Foreign makes have better fuel efficiency and more variety to choose from.
If you define "better" as "the best fuel efficiency in the world" (currently a Toyota Prius) and "foreign" as "anywhere else in the entire world", you'd be right.
But GM, Ford, and Chrysler have, combined, as many or more models than any other three automobile companys you'd care to name. And their fuel economy, if you discount hybrids, is just fine. (In some cases, better.)
And that's before we even consider that any "churn" in vehicles helps everybody.
War is not a sport. The object of a war is to destroy your enemy so that he can act no longer.
The US military is great at fighting and winning wars. The problem is, we can't tell the difference between a war and an occupation -- the latter being that thing where your object is not to destroy, but to build-up. We're so bad at it that we often call it a "war", when it's no closer to a war than a robbery is to an assassination.
There's just some things you can't trust a human to do in any given circumstance. That's reason enough to have the planes.
Given that an F-22 has computer-assisted everything,, the F-117 was "fly by computer", and the UAW is essentially just telepresence with an autopilot...
You don't know what the hell you're talking about. The things that computers do better, THEY ALREADY DO. The things that people do better? Nonintelligent Computers will never do. And we're not closer to intelligent AI than we are fusion.
You realise that we're currently engaged in two wars, right?
Nope. we're engaged in two occupations. Significantly different problem, neither of which requires an Air Force half as much as it requires a Police Force.
Re:Among insiders this is a well-known phenomenon.
on
The Unmanned Air Force
·
· Score: 1
The performance difference between a manned and unmanned aircraft is so great that it pretty much takes all the skill out of dogfighting
The difference between a jet fighter and a cesna is about that. But not all UAVs need to be cesnas.
The equation is more about attrition than anything else, and UAVs will soon hold the edge. Fighter pilots are looking a lot like cavalrymen: highly trained, rather dashing, loved by the girls, but ultimately obsolete.
Wait... what makes you think UAWs don't need pilots, again?
Sure, the army lets enlisted fly 'em -- but that doesn't make them any less pilots.
you have strong misconceptions about what a pilot does, these days their task is more a matter of decision making than anything else
Exactly the right point.
The difference isn't between an "unpiloted" and "piloted" plane./.'ers are good ones for completely missing the point here. The difference is between "local pilot" and "remote pilot."
It's not impractical to imagine a simulator-type UAW control, that provides an even match to a local-pilot fighter. Maybe even better, given the manuverability concerns.
OTOH, since we don't have quantum radios, there is going to have to be SOME signal to the UAW -- and it takes even less imagination to figure out a weapon designed to kill this multi-million dollar UAWs.
UAWs are cheap not because there's no human on board, but because they're, well, cheap. The A-10 did much the same job, but with a significantly different profile.
"Though the demonstration was impressive, notable absentees from the demo were video streaming and any in-depth show of the music player."
PalmOS has had PocketTunes for years -- and Pandora already has a version for WebOS. Music player won't be a problem.
Video streaming? Don't know. Don't REALLY care.
It also has an externally replaceable battery, so one guesses the individual batteries won't last as long as an iphone or else it's thick as a brick. (they don't give the dimensions or show it in profile)
If you bother'd to look:
"Dimensions: 59.57mm (W) x 100.53mm (L, closed) x 16.95mm (D) [2.35 inches (W) x 3.96 inches (L, closed) x 0.67 inches (D)] " (link)
The iPhone not having a user-replaceable battery is just dumb. It's the one thing on a device that WILL wear out, and it's also the one that gets the most benefit from being user-replaceable.
No mention of the enterprise-like push apps that Rim and iphone now sport. No mention of corresponding desktop based easy-management software like itunes or me.com
1: Did you even WATCH the presentation? Yes, it can do enterprise-push. The darn thing screams enterprise in the OS.
2: If you think iTunes software is "easy", then I'm certain Palm won't be a problem for you. They didn't mention it because, quite frankly, they're not focused on desktopy sync.
and of course it is yet-another OS. is there an SDK?
It's HTML5, CSS, and javascript. And yes, there will be an SDK packaged with an eclipse-based IDE.
Unless you are a lawyer, or better yet, a judge, I think it would be fair to say that none of you has any idea what you are talking about.
The law has to be understandable to everybody, or it's not law, it's a secret code.
And they're right. COPYRIGHT is inherent. Best that Psystar could get would be a prejudicial dismissal -- Apple's suit gets thrown out, and they're not allowed to sue PSYSTAR ever again over this version of OS X.
If you use Word to merge multiple document files into one, will it update the main document correctly whenever you edit one of the other document files?
Yes and no.
If you link the file -- that is, create one "master file" with a bunch of "subdocuments" -- then yes. But you also historically increased your risk of corruption. (Don't know if it still does this in 2007 -- so much has changed, there hasn't been enough time to feel out all the quirks.)
However, if you just "insert file", it doesn't. Word read the file you pointed it at, and inserted its contents into the file you're working on now.
Newspapers were considered so important to the country that the first amendment to the Constitution preserved the freedom of the press.
Nope. Newspapers aren't all that important, even in those early days.
What was really important was pamhlets. And those live on, in the form of not only that laser printer on your desk, but also the flash-ban books in the nonfiction section. And blogs.
Free speech and freedom of the press were separate things in the Constitution for a reason.
Yes, but not for the reason you think. Speech and press are mentioned separately -- in the REDUNDANT first ten amendments -- because we inherited British jurisprudence, which has them be separate things.
Remember that the Bill of Rights was written as a "sure, we'll put it in just to be safe" thing. It wasn't part of the original negotiated plan, and was likely written by a legislator who was trying to compe up with a good inclusive list one afternoon.
If a user can be happy with just a word processor, spreadsheet, presentation program, email program, web browser (with Flash support), instant messenger, photo viewer, photo editor, music player, and a few light games such as a minesweeper game, then that user can be happy with Ubuntu, nearly out of the box. (For the music player, you will probably want to install the extra codecs such as MP3 that are not installed by default.)
A personal computer is used for four things.
1: "Personal Computing" (word processing, budgeting, banking, etc.) 2: Communications (e-mail, chat, web browser) 3: Media (DVD, MP3, iTunes, CD Rips) 4: Games
Ubuntu can do 1 if you don't care about having to convert files., 2 unless you have something really bizzare, and 3 if you're lucky. Not bad at all for any platform, especially a free one.
But you can't do #3 out of the box. In fact, you can't do 3 without paying money or breaking the law.
Sorry, Linux isn't ready for the 2008 desktop. If it were still 1998 (or 1988) you'd have it all locked up.
Can you quantify that? What tasks are quicker to perform? What functionality is easier to find?
1: Launch a program. For XP, the fastest path is "hit windows key + R, type in exact program name, run." For Vista, you can just "hit windows key, type in ALL OR PART OF ACTUAL NAME OF PROGRAM OR FILE, run"
2: Backup to CD or DVD.
3: Treat the the "Planesdragon" WiFi network as trusted, but don't trust "Starbucks."
And that's from not using Vista since Beta. If you can't find a clear improvement in the UI in Vista from XP, you're just not looking, sorry.
Microsoft can spray all the marketing turd polish they want on Vista but it will still stink.
Vista, with good drivers, is JUST AS GOOD AS XP.
Is it different, in a way that some are scared by? Sure. If you use XP drivers, is it worse? Yep. But Windows Vista isn't any worse than Windows XP, and if you're getting a new PC you might as well get the new OS as well.
Any turd-i-ness that Vista retains is strictly due to it being Windows.
Free nationwide internet access would be just like what happens with free nationwide health service.
Or free nationwide roads. Or free nationwide television!
Seriously. can you point to a modern country (i.e., one that isn't otherwise a terrible place to live) where socalized health care has ruined health care?
As to your only other cognizant claims:
The state mandates what can it be used for and what not. It sets up any filter it likes (of course, filters will only grow). Privacy is nixed.
1: The state has as much power NOW to regulate the internet as it ever would. And any special regulations they wanted to impose -- such as a time-of-day or max-bandwidth or whitelist-only or no-blacklist restriction -- would keep a market for private internet.
And if it's in the hands of the state, you can simply call up your congresscritter and make a stink if you want to do more. With private internet, if TW wants to regulate what I can do, then I don't have a real choice or way to address it.
2: Yes, a blacklist "filter" will only grow. But so would the internet. And any such filter is likely to be semi-voluntary, with a mandatory component comparable to the "illegal on its face" content out there now, like child porn.
3: You don't have any real privacy now. What keeps your private information private is the force of law, not any difficulty that your ISP or government would have in tracking you.
I don't even know if Eve did anything wrong, now that I think about it, aside from mechanical stuff like stability and, of course, lag issues (does the screen still, 4 years later, have to freeze for 2 seconds every time I open a new window?),
now that you mention it:
* Boring missions * Grind (yes, GRIND! for Rep & ISK) * Confusing UI * Ugly-ass ships * meaningless character portrait * the meat of the game being unfun on its own. * too clear and too short a line between "safe" and "dead"
So, yes, aside from all of those things, CCP didn't do anything wrong with Eve. (They did a fair bit RIGHT, but they did a hell of a lot wrong.)
GitS does the classic ghost in the machine idea, and it does it completely wrong. It tries to delve into identity, self awareness, etc. as well, but pales in comparison to any serious attempts (such as DADoES?, and of course Blade Runner).
Wait-- BLADE RUNNER?
Editing mistakes are not deep. Now I'm sorry I responded at all.
Anyone who says it's deep or has any meaning is either delusional, or has never seen any sci-fi ever.
Sorry. Sci-Fi is not limited to ponderous, arrogant prattling by over-educated shut-ins. It also includes flash, style, and simple characterization.
GitS is as deep as anything in its media could possibly be. "A person who is not sure if she is a person but is becomes indisinguishable from another person who is not a person but wants to be."
Hard to think of a deeper plot. If you can point to one, go ahead.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm also afraid a little over this required scrap clause. It might cause us to lose more of some classic cars that can and SHOULD be restored.
If there is a good enough reason to restore a car, that car will be worth enough to somebody to buy one for more than the voucher is worth.
In all honesty, though, unless you're a museum, you aren't providing ANY worth by doting on your antique.
Foreign makes have better fuel efficiency and more variety to choose from.
If you define "better" as "the best fuel efficiency in the world" (currently a Toyota Prius) and "foreign" as "anywhere else in the entire world", you'd be right.
But GM, Ford, and Chrysler have, combined, as many or more models than any other three automobile companys you'd care to name. And their fuel economy, if you discount hybrids, is just fine. (In some cases, better.)
And that's before we even consider that any "churn" in vehicles helps everybody.
War is not a sport. The object of a war is to destroy your enemy so that he can act no longer.
The US military is great at fighting and winning wars. The problem is, we can't tell the difference between a war and an occupation -- the latter being that thing where your object is not to destroy, but to build-up. We're so bad at it that we often call it a "war", when it's no closer to a war than a robbery is to an assassination.
There's just some things you can't trust a human to do in any given circumstance. That's reason enough to have the planes.
Given that an F-22 has computer-assisted everything,, the F-117 was "fly by computer", and the UAW is essentially just telepresence with an autopilot...
You don't know what the hell you're talking about. The things that computers do better, THEY ALREADY DO. The things that people do better? Nonintelligent Computers will never do. And we're not closer to intelligent AI than we are fusion.
You realise that we're currently engaged in two wars, right?
Nope. we're engaged in two occupations. Significantly different problem, neither of which requires an Air Force half as much as it requires a Police Force.
The performance difference between a manned and unmanned aircraft is so great that it pretty much takes all the skill out of dogfighting
The difference between a jet fighter and a cesna is about that. But not all UAVs need to be cesnas.
The equation is more about attrition than anything else, and UAVs will soon hold the edge. Fighter pilots are looking a lot like cavalrymen: highly trained, rather dashing, loved by the girls, but ultimately obsolete.
Wait... what makes you think UAWs don't need pilots, again?
Sure, the army lets enlisted fly 'em -- but that doesn't make them any less pilots.
you have strong misconceptions about what a pilot does, these days their task is more a matter of decision making than anything else
Exactly the right point.
The difference isn't between an "unpiloted" and "piloted" plane. /.'ers are good ones for completely missing the point here. The difference is between "local pilot" and "remote pilot."
It's not impractical to imagine a simulator-type UAW control, that provides an even match to a local-pilot fighter. Maybe even better, given the manuverability concerns.
OTOH, since we don't have quantum radios, there is going to have to be SOME signal to the UAW -- and it takes even less imagination to figure out a weapon designed to kill this multi-million dollar UAWs.
UAWs are cheap not because there's no human on board, but because they're, well, cheap. The A-10 did much the same job, but with a significantly different profile.
spent millions and millions of dollars convincing you, the unwitting public, that public transportation is a bad -- a waste of government resources!
I spent years riding public transportation. And you know what?
GM didn't need to spend a dime to convince me that they suck.
There's a GSM version coming down the pipe, later in the year.
Yeah, why would this be better? Unless it's open it's crap.
The Pre is at least as open as Android is, for exactly the same reasons.
"Though the demonstration was impressive, notable absentees from the demo were video streaming and any in-depth show of the music player."
PalmOS has had PocketTunes for years -- and Pandora already has a version for WebOS. Music player won't be a problem.
Video streaming? Don't know. Don't REALLY care.
It also has an externally replaceable battery, so one guesses the individual batteries won't last as long as an iphone or else it's thick as a brick. (they don't give the dimensions or show it in profile)
If you bother'd to look:
"Dimensions: 59.57mm (W) x 100.53mm (L, closed) x 16.95mm (D) [2.35 inches (W) x 3.96 inches (L, closed) x 0.67 inches (D)] " (link)
The iPhone not having a user-replaceable battery is just dumb. It's the one thing on a device that WILL wear out, and it's also the one that gets the most benefit from being user-replaceable.
No mention of the enterprise-like push apps that Rim and iphone now sport. No mention of corresponding desktop based easy-management software like itunes or me.com
1: Did you even WATCH the presentation? Yes, it can do enterprise-push. The darn thing screams enterprise in the OS.
2: If you think iTunes software is "easy", then I'm certain Palm won't be a problem for you. They didn't mention it because, quite frankly, they're not focused on desktopy sync.
and of course it is yet-another OS. is there an SDK?
It's HTML5, CSS, and javascript. And yes, there will be an SDK packaged with an eclipse-based IDE.
Unless you are a lawyer, or better yet, a judge, I think it would be fair to say that none of you has any idea what you are talking about.
The law has to be understandable to everybody, or it's not law, it's a secret code.
And they're right. COPYRIGHT is inherent. Best that Psystar could get would be a prejudicial dismissal -- Apple's suit gets thrown out, and they're not allowed to sue PSYSTAR ever again over this version of OS X.
It won't help "Anon-Star" clone Mac OS.
If you use Word to merge multiple document files into one, will it update the main document correctly whenever you edit one of the other document files?
Yes and no.
If you link the file -- that is, create one "master file" with a bunch of "subdocuments" -- then yes. But you also historically increased your risk of corruption. (Don't know if it still does this in 2007 -- so much has changed, there hasn't been enough time to feel out all the quirks.)
However, if you just "insert file", it doesn't. Word read the file you pointed it at, and inserted its contents into the file you're working on now.
Newspapers were considered so important to the country that the first amendment to the Constitution preserved the freedom of the press.
Nope. Newspapers aren't all that important, even in those early days.
What was really important was pamhlets. And those live on, in the form of not only that laser printer on your desk, but also the flash-ban books in the nonfiction section. And blogs.
Free speech and freedom of the press were separate things in the Constitution for a reason.
Yes, but not for the reason you think. Speech and press are mentioned separately -- in the REDUNDANT first ten amendments -- because we inherited British jurisprudence, which has them be separate things.
Remember that the Bill of Rights was written as a "sure, we'll put it in just to be safe" thing. It wasn't part of the original negotiated plan, and was likely written by a legislator who was trying to compe up with a good inclusive list one afternoon.
If a user can be happy with just a word processor, spreadsheet, presentation program, email program, web browser (with Flash support), instant messenger, photo viewer, photo editor, music player, and a few light games such as a minesweeper game, then that user can be happy with Ubuntu, nearly out of the box. (For the music player, you will probably want to install the extra codecs such as MP3 that are not installed by default.)
A personal computer is used for four things.
1: "Personal Computing" (word processing, budgeting, banking, etc.)
2: Communications (e-mail, chat, web browser)
3: Media (DVD, MP3, iTunes, CD Rips)
4: Games
Ubuntu can do 1 if you don't care about having to convert files., 2 unless you have something really bizzare, and 3 if you're lucky. Not bad at all for any platform, especially a free one.
But you can't do #3 out of the box. In fact, you can't do 3 without paying money or breaking the law.
Sorry, Linux isn't ready for the 2008 desktop. If it were still 1998 (or 1988) you'd have it all locked up.
Can you quantify that? What tasks are quicker to perform? What functionality is easier to find?
1: Launch a program. For XP, the fastest path is "hit windows key + R, type in exact program name, run." For Vista, you can just "hit windows key, type in ALL OR PART OF ACTUAL NAME OF PROGRAM OR FILE, run"
2: Backup to CD or DVD.
3: Treat the the "Planesdragon" WiFi network as trusted, but don't trust "Starbucks."
And that's from not using Vista since Beta. If you can't find a clear improvement in the UI in Vista from XP, you're just not looking, sorry.
Microsoft can spray all the marketing turd polish they want on Vista but it will still stink.
Vista, with good drivers, is JUST AS GOOD AS XP.
Is it different, in a way that some are scared by? Sure. If you use XP drivers, is it worse? Yep. But Windows Vista isn't any worse than Windows XP, and if you're getting a new PC you might as well get the new OS as well.
Any turd-i-ness that Vista retains is strictly due to it being Windows.
Sorry, but explain eight years of Bush to me then.
Al Gore and John Kerry ran terrible campaigns.
That, and the Republican Party is not just the party of Stupid. It's also the party of Evil, and smart gets along very well with Evil.
(There are smart and good Republicans, but if you're Evil or Stupid, the Republican Party really is the only one that reaches out to you these days.)
Free nationwide internet access would be just like what happens with free nationwide health service.
Or free nationwide roads. Or free nationwide television!
Seriously. can you point to a modern country (i.e., one that isn't otherwise a terrible place to live) where socalized health care has ruined health care?
As to your only other cognizant claims:
The state mandates what can it be used for and what not. It sets up any filter it likes (of course, filters will only grow). Privacy is nixed.
1: The state has as much power NOW to regulate the internet as it ever would. And any special regulations they wanted to impose -- such as a time-of-day or max-bandwidth or whitelist-only or no-blacklist restriction -- would keep a market for private internet.
And if it's in the hands of the state, you can simply call up your congresscritter and make a stink if you want to do more. With private internet, if TW wants to regulate what I can do, then I don't have a real choice or way to address it.
2: Yes, a blacklist "filter" will only grow. But so would the internet. And any such filter is likely to be semi-voluntary, with a mandatory component comparable to the "illegal on its face" content out there now, like child porn.
3: You don't have any real privacy now. What keeps your private information private is the force of law, not any difficulty that your ISP or government would have in tracking you.
I don't even know if Eve did anything wrong, now that I think about it, aside from mechanical stuff like stability and, of course, lag issues (does the screen still, 4 years later, have to freeze for 2 seconds every time I open a new window?),
now that you mention it:
* Boring missions
* Grind (yes, GRIND! for Rep & ISK)
* Confusing UI
* Ugly-ass ships
* meaningless character portrait
* the meat of the game being unfun on its own.
* too clear and too short a line between "safe" and "dead"
So, yes, aside from all of those things, CCP didn't do anything wrong with Eve. (They did a fair bit RIGHT, but they did a hell of a lot wrong.)
One would think that the Xbox 360 port should come right over...
You think that a multi-core homogenous PowerPC system would port seamlessly to a single-core chaotically heterogenous x86 OS?
Why, exactly?
Really? You need it pointed out to you?
"extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence."
You are postulating a position against the commonly held wisdom. Thus, at the bare minimum, you should include an argument to that effect.
I'm with the others -- I think you just don't understand GitS.
GitS does the classic ghost in the machine idea, and it does it completely wrong. It tries to delve into identity, self awareness, etc. as well, but pales in comparison to any serious attempts (such as DADoES?, and of course Blade Runner).
Wait-- BLADE RUNNER?
Editing mistakes are not deep. Now I'm sorry I responded at all.
Anyone who says it's deep or has any meaning is either delusional, or has never seen any sci-fi ever.
Sorry. Sci-Fi is not limited to ponderous, arrogant prattling by over-educated shut-ins. It also includes flash, style, and simple characterization.
GitS is as deep as anything in its media could possibly be. "A person who is not sure if she is a person but is becomes indisinguishable from another person who is not a person but wants to be."
Hard to think of a deeper plot. If you can point to one, go ahead.