I never said that, I was just implying that prison was not supposed to be a pleasant experience, but a deterrent to further criminal behavior.
Hell, locking a 18-year-old up without net access is going to drive that S.O.B. up the wall all by itself. . .
Prisoner rape is IRRELEVANT. . . .
on
Blaster Writer Caught
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
The fact that the crime was PHYSICALLY non-violent is irrelevant. Distributing a virus causes destruction of virtual structures and physically important data. It may have been a non-violent offense, but it WAS a destructive offense, eating up God only knows how much in manpower, lost data, and wasted time.
As far as prisoner rape goes, it's a crime of violence, every feminist tells us so. If J.Random Virus Hacker goes to jail and gets raped, he/she reports the crime. The Authorities then have their job to do. . . if they don't do it, I'm sure they'd enjoy a spell in jail themselves.
On the other hand, nobody ever said prison was supposed to be all Tea and Crumpets, either: it's punishment for crimes committed and convicted. . .
At the dot-com I used to work for, the main fileserver and domain controller would lock up every Wednesday morning at approximately 6:30 AM.
(Yes, I know. . ..%$#^^@! Windows!!!)
The Only fix was a reboot, until we started checking logs, and found that the system locked, but didn't blue-screen, after a Full Virus Scan of the files in the Fileserver was underway.
It was a problem with Symantec Anti-Virus Corporate edition. And there WAS a fix from Symantec. The problem was, you had to re-apply the fix after each virus definition update, and it was linked to a certain (forgot which) flavor of Java files being scanned.
OF course, we used that particular flavor of JAVA for development, and the code repository was on the fileserver. ..
I finally REALLY fixed the problem when the Corporate AV subscription ran out: I switched the company over to SOPHOS. . . .
. ..which is ALSO why you omit certain crucial details from the files manglement can see. After all, if the VP's nephews are so damned good, they can figure it out. ..eventually. . .
y'know, things like unique server quirks and workarounds, certain recurring bugs that you have the fix for, etc. . .
Having BEEN a voting assistance officer in the past, I can tell you that certain rules do not apply to military absentees.
1. Postmark: Military post office services aren't always available. This is especially common in the Navy on smaller ships. So they get postmarked when they come ashore to the nearest MPO. Despite having been in the mail pipeline for days, or even weeks. . ..
2. Signature. Witness signatures are not required on the Federal Absentee Voter Form: in fact, as I recall, there was only one signature line involved at all, on the envelope you stuck it in, certifying you had obeyed the election rules.
3. Form: A lot of the rejected ballots were on the Federal Form. While a State CAN reject the form by passing a law to do so, none have.
Anyway, military voting was something of a sore subject with me: I'd have been VERY P.O.'d if I found out that, while deployed overseas, my ballot was invalidated for a bogus, political reason. . . I know, because I WAS deployed once, over an election, and my vote WAS not counted because it got home too late, despite me throwing it into the mailbag on or about October 1st. . .
The problem the Florida Supreme Court caused, however, as in supporting selective recounts. As much as I disliked the federal Supreme Court getting involved, they DID have a point: in a recall, you're not allowed to cherry-pick: you have to recount ALL ballots cast.
And as an ex-GI, I was more than a little peeved at the Democrats' efforts to have the presumably Republican-leaning military absentee ballots invalidated.
Incidentally, from my experience, while the Officer Corps runs about 80-90% Republican, the much larger Enlisted Force runs about even on the R-D split. And considering geographic origins and voting/Tax predilections of the Officer Corps (hint: not a lot with Florida cits, but tons of Texas, Georgia, Pennsylvania, and other tax-code-military-friendly states), the overall impact of Military ballots was likely to be a wash. . .
"Arbitrarily set" ? Perhaps, but by the law and the Constitution, both established LONG before the election of 2000. An elector HAD to be certified by the Florida Secretary of State in enough time for his/her name to be formally sent to Washington to the Registrar of the Electoral College.
Actually, it's NOT BS. If you look at all the OTHER issues in his case, convieniently listed
here and here. His crime was NOT linking sites, but hacking other sites. The addition of "explosives" issues and call to action to use those links is akin to inciting to riot. The Feds had him cold, and he copped a plea. What's the big deal here ?
Read, the conservaties view Dean as a threat, I dont know where you get the un-electable crap.
Real-life experience in politics at the national level. Until I got utterly disgusted with it. Dean's strategy is nothing new, and has never worked before. Ask President McCain, Anderson, or McCarthy. Except you can't, as they were never elected despite their "Hey, I'm a new outsider with fresh ideas" shtick. Read some history: there's nothing new under the sun. ..
I'm a college student, there are millions of me who dont even have their first car. Another excuse.
I'm an engineer. I've learned, the hard way, that it's NEVER as easy as it looks, and the "small stuff" always comes back to bite you in the ass.
Your failure to fully analyze the effects of your "simple solution" is typical of college students, I did it myself at your age. But I ask you a final question: how much will a hydro-powered car cost, and how will the working poor be able to afford it ? You know, the people who currently drive 500-dollar beaters because it's all they can afford, to get to their minimum-wage jobs ?
And if you think both parties are evil, then why are you supporting a Democrat, rather than a Green, or a Socialist Worker's candidate ?
What stops government from spending some money and having this built? It would take maybe 5 years, but thats not a long time. I think we begin to move from oil right now and start with hybrid cars, then work our way to full hydogenfuel cell, I think we can break our oil dependencies by 2008 if we spend the money to build the infastructure.
Actually, as I recall, there is such a program already in place. Dubya announced it during the last State of the Union address.
Do you think Gas stations were all built overnight?
No, but you'll need a critical mass, a LARGE critical mass of them, before you can phase out gasolene. And petroleum-based fuel will STILL be used in farm and construction applications, and I suspect, over-the-road cargo as well.
Now, as to the "other option". We have devices that run on a liquid monopropellant that's stable at room temperature +/- 50 degrees C. We call them "internal combustion engines" and "diesel (external combustion) engines". But the only liquid fuel likely to go into a fuel-cell process would be liquid hydrogen. . . methanol-based fuel cells are both inefficient and generally provide too little power for automotive applications.
You also make the unwarranted assumption that everyone will want, and will buy, a new hybrid or hydro-car, in a relatively short period of time. 10 years is by far too short a changeover period: I'd think 30 years is more reasonable. After all, people are still driving 1960's-vintage cars out there as classics, and I still see plenty of 1970's-vintage cars on the roads.
And, recall that quite a few people cannot afford a new vehicle: a quick transition such as you propose would severely impact the lower end of the economic spectrum. By the standards that you appear to espouse as a general case, this is a rather large-turnabout. Somebody convert to to Pat Buchanan last night ???? (g)
Sorry, no more time to debate, a warm bed calls. . but. ..
What do you propose we use instead, and what changes to existing infrastructure are required to implement your proposal ???
Hydogen fuel cells work just fine, whats your excuse for us not using them?
Recall the original question. Sure, fuel cells work just fine in the lab. And they probably work fine on the road. So, where do I fuel up, and where do I get it fixed ? Especially when off to visit Grandma in Podunk, USA, with the wife, kids, and the MiniHydroVan ???? Unless you can get a fuel cell that runs on a liquid monopropellant that's room-temperature stable, plus or minus 50 degrees Celsius, the entire current fueling infrastructure will have to be updated. Likewise, even more so with the maintenance infrastructure
In any large process, the underlying infrastructure is as important, if not more important, than the technology used.
Thats socialism, I mean theres a whole PLAN/Theory about what to do in the situation of an Abundance society, this is called socialism.
I disagree. The definition I've seen is this:
socialism
Economic system which is based on cooperation rather than competition and which utilizes centralized planning and distribution.
Hey i dont force my views on others, but you should be pissed off at George Bush if you are a libertarian
Funny, telling me what I should believe sounds like forcing a view to me. Remember, I said SMALL-L, not a full-fledged Libertarian. There's a difference. And BTW, I musn't agree that DEAN is conservative, unless you mean in the traditional sense that he defends the status quo of a large paternal nation-state. And, from all reports, seeks to enlarge the paternal nation-state significantly. I disagree with THAT approach wholeheartedly.
While I hardly agree with everything Dubya has done (the Patriot Act comes to mind. ..), I'll note that the deficit, as percentage of GNP is nowhere near its' maximum size. Or that the 'Pubs DID manage to force Bubba to balance the budget, for a while. Even so, the deficit was going to come back anyway, thanks to automatic increases in entitlements. 9/11 and the aftermath just pushed it up a year or two. After all, when it comes to finance, ALL politicians are scum: the power of the purse is the easiest way for absolute power to corrupt absolutely. ..
As for Dean being un-electable, let's look at his core constituency: the Hard Left. American Presidential Politics is based on uniting your core faction with as much of the uncommitted Center as you can. Bush's core vote is somewhere between 30 and 40% of the voting populace. Dean's is MAYBE 10%. His outsider message has been seen before. Eugene McCarthy. John Andersen. H.Ross Perot John McCain. NONE have been elected to the Presidency. Add to that his home voter base in Vermont, a hardly-significant electoral state, and I forecast a maximum of 20% of the votes in the Democratic Convention. And, as the cherry on top, please recall that Dean doesn't own the Hard Left: he shares it with the Greens, and they'll support Nader again, the way things look. ..
This is the same situation and I think Dean can win because hes exactly what we need at the moment, a President who works for the people and not lobby groups, special interests and big corperations, and a President who is going to balance the budget and not spend alot.
Y'know, I LOVE idealists. But Dean WON'T balance the budget, his Universal Health Care proposal guarantees that. He CAN'T cut the Defense Budget too far, way too much pork in there for all the Congresscritters. It's not gonna happen.
My guess at who actually has a shot and who doesn't ? Dead in the water: Gephardt, Edwards (who, in fact, may not even get re-elected to the Senate in 2 more years. ..). Never even stood a outside chance: Moseley-Braun, Kunicich (who was revealed to be fundraising overseas, a big no-no). The Pat Paulsen Award for Comic Relief: Al Sharpton. Contenders: Kerry, Lieberman, and Hillary Clinton. And any of the three will lose to Dubya: especially so for Hillary. The Hard Right, and a good chunk of the Middle Right hate her with a passion rarely seen in politics. They might not like Dubya, but they'll be damned if they let (as I've heard her called) "Hitlary" back into the White House. ..
I'm wondering what you mean by a "Fake" conservative. Then again, by classical definitions, today's Conservative Movement is basically Liberal, and today's Liberals are actually hide-bound conservatives who wish to retain the welfare state built in the 60's and 70's. ..
Now, to your last point:
We dont need oil in our cars though.
What do you propose we use instead, and what changes to existing infrastructure are required to implement your proposal ???
Uh, Hardening doesn't change the molecular composistion of the steel, merely the structure. Given nanoscale analysis and assemby techniques, you could make hardened steel in any shape or size, at room temperature, or close to it.
Of course, why you'd want to build with steel when you could build even stronger with diamondoid or sapphire structures. . .
I never mentioned ANY socialist society. I mentioned an ABUNDANCE society, which is the likely outcome of "positive" nanotechnology scenario. (The Negative outcome is the "Grey Goo" or "Star Trek" scenario, where disassemblers run wild and break everything, including us, into their constituent components).
The thing about the emergence of an Abundance Society, is that it will be gradual. The suicides you claim will occur are based on sudden, shock-like events. You claim that "a lot of people commit suicide when fired". Mayhaps. But the vast majority go look for another job. You appear to be generalizing what is actually a small number of cases into a general rule.
Now me, I'm a small-l libertarian. If you and other like-minded individuals choose to band together and provide goods and services to your members in a socialistic fashion, knock yourself out and have a great time doing so. Just recall that others may not share your views and outlook. ..and forcing your views on others, by compulsion or by force, is the ultimate in political violation of our rights and freedoms.
Incidentally, Howard Dean, from what I've seen, is not for an Abundance Society, which promotes individual initiative and action, not the failed group-think of the Left, nor the rigid moralistic strictures of the Right. He reminds me more of Eugene McCarthy in 1972: politically correct and fashionable, but utterly unelectable to the general populace.
Now, as to why people want tax cuts. Perhaps they believe that Government is too large and intrusive, and takes too much money: the quickest way to prevent it from doing so is to starve it of fuel. . . that would fit with the general population electing the GOP into Congress and the White House. ..
Lastly, to answer your title question: We use still use oil because it has quite a number of useful properties, as a fuel, as a lubricant, and as chemical feedstock. In other words, be still use oil because it's so damned USEFUL. ...
Uh, WHY would people with no jobs and no work commit suicide ??
In an "abundance" society, that would be the NORM. Hobbies would likely take the place of employment, and that's also where your innovations come from. The basic commodities would remain the same: food, base materials, power, and information.
Slashdot Mirror
Hell, locking a 18-year-old up without net access is going to drive that S.O.B. up the wall all by itself. . .
As far as prisoner rape goes, it's a crime of violence, every feminist tells us so. If J.Random Virus Hacker goes to jail and gets raped, he/she reports the crime. The Authorities then have their job to do. . . if they don't do it, I'm sure they'd enjoy a spell in jail themselves.
On the other hand, nobody ever said prison was supposed to be all Tea and Crumpets, either: it's punishment for crimes committed and convicted. . .
At the dot-com I used to work for, the main fileserver and domain controller would lock up every Wednesday morning at approximately 6:30 AM.
(Yes, I know. . . .%$#^^@! Windows!!!)
The Only fix was a reboot, until we started checking logs, and found that the system locked, but didn't blue-screen, after a Full Virus Scan of the files in the Fileserver was underway.
It was a problem with Symantec Anti-Virus Corporate edition. And there WAS a fix from Symantec. The problem was, you had to re-apply the fix after each virus definition update, and it was linked to a certain (forgot which) flavor of Java files being scanned.
OF course, we used that particular flavor of JAVA for development, and the code repository was on the fileserver. . .
I finally REALLY fixed the problem when the Corporate AV subscription ran out: I switched the company over to SOPHOS. . . .
. . .which is ALSO why you omit certain crucial details from the files manglement can see. After all, if the VP's nephews are so damned good, they can figure it out. . .eventually. . .
y'know, things like unique server quirks and workarounds, certain recurring bugs that you have the fix for, etc. . .
Either that, or take over the ladies rooms as well (g)
And the sad thing is, it may end up coming down to that. . .
867-5309. . .
The great masses of the people will more easily fall victims to a big lie than to a small one.
And SCO's telling a real whopper. . .
Let's point them to: Let's see . . . Disney World "Pirates of the Carribean"
"The old "Pirates!" game
Tropico 2 "Pirate's Cove"
I'm sure you get the idea. . .
"The internet is a amazing communication system used primarily to diss movies and share pornography. . ."
1. Postmark: Military post office services aren't always available. This is especially common in the Navy on smaller ships. So they get postmarked when they come ashore to the nearest MPO. Despite having been in the mail pipeline for days, or even weeks. . . .
2. Signature. Witness signatures are not required on the Federal Absentee Voter Form: in fact, as I recall, there was only one signature line involved at all, on the envelope you stuck it in, certifying you had obeyed the election rules.
3. Form: A lot of the rejected ballots were on the Federal Form. While a State CAN reject the form by passing a law to do so, none have.
Anyway, military voting was something of a sore subject with me: I'd have been VERY P.O.'d if I found out that, while deployed overseas, my ballot was invalidated for a bogus, political reason. . . I know, because I WAS deployed once, over an election, and my vote WAS not counted because it got home too late, despite me throwing it into the mailbag on or about October 1st. . .
And as an ex-GI, I was more than a little peeved at the Democrats' efforts to have the presumably Republican-leaning military absentee ballots invalidated.
Incidentally, from my experience, while the Officer Corps runs about 80-90% Republican, the much larger Enlisted Force runs about even on the R-D split. And considering geographic origins and voting/Tax predilections of the Officer Corps (hint: not a lot with Florida cits, but tons of Texas, Georgia, Pennsylvania, and other tax-code-military-friendly states), the overall impact of Military ballots was likely to be a wash. . .
"Arbitrarily set" ? Perhaps, but by the law and the Constitution, both established LONG before the election of 2000. An elector HAD to be certified by the Florida Secretary of State in enough time for his/her name to be formally sent to Washington to the Registrar of the Electoral College.
It's probably in Sweden. That's where they make the brand Austin Powers endorses. . . (g)
Actually, it's NOT BS. If you look at all the OTHER issues in his case, convieniently listed here and here. His crime was NOT linking sites, but hacking other sites. The addition of "explosives" issues and call to action to use those links is akin to inciting to riot. The Feds had him cold, and he copped a plea. What's the big deal here ?
. . . .now THIS is a "Nuke" that needs to be proliferated. . .. .
Silly Hanzo, it's you who need to study history. Hint: look up "make the trains run on time". And it DOESN'T break Godwin's Law. . . .(g)
While we're at it, why not make the trains run on time ???
Read, the conservaties view Dean as a threat, I dont know where you get the un-electable crap.
Real-life experience in politics at the national level. Until I got utterly disgusted with it. Dean's strategy is nothing new, and has never worked before. Ask President McCain, Anderson, or McCarthy. Except you can't, as they were never elected despite their "Hey, I'm a new outsider with fresh ideas" shtick. Read some history: there's nothing new under the sun. . .
I'm a college student, there are millions of me who dont even have their first car. Another excuse.
I'm an engineer. I've learned, the hard way, that it's NEVER as easy as it looks, and the "small stuff" always comes back to bite you in the ass.
Your failure to fully analyze the effects of your "simple solution" is typical of college students, I did it myself at your age. But I ask you a final question: how much will a hydro-powered car cost, and how will the working poor be able to afford it ? You know, the people who currently drive 500-dollar beaters because it's all they can afford, to get to their minimum-wage jobs ?
And if you think both parties are evil, then why are you supporting a Democrat, rather than a Green, or a Socialist Worker's candidate ?
Just asking. . .
Actually, as I recall, there is such a program already in place. Dubya announced it during the last State of the Union address.
Do you think Gas stations were all built overnight?
No, but you'll need a critical mass, a LARGE critical mass of them, before you can phase out gasolene. And petroleum-based fuel will STILL be used in farm and construction applications, and I suspect, over-the-road cargo as well. Now, as to the "other option". We have devices that run on a liquid monopropellant that's stable at room temperature +/- 50 degrees C. We call them "internal combustion engines" and "diesel (external combustion) engines". But the only liquid fuel likely to go into a fuel-cell process would be liquid hydrogen. . . methanol-based fuel cells are both inefficient and generally provide too little power for automotive applications.
You also make the unwarranted assumption that everyone will want, and will buy, a new hybrid or hydro-car, in a relatively short period of time. 10 years is by far too short a changeover period: I'd think 30 years is more reasonable. After all, people are still driving 1960's-vintage cars out there as classics, and I still see plenty of 1970's-vintage cars on the roads.
And, recall that quite a few people cannot afford a new vehicle: a quick transition such as you propose would severely impact the lower end of the economic spectrum. By the standards that you appear to espouse as a general case, this is a rather large-turnabout. Somebody convert to to Pat Buchanan last night ???? (g)
What do you propose we use instead, and what changes to existing infrastructure are required to implement your proposal ???
Hydogen fuel cells work just fine, whats your excuse for us not using them?
Recall the original question. Sure, fuel cells work just fine in the lab. And they probably work fine on the road. So, where do I fuel up, and where do I get it fixed ? Especially when off to visit Grandma in Podunk, USA, with the wife, kids, and the MiniHydroVan ???? Unless you can get a fuel cell that runs on a liquid monopropellant that's room-temperature stable, plus or minus 50 degrees Celsius, the entire current fueling infrastructure will have to be updated. Likewise, even more so with the maintenance infrastructure
In any large process, the underlying infrastructure is as important, if not more important, than the technology used.
I disagree. The definition I've seen is this:
Hey i dont force my views on others, but you should be pissed off at George Bush if you are a libertarian
Funny, telling me what I should believe sounds like forcing a view to me. Remember, I said SMALL-L, not a full-fledged Libertarian. There's a difference. And BTW, I musn't agree that DEAN is conservative, unless you mean in the traditional sense that he defends the status quo of a large paternal nation-state. And, from all reports, seeks to enlarge the paternal nation-state significantly. I disagree with THAT approach wholeheartedly.
While I hardly agree with everything Dubya has done (the Patriot Act comes to mind. . .), I'll note that the deficit, as percentage of GNP is nowhere near its' maximum size. Or that the 'Pubs DID manage to force Bubba to balance the budget, for a while. Even so, the deficit was going to come back anyway, thanks to automatic increases in entitlements. 9/11 and the aftermath just pushed it up a year or two. After all, when it comes to finance, ALL politicians are scum: the power of the purse is the easiest way for absolute power to corrupt absolutely. . .
As for Dean being un-electable, let's look at his core constituency: the Hard Left. American Presidential Politics is based on uniting your core faction with as much of the uncommitted Center as you can. Bush's core vote is somewhere between 30 and 40% of the voting populace. Dean's is MAYBE 10%. His outsider message has been seen before. Eugene McCarthy. John Andersen. H.Ross Perot John McCain. NONE have been elected to the Presidency. Add to that his home voter base in Vermont, a hardly-significant electoral state, and I forecast a maximum of 20% of the votes in the Democratic Convention. And, as the cherry on top, please recall that Dean doesn't own the Hard Left: he shares it with the Greens, and they'll support Nader again, the way things look. . .
This is the same situation and I think Dean can win because hes exactly what we need at the moment, a President who works for the people and not lobby groups, special interests and big corperations, and a President who is going to balance the budget and not spend alot.
Y'know, I LOVE idealists. But Dean WON'T balance the budget, his Universal Health Care proposal guarantees that. He CAN'T cut the Defense Budget too far, way too much pork in there for all the Congresscritters. It's not gonna happen.
My guess at who actually has a shot and who doesn't ? Dead in the water: Gephardt, Edwards (who, in fact, may not even get re-elected to the Senate in 2 more years. . .). Never even stood a outside chance: Moseley-Braun, Kunicich (who was revealed to be fundraising overseas, a big no-no). The Pat Paulsen Award for Comic Relief: Al Sharpton. Contenders: Kerry, Lieberman, and Hillary Clinton. And any of the three will lose to Dubya: especially so for Hillary. The Hard Right, and a good chunk of the Middle Right hate her with a passion rarely seen in politics. They might not like Dubya, but they'll be damned if they let (as I've heard her called) "Hitlary" back into the White House. . .
I'm wondering what you mean by a "Fake" conservative. Then again, by classical definitions, today's Conservative Movement is basically Liberal, and today's Liberals are actually hide-bound conservatives who wish to retain the welfare state built in the 60's and 70's. . .
Now, to your last point:
We dont need oil in our cars though.
What do you propose we use instead, and what changes to existing infrastructure are required to implement your proposal ???
Of course, why you'd want to build with steel when you could build even stronger with diamondoid or sapphire structures. . .
The thing about the emergence of an Abundance Society, is that it will be gradual. The suicides you claim will occur are based on sudden, shock-like events. You claim that "a lot of people commit suicide when fired". Mayhaps. But the vast majority go look for another job. You appear to be generalizing what is actually a small number of cases into a general rule.
Now me, I'm a small-l libertarian. If you and other like-minded individuals choose to band together and provide goods and services to your members in a socialistic fashion, knock yourself out and have a great time doing so. Just recall that others may not share your views and outlook. . .and forcing your views on others, by compulsion or by force, is the ultimate in political violation of our rights and freedoms.
Incidentally, Howard Dean, from what I've seen, is not for an Abundance Society, which promotes individual initiative and action, not the failed group-think of the Left, nor the rigid moralistic strictures of the Right. He reminds me more of Eugene McCarthy in 1972: politically correct and fashionable, but utterly unelectable to the general populace.
Now, as to why people want tax cuts. Perhaps they believe that Government is too large and intrusive, and takes too much money: the quickest way to prevent it from doing so is to starve it of fuel. . . that would fit with the general population electing the GOP into Congress and the White House. . .
Lastly, to answer your title question: We use still use oil because it has quite a number of useful properties, as a fuel, as a lubricant, and as chemical feedstock. In other words, be still use oil because it's so damned USEFUL. . ..
In an "abundance" society, that would be the NORM. Hobbies would likely take the place of employment, and that's also where your innovations come from. The basic commodities would remain the same: food, base materials, power, and information.