Espionage is illegal by international law and treaty. Has nothing to do with jurisdiction. You are being deliberately obtuse, sticking head in the sand refusing to think logically.
You think you're being logical, but you're ignoring key facts: Espionage is illegal by international law and treaty.
Yes everybody does it, and everybody knows everybody does it. But that doesn't stop them from prosecuting when the individual agents get caught. Those operating under embassy immunity just get deported. those operating under a more clandestine operation can face jail time, or worse, but also face a good possibility of exchange after a period of a few years.
Why is this modded interesting? This is a joke (mod:funny) at best, comparing a pilotless test plane designed to do just one thing, with the most advanced fighter in the world thats been in development for nigh 30 years.
The actual ground war was over before the F22 even entered active service. The B2 was sent more as real world training/vetting for the crews and squadron, not out of necessity. Your comments are irrelevent.
New Ford Explorer has these capacitive button things and I absolutely detest them. Worst idea ever. Sometimes I accidently brush the button and all of a sudden it goes from nice cold AC to full blast emergency heat. Or dials some phone contact. Or jacks the volume frm one extreme to another.
and then when i WANT to use the button, it frequenctly seems like its not working (no feedback) or working too well (multiclicks vs just one, etc).
Unfortunately I dont get to pick the vehicle in my case. gimme a simple dial interface (or lever, if you remember the even older cars) everytime. Quick, easy, simple.
I'd donate 20$ a month to NASA easily, without a second thought. And that's probably 1000x bigger than their portion of my taxes too.
In fact, we should do that. Set up contribution funds seperate from taxes for certain programs that people would be able to contribute to at will. I'd contribute to NASA in a heartbeat. And give people a tax credit for doing so. You dont contribute, you pay taxes like normal, You do contribute, your final tax bill is reduced by say 5%, since your donation to a specific thing you feel strongly about will likely more than offset the credit.
Would have the effect of your contribution to the whole spectrum of programs via taxes is slightly smaller, but to that specific program (or two or three) is signicantly larger.
Plus would serve as semirealtime (well, not realtime, but you get what I mean) feedback to what people actually care about. No manipulated poll data, no sample size/location cherry picking...real data on the entire nation.
-First, a NASA administrator would be named to a ten year term. The intent is to provide some continuity in the way the space agency is run and to remove it, as much as possible, from the vagaries of politics. GOOD.
-Second, NASA funding would be placed on a multi-year rather than annual cycle. This is of particular importance to the space agency because the majority of its high level projects take several years to run their course. If funding were fixed for a number of years, the theory goes, money could be spent more efficiently. NASA planners would know how much they have to spend four or so years going forward and would not have to worry about being cut off at the knees by Congressional appropriators year after year." EXTREMELY GOOD.
-But is it more than political grandstanding in an election year? POSSIBLE. But that doesn't mean it shouldn't happen
-NASA could get stuck with a bad administrator As a part of the executive branch, the president himself has oversight. Also, very unlikely; you dont get picked to run nasa if you're a bad manager
-multi-year budgets might be a bit unconstitutional On what grounds?
Racism only existed in the south in your history books I'm guessing? And it apparently told you that "reconstruction" was about stopping racism?
All those "reconstruction" policies were not about helping anyone. They were about punishing the south. They were about getting someone elses stuff for free or nearly so, getting rich quick off their misfortune. Anything that hurt the south was deemed good policy. Having land illegally seized by federal troops and sold at auction unless you sold it to some bagger for less than a penny on the dollar. Livestock and crops being barred from sale, or also seriously undervalued (wherein many folks took their goods to Mexico who was willing to pay full price...further ticking off northern policy makers and triggering export bans and huge tariffs and such). The list goes on and on.
Reconstruction was a bad thing. Carbetbaggers were a bad thing Both were more destructive to the south and its resources than anything during the war. In fact these things did more to fuel and perpetuate racism as we know it than anything else, via that lovely piece of human nature, the blame game. Had the war just ended and southerners treated like fellow citizens rather than a conquered nation to be raped and pillaged, the country and history of the past century would have been vastly different. Your history book should be burned.
No false vote? Pretty sure the peer pressure vote, the vote to please my boss, the vote to seem cool, all count as false votes, having been given for the wrong reasons.
and the other side always trots out the "republicans hate old and colored people and are trying to keep them from voting" boilerplate everytime, cause those groups always only vote one way, and repubs are the only ones trying to manipulate things.
and all the same arguments were given when districts began to require voter registration.
If you want to move to an e-vote system, and since everyone is so in love with technology uninformed people will keep pushing for it, then yes, you need proof of ID. period.
ike many other things moving to high-technological, right now it may not be a big problem. but the move to high-tech has a way of magnifying the problem, making it easier to exploit.
example: High Frequency Trading. They do nothing illegal. You could do the exact same thing without the computers. They just do it much faster and much easier because the computer has a capacity and speed that a person does not, and at that level it starts to become a problem.
right now, voter fraud, minor issue. move it to high tech, internet voting....ya. it's gonna be a big issue.
requiring ID in some form just makes sense, period. More so if the system ever actually does move online. An illegal activity should not be ignored just because it is percieved to be minor.
State ID cards are free. You only pay money when you get that special ID known as a "Drivers License". As for requiring no time, that's BS. There are certain things that if you wish to perform in this country you have the responsibilty to make happen. Voting is no different. You want to X the box, you have to take the time to register and prove yourself. the easier you make it to abuse, the more it will be abused.
It has everything to do with money: money to produce, bottom line, return on investment.
Niche games dont return as much money as general appeal games. therefore, they no longer get produced with the same level of funding as other games. you dont see many indie developers making games on the same level as the big studios (or just "because it would be fun" other than by a few devs). they used to all have similar production values. those days are gone, and its nothing to do with piracy. it is entirely because the industry itself is maturing and you can no longer create a King's Quest, or Warcraft, or Doom, in your closet or among a few close friends, and reap a big reward. The cost of getting a game to market is dramatically larger than before, and it only keeps getting higher. Same goes for production time, and number of people involved.
It is not a multiplayer game. Being to buy and sell frm the AH is no more needed now than trading was needed in Diablo 2. That is simply one means to an end, among several. Its a time sink game, more time spent gets you the rewards you want. No different now than then. And that doesn't require multiplayer or the AH to accomplish. It is not "balanced around the ah."
Ultimately this is about relieving ourselves (or others we percieve as being not-good-enough) of responsibilty for their actions. Personally, I feel that is an undersirable outcome for society that already has problems with responsibility.
And in the end, the laws needed to force driverless cars with sufficient maintenance, and no modding, mean one thing: less freedom. And that also is something I cannot support.
exactly. and this is why totally driverless cars will not (or should not) happen. you will need someone, who knows how to drive, to be capable of taking over control when such a situation occurs. otherwise you get this:
"Unknown problem, turning over manual control" "Huh?, What? I wasn't paying attention" "Tonight on the 6 O'Clock news, a Ford TaurusDV drove off a bridge that was washed away due to the flooding" (close enough)
addendum: google's cars had nearly no accidents, but i also garuntee they were continually monitored, constantly maintained, and never let out on the road if there was any inkling of any deficiency in the vehicle.
in other words, they got about a million times more maintenance and TLC than your typical car.
No, most accidents are due to simply a poor driver. But that doesn't mean you should eliminate all drivers. Millions of people drive to and frm work on long commutes every day without incident. Average 4 serious accidents per day in a city (atlanta) with >4 million commuters, do the math. the number is small as hell.
We have planes that essntially fly themselves, yet we still have a trained pilot and copilot in the front in case the hardware fails. And hardware does fail. You have to really be turning a blind eye to the reality of how often most people actually have their cars worked on.
so now you're also mandating preventive car maintenance, driving up costs of ownership, creating a host of new "crimes", and pricing it out of range of most users.
No, the automated car is a toy for rich people. It will never completely replace the driver, because of safety reasons or costs, or both.
Or you can mandate only driverless cars, and once again the people who can afford it can move around and leave the cities, going/moving where they want, and the lower classes who have no mobility and stay in one place, whether its inner city or rural countryside.
...somehow starts talking to their supercomputer, probably because of some undisciplined USB stick swappage, and thinks that that's what he was designed to do, and then we got a SyFy movie!
Preferably one written by someone at least knowledgeable about guns. It's neither high caliber, nor capable of "mowing down just about anything".
It's gas-powered semi-automatic: One trigger pull, one round.
It's 7.62x51mm NATO, which is nearly (but not exactly) identical the.308 Winchester it's based on. It could be potentially classed as high-power (the.308 being a hunting round), but it is not high caliber.
It features the so-called "scary assault rifle look", particularly since it uses the popular modular rail mounting for components and accessories using with a common attachment design. But then there is no law that all rifles must look like grandpappy's squirrel gun, or be "not scary looking".
As for "mowing down", that's hyperbole. Any weapon is capable of such a thing if misused, be it a knife, gun, car, or simple bottle of Chlorine gas from your local pool.
the gravity tow always amuses me. 1) it'd be incredibly slow 2) talking about an incredibly huge fuel as cargo requirement 3) knowledge/maintenance of position with sufficient accuracy to not be wasting time
Better off just anchoring your low thrust high ISP engine on the appropriate side and turning the entire thing into a "spacecraft", ala the ice chunks from Saturn in Asimov's The Martian Way. Same or reduced cargo requirement, more direct (and larger) application of force, simpler engineering requirements.
Slashdot Mirror
Thank you. Exactly. Finally someone on /. with a clue about this stuff not just repeating the same "stupid americans" rhetoric.
Again, who mods this crap insightful?
Americans do not think that american law applies to everyone.
International laws and treaties do however.
And espionage is illegal, everywhere. That's why the posited 2 scenarios and the distinction between them are very important.
But /. has a very heavy general anti american bias, and anything bashing them gets an automatic +5 Insightful, regardless of content.
Espionage is illegal by international law and treaty.
Has nothing to do with jurisdiction.
You are being deliberately obtuse, sticking head in the sand refusing to think logically.
You think you're being logical, but you're ignoring key facts: Espionage is illegal by international law and treaty.
Yes everybody does it, and everybody knows everybody does it. But that doesn't stop them from prosecuting when the individual agents get caught. Those operating under embassy immunity just get deported. those operating under a more clandestine operation can face jail time, or worse, but also face a good possibility of exchange after a period of a few years.
Who mods this crap as insightful?
Why is this modded interesting? This is a joke (mod:funny) at best, comparing a pilotless test plane designed to do just one thing, with the most advanced fighter in the world thats been in development for nigh 30 years.
The actual ground war was over before the F22 even entered active service.
The B2 was sent more as real world training/vetting for the crews and squadron, not out of necessity.
Your comments are irrelevent.
New Ford Explorer has these capacitive button things and I absolutely detest them.
Worst idea ever. Sometimes I accidently brush the button and all of a sudden it goes from nice cold AC to full blast emergency heat. Or dials some phone contact. Or jacks the volume frm one extreme to another.
and then when i WANT to use the button, it frequenctly seems like its not working (no feedback) or working too well (multiclicks vs just one, etc).
Unfortunately I dont get to pick the vehicle in my case.
gimme a simple dial interface (or lever, if you remember the even older cars) everytime.
Quick, easy, simple.
I'd donate 20$ a month to NASA easily, without a second thought.
And that's probably 1000x bigger than their portion of my taxes too.
In fact, we should do that. Set up contribution funds seperate from taxes for certain programs that people would be able to contribute to at will. I'd contribute to NASA in a heartbeat. And give people a tax credit for doing so. You dont contribute, you pay taxes like normal, You do contribute, your final tax bill is reduced by say 5%, since your donation to a specific thing you feel strongly about will likely more than offset the credit.
Would have the effect of your contribution to the whole spectrum of programs via taxes is slightly smaller, but to that specific program (or two or three) is signicantly larger.
Plus would serve as semirealtime (well, not realtime, but you get what I mean) feedback to what people actually care about. No manipulated poll data, no sample size/location cherry picking...real data on the entire nation.
-First, a NASA administrator would be named to a ten year term. The intent is to provide some continuity in the way the space agency is run and to remove it, as
much as possible, from the vagaries of politics.
GOOD.
-Second, NASA funding would be placed on a multi-year rather than annual cycle. This is of particular importance to the space agency because the majority of its high level projects take several years to run their course. If funding were fixed for a number of years, the theory goes, money could be spent more efficiently. NASA planners would know how much they have to spend four or so years going forward and would not have to worry about being cut off at the knees by Congressional appropriators year after year."
EXTREMELY GOOD.
-But is it more than political grandstanding in an election year?
POSSIBLE. But that doesn't mean it shouldn't happen
-NASA could get stuck with a bad administrator
As a part of the executive branch, the president himself has oversight. Also, very unlikely; you dont get picked to run nasa if you're a bad manager
-multi-year budgets might be a bit unconstitutional
On what grounds?
Racism only existed in the south in your history books I'm guessing?
And it apparently told you that "reconstruction" was about stopping racism?
All those "reconstruction" policies were not about helping anyone. They were about punishing the south. They were about getting someone elses stuff for free or nearly so, getting rich quick off their misfortune. Anything that hurt the south was deemed good policy. Having land illegally seized by federal troops and sold at auction unless you sold it to some bagger for less than a penny on the dollar. Livestock and crops being barred from sale, or also seriously undervalued (wherein many folks took their goods to Mexico who was willing to pay full price...further ticking off northern policy makers and triggering export bans and huge tariffs and such). The list goes on and on.
Reconstruction was a bad thing.
Carbetbaggers were a bad thing
Both were more destructive to the south and its resources than anything during the war. In fact these things did more to fuel and perpetuate racism as we know it than anything else, via that lovely piece of human nature, the blame game. Had the war just ended and southerners treated like fellow citizens rather than a conquered nation to be raped and pillaged, the country and history of the past century would have been vastly different.
Your history book should be burned.
No false vote?
Pretty sure the peer pressure vote, the vote to please my boss, the vote to seem cool, all count as false votes, having been given for the wrong reasons.
Only if the voters are stupid is it wrong.
One of the first responsibilities in any democracy is self-education. And one of the primary traits is integrity (not voting if not qualified).
Mayor Daley and the chicago cemetaries are well established as supporting the democratic party.
and the other side always trots out the "republicans hate old and colored people and are trying to keep them from voting" boilerplate everytime, cause those groups always only vote one way, and repubs are the only ones trying to manipulate things.
and all the same arguments were given when districts began to require voter registration.
If you want to move to an e-vote system, and since everyone is so in love with technology uninformed people will keep pushing for it, then yes, you need proof of ID. period.
ike many other things moving to high-technological, right now it may not be a big problem. but the move to high-tech has a way of magnifying the problem, making it easier to exploit.
example: High Frequency Trading. They do nothing illegal. You could do the exact same thing without the computers. They just do it much faster and much easier because the computer has a capacity and speed that a person does not, and at that level it starts to become a problem.
right now, voter fraud, minor issue. move it to high tech, internet voting....ya. it's gonna be a big issue.
requiring ID in some form just makes sense, period. More so if the system ever actually does move online. An illegal activity should not be ignored just because it is percieved to be minor.
State ID cards are free. You only pay money when you get that special ID known as a "Drivers License". As for requiring no time, that's BS. There are certain things that if you wish to perform in this country you have the responsibilty to make happen. Voting is no different. You want to X the box, you have to take the time to register and prove yourself. the easier you make it to abuse, the more it will be abused.
No, it has nothing to do with piracy.
It has everything to do with money: money to produce, bottom line, return on investment.
Niche games dont return as much money as general appeal games. therefore, they no longer get produced with the same level of funding as other games. you dont see many indie developers making games on the same level as the big studios (or just "because it would be fun" other than by a few devs). they used to all have similar production values. those days are gone, and its nothing to do with piracy. it is entirely because the industry itself is maturing and you can no longer create a King's Quest, or Warcraft, or Doom, in your closet or among a few close friends, and reap a big reward. The cost of getting a game to market is dramatically larger than before, and it only keeps getting higher. Same goes for production time, and number of people involved.
It is not a multiplayer game. Being to buy and sell frm the AH is no more needed now than trading was needed in Diablo 2. That is simply one means to an end, among several. Its a time sink game, more time spent gets you the rewards you want. No different now than then. And that doesn't require multiplayer or the AH to accomplish. It is not "balanced around the ah."
Ultimately this is about relieving ourselves (or others we percieve as being not-good-enough) of responsibilty for their actions. Personally, I feel that is an undersirable outcome for society that already has problems with responsibility.
And in the end, the laws needed to force driverless cars with sufficient maintenance, and no modding, mean one thing: less freedom. And that also is something I cannot support.
exactly. and this is why totally driverless cars will not (or should not) happen. you will need someone, who knows how to drive, to be capable of taking over control when such a situation occurs. otherwise you get this:
"Unknown problem, turning over manual control"
"Huh?, What? I wasn't paying attention"
"Tonight on the 6 O'Clock news, a Ford TaurusDV drove off a bridge that was washed away due to the flooding"
(close enough)
addendum: google's cars had nearly no accidents, but i also garuntee they were continually monitored, constantly maintained, and never let out on the road if there was any inkling of any deficiency in the vehicle.
in other words, they got about a million times more maintenance and TLC than your typical car.
No, most accidents are due to simply a poor driver.
But that doesn't mean you should eliminate all drivers.
Millions of people drive to and frm work on long commutes every day without incident. Average 4 serious accidents per day in a city (atlanta) with >4 million commuters, do the math. the number is small as hell.
We have planes that essntially fly themselves, yet we still have a trained pilot and copilot in the front in case the hardware fails. And hardware does fail. You have to really be turning a blind eye to the reality of how often most people actually have their cars worked on.
so now you're also mandating preventive car maintenance, driving up costs of ownership, creating a host of new "crimes", and pricing it out of range of most users.
No, the automated car is a toy for rich people. It will never completely replace the driver, because of safety reasons or costs, or both.
Or you can mandate only driverless cars, and once again the people who can afford it can move around and leave the cities, going/moving where they want, and the lower classes who have no mobility and stay in one place, whether its inner city or rural countryside.
...somehow starts talking to their supercomputer, probably because of some undisciplined USB stick swappage, and thinks that that's what he was designed to do, and then we got a SyFy movie!
Who the hell put this to interesting? This is trolling and flamebait at best
even better when they let you choose the questions to answer...then they ask you one you never chose. *cough* swtor *cough*
Preferably one written by someone at least knowledgeable about guns. It's neither high caliber, nor capable of "mowing down just about anything".
It's gas-powered semi-automatic: One trigger pull, one round.
It's 7.62x51mm NATO, which is nearly (but not exactly) identical the .308 Winchester it's based on. It could be potentially classed as high-power (the .308 being a hunting round), but it is not high caliber.
It features the so-called "scary assault rifle look", particularly since it uses the popular modular rail mounting for components and accessories using with a common attachment design. But then there is no law that all rifles must look like grandpappy's squirrel gun, or be "not scary looking".
As for "mowing down", that's hyperbole. Any weapon is capable of such a thing if misused, be it a knife, gun, car, or simple bottle of Chlorine gas from your local pool.
the gravity tow always amuses me.
1) it'd be incredibly slow
2) talking about an incredibly huge fuel as cargo requirement
3) knowledge/maintenance of position with sufficient accuracy to not be wasting time
Better off just anchoring your low thrust high ISP engine on the appropriate side and turning the entire thing into a "spacecraft", ala the ice chunks from Saturn in Asimov's The Martian Way. Same or reduced cargo requirement, more direct (and larger) application of force, simpler engineering requirements.