Yeah, those peace mongers won't give a shit what we do to the moon. *rolls eyes*
Have you ever heard of Greenpeace protesting about whats going on in Area 51?
No. Because they don't know.
You think that condition is going to get any better when there's a base on the dark side of the moon, protected by "Military Secret" doctrines of the Pentagon?
No.
Anyone that thinks the primary motive for going to the moon is military dominance should put away their UFO cover up books and read a history book instead.
Who said it was a primary reason? I'm only suggesting that there are 'good reasons' for doing so, were one to be militarily inclined.
There are just as many good reasons to have an open colony on the Moon, populated by members of every country on the planet. Hell, maybe "Moon City" would be the ultimate peace weapon, eh? An International, Human Presence of such nature would probably be the best War Deterrent one could create... but do you think anyone in current power has the balls to attempt such a thing?
Nope. Too busy living their one little life, making historical events for themselves... swimming in hubris.
As for Bush, I do hate him. I think he's scum, and I think that Americans who support this man are ignorant and, above all, disgustingly decadent in the face of an International reality.
I am slowly formulating the opinion that Ignorant America deserved 9/11, whoever really perpetrated it, for letting Bush hi-jack their government, letting him wreck the Kyoto accords, letting him foist un-fathomable depravity on his subjects in the name of Big Business and Special Interest. 3000 New-Yorkers died. Big Deal. Bush was the worse disaster to happen to the USA.
I've seen worse events than 9/11 occur in smaller states, where the population recovered quickly, and I can list a number of State Systems wherein the populace would never have used such an incident as a justification for futher agressions against ones fellow man like Bush and his CFR friends have done...
On the moon, you can test the crap out of whatever you want, and nobody will get upset. There's no delicate ecosystem to be rampaged by your killer virus, were it to escape, and you've got tons and tons and tons of vast, empty spaces in which to test your new 'smaller, lighter, cleaner' nukes without upsetting world governments (presumably).
While your first two points are bang-on right, your third point sounds like a paranoid Nader rant against the "military-industrial complex". It undercuts the other two points, which, as I just said, are exactly correct.
Well, you're being reactionary and wanting to defeat my argument before even thinking about it really. What resources do you think I might have meant?
As for MAD, I don't think you understand it as well as you might feel you do... the Moon gives the USAF a pretty big place within which to safely develop -extremely- dangerous weapons. This would not be a 'deterrent' policy, but an overt "we are there, we're going to use that resource to make mega-weapons in sanctity, and there's not much you can do to stop us".
I can think of a few world governments who would consider such a program entirely offensive. But its no surprise to me that an American couldn't see this simple fact...
Sorry, I just get a little peeved when somone implies that it's only western countries that are "brainwashing" people.
Since Western States are the only ones with which I'm truly familiar, in terms of propagandist policies and practices, its the only one I feel comfortable making such an assessment of.
Had I lived in the Ukraine, or Iraq, or North Korea, I would be more comfortable saying "all States". Even though its easy to imply that they are just as bad as any other, I haven't had the direct experience with it that I have in the West.
That's the only reason I used that term. To me, States are irrelevant anyway...
It's hard to argue that the US has any problems controlling the top of the hill these days.
Well, wasn't 9/11 supposed to be an example of just how poor the US is controlling its hill? Isn't that the point?
Because if it isn't, it sure sounds to me like your runaway President and all his lackeys are using the 'we lost the hill, lets take it again' argument to beat up a whole lotta foreigners...
a) The moon is easy to defend from Earth-based attacks. It takes a looooot more effort to get something to the Moon from Earth than it does to get something from the Moon to Earth. b) Anything launched from the Moon can reach any target on the planet, easily enough, using Gravity. c) The moon has tons of resources for constructing weapons, especially new kinds of nuclear weapons. There's no Greenpeace, no protestors, and no life to destroy, so the Military-Industrial complex can do a looooot of things on the moon that they wouldn't stand a chance doing here on Earth.
This was, incidentally, a hot topic in the 50's and 60's, and I seem to remember more than one sci-fi author getting into a lot of trouble for suggesting that the moon be used militarily in the Cold War...
A moon base would be the Top of the Hill for the Pentagon. Its very, very difficult to defend against moon-launched attacks...
I remember, a few years ago (5?) that the various Mars programs being fronted by the U.S. government were in direct opposition to the way Zubrin and his Mars Society were proposing we do it - with the "Mars Direct Program".
Now, it seems that there are a significant number of Washington players who are getting behind the scientific thinking that Zubrin's program has produced for us... and thats good news.
When I think about where we are currently at, evaluating the Mars situation, and where we've come as a result of an independent organization, it warms my heart. The Mars Society have done a lot to get humans thinking about going to Mars properly, and finally it seems like their momentum is having a great effect.
They teach "Propaganda 101" in 'Rhode Island Schools'?
The only truly effective propaganda curriculum I've seen (and yes, I've looked for such things) has been available through private institutions, only. I don't think thats going to solve anything...
The ability to spot and recognize propagandist activities designed to foment social change, sway the 'group mentality', is something that has to be learned at a very young age. If you have to go to college to learn about how propaganda and mass campaigning work on humanity, its too late.
because its customers are too stupid to understand the issues, or even care about it.
remember, the pop industry is all about stripping consumable income from the teen market, which is by definition naive, immature, and not generally capable of independent thought/analysis.
teenagers are the most important resource in all propaganda campaigns, and the RIAA (and its family of organizations) sure knows how to pitch to them like no other... and still sell crap.
until schools start teaching "Propaganda 101" as a basic curriculum requirement, Western States are going to continue to be little more than Sheep Factories.
SD/SDIO is more expensive than CF, to implement. SD involves severe licensing fees - if a mfr wants to implement SDIO, they're looking at paying royalties, in some cases. This is not the case with CF.
The point is, all these competing storage/"I/O" formats are a pain in the ass for the consumer, and a pain in the ass for developers too. The reason you sometimes see SD + CF in the same device, for example, is that SD is demanded, SDIO is too expensive to pay licensing for, so CF was added to provide a peripheral interface without SDIO legal fees. Stupid!
Again though, it comes back to the stupidity of the consumer, who don't care about all this crap, they just want something which works... but are also fickle enough to be woo'ed over to other, 'competing' formats, just because... allowing mfr's to get away with having 4 different formats designed to, essentially, do the same thing.
man, i still have an i-opener sitting in pieces behind me, thanks for reminding me that i need to put it back together and get it working one of these days. great little machine!
this ZVUE thing looks pretty good too, though. of course, it won't be long until there's a linux distro running on it... probably...
well, okay... 'hypertext document browsing' then... not 'web' browsing.
in 1989 i was using a hypertext document system being developed by Wang. I wouldn't say it was a pre-cursor to the web, but it certainly was a 'browse-mode' style interface. In actual fact, I remember that Wang program could remember where I was at in between sessions...
in 1990 i built a hypertext document management system (since Wang went the way of the dodo) for a company I was working for and I can honestly say that it -was- a pre-cursor to http... one of those 'who invented the telephone?' moments which wouldn't have happened if it weren't for really restrictive confidentiality agreements... but I was happy to dump everything and start using mosaic when it was released, and so were my clients, so the rest is history...
no way to do this in safari? surely some enterprising [Apple,Java,Whatever]script hackers have come up with a way to do this state-save in Safari? I have to admit, I'm a bit of a bitch for Safari, its just so fast and smooth in OSX.
Still, it does seem awkward that I have to use a plugin for this basic feature... nevertheless, thanks for all the suggestions, I guess its the time of the year when I have to re-evaluate my browser choice... again.
Slashdot Mirror
I think you're about to discover that the Pentagon committed a gross failure by allowing those planes to hit their targets.
They could've taken them out, they had fighters scrambled, but they didn't. Why?
To me, that's a failure to keep your hill safe from moles.
Yeah, those peace mongers won't give a shit what we do to the moon. *rolls eyes*
... but do you think anyone in current power has the balls to attempt such a thing?
... swimming in hubris.
...
...
...
Have you ever heard of Greenpeace protesting about whats going on in Area 51?
No. Because they don't know.
You think that condition is going to get any better when there's a base on the dark side of the moon, protected by "Military Secret" doctrines of the Pentagon?
No.
Anyone that thinks the primary motive for going to the moon is military dominance should put away their UFO cover up books and read a history book instead.
Who said it was a primary reason? I'm only suggesting that there are 'good reasons' for doing so, were one to be militarily inclined.
There are just as many good reasons to have an open colony on the Moon, populated by members of every country on the planet. Hell, maybe "Moon City" would be the ultimate peace weapon, eh? An International, Human Presence of such nature would probably be the best War Deterrent one could create
Nope. Too busy living their one little life, making historical events for themselves
As for Bush, I do hate him. I think he's scum, and I think that Americans who support this man are ignorant and, above all, disgustingly decadent in the face of an International reality.
I am slowly formulating the opinion that Ignorant America deserved 9/11, whoever really perpetrated it, for letting Bush hi-jack their government, letting him wreck the Kyoto accords, letting him foist un-fathomable depravity on his subjects in the name of Big Business and Special Interest. 3000 New-Yorkers died. Big Deal. Bush was the worse disaster to happen to the USA.
I've seen worse events than 9/11 occur in smaller states, where the population recovered quickly, and I can list a number of State Systems wherein the populace would never have used such an incident as a justification for futher agressions against ones fellow man like Bush and his CFR friends have done
Huge economic gains, confidence, nationalism, technological leaps
That's a good thing, is it?
My, how Americans love their television-fed stigma, it seems that it gets them out of bed in the morning. Good for the hubris sores I guess
And the teacher seemed to me to be an obsessive conspiracy theorist.
The problem with conspiracy theorists can best be summed up with this simple question: "What if they are right?"
On the moon, you can test the crap out of whatever you want, and nobody will get upset. There's no delicate ecosystem to be rampaged by your killer virus, were it to escape, and you've got tons and tons and tons of vast, empty spaces in which to test your new 'smaller, lighter, cleaner' nukes without upsetting world governments (presumably).
... the Moon gives the USAF a pretty big place within which to safely develop -extremely- dangerous weapons. This would not be a 'deterrent' policy, but an overt "we are there, we're going to use that resource to make mega-weapons in sanctity, and there's not much you can do to stop us".
...
While your first two points are bang-on right, your third point sounds like a paranoid Nader rant against the "military-industrial complex". It undercuts the other two points, which, as I just said, are exactly correct.
Well, you're being reactionary and wanting to defeat my argument before even thinking about it really. What resources do you think I might have meant?
As for MAD, I don't think you understand it as well as you might feel you do
I can think of a few world governments who would consider such a program entirely offensive. But its no surprise to me that an American couldn't see this simple fact
Sorry, I just get a little peeved when somone implies that it's only western countries that are "brainwashing" people.
...
Since Western States are the only ones with which I'm truly familiar, in terms of propagandist policies and practices, its the only one I feel comfortable making such an assessment of.
Had I lived in the Ukraine, or Iraq, or North Korea, I would be more comfortable saying "all States". Even though its easy to imply that they are just as bad as any other, I haven't had the direct experience with it that I have in the West.
That's the only reason I used that term. To me, States are irrelevant anyway
It's hard to argue that the US has any problems controlling the top of the hill these days.
...
Well, wasn't 9/11 supposed to be an example of just how poor the US is controlling its hill? Isn't that the point?
Because if it isn't, it sure sounds to me like your runaway President and all his lackeys are using the 'we lost the hill, lets take it again' argument to beat up a whole lotta foreigners
There is no such word, partner. The proper spelling is "heating".
...
Just because you hear your dumb-ass string-based illiterate President use it on the TeeVee, doesn't mean its common language, or correct
Since when has the U.S. given a fuck about International Treaties?
...
If it did, Rumsfeld & Cheney would be sitting in a Belgian prison right about now, with the child molestors, where they belong
Pretty simple, really:
...
...
a) The moon is easy to defend from Earth-based attacks. It takes a looooot more effort to get something to the Moon from Earth than it does to get something from the Moon to Earth.
b) Anything launched from the Moon can reach any target on the planet, easily enough, using Gravity.
c) The moon has tons of resources for constructing weapons, especially new kinds of nuclear weapons. There's no Greenpeace, no protestors, and no life to destroy, so the Military-Industrial complex can do a looooot of things on the moon that they wouldn't stand a chance doing here on Earth.
This was, incidentally, a hot topic in the 50's and 60's, and I seem to remember more than one sci-fi author getting into a lot of trouble for suggesting that the moon be used militarily in the Cold War
A moon base would be the Top of the Hill for the Pentagon. Its very, very difficult to defend against moon-launched attacks
I remember, a few years ago (5?) that the various Mars programs being fronted by the U.S. government were in direct opposition to the way Zubrin and his Mars Society were proposing we do it - with the "Mars Direct Program".
... and thats good news.
Now, it seems that there are a significant number of Washington players who are getting behind the scientific thinking that Zubrin's program has produced for us
When I think about where we are currently at, evaluating the Mars situation, and where we've come as a result of an independent organization, it warms my heart. The Mars Society have done a lot to get humans thinking about going to Mars properly, and finally it seems like their momentum is having a great effect.
They teach "Propaganda 101" in 'Rhode Island Schools'?
...
The only truly effective propaganda curriculum I've seen (and yes, I've looked for such things) has been available through private institutions, only. I don't think thats going to solve anything
The ability to spot and recognize propagandist activities designed to foment social change, sway the 'group mentality', is something that has to be learned at a very young age. If you have to go to college to learn about how propaganda and mass campaigning work on humanity, its too late.
because its customers are too stupid to understand the issues, or even care about it.
... and still sell crap.
remember, the pop industry is all about stripping consumable income from the teen market, which is by definition naive, immature, and not generally capable of independent thought/analysis.
teenagers are the most important resource in all propaganda campaigns, and the RIAA (and its family of organizations) sure knows how to pitch to them like no other
until schools start teaching "Propaganda 101" as a basic curriculum requirement, Western States are going to continue to be little more than Sheep Factories.
SD/SDIO is more expensive than CF, to implement. SD involves severe licensing fees - if a mfr wants to implement SDIO, they're looking at paying royalties, in some cases. This is not the case with CF.
... but are also fickle enough to be woo'ed over to other, 'competing' formats, just because ... allowing mfr's to get away with having 4 different formats designed to, essentially, do the same thing.
The point is, all these competing storage/"I/O" formats are a pain in the ass for the consumer, and a pain in the ass for developers too. The reason you sometimes see SD + CF in the same device, for example, is that SD is demanded, SDIO is too expensive to pay licensing for, so CF was added to provide a peripheral interface without SDIO legal fees. Stupid!
Again though, it comes back to the stupidity of the consumer, who don't care about all this crap, they just want something which works
man, i still have an i-opener sitting in pieces behind me, thanks for reminding me that i need to put it back together and get it working one of these days. great little machine!
... probably...
this ZVUE thing looks pretty good too, though. of course, it won't be long until there's a linux distro running on it
"Track changes" may be one thing, but using it overtly to propagate dis-info (since its 'hard-won', it must be true) is another thing.
What are the chances we're seeing these 'back-alley hacker-obtained details' about SCO/Microsoft as part of a wider campaign to spread disinfo?
I foresee a whole new market for 'backing track' mfr's now.
Maybe all those starving RIAA bots^H^H^H^Hmuso's can diversify a little.
"Sing me a song for a dime, just as long as you make it mine..."
yeah, but they don't ... yet ... have a monopoly on decent mice.
I haven't used a Microsoft product since the mid-90's. I will never use their products again.
End of story, Microsoft.
bwwwwaaaaahahhaaahaahaaaaa!!!
best soviet joke ever.
oh no. now SCO can ask the court to recuse itself.
shit.
its a huuuge mess. someone push the reset button.
Here's one, for example.
Get ready. Its coming!
Anyone know when "Gateway" is supposed to be finished, or even if its still in production?
...
That's one movie I can honestly say I'm looking forward to seeing, no matter how it comes out
Thanks - this is what I need, since Safari is my current browser of choice. Tah very much!
well, okay
in 1989 i was using a hypertext document system being developed by Wang. I wouldn't say it was a pre-cursor to the web, but it certainly was a 'browse-mode' style interface. In actual fact, I remember that Wang program could remember where I was at in between sessions
in 1990 i built a hypertext document management system (since Wang went the way of the dodo) for a company I was working for and I can honestly say that it -was- a pre-cursor to http
no way to do this in safari? surely some enterprising [Apple,Java,Whatever]script hackers have come up with a way to do this state-save in Safari? I have to admit, I'm a bit of a bitch for Safari, its just so fast and smooth in OSX.
... again.
Still, it does seem awkward that I have to use a plugin for this basic feature... nevertheless, thanks for all the suggestions, I guess its the time of the year when I have to re-evaluate my browser choice