Actually, it's possible to travel plenty as a student. I traveled 3 out of 4 summers as a college student. This is a great way to combine vacation and get college credit at the same time.
It wasn't cheap though. I had to use a combination of scholarships and financial aid. If you're resourceful, you'll find a way to raise enough money.
I only traveled for 4-6 weeks each trip, but they were great experiences. If my schedule was more flexible, I would've studied abroad for a semester or entire academic year.
This really had nothing to do with the UN. It was the Cold War which averted another "world" war from happening. Elsewhere you've mentioned that the UN gave the US and USSR a chance to negoiate their differences fairly peacefully, but this would have happened just as well had the UN never been formed. Diplomacy wasn't invented by the UN, it existed ever since there have been competing political entities.
Has negotiated and enforced many peace treaties throughout that time.
This also has little to do with the UN, as most peace treaties have been negotiated and enforced by states that happen to be UN members, sometimes endorsed by the UN. Again, this would have happened just the same without the UN.
Economic and other sanctions have had positive effects on some countries.
I don't understand this point, as sanctions are designed to have negative effects, imposed on states to punish their behavior.
WHO has done some fantastic work in the 3rd world.
OK
Is the world's first supra-national organization and, more remarkably, has had its power seriously challenged only a few times.
Definitely not true, the League of Nations is only one of many supra-national organizations that predate the UN. Besides, the UN has no power, it's merely a consultative body, without sovereignty or even suzerainty over member states. Beyond that, the only part of the UN which exercises any sort of real influence is the Security Council.
Has, respectively, saved the countries of Korea, Kuwait,and many others i'm forgetting by using multinational forces to defeat a common agressor enemy.
These coalitions were US led. The force that liberated Kuwait was definitely not a UN coalition, it was merely a US led force with UN permission.
Its main flaws being that it isn't really above an individual nation states power and is especially vulnerable to the power of the US.
I see that as its greatest feature, not a flaw. If the UN was really a world government, where would you seek refuge if it became tyrannical? That's the advantage of having multiple sovereign states.
Also, any organization that gives an equal voice to freely elected, representative governments and brutal, repressive dictators is fundamentally defective. What does it say about the UN that it placed Libya as the chair of the Human Rights Commision and scheduled Iraq and Iran to chair a disarmament panel?
While the US presence in europe undoubtedly has helped prevent europe from self destructing into war (again) another factor is the increased co-operation and the knowledge of what another world war would due to Europe. Europe seems content with the idea of preserving each individual countries unique
The largest factor why there have been no wars in Europe for decades is that for most of the past 50 years much of the world was polarized by the Cold War. Most countries were aligned with either the US or USSR, and few people were willing to start a conflict that might escalate into global thermonuclear war. (I think your last sentence was cut-off somehow.)
Saying that European countries do not possess formidable armies is wrong. Germany and France both maintain armies of comparable size to the US' and comparable equipment. Now, air force and navy is quite another matter. They also rely almost wholly upon the US for all their military R&D needs, especially aircraft and high technology weapons systems. In that respect, yes, the US does prop them up a bit. But as of currently, iirc, the US maintains only 2 divisons in Europe plus air and naval forces of course.
A quick Google search turned up this article, which says the German army currently has 285,000 troops. I can't find the size of the French army, but it's probably comparable. According to this DOD table, the US Army currently has 499,814 troops. That's almost double the size of the German army! Also, comparing most European military equipment to US equipment is like comparing a 1988 Yugo with a brand new Dodge Viper. In general, their equipment is at least one generation behind ours.
Indeed, most military sucess' of the UN have come with US forces involved, most often heavily. This is somewhat due to the fact that only the United States has the resources and equipment necassary to project force on a worldwide scale. No other country in the world can do this.
That's a pretty staggering thought isn't it? Most of Europe, Canada, and lots of other countries had comparable military strength to the US around World War II. Since then, they've spent very little on defense, merely depending on the US for their survival. This allowed them to spend much more on social programs and other things. If they would have contributed their fair share to defense against the USSR, the US could have been even richer.
I'd switch in a heartbeat if they existed on Linux. I just can't do without them.
When the software is there, the big companies and users will follow. Not until.
It's a chicken and egg problem really. People won't switch until their favorite, can't-do-without-it, application is ported to Linux, but it won't be ported to Linux until there's a critical mass of users to justify porting it.
There are some big companies already using Linux though, and many others seriously considering a switch. They probably only need a few specific applications, or substitutes, before the economics makes the switch a no-brainer.
The 970 (G5) is largely confined to Apple at the moment. IBM will produce some workstations based around it, but that's really it.
Don't forget Microsoft's announcement to use one of IBM's Power CPUs in the next generation Xbox. Not that this really matters, since this is really an embedded use. Most people don't even realize the current Xbox is just a low-end PC in a different form factor.
Your post is mostly lies, half-truths, and just plan BS. It's really a waste of my time to reply, but it almost seems some people believe you, judging by moderation and some previous replies.
Just so you know, Afghanistan is still under the same dictators. The Taliban kept the warlords in line. A bunch of warlords, called the Northern Alliance, didn't like them, and never did. The US backed them up and toppled the Taliban. The warlords got what they wanted: absolute rule back again, like they had before the Taliban.
There was no absolute rule in Afghanistan before the Taliban took power. Since the Soviets pulled out in 1989 it was a period of civil war until 1996 when the Taliban gained power over most of the country. Also, calling them warlords isn't completely accurate, since they're no longer at war. Afghanistan is a very tribally oriented country, and tribal leaders have regularly held positions of power and influence in areas where their tribes were predominant. At least now the different tribes and "warlords" are resolving differences through diplomacy and negotiations rather than large scale warfare.
Before, a woman couldn't go to school, and couldn't go out in public without a burka or she would be arrested. The stories told pre-war about being killed were true...but for Northern Alliance territories, not Taliban.
The Taliban have the worst record on womens' rights of anybody in recent times. Some tribes may have had similar policies in the past, but are now allowing women more rights to remain in favor of western countries.
The Taliban were very harsh to rapists and woman beaters (Unless he was her husband). Now, she is legally allowed to go to school. and work...but she will be beaten to death. And if she doesn't wear a burka...she will be beaten to death and/or raped. The Taliban may have repressed women, but they protected them, and killed rapists.
Many women are working again and girls are going to school, allowed by those in power. Some women are still wearing burkas, but many are not. The situation for women is a huge improvement since the Taliban was ousted.
Things are worse for everybody in Afghanistan. Not that they were very good under the Taliban, but they were STILL better off.
Pure BS! Things have been steadily improving since Afghanistan was liberated. Personally, I don't think the West is doing quite enough to help, but the people there are definitely better off.
The Coalition keeps things in order...but they can barely even control Kabul; the rest of the country is left entierly at the mercy of the same warlords who have always ruled.
While the new Hamid Karzai government has little control beyond Kabul, the fighting that plagued Afghanistan for the last several decades has largely stopped now.
And the Coalition is hiring most of the Taliban back to work the "new" government anyways.
In some cases, yes, because people were coerced, or forced at gunpoint to fight for the Taliban. However, the ones responsible for atrocities and repression are being held accountable and jailed.
The opium trade, which the religious Taliban condemned, is back in full tilt, flooding the streets of Britain with Afghani heroin again, and the CIA coffers with drug money.
They officially condemned it, but allowed it to go on if they got a share of profits and all the drugs went outside the country. Maybe people should stop buying heroin in Britain. And the CIA does not make money off drugs.
Food is a problem, because farmers fields are full of American mines.
Pure BS! The only place the US currently uses mines is the DMZ separating North and South Korea. The mines in Afghanistan have been t
So have we. We've often bucked UN Sanctions, treaties and other signs of good will for our own interests.
Anyone remember the ABM-ban we wiped our asses with?
The ABM Treaty has nothing to do with the UN. It was a bilateral treaty between the Soviet Union and the US, signed in 1972. As with any treaty, it can only remain in effect while both parties still agree to it.
I support their right of free speech, and I think Indymedia should ignore the cease and desist offer.
However, Indymedia is definitely not a very important platform. They're mostly a source of conspiracy theories, shoddy research, half-truths, hate-mongering, and just plain bad journalism.
Well, Coleman's a Minnesota Republican, which is about as conservative as, say, your typical Louisiana Democrat is liberal. If you see what I mean. Minnesota politics tend to be either leftist or libertarian, or some combination thereof; you don't find too many real right-wingers making it very far there.
You obviously don't understand MN politics. It may have been that way in the past, but it's far from the case today. Besides, Coleman has always been pretty conservative, even when he was a Democrat.
Among our congressional delegation, there are 4 Democrats and 4 Republicans. One Republican (Jim Ramstad) could be considered somewhat liberal. On the other hand, one Democrat (Collin Peterson) is a conservative blue dog Democrat. The rest of the Republicans are very conservative, and the rest of the Democrats are very liberal.
Also, 4 of 5 statewide elected officials (Governor, Lt Gov, Secretary of State, and State Auditor) are conservative Republicans. Only our State Attorney General is a Democrat.
That's right, and their license to use my code is commonly referred to as the GPL. If they wish to create derivative works from it, or incorporate it into a larger body of work, they will have to GPL the entire work.
Only if they released the binary outside the company. If they only used the code internally, they're under no obligation to release it.
Interestingly enough, we (the US) has not signed the entire Geneva convention. We do abide by most of it, but compbat troops are trained to follow the Law of Armed Conflict. This is a US Dept of Defense product that may contain some of the same considerations as the Geneva Convention, but is not exactly the same. FWIW
There wasn't just one single Geneva Convention. What are today referred to as the Laws of Armed Conflict (LOAC) are the result of a series of conventions in both Geneva and the Hague starting in the mid-19th century.
Besides, I haven't heard of a part of them that we didn't sign. We are one of the several dozen countries that are signatories, but probably have the best record prosecuting our own soldiers who violate the LOAC.
Wanna make some kernel changes...you MUST release them to the world.
Wrong! Source changes only need to be released if you distribute the binaries. If you only use it personally, or within an organization without a public release, there is no need to publicly release the modified source.
Besides, the original post was about a Linux desktop. Very few desktop users ever need to modify kernel code, probably less than 1 out of 10,000.
Adults are also being blocked. And it is quite possible that they are doing research that may be blocked.
They can always ask the librarian to disable the filter. The law specifically has a clause for this. The articles linked from/. don't mention it, but here's the relevant quote from an article that does:
Justices Kennedy and Breyer joined the judgment because they believe adult patrons need only ask the librarian to 'please disable the filter' and need not provide any reason for the request.
and most people don't mind giving a little back (when this "a little" happens just to be the satisfaction of them being able to confirm that they have x amount of readers, and don't use it for anything else other than that)?
Are you kidding? They can't get any reliable numbers from the login statistics. I always register under a pseudonym like dfjghsdkfjbg and enter fake demographic data, usually a 90 year old female laborer from some 3rd world country in their highest income bracket. When the cookie expires I just create a new login. It's faster than trying to remember or find what username:password combination I used. Besides, I've seen dozens of them posted on/. some people use, like cypherpunks:cypherpunks or slashdot:slashdot.
You don't think those articles write themselves and the writers live off of your wet dreams of free everything, do you?
No, but requiring free logins doesn't generate any revenue.
Is there anyone who grows up speaking only Choctaw, Hawaiian or Yiddish anymore?
Probably not, which is why these have been considered dying languages. Fortunately, there's been a resurgence of interest in Native American languages in the past several years, and more people are learning them. Yiddish, on the other hand, is still spoken by many people in Israel, some as probably the only language.
Many had Esperanto as the primary language spoken around the house.
Who? Where? I would rather spend my time learning the actual languages spoken in places I visit. That way I'll learn a lot more about the the people and culture.
Actually Esperanto has some native speakers - between 200 and 2000, according to the Ethnologue. That's more then many languages in the world.
I wouldn't really consider any of them native Esperanto speakers. Is there anyone who speaks nothing but Esperanto? I highly doubt it. These are people who were probably taught Esperanto growing up, but speak other languages as well, most likely more often.
All chosen out of that list of twenty languages of economic importance. (Okay, I didn't have Korean on that list, but it was oversight.)
What does this have to do with economics?
Choctaw? Basque? Xhosa? Pashto? Yiddish? Heck, even something like Finnish or Farsi, Latin or Sanskrit? Let me guess, they come from the following list: French, German, Russian, Chinese (Mandarian), Japanese, Hindi, Indonesian, Malay, Portuguese (Brazilian), Italian, Hebrew or Swedish. (That's only sixteen for what was supposed to be a list of twenty, but even some of those are of marginal relevance.)
You don't give me very much credit. Actually, Farsi and Latin are two languages I do want to learn, the latter for academic purposes only. I also want to learn at least one Native American language, probably Ojibwe or Dakota (I live less than a mile from the largest concentration of Dakota speakers). It's also not unlikely I'll learn Pashto (or Dari, Uzbek, Tajik, or Turkoman). Also quite possibly Serbo-Croatian or Macedonian.
I want to learn some of the languages from your list (French, German, Russian, Japanese, and Hebrew), but the others aren't high on my priority list. There's only so much time one can devote to language study.
There's reasons to speak a language besides the fact that its speakers make up a important economic block. A language is a way of entering a culture, of a new way of thinking, of a new literature. While Klingon has no native literature (though the other reasons still stand), Esperanto has all three.
Economics has little impact on the languages I study. I just like to learn the language of the places I travel. I didn't mention them in my previous post, but I also speak a little Czech and Hawaiian (not enough to be conversant, but more than the average tourist). Besides travel, the next language(s) I study will depend on books I want to read and research I want to do.
I find it very hard to believe Esperanto has its own culture or way of thinking. Any literature written in Esperanto can't be worth learning the language, but for its novelty value only.
On the other hand, I have no qualms about learning dead languages, like Latin or Sanskrit. There exist large bodies of literary and historical works in many dead languages that have yet to be translated or used in original research. That's the only reason I want to learn Latin.
Excuse me, how does this have anything to do with my post. I was only commenting on the uselessness of Klingon and Esperanto, two constructed languages with no native speakers.
I advocate learning real languages. I currently speak four languages (to one degree or another): English, Spanish, Korean, and Arabic. And I plan on learning more languages in the future.
I don't really see Klingon as being any different from a language like, say, Esperanto when you get right down to it. Sure, it's associated with a TV show, but it's still a complete language.
Exactly, two languages that are completely useless, spoken by only a few handfuls of obsessed nuts.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, it's possible to travel plenty as a student. I traveled 3 out of 4 summers as a college student. This is a great way to combine vacation and get college credit at the same time.
It wasn't cheap though. I had to use a combination of scholarships and financial aid. If you're resourceful, you'll find a way to raise enough money.
I only traveled for 4-6 weeks each trip, but they were great experiences. If my schedule was more flexible, I would've studied abroad for a semester or entire academic year.
This also has little to do with the UN, as most peace treaties have been negotiated and enforced by states that happen to be UN members, sometimes endorsed by the UN. Again, this would have happened just the same without the UN.
I don't understand this point, as sanctions are designed to have negative effects, imposed on states to punish their behavior.
OK
Definitely not true, the League of Nations is only one of many supra-national organizations that predate the UN. Besides, the UN has no power, it's merely a consultative body, without sovereignty or even suzerainty over member states. Beyond that, the only part of the UN which exercises any sort of real influence is the Security Council.
These coalitions were US led. The force that liberated Kuwait was definitely not a UN coalition, it was merely a US led force with UN permission.
I see that as its greatest feature, not a flaw. If the UN was really a world government, where would you seek refuge if it became tyrannical? That's the advantage of having multiple sovereign states.
Also, any organization that gives an equal voice to freely elected, representative governments and brutal, repressive dictators is fundamentally defective. What does it say about the UN that it placed Libya as the chair of the Human Rights Commision and scheduled Iraq and Iran to chair a disarmament panel?
A quick Google search turned up this article, which says the German army currently has 285,000 troops. I can't find the size of the French army, but it's probably comparable. According to this DOD table, the US Army currently has 499,814 troops. That's almost double the size of the German army! Also, comparing most European military equipment to US equipment is like comparing a 1988 Yugo with a brand new Dodge Viper. In general, their equipment is at least one generation behind ours.
That's a pretty staggering thought isn't it? Most of Europe, Canada, and lots of other countries had comparable military strength to the US around World War II. Since then, they've spent very little on defense, merely depending on the US for their survival. This allowed them to spend much more on social programs and other things. If they would have contributed their fair share to defense against the USSR, the US could have been even richer.
There are some big companies already using Linux though, and many others seriously considering a switch. They probably only need a few specific applications, or substitutes, before the economics makes the switch a no-brainer.
There was no absolute rule in Afghanistan before the Taliban took power. Since the Soviets pulled out in 1989 it was a period of civil war until 1996 when the Taliban gained power over most of the country. Also, calling them warlords isn't completely accurate, since they're no longer at war. Afghanistan is a very tribally oriented country, and tribal leaders have regularly held positions of power and influence in areas where their tribes were predominant. At least now the different tribes and "warlords" are resolving differences through diplomacy and negotiations rather than large scale warfare.
The Taliban have the worst record on womens' rights of anybody in recent times. Some tribes may have had similar policies in the past, but are now allowing women more rights to remain in favor of western countries.
Many women are working again and girls are going to school, allowed by those in power. Some women are still wearing burkas, but many are not. The situation for women is a huge improvement since the Taliban was ousted.
Pure BS! Things have been steadily improving since Afghanistan was liberated. Personally, I don't think the West is doing quite enough to help, but the people there are definitely better off.
While the new Hamid Karzai government has little control beyond Kabul, the fighting that plagued Afghanistan for the last several decades has largely stopped now.
In some cases, yes, because people were coerced, or forced at gunpoint to fight for the Taliban. However, the ones responsible for atrocities and repression are being held accountable and jailed.
They officially condemned it, but allowed it to go on if they got a share of profits and all the drugs went outside the country. Maybe people should stop buying heroin in Britain. And the CIA does not make money off drugs.
Pure BS! The only place the US currently uses mines is the DMZ separating North and South Korea. The mines in Afghanistan have been t
I support their right of free speech, and I think Indymedia should ignore the cease and desist offer.
However, Indymedia is definitely not a very important platform. They're mostly a source of conspiracy theories, shoddy research, half-truths, hate-mongering, and just plain bad journalism.
That's the funniest political comment on /. I've ever read!
Thanks.
Among our congressional delegation, there are 4 Democrats and 4 Republicans. One Republican (Jim Ramstad) could be considered somewhat liberal. On the other hand, one Democrat (Collin Peterson) is a conservative blue dog Democrat. The rest of the Republicans are very conservative, and the rest of the Democrats are very liberal.
Also, 4 of 5 statewide elected officials (Governor, Lt Gov, Secretary of State, and State Auditor) are conservative Republicans. Only our State Attorney General is a Democrat.
Besides, I haven't heard of a part of them that we didn't sign. We are one of the several dozen countries that are signatories, but probably have the best record prosecuting our own soldiers who violate the LOAC.
No kidding. You can tell /. is getting pretty bad when the submitters, editors, and most commenters don't read the article.
The submitter also said army personnel at risk (i.e. soldiers), but the Army has no plans to buy the Osprey.
Besides, the original post was about a Linux desktop. Very few desktop users ever need to modify kernel code, probably less than 1 out of 10,000.
Some grocery stores here in MN started using bio-degradable, corn-based plastic bags at the checkout over 10 years ago.
Are you kidding? They can't get any reliable numbers from the login statistics. I always register under a pseudonym like dfjghsdkfjbg and enter fake demographic data, usually a 90 year old female laborer from some 3rd world country in their highest income bracket. When the cookie expires I just create a new login. It's faster than trying to remember or find what username:password combination I used. Besides, I've seen dozens of them posted on
No, but requiring free logins doesn't generate any revenue.
He's admitted this, and that he hasn't had a drink in years.
This is pure speculation.
Who? Where? I would rather spend my time learning the actual languages spoken in places I visit. That way I'll learn a lot more about the the people and culture.
What does this have to do with economics?
You don't give me very much credit. Actually, Farsi and Latin are two languages I do want to learn, the latter for academic purposes only. I also want to learn at least one Native American language, probably Ojibwe or Dakota (I live less than a mile from the largest concentration of Dakota speakers). It's also not unlikely I'll learn Pashto (or Dari, Uzbek, Tajik, or Turkoman). Also quite possibly Serbo-Croatian or Macedonian.
I want to learn some of the languages from your list (French, German, Russian, Japanese, and Hebrew), but the others aren't high on my priority list. There's only so much time one can devote to language study.
Economics has little impact on the languages I study. I just like to learn the language of the places I travel. I didn't mention them in my previous post, but I also speak a little Czech and Hawaiian (not enough to be conversant, but more than the average tourist). Besides travel, the next language(s) I study will depend on books I want to read and research I want to do.
I find it very hard to believe Esperanto has its own culture or way of thinking. Any literature written in Esperanto can't be worth learning the language, but for its novelty value only.
On the other hand, I have no qualms about learning dead languages, like Latin or Sanskrit. There exist large bodies of literary and historical works in many dead languages that have yet to be translated or used in original research. That's the only reason I want to learn Latin.
I advocate learning real languages. I currently speak four languages (to one degree or another): English, Spanish, Korean, and Arabic. And I plan on learning more languages in the future.