This is the state of mobile computing? Look how think that sucker is! How about a little style? Seems if I want to read something on the john I'm still going to have to print it out and shred it when I'm done. At least I get to make environmentalists cry.
Seeing as the Kliper has been in development since before Bush took office I think not. The Kliper is a response to the space shuttle not the CEV. The sole reason why the Kliper is expected to be worth the cost is that, unlike the space shuttle, it will actually be highly reusable. This gives it a major advantage over the Soyuz, although I personally think the Soyuz is the "little spacecraft that could" and the RSA should focus on reusing modules of the Soyuz in space instead of letting them burn up in the atmosphere. David Anderman has suggested that spent Soyuz/Progress modules could be used to build a space station at the Moon/Earth L1 point. The RSA recently said they could take paying customers on a trip around the Moon within the next 5 years and that, with sufficient funding, they could land paying customers on the Moon within the next 10. That is, they could land a sufficiently enthusiastic billionair on the Moon before the CEV has even launched. Of course, talk is cheap, but the RSA has proven they have the skill and experience to provide manned space services.
I believe the goal of islamic militants is to prevent the "corruption" of their homelands by the west. Or to sum it up in a dumbed down Americanism "they hate our freedom". Islamic terrorists associate personal liberty with selfish destructive moral relativism.. they attack the middle class of their society so the poor will pay attention to how corrupt they have become.
Maybe you missed the part about there not being some global conspiracy behind these things. You can't say these incidents are not isolated just because there's been a lot of them. Terrorist attacks are just as isolated as street crime. There isn't some evil figure lurking in the shadows organising the city's criminals to strategically mug people and there isn't some evil figure lurking in the shadows organising the world's terrorists. Neither Osama bin Laden, the current leaders of Palestine or the USSR are organising the world's terrorists. Terrorists are not members of some secret army that you can fight, they're just ordinary people who have been lured into an idiology that advocates the use of violence. Sometimes they're killing people to cause "shock" which they hope will result in social change. Sometimes they are killing people for simple revenge. What they're not killing people for is some overreaching global war of terrorism.
The broader question: is the treat of terrorism credible? Considering that politicians made up the whole concept of "the terror network" from disinformation planted in european newspapers and then failed to listen to the CIA when they told them the Soviet Union was not funding terrorist groups and in-fact it was the CIA that was planting the propaganda, how can we possibly believe that terrorism is capable of any more than the few isolated incidents that have befallen the world in the last dozen years? We're talking about a total number of deaths less than a year of ordinary people driving cars on the national highways. The chances of becoming a victim of terrorism are less than the chances of being hit by falling space debris.
Riiiight. So if you were hypnotised and you experienced a simulation of your mother beating you with a wooden spoon you wouldn't feel any anomosity towards your mother afterwards? If you were made to believe that your wife was killed you wouldn't find yourself emotionally distanced from her when you were reunited? Wow! Turns out everything we know about hypnosis is wrong, thanks random person on Slashdot.
If you willingly let yourself be put into a hypnotic state and then get exposed to a traumatic simulation it's a lot more likely to have a dangerous effect on you than engaging in the same simulation when not under hypnosis.
I remember talking to a psychologist once who, once learning that I was a computer guy, suggested that combining a form of auto-entraining hypnosis with some creative input devices you could easily make an immersive environment with today's technology. The only problem is that by allowing yourself to be hypnotised you're putting yourself into a highly suggestive state (duh, that's how it works) and as such you really need to trust the creator of the experience that you are being fed. If, for example, you're experiencing an online environment, you're allowing random unknown people to have intimate access to your mind. Not exactly something I'd be interested in doing. But consider the fiction of Neuromancer: "a consensual hallucination". That's what we're talking about here. The dangers experienced by Case were real and could lead to his death if he took on a system he couldn't control. Regardless, Case accepted the risks because the rewards were so great.. perhaps that kind of attitude is something we should strive towards. Our aversion to risk is limiting our sensory perception of our shared experiences. We're limited to screens and keyboards. Sure, our screens have gotten bigger and more colourful and we've got joysticks and mice, and surround sound, but the experience of cyberspace is so poor compared to meatspace. And that's not getting any better.
First of all, there's a space in the url of your sig for no apparent reason which means I don't know if you're talking about bug 1105 or bug 11054. As bug 1105 is FIXED I guess you must be talking about bug 11054. "Ignore (kill) a Subthread (branch: not the whole thread)(Troll)".. This is a feature request.. no a bug. If you want it so badly, go code it or hire someone to code it for you. If you think it is so important, why don't you try to get together all the people who want this feature and work together to implement it (or hire someone to implement it). Stop being a helpless cheapskate.
Every RFID-type ID badge you have worn can be read from a distance. The readers are just designed using a particular power configuration such that you need to swipe the RFID. That's the reason why RFIDs are being so heavily protested. If they just want something you have to swipe, why not use a magnetic strip or a barcode? RFIDs were specifically designed to be readable at a distance.. exactly how far away you can be and still read an RFID is completely dependant on how powerful you make the antenna on your reader.
Liable? Obvious they're liable. Who suggested they weren't? We're talking about criminal law. Charging a corporation with a crime is absurd because there's no entity to imprison if you find it guilty. Sure, you could imprison the directors, but in that case you should charge the directors.
Dispite all the bad reporting, Corporate Manslaughter is not a criminal offense. It's a court finding of negligence which can be used to further charges against the directors or other 'controllers' of the company. The current review of the law is intended to make this more clear.. specifically, naming controlling minds before initiating hearings.
Sigh, and said directors are the ones who are charged, not the company. Here's the bit about goldfish. The parent of the parent of the parent [..] said:
Making a report to law enforcement is not going to get you into a civil suit. It will be the state vs. Sony in a criminal case should they pursue it. The trouble is getting them to do so. Try calling the FBI sometime. If it isn't easily demonstrable as several grand worth of damage they will just ignore you.
- by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF (813746)
Note that 'state vs Sony' bit. That's what we're talking about. If it's a criminal case being brought against the directors of the company it will be 'state vs John Q. Capitalist'. The idea that you would charge a company with a criminal act was absurd to me. I wasn't claiming that directors are not responsible for criminal acts they've authorized to be carried out by agents of their company. But you don't get that, cause you're a goldfish.
and the point of my post, which everyone seems to have missed, is that it is illegal for airlines to try to make air travel any less of a hassle. They're required to treat their customers like criminals. It's fucked.
If the passengers of those flights had not been prevented from having weapons they could have easily overwhelmed dudes with boxcutters. It's a double edged sword. On the other hand, explosives are definitely something you can detect without being so fuckin' invasive and have no legitimate use.
I wish it was legal for an airline to offer a tyranny free departure lounge. "I'm aware of the risks of terrorism and I'm willing to pay hirer insurance premiums not to be harrassed."
Another idiot. Never in the history of the world has a corporation been charged with a criminal offense. It doesn't even make sense. You might charge the directors of a company or the executives of a company with a criminal offense but you don't charge the company.
Slashdot Mirror
This is the state of mobile computing? Look how think that sucker is! How about a little style? Seems if I want to read something on the john I'm still going to have to print it out and shred it when I'm done. At least I get to make environmentalists cry.
How would the spent modules get to L1?
Try reading the article I linked to.
Seeing as the Kliper has been in development since before Bush took office I think not. The Kliper is a response to the space shuttle not the CEV. The sole reason why the Kliper is expected to be worth the cost is that, unlike the space shuttle, it will actually be highly reusable. This gives it a major advantage over the Soyuz, although I personally think the Soyuz is the "little spacecraft that could" and the RSA should focus on reusing modules of the Soyuz in space instead of letting them burn up in the atmosphere. David Anderman has suggested that spent Soyuz/Progress modules could be used to build a space station at the Moon/Earth L1 point. The RSA recently said they could take paying customers on a trip around the Moon within the next 5 years and that, with sufficient funding, they could land paying customers on the Moon within the next 10. That is, they could land a sufficiently enthusiastic billionair on the Moon before the CEV has even launched. Of course, talk is cheap, but the RSA has proven they have the skill and experience to provide manned space services.
No offence, but the UK should have given Ireland their independance long before the IRA was formed. As for Israel, don't get me started.
I believe the goal of islamic militants is to prevent the "corruption" of their homelands by the west. Or to sum it up in a dumbed down Americanism "they hate our freedom". Islamic terrorists associate personal liberty with selfish destructive moral relativism.. they attack the middle class of their society so the poor will pay attention to how corrupt they have become.
Maybe you missed the part about there not being some global conspiracy behind these things. You can't say these incidents are not isolated just because there's been a lot of them. Terrorist attacks are just as isolated as street crime. There isn't some evil figure lurking in the shadows organising the city's criminals to strategically mug people and there isn't some evil figure lurking in the shadows organising the world's terrorists. Neither Osama bin Laden, the current leaders of Palestine or the USSR are organising the world's terrorists. Terrorists are not members of some secret army that you can fight, they're just ordinary people who have been lured into an idiology that advocates the use of violence. Sometimes they're killing people to cause "shock" which they hope will result in social change. Sometimes they are killing people for simple revenge. What they're not killing people for is some overreaching global war of terrorism.
The broader question: is the treat of terrorism credible? Considering that politicians made up the whole concept of "the terror network" from disinformation planted in european newspapers and then failed to listen to the CIA when they told them the Soviet Union was not funding terrorist groups and in-fact it was the CIA that was planting the propaganda, how can we possibly believe that terrorism is capable of any more than the few isolated incidents that have befallen the world in the last dozen years? We're talking about a total number of deaths less than a year of ordinary people driving cars on the national highways. The chances of becoming a victim of terrorism are less than the chances of being hit by falling space debris.
The most common slogan of MMOG developers:
"Players? Fuck em."
Riiiight. So if you were hypnotised and you experienced a simulation of your mother beating you with a wooden spoon you wouldn't feel any anomosity towards your mother afterwards? If you were made to believe that your wife was killed you wouldn't find yourself emotionally distanced from her when you were reunited? Wow! Turns out everything we know about hypnosis is wrong, thanks random person on Slashdot.
If you willingly let yourself be put into a hypnotic state and then get exposed to a traumatic simulation it's a lot more likely to have a dangerous effect on you than engaging in the same simulation when not under hypnosis.
I remember talking to a psychologist once who, once learning that I was a computer guy, suggested that combining a form of auto-entraining hypnosis with some creative input devices you could easily make an immersive environment with today's technology. The only problem is that by allowing yourself to be hypnotised you're putting yourself into a highly suggestive state (duh, that's how it works) and as such you really need to trust the creator of the experience that you are being fed. If, for example, you're experiencing an online environment, you're allowing random unknown people to have intimate access to your mind. Not exactly something I'd be interested in doing. But consider the fiction of Neuromancer: "a consensual hallucination". That's what we're talking about here. The dangers experienced by Case were real and could lead to his death if he took on a system he couldn't control. Regardless, Case accepted the risks because the rewards were so great.. perhaps that kind of attitude is something we should strive towards. Our aversion to risk is limiting our sensory perception of our shared experiences. We're limited to screens and keyboards. Sure, our screens have gotten bigger and more colourful and we've got joysticks and mice, and surround sound, but the experience of cyberspace is so poor compared to meatspace. And that's not getting any better.
Because enlightened developers recognise that maximizing freedom for users is more productive than maximizing freedom for themselves.
First of all, there's a space in the url of your sig for no apparent reason which means I don't know if you're talking about bug 1105 or bug 11054. As bug 1105 is FIXED I guess you must be talking about bug 11054. "Ignore (kill) a Subthread (branch: not the whole thread)(Troll)".. This is a feature request.. no a bug. If you want it so badly, go code it or hire someone to code it for you. If you think it is so important, why don't you try to get together all the people who want this feature and work together to implement it (or hire someone to implement it). Stop being a helpless cheapskate.
Where a grand total of 10 comments get posted a week.
Every RFID-type ID badge you have worn can be read from a distance. The readers are just designed using a particular power configuration such that you need to swipe the RFID. That's the reason why RFIDs are being so heavily protested. If they just want something you have to swipe, why not use a magnetic strip or a barcode? RFIDs were specifically designed to be readable at a distance.. exactly how far away you can be and still read an RFID is completely dependant on how powerful you make the antenna on your reader.
Liable? Obvious they're liable. Who suggested they weren't? We're talking about criminal law. Charging a corporation with a crime is absurd because there's no entity to imprison if you find it guilty. Sure, you could imprison the directors, but in that case you should charge the directors.
Dispite all the bad reporting, Corporate Manslaughter is not a criminal offense. It's a court finding of negligence which can be used to further charges against the directors or other 'controllers' of the company. The current review of the law is intended to make this more clear.. specifically, naming controlling minds before initiating hearings.
Sigh, and said directors are the ones who are charged, not the company. Here's the bit about goldfish. The parent of the parent of the parent [..] said:
Making a report to law enforcement is not going to get you into a civil suit. It will be the state vs. Sony in a criminal case should they pursue it. The trouble is getting them to do so. Try calling the FBI sometime. If it isn't easily demonstrable as several grand worth of damage they will just ignore you.
- by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF (813746)
Note that 'state vs Sony' bit. That's what we're talking about. If it's a criminal case being brought against the directors of the company it will be 'state vs John Q. Capitalist'. The idea that you would charge a company with a criminal act was absurd to me. I wasn't claiming that directors are not responsible for criminal acts they've authorized to be carried out by agents of their company. But you don't get that, cause you're a goldfish.
like this.
What's the point of a government saying "Stay away from drugs!"
That's all you needed to say. There isn't two hands. Governments should butt the hell out and mind their own business.
and the point of my post, which everyone seems to have missed, is that it is illegal for airlines to try to make air travel any less of a hassle. They're required to treat their customers like criminals. It's fucked.
I actually think they've done a great job, I just don't know why they make their job so hard for themselves.
If the passengers of those flights had not been prevented from having weapons they could have easily overwhelmed dudes with boxcutters. It's a double edged sword. On the other hand, explosives are definitely something you can detect without being so fuckin' invasive and have no legitimate use.
I wish it was legal for an airline to offer a tyranny free departure lounge. "I'm aware of the risks of terrorism and I'm willing to pay hirer insurance premiums not to be harrassed."
Another idiot. Never in the history of the world has a corporation been charged with a criminal offense. It doesn't even make sense. You might charge the directors of a company or the executives of a company with a criminal offense but you don't charge the company.