And there in lies the problem. A government which lives in fear of its people, and does everything in its power to watch them / curtail its freedoms, thinking that in doing so, it's making itself safer.
Indeed. I had to laugh when I read that quote about the Constitution. Every US history book I know of has a copy of the Constitution as one of its appendixes, as well as the Federalist Papers, etc.
Mostly because the military, in such cases, would impose martial law, and once they get used to that, they would loathe to give it up. They're already paranoid, no sense giving them a reason to give into that mindset. Restoration of elections would take at least a year, and whoever set off that nuke would probably never be able to stop running.
Assuming we have a headless government for other reasons, such as a no confidence vote, other options become available. I believe there is a European county whose government has been headless for over a year now, and its people are in no rush to restore it (services are still functioning).
Depending on the size of the ordinance (we'll assume a city buster, one megaton), the initial blast (gamma waves) will vaporize anyone within a mile or so of the blast (my figures may not be correct, I may be thinking of a kiloton nuke), with most of the blast annihilating anything above ground. Assuming you survive the blast, fallout will be an issue for the next 48 hours. So, if you hide out in a drainage pipe, a few miles away, take some iodine tablets, and don't eat or drink anything before hiking about 15 miles away from ground zero, you should be fine. Of course, you run the possibility that the drainage pipe collapses on you during the shock-wave, and you'd want to put as much concrete or water between you and the opening as is possible. Scuba gear + a submersible vehicle (like what the marines have), and jumping into the ocean / river is your best bet.
Of course it wouldn't forward the cause of democracy. *dons BOFH hat* There's no way to guarantee that everyone from all 3 branches will actually be in DC when the blast hits, as well as their potential replacements (like Pokemon, you gotta get them all).
If we wanted to 'fix' things, we'd make voting transparent. Everyone knows who everyone else voted for, which is the easiest way to prevent voter fraud. Of course, there may be political repercussions when everyone knows who you voted for, but chances are you are already living in a city / county that largely votes one way or the other, and is punished or rewarded accordingly anyway; the same said for the company you probably work for, as it's an open secret which way a corporation is spending its money. I also favor allowing any party on the ballet (thank you R&Ds), as some states only allow the big two; and a general confidence vote to be held biannually, allowing the American people to decide whether the government is heading in the right direction.
The voting transparent thing will probably never happen. Fear over voter intimidation is rather high these days, as it has been in times past. As for the multiple parties, it may be a good thing or a bad thing; it would be good, in that issues that are really bothering people will receive representation, and possibly provide a more 'in touch' form of government; nothing worse than having to decide between two parties that either do not represent you, or represent you on some issues, but not on others; incumbents will, of course, hate the idea, as it means more time spent finding out what, exactly the people want, with more candidates vying for their position. Finally, I think the confidence vote will also be seen as unlikely, as even though other countries have it, it means, once again, more accountability to the American people, as well as forcing people in office to spend more time defending their actions (which politicians hate; they, like anyone, want the ability to win an office, and hold onto it as long as possible).
On behalf of the American people, if our congressmen are stupid enough to get us into a conflict whereby it would be necessary to swear in someone a dozen people down from the President, then they deserve to burn. Why? Because any conflict that large will have the majority of the US population dead or near death, and Americans don't believe in protecting / rewarding politicians who get us killed.
Putting the instigators in special bunkers, while the innocent have to fend for themselves against nuclear / biological / chemical weapons...it kind of sends the wrong message.
You found out that despite reason and logic's many virtues, some people will purposefully blind themselves to them, if only to win an argument; that even though you may be correct, and the other person wrong, the other person will deny the correctness of your position if only to deny you hearing them say you are correct? That some people think that yelling, screaming, and violence are valid substitutes for leadership? That corruption is institutionalized, and couldn't be wiped out even if humanity were reduced to a handful of individuals? That you have more to fear from family that your enemies? That although a single word may be held to have the same meaning by all people, the emotional connotations associated with it alter its understanding in intangible ways? That you may spend more of your time defending your rights and asking others to keep their promises than you will planning a better world / understanding this one? That at the end of the day, your problems stem not from within, but from without? That you will spend more time combating caricatures of the points you are trying to make, in other's heads, than you are comfortable admitting?
And at age 180, you will only begin to understand what any of this means.
"More on that point, its good to have supervision so that kids can be *taught* to recognise things that are bad for them, and/or how to respond to those things." -> Why yes, teach them to conform to your values. Don't give them a choice in the matter! Why should anyone question the social mores of those around them?
I know, seriously. Kids have a lot more energy, and creativity, when it comes to acquiring a taboo item. Thinking of my own childhood, you're better off trying to explain, using proper (adult) reasoning, why your social values need to be respected by them rather than trying to put up magic walls to block the offending material. Remember, the first time a kid catches you lying to them, all bets are off; they'll question everything from that day forward, and test things when you aren't around.
I'd be more worried if they didn't find a way around that filter.
Slashdot Mirror
And yet they don't understand that.
And there in lies the problem. A government which lives in fear of its people, and does everything in its power to watch them / curtail its freedoms, thinking that in doing so, it's making itself safer.
Indeed. I had to laugh when I read that quote about the Constitution. Every US history book I know of has a copy of the Constitution as one of its appendixes, as well as the Federalist Papers, etc.
Well, we are kind of the country which pioneered such things, so it would only be the chickens coming home to roost.
Mostly because the military, in such cases, would impose martial law, and once they get used to that, they would loathe to give it up. They're already paranoid, no sense giving them a reason to give into that mindset. Restoration of elections would take at least a year, and whoever set off that nuke would probably never be able to stop running.
Assuming we have a headless government for other reasons, such as a no confidence vote, other options become available. I believe there is a European county whose government has been headless for over a year now, and its people are in no rush to restore it (services are still functioning).
Depending on the size of the ordinance (we'll assume a city buster, one megaton), the initial blast (gamma waves) will vaporize anyone within a mile or so of the blast (my figures may not be correct, I may be thinking of a kiloton nuke), with most of the blast annihilating anything above ground. Assuming you survive the blast, fallout will be an issue for the next 48 hours. So, if you hide out in a drainage pipe, a few miles away, take some iodine tablets, and don't eat or drink anything before hiking about 15 miles away from ground zero, you should be fine. Of course, you run the possibility that the drainage pipe collapses on you during the shock-wave, and you'd want to put as much concrete or water between you and the opening as is possible. Scuba gear + a submersible vehicle (like what the marines have), and jumping into the ocean / river is your best bet.
Of course it wouldn't forward the cause of democracy. *dons BOFH hat* There's no way to guarantee that everyone from all 3 branches will actually be in DC when the blast hits, as well as their potential replacements (like Pokemon, you gotta get them all).
If we wanted to 'fix' things, we'd make voting transparent. Everyone knows who everyone else voted for, which is the easiest way to prevent voter fraud. Of course, there may be political repercussions when everyone knows who you voted for, but chances are you are already living in a city / county that largely votes one way or the other, and is punished or rewarded accordingly anyway; the same said for the company you probably work for, as it's an open secret which way a corporation is spending its money. I also favor allowing any party on the ballet (thank you R&Ds), as some states only allow the big two; and a general confidence vote to be held biannually, allowing the American people to decide whether the government is heading in the right direction.
The voting transparent thing will probably never happen. Fear over voter intimidation is rather high these days, as it has been in times past. As for the multiple parties, it may be a good thing or a bad thing; it would be good, in that issues that are really bothering people will receive representation, and possibly provide a more 'in touch' form of government; nothing worse than having to decide between two parties that either do not represent you, or represent you on some issues, but not on others; incumbents will, of course, hate the idea, as it means more time spent finding out what, exactly the people want, with more candidates vying for their position. Finally, I think the confidence vote will also be seen as unlikely, as even though other countries have it, it means, once again, more accountability to the American people, as well as forcing people in office to spend more time defending their actions (which politicians hate; they, like anyone, want the ability to win an office, and hold onto it as long as possible).
Shhhh. Let me get some popcorn and a large drink.
On behalf of the American people, if our congressmen are stupid enough to get us into a conflict whereby it would be necessary to swear in someone a dozen people down from the President, then they deserve to burn. Why? Because any conflict that large will have the majority of the US population dead or near death, and Americans don't believe in protecting / rewarding politicians who get us killed.
Putting the instigators in special bunkers, while the innocent have to fend for themselves against nuclear / biological / chemical weapons...it kind of sends the wrong message.
Fine...then I'll take a Displayport in, and this handy HDMI-to-Displayport adapter.
Because some of us want to see what it's like to play a game with maximum bling enabled?
My machine still chokes on Alice: Madness Returns, and that's with a 6970.
Lol. HDMI in, HDMI out. You can't explain that! ;-)
X2 All-In-Wonder edition.
Yes, I think that will do it.
Where's my X2 edition?
I approve of this link.
And now for the return of Smell-O-Vision! As well as in chair vibrators, so you can 'experience' every bump and explosion.
Going to come out smelling like Pinesol and covered in bruises.
Get one on the way out.
You found out that despite reason and logic's many virtues, some people will purposefully blind themselves to them, if only to win an argument; that even though you may be correct, and the other person wrong, the other person will deny the correctness of your position if only to deny you hearing them say you are correct? That some people think that yelling, screaming, and violence are valid substitutes for leadership? That corruption is institutionalized, and couldn't be wiped out even if humanity were reduced to a handful of individuals? That you have more to fear from family that your enemies? That although a single word may be held to have the same meaning by all people, the emotional connotations associated with it alter its understanding in intangible ways? That you may spend more of your time defending your rights and asking others to keep their promises than you will planning a better world / understanding this one? That at the end of the day, your problems stem not from within, but from without? That you will spend more time combating caricatures of the points you are trying to make, in other's heads, than you are comfortable admitting?
And at age 180, you will only begin to understand what any of this means.
Indeed. Technological education is, IMHO, somewhat 'sick' these days.
Use a hardware firewall, and MSE on Windows boxen.
Indeed. You end up with people like me.
Blood, blood, blood, blood, blood, blood, blood...
^_^
Right, because a 5 second search on Google of 'How to disable [Net Nanny]' won't turn up a few dozen pages on the topic, complete with YouTube videos?
What do you think the kid is going to search for the first time this over-protective filter blocks something the kid really wants to read / watch?
"More on that point, its good to have supervision so that kids can be *taught* to recognise things that are bad for them, and/or how to respond to those things." -> Why yes, teach them to conform to your values. Don't give them a choice in the matter! Why should anyone question the social mores of those around them?
Conformity is the future. 'Merica!
It's called a 'fetish,' and most people have them, and they may not be sexual in nature.
I know, seriously. Kids have a lot more energy, and creativity, when it comes to acquiring a taboo item. Thinking of my own childhood, you're better off trying to explain, using proper (adult) reasoning, why your social values need to be respected by them rather than trying to put up magic walls to block the offending material. Remember, the first time a kid catches you lying to them, all bets are off; they'll question everything from that day forward, and test things when you aren't around.
I'd be more worried if they didn't find a way around that filter.