Actually, Bush has a strong case for worst ever based on the combination of his catastrophes.
Sure, Eisenhower, Kennedy, LBJ, and Nixon each had a hand in a mismanaged war. John Adams, Woodrow Wilson, and FDR each violated civil liberties to stop alleged enemies of the state. Many presidents have overseen the causes of recessions and other economic maladies. How many have been through all 3? (I can't think of any.) How many have polled approval ratings in the low 20s? (Nixon and Harding since polling began almost 90 years ago.) It's pretty easy to objectively put Bush in the bottom 3 presidents now, without judging the extent of the current economic troubles.
If the predictions that this is the worst economic downturn since the Great Depression are at all accurate (and macro-economic predictions are often self-fulfilling for psychological reasons), and the many ethical allegations against Bush prove true, Bush would have a strong case as the worst president ever, on relatively objective grounds as far as the matter goes.
That is to say nothing of how far he has departed from the philosophies and policies he and his party campaigned on.
No one with real expertise wants to be stuck in a bureaucratic agency, shuffling the papers and attending meetings at least 6 hours a day. I've been a low-level engineer in one of the military's RDT&E agencies (not DARPA), and everyone there who has ever had any technical skill complains of skill atrophy, boredom, and endless unproductive bureaucracy. I was very lucky to get out while I could. One of the high-level managers there had been known to say that their strategy was to bring in the best and brightest technical minds they could and keep them 3-4 years until their skills had atrophied to the point that no one else would hire them.
If the government wants to succeed here, they absolutely have to throw out all the rulebooks and start over. I've been in project groups that tried to do true engineering work within the government, and it was a resource management nightmare. It would take months to order most anything. Everytime I tried to do something, I always needed something I didn't have and couldn't get for a long time. What we have now is simply an exercise in getting people paychecks. This is the real government welfare system.
I'm curious to see how long that policy lasts if the Google-backed "any device, any app" proposal wins. The market seems to be headed in that direction with the recent announcements from Verizon and AT&T.
A lot of what the Bush administration started in terms of net-centric transformation hasn't been deployed yet, and won't be for years (particularly JTRS, which is where computer networks meet military radios and will be a huge part of the change). Blaming this on a philosophy that is at best half-implemented is silly. Even if JTRS were complete and deployed, I don't know that it'd help reduce manpower needs for the types of missions they're running at this nation-building stage.
I'll second that, except that I noticed significantly better comfort rather than a speed increase. I suppose it's a matter of whether you try to type fast; personally I keep a leisurely pace.
In the last years of Boris Yeltsin's presidency, Russians began to realize that their post-Soviet capitalistic reforms had been too much too fast, leaving the economy in even worse shambles than before, and allowing the rise of the Russian mafia from the chaos. Yeltsin decided it was time to slow down reforms and let people catch up, so he turned to a little known St. Petersburg political aide with a growing reputation for efficiency to be his last prime minister and implement the slow down. That man was ex-KGB agent Vladimir Putin.
Putin slowed down the capitalistic reforms, and then some. He returned some major companies to state-control, including most of the media. The economy is much improved during his tenure. He revived the secret police en masse. When a major oil tycoon decided to form a political party to challenge Putin, the tycoon was arrested on mafia-related charges, and his company was taken over by the state. Similar things have happened to a number of major political opponents. The court system has lost much of its veneer of independence from the executive branch. Putin is well-known for cronyism and a preference for Soviet-style rule. The Bush administration and others have publicly chastised Putin for hurting democracy. In fact, it wouldn't be unreasonable to suspect him of close ties to major players in the mafia, though impossible to prove. Right now the favorite to succeed Putin appears to be one of his former KGB associates who is now one of his top deputies. If you want specific charges that opponents have leveled against Putin, read anything by Anna Politkovskaya, such as Putin's Russia. Just be aware she has a strong anti-Putin bias (which may be why she was murdered).
Kasparov is just one of the latest to attempt an anti-Putin political movement. Obviously Kasparov could expect a meager fine for holding a public demonstration in a spot where he didn't have a permit. The subtext is much more interesting. Pro-Kremlin youth gathering where he expected to protest? Was it really arranged before Kasparov's? I doubt it, especially the way this exact same excuse is being used repeatedly across multiple cities. Who knows; it's hard to be sure what's going on in Russia under Putin.
As Justice Breyer implied, the issue of whether software is patentable isn't being raised by either side in this case, so the Court cannot rule on that question here. All they can do is interpret the law on the assumption that software is patentable. The ruling may very well suggest that the question is debatable though.
Patents are made public initially in exchange for the protection. This ensures eventual release into the public domain and makes it known what is actually to be protected. Compare it to copyright. The only cases in IP law where public revelation isn't necessary for protection are trade secrets, which have no mechanism to enter the public domain.
The 'engine' part is supposed to be based on EXPIRED patents, not current ones. The problem is that by the time patents expire someone else has already not only figured out a way to do it without reading the patent, but improved it as well. In many cases multiple groups have done so without ever knowing the product existed. That's because patent lifetimes are too long and the patents too obvious.
Adding the Wii doesn't prevent me from playing my original NES or SNES any time I want. CounterStrike is an online game, so when the servers change the players have to change. Personally I quit playing CounterStrike during beta 7 because they made changes towards more realism that took the fun out of the game and all the servers updated with it.
We just need to paint the Caps Lock Key red and change the label to Do Not Press. Science fiction shows have already demonstrated that this is how all controls will be made in the future.
Transhumanism? Eh. We're supposed to relate to that?
Ever since DS9 ended I've wanted to see the aftermath of the Dominion War. DS9 was handling issues of the War on Terror before the US had it. Then we were left with a weakened and rebuilding Federation that's just been through a period of compromising its principles. What happens next? Could the Federation decay and crumble from within at that point?
Problem is with all this useless time travel nonsense it's already been established that the Federation lasts at least a few hundred years more. The series has gotten pretty creatively-handicapped by its own canon now.
I'd love to see the patent clerk's face when you register not only the time machine, but also all the not-then-existing technologies that you'd likely use in making a time machine (computer control system, digital electronics, etc.).
Baseball tried something similar. They decided a few years ago that they'd use a computer system (Questec) to "grade" umpires' strike zone accuracy, and then tie the grading to personnel decisions.
The system works by lining up tracking devices/cameras around a predetermined zone. Big problem. The strike zone is defined "from the bottom of the batter's knees to the midpoint between his shoulders and belt as he stands in a habitual crouch." This varies from batter to batter, it varies by the batter's stance; it can't be predetermined. Even instantaneously, it's a judgement call when a 90+ mph pitch is passing by. Then there's the matter that the strike zone is meant to be called as the ball goes over the plate. The strike zone isn't a plane at the front of the plate like many casual fans think. It's a solid volume floating above the pentagonal home plate. When pitchers are throwing good curveballs and sliders, that's very tough to get right, even for a machine.
When the system first came out, it was only in a handful of parks (7? out of 30). Umpires immediately tried to adapt to the system, trying to predict what their zone needed to be to agree with often-flawed calibrations. Games in those parks were way out of the norm for awhile. Players threw tantrums (and Curt Schilling actually broke a machine) protesting the system. Now the system is in many more parks (~23) and the system is no longer in the spotlight. I believe the umps actually negotiated on what the system could and couldn't be used for (ie, personnel decisions) in their last labor agreement.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, Bush has a strong case for worst ever based on the combination of his catastrophes.
Sure, Eisenhower, Kennedy, LBJ, and Nixon each had a hand in a mismanaged war. John Adams, Woodrow Wilson, and FDR each violated civil liberties to stop alleged enemies of the state. Many presidents have overseen the causes of recessions and other economic maladies. How many have been through all 3? (I can't think of any.) How many have polled approval ratings in the low 20s? (Nixon and Harding since polling began almost 90 years ago.) It's pretty easy to objectively put Bush in the bottom 3 presidents now, without judging the extent of the current economic troubles.
If the predictions that this is the worst economic downturn since the Great Depression are at all accurate (and macro-economic predictions are often self-fulfilling for psychological reasons), and the many ethical allegations against Bush prove true, Bush would have a strong case as the worst president ever, on relatively objective grounds as far as the matter goes.
That is to say nothing of how far he has departed from the philosophies and policies he and his party campaigned on.
...
Oh, nuts.
...to CUDOS?
I can't let you do that, Dave.
No one with real expertise wants to be stuck in a bureaucratic agency, shuffling the papers and attending meetings at least 6 hours a day. I've been a low-level engineer in one of the military's RDT&E agencies (not DARPA), and everyone there who has ever had any technical skill complains of skill atrophy, boredom, and endless unproductive bureaucracy. I was very lucky to get out while I could. One of the high-level managers there had been known to say that their strategy was to bring in the best and brightest technical minds they could and keep them 3-4 years until their skills had atrophied to the point that no one else would hire them.
If the government wants to succeed here, they absolutely have to throw out all the rulebooks and start over. I've been in project groups that tried to do true engineering work within the government, and it was a resource management nightmare. It would take months to order most anything. Everytime I tried to do something, I always needed something I didn't have and couldn't get for a long time. What we have now is simply an exercise in getting people paychecks. This is the real government welfare system.
A penny for your thoughts?
No, it's an ARMs race because everyone knows RISC is better.
I'm curious to see how long that policy lasts if the Google-backed "any device, any app" proposal wins. The market seems to be headed in that direction with the recent announcements from Verizon and AT&T.
A lot of what the Bush administration started in terms of net-centric transformation hasn't been deployed yet, and won't be for years (particularly JTRS, which is where computer networks meet military radios and will be a huge part of the change). Blaming this on a philosophy that is at best half-implemented is silly. Even if JTRS were complete and deployed, I don't know that it'd help reduce manpower needs for the types of missions they're running at this nation-building stage.
...a car that collapses like a shopping cart when I'm rear-ended.
I was just trying to find the nuts in Iran. Good job, squirrels!
I'll second that, except that I noticed significantly better comfort rather than a speed increase. I suppose it's a matter of whether you try to type fast; personally I keep a leisurely pace.
In the last years of Boris Yeltsin's presidency, Russians began to realize that their post-Soviet capitalistic reforms had been too much too fast, leaving the economy in even worse shambles than before, and allowing the rise of the Russian mafia from the chaos. Yeltsin decided it was time to slow down reforms and let people catch up, so he turned to a little known St. Petersburg political aide with a growing reputation for efficiency to be his last prime minister and implement the slow down. That man was ex-KGB agent Vladimir Putin.
Putin slowed down the capitalistic reforms, and then some. He returned some major companies to state-control, including most of the media. The economy is much improved during his tenure. He revived the secret police en masse. When a major oil tycoon decided to form a political party to challenge Putin, the tycoon was arrested on mafia-related charges, and his company was taken over by the state. Similar things have happened to a number of major political opponents. The court system has lost much of its veneer of independence from the executive branch. Putin is well-known for cronyism and a preference for Soviet-style rule. The Bush administration and others have publicly chastised Putin for hurting democracy. In fact, it wouldn't be unreasonable to suspect him of close ties to major players in the mafia, though impossible to prove. Right now the favorite to succeed Putin appears to be one of his former KGB associates who is now one of his top deputies. If you want specific charges that opponents have leveled against Putin, read anything by Anna Politkovskaya, such as Putin's Russia. Just be aware she has a strong anti-Putin bias (which may be why she was murdered).
Kasparov is just one of the latest to attempt an anti-Putin political movement. Obviously Kasparov could expect a meager fine for holding a public demonstration in a spot where he didn't have a permit. The subtext is much more interesting. Pro-Kremlin youth gathering where he expected to protest? Was it really arranged before Kasparov's? I doubt it, especially the way this exact same excuse is being used repeatedly across multiple cities. Who knows; it's hard to be sure what's going on in Russia under Putin.
As Justice Breyer implied, the issue of whether software is patentable isn't being raised by either side in this case, so the Court cannot rule on that question here. All they can do is interpret the law on the assumption that software is patentable. The ruling may very well suggest that the question is debatable though.
Patents are made public initially in exchange for the protection. This ensures eventual release into the public domain and makes it known what is actually to be protected. Compare it to copyright. The only cases in IP law where public revelation isn't necessary for protection are trade secrets, which have no mechanism to enter the public domain.
The 'engine' part is supposed to be based on EXPIRED patents, not current ones. The problem is that by the time patents expire someone else has already not only figured out a way to do it without reading the patent, but improved it as well. In many cases multiple groups have done so without ever knowing the product existed. That's because patent lifetimes are too long and the patents too obvious.
Links in email? It's against DOD security policy to click links in email. Copy and paste it.
Yeah, they're not losing anything by banning HTML email.
Then your Wii will give you the most pleasure, but I suggest you get out more.
Adding the Wii doesn't prevent me from playing my original NES or SNES any time I want. CounterStrike is an online game, so when the servers change the players have to change. Personally I quit playing CounterStrike during beta 7 because they made changes towards more realism that took the fun out of the game and all the servers updated with it.
I prefer the to pretend it's a pump-loaded shotgun.
We just need to paint the Caps Lock Key red and change the label to Do Not Press. Science fiction shows have already demonstrated that this is how all controls will be made in the future.
Transhumanism? Eh. We're supposed to relate to that?
Ever since DS9 ended I've wanted to see the aftermath of the Dominion War. DS9 was handling issues of the War on Terror before the US had it. Then we were left with a weakened and rebuilding Federation that's just been through a period of compromising its principles. What happens next? Could the Federation decay and crumble from within at that point?
Problem is with all this useless time travel nonsense it's already been established that the Federation lasts at least a few hundred years more. The series has gotten pretty creatively-handicapped by its own canon now.
I'd love to see the patent clerk's face when you register not only the time machine, but also all the not-then-existing technologies that you'd likely use in making a time machine (computer control system, digital electronics, etc.).
Baseball tried something similar. They decided a few years ago that they'd use a computer system (Questec) to "grade" umpires' strike zone accuracy, and then tie the grading to personnel decisions.
, 00.html, and an inside view from an operator at http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?arti cleid=3326 (not sure if this is a premium article, if you can't get to it sorry)
The system works by lining up tracking devices/cameras around a predetermined zone. Big problem. The strike zone is defined "from the bottom of the batter's knees to the midpoint between his shoulders and belt as he stands in a habitual crouch." This varies from batter to batter, it varies by the batter's stance; it can't be predetermined. Even instantaneously, it's a judgement call when a 90+ mph pitch is passing by. Then there's the matter that the strike zone is meant to be called as the ball goes over the plate. The strike zone isn't a plane at the front of the plate like many casual fans think. It's a solid volume floating above the pentagonal home plate. When pitchers are throwing good curveballs and sliders, that's very tough to get right, even for a machine.
When the system first came out, it was only in a handful of parks (7? out of 30). Umpires immediately tried to adapt to the system, trying to predict what their zone needed to be to agree with often-flawed calibrations. Games in those parks were way out of the norm for awhile. Players threw tantrums (and Curt Schilling actually broke a machine) protesting the system. Now the system is in many more parks (~23) and the system is no longer in the spotlight. I believe the umps actually negotiated on what the system could and couldn't be used for (ie, personnel decisions) in their last labor agreement.
There's an editorial from the original roll-out at http://www.wired.com/news/technology/0,1282,59284
"another job that has smart people in charge"
Does this exist?!?!?