The United Kingdom for example has draconian laws outlawing hate-speech, and IRA "terrorists" (freedom fighters) are not allowed to be interviewed on TV.
Sinn Fein/IRA have been allowed access (if it can be called such) to the British (and Irish) airwaves since 1993.
Sinn Fein/IRA were censored for many years but this is no longer the case.
Link pertaining to an Australian discussion in which the Sinn Fein/IRA censorship issue is discussed:
As for censorship being a cultural issue? Let me assure the original poster that in this case it was most certainly a political issue... else the politicians would not have found it as easy, as convenient, nor as expedient, to remove the "gag" to allow Sinn Fein/IRA to 'begin' to negotiate on the terms of thehttp://www.irelandstory.com/today/good_friday/m ain.html agreement.
In that instance... a political removal of censorship was a precursive move towards "peace".
As an Irish citizen, married to a US citizen who was born and bred in Michigan, I have had an outside, yet extra-USA, interest in this State for a few years.
Michigan seems to me to be the most polarised State in the Union: Democrat yet Republican, WASP yet Afro-American, Conserative yet Liberal... it all exits in Michigan.
Klck-klack, klick-klack... the switch is thrown back and forth.
In the 1980's in Britain the Prime Minister, known as Thatcher, used Scotland as a testing ground for social programmes (Poll Tax).
Has Michigan become the "litmus test" State?
Do Michiganders feel that they are being used to test social policies and issues (concealed-carry of firearms as one example) so the Federal government can determine what goes right and wrong in the big picture? Are the corporations (and their legal depts.) following suit?
"The sobering part comes from a few rare reports during the Gulf War. There were reports of "near misses" with HARM missles by friendly surface forces. The theory is that the HARMs mis-identified friendly radar or communications systems as a threat in its internal threat table. "
I'm interested in this. Could you give us a source for that statement... I would have emailed but I cannot find an email for you.
"OTOH there is one huge disadvantage to a UCAV: in a dog-fight, or whenever human perception is needed to reduce the decision tree to something manageable, they will always (well, for the next few decades anyway) be outmanned"
Fighter pilots may be chomping at the bit to get in on this one but the fact does remain...
If one can pull 10G+, use it to get on the tail of a bogey, and while still pulling 10G+, stay there and deliver a knockout blow then you have ALL the advantages. A human cannot maneuver beyond that, or out of the robot range, as they will blackout.
That is all the "decision tree" these things need in close combat (guns or heatseeking missiles).
The reason is they can shoot and select a new target and then maneuver beyond any threat response (piling on those G's while deploying chaff and flares (if they are onboard) to evade a return missile) better than any human can.
Again here we go. Another/. post that is incorrect and moderated up.
"Useless factoid: Ireland had to reverse (horizontal flip) the harp on their flag because Guiness already used a harp as their logo(*)"
Mere rubbish. Please... when you post on public (read global) forums... research every statement. Otherwise you will be corrected and the correction wastes time. The Irish officical government symbol "in Ireland" is a right facing harp.
As reported in this link:
http://home.clara.net/johnnyfoxs/guinfaq.htm,
Q: What's the significance of the harp symbol on Guinness products?
A: Arthur Guinness & Sons deliberately chose the harp symbol as its logo or symbol to appeal to nationalist pride in Ireland. The harp is also a symbol of Ireland, which appears on the back of their coinage. The Irish Government and Guinness versions of the symbol are identical, except for the fact that the Guinness Harp faces left, while the official government version faces right.
Ireland never had to "reverse" their national symbol.
There was an issue in Ireland a few years back when some person (a former President or similar official (?)) used a right-facing Harp on the cover of a book they wrote. The copies of the book were recalled as only official Government publications may use the right-facing harp. Maybe some other person who knows the details may contribute to this thread.
cheers
front
(Irish, born, bred, proud of it, and living in Eire... and just back from the pub in Dun Laoghaire in Dublin, Ireland, after a couple of pint of Guinness... and happy as larry.)
To add to your comment... what "scares" me is this quote:
""We found Stew in the PC section of a bookshop in Glasgow - the best place to find his sort," says Whitelaw. "The last thing I want is disciplined minds." "
Yikes. This is a very naive statement... either misquoted by the FT journalist (not very hard... see the reference to "freaking" in the article) or spoken by Whitelaw in a fit of "gee-whizz are-we-not-great" euphoria that the FT was talking to him. The individuals at that company are assisting the police (I wonder what they helped the RUC out with) in prosecuting possible crimes.
I would guess that it would be an advantage to have disciplined minds involved therefore.
I tried to reply (as o doubt did others) through the link on/.
They say:
"You must supply a value for the ZIP field"
Ouch. We do not use ZIP codes in the EU. I took a course a few years back in an EU State (WebPageDeSign)... we wondered about the predeliction for US web dickheads (or would that be people who don't care about the world outside the USA) to demand a ZIP code without a choice for those who do not prosper in the US to put their info in the box.
Get up to date! There are billi0ns out there... they are not fighting in the ZIP code arena!
cheers
front
While Apple may make products THEY think are neat enough, consumers purchase those products as well... because they think they are 'neat' to throw their dollars/pounds/yen at them.
Those products also do the job... as far as the consumers are concerned. Apple keeps the customer happy.
I wish you could publish the link about the focus group. I find it hard to imagine that a multi-billion dollar company like Apple would plunge a product into the market-place without the research that proved, at least to them, that their product would make sense.
As far as suing a bunch of employees... every employee in my company understands that outside our company walls there are no friendlies. Any employee who blabs to the press, friends (whoever they may), rivals, and competitors is a liability.
Apple have used the EXPO gatherings as a platform to launch new products over the last few years with Steve Jobs as the ringmaster. It is a formula which has worked in the past for them. It has become an essential marketing tool for them... directed to the developers, customers, resellers (most important), and the press.
You cannot blame nor curse any company who tries to stop such product announcement leaks.
It will be interesting to see the outcome of this legal "blast". It will, as it is designed in my opinion, throw a scare into the idiots who work at Apple who should know better than to blather away to "rumours" sites. They gain nothing by those leaks except "personal karma" and "coolness"... and they may harm Apple, and their jobs, in the future.
A possible solution for abolishing IP without stifling innovation would be to use a broker:
Company X will, if Y$ or more is received at date Z, undertake the proposed research. Payment can be for best-effort (without IP, there can be monthly progress reports to the general public) or on successfull completion only, and can be subject to approval of an auditing body. If the total amount is not received, the research will not be undertaken, and the money refunded.
People contributing will be those having an immediate need or desire for the new product or technology. The broker must, however, keep secret the amount of contributions received (even if the total amount is reached before the closing date) , so there's no point for possible contributors to wait and see. In this case, contributors will receive a proportional refund of the budget surplus. (e.g. the total is 1 M$, 2.5 M$ is received, so everybody gets back 60% of his contribution)
For instance, if a company were to research a wristwatch device that could monitor various substances in your blood, a lot of geeks and persons with various illnesses might fork up money just because it's a nifty thing or might improve their quality of life.
Also note that after the research is completed, everyone can offer for sale an 'implementation' of the product or technology because there is no IP, driving the price down.
So it all comes down to pay for the time of one or more inventors or researchers to invent or research the stuff you want.
But why would people pay rather than do nothing? If they do not pay, they risk the non-undertaking of the research. So they must make a cost-benefit analysis and arrive at an optimum contribution. Another incentive might be to make these contributions tax-deductable (or partly, depending on the actual research)
Slashdot Mirror
pardon my dweebness in regards to html on Slashdot. Mea Culpa.
The links are:
Sinn Fein/IRA censorship Australian article
and
Good Friday agreement
cheers
front
Flabdabb stated:
1 22p3.htm
m ain.html agreement.
The United Kingdom for example has draconian laws outlawing hate-speech, and IRA "terrorists" (freedom fighters) are not allowed to be interviewed on TV.
Sinn Fein/IRA have been allowed access (if it can be called such) to the British (and Irish) airwaves since 1993.
Sinn Fein/IRA were censored for many years but this is no longer the case.
Link pertaining to an Australian discussion in which the Sinn Fein/IRA censorship issue is discussed:
http://jinx.sistm.unsw.edu.au/~greenlft/1993/122/
As for censorship being a cultural issue? Let me assure the original poster that in this case it was most certainly a political issue... else the politicians would not have found it as easy, as convenient, nor as expedient, to remove the "gag" to allow Sinn Fein/IRA to 'begin' to negotiate on the terms of thehttp://www.irelandstory.com/today/good_friday/
In that instance... a political removal of censorship was a precursive move towards "peace".
cheers
front
P.S. I am Irish, resident in Ireland.
As an Irish citizen, married to a US citizen who was born and bred in Michigan, I have had an outside, yet extra-USA, interest in this State for a few years.
Michigan seems to me to be the most polarised State in the Union: Democrat yet Republican, WASP yet Afro-American, Conserative yet Liberal... it all exits in Michigan.
Klck-klack, klick-klack... the switch is thrown back and forth.
In the 1980's in Britain the Prime Minister, known as Thatcher, used Scotland as a testing ground for social programmes (Poll Tax).
Has Michigan become the "litmus test" State?
Do Michiganders feel that they are being used to test social policies and issues (concealed-carry of firearms as one example) so the Federal government can determine what goes right and wrong in the big picture? Are the corporations (and their legal depts.) following suit?
cheers
front
"The sobering part comes from a few rare reports during the Gulf War. There were reports of "near misses" with HARM missles by friendly surface forces. The theory is that the HARMs mis-identified friendly radar or communications systems as a threat in its internal threat table. "
I'm interested in this. Could you give us a source for that statement... I would have emailed but I cannot find an email for you.
cheers
front
front@NOSPAM.mac.com
"OTOH there is one huge disadvantage to a UCAV: in a dog-fight, or whenever human perception is needed to reduce the decision tree to something manageable, they will always (well, for the next few decades anyway) be outmanned"
Fighter pilots may be chomping at the bit to get in on this one but the fact does remain...
If one can pull 10G+, use it to get on the tail of a bogey, and while still pulling 10G+, stay there and deliver a knockout blow then you have ALL the advantages. A human cannot maneuver beyond that, or out of the robot range, as they will blackout.
That is all the "decision tree" these things need in close combat (guns or heatseeking missiles).
In the BVR (Beyond Visual Range) shot using the AMRAAM or Sparrow (whatever they may be armed with) they are going to be a bigger handful for any anti-US force than the current primary manned US air-to-air vehicle (F-15) is... why?
The reason is they can shoot and select a new target and then maneuver beyond any threat response (piling on those G's while deploying chaff and flares (if they are onboard) to evade a return missile) better than any human can.
cheers
front
Again here we go. Another /. post that is incorrect and moderated up.
"Useless factoid: Ireland had to reverse (horizontal flip) the harp on their flag because Guiness already used a harp as their logo(*)"
Mere rubbish. Please... when you post on public (read global) forums... research every statement. Otherwise you will be corrected and the correction wastes time. The Irish officical government symbol "in Ireland" is a right facing harp.
As reported in this link:
http://home.clara.net/johnnyfoxs/guinfaq.htm,
Q: What's the significance of the harp symbol on Guinness products? A: Arthur Guinness & Sons deliberately chose the harp symbol as its logo or symbol to appeal to nationalist pride in Ireland. The harp is also a symbol of Ireland, which appears on the back of their coinage. The Irish Government and Guinness versions of the symbol are identical, except for the fact that the Guinness Harp faces left, while the official government version faces right.
Ireland never had to "reverse" their national symbol.
There was an issue in Ireland a few years back when some person (a former President or similar official (?)) used a right-facing Harp on the cover of a book they wrote. The copies of the book were recalled as only official Government publications may use the right-facing harp. Maybe some other person who knows the details may contribute to this thread.
cheers
front
(Irish, born, bred, proud of it, and living in Eire... and just back from the pub in Dun Laoghaire in Dublin, Ireland, after a couple of pint of Guinness... and happy as larry.)
To add to your comment... what "scares" me is this quote:
""We found Stew in the PC section of a bookshop in Glasgow - the best place to find his sort," says Whitelaw. "The last thing I want is disciplined minds." "
Yikes. This is a very naive statement... either misquoted by the FT journalist (not very hard... see the reference to "freaking" in the article) or spoken by Whitelaw in a fit of "gee-whizz are-we-not-great" euphoria that the FT was talking to him. The individuals at that company are assisting the police (I wonder what they helped the RUC out with) in prosecuting possible crimes.
I would guess that it would be an advantage to have disciplined minds involved therefore.
cheers
front
I tried to reply (as o doubt did others) through the link on /.
They say:
"You must supply a value for the ZIP field"
Ouch. We do not use ZIP codes in the EU. I took a course a few years back in an EU State (WebPageDeSign)... we wondered about the predeliction for US web dickheads (or would that be people who don't care about the world outside the USA) to demand a ZIP code without a choice for those who do not prosper in the US to put their info in the box.
Get up to date! There are billi0ns out there... they are not fighting in the ZIP code arena!
cheers
front
Howdy
While Apple may make products THEY think are neat enough, consumers purchase those products as well... because they think they are 'neat' to throw their dollars/pounds/yen at them.
Those products also do the job... as far as the consumers are concerned. Apple keeps the customer happy.
I wish you could publish the link about the focus group. I find it hard to imagine that a multi-billion dollar company like Apple would plunge a product into the market-place without the research that proved, at least to them, that their product would make sense.
As far as suing a bunch of employees... every employee in my company understands that outside our company walls there are no friendlies. Any employee who blabs to the press, friends (whoever they may), rivals, and competitors is a liability.
Apple have used the EXPO gatherings as a platform to launch new products over the last few years with Steve Jobs as the ringmaster. It is a formula which has worked in the past for them. It has become an essential marketing tool for them... directed to the developers, customers, resellers (most important), and the press.
You cannot blame nor curse any company who tries to stop such product announcement leaks.
It will be interesting to see the outcome of this legal "blast". It will, as it is designed in my opinion, throw a scare into the idiots who work at Apple who should know better than to blather away to "rumours" sites. They gain nothing by those leaks except "personal karma" and "coolness"... and they may harm Apple, and their jobs, in the future.
cheers
front
Howdy
and perhaps enough controversy to make a follow-up mea-culpa article a winner also.
True.... mores the pity that "mea culpa" has lost it's meaning in this case....
At least Catullus (the originator of the phrase) was in love and called the failure of that love "his blame".
I don't think Mr. Moody is in love with Linux at all :)
"mea culpa" links:
mea culpa explained
and search for "culpa" down this online Catullus selection... the poet was suffering:
Catullus
cheers
front
Howdy
A little more info (at this stage) on 'Quova' from the description of an opening they had for a Senior Network Developer :
http://www.e-oasis.com/rmiug-jobs/1223. html
cheers
front
A possible solution for abolishing IP without stifling innovation would be to use a broker:
Company X will, if Y$ or more is received at date Z, undertake the proposed research. Payment can be for best-effort (without IP, there can be monthly progress reports to the general public) or on successfull completion only, and can be subject to approval of an auditing body.
If the total amount is not received, the research will not be undertaken, and the money refunded.
People contributing will be those having an immediate need or desire for the new product or technology. The broker must, however, keep secret the amount of contributions received (even if the total amount is reached before the closing date) , so there's no point for possible contributors to wait and see. In this case, contributors will receive a proportional refund of the budget surplus. (e.g. the total is 1 M$, 2.5 M$ is received, so everybody gets back 60% of his contribution)
For instance, if a company were to research a wristwatch device that could monitor various substances in your blood, a lot of geeks and persons with various illnesses might fork up money just because it's a nifty thing or might improve their quality of life.
Also note that after the research is completed, everyone can offer for sale an 'implementation' of the product or technology because there is no IP, driving the price down.
So it all comes down to pay for the time of one or more inventors or researchers to invent or research the stuff you want.
But why would people pay rather than do nothing? If they do not pay, they risk the non-undertaking of the research. So they must make a cost-benefit analysis and arrive at an optimum contribution.
Another incentive might be to make these contributions tax-deductable (or partly, depending on the actual research)