Don't let them watch movies until he's read the books they're based on.
We did this with the Harry Potter series. We let my oldest (now almost 11) watch the first two movies and then insisted that he read the books with me before he could see any more movies. (He could see a subsequent movie when he finished the book.)
We recently started his with our youngest (7). I let him watch the first movie and now he's reading the first book with my wife. He will be able to watch the other movies as he finishes the books.
In other words, we used the first movie as a hook to get them interested in the series. Not something you can do with any book/movie, but works very nicely with Harry Potter. As a bonus, they can really appreciate what was cut out of the books to make them into movies. As much as I like the movies, the books contain a LOT more details for why things happen and have many subplots that were cut entirely.
Excellent:-)
Mine just finished LoTRs in French. Trying to find stuff in English that he hasn't already read in French is a bit tricky because he's better in French and tends to get his hands on stuff before I can, um, manage the flow.
I've got a kid who is clearly ahead of the class with mathematics but clearly behind the class with reading. So, these studies probably mean it isn't a fundamental ability problem, so where do I go from here?
Aptitude is only half the story. The other half is being interested in the subject.
My suggestions: Read with them. Don't let them watch movies until he's read the books they're based on. Find stories that they fall into and can't put the book down.
Yes, we agree that we feel the same way about the other.
Each brings their 'evidence' which the other does not appear to be listening to. I have listened to what you have to say and I believe that you find rationalizations and justifications for thinking what you want. Of course you think the same thing of me.
You might find it worth noting that Hamas would also slaughter me and my family. I have no reason at all to have bias against Israel or for Hamas. Yet still I believe that Israel is going about defense the wrong way.
As far as world leaders...No I do not think that Israel controls any other countries. But I do think that if Israel were not such a strategic necessity of western powers that Israel would not be getting away with what has been gotten away with. I don't hear any world leaders saying that Israel is doing the right thing, whereas I do hear otherwise. The last article I sent you was the US condemning the Israeli attack. Of course you dismissed this just like you dismiss anything else that you don't like but whatever.
I appreciate you taking the time to answer, though you are busy.
If you're in Paris and have time let me know and we can meet for coffee or a drink. I work across the street from the Israeli embassy.
I can change my password anytime if I think somebody copied it. I cannot change my fingerprint or retina. There is no way I'm giving random webshops or google my biometric data.
You'll probably end up giving it to the US government if you go through customs. If not now then whenever Patriot Act III passes.
Frankly, discussion with you is pointless because you will obviously believe what you want to believe regardless of any other information presented. On top of that you have a habit of not actually paying attention to what I say.
Enjoy your rationalizations. If you are religious I hope they serve you well in whatever afterlife you may believe in.
to sum it up, if a FB server is idle it consumes 60 watts, if CPU is minimally utilised it consumes 130 watts and if it's utilised more it consumes 150 watts.
Instead of round robin use an algorithm that pushes requests to the servers that are already processing other requests, thus allowing many CPUs to remain at 60 watts, while some CPUs to hit 150 watts of power consumption and so instead of doubling or almost trippling power consumption of all servers due to round robin distribution of requests, tripple power consumption of fewer CPUs and let many CPUs to stay at 60 watts.
Sure, it's an interesting thing to optimise, but unless you are running dozens or maybe hundreds and even thousands of servers in a data centre you won't care about this much at all.
Some of us do actually run hundreds or thousands of web servers so it is actually interesting to us.
Also, I think the idea is not only applicable to web servers. I'm not an expert in this field but I would think the power consumption difference is due to dynamic frequency scaling both by direct consumption and by subsequent heat generation.
Don't trust any company with your personal information - or accept that it's going to be shared with whoever has the money to pay for it, or the power to grab it.
Even if there had been, Israel could have sent in foot soldiers who could use those super weapons called eyeballs to decide who to kill and who not.
Instead, as Israel does not want to incur military casualties of their own which would cause political backlash in Israel itself, they shell at a distance - easy for them but incurring, overall, seven times as many dead Palestinian children as there have been Israeli military and civilian casualties combined. Dead Palestinian children being more acceptable in Israel, obviously, than dead Israeli soldiers. http://www.france24.com/en/201...
I do find it useful to note, however, that according to that article 33% (so 622) of the casualties are women and children, the "least likely to be legitimate targets".
"Before, you were implicitly accusing of Israel of impotency, of wishing to kill the Palestinains off, but failing." No I never did so don't put words in my mouth.
"This time around, you are implicitly accusing Israel of super-potency." I have said from the beginning that Israel is super potent indeed.
" You are implying Israel has a choice in the matter. That it has some magical weapons able to distinguish a civilian from an active militant." Yes, they're called eyeballs. What a soldier has in his head that a shell does not. Combined with judgement said soldier can generally determine if a child playing on a swingset is a danger or not.
Don't use the excuse of 'If Hamas had it'. Of course if Hamas had a super weapon they would wipe out as many Israeli civilians as they could. I have never said otherwise and I would not condone such an act as I do not condone the attacks that Hamas uses now against Israeli civilians, but neither do I accept this as an excuse of Israeli behavior of shelling indiscriminately instead of sending in foot soldiers.
The leaflets. Tell me exactly how the leaflets were supposed to protect the civilians and UN staff in the UN compound that were killed by incidental shelling?
There is no place for Palestinian civilians to go that can be considered safe at this point.
Oh leave off with the word genocide. Used or not the reality is that Israel kills Palestinian civilians without any more care than the Germans had for the killing of Jews in WW2.
Well argued and, while I do not like at all the civilian casualties oh so casually inflicted on the Palestinians by Israel I have to agree that it does not qualify as genocide.
if the firewall sees traffic it doesn't understand it's just going to drop it.
MPTCP is backwards compatible with stateful firewalls, so unless your firewall knows about MPTCP, it will think it's just another TCP stream for an unknown Layer7 protocol and nothing will look wrong.
Sure, but if (due to MPTCP) the firewall only sees part of the flow (sequence number problem) or does not see the first packet of the flow as some packets are taking a path that does not flow through the firewall, it will drop the traffic.
This is why I said this whole topic is a design issue. All paths must go through the firewall or traffic will be dropped.
So Hamas is not commotion genocide because it is attacking Jews, Arabs and others indiscriminatingly. And Israel is not because they are motivated by either self defence or greed/conquest. So please stop using the word.
Don't be an idiot.
The word is accurate in both cases. In the case of Israel, however, the use of the word brings to mind the hypocrisy of Israel as they have complained long and loudly, and rightly so, at the treatment they had at the hands of the Germans in WW2 and yet they treat another group of people exactly as they themselves do not want to be treated.
Pick any place in the world where a "genocide" accusation was levied, and you get a death count in the hundreds of thousands at least. Over the past decade, less than ten thousand Palestinian were killed by Israel (this number includes Palestinian killed while holding and using a weapon, which would not, normally, be counted in the "genocide" statistics). If Israel is committing genocide, why is the death toll so low?
Either Israel is attempting genocide, but is being completely incompetent about it, or the genocide accusation is pure bullshit.
Shachar
genocide noun \je-n-sd\
: the deliberate killing of people who belong to a particular racial, political, or cultural group source: http://www.merriam-webster.com...
There is no requirement for a particular quantity of people to be killed.
If all the Russian bloggers are just government controlled parrots, just switch to reading foreign blogs.
Also, you could have a setup where your Russian blogger has only a single reader, a foreigner who re-blogs everything they write (unless Russia doesn't take kindly to being clever like this).
As likely Russian bloggers who want to stay anonymous will VPN out of the country and post somewhere out of Russia's control.
Control of social media is a bigger problem. A lot of Russians already believe whatever Putin tells them and now they'll have even less visibility of what's actually happening than they already do.
I remember as a kid reading the Soviet Union’s constitution giving Soviet citizens more rights than the US. They had a very good constitution and Canada had none. I thought that in Canada, there was no protection similar to our first amendment but Canadians could say, type and publish their thoughts freely. The Soviet union required typewriters to be registered with a typing sample so unauthorized speech wouldn’t contaminate the citizens. Russia is going down the same hole as the Soviet Union and we are following close behind.
Russia wants to be the Soviet Union again. They were a world power, whereas post-Soviet Russia was weak.
Better than Americans giving up their rights out of a blown out of proportion fear of terrorism.
This concept ought to make things interesting when combined with the trend towards self driving cars - a new meaning for the 'hot wiring' of a car (or truck, whatever) maybe.
No individual location has a state tax exceeding 10%, but depending on what is being purchased and where it's being purchased, there may be an additional tax beyond just the general sales tax that applies, driving the price up. Local governments usually can add a percent or two to the state rate. Alcohol, tobacco also get a "sin tax" added, as does lodging, transportation rentals, and restaurants pushing them well above 10%.
A percent or two okay - but the sin tax etc wouldn't apply to telecommunications anyway.
First off, it seems unlikely as the phone will either be a corporate device, including BYOD, or a personal device. In the first case the traffic will have to flow across the network (including the firewall)
What stops a BYOD from using multipath? It will have to use the 4G connection when it isn't on the corporate wifi, so what keeps it from using both?
It's the destination that comes into play. If it's a personal destination it's not going to use the corporate network. If it's a corporate destination then it will.
If it tries to do both - ie to a personal destination across the corporate network + 4G then the firewall will drop the packets and either it won't work at all or the upper level protocol will have to realize that one path is down and not use it.
Say you have a phone on corporate WiFi and 4G. The phone handles MPTCP, but the corporate firewall only sees the part of traffic that goes over WiFi.
First off, it seems unlikely as the phone will either be a corporate device, including BYOD, or a personal device. In the first case the traffic will have to flow across the network (including the firewall) and in the second it will not cross the firewall anyway.
Second, if the firewall sees traffic it doesn't understand it's just going to drop it. Security is not compromised.
IDS and IPS can still intercept traffic taking muliple paths so long as those paths converge at the security device somewhere along the way.
i.e. traffic can be split across a WAN (MPLS / Internet IPSec paths for example) and be reassembled on the DMZ incoming to the destination site or hub site of a regional network.
I don't see how Israel could respond better. If a rocket was launched from a rooftop, I think it is justified to surgically bomb that roof. Hamas is intentionally doing that to garner higher casualties, and therefore support. Hamas is lucky the US hasn't ever decided to step in and "help" defend Israel from the rockets.
That said, I totally agree that the settlements (especially the systematic takeover of water sources), treatment of Palestinians (blockades, cutting off supplies like food and concrete, etc..), and the general attitude of Israel toward a peaceful solution has been horrible.
But I don't fault a country for responding to being attacked. And I doubly don't fault the Israeli military for striking at spots that rockets were fired from earlier. Correct me if I'm wrong if that isn't what is happening.
I don't fault a country for responding when being attacked either. I do feel free to criticize the methods that they use though.
Instead of bombing the roof - or the entire area as likely, you send in ground troops that can actually determine what to kill and what not. The whole area is not big enough for civilians to have anywhere to hide. They're caught in between the proverbial rock and a hard place, with Hamas on one side and Israel on the other.
This is the way it could be done if Israel were willing to risk soldier's lives instead of killing civilians but Israel does not want to have their soldiers so instead they just blow up anything that moves in any area they're passing through, willingly incurring the civilian casualties instead of the military ones.
Civilians can't get far enough away to be safe - the whole zone just isn't large enough and there's nowhere to go that isn't being attacked. Israel was informed 17 times of the location of the UN school in the refugee camp and they still blew it up.
The US (apart from the typical willingly blind Jewish lobby) does not approve of the way that Israel is conducting this slaughter so don't think that they're about to come in and start blowing up more hospitals and schools. Not that Israel needs any help from the US for this.
the warzone is so small and densely packed with civilians that there is nowhere that Hamas can attack from that isn't near, more or less, civilian installations
Which is another very good reason why Hamas shouldn't attack Israel. (In addition to, you know, basic human decency.) Your fixation on the idea that Hamas should attack Israel, in spite of the certain misery this will bring upon its own citizens, reveals unsavory things about you.
It seems that you are able to come to illogical conclusions based on nothing but what you would like to be true.
I have repeatedly said in my posts that I do not support Hamas or their methods. I have never at any point either said or implied that they should be attacking Israel and I do not believe that they should attack Israel. My criticism of Israel's methods does not in any way require or indicate approval or support of Hamas.
Israel attacks anything, anytime, anywhere and doesn't care about the civilian casualties caused
You make that assertion with a straigt face even though you know Israel has dropped leaflets begging civilians to get away from military targets. Congratulations, you have just utterly ruined your credibility. (The men whom Tom Brokaw dubbed "The Greatest Generation" tried to maximize civilian casualties, and this leaflet campaign tries to minimize civilian casualties. A little application of logic would lead Brokaw to say the IDF is "greater than the Greatest Generation," but I won't hold my breath for that.)
It seems that you are completely unable to understand even simple concepts again preferring to just arrive at the conclusions you want to have by blowing farts in the wind.
1) Civilians do try and get away from military targets and take shelter in what are supposed be safe facilities which are subsequently shelled anyway. 2) There is no way to get far from the fighting for the very reason that I said before - there is just nowhere to go that is not a war zone there. 3) Israel saying that they're trying to minimize civilian casualties and actually doing it are two very different things. As I said before, if Israel gave a shit about civilians they would be sending in ground troops instead of randomly shelling the areas where they think they're being fired on from. Israel doesn't want their own soldiers killed (of course) and so instead they attack at a distance, incurring civilian casualties.
Slashdot Mirror
We did this with the Harry Potter series. We let my oldest (now almost 11) watch the first two movies and then insisted that he read the books with me before he could see any more movies. (He could see a subsequent movie when he finished the book.)
We recently started his with our youngest (7). I let him watch the first movie and now he's reading the first book with my wife. He will be able to watch the other movies as he finishes the books.
In other words, we used the first movie as a hook to get them interested in the series. Not something you can do with any book/movie, but works very nicely with Harry Potter. As a bonus, they can really appreciate what was cut out of the books to make them into movies. As much as I like the movies, the books contain a LOT more details for why things happen and have many subplots that were cut entirely.
Excellent :-)
Mine just finished LoTRs in French. Trying to find stuff in English that he hasn't already read in French is a bit tricky because he's better in French and tends to get his hands on stuff before I can, um, manage the flow.
I've got a kid who is clearly ahead of the class with mathematics but clearly behind the class with reading. So, these studies probably mean it isn't a fundamental ability problem, so where do I go from here?
Aptitude is only half the story. The other half is being interested in the subject.
My suggestions:
Read with them.
Don't let them watch movies until he's read the books they're based on.
Find stories that they fall into and can't put the book down.
Yes, we agree that we feel the same way about the other.
Each brings their 'evidence' which the other does not appear to be listening to. I have listened to what you have to say and I believe that you find rationalizations and justifications for thinking what you want. Of course you think the same thing of me.
You might find it worth noting that Hamas would also slaughter me and my family. I have no reason at all to have bias against Israel or for Hamas. Yet still I believe that Israel is going about defense the wrong way.
As far as world leaders...No I do not think that Israel controls any other countries. But I do think that if Israel were not such a strategic necessity of western powers that Israel would not be getting away with what has been gotten away with. I don't hear any world leaders saying that Israel is doing the right thing, whereas I do hear otherwise. The last article I sent you was the US condemning the Israeli attack. Of course you dismissed this just like you dismiss anything else that you don't like but whatever.
I appreciate you taking the time to answer, though you are busy.
If you're in Paris and have time let me know and we can meet for coffee or a drink. I work across the street from the Israeli embassy.
I can change my password anytime if I think somebody copied it. I cannot change my fingerprint or retina. There is no way I'm giving random webshops or google my biometric data.
You'll probably end up giving it to the US government if you go through customs. If not now then whenever Patriot Act III passes.
So half of the twins learned twice as much half the time than the other half of the other twins?
Sounds like one of Tolkien's best lines...
Frankly, discussion with you is pointless because you will obviously believe what you want to believe regardless of any other information presented. On top of that you have a habit of not actually paying attention to what I say.
Enjoy your rationalizations. If you are religious I hope they serve you well in whatever afterlife you may believe in.
to sum it up, if a FB server is idle it consumes 60 watts, if CPU is minimally utilised it consumes 130 watts and if it's utilised more it consumes 150 watts.
Instead of round robin use an algorithm that pushes requests to the servers that are already processing other requests, thus allowing many CPUs to remain at 60 watts, while some CPUs to hit 150 watts of power consumption and so instead of doubling or almost trippling power consumption of all servers due to round robin distribution of requests, tripple power consumption of fewer CPUs and let many CPUs to stay at 60 watts.
Sure, it's an interesting thing to optimise, but unless you are running dozens or maybe hundreds and even thousands of servers in a data centre you won't care about this much at all.
Some of us do actually run hundreds or thousands of web servers so it is actually interesting to us.
Also, I think the idea is not only applicable to web servers. I'm not an expert in this field but I would think the power consumption difference is due to dynamic frequency scaling both by direct consumption and by subsequent heat generation.
Because the American phone manufacturers don't do the same thing?
http://online.wsj.com/news/art...
Don't trust any company with your personal information - or accept that it's going to be shared with whoever has the money to pay for it, or the power to grab it.
There was nothing stored at this school.
http://time.com/3076108/gaza-i...
Even if there had been, Israel could have sent in foot soldiers who could use those super weapons called eyeballs to decide who to kill and who not.
Instead, as Israel does not want to incur military casualties of their own which would cause political backlash in Israel itself, they shell at a distance - easy for them but incurring, overall, seven times as many dead Palestinian children as there have been Israeli military and civilian casualties combined. Dead Palestinian children being more acceptable in Israel, obviously, than dead Israeli soldiers.
http://www.france24.com/en/201...
I've never taken the numbers at face value.
I do find it useful to note, however, that according to that article 33% (so 622) of the casualties are women and children, the "least likely to be legitimate targets".
"Before, you were implicitly accusing of Israel of impotency, of wishing to kill the Palestinains off, but failing."
No I never did so don't put words in my mouth.
"This time around, you are implicitly accusing Israel of super-potency."
I have said from the beginning that Israel is super potent indeed.
" You are implying Israel has a choice in the matter. That it has some magical weapons able to distinguish a civilian from an active militant."
Yes, they're called eyeballs. What a soldier has in his head that a shell does not. Combined with judgement said soldier can generally determine if a child playing on a swingset is a danger or not.
Don't use the excuse of 'If Hamas had it'. Of course if Hamas had a super weapon they would wipe out as many Israeli civilians as they could. I have never said otherwise and I would not condone such an act as I do not condone the attacks that Hamas uses now against Israeli civilians, but neither do I accept this as an excuse of Israeli behavior of shelling indiscriminately instead of sending in foot soldiers.
The leaflets. Tell me exactly how the leaflets were supposed to protect the civilians and UN staff in the UN compound that were killed by incidental shelling?
There is no place for Palestinian civilians to go that can be considered safe at this point.
Oh leave off with the word genocide. Used or not the reality is that Israel kills Palestinian civilians without any more care than the Germans had for the killing of Jews in WW2.
Well argued and, while I do not like at all the civilian casualties oh so casually inflicted on the Palestinians by Israel I have to agree that it does not qualify as genocide.
if the firewall sees traffic it doesn't understand it's just going to drop it.
MPTCP is backwards compatible with stateful firewalls, so unless your firewall knows about MPTCP, it will think it's just another TCP stream for an unknown Layer7 protocol and nothing will look wrong.
Sure, but if (due to MPTCP) the firewall only sees part of the flow (sequence number problem) or does not see the first packet of the flow as some packets are taking a path that does not flow through the firewall, it will drop the traffic.
This is why I said this whole topic is a design issue. All paths must go through the firewall or traffic will be dropped.
So Hamas is not commotion genocide because it is attacking Jews, Arabs and others indiscriminatingly. And Israel is not because they are motivated by either self defence or greed/conquest. So please stop using the word.
Don't be an idiot.
The word is accurate in both cases. In the case of Israel, however, the use of the word brings to mind the hypocrisy of Israel as they have complained long and loudly, and rightly so, at the treatment they had at the hands of the Germans in WW2 and yet they treat another group of people exactly as they themselves do not want to be treated.
I always find the "genocide" mantra strange.
Pick any place in the world where a "genocide" accusation was levied, and you get a death count in the hundreds of thousands at least. Over the past decade, less than ten thousand Palestinian were killed by Israel (this number includes Palestinian killed while holding and using a weapon, which would not, normally, be counted in the "genocide" statistics). If Israel is committing genocide, why is the death toll so low?
Either Israel is attempting genocide, but is being completely incompetent about it, or the genocide accusation is pure bullshit.
Shachar
genocide
noun \je-n-sd\
: the deliberate killing of people who belong to a particular racial, political, or cultural group
source: http://www.merriam-webster.com...
There is no requirement for a particular quantity of people to be killed.
If all the Russian bloggers are just government controlled parrots, just switch to reading foreign blogs.
Also, you could have a setup where your Russian blogger has only a single reader, a foreigner who re-blogs everything they write (unless Russia doesn't take kindly to being clever like this).
As likely Russian bloggers who want to stay anonymous will VPN out of the country and post somewhere out of Russia's control.
Control of social media is a bigger problem. A lot of Russians already believe whatever Putin tells them and now they'll have even less visibility of what's actually happening than they already do.
I remember as a kid reading the Soviet Union’s constitution giving Soviet citizens more rights than the US. They had a very good constitution and Canada had none. I thought that in Canada, there was no protection similar to our first amendment but Canadians could say, type and publish their thoughts freely. The Soviet union required typewriters to be registered with a typing sample so unauthorized speech wouldn’t contaminate the citizens. Russia is going down the same hole as the Soviet Union and we are following close behind.
Russia wants to be the Soviet Union again. They were a world power, whereas post-Soviet Russia was weak.
Better than Americans giving up their rights out of a blown out of proportion fear of terrorism.
This concept ought to make things interesting when combined with the trend towards self driving cars - a new meaning for the 'hot wiring' of a car (or truck, whatever) maybe.
No individual location has a state tax exceeding 10%, but depending on what is being purchased and where it's being purchased, there may be an additional tax beyond just the general sales tax that applies, driving the price up. Local governments usually can add a percent or two to the state rate. Alcohol, tobacco also get a "sin tax" added, as does lodging, transportation rentals, and restaurants pushing them well above 10%.
A percent or two okay - but the sin tax etc wouldn't apply to telecommunications anyway.
First off, it seems unlikely as the phone will either be a corporate device, including BYOD, or a personal device. In the first case the traffic will have to flow across the network (including the firewall)
What stops a BYOD from using multipath? It will have to use the 4G connection when it isn't on the corporate wifi, so what keeps it from using both?
It's the destination that comes into play. If it's a personal destination it's not going to use the corporate network. If it's a corporate destination then it will.
If it tries to do both - ie to a personal destination across the corporate network + 4G then the firewall will drop the packets and either it won't work at all or the upper level protocol will have to realize that one path is down and not use it.
In any case, the security model is not broken.
But that's the point: it doesn't have to.
Say you have a phone on corporate WiFi and 4G. The phone handles MPTCP, but the corporate firewall only sees the part of traffic that goes over WiFi.
First off, it seems unlikely as the phone will either be a corporate device, including BYOD, or a personal device. In the first case the traffic will have to flow across the network (including the firewall) and in the second it will not cross the firewall anyway.
Second, if the firewall sees traffic it doesn't understand it's just going to drop it. Security is not compromised.
It's a design issue.
IDS and IPS can still intercept traffic taking muliple paths so long as those paths converge at the security device somewhere along the way.
i.e. traffic can be split across a WAN (MPLS / Internet IPSec paths for example) and be reassembled on the DMZ incoming to the destination site or hub site of a regional network.
20 euros is inclusive of taxes. France taxes are not super heavy, but still on the upper side, and I'd bet US taxes are lower overall.
When I lived in France I had Free. Excellent service, very disruptive market strategy. I'm very excited with the news. I'd switch in an eyelash.
Yes, 20% TVA is still considerably higher than US sales tax which doesn't exceed 10% anywhere.
I don't see how Israel could respond better. If a rocket was launched from a rooftop, I think it is justified to surgically bomb that roof. Hamas is intentionally doing that to garner higher casualties, and therefore support. Hamas is lucky the US hasn't ever decided to step in and "help" defend Israel from the rockets.
That said, I totally agree that the settlements (especially the systematic takeover of water sources), treatment of Palestinians (blockades, cutting off supplies like food and concrete, etc..), and the general attitude of Israel toward a peaceful solution has been horrible.
But I don't fault a country for responding to being attacked. And I doubly don't fault the Israeli military for striking at spots that rockets were fired from earlier. Correct me if I'm wrong if that isn't what is happening.
I don't fault a country for responding when being attacked either. I do feel free to criticize the methods that they use though.
Instead of bombing the roof - or the entire area as likely, you send in ground troops that can actually determine what to kill and what not. The whole area is not big enough for civilians to have anywhere to hide. They're caught in between the proverbial rock and a hard place, with Hamas on one side and Israel on the other.
This is the way it could be done if Israel were willing to risk soldier's lives instead of killing civilians but Israel does not want to have their soldiers so instead they just blow up anything that moves in any area they're passing through, willingly incurring the civilian casualties instead of the military ones.
Civilians can't get far enough away to be safe - the whole zone just isn't large enough and there's nowhere to go that isn't being attacked. Israel was informed 17 times of the location of the UN school in the refugee camp and they still blew it up.
The US (apart from the typical willingly blind Jewish lobby) does not approve of the way that Israel is conducting this slaughter so don't think that they're about to come in and start blowing up more hospitals and schools. Not that Israel needs any help from the US for this.
the warzone is so small and densely packed with civilians that there is nowhere that Hamas can attack from that isn't near, more or less, civilian installations
Which is another very good reason why Hamas shouldn't attack Israel. (In addition to, you know, basic human decency.) Your fixation on the idea that Hamas should attack Israel, in spite of the certain misery this will bring upon its own citizens, reveals unsavory things about you.
It seems that you are able to come to illogical conclusions based on nothing but what you would like to be true.
I have repeatedly said in my posts that I do not support Hamas or their methods. I have never at any point either said or implied that they should be attacking Israel and I do not believe that they should attack Israel. My criticism of Israel's methods does not in any way require or indicate approval or support of Hamas.
Israel attacks anything, anytime, anywhere and doesn't care about the civilian casualties caused
You make that assertion with a straigt face even though you know Israel has dropped leaflets begging civilians to get away from military targets. Congratulations, you have just utterly ruined your credibility. (The men whom Tom Brokaw dubbed "The Greatest Generation" tried to maximize civilian casualties, and this leaflet campaign tries to minimize civilian casualties. A little application of logic would lead Brokaw to say the IDF is "greater than the Greatest Generation," but I won't hold my breath for that.)
It seems that you are completely unable to understand even simple concepts again preferring to just arrive at the conclusions you want to have by blowing farts in the wind.
1) Civilians do try and get away from military targets and take shelter in what are supposed be safe facilities which are subsequently shelled anyway.
2) There is no way to get far from the fighting for the very reason that I said before - there is just nowhere to go that is not a war zone there.
3) Israel saying that they're trying to minimize civilian casualties and actually doing it are two very different things. As I said before, if Israel gave a shit about civilians they would be sending in ground troops instead of randomly shelling the areas where they think they're being fired on from. Israel doesn't want their own soldiers killed (of course) and so instead they attack at a distance, incurring civilian casualties.