So you're saying that the fact that certain members of the current US administration looked the other way in the past makes Saddam Hussein a good guy?
No. But it does mean that the administration's breast-beating about how they're set on bringing freedom to the oppressed people of Iraq sound a little, well, insincere.
Agreed. My only complaint is that people cite this insincerity as a reason to oppose action. They're addressing secondary motivations instead of the basic question of "was there legitimate cause for action?" The administration's reasoning for going to war is a separate issue from whether it is better to let a murdering crapbag go on murdering or to risk enmity of the locals by going in and clobbering him. The right thing done for the bad reasons is still the right thing. The wrong thing done with good intentions is still the wrong thing. If people are going to argue the point, they should stick to the actual point.
Spoken like a true middle-schooler (shouldn't you be in school now)?
Certainly, the allowance for commerical influence into classrooms and into the hallways of schools is an honest problem, but every civilized society has some sort of learning program for children.
I'm not really trying say that the stated purpose, nor the original intent of our schools is to be child-jails, but that they have essentially become that. Between parents who abdicate their responsibility (forcing teachers to spend time as disciplinarians rather than educators), and school districts being more concerned about maximizing student-hours than quality of education, many contemporary schools are more like day-care centers.
Spoken like a true American child
Because everything is handed to you, and your parents have enough money to be comfortable... you feel that education is not worth anything.
Go into any "developing nation" and look at how kids your age view education. They really do have nothing, and they know the only way to get something is to learn.
It's interesting how you assume that I am a child. I suspect you've misinterpretted my hyperbolic, cynical indictment of what many schools have become as a juvenile mis-analysis of what school is meant to be.
I am not anti-American, but I my goodness that attitude will guarantee that this country will continue to be on top of the most hated list. Get it through your head, you are making a difference... A negative one.
Hmmmm....I submit that pointing out a major flaw in the US educational system is positive rather than a negative. Admittedly, griping about a problem alone is unlikely to elicit any meaningful change, but it's certainly a step above pretending that schools nowadays aren't more concerned with maximizing the appearance of effectiveness (social promotion, grade inflation, forced mainstreaming) than with actually educating children.
Hey, it could've been worse. They could've written "Hoards of agent's searched students lockers. Infringers where arrested and there secret hordes of MP3's were confiscated."
Schools are for learning, not launching political campaigns, selling ideals, or pushing agendas.
(scoff!) Schools are daytime-jails for children, designed to keep them out of society's way while the adults go to work. And if you're going to lock them up, you might as well teach them to be good consumers. And if they show signs of NOT being good consumers, send in the FBI.
Why, yes, he obiviously was.. at least at the time when Donald Rumsfeld was on his sales tour for the US chemical industry. Who cared about Saddam gassing the kurds with the stuff he bought? As long as he was keeping these damn ayatollahs in check Saddam was the US's buddy in the golf region.
He only became an official Bad Guy(tm) when he went for kuweiti oil wells (that the US had been considering part of "their reserves").
So you're saying that the fact that certain members of the current US administration looked the other way in the past makes Saddam Hussein a good guy? Really, the apparent duplicity of Rumsfeld et al has absolutely no bearing on the argument at hand: was or was not Saddam Hussein a murdering bastard of a dictator who should have been taken out?
Re:Removing fingerprints doesn't work
on
Our Man In Black
·
· Score: 1
What would Cthulhu do?
Eat his hands?
Nah, he'd just drive mad and devour alive anyone looking at his hands
Re:Removing fingerprints doesn't work
on
Our Man In Black
·
· Score: 3, Informative
Criminals have already tried removing their fingerprints already.
The resulting lack of fingerprints and scaring is actually more distinctive than the criminals original fingerprints.
What's more, the unique pattern of lines that make up your fingerprints actually cover much of hands. A good palm print left at the scene of a crime will get you convicted just as easily...
If you write a company a letter, particularly a semi-deranged letter (see any book by Don Novello) they'll send you something.
About five years ago, my brother actually went through the trouble of sending a snail-mail letter to CaseLogic to thank them for making the only decent CD case on the market. They thanked him for his letter and sent him five CD cases of various designs for free.
And that "someone" later repented and after his death initiated an annual award in his name in order to promote peace. A kind of "peace price", if you will.
Alfred Nobel was a hypocritical ass. He made a fortune on manufacturing explosives and it pained him that they were used in war, but never spent a dime nor lifted a finger to do anything about it while he was alive, but upon death set up a fund to reward one person a year for being a decent person. Too little, too late, I say. Perhaps it was because it would interfere with his money making. One might also notice that, while deploring death on the battlefield, he apparently didn't mind death in the workplace-- workers in the dynamite factory were as overworked and underpaid as any others at the time, but with the added bonus of occasionally being blown up. Nobel was an idealist in word, but a hard core elitist capitalist in deed. The Nobel Prize crap was just guilt money and, frankly, I don't think one can wait till after death to pay off a lifetime of guilt.
Not to single you out, but this statement really brings up an interesting sheeplike tendency that we all seem to have--the acceptance that when the government is maximixing "profit" like a corporation it's ok to not have the most efficient solution.
Heh. I'd call it "cynical acceptance" in my case. Since I live in a city as huge and bureaucratically inefficient and corrupt as Los Angeles, the amount of effort required to effect change in the system is far beyond my abilities to provide.
I always wondered if, in those case when the setup is stationary (as it is the case here), if it would not be more efficient to just use (lets say) a big block of steel to store potential energy...
They could just use a small electric motor to lift up the steel block up a rail of some kind so they would accumulate potential energy (mechanical batteries?). Then, when they would need to use the stored energy, they could let this steel block go down slowly (with reduction gears etc etc) which would in turn drive a generator...
I really don't know, but I would think that much less energy would be lost due to friction and heat in such a setup then in an electrolysis setup... What is wrong in this idea?
I think friction would cause problems for such a device on a small scale. The mechanical conversion of energy from a slow-moving heavy weight to fast moving rotating axle is too complicated. They do, however, do something similar on a macro scale with the power grid as a whole. During non-peak hours, the excess generating capacity is often used to pump water uphill into a reservoir. Later, when demand increases, they use the reservoir to generate power hydroelectrically.
Why bother ticketing when the time expires?
Let me swipe my credit card, and have it bill me to the exact second my car leaves the stall.
Save money on tickets, ticketing officers, complaints, and time!
Actually, they make more money writing tickets, even taking the cost of employing people to write tickets into account. As for time and complaints, I've never seen a municipal office that wasn't perfectly willing to let you waste your time complaining to them...:)
Noob:
www.FuckFord.com
www.FUCKGM.com
thare are all kinds of FUCK in domain names:-)
Heh. I think he was saying "f*ck" != "fuck". Speaking of which, why was the original poster afraid to put the vowel in FUCK? What are you people, children? Afraid of your mommies? Put on your big boy pants and spell words correctly, you pansies!
Great, and since virtually all From and Reply-to lines in spam are faked, for every 100 spams you receive, you send 90 or so emails to innocent bystanders that don't want your bounce message.
Or worse (as I pointed out to them), the unwitting recipient goes through the whitelist procedure and authorizes all future spam. I told 'em it was a half-baked idea, but I was just an "infrastructure technician" putting in network wiring. Their MCSE outranked my toolbelt, I guess.
That's an interesting implementation, but I guess it mostly depends on user acceptance from the customers/clients/etc. for the extra step. Are you aware of the feedback from the public users trying to correspond with the employees in that organization?
I haven't talked to the guys who were fiddling with the idea lately, but I'm pretty sure the system was highly unpopular with any test group they tried it with. They may have only implemented it selectively upon request for those who were fed up with spam. Even then, forged headers would monkeywrench the whole plan anyway.
A C-17 can move 170900lbs of cargo. A 200GB hard drive weighs about 1.35lbs. This gives us about 202547200 gigabits (126592 * 200 * 8) worth of 200GB drives per planeload. 11000km is about 6835 miles. A C-17 could make the trip in about (6835 / 500) * 60 * 60 ~= 49212 seconds. Therefore, the medium of C-17 Globemaster III Full Of 200GB Hard Drives gives us a whopping 4115.80915Gbps throughput. That means a C-17 has the bandwidth of more than 658 Internet2 L.A.-Geneva 6.25Gbps backbones.
The CIO of the company I just left always claimed that sooner or later, all professional email correspondence will take place by allowing recognized correspondence as opposed to blocking known spammers. Presumably, a person would have to go through some process to request the ability to communicate via email with someone within another company.
I don't claim to know everything, but this seems a bit far-fetched to me. Not to mention crippling a technology that has the potential to be an effective collaboration tool. I'd be interested to hear what you folks think, though.
Interesting idea, I suppose. A company I worked with briefly was considering something like this. Email from sources not on the "whitelist" would get a kind of bounce message that directs you to a page on the company web site. The page explains the whitelist idea and asks you to do a Yahoo-style "type in the word you see in this picture" verification of non-bot-ness. Thereafter, you're on the list as OK. They still haven't implemented it company-wide though (I sent 'em an email last week and didn't get bounced ) so it probably doesn't work as smoothly as it sounds...
Actually, it's the opposite. Where I live, in Northern Viriginia, basic phone service with all local calls at 0.096 each is about $20/month and unlimited local calls is about $30/month. All but the most expensive local phone services don't including unlimited calls. Most people don't get metered service because they don't know about it, and the phone company is not about to volunteer the information about the cheaper service.
Those metered plans are a recent addition. Go back five years and you'll find very few ILECs offered anything between the per-minute metered service and the Zone 1 free service. Where I live, multiple metered rate plans have been available through Verizon for only about a year.
As a 48 year old grandmother, you are obviuosly(sic) a slut who couldn't stay off the hoagie until a proper age, and you gave birth to either a whore such as yourself, or a son who fucked a whore such as yourself.
How old was your grandmother when YOU were born, fucktard? You're looking at it from the point of view of a 20+ year old grandchild because you're too dumb to actually do a little math and realize that grandparents don't start off elderly.
what blows my mind is they spend huge $$$ to replicate a device that has been available to the general consumer for over 24 months....
with a regular wintel PC (hell even a cheap one from 3 years ago) running a old copy of something loke cooledit could do the exact same job for much less money...
what? did they even LOOK to see if there was a OTS solution before they spend Gobs of cash to do this?
Laser vinyl players don't even compare to what they're doing. Your comment is akin to asking why they're blowing so much cash an the Next Generation Space Telescope imaging array when consumer-grade digital cameras already exist. They're not aiming a laser at the disc and digitizing the flickering of the analog return, they're perfectly mapping the face of the disc in 3 dimensions, processing the image to remove scratches and imperfections, digitally simulating the movement of a stylus in the reconstructed grooves, and recording the simulated movement of the stylus. Sheesh, RTFA.
Slashdot Mirror
No. But it does mean that the administration's breast-beating about how they're set on bringing freedom to the oppressed people of Iraq sound a little, well, insincere.
Agreed. My only complaint is that people cite this insincerity as a reason to oppose action. They're addressing secondary motivations instead of the basic question of "was there legitimate cause for action?" The administration's reasoning for going to war is a separate issue from whether it is better to let a murdering crapbag go on murdering or to risk enmity of the locals by going in and clobbering him. The right thing done for the bad reasons is still the right thing. The wrong thing done with good intentions is still the wrong thing. If people are going to argue the point, they should stick to the actual point.
I'm not really trying say that the stated purpose, nor the original intent of our schools is to be child-jails, but that they have essentially become that. Between parents who abdicate their responsibility (forcing teachers to spend time as disciplinarians rather than educators), and school districts being more concerned about maximizing student-hours than quality of education, many contemporary schools are more like day-care centers.
Spoken like a true American child Because everything is handed to you, and your parents have enough money to be comfortable ... you feel that education is not worth anything.
Go into any "developing nation" and look at how kids your age view education. They really do have nothing, and they know the only way to get something is to learn.
It's interesting how you assume that I am a child. I suspect you've misinterpretted my hyperbolic, cynical indictment of what many schools have become as a juvenile mis-analysis of what school is meant to be.
I am not anti-American, but I my goodness that attitude will guarantee that this country will continue to be on top of the most hated list. Get it through your head, you are making a difference... A negative one.
Hmmmm....I submit that pointing out a major flaw in the US educational system is positive rather than a negative. Admittedly, griping about a problem alone is unlikely to elicit any meaningful change, but it's certainly a step above pretending that schools nowadays aren't more concerned with maximizing the appearance of effectiveness (social promotion, grade inflation, forced mainstreaming) than with actually educating children.
Hey, it could've been worse. They could've written "Hoards of agent's searched students lockers. Infringers where arrested and there secret hordes of MP3's were confiscated."
(scoff!) Schools are daytime-jails for children, designed to keep them out of society's way while the adults go to work. And if you're going to lock them up, you might as well teach them to be good consumers. And if they show signs of NOT being good consumers, send in the FBI.
So you're saying that the fact that certain members of the current US administration looked the other way in the past makes Saddam Hussein a good guy? Really, the apparent duplicity of Rumsfeld et al has absolutely no bearing on the argument at hand: was or was not Saddam Hussein a murdering bastard of a dictator who should have been taken out?
Eat his hands?
Nah, he'd just drive mad and devour alive anyone looking at his hands
What's more, the unique pattern of lines that make up your fingerprints actually cover much of hands. A good palm print left at the scene of a crime will get you convicted just as easily...
It's a good word anyway. Even though it doesn't mean anything, it sounds like it should.
About five years ago, my brother actually went through the trouble of sending a snail-mail letter to CaseLogic to thank them for making the only decent CD case on the market. They thanked him for his letter and sent him five CD cases of various designs for free.
You just never know.
Alfred Nobel was a hypocritical ass. He made a fortune on manufacturing explosives and it pained him that they were used in war, but never spent a dime nor lifted a finger to do anything about it while he was alive, but upon death set up a fund to reward one person a year for being a decent person. Too little, too late, I say. Perhaps it was because it would interfere with his money making. One might also notice that, while deploring death on the battlefield, he apparently didn't mind death in the workplace-- workers in the dynamite factory were as overworked and underpaid as any others at the time, but with the added bonus of occasionally being blown up. Nobel was an idealist in word, but a hard core elitist capitalist in deed. The Nobel Prize crap was just guilt money and, frankly, I don't think one can wait till after death to pay off a lifetime of guilt.
No, you just can't eat the same foods they eat.
If it means never having to eat the [Dreaded/Breaded] Veal Patty ever again, I'll do it.
Heh. I'd call it "cynical acceptance" in my case. Since I live in a city as huge and bureaucratically inefficient and corrupt as Los Angeles, the amount of effort required to effect change in the system is far beyond my abilities to provide.
I think friction would cause problems for such a device on a small scale. The mechanical conversion of energy from a slow-moving heavy weight to fast moving rotating axle is too complicated. They do, however, do something similar on a macro scale with the power grid as a whole. During non-peak hours, the excess generating capacity is often used to pump water uphill into a reservoir. Later, when demand increases, they use the reservoir to generate power hydroelectrically.
Actually, they make more money writing tickets, even taking the cost of employing people to write tickets into account. As for time and complaints, I've never seen a municipal office that wasn't perfectly willing to let you waste your time complaining to them... :)
Heh. I think he was saying "f*ck" != "fuck". Speaking of which, why was the original poster afraid to put the vowel in FUCK? What are you people, children? Afraid of your mommies? Put on your big boy pants and spell words correctly, you pansies!
He's probably the same guy who thinks Network Solutions is owned by Verizon.
"quit pinging Geneva-- the fuel cost is over $400,000 per packet"
Or worse (as I pointed out to them), the unwitting recipient goes through the whitelist procedure and authorizes all future spam. I told 'em it was a half-baked idea, but I was just an "infrastructure technician" putting in network wiring. Their MCSE outranked my toolbelt, I guess.
I haven't talked to the guys who were fiddling with the idea lately, but I'm pretty sure the system was highly unpopular with any test group they tried it with. They may have only implemented it selectively upon request for those who were fed up with spam. Even then, forged headers would monkeywrench the whole plan anyway.
A C-17 can move 170900lbs of cargo. A 200GB hard drive weighs about 1.35lbs. This gives us about 202547200 gigabits (126592 * 200 * 8) worth of 200GB drives per planeload. 11000km is about 6835 miles. A C-17 could make the trip in about (6835 / 500) * 60 * 60 ~= 49212 seconds. Therefore, the medium of C-17 Globemaster III Full Of 200GB Hard Drives gives us a whopping 4115.80915Gbps throughput. That means a C-17 has the bandwidth of more than 658 Internet2 L.A.-Geneva 6.25Gbps backbones.
Interesting idea, I suppose. A company I worked with briefly was considering something like this. Email from sources not on the "whitelist" would get a kind of bounce message that directs you to a page on the company web site. The page explains the whitelist idea and asks you to do a Yahoo-style "type in the word you see in this picture" verification of non-bot-ness. Thereafter, you're on the list as OK. They still haven't implemented it company-wide though (I sent 'em an email last week and didn't get bounced ) so it probably doesn't work as smoothly as it sounds...
Those metered plans are a recent addition. Go back five years and you'll find very few ILECs offered anything between the per-minute metered service and the Zone 1 free service. Where I live, multiple metered rate plans have been available through Verizon for only about a year.
How old was your grandmother when YOU were born, fucktard? You're looking at it from the point of view of a 20+ year old grandchild because you're too dumb to actually do a little math and realize that grandparents don't start off elderly.
Laser vinyl players don't even compare to what they're doing. Your comment is akin to asking why they're blowing so much cash an the Next Generation Space Telescope imaging array when consumer-grade digital cameras already exist. They're not aiming a laser at the disc and digitizing the flickering of the analog return, they're perfectly mapping the face of the disc in 3 dimensions, processing the image to remove scratches and imperfections, digitally simulating the movement of a stylus in the reconstructed grooves, and recording the simulated movement of the stylus. Sheesh, RTFA.
Heh. That's more work than unchecking a box, and he won't even do that.