easy there partner... I don't see how this is sabotage. The US intentionally wrote dibilitating software. The USSR stole it. There is a difference between this and, say if the US had broken into the pipeline stations and inserted malicious code. How may I ask is this different than a honeypot?
Read the article. Your answer is in the last paragraphs.
Re:Residence is futile
on
Borg Cube Case
·
· Score: 5, Funny
It is a good thing Picard didn't know how vulnerable the Borg are to a good slashdotting or they wouldn't have been able to sustain so many good Borg episodes...
This isn't about bundling software, in which case I would agree. This is about integrating anti-virus and firewall software into the operating system. IMHO these belong in the OS much more so than say a calculator program of a freaking game of hearts. I want my OS to monitor the integrity of my critcal files (AV) and of my internet connections (firewall).
I can understand people bitching about the integration of IE or WMP into the operating system, but I can't think of any applications that I would rather have tightly integrated than a AV prog and a decent firewall.
There is actually one army helo that is NOT named after a tribe: the AH-1 Cobra. The story I was told was that the Cobra was not procured through the normal acquisition channels, instead Bell created it on its own and basically offered it up to the army who never changed the name.
beginning with your parenthetical: that is exactly my point. The debate is about technology and an arms race. Sure, technology improved little from 1700-1920 (mass land engagements)and then dramatically from 1920ish to 1945 (prevalance of tanks and air power). The death rates basically follow the trends as you point out... rather constant, then a spike up to 1945. I suggest that the paradigmn shift in weapon technology in 1945 (and the arms race/cold war) is responsible for the turnaround after WW2. I know it sounds cliche, but what better reason to keep conflicts 'small' than to prevent escalation into the unknown?
Thanks for the link. I look at your data and see a nice expodential curve up to about 1945 and then a dramatic decrease. Thanks for proving my point. dumbass.
Big words from an anonymous coward. Anyway, try reading your history books or doing some actual research. The number of wartime deaths as a percentage of the world's population is is at a historic low. Fact. Deal with it. Sure, there is conflict throughout the world, there always has been and there always will.
And I would rather have NO nuclear wars (our currents state) than have 20 WW2's. This argument is not about which is worse, nuclear war or conventional war,... but instead is about whether advanced weapon technologies have been successful in PREVENTING war. (At least that is the point I was trying to make)
nope... but I also can not recall a time in my lifetime where the US, USSR, UK, France, Germany or China has fought a TOTAL war. Thank you for making my point. Wars have become increasingly focused and intentionally limitted in scope. You aren't trying to compare say, Grenada to the bombing of Dresden or Battle of Britain, are you?
No, it is not insurance because the risk is universal. EVERYBODY gets old. EVERYBODY will drain the tax dollars of future generations. A better analogy would be comparing social security to welfare for the elderly who were too greedy to save for themselves. Don't get me wrong,... I don't think we should let any segment of our society hand out to dry. There should be a program to protect elderly who have been poor their whole life and never able to save for themselves; but why should we give welfare to others who worked for 45 years and never saved any of it?
Umm... you clearly have no idea what you are talking about:
1. The Kyoto protocol, to which the Clinton administration had previously committed the US
The president of the United States can not ratify ANY treaty. Treaties are ratified by the US Senate. The Kyoto treaty has never even come to a vote in the Senate yet, largely because in 1997 the US Senate voted 95-0 for a resolution (with 65 co-sponsors) to send a message to then President Clinton basically warning him that it would be rejected if he continued to push for it.
3. Free trade, by placing tarriffs on steel, lumber and other imports, in direct violation of NAFTA and other free trade agreements
I am assuming you are referring to the recent impass between the EU and the US. The NA in NAFTA stands for North American. Last I checked neither Canada nor Mexico were members of the EU.
4. Invading Iraq, which was done without a proper UN mandate, hence the UN-bashing when the US didn't get close to getting what it wanted (no, the previous decade old resolutions were not sufficient, if they were the US wouldn't have been looking for a new resolution green-lighting the war in late 2002 and it wouldn't have got so shitty with France and the other countries in the Security Council that promised to veto any such resolution)
Actually, the US did have a mandate from the UN. UN resolution 686 authorized use of force against Iraq in the first Gulf War. That war ended in a cease fire the terms of which were broken nearly daily by Iraq as they engaged coalition aircraft. The second gulf war can easily be viewed as a continuation of the first.
5. The other long-range missile treaties with Russia (originally signed in the 1970s, when it was part of the USSR), which it unilaterally scrapped almost as soon as it entered office.
You have me baffled by this one. Which treaties are you talking about? I spent the last 30 minutes searching google thinking that I had missed something about the US pulling out on SALT or START and found NOTHING. I assume you are referring to the ABM treaty, which was not broken. The treay was exitted using the exact procedures as outlined within the document.
As for all your anti-american sentiment crap: How does sentiment abroad relate to Bush? Did this sentiment exist before 9/11? If Bush is the root of all this sourness abroad, and Clinton is the antithesis of Bush, then why was Al Quaeda attacking the US and planning 9/11 during his presidency?
Then vote Republican so that social security (which will surely fail before we get to retirement age) can be augmented by a private savings plan. Then save for your own damn retirement rather than having me (and my children) pay for yours.
If you end up eating cat food, it will be your own fault.
Actually it is technology and progress that has given us the ability to selectively kill so effectively, that the last 60 years have been among the most peaceful (statistically) in history. Granted, the proliferation of nuclear weapons terrifies me... but I would say that their deterrent value has been proven.
Absolutely ("litle wing" anyone?)... and very common in blues as well. However, holding the neck this way makes it impossible to form a "correct" barr chord. Which was what I was trying to explain how to do.
There were also thousands of sorties in which "doped aimen" did not bomb friendlies. There is zero proof that the drugs played any contributing factor in this mishap. The pilot in question ignored multiple orders to NOT drop at the location. IMHO, it is more likely he was simply trigger happy, and misinterpretted a night training exercise for hostile ground fire.
Tuning IS a science! When I taught physics to prep school students, I would bring in my guitar when we discussed beats and let them hear beats for themselves as I brought two tones closer together and farther apart. Of course, you can not use harmonics to get 'exactly' in tune due to the equal-tempered nature of Western cultures' music scales, but you sure can get close.
Personally I use a tuner about once every couple years... and usually just prove to myself that I don't need it. If you use the harminic method, and get the beat period down to 10 seconds or so, you are talking on the order of.1 Hz of error. The gottcha is that you don't want to compare harmonics all the way across the neck as the errors are cumulative and you will hear that high E and low E are not tuned an octave apart. Once I get tuned close, I then play several different chords arpeggio style (one note at a time) making slight adjustments here and there (open G, C and D chords sufice for me). I assume that this last step is correcting a 'pure-tuning' to an 'equal-tempered' tuning. Is it fast? No... it takes me a minute or two; but it is rewarding in an 'I solved the Rubic's cube' kind of way.
The key to a good bar chord isn't the index finger,.. it is your THUMB! The thumb gives you the leverage you need to bear down with your index finger across all 6 strings equally. Most people press their thumb into the neck of the guitr closer to the side with the big-E string. This results in good contact on the E and A strings, but the higher strings will probably be too loose to get a good tone. Try moving the point where you apply thumb pressure on the back of the neck closer to the higher strings. It may help to 'slightly' rotate your index finger so that you are using a little of the harder 'side' of the finger rather than the meaty palm site of the finger.
Just think of the arms race this will start... countries who deploy mines will genetically engineer weeds to sow over their minefields that appear to indicate a mine-free area...then 'boom!'. And what about genetically engineered insects and pests trained to attaack the 'red weeds'. Haven't we learned from the arms race and space race?! this is just begging for a "flower race".
Dude, you haven't met my mom. I am not kidding about this: she calls me on the phone for me to walk her through it when she want to send me an instant message or an email. Sort of defeats the point eh? But I guess we should consider ourselves lucky that it only took 8 years of having a computer in the house to learn how to turn one on and read email. (Still working on sending). On the other hand, I suppose this is almost a protection measure as there is no way in hell she could figure out how to open an attachment. Of course my dad knows enough to be dangerous... Comet cursor and all those nift email programs that let you spice up your mail, etc...
Slashdot Mirror
easy there partner... I don't see how this is sabotage. The US intentionally wrote dibilitating software. The USSR stole it. There is a difference between this and, say if the US had broken into the pipeline stations and inserted malicious code. How may I ask is this different than a honeypot?
Read the article. Your answer is in the last paragraphs.
It is a good thing Picard didn't know how vulnerable the Borg are to a good slashdotting or they wouldn't have been able to sustain so many good Borg episodes...
no kidding... I wonder why they went out of buisness.
This isn't about bundling software, in which case I would agree. This is about integrating anti-virus and firewall software into the operating system. IMHO these belong in the OS much more so than say a calculator program of a freaking game of hearts. I want my OS to monitor the integrity of my critcal files (AV) and of my internet connections (firewall).
I can understand people bitching about the integration of IE or WMP into the operating system, but I can't think of any applications that I would rather have tightly integrated than a AV prog and a decent firewall.
There is actually one army helo that is NOT named after a tribe: the AH-1 Cobra. The story I was told was that the Cobra was not procured through the normal acquisition channels, instead Bell created it on its own and basically offered it up to the army who never changed the name.
beginning with your parenthetical: that is exactly my point. The debate is about technology and an arms race. Sure, technology improved little from 1700-1920 (mass land engagements)and then dramatically from 1920ish to 1945 (prevalance of tanks and air power). The death rates basically follow the trends as you point out... rather constant, then a spike up to 1945. I suggest that the paradigmn shift in weapon technology in 1945 (and the arms race/cold war) is responsible for the turnaround after WW2. I know it sounds cliche, but what better reason to keep conflicts 'small' than to prevent escalation into the unknown?
Thanks for the link. I look at your data and see a nice expodential curve up to about 1945 and then a dramatic decrease. Thanks for proving my point. dumbass.
Big words from an anonymous coward. Anyway, try reading your history books or doing some actual research. The number of wartime deaths as a percentage of the world's population is is at a historic low. Fact. Deal with it. Sure, there is conflict throughout the world, there always has been and there always will.
And I would rather have NO nuclear wars (our currents state) than have 20 WW2's. This argument is not about which is worse, nuclear war or conventional war,... but instead is about whether advanced weapon technologies have been successful in PREVENTING war. (At least that is the point I was trying to make)
nope... but I also can not recall a time in my lifetime where the US, USSR, UK, France, Germany or China has fought a TOTAL war. Thank you for making my point. Wars have become increasingly focused and intentionally limitted in scope. You aren't trying to compare say, Grenada to the bombing of Dresden or Battle of Britain, are you?
No, it is not insurance because the risk is universal. EVERYBODY gets old. EVERYBODY will drain the tax dollars of future generations. A better analogy would be comparing social security to welfare for the elderly who were too greedy to save for themselves. Don't get me wrong,... I don't think we should let any segment of our society hand out to dry. There should be a program to protect elderly who have been poor their whole life and never able to save for themselves; but why should we give welfare to others who worked for 45 years and never saved any of it?
1. The Kyoto protocol, to which the Clinton administration had previously committed the US
The president of the United States can not ratify ANY treaty. Treaties are ratified by the US Senate. The Kyoto treaty has never even come to a vote in the Senate yet, largely because in 1997 the US Senate voted 95-0 for a resolution (with 65 co-sponsors) to send a message to then President Clinton basically warning him that it would be rejected if he continued to push for it.
3. Free trade, by placing tarriffs on steel, lumber and other imports, in direct violation of NAFTA and other free trade agreements
I am assuming you are referring to the recent impass between the EU and the US. The NA in NAFTA stands for North American. Last I checked neither Canada nor Mexico were members of the EU.
4. Invading Iraq, which was done without a proper UN mandate, hence the UN-bashing when the US didn't get close to getting what it wanted (no, the previous decade old resolutions were not sufficient, if they were the US wouldn't have been looking for a new resolution green-lighting the war in late 2002 and it wouldn't have got so shitty with France and the other countries in the Security Council that promised to veto any such resolution)
Actually, the US did have a mandate from the UN. UN resolution 686 authorized use of force against Iraq in the first Gulf War. That war ended in a cease fire the terms of which were broken nearly daily by Iraq as they engaged coalition aircraft. The second gulf war can easily be viewed as a continuation of the first.
5. The other long-range missile treaties with Russia (originally signed in the 1970s, when it was part of the USSR), which it unilaterally scrapped almost as soon as it entered office.
You have me baffled by this one. Which treaties are you talking about? I spent the last 30 minutes searching google thinking that I had missed something about the US pulling out on SALT or START and found NOTHING. I assume you are referring to the ABM treaty, which was not broken. The treay was exitted using the exact procedures as outlined within the document.
As for all your anti-american sentiment crap: How does sentiment abroad relate to Bush? Did this sentiment exist before 9/11? If Bush is the root of all this sourness abroad, and Clinton is the antithesis of Bush, then why was Al Quaeda attacking the US and planning 9/11 during his presidency?
If you end up eating cat food, it will be your own fault.
'War is the continuation of politics by other means' - Clausewitz
Actually it is technology and progress that has given us the ability to selectively kill so effectively, that the last 60 years have been among the most peaceful (statistically) in history. Granted, the proliferation of nuclear weapons terrifies me... but I would say that their deterrent value has been proven.
Absolutely ("litle wing" anyone?)... and very common in blues as well. However, holding the neck this way makes it impossible to form a "correct" barr chord. Which was what I was trying to explain how to do.
There were also thousands of sorties in which "doped aimen" did not bomb friendlies. There is zero proof that the drugs played any contributing factor in this mishap. The pilot in question ignored multiple orders to NOT drop at the location. IMHO, it is more likely he was simply trigger happy, and misinterpretted a night training exercise for hostile ground fire.
I have never heard anyone advocate using Atkins as a lifestyle diet. I thought everyone knew that it was only for making rapid, dramatic weight loss.
Personally I use a tuner about once every couple years... and usually just prove to myself that I don't need it. If you use the harminic method, and get the beat period down to 10 seconds or so, you are talking on the order of .1 Hz of error. The gottcha is that you don't want to compare harmonics all the way across the neck as the errors are cumulative and you will hear that high E and low E are not tuned an octave apart. Once I get tuned close, I then play several different chords arpeggio style (one note at a time) making slight adjustments here and there (open G, C and D chords sufice for me). I assume that this last step is correcting a 'pure-tuning' to an 'equal-tempered' tuning. Is it fast? No... it takes me a minute or two; but it is rewarding in an 'I solved the Rubic's cube' kind of way.
I am just poking a little fun... haven't heard anyone actually use the term in years.
Just think of the arms race this will start... countries who deploy mines will genetically engineer weeds to sow over their minefields that appear to indicate a mine-free area...then 'boom!'. And what about genetically engineered insects and pests trained to attaack the 'red weeds'. Haven't we learned from the arms race and space race?! this is just begging for a "flower race".
Dude, you haven't met my mom. I am not kidding about this: she calls me on the phone for me to walk her through it when she want to send me an instant message or an email. Sort of defeats the point eh? But I guess we should consider ourselves lucky that it only took 8 years of having a computer in the house to learn how to turn one on and read email. (Still working on sending). On the other hand, I suppose this is almost a protection measure as there is no way in hell she could figure out how to open an attachment. Of course my dad knows enough to be dangerous... Comet cursor and all those nift email programs that let you spice up your mail, etc...