Yes, Mitt Romney is. He said, "[Obama] almost sounded like heâ(TM)s more frightened that Israel might take military action than heâ(TM)s concerned that Iran might become nuclear.â John McCain, the Republican senator, was also annoyed that we haven't lead the national community in a war against Syria in support of the rebels. Note that Russia has already deployed troops and equipment in support of the Syrian government, so the probably of a clusterfuck between the US and Russia are huge, and that the rebels are affiliated with Al Qaeda, who are not exactly tree huggers.
So yeah, let's put things in perspective because you're either going to get AIDS or herpes, and while you can't choose gonorrhea, it doesn't mean that AIDS isn't much worse than herpes.
There is no doubt in my mind that we can curb stomp Iran if we really set our minds to it. Iraq was an anomaly because we weren't really into it. The people kind of knew the war was bullshit, and the leadership realized this, so they didn't want to bother the people with a huge war. Therefore, we invaded with a small force, never planned to provide security or reconstruction for the people, then promptly fired everyone and then disbanded the military and police forces. Just the same, we curb stomped Iraq, the Taliban, and Al Qaeda. Sure, we took losses, but ask them how they're doing.
If we went to war against Iran, it would not be a good time to pussy foot. If we went in with 300,000 soldiers, heavy tanks, AC-130 gunships, and a large complement of drones, the Revolutionary Guards would give up very quickly. We would take them apart.
Yes, and that's why Nazi Germany should have been allowed to rearm and militarize after World War I. After all, a sovereign nation has a right to defense, and attacking them is destabilizing.
"With regard to the "Iranian bomb": Iran is not pursuing nuclear weapons. We know this from a very simple piece of evidence: they don't have them."
That's the dumbest fucking thing I've ever heard. In 1944, the US was pursuing nuclear weapons AND DIDN'T HAVE THEM. What are you, retarded?
The second dumbest part of your argument was claiming that any nation could get a nuclear bomb in five years even if the world's superpowers are actively trying to stop you from getting them. Iraq and Saddam was trying to make a nuclear bomb but utterly failed, so that blows a big hole in our argument off the bat. Anyway, the US spent an absurd amount of money on the Manhattan Project. Nowadays, Iran not only has to try to make the bomb, but it also has to deal with sanctions and embargoes and all sorts of other actions meant to stop them from making nuclear bombs. I mean, you're talking about Iran, a country that sells oil but gets embargoes against importing gasoline into the country because it doesn't have its own refineries. In other words, they can't make gasoline or their own automobiles; what makes you think they can make a nuclear bomb when the US is trying to stop them?
Game theory got a work out during the Cold War as both sides were trying to make sure that mutually-assured destruction would actually be assured. Nuclear deterrence is a threat; fuck with us, and get nuked. Threats only work if the other side knows about them. A secret threat, even if carried out, is pointless, for obvious reasons. Therefore, during the Cold War, each side exchanged and verified information to assure the other side that they actually had nuclear missiles and bombers and warheads at the sites that they guaranteed in the numbers they claimed. That made is less likely for the other side to call a bluff and launch a strike. And it's not like the location of the bombers was in doubt. It really does look stupid, but there was method behind the madness.
Obama has avoided (or at least delayed) a shooting war with Iran. Israel was going to launch their own strike until we let them in on Stuxnet. We withdrew troops from Iraq pursuant to the Status of Forces Agreement with the Iraqis. Obama increased the troops to Afghanistan, but so what? It's not like they are going to be doing more killing than normal; it's just that these dudes need support because they were undermanned from the beginning. Is toppling the Taliban a good thing, given that they spread to Pakistan?
But what are the alternatives? The Republicans are pressing for war with Syria even though Russia has deployed troops and equipment, and Al Qaeda has been helping the rebels.
Nah, all good tricks get compromised. The only reasonable objective would be to avoid disclosure for as long as possible so that the weapons program would have been suitably delayed. But once Stuxnet popped out, which was inevitable, the only problem was trying to avoid ownership. But even if this was disclosed to be an American-Israel project, so what? Israel was about to attack Iran, so who cares?
I'm 29 years old, and I prefer streaming over owning. Look at Netflix. I will never develop a film library but it certainly is nice to have access to all these movies and TV shows in return for a monthly subscription. Of course, movies might get pulled as contracts expire, and that's a risk. However, I don't watch movies repeatedly so if I watch something once, it's good enough for me.
As for music, streaming is very convenient using Pandora and the like--even Youtube. I can just pick whatever strikes my whimsy and listen to it. I can't imagine downloading all the songs like I used to do because I would just listen to the same tracks again and again. Now I get new stuff all the time. I would love a Netflix-like service that can provide all the music out there for a streaming subscription price.
Comparing Space Ship Two with the Dragon capsule is not an even comparison. Putting a craft into orbit and retrieving it safely are not equally hard. Putting something into orbit requires much more energy than a sub-orbital flight. Recovering something that travels through the atmosphere at hypersonic speeds is also tough, especially if you want to man-rate it, and to make portions of it recoverable.
Thomas' attorney K.A.D. Camara is something of a legal gadfly. The guy is 28 years old, doesn't have lots of experience as a practicing attorney, and took the case on pro bono for the publicity. Camara experienced some bad publicity at Harvard Law School when he uploaded legal outlines that contained a racial slur to a student-run sharing website, so he probably wanted some better publicity. He waived the making available theory, I think, in an attempt to get a shot at the Supreme Court hearing about the constitutionality of statutory damages in cases where there are no damages.
I'm not saying that he isn't a bright guy, he certainly is brilliant, but he doesn't have the proper litigation experience. No one in their right mind would tell an appellate court that they should include a statement that it never bothered to review the making available theory. If the court wants to do it, they can, and it's fucking ridiculous for him to ask them to ignore something that can win the case for his clientâ"don't look a gift horse in the mouth! And exactly how do you write an appellate brief that cites only four cases as precedent when the other guys cited over a dozenâ"you need to distinguish those cases, not ignore them by waving your hands and saying "cases such as... should be ignored"? This is real life, and you don't get to argue sexy constitutional issues all the time, and life as a lawyer involves a bunch of nitty gritty stuff such as distinguishing cases and running out ground balls such as the making available theory.
Also, lawyers have to tell their clients, from time to time as the case may be, that they're full of shit. This lady said that she didn't know what Kazaa was, the account in question wasn't hers, and sent a hard drive that wasn't the one in question for forensic investigation. She had written a case study in college about Napster, didn't deny that the IP address used to access the material wasn't hers, didn't deny that the username in question was one that she had regularly used for other accounts, and was familiar with all the music downloaded by the Kazaa account user. If your client is telling you something that smells like bullshit, your job is to tell them to think again before they try to peddle that shit to the other side. That's your job as an attorney and that's the hardest thing for a young attorney to doâ"to push back on their clients.
So, in short, her attorney was just not doing a good job in this case. =/
File the firing pin? Good luck getting the gun to fire reliably after that. Buy the gun outside CA? Sure, but that's why there's a push for all the states to have firing pin tech. Laser engrave some other dudes ID on it? Man, if you can do that, you wouldn't be need to kill dudes with a gun--you'd laser them. A firing pin party? Sure. Let's give your pin to someone else and be responsible for whatever they did. "How did they end up with your firing pin?" "Uh, I gave it to him." "Why?" "Second Amendment rights, uh." "Let's go down to the station to clear this up..."
I thought that it was the custom-made nature of hearing aids that made them expensive, but a quick Google shows that a fitted set of earphones cost $200. I figure the fitting process is similar for hearing aids so it can't be the fitting. I guess the problem is that you can get cheap ones for $500 but everyone wants the best of the line models because it's their hearing, not some useless piece of tech that's a luxury.
I like to think of myself as a smart person (don't we all) and I realized that my biggest cognitive problem is my great ability to rationalize every decision I made. I can be wrong, but I can almost always make a great argument for it, convincing myself and most other people. So I try to think analytically and poke holes in my own decisions to make sure they get tested rigorously. By the way, I'm a lawyer.
Audiophiles hate it when you recommend BOSE or SONY, but I did have a lot of happiness with my Sony MDR-NC200Ds active-noise cancelling earphones. They list for $120 or so but I was able to buy one on sale for $80. I don't know if they are often on sale, but you might be able to get one for $80. If you can, do it. Not only are they great earphones (at least to my ears), they also cancel noise actively, which helps during commutes or airplane flights when you're seated right behind the engines.
Meh. It could be less than 30,000 because warrants have to be renewed at regular intervals. I mean, they could be bugging a fewer number of people for a long period of time.
You don't understand pride in your company, do you? They aren't saying that they won't be able to investigate fairly, but they want to avoid the situation where a FAA or NTSB investigator might want to hide some evidence showing that their friend was a drunk who crashed the plane. Again, not saying that they won't be able to investigate fairly, but they just don't want their guys to be in that position.
"Isn't it ironic? Atty4kids' suffering began when a crafty Houston Chronicle Help Desk Guy, Jay Lee asserted what appeared to be false claims for copyright violation against her, wiping out this and 13 websites 8 days before the primary, under the Digital Millenium Copyright Act ("DMCA"). Why do I believe it was false? A litany of facts suggesting Jay has very naughty. "Fair Use" Doctrine. Jay Lee and his outrageous lynch mob media printing lies to smear Candice have gone so over the top, there's simply more to the story. I've never met anyone so masochistic, begging to be smacked, as Jay. Call in the lynch mob! It goes all the way to Scotland! what's really up? Why would grown men put on an act like this,assassinating the Character of the President & Founder of Attorneys for Special Needs Children? Jay Lee is a hacker and tech expert and knows everything imaginable about computers. He would certainly know how to take down 14 of Atty4kids' websites with a single accusation. He would also know that images can be purchased through licensing, if he did not truly own the image motivating him to slice her jugular. What was wrong with sites? Sheriff Garcia was called a cry baby and couldn't take it. Artsy people like Lee usually possess many talents. He is an Amatuer photographer. He had a right to file te claim if true, but Most people are kind enough to first notify the person going for the jugular. He did not. He whines that he didn't know this would occur, unlikely story. What I think he failed to anticipate was the devastation and anger he'd cause to a mom with three kids who is deeply committed to advancing the Civil Rights of Special Needs Children (Atty4kids) who is a force to be reckoned with. Realizing the damage caused, he withdrew his sworn infringement claim immediately and practically begged her ISP to restore service quickly. Whether her suspicions are right or not, HE SHOULD HAVE HIT THE ROAD After she apologized, offered payment, permitting him to NAME HIS PRICE, he withdrew the accusation and the image was removed. He did not, but began stalking Atty4kids on Twitter and accused her of infringement AGAIN in fron of 1700 followers. Livid, she said "you better be joking" and he disappeared in abject fear. Coupled with the bait and switch game he played on Flickr, theres reason for concen. First, he scripted a drama for others to play that was enough to make you vomit. He wrote his pathetic sob story all over the photo with a frowny face as onlookers gawked ooh, aah, and spoke of the money he should have been paid on Flickr, UNAWARE that he could have NAMED THE PRICE and FAILED. 10 seconds was my limit. I left ad clicked the link a short time afterwards of curiosity, POOF! GONE! A magician like Sheriff Garcia? With the Chronicle Head Sheriff Garcia's crafty weasly Campaign Manager, free lessons? What are the odds that less than 24 hours after calling Garcia a cry baby and 8 days prior to primary, her VERY POLITICAL, HIGH RANKED blog, Chicks and Politics, would be suspended by a hacking pro employed with the Chronicle! If you knew Bernie's influence with the Chronicle, you'd laugh. She traced the Twitter stalker immediately, finding Jay and his Chronicle association she knew before even looking. Media Libels Atty4kids & Violates Her COPYRIGHT (DMCA) Jay milked the horrific tragedy for 4 days at which time Atty had enough and demanded he remove all of his libel, infringement and harassment from the web within 2 hours. Several cease and desist letters were sent, but this one hit a nerve. Maybe it was Atty's advice, "Get a lawyer," for 4 days, every parasite imaginable seeking to cash in (they are collecting funds for Jay's Defense), not yet realizing they'll need one too, is defaming her too. Theyve republished a BS atiry to inflict damage. Keep it up, morons! Damages are looking great! Atty has given 1000 hours in our fight foe justice for disabled kids. She
Forget the M-16. We gave the Mujaheddin a bunch of Stinger anti-aircraft missiles in the eighties but then the batteries ran out really quickly so they couldn't be used against us. Or consider the F-16 that we sell to all these countries.
I also believe that the GP is incorrect. Using your market power to literally exclude other competitors is textbook monopolization and I'm sure MS wouldn't do that. What they would do, however, is to offer huge discounts if you use an all-MS shop. You can use GPL software for stuff like Apache or Pidgin, but desktops would be much cheaper if you all used Windows and Office, for example.
That's just the government fine, not the civil suit. If they haven't sued the dumbass yet, it's probably because he and his parents are dirt-poor. The girlfriend's probably loaded, which is why they tried to sue her with this BS claim rather than the kid.
Researchers are investigating the use of metal printing presses to produce stronger and lighter parts that are currently being forged. Metal printing techniques allow hollow parts to be made much easier than other techniques. Therefore, the nerds want to make strong metal parts that are lighter and stronger due to tight control of the metal particles and hollow. I hope they succeed.
The truth is that this will really be aimed at China and North Korea because their locations make it really hard for the US to project any force in the region. The Middle East isn't a problem because we can base our weapons in friendly nations, and Russia isn't a problem because we have Poland and Turkey and those countries. The China/NK problem will only get worse as these countries develop anti-access weapons such as rockets and ballistic missiles. In China's case, the J-20 stealth fighter is probably going to be a strike fighter that is stealth only from the front; if you have a base nearby, China will flood your defenses with J-20s, then bomb it to pieces.
The new generation of bombers will be stealth enough to penetrate deep into enemy territory, big enough to carry munitions that can destroy bunkers (which cruise missiles can't do), and can be unmanned so they can be made cheaper and deployed more readily than the B-2.
Right now, the B-2 only has a two-man crew. Even if you refuel all the time, eventually the crew gets tired and has to sleep and the mission has to end. But with a drone, you can conceivably have the mission go on indefinitely if you can figure out how to refuel in flight. You can have extended loiter capabilities in enemy territory, which can be killer. The first wave of stealth goes in and bombs the known enemy air defenses. They carry bombs in reserve and loiter. The second wave comes in and when anyone opens their radar, the loiter drones pop them from behind. You can get pretty creative when you can fly a drone for days in a row.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, Mitt Romney is. He said, "[Obama] almost sounded like heâ(TM)s more frightened that Israel might take military action than heâ(TM)s concerned that Iran might become nuclear.â John McCain, the Republican senator, was also annoyed that we haven't lead the national community in a war against Syria in support of the rebels. Note that Russia has already deployed troops and equipment in support of the Syrian government, so the probably of a clusterfuck between the US and Russia are huge, and that the rebels are affiliated with Al Qaeda, who are not exactly tree huggers.
So yeah, let's put things in perspective because you're either going to get AIDS or herpes, and while you can't choose gonorrhea, it doesn't mean that AIDS isn't much worse than herpes.
There is no doubt in my mind that we can curb stomp Iran if we really set our minds to it. Iraq was an anomaly because we weren't really into it. The people kind of knew the war was bullshit, and the leadership realized this, so they didn't want to bother the people with a huge war. Therefore, we invaded with a small force, never planned to provide security or reconstruction for the people, then promptly fired everyone and then disbanded the military and police forces. Just the same, we curb stomped Iraq, the Taliban, and Al Qaeda. Sure, we took losses, but ask them how they're doing.
If we went to war against Iran, it would not be a good time to pussy foot. If we went in with 300,000 soldiers, heavy tanks, AC-130 gunships, and a large complement of drones, the Revolutionary Guards would give up very quickly. We would take them apart.
Yes, and that's why Nazi Germany should have been allowed to rearm and militarize after World War I. After all, a sovereign nation has a right to defense, and attacking them is destabilizing.
"With regard to the "Iranian bomb": Iran is not pursuing nuclear weapons. We know this from a very simple piece of evidence: they don't have them."
That's the dumbest fucking thing I've ever heard. In 1944, the US was pursuing nuclear weapons AND DIDN'T HAVE THEM. What are you, retarded?
The second dumbest part of your argument was claiming that any nation could get a nuclear bomb in five years even if the world's superpowers are actively trying to stop you from getting them. Iraq and Saddam was trying to make a nuclear bomb but utterly failed, so that blows a big hole in our argument off the bat. Anyway, the US spent an absurd amount of money on the Manhattan Project. Nowadays, Iran not only has to try to make the bomb, but it also has to deal with sanctions and embargoes and all sorts of other actions meant to stop them from making nuclear bombs. I mean, you're talking about Iran, a country that sells oil but gets embargoes against importing gasoline into the country because it doesn't have its own refineries. In other words, they can't make gasoline or their own automobiles; what makes you think they can make a nuclear bomb when the US is trying to stop them?
Game theory got a work out during the Cold War as both sides were trying to make sure that mutually-assured destruction would actually be assured. Nuclear deterrence is a threat; fuck with us, and get nuked. Threats only work if the other side knows about them. A secret threat, even if carried out, is pointless, for obvious reasons. Therefore, during the Cold War, each side exchanged and verified information to assure the other side that they actually had nuclear missiles and bombers and warheads at the sites that they guaranteed in the numbers they claimed. That made is less likely for the other side to call a bluff and launch a strike. And it's not like the location of the bombers was in doubt. It really does look stupid, but there was method behind the madness.
Obama has avoided (or at least delayed) a shooting war with Iran. Israel was going to launch their own strike until we let them in on Stuxnet. We withdrew troops from Iraq pursuant to the Status of Forces Agreement with the Iraqis. Obama increased the troops to Afghanistan, but so what? It's not like they are going to be doing more killing than normal; it's just that these dudes need support because they were undermanned from the beginning. Is toppling the Taliban a good thing, given that they spread to Pakistan?
But what are the alternatives? The Republicans are pressing for war with Syria even though Russia has deployed troops and equipment, and Al Qaeda has been helping the rebels.
Nah, all good tricks get compromised. The only reasonable objective would be to avoid disclosure for as long as possible so that the weapons program would have been suitably delayed. But once Stuxnet popped out, which was inevitable, the only problem was trying to avoid ownership. But even if this was disclosed to be an American-Israel project, so what? Israel was about to attack Iran, so who cares?
I'm 29 years old, and I prefer streaming over owning. Look at Netflix. I will never develop a film library but it certainly is nice to have access to all these movies and TV shows in return for a monthly subscription. Of course, movies might get pulled as contracts expire, and that's a risk. However, I don't watch movies repeatedly so if I watch something once, it's good enough for me.
As for music, streaming is very convenient using Pandora and the like--even Youtube. I can just pick whatever strikes my whimsy and listen to it. I can't imagine downloading all the songs like I used to do because I would just listen to the same tracks again and again. Now I get new stuff all the time. I would love a Netflix-like service that can provide all the music out there for a streaming subscription price.
Comparing Space Ship Two with the Dragon capsule is not an even comparison. Putting a craft into orbit and retrieving it safely are not equally hard. Putting something into orbit requires much more energy than a sub-orbital flight. Recovering something that travels through the atmosphere at hypersonic speeds is also tough, especially if you want to man-rate it, and to make portions of it recoverable.
Thomas' attorney K.A.D. Camara is something of a legal gadfly. The guy is 28 years old, doesn't have lots of experience as a practicing attorney, and took the case on pro bono for the publicity. Camara experienced some bad publicity at Harvard Law School when he uploaded legal outlines that contained a racial slur to a student-run sharing website, so he probably wanted some better publicity. He waived the making available theory, I think, in an attempt to get a shot at the Supreme Court hearing about the constitutionality of statutory damages in cases where there are no damages.
I'm not saying that he isn't a bright guy, he certainly is brilliant, but he doesn't have the proper litigation experience. No one in their right mind would tell an appellate court that they should include a statement that it never bothered to review the making available theory. If the court wants to do it, they can, and it's fucking ridiculous for him to ask them to ignore something that can win the case for his clientâ"don't look a gift horse in the mouth! And exactly how do you write an appellate brief that cites only four cases as precedent when the other guys cited over a dozenâ"you need to distinguish those cases, not ignore them by waving your hands and saying "cases such as ... should be ignored"? This is real life, and you don't get to argue sexy constitutional issues all the time, and life as a lawyer involves a bunch of nitty gritty stuff such as distinguishing cases and running out ground balls such as the making available theory.
Also, lawyers have to tell their clients, from time to time as the case may be, that they're full of shit. This lady said that she didn't know what Kazaa was, the account in question wasn't hers, and sent a hard drive that wasn't the one in question for forensic investigation. She had written a case study in college about Napster, didn't deny that the IP address used to access the material wasn't hers, didn't deny that the username in question was one that she had regularly used for other accounts, and was familiar with all the music downloaded by the Kazaa account user. If your client is telling you something that smells like bullshit, your job is to tell them to think again before they try to peddle that shit to the other side. That's your job as an attorney and that's the hardest thing for a young attorney to doâ"to push back on their clients.
So, in short, her attorney was just not doing a good job in this case. =/
File the firing pin? Good luck getting the gun to fire reliably after that. Buy the gun outside CA? Sure, but that's why there's a push for all the states to have firing pin tech. Laser engrave some other dudes ID on it? Man, if you can do that, you wouldn't be need to kill dudes with a gun--you'd laser them. A firing pin party? Sure. Let's give your pin to someone else and be responsible for whatever they did. "How did they end up with your firing pin?" "Uh, I gave it to him." "Why?" "Second Amendment rights, uh." "Let's go down to the station to clear this up..."
I thought that it was the custom-made nature of hearing aids that made them expensive, but a quick Google shows that a fitted set of earphones cost $200. I figure the fitting process is similar for hearing aids so it can't be the fitting. I guess the problem is that you can get cheap ones for $500 but everyone wants the best of the line models because it's their hearing, not some useless piece of tech that's a luxury.
I like to think of myself as a smart person (don't we all) and I realized that my biggest cognitive problem is my great ability to rationalize every decision I made. I can be wrong, but I can almost always make a great argument for it, convincing myself and most other people. So I try to think analytically and poke holes in my own decisions to make sure they get tested rigorously. By the way, I'm a lawyer.
Audiophiles hate it when you recommend BOSE or SONY, but I did have a lot of happiness with my Sony MDR-NC200Ds active-noise cancelling earphones. They list for $120 or so but I was able to buy one on sale for $80. I don't know if they are often on sale, but you might be able to get one for $80. If you can, do it. Not only are they great earphones (at least to my ears), they also cancel noise actively, which helps during commutes or airplane flights when you're seated right behind the engines.
http://reviews.cnet.com/headphones/sony-mdr-nc200d-black/4505-7877_7-35020456.html?tag=rb_content;contentBody
Meh. It could be less than 30,000 because warrants have to be renewed at regular intervals. I mean, they could be bugging a fewer number of people for a long period of time.
It might also be a factor of hydrazine or whatever noxious chemical they use to fuel the boosters on that sucker.
You don't understand pride in your company, do you? They aren't saying that they won't be able to investigate fairly, but they want to avoid the situation where a FAA or NTSB investigator might want to hide some evidence showing that their friend was a drunk who crashed the plane. Again, not saying that they won't be able to investigate fairly, but they just don't want their guys to be in that position.
Read her blog. She sounds insane: http://attorney4specialneeds.blogspot.com/
"Isn't it ironic? Atty4kids' suffering began when a crafty Houston Chronicle Help Desk Guy, Jay Lee asserted what appeared to be false claims for copyright violation against her, wiping out this and 13 websites 8 days before the primary, under the Digital Millenium Copyright Act ("DMCA"). Why do I believe it was false? A litany of facts suggesting Jay has very naughty. "Fair Use" Doctrine. Jay Lee and his outrageous lynch mob media printing lies to smear Candice have gone so over the top, there's simply more to the story. I've never met anyone so masochistic, begging to be smacked, as Jay. Call in the lynch mob! It goes all the way to Scotland! what's really up? Why would grown men put on an act like this,assassinating the Character of the President & Founder of Attorneys for Special Needs Children? Jay Lee is a hacker and tech expert and knows everything imaginable about computers. He would certainly know how to take down 14 of Atty4kids' websites with a single accusation. He would also know that images can be purchased through licensing, if he did not truly own the image motivating him to slice her jugular. What was wrong with sites? Sheriff Garcia was called a cry baby and couldn't take it. Artsy people like Lee usually possess many talents. He is an Amatuer photographer. He had a right to file te claim if true, but Most people are kind enough to first notify the person going for the jugular. He did not. He whines that he didn't know this would occur, unlikely story. What I think he failed to anticipate was the devastation and anger he'd cause to a mom with three kids who is deeply committed to advancing the Civil Rights of Special Needs Children (Atty4kids) who is a force to be reckoned with. Realizing the damage caused, he withdrew his sworn infringement claim immediately and practically begged her ISP to restore service quickly. Whether her suspicions are right or not, HE SHOULD HAVE HIT THE ROAD After she apologized, offered payment, permitting him to NAME HIS PRICE, he withdrew the accusation and the image was removed. He did not, but began stalking Atty4kids on Twitter and accused her of infringement AGAIN in fron of 1700 followers. Livid, she said "you better be joking" and he disappeared in abject fear. Coupled with the bait and switch game he played on Flickr, theres reason for concen. First, he scripted a drama for others to play that was enough to make you vomit. He wrote his pathetic sob story all over the photo with a frowny face as onlookers gawked ooh, aah, and spoke of the money he should have been paid on Flickr, UNAWARE that he could have NAMED THE PRICE and FAILED. 10 seconds was my limit. I left ad clicked the link a short time afterwards of curiosity, POOF! GONE! A magician like Sheriff Garcia? With the Chronicle Head Sheriff Garcia's crafty weasly Campaign Manager, free lessons? What are the odds that less than 24 hours after calling Garcia a cry baby and 8 days prior to primary, her VERY POLITICAL, HIGH RANKED blog, Chicks and Politics, would be suspended by a hacking pro employed with the Chronicle! If you knew Bernie's influence with the Chronicle, you'd laugh. She traced the Twitter stalker immediately, finding Jay and his Chronicle association she knew before even looking. Media Libels Atty4kids & Violates Her COPYRIGHT (DMCA) Jay milked the horrific tragedy for 4 days at which time Atty had enough and demanded he remove all of his libel, infringement and harassment from the web within 2 hours. Several cease and desist letters were sent, but this one hit a nerve. Maybe it was Atty's advice, "Get a lawyer," for 4 days, every parasite imaginable seeking to cash in (they are collecting funds for Jay's Defense), not yet realizing they'll need one too, is defaming her too. Theyve republished a BS atiry to inflict damage. Keep it up, morons! Damages are looking great! Atty has given 1000 hours in our fight foe justice for disabled kids. She
Forget the M-16. We gave the Mujaheddin a bunch of Stinger anti-aircraft missiles in the eighties but then the batteries ran out really quickly so they couldn't be used against us. Or consider the F-16 that we sell to all these countries.
I also believe that the GP is incorrect. Using your market power to literally exclude other competitors is textbook monopolization and I'm sure MS wouldn't do that. What they would do, however, is to offer huge discounts if you use an all-MS shop. You can use GPL software for stuff like Apache or Pidgin, but desktops would be much cheaper if you all used Windows and Office, for example.
That's just the government fine, not the civil suit. If they haven't sued the dumbass yet, it's probably because he and his parents are dirt-poor. The girlfriend's probably loaded, which is why they tried to sue her with this BS claim rather than the kid.
But when we go to war, it's definitely with the Persian Gulf. At least twice, of course. Or is it best out of five?
"her"
Researchers are investigating the use of metal printing presses to produce stronger and lighter parts that are currently being forged. Metal printing techniques allow hollow parts to be made much easier than other techniques. Therefore, the nerds want to make strong metal parts that are lighter and stronger due to tight control of the metal particles and hollow. I hope they succeed.
The truth is that this will really be aimed at China and North Korea because their locations make it really hard for the US to project any force in the region. The Middle East isn't a problem because we can base our weapons in friendly nations, and Russia isn't a problem because we have Poland and Turkey and those countries. The China/NK problem will only get worse as these countries develop anti-access weapons such as rockets and ballistic missiles. In China's case, the J-20 stealth fighter is probably going to be a strike fighter that is stealth only from the front; if you have a base nearby, China will flood your defenses with J-20s, then bomb it to pieces.
The new generation of bombers will be stealth enough to penetrate deep into enemy territory, big enough to carry munitions that can destroy bunkers (which cruise missiles can't do), and can be unmanned so they can be made cheaper and deployed more readily than the B-2.
Right now, the B-2 only has a two-man crew. Even if you refuel all the time, eventually the crew gets tired and has to sleep and the mission has to end. But with a drone, you can conceivably have the mission go on indefinitely if you can figure out how to refuel in flight. You can have extended loiter capabilities in enemy territory, which can be killer. The first wave of stealth goes in and bombs the known enemy air defenses. They carry bombs in reserve and loiter. The second wave comes in and when anyone opens their radar, the loiter drones pop them from behind. You can get pretty creative when you can fly a drone for days in a row.