No you don't get a public defender for private lawsuits. Though, with the litigious nature of our society, I DO think that any corporation suing an essentially BROKE individual should be required to pay reasonable attorney fees for the defendant.
Your a poor candidate. If your a lawyer, thats something completely different. Then you can run you own defense. Continually plea the court for extensions when they "bury you" with paper.
I guess what we really need is for the RIAA to sue a "Will Hunting" type.
I'm pretty sure that music companies (even the conglomerates (Sony)) give $0 to universities.
Reason, well their is no source of talent their. People who graduate from universities are skilled are largely skilled. This OBVIOUSLY is not the target recruiting area for the RIAA:-) They especially shy away from music schools;-)
His particular product is effectively an information tool. It was designed to catalog information and present it to potential users.
RIAA's legal action is effectively a gag order. It says, "You can't say anything because it may be against OUR interest". Thats DEFINITELY a FREE SPEECH issue.
I'm wondering where his university stood on this issue. Did CS professors come out and defend his right to to this?? If not it's a bunch of BS. Any good professor would congratulate his student for creating free (and useful) software.
The only mildly beneficial aspect of this case is that this isn't a ruling. It cannot be used as legal precedent in court. The issue over search engines and whether they're covered under DMCA is still open.
Most vendors ignore that fact that towers go UNDER the desk not ON it. The front ports should be ON a diagonal bezel between the front and top of the machine. There useful to EVERYBODY in that position.
I don't think you qualified your statment correctly. How bout, "Every desktop computer sold today runs on a unix derived OS".
Of couse, their are lots of lecacy home computers that run on somthing other than a unix flavor (Amiga, Apple II(gs), Atari).
And don't forget about the Mainframe players who are still VERY relevant for large information transaction systems. As I understand, these are largely CPM based (the OS that NT was inspired by).
I mean, you get a similar thing in Windows, but XP CAN run on a computer made several years ago, and runs on a ton of computers.
Yes, it will run... POORLY.
If you have a several year old computer, it's time to buy a new one. That's the nature of consumer products. Even automobiles (to many degrees) are like that.
The Mac OS upgrade was LONG overdue. The Mac simply does not have a large enough installed base to support to parallell development tracks for most companies. Successfull transition for Mac means a QUICK transition.
Your legacy Macs still work, do they not???? The happy outcome to the story is that MacOSX is a modern OS that runs on top of Macs that now incorporate a LOT of industry standard components. The new Mac hardware should stay more compatible due to standardized components. They should also stay compatible because Apple has taken to selling an upgrade OS EVERY year. Compatible hardware means more sales.
I think your pretty safe buying a new make right now.
Apple needs higher clock speeds to remain competitive in the minds of Joe Consumer and Joe IT Worker (see #2).
Apple doesn't have a prayer of competing in the Joe IT Worker space. Wintel rules business operations, Unix still has a mindshare in web services, Linux is making a LARGE dent in web services, Mac is a non-player.
The first job of any Mac today is to PRESERVE market share in it's core demographics, Elementary Ed, Higher Ed, Graphics Artists, Publication, Videography. BTW, did you know that many hollywood and HBO/Showtime movies are edited with Final Cut Pro????
A PPC970 machine would obviously be a higher end offering for high-end customers that need serious CPU horsepower. Most of the market doesn't NEED 64-bit and probably won't take advantage of it for quite some time.
In the higher ed space, I see that a 64-bit processor could become a great tool for researchers who want to do simulation work on their desktops (and notebooks).
This is especially relevant as IBM starts putting PPC970 CPUs into super-computer rigs running linux variants. It becomes feasible to run the same large scale programs (at a dialed down resolution) on a G5 OSX Mac.
Apple may consider a licensing policy that allows them to REPORT an effective Mhz rating the way that Athlon does.
PPPower 3000, something like that.
Marketing is a game. Apple's failure to play that game could hurt them. I believe that Athlon's XP ratings have been successful and pretty accurate (sans latest offering) regarding the relative merits of their CPUs versus the whiny Honda engine styled P4.
Apple would do well to duplicate this marketing style. Ultimately, it's horsepower that matters not RPM.
Macs originally adapted USB1.1 because it was an EXCELLENT evolution of the Apple Desktop Bus.
Remember, Apple had the original (generic) external peripheral connector. It worked VERY well. You could hook up Keyboards, Mice, Joysticks, Graphics Tablets and other peripherals.
Regarding USB2.0 adoption... Mac users are VERY used to using firewire. Many classes of high-speed external devices were available in firewire LONG before USB2.0 was even released. Why should Apple bother with implementing an alternative standard until their was a large enough pool of devices around to make it a worthwile option for Mac users?????? Why should they help push an alternative standard that confuses the marketplace?????
The fact now is that there is a ton of USB2 devices out their now and it will likely eclipse firewire acceptance in the arena of desktop to peripheral connection. Adopting USB2 now provides value for Macintosh owners. Thats why they are adopting it now.
No way, low bandwidth peripherals will ALWAYS use USB1.1 standard. Why use a more expensive part for a mouse. That have ZERO high-bandwidth requirements
Where USB 1.1 is nearing an end of it's life on the host side. Including SOME USB1.1 and SOME USB2.0 connections makes little sense. However, there are quite a few applications for USB hosting capabilities in handheld devices. The newer ARM based chips are starting to ship with integrated USB hosting. This gives USB1.1 host chipsets a whole new lease on life.
On the device side, USB1.1 will probably live FOREVER. There is no need to make a mouse with USB2.0 bandwidth, especially when the chipsets cost twice as much and your mouse already works fine using the current engineering.
While Firewire does stuff that USB2 cannot (because it's effectively dumb and requires the host CPU), they do compete in a LOT of markets.
Firewire only Consumer digital video Point to multi-point, hi-bandwidth networks
Firewire and USB2: External storage connection - HD CD/DVD
Medium bandwidth imaging, scanners, printers and webcams
Point to Point networking - adhoc networking cables
Satellite peripherals - MP3 players, Handhelds(though I haven't seen a handheld to date that included firewire)
--
So they do compete in MANY markets. It's a shame because firewire was set to take over the high-bandwidth PC peripheral area. Intel announced USB2 and scared off a lot of motherboard manufacturers. USB2 came in late and buggy.
USB2 will never truly be able to compete in the digital video area. I have seen a few recent offerings that stream video over USB2.0, however I expect these to be absolute flops. Despite USB2's higher theoretical bandwidth, it's reliance on the CPU makes it subject to unpredictable dropouts and dropped frames.
Beyond that, the need for a host CPU controller makes it an unreasonable option for handheld and mobile devices. Their "hack" for this area "USB On The Go" is a two year old standard that to date is complete vapor-ware.
It's a real shame that Intel chose to intervene with USB2 and effectively sabotage large scale firewire deployment. The lack of critical mass has kept firewire prices high (with relation to USB) and kept firewire as a niche player in high-performance (low CPU utilization) scenarios.
One last comment, the Firewire folks DID screw up in a way. The 4-pin connector includes no power. That connector (due to it's smaller size) has showed up on all kinds of notebooks. The problem is that plugging a dependent peripheral into these 4-pin plugs does NOT provide power. This puts Firewire at a serious disadvantage when compared to USB. All the USB ports theoretically CAN include power. As much as Sony wanted the smaller connector, I think Apple should have insisted on a small form-factor plug that INCLUDED power capabilities. Certainly, they should have insisted on licensing policies that prevented computers and hubs from including integrated 4-pin, unpowered connectors.
Have no fear. Firewire is alive and well beyond the reach of any of Intel's machinations. The Consumer Electronics has embraced the standard as a replacement for RCA, S-Video, and component video cables. Furthermore, It's widely speculated that some derivative of firewire (firewire 800) will replace DVI (and ultimately RGB-15) as the method of interconnection between computers and digital monitors due to it's ease of fabrication, size (low pin-count) and a plethora of hardware from the TV industry which will run on firewire.
Beyond that, Firewire has some serious applications in the arena of cluster computing and storage area network. The firewire protocol itself is designed to run over CAT-5 and fiber to produce super-bandwidth networks.
So yes, Firewire does do a lot more then USB2. A lot of these things CAN be done on USB (poorly and inefficiently). But it would have been nice if USB2 hadn't butted into the desktop/laptop space and prevented a very, very QUICK introduction of firewire across EVERYTHING (including cell phones and PDAs).
Actually, graphics card CPU speed affects games FAR more than the host CPU. A REALLY fast main-CPU is nice for running lots of concurrent apps and doing simulations which require RAW horsepower.
Check it out at: http://seds.lpl.arizona.edu/nineplanets/nineplanet s/days.html
http://cjvlang.com/Dow/main/dow1.html
Our English planet references are weird because our references are derived from Swedish.
Vikings settle -> Normandy Normans Conquer -> England
And btw, the last day, the day god rested is (Saturn)day, Saturday, Sabado, SABBATH!!! This is the ONLY one of the English weekdays derived from LATIN rather than Swedish due to christian influences. Hence, most christians go to church on the wrong day: the day of the Sun instead of the day of Saturn 8-(
On thing they are lacking is some method for statically demonstrating the nature of plutos rather bizarre "planetoid" orbit. Perhaps suspending it on a very LONG pole parallell to it's declined orbit would convey this.
When China starts building Carriers, destroyers, and hunter-killer subs, then I'll be worried. For now I'm just suspicious are wary. They may have millions of men at arms. However, without a serious Navy, in order to reach Taiwan, they'd have to swim:-)
As far as Europe goes, they can take care of themselves. The ex-Soviet miliatary can hardly handle muslim rebels now. The EU is gradually going to replace the function of NATO. NATO is really turning into a dead organization.
What is needed is a Pacific Treaty Organization involving the US, Japan, Korea, Taiwan, Phillipines, Indonesia, Australia and perhaps India, maybe even Russia. Indeed China does seme to have some extra-territorial aspirations. It is a totalitarian regime that seems to have a sense dominating that region. Unlike Imperial Japan, they seem to have the resources to do it.
Of course, China would be REALLY pissed to see a permanent US Miliatary/Naval presence in Taiwan. But effectively, what could they do about it??? What put down an embargo against the US and bankrupt themselves????
I agree that the best way to win a war is to prevent it from starting. The Cold War was expensive, but it probably prevented Armageddon. I disagreed with Bush's diplomacy regarding Iraq, but ultimately agreed that Saddam's regime had to be ended (for MANY reasons (Remember Kuwait was to Iraq as the Hinterland/Austria was to Germany)). He was out for regional domination and was pursuing Chemical/Biological weapons to pursue that goal to an end.
Likewise, Taiwan may be to China was the Hinterland/Austria was to Hitler and Kuwait was to Hussein. Preventing that "first strike" is key to stopping the forthcoming wave from such a move. Allowing it would invite further rounds of territorial expansion and promises that after THAT territory, they'll be satisfied.
Ummm, well a after Hitler took over and started re-arming a LOT of people predicted this. The biggest of whom was WINSTON CHURCHILL. Need I give you lecture on appeasment and the chicken-shit leadership in Europe at the time who chose paying territorial bribes over fighting.
Second, the Japanese strike on Pearl Harbor was a hit-and-run affair. It was designed to prevent the US from ENTERING a Pacific War. It was the first stroke in a lightning campaign intended to put the US Navy so far in the whole, that they would be inclined to simply pursue peace. Hirihito knew that this was Japan's ONLY hope of being victorious over the US.
Beyond that the resources needed for a ground invasion would have been far more substantial. More boats, more men, more planes, more food, more fuel. A bigger fleet means a bigger chance of getting caught and a greater succeptability to submarine attack. Additionally, such a fleet would be hindered by a need to protect troop and supply ships if they were discovered.
Now while the US had no substantial Army at the opening bell of World War 2.. We still had the BIGGEST NAVY in the world surpassing both Great Britain AND Japan. Hirihito knew this all too well.
The entire Pacific fleet (save Pearl Harbor (hmmm...??)) WAS on alert status at the time. We did have other fleet resources available at the time. In order to assure victory for invasion, the Japanese would need to keep their fleet in the Hawaii area to protect their invading forces against American Naval reinforcement. This would effectively make them SITTING ducks for submarines and responding US carriers.
Hirihito WAS a brilliant Naval commander. He had no for-knowledge of the poor state of readiness that the Pearl Harbor fleet would be in that day. Had the base been alerted in sufficient time to the approaching strike force, it's very likely that Hirihito's fleet would have had it's asses handed to them being so deep into US controlled waters (In fact they WERE detected on RADAR, the duty officer was just too STUPID to believe it). Had they been detected at the proper time, they could have been encircled and annihalated by a combination of pursuing forces from Pearl Harbor and intercepting vessels who were on patrol further in the Pacific. Had this occured, it's likely that the Phillipines would NEVER have been taken.
So you see it was absoluetly vital that the mission be "hit and run". Furthermore, their only targets could be miliatary, directly targeting civilian facilities (through invasion or otherwise) would necessitate an American committment to full warfare. They DID NOT invade Pearl Harbor because they COULD NOT without placing their entire plan of SE Asia dominance at risk all in one stroke.
First, America is NOT a Miliatary Empire. It is an Economic Empire. Furthermore, the empire is becoming more disattached from it's citizens and more subservient to our new "lords" - corporate CEOs.
Second, Rome's ultimate failure was that they started paying tribute to the "barbarians" instead of kicking their asses. I guess to much time watching TV... errr Colliseum Games was making Romans a soft lot.
Third, the Legions were never under a central unified command. Legions were controlled directly by their generals who paid homage to the Emperor. Whenever the Emperor kicked off, the Legion commanders would typically fight it out for control (as Contantine did when invoking Christ in his battle for the throne). If you did not command a legion, you were nothing in Roman politics.
By contrast, our miliatary is subservient to civil authority. The president may be the "commander-in-chief", but congress writes their paychecks. If a Defense committee in either chamber calls a general to testify, that general MUST appear.
As a compromise, you may consider making architecture changes that allow independent implementations of proprietary stuff you make (largely through interfaces). Of course, you would include a null implementation that effectively disables the feature. You DO effectively tell everyone else WHAT you're doing, but not EXACTLY HOW you're doing it. They have to implement that themselves.
If others release implementations that are better, than you could use theirs instead. If your stuff is so hot that no-one else can touch it, well I suppose you'd keep using your version.
Such a methodology would also create an excellent model for competition (public and private) within open source. Additionally, it would raise the modularity of code so one could essentially mix and match.
Geez, I could understand your Copyrights belonging to PARLIMENT, but the Queen!!!!!! Don't they own enough stuff all ready.
Seriously brits, it's time to dump those psuedo-sovereigns and get a constitution. You might even find the Irish a little less hostile if Wales, Scotland, England and Northern Ireland all had a degree of formal constitutional sovereignty in a British Republic:-)
Uhhh, Cartels don't plant random patches of plants in US national forests. Hippie Stoners plant random patches of Marijauna in national forests.
Marijaunau is too easy to grow to be really worried about. Hell, farm fields in the middle of Indiana have Marijauna patches in them.
BTW, if you stumble across a marijauna patch in the woods with a "criminal" there. Best thing to do is give a piece sign, say "COOL DUDE!!!!" and go about your business.
A moral aversion to Marijauna may be morally correct by some ethos but it's completely pointless. The stuff is just too damn easy to grow.
Slashdot Mirror
Ummm,
No you don't get a public defender for private lawsuits. Though, with the litigious nature of our society, I DO think that any corporation suing an essentially BROKE individual should be required to pay reasonable attorney fees for the defendant.
Your a poor candidate. If your a lawyer, thats something completely different. Then you can run you own defense. Continually plea the court for extensions when they "bury you" with paper.
I guess what we really need is for the RIAA to sue a "Will Hunting" type.
I'm pretty sure that music companies (even the conglomerates (Sony)) give $0 to universities.
:-) They especially shy away from music schools ;-)
Reason, well their is no source of talent their. People who graduate from universities are skilled are largely skilled. This OBVIOUSLY is not the target recruiting area for the RIAA
I wonder if he contacted the ACLU.
His particular product is effectively an information tool. It was designed to catalog information and present it to potential users.
RIAA's legal action is effectively a gag order. It says, "You can't say anything because it may be against OUR interest". Thats DEFINITELY a FREE SPEECH issue.
I'm wondering where his university stood on this issue. Did CS professors come out and defend his right to to this?? If not it's a bunch of BS. Any good professor would congratulate his student for creating free (and useful) software.
The only mildly beneficial aspect of this case is that this isn't a ruling. It cannot be used as legal precedent in court. The issue over search engines and whether they're covered under DMCA is still open.
Well said.
Most vendors ignore that fact that towers go UNDER the desk not ON it. The front ports should be ON a diagonal bezel between the front and top of the machine. There useful to EVERYBODY in that position.
Umm,
I don't think you qualified your statment correctly. How bout, "Every desktop computer sold today runs on a unix derived OS".
Of couse, their are lots of lecacy home computers that run on somthing other than a unix flavor (Amiga, Apple II(gs), Atari).
And don't forget about the Mainframe players who are still VERY relevant for large information transaction systems. As I understand, these are largely CPM based (the OS that NT was inspired by).
I mean, you get a similar thing in Windows, but XP CAN run on a computer made several years ago, and runs on a ton of computers.
... POORLY.
Yes, it will run
If you have a several year old computer, it's time to buy a new one. That's the nature of consumer products. Even automobiles (to many degrees) are like that.
The Mac OS upgrade was LONG overdue. The Mac simply does not have a large enough installed base to support to parallell development tracks for most companies. Successfull transition for Mac means a QUICK transition.
Your legacy Macs still work, do they not???? The happy outcome to the story is that MacOSX is a modern OS that runs on top of Macs that now incorporate a LOT of industry standard components. The new Mac hardware should stay more compatible due to standardized components. They should also stay compatible because Apple has taken to selling an upgrade OS EVERY year. Compatible hardware means more sales.
I think your pretty safe buying a new make right now.
Apple needs higher clock speeds to remain competitive in the minds of Joe Consumer and Joe IT Worker (see #2).
Apple doesn't have a prayer of competing in the Joe IT Worker space. Wintel rules business operations, Unix still has a mindshare in web services, Linux is making a LARGE dent in web services, Mac is a non-player.
The first job of any Mac today is to PRESERVE market share in it's core demographics, Elementary Ed, Higher Ed, Graphics Artists, Publication, Videography. BTW, did you know that many hollywood and HBO/Showtime movies are edited with Final Cut Pro????
A PPC970 machine would obviously be a higher end offering for high-end customers that need serious CPU horsepower. Most of the market doesn't NEED 64-bit and probably won't take advantage of it for quite some time.
In the higher ed space, I see that a 64-bit processor could become a great tool for researchers who want to do simulation work on their desktops (and notebooks).
This is especially relevant as IBM starts putting PPC970 CPUs into super-computer rigs running linux variants. It becomes feasible to run the same large scale programs (at a dialed down resolution) on a G5 OSX Mac.
Apple may consider a licensing policy that allows them to REPORT an effective Mhz rating the way that Athlon does.
PPPower 3000, something like that.
Marketing is a game. Apple's failure to play that game could hurt them. I believe that Athlon's XP ratings have been successful and pretty accurate (sans latest offering) regarding the relative merits of their CPUs versus the whiny Honda engine styled P4.
Apple would do well to duplicate this marketing style. Ultimately, it's horsepower that matters not RPM.
I agree. I believe that iBooks would do well with as convertible tablet Macs (SlateBooks).
Macs originally adapted USB1.1 because it was an EXCELLENT evolution of the Apple Desktop Bus.
... Mac users are VERY used to using firewire. Many classes of high-speed external devices were available in firewire LONG before USB2.0 was even released. Why should Apple bother with implementing an alternative standard until their was a large enough pool of devices around to make it a worthwile option for Mac users?????? Why should they help push an alternative standard that confuses the marketplace?????
Remember, Apple had the original (generic) external peripheral connector. It worked VERY well. You could hook up Keyboards, Mice, Joysticks, Graphics Tablets and other peripherals.
Regarding USB2.0 adoption
The fact now is that there is a ton of USB2 devices out their now and it will likely eclipse firewire acceptance in the arena of desktop to peripheral connection. Adopting USB2 now provides value for Macintosh owners. Thats why they are adopting it now.
No way, low bandwidth peripherals will ALWAYS use USB1.1 standard. Why use a more expensive part for a mouse. That have ZERO high-bandwidth requirements
Where USB 1.1 is nearing an end of it's life on the host side. Including SOME USB1.1 and SOME USB2.0 connections makes little sense. However, there are quite a few applications for USB hosting capabilities in handheld devices. The newer ARM based chips are starting to ship with integrated USB hosting. This gives USB1.1 host chipsets a whole new lease on life.
On the device side, USB1.1 will probably live FOREVER. There is no need to make a mouse with USB2.0 bandwidth, especially when the chipsets cost twice as much and your mouse already works fine using the current engineering.
Ummm,
While Firewire does stuff that USB2 cannot (because it's effectively dumb and requires the host CPU), they do compete in a LOT of markets.
Firewire only
Consumer digital video
Point to multi-point, hi-bandwidth networks
Firewire and USB2:
External storage connection - HD CD/DVD
Medium bandwidth imaging, scanners, printers and webcams
Point to Point networking - adhoc networking cables
Satellite peripherals - MP3 players, Handhelds(though I haven't seen a handheld to date that included firewire)
--
So they do compete in MANY markets. It's a shame because firewire was set to take over the high-bandwidth PC peripheral area. Intel announced USB2 and scared off a lot of motherboard manufacturers. USB2 came in late and buggy.
USB2 will never truly be able to compete in the digital video area. I have seen a few recent offerings that stream video over USB2.0, however I expect these to be absolute flops. Despite USB2's higher theoretical bandwidth, it's reliance on the CPU makes it subject to unpredictable dropouts and dropped frames.
Beyond that, the need for a host CPU controller makes it an unreasonable option for handheld and mobile devices. Their "hack" for this area "USB On The Go" is a two year old standard that to date is complete vapor-ware.
It's a real shame that Intel chose to intervene with USB2 and effectively sabotage large scale firewire deployment. The lack of critical mass has kept firewire prices high (with relation to USB) and kept firewire as a niche player in high-performance (low CPU utilization) scenarios.
One last comment, the Firewire folks DID screw up in a way. The 4-pin connector includes no power. That connector (due to it's smaller size) has showed up on all kinds of notebooks. The problem is that plugging a dependent peripheral into these 4-pin plugs does NOT provide power. This puts Firewire at a serious disadvantage when compared to USB. All the USB ports theoretically CAN include power. As much as Sony wanted the smaller connector, I think Apple should have insisted on a small form-factor plug that INCLUDED power capabilities. Certainly, they should have insisted on licensing policies that prevented computers and hubs from including integrated 4-pin, unpowered connectors.
Have no fear. Firewire is alive and well beyond the reach of any of Intel's machinations. The Consumer Electronics has embraced the standard as a replacement for RCA, S-Video, and component video cables. Furthermore, It's widely speculated that some derivative of firewire (firewire 800) will replace DVI (and ultimately RGB-15) as the method of interconnection between computers and digital monitors due to it's ease of fabrication, size (low pin-count) and a plethora of hardware from the TV industry which will run on firewire.
Beyond that, Firewire has some serious applications in the arena of cluster computing and storage area network. The firewire protocol itself is designed to run over CAT-5 and fiber to produce super-bandwidth networks.
So yes, Firewire does do a lot more then USB2. A lot of these things CAN be done on USB (poorly and inefficiently). But it would have been nice if USB2 hadn't butted into the desktop/laptop space and prevented a very, very QUICK introduction of firewire across EVERYTHING (including cell phones and PDAs).
Actually, graphics card CPU speed affects games FAR more than the host CPU. A REALLY fast main-CPU is nice for running lots of concurrent apps and doing simulations which require RAW horsepower.
The names of weekdays are named after planets.
t s/days.html
Check it out at: http://seds.lpl.arizona.edu/nineplanets/nineplane
http://cjvlang.com/Dow/main/dow1.html
Our English planet references are weird because our references are derived from Swedish.
Vikings settle -> Normandy
Normans Conquer -> England
And btw, the last day, the day god rested is (Saturn)day, Saturday, Sabado, SABBATH!!! This is the ONLY one of the English weekdays derived from LATIN rather than Swedish due to christian influences. Hence, most christians go to church on the wrong day: the day of the Sun instead of the day of Saturn 8-(
In Einstein's world, the model is correct.
:-)
It is a straight plane in CURVED space
On thing they are lacking is some method for statically demonstrating the nature of plutos rather bizarre "planetoid" orbit. Perhaps suspending it on a very LONG pole parallell to it's declined orbit would convey this.
Actually, at that scale, it would be better modeled with clouds of dust. Each and every one of your gravel stones would effectively be earth killers.
When China starts building Carriers, destroyers, and hunter-killer subs, then I'll be worried. For now I'm just suspicious are wary. They may have millions of men at arms. However, without a serious Navy, in order to reach Taiwan, they'd have to swim :-)
As far as Europe goes, they can take care of themselves. The ex-Soviet miliatary can hardly handle muslim rebels now. The EU is gradually going to replace the function of NATO. NATO is really turning into a dead organization.
What is needed is a Pacific Treaty Organization involving the US, Japan, Korea, Taiwan, Phillipines, Indonesia, Australia and perhaps India, maybe even Russia. Indeed China does seme to have some extra-territorial aspirations. It is a totalitarian regime that seems to have a sense dominating that region. Unlike Imperial Japan, they seem to have the resources to do it.
Of course, China would be REALLY pissed to see a permanent US Miliatary/Naval presence in Taiwan. But effectively, what could they do about it??? What put down an embargo against the US and bankrupt themselves????
I agree that the best way to win a war is to prevent it from starting. The Cold War was expensive, but it probably prevented Armageddon. I disagreed with Bush's diplomacy regarding Iraq, but ultimately agreed that Saddam's regime had to be ended (for MANY reasons (Remember Kuwait was to Iraq as the Hinterland/Austria was to Germany)). He was out for regional domination and was pursuing Chemical/Biological weapons to pursue that goal to an end.
Likewise, Taiwan may be to China was the Hinterland/Austria was to Hitler and Kuwait was to Hussein. Preventing that "first strike" is key to stopping the forthcoming wave from such a move. Allowing it would invite further rounds of territorial expansion and promises that after THAT territory, they'll be satisfied.
Ummm, well a after Hitler took over and started re-arming a LOT of people predicted this. The biggest of whom was WINSTON CHURCHILL. Need I give you lecture on appeasment and the chicken-shit leadership in Europe at the time who chose paying territorial bribes over fighting.
Second, the Japanese strike on Pearl Harbor was a hit-and-run affair. It was designed to prevent the US from ENTERING a Pacific War. It was the first stroke in a lightning campaign intended to put the US Navy so far in the whole, that they would be inclined to simply pursue peace. Hirihito knew that this was Japan's ONLY hope of being victorious over the US.
Beyond that the resources needed for a ground invasion would have been far more substantial. More boats, more men, more planes, more food, more fuel. A bigger fleet means a bigger chance of getting caught and a greater succeptability to submarine attack. Additionally, such a fleet would be hindered by a need to protect troop and supply ships if they were discovered.
Now while the US had no substantial Army at the opening bell of World War 2.. We still had the BIGGEST NAVY in the world surpassing both Great Britain AND Japan. Hirihito knew this all too well.
The entire Pacific fleet (save Pearl Harbor (hmmm...??)) WAS on alert status at the time. We did have other fleet resources available at the time. In order to assure victory for invasion, the Japanese would need to keep their fleet in the Hawaii area to protect their invading forces against American Naval reinforcement. This would effectively make them SITTING ducks for submarines and responding US carriers.
Hirihito WAS a brilliant Naval commander. He had no for-knowledge of the poor state of readiness that the Pearl Harbor fleet would be in that day. Had the base been alerted in sufficient time to the approaching strike force, it's very likely that Hirihito's fleet would have had it's asses handed to them being so deep into US controlled waters (In fact they WERE detected on RADAR, the duty officer was just too STUPID to believe it). Had they been detected at the proper time, they could have been encircled and annihalated by a combination of pursuing forces from Pearl Harbor and intercepting vessels who were on patrol further in the Pacific. Had this occured, it's likely that the Phillipines would NEVER have been taken.
So you see it was absoluetly vital that the mission be "hit and run". Furthermore, their only targets could be miliatary, directly targeting civilian facilities (through invasion or otherwise) would necessitate an American committment to full warfare. They DID NOT invade Pearl Harbor because they COULD NOT without placing their entire plan of SE Asia dominance at risk all in one stroke.
Well,
... errr Colliseum Games was making Romans a soft lot.
First, America is NOT a Miliatary Empire. It is an Economic Empire. Furthermore, the empire is becoming more disattached from it's citizens and more subservient to our new "lords" - corporate CEOs.
Second, Rome's ultimate failure was that they started paying tribute to the "barbarians" instead of kicking their asses. I guess to much time watching TV
Third, the Legions were never under a central unified command. Legions were controlled directly by their generals who paid homage to the Emperor. Whenever the Emperor kicked off, the Legion commanders would typically fight it out for control (as Contantine did when invoking Christ in his battle for the throne). If you did not command a legion, you were nothing in Roman politics.
By contrast, our miliatary is subservient to civil authority. The president may be the "commander-in-chief", but congress writes their paychecks. If a Defense committee in either chamber calls a general to testify, that general MUST appear.
First Person Shooters (if done correctly) CAN teach you not to be STUPID!!!!
I think thats was the gist of the US Army's FPS. Stay low, work in a team, follow orders. No Rambo Bullshit, you'll get your ass shot off.
Honestly, for special forces training, I think the game 'Thief' would be more appropriate. Sneek around and kill ONLY if absoluetly necessary.
As a compromise, you may consider making architecture changes that allow independent implementations of proprietary stuff you make (largely through interfaces). Of course, you would include a null implementation that effectively disables the feature. You DO effectively tell everyone else WHAT you're doing, but not EXACTLY HOW you're doing it. They have to implement that themselves.
If others release implementations that are better, than you could use theirs instead. If your stuff is so hot that no-one else can touch it, well I suppose you'd keep using your version.
Such a methodology would also create an excellent model for competition (public and private) within open source. Additionally, it would raise the modularity of code so one could essentially mix and match.
Boy that sucks.
:-)
Geez, I could understand your Copyrights belonging to PARLIMENT, but the Queen!!!!!! Don't they own enough stuff all ready.
Seriously brits, it's time to dump those psuedo-sovereigns and get a constitution. You might even find the Irish a little less hostile if Wales, Scotland, England and Northern Ireland all had a degree of formal constitutional sovereignty in a British Republic
You can't sell passes for trail use if everyone else doesn't have to pay. A better tactic would be a donation box for folks who use trails.
Some parks do indeed charge for parking, and thats a good way to generate revenue.
Uhhh, Cartels don't plant random patches of plants in US national forests. Hippie Stoners plant random patches of Marijauna in national forests.
Marijaunau is too easy to grow to be really worried about. Hell, farm fields in the middle of Indiana have Marijauna patches in them.
BTW, if you stumble across a marijauna patch in the woods with a "criminal" there. Best thing to do is give a piece sign, say "COOL DUDE!!!!" and go about your business.
A moral aversion to Marijauna may be morally correct by some ethos but it's completely pointless. The stuff is just too damn easy to grow.