Nice way to insult above 13% of the world's population!
The reason for this, of course, is that WhatsApp is the most cross-platform multimedia messaging service above SMS. It's not only there on iOS and Android, but also on Windows 10 Mobile, some Blackberry versions and I've even seen it on legacy phones. And with the most recent versions, it supports both audio and video internet calling, which is very handy if one wishes to call people overseas but doesn't want to pay for a phone plan overseas. While I FaceTime some family members who have iPhones, others I videocall using WhatsApp.
Also, while in the US, texts are generally free, it's not the same thing elsewhere in the world, so even there, WhatsApp is useful. Whats more, in WhatsApp, one can embed photos & videos in messages and send them. If one is using iMessage or Hangouts, one had better hope that the person on the other end has the same: an Android user may not want iMessage, and an iPhone user may not want Hangouts. With WhatsApp, all one has to do is confirm that the other person has WhatsApp on their phone.
Right, so it's not socialism in that sense i.e. worker ownership of everything. It's more akin to government controlling and distributing everything to ensure everybody is prosperous, not that everybody is equal. A workable solution when they had an essential resource that the rest of the world had to have, and when oil used to be anything above $30 a barrel. But today, since alternative energy has emerged and grown to unprecedented levels, and alternate sources of oil like fracking in the US has emerged, oil is not only at a record low, but is likely to stay that way.
So whereas in the past, the Saudis had enough cash to pay off all their citizens, finance mosques just about anywhere & everywhere in the world, financially prop up regimes in any country they wished, like Yemen, and finance Jihadist groups anywhere they wished, like the Taliban in Afghanistan, things are no longer as rosy. As I mentioned elsewhere in this page, they have their hands full managing a civil war in Yemen, propping up a Sunni sultan in a majority Shia island in Bahrein, bankrolling their Islamic Front puppets in Syria, providing aid to Egypt, which is a major power supportive of an already stretched Saudi military busy in Yemen, and fending off Iranian machinations in the region. For their survival, they have to keep funding their citizens as well as their wars in their neighborhood w/ decreasing income from oil. When that's their predicament, financing mosques in remote places of the world is the last thing on their minds
Statistically, there are hardly any Jews in Xinxiang, the province where this edict is most likely to be implemented. Also, shaving the beard - that's only forbidden after a Muz has performed the haj - the pilgrimage to Mecca.
This pope has been at the forefront of opening up Italy and Europe to the Muslim rapefugee 'migrants'. The countries where this has been a burning issue has included 'Catholic' Spain, France, Austria, Belgium, mixed Christian Germany & Netherlands, Lutheran Denmark, Norway & Sweden, and Anglican England. One can hardly point to just one sect of Christianity.
The Uighurs are Turkic people - similar to their neighbors in Kyrgyzstan and Kazakhstan. If they became independent, it would spur Jihadist movements throughout Turkistan - 4 of the 5 stans in the region. Both the Chinese as well as the Russians have a very good reason to curb them. I normally loathe the Chicoms and oppose them wherever, but not in this one case.
Also keep in mind that China also has Hui Muslims: Hui are Han Chinese who follow Islam
Saudi Arabia is a command economy, and every Arab citizen (one has to be Muslim to be a citizen of that country) is a welfare recipient from the government. In other words, that country is the closest thing to a Communist country that one can imagine in terms of government owning all property and paying the citizens. The slaves you describe are the expatriate labor from various countries, be it poorer Arab & Muslim countries, such as Egypt, Pakistan, Indonesia, or from other non-Muslim countries such as Philippines, Sri Lanka & India. Those people are SOL: their passports are confiscated by their 'employers', so that they can't even quit if they don't like the working conditions.
That said, the falling price of oil and its relative irrelevance compared to the last century ensures that their days are numbered!
But, they're at least ideologically opposed to the Islamic State
Perhaps you should look into where it came from and how it came to be so well armed and well funded. After you've done so you may come to a very different conclusion.
IMHO Trump's largest foreign policy mistake is to take the Saudi side (the guys that wouldn't let us have a base) against Qatar (our best allies in the middle east - the ones who actually let us have a base in their country). Qatar is giving us plenty of "material support" against I.S. while the Saudis seems to still be feeding the other side.
Saudi Arabia is not one of the former funders of the Islamic State. They have their own factions that they back - the Islamic Front, which was a coalition of 7 Islamic parties from various parts of Syria. It is opposed to ISIS, the Baathist regime as well as the US backed Free Syrian Army. Problem is that aside from the Kurdish SDF/Rojava, all those factions are Sunni Jihadist groups, while the Baathists are Alawites allied to Hizbullah & Iran.
In addition to that, the Saudis have been too nose deep in problems of their own to effectively support Jihad against the West. Aside from their dispute w/ Qatar, they are fighting proxy wars against Iran in both Syria and Yemen. In Syria, their supporters - the Islamic Front - has been too damaged thanks to both Russian bombardment as well as Hizbullah & Iranian military activity. In Yemen, the Saudis are involved in the full blown war against the Iranian backed Shi'ite Houthis, and have even enlisted troops from their allies, like UAE in this conflict. Qatar too was a part of this alliance until recently, when the Saudis had them removed. In Bahrein, the Saudis are desperately supporting the Hanafa emir/sultan from being ousted by the majority Shi'ite population of the country and becoming an open ally of Iran. Oh, and while all this has been happening, oil prices have been plummeting, so that it's no longer a cheap expertise for the Saudis to both bribe their own citizens not to revolt, while keeping all these neighborhood fires in Bahrein, Yemen & Syria in check.
OTOH, Qatar is one of those countries that has deftly played both sides of this conflict. On one hand, they allied w/ the US to be the headquarters of CENTCOM, thereby making themselves indispensable. OTOH, they've been supporters of the Jihadists since day 1. On one occasion, the CIA spotted Osama w/ a member of Qatar's ruling al-Thani family, and could not take any action since the Pentagon/State Department did not want to mar relations w/ Qatar by killing a member of the al-Thanis.
Besides that, Qatar has also supported Hamas, Hizbullah, & the Muslim Brotherhood while al Jazeera, the state owned TV network, used to broadcast those Osama videos last decade. Besides that, Qatar has close ties to Iran, which certainly throws into question how reliable an ally they are of the West. That alone should have made the US raise red flags against them, rather than try & mediate b/w them & the Saudis. While al Jazeera doesn't dare expose any misdeeds of the al-Thanis, they have been happily reporting critically on the Saudis, the Egyptians, the Emiratis & others in the region. Also, Turkey has been playing a role that is anything but at odds w/ the US - most recently exposing the locations of secret US bases in Syria and beheading Kurdish fighters allied to the US.
The US is in a bind, since it would be an expensive proposition to move CENTCOM out of Qatar and to another country in the neighborhood. They wouldn't wanna pick Saudi Arabia, since that was one of the starting issues for al Qaeda. They could pick Kuwait, but it's unclear that Kuwait is any friendlier to the US than Saudi Arabia: 1991 is a distant memory. Also, w/ Congress pressurizing the president to keep alive the rivalry w/ Putin, the US
But only certain branches (mustly Saudi) Muslims believe that Jihad should be violent. Why do we support Saudi again? Why do we allow Saudi funding of mosques abroad?
Actually, no. There are no versions of Islam that prohibit violent jihad, since Mohammed himself clearly stated that violent jihad is the highest form of service to allah.
I generally agree w/ most criticisms of Saudi Arabia, but since President Trump's visit, they have been shifting their policies, and taking a hard line not against moderate Muslims or anti-Muslims, but against Jihadists. You mentioned Wahabism: the only other Wahabi country in the world is Qatar, which has been the focus of criticism from Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Emirates & Bahrein. Saudi Arabia is also unique in being critical of Turkey, which has been proving emphatically that it's a bigger adversary of the US than even Russia! Most recently, Turkish military did their own beheadings of Kurdish troops in Syria (not ISIS), and leaked the locations of secret US military bases in Syria. Somewhat surprisingly, the US hasn't chosen to call Turkey out on that, but the Saudis have.
I also wonder whether the Saudis have had any cash to give mosques anywhere lately. As Hugh Fitzgerald recently noted:
Meanwhile, the Muslim Arabs are more divided among themselves that at any time in their history. They are preoccupied with their own problems. In the Gulf, Saudi Arabia and several Gulf sheikdoms (U.A.E., Bahrain), as well as Egypt, are relentlessly pressuring Qatar, which they charge with supporting the Muslim Brotherhood. For the Saudis, the Muslim Brotherhood practices an inadmissible form of “terrrorism” because it has repeatedly shown itself a threat to the Saudi regime. In 2003, the Brotherhood attacked the Saudi rulers for allowing American forces into the Kingdom; the Saudis were even more shocked when the Muslim Brotherhood helped overthrow Mubarak in Egypt, for this was interpreted as a potential future threat to the Saudi rulers as well. Also unacceptable to the Saudis are Qatar’s continued close ties with Iran, that go beyond the economic links naturally resulting from the fact that Qatar and Iran share the largest natural gas field in the world. And Al Jazeera, based in and funded by Qatar, reports critically on the Saudi regime, as it does on other Arab rulers (though of course exempting those in Qatar itself); some of this news is highly embarrassing to the Saudis and other ruling families. In late June, the Saudis, the U.A.E, Bahrain, and Egypt cut diplomatic ties and severed all their land, sea, and air links to Qatar, and made thirteen demands. These included ending all support for “terrorism” (i.e., the Muslim Brotherhood, Hamas, ISIS, among others), expelling known terrorists who had been living in Qatar, and stop paying ransom to Al-Qaeda and ISIS for kidnapped Qatari nationals. As for its ties to Iran, Qatar was told to close the Iranian diplomatic missions in Qatar and the Qatari missions in Iran, to expel members of Iran’s Revolutionary Guard, and to cut off all military and intelligence cooperation with Iran. Furthermore, all trade and commerce with Iran by Qatar must strictly comply with US and international sanctions. And Qatar was told to stop funding Shi’ite militias in Iraq.
Another demand was for the Turkish airbase in Qatar to be shut down, presumably because Erdogan, though a Sunni, has been too friendly to Iran for the Saudis to accept.
...
Saudi Arabia is the busiest of all, engaged on every front. It is leading the campaign of Gulf states against Qatar and the Muslim Brotherhood. It is propping up the Sunni ruler of Bahrain, keeping his Shi’a population under control. It is fighting a proxy war ag
Actually, not quite. In PCs/laptops, entry level models still come w/ no less than 100GB of storage, which is what one needs in a fully adequate computer. The only exceptions are chromebooks, which seem artificially crippled.
On phones, on the other hand, most of them have either 16GB or 32GB main memory, which is inadequate when one counts not just the apps, but also data that doesn't normally go to SD cards - such as one's messages. 64GB should be the minimum amount of storage on an affordable phone. When that happens, that will be the stage where phones too are good enough.
Russia hardly has much of an outlet into the Baltic: the Soviet Union did, but Russia doesn't. Just St Petersburg & its surrounding areas upto the border w/ Estonia. Also, before it would get to Sweden, it would have to take out not just the Baltic states but Finland as well.
Does Russia have territorial conflicts w/ anybody outside the Soviet Union? Within it, there was the issue of Russians in the near abroad, but aside from that, does Russia have territorial claims on Poland, Romania, Hungary or Slovakia? And no, Syria doesn't count: they're trying to prop up a regime that would constitute a bulwark against Sunni Jihad. I disagree w/ them backing Iran & Syria, but I can see why they're doing it.
People who're on the Right on energy issues don't hate wind or solar. They're just opposed to 2 things:
a. Taxpayers having to subsidize these industries - they should swim or sink on their own in the free market. Once they make economic sense, of course they should be popular, based on market selection
b. These 2 being the only sources of energy, and everything else shut down due to environmental reasons. Coal & oil due to greenhouse gases, hydro dams due to fishes drowning, nuclear due to nuclear war, amongst other things. Heck, there are even animal rights activists who oppose windmills due to birds flying into them, and there may be opposition to solar panels as well if any bird gets scalded midday while resting on them
Of course, there is also the NIMBY crowd that hates them b'cos it looks like an eyesore on the landscape.
Sweden has a military? Who are they defending against? I can see how it might have been useful in WWII or in the Thirty Years War, but today, much of Europe is demilitarized, and only 4 European countries (Russia, Ukraine, Belarus not included) pay 2% or more of their GDP on defense. Sweden's neighbors are Finland, Norway, and Denmark. None of those countries have plans to invade Sweden. Or do they?
Funny this, yesterday, we were discussing the Norwegian story about how everybody has access to everyone else's income, and it's no big deal, since they have a sense of community & everyone trusts each other. Now, I know that Sweden is not Norway, but culturally, from what I understand, very similar. In which case, this accidental leak should be no issue at all, since all Scandinavians are perfectly honest people who wouldn't dream of even SCANNING other people's personal data, let alone steal from them, just b'cos they can. So this story is essentially much ado about nothing
I'm not an artist, but I can't do 3D. I have used Paint in the past to create an electronic signature of mine that I can append to any document that needs it.
The others on the chopping block are welcome deletions. Reader simply sucks - one can't smoothly scroll b/w pages, & by now, Adobe Reader allows one to do some basic Acrobat functions, such as creating/printing to PDF, adding or deleting pages... Reading list - anyone who gets their books from Amazon hardly needs this level of redundancy.
Since the FCC's issue is the prevention of the tampering of radio outputs, is it possible to manage that from something other than the router's management, which is where the question of the proprietary router OS vs the WRTs come in? Like maybe have a baseband BIOS that's not alterable from the router management interface, except in cases of an over the air upgrade of the firmware?
Looks like such a solution should resolve the issue of keeping the routers compliant w/ the licensed frequencies & bands, while letting the router owner customize the router however he chooses, like w/ pFsense, OpenWRT, Tomato or whatever
Possibly! But one of the major surprises for Stalin was that despite several warnings of an impeding German invasion, he refused to prepare. Had he been the head of a democratic country & done that, he'd have been impeached. The only thing that saved the Soviet Union was their strategic depth - their troops could retreat thousands of miles into Siberia, which in fact formed their industrial heartland, since Ukraine & Byelorussia were battlefields & wastelands. And of course, the winter was what saved the Soviets against Hitler, just like they saved the Russians against Napoleon
No, it just proves that if country A is at war w/ country B, and country C is supplying country A w/ weapons, it's perfectly legitimate for country B to sabotage that effort. Including going to war w/ country C.
Fully endorse this. Ideal would be a Bachelors degree in CS followed by an MBA, then go into the market. That way, properly poised to start on either engineering or marketing roles
This may seem a quibble over semantics, but can we avoid using the term 'Russia', which in this thread, conflates Tsarist Russia, the Soviet Union and today's Russian Federation? That would be like conflating Kaiser Wilhelm II, Adolf Hitler and Angela Merkel
The Soviet Union that is often credited w/ being key to winning WWII was the same country that started off in the war on the same side as Hitler - ref: the Ribbentrop-Molotov pact. It doesn't deserve credit for being on the right side just b'cos Hitler turned on them!
Slashdot Mirror
Nice way to insult above 13% of the world's population!
The reason for this, of course, is that WhatsApp is the most cross-platform multimedia messaging service above SMS. It's not only there on iOS and Android, but also on Windows 10 Mobile, some Blackberry versions and I've even seen it on legacy phones. And with the most recent versions, it supports both audio and video internet calling, which is very handy if one wishes to call people overseas but doesn't want to pay for a phone plan overseas. While I FaceTime some family members who have iPhones, others I videocall using WhatsApp.
Also, while in the US, texts are generally free, it's not the same thing elsewhere in the world, so even there, WhatsApp is useful. Whats more, in WhatsApp, one can embed photos & videos in messages and send them. If one is using iMessage or Hangouts, one had better hope that the person on the other end has the same: an Android user may not want iMessage, and an iPhone user may not want Hangouts. With WhatsApp, all one has to do is confirm that the other person has WhatsApp on their phone.
Right, so it's not socialism in that sense i.e. worker ownership of everything. It's more akin to government controlling and distributing everything to ensure everybody is prosperous, not that everybody is equal. A workable solution when they had an essential resource that the rest of the world had to have, and when oil used to be anything above $30 a barrel. But today, since alternative energy has emerged and grown to unprecedented levels, and alternate sources of oil like fracking in the US has emerged, oil is not only at a record low, but is likely to stay that way.
So whereas in the past, the Saudis had enough cash to pay off all their citizens, finance mosques just about anywhere & everywhere in the world, financially prop up regimes in any country they wished, like Yemen, and finance Jihadist groups anywhere they wished, like the Taliban in Afghanistan, things are no longer as rosy. As I mentioned elsewhere in this page, they have their hands full managing a civil war in Yemen, propping up a Sunni sultan in a majority Shia island in Bahrein, bankrolling their Islamic Front puppets in Syria, providing aid to Egypt, which is a major power supportive of an already stretched Saudi military busy in Yemen, and fending off Iranian machinations in the region. For their survival, they have to keep funding their citizens as well as their wars in their neighborhood w/ decreasing income from oil. When that's their predicament, financing mosques in remote places of the world is the last thing on their minds
Statistically, there are hardly any Jews in Xinxiang, the province where this edict is most likely to be implemented. Also, shaving the beard - that's only forbidden after a Muz has performed the haj - the pilgrimage to Mecca.
This pope has been at the forefront of opening up Italy and Europe to the Muslim rapefugee 'migrants'. The countries where this has been a burning issue has included 'Catholic' Spain, France, Austria, Belgium, mixed Christian Germany & Netherlands, Lutheran Denmark, Norway & Sweden, and Anglican England. One can hardly point to just one sect of Christianity.
The Uighurs are Turkic people - similar to their neighbors in Kyrgyzstan and Kazakhstan. If they became independent, it would spur Jihadist movements throughout Turkistan - 4 of the 5 stans in the region. Both the Chinese as well as the Russians have a very good reason to curb them. I normally loathe the Chicoms and oppose them wherever, but not in this one case.
Also keep in mind that China also has Hui Muslims: Hui are Han Chinese who follow Islam
Saudi Arabia is a command economy, and every Arab citizen (one has to be Muslim to be a citizen of that country) is a welfare recipient from the government. In other words, that country is the closest thing to a Communist country that one can imagine in terms of government owning all property and paying the citizens. The slaves you describe are the expatriate labor from various countries, be it poorer Arab & Muslim countries, such as Egypt, Pakistan, Indonesia, or from other non-Muslim countries such as Philippines, Sri Lanka & India. Those people are SOL: their passports are confiscated by their 'employers', so that they can't even quit if they don't like the working conditions.
That said, the falling price of oil and its relative irrelevance compared to the last century ensures that their days are numbered!
Perhaps you should look into where it came from and how it came to be so well armed and well funded. After you've done so you may come to a very different conclusion. IMHO Trump's largest foreign policy mistake is to take the Saudi side (the guys that wouldn't let us have a base) against Qatar (our best allies in the middle east - the ones who actually let us have a base in their country). Qatar is giving us plenty of "material support" against I.S. while the Saudis seems to still be feeding the other side.
Saudi Arabia is not one of the former funders of the Islamic State. They have their own factions that they back - the Islamic Front, which was a coalition of 7 Islamic parties from various parts of Syria. It is opposed to ISIS, the Baathist regime as well as the US backed Free Syrian Army. Problem is that aside from the Kurdish SDF/Rojava, all those factions are Sunni Jihadist groups, while the Baathists are Alawites allied to Hizbullah & Iran.
In addition to that, the Saudis have been too nose deep in problems of their own to effectively support Jihad against the West. Aside from their dispute w/ Qatar, they are fighting proxy wars against Iran in both Syria and Yemen. In Syria, their supporters - the Islamic Front - has been too damaged thanks to both Russian bombardment as well as Hizbullah & Iranian military activity. In Yemen, the Saudis are involved in the full blown war against the Iranian backed Shi'ite Houthis, and have even enlisted troops from their allies, like UAE in this conflict. Qatar too was a part of this alliance until recently, when the Saudis had them removed. In Bahrein, the Saudis are desperately supporting the Hanafa emir/sultan from being ousted by the majority Shi'ite population of the country and becoming an open ally of Iran. Oh, and while all this has been happening, oil prices have been plummeting, so that it's no longer a cheap expertise for the Saudis to both bribe their own citizens not to revolt, while keeping all these neighborhood fires in Bahrein, Yemen & Syria in check.
OTOH, Qatar is one of those countries that has deftly played both sides of this conflict. On one hand, they allied w/ the US to be the headquarters of CENTCOM, thereby making themselves indispensable. OTOH, they've been supporters of the Jihadists since day 1. On one occasion, the CIA spotted Osama w/ a member of Qatar's ruling al-Thani family, and could not take any action since the Pentagon/State Department did not want to mar relations w/ Qatar by killing a member of the al-Thanis.
Besides that, Qatar has also supported Hamas, Hizbullah, & the Muslim Brotherhood while al Jazeera, the state owned TV network, used to broadcast those Osama videos last decade. Besides that, Qatar has close ties to Iran, which certainly throws into question how reliable an ally they are of the West. That alone should have made the US raise red flags against them, rather than try & mediate b/w them & the Saudis. While al Jazeera doesn't dare expose any misdeeds of the al-Thanis, they have been happily reporting critically on the Saudis, the Egyptians, the Emiratis & others in the region. Also, Turkey has been playing a role that is anything but at odds w/ the US - most recently exposing the locations of secret US bases in Syria and beheading Kurdish fighters allied to the US.
The US is in a bind, since it would be an expensive proposition to move CENTCOM out of Qatar and to another country in the neighborhood. They wouldn't wanna pick Saudi Arabia, since that was one of the starting issues for al Qaeda. They could pick Kuwait, but it's unclear that Kuwait is any friendlier to the US than Saudi Arabia: 1991 is a distant memory. Also, w/ Congress pressurizing the president to keep alive the rivalry w/ Putin, the US
But only certain branches (mustly Saudi) Muslims believe that Jihad should be violent. Why do we support Saudi again? Why do we allow Saudi funding of mosques abroad?
Actually, no. There are no versions of Islam that prohibit violent jihad, since Mohammed himself clearly stated that violent jihad is the highest form of service to allah.
I generally agree w/ most criticisms of Saudi Arabia, but since President Trump's visit, they have been shifting their policies, and taking a hard line not against moderate Muslims or anti-Muslims, but against Jihadists. You mentioned Wahabism: the only other Wahabi country in the world is Qatar, which has been the focus of criticism from Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Emirates & Bahrein. Saudi Arabia is also unique in being critical of Turkey, which has been proving emphatically that it's a bigger adversary of the US than even Russia! Most recently, Turkish military did their own beheadings of Kurdish troops in Syria (not ISIS), and leaked the locations of secret US military bases in Syria. Somewhat surprisingly, the US hasn't chosen to call Turkey out on that, but the Saudis have.
I also wonder whether the Saudis have had any cash to give mosques anywhere lately. As Hugh Fitzgerald recently noted:
Meanwhile, the Muslim Arabs are more divided among themselves that at any time in their history. They are preoccupied with their own problems. In the Gulf, Saudi Arabia and several Gulf sheikdoms (U.A.E., Bahrain), as well as Egypt, are relentlessly pressuring Qatar, which they charge with supporting the Muslim Brotherhood. For the Saudis, the Muslim Brotherhood practices an inadmissible form of “terrrorism” because it has repeatedly shown itself a threat to the Saudi regime. In 2003, the Brotherhood attacked the Saudi rulers for allowing American forces into the Kingdom; the Saudis were even more shocked when the Muslim Brotherhood helped overthrow Mubarak in Egypt, for this was interpreted as a potential future threat to the Saudi rulers as well. Also unacceptable to the Saudis are Qatar’s continued close ties with Iran, that go beyond the economic links naturally resulting from the fact that Qatar and Iran share the largest natural gas field in the world. And Al Jazeera, based in and funded by Qatar, reports critically on the Saudi regime, as it does on other Arab rulers (though of course exempting those in Qatar itself); some of this news is highly embarrassing to the Saudis and other ruling families. In late June, the Saudis, the U.A.E, Bahrain, and Egypt cut diplomatic ties and severed all their land, sea, and air links to Qatar, and made thirteen demands. These included ending all support for “terrorism” (i.e., the Muslim Brotherhood, Hamas, ISIS, among others), expelling known terrorists who had been living in Qatar, and stop paying ransom to Al-Qaeda and ISIS for kidnapped Qatari nationals. As for its ties to Iran, Qatar was told to close the Iranian diplomatic missions in Qatar and the Qatari missions in Iran, to expel members of Iran’s Revolutionary Guard, and to cut off all military and intelligence cooperation with Iran. Furthermore, all trade and commerce with Iran by Qatar must strictly comply with US and international sanctions. And Qatar was told to stop funding Shi’ite militias in Iraq.
Another demand was for the Turkish airbase in Qatar to be shut down, presumably because Erdogan, though a Sunni, has been too friendly to Iran for the Saudis to accept.
...
Saudi Arabia is the busiest of all, engaged on every front. It is leading the campaign of Gulf states against Qatar and the Muslim Brotherhood. It is propping up the Sunni ruler of Bahrain, keeping his Shi’a population under control. It is fighting a proxy war ag
I'm normally opposed to most government intrusions of privacy, like /. users. I make an exception when the subjects are Muslim, however.
If the entire world did this to all Muslims, it would be a lot easier to monitor most jihad plots
Actually, not quite. In PCs/laptops, entry level models still come w/ no less than 100GB of storage, which is what one needs in a fully adequate computer. The only exceptions are chromebooks, which seem artificially crippled.
On phones, on the other hand, most of them have either 16GB or 32GB main memory, which is inadequate when one counts not just the apps, but also data that doesn't normally go to SD cards - such as one's messages. 64GB should be the minimum amount of storage on an affordable phone. When that happens, that will be the stage where phones too are good enough.
Jobs was a Buddhist, but there was a story here on /. on how his afterlife is thought to be
Could be, but self driving cars would be a godsend to women in India who risk getting raped by cab drivers
Russia hardly has much of an outlet into the Baltic: the Soviet Union did, but Russia doesn't. Just St Petersburg & its surrounding areas upto the border w/ Estonia. Also, before it would get to Sweden, it would have to take out not just the Baltic states but Finland as well.
Does Russia have territorial conflicts w/ anybody outside the Soviet Union? Within it, there was the issue of Russians in the near abroad, but aside from that, does Russia have territorial claims on Poland, Romania, Hungary or Slovakia? And no, Syria doesn't count: they're trying to prop up a regime that would constitute a bulwark against Sunni Jihad. I disagree w/ them backing Iran & Syria, but I can see why they're doing it.
People who're on the Right on energy issues don't hate wind or solar. They're just opposed to 2 things:
a. Taxpayers having to subsidize these industries - they should swim or sink on their own in the free market. Once they make economic sense, of course they should be popular, based on market selection
b. These 2 being the only sources of energy, and everything else shut down due to environmental reasons. Coal & oil due to greenhouse gases, hydro dams due to fishes drowning, nuclear due to nuclear war, amongst other things. Heck, there are even animal rights activists who oppose windmills due to birds flying into them, and there may be opposition to solar panels as well if any bird gets scalded midday while resting on them
Of course, there is also the NIMBY crowd that hates them b'cos it looks like an eyesore on the landscape.
Hopefully enough sharks around to eat them.
Sweden has a military? Who are they defending against? I can see how it might have been useful in WWII or in the Thirty Years War, but today, much of Europe is demilitarized, and only 4 European countries (Russia, Ukraine, Belarus not included) pay 2% or more of their GDP on defense. Sweden's neighbors are Finland, Norway, and Denmark. None of those countries have plans to invade Sweden. Or do they?
Funny this, yesterday, we were discussing the Norwegian story about how everybody has access to everyone else's income, and it's no big deal, since they have a sense of community & everyone trusts each other. Now, I know that Sweden is not Norway, but culturally, from what I understand, very similar. In which case, this accidental leak should be no issue at all, since all Scandinavians are perfectly honest people who wouldn't dream of even SCANNING other people's personal data, let alone steal from them, just b'cos they can. So this story is essentially much ado about nothing
Does systemd recognize IPv6? Can that be the issue?
I'm not an artist, but I can't do 3D. I have used Paint in the past to create an electronic signature of mine that I can append to any document that needs it.
The others on the chopping block are welcome deletions. Reader simply sucks - one can't smoothly scroll b/w pages, & by now, Adobe Reader allows one to do some basic Acrobat functions, such as creating/printing to PDF, adding or deleting pages... Reading list - anyone who gets their books from Amazon hardly needs this level of redundancy.
Since the FCC's issue is the prevention of the tampering of radio outputs, is it possible to manage that from something other than the router's management, which is where the question of the proprietary router OS vs the WRTs come in? Like maybe have a baseband BIOS that's not alterable from the router management interface, except in cases of an over the air upgrade of the firmware?
Looks like such a solution should resolve the issue of keeping the routers compliant w/ the licensed frequencies & bands, while letting the router owner customize the router however he chooses, like w/ pFsense, OpenWRT, Tomato or whatever
Possibly! But one of the major surprises for Stalin was that despite several warnings of an impeding German invasion, he refused to prepare. Had he been the head of a democratic country & done that, he'd have been impeached. The only thing that saved the Soviet Union was their strategic depth - their troops could retreat thousands of miles into Siberia, which in fact formed their industrial heartland, since Ukraine & Byelorussia were battlefields & wastelands. And of course, the winter was what saved the Soviets against Hitler, just like they saved the Russians against Napoleon
No, it just proves that if country A is at war w/ country B, and country C is supplying country A w/ weapons, it's perfectly legitimate for country B to sabotage that effort. Including going to war w/ country C.
Fully endorse this. Ideal would be a Bachelors degree in CS followed by an MBA, then go into the market. That way, properly poised to start on either engineering or marketing roles
Or for that matter, started on the same side as the Third Reich, and only 'switched' due to Operation Barbarossa.
This may seem a quibble over semantics, but can we avoid using the term 'Russia', which in this thread, conflates Tsarist Russia, the Soviet Union and today's Russian Federation? That would be like conflating Kaiser Wilhelm II, Adolf Hitler and Angela Merkel
The Soviet Union that is often credited w/ being key to winning WWII was the same country that started off in the war on the same side as Hitler - ref: the Ribbentrop-Molotov pact. It doesn't deserve credit for being on the right side just b'cos Hitler turned on them!