Sir, I'll have you know, I'm not so naive as to leave my car unlock and the keys in the ignition. My keys are tucked above the visor thank you very much!
From what I understand they were thought to "probably" have had nukes prior to the '94 agreement and certainly had the plutonium. Now we're "certain" they have one or two. I'm somewhat sceptical of the "enriched uranium" program. If North Korea is having an energy crunch, which is appearently well understood and substantiated, how would the enourmous amounts of power nessecary for such a program be diverted with UN inspectors there? Perhaps the North Koreans are vastly trickyier than I give them credit for. But if it moved beyond paper, it would certainly have to be one of the greatest intelligence failures of all time, for every interested party. And while I think it's an important first step to hydrogen weapons, it seems like it would be much easier and effective to secretly make more plutonium weapons.
Definately a toss up. Clinton might have had the easiest choice, prior to his administration, provoking China wouldn't have been practical. Now China certainly cares more for the US than the North Koreans, and probably wish there was a rug to sweep them under.
They haven't moved the rods yet. A very provacative move, and likely to be one of the last they risk. (in my ever so humble estimation:))
But transporting it is very tricky. China would completely flip out, and might instigate a "regime change." It would be a huge risk to smuggle it through China. Through South Korea seems the stuff of pulp fiction. Which leaves the sea. I would bet a whole host of intelligence agencies spend a lot of time looking at North Korea's ships, and all the minutia associated with them. If one of them was found with a nuclear weapon aboard, it's hard to imagine how North Korea could avoid war. Not with the President willing to go to war pre-emptively to prevent just an eventuality with Iraq. He'd end his Presidency. I have no doubt that North Korea is well with in reach of more than one of our boomers, just in case.
I get the impression that the US is more careful with North Korea, because it is a nuclear power. But not because we fear them, but to keep them from destabilizing regional markets with their threats. First and foremost we know, if it comes down to it, we can just starve them to death. But beyond that, North Korea knows using the weapons tactically, against the US millitary would be futile, and likely unsuccesfull (they'd need to use them pre-emptively to hit anything). They're certainly aware that any use of a nuclear weapon absolutely insures their annhilation, so their best use is as a weapon of terror.
I suspect that the Bush administration now understands the seriousness of the snafu they've entangled themselves in, and what the North is doing. But the communication barrier with the North prevents any sufficently subtle message from conveying the US position. And we, having talked ourselves into something of a corner, need more time to work a new way out. The knowlege that North Korea, has many good reasons to keep it's hands to itself, has few incentives beyond comparitively little money, that they are a flavor of rational, and the economic markets in asia would be much more difficult to rebuild than those of the mideast, have more to do with our tactics, I think. Hussain has a lot of reasons to trade in weapons. He craves prestige, nothing would give him more, than delivering death to Americans. He can't be trusted at any level, not even his own self intrest. And he's surrounded by people, even our so called "allies", who'd be more than happy to help. So Hussain might well use nuclear weapons even if the doom him, because his legacy of the war against the infidels will live on. With him, there just isn't a win scenerio in the future. While North Korea has a lot of reasons to hang on to their big sticks.
Which is part of why the British government seems to on board, even if the people aren't. They know god damn good and well who drew those particular lines in the sand and why. And New York isn't the only finacial center on the Atlantic.
*Not that the recent announcement really was anything. North Korea just aggreed it would solve things peacefully, so long as washington capitulates. Of course the media only presents the extreams of anything. It's a damn shame we're left to muse about these things amongst ourselves with thought experiments supposition and guessing. It's a void one, ok maybe just me, would hope the news would fill with facts.
Well I made the deal to give you the quarter every year to not acquire any more switchblades, even though I wasn't completely sure you had one. But it did/does seem like a safe bet.
And you stopped being cool, relatively (you've always been kinda an ass, it's your nature), right around the time I made my announcement.
But you forget with your burgeoning switchblade dealership. It has to be very small, otherwise I, or my neighborhood friends, all being very watchful, will find out. And that will bring a very nasty world of hurt. And switchblades, they're valuable to be sure, but compared to the quarter, or even a nickle they pretty much bring in chump change. But a good relationship or a particularly effective poking scession might bring in that extra nickle, and if japan and korea also kick in nickles.... That's huge.
But really that last paragraph is the nub of the problem. Now that we're in this mess, is it practical to think we can push the hands of time back, and restore the equalibrium.
I have no idea, I would suspect "no" with the caveat, that there is probably another near by meta-stable state. Which would likely be much more expensive for the us from an aid and monitoring standpoint. Yet we can't make a habbit of paying off extortionists, the value of switchblades would increase dramatically.
I think that North Korea (DPRK my ass) could be put in a position where they don't have to worry about our conventional arms, and recieve enough aid. But they, not understanding us and the realities of our situation, have gotten attention by threatening us in the one way we can't afford to back down from. They've accidently put us in a catch-22. Now the only way out is for them to back down completely, which they can't much afford to do. If there was another country, aside from Britian, that understood the unique position the US fills, and the responsiblities that go with it, they might be able to explain the rules of the game, quitely, to North Korea. But I'm not certain there is such a country. And even if there was, North Korea would need to hear them clearly without any ambiguity, which seems ludicriously unlikely.
It would have just been better if Libya, or Sudan, or hell France were number two. We could have used the existing relationship to leverage ever more cooperation. Which wouldn't have been cheap. But their nuclear weapons would have lost value as a tool to shape US policy as compared to good reliable behavior. Even if we could have just maintained that for just another decade when our of our theater ballistic missle defense programs had matured, their few nuclear weapons and missles would be of dubious use. With the aid worth too much to sell them, better to just "turn them in" as part of a new larger economic agreement.
North Korea is a huge failure of this administration, which will certainly linger for many years. I can't understand how such an enourmous foriegn policy blunder was made. But while the US does get to wear the white hat in this particular episode, I don't think one can say that North Korea is completely irrational in their decision, that it was completely unpredictable, or that the US is without blame. It like they wrote the speeches, and just assumed no one would pay attention because, "It's just politics." Lazyness is a pretty poor excuse if it escalates beyond tough talk. For Christs sake, it wasn't even a great speech.
For the most part, I think we dissagree on how easy it is to make and transfer nuclear weapons undetected. I consider it an exceptionally difficult and very risky proposition. Especially now with the US stance on Iraq it would mean war. I think I consider nuclear weapons to be a more valuable tool for shaping US policy and reactions than you do. It's entirely possible I overstate the consideration they're given, and the value North Korea places on them. I would think that the North would want to have at least enough nuclear weapons to hit every major population center their missles allow, and then a hand full that could be used tactially as part of their defence before they would even consider selling any. Certainly there is room for error in that estimation:). And I think we also disagree on how big a bowl of crazy flakes Kim Jong Ill has for breakfast everyday. I think it's just big enough that he starts to think his hair looks natural, and attribute the remainder to cultural difference (in so far as starving and hating America while running across the Yalu river can be considered a culture). But I suspect you think he's more erratic across the board. Like one of the leaders from Civilization. But from what little I know, it seems like they were genuinly threatened. Abandoning a long term policy in favor of their tried and true 'sand in the shorts' approach because they thought the long term plan was pretty much cancled in Washington and they didn't have enough time for anything but the poking stick. They might be the villian, ok no maybe about it, but I think they actually got sucked into this mess rather creating it from scratch.
You know, they occasionally a special on the History Channel that includes this as part of a espionage program. Very cool. Not likely to see it too soon, it's like their doing a loop of Teddy Rosevelt and set of blowing up Iraq programs. All very cool, of course.
I did find a text version. But if you see the History Channel version, I'd recomend it, but that almost goes without saying. Especially lately.
In Taiwan's special case, the nuclear weapon actually serious undermined their security. China knows Taiwan's is hands off. They can posture, and rattle their saber a little. But they damn well know better because of Taiwan's special relationship with the US. And China needs to cultivate good relations too, as do we with them.
But Taiwan with a nuclear weapon.... Especially Chang Ki Shek who *HATED* communists with a passion that would intimidate Joe McCarthy. Was a pretty significant threat to China. After one, is multiple. China, with the stance they pretty much need to take, their hand would be forced. It was probably a mixture of nationalist pride, and mostly intense loathing on a very primitive level that lead to Taiwan launching a nuclear program. Being more secure, might have been a justification to sell it in some circles, but I doubt it ever seriously entered into the discussion.
For what it's worth. The North Koreans aren't actually insane. They're just going back to what works.
Their strategy prior to the early 90's was to be irritating and annoying to the point just shy of serious consequences, then offer a deal. Sort of like if I were to poke you with a stick incessantly until you were balling up your fist to kick my ass, at which time I might say, "Give me a quarter and I'll go away." You give me a quarter, I do go away, but, every year, my poking stick and I return.
At the turn of the millennium, Kim Jong Ill: President of the Korean Hair Club For Men, was under the impression, that their good (relatively) behavior had earned them a Presidential visit. Which could certainly be considered very important to a starving country who's hate for America, is the only thing that keeps it from imploding.
What does Bush do, with, apparently, the blessing of his silly advisors? (Condalezza Rice could not know less about Asia if all her information came from the old Kung-Fu series.) He makes a shit list, puts North Korea at number two, and prepares to mobilize for war against number one.
If we personalize the situation a little, perhaps...?
Let's say I'm the badass on the block (I'm not, but let's just pretend) so I'll be playing the part of the US. You can pretend you're North Korea, an aggressive panhandler. I've just made my shit list, which I've announced publicly, to make myself feel better. There are only three people on it, out of the nearly 200 people in our town. You're number two.
Maybe you find it random, since just like last month, I was nice to you. And we kinda had an understanding. You wouldn't poke me so much with the stick, and I wouldn't be such a hard ass with the whole quarter thing. You're hungry, and financing bolt on hair on a panhandlers budget wasn't easy. But it's still kinda a diss that you're only just behind the asshole petty criminal who snatched that cowering Kuwaiti woman's purse.
Then I announce that I really would like a shorter shit list, so my plan is to beat petty criminal, Iraq, either to unconsciousness and reform him, or to death. Either of those two ends is fine. If other people in the neighborhood want to help, great, I'm sure it'll be cathartic. Then I proceed to train up, so I can really deliver an effective beating. (One where all the violence is one way.)
Now number two, appears as if it'll soon be number one on the shit list. And it's pretty obvious what's going to happen to number one.
Clearly, you're threatened. You've got to find a way, to find some kind of insurance that you can avoid Iraq's fate. And you might have as little as a year. The whole playing cool thing certainly doesn't look like it will work, it got you to number two on the shit list. But worse, it takes time. Time for ye old poking stick. (The one your father handed down.)
This time, you set the poking stick to maximum and seize the moment. What more effective time to annoy me than while I go through my training regimen. You know that it's really important for me to keep my focus on Iraq, and any distraction will be greatly unappreciated. But you don't want the quarter. You'd like the quarter. But what you really want is for me to promise before the whole town that I won't go all Edward Norton on you. To heighten the urgency you make sure you allude frequently to your switchblade (which no one is completely sure isn't of the comb variety). You'd never actually use it (that would be suicide). Maybe you might quietly sell it, but it's important that people think you have it, and selling switchblades is almost as bad as using them. So mostly its just something you think carefully and wistfully about while poking me with a stick.
Perhaps from that perspective, they're not entirely incomprehensible. The wisdom of their choice(s), well that's certainly debatable, and a regime that makes sport of starving it's own people, they're not likely to win debates or popularity contests. But it might not hurt to remember that the multiheaded any direction that seems like it could be promising approach combined with appearent erratic unilateralism, which we have no problem following, probably seems pretty inscrutable to them.
Taiwan used to have a nuclear program. But in, probably, one of the greater US intelligence successes, we managed to convince the head of the program to help us destroy it.
China always said that if Taiwan developed a nuclear capability they'd invade immediately. And they probably would have. What a mess that would have been.
Heh. In the event 'the birds are in the air', would you rather be near the silo, or far away to wander the aftermath. In the pre-appocolypse I hear it's all location, location, location.
No, they have one agenda. Pandering. The right want's to, for the sake of the children, give them religion (preferably in school so they won't be so difficult on sundays). The left wants to make sure that every kid grows up in a sitcom enviroment. Everyday a new lesson learned amid all the wacky hijinx, but never anything the least bit threatening.
It getting to the point where a politician with personal convictions is in serious danger of being shot, stuffed and mounted in the museum of natural history. But now that we have super-nepotism powers running the country, that'll soon be a distant memory.
They're harder to shoot down than you think when you can't put an aircraft in the air or light up a radar without canceling your own check.
Hussain's not a thinker. He's just putting his military assets near hospitals, schools, mosques and residential areas. There will be plenty of collateral damage.
Much to our disadvantage we care vastly more for the Iraqi people than he does.
I would bet that if he does use chemical weapons, or what have you, he'll use them on a city within Iraq first, say it was the US, and use that as justification for opening pandora's box. His little ploy will probably work too. While everyone in the muslim world will know it's a lie, they'll want to believe it so badly they'll take it as truth.
That's the kind of evil he is. He's the kind of evil you can't blame on movies or video games.
Philosophys like this, measuring what you do, and getting people involved in using that information to improve what they do, lead to things like longer lasting transmitions. When I first learned about it, it was called statistical process control. An american idea, Edward Demming, that was shunned by corporate america, and that the japanese car companies used to kick the hell out of the american auto industry.
You want LCD screens without dead pixles? You want something like this in place. Cheaper chips? This is for you.
The problem Boeing had rolling out a program like this came in the way of resistance of lower level managers.
The site was Iwon.com That link goes right to the survey. I think you might get a popup begging for registration. But you should be able to just close it.
Survey Says...
62% Said they thought evolution should be taught in school.
21% said it shouldn't.
14% were uncertain.
1% didn't care.
58% Said creationism should be taught in school.
23% said it shouldn't.
16% were uncertain.
1% didn't care.
I certainly didn't expect my rather off-hand remark, that was intended to add a little symetry and flow, to end up here.
However, creationism isn't a theory. It shouldn't be confused as such. Furthermore, the vast majority of those who pursue it as science, rather than the looking for the truth, are looking for a truth they've already decided on. Occasionally, scientists do make that mistake, but they usually resist it, and their community acts and destroys it like a cancer. Creationism is a failed hypothesis. There was a 'big bang'. There is no doubt. The mysteries that remain, are: What was its conception like? How does gravity work? Why three spacial dimensions? etc. The fact that there is yet more to learn isn't an indictement of theory, that requires contradicting evidence. In the case of creationism, they must unequivicably disprove all of cosmology (not just the big bang), geology, nuclear physics, chemistry, and of course the field of evolutionary biology to start.
Instead of being incensed that the universe, or rather sinister heathen scientists, are casting aspertions upon their God, they should have gone back and read the story of creation while taking a new look at their faith. They should have seen it for the parable it is. They could choose to believe the wisdom, and enjoy the well written fantasy. I certainly find the idea of a prankster God endearing. But oddly enough, the few creationists I've pressed on the issue, when asked, "Why does God make everything look as if it's older than the six or so millenia it is?" respond without curiosity, or intrest. Who can know the mind of God indeed. Fans of creationism just don't seem to care about how the world works as much as they care about a very superficial validation of their faith.
You might look into what those who so persecuted some of your scientists had to say. In the case of Gallileo and Darwin, almost all of their critics invoked religion. Telling. Newton was something of an asshole, and had some rather unfriendly rivals. In fact his "shoulders of giants" remark was a compliment to those he respected, but a cutting short joke to a diminuative contemperary and object of Newton's considerable contempt.
Sure, while we might not be the second coming (haha) a gift more valuable than the wisdom we pass on would be hard to come by. Which is why we should pass that wisdom on, in schools, as completely as possible. I'm truly sorry if the truth gets in the way of the crutch people use to prop up their flagging faith. But that's hardly a reason to avoid giving children their birthright. Of course the puzzles are incomplete, so much the better. While imparting our wisdom we can issue a challenge. They won't be content to be passive observers. That might not pay dividends to us, but it will for them. If there is some small chance that creationism is more than a parable (and there isn't), the only chance for it to be shown as such is the kid who has the full benefit of that understanding and the desire to explore it, so that he may find and recognize that unfound flaw. Science is about asking questions. That's it's greatest strength, and every theory's greatest foe.:) It's why the engineering that allows us to make our clever tools, like computers, is based on science as opposed to faith.
As Stevens' dissent describes, the court basically decided that since congress has been granting these unconstitutional extensions for a while the court no longer has the authority to stop congress in this particular unconstitutional endeavor.
Some of what he discusses were individuals and companies lobbying congress to grant them patents on inventions within the public domain, occasionally for years. I can't help but wonder if that's prescient foreshadowing. Why bothering inventing new stuff when you can buy congressmen and have them grant you monopolies on older, proven inventions? Yeah, I'm going to file for a business method patent on that one.
But don't worry, in the distopian future I'll create with my impending stranglehold on the future technology of yesterday, everyone gets a free Atari, and not the 2600, the 5200, and two free games! Rejoice future subjects.
I object to the characterization of the star as "failed". While it may be true that it is something of an under-achiever, I would submit that Epsilon Indi B will eventually turn around and realize it's full potential.
If it could only find a one-by-four-by-nine monolith, Epsilon Indi B might well transform itself brilliantly. While Epsilon Indi B may live in a vacuum, its fate is far from predetermined, and who are you or anyone else to say otherwise?
So then there are only two spots left in the top ten? I guess that does take it out of the running unless E! and Brooke Burke get involved, huh? What she has over Letterman in the way of young nubile flesh, she lacks in list making authority I guess.
I guess someone doesn't want a zero-point energy generator then. (Obviously kidding, even if technology analysts for Fox News lead one to believe otherwise.)
600 million isn't *that* much money. Fusion already gets quite a bit more. And if you want to see where money does go, try looking up how much funding cancer and hiv get.
The reason you don't see a pure hydrogen economy has nothing to do with R&D. The technology to make it happen is readily available, it's the cost of retooling the refineries and replacing everything else. And 600 million up against that bill is a joke, and a little tiny one at that.
While not exactly generalizable to all Americans, the last poll I saw (major web site, doesn't make ballot stuffing easy, and there are all sorts of biases that would need to be accounted for) something like 60% thought creationism should be taught along with evolution. More thought evolution should be taught. If I was going to draw conclusions, I would conclude that most people (who took that poll) are undecided, and hedging their bets. That's sad. Creationism isn't a search for answers it's an excuse to not look for them. Faith has it's place, pretending to be fact isn't it.
While the puzzle, as you point out, is far from complete, we should encourage the innovative investigation of the questions that remain, as opposed to endorsing magic.
I might remind you that empircal evidence in support of a 'flat earth', as people so unwisely yet frequently remark, was limited to, "It looks more or less flat to me." By the time people got around to actually conducting experiments designed to test that assumed hypothesis, they discovered not only that the earth was round, but that it was big. I might also note, that the people most fond of creationism took a few extra millenia to pick up that handy bit of information.
Your example, far from being a call to tolerance is a call to arms. A cry for better education.
And here I thought I was saying something no one could disagree with. That'll teach me to share my wonder at man's achivements and my lament that not everyone chooses to share in them.
It's always nice to see this continuing story make it to the mainstream media from time to time.
I wouldn't be opposed to something like a half hour or hour special, really.
But every now and then if I watch my local neighborhood college channel, they have this old MIT physics lecture series which coincidently featers one of the researchers involved with this. The last lecture of the series, he talks a lot about the project, as a send off to his students. My college professors were rarely so engaging.
I can't help but be in awe of the incredible might of our intellect. That the minds of men were are able to fling heavy nuclei together bringing the temperature of a little pocket of space to two trillion degrees (at temperatures that great units are almost irrelivant, but K), pushing the hands of time back, esentially, to the moment of our universe's conception, is why we have words like 'brilliant', 'awesome', and 'incredible'.
That I should be fortunate enough to live in a society that permits an average Joe, such as myself, to understand the mechanics of such a feat in qualitative terms, even if the quantitative methodes elude me, is truly a blessing. That a majority of my people seem to think creationism should be taught in schools, tells me too few of my countrymen take advantage of it.
Guess who didn't RTFA:). (The F stands for Fluff right?) It mentions the Harvard project, and that they've been blocked, rendering them unable to confirm the reports of blog blocking.
I woulda thought you had enough karma. For shame....:)
There going to just add it to the already present anti-theft devices for clothes. Who gives a crap what you do when you leave a store.
However, if you've ever had a reason to do inventory, it will become a much simpler endevor. Instead of hiring a one of those counting companies once a year, and the enormous, inconvienent (for customer and staff) setup, leave everything where it is, tell everything to chirp, let the computer count it all. Better inventory control means less lost/stolen/wasted inventory, and maybe even lower prices.
Am I the only one that used to fill up those vaguely star destroyer hulls, I think it was a huge blue flag hull with photon torpedos, disrupters, fighters and bombers?
Slashdot Mirror
Sir, I'll have you know, I'm not so naive as to leave my car unlock and the keys in the ignition. My keys are tucked above the visor thank you very much!
If this comment was closer to the top you'd be +5 insightful by now.
Which of course would be +5 funny.
From what I understand they were thought to "probably" have had nukes prior to the '94 agreement and certainly had the plutonium. Now we're "certain" they have one or two. I'm somewhat sceptical of the "enriched uranium" program. If North Korea is having an energy crunch, which is appearently well understood and substantiated, how would the enourmous amounts of power nessecary for such a program be diverted with UN inspectors there? Perhaps the North Koreans are vastly trickyier than I give them credit for. But if it moved beyond paper, it would certainly have to be one of the greatest intelligence failures of all time, for every interested party. And while I think it's an important first step to hydrogen weapons, it seems like it would be much easier and effective to secretly make more plutonium weapons.
:))
Definately a toss up. Clinton might have had the easiest choice, prior to his administration, provoking China wouldn't have been practical. Now China certainly cares more for the US than the North Koreans, and probably wish there was a rug to sweep them under.
They haven't moved the rods yet. A very provacative move, and likely to be one of the last they risk. (in my ever so humble estimation
But transporting it is very tricky. China would completely flip out, and might instigate a "regime change." It would be a huge risk to smuggle it through China. Through South Korea seems the stuff of pulp fiction. Which leaves the sea. I would bet a whole host of intelligence agencies spend a lot of time looking at North Korea's ships, and all the minutia associated with them. If one of them was found with a nuclear weapon aboard, it's hard to imagine how North Korea could avoid war. Not with the President willing to go to war pre-emptively to prevent just an eventuality with Iraq. He'd end his Presidency. I have no doubt that North Korea is well with in reach of more than one of our boomers, just in case.
I get the impression that the US is more careful with North Korea, because it is a nuclear power. But not because we fear them, but to keep them from destabilizing regional markets with their threats. First and foremost we know, if it comes down to it, we can just starve them to death. But beyond that, North Korea knows using the weapons tactically, against the US millitary would be futile, and likely unsuccesfull (they'd need to use them pre-emptively to hit anything). They're certainly aware that any use of a nuclear weapon absolutely insures their annhilation, so their best use is as a weapon of terror.
I suspect that the Bush administration now understands the seriousness of the snafu they've entangled themselves in, and what the North is doing. But the communication barrier with the North prevents any sufficently subtle message from conveying the US position. And we, having talked ourselves into something of a corner, need more time to work a new way out. The knowlege that North Korea, has many good reasons to keep it's hands to itself, has few incentives beyond comparitively little money, that they are a flavor of rational, and the economic markets in asia would be much more difficult to rebuild than those of the mideast, have more to do with our tactics, I think. Hussain has a lot of reasons to trade in weapons. He craves prestige, nothing would give him more, than delivering death to Americans. He can't be trusted at any level, not even his own self intrest. And he's surrounded by people, even our so called "allies", who'd be more than happy to help. So Hussain might well use nuclear weapons even if the doom him, because his legacy of the war against the infidels will live on. With him, there just isn't a win scenerio in the future. While North Korea has a lot of reasons to hang on to their big sticks.
Which is part of why the British government seems to on board, even if the people aren't. They know god damn good and well who drew those particular lines in the sand and why. And New York isn't the only finacial center on the Atlantic.
*Not that the recent announcement really was anything. North Korea just aggreed it would solve things peacefully, so long as washington capitulates. Of course the media only presents the extreams of anything. It's a damn shame we're left to muse about these things amongst ourselves with thought experiments supposition and guessing. It's a void one, ok maybe just me, would hope the news would fill with facts.
Well I made the deal to give you the quarter every year to not acquire any more switchblades, even though I wasn't completely sure you had one. But it did/does seem like a safe bet.
:). And I think we also disagree on how big a bowl of crazy flakes Kim Jong Ill has for breakfast everyday. I think it's just big enough that he starts to think his hair looks natural, and attribute the remainder to cultural difference (in so far as starving and hating America while running across the Yalu river can be considered a culture). But I suspect you think he's more erratic across the board. Like one of the leaders from Civilization. But from what little I know, it seems like they were genuinly threatened. Abandoning a long term policy in favor of their tried and true 'sand in the shorts' approach because they thought the long term plan was pretty much cancled in Washington and they didn't have enough time for anything but the poking stick. They might be the villian, ok no maybe about it, but I think they actually got sucked into this mess rather creating it from scratch.
And you stopped being cool, relatively (you've always been kinda an ass, it's your nature), right around the time I made my announcement.
But you forget with your burgeoning switchblade dealership. It has to be very small, otherwise I, or my neighborhood friends, all being very watchful, will find out. And that will bring a very nasty world of hurt. And switchblades, they're valuable to be sure, but compared to the quarter, or even a nickle they pretty much bring in chump change. But a good relationship or a particularly effective poking scession might bring in that extra nickle, and if japan and korea also kick in nickles.... That's huge.
But really that last paragraph is the nub of the problem. Now that we're in this mess, is it practical to think we can push the hands of time back, and restore the equalibrium.
I have no idea, I would suspect "no" with the caveat, that there is probably another near by meta-stable state. Which would likely be much more expensive for the us from an aid and monitoring standpoint. Yet we can't make a habbit of paying off extortionists, the value of switchblades would increase dramatically.
I think that North Korea (DPRK my ass) could be put in a position where they don't have to worry about our conventional arms, and recieve enough aid. But they, not understanding us and the realities of our situation, have gotten attention by threatening us in the one way we can't afford to back down from. They've accidently put us in a catch-22. Now the only way out is for them to back down completely, which they can't much afford to do. If there was another country, aside from Britian, that understood the unique position the US fills, and the responsiblities that go with it, they might be able to explain the rules of the game, quitely, to North Korea. But I'm not certain there is such a country. And even if there was, North Korea would need to hear them clearly without any ambiguity, which seems ludicriously unlikely.
It would have just been better if Libya, or Sudan, or hell France were number two. We could have used the existing relationship to leverage ever more cooperation. Which wouldn't have been cheap. But their nuclear weapons would have lost value as a tool to shape US policy as compared to good reliable behavior. Even if we could have just maintained that for just another decade when our of our theater ballistic missle defense programs had matured, their few nuclear weapons and missles would be of dubious use. With the aid worth too much to sell them, better to just "turn them in" as part of a new larger economic agreement.
North Korea is a huge failure of this administration, which will certainly linger for many years. I can't understand how such an enourmous foriegn policy blunder was made. But while the US does get to wear the white hat in this particular episode, I don't think one can say that North Korea is completely irrational in their decision, that it was completely unpredictable, or that the US is without blame. It like they wrote the speeches, and just assumed no one would pay attention because, "It's just politics." Lazyness is a pretty poor excuse if it escalates beyond tough talk. For Christs sake, it wasn't even a great speech.
For the most part, I think we dissagree on how easy it is to make and transfer nuclear weapons undetected. I consider it an exceptionally difficult and very risky proposition. Especially now with the US stance on Iraq it would mean war. I think I consider nuclear weapons to be a more valuable tool for shaping US policy and reactions than you do. It's entirely possible I overstate the consideration they're given, and the value North Korea places on them. I would think that the North would want to have at least enough nuclear weapons to hit every major population center their missles allow, and then a hand full that could be used tactially as part of their defence before they would even consider selling any. Certainly there is room for error in that estimation
You know, they occasionally a special on the History Channel that includes this as part of a espionage program. Very cool. Not likely to see it too soon, it's like their doing a loop of Teddy Rosevelt and set of blowing up Iraq programs. All very cool, of course.
I did find a text version. But if you see the History Channel version, I'd recomend it, but that almost goes without saying. Especially lately.
Col. Chang Hsien-yi, who was deputy director of Taiwan's nuclear energy research institute
In Taiwan's special case, the nuclear weapon actually serious undermined their security. China knows Taiwan's is hands off. They can posture, and rattle their saber a little. But they damn well know better because of Taiwan's special relationship with the US. And China needs to cultivate good relations too, as do we with them.
But Taiwan with a nuclear weapon.... Especially Chang Ki Shek who *HATED* communists with a passion that would intimidate Joe McCarthy. Was a pretty significant threat to China. After one, is multiple. China, with the stance they pretty much need to take, their hand would be forced. It was probably a mixture of nationalist pride, and mostly intense loathing on a very primitive level that lead to Taiwan launching a nuclear program. Being more secure, might have been a justification to sell it in some circles, but I doubt it ever seriously entered into the discussion.
For what it's worth. The North Koreans aren't actually insane. They're just going back to what works.
Their strategy prior to the early 90's was to be irritating and annoying to the point just shy of serious consequences, then offer a deal. Sort of like if I were to poke you with a stick incessantly until you were balling up your fist to kick my ass, at which time I might say, "Give me a quarter and I'll go away." You give me a quarter, I do go away, but, every year, my poking stick and I return.
At the turn of the millennium, Kim Jong Ill: President of the Korean Hair Club For Men, was under the impression, that their good (relatively) behavior had earned them a Presidential visit. Which could certainly be considered very important to a starving country who's hate for America, is the only thing that keeps it from imploding.
What does Bush do, with, apparently, the blessing of his silly advisors? (Condalezza Rice could not know less about Asia if all her information came from the old Kung-Fu series.) He makes a shit list, puts North Korea at number two, and prepares to mobilize for war against number one.
If we personalize the situation a little, perhaps...?
Let's say I'm the badass on the block (I'm not, but let's just pretend) so I'll be playing the part of the US. You can pretend you're North Korea, an aggressive panhandler. I've just made my shit list, which I've announced publicly, to make myself feel better. There are only three people on it, out of the nearly 200 people in our town. You're number two.
Maybe you find it random, since just like last month, I was nice to you. And we kinda had an understanding. You wouldn't poke me so much with the stick, and I wouldn't be such a hard ass with the whole quarter thing. You're hungry, and financing bolt on hair on a panhandlers budget wasn't easy. But it's still kinda a diss that you're only just behind the asshole petty criminal who snatched that cowering Kuwaiti woman's purse.
Then I announce that I really would like a shorter shit list, so my plan is to beat petty criminal, Iraq, either to unconsciousness and reform him, or to death. Either of those two ends is fine. If other people in the neighborhood want to help, great, I'm sure it'll be cathartic. Then I proceed to train up, so I can really deliver an effective beating. (One where all the violence is one way.)
Now number two, appears as if it'll soon be number one on the shit list. And it's pretty obvious what's going to happen to number one.
Clearly, you're threatened. You've got to find a way, to find some kind of insurance that you can avoid Iraq's fate. And you might have as little as a year. The whole playing cool thing certainly doesn't look like it will work, it got you to number two on the shit list. But worse, it takes time. Time for ye old poking stick. (The one your father handed down.)
This time, you set the poking stick to maximum and seize the moment. What more effective time to annoy me than while I go through my training regimen. You know that it's really important for me to keep my focus on Iraq, and any distraction will be greatly unappreciated. But you don't want the quarter. You'd like the quarter. But what you really want is for me to promise before the whole town that I won't go all Edward Norton on you. To heighten the urgency you make sure you allude frequently to your switchblade (which no one is completely sure isn't of the comb variety). You'd never actually use it (that would be suicide). Maybe you might quietly sell it, but it's important that people think you have it, and selling switchblades is almost as bad as using them. So mostly its just something you think carefully and wistfully about while poking me with a stick.
Perhaps from that perspective, they're not entirely incomprehensible. The wisdom of their choice(s), well that's certainly debatable, and a regime that makes sport of starving it's own people, they're not likely to win debates or popularity contests. But it might not hurt to remember that the multiheaded any direction that seems like it could be promising approach combined with appearent erratic unilateralism, which we have no problem following, probably seems pretty inscrutable to them.
Taiwan used to have a nuclear program. But in, probably, one of the greater US intelligence successes, we managed to convince the head of the program to help us destroy it.
China always said that if Taiwan developed a nuclear capability they'd invade immediately. And they probably would have. What a mess that would have been.
Heh. In the event 'the birds are in the air', would you rather be near the silo, or far away to wander the aftermath. In the pre-appocolypse I hear it's all location, location, location.
I'm tired of Sinatra singing about drugs and casual sex too! There outta be a law!
No, they have one agenda. Pandering. The right want's to, for the sake of the children, give them religion (preferably in school so they won't be so difficult on sundays). The left wants to make sure that every kid grows up in a sitcom enviroment. Everyday a new lesson learned amid all the wacky hijinx, but never anything the least bit threatening.
It getting to the point where a politician with personal convictions is in serious danger of being shot, stuffed and mounted in the museum of natural history. But now that we have super-nepotism powers running the country, that'll soon be a distant memory.
They're harder to shoot down than you think when you can't put an aircraft in the air or light up a radar without canceling your own check.
Hussain's not a thinker. He's just putting his military assets near hospitals, schools, mosques and residential areas. There will be plenty of collateral damage.
Much to our disadvantage we care vastly more for the Iraqi people than he does.
I would bet that if he does use chemical weapons, or what have you, he'll use them on a city within Iraq first, say it was the US, and use that as justification for opening pandora's box. His little ploy will probably work too. While everyone in the muslim world will know it's a lie, they'll want to believe it so badly they'll take it as truth.
That's the kind of evil he is. He's the kind of evil you can't blame on movies or video games.
Timothy is going to have to put off that vacation to Finland indefinately and he won't be getting all of his deposit back.
He knows there won't be a Free Timothy t-shirt, and a Free Taco t-shirt would just be missunderstood.
Philosophys like this, measuring what you do, and getting people involved in using that information to improve what they do, lead to things like longer lasting transmitions. When I first learned about it, it was called statistical process control. An american idea, Edward Demming, that was shunned by corporate america, and that the japanese car companies used to kick the hell out of the american auto industry.
You want LCD screens without dead pixles? You want something like this in place. Cheaper chips? This is for you.
The problem Boeing had rolling out a program like this came in the way of resistance of lower level managers.
I would have modded you as funny. But you were blatently whoring by posting a funny comment early.
Well that and I don't have any mod points.
On the other hand, with every Western Digital drive you get a free white noise machine. Let's see Seagate match that offer.
Survey Says...
62% Said they thought evolution should be taught in school.
21% said it shouldn't.
14% were uncertain.
1% didn't care.
58% Said creationism should be taught in school.
23% said it shouldn't.
16% were uncertain.
1% didn't care.
:) It's why the engineering that allows us to make our clever tools, like computers, is based on science as opposed to faith.
I certainly didn't expect my rather off-hand remark, that was intended to add a little symetry and flow, to end up here.
However, creationism isn't a theory. It shouldn't be confused as such. Furthermore, the vast majority of those who pursue it as science, rather than the looking for the truth, are looking for a truth they've already decided on. Occasionally, scientists do make that mistake, but they usually resist it, and their community acts and destroys it like a cancer. Creationism is a failed hypothesis. There was a 'big bang'. There is no doubt. The mysteries that remain, are: What was its conception like? How does gravity work? Why three spacial dimensions? etc. The fact that there is yet more to learn isn't an indictement of theory, that requires contradicting evidence. In the case of creationism, they must unequivicably disprove all of cosmology (not just the big bang), geology, nuclear physics, chemistry, and of course the field of evolutionary biology to start.
Instead of being incensed that the universe, or rather sinister heathen scientists, are casting aspertions upon their God, they should have gone back and read the story of creation while taking a new look at their faith. They should have seen it for the parable it is. They could choose to believe the wisdom, and enjoy the well written fantasy. I certainly find the idea of a prankster God endearing. But oddly enough, the few creationists I've pressed on the issue, when asked, "Why does God make everything look as if it's older than the six or so millenia it is?" respond without curiosity, or intrest. Who can know the mind of God indeed. Fans of creationism just don't seem to care about how the world works as much as they care about a very superficial validation of their faith.
You might look into what those who so persecuted some of your scientists had to say. In the case of Gallileo and Darwin, almost all of their critics invoked religion. Telling. Newton was something of an asshole, and had some rather unfriendly rivals. In fact his "shoulders of giants" remark was a compliment to those he respected, but a cutting short joke to a diminuative contemperary and object of Newton's considerable contempt.
Sure, while we might not be the second coming (haha) a gift more valuable than the wisdom we pass on would be hard to come by. Which is why we should pass that wisdom on, in schools, as completely as possible. I'm truly sorry if the truth gets in the way of the crutch people use to prop up their flagging faith. But that's hardly a reason to avoid giving children their birthright. Of course the puzzles are incomplete, so much the better. While imparting our wisdom we can issue a challenge. They won't be content to be passive observers. That might not pay dividends to us, but it will for them. If there is some small chance that creationism is more than a parable (and there isn't), the only chance for it to be shown as such is the kid who has the full benefit of that understanding and the desire to explore it, so that he may find and recognize that unfound flaw. Science is about asking questions. That's it's greatest strength, and every theory's greatest foe.
As Stevens' dissent describes, the court basically decided that since congress has been granting these unconstitutional extensions for a while the court no longer has the authority to stop congress in this particular unconstitutional endeavor.
Some of what he discusses were individuals and companies lobbying congress to grant them patents on inventions within the public domain, occasionally for years. I can't help but wonder if that's prescient foreshadowing. Why bothering inventing new stuff when you can buy congressmen and have them grant you monopolies on older, proven inventions? Yeah, I'm going to file for a business method patent on that one.
But don't worry, in the distopian future I'll create with my impending stranglehold on the future technology of yesterday, everyone gets a free Atari, and not the 2600, the 5200, and two free games! Rejoice future subjects.
I object to the characterization of the star as "failed". While it may be true that it is something of an under-achiever, I would submit that Epsilon Indi B will eventually turn around and realize it's full potential.
If it could only find a one-by-four-by-nine monolith, Epsilon Indi B might well transform itself brilliantly. While Epsilon Indi B may live in a vacuum, its fate is far from predetermined, and who are you or anyone else to say otherwise?
So then there are only two spots left in the top ten? I guess that does take it out of the running unless E! and Brooke Burke get involved, huh? What she has over Letterman in the way of young nubile flesh, she lacks in list making authority I guess.
I guess someone doesn't want a zero-point energy generator then. (Obviously kidding, even if technology analysts for Fox News lead one to believe otherwise.)
600 million isn't *that* much money. Fusion already gets quite a bit more. And if you want to see where money does go, try looking up how much funding cancer and hiv get.
The reason you don't see a pure hydrogen economy has nothing to do with R&D. The technology to make it happen is readily available, it's the cost of retooling the refineries and replacing everything else. And 600 million up against that bill is a joke, and a little tiny one at that.
While not exactly generalizable to all Americans, the last poll I saw (major web site, doesn't make ballot stuffing easy, and there are all sorts of biases that would need to be accounted for) something like 60% thought creationism should be taught along with evolution. More thought evolution should be taught. If I was going to draw conclusions, I would conclude that most people (who took that poll) are undecided, and hedging their bets. That's sad. Creationism isn't a search for answers it's an excuse to not look for them. Faith has it's place, pretending to be fact isn't it.
While the puzzle, as you point out, is far from complete, we should encourage the innovative investigation of the questions that remain, as opposed to endorsing magic.
I might remind you that empircal evidence in support of a 'flat earth', as people so unwisely yet frequently remark, was limited to, "It looks more or less flat to me." By the time people got around to actually conducting experiments designed to test that assumed hypothesis, they discovered not only that the earth was round, but that it was big. I might also note, that the people most fond of creationism took a few extra millenia to pick up that handy bit of information.
Your example, far from being a call to tolerance is a call to arms. A cry for better education.
And here I thought I was saying something no one could disagree with. That'll teach me to share my wonder at man's achivements and my lament that not everyone chooses to share in them.
It's always nice to see this continuing story make it to the mainstream media from time to time.
I wouldn't be opposed to something like a half hour or hour special, really.
But every now and then if I watch my local neighborhood college channel, they have this old MIT physics lecture series which coincidently featers one of the researchers involved with this. The last lecture of the series, he talks a lot about the project, as a send off to his students. My college professors were rarely so engaging.
I can't help but be in awe of the incredible might of our intellect. That the minds of men were are able to fling heavy nuclei together bringing the temperature of a little pocket of space to two trillion degrees (at temperatures that great units are almost irrelivant, but K), pushing the hands of time back, esentially, to the moment of our universe's conception, is why we have words like 'brilliant', 'awesome', and 'incredible'.
That I should be fortunate enough to live in a society that permits an average Joe, such as myself, to understand the mechanics of such a feat in qualitative terms, even if the quantitative methodes elude me, is truly a blessing. That a majority of my people seem to think creationism should be taught in schools, tells me too few of my countrymen take advantage of it.
Guess who didn't RTFA :). (The F stands for Fluff right?) It mentions the Harvard project, and that they've been blocked, rendering them unable to confirm the reports of blog blocking.
:)
I woulda thought you had enough karma. For shame....
There going to just add it to the already present anti-theft devices for clothes. Who gives a crap what you do when you leave a store.
However, if you've ever had a reason to do inventory, it will become a much simpler endevor. Instead of hiring a one of those counting companies once a year, and the enormous, inconvienent (for customer and staff) setup, leave everything where it is, tell everything to chirp, let the computer count it all. Better inventory control means less lost/stolen/wasted inventory, and maybe even lower prices.
Am I the only one that used to fill up those vaguely star destroyer hulls, I think it was a huge blue flag hull with photon torpedos, disrupters, fighters and bombers?