PCs are easy to upgrade. Phones are not, because they have no standards that matter much. I can't for example, download one distro that works on most Android phones and is backward compatible.
So I should be eager to sacrifice every possible personal advantage to my global "family", because you have essentially decreed "competition" to be obsolete.
Nature didn't select for "non-competitiveness" and I don't have any use for that idea either.
"Just wait until "ipv6 conversion specialists" are charging you $450 an hour to make sure your business is not floundering because you ignored the problem until it was an emergency."
That doesn't argue for warning PHBs. It argues for becoming a Conversion Specialist!
"What do we do when every store, not just bars and clubs, start to share this data and now a person is banned from every public place?"
They should have behaved themselves. Consider it an order rather than a request. Also, businesses will cater to the banned the way lending companies do. Segregation by behavior, so to speak. Thugs can go to thug bars.
People eventually get OUT of jail, and "paying your debt to society" has NOTHING to do with "changing your behavior".
Idealistic bullshit is SO CUTE when it's spouted by folks who never ran a bar. Don't like the rules? Get the fuck out. That's why so many bars are private clubs. Exclusivity is good.
PRIVATE businesses don't BELONG to the public. The shopkeeper should have "freedom" too.
All that boilerplate is nice, but if you don't want to get blacklisted by bars the fucking behave yourself or get shitfaced at home. An individual bar in the US can get a ban customers, and sharing info about those who are banworthy is merely cooperation.
The majority of the US public really want a Welfare State, though there is frothing disagreement about _who_ should get the welfare.
We might have the resources to do this for native-born and LEGAL immigrants, but not for everyone who storms the gates.
We can't afford ponies for everyone.
There is no reason not to lock the gates and CHOOSE who we may deign to let in. There is every reason to protect OUR assets so they may be spent on OURSELVES.
With that, you dodge the content of my statement because you find its observations offensive. You have said nothing, at all, to invalidate it. Political Correctness at its finest. Nice Job.
Strong men who take and hold power by force over simple peoples are the standard for "effective" (not "nice", one thing is not like the other!) leadership throughout history. Simple peoples demand such leaders and the other sort are mere speedbumps.
Saddam, Assad, Sadat, Mubarak, and the visionary Kemal Ataturk were all products of their societies. _I_ didn't choose them. I merely observe how they got there.
Such leaders elsewhere have accomplished tremendous things. Mao unified China and pushed it by force into the modern age. He was perfect to lead simple people in a powerful revolt against "sophisticated" opposition. What Mao accomplished was clearly worth the bloodshed. It's not prejudice to note that, either.
Liquidation can be applied for good or ill. No rule should be a suicide pact, and when one has enemies who are self-liberated by ignoring your (not their) rules, one may choose similar freedom of action.
Preventive measures that encumber everyone are merely a PC effort to avoid punishing the guilty.
DUI should carry a one-year mandatory jail sentence. Don't want to get busted? Don't fucking drink and drive.
As I used to tell my military motorcycle safety classes:
"I might drink 'til it runs out my ears, but I don't drive until I'm sober and alert. Party at the house, take everyone's keys, and we won't be going to a memorial service for a dead drunk or the people they kill."
"In a hypothetical scenario in some Axis of Evil nation of course."
Put functional "bait" hotspots in plastic containers that contain a tamper switch discreetly connected to any number of interesting "prizes" made from uncontrollable common non-firearm components anyone with a bit of ingenuity can assemble. A fat UPS case has LOTS of room if you ditch the large batteries. Take out enemy techs and weaken their response.
Peaceful baiting could include sacrificial easily found hotspots adjacent to concealed hotspots. When baitspot is disconnected, timer allows removal and a few hours later the backup hotspot powers up.
Baitspots could be used as ambush bait. Monitor on cam, target arrives, Claymore time. Secondary IEDs are old news but work. Tertiary and clustered command-detonated units would be practical. Cellphones are routinely used in urban warfare and the internet could be integrated into it as well. Cams could monitor targets ("drones" need not fly!), facilitating placement of ordnance in the monitored zone as well as the attack.
Write this scenario into literature. The Turner Diaries are fiction, and there is no reason other fiction can't cover controversial subjects in detail.
Protecting Israel from Egypt takes second place to protecting Egyptians from each other. Do not forget Mubarak, like Hafez Assad in Syria and Saddam Hussein in Iraq, imposed stability on people who would not otherwise have it. It takes a strong, forceful leader to rule primitive societies.
Mubarak was useful to the US. He fought Al Qaeda, which his successors won't bother to do.
When there are no "good guys", playing some of the bad guys against each other is necessary. Taking the moral high road never conferred any advantage, which is why the most successful Empires in history did not (as opposed to "pretend to") do that.
"There's absolutely no good reason for trucks to have to transport things long distances."
Asserted conclusions aren't proof.
Wake me when you can:
Drive a train all the places trucks can go, stop and start that train as conveniently while making multiple dropoffs and pickups, and CHANGE its itinerary as easily via dispatcher.
"That stuff would eventually be transported by rail, the only reason it is not is because of the huge subsidies trucking gets via free roads"
Nice try, but trucking operations are subject to heavy taxation, and rail could never, ever reach even a high proportion of areas served by road. Trains are long and heavy, take a long time to start and to stop, and unsuitable to small package delivery in dispersed locations.
Slashdot Mirror
Only enthusiasts will know or care about this issue so long as the PC they are sold works as advertised.
PCs are easy to upgrade. Phones are not, because they have no standards that matter much. I can't for example, download one distro that works on most Android phones and is backward compatible.
Fortunately phones are disposable.
See 4chan for examples of that. This isn't even a good story.
Small engine mechs represent!
Briggs and Stratton is CLEARLY a company that would have been destroyed if it didn't compete, so "you did good".
So I should be eager to sacrifice every possible personal advantage to my global "family", because you have essentially decreed "competition" to be obsolete.
Nature didn't select for "non-competitiveness" and I don't have any use for that idea either.
After experiencing a variety of paid "caregivers" for my aging parents, I'd prefer good robots for myself!
"Old people and technology don't mix."
Older GENERATIONS and technology don't mix, and that problem will solve itself.
"Just wait until "ipv6 conversion specialists" are charging you $450 an hour to make sure your business is not floundering because you ignored the problem until it was an emergency."
That doesn't argue for warning PHBs. It argues for becoming a Conversion Specialist!
If xenophobia drives good tech, fine with me!
The more jobs we automate, the fewer incentives for the backward to invade our countries seeking work.
Regarding attempts to flood self-selected groups with noobs, fuck yes I'm bitter. It just pollutes (groups) with non-serious people and adds noise.
Remember when Slashdot wasn't just 4chan with a green color scheme?
No wedgie though. Underwear is just a way to turn perfectly good white fabric brown and yellow.
I don't give a fuck what the jock-worshippers I already despise think so long as they stay out of my way.
I don't WANT every dumbshit out there to be a wannabe geek. We don't need to flood the market, we don't need any more noobs.
Exclusivity benefits people who provide services, be they a pipe weldor or a geek. Barriers to entry are fine.
"What do we do when every store, not just bars and clubs, start to share this data and now a person is banned from every public place?"
They should have behaved themselves. Consider it an order rather than a request. Also, businesses will cater to the banned the way lending companies do. Segregation by behavior, so to speak.
Thugs can go to thug bars.
How is that Insightful?
People eventually get OUT of jail, and "paying your debt to society" has NOTHING to do with "changing your behavior".
Idealistic bullshit is SO CUTE when it's spouted by folks who never ran a bar. Don't like the rules? Get the fuck out.
That's why so many bars are private clubs. Exclusivity is good.
PRIVATE businesses don't BELONG to the public. The shopkeeper should have "freedom" too.
All that boilerplate is nice, but if you don't want to get blacklisted by bars the fucking behave yourself or get shitfaced at home. An individual bar in the US can get a ban customers, and sharing info about those who are banworthy is merely cooperation.
The majority of the US public really want a Welfare State, though there is frothing disagreement about _who_ should get the welfare.
We might have the resources to do this for native-born and LEGAL immigrants, but not for everyone who storms the gates.
We can't afford ponies for everyone.
There is no reason not to lock the gates and CHOOSE who we may deign to let in. There is every reason to protect OUR assets so they may be spent on OURSELVES.
Do well enough to get an MBA is so you can rule the geeks chained in the basement and the jocks digging ditches outside.
Safe bet the Army switches out the civilian upper echelon.
"With this, you clearly show your prejudice."
With that, you dodge the content of my statement because you find its observations offensive. You have said nothing, at all, to invalidate it. Political Correctness at its finest. Nice Job.
Strong men who take and hold power by force over simple peoples are the standard for "effective" (not "nice", one thing is not like the other!) leadership throughout history. Simple peoples demand such leaders and the other sort are mere speedbumps.
Saddam, Assad, Sadat, Mubarak, and the visionary Kemal Ataturk were all products of their societies. _I_ didn't choose them. I merely observe how they got there.
Such leaders elsewhere have accomplished tremendous things.
Mao unified China and pushed it by force into the modern age. He was perfect to lead simple people in a powerful revolt against "sophisticated" opposition. What Mao accomplished was clearly worth the bloodshed. It's not prejudice to note that, either.
Yes.
Liquidation can be applied for good or ill. No rule should be a suicide pact, and when one has enemies who are self-liberated by ignoring your (not their) rules, one may choose similar freedom of action.
Preventive measures that encumber everyone are merely a PC effort to avoid punishing the guilty.
DUI should carry a one-year mandatory jail sentence. Don't want to get busted? Don't fucking drink and drive.
As I used to tell my military motorcycle safety classes:
"I might drink 'til it runs out my ears, but I don't drive until I'm sober and alert. Party at the house, take everyone's keys, and we won't be going to a memorial service for a dead drunk or the people they kill."
"None of these are equatable! They are all different events in different situations."
That's not an acceptable answer.
Resubmit in a manner that let's me play even name-matching games instead of thinking.
"In a hypothetical scenario in some Axis of Evil nation of course."
Put functional "bait" hotspots in plastic containers that contain a tamper switch discreetly connected to any number of interesting "prizes" made from uncontrollable common non-firearm components anyone with a bit of ingenuity can assemble. A fat UPS case has LOTS of room if you ditch the large batteries. Take out enemy techs and weaken their response.
Peaceful baiting could include sacrificial easily found hotspots adjacent to concealed hotspots. When baitspot is disconnected, timer allows removal and a few hours later the backup hotspot powers up.
Baitspots could be used as ambush bait. Monitor on cam, target arrives, Claymore time. Secondary IEDs are old news but work. Tertiary and clustered command-detonated units would be practical. Cellphones are routinely used in urban warfare and the internet could be integrated into it as well. Cams could monitor targets ("drones" need not fly!), facilitating placement of ordnance in the monitored zone as well as the attack.
Write this scenario into literature. The Turner Diaries are fiction, and there is no reason other fiction can't cover controversial subjects in detail.
Protecting Israel from Egypt takes second place to protecting Egyptians from each other. Do not forget Mubarak, like Hafez Assad in Syria and Saddam Hussein in Iraq, imposed stability on people who would not otherwise have it. It takes a strong, forceful leader to rule primitive societies.
Mubarak was useful to the US. He fought Al Qaeda, which his successors won't bother to do.
When there are no "good guys", playing some of the bad guys against each other is necessary. Taking the moral high road never conferred any advantage, which is why the most successful Empires in history did not (as opposed to "pretend to") do that.
"There's absolutely no good reason for trucks to have to transport things long distances."
Asserted conclusions aren't proof.
Wake me when you can:
Drive a train all the places trucks can go, stop and start that train as conveniently while making multiple dropoffs and pickups, and CHANGE its itinerary as easily via dispatcher.
"That stuff would eventually be transported by rail, the only reason it is not is because of the huge subsidies trucking gets via free roads"
Nice try, but trucking operations are subject to heavy taxation, and rail could never, ever reach even a high proportion of areas served by road. Trains are long and heavy, take a long time to start and to stop, and unsuitable to small package delivery in dispersed locations.