The Davidians, fortunately, didn't do what they should have and instantly surrender. They asked for what happened to them, and given the toxicity of religion I'm fine with them provoking their own destruction.
There is no reason to negotiate with people who rebel against the state, and every reason to kill them. Killing rebels poses an appropriate, stabilizing "barrier to entry" to power. Either get voted in, or fight a successful revolution.
The user will have the choice to reject Google just as the masses moved away from AOL.
Remember when AOL dialup was a Good Thing because of their fast connection speeds, and that at the time their software sucked much less than it does now?
"This gives a stupid reason for Peta and other hippies to try to ban 'real' meat and put everybody to eat artificially produced meat."
At that point, the only appropriate way to deal with such fanatics would be violence. Laws are only worth obeying if they are not overly oppressive, and submitting to the demands of others only worth while if those demands are reasonable.
Our Founders had to kill and maim thousands of British and Hessians to buy our freedom. Violence in defence of freedom is no vice.
"Imagine what happens if the pirates capture a large vessel that actually DOES have that 35mm AP thing mounted."
Put a JDAM into it. Take the loss. Kill the enemy. The historic method that works against pirates is to kill them, destroy their land bases where practical, and keep killing them until they quit. Ruthlessness without rules is all that works against some enemies.
Never, ever forget that rules only restrain those who obey them. Rules do not make power, only limit and guide it.
Fine. Let them pay for it. If they do it first that doesn't mean we won't eventually benefit. The US has paid dearly for the burden of prideful leadership while others profit from our effort. Why not flip the situation and let someone else foot the bill?
That's why we should drop manned spaceflight as a priority and tackle that dangerous job with remotely operated systems.
Think about it. Why, precisely, should _NASA_ pursue manned spaceflight when we can get more benefit from focusing on (instead of neglecting) unmanned systems which can have much faster development cycles?
There are other ways than NASA to put people in space, machines should be developed to remove the necessity for (expensive) human physical labor, and this argues for dropping manned NASA programs.
Their launches would be much "safer" if they concentrated on useful research instead of the absurd focus on sending people into space. There is no reason to rush the process, and we need to improve robots (which are expendable and can serve us everywhere) more then we need to send tourists for a ride.
If there is something that an automaton cannnot currently do, it is better to improve the machine than send humans. Humans are delicate, burdensome to support, require excessive safety precautions because society overvalues them (compare to the vigorous level of Terran exploration that used expendable ships and crews) and are a limiting factor rather than an enhancement.
We should dump tourism on the for-profit commercial space community and on foreign countries. We don't have to lead to benefit from technology any more than did the current beneficiaries of OUR technology. The Cold War is over and the penis-waving that drove manned missions can end.
There is an easy way around the problem, which is not to play in the first place.
Just as other peoples business models aren't my problem, the Cloud (of hot air as far as I'm concerned) isn't my problem.
Let the early adopters be examples to others. I won't feel a thing when they run into difficulty, for the moral is as always, "back up your stuff or deserve to lose it".
I can carry all the "Cloud" I need in my wallet or pocket while having backups wherever I like. Portable apps (hooray for Thinstall!)and portable VMs just get better and better, but don't generate page hits like Cloud hype.
The only way to compete with cheap labor is to have...cheap labor. The realignment is going to be painful, but as generations come in with lowered expectations it may not be overly disruptive.
"The Heinlein fan in me says this will happen with war and starvation."
The trick is to be the killers instead of the dead, and the fed instead of the starving. Should it come down to that, I suspect we'll find it easy to shitcan idealism and kill our competition.
Given a choice between theirs and ours, I'll choose ours.
"It's surprisingly expeinsive to leave old computers turned on."
It's also cheap to convert them to passive heatsinks from ones junk drawer, underclock them, and replace power supply fans with something slower. I don't find the time to set it up "costly" (YMMV) because, being a geek, it's relaxing and fun.
"In the UK we do at least give the majority of our prisoners the chance of rehabilitation."
Letting him go early (the idea of rehabilitation is nonsense) won't deter others. If this guy didn't want to go to prison he would have made the adult choice not to fuck with computers that belong to other people. Wreck him as an example to those who think they have a right to pwn any machine they can access.
IAAAM. (I Am An Aircraft Mechanic.) Aircraft are tender, soft, and made mostly of aluminum, magnesium, and composites.
They are rather like balloons, and don't make very large holes when they crash. Wings are crumply, with smaller parts like engine cores (not the whole turbofan, just the inner bits) and landing gear being the solid bits that survive impact.
With all the efforts at security, why did people with obviously Muslim names make it into the bidding process without triggering immediate investigation?
Slashdot Mirror
Slaves are normally fed, even in concentration camps.
This is not "compensation" due to the coercive nature of the labor arrangement. :)
"But if they are, CoS will soon have its own Waco."
There's is nothing bad about that prospect except the possibility of government casualties.
ProTip:
Don't storm bunkered enemy with infantry until there are no enemy left alive.
The Davidians, fortunately, didn't do what they should have and instantly surrender. They asked for what happened to them, and given the toxicity of religion I'm fine with them provoking their own destruction.
There is no reason to negotiate with people who rebel against the state, and every reason to kill them. Killing rebels poses an appropriate, stabilizing "barrier to entry" to power. Either get voted in, or fight a successful revolution.
The user will have the choice to reject Google just as the masses moved away from AOL.
Remember when AOL dialup was a Good Thing because of their fast connection speeds, and that at the time their software sucked much less than it does now?
Beware hubris, for it provokes smackdowns. :)
"Mainstream" does not at all exclude abusing the flock.
Note the HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS of dollars paid by the Catholic Church to dampen the scandal caused by their decades-long support of rampant pedophilia.
Given the lawyers such money would buy, the willingness to hand out that level of settlement/hush money is telling.
"What's up with all the Chrome on ARM astroturfing around here...? It's quite obvious, guys."
Slashdot has turned into Chromedot, a frenzied example of browser appliance worship.
"This gives a stupid reason for Peta and other hippies to try to ban 'real' meat and put everybody to eat artificially produced meat."
At that point, the only appropriate way to deal with such fanatics would be violence. Laws are only worth obeying if they are not overly oppressive, and submitting to the demands of others only worth while if those demands are reasonable.
Our Founders had to kill and maim thousands of British and Hessians to buy our freedom. Violence in defence of freedom is no vice.
"At least when the Optiplex GX260 power supplies all failed a few years ago, it was easy enough to fix them. These things are abhorrent."
When the motherboards failed on GX260s a few years ago, it was a monumental pain in the ass.
"Imagine what happens if the pirates capture a large vessel that actually DOES have that 35mm AP thing mounted."
Put a JDAM into it. Take the loss. Kill the enemy.
The historic method that works against pirates is to kill them, destroy their land bases where practical, and keep killing them until they quit. Ruthlessness without rules is all that works against some enemies.
Never, ever forget that rules only restrain those who obey them. Rules do not make power, only limit and guide it.
Their reasoning doesn't matter. Stopping them matters. The pirates of old were often poor before taking up piracy.
If they are dead, they are stopped.
Cute, but with many eyes all fakequotes are shallow:
http://sydwalker.info/blog/2008/12/08/having-fun-falsifying-history/
Fine. Let them pay for it.
If they do it first that doesn't mean we won't eventually benefit.
The US has paid dearly for the burden of prideful leadership while others profit from our effort. Why not flip the situation and
let someone else foot the bill?
That's why we should drop manned spaceflight as a priority and tackle that dangerous job with remotely operated systems.
Think about it. Why, precisely, should _NASA_ pursue manned spaceflight when we can get more benefit from focusing on (instead of neglecting) unmanned systems which can have much faster development cycles?
There are other ways than NASA to put people in space, machines should be developed to remove the necessity for (expensive) human physical labor, and this argues for dropping manned NASA programs.
Their launches would be much "safer" if they concentrated on useful research instead of the absurd focus on sending people into space.
There is no reason to rush the process, and we need to improve robots (which are expendable and can serve us everywhere) more then we need to send tourists for a ride.
If there is something that an automaton cannnot currently do, it is better to improve the machine than send humans. Humans are delicate, burdensome to support, require excessive safety precautions because society overvalues them (compare to the vigorous level of Terran exploration that used expendable ships and crews) and are a limiting factor rather than an enhancement.
We should dump tourism on the for-profit commercial space community and on foreign countries. We don't have to lead to benefit from technology any more than did the current beneficiaries of OUR technology. The Cold War is over and the penis-waving that drove manned missions can end.
There is an easy way around the problem, which is not to play in the first place.
Just as other peoples business models aren't my problem, the Cloud (of hot air as far as I'm concerned) isn't my problem.
Let the early adopters be examples to others. I won't feel a thing when they run into difficulty, for the moral is as always, "back up your stuff or deserve to lose it".
I can carry all the "Cloud" I need in my wallet or pocket while having backups wherever I like. Portable apps (hooray for Thinstall!)and portable VMs just get better and better, but don't generate page hits like Cloud hype.
The only way to compete with cheap labor is to have...cheap labor. The realignment is going to be painful, but as generations come in with lowered expectations it may not be overly disruptive.
"The Heinlein fan in me says this will happen with war and starvation."
The trick is to be the killers instead of the dead, and the fed instead of the starving. Should it come down to that, I suspect we'll find it easy to shitcan idealism and kill our competition.
Given a choice between theirs and ours, I'll choose ours.
"4chan for Harvard?"
Lulzworthy!
I favor anything that "helps" the public view graduates of such schools with less respect.
Since the internet rarely forgets, it will be a hoot when some of this comes back to bite the high and mighty as they rise up the political ladder.
"It's surprisingly expeinsive to leave old computers turned on."
It's also cheap to convert them to passive heatsinks from ones junk drawer, underclock them, and replace power supply fans with something slower.
I don't find the time to set it up "costly" (YMMV) because, being a geek, it's relaxing and fun.
"It's pretty sad that Linux has taken market share from good companies like Sun at least as much as Microsoft."
Not sad at all for OS consumers.
Given the swill US rivers dump into oceans, perhaps combining this process with pollutant separation would improve the outflow while generating power.
"If I was his defense attorney, it sure the hell would."
If he loses, at least sue the prison for not providing a hugbox...
"In the UK we do at least give the majority of our prisoners the chance of rehabilitation."
Letting him go early (the idea of rehabilitation is nonsense) won't deter others. If this guy didn't want to go to prison he would have made the adult choice not to fuck with computers that belong to other people. Wreck him as an example to those who think they have a right to pwn any machine they can access.
IAAAM. (I Am An Aircraft Mechanic.)
Aircraft are tender, soft, and made mostly of aluminum, magnesium, and composites.
They are rather like balloons, and don't make very large holes when they crash. Wings are crumply, with smaller parts like engine cores (not the whole turbofan, just the inner bits) and landing gear being the solid bits that survive impact.
Plenty of stuff, I'm sure.
With all the efforts at security, why did people with obviously Muslim names make it into the bidding process without triggering immediate investigation?