Doh, but I am reminded of the telephone company's 90-volt bulbs... that was POV (power over voice).
On a related topic, I think we all may need backups; substitutes for electric power, connectivity for voice and data, not to mention TV. I guess food comes in handy too...
I really do care about this. Conventional wisdom says think globally and act locally. Yes, vote but first find out who you are voting for.
Also, understand the issues. The United States, known locally as America is the dominant force in the world. Supportive of Israel against Palestine, for one. For two, aggressively killing people, including young Americans, in Afghanistan and Iraq.
Does your Senator, city councilman or Congressional Representative support your view? If not, vote against them.
As noted below the only alternative is armed rebellion and that is not a viable alternative in my opinion.
Educate yourself about the issues. Start with world hunger versus the US. Your happy life versus being bombed daily. Another interesting question is the US trade deficit -- do you understand what your economy exports (US dollars) in return for the world's good and resources.
There are many resources to investigate, take a look at http://cursor.org for example, or the UN website to get a better idea.
Mod parent up... Yes, Wolfowitz, Perle, Cheney definitely have advocated invasion of Iraq for over 10 years.
They believe it is in the U.S. interest to begin playing public hardball as a superpower in the wake of the Soviet collapse, and truly dominate the world economically and militarily.
I respect the opinion of an American who understands this and still suppports his government, but know this:
There are many people in the world who do not want to see this aggression, and you are a fool if you think that it is justified by saying, "Our way of life is better."
If you want to interest me in the discussion, answer this question:
How can an aggressive takeover of Iraq, Iran, Syria and other states make the world a safer place?
"There are going to be more and more issues like this, but this is what happens when you empower the public in the way that the internet has"
I agree -- some of this was worked out by Larry Niven, I believe, in a story called "Flash Crowd" which imagines a future where matter transmission booths exist. I think that everyone converges at certain spots because the word has gotten out.
Kinda like slashdotting.
The following poster's point, that eastern Canada has enough votes that the election is decided before the western provinces even close their polls, is different from the idea that instant communication can affect political and legal decisions in progress.
One is a criticism of the Canadian parliamentary system, the second is a challenge to our systems as a whole.
"customized Web site without the Web site creator writing any HTML or other programming code", based on "a plurality of pre-stored templates"
In 1996 I wrote JavaScript that would give a different action based on browser detection. This did require "programming."
I recently wrote a content manangement system (1999) and e-commerce site, the creator does no programming. Steuben.com.
Same workaround: different browsers see different-looking page (CSS or simplified version for IE 3.0, which cannot deliver different colored links on the same page). Similar effects for other features, pop-up windows etc. Also different menu actions. Many done with included page fragments ("templates").
Perhaps a lawyer would say I am the creator, although the tools were handed over to non-techies, they loaded all the images, content and products and now run the site.
Another answer is browser detection sending to a Flash or vanilla html site. Which are "templates."
Perhaps I made an error placing the decimal point... but $60 billion is probably not far off for total costs of the Persian Gulf conflict:
"During Operation Desert Storm U.S. Air Force aircraft flew about 70,000 sorties (i.e., round-trip missions by individual aircraft) and incurred incremental costs (i.e., costs above and beyond those incurred as part of normal peacetime operations) of $14-15 billion (FY 1999 dollars)." from CSBA
The Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments (CSBA) estimates that the U.S. portion of the just-concluded NATO air campaign against Yugoslavia cost some $1.8 billion to $3.0 billion.
- Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments (CSBA)
We spend millions on an action like this one. For every enemy killed the cost is hundreds of thousands of dollars. Why don't we bomb them with money?
Or, to be realistic, can't the U.S. find a better way to spend those tax dollars: medicine, food, education, infrastructure development instead of weapons.
Perhaps you've heard of the military-industrial complex...
There's some good alternative points of view available on counterpunch.org -- including on-the-ground information about Afghanistan and the building of an airstrip in Northern Alliance territory.
Dont forget that all this technology is phenomenally expensive.
During the Persian Gulf war about 600,000 persons were killed at a reported cost of about $1,000,000 per casualty. (My own calculation based on news reports and the French casualty estimates.)
Remember the defense contractors benefit from this, and, to be fair, so does our economy.
I live in Brooklyn and work in downtown NYC. The first day I was allowed back into downtown (Monday 9/17) met my partners and found that our building had just been powered up by mobile generators. That afternoon our colo servers gained access to the Internet. A week later Con Edison grid power was restored. We are back in business.
2. Most people trust and support their (Western) government.
Discussions with neighbors tell me that people are supporting the U.S. actions. Military personnel are, as to be expected, ready to fight and do their duty.
3. Most Americans are uninformed about the current situation and the U.S.'s history and how it is regarded in the Middle East.
The U.S. is seen as a dangerous, evil force amongst citizens of these countries. U.S. supported Hussein, bin Laden, and oppressive governments. It is seen as an enemy of these people. More background can be found at http://www.counterpunch.org (counterpunch.org). People I've spoken to blame the media for not informing them. It is our duty to inform ourselves about this situation and its origins.
4. Democracy is wasted
Unless citizens inform themselves and vote responsibility, they have no right to complain or be angry about attacks against them or actions taken by their leaders. We have a huge number of information resouces available. Use them!
Slashdot Mirror
"And what the heck is pre-trash inspection?"
I think Ogg Vorbis is seen as a competitor to QuickTime.
POE! Not a good idea!
... that was POV (power over voice).
...
Doh, but I am reminded of the telephone company's 90-volt bulbs
On a related topic, I think we all may need backups; substitutes for electric power, connectivity for voice and data, not to mention TV. I guess food comes in handy too
I really do care about this. Conventional wisdom says think globally and act locally. Yes, vote but first find out who you are voting for.
Also, understand the issues. The United States, known locally as America is the dominant force in the world. Supportive of Israel against Palestine, for one. For two, aggressively killing people, including young Americans, in Afghanistan and Iraq.
Does your Senator, city councilman or Congressional Representative support your view? If not, vote against them.
As noted below the only alternative is armed rebellion and that is not a viable alternative in my opinion.
Educate yourself about the issues. Start with world hunger versus the US. Your happy life versus being bombed daily. Another interesting question is the US trade deficit -- do you understand what your economy exports (US dollars) in return for the world's good and resources.
There are many resources to investigate, take a look at http://cursor.org for example, or the UN website to get a better idea.
Mod parent up ... Yes, Wolfowitz, Perle, Cheney definitely have advocated invasion of Iraq for over 10 years.
They believe it is in the U.S. interest to begin playing public hardball as a superpower in the wake of the Soviet collapse, and truly dominate the world economically and militarily.
I respect the opinion of an American who understands this and still suppports his government, but know this:
There are many people in the world who do not want to see this aggression, and you are a fool if you think that it is justified by saying, "Our way of life is better."
If you want to interest me in the discussion, answer this question:
How can an aggressive takeover of Iraq, Iran, Syria and other states make the world a safer place?
Or a better place.
"There are going to be more and more issues like this, but this is what happens when you empower the public in the way that the internet has"
I agree -- some of this was worked out by Larry Niven, I believe, in a story called "Flash Crowd" which imagines a future where matter transmission booths exist. I think that everyone converges at certain spots because the word has gotten out.
Kinda like slashdotting.
The following poster's point, that eastern Canada has enough votes that the election is decided before the western provinces even close their polls, is different from the idea that instant communication can affect political and legal decisions in progress.
One is a criticism of the Canadian parliamentary system, the second is a challenge to our systems as a whole.
My tuppence.
Someone has to answer this.
"customized Web site without the Web site creator writing any HTML or other programming code", based on "a plurality of pre-stored templates"
In 1996 I wrote JavaScript that would give a different action based on browser detection. This did require "programming."
I recently wrote a content manangement system (1999) and e-commerce site, the creator does no programming. Steuben.com.
Same workaround: different browsers see different-looking page (CSS or simplified version for IE 3.0, which cannot deliver different colored links on the same page). Similar effects for other features, pop-up windows etc. Also different menu actions. Many done with included page fragments ("templates").
Perhaps a lawyer would say I am the creator, although the tools were handed over to non-techies, they loaded all the images, content and products and now run the site.
Another answer is browser detection sending to a Flash or vanilla html site. Which are "templates."
Am I missing the point?
Perhaps I made an error placing the decimal point ... but $60 billion is probably not far off for total costs of the Persian Gulf conflict:
"During Operation Desert Storm U.S. Air Force aircraft flew about 70,000 sorties (i.e., round-trip missions by individual aircraft) and incurred incremental costs (i.e., costs above and beyond those incurred as part of normal peacetime operations) of $14-15 billion (FY 1999 dollars)." from CSBA
The Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments (CSBA) estimates that the U.S. portion of the just-concluded NATO air campaign against Yugoslavia cost some $1.8 billion to $3.0 billion.
- Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments (CSBA)
We spend millions on an action like this one. For every enemy killed the cost is hundreds of thousands of dollars. Why don't we bomb them with money?
...
Or, to be realistic, can't the U.S. find a better way to spend those tax dollars: medicine, food, education, infrastructure development instead of weapons.
Perhaps you've heard of the military-industrial complex
There's some good alternative points of view available on counterpunch.org -- including on-the-ground information about Afghanistan and the building of an airstrip in Northern Alliance territory.
I keep my info in a house.
Dont forget that all this technology is phenomenally expensive.
During the Persian Gulf war about 600,000 persons were killed at a reported cost of about $1,000,000 per casualty. (My own calculation based on news reports and the French casualty estimates.)
Remember the defense contractors benefit from this, and, to be fair, so does our economy.
Is it the best application of our tax money?
I keep my info in a house.
1. North America is well-prepared for disasters.
I live in Brooklyn and work in downtown NYC. The first day I was allowed back into downtown (Monday 9/17) met my partners and found that our building had just been powered up by mobile generators. That afternoon our colo servers gained access to the Internet. A week later Con Edison grid power was restored. We are back in business.
2. Most people trust and support their (Western) government.
Discussions with neighbors tell me that people are supporting the U.S. actions. Military personnel are, as to be expected, ready to fight and do their duty.
3. Most Americans are uninformed about the current situation and the U.S.'s history and how it is regarded in the Middle East.
The U.S. is seen as a dangerous, evil force amongst citizens of these countries. U.S. supported Hussein, bin Laden, and oppressive governments. It is seen as an enemy of these people. More background can be found at http://www.counterpunch.org (counterpunch.org). People I've spoken to blame the media for not informing them. It is our duty to inform ourselves about this situation and its origins.
4. Democracy is wasted
Unless citizens inform themselves and vote responsibility, they have no right to complain or be angry about attacks against them or actions taken by their leaders. We have a huge number of information resouces available. Use them!
I keep my info in a house.