It is nothing like the previous firings, including the earlier firings by Bush.
Yes it is. One is preemptive firing, and one is after the fact. One set of firings is designed to get rid of employees who probably won't follow the administration's agenda, and the other was to get rid of those who haven't. Actually, I find the reasoning of the latter to be less tenuous.
Anyway, what's insulting is that the Justice Dept. didn't even bother to make up a plausible reason for firing them. We all know this sort of crap happens all the time in all aspects of civilian and gov't employment alike, and there's really no way to prevent it, but at least try to keep up the appearance of a legitimate basis for your actions.
Ever heard the official term Executive Privilege? True, it's not in the Constitution, but neither is Contempt of Congress.
Moreover, the executive can only ever be impeached, and only for "treason, bribery, and other high crimes." It has yet to be decided what constitute high crimes, but failing to comply with Congress is clearly neither treason nor bribery. Additionally, it would take a two thirds vote, which the Democrats couldn't muster on their own (assuming they could manage 100% compliance). The Republicans are almost guaranteed to vote against.
Criminal charges are possible, but unlikely since the Justice Department is part of the executive branch. A subsequent administration might bring charges, but that's equally unlikely since, by nature, few people are willing to set precedents which would essentially limit or check their own power.
The more horizontal real estate used, the more information per line, which makes reading a given amount of text easier. As for vertical, obviously it means less scrolling. If it's a picture or video, it means it's bigger and easier to see. It's faster to get to menus (always in the upper right) and scroll bars (always on the right edge). No chance of accidentally moving/resizing the windows. This isn't exactly rocket science. Also, I'm fairly sure I can switch apps with keyboard shortcuts faster than you can with a mouse.
There's virtually nothing non-minimized windows do well that can't be done better with dual monitors and windows maxed on each. There are some things that can approximate the functionality of dual screens, such as side-by-side layouts for something like programming, or extensive file management, but even with a widescreen it just seems like a kludge.
CLIs have limited utility in being fullscreen, although I typically use different sessions with CTRL-ALT-F#.
Unless TestDriven provides functionality which is duplicated in other versions of VS (which I do not believe it does), it's hard to argue that it's circumventing a technical limitation (not to mention that the same verbiage is included in the EULAs of all VS versions). A lack of presence is not, in and of itself, evidence of a technical limitation. For example, there is no code present when I launch the IDE. Providing code which did not exist is itself circumventing a technical limitation, albeit one MS expects the user to overcome. I would argue that any intended limits need to be explicitly enumerated to be valid (which is obviously infeasible, though inclusion of those features with alternate versions of the program may be construed as an explicit definition by default), otherwise doing *anything* with the program could be construed to be a circumvention.
Suggesting user defined tag filters is like suggesting people close their eyes and cover their ears at certain timestamps during a movie. Sure, it's doable (and a lot easier to filter tags), but it avoids the central issue, which is creating content that appeals to people in the first place. Naturally you can't please everyone, and tag filters may be a valid suggestion, but you have to consider A) How many people would even use them, and B) Are they necessary in order to create an appearance that would appeal to a first-time visitor? I would suggest that tags like "haha" and various profanity, while not offensive to me personally, create an unprofessional appearance, and one which may alienate the sort of new visitors the site wishes to attract.
Maximized windows are the shit. The Amiga technique of "pages" was even better. Crappy Macs with their non-fullscreen windows. If I wanted to use less than the full viewing area, I'd have bought a smaller monitor.
The Wiimote sucks. The motion sensing is too vague to allow precise control, and the controller is too small to work well sideways, at least with my non-child/non-asian hands. Don't even get me started on pointing.
Ah, yeah.. the 70s were a golden age, what with Vietnam, Watergate, and cocaine. And the 60s were much better.. only race riots and the assassination of a sitting president, one presidential hopeful, Malcom X, and MLK. Of course, the civil rights movement really started in the 50s -- The golden age that brought us widespread DDT use, Duck & Cover, and the Korean War.
[Company Name] is announcing its decision to turn [Franchise] into a [Superlative] new MMORPG set in the award-winning [Franchise] universe! It will feature the latest in [3D Feature] technology and each of the avatars will be rendered in [Superlative] detail! Players will be able to visit [Landscapes], massive [Type of Settlement], and many other exotic locations!
[Franchise] will allow thousands of players to interact within the same persistant state world, adventuring together or fighting against each other in epic battles*! Among other features, players will be able to own [nouns] and ride [animal or vehicle], and [Guilds/Companies/Clans] will be able to purchase [Status Symbols] once they have achieved enough [Arbitrary Measures]!
There will be [Integer] playable races from [2 or 3] factions, as well as [Integer] classes, including [Ranged Combat], [Melee Class], [Healing Class], and [Worthless Hybrid Class]! A vast storyline will put players in the middle of the action, and [Random or Recurring Time Period] events will provide a chance for players to win valuable prizes and items! Tradskills will allow players to craft [items] by performing [tedious activity] until [death]. A fully customizable user interface will allow players to craft an experience that best suits their play style! Reserve your copy today!
* [Company Name] reserves the right to ban anyone at any time for any reason.
Also, I should mention that cruise missiles are preferred over ballistic missiles because of accuracy and the ability to fly at extremely low altitude. The only advantage of a ballistic missile is range, which is somewhat negated by the fact that subs can park off the coast.
A) I'm aware that they're attack subs, however they're still useful in combating China's growing sub fleet. SSBNs were not designed to engage other subs. Even ignoring China, it would be prudent to have the capability to defend against enemy subs, should the threat emerge.
B) The Virginia Class sub (replacement for the Seawolf) was designed with a VLS, which can be used for launching Tomahawks (although they can also be launched via torpedo tubes).
C) Tomahawks can deliver multiple payloads, including the TLAM-A and TLAM-N, which are nuclear.
For another example, look at the Seawolf class submarines. They cost nearly a billion dollars each and were also designed to meet a threat that no longer exists.
Sorry, I can't stand bubble-heads any more than the next guy, but subs play a critical role as a deterrant. First of all, China is currently playing games, feeling out our military capabilities and responsiveness, and they're only increasing their submarine production. Granted, the motivation of the source (the Pentagon) for disclosing this information is undoubtedly to procure more funding, but that doesn't negate the fact that these vessels give us the capability to meet the potential threat of naval warfare, in the unlikely event that China decides to engage in open hostilities.
Aside from that, the missiles launched against Afghanistan in 1998 (in response to the embassy bombings) were launched from -- you guessed it -- a sub. Submarines provide a US military presence throughout the world, without everyone knowing where we are, or when we're there. Additionally, subs play a large role in Mutually Assured Destruction -- meaning that even if all of our land and surface facilities were wiped out, there are enough missiles in the water that whomever was responsible would be eliminated as well. While the practicality or sanity of such a response is questionable (why bother killing more people if you've already lost?), I'm sure that knowledge doesn't make Kim Jong-il sleep any better at night. Naturally some people are uncomfortable with the idea that there's probably a US sub lurking somewhere off their coastline, but from a national defense standpoint there's no question that submarines are an essential part of the strategy.
Some may argue that the threat of the future is not conventional warfare, but terrorism. I would argue that the only reason terrorism is a viable attack vector is because conventional warfare has been so heavily dominated by the US. If we were to, in essence, demilitarize (and getting rid of subs would seriously weaken our naval position, akin to demilitarization), it would only compromise our ability to deal with future threats. Similiarly, advocating that we abandon, say, strong passwords, because most attacks use completely different vectors, would make little sense. Granted, it is difficult to measure the deterrant effect of something when its effectiveness, by definition, provides a lack of data points, but as long as other countries posess the capability for naval warfare, it behooves us to maintain an equal or superior capability (preferrably the latter).
I'm fairly liberal, but I'm a big fan of the big stick policy, though not quite the way Roosevelt practiced it. There's little point in making laws, for example, without the capability to enforce those laws, which is the function of the police. Likewise, we need a capable military to enforce our position in the global playing field. But with power comes responsibility. It is encumbant upon us to use our power judiciously, not to abuse and squander it in frivilous conflicts (and I use the term frivilous with respect to its importance in global strategy, not the lives of those directly affected) with dubious merit.
Resolution might not be a problem (don't know the quality of his images), and I'm absolutely positive that this is the USS Kitty Hawk, but considering that this is virtually invisible (compare to this), I have a hard time believing he could see anything more than a few feet below the surface.
Highly urban regions can actually be worse for reception due to multipathing phenomenon (reflection of the signal off of nearby buildings), and it may be impossible for many people, particularly apartment dwellers, to find a suitable location for antenna placement. Analog signals can be somewhat more forgiving under those conditions (as in, you can still see the picture).
Slashdot Mirror
Ironically homonymous with "break a couple legs."
I'm not sure a word that sounds like "of or relating to urine" is any better.
That said, I'm not in favor of renaming it at all. If you haven't learned to ignore name jokes by the time you're out of 5th grade, you've got issues.
It is nothing like the previous firings, including the earlier firings by Bush.
Yes it is. One is preemptive firing, and one is after the fact. One set of firings is designed to get rid of employees who probably won't follow the administration's agenda, and the other was to get rid of those who haven't. Actually, I find the reasoning of the latter to be less tenuous.
Anyway, what's insulting is that the Justice Dept. didn't even bother to make up a plausible reason for firing them. We all know this sort of crap happens all the time in all aspects of civilian and gov't employment alike, and there's really no way to prevent it, but at least try to keep up the appearance of a legitimate basis for your actions.
Ever heard the official term Executive Privilege? True, it's not in the Constitution, but neither is Contempt of Congress.
Moreover, the executive can only ever be impeached, and only for "treason, bribery, and other high crimes." It has yet to be decided what constitute high crimes, but failing to comply with Congress is clearly neither treason nor bribery. Additionally, it would take a two thirds vote, which the Democrats couldn't muster on their own (assuming they could manage 100% compliance). The Republicans are almost guaranteed to vote against.
Criminal charges are possible, but unlikely since the Justice Department is part of the executive branch. A subsequent administration might bring charges, but that's equally unlikely since, by nature, few people are willing to set precedents which would essentially limit or check their own power.
The more horizontal real estate used, the more information per line, which makes reading a given amount of text easier. As for vertical, obviously it means less scrolling. If it's a picture or video, it means it's bigger and easier to see. It's faster to get to menus (always in the upper right) and scroll bars (always on the right edge). No chance of accidentally moving/resizing the windows. This isn't exactly rocket science. Also, I'm fairly sure I can switch apps with keyboard shortcuts faster than you can with a mouse.
There's virtually nothing non-minimized windows do well that can't be done better with dual monitors and windows maxed on each. There are some things that can approximate the functionality of dual screens, such as side-by-side layouts for something like programming, or extensive file management, but even with a widescreen it just seems like a kludge.
CLIs have limited utility in being fullscreen, although I typically use different sessions with CTRL-ALT-F#.
Ah, not having to forget about ex's. I'm going to add that to my list of rationalizations for not having a girlfriend. :(
Unless TestDriven provides functionality which is duplicated in other versions of VS (which I do not believe it does), it's hard to argue that it's circumventing a technical limitation (not to mention that the same verbiage is included in the EULAs of all VS versions). A lack of presence is not, in and of itself, evidence of a technical limitation. For example, there is no code present when I launch the IDE. Providing code which did not exist is itself circumventing a technical limitation, albeit one MS expects the user to overcome. I would argue that any intended limits need to be explicitly enumerated to be valid (which is obviously infeasible, though inclusion of those features with alternate versions of the program may be construed as an explicit definition by default), otherwise doing *anything* with the program could be construed to be a circumvention.
Suggesting user defined tag filters is like suggesting people close their eyes and cover their ears at certain timestamps during a movie. Sure, it's doable (and a lot easier to filter tags), but it avoids the central issue, which is creating content that appeals to people in the first place. Naturally you can't please everyone, and tag filters may be a valid suggestion, but you have to consider A) How many people would even use them, and B) Are they necessary in order to create an appearance that would appeal to a first-time visitor? I would suggest that tags like "haha" and various profanity, while not offensive to me personally, create an unprofessional appearance, and one which may alienate the sort of new visitors the site wishes to attract.
Maximized windows are the shit. The Amiga technique of "pages" was even better. Crappy Macs with their non-fullscreen windows. If I wanted to use less than the full viewing area, I'd have bought a smaller monitor.
</rant>
The Wiimote sucks. The motion sensing is too vague to allow precise control, and the controller is too small to work well sideways, at least with my non-child/non-asian hands. Don't even get me started on pointing.
Ah, yeah.. the 70s were a golden age, what with Vietnam, Watergate, and cocaine. And the 60s were much better.. only race riots and the assassination of a sitting president, one presidential hopeful, Malcom X, and MLK. Of course, the civil rights movement really started in the 50s -- The golden age that brought us widespread DDT use, Duck & Cover, and the Korean War.
etc., etc...
[Company Name] is announcing its decision to turn [Franchise] into a [Superlative] new MMORPG set in the award-winning [Franchise] universe! It will feature the latest in [3D Feature] technology and each of the avatars will be rendered in [Superlative] detail! Players will be able to visit [Landscapes], massive [Type of Settlement], and many other exotic locations!
[Franchise] will allow thousands of players to interact within the same persistant state world, adventuring together or fighting against each other in epic battles*! Among other features, players will be able to own [nouns] and ride [animal or vehicle], and [Guilds/Companies/Clans] will be able to purchase [Status Symbols] once they have achieved enough [Arbitrary Measures]!
There will be [Integer] playable races from [2 or 3] factions, as well as [Integer] classes, including [Ranged Combat], [Melee Class], [Healing Class], and [Worthless Hybrid Class]! A vast storyline will put players in the middle of the action, and [Random or Recurring Time Period] events will provide a chance for players to win valuable prizes and items! Tradskills will allow players to craft [items] by performing [tedious activity] until [death]. A fully customizable user interface will allow players to craft an experience that best suits their play style! Reserve your copy today!
* [Company Name] reserves the right to ban anyone at any time for any reason.
Are you sure you want to call 911? Cancel or Allow
[If you do not recognize the number, or you did not initiate this action, select Cancel]
(v)--More Information--
I'll give it a try..
Ugh ugh uhh. *Bang* Huh ugh huh mmmm uh buh ugh Fortran.
All I have are Dr. Pepper, Twizzlers, and cavities you insensitive clod.
Better wipe that up.
http://www.wsu.edu/~brians/errors/who's.html
Now all they need is an add-on to allow hybrids to run on smug and we'll be free of fossil fuels!
Also, I should mention that cruise missiles are preferred over ballistic missiles because of accuracy and the ability to fly at extremely low altitude. The only advantage of a ballistic missile is range, which is somewhat negated by the fact that subs can park off the coast.
A) I'm aware that they're attack subs, however they're still useful in combating China's growing sub fleet. SSBNs were not designed to engage other subs. Even ignoring China, it would be prudent to have the capability to defend against enemy subs, should the threat emerge.
B) The Virginia Class sub (replacement for the Seawolf) was designed with a VLS, which can be used for launching Tomahawks (although they can also be launched via torpedo tubes).
C) Tomahawks can deliver multiple payloads, including the TLAM-A and TLAM-N, which are nuclear.
For another example, look at the Seawolf class submarines. They cost nearly a billion dollars each and were also designed to meet a threat that no longer exists.
Sorry, I can't stand bubble-heads any more than the next guy, but subs play a critical role as a deterrant. First of all, China is currently playing games, feeling out our military capabilities and responsiveness, and they're only increasing their submarine production. Granted, the motivation of the source (the Pentagon) for disclosing this information is undoubtedly to procure more funding, but that doesn't negate the fact that these vessels give us the capability to meet the potential threat of naval warfare, in the unlikely event that China decides to engage in open hostilities.
Aside from that, the missiles launched against Afghanistan in 1998 (in response to the embassy bombings) were launched from -- you guessed it -- a sub. Submarines provide a US military presence throughout the world, without everyone knowing where we are, or when we're there. Additionally, subs play a large role in Mutually Assured Destruction -- meaning that even if all of our land and surface facilities were wiped out, there are enough missiles in the water that whomever was responsible would be eliminated as well. While the practicality or sanity of such a response is questionable (why bother killing more people if you've already lost?), I'm sure that knowledge doesn't make Kim Jong-il sleep any better at night. Naturally some people are uncomfortable with the idea that there's probably a US sub lurking somewhere off their coastline, but from a national defense standpoint there's no question that submarines are an essential part of the strategy.
Some may argue that the threat of the future is not conventional warfare, but terrorism. I would argue that the only reason terrorism is a viable attack vector is because conventional warfare has been so heavily dominated by the US. If we were to, in essence, demilitarize (and getting rid of subs would seriously weaken our naval position, akin to demilitarization), it would only compromise our ability to deal with future threats. Similiarly, advocating that we abandon, say, strong passwords, because most attacks use completely different vectors, would make little sense. Granted, it is difficult to measure the deterrant effect of something when its effectiveness, by definition, provides a lack of data points, but as long as other countries posess the capability for naval warfare, it behooves us to maintain an equal or superior capability (preferrably the latter).
I'm fairly liberal, but I'm a big fan of the big stick policy, though not quite the way Roosevelt practiced it. There's little point in making laws, for example, without the capability to enforce those laws, which is the function of the police. Likewise, we need a capable military to enforce our position in the global playing field. But with power comes responsibility. It is encumbant upon us to use our power judiciously, not to abuse and squander it in frivilous conflicts (and I use the term frivilous with respect to its importance in global strategy, not the lives of those directly affected) with dubious merit.
Wow. Insightful, comprehensible, logical, AND true, all in one post. WTF is Slashdot coming to?
Well, luckily my wife doesn't need to be shocking. She's battery powered.
Resolution might not be a problem (don't know the quality of his images), and I'm absolutely positive that this is the USS Kitty Hawk, but considering that this is virtually invisible (compare to this), I have a hard time believing he could see anything more than a few feet below the surface.
Highly urban regions can actually be worse for reception due to multipathing phenomenon (reflection of the signal off of nearby buildings), and it may be impossible for many people, particularly apartment dwellers, to find a suitable location for antenna placement. Analog signals can be somewhat more forgiving under those conditions (as in, you can still see the picture).