"senior police have been accused of lying to parliament about the deployment of undercover agents"
But, it does sound like he was doing his job well. How could possibly lying to politicians be an offense?
If you want to outright lie legally, you have to be a politician.
All the others are allowed to try "putting a spin" - the quickest way: present it as a positive. Like: "this demonstrates just how good the undercover agents were: not even their senior knew what were they doing. You think their targets had any chance?"
[C]ertain new technological advances, enabling systems and cost considerations will change the entertainment industry as we know it within 5 years.
Sure they will, provided the law doesn't get in the way.
Sure they will. Just as simple as running an ISP business and throttling the access to content providers they don't like (that is: providers not paying the ransom).
When is it generating little to very little growth?
Everything you listed falls into:
1. investment create growth (funding your hopes to make them reality)
2. cost of risk prevention/sustainability doesn't create growth (spending to prevent your fears. Yes, fear can be good: its a necessary part of responsibility).
But what if borrowing leads to more growth that pays off the debt? What if cutting spending in a depression lowers economic activity and therefore tax revenues? What if interest rates are low enough to make it non-sensical to pay more than the bare minimum?
Your model may work for a household, but not a government.
Work for both all the same; it is called "living on the expense of the future". How long you can extend your "future" so that it won't come and bite your butt?
And everyone here will tell you that it'll work on paper until you account for human nature. Will communities be willing to share their abilities with the rest of the state simply because they're part of a family? Unlikely, since Michigan is a state, not a family.
Don't know about Michigan, but I'm quite sure the volunteers in the clean-up after the massive flooding in Queensland Australia would take offence: the participation is and was overwhelming.
The same way you can put "ActionScript" (for Flash and so) and "Professional" in the same sentence?
Not that semantically makes any less oxymoronic, but anyway... the English language support bigger abuses that this one - after all, the political clique of many countries in this world do it every day (even letting aside the markedrones).
Because in a globalize market you live or die by the strength of your economy and not by the strength of your army?
In that case it would be insane for China to harm our economy. I don't necessarily agree with your statement, though.
Would be insane to harm US economy now. Wanna place a bet for other markets taking US'es place as the preferred one for China - say, in about 2 years? Europe, Russia, even Africa (don't have to do anything more than Google for "China investments Africa").
Never... you see, StinkPad is already a trademark of IBM and iSmell is the name of the previous failure of this technology. Too crowded for Apple to try it now... *duck*
It also doesn't require either the player to use their very real nose to experience anything unpleasant, and doesn't require an expensive, useless, gimmicky peripheral.
It's not useless. It is just simply not... enough... to... use... a... single one. I mean, com'on, in an immersive 3D gaming experince, you want to use a single expensive gimmick? Buddy, you'll need at least 4 of them for a true "surround" smelly experience... Just look at the today's sound systems - the decent ones would even have a bass-booster dedicated channel... now that's how you need to do it.
Ahh, the smell of rotten corpses in the zombie caves! Or "the smell of napalm in the morning. The smell, you know that gasoline smell... Smells like, victory"
Hint, once again: geo comes from Gea or Gaia: the primal Greek goddess personifying the Earth.
Most of the Moon comes from Earth in the first place, if we're going to be that pedantic.
Then, let me stay pedantic a bit more: "Most of the Moon comes from Earth" is only a theory, for the time being. The very existence of the water on the Moon raises some supplementary questions on it:
Most astronomers believe a rogue planet collided with Earth about 4.5 billion years ago. The impact sent molten debris into orbit around Earth, some of which coalesced to form the moon.
Under this scenario, the heat of the impact should have vaporized light elements, including the hydrogen necessary for water to form.
The sine rule does not apply. You make the assumption that it would facing upward and it does apply on the surface area to irradiation on Earth because the surface is of course at an angle to the sun but a solar panel pointing at the sun is face on as an example.
Oh, I see... and this is where the Helium-2 comes in effect: because everybody knows that a neuron-less Helium (aka unobtainium) will have antigravitational properties. Thus if filling a baloon with He-2, even if the Moon doesn't have any atmosphere, one can keep a huge solar panel erected - showing always a full side straight to the sun. No problems thus with multiple (smaller) solar panels in which one in front would be casting a looong shadow on the one behind it. Clever, sir, very clever.
There is an open source project to go to the moon.
I think I'll get involved on that one. Testing and QA springs into my mind.
You know, these guys are so greedy and so shortsighted, a dangerous combination. I swear they'd sell a mugger the gun to rob them with.
No, bad choice of words. The muggers you speak of are, in fact your banker and your retailer selling you goods "on the tab". You may want to think twice before pissing them off.
US of A could not be helped to stop using the rope to hang themselves, even before they started selling the rope to China. With a trade deficit of more than a quarter of a trillionin2010 alone and a public debt to China close to 1 trillion, I don't know how to put it in other words.
Perhaps we might start demanding that every Chinese company wanting access to American markets must locate offices here, staff them with US workers, and share their technology in turn.
Yeap. Le'me guess China's answer: are US workers willing to get only USD200 a month? No? Well, will gladly pay them USD3000. (hmm... not that will help them too much after we'll be dumping on the financial marker all the US treasury bonds we own.... actually, might come even cheaper than the chinese workforce).
Would China owned companies share any of their military technology with us? We are are simultaneously the strongest and most soft-headed country in the history of the world.
What else you have for sale to balance the trade deficit? I mean, what? Music? Movies? MS Windows? What else that China would be interested in buying?
Strongest country? Stop deluding yourself... PR of C doesn't need to invade US of A... if it starts selling only 10% of the US Treasury bonds it owns and in 1 month the USD will be so weak, China will buy the entire US of A on closing-down-sale prices.
How come talk of globalization somehow only includes us selling our shiz off?
Because in a globalize market you live or die by the strength of your economy and not by the strenght of your army?
Those who do not learn history are doomed to repeat it... see: software piracy, high speed trains, stealth fighters, aircraft carriers. Up next: commercial aircraft!
But... but... they are indeed learning!! Like: why spend so much in guarding your secrets, that's a huge cost. Isn't it much better to offer them secrets in return for... something... I don't know... money? Afterall, China has enough of US bonds, getting some of them back means something?
Seriously guys: letting aside movies, music and MS Windows (in which China doesn't seem to be interested), what else have US of A to export?
Seriously though: What about the moon's south pole? It gets sun all the time.
Seriously, what about it? Does it offer an angle of incidence good enough (say +/-15 degrees around the normal?). Otherwise... heck... read what the cosine law has to say, will you? Until you convince the US Senate to abolish it, I'm affraid we can't do something economically viable, as much as I would like.
> And if you don't need to do that, then the lawyers and the governments
> (with lawyers and weapons) can also come to you.
Actually, no. If you are mining lunar resources in sufficient quantity to be economically viable and delivering them to earth orbit you, by definition, are in possession of sufficient tech with direct military application that you could tell the earthers to self procreate.
False... you'll need to be more than "economy viable" to do it, you'd need to be self-sufficient. There's no "economic viable" in destroying your very supply of anything else you cannot produce. An believe me, the "earthians" will be able to survive even in the stone age, on the moon surface... good luck with that. Read again that harsh-mistress you mention.
Actually, you would very likely be wrong. It has been determined that the moon's core is molten. As such, that indicates that the core has a lot of heat.
(spoiler for those unable to take the hint: even if the Moon have a molten core, the energy obtained from it would one choose to tap it would not be called Geo-thermal - would it be Selena-thermal?).
I still don't get your opinion in regards with the corporations: 1. are they a good thing - because they are pretty synonymous in the current stage of capitalism, them being the enitities that create most of the wealth; *or*
2. are they a baaad thing - being in existence because the blessing of a governmen. (no, they are not created by the govt, they are created by the money everybody in the capitalistic world put in - if you have a private retirement plan, you are contributing to their existence every pay-check at least).
The above aside, you will be probably excited by another article of the same author: let's privatize the government, start leasing the moon and reap the benefits. Two out-of-the-box solutions offered by the same author (I can guarantee he's not of the nosy MBA graduates, he's only an BA in history). My only problem: he's offering these solutions fro free - which gets me thinking: "Hang on, that's not capitalistic. These ideas will surely create wealth, how dare him offering them for free? Isn't this rather Marx-istic?"
Granted, I can't say these solutions are "hot-air" given the moon has no atmosphere, but they do have a merit: with the govts being privatized, there's no reason for UN to exist anymore, thus every inch on the Moon claimed by UN will be reverted to the ownership of corporations (again: are they good? are they bad?).
Slashdot Mirror
"senior police have been accused of lying to parliament about the deployment of undercover agents"
But, it does sound like he was doing his job well. How could possibly lying to politicians be an offense?
If you want to outright lie legally, you have to be a politician.
All the others are allowed to try "putting a spin" - the quickest way: present it as a positive. Like: "this demonstrates just how good the undercover agents were: not even their senior knew what were they doing. You think their targets had any chance?"
Sure they will, provided the law doesn't get in the way.
Sure they will. Just as simple as running an ISP business and throttling the access to content providers they don't like (that is: providers not paying the ransom).
When is government spending generating growth?
When is it generating little to very little growth?
Everything you listed falls into:
1. investment create growth (funding your hopes to make them reality)
2. cost of risk prevention/sustainability doesn't create growth (spending to prevent your fears. Yes, fear can be good: its a necessary part of responsibility).
But what if borrowing leads to more growth that pays off the debt? What if cutting spending in a depression lowers economic activity and therefore tax revenues? What if interest rates are low enough to make it non-sensical to pay more than the bare minimum?
Your model may work for a household, but not a government.
Work for both all the same; it is called "living on the expense of the future". How long you can extend your "future" so that it won't come and bite your butt?
And everyone here will tell you that it'll work on paper until you account for human nature. Will communities be willing to share their abilities with the rest of the state simply because they're part of a family? Unlikely, since Michigan is a state, not a family.
Don't know about Michigan, but I'm quite sure the volunteers in the clean-up after the massive flooding in Queensland Australia would take offence: the participation is and was overwhelming.
Not that semantically makes any less oxymoronic, but anyway... the English language support bigger abuses that this one - after all, the political clique of many countries in this world do it every day (even letting aside the markedrones).
~223 years on, they are still ruled by idiots.
Was ever a country ruled by smart people? Please provide examples if possible.
Hutt River Province...
Seems rather pertinent under the circumstances.
It is, after all, the second biggest country in Australia.
GrpA
Is secession still possible?
How does it work with "compulsory land acquisition" laws - see the current Kimberley-related matters?
~223 years on, they are still ruled by idiots.
Was ever a country ruled by smart people? Please provide examples if possible.
The land down under just went underer.
ftfy
Enjoy it while it lasts.
You reckon it will take long for the single choice you have for a mobile to be a smart-phone?
Because in a globalize market you live or die by the strength of your economy and not by the strength of your army?
In that case it would be insane for China to harm our economy. I don't necessarily agree with your statement, though.
Would be insane to harm US economy now. Wanna place a bet for other markets taking US'es place as the preferred one for China - say, in about 2 years? Europe, Russia, even Africa (don't have to do anything more than Google for "China investments Africa").
When will they come out with a fart app for it?
Never... you see, StinkPad is already a trademark of IBM and iSmell is the name of the previous failure of this technology. Too crowded for Apple to try it now... *duck*
It also doesn't require either the player to use their very real nose to experience anything unpleasant, and doesn't require an expensive, useless, gimmicky peripheral.
It's not useless. It is just simply not... enough... to... use... a... single one.
I mean, com'on, in an immersive 3D gaming experince, you want to use a single expensive gimmick? Buddy, you'll need at least 4 of them for a true "surround" smelly experience... Just look at the today's sound systems - the decent ones would even have a bass-booster dedicated channel... now that's how you need to do it.
Ahh, the smell of rotten corpses in the zombie caves!
Or "the smell of napalm in the morning. The smell, you know that gasoline smell... Smells like, victory"
If you say so... I'm not the one to contradict you. Just wonder who the National Geographic think they are to contradict you?
Hint, once again: geo comes from Gea or Gaia: the primal Greek goddess personifying the Earth .
Most of the Moon comes from Earth in the first place, if we're going to be that pedantic.
Then, let me stay pedantic a bit more: "Most of the Moon comes from Earth" is only a theory, for the time being. The very existence of the water on the Moon raises some supplementary questions on it:
Most astronomers believe a rogue planet collided with Earth about 4.5 billion years ago. The impact sent molten debris into orbit around Earth, some of which coalesced to form the moon.
Under this scenario, the heat of the impact should have vaporized light elements, including the hydrogen necessary for water to form.
The sine rule does not apply. You make the assumption that it would facing upward and it does apply on the surface area to irradiation on Earth because the surface is of course at an angle to the sun but a solar panel pointing at the sun is face on as an example.
Oh, I see... and this is where the Helium-2 comes in effect: because everybody knows that a neuron-less Helium (aka unobtainium) will have antigravitational properties.
Thus if filling a baloon with He-2, even if the Moon doesn't have any atmosphere, one can keep a huge solar panel erected - showing always a full side straight to the sun. No problems thus with multiple (smaller) solar panels in which one in front would be casting a looong shadow on the one behind it.
Clever, sir, very clever.
There is an open source project to go to the moon.
I think I'll get involved on that one. Testing and QA springs into my mind.
You know, these guys are so greedy and so shortsighted, a dangerous combination. I swear they'd sell a mugger the gun to rob them with.
No, bad choice of words. The muggers you speak of are, in fact your banker and your retailer selling you goods "on the tab". You may want to think twice before pissing them off.
US of A could not be helped to stop using the rope to hang themselves, even before they started selling the rope to China. With a trade deficit of more than a quarter of a trillion in2010 alone and a public debt to China close to 1 trillion, I don't know how to put it in other words.
Perhaps we might start demanding that every Chinese company wanting access to American markets must locate offices here, staff them with US workers, and share their technology in turn.
Yeap. Le'me guess China's answer: are US workers willing to get only USD200 a month? No? Well, will gladly pay them USD3000. (hmm... not that will help them too much after we'll be dumping on the financial marker all the US treasury bonds we own.... actually, might come even cheaper than the chinese workforce).
We did that with the Japanese...
Well, well... did the Japanase also had almost 1 trillion dollars worth of US public debt and had a trade balance in their favor of a quarter of a trillion/year?
Would China owned companies share any of their military technology with us? We are are simultaneously the strongest and most soft-headed country in the history of the world.
What else you have for sale to balance the trade deficit? I mean, what? Music? Movies? MS Windows? What else that China would be interested in buying?
Strongest country? Stop deluding yourself... PR of C doesn't need to invade US of A... if it starts selling only 10% of the US Treasury bonds it owns and in 1 month the USD will be so weak, China will buy the entire US of A on closing-down-sale prices.
How come talk of globalization somehow only includes us selling our shiz off?
Because in a globalize market you live or die by the strength of your economy and not by the strenght of your army?
Those who do not learn history are doomed to repeat it... see: software piracy, high speed trains, stealth fighters, aircraft carriers. Up next: commercial aircraft!
But... but... they are indeed learning!!
Like: why spend so much in guarding your secrets, that's a huge cost. Isn't it much better to offer them secrets in return for... something... I don't know... money? Afterall, China has enough of US bonds, getting some of them back means something?
Seriously guys: letting aside movies, music and MS Windows (in which China doesn't seem to be interested), what else have US of A to export?
Seriously though: What about the moon's south pole? It gets sun all the time.
Seriously, what about it? Does it offer an angle of incidence good enough (say +/-15 degrees around the normal?).
Otherwise... heck... read what the cosine law has to say, will you? Until you convince the US Senate to abolish it, I'm affraid we can't do something economically viable, as much as I would like.
Yes it does.
It has downsides, though.
They're called things like: The Great Depression. The Dot Com Bubble. The Housing Bubble.
That's were point 3 kicks in. The guys that won;t do it... well... to bad, it is called "economical darwinism" for a reason.
Lather. Rinse, forget the well known standards of stable investing and corporate governance. Repeat ad nauseum.
Even better... a renewable resourse... profit at every boom-bust cycle. At least, as long as you can find other dim-witts to GS-scam.
> And if you don't need to do that, then the lawyers and the governments > (with lawyers and weapons) can also come to you.
Actually, no. If you are mining lunar resources in sufficient quantity to be economically viable and delivering them to earth orbit you, by definition, are in possession of sufficient tech with direct military application that you could tell the earthers to self procreate.
False... you'll need to be more than "economy viable" to do it, you'd need to be self-sufficient.
There's no "economic viable" in destroying your very supply of anything else you cannot produce. An believe me, the "earthians" will be able to survive even in the stone age, on the moon surface... good luck with that. Read again that harsh-mistress you mention.
Actually, you would very likely be wrong. It has been determined that the moon's core is molten. As such, that indicates that the core has a lot of heat.
Hint, once again: geo comes from Gea or Gaia: the primal Greek goddess personifying the Earth .
(spoiler for those unable to take the hint: even if the Moon have a molten core, the energy obtained from it would one choose to tap it would not be called Geo-thermal - would it be Selena-thermal?).
I still don't get your opinion in regards with the corporations:
1. are they a good thing - because they are pretty synonymous in the current stage of capitalism, them being the enitities that create most of the wealth; *or*
2. are they a baaad thing - being in existence because the blessing of a governmen. (no, they are not created by the govt, they are created by the money everybody in the capitalistic world put in - if you have a private retirement plan, you are contributing to their existence every pay-check at least).
The above aside, you will be probably excited by another article of the same author: let's privatize the government, start leasing the moon and reap the benefits. Two out-of-the-box solutions offered by the same author (I can guarantee he's not of the nosy MBA graduates, he's only an BA in history). My only problem: he's offering these solutions fro free - which gets me thinking: "Hang on, that's not capitalistic. These ideas will surely create wealth, how dare him offering them for free? Isn't this rather Marx-istic?"
Granted, I can't say these solutions are "hot-air" given the moon has no atmosphere, but they do have a merit: with the govts being privatized, there's no reason for UN to exist anymore, thus every inch on the Moon claimed by UN will be reverted to the ownership of corporations (again: are they good? are they bad?).