As an aside when I was reading Jared Diamond's Collapse: How Societies Choose to Fail or Succeed there was a bit on the Easter Island statues that made the builders seem all too human(rather than strange people who carved weird heads). Jared talked about someone lifting up one of the statues and finding a finger bone underneath it. At that point I could just imagine the hapless native going "D'oh" (in his own language) when the rest of his work party dropped the damn statue on his hand.
Everyone in the world dies, Americans just seem to be the only country that likes to shelter their kids from death.
I lived in russia for a bit and the local TV news wasn't shy about showing the bodies of people hit by cars or trams etc. Something that would never occur in a western country (and not just the US). In addition I remember watching an animated kids show about some kids running around in the forest playing kids games etc. When these kids went skinny dipping in the local lake the animators drew in little penises in order to be anatomically correct.
Comparing public outrage to institutionalized discrimination is disingenuous. The United States has it's share of people that are intolerant towards other faiths yet our government isn't busy drafting laws to control what kind of Houses of Worship can be built (the Swiss minaret ban) or what kind of clothing can be worn (the French legislation). You've literally got national governments in Europe that are concerning themselves with the clothes that people wear. That's absurd and frightening.
No.. what is happening is more insidious when you have politicians proposing investigations into financing of the mosque "just in case something might not be right". Sure its not institutionalized, but the anti-religeous sentiment is alive and well at all levels of the government. Witch hunts are not pleasant for the person(s) being investigated yet they can have the air of being perfectly legal and all above board. Dare I mention McCarthyism?
And as to public tolerance - how about asking all the persecuted muslims who were kicked off planes in recent years because of religion and appearance. Sure it was not institutionalized discrimination, but the authorities felt like they had to remove these people because of unfounded fears by intolerant passengers. If there was no bias the authorities should have simple said that "These paying passengers have a right to be on this plane so suck it it up bitch!"
The last time I checked that Mosque had been approved by the relevant NYC zoning departments. Got any other bad comparisons that you want to make?
So there was no opposition at all? Everyone was happy to have it there?
Saying that you have respect religion in the US is a rather gross generalization - otherwise there would not have been so many people venting against the mosque
This was all also true for 10+ years before 9/11, when many of today's "security" measures were not in place. How does your theory account for this? Could it be that we already had successful prevention measures in place and they simply failed one time, with only small tweaks needed instead of a deeply rooted culture of fear and suspicion?
I'm going to go devil's advocate on this. Your refute of the the OP's argument is predicated on the state of the world being the same in the 10 years previous and 10 years after 9/11. If there was a change of state just prior to 9/11 then additional measures would not have been required before 9/11, but would have been required after 9/11
well I have a rock too.. and it keeps terr'rists *and* elephants at bay. And at $50 its a steal compared to a rock that only does one thing.
The reason I am selling it is because I want to get one of those K-Tel rocks.. man they are sweet.. they keep everything at bay!
Re:The day after 9/11 you found a rock?
on
Top Secret America
·
· Score: 5, Informative
For most Americans, the day after 9/11 they found Iraq.
Which is sad revisionist history since that the US immediately invaded Afghanistan over 9/11 and only a long time later did they get around to invading Iraq.
Considering the reliability of Windows...I'd probably choose to deploy one of the FOSS HMI systems over the commercial ones.
It doesn't matter if you build a fortress- if you build the same on a foundation of shifting sands.
Can you furnish any links to any decent/competitive FOSS HMIs? Because building a fortress out of mud doesn't appeal to me when I can user armor plating for my fortress. Also I don't think you have a very realistic appreciation of Windows reliability.. (not that I am a fanboi - typing from my Mac) , just that I have worked on lots and lots of commercial systems running windows.
The funny thing is that I work with a lot of GE products. After getting on a first name basis with their tech support people, I know that their programmers are definitely not the sharpest crayons in the box so cracking their software shouldn't be too hard. However they did buy iFix recently and I haven't had a chance to peek the hood of that product so perhaps to might be better than average.
But why is that sad? So I can't win an argument with Joe Average. It's not the end of the world.
Because there is this thing called a Bell curve that points out that there are a lot more Joe Averages than there are smart people (not people who think they are smart) and the US is a Republic where the voting of all those Joe Averages out weighs that of the smart people.
That is why John Hodgeman's punch line "Glen Beck makes a lot of sense if you think about it. If you don't think about it, he makes even more sense" makes me quite sad.
No.. what makes me sad is "Third most listened to talk show in the US".
I was going to ask "why hydrogen?", then I think I answered my question myself. I would guess that if you had a fossil fuel based system then all your enemies would need to do is point some sort of spectrographic analyzer at the sky and detect a trail of combustion emissions - where the trail ends is where you aim your counter measures. With a hydrogen based system it would be a lot harder to detect a trail a of water vapour in a sky full of water vapour.
Emissions free where? At the point of final energy usage?
I'm probably feeding a troll
No I am not trolling. But it seems like every time there is a story on alternative energy their seems to be a magical, overall-systems-impact-denying aura about them. And without clearly reporting on what is going on the general public will get misled into believing in magical energy and environment pixies.
A classic example is the electric vehicles you mentioned. Yes they have all the benefits that you mentioned (but no mention of mining and purifying etc of the additional minerals), but there was an IEEE article earlier this year that pointed out that the domestic power infrastructure can't handle an onslaught of plug in chargers. The system was designed with peak daytime usage in mind and requires an overnight cooling cycle. So there will be additional hidden cost in upgrading that infrastructure. So unless the overall system is correctly considered then people will have unrealistic expectations - which was the point I was originally trying to make.
You have of course given in to the obvious, government only represents the majority consensus, therefore the minority of 'individual voters' is blameless so long as they have participated.
For fucks sake. I was basically paraphrasing Lincoln from the Gettysburg address:
But, in a larger sense, we can not dedicate -- we can not consecrate -- we can not hallow -- this ground. The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract. The world will little note, nor long remember what we say here, but it can never forget what they did here. It is for us the living, rather, to be dedicated here to the unfinished work which they who fought here have thus far so nobly advanced. It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us -- that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion -- that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain -- that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom -- and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.
You obviously have tuned in to all of none of the shows.
I have tuned in to quite a few of those shows and find in general that their discussions are so propped up by logical fallacies and bad research that they are a joke.
I have heard Rush emphatically contradict himself and also use emotive methods to try and slip invalid arguments past critical thinkers.
I have heard Hannity complain about politicians not wanting to come on his show and accusing them of basically hating him - yet continue to refer to them with denigrating language.
I have heard Beck take lots of topics, focus on some small part of them and beat it to death without considering the whole, because he can't understand overall consequences.
I have heard Savage yell and scream and shout down people who disagreed with his extremist views and then whine about how the UK won't let him in.
"You voted them in, so the're your responsibility"
You live in Australia and made him what he is today, so you're responsible for Rupert Murdoch, who is just as responsible for the current state of American politics.
No, Rupert has been a US citizen for quite a while - it was the US rules on foreign media ownership that made him what he is today. You may consider him a bastard, but he is an American bastard.
Slashdot Mirror
To keep your fingers out of the gap!
As an aside when I was reading Jared Diamond's Collapse: How Societies Choose to Fail or Succeed there was a bit on the Easter Island statues that made the builders seem all too human(rather than strange people who carved weird heads). Jared talked about someone lifting up one of the statues and finding a finger bone underneath it. At that point I could just imagine the hapless native going "D'oh" (in his own language) when the rest of his work party dropped the damn statue on his hand.
Everyone in the world dies, Americans just seem to be the only country that likes to shelter their kids from death.
I lived in russia for a bit and the local TV news wasn't shy about showing the bodies of people hit by cars or trams etc. Something that would never occur in a western country (and not just the US). In addition I remember watching an animated kids show about some kids running around in the forest playing kids games etc. When these kids went skinny dipping in the local lake the animators drew in little penises in order to be anatomically correct.
Comparing public outrage to institutionalized discrimination is disingenuous. The United States has it's share of people that are intolerant towards other faiths yet our government isn't busy drafting laws to control what kind of Houses of Worship can be built (the Swiss minaret ban) or what kind of clothing can be worn (the French legislation). You've literally got national governments in Europe that are concerning themselves with the clothes that people wear. That's absurd and frightening.
No .. what is happening is more insidious when you have politicians proposing investigations into financing of the mosque "just in case something might not be right". Sure its not institutionalized, but the anti-religeous sentiment is alive and well at all levels of the government. Witch hunts are not pleasant for the person(s) being investigated yet they can have the air of being perfectly legal and all above board. Dare I mention McCarthyism?
And as to public tolerance - how about asking all the persecuted muslims who were kicked off planes in recent years because of religion and appearance. Sure it was not institutionalized discrimination, but the authorities felt like they had to remove these people because of unfounded fears by intolerant passengers. If there was no bias the authorities should have simple said that "These paying passengers have a right to be on this plane so suck it it up bitch!"
The last time I checked that Mosque had been approved by the relevant NYC zoning departments. Got any other bad comparisons that you want to make?
So there was no opposition at all? Everyone was happy to have it there?
Saying that you have respect religion in the US is a rather gross generalization - otherwise there would not have been so many people venting against the mosque
This was all also true for 10+ years before 9/11, when many of today's "security" measures were not in place. How does your theory account for this? Could it be that we already had successful prevention measures in place and they simply failed one time, with only small tweaks needed instead of a deeply rooted culture of fear and suspicion?
I'm going to go devil's advocate on this. Your refute of the the OP's argument is predicated on the state of the world being the same in the 10 years previous and 10 years after 9/11. If there was a change of state just prior to 9/11 then additional measures would not have been required before 9/11, but would have been required after 9/11
Funny that in Europe many people think its the redneck militaristic Americans who are the douchebags.
At least we respect freedom of religion in this country
How is that proposed mosque next to ground zero coming along?
WHOOOSH!
Puns are the only thing that separates us from The Terrorists.
Damn I feel stoopid now. In the rush to post I forgot that I was posting on /. rather than CL RNR.
i'll give you $30 for the rock.
well I have a rock too .. and it keeps terr'rists *and* elephants at bay. And at $50 its a steal compared to a rock that only does one thing.
The reason I am selling it is because I want to get one of those K-Tel rocks .. man they are sweet .. they keep everything at bay!
For most Americans, the day after 9/11 they found Iraq.
Which is sad revisionist history since that the US immediately invaded Afghanistan over 9/11 and only a long time later did they get around to invading Iraq.
If this is advertising or genuine news?
I'm old and dense, so please help me: does 'IP' refer to 'intellectual property', or is it some game-specific acronym?
Perhaps he meant IPO?
None of these remaining franchises seem like 1 billion dollar winners, so what does that leave for the seventh pillar?
Well its got to be one of:
Given that its a gaming company, I'd be going with Greed
"we are in negotiations to try and get the original data."
In other words the OP does not have the data. And from the OP's reply below it may be that they never get it.
Leverage the power of virtualization to run your legacy platform for now, and have time to come up with other solutions.
That assumes that the original data is available to the OP. It may be that it is not.
Considering the reliability of Windows...I'd probably choose to deploy one of the FOSS HMI systems over the commercial ones.
It doesn't matter if you build a fortress- if you build the same on a foundation of shifting sands.
Can you furnish any links to any decent/competitive FOSS HMIs? Because building a fortress out of mud doesn't appeal to me when I can user armor plating for my fortress. Also I don't think you have a very realistic appreciation of Windows reliability .. (not that I am a fanboi - typing from my Mac) , just that I have worked on lots and lots of commercial systems running windows.
The funny thing is that I work with a lot of GE products. After getting on a first name basis with their tech support people, I know that their programmers are definitely not the sharpest crayons in the box so cracking their software shouldn't be too hard. However they did buy iFix recently and I haven't had a chance to peek the hood of that product so perhaps to might be better than average.
But why is that sad? So I can't win an argument with Joe Average. It's not the end of the world.
Because there is this thing called a Bell curve that points out that there are a lot more Joe Averages than there are smart people (not people who think they are smart) and the US is a Republic where the voting of all those Joe Averages out weighs that of the smart people.
That is why John Hodgeman's punch line "Glen Beck makes a lot of sense if you think about it. If you don't think about it, he makes even more sense" makes me quite sad.
No .. what makes me sad is "Third most listened to talk show in the US".
I was going to ask "why hydrogen?", then I think I answered my question myself. I would guess that if you had a fossil fuel based system then all your enemies would need to do is point some sort of spectrographic analyzer at the sky and detect a trail of combustion emissions - where the trail ends is where you aim your counter measures. With a hydrogen based system it would be a lot harder to detect a trail a of water vapour in a sky full of water vapour.
considering it appears to be translucent when dry, a wet T-Shirt contest with this material seems kind of pointless.
Exactly - thats why you need the cold water - to get the pointy bits to stick out!
Emissions free where? At the point of final energy usage?
I'm probably feeding a troll
No I am not trolling. But it seems like every time there is a story on alternative energy their seems to be a magical, overall-systems-impact-denying aura about them. And without clearly reporting on what is going on the general public will get misled into believing in magical energy and environment pixies.
A classic example is the electric vehicles you mentioned. Yes they have all the benefits that you mentioned (but no mention of mining and purifying etc of the additional minerals), but there was an IEEE article earlier this year that pointed out that the domestic power infrastructure can't handle an onslaught of plug in chargers. The system was designed with peak daytime usage in mind and requires an overnight cooling cycle. So there will be additional hidden cost in upgrading that infrastructure. So unless the overall system is correctly considered then people will have unrealistic expectations - which was the point I was originally trying to make.
Or to put it another way TANSTAAFL
At the point of final energy usage? Or at the point of original manufacturing? Or at the point of energy generation for the manufacturing plant?
You have of course given in to the obvious, government only represents the majority consensus, therefore the minority of 'individual voters' is blameless so long as they have participated.
For fucks sake. I was basically paraphrasing Lincoln from the Gettysburg address:
But, in a larger sense, we can not dedicate -- we can not consecrate -- we can not hallow -- this ground. The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract. The world will little note, nor long remember what we say here, but it can never forget what they did here. It is for us the living, rather, to be dedicated here to the unfinished work which they who fought here have thus far so nobly advanced. It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us -- that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion -- that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain -- that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom -- and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.
You = people = government
How hard can it be?
You obviously have tuned in to all of none of the shows.
I have tuned in to quite a few of those shows and find in general that their discussions are so propped up by logical fallacies and bad research that they are a joke.
"You voted them in, so the're your responsibility"
You live in Australia and made him what he is today, so you're responsible for Rupert Murdoch, who is just as responsible for the current state of American politics.
No, Rupert has been a US citizen for quite a while - it was the US rules on foreign media ownership that made him what he is today. You may consider him a bastard, but he is an American bastard.