China's "expanding" space program consists primarily of plans and conjecture. Calling this is "space race" is more than a little silly.
China is using 30-40 year old Soviet technology in their attempt to accomplish things other nations accomplished 30-40 years ago. I'm happy they are trying, but this isn't much of a race.
If you look at the last 100 years, any number of contries have had prominent roles in overthrowing other countries. Here are a few of them:
Great Britain, France, Germany, Belgium, Italy, Russia, Japan, China, Iraq, Brazil,...
The world, and far too many Americans, forget this and apply a double standard to the U.S.: The world lives by its own set of rules but expects the U.S. to live by another.
Or, to use an older adage: He who is without sin, cast the first stone.
U.S. foreign policy should operate in the perceived best interests of the American people, not as the obligatory benefactor to a world full of people who run scared from democracy into the hands of racism and extremeism (only its called nationalism and self-determinism in fashionable circles.)
What, exactly, have you done to "improve the conditions" of people?
And why do you presume that assisting sightless people will inconvenience the seeing?
(It's indicative of the smelly nature of/. that your post is tagged with a score of 5 and labeled "interesting". "Embarrassing" would be more appropriate.)
Why would MS port Office to a platform they see as competition for Windows? Apple isn't competition; Office on the Mac doesn't take away potential sales of Windows and other MS products. Selling Office for Linux, on the other hand, would just encourage migration from Windows to Linux.
Well, I don't understand the guy's concerns. This DARPA effort is just the application of current technology to a traditional warzone necessity. Any nation with the same technical capabilities would, and will, do the same.
Slashdot runs this kind of stuff under a "rights" rubric just as a piece of scaremongering to drum up traffic. It is nothing less than bush league tabload sensationalism (which, come to think of it, is what Slashdot has sunk to these days.) Sadly, it seems to get a lot of credence in the "Ashamed to be Born in the West" crowd.
The U.S. can't and shouldn't lead if that means kowtowing to the racist and extremist views that are endemic and most of the world. If the rest of the world finally gets the gumption to eliminate its own racist and manipulative dictators and potentates, then they can democratize themselves and join the 21st century. Until then, they pose a threat to democracies everywhere, including the U.S. Why would any state seek to lead nations whose very existence threaten it?
Read it again, OK? It says "poverty is not a deterrent to killing someone".
BTW, whie poverty isn't a deterrent to killing, it isn't a reason or a moral justification, either. A poor person who murders is just as morally culpable as a rich person who kills. Unfortunately, too many people -- ashamed to be non-poor residents of the modern West -- are quite willing to excuse the indefensible behavior of thugs and murderers who have wrapped their endevaors in a patina of anti-Western rhetoric. Lame "thinkers" in the West fall for because they're simply racists in new dress, quite willing to assume that non-Westerners are only capable of finding motivation from poverty, not from anything else.
Tabs are nice, but they do not really add any new capability. The browser just displays one page at a time in multiple instances.
On the other hand, we've seen no serious effort to incorporate RSS into mainstream browsers, to eliminate confusion about plugins (better yet, eliminate plugins), no ability to mark, annotate, store and organize portions of displayed text and images, etc.
What we have seen, at least on the developer front, is an explosion of acronymial soup (XHTML, CSS, XML, etc.) thatpromised simplicity but delivered complexity.
You know, if the software community sees those things as real innovation, thats' conbinving evidence their a bunch of conservative fuddie-duddies.
Each thing you name is a pleasant improvement, but I don't consider them innovative because they don't take the browser beyond Mosaic's heritage of displaying one HTML file at a time. They're just variations on a static theme.
Nah, just a sympathtic vibration inside your drains.
I thought BA had stopped flying the Concorde? If not, Real Soon Now.
Actually, I lived for a coupla years in Caversham, across the river from Reading. Its wheels were still down when it went over my house. Loudest damn airplane I've ever heard.
Treaties do not "trump" law within a nation. Treaties are agreements between soverign states, not legislation internal to a state. A nation must enact its own enabling legislation before its citizens are subject to the terms of the treaty.
If memory serves, there was an Astronomer Royal in the fifties and sixties who ridiculed the idea of going to the Moon until after Apollo 11 landed there.
As for this Astronomer Royal, his premises are incorrect, his logic is incorrect, and his conclusions are incorrect.
I doubt he'd be in Foreign Policy if he hadn't recently published a doom-and-gloom book that caught the attention of the anti-technology embarrassed-to-be-human crowd.
Technology doesn't drive commercial air travel. Profit does. That's why no one flies a supersonic passenger plane. When someone figures out how to make money on hypersonic air travel, they'll do it.
Your statement implies that the U.S. has a responsibility to give its wealth away in the interest of making "friends". I reject that.
Seems to me that poverty is not a deterrent to killing someone. People seem quite capabld of using whatever techology is at hand to murder each other.
Consider: Africa is awash with inexplicable wars, with armies staffed by children. Are those countries and those children any less morally culpable because they are poor?
>>...these could be used to take out ICBM's, as they would be much faster.
Good post, but that last bit is incorrect. ICBM's achieve a speed in the range of 15000-16000 mph. In other words, just short of orbital velocity. These aircrat woujld be fast, but not that fast.
(Broadly speaking, ICBM's are capable of reaching orbit by extending their "burn" a bit longer. For example, the first communication satellite launched by the U.S. came late in the Eisenhower administration. An Atlas ICBM was the launch vehicle, and the whole thing was placed in orbit.)
ICBM's carry nuclear warheads that destroy cities. That's the wrong tool if you need to remove a bunker located next to a school.
Think 6,000 mph stealthed descendants of the B-2 launching guided munitions and cruise missiles, all while swooping into and out of the enemy's vision before he can defend against it.
Remember, the days of aircraft carrying dozens of unguided dumb bombs which are dropped at 50,000 feet are rapidly ending. We need to make an adjustment in what we think is a "bomb". Today, it is most often a guided, perhaps propelled, weapon.
Re:He's Talking About Who Pays Mozilla's Bills
on
Netscape 7.1 Released
·
· Score: 1
So, what then? Full-time Mozilla progammers are supposed to dump the family, the house, the car payments, the credit card bills and all the rest just to keep on coding Mozilla for free and the greater glory of open source? If someone would forego all that just to keep on coding for free, he needs a lot of help.
Your comparison of Netscape with SCO is silly. Has Netscape brought suit against IBM for infringement? Is Netscape keeping its PR department busy asserting its primacy in the world of browsers? No, of course not.
You seem to be placing a lot of stock in open source's ability to proceed without financial support from anyone, expecially all those corporations which most of the/. gang label "evil" out of blind reflex. What's so bad about being funded by someone? The "free" part of free software has nothing to do with who pays the programmers.
Slashdot Mirror
China's "expanding" space program consists primarily of plans and conjecture. Calling this is "space race" is more than a little silly.
China is using 30-40 year old Soviet technology in their attempt to accomplish things other nations accomplished 30-40 years ago. I'm happy they are trying, but this isn't much of a race.
If you look at the last 100 years, any number of contries have had prominent roles in overthrowing other countries. Here are a few of them:
...
Great Britain, France, Germany, Belgium, Italy, Russia, Japan, China, Iraq, Brazil,
The world, and far too many Americans, forget this and apply a double standard to the U.S.: The world lives by its own set of rules but expects the U.S. to live by another.
Or, to use an older adage: He who is without sin, cast the first stone.
U.S. foreign policy should operate in the perceived best interests of the American people, not as the obligatory benefactor to a world full of people who run scared from democracy into the hands of racism and extremeism (only its called nationalism and self-determinism in fashionable circles.)
What, exactly, have you done to "improve the conditions" of people?
/. that your post is tagged with a score of 5 and labeled "interesting". "Embarrassing" would be more appropriate.)
And why do you presume that assisting sightless people will inconvenience the seeing?
(It's indicative of the smelly nature of
>> Some things just aren't meant to be used by the blind.
And who gets to decide what that is? You?
No thanks.
Instead of whining, why doesn't the fabled open source community get busy and code something.
Why would MS port Office to a platform they see as competition for Windows? Apple isn't competition; Office on the Mac doesn't take away potential sales of Windows and other MS products. Selling Office for Linux, on the other hand, would just encourage migration from Windows to Linux.
But they have every right to try.
(What, exactly, makes this a "YRO" issue? People don't believe comanies have a right to sue? Whose rights are threatened?)
Typical moronic Slashdot post. Go back to playing with your toys and stop posting until you learn to think.
Well, I don't understand the guy's concerns. This DARPA effort is just the application of current technology to a traditional warzone necessity. Any nation with the same technical capabilities would, and will, do the same.
Slashdot runs this kind of stuff under a "rights" rubric just as a piece of scaremongering to drum up traffic. It is nothing less than bush league tabload sensationalism (which, come to think of it, is what Slashdot has sunk to these days.) Sadly, it seems to get a lot of credence in the "Ashamed to be Born in the West" crowd.
The U.S. can't and shouldn't lead if that means kowtowing to the racist and extremist views that are endemic and most of the world. If the rest of the world finally gets the gumption to eliminate its own racist and manipulative dictators and potentates, then they can democratize themselves and join the 21st century. Until then, they pose a threat to democracies everywhere, including the U.S. Why would any state seek to lead nations whose very existence threaten it?
Read it again, OK? It says "poverty is not a deterrent to killing someone".
BTW, whie poverty isn't a deterrent to killing, it isn't a reason or a moral justification, either. A poor person who murders is just as morally culpable as a rich person who kills. Unfortunately, too many people -- ashamed to be non-poor residents of the modern West -- are quite willing to excuse the indefensible behavior of thugs and murderers who have wrapped their endevaors in a patina of anti-Western rhetoric. Lame "thinkers" in the West fall for because they're simply racists in new dress, quite willing to assume that non-Westerners are only capable of finding motivation from poverty, not from anything else.
Tabs are nice, but they do not really add any new capability. The browser just displays one page at a time in multiple instances.
On the other hand, we've seen no serious effort to incorporate RSS into mainstream browsers, to eliminate confusion about plugins (better yet, eliminate plugins), no ability to mark, annotate, store and organize portions of displayed text and images, etc.
What we have seen, at least on the developer front, is an explosion of acronymial soup (XHTML, CSS, XML, etc.) thatpromised simplicity but delivered complexity.
You know, if the software community sees those things as real innovation, thats' conbinving evidence their a bunch of conservative fuddie-duddies.
Each thing you name is a pleasant improvement, but I don't consider them innovative because they don't take the browser beyond Mosaic's heritage of displaying one HTML file at a time. They're just variations on a static theme.
CSS, Flash and PHP aren't browser innovations.
It's not so much that 4.5 was so innovative, it's just that very little in the way of innovation since then has happen.
A browser's job is to display HTML-tagged text and images. There's been no innovation beyond that in several years. Maybe there doesn't need to be.
Like I said, Congress needs to enact enabling legislation.
Nah, just a sympathtic vibration inside your drains.
I thought BA had stopped flying the Concorde? If not, Real Soon Now.
Actually, I lived for a coupla years in Caversham, across the river from Reading. Its wheels were still down when it went over my house. Loudest damn airplane I've ever heard.
Treaties do not "trump" law within a nation. Treaties are agreements between soverign states, not legislation internal to a state. A nation must enact its own enabling legislation before its citizens are subject to the terms of the treaty.
If memory serves, there was an Astronomer Royal in the fifties and sixties who ridiculed the idea of going to the Moon until after Apollo 11 landed there.
As for this Astronomer Royal, his premises are incorrect, his logic is incorrect, and his conclusions are incorrect.
I doubt he'd be in Foreign Policy if he hadn't recently published a doom-and-gloom book that caught the attention of the anti-technology embarrassed-to-be-human crowd.
>> DARPA should be shunned.
Huh?
Even if I agreed with you (I don't), that still mk=akes little sense.
Technology doesn't drive commercial air travel. Profit does. That's why no one flies a supersonic passenger plane. When someone figures out how to make money on hypersonic air travel, they'll do it.
Your statement implies that the U.S. has a responsibility to give its wealth away in the interest of making "friends". I reject that.
Seems to me that poverty is not a deterrent to killing someone. People seem quite capabld of using whatever techology is at hand to murder each other.
Consider: Africa is awash with inexplicable wars, with armies staffed by children. Are those countries and those children any less morally culpable because they are poor?
>> ...these could be used to take out ICBM's, as they would be much faster.
Good post, but that last bit is incorrect. ICBM's achieve a speed in the range of 15000-16000 mph. In other words, just short of orbital velocity. These aircrat woujld be fast, but not that fast.
(Broadly speaking, ICBM's are capable of reaching orbit by extending their "burn" a bit longer. For example, the first communication satellite launched by the U.S. came late in the Eisenhower administration. An Atlas ICBM was the launch vehicle, and the whole thing was placed in orbit.)
ICBM's carry nuclear warheads that destroy cities. That's the wrong tool if you need to remove a bunker located next to a school.
Think 6,000 mph stealthed descendants of the B-2 launching guided munitions and cruise missiles, all while swooping into and out of the enemy's vision before he can defend against it.
Remember, the days of aircraft carrying dozens of unguided dumb bombs which are dropped at 50,000 feet are rapidly ending. We need to make an adjustment in what we think is a "bomb". Today, it is most often a guided, perhaps propelled, weapon.
So, what then? Full-time Mozilla progammers are supposed to dump the family, the house, the car payments, the credit card bills and all the rest just to keep on coding Mozilla for free and the greater glory of open source? If someone would forego all that just to keep on coding for free, he needs a lot of help.
Your comparison of Netscape with SCO is silly. Has Netscape brought suit against IBM for infringement? Is Netscape keeping its PR department busy asserting its primacy in the world of browsers? No, of course not.
You seem to be placing a lot of stock in open source's ability to proceed without financial support from anyone, expecially all those corporations which most of the/. gang label "evil" out of blind reflex. What's so bad about being funded by someone? The "free" part of free software has nothing to do with who pays the programmers.
Wrong. He's not talking who uses who's code. He's talking about who pays Mozilla's bills.
Gee, you think if you added everything in the Netscape package to Mozilla, it just might weigh in at 29.2M, too?
Go for the custom install and pick only what you want.