It wasn't about warships, the fleets in the early 1400's were for exploration, not expansion. The treasure ships brought gifts to the places they visited as tribute. They may have been the largest wooden ships ever built. The official records were discarded. The anti-exploratory trend continued until it became a capital offense to build a seagoing junk with more than two masts.
it (the URL bar) has a mode for displaying the current pageâ(TM)s location and a mode for entering your next destination. Itâ(TM)s not always immediately obvious which mode youâ(TM)re in and what the current text is indicating, and switching modes is not easy either.
Clicking on a the URL bar and typing is not easy? What the hell? It's a text box, if you don't know how to work one of those, you probably shouldn't have the computer. At least we won't have to hear from those people, because they'll never be able to post anything or send any email.
And how would adding an initial step of "Find the hidden URL bar" make it easier? You still have to click on it and start typing. If you change your mind, you'll probably still have to hit "Esc" to get the original address back.
It's not obvious which mode you're in? Did you click on it and start typing? If not, it's the current page's location.
It's one thing to make it usable for everyone, but when you're basing design decisions by assuming your customers are the most feeble-minded of morons, you're not helping anyone.
China stopped building warships because it adopted isolationist policy and therefore had no use for giant navy, not because suddenly every Chinese forgot some seekrit technology. It was a political decision
THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT MY FIRST POST WAS ABOUT. You are using the entire point of my original argument to discredit what I'm saying? I'm wrong because I'm right? You're suffering from a complete comprehension failure.
From my original post: "So the Chinese historically can invent and achieve great things, but their politicians eventually screw up any advantage it would give them."
Patriotic nonsense? What, where I smashed every example of bullshit that you brought up? That's not patriotism, that's just refuting brain-dead claims that aren't even close to true.
You made a list and claimed that those things were "inaccessible, impossible or greatly diminished," I've explained why they aren't, you've backed none of those claims up, and are now complaining that I'm arguing with strawmen, ignoring the fact that you were the one who brought them up.
There was no mention of any Chinese respecting/disrespecting intellectual property laws in any of the parent posts until you brought it up.
Not a single thing you listed is impossible, you can't back up any of them. None of them are greatly diminished from government, some of them became too expensive, but that is not the government's fault or problem. The only inaccessible one is the movies on non-windows PC, which is not even a technology, but a specific use case so narrow it's
China DID forget how to make ships. They had a highly advanced navy back in the early 1400's, when they closed their borders, the ships were left to rot, the technology they had was lost. They still had fishing junks, but those pale in comparison to the 450 foot, 9 masted treasure ships (much larger than the long range ships the west had at the time), not to mention all the other types of large vessels in their fleet.
We did NOT lose the technology to watch movies, you want to watch it on a non-windows PC, I want to watch it on my toaster. I also can't run Mac software on a PC, that doesn't mean that Mac software doesn't work anymore. We both can get any one of dozens of players at a store. Calling that a lost or banned technology is ridiculous.
my response to a ridiculous, retarded claim that Chinese are somehow obligated to treat some technology as exclusive property of some foreign nation.
I don't know who's post you're referring to, but I never mentioned, implied or referenced anything of the sort.
I seriously doubt that it will be more than a year or two before some state allows you to be pulled over and the data pulled from this to write speeding tickets. And the amount of data they will contain will only increase, before long they'll be able to cite you for infractions from weeks ago. Soon it will be argued that GPS data will be needed too, so 1 MPH through a stop sign can be ticketed, too. They'll probably "need" to check it when you register or emission test your car.
Illegal to modify or remove? Why? Who would that harm, other than the police ability to fine you? It's a money grab, nothing else.
Why did we bail out the auto industry if we're going to kill new car sales a couple years down the line when new cars can convict you of speeding without an officer having to observe it?
Industrial infrastructure? There's tons in the US. Are you insane? How would the government ban that?
Railroad network? We have 140,000 miles of railroad. It currently handles 38% of US freight, compared to 8% in Europe.
Transportation? We have absolutely tons of transportation available. That's the important one, but you had to limit it to public Transit. We have plenty of that in the US. Some cities have subway/elevated systems, all of them have bus lines. None of them are banned by the government.
Schools? Again, absolutely tons, including some of the best in the world. Public schools? Some of them are really good, some not. But again, that's a funding issue, they are definitely not banned by the government.
Nuclear power? 65 plants with 104 total reactors. Construction of NP? Watts Bar plant #2 is set to open next year. Most applied for plants have funding problems, not regulatory. Not banned by the US government.
Healthcare? Probably the best in the world, if you can afford it. Again, you're talking about money, the government has not banned anything.
Video and audio equipment? Available anywhere. It's even on the phone. Not banned by the government. Some states have specific uses banned, but that is not the same as the equipment being banned. I doubt those cases will survive extensive judicial review.
Movies? Are you serious? You can get them at thousands of places along with the players, you can stream them to any device that can handle Netflix. I can't play them on my toaster, either, but that's not the same as the government banning them.
You didn't even come close to understanding the point of the discussion.
I'm not sure what county you're referring to, but I can't think of any great, history changing inventions that I can no longer get or use due to US government bans.
Illegal downloading of copyrighted works doesn't count as great, history changing or an invention.
The Emperor Su Sung's had a celestial clock built in 1090, well before the West had one, but when a new Emperor declared the old Emperor's calendar invalid in 1094, it was scavenged for bronze. Similarly, the massive and advanced navy they had built was left to rot when a new emperor closed China's borders. The Mongols (not Chinese, I know, but they ruled China at the time) were poised to invade and most likely take over Europe when they had to retreat to choose a new leader.
So the Chinese historically can invent and achieve great things, but their politicians eventually screw up any advantage it would give them. Their most pervasive invention seems to be idiotic management. No matter how great the employees' work is, it's ignored so they can fill out TPS reports.
The great firewall is another continuation of this tradition.
I know you were trying to make a joke, but since about 2-3 weeks ago, if I click my username in the top right, I get "The user you requested does not exist, no matter how much you wish this might be the case. "
It's just a theory, but I think the != in the middle of my username has something to do with it.
There are and have been a lot of religions that shun the disbeliever and control the lives of a majority of the population, making it more difficult for the disbelievers to marry and procreate. At the extreme end would be organizations like the inquisition, which killed the heretics.
The fact is that our Western norms doesn't make it the right one and people in more conservative or traditional countries in the world have a right to decide for themselves what is appropriate or not.
I agree, people do have a right to decide for themselves what is appropriate or not. Unfortunately for the rest of your post, that means there can be no censorship at the government level, because then people are not given any choice in the matter. The fact they are demonstrating shows that the people want to choose for themselves, which requires unfiltered access to information.
Have you looked at any news this year? There are half a dozen of examples that refute nearly everything you said, not to mention the many dozens more in the past. Turkey shares a border with Syria. Syrians are using donkeys to smuggle videos and pictures out of the country to get the word out about their struggles. You still think government censorship is a good thing? Then you must be incredibly ignorant about the world and it's people.
I actually did RTFA, and none of the articles mention the embarkation point. They mention mission control in Payerne, and that the plane went over the Jura mountains, and that the plane landed in Brussels, but never states where it took off from.
The summary isn't good (Brussels Switzerland?), but the articles suck.
FTFA: "âoeWhatâ(TM)s even more troubling was the finding from our survey that indicated that a majority of parents of kids 10 and under seemed largely unconcerned by their childrenâ(TM)s use of the site.â
But, we're telling them to be scared. Why aren't they scared? These parents must be the same insane lunatics that use craigslist when you know you will be killed if you do. These kids could be bullied, you know. Unlike real life, there's no way to avoid the person or never hear what they say on facebook. They also could have their identity stolen which will just trash their credit score, and if you've got heavy credit card debt at 13, you'll be paying it off the rest of your life.
You should do as the article suggests and have facebook delete the account using the "report an underage child" form. Because a child needs to feel secure that they can tell you anything and know that you'll report them to the relevant authorities immediately. This proves to them how much that they can trust you.
Northern Ireland is part of the UK. What you described was a police raid that used soldiers. What happened in Pakistan was a strictly military operation. There are no real similarities between the two situations.
If the known terrorist is famous for using suicide bombers, the police have to try to arrest him if he comes running at them? You know there's a reason they carry guns, right?
Intelligent, civilized law-abiding people would shoot the guy before finding out if he had a bomb or weapon. Any trained police officer would have shot him first. This isn't a suspect wanted for questioning, this is a known murderer who has killed thousands and is in charge of a huge terrorist organization. There has been a nearly 10 year war with the intent to kill him. He declared war on the US. He died in that war. There's no real debate here, known suicidal violent sociopaths running at you don't get the benefit of the doubt.
If someone has repeatedly said they're going to kill you regardless of the consequences, you don't try to wrestle them to the ground if you have a gun and they're coming at you.
When you have a government who has urged everyone, including civilians, to fight to the death rather than surrender, and you've seen this policy at work in several military operations beforehand and calculated that the loss of life would be much, much higher if an invasion is necessary, it's not so simple a decision.
Precision bombing wasn't a reality back then. Night missions were basically just a best guess.
More than 100,000 Japanese soldiers and tens of thousands (estimates range between 42,000 and 150,000) of civilians died in the invasion of Okinawa. Civilians were urged to commit suicide instead of surrendering to the "barbarians," many did. About 100,000 people died in the bombing (and subsequent fires) of Tokyo. An invasion of the mainland would have killed many times the amount of deaths from the atomic bombs.
After the first atomic bomb was dropped, they wouldn't surrender. After the second one was dropped 3 days later, it still took them 6 days to surrender.
The loss of life was tragic. But, like it or not, it was a far smaller loss of life than an invasion would have caused.
I've heard hearsay that they pulled him out, took him to another floor, dressed him as a clown, made a children's TV show with him as the host, then destroyed the video tape and shot him. I'm not saying that's what happened, but if it is, I don't see how you could endorse that.
I have no problem with logical arguments based on some sort of reputable facts - but capturing a friend-of-a-friend-who-wasn't-there-either-but-thinks-he-heard story and then using it as some weird basis for your moral outrage, that's inexcusable.
This was a military operation, not a police raid. Put yourself in the position of the guy who shot him first.
It would have been borderline mentally retarded to assume he wasn't armed in any way if he were resisting arrest. He was responsible for many deaths and bombings even if you don't including 9/11.
If you had a gun aimed at him and he ran at you, you would have to be a complete idiot to wait until the guy who used suicide bombers repeatedly gets close to you and try to grab and arrest him rather than pull the trigger. Was he armed? No. Was there any way to tell that he didn't have a gun, knife, or bomb strapped to him? Also no. Would you have pulled the trigger? If you had any brains, yes you would.
It's a complete fantasy that arresting him was possible once he resisted. Any known murderer who publicly promoted suicide bombing would have been shot if he charged the police even if they didn't see any weapons. Any cop from pretty much anywhere in the world would have pulled the trigger. This was a guy who didn't just publicly promote suicide bombing, he controlled an organization which repeatedly used it to kill civilians. Who in their right mind would try to tackle him?
Arrest wasn't really a possible, or even sane, choice once he resisted.
On another note: How the hell is anyone surprised in the least bit that they killed him? Have you been in a coma the last 10 years? How did you miss that that's what the US has been trying to do this whole time?
Slashdot Mirror
It wasn't about warships, the fleets in the early 1400's were for exploration, not expansion. The treasure ships brought gifts to the places they visited as tribute. They may have been the largest wooden ships ever built. The official records were discarded. The anti-exploratory trend continued until it became a capital offense to build a seagoing junk with more than two masts.
FTFA:
Clicking on a the URL bar and typing is not easy? What the hell? It's a text box, if you don't know how to work one of those, you probably shouldn't have the computer. At least we won't have to hear from those people, because they'll never be able to post anything or send any email.
And how would adding an initial step of "Find the hidden URL bar" make it easier? You still have to click on it and start typing. If you change your mind, you'll probably still have to hit "Esc" to get the original address back.
It's not obvious which mode you're in? Did you click on it and start typing? If not, it's the current page's location.
It's one thing to make it usable for everyone, but when you're basing design decisions by assuming your customers are the most feeble-minded of morons, you're not helping anyone.
THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT MY FIRST POST WAS ABOUT. You are using the entire point of my original argument to discredit what I'm saying? I'm wrong because I'm right? You're suffering from a complete comprehension failure.
From my original post:
"So the Chinese historically can invent and achieve great things, but their politicians eventually screw up any advantage it would give them."
Patriotic nonsense? What, where I smashed every example of bullshit that you brought up? That's not patriotism, that's just refuting brain-dead claims that aren't even close to true.
You made a list and claimed that those things were "inaccessible, impossible or greatly diminished," I've explained why they aren't, you've backed none of those claims up, and are now complaining that I'm arguing with strawmen, ignoring the fact that you were the one who brought them up.
There was no mention of any Chinese respecting/disrespecting intellectual property laws in any of the parent posts until you brought it up.
Not a single thing you listed is impossible, you can't back up any of them. None of them are greatly diminished from government, some of them became too expensive, but that is not the government's fault or problem. The only inaccessible one is the movies on non-windows PC, which is not even a technology, but a specific use case so narrow it's
China DID forget how to make ships. They had a highly advanced navy back in the early 1400's, when they closed their borders, the ships were left to rot, the technology they had was lost. They still had fishing junks, but those pale in comparison to the 450 foot, 9 masted treasure ships (much larger than the long range ships the west had at the time), not to mention all the other types of large vessels in their fleet.
We did NOT lose the technology to watch movies, you want to watch it on a non-windows PC, I want to watch it on my toaster. I also can't run Mac software on a PC, that doesn't mean that Mac software doesn't work anymore. We both can get any one of dozens of players at a store. Calling that a lost or banned technology is ridiculous.
I don't know who's post you're referring to, but I never mentioned, implied or referenced anything of the sort.
I seriously doubt that it will be more than a year or two before some state allows you to be pulled over and the data pulled from this to write speeding tickets. And the amount of data they will contain will only increase, before long they'll be able to cite you for infractions from weeks ago. Soon it will be argued that GPS data will be needed too, so 1 MPH through a stop sign can be ticketed, too. They'll probably "need" to check it when you register or emission test your car.
Illegal to modify or remove? Why? Who would that harm, other than the police ability to fine you? It's a money grab, nothing else.
Why did we bail out the auto industry if we're going to kill new car sales a couple years down the line when new cars can convict you of speeding without an officer having to observe it?
For some reason that didn't work for mine. However, I just found out that you can replace the username with the UID and it will pull up my comments.
Industrial infrastructure? There's tons in the US. Are you insane? How would the government ban that?
Railroad network? We have 140,000 miles of railroad. It currently handles 38% of US freight, compared to 8% in Europe.
Transportation? We have absolutely tons of transportation available. That's the important one, but you had to limit it to public Transit. We have plenty of that in the US. Some cities have subway/elevated systems, all of them have bus lines. None of them are banned by the government.
Schools? Again, absolutely tons, including some of the best in the world. Public schools? Some of them are really good, some not. But again, that's a funding issue, they are definitely not banned by the government.
Nuclear power? 65 plants with 104 total reactors. Construction of NP? Watts Bar plant #2 is set to open next year. Most applied for plants have funding problems, not regulatory. Not banned by the US government.
Healthcare? Probably the best in the world, if you can afford it. Again, you're talking about money, the government has not banned anything.
Video and audio equipment? Available anywhere. It's even on the phone. Not banned by the government. Some states have specific uses banned, but that is not the same as the equipment being banned. I doubt those cases will survive extensive judicial review.
Movies? Are you serious? You can get them at thousands of places along with the players, you can stream them to any device that can handle Netflix. I can't play them on my toaster, either, but that's not the same as the government banning them.
You didn't even come close to understanding the point of the discussion.
I'm not sure what county you're referring to, but I can't think of any great, history changing inventions that I can no longer get or use due to US government bans.
Illegal downloading of copyrighted works doesn't count as great, history changing or an invention.
The Emperor Su Sung's had a celestial clock built in 1090, well before the West had one, but when a new Emperor declared the old Emperor's calendar invalid in 1094, it was scavenged for bronze. Similarly, the massive and advanced navy they had built was left to rot when a new emperor closed China's borders. The Mongols (not Chinese, I know, but they ruled China at the time) were poised to invade and most likely take over Europe when they had to retreat to choose a new leader.
So the Chinese historically can invent and achieve great things, but their politicians eventually screw up any advantage it would give them. Their most pervasive invention seems to be idiotic management. No matter how great the employees' work is, it's ignored so they can fill out TPS reports.
The great firewall is another continuation of this tradition.
I know you were trying to make a joke, but since about 2-3 weeks ago, if I click my username in the top right, I get "The user you requested does not exist, no matter how much you wish this might be the case. "
It's just a theory, but I think the != in the middle of my username has something to do with it.
You're right, you don't want American bullshit in Europe.
You apparently want China's bullshit in Europe, since the EU's Law Enforcement Work Party just proposed a version of the great firewall for Europe.
http://techweek.org/71481alarm-over-proposal-of-eu-great-firewall.html
Belief in evolution DOES NOT imply atheism, just a brain that can accept logic. Many religions (including Catholics) believe in evolution.
There are and have been a lot of religions that shun the disbeliever and control the lives of a majority of the population, making it more difficult for the disbelievers to marry and procreate. At the extreme end would be organizations like the inquisition, which killed the heretics.
That's my guess anyway.
If you walked in the store, you passed the test.
FTFA:
"Input from the collective IQ can enable search to become a discovery tool"
Damn, they're not even trying to hide it anymore.
You mean "how many infant boys have their genitals mutilated to prevent them from ever having pleasurable sex?"
None.
I agree, people do have a right to decide for themselves what is appropriate or not. Unfortunately for the rest of your post, that means there can be no censorship at the government level, because then people are not given any choice in the matter. The fact they are demonstrating shows that the people want to choose for themselves, which requires unfiltered access to information.
Have you looked at any news this year? There are half a dozen of examples that refute nearly everything you said, not to mention the many dozens more in the past. Turkey shares a border with Syria. Syrians are using donkeys to smuggle videos and pictures out of the country to get the word out about their struggles. You still think government censorship is a good thing? Then you must be incredibly ignorant about the world and it's people.
I actually did RTFA, and none of the articles mention the embarkation point. They mention mission control in Payerne, and that the plane went over the Jura mountains, and that the plane landed in Brussels, but never states where it took off from.
The summary isn't good (Brussels Switzerland?), but the articles suck.
FTFA: "âoeWhatâ(TM)s even more troubling was the finding from our survey that indicated that a majority of parents of kids 10 and under seemed largely unconcerned by their childrenâ(TM)s use of the site.â
But, we're telling them to be scared. Why aren't they scared? These parents must be the same insane lunatics that use craigslist when you know you will be killed if you do. These kids could be bullied, you know. Unlike real life, there's no way to avoid the person or never hear what they say on facebook. They also could have their identity stolen which will just trash their credit score, and if you've got heavy credit card debt at 13, you'll be paying it off the rest of your life.
You should do as the article suggests and have facebook delete the account using the "report an underage child" form. Because a child needs to feel secure that they can tell you anything and know that you'll report them to the relevant authorities immediately. This proves to them how much that they can trust you.
iCloud you're thinking?
That's regulation of the citizens. The company is under no regulation there.
Begging what question?
Northern Ireland is part of the UK. What you described was a police raid that used soldiers. What happened in Pakistan was a strictly military operation. There are no real similarities between the two situations.
If the known terrorist is famous for using suicide bombers, the police have to try to arrest him if he comes running at them? You know there's a reason they carry guns, right?
Intelligent, civilized law-abiding people would shoot the guy before finding out if he had a bomb or weapon. Any trained police officer would have shot him first. This isn't a suspect wanted for questioning, this is a known murderer who has killed thousands and is in charge of a huge terrorist organization. There has been a nearly 10 year war with the intent to kill him. He declared war on the US. He died in that war. There's no real debate here, known suicidal violent sociopaths running at you don't get the benefit of the doubt.
If someone has repeatedly said they're going to kill you regardless of the consequences, you don't try to wrestle them to the ground if you have a gun and they're coming at you.
When you have a government who has urged everyone, including civilians, to fight to the death rather than surrender, and you've seen this policy at work in several military operations beforehand and calculated that the loss of life would be much, much higher if an invasion is necessary, it's not so simple a decision.
Precision bombing wasn't a reality back then. Night missions were basically just a best guess.
More than 100,000 Japanese soldiers and tens of thousands (estimates range between 42,000 and 150,000) of civilians died in the invasion of Okinawa. Civilians were urged to commit suicide instead of surrendering to the "barbarians," many did. About 100,000 people died in the bombing (and subsequent fires) of Tokyo. An invasion of the mainland would have killed many times the amount of deaths from the atomic bombs.
After the first atomic bomb was dropped, they wouldn't surrender. After the second one was dropped 3 days later, it still took them 6 days to surrender.
The loss of life was tragic. But, like it or not, it was a far smaller loss of life than an invasion would have caused.
I've heard hearsay that they pulled him out, took him to another floor, dressed him as a clown, made a children's TV show with him as the host, then destroyed the video tape and shot him. I'm not saying that's what happened, but if it is, I don't see how you could endorse that.
I have no problem with logical arguments based on some sort of reputable facts - but capturing a friend-of-a-friend-who-wasn't-there-either-but-thinks-he-heard story and then using it as some weird basis for your moral outrage, that's inexcusable.
This was a military operation, not a police raid. Put yourself in the position of the guy who shot him first.
It would have been borderline mentally retarded to assume he wasn't armed in any way if he were resisting arrest. He was responsible for many deaths and bombings even if you don't including 9/11.
If you had a gun aimed at him and he ran at you, you would have to be a complete idiot to wait until the guy who used suicide bombers repeatedly gets close to you and try to grab and arrest him rather than pull the trigger. Was he armed? No. Was there any way to tell that he didn't have a gun, knife, or bomb strapped to him? Also no. Would you have pulled the trigger? If you had any brains, yes you would.
It's a complete fantasy that arresting him was possible once he resisted. Any known murderer who publicly promoted suicide bombing would have been shot if he charged the police even if they didn't see any weapons. Any cop from pretty much anywhere in the world would have pulled the trigger. This was a guy who didn't just publicly promote suicide bombing, he controlled an organization which repeatedly used it to kill civilians. Who in their right mind would try to tackle him?
Arrest wasn't really a possible, or even sane, choice once he resisted.
On another note: How the hell is anyone surprised in the least bit that they killed him? Have you been in a coma the last 10 years? How did you miss that that's what the US has been trying to do this whole time?