I'm not inclined to be a spelling Nazi, let alone a typo Nazi. I'd have to waste too much time throwing bricks at the rubber wall. However, when such results in potential humor I have a hard time resisting the striaght line, even when the typo is my own.
Since I'm of the habit of fashioning punch lines in nonobvious ways the odd person who misses the joke on first parsing may may be excused, although this does not prevent me from being puzzled now and again when vast hordes come out of the woodwork to brand me an idiot for something I thought an obvious bit of irony, e.g. my "don't fill space with nuclear radiation" post.
What I don't want is this BS should we shouldn't we crap that has the potential to cost lives and slow down the space program even more.
I concur fully, but that is the nature of politics and NASA is inherently a political body. A political body with no actual political power to boot. They can be yanked around by virtually anybody with actual power and that affects the way they approach issuses, which, yes, has already cost lives.
All we need is another damn shuttle disaster to slow everything down and have people screaming "its too dangerous to explore space - spend all your money down here".
Do you not suppose that this is the actual risk that NASA is considering when they say the mission would be "too risky"?
If you read the article and/or had ever read 419eater you'd know that this is an extensive international ring.
As it happens they have confederates in London and Mike can be assumed to be in England given that it's a BBC story. Holland is also a big center of the "Nigerian" scam. They can afford all of this because, I'm afraid, the scam actually works.
While the poor schlubs who actually work the scam in the initial phases are poor patsys the people actually working the scam are rich, powerful and often even Nigerian government and law enforcement officers, which is part of what makes prosecutions of the scammers a nonstarter in Nigeria.
Maybe this was just a fluke, but I can't understand the whole idea of a point release every few months.
The point is that it's a development version test release, not a point release, in order to find out what all the problems are as quickly as possible so that they can be fixed before the next point release so there can be a next point release someday.
If you aren't interested in testing potentially broken things avoid it.
Tell ya what, why don't we just form a partnership to move Polaris? Should be gobs of government money for the both of us in that scam and we'll get to play around with real rockets and spacesuits and shit.
If the US was at all sane, they didn't want to invade Japan - preceisely because people fight furiously when they're defending their home.
I'll agree with that. I know people who helped dismantle the Japanese fortifications. They were extensive.
. ..forcing an unconditional surrender.
As we had to do with Germany, since they fought down to the last square inch even after they knew the war was lost. I expect the Japanese would have put up an even more terrific fight. To negotiate a surrender you first have to convince the other side to stop shooting at you, and to be convinced that they won't take that opportunity to rebuild defenses. If they do the latter you'll need to explain things to all the family of your own dead after the fact. It isn't as simple an issue to deal with while the shooting is going on as it is decades after the fact.
There is also the simple fact that conditional surrenders are things that happen when one side sues for peace when they are still a higly viable fighting force.
Germany would have been wise to sue for peace when Italy fell. Japan would have been wise to sue for peace when the Phillipines fell.
They did not.
Once you fall below a certain point you have nothing to trade.
Of course the Japanese did not play by those rules, which we did not understand fully at the time.
They were people who, on the whole, believed in death before dishonor. They considered suicide weapons as desperate, but viable. They had been raised to refuse to surrender. You are basing your arguments on issues that largely did not apply to the conditions of the time based on a modern outlook.
But these were all people that didn't know what was coming.
Name a single Japanese person over the age of two who, in 1945, did not know that their country was in a war, one which they declared and fired the first shot against people who didn't know what was coming, and under aerial bombardment.
How many of the Oregonians killed by a Japanese bomb knew what was coming?
Since they were still, in fact, shooting at us, name a viable alternative to shooting back that would have ended the war without their explicit surrender.
Did not the Germans surrender unconditionally, but did we not have to take Berlin before they did so? Did we not bomb the shit out of it daily before we took it? Did they not bomb us previous to that? Did they not continue shooting at us until the moment of their surrender?
Invading soldiers at least know what they're dealing with, one would hope.
You have left the invaded out of that equation.
It was a war of the 'good old fashioned' kind. They shoot at us. We shoot at them. It continues until one side says "enough already."
I don't happen to agree that that's a very good way to go about things. I'm a nonviolent pacifist and all that shit. But it's still a historical fact.
I am saying that if Japan had conditionally surrendered to the US, as they might have done prior to the bombings. ..
Had they been offered any such, or lead to expect that an offer of conditions would be accepted.
They were not. An unconditional surrender was demanded. That is unfortunate. It was a mistake on America's part, one that in the original wording of the demand could have been avoided. Dean Acheson himself admited the mistake after the fact. Hindsight is always sharper. There is at least an outside chance that terms could have been come to that would have allowed such a thing, although I find it doubtful.
But they did allow such a thing after the bombings.
No. After the surrender. It is a tautology to say that the surrenderd have surrenderd, and that's the only sense I can make out of what you're saying here. Had there been no surrender America almost certainly would have invaded and it was the dropping of the atomic bombs that decided the Emperor to order surrender (he could not, himself, actually surrender).
And invasion would not have forced surrender. It would have strenthend spiritual resolve to defend the homeland to the last person capable of putting up resistence, even if only armed with sticks.
It is a remarkable aspect of Japanese culture, however, that once they surrendered they did so wholly and down to the last "man." I can't imagine Americans doing that. We would have people taking hostages and killing them after we had surrendered, just as we object to Iraqi patriots doing now.
No, you missed my meaning. I meant that before the bombings, the Japanese would have considered a conditional surrender.
Ah, yes. At least some of them would have. Whether they would have carried the day is another question as some likely would not have and a unanimous vote was necessary for surrender. Before the bombings the vote was split. After the bombings there was a single hold out and that was enough to continue the war. I find it unlikely that that vote would have been turned by any conditions that the US could have reasonably offered.
After the Emperor ordered a vote for surrender the vote was unanimous.
And the hold out commited hara kiri.
. ..attack against an already-defeated foe. ..
A foe that is still standing and concious and able to put up some sort of fight must cry "uncle" and drop its arms before it can be considered defeated. Many a man has been killed by a "defeated" foe.
Apart from the people who decided to use it, who knew full well its destructive potential. ..
Well of course they knew its destructive potential. Thousands did even before it was tested on purely theoretical grounds. There was no mystery there. But they knew its destructive potential only in terms of how many pounds of conventional bombs it equaled, a tonnage they had already dropped and were prepared to drop again. It was just one big bomb instead of a lot of little ones.
My point was that the idea of a "nuke" did not exist. In the modern mind that is a loaded term. At the time it was not. Now at least nearly everyone would hesitate to use a "nuke," at the time no one would have, including the Japanese. The fact that it was America that was the first to produce and drop an atomic bomb is something of a historical accident.
Are you changing your argument from "nuke" to "destructive potential?" If so are you taking the position that America should not have employed bombs in the war?
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, because one can be in the sandbox enviroment without being in a debugging enviroment. The latter in this case being run inside the former.
Just like you could specifiy being in an automotive enviroment but might also specify being in a driver's seat enviroment.
(Conversely, I'm in a driver's seat enviroment right now, but not in an automotive one, since my desk chair used to reside in an automobile)
KFG
. . .and don't have to sit through adverts and other crap, well, that would be heaven frankly
Heaven is a myth.
KFG
Look at how fast we got exceeded CDs in computing.
Look at how many titles in the average music store are CDs compared to other media.
KFG
... they'll be trying to page me out even after I'm dead.
Actually, you died a while ago, but HR suppressed the information so that they can get a couple of free weeks out of you.
KFG
I'm not inclined to be a spelling Nazi, let alone a typo Nazi. I'd have to waste too much time throwing bricks at the rubber wall. However, when such results in potential humor I have a hard time resisting the striaght line, even when the typo is my own.
Since I'm of the habit of fashioning punch lines in nonobvious ways the odd person who misses the joke on first parsing may may be excused, although this does not prevent me from being puzzled now and again when vast hordes come out of the woodwork to brand me an idiot for something I thought an obvious bit of irony, e.g. my "don't fill space with nuclear radiation" post.
KFG
What I don't want is this BS should we shouldn't we crap that has the potential to cost lives and slow down the space program even more.
I concur fully, but that is the nature of politics and NASA is inherently a political body. A political body with no actual political power to boot. They can be yanked around by virtually anybody with actual power and that affects the way they approach issuses, which, yes, has already cost lives.
KFG
All we need is another damn shuttle disaster to slow everything down and have people screaming "its too dangerous to explore space - spend all your money down here".
Do you not suppose that this is the actual risk that NASA is considering when they say the mission would be "too risky"?
KFG
Hasn't it discovered hundreds of new plants?
No.
KFG
If you read the article and/or had ever read 419eater you'd know that this is an extensive international ring.
As it happens they have confederates in London and Mike can be assumed to be in England given that it's a BBC story. Holland is also a big center of the "Nigerian" scam. They can afford all of this because, I'm afraid, the scam actually works.
While the poor schlubs who actually work the scam in the initial phases are poor patsys the people actually working the scam are rich, powerful and often even Nigerian government and law enforcement officers, which is part of what makes prosecutions of the scammers a nonstarter in Nigeria.
KFG
Maybe this was just a fluke, but I can't understand the whole idea of a point release every few months.
The point is that it's a development version test release, not a point release, in order to find out what all the problems are as quickly as possible so that they can be fixed before the next point release so there can be a next point release someday.
If you aren't interested in testing potentially broken things avoid it.
KFG
Tell ya what, why don't we just form a partnership to move Polaris? Should be gobs of government money for the both of us in that scam and we'll get to play around with real rockets and spacesuits and shit.
KFG
Maybe someone familiar with set theory can comment here?
Notice they didn't say anything about future market share?
KFG
35% of Microsoft's enterprise customers are still running Windows 9x and they are ripe for upgrade.
We'll be sending Guido around to make them an offer they can't refuse.
KFG
As The southern hemisphere has its winter during our summer,
I am wondering if the seasons will flip flop as well ???
If it takes the physical poles along with it, yes.
KFG
And there will be calls for huge governmennt expenditures to "fix" or "solve" the problem.
I guess I should put in for the government contract on repainting compass needles now and avoid the rush.
KFG
Could they have possibly picked a more random animal for that example?
You're just more interested in the effect this will have on the CPIP. If there were a LTIP you'd think of the turtles a bit more yourself.
KFG
Darwin is based on FreeBSD and you can't say that xserves are not selling.
That's Mach/BSD, you insensitive clod.
KFG
The violin is one of the awesomest insturments ever. It will be a sad day when it is obsolete.
As it happens I concur fully.
KFG
what model of theremin sounds just like a violin?
None, of course.
KFG
If the US was at all sane, they didn't want to invade Japan - preceisely because people fight furiously when they're defending their home.
.forcing an unconditional surrender.
I'll agree with that. I know people who helped dismantle the Japanese fortifications. They were extensive.
. .
As we had to do with Germany, since they fought down to the last square inch even after they knew the war was lost. I expect the Japanese would have put up an even more terrific fight. To negotiate a surrender you first have to convince the other side to stop shooting at you, and to be convinced that they won't take that opportunity to rebuild defenses. If they do the latter you'll need to explain things to all the family of your own dead after the fact. It isn't as simple an issue to deal with while the shooting is going on as it is decades after the fact.
There is also the simple fact that conditional surrenders are things that happen when one side sues for peace when they are still a higly viable fighting force.
Germany would have been wise to sue for peace when Italy fell. Japan would have been wise to sue for peace when the Phillipines fell.
They did not.
Once you fall below a certain point you have nothing to trade.
Of course the Japanese did not play by those rules, which we did not understand fully at the time.
They were people who, on the whole, believed in death before dishonor. They considered suicide weapons as desperate, but viable. They had been raised to refuse to surrender. You are basing your arguments on issues that largely did not apply to the conditions of the time based on a modern outlook.
KFG
The Theremin is hardly obsolete. Moog makes them and it is still being composed for. Led Zepplin, among others, have used them in modern recordings.
No, it isn't as popular as the guitar, or even the recorder, but then it never was in the first place.
If you want an example of an "obsolete" instrument that would the violin. The Theremin supercedes it.
KFG
But these were all people that didn't know what was coming.
Name a single Japanese person over the age of two who, in 1945, did not know that their country was in a war, one which they declared and fired the first shot against people who didn't know what was coming, and under aerial bombardment.
How many of the Oregonians killed by a Japanese bomb knew what was coming?
Since they were still, in fact, shooting at us, name a viable alternative to shooting back that would have ended the war without their explicit surrender.
Did not the Germans surrender unconditionally, but did we not have to take Berlin before they did so? Did we not bomb the shit out of it daily before we took it? Did they not bomb us previous to that? Did they not continue shooting at us until the moment of their surrender?
Invading soldiers at least know what they're dealing with, one would hope.
You have left the invaded out of that equation.
It was a war of the 'good old fashioned' kind. They shoot at us. We shoot at them. It continues until one side says "enough already."
I don't happen to agree that that's a very good way to go about things. I'm a nonviolent pacifist and all that shit. But it's still a historical fact.
KFG
I am saying that if Japan had conditionally surrendered to the US, as they might have done prior to the bombings. . .
Had they been offered any such, or lead to expect that an offer of conditions would be accepted.
They were not. An unconditional surrender was demanded. That is unfortunate. It was a mistake on America's part, one that in the original wording of the demand could have been avoided. Dean Acheson himself admited the mistake after the fact. Hindsight is always sharper. There is at least an outside chance that terms could have been come to that would have allowed such a thing, although I find it doubtful.
But they did allow such a thing after the bombings.
No. After the surrender. It is a tautology to say that the surrenderd have surrenderd, and that's the only sense I can make out of what you're saying here. Had there been no surrender America almost certainly would have invaded and it was the dropping of the atomic bombs that decided the Emperor to order surrender (he could not, himself, actually surrender).
And invasion would not have forced surrender. It would have strenthend spiritual resolve to defend the homeland to the last person capable of putting up resistence, even if only armed with sticks.
It is a remarkable aspect of Japanese culture, however, that once they surrendered they did so wholly and down to the last "man." I can't imagine Americans doing that. We would have people taking hostages and killing them after we had surrendered, just as we object to Iraqi patriots doing now.
KFG
No, you missed my meaning. I meant that before the bombings, the Japanese would have considered a conditional surrender.
.attack against an already-defeated foe. . .
.
Ah, yes. At least some of them would have. Whether they would have carried the day is another question as some likely would not have and a unanimous vote was necessary for surrender. Before the bombings the vote was split. After the bombings there was a single hold out and that was enough to continue the war. I find it unlikely that that vote would have been turned by any conditions that the US could have reasonably offered.
After the Emperor ordered a vote for surrender the vote was unanimous.
And the hold out commited hara kiri.
. .
A foe that is still standing and concious and able to put up some sort of fight must cry "uncle" and drop its arms before it can be considered defeated. Many a man has been killed by a "defeated" foe.
Apart from the people who decided to use it, who knew full well its destructive potential. .
Well of course they knew its destructive potential. Thousands did even before it was tested on purely theoretical grounds. There was no mystery there. But they knew its destructive potential only in terms of how many pounds of conventional bombs it equaled, a tonnage they had already dropped and were prepared to drop again. It was just one big bomb instead of a lot of little ones.
My point was that the idea of a "nuke" did not exist. In the modern mind that is a loaded term. At the time it was not. Now at least nearly everyone would hesitate to use a "nuke," at the time no one would have, including the Japanese. The fact that it was America that was the first to produce and drop an atomic bomb is something of a historical accident.
Are you changing your argument from "nuke" to "destructive potential?" If so are you taking the position that America should not have employed bombs in the war?
KFG
Actually, that's a requirement for many vehicle warranties, and has been for quite some time.
This has been explicitly illegal in the United States, and has been for quite some time.
KFG