ZOMG you mean he voted against protecting us from the evil terrorists?!!11!1!2onetyeleven
Sounds like a horrible place to live, what with all the personal liberties and rights being vocally upheld.
Seriously, though. The 'everyone should own a firearm' law isn't enforced. It's more of a law to visibly protest anti-gun laws and show how it effects crime statistics. Crime is down, by the way, when adjusted by population. It's a fun case though, since the population has expanded quite a bit since the law was enacted. Anti-gun groups point out that crime is up without revealing the fact that the population has increased severalfold since then.
At any rate, it's a blue law, and shouldn't be on the books. If you aren't going to enforce it, then it shouldn't be there. Requiring people to own firearms is just as big a violation of their rights as outlawing their ability to own them, so I'm against it.
People just like me? Perhaps on a local level, and moreso in rural areas. On the federal level, all the positions of real power (those at the top who make, judge, and enforce laws) are decidedly unlike me and the majority of people under them. Have you looked at the backgrounds for most of the higher-ups recently? How many recent senators, representatives, or presidents can you name that ever in their life worked at a resteraunt or doing manual labor to put themselves through college? Most of these people were born with more to work with than the majority of the people under them will ever develop.
Joe Tax Auditor #100059242135 might be just like me, but those are cog positions. They have minimal power to make any far-reaching change. I suppose if you count every federal employee, then yes, the government is by and large made up of people like me. Face the facts, though: The ones that matter aren't.
So, wait, his off-duty speeding is somehow more legitimate than when I speed? Explain the reasoning there. Is it somehow safer for him to speed? Do the laws of physics bend a little for cops and make a car driven by a cop at 75 MPH do the same damage as a car crashing at 55 MPH with a civvie behind the wheel?
"Because you can" is no more a valid excuse for police to break the law than it is for me. The difference is that they can chose to enforce the rules when and if they choose. Speeding on the job, when required, is overlooked because it is usually required to perform a task that benefits the public safety. Driving around at 20 MPH over the limit just because they can is endangering the public safety. That's why we have speed limits to begin with. If they want to drive like bats out of hell even when it isn't needed, perhaps they should push to do away with speed limits.
You're right, though. Police are people too, not evil overlords bent on dominating everyone else. As such, they should be held to the same standards as the rest of us.
No kidding. I was listening to the news the other night, and evidently there is a movement in Arizona (of all places) to ban mud flaps with outlines of nude females, or obscene language. My head nearly exploded.
People need to come to grips with the fact that the world is not a happy, shiny, non-offensive place where everybody gets free cupcakes and rainbows. People can and will say and do things that you dislike. Unless it is actually causing you REAL harm, that's within their rights. If you don't like it, grow a pair and ask them to stop. If they don't? Well, you can either leave, ignore it, or turn around and do the same to them. This trend of banning the most minutely offensive material is BS. I'm not telling them that they can't drive around with "My Kid Is An Honors Suckup at XXXX High" bumper stickers, so they should stop trying to prevent me from expressing what I want.
As for this guy, well, IMO he's in the wrong. Why? Because, if nothing else, he wasn't doing his job when he was getting paid to. I'm also well aware of the fact that holds true for pretty much everyone else, as well, but let's face it: our employers aren't paying us to troll slashdot, they're paying for us to do the job we signed up for. The fact that this guy was spanking it was just enough reason for his boss to axe him, and that was after warning him. I would imagine the same is true for any other sites -- even religious sites. Freedom of speech / religion isn't the same as 'freedom to fuck off at work and get paid for it'.
Hey, I've watched movies just because Bruce Campbell was in them. I'm not sure how much he makes per movie, but I'm pretty sure it isn't anywhere near 12M.
Well, personally, I'm a night owl anyway. I have a hard time functioning before noon, and my best sleep falls somewhere between 0600 - 1000.
As for doing things late instead of a little early? I prefer it that way because Murphy's law is a bastard. I'd rather know that if the planets align just right and the increased gravitational influence just so happens to cause Jim Bob to trip and take out one of the core office switches with his face while swapping UPS batteries, I've got a little time to get on the horn and have a replacement sent out before users start coming in and complaining about where their youtube^H^H^H^H^H^H^H outlook went.
If I may ask......why the hell are you a scientologist? I mean, the secret is out. You're on/., you're bound to know about Op Clambake. Why on earth would you still be following them? Once you know what they aren't willing to divulge up front, it becomes a painfully obvious ponzi scheme.
Not intending to be a jerk here, just genuinely curious as to what would motivate you to stay with them.
Yes, we know the exact origins of Scientology. Do a little research. We know that it is made up. The guy that made it up admitted to it more than once. If scientology is a religion, then all people calling themselves Jedi should be subject to the same tax breaks and religious coverage. They're about equally valid.
Funnily enough, no, AP bullets are not illegal to own. Just illegal to manufacture by your average Joe. And illegal to import, IIRC. And maybe illegal for a manufacturer to sell to civvies. Of course, it's a lot more complicated than that -- the definition of AP is enough to make a lot of people question what the law does/doesn't cover. It's complicated, but to the best of my knowledge, no, it isn't illegal to simply possess AP ammo.
Of course, I don't work for the BATFE, and this post is hardly long enough to contain all the details anyway. My real point is to go look at the laws. You'll be surprised what is legal, and what silly things aren't.
Don't blame the bomb squad, I'm pretty sure they knew what they were dealing with as soon as they got on-site and had a look.
Blame the idiot(s) that saw what is obviously a cheap-ass sign in an odd spot and went "ITZ DA BOMZ OMG!", and the media outlets that turned around and sensationalized it.
I wouldn't put it past the bomb squad to blow them up, but hey...you don't join a bomb squad unless you _like_ watching things blow up, so any excuse to make something go pop works, you know?
You make it sound like he really has a choice. AFAIK all of the land on earth upon which one could sustain themselves has been claimed by one government or another. There are arguably a few places you could go where the government claiming the land would be too busy to come after you if you didn't make too much noise, but that's a big if. The only other option is to drop off the scope completely: Become homeless, have no job, and beg. That's even more of a non-option.
It is in the interests of governments across the world to ensure that there aren't any places for people to go do their own thing. If you don't believe this, please explain why there are dozens of uninhabited, almost completely barren Pacific islands that are claimed by the US alone.
This reeks of pandering to the audience. She's already shown that she is interested in taking the peoples' ability to make decisions for themselves away from them. I mean, look at the whole game thing with Jack-o and crew. If she doesn't think we should be allowed to play the games we want, well, I sincerely doubt she honestly believes that we should be allowed to manage our private details without supervision either.
Not to mention her stance on firearms...
Hillary is about as likely to get my vote as Bush was in the last election, which is to say not at all. We really need a 'toss these jokers and run up new candidates' box on ballots. I'm tired of having to choose the lesser of two evils/idiots.
Most snipers do work in pairs, but not both as snipers. One acts as a spotter, the other does the actual shooting. Even in cases where two snipers are firing at the same time, I sincerely doubt they'll be able to reliably time their shots to the point where it would actually confuse a robot, unless the robot was pretty crappy to begin with. Also, there's the fact that they'd have to time their shots so the sound arrived at the target at the same instance. Depending on range and orientation, that might be a nice trick. It's not as easy as firing at the same instant.
I think Judge Wells sees what is going on and is giving SCO pretty much whatever they want, just to make sure they've got no grounds to appeal when he slaps them down (hopefully soon). Giving them all the rope they want to hang themselves with, as it were. Let's hope it works.
Um, wow. That's a singularly _bad idea_ for any sort of mobile setup. Hell, it's not even all that hot for a sustained setup, unless you're making ethanol frequently and stockpiling it.
First off... $1,500 for a still? You're either running several stills, or a REALLY large and expensive one. Or maybe you just opted for gold piping. You can make a workable reflux still for under $200.
Secondly... Corn is one of the most asstastic ethanol crops around. Seriously. Unless you live in Iowa, or elsewhere in the corn belt, where the stuff is EVERYWHERE, you can probably find something better to use. If you're growing it yourself, you'll want something more efficient. You still won't be able to last a long time on what you can grow, anyway.
SVO is a much better solution, IMO. No, you won't be producing it, but the effort involved in filtering it is less than distilling ethanol by far. Getting WVO is pretty easy, and if you happen to drive a diesel car, then it wouldn't be a huge issue to keep 3-4 30 or 55 gallon drums on hand and cycle them. Once a month you go out and gather oil from your sources, start filtering it. Fill a drum. Take precautions to make sure it doesn't go rancid in the near future. Use the oldest drum as your filling supply for the car.
Hurricane hits? Well, make sure your drums are secure, and that your generator setup is protected. You have enough fuel there for quite a while, and rigging a generator to run on SVO should be about the same as rigging a car engine. Just make sure you heat the oil. If you run out of fuel, switching back to regular diesel won't be an issue at all, unlike a lot of ethanol/gas setups. It's also a hell of a lot more portable than your idea, and a lot more workable when things are actually broken. I wouldn't want to be gathering my oil after a hurricane, though...
If you're looking for longer term supplies for being off the grid (which the OP isn't), wind, solar, and hydro are good choices (depending on where you are). You'll need a battery bank for power storage overnight and lull periods, and a generator setup for high power loads and long-term lulls is always a good idea, as well.
On the contrary. Being recognized by other countries is a major part of really BEING a country. I could declare that the land I own is a seperate country today, and you know what would happen? Probably not much, until the US government noticed I wasn't paying taxes. Then they'd get ticked off and send someone to arrest me. Assuming I resisted, I'd be taken by force. I could raise all the stink I wanted about my country being invaded, blah blah blah, but no other country would give a crap. Without the recognition of other countries, and the threat of those other countries imposing a penalty on someone attacking Sealand, his claim is utterly worthless when it is finally challenged.
If you can't defend your claim against all that attack you, then you need other countries to support you. That's the way this works. Nobody from the UN is going to step and and do dick in regards to Sealand. Sealand isn't even an island -- it's a concrete and steel structure that, IIRC, is built up from the seafloor. There is no land there. If it is an island, then every oil platform is as well.
The _only_ reason that Sealand is still around is because it would be too much of a pain to tear it down. As soon as something happens that actually makes news and paints sealand in a bad light, the UK government will send out a demo team and blow it up just like every other sea platform they built during WW2. Nobody will do crap about it, and the creep who has been sort-of living there will probably pitch a fit and be ignored.
Personally, I hope somebody does move in and overthrow the guy. From everything I've heard, he's a real jerk anyway.
Well, the poles tend to see a lot of magnetic activity, for obvious reasons. Given this, I'd say that if you want the least effects, the equatorial regions are where to be.
Having said that, I'd like to point out that (due to the scale of these things) they're global events. If a big flare heads our way, it could cause global disruptions. A big flare could effectively disrupt global radio communications, as well as wipe out multiple sattelites. Power grid hits are also a possibility.
If you are thinking about heading for greener pastures to avoid this thing, my advice to you is not to bother. If you're REALLY worried, get some power filtering equipment/UPSes and a backup generator.
If you aren't worried...well, I have it on good authority that (if the weather is right) being out on the water during these events can be very spectacular. I had a relative who was out on one of the great lakes during calm weather, and according to him the aurora was spectacular. The smooth water reflected the lights overhead. Personally, I plan on heading north to see the show.
Okay, if you've captured an entire cell to cross-check stories against, certain methods of torture may yeild some results. I'll admit that. On one person, torture is still pretty worthless, though. I don't know enough about the breakdown of the people we're torturing to draw any sort of meaningful conclusion about whether or not this is what is going on.
As to your first point, I think I can counter it quite simply: How do we know you aren't a terrorist? How does the government? Realistically, nobody but you (and possibly your wife/kids) know that. Perhaps your family is really a terror cell? Well, their goes their reliability.
If the government can PROVE that the detainees are terrorists, and it is a situation where they might get some good intel (such as the capture of an entire cell), then go for it. Torture them. I really don't care.
The burden of proof is on the government. That's the big thing that keeps police and enforcement agencies in check. Otherwise, one abusive person in a position of power could effectively lock up whoever he likes for as long as he likes. This has been a big problem with governments in the past, and it was one of the first issues addressed in the founding of this country. I happen to beleive in that.
Oh, as a final note, don't try to pull out the 'enemy combatant' BS, either. Unless they're uniformed or visibly bearing arms against our citizens or armed forces, they aren't combatants. Otherwise, you could be labeled one just as easy as you could be called a terrorist, and that doesn't fly.
I was on the Alpha test for that, and it did look pretty fun. The alpha test was watching the AI blow itself to bits with others, so I didn't really get to sample the gameplay. Looked like it had promise, but I never followed up. It'd certainly be worth the cash if it was released at the same price as Uplink was initially.
Here, let me pick apart the major points of your short troll:
1: The problem here is that these people, by and large, have not been proven to be terrorists. How would you like it if you were randomly grabbed off the street, called a murder, and thrown in prison? Here in the US, we used to believe that people were innocent until proven guilty. Obviously you don't.
2: Torture is not an effective means of getting reliable intel from people, despite what TV has told you. Torture IS very good at getting people to do what you want them to do. While the second statement may appear to counter the first, it doesn't. Torture attempts to force compliance through pain, threat of death, or extreme discomfort. When successful, the victim will do whatever they think you want, if it means you will quit torturing them. This includes signing false confessions, even admitting to things they know are untrue. If tortured enough (and HERE's a classic example) you can get someone to admit that 1+1=3. If you know enough beforehand to catch false statements and continue torturing the victim until you get a reliable answer, then you basically know the answer beforehand anyway. If you don't, then how do you know when to stop? The first answer may be unreliable, and so may the third, fifth, 86th, whatever. If they DO give you the correct information at some point, how do you know?
You'd want to be able to flip it on the fly for OS updates. Otherwise, you're looking at pretty routine downtime -- which may or may not be an issue for you.
You have your l33t ninja with his army of zombie Windows boxes......but how do they stack up to the *nix pirates, and their FTPs on the seven seas of the intarwebs? It's the classic clashes, modernized. Who has the REAL Ultimate Power?
Slashdot Mirror
ZOMG you mean he voted against protecting us from the evil terrorists?!!11!1!2onetyeleven
Sounds like a horrible place to live, what with all the personal liberties and rights being vocally upheld.
Seriously, though. The 'everyone should own a firearm' law isn't enforced. It's more of a law to visibly protest anti-gun laws and show how it effects crime statistics. Crime is down, by the way, when adjusted by population. It's a fun case though, since the population has expanded quite a bit since the law was enacted. Anti-gun groups point out that crime is up without revealing the fact that the population has increased severalfold since then.
At any rate, it's a blue law, and shouldn't be on the books. If you aren't going to enforce it, then it shouldn't be there. Requiring people to own firearms is just as big a violation of their rights as outlawing their ability to own them, so I'm against it.
People just like me? Perhaps on a local level, and moreso in rural areas. On the federal level, all the positions of real power (those at the top who make, judge, and enforce laws) are decidedly unlike me and the majority of people under them. Have you looked at the backgrounds for most of the higher-ups recently? How many recent senators, representatives, or presidents can you name that ever in their life worked at a resteraunt or doing manual labor to put themselves through college? Most of these people were born with more to work with than the majority of the people under them will ever develop.
Joe Tax Auditor #100059242135 might be just like me, but those are cog positions. They have minimal power to make any far-reaching change. I suppose if you count every federal employee, then yes, the government is by and large made up of people like me. Face the facts, though: The ones that matter aren't.
So, wait, his off-duty speeding is somehow more legitimate than when I speed? Explain the reasoning there. Is it somehow safer for him to speed? Do the laws of physics bend a little for cops and make a car driven by a cop at 75 MPH do the same damage as a car crashing at 55 MPH with a civvie behind the wheel?
"Because you can" is no more a valid excuse for police to break the law than it is for me. The difference is that they can chose to enforce the rules when and if they choose. Speeding on the job, when required, is overlooked because it is usually required to perform a task that benefits the public safety. Driving around at 20 MPH over the limit just because they can is endangering the public safety. That's why we have speed limits to begin with. If they want to drive like bats out of hell even when it isn't needed, perhaps they should push to do away with speed limits.
You're right, though. Police are people too, not evil overlords bent on dominating everyone else. As such, they should be held to the same standards as the rest of us.
No kidding. I was listening to the news the other night, and evidently there is a movement in Arizona (of all places) to ban mud flaps with outlines of nude females, or obscene language. My head nearly exploded.
People need to come to grips with the fact that the world is not a happy, shiny, non-offensive place where everybody gets free cupcakes and rainbows. People can and will say and do things that you dislike. Unless it is actually causing you REAL harm, that's within their rights. If you don't like it, grow a pair and ask them to stop. If they don't? Well, you can either leave, ignore it, or turn around and do the same to them. This trend of banning the most minutely offensive material is BS. I'm not telling them that they can't drive around with "My Kid Is An Honors Suckup at XXXX High" bumper stickers, so they should stop trying to prevent me from expressing what I want.
As for this guy, well, IMO he's in the wrong. Why? Because, if nothing else, he wasn't doing his job when he was getting paid to. I'm also well aware of the fact that holds true for pretty much everyone else, as well, but let's face it: our employers aren't paying us to troll slashdot, they're paying for us to do the job we signed up for. The fact that this guy was spanking it was just enough reason for his boss to axe him, and that was after warning him. I would imagine the same is true for any other sites -- even religious sites. Freedom of speech / religion isn't the same as 'freedom to fuck off at work and get paid for it'.
Hey, I've watched movies just because Bruce Campbell was in them. I'm not sure how much he makes per movie, but I'm pretty sure it isn't anywhere near 12M.
Well, personally, I'm a night owl anyway. I have a hard time functioning before noon, and my best sleep falls somewhere between 0600 - 1000.
As for doing things late instead of a little early? I prefer it that way because Murphy's law is a bastard. I'd rather know that if the planets align just right and the increased gravitational influence just so happens to cause Jim Bob to trip and take out one of the core office switches with his face while swapping UPS batteries, I've got a little time to get on the horn and have a replacement sent out before users start coming in and complaining about where their youtube^H^H^H^H^H^H^H outlook went.
If I may ask... ...why the hell are you a scientologist? I mean, the secret is out. You're on /., you're bound to know about Op Clambake. Why on earth would you still be following them? Once you know what they aren't willing to divulge up front, it becomes a painfully obvious ponzi scheme.
Not intending to be a jerk here, just genuinely curious as to what would motivate you to stay with them.
Um, what?
Yes, we know the exact origins of Scientology. Do a little research. We know that it is made up. The guy that made it up admitted to it more than once. If scientology is a religion, then all people calling themselves Jedi should be subject to the same tax breaks and religious coverage. They're about equally valid.
Wow. That's frightening. I think I'd rather take my chances with a bomb than risk them touching one.
Funnily enough, no, AP bullets are not illegal to own. Just illegal to manufacture by your average Joe. And illegal to import, IIRC. And maybe illegal for a manufacturer to sell to civvies. Of course, it's a lot more complicated than that -- the definition of AP is enough to make a lot of people question what the law does/doesn't cover. It's complicated, but to the best of my knowledge, no, it isn't illegal to simply possess AP ammo.
Of course, I don't work for the BATFE, and this post is hardly long enough to contain all the details anyway. My real point is to go look at the laws. You'll be surprised what is legal, and what silly things aren't.
Don't blame the bomb squad, I'm pretty sure they knew what they were dealing with as soon as they got on-site and had a look.
Blame the idiot(s) that saw what is obviously a cheap-ass sign in an odd spot and went "ITZ DA BOMZ OMG!", and the media outlets that turned around and sensationalized it.
I wouldn't put it past the bomb squad to blow them up, but hey...you don't join a bomb squad unless you _like_ watching things blow up, so any excuse to make something go pop works, you know?
"Agreeing" to be governed?
You make it sound like he really has a choice. AFAIK all of the land on earth upon which one could sustain themselves has been claimed by one government or another. There are arguably a few places you could go where the government claiming the land would be too busy to come after you if you didn't make too much noise, but that's a big if. The only other option is to drop off the scope completely: Become homeless, have no job, and beg. That's even more of a non-option.
It is in the interests of governments across the world to ensure that there aren't any places for people to go do their own thing. If you don't believe this, please explain why there are dozens of uninhabited, almost completely barren Pacific islands that are claimed by the US alone.
Ever heard of a 'keylogger'?
This reeks of pandering to the audience. She's already shown that she is interested in taking the peoples' ability to make decisions for themselves away from them. I mean, look at the whole game thing with Jack-o and crew. If she doesn't think we should be allowed to play the games we want, well, I sincerely doubt she honestly believes that we should be allowed to manage our private details without supervision either.
Not to mention her stance on firearms...
Hillary is about as likely to get my vote as Bush was in the last election, which is to say not at all. We really need a 'toss these jokers and run up new candidates' box on ballots. I'm tired of having to choose the lesser of two evils/idiots.
Most snipers do work in pairs, but not both as snipers. One acts as a spotter, the other does the actual shooting. Even in cases where two snipers are firing at the same time, I sincerely doubt they'll be able to reliably time their shots to the point where it would actually confuse a robot, unless the robot was pretty crappy to begin with. Also, there's the fact that they'd have to time their shots so the sound arrived at the target at the same instance. Depending on range and orientation, that might be a nice trick. It's not as easy as firing at the same instant.
I think Judge Wells sees what is going on and is giving SCO pretty much whatever they want, just to make sure they've got no grounds to appeal when he slaps them down (hopefully soon). Giving them all the rope they want to hang themselves with, as it were. Let's hope it works.
Um, wow. That's a singularly _bad idea_ for any sort of mobile setup. Hell, it's not even all that hot for a sustained setup, unless you're making ethanol frequently and stockpiling it.
First off... $1,500 for a still? You're either running several stills, or a REALLY large and expensive one. Or maybe you just opted for gold piping. You can make a workable reflux still for under $200.
Secondly... Corn is one of the most asstastic ethanol crops around. Seriously. Unless you live in Iowa, or elsewhere in the corn belt, where the stuff is EVERYWHERE, you can probably find something better to use. If you're growing it yourself, you'll want something more efficient. You still won't be able to last a long time on what you can grow, anyway.
SVO is a much better solution, IMO. No, you won't be producing it, but the effort involved in filtering it is less than distilling ethanol by far. Getting WVO is pretty easy, and if you happen to drive a diesel car, then it wouldn't be a huge issue to keep 3-4 30 or 55 gallon drums on hand and cycle them. Once a month you go out and gather oil from your sources, start filtering it. Fill a drum. Take precautions to make sure it doesn't go rancid in the near future. Use the oldest drum as your filling supply for the car.
Hurricane hits? Well, make sure your drums are secure, and that your generator setup is protected. You have enough fuel there for quite a while, and rigging a generator to run on SVO should be about the same as rigging a car engine. Just make sure you heat the oil. If you run out of fuel, switching back to regular diesel won't be an issue at all, unlike a lot of ethanol/gas setups. It's also a hell of a lot more portable than your idea, and a lot more workable when things are actually broken. I wouldn't want to be gathering my oil after a hurricane, though...
If you're looking for longer term supplies for being off the grid (which the OP isn't), wind, solar, and hydro are good choices (depending on where you are). You'll need a battery bank for power storage overnight and lull periods, and a generator setup for high power loads and long-term lulls is always a good idea, as well.
On the contrary. Being recognized by other countries is a major part of really BEING a country. I could declare that the land I own is a seperate country today, and you know what would happen? Probably not much, until the US government noticed I wasn't paying taxes. Then they'd get ticked off and send someone to arrest me. Assuming I resisted, I'd be taken by force. I could raise all the stink I wanted about my country being invaded, blah blah blah, but no other country would give a crap. Without the recognition of other countries, and the threat of those other countries imposing a penalty on someone attacking Sealand, his claim is utterly worthless when it is finally challenged.
If you can't defend your claim against all that attack you, then you need other countries to support you. That's the way this works. Nobody from the UN is going to step and and do dick in regards to Sealand. Sealand isn't even an island -- it's a concrete and steel structure that, IIRC, is built up from the seafloor. There is no land there. If it is an island, then every oil platform is as well.
The _only_ reason that Sealand is still around is because it would be too much of a pain to tear it down. As soon as something happens that actually makes news and paints sealand in a bad light, the UK government will send out a demo team and blow it up just like every other sea platform they built during WW2. Nobody will do crap about it, and the creep who has been sort-of living there will probably pitch a fit and be ignored.
Personally, I hope somebody does move in and overthrow the guy. From everything I've heard, he's a real jerk anyway.
Well, the poles tend to see a lot of magnetic activity, for obvious reasons. Given this, I'd say that if you want the least effects, the equatorial regions are where to be.
Having said that, I'd like to point out that (due to the scale of these things) they're global events. If a big flare heads our way, it could cause global disruptions. A big flare could effectively disrupt global radio communications, as well as wipe out multiple sattelites. Power grid hits are also a possibility.
If you are thinking about heading for greener pastures to avoid this thing, my advice to you is not to bother. If you're REALLY worried, get some power filtering equipment/UPSes and a backup generator.
If you aren't worried...well, I have it on good authority that (if the weather is right) being out on the water during these events can be very spectacular. I had a relative who was out on one of the great lakes during calm weather, and according to him the aurora was spectacular. The smooth water reflected the lights overhead. Personally, I plan on heading north to see the show.
Remind me not to argue things before breakfast. I doubt my previous post even counts as English. Oops.
Okay, if you've captured an entire cell to cross-check stories against, certain methods of torture may yeild some results. I'll admit that. On one person, torture is still pretty worthless, though. I don't know enough about the breakdown of the people we're torturing to draw any sort of meaningful conclusion about whether or not this is what is going on.
As to your first point, I think I can counter it quite simply: How do we know you aren't a terrorist? How does the government? Realistically, nobody but you (and possibly your wife/kids) know that. Perhaps your family is really a terror cell? Well, their goes their reliability.
If the government can PROVE that the detainees are terrorists, and it is a situation where they might get some good intel (such as the capture of an entire cell), then go for it. Torture them. I really don't care.
The burden of proof is on the government. That's the big thing that keeps police and enforcement agencies in check. Otherwise, one abusive person in a position of power could effectively lock up whoever he likes for as long as he likes. This has been a big problem with governments in the past, and it was one of the first issues addressed in the founding of this country. I happen to beleive in that.
Oh, as a final note, don't try to pull out the 'enemy combatant' BS, either. Unless they're uniformed or visibly bearing arms against our citizens or armed forces, they aren't combatants. Otherwise, you could be labeled one just as easy as you could be called a terrorist, and that doesn't fly.
I was on the Alpha test for that, and it did look pretty fun. The alpha test was watching the AI blow itself to bits with others, so I didn't really get to sample the gameplay. Looked like it had promise, but I never followed up. It'd certainly be worth the cash if it was released at the same price as Uplink was initially.
I think I'll have to go pick up a copy.
You, sir, are wrong.
Here, let me pick apart the major points of your short troll:
1: The problem here is that these people, by and large, have not been proven to be terrorists. How would you like it if you were randomly grabbed off the street, called a murder, and thrown in prison? Here in the US, we used to believe that people were innocent until proven guilty. Obviously you don't.
2: Torture is not an effective means of getting reliable intel from people, despite what TV has told you. Torture IS very good at getting people to do what you want them to do. While the second statement may appear to counter the first, it doesn't. Torture attempts to force compliance through pain, threat of death, or extreme discomfort. When successful, the victim will do whatever they think you want, if it means you will quit torturing them. This includes signing false confessions, even admitting to things they know are untrue. If tortured enough (and HERE's a classic example) you can get someone to admit that 1+1=3. If you know enough beforehand to catch false statements and continue torturing the victim until you get a reliable answer, then you basically know the answer beforehand anyway. If you don't, then how do you know when to stop? The first answer may be unreliable, and so may the third, fifth, 86th, whatever. If they DO give you the correct information at some point, how do you know?
You'd want to be able to flip it on the fly for OS updates. Otherwise, you're looking at pretty routine downtime -- which may or may not be an issue for you.
You have your l33t ninja with his army of zombie Windows boxes... ...but how do they stack up to the *nix pirates, and their FTPs on the seven seas of the intarwebs? It's the classic clashes, modernized. Who has the REAL Ultimate Power?