1. Defining a trail-difficulty classification system: (using standard mountaineering terms - class I, II, III, etc.) - Maybe Class I should be broken down into a Ia, Ib, Ic, based on length, elevation gain, weather conditions, etc.
2. Making sure maps and signs very clearly designate the trails' difficulty, when the trails are day-hike trails.
3. Clearly mark a delineation when a "casual afternoon hike" trail becomes a "day hike; you should pack a lunch and water", and "do not proceed past this point unless you are prepared to spend the night in the backcountry." (and assume the third type is only traveled by people who know what the fuck they're doing).
Backpackers typically are going to have GPS and maps. I think backpackers, in general, appreciate LESS well-maintained trails and infrastructure. I think they appreciate the experience of being "on their own" - and as long as the NPS backs away from this type of hiker, (and they do - through the permit-system). . . the rangers can usually "vet" hikers who are biting off more than they can chew; and they can warn those folks - know what you're doing, or you're on your own. . . S&R is only for REAL emergencies).
Day-hikers, unfortunately, come in all types, from casual n00bs who get in way over their heads, to ultramarathon guys looking for the next X-treme challenge. Because day-hiking doesn't require a permit, the rangers can't vet them, and tell the difference. (nor can they limit the access to such trails). I think if they made this middle-distinction for trails, they could dissuade a large proportion of the casual n00bs who end up getting themselves into trouble.
Then, they shove out all the folks who *can* afford the $300-$500 investment in equipment, for whom, this is a financial risk, and therefore, not approached casually.
So you only allow park access to the guys who have their own helicopter, don't bother to hike the trails or climb, just fly-in, set down, and fish? These are the people who care the least for nature, and wont respect it, and wont invest any of their own time and effort into gaining outdoor expertise and knowledge to become self-sufficient when their equipment quits on them.
Yosemite is a perfect example of this: The Yosemite Valley is accessible to cars, and therefore, the zillions of massive quarter-million-dollar motorhomes that continuously clog the roads, visitors center and facilities, and try to make the insane day-hike of half dome without any real knowledge of how difficult this really is. The people who park remotely, hike-in, and sleep in the backcountry, and make it to half dome, end up waiting in a fucking LINE for. . . often, 2-3 hours, to climb the 200 foot cable-ladder to the top. This ladder bears the continuous weight of hundreds of people, patiently waiting to ascend, one or two steps at a time. It's a fucking zoo; and while it's one of the most amazing views and awesome spectacles in nature, no way would I ever go back there again. If I want to be overwhelmed with crowds of rude ignorant people who just spent $5000 to rent a motorhome, I'd just stay in the fucking city.
(hint: there *are* a lot of less-crowded, and just as spectacular places in the Sierras. And I hope that nobody ever builds a road to get there. These places are hard to get to, and they should be, and it's one of the few places left in the world where reward is based on MERIT, not daddy's trust fund and connections.)
The worst bit about this is that the bears are often NOT responding to instinct.
They are often responding to YEARS of abusive treatment by ignorant park visitors, who have carelessly TRAINED the bears that. . . people have food. Go hang out around people, they'll feed you to get a good photo (because a bag of pretzels is cheaper than a good telephoto lens). Or if you terrorize people, they'll give you food to leave them alone. Or, if you just head down to the trailhead at night, where the cars are parked, there's often food inside the cars, just rip em open and eat!
Nowhere (it seems) is this more readily apparent than at Yosemite, where they have a special squad of horseback rangers, whose job it is to find bears in areas frequented by humans, and chase them off with paintball guns loaded with pepper balls, or shotguns with beanbag rounds.
It's incredibly unfortunate - that the California Grizzly, depicted on the State Flag, is actually extinct, due to human hunting and habitat degradation. Black bears remain. But a few more California Grizzly attacks would probably dispel the "rumor" that bears are friendly and safe if you bribe them with food, and maybe park visitors would stop being douchebags.
Yes, but which ONE condition was the NECESSARY condition (in conjunction with all others) that allowed the whole set of conditions to cause the crash?
Had the computer not been infected, the maintenance crew would have entered the data per their procedural spec, the alert would have flagged the plane, and presumably, repairs would have been recommended and implemented prior to further flights.
Cascade failure is more complex to analyze - and when you're swinging a dead cat around trying to hit One Blameable Cause, the other conditions tend to muddy the waters. But the presence of the computer trojan is the root-cause.
Actually - the root-cause is probably; lack of adequate design robustness for preserving operational status of the maintenance logging computer and/or alternate effective maintenance logging operations procedures (ie. backup plan when the computer is down?).
This maintenance system was supposed to "have the pilot's back" - for when the pilot's lack of expertise in the strange functions of the electrical system caused a fatal condition.
I've got a car that runs critical engine fuel mixture data off a common power supply with the brake-light switch. A fault in the brake-light switch can actually cause the engine's electrical control system to fail in various ways, or misreport errors. (and vice-versa. . . faults in the fuel pump connector can also cause the brake lights to simply not light when you press the pedal). How the fuck is a driver supposed to know that? You get pulled over for not having brake lights (or rear-ended) - and if you happen to be a car nerd, you can look this trivia up online on enthusiast forums. But the manufacturer didn't even know about these conditions when the car was built, or even up until 5 years later.
And there was also a recall, because the brake light switches were defective. I know, that literally hundreds of enthusiasts were netted by the dealer for bogus repairs, replacement turbos, replacement fuel pumps, new engines, repairs on relatively new cars, for thousands, sometimes tens of thousands of dollars, caused by bogus error codes, caused by a faulty brake light switch. Did anybody ever get rear-ended and killed because of this? Who knows?
I only know this because I'm a car nerd. thousands of other drivers were clueless. Because of this bizarre design flaw, and cascade failure with varying symptoms.
The manufacturer's answer was to replace the defective, malfunctioning brake light switches in a recall. (often, dealer service departments installed these recall switches incorrectly, resulting in even more crazy car behavior). This fix did not address the deeper problem of power routing through that switch. This design was changed in the '07 model year.
I'd say that pulling the heater fuse, disables the set flaps alarm, is also a terrible design flaw - even if it's well documented for the maintenance guys - even if there's a maintenance procedure that *should* flag it; because the pilot can still pull that fuse, and fuck himself and all passengers, without knowing. This little bit of design trivia is beyond the knowledge realm of a pilot. Pilots are supposed to really know, in detail, how their planes work. But that's just bizarre unexpected behavior, and within the realm of a maintenance specialist. (or plane-nerd).
Even so - there is a single root-cause for this crash.
It would be an awesome lampoon of the typical teen-girl's neurotic low-self-esteem angst.
It's not about whether the Zombie dude is attractive. You observe this in MANY real-life relationships: The worse the guy is, the worse he treats her, the more she loves him. Because it's not about the guy - it's about HER.
If the guy WANTS her, it strokes her ego. "*gasp*! I'm WANTED. He WANTS me. *swoon*!"
You could totally dress the zombie "boy" in a wifebeater.
"Brains! Brains! I want to eat your brains!"
"*swoon* . . . he luuuuuvs me!"
(disclaimer: I'm not describing normal female behavior, it's neurotic, abnormal, and often the result of being brought up in an abusive or dysfunctional environment. But - isn't it so comically common? It's always the really, really, hot, unattainable chicks too.)
The girl could have a living boy, who is a "nice guy" - who she ignores, while he's in love with her. He could kill the zombies for her, while she swoons over them. And then, as a final act of self-sacrifice, this boy intentionally infects himself, in order to gain her love.
Actually, I believe that the current meme-spill is the "Man baby" meme.
"Double-rainbow" has been trending downward for several weeks, and has begun to taper into obscurity; though the semi-related "autotune someone else's youtube video", I think, maybe has not peaked yet.
It is very unfortunate that due to the deregulated environment, we're unable to hold those responsible to account for these hideous crimes. Look at the widespread damage and destruction to our collective zeitgeist, that the lolcats meme caused. Was anybody punished? Only the victims.
This is the hazard of the "Free Meme" system, and ridiculous belief in the "invisible hand-job" that comes along and guides the internet in the "right" direction.
Man-babies, sparkley vampires, omg pwnies, what atrocity is next?
I reckon that either possibility is. . . possible. The existence of extremophiles, and also plants and animals that are able to "survive" prolonged periods of poor conditions via morphology (spores, seeds) or biological processes (like hibernation), it's not unreasonable to believe that some animal life survived this prolonged event. Even the Martian climate, which is nearly universally unhospitable has niches where life could possibly exist. . . in warm, protected areas underground, water-bearing rock, etc. It's possible that such life could adapt forms that will survive millions of years of otherwise inhospitable climate. There are signs on Mars that such life exists - the presence of atmospheric methane, for one.
We know that Earth was a huge snowball; but we also know there certainly must have been exceptional locations as well, that could support life.
And we know that life-arising is incredibly improbable. But exactly HOW improbable, we have absolutely no idea. We don't have a set of alternate-reality Earths to test such an hypothesis, or gather data to calculate; which one's evolve life and which ones do not, out of random chance. It may be that generation of life is both highly improbable, and also, INEVITABLE.
Yep - our Chinese exchange students promptly logged onto the Chinese version of YouTube, and spent nearly every night watching some stupid Chinese soap-opera.
Thought you were here to learn English? After the first few days of that (refused to adjust to the time too, so they wouldn't get out of bed for school, at 9am!). . . I "broke" the router - oops, can't get to their site anymore! Bummer. I'll fix it when I have time. Very busy you know.
Then I really started messing with them. We'd watch English DVDs, and I'd set the subtitles, so they could read-and-listen. But for Twilight, (ha ha, teenage girls), I set them to Spanish. After 10 minutes, the confused looks on their faces! LOL. So I fixed that - and they only made it halfway through the movie. They couldn't figure out the plot (?!).
hm. I thought Luke just picked it up at the Bespin Lost-and-Found, when they went back, a few months later. Then, that Friday Night, at the Bespin Rave-a-thon, tripping on death-sticks, he found the hidden setting to change the color to green, and decided he liked that better.
yes, clearly, a nuclear power industry of new-design, high-tech plants run remotely by underage children in third-world countries with no labor or safety regulations, (and sketchy ties to terrorist organizations; Pakistan->ISI->Taliban->Al Qaeda, for example. ..) would be FAR cheaper.
Especially with no messy accounting for externalities like accidental leaks, spillage, explosions or fires, or damage to adjacent economies from contaminated fisheries or farmlands resulting from such externalities.
These cost figures should be immediately recalculated so we can switch over to an ALL NUCLEAR energy infrastructure as soon as possible!!!
Yes, ever since the Soviets (and the US) tossed Afghanistan onto the dirt like a used condom, back in the 1980's, the ISI stepped in and found it to be a nice, convenient little proxy-war weapon.
We fed them money, just like we fed the Baath Party money all the way back from the beginning of Saddam's career. Just like we fed money to the Shah of Iran and his secret police from 1953, all the way to the revolution in 1979.
What was their role in 9/11? What was their role in Pune? What was their role in, ousting Bhutto, then later, her assassination?
Why the fuck did we elect a president in the year 2000, SPECIFICALLY because he couldn't answer the question in a debate: "What is the capital of Pakistan?" (remember?)
Why does this nation not ask these questions? Why were these secrets kept?
Because, we, as a people, DO NOT want to know the answers. To look in the mirror, it so see an ugliness we do not want to see.
It's also important to maintain that veneer of deniability.
Those voters, who really know enough history to have known damn well how this stuff works - allowed themselves to be conned into believing that it really would be different this time. Just like we did with VietNam - would be different than Korea. (etc. - let's go all the way back in history, we can go back to the Spanish American war, or even further to Roman times if you like, that seems a popular comparison. . . ). Those voters NEED that deniability, otherwise they couldn't shoulder the guilt. Because deep down, they KNOW, that they knew what they were voting for, when they were re-electing Bush. They KNEW, but they were too afraid of what retreat meant. They were too COWARDLY to run from battle. Sometimes it takes a hero to do the right thing, when the right thing is to back down from a fight. (and take the awful black-eye that's rightfully coming).
So - voters have been pretty happy with their FoxNews lies. It's a great excuse to avoid having to face the awful truth of their blood-soaked ballots. And since Wikileaks comes along. . . 6 years later - wheeee! we can pretend to be all moral and righteous, and pretend we didn't KNOW! Thanks wikileaks, for taking the Treason shot up the ass for us!
It was a direct result of engaging in an economic embargo (oil) of Japan, supplying Japan's enemies with material and personnel support . . . we were very well-positioned for being attacked. As a nation, to say that we were not already involved in WWII prior to Pearl Harbor, is an incredibly naive statement. We were neck-deep in it, both theaters.
I won't say that we were aggressors. Japan and Germany were CLEAR aggressors, and any actions we could have taken to avoid involvement would have been appeasement, pure and simple, and the game was, one of stalling towards eventual surrender anyway. Both empires were hell-bent on going "all the way", and the US was just standing there, at that point. Peaceful co-existence wasn't possible (as I don't think it's really possible in the modern case, either).
But essentially: US involvement in all these cases was the result of decades of flawed thinking, official lying, and the politics of denial. All necessary ingredients in a Democracy. (and even in most monarchies and dictatorships. Even the emperor of Japan had to appease his generals with imperial expansion, to remain in power. He probably would have preferred a policy of ongoing isolationism, had he thought he could get away with it - he was facing a likely civil war, or a return to a semi-feudal or federal system, had he not gone through with it). I'm not saying the clashes and wars between civilizations are inevitable. But I'm saying that the kind of political cowardice that leads to war, is common to pretty much all forms of government. I think Democracies are probably more prone, because the leaders have to answer to the capricious will of a jingoistic populace. (easier to herd, than a small oligarchy of privileged nobles? who knows?)
Traditional Japanese woodcut printing originally came from early Dutch traders in the 16th century, and they style and design, minimalist economy of line gives a nod to some of Albrecht Durer's work; (though their anatomy and proportion always maintained a strong influence from China and other centers of art in the region, from hundreds of years prior).
Japanese design was pilfered in the West, back in the 19th century, and popularized by, well, I guess Wright, mostly, (though really, he was stealing the thunder of the Art Nouveau/Arts and Crafts movement that was heavily influenced by Japanese art) - and SOME of that found it's way BACK into Japanese culture via comic books, which influenced American Film Noir movie visual composition, which found it's way into Japanese cinema, Samurai movies, which influenced ITALIAN "American-Cowboy-Themed" Spaghetti-western movies (upon which our ENTIRE modern American concept of the Cowboy is actually based, as opposed to actual REAL historical cowboys/vaqueros), which, in turn, influenced American comic-book artists like Frank Miller (in the 1980's) whose visual style has influenced an entire generation of filmmakers in the 2000's. . . fuck me sideways, there is NOTHING original in design anymore.
So when you take someone with almost zero formal education or training in art, and expose them to a foreign visual style; even one that's been isolated geographically (yet still has very dynamic connections through print, post, and internet) - they'll look at it like it's from another planet, and it all seems fresh and new.
What blew me away, was; I recently made waffles for a Chinese foreign exchange student. She knew what pizza was. She knew what hamburgers were. She had no fucking clue what to do with a waffle. She wanted to put salt on it. She has current magazines and books that look like 1980's style Japanese animation (color and clothing-style wise). Kind of weird. We were told they hate Mexican food. She LOVES all things Mexican. So, China, hell, even Japan, these are large countries, and they're always changing, and we like to think that these countries were completely isolated islands, because their languages and cultures seem so alien. But actually, a lot of ideas churned.
(My karate instructor is one of those guys who has bought into the theory that the Asian martial arts did not originate in China, that they actually migrated over there from Alexander the Great, hundreds of years before history records their existence in China . . . interesting theory, but I don't see the evidence of connection in the actual techniques or traditions. I guess that's one for the professional Anthropologists).
Yeah. There've been some interesting studies on this lately. And I know it's bordering on the realm of pseudoscience. Personally, I'd like to see some more rigorous work done, maybe wider studies, replicate these results, back it up with some hard neuroscience. Seriously. Because it makes a lot of sense - and I'd like to see whether this is just a culturally isolated phenomenon, or if it's all of humanity, or what. I'd like to see it proven. Really really proven. Or debunked.
Because it really turns our whole carrot-stick approach of work-ethic morality upside down.
Frankly. I mean, if it's true, do we (as a civilization. . . humanity), really need money?
I mean - our money, globally, is imaginary now, as it is. We don't even bother to PRINT 99% of it on paper. It's electronic bits. Some of which represent orders of magnitude of individual currency units. And the SICK thing is. . . 99% of us? Will never have a chance in hell of ever owning 99% of this imaginary "property". No matter how hard we work. No matter who we know. No matter how lucky we get.
Yet, we're supposed to be working and slaving away for it? We're in-debt for it? We're starving, hating, killing, and warring over it? We're making decisions that short-change our future, our children, our planet's ability to sustain life. . . over imaginary units of . . . numbers used to measure financial transactions, that are used mostly for. . . what, um. . . the vast majority is basically hoarded.
And the only reason why I can figure out why anyone would want to hoard imaginary bits of currency, is to either just be MEAN, and keep it from everyone else, or just out of the mistaken belief, that they can motivate everyone else to work hard, if they can con everyone into thinking they can get some.
Yeah, it's like the auto industry, in 2004, all over again. All of a sudden, for some reason, everyone wanted GIGANTIC CHROME GRILLZ. PHAT SPINNAH PIMP RIMZ. LO PROPHILE TIRZ. Everyone wanted their rides lookin' all gangsta, yo, and even coming stock from the dealer. So the manufacturers styled out some of the most fugly looking cars you ever saw. It was way worse than the 1980's.
Chrome chrome chrome every fucking where. And all of it was actually just chrome-surfaced plastic. It all looks real pretty now, 6 years later, all sun-worn down, and yellowed. lol. Dumbass gangsta wanna be's.
I bought new in 2003, and I'm still driving those cars today. And, I don't think I'm going to be buying new cars, especially American cars, until this whole gangsta-look thing is thoroughly flushed-out of the car-design system.
well. . . tell ya what. white-hat security engineering? can have it's very interesting and fascinating moments, on the Research side.
On the Development, and Admin side . . . frankly, EXTREME boredom. Call it "Cyber Warrior." Please. Anything. it's just fucking MOUNTAINS of paperwork, endless 5am meetings with inconsiderate east-coast goons, and ignorant motherfuckers who think THIS Windows release will be the REALLY secure one. Yay! I got a security clearance. So I can, um, do what? Oh yeah. Be secure. I'm so secure. don't mess with me man. I'm a cyber warrior. To the rescue! fuck those nasty black-hat dudes! They make us re-install Windows all the time. Assholes!
Re:United States Government Accountability Office?
on
Top Secret America
·
· Score: 1
I reckon "subsidized" can be code for the way the government funded research through DARPA to create the Internet, and also regulates over-air broadcasts through the FCC. So basically internet, radio/tv, and cable news are all basically subsidized or regulated by the government in one form or another. We Await Tristero's Silent Empire.
bah. GPO/MSI support is overrated. All that configuration stuff *can* be scripted and automated, just not the "Microsoft" way. So a competent network administrator's going to set it up and deploy FireFox in that manner, and the IN-competent, will use IEAK. I don't see what Chrome puts on the table that's going to be worth the effort, even if they "support" GPO/MSI.
There's a zillion productivity apps out there that don't support GPO/MSI; and have to be "hacked" for automated deployment and management on Microsoft networks. Firefox is significant enough, and worthwhile for that effort.
heh. If I were Obama, I would keep my Birth Certificate private. He doesn't have to show it to them, and as long as he doesn't, he makes the other side look like the fruitcakes they are.
Stealing a page right out of Karl Rove's playbook, if you ask me.
Nope. The 2nd Amendment would say that everyone should have a gun, regardless of GPA. In fact, belt-fed full-auto, nuclear weapons shouldn't be prohibited either.
And I'd say that would pretty much solve the "bullying" problem too. And the overpopulation problem. And the . . . well, existence problem.
1. It does not look like Bender. 2. It does not open the bottles with a laser. WTF? All that effort to build a beer-fetching robot, and NOBODY thought of lasers? Are you freaking KIDDING me? What is wrong with these people?
Slashdot Mirror
I agree that the NPS ought to do a better job of:
1. Defining a trail-difficulty classification system: (using standard mountaineering terms - class I, II, III, etc.) - Maybe Class I should be broken down into a Ia, Ib, Ic, based on length, elevation gain, weather conditions, etc.
2. Making sure maps and signs very clearly designate the trails' difficulty, when the trails are day-hike trails.
3. Clearly mark a delineation when a "casual afternoon hike" trail becomes a "day hike; you should pack a lunch and water", and "do not proceed past this point unless you are prepared to spend the night in the backcountry." (and assume the third type is only traveled by people who know what the fuck they're doing).
Backpackers typically are going to have GPS and maps. I think backpackers, in general, appreciate LESS well-maintained trails and infrastructure. I think they appreciate the experience of being "on their own" - and as long as the NPS backs away from this type of hiker, (and they do - through the permit-system). . . the rangers can usually "vet" hikers who are biting off more than they can chew; and they can warn those folks - know what you're doing, or you're on your own. . . S&R is only for REAL emergencies).
Day-hikers, unfortunately, come in all types, from casual n00bs who get in way over their heads, to ultramarathon guys looking for the next X-treme challenge. Because day-hiking doesn't require a permit, the rangers can't vet them, and tell the difference. (nor can they limit the access to such trails). I think if they made this middle-distinction for trails, they could dissuade a large proportion of the casual n00bs who end up getting themselves into trouble.
I can't get behind this idea.
Make the parks accessible only to the super-rich?
Then, they shove out all the folks who *can* afford the $300-$500 investment in equipment, for whom, this is a financial risk, and therefore, not approached casually.
So you only allow park access to the guys who have their own helicopter, don't bother to hike the trails or climb, just fly-in, set down, and fish? These are the people who care the least for nature, and wont respect it, and wont invest any of their own time and effort into gaining outdoor expertise and knowledge to become self-sufficient when their equipment quits on them.
Yosemite is a perfect example of this: The Yosemite Valley is accessible to cars, and therefore, the zillions of massive quarter-million-dollar motorhomes that continuously clog the roads, visitors center and facilities, and try to make the insane day-hike of half dome without any real knowledge of how difficult this really is. The people who park remotely, hike-in, and sleep in the backcountry, and make it to half dome, end up waiting in a fucking LINE for. . . often, 2-3 hours, to climb the 200 foot cable-ladder to the top. This ladder bears the continuous weight of hundreds of people, patiently waiting to ascend, one or two steps at a time. It's a fucking zoo; and while it's one of the most amazing views and awesome spectacles in nature, no way would I ever go back there again. If I want to be overwhelmed with crowds of rude ignorant people who just spent $5000 to rent a motorhome, I'd just stay in the fucking city.
(hint: there *are* a lot of less-crowded, and just as spectacular places in the Sierras. And I hope that nobody ever builds a road to get there. These places are hard to get to, and they should be, and it's one of the few places left in the world where reward is based on MERIT, not daddy's trust fund and connections.)
The worst bit about this is that the bears are often NOT responding to instinct.
They are often responding to YEARS of abusive treatment by ignorant park visitors, who have carelessly TRAINED the bears that. . . people have food. Go hang out around people, they'll feed you to get a good photo (because a bag of pretzels is cheaper than a good telephoto lens). Or if you terrorize people, they'll give you food to leave them alone. Or, if you just head down to the trailhead at night, where the cars are parked, there's often food inside the cars, just rip em open and eat!
Nowhere (it seems) is this more readily apparent than at Yosemite, where they have a special squad of horseback rangers, whose job it is to find bears in areas frequented by humans, and chase them off with paintball guns loaded with pepper balls, or shotguns with beanbag rounds.
It's incredibly unfortunate - that the California Grizzly, depicted on the State Flag, is actually extinct, due to human hunting and habitat degradation. Black bears remain. But a few more California Grizzly attacks would probably dispel the "rumor" that bears are friendly and safe if you bribe them with food, and maybe park visitors would stop being douchebags.
Yes, but which ONE condition was the NECESSARY condition (in conjunction with all others) that allowed the whole set of conditions to cause the crash?
Had the computer not been infected, the maintenance crew would have entered the data per their procedural spec, the alert would have flagged the plane, and presumably, repairs would have been recommended and implemented prior to further flights.
Cascade failure is more complex to analyze - and when you're swinging a dead cat around trying to hit One Blameable Cause, the other conditions tend to muddy the waters. But the presence of the computer trojan is the root-cause.
Actually - the root-cause is probably; lack of adequate design robustness for preserving operational status of the maintenance logging computer and/or alternate effective maintenance logging operations procedures (ie. backup plan when the computer is down?).
This maintenance system was supposed to "have the pilot's back" - for when the pilot's lack of expertise in the strange functions of the electrical system caused a fatal condition.
I've got a car that runs critical engine fuel mixture data off a common power supply with the brake-light switch. A fault in the brake-light switch can actually cause the engine's electrical control system to fail in various ways, or misreport errors. (and vice-versa. . . faults in the fuel pump connector can also cause the brake lights to simply not light when you press the pedal). How the fuck is a driver supposed to know that? You get pulled over for not having brake lights (or rear-ended) - and if you happen to be a car nerd, you can look this trivia up online on enthusiast forums. But the manufacturer didn't even know about these conditions when the car was built, or even up until 5 years later.
And there was also a recall, because the brake light switches were defective.
I know, that literally hundreds of enthusiasts were netted by the dealer for bogus repairs, replacement turbos, replacement fuel pumps, new engines, repairs on relatively new cars, for thousands, sometimes tens of thousands of dollars, caused by bogus error codes, caused by a faulty brake light switch. Did anybody ever get rear-ended and killed because of this? Who knows?
I only know this because I'm a car nerd. thousands of other drivers were clueless. Because of this bizarre design flaw, and cascade failure with varying symptoms.
The manufacturer's answer was to replace the defective, malfunctioning brake light switches in a recall. (often, dealer service departments installed these recall switches incorrectly, resulting in even more crazy car behavior). This fix did not address the deeper problem of power routing through that switch. This design was changed in the '07 model year.
I'd say that pulling the heater fuse, disables the set flaps alarm, is also a terrible design flaw - even if it's well documented for the maintenance guys - even if there's a maintenance procedure that *should* flag it; because the pilot can still pull that fuse, and fuck himself and all passengers, without knowing. This little bit of design trivia is beyond the knowledge realm of a pilot. Pilots are supposed to really know, in detail, how their planes work. But that's just bizarre unexpected behavior, and within the realm of a maintenance specialist. (or plane-nerd).
Even so - there is a single root-cause for this crash.
Q.E.D.:
It would be an awesome lampoon of the typical teen-girl's neurotic low-self-esteem angst.
It's not about whether the Zombie dude is attractive. You observe this in MANY real-life relationships: The worse the guy is, the worse he treats her, the more she loves him. Because it's not about the guy - it's about HER.
If the guy WANTS her, it strokes her ego. "*gasp*! I'm WANTED. He WANTS me. *swoon*!"
You could totally dress the zombie "boy" in a wifebeater.
"Brains! Brains! I want to eat your brains!"
"*swoon* . . . he luuuuuvs me!"
(disclaimer: I'm not describing normal female behavior, it's neurotic, abnormal, and often the result of being brought up in an abusive or dysfunctional environment. But - isn't it so comically common? It's always the really, really, hot, unattainable chicks too.)
The girl could have a living boy, who is a "nice guy" - who she ignores, while he's in love with her. He could kill the zombies for her, while she swoons over them. And then, as a final act of self-sacrifice, this boy intentionally infects himself, in order to gain her love.
I think I have a winner.
Actually, I believe that the current meme-spill is the "Man baby" meme.
"Double-rainbow" has been trending downward for several weeks, and has begun to taper into obscurity; though the semi-related "autotune someone else's youtube video", I think, maybe has not peaked yet.
It is very unfortunate that due to the deregulated environment, we're unable to hold those responsible to account for these hideous crimes. Look at the widespread damage and destruction to our collective zeitgeist, that the lolcats meme caused. Was anybody punished? Only the victims.
This is the hazard of the "Free Meme" system, and ridiculous belief in the "invisible hand-job" that comes along and guides the internet in the "right" direction.
Man-babies, sparkley vampires, omg pwnies, what atrocity is next?
Only R. Stalmann knows.
yep. The FEMA Concentration Camps will save us. (
I reckon that either possibility is. . . possible. The existence of extremophiles, and also plants and animals that are able to "survive" prolonged periods of poor conditions via morphology (spores, seeds) or biological processes (like hibernation), it's not unreasonable to believe that some animal life survived this prolonged event. Even the Martian climate, which is nearly universally unhospitable has niches where life could possibly exist. . . in warm, protected areas underground, water-bearing rock, etc. It's possible that such life could adapt forms that will survive millions of years of otherwise inhospitable climate. There are signs on Mars that such life exists - the presence of atmospheric methane, for one.
We know that Earth was a huge snowball; but we also know there certainly must have been exceptional locations as well, that could support life.
And we know that life-arising is incredibly improbable. But exactly HOW improbable, we have absolutely no idea. We don't have a set of alternate-reality Earths to test such an hypothesis, or gather data to calculate; which one's evolve life and which ones do not, out of random chance. It may be that generation of life is both highly improbable, and also, INEVITABLE.
Yep - our Chinese exchange students promptly logged onto the Chinese version of YouTube, and spent nearly every night watching some stupid Chinese soap-opera.
Thought you were here to learn English? After the first few days of that (refused to adjust to the time too, so they wouldn't get out of bed for school, at 9am!). . . I "broke" the router - oops, can't get to their site anymore! Bummer. I'll fix it when I have time. Very busy you know.
Then I really started messing with them. We'd watch English DVDs, and I'd set the subtitles, so they could read-and-listen. But for Twilight, (ha ha, teenage girls), I set them to Spanish. After 10 minutes, the confused looks on their faces! LOL. So I fixed that - and they only made it halfway through the movie. They couldn't figure out the plot (?!).
hm. I thought Luke just picked it up at the Bespin Lost-and-Found, when they went back, a few months later. Then, that Friday Night, at the Bespin Rave-a-thon, tripping on death-sticks, he found the hidden setting to change the color to green, and decided he liked that better.
yes, clearly, a nuclear power industry of new-design, high-tech plants run remotely by underage children in third-world countries with no labor or safety regulations, (and sketchy ties to terrorist organizations; Pakistan->ISI->Taliban->Al Qaeda, for example. . .) would be FAR cheaper.
Especially with no messy accounting for externalities like accidental leaks, spillage, explosions or fires, or damage to adjacent economies from contaminated fisheries or farmlands resulting from such externalities.
These cost figures should be immediately recalculated so we can switch over to an ALL NUCLEAR energy infrastructure as soon as possible!!!
Yes, ever since the Soviets (and the US) tossed Afghanistan onto the dirt like a used condom, back in the 1980's, the ISI stepped in and found it to be a nice, convenient little proxy-war weapon.
We fed them money, just like we fed the Baath Party money all the way back from the beginning of Saddam's career. Just like we fed money to the Shah of Iran and his secret police from 1953, all the way to the revolution in 1979.
What was their role in 9/11?
What was their role in Pune?
What was their role in, ousting Bhutto, then later, her assassination?
Why the fuck did we elect a president in the year 2000, SPECIFICALLY because he couldn't answer the question in a debate: "What is the capital of Pakistan?" (remember?)
Why does this nation not ask these questions?
Why were these secrets kept?
Because, we, as a people, DO NOT want to know the answers.
To look in the mirror, it so see an ugliness we do not want to see.
It's also important to maintain that veneer of deniability.
Those voters, who really know enough history to have known damn well how this stuff works - allowed themselves to be conned into believing that it really would be different this time. Just like we did with VietNam - would be different than Korea. (etc. - let's go all the way back in history, we can go back to the Spanish American war, or even further to Roman times if you like, that seems a popular comparison. . . ). Those voters NEED that deniability, otherwise they couldn't shoulder the guilt. Because deep down, they KNOW, that they knew what they were voting for, when they were re-electing Bush. They KNEW, but they were too afraid of what retreat meant. They were too COWARDLY to run from battle. Sometimes it takes a hero to do the right thing, when the right thing is to back down from a fight. (and take the awful black-eye that's rightfully coming).
So - voters have been pretty happy with their FoxNews lies. It's a great excuse to avoid having to face the awful truth of their blood-soaked ballots. And since Wikileaks comes along. . . 6 years later - wheeee! we can pretend to be all moral and righteous, and pretend we didn't KNOW! Thanks wikileaks, for taking the Treason shot up the ass for us!
It was a direct result of engaging in an economic embargo (oil) of Japan, supplying Japan's enemies with material and personnel support . . . we were very well-positioned for being attacked. As a nation, to say that we were not already involved in WWII prior to Pearl Harbor, is an incredibly naive statement. We were neck-deep in it, both theaters.
I won't say that we were aggressors. Japan and Germany were CLEAR aggressors, and any actions we could have taken to avoid involvement would have been appeasement, pure and simple, and the game was, one of stalling towards eventual surrender anyway. Both empires were hell-bent on going "all the way", and the US was just standing there, at that point. Peaceful co-existence wasn't possible (as I don't think it's really possible in the modern case, either).
But essentially: US involvement in all these cases was the result of decades of flawed thinking, official lying, and the politics of denial. All necessary ingredients in a Democracy. (and even in most monarchies and dictatorships. Even the emperor of Japan had to appease his generals with imperial expansion, to remain in power. He probably would have preferred a policy of ongoing isolationism, had he thought he could get away with it - he was facing a likely civil war, or a return to a semi-feudal or federal system, had he not gone through with it). I'm not saying the clashes and wars between civilizations are inevitable. But I'm saying that the kind of political cowardice that leads to war, is common to pretty much all forms of government. I think Democracies are probably more prone, because the leaders have to answer to the capricious will of a jingoistic populace. (easier to herd, than a small oligarchy of privileged nobles? who knows?)
Oh yeah?
I've got a 4-digit UID, and this is probably the best "religious" flamewar I've read on slashdot in about, oh god, maybe 7 years! Fucking-A man!
Other than that, I have nothing constructive to contribute. Enjoy your pad.
Ah, finally, someone who GETS it.
Traditional Japanese woodcut printing originally came from early Dutch traders in the 16th century, and they style and design, minimalist economy of line gives a nod to some of Albrecht Durer's work; (though their anatomy and proportion always maintained a strong influence from China and other centers of art in the region, from hundreds of years prior).
Japanese design was pilfered in the West, back in the 19th century, and popularized by, well, I guess Wright, mostly, (though really, he was stealing the thunder of the Art Nouveau/Arts and Crafts movement that was heavily influenced by Japanese art) - and SOME of that found it's way BACK into Japanese culture via comic books, which influenced American Film Noir movie visual composition, which found it's way into Japanese cinema, Samurai movies, which influenced ITALIAN "American-Cowboy-Themed" Spaghetti-western movies (upon which our ENTIRE modern American concept of the Cowboy is actually based, as opposed to actual REAL historical cowboys/vaqueros), which, in turn, influenced American comic-book artists like Frank Miller (in the 1980's) whose visual style has influenced an entire generation of filmmakers in the 2000's. . . fuck me sideways, there is NOTHING original in design anymore.
So when you take someone with almost zero formal education or training in art, and expose them to a foreign visual style; even one that's been isolated geographically (yet still has very dynamic connections through print, post, and internet) - they'll look at it like it's from another planet, and it all seems fresh and new.
What blew me away, was; I recently made waffles for a Chinese foreign exchange student. She knew what pizza was. She knew what hamburgers were. She had no fucking clue what to do with a waffle. She wanted to put salt on it. She has current magazines and books that look like 1980's style Japanese animation (color and clothing-style wise). Kind of weird. We were told they hate Mexican food. She LOVES all things Mexican. So, China, hell, even Japan, these are large countries, and they're always changing, and we like to think that these countries were completely isolated islands, because their languages and cultures seem so alien. But actually, a lot of ideas churned.
(My karate instructor is one of those guys who has bought into the theory that the Asian martial arts did not originate in China, that they actually migrated over there from Alexander the Great, hundreds of years before history records their existence in China . . . interesting theory, but I don't see the evidence of connection in the actual techniques or traditions. I guess that's one for the professional Anthropologists).
What Motivates People.
Yeah. There've been some interesting studies on this lately. And I know it's bordering on the realm of pseudoscience. Personally, I'd like to see some more rigorous work done, maybe wider studies, replicate these results, back it up with some hard neuroscience. Seriously. Because it makes a lot of sense - and I'd like to see whether this is just a culturally isolated phenomenon, or if it's all of humanity, or what. I'd like to see it proven. Really really proven. Or debunked.
Because it really turns our whole carrot-stick approach of work-ethic morality upside down.
Frankly. I mean, if it's true, do we (as a civilization. . . humanity), really need money?
I mean - our money, globally, is imaginary now, as it is. We don't even bother to PRINT 99% of it on paper. It's electronic bits. Some of which represent orders of magnitude of individual currency units. And the SICK thing is. . . 99% of us? Will never have a chance in hell of ever owning 99% of this imaginary "property". No matter how hard we work. No matter who we know. No matter how lucky we get.
Yet, we're supposed to be working and slaving away for it?
We're in-debt for it?
We're starving, hating, killing, and warring over it?
We're making decisions that short-change our future, our children, our planet's ability to sustain life. . . over imaginary units of . . . numbers used to measure financial transactions, that are used mostly for. . . what, um. . . the vast majority is basically hoarded.
And the only reason why I can figure out why anyone would want to hoard imaginary bits of currency, is to either just be MEAN, and keep it from everyone else, or just out of the mistaken belief, that they can motivate everyone else to work hard, if they can con everyone into thinking they can get some.
And this stuff isn't even really good for motivating us to do our best work.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u6XAPnuFjJc&feature=autofb
. . . apparently.
Who sandboxes the sandboxers?
Yeah, it's like the auto industry, in 2004, all over again. All of a sudden, for some reason, everyone wanted GIGANTIC CHROME GRILLZ. PHAT SPINNAH PIMP RIMZ. LO PROPHILE TIRZ. Everyone wanted their rides lookin' all gangsta, yo, and even coming stock from the dealer. So the manufacturers styled out some of the most fugly looking cars you ever saw. It was way worse than the 1980's.
Chrome chrome chrome every fucking where. And all of it was actually just chrome-surfaced plastic. It all looks real pretty now, 6 years later, all sun-worn down, and yellowed. lol. Dumbass gangsta wanna be's.
I bought new in 2003, and I'm still driving those cars today. And, I don't think I'm going to be buying new cars, especially American cars, until this whole gangsta-look thing is thoroughly flushed-out of the car-design system.
well. . . tell ya what. white-hat security engineering? can have it's very interesting and fascinating moments, on the Research side.
On the Development, and Admin side . . . frankly, EXTREME boredom. Call it "Cyber Warrior." Please. Anything. it's just fucking MOUNTAINS of paperwork, endless 5am meetings with inconsiderate east-coast goons, and ignorant motherfuckers who think THIS Windows release will be the REALLY secure one. Yay! I got a security clearance. So I can, um, do what? Oh yeah. Be secure. I'm so secure. don't mess with me man. I'm a cyber warrior. To the rescue! fuck those nasty black-hat dudes! They make us re-install Windows all the time. Assholes!
I reckon "subsidized" can be code for the way the government funded research through DARPA to create the Internet, and also regulates over-air broadcasts through the FCC. So basically internet, radio/tv, and cable news are all basically subsidized or regulated by the government in one form or another. We Await Tristero's Silent Empire.
bah. GPO/MSI support is overrated.
All that configuration stuff *can* be scripted and automated, just not the "Microsoft" way. So a competent network administrator's going to set it up and deploy FireFox in that manner, and the IN-competent, will use IEAK. I don't see what Chrome puts on the table that's going to be worth the effort, even if they "support" GPO/MSI.
There's a zillion productivity apps out there that don't support GPO/MSI; and have to be "hacked" for automated deployment and management on Microsoft networks. Firefox is significant enough, and worthwhile for that effort.
heh. If I were Obama, I would keep my Birth Certificate private. He doesn't have to show it to them, and as long as he doesn't, he makes the other side look like the fruitcakes they are.
Stealing a page right out of Karl Rove's playbook, if you ask me.
Nope. The 2nd Amendment would say that everyone should have a gun, regardless of GPA. In fact, belt-fed full-auto, nuclear weapons shouldn't be prohibited either.
And I'd say that would pretty much solve the "bullying" problem too. And the overpopulation problem. And the . . . well, existence problem.
1. It does not look like Bender.
2. It does not open the bottles with a laser. WTF? All that effort to build a beer-fetching robot, and NOBODY thought of lasers? Are you freaking KIDDING me? What is wrong with these people?