All disputation of the count of known nukes and mega-ICBM systems is irrelevant. It doesn't matter whether a country has a damn nuke or not: all it needs is a launch platform capable of sending one over here. In case you haven't noticed, there's enough unaccounted for fissionable material out there to make a very plausible threat. Almost anyone who can scape up six or seven figures can deliver it air mail.
Here's the relevant scenario. Our friends the Serbs (or Iranians, or Larry Ellis) invest between $100,000 and $2M in a sounding rocket, which is available over the counter and can deliver payloads from 200 lbs. (your suitcase bomb) to a ton or so. The low end rockets would need to launch from somewhere close, but they don't require a lot of room or facilities. The top end models can achieve low earth orbit. Do you really think that Milosovic or Hussein would hesitate to launch that one lone missle as their weary countrymen finally rise up to throw them out? What does Larry do when the Supreme Court finally gives Bill full license to crush him? For the $20M that was spent for a Soviet space joy ride, at least four missles could reach the US from almost anywhere.
This is the threat to stop. It doesn't even matter whether the other guy has a warhead; do you really want to call his bluff? Would we support Kuwait, or Israel, or Austria if our involvement might result in taking out New York? If Mexico says to loosen up immigration or else, would we be willing to make a nuclear hole on our own border? Even a kiloton of conventional explosive or nerve gas will kill thousands if properly placed (lobbed onto a nuclear reactor, perhaps). A thin missle defense puts the cost of this out of the reach of the madmen and rogue states.
A lot of cops have had their lives saved by bulletproof vests, even though the drug czars can afford RPGs which could render them irrelevant. It is just plain nuts to think that a defense against cheap thuggery somehow lowers safety.
The reason that ads don't raise money for Web sites is that advertisers want to hold the Net to a whole new standard: proven ad readership. They don't do this for any other medium. Know what I do with the 15 full glossy/frequently stinky pages that appear in my favorite rags before the table of contents? I rip them out and trash 'em without a glance. Know how long it takes to watch the typical Fox hour show if you zap the commercials? About 45 minutes. Those advertisers paid for my eyeballs, and I never even know their names, much less their pitches.
So what is it with the Web? There are enough click counts that we know people go through the sites; that's at least as good as a Neilsen or Arbitron rating. Why does anyone give a rat's ass when most of us skip the commercials just like we do in any other medium? If they just ASSUMED that everyone reads the ads on Slashdot like they assume for the ads in Rolling Stone, they would happily shovel the same cash at the Web.
But if it happens, it might make things a whole lot worse. Maybe all of this wiseass punditry is just going to have to be a labor of love instead of a career. I doubt that will decrease the supply of wiseass pundits (look around). After all, there's still more poetry than anyone can hope to read, and it has never offered anyone a living. Maybe the reason the boutique zines are good is because they will never make it commercially. If volunteer labor can build Linux, we might just be able to have good Open Source commentary/literature/critique.
Slashdot Mirror
Here's the relevant scenario. Our friends the Serbs (or Iranians, or Larry Ellis) invest between $100,000 and $2M in a sounding rocket, which is available over the counter and can deliver payloads from 200 lbs. (your suitcase bomb) to a ton or so. The low end rockets would need to launch from somewhere close, but they don't require a lot of room or facilities. The top end models can achieve low earth orbit. Do you really think that Milosovic or Hussein would hesitate to launch that one lone missle as their weary countrymen finally rise up to throw them out? What does Larry do when the Supreme Court finally gives Bill full license to crush him? For the $20M that was spent for a Soviet space joy ride, at least four missles could reach the US from almost anywhere.
This is the threat to stop. It doesn't even matter whether the other guy has a warhead; do you really want to call his bluff? Would we support Kuwait, or Israel, or Austria if our involvement might result in taking out New York? If Mexico says to loosen up immigration or else, would we be willing to make a nuclear hole on our own border? Even a kiloton of conventional explosive or nerve gas will kill thousands if properly placed (lobbed onto a nuclear reactor, perhaps). A thin missle defense puts the cost of this out of the reach of the madmen and rogue states.
A lot of cops have had their lives saved by bulletproof vests, even though the drug czars can afford RPGs which could render them irrelevant. It is just plain nuts to think that a defense against cheap thuggery somehow lowers safety.
So what is it with the Web? There are enough click counts that we know people go through the sites; that's at least as good as a Neilsen or Arbitron rating. Why does anyone give a rat's ass when most of us skip the commercials just like we do in any other medium? If they just ASSUMED that everyone reads the ads on Slashdot like they assume for the ads in Rolling Stone, they would happily shovel the same cash at the Web.
But if it happens, it might make things a whole lot worse. Maybe all of this wiseass punditry is just going to have to be a labor of love instead of a career. I doubt that will decrease the supply of wiseass pundits (look around). After all, there's still more poetry than anyone can hope to read, and it has never offered anyone a living. Maybe the reason the boutique zines are good is because they will never make it commercially. If volunteer labor can build Linux, we might just be able to have good Open Source commentary/literature/critique.