> Are you so mad at the US you would want to kill us?
If I were not highly averse to moral risk, and had the capability, I would definitely eliminate the US as an international actor, given that the cost in lives was less than 10 millions. Including my family and myself, if necessary.
It doesn't take long hair or a splinter fetish to recognize that the U.S. has made a lot of enemies by creating injustice and misery by it's aggression outside of its borders, and it doesn't take a politician's keen insight to understand that this will result in attacks against the U.S. on a much larger scale than a couple of tall buildings.
WMD are becoming cheaper and easier to produce every day. What worked to prevent attack by a global superpower (USSR) will NOT work to prevent attack by a well-funded cell group.
> Can't another country simply give us the > finger once and a while and do their own god > damned thing
Not without getting invaded or nuked;)
> without bitching about us and our > international policys?
I can't understand why you would object that our international policies are a cause for complaint. If you had said "internal" policies, I could have understood.
No, it's because the French and the British are the only EU nations with nukes, and the British are our pet poodles. That means that France is the seed from which a future nuclear superpower Europe will grow. The U.S. wants to remain the worlds only superpower. China and Europe are the only threats to that status. Therefore, PRC and France are the only real enemies of the U.S.
Man, the U.S. is getting bitch-slapped big time right now because the best response they can offer is a satellite-guided gravity bomb. If you took away their night vision and their guidance systems (you can't harden an antenna or a CCD, because they have to be exposed in order to function) they would be SO dead...
I think it is a fundamental theorem of justice that the moral responsibility for outcomes can be assigned to an agent must be a monotone function of the degree of achievable control that agent can excercise over the process that produces those outcomes.
There is no collective responsibility in practice, because it is not permissible to apply collective punishment. As a result, while the people of the U.S. as a collective unit may be assigned a collective responsibility in theory, I can't imagine any possible system of justice which could enforce that responsibility in practice.
At this point one must rely upon natural consequences.
They are using "open source" correctly. They are not using "Open Source", which would be an incorrect use. ESR does not get to redefine the English language for his personal political purposes, sorry.
Oh come on. Most nuclear science was developed for the direct practical purpose of killing vast numbers of people. MRI was developed by some guy with a cute idea. I'd bet you could not have repopulated Hiroshima and Nagasaki with the people whose lives were saved by MRI since its invention.
Or are spending their money on HEP instead of delivering food to the people whose leaders are using them as pawns or just down giving a damn about them.
Slashdot Mirror
> Are you so mad at the US you would want to kill us?
If I were not highly averse to moral risk,
and had the capability, I would definitely
eliminate the US as an international actor,
given that the cost in lives was less than
10 millions. Including my family and
myself, if necessary.
It doesn't take long hair or a splinter fetish
to recognize that the U.S. has made a lot of
enemies by creating injustice and misery by
it's aggression outside of its borders, and
it doesn't take a politician's keen insight
to understand that this will result in attacks
against the U.S. on a much larger scale than
a couple of tall buildings.
WMD are becoming cheaper and easier to
produce every day. What worked to prevent
attack by a global superpower (USSR)
will NOT work to prevent attack by a
well-funded cell group.
It's shaping up to be a post-American
century.
> imagine if your friends always had a gun
> pointed at you, so they could shoot you if
> an argument developed?
Well, we do: Our friends in China, France,
Israel, and (perhaps) Russia.
> Can't another country simply give us the
;)
> finger once and a while and do their own god
> damned thing
Not without getting invaded or nuked
> without bitching about us and our
> international policys?
I can't understand why you would object
that our international policies are a cause
for complaint. If you had said "internal"
policies, I could have understood.
Destroying the planet Earth would be no more
of an act of war than providing the use of its
surface to an enemy.
No, it's because the French and the British
are the only EU nations with nukes, and the
British are our pet poodles. That means that
France is the seed from which a future nuclear
superpower Europe will grow. The U.S. wants
to remain the worlds only superpower. China
and Europe are the only threats to that
status. Therefore, PRC and France are the
only real enemies of the U.S.
Now this is a hoot.
Man, the U.S. is getting bitch-slapped big
time right now because the best response they
can offer is a satellite-guided gravity bomb.
If you took away their night vision and their
guidance systems (you can't harden an antenna
or a CCD, because they have to be exposed in
order to function) they would be SO dead...
I think it is a fundamental theorem of justice
that the moral responsibility for outcomes
can be assigned to an agent must be a
monotone function of the degree of achievable
control that agent can excercise over the
process that produces those outcomes.
There is no collective responsibility in
practice, because it is not permissible to
apply collective punishment. As a result,
while the people of the U.S. as a collective
unit may be assigned a collective
responsibility in theory, I can't imagine
any possible system of justice which could
enforce that responsibility in practice.
At this point one must rely upon natural
consequences.
Unlimited t-mobile is $19.99/mo
Looks like Sprint offers unlimited data for
$80 now. That's twice as much as T-Mobile.
AT&T does not appear to offer unmetered
service.
Things change fast in this market.
Methinks the problem is your VPN, not the
network. You can VPN over much lower b/w
links than PCS offers.
T-Mobile is the only one that offers unlimited
service, to my knowledge, in the U.S.
I need to go to Kunming. Anybody recommend
mobile Internet service that works in
all major Chinese cities?
Yes, a square is an odd shape.
A golden rectangle is not.
For what crime, exactly? Shining a light?
Levenworth is not in England, by the way.
Except you can't buy it.
Unless you have a military alliance with
the U.S., that is.
I don't.
They are using "open source" correctly.
They are not using "Open Source", which would
be an incorrect use. ESR does not get to
redefine the English language for his personal
political purposes, sorry.
So you are willing to kill millions of people to teach some schmuck with golden faucets a lesson?
A disintermediated retail forex would rock
my world. Play money might be nice too, but
only after substantial research.
No, they want open formats. They are the
outside competitor. Outside competitors
always try to undermine the entrenched players
to gain market share.
They have scads of content. Sometimes you
see it on DVD (Crouching Tiger, Raise the Red
Lantern), but usually you don't.
Given that there are about 95 million
speakers of Chinese outside of China,
even the subtitle-averse market for that
content is substantial.
XviD is not DVD. Sheesh.
Oh come on. Most nuclear science was developed for the direct practical purpose of killing vast numbers of people. MRI was developed by some guy with a cute idea. I'd bet you could not have repopulated Hiroshima and Nagasaki with the people whose lives were saved by MRI since its invention.
Or are spending their money on HEP instead of delivering food to the people whose leaders are using them as pawns or just down giving a damn about them.
Cute, but a more informative rejoinder would have included a link to the great vowel shift.
Harder is not the word. Quixotic is.
Advocating the execution of HEP physicists
is an *achieveable* end, at least.
But what is corruption if not the diversion
of public funds to private benefit?
I certainly agree with you about the defense
budget, however.
Oh yes, Hitler is not as bad as Stalin.
Would you therefore vote for him?