The Commodore 64 had a 6510 CPU, not a 6502. The Commodore VIC-20 had a 6502 processor, and while they looked similar on the outside ( of the computer ), they were incredibly different in performance and capability. The 6510 was a BIG step forwards.
Are you saying that the poor, defenseless, uneducated masses of morons in the US can't defend themselves from the highly educated, professional hackers in Nigeria?
Is that really what you're saying?
Actually, when I take a minute to reflect upon your choice of president ( twice in a row, for good measure ), I am inclined to believe you.
You're right. You're all helpless fucking idiots, and being pushed around by the 3rd world. Poor, poor Americans:)
When did Dubya sever people's limbs? I thought he only oversaw the gassing of more 'convicted' criminals than any other governor. And we all know how American justice works, isn't that right Iraq / Afghanistan / Palestine / Chille / Venezuela?
I wondered the same thing. He did say that he could turn any mathematical concept in his mind into geometry, so it's possible that he actually imagined it.
Personally, I see it ( or relatives of 'it' ) quite often when I take psychadelics. I wonder if Mandelbrot has had any acid? It would certainly open him up to another aspect of his work:)
If people are too comfortable with Dubya and the neo-cons now, let them have another 4 years and see if they change their tune.
The only problem with this argument of course, is that within 4 years the neo-cons will have stirred up plenty more people, some of whom will attempt a terrorist attack, and the oh-so-enlightened American public will swing even further towards their beloved president as the protector of all that is good.
But if it wasn't for this last point, I say let them have it!
Ah, just like a socialist.....spread the misery equally.
You surely are an idiot, aren't you? If wealth were distributed more evenly ( as the socialists you are taking a shallow shot at argue for ), then there wouldn't be anywhere near as much misery to spread around. And you do realise that the current amount of miserly can be directly attributed to the policies of the neo-conservatives arseholes controlling the Republican party at the moment?
I agree with the grandparent post... Americans have brought this one on themselves. If they were too stooooopid to realise it this time around, perhaps another 4 years of Dubya and the neo-cons is just what the doctor ordered. Pitty about the effect on the rest of the world, but you have to look for the silver lining, no?
I think you're being a little unfair on Rumsfeld here.
Sure he's a lying, cheating arsehole, like the rest of the Republican party. But keep in mind that he's not the one in control here. The Project for the new American Century is in charge, and Rumsfeld and Bush are merely pawns in their game. Guilty, lying sons-of-bitches pawns, but pawns regardless.
It should be reused for fuel. This allows a reactor to get more energy out of less nuclear material, resulting in both reduced cost and waste. The only reason why the US doesn't do this, is the concern over terrorists or spies obtaining bomb-grade materials.
Are you serious? You can't re-use waste. That's why it's called 'waste'. Sure you can reprocess it slightly to try to squeeze more out of it, and in the process produce about 100 times the pollution than the original fission produced, but you certainly can't "just" re-use waste, and the extra energy you get out of it by reprocessing it will be very slight and very expensive.
If they are considering moving towards Linux we should push them to take a principled stance towards IP law. Not that I expect Howard government to take a principled stance on anything, but still, they've provided an opportunity to bring their attention to the issues that it creates for Linux and competition.
Just because we can?
on
Flying By Brain
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
Yet another example of technology outstripping society and out collective wisdom.
Just because you can do something, doesn't mean you should.
Indeed, a wise society is one that can do something, yet chooses not to and offers their reasoning for others to contemplate.
I am not particularly religious, ie I don't identify with organised religion. However I do believe in the sanctity of life, and I know that these experiments are fundamentally wrong, no matter what justification you choose to attach to them. They go way beyond normal experimentation, because they directly affect consciousness, and this type of experimentation on a mind is not something that I can ethically deal with, nor is any product based on the same type of process.
If people want artificial intelligence, then fine... create one from scratch. But don't screw with the brain / mind of another living being, no matter how primitive or insignificant you claim it to be.
Well said. In fact, that's the best off-topic post I've read.
But keep in mind that Kerry is only very slightly better.
If you want real change in the US, you have to promote people like Nader. Honestly, Kerry will do the same thing as Bush... maybe even more so. He's suggesting sending more troops to Iraq.
It's a pity someone in the US can't simulate some integrity.
With the 2 mainstream presidential candidates fighting over who is tougher on terrorism and how many more soldiers to deploy, it's little wonder ther rest of the world is becoming increasingly alarmed and anti-American.
If the money the US spent on so-called 'defense' were put towards addressing some of the gross injustices ( 3rd world debt, Palestine, multinationals 'acquiring' the world's resources at the expense of practically everyone ), there would be no need for an army. There would be nothing to defend from.
And yes I reject the idea that there are religious fundamentalists that can't wait to take over the world, or destroy us because the 'hate our freedom' or some crap like that... with the one exception of the Christian fundamentalists that are currently in control of the US... but I understand that we can't defend ourselves with weapons from them - we'll have to be more creative.
John Ashcroft summed up the biggest difference between Islam and true Christianity nicely when he said "In Islam, people send their sons to die for God, while in Christianity, God sends his son to die for us" (or something to that effect).
Yes. Well John Ashcroft is a bit of an arsewipe. I wouldn't be quoting him and expecting to win the argument. As for the content of the quote itself: fucking bullshit! All those American youth that are dying in Iraq each day... you know, the ones that the media is banned from showing when they return in body bags... they're all Jesus, are they? The Christian fundamentalists are just as willing to send not only their OWN children to die, but OTHERS as well - anyone who's enlisted in the army at the time ( unless you're Dubya, of course... there are some exceptions ). The Islamic fundamentalists only send their own people to fight in their name. And at least they've got the decency to speak the truth about what they're fighting for.
If you read the PLO charter, you'd actually see that many Islamic fundamentalists want to control not only their own people, but the entire middle east, and would like nothing more than to wipe out any trace of the Jews from the earth, and anyone associated with them.
I can see some value in their goals. Keep in mind what the Jews have done to the Palestinians, and the fact that the PLO is a Palestinian organisation, and you begin to realise the forces at work here. I'm not saying I'd line them up and exterminate them, but I wouldn't judge the Palestinians too harshly for wanting to. The Jews have brought that one down on themselves.
You miss the entire point of terrorism. They aren't targetting citizens because they're lousy shots. They are targetting them deliberately because they know they'll get the very reaction that they just got out of you.
Says who? The Pentagon and the World Trade Centre buildings were very good targets, and were hit with precision accuracy. Compare these attacks to the 'shock and awe' campaign in Iraq that killed tens of thousands. And consider the very fucking NAME of the 'shock and awe' campaign, and then tell me that what the US is doing isn't terrorism. In contrast to this, the September 11 attacks were extremely well targeted, and had minimal casualties ( I SAID IN COMPARISON ).
Now once more for the slow among us: I don't support either of these acts. I'm just pointing out the hypocracy in the US's stance. The Islamic terrorists choose their targets well and minimise casualties. As I hinted in my previous post, if I were them, I'd target the PNAC offices when their next meeting in on, and leave the so-called 'innocents' alone. They would get MUCH more support world-wide if they did this. But they don't. They are somewhere inbetween this and what the US does. The US employs terrorism far more than any other country or organisation - and they do it officially, and even call it things like 'shock and awe'.
I don't think I'm missing the point of terrorism. I think you're demonising the other side and pretending your side doesn't engage in terrorism itself. It most certainly does.
Sound like the bullshit coming out of the Project for the New American Century" ( PNAC ). They've long been arguing for "American world domination via economic and military supremacy".
What really strikes me as worrying is that a majority of Americans will support this on the grounds that America is the superior country, and has the right to impose it's will on others ( for the good of all, of course ). These same people are the ones that are mortally horrified when they discover that there are people around the world that don't have such a rosy oppinion of the US. Of course we all know that people who don't think the sun shines out of George Dubya's arsehole are simply terrorists.
With all the talk about terrorism and religious fundamentalism, I think it's about time we removed the biggest terrorists and religious fundamentalists from power, the Project for the New American Century. Listen to this shit:
The unavoidable reality is that the exercise of American power is key to maintaining what peace and order there is in the world today.
Sounds a little fundamentalist to me. Sounds a bit fucking arrogent too, but I guess that is 'unavoidable' considering who's saying it. The difference between Islamic fundamentalists and Christian fundamentalists is the Islamic ones are content to control their own people. The Christians however feel it their 'duty' to take over the whole world. This is what makes Christian fundamentalism far more dangerous. Then add to that the people of the calibur of the PNAC members ( corrupt politicians, arms dealers, war criminals, oil tycoons, and other right-wing extremists ) and you have a very dangerous organisation. Unfortunately, this is the organisation that is currently in charge of the US. Note on their website they talk about how President Dubya 'decided' this and 'decided' that, and had the 'conviction to decide' something else. It's all bullshit. Dubya couldn't decide which hand to wank with first if it wasn't for the fact that he sprained his left one badly when he was in military service. All his 'decisions' are made by the PNAC gang.
Anyway, if the US continues down this path, we will see a lot more terrorism in the years to come. I hope for the innocent among us that the terrorists targets their attacks a little better. No points for guessing the best target.
It would if all opposition to the US puppet regime weren't in Abu Graihb prison, or already executed. Don't tell me you think these are going to be elections where the people actually get someone who represents them.
Keep in mind the way the current US President came to power ( lost the popular vote, was awarded the presidency by the Supreme Court ) before you start praising the US-run Iraqi elections.
Whether it develops further or is killed off by your immune system ( or simply dies ) is anyone's guess after that.
which implies that DNA damage along doesn't cause cancer to develop. And no I didn't go into details about how the body deals with damaged DNA, but yes I'm aware that it does.
Increasing the number of people creates more jobs that it takes. If this weren't the case, then villages with a population of 5 would have full employment, and cities with a population of 10 million would have 99.999% unemployment.
Add to that the increase in cultural diversity that immigrants bring ( I believe something the Yanks are sorely missing, by the way ), and you have some very strong arguments for increasing the number of immigrants.
Please don't let this nationalist trash get regurgitated again.
While I disagree strongly with the implications of this question ( ie that the US will have a right to overrule the democratic wishes or the Iraqis when they finally get a vote ), I would be interested to hear what Bush and Kerry have in mind. I imagine both will simply label the elections as being invalid, using the excuse that the Iraqi people were terrorised by the terrorists into voting for terrorists because of all the extreme terrorism occuring in the terrorist state of Iraq. Terrorist.
Re:Not so fast there, Sparky!
on
Nuclear Batteries
·
· Score: 0, Flamebait
Slashdot Mirror
The Commodore 64 had a 6510 CPU, not a 6502.
The Commodore VIC-20 had a 6502 processor, and while they looked similar on the outside ( of the computer ), they were incredibly different in performance and capability. The 6510 was a BIG step forwards.
Oh what a load of shit!
:)
Are you saying that the poor, defenseless, uneducated masses of morons in the US can't defend themselves from the highly educated, professional hackers in Nigeria?
Is that really what you're saying?
Actually, when I take a minute to reflect upon your choice of president ( twice in a row, for good measure ), I am inclined to believe you.
You're right. You're all helpless fucking idiots, and being pushed around by the 3rd world. Poor, poor Americans
When did Dubya sever people's limbs? I thought he only oversaw the gassing of more 'convicted' criminals than any other governor. And we all know how American justice works, isn't that right Iraq / Afghanistan / Palestine / Chille / Venezuela?
I wondered the same thing. He did say that he could turn any mathematical concept in his mind into geometry, so it's possible that he actually imagined it.
Personally, I see it ( or relatives of 'it' ) quite often when I take psychadelics. I wonder if Mandelbrot has had any acid? It would certainly open him up to another aspect of his work
I 100% agree.
If people are too comfortable with Dubya and the neo-cons now, let them have another 4 years and see if they change their tune.
The only problem with this argument of course, is that within 4 years the neo-cons will have stirred up plenty more people, some of whom will attempt a terrorist attack, and the oh-so-enlightened American public will swing even further towards their beloved president as the protector of all that is good.
But if it wasn't for this last point, I say let them have it!
You surely are an idiot, aren't you? If wealth were distributed more evenly ( as the socialists you are taking a shallow shot at argue for ), then there wouldn't be anywhere near as much misery to spread around. And you do realise that the current amount of miserly can be directly attributed to the policies of the neo-conservatives arseholes controlling the Republican party at the moment?
I agree with the grandparent post
I think you're being a little unfair on Rumsfeld here.
Sure he's a lying, cheating arsehole, like the rest of the Republican party. But keep in mind that he's not the one in control here. The Project for the new American Century is in charge, and Rumsfeld and Bush are merely pawns in their game. Guilty, lying sons-of-bitches pawns, but pawns regardless.
Their Linux drivers suck oh-so-much.
If you use Linux, or even if you think you might want to try Linux out at some point in time, you are a bloody fool if you buy an ATI card.
Are you serious? You can't re-use waste. That's why it's called 'waste'. Sure you can reprocess it slightly to try to squeeze more out of it, and in the process produce about 100 times the pollution than the original fission produced, but you certainly can't "just" re-use waste, and the extra energy you get out of it by reprocessing it will be very slight and very expensive.
If they are considering moving towards Linux we should push them to take a principled stance towards IP law. Not that I expect Howard government to take a principled stance on anything, but still, they've provided an opportunity to bring their attention to the issues that it creates for Linux and competition.
1 Bush + 1 Dick = 1 fucked country.
Yet another example of technology outstripping society and out collective wisdom.
.
... create one from scratch. But don't screw with the brain / mind of another living being, no matter how primitive or insignificant you claim it to be.
Just because you can do something, doesn't mean you should
Indeed, a wise society is one that can do something, yet chooses not to and offers their reasoning for others to contemplate.
I am not particularly religious, ie I don't identify with organised religion. However I do believe in the sanctity of life, and I know that these experiments are fundamentally wrong , no matter what justification you choose to attach to them. They go way beyond normal experimentation, because they directly affect consciousness, and this type of experimentation on a mind is not something that I can ethically deal with, nor is any product based on the same type of process.
If people want artificial intelligence, then fine
Well said. In fact, that's the best off-topic post I've read.
... maybe even more so. He's suggesting sending more troops to Iraq.
But keep in mind that Kerry is only very slightly better.
If you want real change in the US, you have to promote people like Nader. Honestly, Kerry will do the same thing as Bush
It's a pity someone in the US can't simulate some integrity.
... with the one exception of the Christian fundamentalists that are currently in control of the US ... but I understand that we can't defend ourselves with weapons from them - we'll have to be more creative.
With the 2 mainstream presidential candidates fighting over who is tougher on terrorism and how many more soldiers to deploy, it's little wonder ther rest of the world is becoming increasingly alarmed and anti-American.
If the money the US spent on so-called 'defense' were put towards addressing some of the gross injustices ( 3rd world debt, Palestine, multinationals 'acquiring' the world's resources at the expense of practically everyone ), there would be no need for an army. There would be nothing to defend from.
And yes I reject the idea that there are religious fundamentalists that can't wait to take over the world, or destroy us because the 'hate our freedom' or some crap like that
Well argued, AC.
Maybe you should make yourself an account so people know who to praise.
Anyone care to forward that list on? :)
That's my kind of virus
Yes. Well John Ashcroft is a bit of an arsewipe. I wouldn't be quoting him and expecting to win the argument. As for the content of the quote itself: fucking bullshit! All those American youth that are dying in Iraq each day
I can see some value in their goals. Keep in mind what the Jews have done to the Palestinians, and the fact that the PLO is a Palestinian organisation, and you begin to realise the forces at work here. I'm not saying I'd line them up and exterminate them, but I wouldn't judge the Palestinians too harshly for wanting to. The Jews have brought that one down on themselves.
Says who? The Pentagon and the World Trade Centre buildings were very good targets, and were hit with precision accuracy. Compare these attacks to the 'shock and awe' campaign in Iraq that killed tens of thousands . And consider the very fucking NAME of the 'shock and awe' campaign, and then tell me that what the US is doing isn't terrorism. In contrast to this, the September 11 attacks were extremely well targeted, and had minimal casualties ( I SAID IN COMPARISON ).
Now once more for the slow among us: I don't support either of these acts. I'm just pointing out the hypocracy in the US's stance. The Islamic terrorists choose their targets well and minimise casualties. As I hinted in my previous post, if I were them, I'd target the PNAC offices when their next meeting in on, and leave the so-called 'innocents' alone. They would get MUCH more support world-wide if they did this. But they don't. They are somewhere inbetween this and what the US does. The US employs terrorism far more than any other country or organisation - and they do it officially, and even call it things like 'shock and awe'.
I don't think I'm missing the point of terrorism. I think you're demonising the other side and pretending your side doesn't engage in terrorism itself. It most certainly does.
What really strikes me as worrying is that a majority of Americans will support this on the grounds that America is the superior country, and has the right to impose it's will on others ( for the good of all, of course ). These same people are the ones that are mortally horrified when they discover that there are people around the world that don't have such a rosy oppinion of the US. Of course we all know that people who don't think the sun shines out of George Dubya's arsehole are simply terrorists.
With all the talk about terrorism and religious fundamentalism, I think it's about time we removed the biggest terrorists and religious fundamentalists from power, the Project for the New American Century. Listen to this shit:
From: Power & Duty: U.S. Action is Crucial to Maintaining World Order
Sounds a little fundamentalist to me. Sounds a bit fucking arrogent too, but I guess that is 'unavoidable' considering who's saying it. The difference between Islamic fundamentalists and Christian fundamentalists is the Islamic ones are content to control their own people. The Christians however feel it their 'duty' to take over the whole world. This is what makes Christian fundamentalism far more dangerous. Then add to that the people of the calibur of the PNAC members ( corrupt politicians, arms dealers, war criminals, oil tycoons, and other right-wing extremists ) and you have a very dangerous organisation. Unfortunately, this is the organisation that is currently in charge of the US. Note on their website they talk about how President Dubya 'decided' this and 'decided' that, and had the 'conviction to decide' something else. It's all bullshit. Dubya couldn't decide which hand to wank with first if it wasn't for the fact that he sprained his left one badly when he was in military service. All his 'decisions' are made by the PNAC gang.
Anyway, if the US continues down this path, we will see a lot more terrorism in the years to come. I hope for the innocent among us that the terrorists targets their attacks a little better. No points for guessing the best target.
It would if all opposition to the US puppet regime weren't in Abu Graihb prison, or already executed. Don't tell me you think these are going to be elections where the people actually get someone who represents them.
Keep in mind the way the current US President came to power ( lost the popular vote, was awarded the presidency by the Supreme Court ) before you start praising the US-run Iraqi elections.
which implies that DNA damage along doesn't cause cancer to develop . And no I didn't go into details about how the body deals with damaged DNA, but yes I'm aware that it does.
By mainstream logic I guess I'd be a terrorist, right?
Excellent!
Electoral reform is a pre-requisite for removing the 2-party system that has plagued the US for decades.
It's been said before, but:
MOD PARENT UP
Interesting? Oh Lordy Lord!
Increasing the number of people creates more jobs that it takes. If this weren't the case, then villages with a population of 5 would have full employment, and cities with a population of 10 million would have 99.999% unemployment.
Add to that the increase in cultural diversity that immigrants bring ( I believe something the Yanks are sorely missing, by the way ), and you have some very strong arguments for increasing the number of immigrants.
Please don't let this nationalist trash get regurgitated again.
While I disagree strongly with the implications of this question ( ie that the US will have a right to overrule the democratic wishes or the Iraqis when they finally get a vote ), I would be interested to hear what Bush and Kerry have in mind. I imagine both will simply label the elections as being invalid, using the excuse that the Iraqi people were terrorised by the terrorists into voting for terrorists because of all the extreme terrorism occuring in the terrorist state of Iraq. Terrorist.
Sure. Live in radioactive area. Live longer.
You need to be more critical of what you read.