"I used to think the gap between those already doing this kind of work and those just getting into it would start to narrow," says Abrash. "Instead I think it's widening. People aren't catching up; they're falling further behind. A large knowledge base is required to do anything state-of-the art, and it takes longer and longer to acquire that knowledge."
It's my impression that other companies have caught up with id, as employees have left or been fired. Perhaps the same will happen with Google.
We've already had the sickening sight of Jimmy Carter campaigning for the prize via a campaign of open sedition against the US. In a less-decadent society he'd be booed in the streets and pelted with rotten cabbage.
The next Nobel Peace Prize presented to an American will probably go to Bill Clinton, for a series of lip-trembling apologies for American exceptionalism.
I must confess that I am a little taken aback by the sight of people who seem to be having conversations with themselves.
Nonetheless, I wanted to try it so I could have recordings of "Champs Elysees" (s French current affairs CD I get every month) play with the ability to interrupt on an incoming call. I thought Bluetooth is expensive in standby, then I tried using it to play MP3s. That was a power hog, let me tell you.
When I bought the phone, I also bought a Bluetooth headset. I gave up on the Bluetooth pretty quickly: The headset would only run for about five hours before needing to be recharged, and the phone's standby time was cut down massively.
This isn't a complaint about Bluetooth as such. It's more that current devices, as delivered, don't provide long-enough standby time, never mind talk time, when Bluetooth is enabled.
I provided a couple of links. I'd appreciate some in return. Thanks in advance.
And actually, I think the only thing this Administration has done well is fight the GWoT. For example, I really worry about the way this administration spends - like a drunken sailor. I also think that Republicans deserve to lose to Democrats in the upcoming elections. Unfortunately, there's nobody for them to lose to.
You see, the Republicans may be wrong, but they are serious. Democrats may be wrong, but they're frivolous. There is a difference.
Formed by two ex-Clinton advisers and someone who wants an abortion pill on the market - and people who dislike the current administration, to boot - six weeks before an election.
This wouldn't make it into the NYT, except for Bush Derangement Syndrome.
Believe it or not, all that happened in Iraq happened as a result of UN resolutions.
The first Gulf War happened because Saddam decided to turn a sovreign nation into "Province 19". The UN ordered him out and a coalition force ejected him when he refused to go.
Afterwards, the UN imposed a set of sanctions to keep Saddam from posing a threat to his neighbours. Of course, Saddam bought the UN, starting at Kofi Annan, and turned the Oil-for-Food program into the Oil-for-Palaces-and-UN-payoffs program. Oh, and whatever money was left over was used to pay bounties to the families of suicide bombers for killing Jews.
Later, Saddam expelled UN employees attempting to monitor his regime's WMD programs. As a direct results of this, and a number of other violations of UN demands, a coalition force eventually took over Iraq.
None of this was for our ends. It was entirely UN-endorsed, right up to the point when Saddam's bribes took effect.
Finally, let me leave you a hypothetical. What would have happened to 15,000 (say) Christians, had Christian hijackers crashed airliners into Muslims buildings, killing 3,000 Muslims?
I sort of see the Muslim world the way I saw Ireland when I was growing up. Sure, the IRA was bad, but they were blowing people up "for us." Onl;y with a bit of maturity did I see the IRA as the collection of thugs they are.
Thing is, most Irish people were silent about the IRA, and by silence gave approval. I think the same mechanism is at work in the Muslim world. So I challenge the Muslim world by throwing the radical violence in its face. The Muslim world can either disavow and hunt down its radicals, or throw in with them. I'm fine on that wither way.
As to your statistics, there is a difference between random acts and premeditated violence. This moral equivalence you're attempting to make between terrorism and traffic accidents is despicable.
As for the rest, I am in agreement with you: I did say in my original post that given my druthers I'd scrap the TSA and use its budget to pay bounties on anyone planning terror.
Well, my take on the Muslim street is that most people are quiet about terrorism, for fear of ending up on a head-sawing video. And, unfortunate as it may be, slience does give consent.
As far as reasoned debate is concerned, you're dealing with the wrong people. I mean, when the Pope can quote a 14th century Byzantine emperor about Islamic violence, only to see Muslims around the world burn churches, behead schoolgirls, and shoot a nun at prayer, etc., etc., well, I'm sure you take my point.
I was waiting for that. In case you don't know, the report was from a highly-selective leak, that was think massaged by reporters at the NYT suffering from Bush Derangement Syndrome.
Slashdot Mirror
Money quote:
It's my impression that other companies have caught up with id, as employees have left or been fired. Perhaps the same will happen with Google.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mr._Methane
Global warming. Right?
Flies like shit.
Fleas like dogs.
Homer like beer.
Well, I guess time to launch is one factor, but so is use of the payload, once in orbit.
What a predictable and utterly cheap shot!
We've already had the sickening sight of Jimmy Carter campaigning for the prize via a campaign of open sedition against the US. In a less-decadent society he'd be booed in the streets and pelted with rotten cabbage.
The next Nobel Peace Prize presented to an American will probably go to Bill Clinton, for a series of lip-trembling apologies for American exceptionalism.
You mean, like Vandenberg, and Cape Kennedy, and...
Anywhere the capability exists to put a payload into orbit is a target.
That "most important target" bit was a simple piece of scaremongering.
You know, like here: http://politics.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/09/ 21/1653231
Cry Havoc! And let slip the Hounds of the Bar!
I must confess that I am a little taken aback by the sight of people who seem to be having conversations with themselves.
Nonetheless, I wanted to try it so I could have recordings of "Champs Elysees" (s French current affairs CD I get every month) play with the ability to interrupt on an incoming call. I thought Bluetooth is expensive in standby, then I tried using it to play MP3s. That was a power hog, let me tell you.
I have a Nokia phone, and it has Bluetooth.
When I bought the phone, I also bought a Bluetooth headset. I gave up on the Bluetooth pretty quickly: The headset would only run for about five hours before needing to be recharged, and the phone's standby time was cut down massively.
This isn't a complaint about Bluetooth as such. It's more that current devices, as delivered, don't provide long-enough standby time, never mind talk time, when Bluetooth is enabled.
I provided a couple of links. I'd appreciate some in return. Thanks in advance.
And actually, I think the only thing this Administration has done well is fight the GWoT. For example, I really worry about the way this administration spends - like a drunken sailor. I also think that Republicans deserve to lose to Democrats in the upcoming elections. Unfortunately, there's nobody for them to lose to.
You see, the Republicans may be wrong, but they are serious. Democrats may be wrong, but they're frivolous. There is a difference.
...They definitely show up artists for what they truly are.
I mean, display a crucifix in a container of urine and bask in the adulation of your peers, as Christians complain.
Show the head of the Prophet on a plate? Run in terror from the production, for fear of your own beheading.
To afford this. Obviously.
Formed by two ex-Clinton advisers and someone who wants an abortion pill on the market - and people who dislike the current administration, to boot - six weeks before an election.
This wouldn't make it into the NYT, except for Bush Derangement Syndrome.
Pity. Those hairy underarms were hot!
Believe it or not, all that happened in Iraq happened as a result of UN resolutions.
The first Gulf War happened because Saddam decided to turn a sovreign nation into "Province 19". The UN ordered him out and a coalition force ejected him when he refused to go.
Afterwards, the UN imposed a set of sanctions to keep Saddam from posing a threat to his neighbours. Of course, Saddam bought the UN, starting at Kofi Annan, and turned the Oil-for-Food program into the Oil-for-Palaces-and-UN-payoffs program. Oh, and whatever money was left over was used to pay bounties to the families of suicide bombers for killing Jews.
Later, Saddam expelled UN employees attempting to monitor his regime's WMD programs. As a direct results of this, and a number of other violations of UN demands, a coalition force eventually took over Iraq.
None of this was for our ends. It was entirely UN-endorsed, right up to the point when Saddam's bribes took effect.
Finally, let me leave you a hypothetical. What would have happened to 15,000 (say) Christians, had Christian hijackers crashed airliners into Muslims buildings, killing 3,000 Muslims?
Mod away. The subject line says it all, thank God.
I sort of see the Muslim world the way I saw Ireland when I was growing up. Sure, the IRA was bad, but they were blowing people up "for us." Onl;y with a bit of maturity did I see the IRA as the collection of thugs they are.
Thing is, most Irish people were silent about the IRA, and by silence gave approval. I think the same mechanism is at work in the Muslim world. So I challenge the Muslim world by throwing the radical violence in its face. The Muslim world can either disavow and hunt down its radicals, or throw in with them. I'm fine on that wither way.
As to your statistics, there is a difference between random acts and premeditated violence. This moral equivalence you're attempting to make between terrorism and traffic accidents is despicable.
As for the rest, I am in agreement with you: I did say in my original post that given my druthers I'd scrap the TSA and use its budget to pay bounties on anyone planning terror.
Here's an estimate: http://www.strategypage.com/dls/articles/200581423 1422.asp
Well, since you're an Anonymous Coward, you could be a dog for all I care.
Well, let me just say that you're pithy little original comment sounded more like a statement of moral equivalance than anything else.
Well, my take on the Muslim street is that most people are quiet about terrorism, for fear of ending up on a head-sawing video. And, unfortunate as it may be, slience does give consent.
As far as reasoned debate is concerned, you're dealing with the wrong people. I mean, when the Pope can quote a 14th century Byzantine emperor about Islamic violence, only to see Muslims around the world burn churches, behead schoolgirls, and shoot a nun at prayer, etc., etc., well, I'm sure you take my point.
Are you seriously trying to suggest that the US is the moral equivalent of Saddam's Iraq?
You're either a bad comic, or so far out of touch with reality as to be unworthy of any further comment.
I was waiting for that. In case you don't know, the report was from a highly-selective leak, that was think massaged by reporters at the NYT suffering from Bush Derangement Syndrome.
E _Key_Judgments.pdf
The NIE was declassified, and is available here: http://www.dni.gov/press_releases/Declassified_NI
A close reading reveals it to be...pablum.
In ralated news, al Qaeda is not polling all too well in Iraq: http://hnn.us/blogs/entries/30289.html
Please take a look at the comment labeled "I appreciate your point".
I don't hate anybody. I'm just well-aware of the world, and appropriately careful.