After some further reading the dispute is a little more complex.
aparantly someone had earlier hacked the WBC, claiming to be anonymous, but it really wasn't.
Anonymous refuted, and even apologized, and tried to explain this to WBC. WBC, didn't want to back down, and kept talking smack to anonymous, and kept provoking anonymous.
Today WBC found out what happened when you kick a sleeping bear.
They were not silenced for the speech, and the WBC does not "win", and this has nothing to do with their ongoing campaign against everything for tollerating gays.
This his what happens when the sped kid keeps picking a fight with the biggest kid in class, and he finally runs out of patience.
If course the WBC are mentally deranged idiots, but they do have a (negative) Right to unlimited Free Speech, including their Web-site. Whether hacking constitutes aggression is a complicated discussion, but the Anontards' intent was clear and despicable! At least the WBC has the balls to drivel in the open, rather than hiding behind masks!
The harm that the WBC does is limited to annoyance, and can be further restricted on the basis of Property Rights - they cannot go where they're not wanted. The Anontards, on the other hand, have no respect for anyone's Rights.
--libman
posted as the "Anonymous Coward".
The irony is killing me. Not only do you hide behind the "anonymous" title like they do, you ultimately got it the same way.
Postinging in a threaded message board and not choosing to use a name.
"I figure once a few of those members have protesters of their own driving to Westboro, KS and showing up at their homes, schools, and everywhere they go,"
Its been done. They are all lawyers. They provoke people for the sake suing them. They all live comfortably, but they don't work.
The best thing to do with a troll is not to feed it.
broadcast TV has been 50 for years, with more recent forays with high def into 120hz (no idea of the actual frame rate with digital, but I could image its up there)
and in points in history they did. The reason they do not is because legal authority has been taken from them.
Which is the reason for the seperation of church and state. Not only does it protect the state from the influence of the church, it protects the church from the influence of the state.
if anything the "security theatre" is populat with voters, and the ideas of freedom and liberty less so these days.
Airport security, obnoxious and mostly for show, gets high marks, for looking important and making people FEEL safe by giving the illusion of security.
"which is one of the reasons that Iraqi T-72Ms didn't stand a chance in the first Gulf War." I think you are talking about the battle of 73 easting. The most lopsided tank battle in history. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_73_Easting
There are a few reasons the Americans won.:
1. They were a full generation, if not two generations behind in tank development. The Russian T72s could probably hold their own against American M60 tanks. The Russian T80 was a good equiv of the M1 and the M90 the M1A1. There is no T72 that could hold its own against M1 abrams with equally skilled crews on both sides.(T80s and T90s should however)
The Americans fielded M1A1s in gulf storm. Faster, modern FCS, better armor, better gun. More manueverable. a good solid 30 years of inhead of the T72(litterally)
2. American tank guns had longer range....in the desert, where there is nowhere to hide, range is big. the T72 needed to get within 800m to kill an M1. The M1 could kill a T72 at 3200m.
3. The Americans had GPS, which allowed them to traverse open desert where traditional land navigation is impossible. Not only did the Iraqis not have GPS, they had no idea the Americans had GPS, or even what it was. (this is 1991, GPS was still pretty new, and very exclusive).
Number 3 was probably the biggest factor here. The republican guard actually planned adequate defenses with traditional tank strategy. The Americans hit their flanks and bypassed their carefully laid defenses, using GPS to navigate through the desert and caught the Iraqis by suprise.
the irony of the n900/n9 is that while small, the fan base is loyal, not only WILLING to contribute back via software contributions, but ABLE.
The community kernel, and even the officially adopoted MMS apt for the n900 are proof.
That, and the N9 still sold better with no advertising than the lumina 900 which was actively being pushed. GNU/Linux such as meego/maemo/etc... has a bigger fanbase than windows 8. One is a niche product OS that apeals to the tech types, one is supposed to be a "for general consumpion" OS.
actually no. the unarmored trucks with turrent mounted machine guns are a big step up, as they are very fast and agile compared to typical battlefield vehicles. they also act as troop transports.
the armor on this "tank" won't stop modern rifle rounds.
"So what's your excuse, you don't have a welder?" I can't speak for uninformedluddite, but since I said the exact same thing as a response
MY excuses are:
1. no where to park it. 2. no need for an armored fighting vehicle where I live. 3. I don't wanna be put on a list.(someone is going to think I am a terrorist, criminal, etc...) 4. If I wanted an FV(for arguments sake, I don't), I wouldn't bother with such a crap design, I'd do something more like killdozer. 5. Combine points 1,2, and 3, with I don't have 10 grand to waste.
"Hold on, are you trying to suggest that a vehicle that took a month and $10k to design and build" killdozer had far less, and did far better.
"Seriously though, cut the guys some slack. It might not fit your definition of a "tank"" it doesn't fit my definition of armored car.
"but it's pretty impressive that these guys are able to design, build, and field vehicles like this." no its not. any idiot with a welder could make this.
" I doubt they are trying to put these things up against T90s," it wouldn't go up against an infantry squad with a medium machine gun, for example the Russian PKM, which is wideley in use in that reigon of the world.(equiv of NATO M60) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PK_machine_gun
Slashdot Mirror
I'm sorry, they work very hard
so do pimps, drug dealers, hitmen, etc...
After some further reading the dispute is a little more complex.
aparantly someone had earlier hacked the WBC, claiming to be anonymous, but it really wasn't.
Anonymous refuted, and even apologized, and tried to explain this to WBC. WBC, didn't want to back down, and kept talking smack to anonymous, and kept provoking anonymous.
Today WBC found out what happened when you kick a sleeping bear.
They were not silenced for the speech, and the WBC does not "win", and this has nothing to do with their ongoing campaign against everything for tollerating gays.
This his what happens when the sped kid keeps picking a fight with the biggest kid in class, and he finally runs out of patience.
If course the WBC are mentally deranged idiots, but they do have a (negative) Right to unlimited Free Speech, including their Web-site. Whether hacking constitutes aggression is a complicated discussion, but the Anontards' intent was clear and despicable! At least the WBC has the balls to drivel in the open, rather than hiding behind masks!
The harm that the WBC does is limited to annoyance, and can be further restricted on the basis of Property Rights - they cannot go where they're not wanted. The Anontards, on the other hand, have no respect for anyone's Rights.
--libman
posted as the "Anonymous Coward".
The irony is killing me. Not only do you hide behind the "anonymous" title like they do, you ultimately got it the same way.
Postinging in a threaded message board and not choosing to use a name.
"I figure once a few of those members have protesters of their own driving to Westboro, KS and showing up at their homes, schools, and everywhere they go,"
Its been done. They are all lawyers. They provoke people for the sake suing them. They all live comfortably, but they don't work.
The best thing to do with a troll is not to feed it.
you mean doing something you agree with.
which means your OK with anonymous so long as you share their disatain for their target.
ruhbarb ruhbarb......
probably because no on buys DVDs anymore.
I wonder if they made one for blu-ray?
I'm sick of rewinding my blue-rays either by hand or in the drive.
you don't have to rewind dvds?
http://www.dvdrewinder.com/
not, and neither does 95
both require the i386 instruction set, as they are both 32 bit.
Linux also never ran on the 8086, the 2086, and was a i386 OS from the start
lets face it, a lot of embedded x86 still runs on 386/486 hardware.
the real question is, are they intrested in using new software updates, because I suspect most legacy hardware uses legacy software as well.
I'd peg linux at the dawn of the i686 platform, giving more of a perfomance boost to the almost obsolete like pentium II/III/celerons.
Of which i686 is still used in embedded work. I'd be hopping steaming mad if someone kills support for my AMD Geodes.
A lot fo the magic of film was 24fps.
sure its outdated, but so is 48 fps.
broadcast TV has been 50 for years, with more recent forays with high def into 120hz (no idea of the actual frame rate with digital, but I could image its up there)
why are the doing this now? and why only 48fps?
desktop idle is around 90-100w
full on, to include video card, I'm running over 400w
not to mention longer service life
I never thought about the power consumption aspect, but the 80+ ar definately
1.cooler
2. quieter
3. better made, last longer(less waste heat doing damage)
I think its especially important when power supplies are reaching over the 500w, and total peak usage can be somewhere around 400w.
depends on the church.
and in points in history they did. The reason they do not is because legal authority has been taken from them.
Which is the reason for the seperation of church and state. Not only does it protect the state from the influence of the church, it protects the church from the influence of the state.
or even worse, post as the AC without the C part.
Real terrorist.
score +5 funny, indeed.
if anything the "security theatre" is populat with voters, and the ideas of freedom and liberty less so these days.
Airport security, obnoxious and mostly for show, gets high marks, for looking important and making people FEEL safe by giving the illusion of security.
the only myth was that people actually want to use windows. Or that windows 8 was a viable OS.
"which is one of the reasons that Iraqi T-72Ms didn't stand a chance in the first Gulf War."
I think you are talking about the battle of 73 easting. The most lopsided tank battle in history.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_73_Easting
There are a few reasons the Americans won.:
1. They were a full generation, if not two generations behind in tank development. The Russian T72s could probably hold their own against American M60 tanks. The Russian T80 was a good equiv of the M1 and the M90 the M1A1. There is no T72 that could hold its own against M1 abrams with equally skilled crews on both sides.(T80s and T90s should however)
The Americans fielded M1A1s in gulf storm. Faster, modern FCS, better armor, better gun. More manueverable. a good solid 30 years of inhead of the T72(litterally)
2. American tank guns had longer range....in the desert, where there is nowhere to hide, range is big. the T72 needed to get within 800m to kill an M1. The M1 could kill a T72 at 3200m.
3. The Americans had GPS, which allowed them to traverse open desert where traditional land navigation is impossible. Not only did the Iraqis not have GPS, they had no idea the Americans had GPS, or even what it was. (this is 1991, GPS was still pretty new, and very exclusive).
Number 3 was probably the biggest factor here. The republican guard actually planned adequate defenses with traditional tank strategy. The Americans hit their flanks and bypassed their carefully laid defenses, using GPS to navigate through the desert and caught the Iraqis by suprise.
the irony of the n900/n9 is that while small, the fan base is loyal, not only WILLING to contribute back via software contributions, but ABLE.
The community kernel, and even the officially adopoted MMS apt for the n900 are proof.
That, and the N9 still sold better with no advertising than the lumina 900 which was actively being pushed. GNU/Linux such as meego/maemo/etc... has a bigger fanbase than windows 8. One is a niche product OS that apeals to the tech types, one is supposed to be a "for general consumpion" OS.
Yes, win 8 is that fail
"I watched it on YouTube... it was the biggest pos movie I've ever seen. "
yeah, and I agree with you. the preview was so terrible I didn't even bother.
It just bugs me someone is doing time for watching a shitty movie. Watching and making bad movies should not be a crime.
After all, no one locked up Ed Wood, did they???
6 of one hand, half a dozen of the other....really.
but it looks like an innocent non-crazy got caught in the middle.
actually no. the unarmored trucks with turrent mounted machine guns are a big step up, as they are very fast and agile compared to typical battlefield vehicles. they also act as troop transports.
the armor on this "tank" won't stop modern rifle rounds.
"So what's your excuse, you don't have a welder?"
I can't speak for uninformedluddite, but since I said the exact same thing as a response
MY excuses are:
1. no where to park it.
2. no need for an armored fighting vehicle where I live.
3. I don't wanna be put on a list.(someone is going to think I am a terrorist, criminal, etc...)
4. If I wanted an FV(for arguments sake, I don't), I wouldn't bother with such a crap design, I'd do something more like killdozer.
5. Combine points 1,2, and 3, with I don't have 10 grand to waste.
I was just thinking this. LOL
"Hold on, are you trying to suggest that a vehicle that took a month and $10k to design and build"
killdozer had far less, and did far better.
"Seriously though, cut the guys some slack. It might not fit your definition of a "tank""
it doesn't fit my definition of armored car.
"but it's pretty impressive that these guys are able to design, build, and field vehicles like this."
no its not. any idiot with a welder could make this.
" I doubt they are trying to put these things up against T90s,"
it wouldn't go up against an infantry squad with a medium machine gun, for example the Russian PKM, which is wideley in use in that reigon of the world.(equiv of NATO M60)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PK_machine_gun
making it just about worthless.