Nothing strange about it at all. Take (for instance) China, which also has massive piracy of software, music, and movies, but is also kind of restrictive in some things.
Maybe pirated bad anime fandubs are just the new opiate of the masses?
THe traditional military solution would be when your base comes under mortar fire or the like would be to launch counterbattery fire.
And whatever civilians the mortar teams have been using as shields should make their peace with allah.
Typically, before the last three decades or so, most militaries would have done this as standard procedure and attributed the blame to the resultant civilian deaths to the "insurgents."
Look up what happened to the monastery of Monte Cassino in WW2. Google should be useful for that task too.
Everyone thinks that every little loophole they find in the rules that were put into place to keep war limited will only help their side, and we won't go back to the bad old days of WW2 where civilians were seen as legitimate targets and targeted by both sides.
Actually, firms like that do hire (and train) a lot of locals; I know this is the case in Nigeria.
The main gist of the article seems to be "The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation invests in oil companies, pharmaceutical companies, etc., and those are all the font of evil..." and relying on the modern American's quasi-religious belief that this is the case to make their point. It has enough anecdotes to make it appear as if it's proved its point, but the plural of anecdote
is not data.
The point regarding Iraq was to stop them before they managed to get an entrenched detterent, which North Korea already has.
You speak of South Korea... you realize, should war break out there, the US doesn't have any way of defending South Korea from the use of these weapons?
Just to give one example of an instance of something like this from the past, since someone asked... during WW2, the administration (Roosevelt, not Bush) threatened to pull the broadcast license of anyone who reported that the Soviet Union instead of Nazi Germany was responsible for the Katyn Forest massacre.
Today we know that the Soviets did it. (Although it's kind-of a moot point, as they were allies of Nazi Germany at the time, partitioning Poland between them.
Do a Google search on the keywords "Office of Wartime Information" and "Katyn Forest" for more information.
Plus, we get to pursue alternative energy a lot faster. California will be bruised but we'll come out of it even better off than Brazil.
No, you won't.
Look at what this tax really does: it's a tax on oil produced _in_ California.
SO someone producing oil at $ 40/bbl in CA and selling it at $ 50/bbl in CA gets to pay an extra tax.
BUT, a foreign extracting oil at $ 10/bbl and selling it at $ 60/bbl in CA... doesn't
have to pay this tax.
I'd also like to point out... Brazil does have an active domestic oil industry of their own. They're trying to achieve real energy independence, and apparently don't think they can do that by _exporting_ what oil industry they have to the Middle East. Unlike California.
Threads on slashdot are getting tedious these days.
If you don't use ogg, that's fine with me.
Why you (and about a dozen other people on this thread) feel the need to jump up and down and shout "NOONE USES OGG, NOONE WANTS OGG, GET OVER IT!" completely baffles me. It makes this thread look more like a stupid and poorly executed astroturf attempt than a real discussion of mp3 players.
Right now, as we speak, I could go down to the local Target, a nationwide department store chain not known for any special catering to the "fringe techie geek linux purist crowd" or whatever they're accusingly called on the modern slashdot, and have my choice of multiple flash music players that support ogg vorbis out of the box. They carry both iRiver and Samsung players that support the format and don't need any new firmware replacement like Rockbox to do so.
So why not tell me why _I_ should like this player when the one I own plays the files I have and this one doesn't? Because I'm not going to spend money on this thing based on what _you_ think the "average consumer" or some pointy haired boss is going to enjoy, I'm going to spend money on what _I_ am going to enjoy.
IMHO, you don't know what her brain would have looked like before she went through roughly a decade worth of non-treatment coupled with the occasional court-ordered attempt (and the one that was successful was not the first) to cause her to die of thirst.
I'm reminded of all of those "self-fulfilling prophecies" from the old Greek legends.
I once figured out a way to jury rig a chain lift in a stairwell shaft to get a 500lb electrical transformer to the roof rather than dragging it up the stairs, but that certainly doesn't make me an expert in electronic power management systems. Don't get me wrong, I firmly believe they can build these carriers and that they'll perform well. I just don't see how the brits being the first to figure out the best way to arrange the deck chairs does anything to demonstrate their technological ingenuity.
The angled flight deck was a significant improvement that allowed safer and better operations, especially with jet aircraft.
Oh, the RN was also the first organization to land a jet aircraft on a carrier.
(Do I have to mention the bit where the British independently invented the turbojet?)
And they also invented a lot of the automatic guidance equipment used to guide pilots to safe landings on carriers.
Their carriers in WW2 had armored steel flight decks during a time when most US carriers had wooden decks, and while this meant they carried less aircraft, they were also significantly less vulnerable to kamikaze attacks as a result. (And yes, they operated in the Pacific with those carriers).
Someone else has already mentioned the steam catapult.
The only way that war becomes "fair" is if both sides incur the same 'cost' of the war (monetary, soldier deaths, civilian deaths, etc.). If 33,773 [iraqbodycount.net] American soldiers or civillians died because of our involvement there, we'd be pulling our troops out as fast as we possibly could.
Or perhaps we'd start fighting the war the same way we did the last time we had immense casualties. We lost half a million military personnell in WW2, but in the later stages destroyed cities in the axis nations by firebombing, with massive loss of life among their civilian population.
(Note that I am not mentioning Hiroshima and Nagasaki, because they had a lot less casualties than Tokyo did).
Seriously, how much experience does France and England have with aircraft carriers of this size? None whatsoever from what I can tell. I'm deeply skeptical that they're going to magically find the means to reduce the personnel requirement by over 50%, least of all by making use of utterly untested technology. And on a warship no less! In a time of war I'd greatly prefer somewhat redundant personnel on board, rather than a ship being run by technology which has not been battle-tested.
The British invented the angled flight deck layout on modern carriers.
Following up to myself, I found the following statistics: California has 14,000 MW of hydroelectric capacity, 30 million people, and no new suitable sites. Quebec has 7 million people, 34,000 MW of hydroelectric capacity, and many unused sites (they're thinking of building more). I really doubt these numbers are the result of nationalization.
So all we have to do now is to nationalize our power industry, and we'd suddenly have the per-capita hydroelectric capacity that Quebec has?
Quebec has enourmous hydroelectric resources and a very sparse population. Saudi Arabia has the same sort of situation regarding oil. However, in neither case did the natural resources come about because of nationalization.
Hmm. You accuse me of wanting to restrict your speech. This is an ad-hominem attack; at no point
did I say you should be arrested and jailed for
what you believe. The bit about the TV stations being supporters of the Shah... it's unproven, and
it sounds like you're trying to change the subject.
First it was, "only the evil Americans would jam
the TV station," and now it's "you know, we really
shouldn't be cooperating with that TV station."
CNN are the people who admitted to censoring
various news broadcasts out of Iraq in the days
when Saddam was still in charge there, so he
wouldn't kick them out. I wouldn't be suprised
if they'd do the same for other middle eastern
dictators they needed to "keep access to."
I don't know if you've been following the news, but also, this week, student protests against the regime, by people who want democracy, and not the Shah back in power, were brutally suppressed by the government and what the press
has been calling "pro-government vigilantes,"
which are not vigilantes but in reality Syrians
and other Arabs hired by the government as
enforcers, because they don't even trust their own
people in the security apparatus anymore.
Given that set of events, the same week, and
the fact that the signals came from Havana, I think we can rule Guantanamo out for now.
I wouldn't be suprised if future jamming came
from the Cuban side of the border between Cuba
proper and Guantanamo; it would be a nice way of
utilizing all the useful idiots in the west.
It's suprising that everyone's so suprised to
find that the Cuban and Iranian governments have
been cooperating already for years. What's one more instance of cooperation in this case?
I would suggest that in your rush to blame
everything on the United States, and not even believe that one dictatorial regime (Cuba) would support another (Iran) you actually
share characteristics with some of the anticommunists of the 50's, who in their rush to combat communism wound up in bed with people like the Shah, or Ferdinand Marcos.
I mean, look at your use of the term "McCarthyite." It's functional use is for any conservative that argues back against a progressive. It's a stick the liberals have been
using against the conservatives for the past forty
years. By pontificating on behalf of the Cuban and
Iranian regimes (and the "it must have been the US
doing the jamming" counts as that, I think) you
run the risk of making all the same mistakes, and
winding up with the same fate: forty years from now the word "Progressive" may be similarly devoid
of meaning, except as a stick to beat people with.
You know, it occured to me that the TV
stations in question are broadcast from the
United States, and that this jamming has happened
at the exact same time that there has been major
unrest in Iran by people revolting against the
theocracy there. The US does not approve of the
Iranian theocracy; remember the "axis of evil"
speech? That the jamming happened when it did
seems to indicate that it was intentional, and was
to the benefit of our enemies. That you therefore
conclude that it was done by the US says a lot
more about you than it does the US.
I would instead direct your attention
here, and here. If Iran and Cuba have been working together, this suggests that the Cuban government really was the source of the jamming. If you
feel sympathies towards the Cuban government such
that you're unwilling to believe that they'd support the Mullahs, I suggest you reconsider them.
No, I don't think the X-33 was a prototype for this project. The technologies you want for a launcher (which accelerates) and a "cruiser" (which hangs around at one speed inside the atmosphere) are too dissimilar. Airbreathing is more useful for one, but at the expense of worse thermal control issues.
And neither one of these really want to use hydrogen as fuel.
The problem isn't that NASA is under the control of a beancounter. The problem is that they usually haven't been.
The X-33, at the time of cancellation, had already spent 50% more money than it was supposed to take to complete the damn thing, and couldn't have flown the flight envelope it was supposed to have. The tanks weren't working. And the empty space cost too much.
In each NASA launch program since the shuttle, there are a whole lot of unexamined assumptions. Like the use of hydrogen for fuel. Or the idea that performance is more important than operations. Until they start thinking otherwise, we'll never get a vehicle that flies often enough to learn anything about operations _with_.
It may be built fifty years after everyone stops laughing, but I suspect this will be after launch have dropped enough, and volume increaced enough, that there's a reason to stop laughing. At present, it looks like a space elevator is something that could only be built after it's made obsolete by something else.
Slashdot Mirror
Nothing strange about it at all. Take (for instance) China, which also has massive piracy of software, music, and movies, but is also kind of restrictive in some things.
Maybe pirated bad anime fandubs are just the new opiate of the masses?
THe traditional military solution would be when your base comes under mortar fire or the like would be to launch counterbattery fire.
And whatever civilians the mortar teams have been using as shields should make their peace with allah.
Typically, before the last three decades or so, most militaries would have done this as standard procedure and attributed the blame to the resultant civilian deaths to the "insurgents."
Look up what happened to the monastery of Monte Cassino in WW2. Google should be useful for that task too.
Everyone thinks that every little loophole they find in the rules that were put into place to keep war limited will only help their side, and we won't go back to the bad old days of WW2 where civilians were seen as legitimate targets and targeted by both sides.
Actually, firms like that do hire (and train) a lot of locals; I know this is the case in Nigeria.
The main gist of the article seems to be "The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation invests in oil companies, pharmaceutical companies, etc., and those are all the font of evil..." and relying on the modern American's quasi-religious belief that this is the case to make their point. It has enough anecdotes to make it appear as if it's proved its point, but the plural of anecdote is not data.
The point regarding Iraq was to stop them before they managed to get an entrenched detterent, which North Korea already has.
You speak of South Korea... you realize, should war break out there, the US doesn't have any way of defending South Korea from the use of these weapons?
If only Mohammed Atta et alia had made such a decision.
I was unaware that the current US educational system had anything to do with Montessori methods to begin with.
Just to give one example of an instance of something like this from the past, since someone asked... during WW2, the administration (Roosevelt, not Bush) threatened to pull the broadcast license of anyone who reported that the Soviet Union instead of Nazi Germany was responsible for the Katyn Forest massacre.
Today we know that the Soviets did it. (Although it's kind-of a moot point, as they were allies of Nazi Germany at the time, partitioning Poland between them.
Do a Google search on the keywords "Office of Wartime Information" and "Katyn Forest" for more information.
Congratulations on that.
I hear they're setting deep-water drilling records out there in the process too.
Plus, we get to pursue alternative energy a lot faster. California will be bruised but we'll come out of it even better off than Brazil. No, you won't. Look at what this tax really does: it's a tax on oil produced _in_ California. SO someone producing oil at $ 40/bbl in CA and selling it at $ 50/bbl in CA gets to pay an extra tax. BUT, a foreign extracting oil at $ 10/bbl and selling it at $ 60/bbl in CA... doesn't have to pay this tax. I'd also like to point out... Brazil does have an active domestic oil industry of their own. They're trying to achieve real energy independence, and apparently don't think they can do that by _exporting_ what oil industry they have to the Middle East. Unlike California.
Threads on slashdot are getting tedious these days.
If you don't use ogg, that's fine with me.
Why you (and about a dozen other people on this thread) feel the need to jump up and down and shout "NOONE USES OGG, NOONE WANTS OGG, GET OVER IT!" completely baffles me. It makes this thread look more like a stupid and poorly executed astroturf attempt than a real discussion of mp3 players.
Right now, as we speak, I could go down to the local Target, a nationwide department store chain not known for any special catering to the "fringe techie geek linux purist crowd" or whatever they're accusingly called on the modern slashdot, and have my choice of multiple flash music players that support ogg vorbis out of the box. They carry both iRiver and Samsung players that support the format and don't need any new firmware replacement like Rockbox to do so.
So why not tell me why _I_ should like this player when the one I own plays the files I have and this one doesn't? Because I'm not going to spend money on this thing based on what _you_ think the "average consumer" or some pointy haired boss is going to enjoy, I'm going to spend money on what _I_ am going to enjoy.
You're also forgetting snarky put-downs of weblogs written by _other people_ than the slashdot staff. It's hilarious.
IMHO, you don't know what her brain would have looked like before she went through roughly a decade worth of non-treatment coupled with the occasional court-ordered attempt (and the one that was successful was not the first) to cause her to die of thirst.
I'm reminded of all of those "self-fulfilling prophecies" from the old Greek legends.
I wonder if this means gnome is going to join the Horde.
The angled flight deck was a significant improvement that allowed safer and better operations, especially with jet aircraft.
Oh, the RN was also the first organization to land a jet aircraft on a carrier.
(Do I have to mention the bit where the British independently invented the turbojet?)
And they also invented a lot of the automatic guidance equipment used to guide pilots to safe landings on carriers.
Their carriers in WW2 had armored steel flight decks during a time when most US carriers had wooden decks, and while this meant they carried less aircraft, they were also significantly less vulnerable to kamikaze attacks as a result. (And yes, they operated in the Pacific with those carriers).
Someone else has already mentioned the steam catapult.
The British invented the angled flight deck layout on modern carriers.
I'm suprised noone's made this statement yet...
"We were negotiating with the Pentagon, we got a blue screen of death, it was the last straw..."
"When you're holding the Moon for ransom you tend to value stability in an applications platform."
I think I remember reading that some US forces in Afghanistan actually have these sorts of undergarments.
I don't remember the details, though, other than that silver was interwoven with whatever other material was in the clothing.
Following up to myself, I found the following statistics: California has 14,000 MW of hydroelectric capacity, 30 million people, and no new suitable sites. Quebec has 7 million people, 34,000 MW of hydroelectric capacity, and many unused sites (they're thinking of building more). I really doubt these numbers are the result of nationalization.
So all we have to do now is to nationalize our power industry, and we'd suddenly have the per-capita hydroelectric capacity that Quebec has?
Quebec has enourmous hydroelectric resources and a very sparse population. Saudi Arabia has the same sort of situation regarding oil. However, in neither case did the natural resources come about because of nationalization.
Hmm. You accuse me of wanting to restrict your speech. This is an ad-hominem attack; at no point did I say you should be arrested and jailed for what you believe. The bit about the TV stations being supporters of the Shah... it's unproven, and it sounds like you're trying to change the subject. First it was, "only the evil Americans would jam the TV station," and now it's "you know, we really shouldn't be cooperating with that TV station."
CNN are the people who admitted to censoring various news broadcasts out of Iraq in the days when Saddam was still in charge there, so he wouldn't kick them out. I wouldn't be suprised if they'd do the same for other middle eastern dictators they needed to "keep access to."
I don't know if you've been following the news, but also, this week, student protests against the regime, by people who want democracy, and not the Shah back in power, were brutally suppressed by the government and what the press has been calling "pro-government vigilantes," which are not vigilantes but in reality Syrians and other Arabs hired by the government as enforcers, because they don't even trust their own people in the security apparatus anymore.
Given that set of events, the same week, and the fact that the signals came from Havana, I think we can rule Guantanamo out for now.
I wouldn't be suprised if future jamming came from the Cuban side of the border between Cuba proper and Guantanamo; it would be a nice way of utilizing all the useful idiots in the west.
It's suprising that everyone's so suprised to find that the Cuban and Iranian governments have been cooperating already for years. What's one more instance of cooperation in this case?
I would suggest that in your rush to blame everything on the United States, and not even believe that one dictatorial regime (Cuba) would support another (Iran) you actually share characteristics with some of the anticommunists of the 50's, who in their rush to combat communism wound up in bed with people like the Shah, or Ferdinand Marcos.
I mean, look at your use of the term "McCarthyite." It's functional use is for any conservative that argues back against a progressive. It's a stick the liberals have been using against the conservatives for the past forty years. By pontificating on behalf of the Cuban and Iranian regimes (and the "it must have been the US doing the jamming" counts as that, I think) you run the risk of making all the same mistakes, and winding up with the same fate: forty years from now the word "Progressive" may be similarly devoid of meaning, except as a stick to beat people with.
You know, it occured to me that the TV stations in question are broadcast from the United States, and that this jamming has happened at the exact same time that there has been major unrest in Iran by people revolting against the theocracy there. The US does not approve of the Iranian theocracy; remember the "axis of evil" speech? That the jamming happened when it did seems to indicate that it was intentional, and was to the benefit of our enemies. That you therefore conclude that it was done by the US says a lot more about you than it does the US.
I would instead direct your attention here, and here. If Iran and Cuba have been working together, this suggests that the Cuban government really was the source of the jamming. If you feel sympathies towards the Cuban government such that you're unwilling to believe that they'd support the Mullahs, I suggest you reconsider them.
No, I don't think the X-33 was a prototype for this project. The technologies you want for a launcher (which accelerates) and a "cruiser" (which hangs around at one speed inside the atmosphere) are
too dissimilar. Airbreathing is more useful for one,
but at the expense of worse thermal control issues.
And neither one of these really want to use hydrogen
as fuel.
The problem isn't that NASA is under the control
of a beancounter. The problem is that they usually
haven't been.
The X-33, at the time of cancellation, had already spent 50% more money than it was supposed
to take to complete the damn thing, and couldn't
have flown the flight envelope it was supposed
to have. The tanks weren't working. And the
empty space cost too much.
In each NASA launch program since the shuttle,
there are a whole lot of unexamined assumptions.
Like the use of hydrogen for fuel. Or the idea that performance is more important than operations. Until they start thinking otherwise,
we'll never get a vehicle that flies often enough
to learn anything about operations _with_.
It may be built fifty years after everyone
stops laughing, but I suspect this will be after
launch have dropped enough, and volume increaced
enough, that there's a reason to stop laughing.
At present, it looks like a space elevator is
something that could only be built after it's
made obsolete by something else.