That 3 ton SUV is already blowing your roadblock, anything you can do to prevent it from getting where the driver intends to put it is a viable solution.
This is probably a better solution than killing the driver which is what is done now in war zones or at least attempted. It also has the potential to save lives instead of blindly firing into a moving vehicle.
One example The French reporter killed because her driver was speeding into a roadblock may be alive to day if a non-lethal method of disabling the driver was available.
Others. There are cases where people freak at the sign of a checkpoint and a non-lethal device would allow a reduction in loss of life. The current alternative is to shoot at it with guns. An early example in the Iraq war was a van with women and children in it that ran or attempted to run a roadblock.
Finally, most roadblocks are set up so you have to navigate them. That 3-ton SUV with a blinded driver is not going to be able to navigate anything blid.
Your reply is summarized as such, Open Source cannot hope to compete against any corporate interest which is competent.
Sorry, if everyone rolled over liked that the OS movement would never have gotten off the ground. They are countless people who would make the same glorification posts about Microsoft but that did not stop those who thought otherwise.
I have an iPod but I know damn well its not the end all of MP3 players. iTunes has its share of annoyances. The difference is that fanboi support of Apple is considered acceptable regardless of nature.
When the reporters and staff at the newspapers forgot the difference between an editorial and factual reporting. It didn't take long for the readers to catch on as they could compare what they read to what they saw and heard on radio and TV.
Consolidation also did not help with competing papers buying each other up only to shut the other down.
My local paper (Atlanta Journal Constitution) has veered so far from factual reporting that you can essentially skip the entire A section (front page) and go to the Business section or Sports section for factual information. Unless just reprinting one of the major's services the reporting is not only sloppy but horribly slanted.
Local newspapers were the first to break big stories like Cobb's "evolution labels" or their notebook computer swindle. The AJC only found out after reading the local papers. Simple reason is because the AJC stopped being about news and turned into an agenda driven rag.
People now have many outlets for news on both the net and tv that they don't are no longer trapped to their newspaper. It wasn't bad when there were competeting papers.
Sorry but considering their track record Middle Earth Online's biggest handicap is Turbine. First and foremost they have pushed this game back so many times that its nearing irrelevance. Any grafting onto the success of the movies has long been lost. The game has also suffered a few near rewrites which pushed it back with rumors of 07 floating about!
Recent events include putting out an expansion for AC2 and then cancelling the game less than 3 months later. This is nearly a classic case of milking the existing playerbase for all the money you can get.
Lastly combine that with a reputation for tolerating cheaters, exploiters, and combat macros and MEO has a lot to overcome.
So MMOG fortunes do rise and fall and it shows just who really has the best production values. WOW turned out really well because Blizzard is a highly polished organization with competence from years of prodcuing games. For some companies their first product is a MMO and unfortunately it shows. Also the days of where you can build one of these in your garage and maintain that type of environment are probably long gone. Players do not tolerate very well bugs and downtime and the games which have these problems are usually quick to suffer from them.
Sheesh, asking geeks who are already on a linux oriented site why they switched and trying to overlay their reasons on the general public?
Non-random surveys are just junk.
A better use of their readers and our time would be to ask why they didn't look at other alternatives to Linux, like Apple or even better, why they chose one paticular flavor of linux over another.
Honestly would you expect anything constructive in a comment section? Look at some forums from across the net. What a comment section would attract is a load of hate filled messages for no other reason than simply because they could post them. Most would post only for self glorification and not to further an intelligent discussion. Even moderated systems like the Slashdot has are heavily slanted.
If you want to send feedback then you have many known avenues to get that opinion or comment to a Representative. If he is your local Representative then try to meet him at any local event he plans to attend. Posting comments to a message board is the cheap way out and it gets you exactly what you invested - nothing.
of the rules and it isn't Blizzard's fault that it wasn't caught. The rules for naming characters clearly state that titles are not allowed and can only be rewarded. Someone else already posted a link to the actual rule.
While some name changes are the result of griefing the majority are deserved. What I find all so amazing are the blantant offenders whose accounts are not immediately permanently banned.
The programming problem is that people can come up with all sorts of tricks to convey the name they want that will pass most if not all attempts to scan for it. Add in mulitple nationalities and the problem becomes worse exponentially.
It really comes down to players doing their best to know the environment they are playing in. Ignorance of the rules is not an excuse. In this case CmdrTaco either did not know the rule or decided to just ignore it (whether conciously or not)
It has been known in performance circles that the 3000+ Venice cores were ideal overclockers. They had the best price/mhz ratio as well. (and yes I have one)
It is part of the samed flawed NASA that kept the shuttle around too long. First off we have a station that is designed around what the shuttle could deliver. We also have a station butchered by committee. What we have now is not a system which was proposed back in the Reagan days.
I figure the best bet would be to push it into a much higher "parking" orbit and revisit it once we get the new launch technology together. This would be more politically acceptable than deorbiting it. By the time we get back to it we can probably find some uses for it as a whole or by components. Most likely we would just be able to ditch it then as being "too old".
If this new reengineering of NASA can keep on the "do it right" mindset instead of "lets do it because we can" we might actually see real human exploration of space. Putting robots up is fine but it doesn't really advance our use of space. It will take people to do that. Some will say going to the moon again is "because we can" but I say it is "because we must". We must get out of orbit to keep advancing space technology and understanding of how things work. This in turn will lead to advancements and such that can be used back on Earth. But sitting in Earth orbit gets us nowhere. We have been there for 50 odd years already. All the big accomplishments took place in the 60s and early 70s. Ever since its been a study in new ways to look flashy but not really do anything.
Let NASA be the builder of destinations. Then let the privates make use of those destinations. NASA needs to be the one who does the gruntwork to establish a presence in space. From there we get others to build on that. Having a government agency develope the base from which private enterprise expands is a valid use. Besides if he have to wait for a private enterprise to provide the basis of being in space we will end up with a very proprietary and private solution.
and this time, don't handicap missions in space because of your partners.
this sounds kind of fishy. Most likely this is because.
1. New avenue of tax revenue 2. Family or friend owns the auctioning schools.
In Georgia we have DUI schools, courtesy of a former state rep who owned a chain of them. Politicians only protect their seats and their pocketbooks and actions like these most likely fall into the second category.
I look at it this way, if your trying to sell a flight sim, racing sim, or Army-Sim then yet photo realism is going to be a good feature to have.
Yet for games like the "Sims" there isn't a need. The context of the sims isn't emulating real life in the same sense as the other games.
A lot can be said by adapting a style that is not trying to be realistic to create an environment more beneficial to the story you are telling. World of Warcraft is a great example. While many other MMOPRGs tried harder to look more "realistic" WOW went a whole another direction.
The problem with trying to make realistic appearing models is that the little errors of those models become glaring. Half-Life2 has many examples of approaching a realistic setting but having incosistencies that totally blow it. Examples include objects of a type that are not destructible while others of the same type are. MMORPGs suffer more as they have to meet the limitations imposed by lesser machines. This leads to a game that looks great on the high end machines and downright atrocious on lower end machines.
Context should be the deciding factor. Don't do it just because you can.
it is best to put it to use before someone catches on. If AOL was the most over valued presence on the internet in their heyday I think Google is the same for ours.
Yeah Google is doing cool things, moving quicker than their competitors, but they are horribly overvalued. The best thing for them to do is buy up as much IP & resources as possible to form the basis of an enduring and broad based company.
It really should read that consumers are paying Real 750 million dollars. Microsoft isn't going anywhere, hence everyone who buys a preloaded PC or uses services of someone who did will indirectly pay this fine.
Most fines against businesses simply move money from one businesses pocket to another or to the government. The consumer never sees any of it back. Unless a company is driven under by penalty for their actions there is no real loss. One set of shareholders sees a smaller return compared to another. Those shareholders are probably the only "real" people affected directly by the exchange.
It does look like a feeding frenzy at Microsoft's expense. Most of their competitors failed because of inferior programs. Netscaped sucked for most the 4.xx series and Real has been horrid bloatware/adware for God knows how long.
That is the key here. Microsoft's software does have problems, most software does. The big problem is that the users are in no shape or form secure. I can't count the number of times people do the same things over and over even after you tell them that is what screwed them up in the first place.
MS added a firewall to XP and now they are integrating AV. I say good for them. That is one more step to making the system more secure. Since there are many FREE AV packages I don't see a big loss here to those charging; especially Symantec.
The amount of obligation that the public is under for the various Government Employee Retirement programs is going to come to light and it won't be a pleasant story. Already it was Virginia or West Virginia where there was a shortfall because of mismangement and the public was held accountable for it by the courts.
People complain about CEOs and their golden parachutes have never looked towards the public workers and realized just how golden those retirements really are. People think Social Security and Medicare funding are the big problem only do so because this is the big "dirty" secret that hasn't been publically harped on.
Here is a good story about just how big the numbers are, and you will be liable for it.
because the one thing I have noticed that is consistent about the General Assembly is anyway to codemn Israel is accepted. If not the GA then by any special event they sponsor.
The fact is the current arrangement is safe because the US can be held more accountable than the UN or worse some of the other countries that comprise the UN.
The other general rule is, impose new rules but don't press it should China or Russia oppose but lambast the US should it oppose.
I look at voting this way, even if I have a receipt there is still no way *I* will be able to verify that my vote counted. I want to go one step further beyond a paper trail. I want a web based method where I can punch in a code at the bottom of my receipt to show that it is indeed in the system and was accepted. They have systems to verify the integrity of lottery tickets they can certainly do this.
I also want a voter ID system that requires a photo. This voter ID must be free and easy to obtain. I have seen many complaints against such systems under the claim they "disenfranchise" people. Yet at the same time nothing is being done to ensure those who vote legally are not disenfranchised by fradulent voting. It goes both ways. If it is too much of a burden to get an ID should they be "easy" to get then it probably is too much of a burden to actually expect these people to vote.
As for Diebold, just be willing to admit the number of abuses using OCR, punch card, and other systems are just as bad, the difference is that we are used to it. Plus the Diebold angle is mostly pursued by those who want to cast doubt on an election they will not accept
Your argument is detestable. There is no comparison between the two countries. Your attempt at doing so shows a great amount of ignorance and trivializes the suffering of the Chinese people.
In China the true side effect of getting in the way of the state or a business, which by the way most businesses are the state, is imprisonment or death.
Go look at Amnesty International's 2004 page on China, now tell me how you can truly compare what they do to the US? Freedom of speech? I can go shout at Bush and any member of Congress while in Washington, I can post to a blog, or even buy an ad. I can run anti-corporate web pages here as well as those of accusing the US of atrocity after atrocity without fear of losing my life, having my family disappear, or being imprisoned forever hoping some international group my find me.
Rule #1 : You're not lucky you have a job.
on
Pay vs. Happiness
·
· Score: 1
Sorry but I hate that line "You're lucky if you have a job".
If you don't position yourself for the market then move. It isn't a bad economy, we have had near constant rates with small fluctuations up and down. I know of only ONE person I regulary talk with who doesn't have a job. He is busy busting his ass learning something that will make him money. In the mean time he takes low skill jobs until he gets the job he needs. Fortunately for him his wife went through this a few years back; web designer; so he knows what to do.
If your feeling lucky you have a job your probably miserable too. It is up to you. No one is going to give you a job. You don't deserve one. If you hate your job then move on. Can't? Then learn a skill which will let you. Oh, finally, try thinking outside the box. That means if your not happy at your current programming job and weren't at the previous then perhaps it isn't the job for you. It might make a good hobby. Don't beat yourself into being what you think is expected of you.
While I like the idea of continuing the space program the idea of allowing Russia off the hook for their behavior in regards to the Iranian nuclear program is not good.
Putting it bluntly no one in their right mind should trust Iran. Russia and China are doing this because they know that Iran will cause more trouble for the West before acting on them. While neither China or Russia are friendly to their own Muslims that gets totally brushed over by the Islamic extremist in Iran. Iran is quite willing to trade the lives of fellow Muslims if it gives them power, this means kissing off those in Checnya and other places.
A Nuclear Iran will be a nightmare for Israel, Europe, and the US in that order. Trading for support to maintain the ISS is to high of a price.
When Starbuck was presented as a woman that indeed was unique and a good change to make. After listening to the podcast for Pegasus the writers seem to think that it still is original to recast male characters are female characters. The whole story of multiple Boomers, who used to be a male character, also is a great touch because they did something with the character other than changing the sex. The problem that currently exist with the Starbuck character is that it is very little different from the first Starbuck other than sex. It would be nice to see some creativity in regards to the character.
Strong female characters are needed in Science Fiction. Too often we get bouncing boobs on horses or what boils down to girls on trampolines. BSG comes close to these violations much more this second season as compared to the first.
Some good strong female characters from science fiction shows.
Samantha Carter : Stargate SG-1 Delenn : B5 Susan Ivanova : B5 Ensign Ro : ST:DS9 Captain Janeway : Star Trek Voyager
Actually the ranking of the new BSG is more telling.
BSG has proven to be interesting but the writers are stuck on the idea that changing the sex of known characters constitutes "unique" changes. After the premier that "stunt" loses all meaning.
Frankly Stargate SG:1 is good science fiction, perhaps the best adaptation of any movie to the small screen. Still I would put Dr. Who in the top 3 with Star Trek. Who else to put up there I am not sure, as in there are many candidates for #2. Personal preference and I would put Babylon 5.
Some of the shows are most definitely not science fiction at all, and they left out a good show that proceeded Space 1999, UFO.
Also missing, but borderline, is Project Bluebook.
Slashdot Mirror
Ignorant is more like it.
That 3 ton SUV is already blowing your roadblock, anything you can do to prevent it from getting where the driver intends to put it is a viable solution.
This is probably a better solution than killing the driver which is what is done now in war zones or at least attempted. It also has the potential to save lives instead of blindly firing into a moving vehicle.
One example
The French reporter killed because her driver was speeding into a roadblock may be alive to day if a non-lethal method of disabling the driver was available.
Others.
There are cases where people freak at the sign of a checkpoint and a non-lethal device would allow a reduction in loss of life. The current alternative is to shoot at it with guns. An early example in the Iraq war was a van with women and children in it that ran or attempted to run a roadblock.
Finally, most roadblocks are set up so you have to navigate them. That 3-ton SUV with a blinded driver is not going to be able to navigate anything blid.
Your reply is summarized as such, Open Source cannot hope to compete against any corporate interest which is competent.
Sorry, if everyone rolled over liked that the OS movement would never have gotten off the ground. They are countless people who would make the same glorification posts about Microsoft but that did not stop those who thought otherwise.
I have an iPod but I know damn well its not the end all of MP3 players. iTunes has its share of annoyances. The difference is that fanboi support of Apple is considered acceptable regardless of nature.
When the reporters and staff at the newspapers forgot the difference between an editorial and factual reporting. It didn't take long for the readers to catch on as they could compare what they read to what they saw and heard on radio and TV.
Consolidation also did not help with competing papers buying each other up only to shut the other down.
My local paper (Atlanta Journal Constitution) has veered so far from factual reporting that you can essentially skip the entire A section (front page) and go to the Business section or Sports section for factual information. Unless just reprinting one of the major's services the reporting is not only sloppy but horribly slanted.
Local newspapers were the first to break big stories like Cobb's "evolution labels" or their notebook computer swindle. The AJC only found out after reading the local papers. Simple reason is because the AJC stopped being about news and turned into an agenda driven rag.
People now have many outlets for news on both the net and tv that they don't are no longer trapped to their newspaper. It wasn't bad when there were competeting papers.
Sorry but considering their track record Middle Earth Online's biggest handicap is Turbine. First and foremost they have pushed this game back so many times that its nearing irrelevance. Any grafting onto the success of the movies has long been lost. The game has also suffered a few near rewrites which pushed it back with rumors of 07 floating about!
Recent events include putting out an expansion for AC2 and then cancelling the game less than 3 months later. This is nearly a classic case of milking the existing playerbase for all the money you can get.
Lastly combine that with a reputation for tolerating cheaters, exploiters, and combat macros and MEO has a lot to overcome.
So MMOG fortunes do rise and fall and it shows just who really has the best production values. WOW turned out really well because Blizzard is a highly polished organization with competence from years of prodcuing games. For some companies their first product is a MMO and unfortunately it shows. Also the days of where you can build one of these in your garage and maintain that type of environment are probably long gone. Players do not tolerate very well bugs and downtime and the games which have these problems are usually quick to suffer from them.
Sheesh, asking geeks who are already on a linux oriented site why they switched and trying to overlay their reasons on the general public?
Non-random surveys are just junk.
A better use of their readers and our time would be to ask why they didn't look at other alternatives to Linux, like Apple or even better, why they chose one paticular flavor of linux over another.
Honestly would you expect anything constructive in a comment section? Look at some forums from across the net. What a comment section would attract is a load of hate filled messages for no other reason than simply because they could post them. Most would post only for self glorification and not to further an intelligent discussion. Even moderated systems like the Slashdot has are heavily slanted.
If you want to send feedback then you have many known avenues to get that opinion or comment to a Representative. If he is your local Representative then try to meet him at any local event he plans to attend. Posting comments to a message board is the cheap way out and it gets you exactly what you invested - nothing.
of the rules and it isn't Blizzard's fault that it wasn't caught. The rules for naming characters clearly state that titles are not allowed and can only be rewarded. Someone else already posted a link to the actual rule.
While some name changes are the result of griefing the majority are deserved. What I find all so amazing are the blantant offenders whose accounts are not immediately permanently banned.
The programming problem is that people can come up with all sorts of tricks to convey the name they want that will pass most if not all attempts to scan for it. Add in mulitple nationalities and the problem becomes worse exponentially.
It really comes down to players doing their best to know the environment they are playing in. Ignorance of the rules is not an excuse. In this case CmdrTaco either did not know the rule or decided to just ignore it (whether conciously or not)
taught by the local Life University here in Georgia, oh they teach "Chiropractic science"
t _is_chiro.asp
http://www.life.edu/Chiropractic_and_Wellness/wha
and leave it to AMD to drop that chip, AMD64 3000+ processors are no longer being produced. The new low end is the 3200+
o m/0,,51_104_609,00.html
http://www.amd.com/us-en/Corporate/VirtualPressRo
It has been known in performance circles that the 3000+ Venice cores were ideal overclockers. They had the best price/mhz ratio as well. (and yes I have one)
It is part of the samed flawed NASA that kept the shuttle around too long. First off we have a station that is designed around what the shuttle could deliver. We also have a station butchered by committee. What we have now is not a system which was proposed back in the Reagan days.
I figure the best bet would be to push it into a much higher "parking" orbit and revisit it once we get the new launch technology together. This would be more politically acceptable than deorbiting it. By the time we get back to it we can probably find some uses for it as a whole or by components. Most likely we would just be able to ditch it then as being "too old".
If this new reengineering of NASA can keep on the "do it right" mindset instead of "lets do it because we can" we might actually see real human exploration of space. Putting robots up is fine but it doesn't really advance our use of space. It will take people to do that. Some will say going to the moon again is "because we can" but I say it is "because we must". We must get out of orbit to keep advancing space technology and understanding of how things work. This in turn will lead to advancements and such that can be used back on Earth. But sitting in Earth orbit gets us nowhere. We have been there for 50 odd years already. All the big accomplishments took place in the 60s and early 70s. Ever since its been a study in new ways to look flashy but not really do anything.
Let NASA be the builder of destinations. Then let the privates make use of those destinations. NASA needs to be the one who does the gruntwork to establish a presence in space. From there we get others to build on that. Having a government agency develope the base from which private enterprise expands is a valid use. Besides if he have to wait for a private enterprise to provide the basis of being in space we will end up with a very proprietary and private solution.
and this time, don't handicap missions in space because of your partners.
this sounds kind of fishy. Most likely this is because.
1. New avenue of tax revenue
2. Family or friend owns the auctioning schools.
In Georgia we have DUI schools, courtesy of a former state rep who owned a chain of them. Politicians only protect their seats and their pocketbooks and actions like these most likely fall into the second category.
I look at it this way, if your trying to sell a flight sim, racing sim, or Army-Sim then yet photo realism is going to be a good feature to have.
Yet for games like the "Sims" there isn't a need. The context of the sims isn't emulating real life in the same sense as the other games.
A lot can be said by adapting a style that is not trying to be realistic to create an environment more beneficial to the story you are telling. World of Warcraft is a great example. While many other MMOPRGs tried harder to look more "realistic" WOW went a whole another direction.
The problem with trying to make realistic appearing models is that the little errors of those models become glaring. Half-Life2 has many examples of approaching a realistic setting but having incosistencies that totally blow it. Examples include objects of a type that are not destructible while others of the same type are. MMORPGs suffer more as they have to meet the limitations imposed by lesser machines. This leads to a game that looks great on the high end machines and downright atrocious on lower end machines.
Context should be the deciding factor. Don't do it just because you can.
it is best to put it to use before someone catches on. If AOL was the most over valued presence on the internet in their heyday I think Google is the same for ours.
Yeah Google is doing cool things, moving quicker than their competitors, but they are horribly overvalued. The best thing for them to do is buy up as much IP & resources as possible to form the basis of an enduring and broad based company.
First and foremost I cannot find mention of PVR capability.
It really should read that consumers are paying Real 750 million dollars. Microsoft isn't going anywhere, hence everyone who buys a preloaded PC or uses services of someone who did will indirectly pay this fine.
Most fines against businesses simply move money from one businesses pocket to another or to the government. The consumer never sees any of it back. Unless a company is driven under by penalty for their actions there is no real loss. One set of shareholders sees a smaller return compared to another. Those shareholders are probably the only "real" people affected directly by the exchange.
It does look like a feeding frenzy at Microsoft's expense. Most of their competitors failed because of inferior programs. Netscaped sucked for most the 4.xx series and Real has been horrid bloatware/adware for God knows how long.
That is the key here. Microsoft's software does have problems, most software does. The big problem is that the users are in no shape or form secure. I can't count the number of times people do the same things over and over even after you tell them that is what screwed them up in the first place.
MS added a firewall to XP and now they are integrating AV. I say good for them. That is one more step to making the system more secure. Since there are many FREE AV packages I don't see a big loss here to those charging; especially Symantec.
I wonder what the range is....
The amount of obligation that the public is under for the various Government Employee Retirement programs is going to come to light and it won't be a pleasant story. Already it was Virginia or West Virginia where there was a shortfall because of mismangement and the public was held accountable for it by the courts.
e NodeId=136&languageId=1&contentId=55769
People complain about CEOs and their golden parachutes have never looked towards the public workers and realized just how golden those retirements really are. People think Social Security and Medicare funding are the big problem only do so because this is the big "dirty" secret that hasn't been publically harped on.
Here is a good story about just how big the numbers are, and you will be liable for it.
http://www.stateline.org/live/ViewPage.action?sit
because the one thing I have noticed that is consistent about the General Assembly is anyway to codemn Israel is accepted. If not the GA then by any special event they sponsor.
The fact is the current arrangement is safe because the US can be held more accountable than the UN or worse some of the other countries that comprise the UN.
The other general rule is, impose new rules but don't press it should China or Russia oppose but lambast the US should it oppose.
I look at voting this way, even if I have a receipt there is still no way *I* will be able to verify that my vote counted. I want to go one step further beyond a paper trail. I want a web based method where I can punch in a code at the bottom of my receipt to show that it is indeed in the system and was accepted. They have systems to verify the integrity of lottery tickets they can certainly do this.
I also want a voter ID system that requires a photo. This voter ID must be free and easy to obtain. I have seen many complaints against such systems under the claim they "disenfranchise" people. Yet at the same time nothing is being done to ensure those who vote legally are not disenfranchised by fradulent voting. It goes both ways. If it is too much of a burden to get an ID should they be "easy" to get then it probably is too much of a burden to actually expect these people to vote.
As for Diebold, just be willing to admit the number of abuses using OCR, punch card, and other systems are just as bad, the difference is that we are used to it. Plus the Diebold angle is mostly pursued by those who want to cast doubt on an election they will not accept
Your argument is detestable. There is no comparison between the two countries. Your attempt at doing so shows a great amount of ignorance and trivializes the suffering of the Chinese people.
In China the true side effect of getting in the way of the state or a business, which by the way most businesses are the state, is imprisonment or death.
Go look at Amnesty International's 2004 page on China, now tell me how you can truly compare what they do to the US? Freedom of speech? I can go shout at Bush and any member of Congress while in Washington, I can post to a blog, or even buy an ad. I can run anti-corporate web pages here as well as those of accusing the US of atrocity after atrocity without fear of losing my life, having my family disappear, or being imprisoned forever hoping some international group my find me.
Sorry but I hate that line "You're lucky if you have a job".
If you don't position yourself for the market then move. It isn't a bad economy, we have had near constant rates with small fluctuations up and down. I know of only ONE person I regulary talk with who doesn't have a job. He is busy busting his ass learning something that will make him money. In the mean time he takes low skill jobs until he gets the job he needs. Fortunately for him his wife went through this a few years back; web designer; so he knows what to do.
If your feeling lucky you have a job your probably miserable too. It is up to you. No one is going to give you a job. You don't deserve one. If you hate your job then move on. Can't? Then learn a skill which will let you. Oh, finally, try thinking outside the box. That means if your not happy at your current programming job and weren't at the previous then perhaps it isn't the job for you. It might make a good hobby. Don't beat yourself into being what you think is expected of you.
While I like the idea of continuing the space program the idea of allowing Russia off the hook for their behavior in regards to the Iranian nuclear program is not good.
Putting it bluntly no one in their right mind should trust Iran. Russia and China are doing this because they know that Iran will cause more trouble for the West before acting on them. While neither China or Russia are friendly to their own Muslims that gets totally brushed over by the Islamic extremist in Iran. Iran is quite willing to trade the lives of fellow Muslims if it gives them power, this means kissing off those in Checnya and other places.
A Nuclear Iran will be a nightmare for Israel, Europe, and the US in that order. Trading for support to maintain the ISS is to high of a price.
you didn't read closely.
When Starbuck was presented as a woman that indeed was unique and a good change to make. After listening to the podcast for Pegasus the writers seem to think that it still is original to recast male characters are female characters. The whole story of multiple Boomers, who used to be a male character, also is a great touch because they did something with the character other than changing the sex. The problem that currently exist with the Starbuck character is that it is very little different from the first Starbuck other than sex. It would be nice to see some creativity in regards to the character.
Strong female characters are needed in Science Fiction. Too often we get bouncing boobs on horses or what boils down to girls on trampolines. BSG comes close to these violations much more this second season as compared to the first.
Some good strong female characters from science fiction shows.
Samantha Carter : Stargate SG-1
Delenn : B5
Susan Ivanova : B5
Ensign Ro : ST:DS9
Captain Janeway : Star Trek Voyager
Actually the ranking of the new BSG is more telling.
BSG has proven to be interesting but the writers are stuck on the idea that changing the sex of known characters constitutes "unique" changes. After the premier that "stunt" loses all meaning.
Frankly Stargate SG:1 is good science fiction, perhaps the best adaptation of any movie to the small screen. Still I would put Dr. Who in the top 3 with Star Trek. Who else to put up there I am not sure, as in there are many candidates for #2. Personal preference and I would put Babylon 5.
Some of the shows are most definitely not science fiction at all, and they left out a good show that proceeded Space 1999, UFO.
Also missing, but borderline, is Project Bluebook.