Of course, the problem is that 'sanctions' as a concept, are a POLITICIAN'S response to a DIPLOMATIC issue.
If the government you're dealing with is vulnerable to sanctions, i.e. they give a shit about their populace like France, Germany, Japan, etc. they are PROBABLY already amenable to negotiation and diplomacy. Sanctions just become the 'biggest hammer in the toolbox' of diplomacy between what I'd call 'reasonable' nation/states.
But if you have rogue states, dictatorships, or thugocracies (as you state) that don't care about their people, 'sanctions' are a mealy-mouthed politician's way of saying "I don't really have the balls to call you on the carpet and demand you change your activity; you changing your ways isn't worth me actually risking blood and treasure. But I sure would like it to SEEM like it matters to me (to the voters, or the public, or other countries, etc.) so I'm going to call for sanctions. That will make me seem appropriately stern, without having to really risk anything."
It's a result of a democracy of milquetoast voters selecting milquetoast candidates. When the silver-spoon rich kid who evaded Vietnam service by serving in the Nat'l Guard is the 'hawk', it shouuld be abundantly clear that the testosterone levels in the American male have been plummetting for a while. And don't misunderstand me - I don't buy that 'chickenhawk' crap for one minute; Bush may have evaded the draft, Kerry (to choose another example) *tried* to 'serve without serving' by choosing a cushy Naval job, and got snookered into combat duty which he promptly tried to shirk at every opportunity while parlaying it into political fuel for his attempt to be the 'new JFK'. Bush IS clearly the hawk here, and even he wussied out short of truly LEVELLING Iraq...leaving us with another unwinnable 'twilight half-war'. Either fight to win, with every resource you can bear, or don't fight at ALL, George.
I do believe that there are no more Disraelis, Bismarcks, or Cavours. None of them would have had any hesitation to apply force where needed, call a spade a spade, or simply refuse to get sucked into other people's problems. None of them would have relied on sanctions to accomplish anything but a distraction while the real action was elsewhere.
blah blah blah...the US government is starting to look like Nazis...blah blah blah
What's so ironic is that at the same time you point the finger at the US government propaganda efforts, I'm certain that you believe YOUR media is objective.
I've never seen people so willing to swallow unquestioning propaganda by the Left - I'm not sure if it's not some psychological knee jerk against the pervasive guilt of your older generations, or some deep Teutonic need to be told what to think (possbly both). Since the fall of the Iron Curtain, we now know from Soviet and East German archives that the younger generations of Germans were flat-out MANIPULATED by rather simplistic disinformation techniques, cheerfully marching into the streets to (sometimes violently) oppose "Reagan's Kernwaffen" and American militarism while the Soviets chuckled all through the 80s.
Frankly, you don't know crap about the US aside from the nonsense that comes out of Hollywood or from OUR media sources who themselves are deeply opposed to the war and don't mind letting that bias inform their view (example: New York Times) or other news services who are also made up nearly 100% of people who oppose the war (example: BBC). But I'm sure you're CERTAIN that, despite their political leanings, these people are the soul of objective reporting. HINT: you're being manipulated again.
One would think that one would be a little more questioning about one's own motivations and information sources, particularly when pointing the finger at someone else. What's the word for 'hypocrite' in German again?
Practical, cheaper, reliable, reuses established components? Congress (ie the congressmen responsible for the district in which these subcontracting firms sit) would NEVER stand for such an outrage.
Only communists would try to make such a direct assault on the jobs of American workers!*
(From the onion, the next logical step): Stop. I just had a stroke of genius. Are you ready? Open your mouth, baby birds, cause Mama's about to drop you one sweet, fat nightcrawler. Here she comes: Put another aloe strip on that fucker, too. That's right. Five blades, two strips, and make the second one lather. You heard me--the second strip lathers. It's a whole new way to think about shaving. Don't question it. Don't say a word. Just key the music, and call the chorus girls, because we're on the edge--the razor's edge--and I feel like dancing.
FWIW, I only shave about once a week barring customer visits. I have to say that I *did* notice a significant difference in ease of shaving with 3 blades from 2. A brand-new 3 blade really does clear the stubble away in one pass, rather than having to hack away at it. The only thing worse is that there's less clearance between blades, so I have more trouble with piles of whiskers clogging the head.
Now, 5 seems a little silly. I have a freebie sitting there, like a crack pipe daring me to smoke it "first one's free, baby". Frankly, I think 5 means *more* clogging with big piles of whiskers, and a worse shave....but the siren keeps calling.....
It's funny, I just built a system and I was amazed at how quickly the install/run process went, compared to all the systems I've built since about 1990.
Maybe an hour from 'opening boxes' to 'windows updating'. Granted, all the updates suck, that's directly MSs fault for not bundling occasionally an 'uber patch' that updates all systems from 1.0 to current.
Note that when you're installing everything from sound to mice to video, etc. when it says "system will need to reboot" you usually don't HAVE to. It's only to make THAT component fully functional. Hit cancel, and keep installing everything that doesn't DEPEND on that part to work (for example, I wouldn't install the video player software until after you're rebooted from installing the DVD player(s)), and you only have a couple of reboots at the end of the process.
Also, any reasonably competent tech friend can burn a copy of your XP install disk as a 'no hands' install, that uses YOUR serial numbers and data (no piracy!) but installs XP in one session in which you don't have to sit there hitting ok...ok....ok....ok.
(chance that you find a 'game media' journalist at an event) = (0.5*(chance of bags of swag))+(0.75*(chance of free games given away))+(1.0*(chance of seeing bodacious T&A))
Kind of a stupid point - who watches the watchers? Hint: I bet your HR person knows what everyone's paid, too.
Unless your CEO is an ubergeek willing to handle network admin her- or himself, and as long as your company insists that email is not private and must be accessible by SOMEONE in authority, then your IT admin (at least) will be able to read your CEOs email.
Duh. If you don't trust your IT admin to be discreet, you have bigger problems than them reading the occasionally confidential email.
If it's that big a freaking deal, you have perhaps 3 choices (none of which are great): - hand everyone who 'needs' confidential email access a gmail (or whatever) account. Yes, there are confidentiality issues there too, but less contextually sensitive than to someone IN the company. And it means that they will be able to send emails unsupervised as well - so if they send a gmail with that bestiality pr0n movie, nobody would know. - tell them (like all employees) that their email is readable. Confidential docs / communication should be sent in encrypted attachments like a passworded RAR file. - let them use an email client that supports encrypted emails, and teach them how to use it when needed.
Actually it's very circular. It illustrates perfectly the valuelessness of such a report. All reporting is NOT intrinsically valuable.
- If the US Gov't had suppressed the Hearst Papers (blatantly yellow journalism) before the Spanish-American War, by their measure, this would count as a 'less free' press.
- If a 'news report' comes out that's blatantly untrue, and the government prosecutes the publisher under libel laws, that is again a 'less free' press. According to their listing, Namibia is well above the United States. I'm guessing that in a sense, that's true - I would imagine you can say whatever you want in a Namibian newspaper without being 'surpressed' by the government; I'd also guess that you can say whatever you want without being troubled a great about facts, either.
- What also happens to their statistics in the modern media age where anyone (like Drudge) can spit whatever they want onto a site and call it news? There's no fact checking, no real culpability.
I guess the point is that trading on the well-deserved good name of "MSF" (Doctors Without Borders) to shill for the overprotected Fourth Estate is rather despicable.
I find it amusingly that people believe that they can login and play World of Warcraft anywhere - gaming cafes, etc. - and then are shocked that their accounts are hacked by keyloggers.
Not sure if it's naivete, or simply an absence of logic. Yes, one would HOPE that such sites routinely sweep their systems for unauthorized software, but frankly, short of re-imaging the hard drive after every user, I'm not sure how they could entirely prevent it.
I know your response was as tongue-in-cheek as mine was meant to be, but the last couple of notes had enough 'hint of bitterness' that they're worth responding to: 7) The act of creating isn't doing anything? Awesome, I'll be sure to send that memo over to Da Vinci. Relativism, ahoy!
I'm not sure the it logically follows that "since DaVinci created masterpieces, that all acts of creation are therefore valuable"?
8) Because the contingent there were racist homophobes who shot their neighbors? Funny, I thought it was because the inhabitants of Jesse were hypocrites that believed in the freedoms of speech and thought only when it agreed with their utopian religion (not to be confused with actual religion, with, like, God and stuff). If I recall correctly, the "Jesse War" BEGAN with the suppression of the WW2OLer's FREEDOM OF SPEECH (viz http://www.wired.com/news/games/0,2101,59675,00.ht ml or http://secondlife.com/notes/2003_07_07_archive.php #20030707) because the hippies objected to the pro-war postings and tried to cover them.
It was absolutely hilarious to us (by now you've probably realized I'm one of "them") that the hippies didn't understand the real ramifications of being in Jesse....ie that the rules of the area allowed a Hobbesian resolution to the conflict. The only reason 'we' effectively lost was because Linden Labs broke their OWN rules and intervened like a Politically-correct Deus ex Machina. That was probably very validating for the hippies, we imagined, because it dovetailed so nicely with their general pro-nanny-state politics (again, ONLY as long as it agrees with their Leftish beliefs). So the WW2OLers lost in actuality, but IMVHO won a giant moral victory.
It's so cheap as to be free (I got a perma-account back when they were giving them away, dunno if they still do that) It frequently doesn't work. It's pretty farking ugly. Constantly going down on just about everyone. Meaningless, worthless except to narcissists. Frequently seen in odd sexual practices. No visible means of support; somehow able to make money despite not actually DOING anything, and doing that poorly, if you can believe it. Doesn't like guys who play World War 2 Online.
Slashdot, the 'web' mouthpiece of the DNC, er, 'independent media'.
WHY IS THIS NEWS?
Let me rephrase the announcement, see if you get the point: 'Consistent with this policy, the United States will preserve its rights, capabilities and freedom of action in on the high seas... and deny, if necessary, adversaries the use of the high seas in ways hostile to U.S. national interests.'
This formulation has been effective US policy for what, 227 years? And been the policy of any other national governmment with a navy FOREVER?
While I understand that it's deeply satisfying to the Hate Bush crowd to protray the administration as bloody-fanged warmongers desperate to stomp the jackboot of American imperialism across the benign and peaceful peoples of the Earth, this is PRECISELY the same stance the US and every other state in history has had toward the open ocean. Is it so surprising we'd have the same policy toward space, when it became better-traveled?
The fact is that previously, we and the Soviets were the only states with any sort of expectation of BEING in space on any regular basis and thus had an understanding - it simply wasn't announced publically as policy.
Now that the franchise of space operations seems to be spreading (namely to the Chinese) this administration has seen fit to make this stance abundantly clear to all.
You can freely dispute that the US should have instead come to another sort of 'private understanding' with China instead of making it public. I'd argue that was more a tactic applicable to the static bipolar Cold War era, but it's arguable.
But to wring your hands, rend your garments, and weep piteously that this is some sort of uniquely fascist behavior by the Bush administration? That's just idiotic.
Yeah, it's so that when you load up Vista for the first time, your Start menu will be jam-packed with Windows Internet Explorer, Windows Mail, Windows Media Center, Windows Media Player, Windows Live Messenger download, Windows Calendar, Windows Defender, and more.
So, if you have anything less than FULL unobstructed visibility of the application launch button (be it on a start menu or whatever) all you see is: Windows I... Windows M... Windows M... Windors M... Windows L... Windows C... and so on.
Yeah, THAT's brilliant marketing. I can see the 'brand name' 7+ times, but I can't see which application I want to launch. I can see why Ballmer is so successful (/rolls eyes).
'The sad truth is, once the humans get out of the picture, the outlook starts to get a lot better,' says John Orrock, a conservation biologist.
Sad truth? This is an environmentalist's fantasy dream.
Sure, mod me 'troll' but at least read the article at http://www.sas.org/tcs/weeklyIssues_2006/2006-04-0 7/feature1p/index.html...following a recent speech before the Texas Academy of Science in which Pianka endorsed airborne Ebola as an efficient means for eliminating 90 percent of the world's population. Pianka received an enthusiastic and prolonged standing ovation. Later he received more applause from a banquet hall filled with more than 400 people when the president of the Texas Academy of Science presented him with a plaque naming him 2006 Distinguished Texas Scientist.
Not warned, ENDORSED.
The environmentalist agenda, if they are honest enough to admit it, is ultimately about elimination of humans because essentially the problem is that there are too many of us. End of story.
Would I hire ex gamers? Probably. It depends if they have used their time to do something valuable, like learning how to build their confidence, lead, motivate and get along with others - and that's hard to demonstrate.
It's not the ex-gamers that are in question. It's the current gamers. Like any addict, they would be a questionable hire until you were reasonably sure they could control themselves and understand that real life work = real life money and virtual work = no real life money.......he just said, realizing he was posting on/. at 0950. Ahem.
You can't REALLY defeat the IRS; you can stun it, you can even perhaps get away - but nobody actually WINS except them. I don't care if you have the Sword of 1000 Truths.
But aren't these emails ALREADY hitting email servers? It sounds like this speculation is FUD-y.
I mean, it's not like Spamhaus somehow redirects the emails to itself like some sort of Intarweb spam-specific black hole.
As I understand it: 1. Spam is sent by spammer (it's taking bandwidth). Because of how mail packets flow through multiple redundant paths, each mail takes up bandwidth many times its raw packet size. 2. Spam hits email server (it's taking CPU time to process) 3. Email server checks against Spamhaus blacklist (dunno if this is bandwidth, CPU, or both - I'm not terribly familiar if Spamhaus caches that information locally at its client sites) 4. Spam is rejected (taking CPU time) 5. Rejection reply generated/sent (? dunno if it does this; would take CPU+bandwidth both)
So Spamhaus disappears. Yes, it would suck as a email user to get flooded with spam, but would this REALLY cause any more work for the mailservers? I could see (if they are generating rejection replies and sending them) that this might actually be LESS work for CPUs and less bandwidth used.
Apparently nobody recalls the catastrophic "mysterious" explosion of a train in North Korea last year?
Hm...why would they be shipping railcars full of explosive anywhere?
Face it, "dear leader" is just an attention wh0re.
Although I confess I expected that he would have at least loaded the cave with a bunch of Fiestaware? Old smoke detectors? bought off ebay to give it SOME sort of radiation signature.
The outcome of this assessment is rather worrisome.
Well, isn't that the point?
I mean, I took temperature measurements from 5 different hours this morning and got the following results: 5am = 35 F 6am = 40 F 7am = 45 F 8am = 50 F 9am = 55 F
By midnight, trends indicate it's going to be around 130 degrees F! I need to post this on the intarweb, so everyone will know that the sky is indeed falling. My conservative projections prove it.
But WTF good will 'raising awareness of the humanitarian crisis in Sudan' do for ANYONE?
What, someone's going to feel all guilty and donate another $5 in aid that can be sent to Sudan for the gov't to either take for the military or give to the janjaweed?
All the compassion in the world doesn't help for crap unless someone is willing to man up and kill bad guys. And frankly, if you have to kill *lots* of bad guys (because, say, previous generations/governments couldn't or wouldn't come to grips with the problem), some good guys/gals/kids are going to get killed in the crossfire.
The 'enlightened' Western world has to understand this calculus and either shit or get off the pot: either quit whining about humanitarian crises or DO something about them. Because the whinging PLUS inaction just makes you look like the effete, useless busybodies you are.
This is a logical extension of US policy since the middle of the 19th Century.
Since the beginnings of American diplomacy, the US has been committed to a 'freedom of action' policy just about everywhere in the world. Yes, yes, I know a lot of the/. crowd will jump in with examples of US hypocrisy but that's simply naive: NO COUNTRY ON EARTH PLACES THE WELFARE OF OTHERS AHEAD OF ITS OWN. (And if you think they do, you're stupid.)
So the US stance is simply being extended to space - where the US is determined to maintain 'freedom of action' (for itself and its allies). No shock there.
The 'neutralization' of space was only going to last as long as pretty much nobody needed/wanted it. I know that probably half or more of the readers here immediately see this policy as some sort of American effort to hegemonize space. So be it. I would simply point to the Hegemonic powers of the last, say, 200 years: Russia/Soviets, Japan, Germany, France, Great Britain. Aside from Great Britain (of which the US is really just Great Britain 2.0), there's not a one of them I'd rather more trust as the hegemon. Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
Same with Antarctica - as long as its just some benighted frozen wilderness down there, all the nations of the world will 'play nice'. The moment it's exploitable for commercial or strategic advantage, this will play out again.
It seems that this is a rather larger problem than they consider.
Is there a better way to protect the shuttle in orbit? Will a serious mishap in space be the end of our manned space program?
If whoever going into space doesn't have a plan for coping with the amount of litter in the immediate neighborhood of the earth, then they are stupid and probably WILL suffer catastrophe.
Slashdot Mirror
Of course, the problem is that 'sanctions' as a concept, are a POLITICIAN'S response to a DIPLOMATIC issue.
If the government you're dealing with is vulnerable to sanctions, i.e. they give a shit about their populace like France, Germany, Japan, etc. they are PROBABLY already amenable to negotiation and diplomacy. Sanctions just become the 'biggest hammer in the toolbox' of diplomacy between what I'd call 'reasonable' nation/states.
But if you have rogue states, dictatorships, or thugocracies (as you state) that don't care about their people, 'sanctions' are a mealy-mouthed politician's way of saying "I don't really have the balls to call you on the carpet and demand you change your activity; you changing your ways isn't worth me actually risking blood and treasure. But I sure would like it to SEEM like it matters to me (to the voters, or the public, or other countries, etc.) so I'm going to call for sanctions. That will make me seem appropriately stern, without having to really risk anything."
It's a result of a democracy of milquetoast voters selecting milquetoast candidates. When the silver-spoon rich kid who evaded Vietnam service by serving in the Nat'l Guard is the 'hawk', it shouuld be abundantly clear that the testosterone levels in the American male have been plummetting for a while. And don't misunderstand me - I don't buy that 'chickenhawk' crap for one minute; Bush may have evaded the draft, Kerry (to choose another example) *tried* to 'serve without serving' by choosing a cushy Naval job, and got snookered into combat duty which he promptly tried to shirk at every opportunity while parlaying it into political fuel for his attempt to be the 'new JFK'. Bush IS clearly the hawk here, and even he wussied out short of truly LEVELLING Iraq...leaving us with another unwinnable 'twilight half-war'. Either fight to win, with every resource you can bear, or don't fight at ALL, George.
I do believe that there are no more Disraelis, Bismarcks, or Cavours. None of them would have had any hesitation to apply force where needed, call a spade a spade, or simply refuse to get sucked into other people's problems. None of them would have relied on sanctions to accomplish anything but a distraction while the real action was elsewhere.
blah blah blah...the US government is starting to look like Nazis...blah blah blah
What's so ironic is that at the same time you point the finger at the US government propaganda efforts, I'm certain that you believe YOUR media is objective.
I've never seen people so willing to swallow unquestioning propaganda by the Left - I'm not sure if it's not some psychological knee jerk against the pervasive guilt of your older generations, or some deep Teutonic need to be told what to think (possbly both). Since the fall of the Iron Curtain, we now know from Soviet and East German archives that the younger generations of Germans were flat-out MANIPULATED by rather simplistic disinformation techniques, cheerfully marching into the streets to (sometimes violently) oppose "Reagan's Kernwaffen" and American militarism while the Soviets chuckled all through the 80s.
Frankly, you don't know crap about the US aside from the nonsense that comes out of Hollywood or from OUR media sources who themselves are deeply opposed to the war and don't mind letting that bias inform their view (example: New York Times) or other news services who are also made up nearly 100% of people who oppose the war (example: BBC). But I'm sure you're CERTAIN that, despite their political leanings, these people are the soul of objective reporting. HINT: you're being manipulated again.
One would think that one would be a little more questioning about one's own motivations and information sources, particularly when pointing the finger at someone else. What's the word for 'hypocrite' in German again?
Practical, cheaper, reliable, reuses established components? Congress (ie the congressmen responsible for the district in which these subcontracting firms sit) would NEVER stand for such an outrage.
Only communists would try to make such a direct assault on the jobs of American workers!*
* jobs not actually filled by American workers
(From the onion, the next logical step):
Stop. I just had a stroke of genius. Are you ready? Open your mouth, baby birds, cause Mama's about to drop you one sweet, fat nightcrawler. Here she comes: Put another aloe strip on that fucker, too. That's right. Five blades, two strips, and make the second one lather. You heard me--the second strip lathers. It's a whole new way to think about shaving. Don't question it. Don't say a word. Just key the music, and call the chorus girls, because we're on the edge--the razor's edge--and I feel like dancing.
FWIW, I only shave about once a week barring customer visits. I have to say that I *did* notice a significant difference in ease of shaving with 3 blades from 2. A brand-new 3 blade really does clear the stubble away in one pass, rather than having to hack away at it. The only thing worse is that there's less clearance between blades, so I have more trouble with piles of whiskers clogging the head.
Now, 5 seems a little silly. I have a freebie sitting there, like a crack pipe daring me to smoke it "first one's free, baby". Frankly, I think 5 means *more* clogging with big piles of whiskers, and a worse shave....but the siren keeps calling.....
It's funny, I just built a system and I was amazed at how quickly the install/run process went, compared to all the systems I've built since about 1990.
Maybe an hour from 'opening boxes' to 'windows updating'. Granted, all the updates suck, that's directly MSs fault for not bundling occasionally an 'uber patch' that updates all systems from 1.0 to current.
Note that when you're installing everything from sound to mice to video, etc. when it says "system will need to reboot" you usually don't HAVE to. It's only to make THAT component fully functional. Hit cancel, and keep installing everything that doesn't DEPEND on that part to work (for example, I wouldn't install the video player software until after you're rebooted from installing the DVD player(s)), and you only have a couple of reboots at the end of the process.
Also, any reasonably competent tech friend can burn a copy of your XP install disk as a 'no hands' install, that uses YOUR serial numbers and data (no piracy!) but installs XP in one session in which you don't have to sit there hitting ok...ok....ok....ok.
(chance that you find a 'game media' journalist at an event) = (0.5*(chance of bags of swag))+(0.75*(chance of free games given away))+(1.0*(chance of seeing bodacious T&A))
Clearly, this event had little chance.
You gotta feel sorry for the Blood Elf women though; they can look, they can dream...
Why do you think they joined the Horde?
I hear that once you go Tauren, you never go back.
Kind of a stupid point - who watches the watchers? Hint: I bet your HR person knows what everyone's paid, too.
Unless your CEO is an ubergeek willing to handle network admin her- or himself, and as long as your company insists that email is not private and must be accessible by SOMEONE in authority, then your IT admin (at least) will be able to read your CEOs email.
Duh. If you don't trust your IT admin to be discreet, you have bigger problems than them reading the occasionally confidential email.
If it's that big a freaking deal, you have perhaps 3 choices (none of which are great):
- hand everyone who 'needs' confidential email access a gmail (or whatever) account. Yes, there are confidentiality issues there too, but less contextually sensitive than to someone IN the company. And it means that they will be able to send emails unsupervised as well - so if they send a gmail with that bestiality pr0n movie, nobody would know.
- tell them (like all employees) that their email is readable. Confidential docs / communication should be sent in encrypted attachments like a passworded RAR file.
- let them use an email client that supports encrypted emails, and teach them how to use it when needed.
Wasn't this first?: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0853096/
Actually it's very circular. It illustrates perfectly the valuelessness of such a report. All reporting is NOT intrinsically valuable.
- If the US Gov't had suppressed the Hearst Papers (blatantly yellow journalism) before the Spanish-American War, by their measure, this would count as a 'less free' press.
- If a 'news report' comes out that's blatantly untrue, and the government prosecutes the publisher under libel laws, that is again a 'less free' press. According to their listing, Namibia is well above the United States. I'm guessing that in a sense, that's true - I would imagine you can say whatever you want in a Namibian newspaper without being 'surpressed' by the government; I'd also guess that you can say whatever you want without being troubled a great about facts, either.
- What also happens to their statistics in the modern media age where anyone (like Drudge) can spit whatever they want onto a site and call it news? There's no fact checking, no real culpability.
I guess the point is that trading on the well-deserved good name of "MSF" (Doctors Without Borders) to shill for the overprotected Fourth Estate is rather despicable.
I find it amusingly that people believe that they can login and play World of Warcraft anywhere - gaming cafes, etc. - and then are shocked that their accounts are hacked by keyloggers.
Not sure if it's naivete, or simply an absence of logic. Yes, one would HOPE that such sites routinely sweep their systems for unauthorized software, but frankly, short of re-imaging the hard drive after every user, I'm not sure how they could entirely prevent it.
I know your response was as tongue-in-cheek as mine was meant to be, but the last couple of notes had enough 'hint of bitterness' that they're worth responding to:
t ml or http://secondlife.com/notes/2003_07_07_archive.php #20030707) because the hippies objected to the pro-war postings and tried to cover them.
7) The act of creating isn't doing anything? Awesome, I'll be sure to send that memo over to Da Vinci.
Relativism, ahoy!
I'm not sure the it logically follows that "since DaVinci created masterpieces, that all acts of creation are therefore valuable"?
8) Because the contingent there were racist homophobes who shot their neighbors?
Funny, I thought it was because the inhabitants of Jesse were hypocrites that believed in the freedoms of speech and thought only when it agreed with their utopian religion (not to be confused with actual religion, with, like, God and stuff). If I recall correctly, the "Jesse War" BEGAN with the suppression of the WW2OLer's FREEDOM OF SPEECH (viz http://www.wired.com/news/games/0,2101,59675,00.h
It was absolutely hilarious to us (by now you've probably realized I'm one of "them") that the hippies didn't understand the real ramifications of being in Jesse....ie that the rules of the area allowed a Hobbesian resolution to the conflict. The only reason 'we' effectively lost was because Linden Labs broke their OWN rules and intervened like a Politically-correct Deus ex Machina. That was probably very validating for the hippies, we imagined, because it dovetailed so nicely with their general pro-nanny-state politics (again, ONLY as long as it agrees with their Leftish beliefs). So the WW2OLers lost in actuality, but IMVHO won a giant moral victory.
It's so cheap as to be free (I got a perma-account back when they were giving them away, dunno if they still do that)
It frequently doesn't work.
It's pretty farking ugly.
Constantly going down on just about everyone.
Meaningless, worthless except to narcissists.
Frequently seen in odd sexual practices.
No visible means of support; somehow able to make money despite not actually DOING anything, and doing that poorly, if you can believe it.
Doesn't like guys who play World War 2 Online.
I'd say that's a pretty solid YES.
Slashdot, the 'web' mouthpiece of the DNC, er, 'independent media'.
... and deny, if necessary, adversaries the use of the high seas in ways hostile to U.S. national interests.'
WHY IS THIS NEWS?
Let me rephrase the announcement, see if you get the point:
'Consistent with this policy, the United States will preserve its rights, capabilities and freedom of action in on the high seas
This formulation has been effective US policy for what, 227 years?
And been the policy of any other national governmment with a navy FOREVER?
While I understand that it's deeply satisfying to the Hate Bush crowd to protray the administration as bloody-fanged warmongers desperate to stomp the jackboot of American imperialism across the benign and peaceful peoples of the Earth, this is PRECISELY the same stance the US and every other state in history has had toward the open ocean. Is it so surprising we'd have the same policy toward space, when it became better-traveled?
The fact is that previously, we and the Soviets were the only states with any sort of expectation of BEING in space on any regular basis and thus had an understanding - it simply wasn't announced publically as policy.
Now that the franchise of space operations seems to be spreading (namely to the Chinese) this administration has seen fit to make this stance abundantly clear to all.
You can freely dispute that the US should have instead come to another sort of 'private understanding' with China instead of making it public. I'd argue that was more a tactic applicable to the static bipolar Cold War era, but it's arguable.
But to wring your hands, rend your garments, and weep piteously that this is some sort of uniquely fascist behavior by the Bush administration? That's just idiotic.
Yeah, it's so that when you load up Vista for the first time, your Start menu will be jam-packed with Windows Internet Explorer, Windows Mail, Windows Media Center, Windows Media Player, Windows Live Messenger download, Windows Calendar, Windows Defender, and more.
So, if you have anything less than FULL unobstructed visibility of the application launch button (be it on a start menu or whatever) all you see is:
Windows I...
Windows M...
Windows M...
Windors M...
Windows L...
Windows C...
and so on.
Yeah, THAT's brilliant marketing. I can see the 'brand name' 7+ times, but I can't see which application I want to launch. I can see why Ballmer is so successful (/rolls eyes).
'The sad truth is, once the humans get out of the picture, the outlook starts to get a lot better,' says John Orrock, a conservation biologist.
0 7/feature1p/index.html ...following a recent speech before the Texas Academy of Science in which Pianka endorsed airborne Ebola as an efficient means for eliminating 90 percent of the world's population. Pianka received an enthusiastic and prolonged standing ovation. Later he received more applause from a banquet hall filled with more than 400 people when the president of the Texas Academy of Science presented him with a plaque naming him 2006 Distinguished Texas Scientist.
Sad truth? This is an environmentalist's fantasy dream.
Sure, mod me 'troll' but at least read the article at http://www.sas.org/tcs/weeklyIssues_2006/2006-04-
Not warned, ENDORSED.
The environmentalist agenda, if they are honest enough to admit it, is ultimately about elimination of humans because essentially the problem is that there are too many of us. End of story.
Would I hire ex gamers? Probably. It depends if they have used their time to do something valuable, like learning how to build their confidence, lead, motivate and get along with others - and that's hard to demonstrate.
...he just said, realizing he was posting on /. at 0950. Ahem.
It's not the ex-gamers that are in question.
It's the current gamers. Like any addict, they would be a questionable hire until you were reasonably sure they could control themselves and understand that real life work = real life money and virtual work = no real life money....
I call BS.
You can't REALLY defeat the IRS; you can stun it, you can even perhaps get away - but nobody actually WINS except them. I don't care if you have the Sword of 1000 Truths.
But aren't these emails ALREADY hitting email servers? It sounds like this speculation is FUD-y.
I mean, it's not like Spamhaus somehow redirects the emails to itself like some sort of Intarweb spam-specific black hole.
As I understand it:
1. Spam is sent by spammer (it's taking bandwidth). Because of how mail packets flow through multiple redundant paths, each mail takes up bandwidth many times its raw packet size.
2. Spam hits email server (it's taking CPU time to process)
3. Email server checks against Spamhaus blacklist (dunno if this is bandwidth, CPU, or both - I'm not terribly familiar if Spamhaus caches that information locally at its client sites)
4. Spam is rejected (taking CPU time)
5. Rejection reply generated/sent (? dunno if it does this; would take CPU+bandwidth both)
So Spamhaus disappears. Yes, it would suck as a email user to get flooded with spam, but would this REALLY cause any more work for the mailservers? I could see (if they are generating rejection replies and sending them) that this might actually be LESS work for CPUs and less bandwidth used.
Apparently nobody recalls the catastrophic "mysterious" explosion of a train in North Korea last year?
Hm...why would they be shipping railcars full of explosive anywhere?
Face it, "dear leader" is just an attention wh0re.
Although I confess I expected that he would have at least loaded the cave with a bunch of Fiestaware? Old smoke detectors? bought off ebay to give it SOME sort of radiation signature.
The outcome of this assessment is rather worrisome.
Well, isn't that the point?
I mean, I took temperature measurements from 5 different hours this morning and got the following results:
5am = 35 F
6am = 40 F
7am = 45 F
8am = 50 F
9am = 55 F
By midnight, trends indicate it's going to be around 130 degrees F! I need to post this on the intarweb, so everyone will know that the sky is indeed falling. My conservative projections prove it.
But WTF good will 'raising awareness of the humanitarian crisis in Sudan' do for ANYONE?
What, someone's going to feel all guilty and donate another $5 in aid that can be sent to Sudan for the gov't to either take for the military or give to the janjaweed?
All the compassion in the world doesn't help for crap unless someone is willing to man up and kill bad guys. And frankly, if you have to kill *lots* of bad guys (because, say, previous generations/governments couldn't or wouldn't come to grips with the problem), some good guys/gals/kids are going to get killed in the crossfire.
The 'enlightened' Western world has to understand this calculus and either shit or get off the pot: either quit whining about humanitarian crises or DO something about them. Because the whinging PLUS inaction just makes you look like the effete, useless busybodies you are.
This is a logical extension of US policy since the middle of the 19th Century.
/. crowd will jump in with examples of US hypocrisy but that's simply naive: NO COUNTRY ON EARTH PLACES THE WELFARE OF OTHERS AHEAD OF ITS OWN. (And if you think they do, you're stupid.)
Since the beginnings of American diplomacy, the US has been committed to a 'freedom of action' policy just about everywhere in the world. Yes, yes, I know a lot of the
So the US stance is simply being extended to space - where the US is determined to maintain 'freedom of action' (for itself and its allies). No shock there.
The 'neutralization' of space was only going to last as long as pretty much nobody needed/wanted it. I know that probably half or more of the readers here immediately see this policy as some sort of American effort to hegemonize space. So be it. I would simply point to the Hegemonic powers of the last, say, 200 years: Russia/Soviets, Japan, Germany, France, Great Britain. Aside from Great Britain (of which the US is really just Great Britain 2.0), there's not a one of them I'd rather more trust as the hegemon. Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
Same with Antarctica - as long as its just some benighted frozen wilderness down there, all the nations of the world will 'play nice'. The moment it's exploitable for commercial or strategic advantage, this will play out again.
I read the beginning of the article, and didn't notice anyone saying COMPUTER RPGs.
"Which role playing game over the entire history of the genre do you think has made the biggest 'quantum leap', and why?"
I'm going to go with Dungeons and Dragons for $100, Chuck.
It seems that this is a rather larger problem than they consider.
Is there a better way to protect the shuttle in orbit? Will a serious mishap in space be the end of our manned space program?
If whoever going into space doesn't have a plan for coping with the amount of litter in the immediate neighborhood of the earth, then they are stupid and probably WILL suffer catastrophe.