people vote based on all sorts of things, including sex, though I didn't vote based not on how big Gillard's tits are if that's what you're getting at; I voted because she seems to be level-headed, and level-headed women can sometimes bring a more rational (maybe even "maternal") balance to the testosterone-fueled gun-slinging that otherwise dominates Parliament. Apparently it can work in business too (such as a woman CEO).
I've watched a few House of Reps Question Time sessions on TV, and in all honesty I reckon my 3 year old daughter is more mature. Its like watching a bunch of kids trying to shout over the top of each other.
The true strength in a firearm, is not firing the weapon. It is the threat of discharging the weapon in a particular and controlled manner
Your "wisdom" is ridiculous. Your statement is an oxymoron. People who are capable of exercising control don't go out and buy guns in the first place, and any perceived "need" for a gun for self-defense is based on irrational fear of everyone else having a gun, and irrational people shouldn't be allowed to have guns. The "MAD" principle may work for nukes, but not for guns (though even nuke MAD is based on fear). Irrational fear is only a threat to those you don't intend to be threatened (such as elderly neighbors), and macho morons with guns can be easily taken advantage of by those that any so called "threat" is intended for.
Oh and I'm not racist against Americans; I hate all races equally. Americans just publicize their fuck-ups enough that its easy to make an example of them (and by "them" I mean politicians and business). If anything I'm "racist" against multinational corporates, many of which come from or are supported by American politics.
Ah the old "you have to spend money to make money" business adage. Too bad big business is the only beneficiary of government R&D spending; everyone else pays twice over... first as a taxpayer and then as a consumer.
A more financially responsible move would be to "INVEST" in R&D (with selection possibly based on a tender process), so at least the taxpayer can get some dividends.
a good turning-point you fucking redneck. guns might not kill people, but idiots with guns kill people, so take the guns away from the idiots and they just sit there and drool (at least better than killing people).
there are still guns (and drugs and any other contraband item you can think of) but at least there is less, and less is better.
thank goodness we don't suffer the rediculous "right to bear arms" frogshit that Americans have to put up with.
if you want a gun that bad, get a license and join a gun club. otherwise, shut the fuck up.
It's pretty hard to pass legislation in Australia without any public scrutiny... it all has to come out in Parliament eventually. That's not to say that scrutiny will change anything.
I'm not really worried about any kind of anti-piracy legislation, because whatever they come up with will be practically and legally unenforceable, and any technical challenges will be easily overcome.
The Aussie government will probably let the SOPA contingent have their say, implement some token gestures (maybe a Bill or two to shut them up), which will then get some back-patting after seemingly easily passing through the House of Reps (maybe with a little bribery), but will then be dumped by the Senate, and then at the end of the day Canberra will go have a drink at the pub like everyone else and SOPA morons will go home empty handed.
On the other hand, if by some miracle something does receive Assent, it will probably be butchered beyond recognition compared to what was originally proposed (all parties have to put in their 2c), and will become so vague as to be irrelevant until interpreted by the courts in the future.
In the end, the companies supporting SOPA won't make any money out of it because litigation of individuals for piracy is just desperation. They can chase small fish for all their worth, but small fish won't satisfy any amount of hunger. Most individuals who engage in piracy just aren't worth suing. There are already laws (such as copyright) to prosecute bigger fish; SOPA won't change that.
Americans like to think they run this country, but in reality we just don't give a fuck.
I don't usually vote unless there's someone I really don't like (so I vote for the other guy), but I'll admit I voted for Gillard (via my local Labour MP) because I there aren't really enough female role models in the world, and I have a daughter, and I figured she couldn't possibly be worse than all the blokes before her. I actually reckon she's done OK so far. Every politician makes mistakes (some with monotonous regularity), and she's made some tough and seemingly unpopular calls, but she's stuck by her principles and it takes a lot of guts to stand by that (Abbott would no doubt back flip). She also seems level-headed in interviews, which the media probably doesn't like because it doesn't make for exciting headlines, but the fucking media can suck my big fat hairy cock for all I care.
At most elections (particularly local and state) I just attend to get my name checked off the list so I don't get fined... how the fuck is that for democracy?
I guess in Australia if we didn't have to vote (or at least get our name checked off) there wouldn't be much of an election because I reckon many Aussies don't really gives a shit about stupid greedy corrupt lying bastards spouting their filth on TV and filling our mailboxes with taxpayer-funded junk mail.
if it were really that easy, everyone would do it. its like everything on those diy shows, they say things like "simply just", but in many cases people simply just aren't handy at that sort of thing. everyone has something they are good at, and its not always home diy. you are technically correct (i know of ways i could extract water from my own urine), but in cities it isn't always practical (and in some cases it isn't permitted).
you are an idiot.
where the hell do you think the US defense budget goes? of course raytheon etc can do tests like this, because they literally have money to burn
i'm not saying it happened like that, but defense R&D can easily get this bizarre
Why use the expensive Tomahawk when Harpoons are cheaper?
if you've been paid to test the capabilities of a defense platform, that's what you do. the op only mentioned testing guns, but the test could easily have included functions of the tomohawk missiles.
you might as well ask why develop nuclear weapons when a slingshot is cheaper. a harpoon may be similar to a tomohawk, but obviously there are differences (a quick google search reveals that tomohawks have significantly higher range than harpoons, and can carry nukes).
only the US is stupid and irresponsible enough to even consider such a pointless and wasteful exercise
and shame on the EU for tagging along with them in the first place, no doubt as a cooperative gesture, only to be butt-fucked by NASA when ESA has no doubt vested enough interest to make it difficult to call the whole thing off
So I guess everyone is stupid for paying ridiculous water bills since we could just collect water from the sky.
You sound like you been smoking too much fucking dope.
Slashdot Mirror
the tabletop dancers in duke nukem can finally be naked
no, in other words, iphones are gay.
is anonymous ddos'ing hotmail atm?
if its profitable, the government being a shareholder can't be as bad as just blowing it on grants that are only going to be squandered
people vote based on all sorts of things, including sex, though I didn't vote based not on how big Gillard's tits are if that's what you're getting at; I voted because she seems to be level-headed, and level-headed women can sometimes bring a more rational (maybe even "maternal") balance to the testosterone-fueled gun-slinging that otherwise dominates Parliament. Apparently it can work in business too (such as a woman CEO).
I've watched a few House of Reps Question Time sessions on TV, and in all honesty I reckon my 3 year old daughter is more mature. Its like watching a bunch of kids trying to shout over the top of each other.
newsflash: owning a gun is very unlikely to "save" you from anything
The true strength in a firearm, is not firing the weapon. It is the threat of discharging the weapon in a particular and controlled manner
Your "wisdom" is ridiculous. Your statement is an oxymoron. People who are capable of exercising control don't go out and buy guns in the first place, and any perceived "need" for a gun for self-defense is based on irrational fear of everyone else having a gun, and irrational people shouldn't be allowed to have guns. The "MAD" principle may work for nukes, but not for guns (though even nuke MAD is based on fear). Irrational fear is only a threat to those you don't intend to be threatened (such as elderly neighbors), and macho morons with guns can be easily taken advantage of by those that any so called "threat" is intended for.
Oh and I'm not racist against Americans; I hate all races equally. Americans just publicize their fuck-ups enough that its easy to make an example of them (and by "them" I mean politicians and business). If anything I'm "racist" against multinational corporates, many of which come from or are supported by American politics.
You are the drooling idiot.
Ah the old "you have to spend money to make money" business adage. Too bad big business is the only beneficiary of government R&D spending; everyone else pays twice over... first as a taxpayer and then as a consumer.
A more financially responsible move would be to "INVEST" in R&D (with selection possibly based on a tender process), so at least the taxpayer can get some dividends.
a good turning-point you fucking redneck. guns might not kill people, but idiots with guns kill people, so take the guns away from the idiots and they just sit there and drool (at least better than killing people).
there are still guns (and drugs and any other contraband item you can think of) but at least there is less, and less is better.
thank goodness we don't suffer the rediculous "right to bear arms" frogshit that Americans have to put up with.
if you want a gun that bad, get a license and join a gun club. otherwise, shut the fuck up.
It's pretty hard to pass legislation in Australia without any public scrutiny... it all has to come out in Parliament eventually. That's not to say that scrutiny will change anything.
I'm not really worried about any kind of anti-piracy legislation, because whatever they come up with will be practically and legally unenforceable, and any technical challenges will be easily overcome.
The Aussie government will probably let the SOPA contingent have their say, implement some token gestures (maybe a Bill or two to shut them up), which will then get some back-patting after seemingly easily passing through the House of Reps (maybe with a little bribery), but will then be dumped by the Senate, and then at the end of the day Canberra will go have a drink at the pub like everyone else and SOPA morons will go home empty handed.
On the other hand, if by some miracle something does receive Assent, it will probably be butchered beyond recognition compared to what was originally proposed (all parties have to put in their 2c), and will become so vague as to be irrelevant until interpreted by the courts in the future.
In the end, the companies supporting SOPA won't make any money out of it because litigation of individuals for piracy is just desperation. They can chase small fish for all their worth, but small fish won't satisfy any amount of hunger. Most individuals who engage in piracy just aren't worth suing. There are already laws (such as copyright) to prosecute bigger fish; SOPA won't change that.
Americans like to think they run this country, but in reality we just don't give a fuck.
Government do not need or try to hide honorable intentions.
Government ministers like to give themselves "Honourable" titles because that's the only honour they have.
I don't usually vote unless there's someone I really don't like (so I vote for the other guy), but I'll admit I voted for Gillard (via my local Labour MP) because I there aren't really enough female role models in the world, and I have a daughter, and I figured she couldn't possibly be worse than all the blokes before her. I actually reckon she's done OK so far. Every politician makes mistakes (some with monotonous regularity), and she's made some tough and seemingly unpopular calls, but she's stuck by her principles and it takes a lot of guts to stand by that (Abbott would no doubt back flip). She also seems level-headed in interviews, which the media probably doesn't like because it doesn't make for exciting headlines, but the fucking media can suck my big fat hairy cock for all I care.
At most elections (particularly local and state) I just attend to get my name checked off the list so I don't get fined... how the fuck is that for democracy?
I guess in Australia if we didn't have to vote (or at least get our name checked off) there wouldn't be much of an election because I reckon many Aussies don't really gives a shit about stupid greedy corrupt lying bastards spouting their filth on TV and filling our mailboxes with taxpayer-funded junk mail.
the budgie smuggler incident was bad enough. he'll never live that one down
its funny how often the obvious things get left behind in software development, but not quite as funny as that joke
if it were really that easy, everyone would do it. its like everything on those diy shows, they say things like "simply just", but in many cases people simply just aren't handy at that sort of thing. everyone has something they are good at, and its not always home diy. you are technically correct (i know of ways i could extract water from my own urine), but in cities it isn't always practical (and in some cases it isn't permitted).
mod parent up. all true and relevant to OP
where the hell do you think the US defense budget goes? of course raytheon etc can do tests like this, because they literally have money to burn
i'm not saying it happened like that, but defense R&D can easily get this bizarre
Why use the expensive Tomahawk when Harpoons are cheaper?
if you've been paid to test the capabilities of a defense platform, that's what you do. the op only mentioned testing guns, but the test could easily have included functions of the tomohawk missiles.
you might as well ask why develop nuclear weapons when a slingshot is cheaper. a harpoon may be similar to a tomohawk, but obviously there are differences (a quick google search reveals that tomohawks have significantly higher range than harpoons, and can carry nukes).
http://xkcd.com/327/
only the US is stupid and irresponsible enough to even consider such a pointless and wasteful exercise
and shame on the EU for tagging along with them in the first place, no doubt as a cooperative gesture, only to be butt-fucked by NASA when ESA has no doubt vested enough interest to make it difficult to call the whole thing off
We're never going to Mars at this rate. Well, America isn't at least.
shame on you for believing it was ever going to happen in the first place
Good thing there are other, less short-sighted countries that will inevitably get there.
no, actually i think only the US is stupid and irresponsible enough to even consider such a pointless and wasteful exercise
So I guess everyone is stupid for paying ridiculous water bills since we could just collect water from the sky.
You sound like you been smoking too much fucking dope.
beowulf is a "network" of cumpyewters
almost = mathematical uncertainty (also a handy disclaimer)
peace and happiness for all... maaan V
...the plaintiff wins.
its not as if the defendant companies are innocent here. they are all patent trolls too.
what's good for the goose...
the term "bug smasher" has been in aircraft circles for a long time. example is the Hawker Siddeley HS 748