No. We've been lucky. And yes, there have been successful attempts to get them better under control. The first 20 years were pretty reckless and afterwards there also have been unintended close calls.
Yeah, using nuclear bombs as an example of restraint isn't very enlightened. We made bombs for one purpose, and when that purpose went away we instantly found another use for them as soon as we had the first bombs ready, and then proceeded by furiously making as many of them as possible. The main reason we haven't blown up the planet a few times is luck.
The list of chemical weapons uses in the last century is nice. I'll point out though where it suffers from 'mainstream' bias. That chemical gas usage in Iraq in 1920 is omitted is acceptable, the claim can be disputed with reason. A similar claim about use of chemical weapons by the Syrian is taken as fact because everyone says so, while it's very doubtful that the Syrian army has resorted to chemical weapons. The very significant fact that Iran always refused to even make chemical weapons let alone use them while Iraq used them abundantly is turned into them running a weapons program after some restraint. They never made the weapons. Sure, proponents did some research, but proposals for weaponization were met with an unequivocal no from Khomeini.
I wonder about the claim that chemical weapons killed millions of people . How many besides the german concentration camps? Often war casualties were not killed but maimed.
Intelligence is a plus if the species is opportunistic and social. Like for instance raptors. Standing on rear legs opens opportunities - indicating that it increases chances for opportunistic strategies to outweigh the extra braincost.
I think the genes responsible for 'bigger' and 'more' generally don't take up more space, much less than 'restructure to do the same in a brain half the size'. Probably we've taken a very wasteful approach to getting smarter in terms of er, brain real estate.
Could be, I don't know. Dissolve and spray? But you really need very little to close the place because the actual extent of the danger doesn't matter much. Perception runs its own course.
Alpha emissions are easily shielded too. On the other hand, if the sample is broken and dispersed they can't avoid closing the whole place down. Small amounts of plutonium function great in dirty bombs.
no matter what the situation, no matter the result, there will always be a segment of the population that is unhappy with how a cop handled the situation
for those involved 10 billion per year that is redirected to the right pockets just means a huge success. To maintain a budget like that you'll hire terrorists if necessary.
Then maybe I should rephrase it. I'm talking about militarization in the sense that you treat the other party as an enemy who is trying to kill you and whose life has very little value in comparison to yours. Not in terms of structure and discipline.
I suppose you'll have kneejerk reactions in both directions. The thing that's popping up now and then is militarization. That they're moving towards warlike thinking and warlike methods.
Recall that for a recent shooting of a 12 year old kid in the park the police released video footage. The footage was used in defense of the police actions. They showed a police car driving right up to the kid, getting out and shooting the kid. The cops thought that was perfectly alright because the kid had a gun and they couldn't know the gun wasn't real. But ask any cop in a european country how they would have handled it. First, it's suicidal because if the kid had really been dangerous the cop would have been dead with that maneuver. Second, they should have stayed at a distance and ordered the kid to put the gun down.
Now those cops and taser footage? Any action that the cops don't approve of would be seen (with sincere conviction) as a reason for tasering.
You'll need a solution for all that footage of shoes:) But it's an idea. It's also possible to put things in a constant recording loop . Then at any time you have a recording of the last half minute but it gets overwritten all the time unless you pull the taser out of the holster. Then it gets extended.
That's right but I wonder to what extent the argument of self defense is still being dragged in. I recall that in the beginning tasers were being presented as an alternative to guns. That was not a credible argument and I would like to see statistics about whether guns have been used less since introduction of tasers. I think that tasers have just become a new way to force people to are no credible danger but who are just not obeying orders . Or not fast enough.
Actually a lot of audiophiles have always stuck to vinyl . It was the CD they scoffed at. Then later on they got a new reason to despise CD when record companies started to use more compression on CD while the dynamics on vinyl was left intact.
A new article fleshes out Dijkstra's statement, providing a good example of where an anthropomorphized analogy for Object Oriented Programming breaks down when you push it too far.
Yeah well, don't push it too far then. Are there a lot of people who are pushing it too far?
If you can provide external propulsion (some kind of laser thing or whatever) it would make a large difference. Then you just need to brake. So - step one: mission with unmanned replicating robots that starts with external propulsion, takes an awful long time to get there - it brakes by itself. - it builds a braking system - a manned mission is sent with external launching and braking. - profit
Slashdot Mirror
No. We've been lucky. And yes, there have been successful attempts to get them better under control. The first 20 years were pretty reckless and afterwards there also have been unintended close calls.
Yeah, using nuclear bombs as an example of restraint isn't very enlightened. We made bombs for one purpose, and when that purpose went away we instantly found another use for them as soon as we had the first bombs ready, and then proceeded by furiously making as many of them as possible. The main reason we haven't blown up the planet a few times is luck.
Overripe Camembert Mortars? Munster grenades?
The list of chemical weapons uses in the last century is nice. I'll point out though where it suffers from 'mainstream' bias. That chemical gas usage in Iraq in 1920 is omitted is acceptable, the claim can be disputed with reason. A similar claim about use of chemical weapons by the Syrian is taken as fact because everyone says so, while it's very doubtful that the Syrian army has resorted to chemical weapons. The very significant fact that Iran always refused to even make chemical weapons let alone use them while Iraq used them abundantly is turned into them running a weapons program after some restraint. They never made the weapons. Sure, proponents did some research, but proposals for weaponization were met with an unequivocal no from Khomeini.
I wonder about the claim that chemical weapons killed millions of people . How many besides the german concentration camps? Often war casualties were not killed but maimed.
Intelligence is a plus if the species is opportunistic and social. Like for instance raptors. Standing on rear legs opens opportunities - indicating that it increases chances for opportunistic strategies to outweigh the extra braincost.
I think the genes responsible for 'bigger' and 'more' generally don't take up more space, much less than 'restructure to do the same in a brain half the size'. Probably we've taken a very wasteful approach to getting smarter in terms of er, brain real estate.
Right. Assange wrote a piece about Google
http://www.newsweek.com/assang...
I said such a thing in a recent post (http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=6696045&cid=48782413), but much less eloquently .
Ow, good quote.
It's a public secret that the reason NSA 's billion dollar program doesn't intercept any terrorist communication is their spam filters
that many more came after you.
Maybe you just haven't noticed the followup part of the metaphor...
Could be, I don't know. Dissolve and spray? But you really need very little to close the place because the actual extent of the danger doesn't matter much. Perception runs its own course.
Alpha emissions are easily shielded too. On the other hand, if the sample is broken and dispersed they can't avoid closing the whole place down. Small amounts of plutonium function great in dirty bombs.
To be honest I don't really think there are any black flag operations involved in whatever you think..
But I do think it's about the money.
No.
Yes.
for those involved 10 billion per year that is redirected to the right pockets just means a huge success. To maintain a budget like that you'll hire terrorists if necessary.
Then maybe I should rephrase it. I'm talking about militarization in the sense that you treat the other party as an enemy who is trying to kill you and whose life has very little value in comparison to yours. Not in terms of structure and discipline.
I suppose you'll have kneejerk reactions in both directions. The thing that's popping up now and then is militarization. That they're moving towards warlike thinking and warlike methods.
Recall that for a recent shooting of a 12 year old kid in the park the police released video footage. The footage was used in defense of the police actions. They showed a police car driving right up to the kid, getting out and shooting the kid. The cops thought that was perfectly alright because the kid had a gun and they couldn't know the gun wasn't real. But ask any cop in a european country how they would have handled it. First, it's suicidal because if the kid had really been dangerous the cop would have been dead with that maneuver. Second, they should have stayed at a distance and ordered the kid to put the gun down.
Now those cops and taser footage? Any action that the cops don't approve of would be seen (with sincere conviction) as a reason for tasering.
You'll need a solution for all that footage of shoes :) But it's an idea. It's also possible to put things in a constant recording loop . Then at any time you have a recording of the last half minute but it gets overwritten all the time unless you pull the taser out of the holster. Then it gets extended.
That's right but I wonder to what extent the argument of self defense is still being dragged in. I recall that in the beginning tasers were being presented as an alternative to guns. That was not a credible argument and I would like to see statistics about whether guns have been used less since introduction of tasers. I think that tasers have just become a new way to force people to are no credible danger but who are just not obeying orders . Or not fast enough.
Actually a lot of audiophiles have always stuck to vinyl . It was the CD they scoffed at. Then later on they got a new reason to despise CD when record companies started to use more compression on CD while the dynamics on vinyl was left intact.
Yeah well, don't push it too far then. Are there a lot of people who are pushing it too far?
If you can provide external propulsion (some kind of laser thing or whatever) it would make a large difference. Then you just need to brake. So
- step one: mission with unmanned replicating robots that starts with external propulsion, takes an awful long time to get there
- it brakes by itself.
- it builds a braking system
- a manned mission is sent with external launching and braking.
- profit