"(taxi licenses in Italy are numbered, each can cost more than $ 100k to obtain)."
There's the problem. Piss off Italy...
Italy is a country and can make whatever laws they want to regulating taxis or any other industries. If a company can take away Italy's right to regulate their own markets via TTIP, then wait until some other entity or business comes to your backyard and decides they don't like the regulations that maybe you want or need to preserve your business.
The European Central Bank has already declared that they won't let any of their member states go under, which means they are committed to printing as much money as needed....
Mario Draghi said, "Within our mandate, the ECB is ready to do whatever it takes to preserve the euro. And believe me, it will be enough."
Financing a member state via printing money does not exist within the ECB's mandate. So the ECB cannot legally do what you say they are doing. Greece is financing itself via ELA Emergency Liquidity Assistance, where Greek banks loan the Greek government money that cannot be repaid, then the ELA rescues the Greek banks from the bad loans. This type of back-door financing is not sustainable and will eventuall collapse under its own weight. OTOH, the ECB also lacks the mandate to kick a member state out of the common currency when they are unwilling and unable to meet the conditions for membership. Only the political leadership of the member states have the authority to either change the ECB's mandate, or to kick a member state out. How this will turn out is anybody's guess.
One major reason for the split was that IBM insisted on programming OS/2 in assembler - over Gates' objections...
I think both IBM and Microsoft were working hard to undermine each other from the start of the project. IBM wanted to regain 100% control of the PC market and eventually ditch Microsoft. Microsoft on the other hand was trying to break free of IBM and wanted to license the OS to other computer makers on other platforms. Hence the disagreement over assembler and 286 support.
Former OS/2 fan here. In hind sight, one of OS/2's biggest flaws was lack of file permissioning, which NT had. I don't think IBM ever intended for OS/2 to be used as a server OS at all.
...people who grew up on PC or Macs would naively ask "what's the point of multitasking?" That's one of the reasons IBM flubbed the market as they thought it wasn't ever going to be that big except as a front-end for major back office applications...
IBM was a mainframe and mini-computer company that also sold micros. IBM understood multitasking better than anyone else, but they also understood that as soon as micros could multitask, had networking and became multi-user (file permissions) the market for minis and mainframes would shrink. IBM's PC strategy from the mid '80s to mid '90s could be summed up as using their influence to prevent networking, multi-tasking and file permissions from happening on the same platform at the same time.
....What the chickenhawks were squawking about was satellite photographic proof that Saddam was making new weapons.
We don't know what the satellite photos showed. They were never made public. The irony is we got our best intelligence on Iraq's WMD program from Hans Blix and the UN weapons inspections. But we ended those when we started making ultimatums to Saddam Hussein... and in doing so, lost the best intelligence source we ever had on Iraq.
My personal theory is Saddam probably thought he had WMD, even if he didn't. Saddam Hussein wasn't exactly the kind of ruler you could say no to more than once. Mussolini's thought he had an air force on par with the German Luftwaffe or the RAF. The reality was the generals moved the few planes they actually had to whichever airbase Mussolini was visiting. The other theory is the Saudis were right; Saddam knew he had no WMD, but admitting it would have been a sign of weakness, especailly with Iran next door. Either way, our "career intelligence officers" and our political elite seemed to lack the street smarts to critically question the evidence. Maybe they didn't even want to. Donald Rumsfeld promised a 90-day holiday in the desert.
(apologies to the "you just might be a red neck" guy)
If you remember owning a black and white television... you just might not be a digital native.
If you first learned to drive a stick shift.... you just might not be a digital native.
If you remember when there were only two kinds of coffee... you just might not be a digital native.
If you know what a pencil has to do with a cassette tape.... you just might not be a digital native. ...... < i could go on >....
If you have an AOL email address..... you are definately not a digital native.
Whoah whoah whoah there!
We use standard units around here, none of that "furlongs per fortnight" crap...
How many British Thermal Units per hour is she capable of performing when at peak capacity? For extra credit: What is the BTU/h per stone, i.e. specific power? Please show all unit conversions and penmanship counts.
Where I am in France, if I tune in to AM I mostly hear a shit ton of spanish language spoken very fast,...French AM station are a handful of national radios you can receive on FM anyway, only useful for grandmas and remote places (or from abroad, I guess)
I live in Germany. Recently built a transistor radio with my son to teach him about electronics and dipole antennas, etc. The first thing we received was a French AM radio station. Next project is restoring a 1930's Koffer (portable) radio. Losing over the air analog broadcasting would be a bummer.
.... I'd feel better about them if they actually caught real terrorists instead of creating them.....
But that would require doing real, hard police work. Professional operational terrorists are familiar with the concept of OPSEC and do not post their plans on FaceBook or Twitter. They probably do not even use email or cell phones. It's far easier to conduct mass surveillance and then try to set up the young, gullible, and easily impressionable when they make a rant on FaceBook about Jihad. It's a bit like the DoHS claiming that every confiscated water bottle, nail clipper, or pair of safety scissors is a foiled hijacking.
You apparently didn't comprehend the story. That guy was committed to make an attack and die in the process before he came into contact with the FBI. Where is your evidence that the FBI was "pressuring" and "reassuring him"?
Quick google, the FBI has charged over 150 suspected 'terrorists' since 9-11 based on evidence from sting operations. Did they really prevent 150 people from committing terrorist acts? The FBI is either very good at catching terrorists before they even plan their attacks, or they are going out and setting people up. The Tsarnaev brothers kind of disprove the first possibility.
Anyone who passed high school science (or grade school if you're a bit older), or is literate and has access to the internet can figure out how to make bombs.
The hardest part in bomb making is not blowing yourself up in the process. Chemical reactions do not always scale well, especially ones that deal with explosive compounds.
What the article in NYT seems to omit is that the German Wings mishap could have been prevented if the Captain was able to regain access to the cockpit. But in the politically-charged aftermath of 9-11, we mandated a cockpit-door system on aircraft that under certain circumstances has no back up option for the event that the captain is locked out of the cockpit. A more careful analysis of all the risk at the time might have produced a system with at least some means available for the Captain to open the door from the outside if necessary. Going pilotless falls into the same category of reactive thinking because it is creating another system without any backups. Computers may not be suicidal and they may not make the same kinds of mistakes that human pilots make, but they do make different ones. What's missing from the NYT article is information about the safety record for pilotless aircraft. They can and do fail. Good aviation safety requires taking into account the big picture and making educated tradeoffs to minimize the total risk. Quick fixes or knee-jerk reactions often end up creating new hazards and often increase the total level of risk.
I think a lot of the automation proponents are missing the point and fail to understand the role of a pilot in command of an aircraft. He is not just there to steer the aircraft. He is there to accept and take responsibility for the safety and well being of the aircraft and all those who are riding on it. If we go pilotless, who will check the maintenance records and accept that the aircraft is air worthy? Who is responsible for ensuring that the weather meets minimums? Who is responsible for ensuring that the aircraft is properly loaded and balanced and that the fuel load is adequate for the planed flight and any unplanned contingencies? I would rather trust a person who's ass is sitting in the same aircraft than some faceless manager who is sitting the ground who presses "GO". We have known for at least the past 1000 years the importance of having one person on board who is in charge who has the authority to make decisions when things go wrong. Technology will not change this.
"....where the real money from the movie is made. Spaceballs-the T-shirt, Spaceballs-the Coloring Book, Spaceballs-the Lunch box, Spaceballs-the Breakfast Cereal, Spaceballs-the Flame Thrower.... The kids love this one."
Slashdot Mirror
"(taxi licenses in Italy are numbered, each can cost more than $ 100k to obtain)."
There's the problem. Piss off Italy...
Italy is a country and can make whatever laws they want to regulating taxis or any other industries. If a company can take away Italy's right to regulate their own markets via TTIP, then wait until some other entity or business comes to your backyard and decides they don't like the regulations that maybe you want or need to preserve your business.
The European Central Bank has already declared that they won't let any of their member states go under, which means they are committed to printing as much money as needed....
Mario Draghi said, "Within our mandate, the ECB is ready to do whatever it takes to preserve the euro. And believe me, it will be enough."
Financing a member state via printing money does not exist within the ECB's mandate. So the ECB cannot legally do what you say they are doing. Greece is financing itself via ELA Emergency Liquidity Assistance, where Greek banks loan the Greek government money that cannot be repaid, then the ELA rescues the Greek banks from the bad loans. This type of back-door financing is not sustainable and will eventuall collapse under its own weight. OTOH, the ECB also lacks the mandate to kick a member state out of the common currency when they are unwilling and unable to meet the conditions for membership. Only the political leadership of the member states have the authority to either change the ECB's mandate, or to kick a member state out. How this will turn out is anybody's guess.
One major reason for the split was that IBM insisted on programming OS/2 in assembler - over Gates' objections...
I think both IBM and Microsoft were working hard to undermine each other from the start of the project. IBM wanted to regain 100% control of the PC market and eventually ditch Microsoft. Microsoft on the other hand was trying to break free of IBM and wanted to license the OS to other computer makers on other platforms. Hence the disagreement over assembler and 286 support.
And compared to NT, OS/2 was a horrible server...
Former OS/2 fan here. In hind sight, one of OS/2's biggest flaws was lack of file permissioning, which NT had. I don't think IBM ever intended for OS/2 to be used as a server OS at all.
...people who grew up on PC or Macs would naively ask "what's the point of multitasking?" That's one of the reasons IBM flubbed the market as they thought it wasn't ever going to be that big except as a front-end for major back office applications...
IBM was a mainframe and mini-computer company that also sold micros. IBM understood multitasking better than anyone else, but they also understood that as soon as micros could multitask, had networking and became multi-user (file permissions) the market for minis and mainframes would shrink. IBM's PC strategy from the mid '80s to mid '90s could be summed up as using their influence to prevent networking, multi-tasking and file permissions from happening on the same platform at the same time.
They seem to be having problems getting astronauts to man the thing...
...sounds like the plot of a slumdog astronaut movie.
....What the chickenhawks were squawking about was satellite photographic proof that Saddam was making new weapons.
We don't know what the satellite photos showed. They were never made public. The irony is we got our best intelligence on Iraq's WMD program from Hans Blix and the UN weapons inspections. But we ended those when we started making ultimatums to Saddam Hussein... and in doing so, lost the best intelligence source we ever had on Iraq.
My personal theory is Saddam probably thought he had WMD, even if he didn't. Saddam Hussein wasn't exactly the kind of ruler you could say no to more than once. Mussolini's thought he had an air force on par with the German Luftwaffe or the RAF. The reality was the generals moved the few planes they actually had to whichever airbase Mussolini was visiting. The other theory is the Saudis were right; Saddam knew he had no WMD, but admitting it would have been a sign of weakness, especailly with Iran next door. Either way, our "career intelligence officers" and our political elite seemed to lack the street smarts to critically question the evidence. Maybe they didn't even want to. Donald Rumsfeld promised a 90-day holiday in the desert.
why communists always seem to get a free pass on the tyranny train?
They were ever so slightly less bad than the Nazis.
...
When communists murder people, it's treated more like an industrial accident than a crime. At least by some people.
"It's a very sobering feeling to be up in space and realize that one's safety factor was determined by the lowest bidder on a government contract."
(apologies to the "you just might be a red neck" guy)
...... < i could go on >....
If you remember owning a black and white television... you just might not be a digital native.
If you first learned to drive a stick shift.... you just might not be a digital native.
If you remember when there were only two kinds of coffee... you just might not be a digital native.
If you know what a pencil has to do with a cassette tape.... you just might not be a digital native.
If you have an AOL email address..... you are definately not a digital native.
And socialism causes SOO much good. Yeah to governments telling everyone what to do and putting you in jail (or killing you) if you disagree.
Socialist governments do not have a monopoly on jailing or murdering their population.
We should all know by now that any -ism taken to its most extreme form is destructive.
....Guess whom I take if I need someone who does real work?
It all depends on what you are trying to accomplish. Each candidate has their own niche.
GWB never claimed to be a business genius. I think that's the difference.
The country is 18 trillion dollars in debt.
That's the punch line.
The joke would be to assume she could do anything to improve what we laughingly call an economy.
She could do what she did at HP. Revoke americans of their citizenship until the budget is balanced. Problem solved.
Whoah whoah whoah there! We use standard units around here, none of that "furlongs per fortnight" crap...
How many British Thermal Units per hour is she capable of performing when at peak capacity?
For extra credit: What is the BTU/h per stone, i.e. specific power?
Please show all unit conversions and penmanship counts.
Now, if i could write a software, that took 1 cent of each transaction and put it on my back account...
You mean fractions of a cent, kinda like in Superman 3.
So they want a foreigner with a soon-to-expire Visa and a current TS clearance?
I think James Bond beat him to it....will that ball come with a foxy KGB agent inside?
Where I am in France, if I tune in to AM I mostly hear a shit ton of spanish language spoken very fast,...French AM station are a handful of national radios you can receive on FM anyway, only useful for grandmas and remote places (or from abroad, I guess)
I live in Germany. Recently built a transistor radio with my son to teach him about electronics and dipole antennas, etc. The first thing we received was a French AM radio station. Next project is restoring a 1930's Koffer (portable) radio. Losing over the air analog broadcasting would be a bummer.
.... I'd feel better about them if they actually caught real terrorists instead of creating them.....
But that would require doing real, hard police work. Professional operational terrorists are familiar with the concept of OPSEC and do not post their plans on FaceBook or Twitter. They probably do not even use email or cell phones. It's far easier to conduct mass surveillance and then try to set up the young, gullible, and easily impressionable when they make a rant on FaceBook about Jihad. It's a bit like the DoHS claiming that every confiscated water bottle, nail clipper, or pair of safety scissors is a foiled hijacking.
You apparently didn't comprehend the story. That guy was committed to make an attack and die in the process before he came into contact with the FBI. Where is your evidence that the FBI was "pressuring" and "reassuring him"?
Quick google, the FBI has charged over 150 suspected 'terrorists' since 9-11 based on evidence from sting operations. Did they really prevent 150 people from committing terrorist acts? The FBI is either very good at catching terrorists before they even plan their attacks, or they are going out and setting people up. The Tsarnaev brothers kind of disprove the first possibility.
Anyone who passed high school science (or grade school if you're a bit older), or is literate and has access to the internet can figure out how to make bombs.
The hardest part in bomb making is not blowing yourself up in the process. Chemical reactions do not always scale well, especially ones that deal with explosive compounds.
What the article in NYT seems to omit is that the German Wings mishap could have been prevented if the Captain was able to regain access to the cockpit. But in the politically-charged aftermath of 9-11, we mandated a cockpit-door system on aircraft that under certain circumstances has no back up option for the event that the captain is locked out of the cockpit. A more careful analysis of all the risk at the time might have produced a system with at least some means available for the Captain to open the door from the outside if necessary. Going pilotless falls into the same category of reactive thinking because it is creating another system without any backups. Computers may not be suicidal and they may not make the same kinds of mistakes that human pilots make, but they do make different ones. What's missing from the NYT article is information about the safety record for pilotless aircraft. They can and do fail. Good aviation safety requires taking into account the big picture and making educated tradeoffs to minimize the total risk. Quick fixes or knee-jerk reactions often end up creating new hazards and often increase the total level of risk.
I think a lot of the automation proponents are missing the point and fail to understand the role of a pilot in command of an aircraft. He is not just there to steer the aircraft. He is there to accept and take responsibility for the safety and well being of the aircraft and all those who are riding on it. If we go pilotless, who will check the maintenance records and accept that the aircraft is air worthy? Who is responsible for ensuring that the weather meets minimums? Who is responsible for ensuring that the aircraft is properly loaded and balanced and that the fuel load is adequate for the planed flight and any unplanned contingencies? I would rather trust a person who's ass is sitting in the same aircraft than some faceless manager who is sitting the ground who presses "GO". We have known for at least the past 1000 years the importance of having one person on board who is in charge who has the authority to make decisions when things go wrong. Technology will not change this.
"....where the real money from the movie is made. Spaceballs-the T-shirt, Spaceballs-the Coloring Book, Spaceballs-the Lunch box, Spaceballs-the Breakfast Cereal, Spaceballs-the Flame Thrower.... The kids love this one."