Re:But they're a bargain if you buy them in bulk
on
F-22 Raptor Cancelled
·
· Score: 1
Seems good news to me then.
Assuming you post AC because of some security reason, perhaps you could wax poetic on the Chinese air force capabilities.
Re:The F-35 Lightning II is bad-ass, btw
on
F-22 Raptor Cancelled
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
The F-35 was not designed as a replacement, but as a compliment to the F-22.
The F-22 has one mission, dominate the airspace and kill other fighters. As the video probably shows, the F-35 is designed as a multi-role/configuration fighter. And yes, it is bad ass. It is very cheap (inexpensive) and is a good asset.
But watch out, as I said earlier, the Russians are still build fighters and they are pretty good at it.
Re:But they're a bargain if you buy them in bulk
on
F-22 Raptor Cancelled
·
· Score: 1
The per unit cost is so high because they are buying far fewer than they originally planned (1200, I think).
I remember when they were working on the F-15 and F-16. It was all the same crap. "We don't need it", "It costs too much", blah blah blah.
The Russians are still building fighters and they are pretty good at it. And they are selling them to China and others that we may come up against.
For anyone who thinks we will never need them, well, you need to back and read you military history.
I don't know. I have used several different languages in the last 20 years. While some may think it's good to be able to display a modal dialog box in 10 different languages, I find it a quite tedious exercise to have master the whims of the latest and greatest (fad) language. Sure, it's all the result of competition and it all eventually will make for higher productivity, but really, I have a project to do now and I don't have time to figure out a new and arbitrarily different syntax just because some manager gets a bug up his ass and decides that this formerly language A shop is now a language B shop.
It seems to me that at some point, it would be better for the industry if at least some constructs always, always, always had the same syntax and usage. For instance...iterations, assignments, math, comments.
The never ending "language of the quarter that will obsolete all others" is getting pretty old and irritating. Jazz, C#, C++, C-+, Swing, Mamba, Cow, Shell, Ahhhhhh!
O'Rielly is going to run out of freaking animals for their books.
Well, read the link. The Nation Guard was stationed there. If it is contest between what you and your friend says and the National Guard, I'll go with the Guard.
Summary: No water Shortage. No food Shortage. No murders, rapes, etc.
It was all media bullshit that made for dramatic stories.
It may make you feel better to blame Bush for imaginary problems, but to the extend there were problems, Nagel and Blanco were the primary fuck ups. The most you can blame FEMA and Bush for is not telling the dipsticks in LA government to get the hell out of the way and then do what needed to be done.
Nagel should have evacuated the fucking city like he was asked to do.
I bet I could find ten individuals with the talent, pay them $100k for for two years plus $400k incentive to get it done right and on time. The job would get done and there would still be money left over.
At $100,000 per employee, you could hire 10 developers, buy all the best equipment and development tools and spend 10 years on the project and still have money left over.
Remember, this is the kind of process they would bring to health care.
You say "event", meaning, I assume, some action the government has taken. There are also secrets that are not so much actions as information that could be used by someone to perpetrate some kind of harm.
But...right off the top of my head...
1. Clandestine intelligence operations. 2. Ongoing law enforcement investigations. 3. Defense development projects 4. And of course, UFOs.
Arguing the extremes merely reduces the discussion to black and white, allowing it to proceed with everyone on the same page...i.e. leaking national secrets is a bad thing or a good thing.
"Depends" makes for a messy discussions with people quibbling over the relative seriousness of one particular leak over another.
I would prefer that allegations of such abuses be considered by our elected leaders (who were fully informed, despite their lame protestations) performing their mandated oversight duties, and then be dealt with in a manner that falls within the rule of law and is best for the over all good of the nation.
I would not prefer to have some political hack with a grudge or some young and dumb idealist decide for the entire nation what should be done with said allegations.
Two groups of documents, the memos describing and authorizing, and the pictures. Both of which a great majority of wikileak supporters would consider more than appropriate for publication.
Obama has released the memos, to much controversy, but not the pictures, to even more controversy. But then, he is the President, with access to the necessary resources to decide what he believes is in the best interest of the nation. He was elected to make these decisions.
Wikileaks, on the other hand, is not elected by anyone and is not accountable to anyone. Not even in an economic sense because they don't have "consumers" as such that they rely on to remain open.
I ask you, should Wikileaks substitute its judgment for the the judgment of a very popular President, with access to all the necessary information to decide what is best for the country and who is arguably very sympathetic to the same constituency that support wikileaks?
The difference is accountability. If Obama's judgment is incorrect and results in harm, he will most certainly be held accountable at the next election. If Wikileak's judgment is wrong, how will they be accountable?
Slashdot Mirror
Noted.
Seems good news to me then.
Assuming you post AC because of some security reason, perhaps you could wax poetic on the Chinese air force capabilities.
The F-35 was not designed as a replacement, but as a compliment to the F-22.
The F-22 has one mission, dominate the airspace and kill other fighters. As the video probably shows, the F-35 is designed as a multi-role/configuration fighter. And yes, it is bad ass. It is very cheap (inexpensive) and is a good asset.
But watch out, as I said earlier, the Russians are still build fighters and they are pretty good at it.
The per unit cost is so high because they are buying far fewer than they originally planned (1200, I think).
I remember when they were working on the F-15 and F-16. It was all the same crap. "We don't need it", "It costs too much", blah blah blah.
The Russians are still building fighters and they are pretty good at it. And they are selling them to China and others that we may come up against.
For anyone who thinks we will never need them, well, you need to back and read you military history.
"The modern world basically decided to get rid of all these stupid laws and regulations..."
We still have Blasphemy laws, they just changed the subject of the blasphemy from Religion to a hodgepodge of special interest groups.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/07/17/hate-crimes-law-expansion_n_237389.html
Hot and Wet. That's good when you're with a women, it sucks when you are in the jungle.
I don't know. I have used several different languages in the last 20 years. While some may think it's good to be able to display a modal dialog box in 10 different languages, I find it a quite tedious exercise to have master the whims of the latest and greatest (fad) language. Sure, it's all the result of competition and it all eventually will make for higher productivity, but really, I have a project to do now and I don't have time to figure out a new and arbitrarily different syntax just because some manager gets a bug up his ass and decides that this formerly language A shop is now a language B shop.
It seems to me that at some point, it would be better for the industry if at least some constructs always, always, always had the same syntax and usage. For instance...iterations, assignments, math, comments.
The never ending "language of the quarter that will obsolete all others" is getting pretty old and irritating. Jazz, C#, C++, C-+, Swing, Mamba, Cow, Shell, Ahhhhhh!
O'Rielly is going to run out of freaking animals for their books.
Lots of old bald pilots though.
"considering that the wealthier (presumably white) parts of the city had left these people behind without the consideration you would show a dog."
They were left in NOLA by the Black mayor, the black police chief, and the Democrat State government. The feds said get out, they didn't.
You clearly are getting your info from the lying bastards in the press. They clearly had no idea what they were talking about.
Well, read the link. The Nation Guard was stationed there. If it is contest between what you and your friend says and the National Guard, I'll go with the Guard.
Ahem,
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2006/05/katrina_what_the_media_missed.html
Summary:
No water Shortage.
No food Shortage.
No murders, rapes, etc.
It was all media bullshit that made for dramatic stories.
It may make you feel better to blame Bush for imaginary problems, but to the extend there were problems, Nagel and Blanco were the primary fuck ups. The most you can blame FEMA and Bush for is not telling the dipsticks in LA government to get the hell out of the way and then do what needed to be done.
Nagel should have evacuated the fucking city like he was asked to do.
Don't hold your breath waiting for them to start behaving like that here. Jerry Springer has nothing on these guys.
I bet I could find ten individuals with the talent, pay them $100k for for two years plus $400k incentive to get it done right and on time. The job would get done and there would still be money left over.
Maybe they didn't like my sig.
I forgot to add, they could start from scratch and build it from the ground up.
At $100,000 per employee, you could hire 10 developers, buy all the best equipment and development tools and spend 10 years on the project and still have money left over.
Remember, this is the kind of process they would bring to health care.
You say "event", meaning, I assume, some action the government has taken. There are also secrets that are not so much actions as information that could be used by someone to perpetrate some kind of harm.
But...right off the top of my head...
1. Clandestine intelligence operations.
2. Ongoing law enforcement investigations.
3. Defense development projects
4. And of course, UFOs.
To be wary and cautious of those in power is a good thing.
To be distrustful and paranoid to the point where people take the law into their own hands is not a good thing.
Until someone crashes while gawking at the bleeding billboards?
"Wikileaks is but one place for individuals to research what their governments are doing"
But then, you have only the word of the leaker. How many "fake, but accurate" documents are in Wikileaks?
This is true, but still, perhaps the greatest leaker of all did not gain even one penny from his leaking...Deep Throat.
Arguing the extremes merely reduces the discussion to black and white, allowing it to proceed with everyone on the same page...i.e. leaking national secrets is a bad thing or a good thing.
"Depends" makes for a messy discussions with people quibbling over the relative seriousness of one particular leak over another.
I would prefer that allegations of such abuses be considered by our elected leaders (who were fully informed, despite their lame protestations) performing their mandated oversight duties, and then be dealt with in a manner that falls within the rule of law and is best for the over all good of the nation.
I would not prefer to have some political hack with a grudge or some young and dumb idealist decide for the entire nation what should be done with said allegations.
I submit to you the "torture" controversy.
Two groups of documents, the memos describing and authorizing, and the pictures. Both of which a great majority of wikileak supporters would consider more than appropriate for publication.
Obama has released the memos, to much controversy, but not the pictures, to even more controversy. But then, he is the President, with access to the necessary resources to decide what he believes is in the best interest of the nation. He was elected to make these decisions.
Wikileaks, on the other hand, is not elected by anyone and is not accountable to anyone. Not even in an economic sense because they don't have "consumers" as such that they rely on to remain open.
I ask you, should Wikileaks substitute its judgment for the the judgment of a very popular President, with access to all the necessary information to decide what is best for the country and who is arguably very sympathetic to the same constituency that support wikileaks?
The difference is accountability. If Obama's judgment is incorrect and results in harm, he will most certainly be held accountable at the next election. If Wikileak's judgment is wrong, how will they be accountable?
I don't think many people would disagree with the notion that information is often leaked for partisan and/or personal reasons not related to money.