That said, I would think that true VR will come to game consoles long before it comes to any generic computer. In the Console market, this seems like a natural evolution and not just some NEAT-O idea being added on for the sake of change.
Well, there are different levels of VR quality. Everyone currently thinks that the Wii is cool. I'll take a 3-5 year wait and see on that. If it turns out that's a new gaming niche that Nintendo grabs in the next 3-4 years, I can Nintendo working on scaling down the Wii for being a portable game systema and adding A/V glasses, and you are mainly there. I think there are groups or internal politics within Nintendo that are still hurt over the whole Virtual Boy thing, but are trying to develop all the supporting techs to make VB2 a real block buster. Instead of VB2 it would be more along the lines of VB^2 or VB^3 though. It would be like jumping from the NES to the Gamecube in quailty. Wii looks to be developing all the techs and training a future fan base to prepare them for VB2.
Um, you forget that most believers only take that to apply to followers of their sect of the religion.
Check out Deuteronomy, chapter 13, where Moses specifically instructs his followers to kill anyone who suggests worshipping a different God, even friends and family. Be careful not to argue with any fundamentalists -- their infallible Bible commands them to stone you to death!
I'd have to look up that, but that would involve actually looking through the Bible, which I try to avoid. I'd buy it though. Remember, I stated it applied only to members of the sect. Those that even thought about worshiping other gods weren't part of the sect though really that was more against the first law of only their god. Once you have a "law" you have a community death penalty. Really thinking about it, I sometimes wonder if it would be a good or bad idea to bring back public stoning as a death sentence. The key part that I'm thinking about is that many members of the society/community that want those sorts of actions gone from their community would throw a stone and maybe get something out of their system while actually feeling like they did their part in the court process. There wouldn't be nearly the urge to question rather or not a sentence was correct if most of the local community had to actually administer the punishment. They'd feel some collective guilt if there was any real doubt that they stoned some one that may have been why we quit doing that form of punishment though.
It's the scariest thing I've seen since the last time I was tricked into clicking a link to Goatse.
Um, if you really think about it that link is the least scary of the things that you can encounter on the internet now a days. With virii, spam bots, and spyware does visually distrubing links even other you?
Ok, Fine. What counts as arms? a.22 pistol? A tank? A basement full of C-4? An F16? and what counts as a citizen of good standing? Someone who hasn't been convicted of a felony? Someone who has no criminal record? Does this include traffic violations? Even your clarifications must be further clarified. It's a never ending cycle that can never be fully codified.
Let's see for a really well-rounded infantry person you'd need machine guns for killing other soliders. Today you have tanks, airplanes and helicopters. We have infantry weapons that target each of those weapons platforms. I have very mixed feeling about having anti-tank, anti-airplane, anti-helicopter weapons in private citizen's hands no matter how well regulated. I wouldn't want any arty to be in included. I'd have to look it up, but mortars are really susposed to be the quick and easy arty so I could see some arguing for them to be infantry weapons. Arty doesn't need to be in civilian hands. I'd say that the raw fire power that it takes for anti-tank, anti-airplane, or anti-helicopter weapons would make them just as destructive as arty if aimed at ground targets. I've always read well-regulated to mean having a list of rules and to follow to be properly licensed. Heck, I wouldn't really worry if we had properly licensed former professionals out there with these weapons, but after 9/11 that ain't ever going to happen. I'm less afraid of my government using heavy weapons on me than I am about random other citizens trying out and using heavy weapons. I'd much rather that remained a military only thing just for my peace of mind. If I ever really need to know or have access to that kinda of hardware, the government would draft me, train me and issue me a set of my very own heavy weapons. I don't see the need for needing or paying for that expense for an ordinary citizen.
I'd rather have 12 foot walls around my property than an fully automatic machine gun.
Ten commandments? I'm not religious, but... "Thou shalt not murder" Is pretty clear to me. Although apparently it wasn't to Christianity. Then again this wasn't an issue of not being clear rather than the people this is and was addressed to, putting their fingers in their ears and singing "LA LA LA LA LA LA I can't hear you LA LA LA!!"...
Um, you forget that most believers only take that to apply to followers of their sect of the religion. Remember it culturally reads thou shalt not murder other Jews. Christains mentally changed it to thou shalt not murder other Christains. Its only modern day liberals and revisionist Christains that are going back and saying it means thou shalt not kill any other human. If you really want to nit-picky some Christains will just say that the entire ten commandments is outdated by the new testament and doesn't have to be followed since it is the "old law." Trust me; they can have their cake and eat it too. The old testament ten commandments is something that is thrown around alot mainly because its the only part of the Bible that Christains actually bother to pound into their young and it sometimes sticks. Most of the other stuff is forgotten, but that the ten commandments is supposed to be important cause we learned that when we were little is remembered. I was raised as a Christian and not really a follower. That's just how alot of people think. Heck, folks that don't really care for Christianity don't really mind the ten commandments once you strike out that first one about god and culturally update a few others. Basically most folks just don't mind living by them most of the time. That's why you'll hear a big up roar about them even if those shouting don't really follow any of the other parts of the Bible. It's sort of like picking out the top ten laws that you'll obey and then disreguarding the rest of the criminal code because no one on this Earth would really call you on it.;)
I wouldn't be at all surprised. Considering how he's managed the Linux trademark, and the general lack of understanding of the GPL he's publicly displayed, I'd almost be surprised if he even knows any IP lawyers. In contrast, RMS has had Even Moglen on board from day one.
That sounds like praise for Linus and blasting of RMS. The more that I hear of this RMS the less that I like. He sounds like the Linux version of Ballmer.
I've got an idea for a new work that would require vast community input. I call it Rebuild the World project AKA In Case of Disaster. The idea is that you start with nothing (no tools, etc.) and bring the technology level back up to 1940's(or up to current levels). I'm talking everything from simple tools and shelters to finding ore and refining it to making automobiles and radios. The idea is way too big for one person to do.
This is a great idea, but really needs to be a seperate project from the ground up than wikipedia. I read alot of scifi time travel where one person from our time or slightly into the future goes back in time and transforms that world with current ideas. I have no idea how to make gun powder or the base raw materials for it, but its in several of the more common time travel or build up a preindustrial tech base scifi books. I'd actually enjoy reading all the different ways of doing things that we've already invented.
I'm betting most academics don't earn much over $100,000 a year. Take the $100M and pay the thousand smartest people on the planet to each spend an entire year writing about everything and anything they feel is important for the future of humanity - with the stipulation that every word they write in that year goes immediately into the public domain.
Think of the qualitative improvement in Wikipedia if we added tens of thousands of new articles by the smartest people in their fields.
This reminds me of that math guy that was talked into a duel for political reasons (he was a member fo the the wrong set/party.) His duel was the next day and knew that he had no hope of winning. During that time, he poured out every spare thought of math that he had and put it to paper. I forget what that guy's name is at the moment, but remember the story.
I think that you have an excellent idea. I'd change it up so that the prizes where smaller 1K, 5K, or 10K-30K for week, month, or year's output. I'd put in there that untested theories and personal ideas should be included as well. Just having the ideas could be of use in the future. Occasionally, I re-read about Tesla. Near the end of his life he had some really wild ideas and he never liked Einstein's theory of general relativity and came up with his own vastly different theory. We've gone down the route based on what Einstein left published and followed. Telsa's personal documents weren't published and some seized by the FBI based on the idea that Telsa had invented a death ray. I'm more curious about what path's and ideas could have been opened up if we had Telsa's final works to contrast with Einstein's theory. Go read some of Tesla's bio if you ever have time. The guy was really prideful and could actually deliver on most of his boasts. He had to work very manual labor for his most hated enemy Edison because he didn't have any other source of income. I have no idea how difficult or if it would even be possible to find a modern day Tesla. I could see a person with those traits fleshing out entire new branches of raw theories. You know even though I think its a great idea, I don't think wikipedia is the right media for that. Wikipedia is for published works and things that are already out there some where. You and I and some others have been thinking of using this money for totally new/refined/improved information. Is that within wikipedia's stated goals though? I don't know and would have to check.
I was just skiming headlines. I think a Paris Hilton MMORPG would be more successful. Heck, why limit yourself with her? Go after the entire porn industry. Try digitizing all those porn stars and ameutars for the MMORPG of Porn Land. The place you go to flirt and find random characters to have sex with. Forget WOW or Second Life, I think this idea could really be the next big thing. We just need Rock Star to develop it.
Hello. I'm Japanese, and I can tell you you are overthinking. We don't care if you laugh at Japanese comedians doing stupid things. It's their job. I'm kind of proud of their success. Relax and enjoy.
Nah, it's just slashdot. That's part of the slashdot charm is trying to come up with a paranoid fantasy about whatever organization or group is in the headline be it MS, MPAA, RIAA, associated governments, or just random groups. Everything and one is out to get us! Except Linux. Linux is the one safe thing out there.;)
It's not so bad. I'd rather be me than them, and at least the modern economy and social system is free enough that it's possible for me to eke out a living doing what I think is cool and efficient (and if it turns out to be cheap and convenient -- why, then I get the chance to be a millionaire, too). It could be worse, and historically usually has been. Just consider Galileo!
As for solar: don't give up yet. I don't think the future is in solar-electric, as in acres of extraordinarily-pure silicon wafers facing mother Sol, but in solar-chemical, as in artificial photosynthesis.
I'm lower middle class. I only was able to afford those compact flourcent lights when Wal-mart sold a 4 pack for like $7-12, before then they were like $20 for 2 pack, which was just too expensive for poor little ole me. I'm thrilled with the idea that Wal-mart is aleast going to pay lip service to being environmentally correct. I don't give a cent about the religion of environmentalism, but I'd like to be able to afford cleaner, cheaper, and more effiicient household items. Wal-mart just wants to save millions and insure a future food supply to sell farther down the road. Corporate environmentalism like that appeals to my inner selfish bastard. I don't care about the planet or any life forms on the planet other than my gene line's standard of living and existance. That's the kind of attitude that really changes your outlook on things.;) I'm more of the survivalist mental set because I'm paraoid. I can't afford any of their cool toys and can't keep my family going if civilization collapsed, but their attitude towards environmentalism suits me better. The planet and nature isn't doing anything for me other than existing. As long as they can insure enough reserves, I'd say let 'em try to improve on nature in most areas.;)
This patch required the scout having a conversation with his parents, and then sending in a form that said something along the lines of, "I have talked with Mommy and Daddy about who will get my kidneys when I die," plus shipping and handling.
The moment that my boy comes back with a badge quest like that is the moment I actually come down like the wrath of God on my wife and forbid my boy from ever attending boy scouts again. I never wanted my kid to go into that organization and its the little things like that hit all my buttons. My wife has been brain washing my kids by taking them to her church. It's been working. She insisted our girl be in girl scouts and our boy be in boy scouts just like she and her brother were. I disliked getting applications for a private organization that clashed with my personal beliefs in publics school from K-5 grade. Having both sets of scouts interrupt my family life for all those "petty" actives really annoys me. The social good works and being a good citizen thing are just PR flak. Sort of like the honor and obey your parents seem to be to them as well. Next will be sports. I'm not looking forward to that one.
These qualities are important, sure, but to dangle a badge as a carrot for not doing something wrong seems a like it's missing the point. Boy Scouts have a code and moral values (including those that would keep you from pirating software, smoking, and cheating) are implicit therein; further bribery, especially in the form of badges, seems unwarranted.
You haven't actually met too many boy scouts have you? I've never liked the organization, but after finding out which guys in my age group were members made it certain that I'd never really trust a scout. Sorry they are far more likely to be a politican or petty backstabber. As far as having those morals and following them, well I've seen my share of scouts do each one of those things that you say are againt their code of conduct. Sorry, but I try not to associate with self rightous pricks. That's why don't really do the Christainity thing although that's what I was raised to. I've observed far too mainy of the same type of people in most churches and would rather not share any of my time with them. My wife and co-workers call me anti-social. I tend to think of it more that there isn't anyone local that I want to be social with. I don't want to do the PTA thing, the Scout Leader thing, or the Church thing. Where I happen to be, on-line friendships don't count. If you can't physically produce 'em, they don't exist to these locals. Oh, and they wonder why I'm anti-social to them.
I realize the Boy Scouts like to try to teach morals and the like, but it doesn't sit well that the *AA's would be able to create a new merit badge and start indoctrinating them.
I've never like the concept of the boy scouts. I really didn't want my boy to be part of the boy scouts. I lost out of that arguement with my wife because her brother happened to be a scout. I've always viewed the Boy Scouts as the US version of the Hilter Youth. Things like that only confirm that opinion. Our girl is part of the cookie mafia... the girl scouts. I've never liked them either. (I think that's mainly because I just hated seeing US girls dressed up like that. I can live with Anime girls dressed goofy like that, but I don't like real people dressing that way.;)
Are you sure your belief does not reflect merely an uncritical acceptance of the current social mythology?
I'm not on either coast. I'm in Arkansas. I have one of the "cheapest" gas prices in the nation at $2.06 per gal last I checked and I personally don't like it. Why? I think that we could do better. To tell you the truth, I'd rather we had nuclear powered cars and bought them pre-fueled with enough fuel to run the vehicle 200K miles. How much would you be willing to pay for a "new" car if you only had to "fuel" the vehicle once or twice? Actually, I think our shipping companies would be those that would be really interested in something like that. Regular car drivers aren't on the road to get that much raw mileage. Fleet vehicles can hit those numbers.
Not much is left to be learned about nuclear, solar, wind or hydro power. t's just a question of economics. I won't agrue with you on hydro power, but for wind, solar, and nuclear I do believe that we can really increase our utility of them. Raw science wise, you are right. There isn't any "basic" science that we need to do. We just need to have a need to purchase lots of wind, solar, or nuclear powered products from different companies and the engineers would improve them each generation. I honestly would like more consumer oriented nuclear devices. Screw the fuel-cell fad. I want nuclear powered AA & AAA batteries. Solar, I look into, but it's just far too expensive too keep up my current standard of living, and I'm not going to reduce that just to switch power sources.
You know the said thing about solar? The only solar powered device that most people run into is solar powered calculators. We should be able to do better than that. Couldn't these Ipods, PSPs, GameBoy DS have "some" small amount of "solar" recharging ability? Oh, it's most likely just not worth it.
That's really unfortunate. Some of those Japanese shows are hilarious, and watching videos from foreign shows is a great glimpse into another culture.
Maybe that's why they want them removed. Could it be a secret plot by the Japanese to export only anime, but keep all the really good live action Japanese cultural related shows to themselves? It could also be that the Japanese don't mind acting fools infront of other Japanese, but by damned if they'll act a fool where non-Japanese will see it.
> We need to learn how to use our position to better control the rest of the globe.
I'ld just like to point out that I'm not going to accept being controlled from Washington D.C. unless I get to vote for my representative there, and will use any means necessary to resist any such attempt by the U.S. Sovereignty is not an American prerogative. I'ld wager that the other 6+ billion non-American people on the globe feel just like I do.
You seemed to missed the undertone of what I was trying to get across. I don't mean direct control over your activities like your government would do to you. I mean stealth controls like actually controling the global energy market (like folks believe that the OPEC actually does). (The only way that we could do that is really develop nuclear tech or another high tech energy tech to the point where all other forms of energy production look comical to use because of the return on investment and other difficulties involved. Of course that's also like saying, let's develop a magic solar paint that we spray on stuff and will convert 98% of sunlight into electricity and is really cheap. It's far easier said than done.) Personally, I wouldn't have any problems with adding a few more states to the US. I really had hoped that we'd have added two middle eastern counteries and states that would have changed us more as a country than anything else I could think of.
The US oil dependence is just one string among many that bind it to the rest of the world. Cutting that one, even if were possible, wouldn't change much. There'd still be plenty of others. So I don't much see the point. I've never believed the canard that US policy is dictated by "oil blackmail."
Um, I actually buy it. You missed one really tiny thing. Oil fuels our entire domestic transportation grid. Without oil, we can't move around those goods to and from other countries. I don't really care if we use foreign oil at all, but we need to be able to fuel and power our transportation internally for 4-5 years without energy imports. We actually have the raw energy resources to do that in various forms. We just need to develop them.
As to controlling the rest of the planet, it is this attitude that makes the rest of us extremely wary of the United States.
Well, you really don't have too much to worry about the US government because it and those we elect do a very poor job of it. When I talk of strings and control, I mean that the US should develop/invent some new "thing" that only we can do "easily" and everyone else has to go through us for it. I'd like stealth strings of control. You know that we could throw around our weight, but its only in very little ways. You know, I'd want our president to spend billions on "energy companies", but I wouldn't want him to annouce to the world that we were going to kick oil though. I'd invite the heads of the current US energy companies and say that we need a 5-10 year plan to be independent of foreign energy resources though we don't want a word of this leaking out until after we are ready to cut the thread of foreign energy resources coming into this country. It won't happen. Our president doesn't have that kind of power, and though he could arrange a meeting and attempt the same thing, I would be near impossible to do without world leaking out. I'd want it to be a black project of radically transforming our entire nation. You forget that foreign interests want the US tied to oil. The EU, China and Russia are very happy that the entire US economy could be really damaged just by capturing/destoring oil tankers. Oh, our military has enough oil to run a few months on, but that won't keep the US economy going, which if they could keep the oil from the US wouldn't take long for the US citizens to demand for our government to fix things, which by that point it would be too late. The US may be currently be a superpower, but I think that we are in decline and that there isn't even a rumor of the US government trying to secretly fix things just incase we had to fight WWIII with some one that could shoot down our space assets and has just enough of a navy to destory our incoming oil tankers. The US isn't invinicible and doesn't have any real control over the rest of the globe. As far as being wary of the US goes, your government should always a be a bit on the look out of scoring points off other countries and increasing/keeping your standard of living. I'll be honest; I could almost careless what the US gov. is doing outside of our borders as long as they secure my and my family's standard of living for the present and the foreseeable future. If this means other countries don't like what my country is doing to stay on top, I'd say ignore them or conquer them. Oh forgot conquest is out of favor this century. Look on the bright side, I'd say that the US has 20-30 years as major super power until China, Russia, or the EU really become into their own as superpowers. Maybe we need that now more than in a generation or two so we'd feel like we need to compete more.
(2) This business has been thrashed out before, in the 16th-17th centuries, with respect to navigation of the high seas. In addition to being a very expensive process, the end result was a general agreement that freedom to travel -- even for a warship -- peacefully anywhere in international waters is guaranteed, unless you are actually at war. Do we really need to repeat the bloody experiment in space to probably arrive at the same conclusion?
For actual space colonization and mining, I'd say no. For control of Earth's orbitals that could be used by Earth's various governments to control the entire Earth. Yes, we wouldn't fight WWIII with China over this, but we would fight "smaller" countries like Iran or NK that tried to get into space. I'd think China, Russia, EU, Japan, and India would be "safe" from any US actions. It's the smaller countries that can't be easily controlled by the big boys that the US really wants to keep Earth bound.
Let's be honest, the US doesn't control the Earth. We have our strings of control over various other governments, but they hold our strings as well. I'd say that the entire EU was more worried about our Iraq adventures mainly because there was a feeling that the US would try to liberate the entire region for its resources for our use. Those middle eastern countries with oil have strings that have a pretty tight hold on us. We are trying to break them, but we can't do it within 5 years though. We need to learn how to use our position to better control the rest of the globe. They are catching up far to quickly and they are just as smart as we are.
Is this the new SDI? I don't care if you're Republican or Democrat or Independent, this isn't about keeping bad people out of space. This isn't about securing space. It's about doing what we want the rest of the world to do. It's childish colonial imperialism and it's complete bullshit.
Um, I think you missed a point. It really just a stupid PR announcement that can be ignored by most nations. I'd be more worried if we showed any signs of actually using space at the moment. If we were making any real money/resources off of space or space resources, we'd have them defended and there would be no debate about defending our assests. We have spy stats, weather stats, telecommunications stats, and TV stats up there. Oh, and NASA happens to have a very small amount of probes out side of Earth orbit. Opps I forgot to price the cost of one of those stats.
If ABC/NBC/FOX/CNN loses a multibillion dollar stat that happens to be above/near China, the slant on the US defending our space assets would really change. There is a part of me that would like China/Russia to sell Iran or NK some stat killer lasers just so one of those nations could really hurt the US in an economic manner, blind us from observing that entire portion of the world, and make us mad with them. (Russia and China would benefit from our stats being shoot down and they could just say that it was legitmate weapons sale.) The US public will not want to go to war over shoot down stats. On the other hand, we would go to war after 2-3 years of constantly loosing billions in stats above a few nations.
It wouldn't even matter if that nation had nukes like NK is supposed to, we'd change our offensive nuke policy just for them if we thought that a nuke armed country was really dangerous to us. Let's be honest eliminating competition is a primary part of what being a living organism is. Actually, I think if we got all our space stats shoot down it could do more to speed up our long term development of space than anything else could have. That is if we don't spend 5-10 years waging a war against those that shot down that stats.
This brings back memories of my first night playing Doom at a friends house. I'd never played an id game before. The first time those demons/imps popped up I nearlly fell out of the chair. I think that my friends offered for me to play the most just to laugh at me that night.;) After a few nights, you get used to it. Of course what really helped was just turning off the sound. That helped a lot for me.
The "environmentalist" movement was taken over by socialists/anti-capitalists (if it looks like they have more than one agenda, it's because they do), but even more, they want to reprogram everyone's mind, just like a cult. "We're all no better than bacteria."
Um, this is where good ole dictatorships, communism, monarchies, republics, and capitalist system come to the rescue. Yes, you are no better than a bacteria and should be consider yourself no better than a bacteria and do what I or my appointed ones tell you. The secret is that you are no better than a bacteria, but I'm vastly better than you so I should have the results of most of your labor and generally better resources just because I exist. You on the hand should be thankful to have any resources because you are no better than bacteria. Can you see where this leads? Two groups: The sheep and those that herd them. In most of my examples, the guy at the top or the structure doesn't care about the guys at the bottom and would consider it a good thing if the guys at the bottom never thought of personal advancement in any form. Remember, republics don't have to be democracies. They are just proxies for the voting class whatever form the voting class takes. We could have a rule that "you have to have the desire and will to rule others to be able to vote."
You laugh, but China's population is seriously unbalanced. There's not enough women for something in excess of twenty percent of China's men. They're either going to have to have a war (a really big one, or one where they sacrifice a lot of troops) or embrace homosexuality because the rest of the world's women don't want them - Chinese men typically do not have much respect for women, it's not exactly a cultural value for them.
Wasn't it Diamond Age that had one organization save all those female infanticides and raise them through cheap nano-tech. I wish that he'd have sequel to that. I would really love to seen the long term social effects as all those geneic Chinese women violently reject every Chinese male and/or most of the traditional male dominated mores of China. If I recall correctly, that female base was all very highly educated and had their own uniform culture. They could turn into a homosexual culture, but I had the feeling that they'd more just marry non-Chinese cultural men. Though that would ironically leave the same problem of a massive sex imbalance in China and extreme competetion for mates. Do you think that China would go to war just to capture females and kill off excess males? Maybe. I've read of alot stupider reasons to go to war. That one actually makes sense.
Slashdot Mirror
That said, I would think that true VR will come to game consoles long before it comes to any generic computer. In the Console market, this seems like a natural evolution and not just some NEAT-O idea being added on for the sake of change.
Well, there are different levels of VR quality. Everyone currently thinks that the Wii is cool. I'll take a 3-5 year wait and see on that. If it turns out that's a new gaming niche that Nintendo grabs in the next 3-4 years, I can Nintendo working on scaling down the Wii for being a portable game systema and adding A/V glasses, and you are mainly there. I think there are groups or internal politics within Nintendo that are still hurt over the whole Virtual Boy thing, but are trying to develop all the supporting techs to make VB2 a real block buster. Instead of VB2 it would be more along the lines of VB^2 or VB^3 though. It would be like jumping from the NES to the Gamecube in quailty. Wii looks to be developing all the techs and training a future fan base to prepare them for VB2.
Um, you forget that most believers only take that to apply to followers of their sect of the religion.
Check out Deuteronomy, chapter 13, where Moses specifically instructs his followers to kill anyone who suggests worshipping a different God, even friends and family. Be careful not to argue with any fundamentalists -- their infallible Bible commands them to stone you to death!
I'd have to look up that, but that would involve actually looking through the Bible, which I try to avoid. I'd buy it though. Remember, I stated it applied only to members of the sect. Those that even thought about worshiping other gods weren't part of the sect though really that was more against the first law of only their god. Once you have a "law" you have a community death penalty. Really thinking about it, I sometimes wonder if it would be a good or bad idea to bring back public stoning as a death sentence. The key part that I'm thinking about is that many members of the society/community that want those sorts of actions gone from their community would throw a stone and maybe get something out of their system while actually feeling like they did their part in the court process. There wouldn't be nearly the urge to question rather or not a sentence was correct if most of the local community had to actually administer the punishment. They'd feel some collective guilt if there was any real doubt that they stoned some one that may have been why we quit doing that form of punishment though.
It's the scariest thing I've seen since the last time I was tricked into clicking a link to Goatse.
Um, if you really think about it that link is the least scary of the things that you can encounter on the internet now a days. With virii, spam bots, and spyware does visually distrubing links even other you?
Ok, Fine. What counts as arms? a .22 pistol? A tank? A basement full of C-4? An F16? and what counts as a citizen of good standing? Someone who hasn't been convicted of a felony? Someone who has no criminal record? Does this include traffic violations? Even your clarifications must be further clarified. It's a never ending cycle that can never be fully codified.
Let's see for a really well-rounded infantry person you'd need machine guns for killing other soliders. Today you have tanks, airplanes and helicopters. We have infantry weapons that target each of those weapons platforms. I have very mixed feeling about having anti-tank, anti-airplane, anti-helicopter weapons in private citizen's hands no matter how well regulated. I wouldn't want any arty to be in included. I'd have to look it up, but mortars are really susposed to be the quick and easy arty so I could see some arguing for them to be infantry weapons. Arty doesn't need to be in civilian hands. I'd say that the raw fire power that it takes for anti-tank, anti-airplane, or anti-helicopter weapons would make them just as destructive as arty if aimed at ground targets. I've always read well-regulated to mean having a list of rules and to follow to be properly licensed. Heck, I wouldn't really worry if we had properly licensed former professionals out there with these weapons, but after 9/11 that ain't ever going to happen. I'm less afraid of my government using heavy weapons on me than I am about random other citizens trying out and using heavy weapons. I'd much rather that remained a military only thing just for my peace of mind. If I ever really need to know or have access to that kinda of hardware, the government would draft me, train me and issue me a set of my very own heavy weapons. I don't see the need for needing or paying for that expense for an ordinary citizen.
I'd rather have 12 foot walls around my property than an fully automatic machine gun.
Let's see:
;)
Ten commandments?
I'm not religious, but...
"Thou shalt not murder"
Is pretty clear to me. Although apparently it wasn't to Christianity. Then again this wasn't an issue of not being clear rather than the people this is and was addressed to, putting their fingers in their ears and singing "LA LA LA LA LA LA I can't hear you LA LA LA!!"...
Um, you forget that most believers only take that to apply to followers of their sect of the religion. Remember it culturally reads thou shalt not murder other Jews. Christains mentally changed it to thou shalt not murder other Christains. Its only modern day liberals and revisionist Christains that are going back and saying it means thou shalt not kill any other human. If you really want to nit-picky some Christains will just say that the entire ten commandments is outdated by the new testament and doesn't have to be followed since it is the "old law." Trust me; they can have their cake and eat it too. The old testament ten commandments is something that is thrown around alot mainly because its the only part of the Bible that Christains actually bother to pound into their young and it sometimes sticks. Most of the other stuff is forgotten, but that the ten commandments is supposed to be important cause we learned that when we were little is remembered. I was raised as a Christian and not really a follower. That's just how alot of people think. Heck, folks that don't really care for Christianity don't really mind the ten commandments once you strike out that first one about god and culturally update a few others. Basically most folks just don't mind living by them most of the time. That's why you'll hear a big up roar about them even if those shouting don't really follow any of the other parts of the Bible. It's sort of like picking out the top ten laws that you'll obey and then disreguarding the rest of the criminal code because no one on this Earth would really call you on it.
I wouldn't be at all surprised. Considering how he's managed the Linux trademark, and the general lack of understanding of the GPL he's publicly displayed, I'd almost be surprised if he even knows any IP lawyers. In contrast, RMS has had Even Moglen on board from day one.
That sounds like praise for Linus and blasting of RMS. The more that I hear of this RMS the less that I like. He sounds like the Linux version of Ballmer.
I've got an idea for a new work that would require vast community input. I call it Rebuild the World project AKA In Case of Disaster. The idea is that you start with nothing (no tools, etc.) and bring the technology level back up to 1940's(or up to current levels). I'm talking everything from simple tools and shelters to finding ore and refining it to making automobiles and radios. The idea is way too big for one person to do.
This is a great idea, but really needs to be a seperate project from the ground up than wikipedia. I read alot of scifi time travel where one person from our time or slightly into the future goes back in time and transforms that world with current ideas. I have no idea how to make gun powder or the base raw materials for it, but its in several of the more common time travel or build up a preindustrial tech base scifi books. I'd actually enjoy reading all the different ways of doing things that we've already invented.
I'm betting most academics don't earn much over $100,000 a year. Take the $100M and pay the thousand smartest people on the planet to each spend an entire year writing about everything and anything they feel is important for the future of humanity - with the stipulation that every word they write in that year goes immediately into the public domain.
Think of the qualitative improvement in Wikipedia if we added tens of thousands of new articles by the smartest people in their fields.
This reminds me of that math guy that was talked into a duel for political reasons (he was a member fo the the wrong set/party.) His duel was the next day and knew that he had no hope of winning. During that time, he poured out every spare thought of math that he had and put it to paper. I forget what that guy's name is at the moment, but remember the story.
I think that you have an excellent idea. I'd change it up so that the prizes where smaller 1K, 5K, or 10K-30K for week, month, or year's output. I'd put in there that untested theories and personal ideas should be included as well. Just having the ideas could be of use in the future. Occasionally, I re-read about Tesla. Near the end of his life he had some really wild ideas and he never liked Einstein's theory of general relativity and came up with his own vastly different theory. We've gone down the route based on what Einstein left published and followed. Telsa's personal documents weren't published and some seized by the FBI based on the idea that Telsa had invented a death ray. I'm more curious about what path's and ideas could have been opened up if we had Telsa's final works to contrast with Einstein's theory. Go read some of Tesla's bio if you ever have time. The guy was really prideful and could actually deliver on most of his boasts. He had to work very manual labor for his most hated enemy Edison because he didn't have any other source of income. I have no idea how difficult or if it would even be possible to find a modern day Tesla. I could see a person with those traits fleshing out entire new branches of raw theories. You know even though I think its a great idea, I don't think wikipedia is the right media for that. Wikipedia is for published works and things that are already out there some where. You and I and some others have been thinking of using this money for totally new/refined/improved information. Is that within wikipedia's stated goals though? I don't know and would have to check.
I was just skiming headlines. I think a Paris Hilton MMORPG would be more successful. Heck, why limit yourself with her? Go after the entire porn industry. Try digitizing all those porn stars and ameutars for the MMORPG of Porn Land. The place you go to flirt and find random characters to have sex with. Forget WOW or Second Life, I think this idea could really be the next big thing. We just need Rock Star to develop it.
Hello. I'm Japanese, and I can tell you you are overthinking. We don't care if you laugh at Japanese comedians doing stupid things. It's their job. I'm kind of proud of their success. Relax and enjoy.
;)
Nah, it's just slashdot. That's part of the slashdot charm is trying to come up with a paranoid fantasy about whatever organization or group is in the headline be it MS, MPAA, RIAA, associated governments, or just random groups. Everything and one is out to get us! Except Linux. Linux is the one safe thing out there.
It's not so bad. I'd rather be me than them, and at least the modern economy and social system is free enough that it's possible for me to eke out a living doing what I think is cool and efficient (and if it turns out to be cheap and convenient -- why, then I get the chance to be a millionaire, too). It could be worse, and historically usually has been. Just consider Galileo!
;) I'm more of the survivalist mental set because I'm paraoid. I can't afford any of their cool toys and can't keep my family going if civilization collapsed, but their attitude towards environmentalism suits me better. The planet and nature isn't doing anything for me other than existing. As long as they can insure enough reserves, I'd say let 'em try to improve on nature in most areas. ;)
As for solar: don't give up yet. I don't think the future is in solar-electric, as in acres of extraordinarily-pure silicon wafers facing mother Sol, but in solar-chemical, as in artificial photosynthesis.
I'm lower middle class. I only was able to afford those compact flourcent lights when Wal-mart sold a 4 pack for like $7-12, before then they were like $20 for 2 pack, which was just too expensive for poor little ole me. I'm thrilled with the idea that Wal-mart is aleast going to pay lip service to being environmentally correct. I don't give a cent about the religion of environmentalism, but I'd like to be able to afford cleaner, cheaper, and more effiicient household items. Wal-mart just wants to save millions and insure a future food supply to sell farther down the road. Corporate environmentalism like that appeals to my inner selfish bastard. I don't care about the planet or any life forms on the planet other than my gene line's standard of living and existance. That's the kind of attitude that really changes your outlook on things.
This patch required the scout having a conversation with his parents, and then sending in a form that said something along the lines of, "I have talked with Mommy and Daddy about who will get my kidneys when I die," plus shipping and handling.
The moment that my boy comes back with a badge quest like that is the moment I actually come down like the wrath of God on my wife and forbid my boy from ever attending boy scouts again. I never wanted my kid to go into that organization and its the little things like that hit all my buttons. My wife has been brain washing my kids by taking them to her church. It's been working. She insisted our girl be in girl scouts and our boy be in boy scouts just like she and her brother were. I disliked getting applications for a private organization that clashed with my personal beliefs in publics school from K-5 grade. Having both sets of scouts interrupt my family life for all those "petty" actives really annoys me. The social good works and being a good citizen thing are just PR flak. Sort of like the honor and obey your parents seem to be to them as well. Next will be sports. I'm not looking forward to that one.
These qualities are important, sure, but to dangle a badge as a carrot for not doing something wrong seems a like it's missing the point. Boy Scouts have a code and moral values (including those that would keep you from pirating software, smoking, and cheating) are implicit therein; further bribery, especially in the form of badges, seems unwarranted.
You haven't actually met too many boy scouts have you? I've never liked the organization, but after finding out which guys in my age group were members made it certain that I'd never really trust a scout. Sorry they are far more likely to be a politican or petty backstabber. As far as having those morals and following them, well I've seen my share of scouts do each one of those things that you say are againt their code of conduct. Sorry, but I try not to associate with self rightous pricks. That's why don't really do the Christainity thing although that's what I was raised to. I've observed far too mainy of the same type of people in most churches and would rather not share any of my time with them. My wife and co-workers call me anti-social. I tend to think of it more that there isn't anyone local that I want to be social with. I don't want to do the PTA thing, the Scout Leader thing, or the Church thing. Where I happen to be, on-line friendships don't count. If you can't physically produce 'em, they don't exist to these locals. Oh, and they wonder why I'm anti-social to them.
I realize the Boy Scouts like to try to teach morals and the like, but it doesn't sit well that the *AA's would be able to create a new merit badge and start indoctrinating them.
;)
I've never like the concept of the boy scouts. I really didn't want my boy to be part of the boy scouts. I lost out of that arguement with my wife because her brother happened to be a scout. I've always viewed the Boy Scouts as the US version of the Hilter Youth. Things like that only confirm that opinion. Our girl is part of the cookie mafia... the girl scouts. I've never liked them either. (I think that's mainly because I just hated seeing US girls dressed up like that. I can live with Anime girls dressed goofy like that, but I don't like real people dressing that way.
Are you sure your belief does not reflect merely an uncritical acceptance of the current social mythology?
I'm not on either coast. I'm in Arkansas. I have one of the "cheapest" gas prices in the nation at $2.06 per gal last I checked and I personally don't like it. Why? I think that we could do better. To tell you the truth, I'd rather we had nuclear powered cars and bought them pre-fueled with enough fuel to run the vehicle 200K miles. How much would you be willing to pay for a "new" car if you only had to "fuel" the vehicle once or twice? Actually, I think our shipping companies would be those that would be really interested in something like that. Regular car drivers aren't on the road to get that much raw mileage. Fleet vehicles can hit those numbers.
Not much is left to be learned about nuclear, solar, wind or hydro power. t's just a question of economics.
I won't agrue with you on hydro power, but for wind, solar, and nuclear I do believe that we can really increase our utility of them. Raw science wise, you are right. There isn't any "basic" science that we need to do. We just need to have a need to purchase lots of wind, solar, or nuclear powered products from different companies and the engineers would improve them each generation. I honestly would like more consumer oriented nuclear devices. Screw the fuel-cell fad. I want nuclear powered AA & AAA batteries. Solar, I look into, but it's just far too expensive too keep up my current standard of living, and I'm not going to reduce that just to switch power sources.
You know the said thing about solar? The only solar powered device that most people run into is solar powered calculators. We should be able to do better than that. Couldn't these Ipods, PSPs, GameBoy DS have "some" small amount of "solar" recharging ability? Oh, it's most likely just not worth it.
That's really unfortunate. Some of those Japanese shows are hilarious, and watching videos from foreign shows is a great glimpse into another culture.
Maybe that's why they want them removed. Could it be a secret plot by the Japanese to export only anime, but keep all the really good live action Japanese cultural related shows to themselves? It could also be that the Japanese don't mind acting fools infront of other Japanese, but by damned if they'll act a fool where non-Japanese will see it.
> We need to learn how to use our position to better control the rest of the globe.
I'ld just like to point out that I'm not going to accept being controlled from Washington D.C. unless I get to vote for my representative there, and will use any means necessary to resist any such attempt by the U.S. Sovereignty is not an American prerogative. I'ld wager that the other 6+ billion non-American people on the globe feel just like I do.
You seemed to missed the undertone of what I was trying to get across. I don't mean direct control over your activities like your government would do to you. I mean stealth controls like actually controling the global energy market (like folks believe that the OPEC actually does). (The only way that we could do that is really develop nuclear tech or another high tech energy tech to the point where all other forms of energy production look comical to use because of the return on investment and other difficulties involved. Of course that's also like saying, let's develop a magic solar paint that we spray on stuff and will convert 98% of sunlight into electricity and is really cheap. It's far easier said than done.) Personally, I wouldn't have any problems with adding a few more states to the US. I really had hoped that we'd have added two middle eastern counteries and states that would have changed us more as a country than anything else I could think of.
The US oil dependence is just one string among many that bind it to the rest of the world. Cutting that one, even if were possible, wouldn't change much. There'd still be plenty of others. So I don't much see the point. I've never believed the canard that US policy is dictated by "oil blackmail."
Um, I actually buy it. You missed one really tiny thing. Oil fuels our entire domestic transportation grid. Without oil, we can't move around those goods to and from other countries. I don't really care if we use foreign oil at all, but we need to be able to fuel and power our transportation internally for 4-5 years without energy imports. We actually have the raw energy resources to do that in various forms. We just need to develop them.
As to controlling the rest of the planet, it is this attitude that makes the rest of us extremely wary of the United States.
Well, you really don't have too much to worry about the US government because it and those we elect do a very poor job of it. When I talk of strings and control, I mean that the US should develop/invent some new "thing" that only we can do "easily" and everyone else has to go through us for it. I'd like stealth strings of control. You know that we could throw around our weight, but its only in very little ways. You know, I'd want our president to spend billions on "energy companies", but I wouldn't want him to annouce to the world that we were going to kick oil though. I'd invite the heads of the current US energy companies and say that we need a 5-10 year plan to be independent of foreign energy resources though we don't want a word of this leaking out until after we are ready to cut the thread of foreign energy resources coming into this country. It won't happen. Our president doesn't have that kind of power, and though he could arrange a meeting and attempt the same thing, I would be near impossible to do without world leaking out. I'd want it to be a black project of radically transforming our entire nation. You forget that foreign interests want the US tied to oil. The EU, China and Russia are very happy that the entire US economy could be really damaged just by capturing/destoring oil tankers. Oh, our military has enough oil to run a few months on, but that won't keep the US economy going, which if they could keep the oil from the US wouldn't take long for the US citizens to demand for our government to fix things, which by that point it would be too late. The US may be currently be a superpower, but I think that we are in decline and that there isn't even a rumor of the US government trying to secretly fix things just incase we had to fight WWIII with some one that could shoot down our space assets and has just enough of a navy to destory our incoming oil tankers. The US isn't invinicible and doesn't have any real control over the rest of the globe. As far as being wary of the US goes, your government should always a be a bit on the look out of scoring points off other countries and increasing/keeping your standard of living. I'll be honest; I could almost careless what the US gov. is doing outside of our borders as long as they secure my and my family's standard of living for the present and the foreseeable future. If this means other countries don't like what my country is doing to stay on top, I'd say ignore them or conquer them. Oh forgot conquest is out of favor this century. Look on the bright side, I'd say that the US has 20-30 years as major super power until China, Russia, or the EU really become into their own as superpowers. Maybe we need that now more than in a generation or two so we'd feel like we need to compete more.
(2) This business has been thrashed out before, in the 16th-17th centuries, with respect to navigation of the high seas. In addition to being a very expensive process, the end result was a general agreement that freedom to travel -- even for a warship -- peacefully anywhere in international waters is guaranteed, unless you are actually at war. Do we really need to repeat the bloody experiment in space to probably arrive at the same conclusion?
For actual space colonization and mining, I'd say no. For control of Earth's orbitals that could be used by Earth's various governments to control the entire Earth. Yes, we wouldn't fight WWIII with China over this, but we would fight "smaller" countries like Iran or NK that tried to get into space. I'd think China, Russia, EU, Japan, and India would be "safe" from any US actions. It's the smaller countries that can't be easily controlled by the big boys that the US really wants to keep Earth bound.
Let's be honest, the US doesn't control the Earth. We have our strings of control over various other governments, but they hold our strings as well. I'd say that the entire EU was more worried about our Iraq adventures mainly because there was a feeling that the US would try to liberate the entire region for its resources for our use. Those middle eastern countries with oil have strings that have a pretty tight hold on us. We are trying to break them, but we can't do it within 5 years though. We need to learn how to use our position to better control the rest of the globe. They are catching up far to quickly and they are just as smart as we are.
Is this the new SDI? I don't care if you're Republican or Democrat or Independent, this isn't about keeping bad people out of space. This isn't about securing space. It's about doing what we want the rest of the world to do. It's childish colonial imperialism and it's complete bullshit.
Um, I think you missed a point. It really just a stupid PR announcement that can be ignored by most nations. I'd be more worried if we showed any signs of actually using space at the moment. If we were making any real money/resources off of space or space resources, we'd have them defended and there would be no debate about defending our assests. We have spy stats, weather stats, telecommunications stats, and TV stats up there. Oh, and NASA happens to have a very small amount of probes out side of Earth orbit. Opps I forgot to price the cost of one of those stats.
If ABC/NBC/FOX/CNN loses a multibillion dollar stat that happens to be above/near China, the slant on the US defending our space assets would really change. There is a part of me that would like China/Russia to sell Iran or NK some stat killer lasers just so one of those nations could really hurt the US in an economic manner, blind us from observing that entire portion of the world, and make us mad with them. (Russia and China would benefit from our stats being shoot down and they could just say that it was legitmate weapons sale.) The US public will not want to go to war over shoot down stats. On the other hand, we would go to war after 2-3 years of constantly loosing billions in stats above a few nations.
It wouldn't even matter if that nation had nukes like NK is supposed to, we'd change our offensive nuke policy just for them if we thought that a nuke armed country was really dangerous to us. Let's be honest eliminating competition is a primary part of what being a living organism is. Actually, I think if we got all our space stats shoot down it could do more to speed up our long term development of space than anything else could have. That is if we don't spend 5-10 years waging a war against those that shot down that stats.
This brings back memories of my first night playing Doom at a friends house. I'd never played an id game before. The first time those demons/imps popped up I nearlly fell out of the chair. I think that my friends offered for me to play the most just to laugh at me that night. ;) After a few nights, you get used to it. Of course what really helped was just turning off the sound. That helped a lot for me.
The "environmentalist" movement was taken over by socialists/anti-capitalists (if it looks like they have more than one agenda, it's because they do), but even more, they want to reprogram everyone's mind, just like a cult. "We're all no better than bacteria."
Um, this is where good ole dictatorships, communism, monarchies, republics, and capitalist system come to the rescue. Yes, you are no better than a bacteria and should be consider yourself no better than a bacteria and do what I or my appointed ones tell you. The secret is that you are no better than a bacteria, but I'm vastly better than you so I should have the results of most of your labor and generally better resources just because I exist. You on the hand should be thankful to have any resources because you are no better than bacteria. Can you see where this leads? Two groups: The sheep and those that herd them. In most of my examples, the guy at the top or the structure doesn't care about the guys at the bottom and would consider it a good thing if the guys at the bottom never thought of personal advancement in any form. Remember, republics don't have to be democracies. They are just proxies for the voting class whatever form the voting class takes. We could have a rule that "you have to have the desire and will to rule others to be able to vote."
You laugh, but China's population is seriously unbalanced. There's not enough women for something in excess of twenty percent of China's men. They're either going to have to have a war (a really big one, or one where they sacrifice a lot of troops) or embrace homosexuality because the rest of the world's women don't want them - Chinese men typically do not have much respect for women, it's not exactly a cultural value for them.
Wasn't it Diamond Age that had one organization save all those female infanticides and raise them through cheap nano-tech. I wish that he'd have sequel to that. I would really love to seen the long term social effects as all those geneic Chinese women violently reject every Chinese male and/or most of the traditional male dominated mores of China. If I recall correctly, that female base was all very highly educated and had their own uniform culture. They could turn into a homosexual culture, but I had the feeling that they'd more just marry non-Chinese cultural men. Though that would ironically leave the same problem of a massive sex imbalance in China and extreme competetion for mates. Do you think that China would go to war just to capture females and kill off excess males? Maybe. I've read of alot stupider reasons to go to war. That one actually makes sense.
...nobody would be running Windows.
Or Linux or FireFox or any opensource software.