With the impending victory of American troops, civilians often committed mass suicide, urged on by fanatical Japanese soldiers. They persuaded locals that victorious American soldiers would go on a rampage of killing and raping. Ryukyu Shimpo, one of the two major Okinawan newspapers, wrote:
There are many Okinawans who have testified that the Japanese Army directed them to commit suicide. There are also people who have testified that they were handed grenades by Japanese soldiers (to blow up themselves) [2]
Some of the civilians, having been induced by Japanese propaganda to believe that U.S. soldiers were barbarians who committed horrible atrocities, killed their families and themselves to avoid capture. Some Okinawans threw themselves and their family members from the cliffs where the Peace Museum now resides.
Considering the civillians were commiting mass suicide rather than surrender to Allied forces, I suspect the "war which was largely won" would have very high casualties if Allied forces had attempted an invasion of Kyushu, Honshu and Hokaido.
While you call the casualty estimate of 500,000 a myth there does seem evidence the Japanese population and military would fight fanatically and/or commit suicide rather than capitulate.
Agreed. I'm still in shock that the decision seems rational;)
Also, since paid-for bloggers ( by any political entity ) would seemingly have to be reported under campaign finance rules, this might make spotting astroturf easier.
The FEC said the blogger, Michael L. Grace, acted in the capacity of a volunteer and his blogging efforts did not constitute an ``in-kind service'' subject to financial disclosure rules.
Which seems to imply that if Kos had provided an in-kind service the ruling may have been different.
Also, from the FEC press release:
Since 1974, media activity has been explicitly exempted from federal campaign finance regulation. In March 2006, the Commission made clear that this exemption extends to online media publications and that "costs incurred in covering or carrying a news story, commentary, or editorial by any broadcasting station. . . , Web site, newspaper, magazine, or other periodical publication, including any Internet or electronic publication," are not a contribution or expenditure unless the facility is owned by a political party, committee, or candidate. With respect to MUR 5928, the FEC found that Kos Media meets the definition of a media entity and that the activity described in the complaint falls within the media exemption. Thus, activity on the DailyKos website does not constitute a contribution or expenditure that would trigger political committee status. The Commission therefore found no reason to believe Kos Media, DailyKos.com, or Markos Moulitsas Zuniga violated federal campaign finance law.
So, if a blogger is independant of a political organization ( or at least, doesn't get his bills paid for by a political organization ) said blogger isn't subject to campaign finance law.
The report, which includes a mental health history of the shooter, Seung Hui Cho, notes that during his childhood he had "played videogames like Sonic the Hedgehog," yet "none of the videogames were war games or had violent themes."
Obviously, to prevent further school violence we must encourage the youth of today to play violent games, not repeditive puzzle games with bad disco music.
I suggest we start a fund to provide low-cost or free copies of Manhunt to inner city youth. Think of the children!
Seems like it's available "Real Soon Now" for large values of "Soon".
from TFA: By the time the Skycar goes into production - probably in about six years time - it will be capable of climbing 6,000ft a minute and travelling at up to 400 miles an hour.
Not saying the system isn't subject to abuse, but it does seem better than the FBI initiating a wiretap without telco involvement/knowledge.
If/when it's proven in court that telcos enabled wiretaps without a proper warrant then sure, nail them with a puntative judgement / fine. When it hurts the telco's profit margin, they'll be sure to ask for a warrant next time.
With new CALEA-compliant digital switches, the FBI now logs directly into the telecom's network. Once a court order has been sent to a carrier and the carrier turns on the wiretap, the communications data on a surveillance target streams into the FBI's computers in real time.
So it seems wiretaps can't be initiated at will by the FBI; someone at the telcom has to enable access.
And in 2005, 92 percent of those criminal wiretaps targeted cell phones, according to a report published last year.
[tounge_in_cheek] Ninety two percent?!? OBVIOUSLY, cell phone users are terrorists! Round em up! Send 'em to gitmo!
Or, at least, can we get the soccer mom blabbing on her cell phone drifting between lanes at 90 mph off the roads? For great justice? [/ tounge_in_cheek]
IIRC, SIPRNET was built on the principal of security through network separation. Kinda hard to hack it remotely if 1337 script kiddie can't connect to the network in the first place.
From a security standpoint it seems to make sense, although I agree that it's an expensive option.
Interesting thought. In effect then, solar might be a way to push the infrastructure costs down to the end-user. Getting people to build solar rather than, say, getting the utility to build another power station.
Interesting point. I think you're right; such rebates/incentives would go away once solar system prices are competitive with conventional electricity generation.
What do you think about the argument that traditional power companies don't like local ( i.e. home owner ) power generation because it cuts into their profits? On an instinctive level ( i.e. no data ) level I can see it; if many people generate the power they need they won't need to purchase power from the grid.
Other posters here mention some solar system are sized to 80% of capacity to prevent generating power that isn't used ( and, apparently, reduce the installation size and cost ) so perhaps that's not as much of a factor as I thought. If you're only generating 80%, you need to get that 20% from somewhere, after all.
Ok, I understood that the primary way solar can pay for itself is through net metering:
Under federal law, utilities must allow independent power producers to be interconnected with the utility grid, and utilities must purchase any excess electricity they generate. Many states have gone beyond the minimum requirements of the federal law by allowing net metering for customers with PV systems.
So, it seems it's a result of federal law not utility company policy.
Not that I doubt you, but could you throw a few links up where utility companies are encouraging solar power?
The outlook for solar, though, is getting much brighter. A few dozen companies say advances in technology will let them halve the price of solar-panel installations in as little as three years. By 2014, solar-system prices will be competitive with conventional electricity when energy savings are figured in, Deutsche Bank (DB) says. And that's without government incentives.
This is saying what I was trying to get across in our other thread. Solar, without government subsidy, doesn't stand on it's own yet in pure economic terms.
I like net metering and any other incentives/rebates which make the investment in solar pay off within 5 years. It's a damn good thing that makes solar affordable for more people.
Now, I'd love to be proven wrong. Show me a solar system I can buy which will pay for itself without government subsidy within 5 years.
That's what TFA is getting at, and what I've been asking for. I'd really like to install a solar system in my house, but I don't want to spend more money on it than I would on line power.
PS: Ya know, just because we don't agree on the economics of solar doesn't mean I'm trolling. Or is your ego too fragile to understand that?
I look forward to cheaper up-front costs as a tipping point where solar really takes off.
Not that I disagree with your numbers, but reading this:
In areas with the highest electricity costs and the highest rebates/incentives, ROI can happen in 5 years.
Just makes me think conventional power producers will just bribe^H^H^H dontate money to a politician who'll remove the rebates/incentives ( or tighten the qualifications to get said rebate, increase the paperwork required to an onerous degree, etc. ).
Once solar comes down in price so that without rebates/incentives it reaches it's ROI within 5 years I think we'll see widespread adoption. TFA seems to think that will happen by 2014. Frankly, the sooner the better.
It's not "blanket statement that was wrong in the 1970s". It's current economics from today. Unless you think mother earth jones is a shill for big oil, or something.
Unless you can show hard numbers to the contrary, I think we're done here.
Agreed, and this is what I ment by "we're talking past each other".
I'm not saying solar isn't useful; far from it.
I'm saying that without net metering the inital investment in solar for the end-user isn't recouped. 35 states have some sort of net metering in place(1) so there is progress.
Ideally I'd like to see research into reducing the end-user's inital investment to the point that even without net metering the inital investment is recouped within the service life of the gear. Ideally, within 50% of the useful life.
If progress was made, I'd think we'd see an wide scale switch to solar. As many others have stated, for many people the only green they care about is money. When solar either pays for itself ( or even better, turns a profit ) then renewable energy becomes profitable. Those who want clean energy and those who like profits would have the same method to achieve their goals.
I know some people with seriously f-ed up ideas of how sex should be, or what they expect their partner to be cool with doing...simply because they watch too much porn and don't talk to enough actual women.
I'm getting that bukkake on the first date is a bad thing?
If you live in an area where net metering is not available, a solar electric system for your home probably won't pay for itself during your lifetime, unless the declining supply of coal and oil causes unprecedented increases in the cost of electricity. Your money may be better spent on energy- efficient home improvements.
It seems that in absence of a net-metering scheme, solar power doesn't pay for itself. That's the point.
Satelites are irrelevant to the discussion; there aren't the options in orbit there are in a terrestrial environment.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm disapointed that he didn't win the best novel category. I'm a huge fan of his Laundry books ( think HP Lovecraft + Dilbert in a spy novel ).
Emacs?
Dude... TFA seems to be talking about applications, not operating systems.
[badum-ching]
Considering the civillians were commiting mass suicide rather than surrender to Allied forces, I suspect the "war which was largely won" would have very high casualties if Allied forces had attempted an invasion of Kyushu, Honshu and Hokaido.
While you call the casualty estimate of 500,000 a myth there does seem evidence the Japanese population and military would fight fanatically and/or commit suicide rather than capitulate.
Agreed. I'm still in shock that the decision seems rational ;)
Also, since paid-for bloggers ( by any political entity ) would seemingly have to be reported under campaign finance rules, this might make spotting astroturf easier.
Which seems to imply that if Kos had provided an in-kind service the ruling may have been different.
Also, from the FEC press release:
So, if a blogger is independant of a political organization ( or at least, doesn't get his bills paid for by a political organization ) said blogger isn't subject to campaign finance law.
You mean a liberal arts degree doesn't have anything to do with the real world?
I'm shocked... SHOCKED I say!
Well ok. Not that shocked.
[snicker]
Sounds like you're onto something!
Think of the possibilities of dynamically altering incoming video:
Yes, I'm being a bit silly... but does sound like fun.
[1] See here if you haven't seen those commercials
As in, could one use this to block all religious programing? Or all $FOO that the viewer doesn't want to watch?
If so, and it's controlled by the viewer... problem?
A switch to block $naughty_things ( cancel or allow? ) doesn't seem as useful, but if it's user controled content filtering it might be ok.
From tfa:
Obviously, to prevent further school violence we must encourage the youth of today to play violent games, not repeditive puzzle games with bad disco music.
I suggest we start a fund to provide low-cost or free copies of Manhunt to inner city youth. Think of the children!
=:0)
Seems like it's available "Real Soon Now" for large values of "Soon".
from TFA:
By the time the Skycar goes into production - probably in about six years time - it will be capable of climbing 6,000ft a minute and travelling at up to 400 miles an hour.
I'd say your skepticism is warranted.
It's funny, but you might be on to something.
If you could keep operating in, say, the environment of the movie 28 Days Later I imagine more realistic disasters wouldn't be a challenge.
Not saying the system isn't subject to abuse, but it does seem better than the FBI initiating a wiretap without telco involvement/knowledge.
If/when it's proven in court that telcos enabled wiretaps without a proper warrant then sure, nail them with a puntative judgement / fine. When it hurts the telco's profit margin, they'll be sure to ask for a warrant next time.
From TFA:
So it seems wiretaps can't be initiated at will by the FBI; someone at the telcom has to enable access.
[tounge_in_cheek]
Ninety two percent?!? OBVIOUSLY, cell phone users are terrorists! Round em up! Send 'em to gitmo!
Or, at least, can we get the soccer mom blabbing on her cell phone drifting between lanes at 90 mph off the roads? For great justice?
[/ tounge_in_cheek]
Sounds like they're running it through SIPRNET.
IIRC, SIPRNET was built on the principal of security through network separation. Kinda hard to hack it remotely if 1337 script kiddie can't connect to the network in the first place.
From a security standpoint it seems to make sense, although I agree that it's an expensive option.
Interesting thought. In effect then, solar might be a way to push the infrastructure costs down to the end-user. Getting people to build solar rather than, say, getting the utility to build another power station.
Interesting point. I think you're right; such rebates/incentives would go away once solar system prices are competitive with conventional electricity generation.
What do you think about the argument that traditional power companies don't like local ( i.e. home owner ) power generation because it cuts into their profits? On an instinctive level ( i.e. no data ) level I can see it; if many people generate the power they need they won't need to purchase power from the grid.
Other posters here mention some solar system are sized to 80% of capacity to prevent generating power that isn't used ( and, apparently, reduce the installation size and cost ) so perhaps that's not as much of a factor as I thought. If you're only generating 80%, you need to get that 20% from somewhere, after all.
So, it seems it's a result of federal law not utility company policy.
Not that I doubt you, but could you throw a few links up where utility companies are encouraging solar power?
This is saying what I was trying to get across in our other thread. Solar, without government subsidy, doesn't stand on it's own yet in pure economic terms.
I like net metering and any other incentives/rebates which make the investment in solar pay off within 5 years. It's a damn good thing that makes solar affordable for more people.
Now, I'd love to be proven wrong. Show me a solar system I can buy which will pay for itself without government subsidy within 5 years.
That's what TFA is getting at, and what I've been asking for. I'd really like to install a solar system in my house, but I don't want to spend more money on it than I would on line power.
PS: Ya know, just because we don't agree on the economics of solar doesn't mean I'm trolling. Or is your ego too fragile to understand that?
Not that I disagree with your numbers, but reading this:
Just makes me think conventional power producers will just bribe^H^H^H dontate money to a politician who'll remove the rebates/incentives ( or tighten the qualifications to get said rebate, increase the paperwork required to an onerous degree, etc. ).
Once solar comes down in price so that without rebates/incentives it reaches it's ROI within 5 years I think we'll see widespread adoption. TFA seems to think that will happen by 2014. Frankly, the sooner the better.
I have to ask how "ethical society" is defined.
One definition could be "maximize profits within the bounds of the law", which might mean the example in TFA is "ethical".
Not saying it is, mind you, just thinking that unless the term "ethical society" is clearly defined anything may be "ethical" depending on POV.
It's not "blanket statement that was wrong in the 1970s". It's current economics from today. Unless you think mother earth jones is a shill for big oil, or something.
Unless you can show hard numbers to the contrary, I think we're done here.
Agreed, and this is what I ment by "we're talking past each other".
m etering.shtml
I'm not saying solar isn't useful; far from it.
I'm saying that without net metering the inital investment in solar for the end-user isn't recouped. 35 states have some sort of net metering in place(1) so there is progress.
Ideally I'd like to see research into reducing the end-user's inital investment to the point that even without net metering the inital investment is recouped within the service life of the gear. Ideally, within 50% of the useful life.
If progress was made, I'd think we'd see an wide scale switch to solar. As many others have stated, for many people the only green they care about is money. When solar either pays for itself ( or even better, turns a profit ) then renewable energy becomes profitable. Those who want clean energy and those who like profits would have the same method to achieve their goals.
1) http://www.eere.energy.gov/greenpower/markets/net
I'm getting that bukkake on the first date is a bad thing?
[badum-ching]
It seems that in absence of a net-metering scheme, solar power doesn't pay for itself. That's the point.
Satelites are irrelevant to the discussion; there aren't the options in orbit there are in a terrestrial environment.