You have a certain point, but the possible benefits of this outweigh the negatives. If it's less expensive both in terms of absolute costs and in resources, then this could prove a boon to those who have restricted protein intakes because the cost of meat is too high for them.
It may be possible to introduce a certain amount of normal bacteria to this meat to help enhance our immune systems, but there are those with compromised immune systems that might be able to enjoy the taste of a rare or medium-rare steak without worrying.
And as for the bacteria-killing soaps and such, I tend to avoid most of those products, but I do clean my kitchen with a couple of them. Salmonella poisoning just isn't a fun thing to get.
Notes is good for ensuring employment in the server clustering industry, and boosting pay of people willing to commit their lives to learn to administer one of the more infuriating applications available today.
It does when ASAT weapons come into play. As the need to defend oneself from satellite-borne weapons increases, the likelihood of developing a weapon capable of taking them down also increases. ASATs are difficult to do, but not impossible, and the nations most likely to need defense against satellite-borne weapons are the ones that already have (US, Russia) or could develop (UK, France, India, Pakistan, Iran, Japan, North Korea) ASAT missiles.
If the war had been against the Japanese, then there would have been continued war until the Japanese had been wiped out, or enslavement of the Japanese people at the close of the war. As it was, once the war was over, Japan was put on a firm footing, including being allowed to keep their emperor, a critical piece of Japanese culture.
Your viewpoint seems to be that being at war with a nation means being at war with anything connected to it. I -- and I suspect most others -- simply disagree with this position.
From the minutes of the Target Committee Meeting of May 10-11, 1945:
Hiroshima - This is an important army depot and port of embarkation in the middle of an urban industrial area. It is a good radar target and it is such a size that a large part of the city could be extensively damaged. There are adjacent hills which are likely to produce a focussing effect which would considerably increase the blast damage. Due to rivers it is not a good incendiary target. (Classified as an AA Target)
Hiroshima was selected because of the depot, because of the industrial area (which included military manufacturing), and to see how the hills would reflect the explosion.
Truman specifically avoided targeting purely civilian locations, including an order that Tokyo and Kyoto not be on the list. He accepted that civilian losses would be there; his speech stated as much when he said, "The world will note that the first atomic bomb was dropped on Hiroshima, a military base. That was because we wished in this first attack to avoid, insofar as possible, the killing of civilians."
Nagasaki was the second target of its day, and was a significant military port.
There is no debate that Japan was not in fighting shape anymore. The Potsdam Declaration (which demanded the disarming of Japan, the dismantling of war industries, the occupation of the islands, renouncement of territorial claims outside of the home islands, institution of a new government, handing over war criminals, and the occupation of Japan until such time as the above conditions were met, under pain of "total destruction", and there would be no negotiations) admitted as much. But the first reaction to the Declaration by the Japanese was to not comment (specifically, "mokusatsu" which may have been misinterpreted as intentionally refusing comment).
Had Japan been considering a conditional surrender? If they had, I've not been able to find anything solid on it. The only terms that I've found commonly suggested centered around keeping the emperor, having no foreign occupiers, and trying their own war criminals. These weren't going to go over well with the exception of keeping the emperor, because there was a severe lack of trust of the Japanese to follow through on their own and not rearm. The emperor had seen enough by this point, and was re-asserting himself to demand the end of the war, but this wasn't coming around fast enough because he still didn't have enough power. After the first bombing, no surrender announcement was made, and even after Nagasaki was hit, it still took four days of internal bickering before the emperor could come out and announce the surrender.
As for the losses, an invasion force of some 650,000 was being prepared. Okinawa had involved some 300,000 Allied troops and took nearly 50,000 casualties, one of four of which were deaths. More than 110,000 Japanese were dead, making for about a 9:1 kill ratio. Had similar rations occurred in a mainland invasion, it would have involve more than 100,000 casualties with 27,000 dead on the US side alone, and a quarter-million dead Japanese. However, the closer to the home islands the fighting got, the more extreme the Japanese became in their defensive efforts, and it's likely that the fighting would have been even more fierce, with losses even higher, because cities would be bombed prior to troop arrival, and it wasn't hard to kill tens of thousands with one raid.
The Japanese were not our enemy. Japan was our enemy. My grandfather had a Japanese friend who left for home in 1940, a point when they knew that Japan and the US would almost certainly be fighting each other. He used to tell the tale of their parting, when his friend said, "I go to fight for my country. You go and fight for your country. And when it's all over, we shall meet and continue this friendship."
The detention of Japanese in the internment camps was inexcusable, but was not on the scale of what happened to the Jews. The Japanese were not routinely executed, had their fillings dug out after they were dead, vivisected, or forced to work in dangerous conditions. There were people of Japanese descent in the US armed forces.
The US did have an idea of what was happening to Japanese cities, though. I'm not sure that casualty figures were routinely announced, but it was well-known that extraordinary numbers of civilians were dying in the bombing of that nation. More than 100,000 died in the fire-bombing of Tokyo of 10 Mar 1945.
The overall difference is that the attacks on the Japanese people could be argued as military necessity; the attacks on Jews by Nazis had no military necessity, and in fact it can be strongly argued that they hurt military operations by diverting men and armaments from the front lines, and workers from the factories.
No, I'm not. I'm part of a local government in the US that assists in the implementation of the network for various parts of said local government, airport included.:)
What happens is the basic network is set up. High-speed interconnects are run between high-end routers and switches... We all know the drill. VLANs are then carved out for the various users, be they airport staff, airlines, law enforcement, or whatever, and then rigid ACLs are put in place to help prevent damage to one network from taking down others, because that can cause severe havoc and it's not inconceivable that lives could end up on the line. At the very least, it's a royal PITA when something goes bad. In many cases, it's nearly impossible for VLANs to access each other from within, though we can access them from limited addresses outside the VLANs (but within the network) for diagnostic purposes. It takes a serious need to get those ACLs modified.
There are also at least two firewalls that I know of (one guarding the network and then at least one inside), though I am not entirely sure of the internal configuration, as I'm only peripherally involved in it.
Since I work with some of the people that assist in designing and securing a major airport network, I can say that the majority of the network is fine. We provide inputs for various companies to make the connections they need, and they can do bad things with their parts, but there's usually not much that gets into the internals of the network.
They seem to know how the exact same wireless signal is going to interfere in the safety of the airport just because it has a different name on it. I can understand asking them to perhaps use a different channel, but they're presumably using the same 802.11 technologies.
South Korea has 16.4% of the population of the continental US while residing in just about 1.2% of the land area of the continental US. It's a huge geographical edge when your longest cable run is only a few tens of kilometers, and when you can run relatively small numbers of cables to connect large numbers of homes. It also helps that South Korea did not have an entrenched infrastructure like the US does, which is expensive to replace.
I'm not surprised that you have this outlook, coming from a Jesuit school. Jesuits have always been intellectually oriented, and the few that I've known who had such influence tended to be very good at examining the facts of a case and sorting the wheat from the chaff, rarely resort to the rhetoric to prove their points.
I don't think that unionizing is high on the list of priorities for IT people. They tend to like the independence they have, and most I know do not trust unions, many having been in them before. (I live in SoCal, and a significant portion of IT here has been employed in aerospace at one time or another.)
From another angle, unions are often seen as a lower tier of workers by many in IT, something probably due to the blue-collar roles held by so many union members. Salaried positions are craved because they are a status symbol. We lost our salaried positions and were changed to hourly with a strict 40-hour limit without prior approval; I've rarely heard so many complaints before. It wasn't that we were restricted in the number of hours worked, but that the status symbol of being on salary had been taken away. Time after 5pm was seen as a relaxing time, when things could get done that were difficult to do during the day due to normal troubleshooting.
Finally, there is little desire to see that much more of the paycheck disappear. Taxes eat a fair portion, and medical insurance costs aren't going down for us, either. Seeing yet more taken out by a union that may or may not see the situation as individuals do is not going to make most much happier, especially since so many unions seem content to make a point rather than to maintain jobs for their members.
NSA maintains some smaller places where they make some of their custom gear, but yeah, for the most part, the nuclear facilities are the only large-scale facilities.
The stuff tested out there came from private contractors. The U-2, SR-71, and F-117 all came from Lockheed, a private contractor. Numerous others are out there. They do employ a number of federal employees, but the federal government owns very few manufacturing plants.
The EFT falls into the Indian Ocean, IIRC. Launches from Florida allow debris from a low-altitude explosion or abort to fall into the waters of the Atlantic. Anything bad happening much higher has a good chance of burning up before pieces hit the ground.
No, no, no... You don't get it. See, if Amazon or Microsoft comes up with something like this, then they're evil for taking over basic mechanisms of the internet. If Google does something like this, it's an interesting "insight into how Google's ad servers work" and must be something that will be only good.
How many calls does Microsoft get that end up having to do with the drivers that they're not writing? I imagine that they spend a considerable sum on those calls.
My first thought was that he might have been killed because he was a spammer not sharing his profits with the right people. The various Russian mobs are very powerful, very greedy, and very territorial.
I'm exactly the opposite. The room in which I work is shared by four other people (one of them for only 90 minutes as he works second shift) and has about 14 other systems total (operations center) plus a switch, and I would get rid of every single sound if I could. The fan on my laptop and the fan on the switch, neither of which is particularly loud, both annoy the hell out of me. It doesn't help that we take phone calls and often have a TV on to a cable news station.
My system at home is built around quiet parts, using an Antec Sonata and a Coolermaster Aero 7+ CPU fan, and I still wish I could get it quieter. No random addition fans, because I can't deal with the noise when I'm browsing, researching, learning, or coding.
I have a fan in my bedroom, but it is there solely for cooling at night and stays on the lowest setting, which fortunately is nearly silent even up close.
The more I can rid my environment of background noise, the happier I am.
I don't use complete adblockers, nor do many people I know. The free web runs off of ads, and while I do avoid popups and have not installed anything from Macromedia in Firefox largely to avoid annoying Flash ads, I have no issues with banner ads. Sometimes I even click on them when I see something interesting.
The base pay of a full-time TSA screener is about $23,600 per year, not including overtime and compensation for geographical area. That's significantly more than minimum wage.
Some profiling is bad. Racial profiling, for example, is generally bad unless you have a description of a specific suspect.
However, if someone is walking around wearing a hat and heavy jacket in the middle of summer when it's 85 degrees and 80% humidity, and seeming to deliberately avoid the security apparatus, there may be some interest in talking to him. It's still profiling, because his behavioral profile is suspicious.
TSA security screeners are paid 50% to 100% more on hiring than the average salaries of the old screeners. Part of the problem was that the screeners were poorly checked, poorly paid, poorly trained, and not particularly effective.
Now they're semi-well-checked, well paid, poorly trained, and not particularly effective. The rates of getting banned items past them are about the same as they were before.
You can only get so much in deductions for charitable contributions. People that donate to charity solely for the tax write-off do so to avoid taxes and increase their wealth; Gates has on several occasions donated more than he made in salary, bonus, and gains based on stock price. He would be worth significantly more -- many billions -- if he had not dedicated his energies to these activities.
Slashdot Mirror
You have a certain point, but the possible benefits of this outweigh the negatives. If it's less expensive both in terms of absolute costs and in resources, then this could prove a boon to those who have restricted protein intakes because the cost of meat is too high for them.
It may be possible to introduce a certain amount of normal bacteria to this meat to help enhance our immune systems, but there are those with compromised immune systems that might be able to enjoy the taste of a rare or medium-rare steak without worrying.
And as for the bacteria-killing soaps and such, I tend to avoid most of those products, but I do clean my kitchen with a couple of them. Salmonella poisoning just isn't a fun thing to get.
Notes is good for ensuring employment in the server clustering industry, and boosting pay of people willing to commit their lives to learn to administer one of the more infuriating applications available today.
It does when ASAT weapons come into play. As the need to defend oneself from satellite-borne weapons increases, the likelihood of developing a weapon capable of taking them down also increases. ASATs are difficult to do, but not impossible, and the nations most likely to need defense against satellite-borne weapons are the ones that already have (US, Russia) or could develop (UK, France, India, Pakistan, Iran, Japan, North Korea) ASAT missiles.
If the war had been against the Japanese, then there would have been continued war until the Japanese had been wiped out, or enslavement of the Japanese people at the close of the war. As it was, once the war was over, Japan was put on a firm footing, including being allowed to keep their emperor, a critical piece of Japanese culture.
Your viewpoint seems to be that being at war with a nation means being at war with anything connected to it. I -- and I suspect most others -- simply disagree with this position.
From the minutes of the Target Committee Meeting of May 10-11, 1945:
Hiroshima was selected because of the depot, because of the industrial area (which included military manufacturing), and to see how the hills would reflect the explosion.
Truman specifically avoided targeting purely civilian locations, including an order that Tokyo and Kyoto not be on the list. He accepted that civilian losses would be there; his speech stated as much when he said, "The world will note that the first atomic bomb was dropped on Hiroshima, a military base. That was because we wished in this first attack to avoid, insofar as possible, the killing of civilians."
Nagasaki was the second target of its day, and was a significant military port.
There is no debate that Japan was not in fighting shape anymore. The Potsdam Declaration (which demanded the disarming of Japan, the dismantling of war industries, the occupation of the islands, renouncement of territorial claims outside of the home islands, institution of a new government, handing over war criminals, and the occupation of Japan until such time as the above conditions were met, under pain of "total destruction", and there would be no negotiations) admitted as much. But the first reaction to the Declaration by the Japanese was to not comment (specifically, "mokusatsu" which may have been misinterpreted as intentionally refusing comment).
Had Japan been considering a conditional surrender? If they had, I've not been able to find anything solid on it. The only terms that I've found commonly suggested centered around keeping the emperor, having no foreign occupiers, and trying their own war criminals. These weren't going to go over well with the exception of keeping the emperor, because there was a severe lack of trust of the Japanese to follow through on their own and not rearm. The emperor had seen enough by this point, and was re-asserting himself to demand the end of the war, but this wasn't coming around fast enough because he still didn't have enough power. After the first bombing, no surrender announcement was made, and even after Nagasaki was hit, it still took four days of internal bickering before the emperor could come out and announce the surrender.
As for the losses, an invasion force of some 650,000 was being prepared. Okinawa had involved some 300,000 Allied troops and took nearly 50,000 casualties, one of four of which were deaths. More than 110,000 Japanese were dead, making for about a 9:1 kill ratio. Had similar rations occurred in a mainland invasion, it would have involve more than 100,000 casualties with 27,000 dead on the US side alone, and a quarter-million dead Japanese. However, the closer to the home islands the fighting got, the more extreme the Japanese became in their defensive efforts, and it's likely that the fighting would have been even more fierce, with losses even higher, because cities would be bombed prior to troop arrival, and it wasn't hard to kill tens of thousands with one raid.
The Japanese were not our enemy. Japan was our enemy. My grandfather had a Japanese friend who left for home in 1940, a point when they knew that Japan and the US would almost certainly be fighting each other. He used to tell the tale of their parting, when his friend said, "I go to fight for my country. You go and fight for your country. And when it's all over, we shall meet and continue this friendship."
The detention of Japanese in the internment camps was inexcusable, but was not on the scale of what happened to the Jews. The Japanese were not routinely executed, had their fillings dug out after they were dead, vivisected, or forced to work in dangerous conditions. There were people of Japanese descent in the US armed forces.
The US did have an idea of what was happening to Japanese cities, though. I'm not sure that casualty figures were routinely announced, but it was well-known that extraordinary numbers of civilians were dying in the bombing of that nation. More than 100,000 died in the fire-bombing of Tokyo of 10 Mar 1945.
The overall difference is that the attacks on the Japanese people could be argued as military necessity; the attacks on Jews by Nazis had no military necessity, and in fact it can be strongly argued that they hurt military operations by diverting men and armaments from the front lines, and workers from the factories.
No, I'm not. I'm part of a local government in the US that assists in the implementation of the network for various parts of said local government, airport included. :)
What happens is the basic network is set up. High-speed interconnects are run between high-end routers and switches... We all know the drill. VLANs are then carved out for the various users, be they airport staff, airlines, law enforcement, or whatever, and then rigid ACLs are put in place to help prevent damage to one network from taking down others, because that can cause severe havoc and it's not inconceivable that lives could end up on the line. At the very least, it's a royal PITA when something goes bad. In many cases, it's nearly impossible for VLANs to access each other from within, though we can access them from limited addresses outside the VLANs (but within the network) for diagnostic purposes. It takes a serious need to get those ACLs modified.
There are also at least two firewalls that I know of (one guarding the network and then at least one inside), though I am not entirely sure of the internal configuration, as I'm only peripherally involved in it.
Since I work with some of the people that assist in designing and securing a major airport network, I can say that the majority of the network is fine. We provide inputs for various companies to make the connections they need, and they can do bad things with their parts, but there's usually not much that gets into the internals of the network.
They seem to know how the exact same wireless signal is going to interfere in the safety of the airport just because it has a different name on it. I can understand asking them to perhaps use a different channel, but they're presumably using the same 802.11 technologies.
South Korea has 16.4% of the population of the continental US while residing in just about 1.2% of the land area of the continental US. It's a huge geographical edge when your longest cable run is only a few tens of kilometers, and when you can run relatively small numbers of cables to connect large numbers of homes. It also helps that South Korea did not have an entrenched infrastructure like the US does, which is expensive to replace.
I'm not surprised that you have this outlook, coming from a Jesuit school. Jesuits have always been intellectually oriented, and the few that I've known who had such influence tended to be very good at examining the facts of a case and sorting the wheat from the chaff, rarely resort to the rhetoric to prove their points.
I don't think that unionizing is high on the list of priorities for IT people. They tend to like the independence they have, and most I know do not trust unions, many having been in them before. (I live in SoCal, and a significant portion of IT here has been employed in aerospace at one time or another.)
From another angle, unions are often seen as a lower tier of workers by many in IT, something probably due to the blue-collar roles held by so many union members. Salaried positions are craved because they are a status symbol. We lost our salaried positions and were changed to hourly with a strict 40-hour limit without prior approval; I've rarely heard so many complaints before. It wasn't that we were restricted in the number of hours worked, but that the status symbol of being on salary had been taken away. Time after 5pm was seen as a relaxing time, when things could get done that were difficult to do during the day due to normal troubleshooting.
Finally, there is little desire to see that much more of the paycheck disappear. Taxes eat a fair portion, and medical insurance costs aren't going down for us, either. Seeing yet more taken out by a union that may or may not see the situation as individuals do is not going to make most much happier, especially since so many unions seem content to make a point rather than to maintain jobs for their members.
NSA maintains some smaller places where they make some of their custom gear, but yeah, for the most part, the nuclear facilities are the only large-scale facilities.
The stuff tested out there came from private contractors. The U-2, SR-71, and F-117 all came from Lockheed, a private contractor. Numerous others are out there. They do employ a number of federal employees, but the federal government owns very few manufacturing plants.
The EFT falls into the Indian Ocean, IIRC. Launches from Florida allow debris from a low-altitude explosion or abort to fall into the waters of the Atlantic. Anything bad happening much higher has a good chance of burning up before pieces hit the ground.
No, no, no... You don't get it. See, if Amazon or Microsoft comes up with something like this, then they're evil for taking over basic mechanisms of the internet. If Google does something like this, it's an interesting "insight into how Google's ad servers work" and must be something that will be only good.
Get with the times, man.
How many calls does Microsoft get that end up having to do with the drivers that they're not writing? I imagine that they spend a considerable sum on those calls.
My first thought was that he might have been killed because he was a spammer not sharing his profits with the right people. The various Russian mobs are very powerful, very greedy, and very territorial.
I'm exactly the opposite. The room in which I work is shared by four other people (one of them for only 90 minutes as he works second shift) and has about 14 other systems total (operations center) plus a switch, and I would get rid of every single sound if I could. The fan on my laptop and the fan on the switch, neither of which is particularly loud, both annoy the hell out of me. It doesn't help that we take phone calls and often have a TV on to a cable news station.
My system at home is built around quiet parts, using an Antec Sonata and a Coolermaster Aero 7+ CPU fan, and I still wish I could get it quieter. No random addition fans, because I can't deal with the noise when I'm browsing, researching, learning, or coding.
I have a fan in my bedroom, but it is there solely for cooling at night and stays on the lowest setting, which fortunately is nearly silent even up close.
The more I can rid my environment of background noise, the happier I am.
I don't use complete adblockers, nor do many people I know. The free web runs off of ads, and while I do avoid popups and have not installed anything from Macromedia in Firefox largely to avoid annoying Flash ads, I have no issues with banner ads. Sometimes I even click on them when I see something interesting.
The base pay of a full-time TSA screener is about $23,600 per year, not including overtime and compensation for geographical area. That's significantly more than minimum wage.
Some profiling is bad. Racial profiling, for example, is generally bad unless you have a description of a specific suspect.
However, if someone is walking around wearing a hat and heavy jacket in the middle of summer when it's 85 degrees and 80% humidity, and seeming to deliberately avoid the security apparatus, there may be some interest in talking to him. It's still profiling, because his behavioral profile is suspicious.
TSA security screeners are paid 50% to 100% more on hiring than the average salaries of the old screeners. Part of the problem was that the screeners were poorly checked, poorly paid, poorly trained, and not particularly effective.
Now they're semi-well-checked, well paid, poorly trained, and not particularly effective. The rates of getting banned items past them are about the same as they were before.
You can only get so much in deductions for charitable contributions. People that donate to charity solely for the tax write-off do so to avoid taxes and increase their wealth; Gates has on several occasions donated more than he made in salary, bonus, and gains based on stock price. He would be worth significantly more -- many billions -- if he had not dedicated his energies to these activities.