Read what I typed, not that which you wish to project into it. Killing and murder are two different things. Any dictionary clearly documents that.
As far as Christianity goes, it is an inextricable extension of Judaism with the realization of the prophecies in the OT. The NT doesn't negate the OT, it fulfills it. The nature of God doesn't change.
I didn't type anything about "just war". Even so, you're wrong about that. There are plenty of citations in which God directed "just war". God did not instruct people to allow themselves to be slaughtered.
The problems of power in California were created by California's government and the environmental wackos who used the courts to prevent expansion of electrical production. As population expands and people use more electrical devices, something has to give.
There is a lot of land in California which could be used for turbines, true. Who pays for them, the power transmission cables and, possibly even more importantly, what is the financial overhead to meet the crazy government requirements? Maybe California will change but they haven't had alternative power because it's too expensive to build from a liability standpoint. Would be nice, though. Why not harness the winds from the sea? makes perfect sense. Hmmm....maybe places like Orlando could use solar panels that also harness impact from rain. Put them in the swamps.
Exactly. "Connecting the dots" is always easier when you know the connections. Discovering them is a lot harder.
This guy also doesn't seem to have much knowledge of intel gathering. The idea that forward projection isn't happening is...uh...wrong, and that's all I'll say on the matter (disclaimer: I'm ex-NSA)
He also doesn't seem to comprehend the concept of misdirection, as the term is used by performance magicians.
I'd guess he can't even pronounce the name, "Sun Tzu", let alone have read the writings.
Yes, I agree with the "don't feed the trolls" post. I'm throwing in a little true history to illustrate just why this post is trolling...
There wasn't much digging involved given John Kerry trumpeted himself as a humble decorated war hero. HE made an issue of what John Kerry was doing 20 years ago (aid and comfort for the Sandinistas) and 30 years ago (Winter Soldiers). He was challenged with documented proof and refused to provide proof to counter the claims. To this day he still hasn't released his service records which would help to settle the issues of how he got 3 Purple Hearts in such a short period of time and how he received medals for which he was not qualified, among other issues. His time travel comments and claims of hunting deer by crawling on his belly didn't help him, either. Kerry has a 30-year history of supporting Communist causes and subverting US sovereignty.
Bill Clinton dodged the draft and has a history of sexually predatory behavior, among other things.
For the most part, Kerry and Clinton provided their own baggage and lied about it. Of course, "that depends on what your definition of, 'is', is."
Just as this guy's past is a valid issue when evaluating his character for an elected office, so was their character when evaluating how suited they were to be Commander in Chief of the most powerful military ever and executive officer of the US. The stakes are high WRT a person's history when it comes to positions of authority. He probably wouldn't survive a tight race for a legal authority position.
The lunatic left claims "hypocrisy" at the Republicans but never themselves. There is some truth to that because the Democrats hold less strict levels of accountability than the Republicans. The Republicans practice repentance, not absolution of responsibility.
If the statues of limitation are expired, so be it. He still has the "black mark" on his history. He'll have the responsibility of that for the rest of his life. That doesn't make him an untouchable nor does it mean he is unqualified for leadership positions. It means there are limits on what he can achieve.
Thanks for making my point more accurate. Of course I know plants don't have lungs. There probably are people who would miss the point because of my over-generalized use of language.
Silly Slashdotter, the savings comes from powering down the flux capacitors. Don't you know ANYthing about science?!?! Geez, next you'll say reducing carbon dioxide makes the planet more green. Any fool knows plants breathe carbon dioxide. Reducing it makes the planet more BROWN!
National Geographic Channel has a show title Naked Science. One of the episodes, Super Volcanoes, discusses this. It specifically talks about the particulate matter from a massive volcano and how it blocks so much of the sun's light or covers so much of the surface that almost all the people died. FWIW, volcano "ash" isn't really ash like that from a fire. It's more like very small particles of sharp glass.
There are some Biblical passages which some people take to be describing dinosaurs and very early people-like creatures. I don't remember the reference but it's translated as "leviathan" in some translations. I've wondered for quite a while if this starvation/drought period for humans is what those passages are describing. Maybe there are similar stories in various mythologies about a similar time, similar to the common theme of an all-world flood. There might also be a common thread to a Phoenix-like cycle of existence.
Videodisc players with branching story lines have been used for training going back to the 1980s. Popular Science, I think it was, had an article about police trainers where the scenarios would change so the trainee had to respond appropriately, sort of like a virtual kill house trainer but it was for street situations. There's nothing really new to this story.
Stupid Slashdot ate my post. It lets you type then log in at which point your composition is lost. Grrrr....
Combustion is creating expansive gas (pneumatic power) which is then turned into locomation.
Electrical power cannot provide an equivalent torque.
Electrical loss over copper and aluminum is very significant.
You can't just "plug in" to "the grid" to get power. The electricity must be created, transported and sold. There is no infrastructure to support this.
Electrical power cannot provide sufficient torque for vehicles. It's fine for golf carts on fairly level terrain but it won't move trucks over mountains.
Torque CAN be created with electricity but it's very, very inefficient. Explosively-created expansive gas is far more efficient.
Electricity cannot be transported and consumed as a fuel. The transport mechanisms are not consumed.
Harnessing residual energy in vehicles is an admirable idea as long as there is a net gain. The weight and size of the harnessing systems must be transported which leads to lower fuel efficiency, no matter what the fuel.
Methinks you vastly underestimate the infrastructure required to supply electricity for mobile vehicles, the ability of the carbon-based Earth to handle Western-type emissions (India and China? That's another issue.), the transmission loss of electricity, the transportation challenges of electricity and the ROI.
Bottom line, the most efficient harnessing of energy is using it as close to the creation point as possible. For vehicles, that means combustion to create pneumatic energy. There's really no other alternative.
"In sight"? Hardly. The only way to make gasoline is to distill hydrocarbons. As usual, the hyperbole of the title obscures the actual article. $2/gallon combustible organic fuel which is very inefficient compared to gasoline is the real situation. "Hope" of reaching $1/gallon and 100% efficiency is just empty hope
As long as it's ethanol, it's going to be monstrously expensive to transport. Ethanol is, essentially, a food product which rots.
If this process can help make with turning coal and other high-carbon materials into actual gasoline, it might be interesting.
However, do not underestimate the physical space and cost to build new fuel processing factories. No matter what, the world's energy needs will increase.
The goals should be to focus on the most effective methods of converting physical substance into harnessed energy, not the fantasy of "clean" energy. Think of all the people who bought or promote electric vehicles claiming they are "clean". That idea is beyond stupid. The energy has to be created somewhere then distributed. All distribution systems have loss. They might be "cleaner" at the point of use but they are not gross clean.
The cleanest energy would be something like wind or water power. They're not efficient and they can't power wheeled vehicles sufficiently. That leaves the concept of combustion in some form. Little pebble reactors in vehicles? Forget it. That leaves the process of a controlled burn. What is the best substance to burn considering infrastructure, portability and energy return aspects? Hydrocarbon. That's all there is to it.
Having said that, for static location energy needs like an electric grid, there could be some advantage to biomass conversion or forms of incineration when they are also used as a way to reduce the expense of handling trash. They'll never be as efficient as burning hydrocarbons because it takes energy to turn them into hydrocarbons. Oil and coal are the closest forms to carbon which are viable fuel sources for combustion.
Welcome to 2008, OP. Sealed systems have been on the market for months. You can even find Cooler Master Aquagatte (on the market since 2007) in some of the larger retail stores.
No, I'm not familiar with him but that's irrelevant, actually. I was trying to communicate there are some things which the "general public" can never know and could never use to make informed decisions. The world isn't based on mob rule (pure democracy), nor should it be. A lot of security issues are like this, be they national defense or police actions. It's true of other things as well. I don't want to know the operational details of NARC activities or the regulation and enforcement of standards of medical practice. I do want them done properly, though, which I why I tried to make the distinction between proper oversight and the "general public."
Maybe I didn't explain enough about my viewpoint in my earlier post. I did 183 ICBM alerts spanning through the first President Bush's drawdown orders then I helped with design of associated equipment at NSA. That's about as detailed as I can get. Security isn't just cryptographic resiliency, it involves a whole slew of other things. My experience is that quite often the crypto geniuses try to be too clever by half. They're an important component of the overall security but usually are too academically oriented to be given complete control. By any chance, did you see the ad a few years ago that stated the Americans spent XXX Millions of dollars to invent a pen that works in zero gravity, the Russians used a pencil?
There's probably still an uneasy alliance between the military operational needs and the U.S civilian cryptographic interests. The best analogy I can think of is the tactical nuke doctrine, as publicly disseminated, during the late 1980s. The doctrine called for a huge amount of upstream and downstream co-ordination before using such a weapon. The problem is the enemy wouldn't be "following our script" and stand still while the Allied forces withdrew.
But those comments are just the U.S. aspect. Its lunatic to think all potential actors would freely disclose and exchange all information about nuclear weapons activities and assets. The key for nukes is intimidation, not use. Intimidation's largest component is the "unknown" component. That site purports that "the general public" should pursue full access to all aspects of all nuclear actors as a way to influence them. The general public isn't qualified to make these types of actions and it's a very dangerous idea.
I didn't say anything against oversight. I said it's impossible for "the general public" to possibly have this knowledge, let alone make informed decisions. The article is about the entire world. It's lunatic, really.
Cost and danger of nukes is far less than most people would think for the U.S. Don't take it personally but just making that statement shows you don't have a lot of knowledge about the subject. Size and cost of nuke programs are far less than most people think. MAD and nuke arms race were passe 15 years ago when the drawdown really got going under Bush Sr.
Historical tidbit: The order to safe the nukes which were part of the drawdown as given by Bush Sr. was in clear text!!
Yup, same thing I thought after I looked at the site. Note that Bobby Inman doesn't exactly have a great reputation wrt strategic assets or intel. He's like the weatherman who predicts the opposite of what will really happen. I was an ICBM launch officer in SAC and designed some support equipment at NSA. From my perspective, as someone who actually worked on this stuff, there ain't no way "the general public" can possibly know anything that would lead to these types of studies. NSA isn't DOE or DOD. They do code-related stuff. They don't design, build, maintain or service nuke assets. Inman hasn't been there for what, 30 years when launch controls were basically switches? Tain't like that now, Bobby. The whole premise of that web site is stupid, frankly. It's pure speculation about pure speculation with absolutely no way to possibly gather enough information to pass into the realm of actual analysis. What happens to the "general public" if they try to get actual information about this type of thing? They don't get real information, to put it lightly.
Those are some good points. I'll have to point out the government wasted a huge amount of money putting wires into schools just a few years before wireless methods became so easy/cheap. The problem with government funding of private operations is the lack of accountability. That's the case in everything. Personally, I like the idea of treating the ISPs as common carriers and I do think the cable companies are allowed to do things the phone companies cannot do which doesn't make a lot of sense given both are basically digital switching packet networks. The phone companies aren't public utilities, though. They're not critical to physical survival the way water and power are critical. This being Slashdot, we'd also have to bring up the spectre of guv'mint spying/control of the people if they control access to data. I wonder what would happen to the traffic volume, too. What happens when porn and pirated stuff isn't moved on the Internet because it's run by the government. Maybe bandwidth limits aren't an issue in that situation!:P
Nobody was actually preventing you from having life. Wants and not the basic needs of life. Keep this in perspective.
"I said government should own the lines, not necessarly run the services over those lines. And yes, my city does offer other companies the chance to offer services of the city's lines."
No, you didn't state that at all. You specifically typed, "This is exactly why all communications lines must be seized as property of the public." That is very clear advocation of theft of private property and they're the words you chose to use. They are a very dangerous thought.
Are you now trying to change your comments? If that's the case, fine, do so but take ownership of the words you did choose to use.
So...your city created their own santioned monopoly and that means you advocate the theft of private property by "the people." Are you SURE the prices and service are better or do you only see part of the cost? Price and service improve for the customer when there is competition in a free market, not when a government creates a monopoly. Most likely your city is hiding some of the cost in taxation or they aren't including investment for the future. Advocating theft of private property by "the people" is almost always the worst option. Innovation comes from incentive to acquire through achievement. That requires private property rights.
Uh...why is this "shocking?" The telephone systems use VOIP and cell phones didn't exist 30 years ago. There were a few portable phones but nothing like today.
That's a serious question. I know, this is Slashdot, the home of foil hats and radial paranoia by broke students...
Really? There must have been far less traffic in the 50s. I've got some home movies from the WWII era showing how "empty" D.C. was compared to today. It's strange to see what are essentially grass fields around the monuments and I don't mean the Mall. Fifty years ago, hmm, interesting. Makes sense, though. No satellites or flyover to worry about.
Oops, yes, "extrovert" was the word I wanted to use. Optimist is different. Well, there aren't a lot of those at NSA, either...
I just remembered something really funny. M$ sent some people to NSA who were all excited that Windows 2000 was finally going to be "secure." That briefing didn't last long. IIRC, there was a coment about some kind of checksum that was weak then the Easter Egg comments and it was all over for M$. We had Windows on the insecure net and Sun on the secure net, not including whatever internal stuff was set up. Our development system was supposed to be really secure. The security people came and used some of the things that are used with nukes to detect any attempts to get inside but they missed something really obvious to anyone who'd programmed DOS I/O. We also found BIOS passwords can be more secure than planned when the sole person who knew it, forgot it after the systems were "secured." I thought about showing them how to get in but decided that was a little too risky.
Uh...no. CIA has the hot girls. Most of them are interrogators or field types. NSA is almost all math geeks and career government workers (I use that word loosely.) How many hot math geeks have you ever seen? How many hot girls want to sit in closed rooms all day long surrounded by math geeks. NSA is mainly older civil service slugs and active duty military GUYS. Think about it, if you're a hot military chick, do you want to be around the math geeks or the power? If they're at NSA and they're not, they're visitors or PR people.
I highly doubt this story. I've worked there. The buildings are massive and it's hidden...on the ground of Fort Meade close enough to hit with a golf ball from the Parkway. The exit signs and "yard sign" that say "National Security Agency" weren't always there but a dirt road onto which people exited from the parkway!?!?! No. That's crazy. Unmarked entrances to various remote listening posts, that's possible, but even then, you'd run into security. Even when Bamford wrote The Puzzle Palace, it wasn't that much of a secret. I have no idea how many people work in the main 2 buildings but you can't be in Columbia for too long without running into people who are obviously math geeks. Add in their families and support contractors (somebody has to order paper, pencils, empty the trash, etc.) and it's impossible to hide.
Methinks anyone who would believe the hidden dirt road idea doesn't know what the average NSA employee is like. The CIA has a joke: "An optimist at the NSA is someone who looks at YOUR shoes when they walk by." I've literally had NSA employees jump in surprise when I said hello to them. Most of the time, if you look them in the eye they look away. It's a weird place. A lot of the people made we wonder how Garanamils missed such a huge marketing opportunity.
I'm going to visit the museum in a week, actually. Never went there when I had the clearances but it should be fun. I live in Charlotte now, home of one of the Projector twins. IIRC, there was a post about part of it being solved a couple of years ago. Wasn't there a mistake in it? Something like that.
Slashdot Mirror
Read what I typed, not that which you wish to project into it. Killing and murder are two different things. Any dictionary clearly documents that.
As far as Christianity goes, it is an inextricable extension of Judaism with the realization of the prophecies in the OT. The NT doesn't negate the OT, it fulfills it. The nature of God doesn't change.
I didn't type anything about "just war". Even so, you're wrong about that. There are plenty of citations in which God directed "just war". God did not instruct people to allow themselves to be slaughtered.
Uh, no. Christianity holds that murder is wrong. Kiling and murder are two different things.
The problems of power in California were created by California's government and the environmental wackos who used the courts to prevent expansion of electrical production. As population expands and people use more electrical devices, something has to give.
There is a lot of land in California which could be used for turbines, true. Who pays for them, the power transmission cables and, possibly even more importantly, what is the financial overhead to meet the crazy government requirements? Maybe California will change but they haven't had alternative power because it's too expensive to build from a liability standpoint. Would be nice, though. Why not harness the winds from the sea? makes perfect sense. Hmmm....maybe places like Orlando could use solar panels that also harness impact from rain. Put them in the swamps.
Exactly. "Connecting the dots" is always easier when you know the connections. Discovering them is a lot harder.
This guy also doesn't seem to have much knowledge of intel gathering. The idea that forward projection isn't happening is...uh...wrong, and that's all I'll say on the matter (disclaimer: I'm ex-NSA)
He also doesn't seem to comprehend the concept of misdirection, as the term is used by performance magicians.
I'd guess he can't even pronounce the name, "Sun Tzu", let alone have read the writings.
Yes, I agree with the "don't feed the trolls" post. I'm throwing in a little true history to illustrate just why this post is trolling...
There wasn't much digging involved given John Kerry trumpeted himself as a humble decorated war hero. HE made an issue of what John Kerry was doing 20 years ago (aid and comfort for the Sandinistas) and 30 years ago (Winter Soldiers). He was challenged with documented proof and refused to provide proof to counter the claims. To this day he still hasn't released his service records which would help to settle the issues of how he got 3 Purple Hearts in such a short period of time and how he received medals for which he was not qualified, among other issues. His time travel comments and claims of hunting deer by crawling on his belly didn't help him, either. Kerry has a 30-year history of supporting Communist causes and subverting US sovereignty.
Bill Clinton dodged the draft and has a history of sexually predatory behavior, among other things.
For the most part, Kerry and Clinton provided their own baggage and lied about it. Of course, "that depends on what your definition of, 'is', is."
Just as this guy's past is a valid issue when evaluating his character for an elected office, so was their character when evaluating how suited they were to be Commander in Chief of the most powerful military ever and executive officer of the US. The stakes are high WRT a person's history when it comes to positions of authority. He probably wouldn't survive a tight race for a legal authority position.
The lunatic left claims "hypocrisy" at the Republicans but never themselves. There is some truth to that because the Democrats hold less strict levels of accountability than the Republicans. The Republicans practice repentance, not absolution of responsibility.
If the statues of limitation are expired, so be it. He still has the "black mark" on his history. He'll have the responsibility of that for the rest of his life. That doesn't make him an untouchable nor does it mean he is unqualified for leadership positions. It means there are limits on what he can achieve.
The environment is in a constant state of flux and doesn't care what humans desire nor does it follow their commands.
Thanks for making my point more accurate. Of course I know plants don't have lungs. There probably are people who would miss the point because of my over-generalized use of language.
Silly Slashdotter, the savings comes from powering down the flux capacitors. Don't you know ANYthing about science?!?! Geez, next you'll say reducing carbon dioxide makes the planet more green. Any fool knows plants breathe carbon dioxide. Reducing it makes the planet more BROWN!
Carbon dioxide is what plants respirate. You exhale it.
National Geographic Channel has a show title Naked Science. One of the episodes, Super Volcanoes, discusses this. It specifically talks about the particulate matter from a massive volcano and how it blocks so much of the sun's light or covers so much of the surface that almost all the people died. FWIW, volcano "ash" isn't really ash like that from a fire. It's more like very small particles of sharp glass.
There are some Biblical passages which some people take to be describing dinosaurs and very early people-like creatures. I don't remember the reference but it's translated as "leviathan" in some translations. I've wondered for quite a while if this starvation/drought period for humans is what those passages are describing. Maybe there are similar stories in various mythologies about a similar time, similar to the common theme of an all-world flood. There might also be a common thread to a Phoenix-like cycle of existence.
Videodisc players with branching story lines have been used for training going back to the 1980s. Popular Science, I think it was, had an article about police trainers where the scenarios would change so the trainee had to respond appropriately, sort of like a virtual kill house trainer but it was for street situations. There's nothing really new to this story.
Stupid Slashdot ate my post. It lets you type then log in at which point your composition is lost. Grrrr....
Combustion is creating expansive gas (pneumatic power) which is then turned into locomation.
Electrical power cannot provide an equivalent torque.
Electrical loss over copper and aluminum is very significant.
You can't just "plug in" to "the grid" to get power. The electricity must be created, transported and sold. There is no infrastructure to support this.
Electrical power cannot provide sufficient torque for vehicles. It's fine for golf carts on fairly level terrain but it won't move trucks over mountains.
Torque CAN be created with electricity but it's very, very inefficient. Explosively-created expansive gas is far more efficient.
Electricity cannot be transported and consumed as a fuel. The transport mechanisms are not consumed.
Harnessing residual energy in vehicles is an admirable idea as long as there is a net gain. The weight and size of the harnessing systems must be transported which leads to lower fuel efficiency, no matter what the fuel.
Methinks you vastly underestimate the infrastructure required to supply electricity for mobile vehicles, the ability of the carbon-based Earth to handle Western-type emissions (India and China? That's another issue.), the transmission loss of electricity, the transportation challenges of electricity and the ROI.
Bottom line, the most efficient harnessing of energy is using it as close to the creation point as possible. For vehicles, that means combustion to create pneumatic energy. There's really no other alternative.
"In sight"? Hardly. The only way to make gasoline is to distill hydrocarbons. As usual, the hyperbole of the title obscures the actual article. $2/gallon combustible organic fuel which is very inefficient compared to gasoline is the real situation. "Hope" of reaching $1/gallon and 100% efficiency is just empty hope
As long as it's ethanol, it's going to be monstrously expensive to transport. Ethanol is, essentially, a food product which rots.
If this process can help make with turning coal and other high-carbon materials into actual gasoline, it might be interesting.
However, do not underestimate the physical space and cost to build new fuel processing factories. No matter what, the world's energy needs will increase.
The goals should be to focus on the most effective methods of converting physical substance into harnessed energy, not the fantasy of "clean" energy. Think of all the people who bought or promote electric vehicles claiming they are "clean". That idea is beyond stupid. The energy has to be created somewhere then distributed. All distribution systems have loss. They might be "cleaner" at the point of use but they are not gross clean.
The cleanest energy would be something like wind or water power. They're not efficient and they can't power wheeled vehicles sufficiently. That leaves the concept of combustion in some form. Little pebble reactors in vehicles? Forget it. That leaves the process of a controlled burn. What is the best substance to burn considering infrastructure, portability and energy return aspects? Hydrocarbon. That's all there is to it.
Having said that, for static location energy needs like an electric grid, there could be some advantage to biomass conversion or forms of incineration when they are also used as a way to reduce the expense of handling trash. They'll never be as efficient as burning hydrocarbons because it takes energy to turn them into hydrocarbons. Oil and coal are the closest forms to carbon which are viable fuel sources for combustion.
Welcome to 2008, OP. Sealed systems have been on the market for months. You can even find Cooler Master Aquagatte (on the market since 2007) in some of the larger retail stores.
No, I'm not familiar with him but that's irrelevant, actually. I was trying to communicate there are some things which the "general public" can never know and could never use to make informed decisions. The world isn't based on mob rule (pure democracy), nor should it be. A lot of security issues are like this, be they national defense or police actions. It's true of other things as well. I don't want to know the operational details of NARC activities or the regulation and enforcement of standards of medical practice. I do want them done properly, though, which I why I tried to make the distinction between proper oversight and the "general public."
Maybe I didn't explain enough about my viewpoint in my earlier post. I did 183 ICBM alerts spanning through the first President Bush's drawdown orders then I helped with design of associated equipment at NSA. That's about as detailed as I can get. Security isn't just cryptographic resiliency, it involves a whole slew of other things. My experience is that quite often the crypto geniuses try to be too clever by half. They're an important component of the overall security but usually are too academically oriented to be given complete control. By any chance, did you see the ad a few years ago that stated the Americans spent XXX Millions of dollars to invent a pen that works in zero gravity, the Russians used a pencil?
There's probably still an uneasy alliance between the military operational needs and the U.S civilian cryptographic interests. The best analogy I can think of is the tactical nuke doctrine, as publicly disseminated, during the late 1980s. The doctrine called for a huge amount of upstream and downstream co-ordination before using such a weapon. The problem is the enemy wouldn't be "following our script" and stand still while the Allied forces withdrew.
But those comments are just the U.S. aspect. Its lunatic to think all potential actors would freely disclose and exchange all information about nuclear weapons activities and assets. The key for nukes is intimidation, not use. Intimidation's largest component is the "unknown" component. That site purports that "the general public" should pursue full access to all aspects of all nuclear actors as a way to influence them. The general public isn't qualified to make these types of actions and it's a very dangerous idea.
I didn't say anything against oversight. I said it's impossible for "the general public" to possibly have this knowledge, let alone make informed decisions. The article is about the entire world. It's lunatic, really.
Cost and danger of nukes is far less than most people would think for the U.S. Don't take it personally but just making that statement shows you don't have a lot of knowledge about the subject. Size and cost of nuke programs are far less than most people think. MAD and nuke arms race were passe 15 years ago when the drawdown really got going under Bush Sr.
Historical tidbit: The order to safe the nukes which were part of the drawdown as given by Bush Sr. was in clear text!!
Yup, same thing I thought after I looked at the site. Note that Bobby Inman doesn't exactly have a great reputation wrt strategic assets or intel. He's like the weatherman who predicts the opposite of what will really happen. I was an ICBM launch officer in SAC and designed some support equipment at NSA. From my perspective, as someone who actually worked on this stuff, there ain't no way "the general public" can possibly know anything that would lead to these types of studies. NSA isn't DOE or DOD. They do code-related stuff. They don't design, build, maintain or service nuke assets. Inman hasn't been there for what, 30 years when launch controls were basically switches? Tain't like that now, Bobby. The whole premise of that web site is stupid, frankly. It's pure speculation about pure speculation with absolutely no way to possibly gather enough information to pass into the realm of actual analysis. What happens to the "general public" if they try to get actual information about this type of thing? They don't get real information, to put it lightly.
Those are some good points. I'll have to point out the government wasted a huge amount of money putting wires into schools just a few years before wireless methods became so easy/cheap. The problem with government funding of private operations is the lack of accountability. That's the case in everything. Personally, I like the idea of treating the ISPs as common carriers and I do think the cable companies are allowed to do things the phone companies cannot do which doesn't make a lot of sense given both are basically digital switching packet networks. The phone companies aren't public utilities, though. They're not critical to physical survival the way water and power are critical. This being Slashdot, we'd also have to bring up the spectre of guv'mint spying/control of the people if they control access to data. I wonder what would happen to the traffic volume, too. What happens when porn and pirated stuff isn't moved on the Internet because it's run by the government. Maybe bandwidth limits aren't an issue in that situation! :P
Nobody was actually preventing you from having life. Wants and not the basic needs of life. Keep this in perspective.
"I said government should own the lines, not necessarly run the services over those lines. And yes, my city does offer other companies the chance to offer services of the city's lines."
No, you didn't state that at all. You specifically typed, "This is exactly why all communications lines must be seized as property of the public." That is very clear advocation of theft of private property and they're the words you chose to use. They are a very dangerous thought.
Are you now trying to change your comments? If that's the case, fine, do so but take ownership of the words you did choose to use.
Do you see what the words you used communicate?
So...your city created their own santioned monopoly and that means you advocate the theft of private property by "the people." Are you SURE the prices and service are better or do you only see part of the cost? Price and service improve for the customer when there is competition in a free market, not when a government creates a monopoly. Most likely your city is hiding some of the cost in taxation or they aren't including investment for the future. Advocating theft of private property by "the people" is almost always the worst option. Innovation comes from incentive to acquire through achievement. That requires private property rights.
Uh...why is this "shocking?" The telephone systems use VOIP and cell phones didn't exist 30 years ago. There were a few portable phones but nothing like today.
That's a serious question. I know, this is Slashdot, the home of foil hats and radial paranoia by broke students...
Really? There must have been far less traffic in the 50s. I've got some home movies from the WWII era showing how "empty" D.C. was compared to today. It's strange to see what are essentially grass fields around the monuments and I don't mean the Mall. Fifty years ago, hmm, interesting. Makes sense, though. No satellites or flyover to worry about.
Oops, yes, "extrovert" was the word I wanted to use. Optimist is different. Well, there aren't a lot of those at NSA, either...
I just remembered something really funny. M$ sent some people to NSA who were all excited that Windows 2000 was finally going to be "secure." That briefing didn't last long. IIRC, there was a coment about some kind of checksum that was weak then the Easter Egg comments and it was all over for M$. We had Windows on the insecure net and Sun on the secure net, not including whatever internal stuff was set up. Our development system was supposed to be really secure. The security people came and used some of the things that are used with nukes to detect any attempts to get inside but they missed something really obvious to anyone who'd programmed DOS I/O. We also found BIOS passwords can be more secure than planned when the sole person who knew it, forgot it after the systems were "secured." I thought about showing them how to get in but decided that was a little too risky.
Uh...no. CIA has the hot girls. Most of them are interrogators or field types. NSA is almost all math geeks and career government workers (I use that word loosely.) How many hot math geeks have you ever seen? How many hot girls want to sit in closed rooms all day long surrounded by math geeks. NSA is mainly older civil service slugs and active duty military GUYS. Think about it, if you're a hot military chick, do you want to be around the math geeks or the power? If they're at NSA and they're not, they're visitors or PR people.
I highly doubt this story. I've worked there. The buildings are massive and it's hidden...on the ground of Fort Meade close enough to hit with a golf ball from the Parkway. The exit signs and "yard sign" that say "National Security Agency" weren't always there but a dirt road onto which people exited from the parkway!?!?! No. That's crazy. Unmarked entrances to various remote listening posts, that's possible, but even then, you'd run into security. Even when Bamford wrote The Puzzle Palace, it wasn't that much of a secret. I have no idea how many people work in the main 2 buildings but you can't be in Columbia for too long without running into people who are obviously math geeks. Add in their families and support contractors (somebody has to order paper, pencils, empty the trash, etc.) and it's impossible to hide.
Methinks anyone who would believe the hidden dirt road idea doesn't know what the average NSA employee is like. The CIA has a joke: "An optimist at the NSA is someone who looks at YOUR shoes when they walk by." I've literally had NSA employees jump in surprise when I said hello to them. Most of the time, if you look them in the eye they look away. It's a weird place. A lot of the people made we wonder how Garanamils missed such a huge marketing opportunity.
I'm going to visit the museum in a week, actually. Never went there when I had the clearances but it should be fun. I live in Charlotte now, home of one of the Projector twins. IIRC, there was a post about part of it being solved a couple of years ago. Wasn't there a mistake in it? Something like that.