This gets explained a lot as, "We have to make tech look cool so younger people will want to get into it...".
Well yes, but... we're creating cliches and charicatures of truth.
And it really isn't cool work. It's something you simply do because you want to do it. Not something that you do because you want to be around cool people. And it is one of the largest reasons why any gender gap exits in tech. We aren't Kim Kardashians, or Beyonces or Justin Beibers. A larger percentage of women seem to be drawn to pop culture. And even if we were cool, Pop culture oriented people would be the last group that would succeed at Tech. Because there is a thought divide, a concern with what other people think about you that draws a person to popular culture that very seldom exists in people who are drawn to STEM work.
They're not truly wild. They live in the managed ecosystems of our towns and villages.
Whilst feeding animal in the true wild is bad, feeding back garden birds that would otherwise fail to find sufficient food in bird-unfriendly gardens (lacking the correct plants and enough prey) is necessary to prevent further decline.
We feed a number of species in our back yard. Aside from educational and entertainment value, it is nice to be of some help to some of the birds. We now have a couple families of pileated woodpeckers along with downy, hairy and redheaded peckers, lots of goldfinches, cardinals, grosbeaks. and wood thrushes, winter wrens, as well as bluejays. Sparrows and we have some Cooper Hawks, one who seems to really like my wife.Those are just the regulars.
"House sparrow numbers were not monitored adequately before the mid-1970s. Since then, numbers in rural England have nearly halved while numbers in towns and cities have declined by 60 per cent.
I wonder if the numbers have declined in part because of increased competition with other birds who are becoming more common? Just conjecture - in our area the entirety of the bird population is way up. But I have noticed less of them in our back yard.
One behavioral thing about the sparrows I've noticed around here. They are clever at finding food sources. At restaurants and gas stations, when cars pull in and park, the sparrows fly under the car and up to the radiators to feast on bugs caught on them while driving.
I've noticed less of them here in the Northeast of US as well.
Yes, this is true. HOWEVER, to create long lasting radioactive fallout, you generally need to excite really big atoms. Like Uranium or Plutonium.
I've already proven the inaccuracy of your statement in my other reply. But here is the thing. The hydrogen bombs are huge. And they might be more efficient than the first three fission bombs ever made, it does not mean they are even remotely clean, and the Marshall islanders and US government can attest.
What are you talking about? Need a citation. The original bombs were inefficient and produced more radioactive material that was embedded into everything.
This would be an Hydrogen bomb. It would have less radioactive material to blanket everything.
You need to go live on Rongelap and make certain you live on only food grown there.
Your clean Hydrogen bomb the Castle Bravo test, was 15 megatons of pure nuclear orgasm. http://www.ctbto.org/specials/... It really didn't seem to be all that clean though After rendering Bikini and then Rongelap uninhabitable, and killing a sailor and sickening others on the ironically named Lucky Dragon when the radioactive plume drifted over them.
but it would hardly ever be mentioned outside of a SCIF. But Trump has threatend using them like waving around a big bomb cock.
So the real problem with Trump is that he openly said what everyone knows is being thought about in the dark hallways of the Pentagon and State Department.
Anyone who thinks that nuclear response isn't part of the planning is ignorant. It's a tool to be used when necessary. Some politicians are too weak and bend too much in the political winds to ever admit that. Trump isn't a politician.
The problem with your idea is that the nuclear option is usually like amputating your leg for athlete's foot. You always have a plan for escalation if it is needed. But the prudent war gamer has a plan for destroying even friendly countries. But you sure as hell don't talk about it, and the plans are highly classified.
The issue of baiting a country with threat of nuclear force is that once you go there, most ensuing options make you look like you are backing down, unless you actually use them.
Do you actuallly think that use of nuvclear weapons spreading their side effects are just fine, and no one will care? You think china will say, "Oh ho, our good friends have just dumped a load of fission products on us, but this is just fine".... really?
It would be a last ditch option, and once I fired them, it would be all of them,
A measured response to a measured threat is off the table?
Not with such an indiscriminate weapon. The old concept of Mutual Assured Destruction did work. Do you think that the destructive effects of nucs just suddenly stop at borders? Seoul is not at all far from the Border of North Korea, and most nucs we have will likewise be a huge problem for Seoul.
Your concept of a "measured response" means exactly that China, Japan, and South Korea will accept any and all destruction and any deaths caused by our "friendly nuclear devices. To put it another way, if France had a problem with Cornwall Ontario, and decided to nuc the place, that the USA would and should stand by and accept the destructive effects on New York State? That's what your measured response requires.
The correct response to NK lobbing a nuke somewhere into CA or Guam would be to unload our entire arsenal onto the upper half of that peninsula? Cool.
In this case, no. But in the even of responding to a nuclear hit on us, a large nuclear response is justified, one that will ensure they have no more capability to defend themselves.
This is not even that much different than Trump's threats. It is just that in the world of diplomacy, you simply do not cause the problem to be exacerbated. You might go on television once and say that any nuclear attack on the US or it's posessions will be met with destruction of the country launching the attack. Since North Korea isn't at all capable of destroying the US, the doctrine of Assured Destruction holds, just not the Mutual part.
But that swath of destruction will not confine itself to North Korea, which complicates matters - a lot. In a retaliatory strike, there would be a certain amount of wiggle room. But it will be messy as hell. Look at the maps.
Even the lefty communist pinkos trying to show how awful it was that the US had nukes didn't go that far. They stopped at the US destroying New York in exchange for the bomb that got through to Moscow in "Fail Safe". Maybe Henry Fonda pushed the screenwriter for a full-on Russian launch ending to the movie, but it didn't get filmed that way.
Fail Safe was an interesting movie, but I liked Strangelove much, much better. And both were fiction you know.
In my estimation, I don't want to use these thigs at all, ever. They are indiscriminate, and do not respect boundaries. A retaliatory attack with nucs, sure - if they were used on you first. But you have Seoul on one side, and China on the other, North and South Korea are not big countries, neutralizing North Korea means you are going to have to pick which of the other countries gets irradiated during the strike. And then there is Japan.
What is wrong with your ability to write normal English sentences? "nucs"? "shakers and movers"? It's like you're deliberately going against convention because of some narcissistic compulsive disorder. Are you Trump?
People bitch when I use the big words too. So some times I use other words to either get people's attention, or to annoy them. You can tdecide which in your case. in your case.
Millenials make up more of the workforce than all other generations combined.
But I really don't understand why any hiring manager would want to take on someone who just thinks they are entitled to a paycheck without anything in return. Most millenial devs I've worked with epitomize that.
Politics. Most of the millennials we hired were an affirmative action. It really didn't work out too well. But enough were males that a generalization could be made.
Clinton said she would be willing to consider nuclear force in the 2008 debates, and obama said he would not. There you go.
So if I read you right Clinton saying she would consider, is an itchy trigger finger, and teh peace loving Trump suggesting that nuclear weapons might be used in the mideast is just a peace loving musing.
Of course anyone wanting to be president has to "consider" using nuckear weapons. They are there, and there are situations in which they might be used. If I was president, I would consider their use. It would be a last ditch option, and once I fired them, it would be all of them, but it would hardly ever be mentioned outside of a SCIF. But Trump has threatend using them like waving around a big bomb cock.
The US would never pre-emptively use a nuclear strike against anyone. The economic, social, and political fallout for decades would cause more damage than NKs nuke.
Perhaps at one time. Maby not so much now. Thos in power now know that we are just as invincible as we were around 1947. We do not need to consider what the weaker nations think. Because they are losers, and we are winning.
The US is now posing a serious danger to the planet and Trump is just a symptom.
Explain. I don't recall any US leaders promoting nuclear force and a lust for using them before Trump. I do recall the Russian trolls and the "But her emails" crowd telling us that if Gramma Clinton was elected, we'd be in a nuclear war with Russia.
There are some DosBox forks/patches out there that enable things like parallel port passthrough... that'd be a nice one to have official support for. Seems they have a fair number of interesting builds at:
http://www.dosbox.com/wiki/SVN...
It's getting pretty complex for this guy though. This whole exercise would be learning how to use DosBox, whihc he doesn't want to do, or learning a modern graphic layout program, which he doesn't want to do. I see so many red flags that tell me I'd end up owning every problem on his computer.
Maybe he could pick up an old 286 machine at a hamfest?
>. There really isn't a good way to use them, the exception being the EMP pulsing
And of course the way we've BEEN using them, as deterrents. I'd say the primary use of nukes is with them remaining in their silos. Having them in strategic locations has been very useful, without pressing the button.
Here we have the US military using them, by freshening up the paint on the runway near them. That gets people's attention, and that's the point.
Well, not using them is a stretch definition of use. But point taken.
The Concept of Mutually Assured Destruction actually does work. It is brinksmanship to be sure, but it caused the old Soviet Union and USA to be very very careful. This also took some brave heroic people like Stanislav Petrov, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... who managed to not start WW3 after a satellite malfunction.
But MAD isn't in effect here. It's a nutjob with nuclear ambitions versus another one who is itching to use these things yet has absolutely no understanding of how they work and their effects, during and afterwards. Some of the ignorant statements in here regarding the nucs make the anti-anything nuclear crowd look smart by comparison.
But a strange world we live in, with weapons so powerful and nasty that their very use is akin to ending the world as we know it. I'm more for sending a few moabs to a few select places if we can arrange the diplomatic okays with China.
The fallout will be far worse than in Japan because most of the fallout consists of soil that has been activated by the neutron flux from the explosion. The fission products are a secondary issue.
Yup, fallout is mostly soil. And the physics and pragmatic effects of any state deciding to use nuclear weapons as part of it's diplomacy eludes some folks. My mini essay with cites on the effects of a few 1 megaton nucs were met with "they are better designed now, and radiation isn't a problem" Bolshy yarblockos - what the fuq?
From what I've been able to suss out, the idea is that we turn Pyongyang into molten glass, the world will be forever grateful, and we'd establish permanent dominance. Any country or group that disagrees with us will then have the option of obeying us, or likewise be the target of our nuclear force. All will be well as we enter a new age of peace or else.
The problem of course is that not everyone in the world is all that hot on the idea of killing millions, even in a shithole like NK. Especially not with nucs.
Then there is the matter of precedent. Despite what some might think, the world has a lot of these little cuties. If we decide that turning NK into glass and irradiating a lot of countries nearby is just a great thing to do, well, we've opened Pandora's box, and we ourselves are now a justifiable target.
Note this in no way means support of that asshole regime. And it doesn't mean I wouldn't be happy to remove their capability to be any threat to anyone by more conventional things that go boom. But even then, it is a touchy situation, given that NK is not without some allies.
But altogether too much of the clamor to use nucs as a pre-emptive cure for the problem NC represents is a weird sort of end-of-the-world lust.
And while Pat Robertson and the merry death cult with major wood over the Rapture and end of the world might think this is greasing the skids for a glorious exit into the loving arms of their god, some of us would like to keep the world in better condition, and not turn ourselves into a worldwide pariah.
But... there is no point in doing what you are saying. Sure we might send one HBomb to level a C&C city. But not for bases. That would be a standard precision cruise missile from the local Navy.
And then we'll make s'mores around the campfire while singing Kumbaya?
Also, the fallout from the HBomb wouldn't be anywhere as bad as what fell on Japan.
Oh, that calls for a citation.
However, it would still make people the world over mad at the US. Because we would have crossed a line. A lot of goodwill will take quite a hit. The US will pay economically and social for a few years to come. But the disgust will be tapered by the fact it was NK that was taken out. People will realize that they shouldn't have been such a squeaky wheel.
Sounds like the hearts and minds argument. And likely to work just as well. If the nucs were as benign and the world as forgiving as you seem to claim, we'd be using them all the time because they are so awesome and safe.
Most of the world will concur with you. The history of nucs and their testing brought some interesting things to light. First, it eally sucks to be in the vicinity where one goes off. The things are completely indiscriminate. Thy make one hella mess. And with few exceptions the shakers and movers in the Military loathe them. There really isn't a good way to use them, the exception being the EMP pulsing, but even then, there is the travelling radioactivity. But the concept of quickly killing millions, mostly civilians, and leaving many of them terribly injured, is going to get the country first using nucs instant pariahhood.
And despite the murderous wet dreams of some folks, the US has been waging war for 16 years now, and that uses up a lot of money. I severely dougt we could stand against the combined forces of the rest of the world. That might be blunt,
Despite my inclination to agree with the guy, it's obvious he was pretty stupid in the way he handled himself. If you are going to hav opinions like that, publishing them in an open memo is going to get you fired, regardless. It's one of those mysteries where the patriarchy is in total control, but supporting it gets you fired.
In general, where I worked, entry wages and job level wages had both male and female in the same general range, although it was indisputable that women were promoted at a much faster rate as part of an affirmative action situation. I was the exception in getting paid a lot more than either male or female workers sharing my job title, but that was based upon my ability and attitude as well as years of service.
There were a few complaints, but the boss told them that they could get paid like me if they were willing to do what I did - a lot of travel, a lot of extra hours, and being capable of performing all of the jobs we handled so others could go on vacation. That tended to stop the whining.
Regardless, if there was that much of a pay gap, we would see companies hiring only women to take advantage of the indisputable cost savings.
But yeah, if Damore was working for me, I would let him go as well, not so much for whether he was right or wrong, but because he apparently had an advanced degree in Dumfuk.
For what? Last time I looked it could be used for games. Some games. Often the popular ones that somebody cared enough about to write workarounds for. It wasn't even good at emulating hardware used by games and creativity programs (music players, graphics stuff etc.).
Of course that was my impression from some years ago, could be better now.
Keeping in mind that this guy was trying to keep using an ancient command line design program for graphic design, and use it in all of the ways needed, like printing - which I've not seen done on DosBox - does this DOS emulator have modern printer drivers? - to me, while yes I did tell him about DosBox, The smart money was on simply jumping ahead and using a program designed for modern computers.
It wasn't even money - He had to buy a new computer when his old one crapped out, and the people he was doing this for would buy him the new layout software. He just didn't want to learn something new. Which meant he really didn't want to learn DosBox either. He must have a hella time with the kids on his lawn.
You've never heard of DosBox? It works pretty good.
I've heard of many things.I was relaying the story, not my suggestions. I did suggest DosBox. He didn't like it.
And I still stand by my recommendation that he get a computer program that isn't worthless and will run on a modern computer. His output looked like something from 30 years ago. If you are doing design with a DOS program, you get documents that look like a step above a mechanical typwriter, and you glue the pictures to the output.
In the end, I think what he was really looking for was an old 286 PC from a museum, so he didn't have to learn anything new.
No, a single nuclear weapon removes the need for tens of thousands of soldiers to risk their lives. It is also drastically more cost effective. It's also the only way to reduce the loss of lives in cases like Seoul where people will have to endure "only" several hours of artillery strikes rather than weeks.
Ah, so you actually think a single weapon will be used? Anyhow let us back off from that idea for a sec, so as we can get your atomic lust some info.
Pyongyang is 118 miles from Seoul. Kaesong is around 30 miles to the center of Seoul. So lets say that the assholes start shelling from near Kaesong. So we decide to nuke Kaesong. A 1 megaton will suffice. Whether an air or ground burst is to be determined, and terrain is a factor as well
Seoul isn't going to like that very much, because they gonna get irradiated. China will get some of that radioactive goodness as well, especially if we decide to take out the North Korean Capital as well. China is about 100 miles away. Japan getting dusted will depend on how the upper atmosphere winds are blowing.
As likely as not, NC will set up multiple shelling locations, and while the radiation effects will eventually kill those further away after a short time, they can continue to shell SC before they croak. So some nucs will be needed there as well to stop that shit. And of course, they have their missiles in the first place, so more nucs for them. Also a problem for China. Probably for Japan as well.
So yeah, if Trump gets his wish of wiping NC off the map, it will be multiple weapons, and a lot of people killed in both North and South Korea by our weaponry, we will spread the radiation into other nations, who also have nuclear weaponry. They probably won't like this at all.
By golly, since this has now become a critical international act of war incident wht with making a mess out of the place, and contaminating other countries, one might not be too surprised if old Alex in Russia decided to help the rest of the world by sending a few gifts our way. And us them. And it wouldn't be too surprising if the rest of the world supported them.
All manner of scenarios are being gamed out right now, and your simple happy one nuc scenario, then happiness all around afterwards is almost certainly not one of them.
So, there is now a GPL operating system that will run DOS applications. That's pretty interesting.
If there were still sufficient "must have" DOS applications that could benefit from a little source code tweaking ("because I can!")
An old Ham called me up and wanted a way to run DOS on his W10 computer. He had programs he'd been using since the early 90's, his Windows 95 computer gave up the ghost, and he didn't want to change. I gave him some hints, but he didn't like it when I said the best idea was to start using software that wasn't written 30 years ago.
If the Russians ever tried anything, Canada has an elite force of eskimos on snowmobiles who have.303 rifles and it would be very bad for Putin.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Trump is going to get rid of those damn immigrant Eskimos when we invade Canada.
Slashdot Mirror
Any great tits in your backyard?
Occasionally. Especially when we have the hot tub going.
This gets explained a lot as, "We have to make tech look cool so younger people will want to get into it ...".
Well yes, but ... we're creating cliches and charicatures of truth.
And it really isn't cool work. It's something you simply do because you want to do it. Not something that you do because you want to be around cool people. And it is one of the largest reasons why any gender gap exits in tech. We aren't Kim Kardashians, or Beyonces or Justin Beibers. A larger percentage of women seem to be drawn to pop culture. And even if we were cool, Pop culture oriented people would be the last group that would succeed at Tech. Because there is a thought divide, a concern with what other people think about you that draws a person to popular culture that very seldom exists in people who are drawn to STEM work.
Promoting it as somehow cool will backfire badly.
They're not truly wild. They live in the managed ecosystems of our towns and villages.
Whilst feeding animal in the true wild is bad, feeding back garden birds that would otherwise fail to find sufficient food in bird-unfriendly gardens (lacking the correct plants and enough prey) is necessary to prevent further decline.
We feed a number of species in our back yard. Aside from educational and entertainment value, it is nice to be of some help to some of the birds. We now have a couple families of pileated woodpeckers along with downy, hairy and redheaded peckers, lots of goldfinches, cardinals, grosbeaks. and wood thrushes, winter wrens, as well as bluejays. Sparrows and we have some Cooper Hawks, one who seems to really like my wife.Those are just the regulars.
"House sparrow numbers were not monitored adequately before the mid-1970s. Since then, numbers in rural England have nearly halved while numbers in towns and cities have declined by 60 per cent.
I wonder if the numbers have declined in part because of increased competition with other birds who are becoming more common? Just conjecture - in our area the entirety of the bird population is way up. But I have noticed less of them in our back yard.
One behavioral thing about the sparrows I've noticed around here. They are clever at finding food sources. At restaurants and gas stations, when cars pull in and park, the sparrows fly under the car and up to the radiators to feast on bugs caught on them while driving.
I've noticed less of them here in the Northeast of US as well.
Lady: "How interesting! What are you studying?"
Researcher: "Great Tits."
Lady: "Um, thanks, but my eyes are up here!"
Excuse me, but you don't know what the fuck you're talking about.
I see. Just curious though, you being the final authority in these matters, are you cleared to discuss it publicly?
The first casualty of war is the plan.
Yes, this is true. HOWEVER, to create long lasting radioactive fallout, you generally need to excite really big atoms. Like Uranium or Plutonium.
I've already proven the inaccuracy of your statement in my other reply. But here is the thing. The hydrogen bombs are huge. And they might be more efficient than the first three fission bombs ever made, it does not mean they are even remotely clean, and the Marshall islanders and US government can attest.
What are you talking about? Need a citation. The original bombs were inefficient and produced more radioactive material that was embedded into everything.
This would be an Hydrogen bomb. It would have less radioactive material to blanket everything.
You need to go live on Rongelap and make certain you live on only food grown there.
Your clean Hydrogen bomb the Castle Bravo test, was 15 megatons of pure nuclear orgasm. http://www.ctbto.org/specials/... It really didn't seem to be all that clean though After rendering Bikini and then Rongelap uninhabitable, and killing a sailor and sickening others on the ironically named Lucky Dragon when the radioactive plume drifted over them.
Bikini is going to be a long time uninhabitable. https://www.sciencenews.org/ar...
Rongelap? Perhaps if no one eats any food raised or grown there.
but it would hardly ever be mentioned outside of a SCIF. But Trump has threatend using them like waving around a big bomb cock.
So the real problem with Trump is that he openly said what everyone knows is being thought about in the dark hallways of the Pentagon and State Department. Anyone who thinks that nuclear response isn't part of the planning is ignorant. It's a tool to be used when necessary. Some politicians are too weak and bend too much in the political winds to ever admit that. Trump isn't a politician.
The problem with your idea is that the nuclear option is usually like amputating your leg for athlete's foot. You always have a plan for escalation if it is needed. But the prudent war gamer has a plan for destroying even friendly countries. But you sure as hell don't talk about it, and the plans are highly classified.
The issue of baiting a country with threat of nuclear force is that once you go there, most ensuing options make you look like you are backing down, unless you actually use them.
Do you actuallly think that use of nuvclear weapons spreading their side effects are just fine, and no one will care? You think china will say, "Oh ho, our good friends have just dumped a load of fission products on us, but this is just fine".... really?
It would be a last ditch option, and once I fired them, it would be all of them,
A measured response to a measured threat is off the table?
Not with such an indiscriminate weapon. The old concept of Mutual Assured Destruction did work. Do you think that the destructive effects of nucs just suddenly stop at borders? Seoul is not at all far from the Border of North Korea, and most nucs we have will likewise be a huge problem for Seoul.
Your concept of a "measured response" means exactly that China, Japan, and South Korea will accept any and all destruction and any deaths caused by our "friendly nuclear devices. To put it another way, if France had a problem with Cornwall Ontario, and decided to nuc the place, that the USA would and should stand by and accept the destructive effects on New York State? That's what your measured response requires.
The correct response to NK lobbing a nuke somewhere into CA or Guam would be to unload our entire arsenal onto the upper half of that peninsula? Cool.
In this case, no. But in the even of responding to a nuclear hit on us, a large nuclear response is justified, one that will ensure they have no more capability to defend themselves.
This is not even that much different than Trump's threats. It is just that in the world of diplomacy, you simply do not cause the problem to be exacerbated. You might go on television once and say that any nuclear attack on the US or it's posessions will be met with destruction of the country launching the attack. Since North Korea isn't at all capable of destroying the US, the doctrine of Assured Destruction holds, just not the Mutual part.
But that swath of destruction will not confine itself to North Korea, which complicates matters - a lot. In a retaliatory strike, there would be a certain amount of wiggle room. But it will be messy as hell. Look at the maps.
Even the lefty communist pinkos trying to show how awful it was that the US had nukes didn't go that far. They stopped at the US destroying New York in exchange for the bomb that got through to Moscow in "Fail Safe". Maybe Henry Fonda pushed the screenwriter for a full-on Russian launch ending to the movie, but it didn't get filmed that way.
Fail Safe was an interesting movie, but I liked Strangelove much, much better. And both were fiction you know.
In my estimation, I don't want to use these thigs at all, ever. They are indiscriminate, and do not respect boundaries. A retaliatory attack with nucs, sure - if they were used on you first. But you have Seoul on one side, and China on the other, North and South Korea are not big countries, neutralizing North Korea means you are going to have to pick which of the other countries gets irradiated during the strike. And then there is Japan.
What is wrong with your ability to write normal English sentences? "nucs"? "shakers and movers"? It's like you're deliberately going against convention because of some narcissistic compulsive disorder. Are you Trump?
People bitch when I use the big words too. So some times I use other words to either get people's attention, or to annoy them. You can tdecide which in your case. in your case.
Millenials make up more of the workforce than all other generations combined. But I really don't understand why any hiring manager would want to take on someone who just thinks they are entitled to a paycheck without anything in return. Most millenial devs I've worked with epitomize that.
Politics. Most of the millennials we hired were an affirmative action. It really didn't work out too well. But enough were males that a generalization could be made.
Clinton said she would be willing to consider nuclear force in the 2008 debates, and obama said he would not. There you go.
So if I read you right Clinton saying she would consider, is an itchy trigger finger, and teh peace loving Trump suggesting that nuclear weapons might be used in the mideast is just a peace loving musing.
Of course anyone wanting to be president has to "consider" using nuckear weapons. They are there, and there are situations in which they might be used. If I was president, I would consider their use. It would be a last ditch option, and once I fired them, it would be all of them, but it would hardly ever be mentioned outside of a SCIF. But Trump has threatend using them like waving around a big bomb cock.
Tere you go,
The US would never pre-emptively use a nuclear strike against anyone. The economic, social, and political fallout for decades would cause more damage than NKs nuke.
Perhaps at one time. Maby not so much now. Thos in power now know that we are just as invincible as we were around 1947. We do not need to consider what the weaker nations think. Because they are losers, and we are winning.
The US is now posing a serious danger to the planet and Trump is just a symptom.
Explain. I don't recall any US leaders promoting nuclear force and a lust for using them before Trump. I do recall the Russian trolls and the "But her emails" crowd telling us that if Gramma Clinton was elected, we'd be in a nuclear war with Russia.
There are some DosBox forks/patches out there that enable things like parallel port passthrough... that'd be a nice one to have official support for. Seems they have a fair number of interesting builds at: http://www.dosbox.com/wiki/SVN...
It's getting pretty complex for this guy though. This whole exercise would be learning how to use DosBox, whihc he doesn't want to do, or learning a modern graphic layout program, which he doesn't want to do. I see so many red flags that tell me I'd end up owning every problem on his computer.
Maybe he could pick up an old 286 machine at a hamfest?
>. There really isn't a good way to use them, the exception being the EMP pulsing
And of course the way we've BEEN using them, as deterrents. I'd say the primary use of nukes is with them remaining in their silos. Having them in strategic locations has been very useful, without pressing the button.
Here we have the US military using them, by freshening up the paint on the runway near them. That gets people's attention, and that's the point.
Well, not using them is a stretch definition of use. But point taken.
The Concept of Mutually Assured Destruction actually does work. It is brinksmanship to be sure, but it caused the old Soviet Union and USA to be very very careful. This also took some brave heroic people like Stanislav Petrov, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... who managed to not start WW3 after a satellite malfunction.
But MAD isn't in effect here. It's a nutjob with nuclear ambitions versus another one who is itching to use these things yet has absolutely no understanding of how they work and their effects, during and afterwards. Some of the ignorant statements in here regarding the nucs make the anti-anything nuclear crowd look smart by comparison.
But a strange world we live in, with weapons so powerful and nasty that their very use is akin to ending the world as we know it. I'm more for sending a few moabs to a few select places if we can arrange the diplomatic okays with China.
The fallout will be far worse than in Japan because most of the fallout consists of soil that has been activated by the neutron flux from the explosion. The fission products are a secondary issue.
Yup, fallout is mostly soil. And the physics and pragmatic effects of any state deciding to use nuclear weapons as part of it's diplomacy eludes some folks. My mini essay with cites on the effects of a few 1 megaton nucs were met with "they are better designed now, and radiation isn't a problem" Bolshy yarblockos - what the fuq?
From what I've been able to suss out, the idea is that we turn Pyongyang into molten glass, the world will be forever grateful, and we'd establish permanent dominance. Any country or group that disagrees with us will then have the option of obeying us, or likewise be the target of our nuclear force. All will be well as we enter a new age of peace or else.
The problem of course is that not everyone in the world is all that hot on the idea of killing millions, even in a shithole like NK. Especially not with nucs.
Then there is the matter of precedent. Despite what some might think, the world has a lot of these little cuties. If we decide that turning NK into glass and irradiating a lot of countries nearby is just a great thing to do, well, we've opened Pandora's box, and we ourselves are now a justifiable target.
Note this in no way means support of that asshole regime. And it doesn't mean I wouldn't be happy to remove their capability to be any threat to anyone by more conventional things that go boom. But even then, it is a touchy situation, given that NK is not without some allies.
But altogether too much of the clamor to use nucs as a pre-emptive cure for the problem NC represents is a weird sort of end-of-the-world lust.
And while Pat Robertson and the merry death cult with major wood over the Rapture and end of the world might think this is greasing the skids for a glorious exit into the loving arms of their god, some of us would like to keep the world in better condition, and not turn ourselves into a worldwide pariah.
But... there is no point in doing what you are saying. Sure we might send one HBomb to level a C&C city. But not for bases. That would be a standard precision cruise missile from the local Navy.
And then we'll make s'mores around the campfire while singing Kumbaya?
Also, the fallout from the HBomb wouldn't be anywhere as bad as what fell on Japan.
Oh, that calls for a citation.
However, it would still make people the world over mad at the US. Because we would have crossed a line. A lot of goodwill will take quite a hit. The US will pay economically and social for a few years to come. But the disgust will be tapered by the fact it was NK that was taken out. People will realize that they shouldn't have been such a squeaky wheel.
Sounds like the hearts and minds argument. And likely to work just as well. If the nucs were as benign and the world as forgiving as you seem to claim, we'd be using them all the time because they are so awesome and safe.
But imho nukes are a war crime.
Most of the world will concur with you. The history of nucs and their testing brought some interesting things to light. First, it eally sucks to be in the vicinity where one goes off. The things are completely indiscriminate. Thy make one hella mess. And with few exceptions the shakers and movers in the Military loathe them. There really isn't a good way to use them, the exception being the EMP pulsing, but even then, there is the travelling radioactivity. But the concept of quickly killing millions, mostly civilians, and leaving many of them terribly injured, is going to get the country first using nucs instant pariahhood.
And despite the murderous wet dreams of some folks, the US has been waging war for 16 years now, and that uses up a lot of money. I severely dougt we could stand against the combined forces of the rest of the world. That might be blunt,
Honestly, he started it.
Despite my inclination to agree with the guy, it's obvious he was pretty stupid in the way he handled himself. If you are going to hav opinions like that, publishing them in an open memo is going to get you fired, regardless. It's one of those mysteries where the patriarchy is in total control, but supporting it gets you fired.
In general, where I worked, entry wages and job level wages had both male and female in the same general range, although it was indisputable that women were promoted at a much faster rate as part of an affirmative action situation. I was the exception in getting paid a lot more than either male or female workers sharing my job title, but that was based upon my ability and attitude as well as years of service.
There were a few complaints, but the boss told them that they could get paid like me if they were willing to do what I did - a lot of travel, a lot of extra hours, and being capable of performing all of the jobs we handled so others could go on vacation. That tended to stop the whining.
Regardless, if there was that much of a pay gap, we would see companies hiring only women to take advantage of the indisputable cost savings.
But yeah, if Damore was working for me, I would let him go as well, not so much for whether he was right or wrong, but because he apparently had an advanced degree in Dumfuk.
Anndddd the biggest non-sequitur goes to you dear sir. One each underwent is your reward. But you can bring your reward to the entire internet.
How in the friggin hell would autocorrect turn "undernet" into underwent?
For what? Last time I looked it could be used for games. Some games. Often the popular ones that somebody cared enough about to write workarounds for. It wasn't even good at emulating hardware used by games and creativity programs (music players, graphics stuff etc.).
Of course that was my impression from some years ago, could be better now.
Keeping in mind that this guy was trying to keep using an ancient command line design program for graphic design, and use it in all of the ways needed, like printing - which I've not seen done on DosBox - does this DOS emulator have modern printer drivers? - to me, while yes I did tell him about DosBox, The smart money was on simply jumping ahead and using a program designed for modern computers.
It wasn't even money - He had to buy a new computer when his old one crapped out, and the people he was doing this for would buy him the new layout software. He just didn't want to learn something new. Which meant he really didn't want to learn DosBox either. He must have a hella time with the kids on his lawn.
You've never heard of DosBox? It works pretty good.
I've heard of many things.I was relaying the story, not my suggestions. I did suggest DosBox. He didn't like it.
And I still stand by my recommendation that he get a computer program that isn't worthless and will run on a modern computer. His output looked like something from 30 years ago. If you are doing design with a DOS program, you get documents that look like a step above a mechanical typwriter, and you glue the pictures to the output.
In the end, I think what he was really looking for was an old 286 PC from a museum, so he didn't have to learn anything new.
No, a single nuclear weapon removes the need for tens of thousands of soldiers to risk their lives. It is also drastically more cost effective. It's also the only way to reduce the loss of lives in cases like Seoul where people will have to endure "only" several hours of artillery strikes rather than weeks.
Ah, so you actually think a single weapon will be used? Anyhow let us back off from that idea for a sec, so as we can get your atomic lust some info.
Pyongyang is 118 miles from Seoul. Kaesong is around 30 miles to the center of Seoul. So lets say that the assholes start shelling from near Kaesong. So we decide to nuke Kaesong. A 1 megaton will suffice. Whether an air or ground burst is to be determined, and terrain is a factor as well
Seoul isn't going to like that very much, because they gonna get irradiated. China will get some of that radioactive goodness as well, especially if we decide to take out the North Korean Capital as well. China is about 100 miles away. Japan getting dusted will depend on how the upper atmosphere winds are blowing.
As likely as not, NC will set up multiple shelling locations, and while the radiation effects will eventually kill those further away after a short time, they can continue to shell SC before they croak. So some nucs will be needed there as well to stop that shit. And of course, they have their missiles in the first place, so more nucs for them. Also a problem for China. Probably for Japan as well. So yeah, if Trump gets his wish of wiping NC off the map, it will be multiple weapons, and a lot of people killed in both North and South Korea by our weaponry, we will spread the radiation into other nations, who also have nuclear weaponry. They probably won't like this at all.
By golly, since this has now become a critical international act of war incident wht with making a mess out of the place, and contaminating other countries, one might not be too surprised if old Alex in Russia decided to help the rest of the world by sending a few gifts our way. And us them. And it wouldn't be too surprising if the rest of the world supported them.
All manner of scenarios are being gamed out right now, and your simple happy one nuc scenario, then happiness all around afterwards is almost certainly not one of them.
So, there is now a GPL operating system that will run DOS applications. That's pretty interesting.
If there were still sufficient "must have" DOS applications that could benefit from a little source code tweaking ("because I can!")
An old Ham called me up and wanted a way to run DOS on his W10 computer. He had programs he'd been using since the early 90's, his Windows 95 computer gave up the ghost, and he didn't want to change. I gave him some hints, but he didn't like it when I said the best idea was to start using software that wasn't written 30 years ago.
If the Russians ever tried anything, Canada has an elite force of eskimos on snowmobiles who have .303 rifles and it would be very bad for Putin.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Trump is going to get rid of those damn immigrant Eskimos when we invade Canada.