic-based media. These sorts of sea changes are brought about by thresholds. Until these concepts graduate from prototype to production AND cost so ridiculously less per ghz than existing tech, it'll be silicon for the foreseeable future.
Dear AC, LEO is usually understood to mean Law Enforcement Officer when used in a law enforcement context. Not so much when talking about launch operations.
To be fair/. does talk about legal matters a fair amount as well. More context is needed than just 'it's on/.', which is given by the summary, so the point is moot.
I used to work for a guy with a JD, a PhD in Chemistry, and knowledge equivalent to at least a CCNP if not CCIE. He was also nuttier than squirrel shit. He belonged to the 'natural medicine' quasi-political movement and was always coming up with crazy ideas like building a robotic landform sculpting device from scratch just so he could see topographical LOS representations.
I also have a friend who is a retired US Army LtCol with a PhD in Business Statistics or something like that and Master Mariner's License who is also an ordained minister (and not just one of those jackasses with a piece of paper from the internet). The Rev. Dr. LtCol./Capt. US Army, retired is quite a mouthful, and he's probably the most interesting guy to have a conversation with that I've ever known or am likely to know.
I mean really, this doesn't produce any image at all. Yes, you can put it over a monitor of some kind, but if you stick it on any other surface, it's not a touchscreen but a touchpad.
Basic physics, more distance means more time to intercept. All a defensive system needs is greater range than an offensive system (and fixed systems tend to have that capacity over mobile systems) and/or more hardening than potential penetrative power. (Queue Bevis & Butthead laugh here.) The moon would be very easy to defend vs. terrestrial targets because it has no atmosphere. Radars on Earth are limited by an atmosphere full of biological chatter--birds, trees, etc. That's why stealth is important, because while it's impossible to eliminate a good radar's ability to detect physical objects, if the profile is 'lowered' to the range of 'background noise' like birds, then you either have to track every bird in the sky or give up on tracking stealth aircraft. The moon has no such problems, radars on the moon could turn their sensitivity to 'eleven' as it were, and nothing would be missed. Then it's a simple matter of countermeasures.
So what are you saying, because mistakes were made in the past that they should continue to be made in the future? Or that because of some human errors we should just give up and throw everything away?
Neither party wants to put up the money it would actually take to fly people to the Moon, much less Mars.
And so you blame... NASA? lol, wut?
I can't think of a single, published, peer-reviewed, scientific discovery made by people in low Earth orbit. Can anyone?
No, we all imagined the biological and chemical research done by the shuttle and sky lab. I mean really, because *you* don't know anything, we're supposed to assume nothing happened? Especially when your obvious bias inclines you to stick your fingers in your ears and go LALALALA?
No rational person is going to deny the importance of automated space exploration and experiments, but not everything can be automated. You are just plain nuts if you think humans have no role to play off planet.
Slashdot Mirror
With humor like that, you could work for The Onion!
Seriously though, that was brilliant.
It gave him a lot of hits. Sounds like a successful article to me. (Which is why I don't trust 'journalism' much, whether it's MSM or blogs.)
This... THIS!
(Yeah, yeah -1 redundant IDC.)
"Everything is worth what its purchaser will pay for it." - Publius Syrius
;-p
Definitely one of my favorite quotes from Civ IV
For all the mods without brains, this isn't a troll post, if you read the GP you'd see he's using the GP's words and essentially replacing every mention of 'pedo' with 'homo' to expose the faultiness of the reasoning.
It is an odd rationale for you to dislike in others what you (one would hope) like in yourself. How is it you expect others to like you for what you would dislike in others? And to say that geeky girls aren't 'real' is just plain chauvanism. Quite the opposite. The girl that is self-confident and not driven by fads and groups is the 'real' girl. What you want seems like some fake stereotype.
You are of course assuming that the roles of fossil fuels cannot be replaced, that energy can't come from other sources, that other methods of producing materials analogous to plastics are impossible, etc. etc.
In a simple sense, yes, there is only so much material on earth. However, that's still a lot of fucking material, and we still only use a fraction of it, and have only figured out a fraction of the ways in which it can be used. All these Malthusians who keep bawling about limited resources have such a poverty of imagination that I am immeasurably thankful that they are not the ones charged with innovating the efficient use of materials.
It *is* possible for everybody to have the quality of life average for a US citizen (land use excepted, though really that doesn't matter anyway, most US citizens live in cities, not prairies, it's just that open space counts so much against the average), just not by the same *means* that are currently necessary to provide this quality of life to US citizens now.
And to say that the founding fathers wanted an agrarian society is blatantly disingenuously anachronistic. The Industrial Revolution hadn't even occurred yet! The 'agrarian society' of the founders was about a view of civic society embodied in ancient historical figures like Cincinnatus and agrarian reformers like the Gracchi brothers. It was about the power structure, balance, and attitude of the national body politic, not some anachronistic concept of farm vs. factory.
Once you get past the boring intro... damn! That is some fancy drivin'! Drifting through turns at such high speeds on unpaved roads inches away from a cliff-top drop to certain death... Makes me wonder how he can drive comfortably with such enormous balls.
'Meaningless oxymoronic bullshit' is overly-cynical hyperbole. These are obviously mitigating phrases, but if they were unbalanced to the point of being wholly untrue, somebody would call them out. Somebody would say, 'but they're not sensitive/sexy/trusting at all!' There must at least be plausibility in order for the phrasing/framing of the issue not to become a laughingstock and more embarrassing than the 'negative' half of things would be by itself.
I suppose your interpretation may be the author's original perspective. I'm just a little manic and trigger-happy about China because on the one hand the government is a bunch of dangerous, scheming, and authoritarian assholes, but on the other hand I sincerely love and respect the Chinese people and their culture, so I'm always defending the Chinese generally from racists hopping around about the 'yellow peril' while simultaneously attacking the Chinese government. It's hard to balance sometimes.
In any case I was afraid that because Bertrand Russell was sympathetic to the Chinese, and the AC was sympathetic to the Chinese, that abigor was making a negative insinuation about harboring any sympathy toward the Chinese. However in light of your interpretation I can see how this may have been paranoia.
Yes, that's why I mentioned the relationship as I did (I said 'very Chinese' in a cultural way, which is made clear by the parenthetical political contrast), although both the PRC/CCP and the KMT would disagree with you.
It is an attitude based on precedents I've already mentioned in another post. There is no evidence that I know of regarding backdoors in Chinese hardware as yet, but the precedents in malicious software are not something that should just be dismissed.
The fact that you insinuate that Bertrand Russell was a man of weak reasoning or understanding speaks volumes about your own biases. I suspect that you harbor some negativity toward more Chinese than just the government.
That too was not a physical limit, but a limit on the way the data was being handled. Just like LANs over copper. Moving from 10 to 100 to 1000 gb/s is not so much about physical advancements as it is handling the data. This doesn't make things any easier, coming up with algorithms and logic isn't child's play, but it's not like the melting point of a pure element that's just a physical property that can't be changed.
That's the context of the discussion, what are 'the limits' of silicon physically, not what are the design limits of the circuits printed on it.
Yes. All the sources that have found trojans on data storage from Chinese manufacturers are liars perpetrating this insidious 'sham'. Granted many of these problems are unrelated to the Chinese government, but that doesn't change the threat, only the underlying motivation for the threat.
Intel has several fabs in the US, and AMD's spun off fab company Global Foundries is building a US fab. Even the very Chinese (insofar as Taiwan is Chinese) TMSC has a fab in the US.
Modems are a terrible example. 56k was a ceiling codified in law by the FCC not a limit inherent to the technology. Granted using audio to transmit data would not have gone much farther, and infrastructure changes would have been necessary to make higher speeds possible while mitigating the effects of crosstalk, but the FCC regulation was just a lazy way of brushing that aside. When broadband options overtook dial-up, the issue was moot.
Hard drives would be a more interesting example. There is an industry that keeps changing the maximum, from new perpendicular storage now to using heating lasers to increase data density. Barriers keep getting broken on what is essentially the same old media. However once the slow speeds of holographic storage are solved, there is no doubt that 3D storage will overtake magnetic-based media. These sorts of sea changes are brought about by thresholds. Until these concepts graduate from prototype to production AND cost so ridiculously less per ghz than existing tech, it'll be silicon for the foreseeable future.
Dear AC, LEO is usually understood to mean Law Enforcement Officer when used in a law enforcement context. Not so much when talking about launch operations.
To be fair /. does talk about legal matters a fair amount as well. More context is needed than just 'it's on /.', which is given by the summary, so the point is moot.
But what about times where one is talking about police operations in space? How will we get our LEOs into LEO?
ever seen real genius?
I used to work for a guy with a JD, a PhD in Chemistry, and knowledge equivalent to at least a CCNP if not CCIE. He was also nuttier than squirrel shit. He belonged to the 'natural medicine' quasi-political movement and was always coming up with crazy ideas like building a robotic landform sculpting device from scratch just so he could see topographical LOS representations.
I also have a friend who is a retired US Army LtCol with a PhD in Business Statistics or something like that and Master Mariner's License who is also an ordained minister (and not just one of those jackasses with a piece of paper from the internet). The Rev. Dr. LtCol./Capt. US Army, retired is quite a mouthful, and he's probably the most interesting guy to have a conversation with that I've ever known or am likely to know.
The internet turned me into a newt!
I mean really, this doesn't produce any image at all. Yes, you can put it over a monitor of some kind, but if you stick it on any other surface, it's not a touchscreen but a touchpad.
Basic physics, more distance means more time to intercept. All a defensive system needs is greater range than an offensive system (and fixed systems tend to have that capacity over mobile systems) and/or more hardening than potential penetrative power. (Queue Bevis & Butthead laugh here.) The moon would be very easy to defend vs. terrestrial targets because it has no atmosphere. Radars on Earth are limited by an atmosphere full of biological chatter--birds, trees, etc. That's why stealth is important, because while it's impossible to eliminate a good radar's ability to detect physical objects, if the profile is 'lowered' to the range of 'background noise' like birds, then you either have to track every bird in the sky or give up on tracking stealth aircraft. The moon has no such problems, radars on the moon could turn their sensitivity to 'eleven' as it were, and nothing would be missed. Then it's a simple matter of countermeasures.
Neither party wants to put up the money it would actually take to fly people to the Moon, much less Mars.
And so you blame... NASA? lol, wut?
I can't think of a single, published, peer-reviewed, scientific discovery made by people in low Earth orbit. Can anyone?
No, we all imagined the biological and chemical research done by the shuttle and sky lab. I mean really, because *you* don't know anything, we're supposed to assume nothing happened? Especially when your obvious bias inclines you to stick your fingers in your ears and go LALALALA?
No rational person is going to deny the importance of automated space exploration and experiments, but not everything can be automated. You are just plain nuts if you think humans have no role to play off planet.