Everyone seems to be completely unaware of the purpose of the military.
The main purpose of the military is not to fight wars. It is to appear so fierce that the war does not NEED to be fought. The potential opponent should be so in awe of the military might of the "hostile" country that they pursue peaceful means of achiving their desired ends.
War means that the military has failed in it's primary mission and now must undertake it's secondary mission, to fight.
It seems to me that if you're going to worry about journalistic ethics you have a lot of bigger fish to fry than this guy. Start with the entier leftist media and their biased reporting, then get back to me on journalistic ethics when you have that sorted out.
You have GOT to be kidding me!!!
Whether or not you support homosexual marriage is irrelevent. The fact is that the MA Supreme Court subourned the legislative process. The fact that the court (thinks they) can do this should be setting off red flags for every U.S. citizen! Courts have overturned referendums passed by the populace, over ruled laws passed by the Legislative branch for and generally stepped waaay outside the defined role of the Judicial branch in our government.
This is a Bad Thing (TM) for our personal individual freedoms, just in case no one is paying attention.
Take a liquid pump, hook it to a wind mill. Have the liquid drain through a Tesla Engine and hook the engine up to a generator. Voila! Free electricity.
Have you done this at your house? Then don't gripe about everyone else using fossil fuels.
I submitted this yesterday but it wasn't good enough then? I'm sooooo confused.
Re:Yeah, like we haven't f'ed up the planet enough
on
The Year In Ideas
·
· Score: 1
Now someone on/. is claiming government permission is a good reason to do something? I thought the prevailing attitude here was to reject authority and make up your own mind??!?!?!?
However, regardless of the prevailing attitude here (or anywhere else for that matter), I think that making up my own mind is what I'll stick with.
And IMHO (which FAR outweighs the government's as far as I am concerned) if you can't express yourself well without profanity, then you can't express your self well.
In closeing let me just add that (while you already know my opinion of profanity) what really offended me was you citing the FCC (a wholly owned subsidary of whoever has the most money at the moment) as a source of good moral judgement.
Riiiiiight. That would explain why 90% of the world's steel production is overseas. Because weakening dollar prompted manufacturers to bring it back to the U.S. since we already had existing infrastructure.
That would also explain why it took actual Federal legislation to keep 50% of the semiconductor founderies in the U.S. when we started with 90% of them.
This isn't about hating Indians because they're a different culture. This is about watching high tech U.S. jobs vanish overseas to some $2 a day worker so some corporate boardroom bozo can buy his 5th Rolls. My question is this: When all the people in the U.S. are unemployed or under employed because all the formerly high paying - high tech jobs are overseas, who's going to buy the $50 widgits (that cost $1 to make overseas)?
Freedom of speech (or any freedom) is not the freedom to do what ever you want to do or say. There are already just, valid laws in place to prevent certain types of speech. Don't believe me? go yell "FIRE!!" in a crowded movie theater. Or stand in front of city hall spewing profanity. You'll be arrested pretty quickly. Freedom of any kind comes with responsibility, something that has been forgotten in the past several decades.
For example the freedom of information that is so highly regarded in the Open Source community. This freedom came with a responsibility to not steal information or software. (Please note that I am not attempting to start a flame war about whether or not said info or software should have been free in the first place, just a recognition that it was protected under the then current laws). These freedoms were handled irresponsibly by the members of the Open Source community, leaving us with reactions like the DMCA from the offended companies.
"War on freedom"? Which freedom is this a war against? The freedom to hijack airplanes full of innocent civilians and crash them into skyscrapers full of more innocent civilians? The restrictions on personal freedoms that permitted that have been in place for over 100 years. The only "war on freedom" I've seen is the Homeland Security Act, and that's more than enough for me.
Don't get me wrong, I support the restrictions against those Web masters if there is any evidence that they are supporting a terrorist organization, and if (and only if) terrorists are defined as a person or group who's intention is to motivate political change by harming (for the purpose of causing fear/terror) non-combatents. But not if terrorists are defined as anyone who has a different political viewpoint than your own. However, unless those Web pages are organizing persons to commit specific crimes (i.e. racketeering), there is nothing illigal on them and anyone should be allowed to read them.
Who're you kidding? They only thing they want to preserve is their profits. They don't care about the goose that lays the golden eggs at least so long as she lives as long as they (Vallenti et. al.) do.
I've had similar issues in other threads. I think that when your posts are modded you should be able to see who modded them. That should happen automagically with no user intervention possible. The only question I have is should everyone see who modded a post, or only the poster who was modded?
You don't want them to always spends $500 on a hammer, do you?
Uh, that $500 hammer is made of titanium for hammering on titanium rivets in aircraft frames. No, I don't want them to always spend $500 on a hammer, just when they need to.
Didn't you read the/. article the other day where a company had cut the cost of their workstations from $22k to $3k by going open source? That would save my tax dollars a bunch of Uncle Sam did it. It would also remove a lever that Microsoft has against the government if my "IT tax dollars" weren't all going to one vendor.
And forcing the government to use open source is a decidedly communist idea.
That's gotta be a troll, but I'm going to reply anyway. Anything that limits government can't be communist. In fact a major part of what defines our governemt is what it can not do, read the Bill of Rights for examples.
Besides, money is part of the problem here anyway. If my tax dollars aren't going to Microsoft then that's that much less money they'll have to spend on FUD or buying off the Justice Dept. on their next anti-trust suit.
If the government can get a product for free that has been proven as good or better than a commercial product, and if that product is freely modifiable by the government and the commercial product is not, then I say spend my tax dollars on something other than the commercial product. If both products cost (i.e. are commercial products) and the customer (the gov't in this case) can modify one but not the other, then buy the one you can customize to your needs.
That may be, however the part of the "job" of government is to be run by the citizens, at least in the US. Any information held by the government is held in trust for us. Open source software is just another aspect of keeping that information public. And since it is open source, the government is able to make sure that the software meets the government's needs, either by changing the software itself, or hiring someone to do so for them.
Can only GM mechanics work on the Abrams and Bradley vehicles? Can only Bell Hellicopter personal repair the Apache? Why should software be measured by a different standard? Besides, Microsoft is going open source to a limited degree. So, let Microsoft make their source code accessable if they wish to continue to do business with the government!
Try using Proxomitron for a proxy server instead. Slashdotter's outta love this one! http://proxomitron.org/
100% customizable proxy server blocks pop-ups when the page loads/unloads but keeps the functionality for pages where the author has made good use of it.
...The Humans and the process of inductrialisation have influenced the ecosphere quite much...
Volcanos and other natural phenoma pump out far more "greenhouse gasses" than factories and automobiles. So while I will certainly agree that Humankind has impacted the environment, I don't see that it points to a trendin global warming. My original post was meant to point out that the recent rise in temperatures may be perfectly normal. Indeed since paleological and historical evidence seem to show that the earth was actually warmer in the past we could have been living in an unusually cold period for the past 200 years. Nothing as extreme as an Ice Age of course, but still a perfectly "normal" dip in the chart.
There was a hemispherical device with 16 buttons where you chorded out the letters made in the late 1970's ('78 or '79). It was called the Write-Hander. So this is old news, at best..... I googled but couldn't find a link, but my time is limited I'm sorry to say.
Ok, this post has beem modded up 4 or 5 times, and metamoderated down (Overrated -1) all but one of those. I suspect that my opening statement does not sit well with the politics of some on this board. Where is the famed objectivity of computer geeks? Where is the study of the facts and application of reason that you apply to administering your networks and systems, and to writing your code? Did I post something controversial? Undoubtedly! Unpopular? Maybe. Insightful? Well, you don't find my argument on every site on the Web, nor do you commonly see it in newspaper columns. So why were the Insightful mods given Overrated? I could understand if they were given Off Topic, because it is, slightly. Although I see that many other posters had no problem making the connection.
For your moderation to be other than mental masterbation you MUST be objective about it. My comments may not agree with your politics In fact, I can almost guarantee that they won't most ofthe time. I am dissapointed by the response from the/. community on this. I expected alot more.
PS This is not about karma, I could really care less. I've been on this board for over 5 years and only started posting recently. This is about my expectations from the community. You have a different opinion? Great! Please share it in a civil fashion. We all grow. But don't mod something down, or call it a troll, just because you don't agree with it. Thank you,
Sorry to dissapoint you, but this is no troll, it's my opinion. And while there is alot of interesting historical data out there regarding the climate (did I mention I'm an amature historian?) we don't really KNOW what the temperature trends are from as little as 4000 years ago. We can speculate (see all the sites you pointed me to for examples of speculation) but we don't know, or even have more than a reasoned guess. And while some may feel that.00000057% could be a valid statistical sample, I submit the opinion that when it is all grouped in one portion of your data that it is invalid. To be a good statistical sample the data would need to be spread out across a larger portion of the entire field of data.
According to most theories the earth is 3.5 billion years old. We (humans) have been measuring the temperature for less than 200 years. 200/3.5X10^12=5.7X19^-8. We are attempting to calculat trends in global warming with.000000057% of the total data? I suspect that any competent statistician would laugh you out of his office if you asked him to attempt to calculate a trend with a sample that small.
Slashdot Mirror
Everyone seems to be completely unaware of the purpose of the military.
The main purpose of the military is not to fight wars. It is to appear so fierce that the war does not NEED to be fought. The potential opponent should be so in awe of the military might of the "hostile" country that they pursue peaceful means of achiving their desired ends.
War means that the military has failed in it's primary mission and now must undertake it's secondary mission, to fight.
Ok, so he telecommutes. What's the big deal?
It seems to me that if you're going to worry about journalistic ethics you have a lot of bigger fish to fry than this guy. Start with the entier leftist media and their biased reporting, then get back to me on journalistic ethics when you have that sorted out.
You have GOT to be kidding me!!! Whether or not you support homosexual marriage is irrelevent. The fact is that the MA Supreme Court subourned the legislative process. The fact that the court (thinks they) can do this should be setting off red flags for every U.S. citizen! Courts have overturned referendums passed by the populace, over ruled laws passed by the Legislative branch for and generally stepped waaay outside the defined role of the Judicial branch in our government. This is a Bad Thing (TM) for our personal individual freedoms, just in case no one is paying attention.
Take a liquid pump, hook it to a wind mill. Have the liquid drain through a Tesla Engine and hook the engine up to a generator. Voila! Free electricity.
Have you done this at your house? Then don't gripe about everyone else using fossil fuels.
Here is the arcicle I referenced, if anyone cares... http://www.phonescoop.com/news/item.php?id=750
I submitted this yesterday but it wasn't good enough then? I'm sooooo confused.
Now someone on /. is claiming government permission is a good reason to do something? I thought the prevailing attitude here was to reject authority and make up your own mind??!?!?!?
However, regardless of the prevailing attitude here (or anywhere else for that matter), I think that making up my own mind is what I'll stick with.
And IMHO (which FAR outweighs the government's as far as I am concerned) if you can't express yourself well without profanity, then you can't express your self well.
In closeing let me just add that (while you already know my opinion of profanity) what really offended me was you citing the FCC (a wholly owned subsidary of whoever has the most money at the moment) as a source of good moral judgement.
The question isn't do I need it, it's business related. You can make all the $50 widgits you want, but someone's got to buy them or you go bankrupt.
Riiiiiight. That would explain why 90% of the world's steel production is overseas. Because weakening dollar prompted manufacturers to bring it back to the U.S. since we already had existing infrastructure.
That would also explain why it took actual Federal legislation to keep 50% of the semiconductor founderies in the U.S. when we started with 90% of them.
This isn't about hating Indians because they're a different culture. This is about watching high tech U.S. jobs vanish overseas to some $2 a day worker so some corporate boardroom bozo can buy his 5th Rolls. My question is this: When all the people in the U.S. are unemployed or under employed because all the formerly high paying - high tech jobs are overseas, who's going to buy the $50 widgits (that cost $1 to make overseas)?
Freedom of speech (or any freedom) is not the freedom to do what ever you want to do or say. There are already just, valid laws in place to prevent certain types of speech. Don't believe me? go yell "FIRE!!" in a crowded movie theater. Or stand in front of city hall spewing profanity. You'll be arrested pretty quickly. Freedom of any kind comes with responsibility, something that has been forgotten in the past several decades.
For example the freedom of information that is so highly regarded in the Open Source community. This freedom came with a responsibility to not steal information or software. (Please note that I am not attempting to start a flame war about whether or not said info or software should have been free in the first place, just a recognition that it was protected under the then current laws). These freedoms were handled irresponsibly by the members of the Open Source community, leaving us with reactions like the DMCA from the offended companies.
"War on freedom"? Which freedom is this a war against? The freedom to hijack airplanes full of innocent civilians and crash them into skyscrapers full of more innocent civilians? The restrictions on personal freedoms that permitted that have been in place for over 100 years. The only "war on freedom" I've seen is the Homeland Security Act, and that's more than enough for me.
Don't get me wrong, I support the restrictions against those Web masters if there is any evidence that they are supporting a terrorist organization, and if (and only if) terrorists are defined as a person or group who's intention is to motivate political change by harming (for the purpose of causing fear/terror) non-combatents. But not if terrorists are defined as anyone who has a different political viewpoint than your own. However, unless those Web pages are organizing persons to commit specific crimes (i.e. racketeering), there is nothing illigal on them and anyone should be allowed to read them.
Who're you kidding? They only thing they want to preserve is their profits. They don't care about the goose that lays the golden eggs at least so long as she lives as long as they (Vallenti et. al.) do.
I've had similar issues in other threads. I think that when your posts are modded you should be able to see who modded them. That should happen automagically with no user intervention possible. The only question I have is should everyone see who modded a post, or only the poster who was modded?
...why I said forcing government to use only open source software was a good thing....
Pay Microsoft later? Oh, they'll pay later all right. Plus interest!
You don't want them to always spends $500 on a hammer, do you?
Uh, that $500 hammer is made of titanium for hammering on titanium rivets in aircraft frames. No, I don't want them to always spend $500 on a hammer, just when they need to.
Didn't you read the /. article the other day where a company had cut the cost of their workstations from $22k to $3k by going open source? That would save my tax dollars a bunch of Uncle Sam did it. It would also remove a lever that Microsoft has against the government if my "IT tax dollars" weren't all going to one vendor.
And forcing the government to use open source is a decidedly communist idea.
That's gotta be a troll, but I'm going to reply anyway. Anything that limits government can't be communist. In fact a major part of what defines our governemt is what it can not do, read the Bill of Rights for examples.
Besides, money is part of the problem here anyway. If my tax dollars aren't going to Microsoft then that's that much less money they'll have to spend on FUD or buying off the Justice Dept. on their next anti-trust suit.
If the government can get a product for free that has been proven as good or better than a commercial product, and if that product is freely modifiable by the government and the commercial product is not, then I say spend my tax dollars on something other than the commercial product. If both products cost (i.e. are commercial products) and the customer (the gov't in this case) can modify one but not the other, then buy the one you can customize to your needs.
That's right, "...or the Army mechanics they trained." Army mechanics = members of the government.
That may be, however the part of the "job" of government is to be run by the citizens, at least in the US. Any information held by the government is held in trust for us. Open source software is just another aspect of keeping that information public. And since it is open source, the government is able to make sure that the software meets the government's needs, either by changing the software itself, or hiring someone to do so for them.
Can only GM mechanics work on the Abrams and Bradley vehicles? Can only Bell Hellicopter personal repair the Apache? Why should software be measured by a different standard? Besides, Microsoft is going open source to a limited degree. So, let Microsoft make their source code accessable if they wish to continue to do business with the government!
Try using Proxomitron for a proxy server instead. Slashdotter's outta love this one!
http://proxomitron.org/
100% customizable proxy server blocks pop-ups when the page loads/unloads but keeps the functionality for pages where the author has made good use of it.
...The Humans and the process of inductrialisation have influenced the ecosphere quite much...
Volcanos and other natural phenoma pump out far more "greenhouse gasses" than factories and automobiles. So while I will certainly agree that Humankind has impacted the environment, I don't see that it points to a trendin global warming. My original post was meant to point out that the recent rise in temperatures may be perfectly normal. Indeed since paleological and historical evidence seem to show that the earth was actually warmer in the past we could have been living in an unusually cold period for the past 200 years. Nothing as extreme as an Ice Age of course, but still a perfectly "normal" dip in the chart.
There was a hemispherical device with 16 buttons where you chorded out the letters made in the late 1970's ('78 or '79). It was called the Write-Hander. So this is old news, at best..... I googled but couldn't find a link, but my time is limited I'm sorry to say.
Ok, this post has beem modded up 4 or 5 times, and metamoderated down (Overrated -1) all but one of those. I suspect that my opening statement does not sit well with the politics of some on this board. Where is the famed objectivity of computer geeks? Where is the study of the facts and application of reason that you apply to administering your networks and systems, and to writing your code? Did I post something controversial? Undoubtedly! Unpopular? Maybe. Insightful? Well, you don't find my argument on every site on the Web, nor do you commonly see it in newspaper columns. So why were the Insightful mods given Overrated? I could understand if they were given Off Topic, because it is, slightly. Although I see that many other posters had no problem making the connection.
/. community on this. I expected alot more.
For your moderation to be other than mental masterbation you MUST be objective about it. My comments may not agree with your politics In fact, I can almost guarantee that they won't most ofthe time. I am dissapointed by the response from the
PS This is not about karma, I could really care less. I've been on this board for over 5 years and only started posting recently. This is about my expectations from the community. You have a different opinion? Great! Please share it in a civil fashion. We all grow. But don't mod something down, or call it a troll, just because you don't agree with it.
Thank you,
David
Sorry to dissapoint you, but this is no troll, it's my opinion. And while there is alot of interesting historical data out there regarding the climate (did I mention I'm an amature historian?) we don't really KNOW what the temperature trends are from as little as 4000 years ago. We can speculate (see all the sites you pointed me to for examples of speculation) but we don't know, or even have more than a reasoned guess. And while some may feel that .00000057% could be a valid statistical sample, I submit the opinion that when it is all grouped in one portion of your data that it is invalid. To be a good statistical sample the data would need to be spread out across a larger portion of the entire field of data.
Ok, let me see if I understand this....
.000000057% of the total data? I suspect that any competent statistician would laugh you out of his office if you asked him to attempt to calculate a trend with a sample that small.
According to most theories the earth is 3.5 billion years old. We (humans) have been measuring the temperature for less than 200 years. 200/3.5X10^12=5.7X19^-8. We are attempting to calculat trends in global warming with