facist == right wing authoritarian. Survival of the fitest etc. Hilter, Mussolini etc
Stalinist == left wing authoritarian. The state will assign everyone a job, a house, a doctor, a car if you need one, a school, enough food to survive but not enough to thrive. Stalin, Mao Tse Dung, etc
OK both type viciously put down opposition and have a state controlled single party system. Of course you americans have two virtually identical parties so you're nearly there.
I think you're wrong about state run health (and education), they work well and are efficient, but then I'm european and we care about our fellow man.
Also the security services and government are effectively immune from requests because they simply claim that all information they hold on you is secret and cannot be released for National Security reasons.
There is more to vote rigging than just playing with the ballots that were cast, there is also the issue of the thousands of people who were illegally and arbitrarily denied their right to vote on the grounds that their name was similar to someone who was not allowed to vote. Anyway, the point is moot. What is important is that Bush leaves office as soon as possible, before he creates a facist police state that no one can dismantle.
I just wonder how long it will be before wierdo groups start trying to gain respectibilty by jumping on the anti-terrorism bandwagon. You can almost imagine Satanists Against Terrorism, or Kiddie Rapists Against Terrorism etc
One of the aims of terrorists tends to be to make governments over react and behave like totalitarian regimes. Coming up with ever more extreme, xenophobic and invasive responses only furthers the goals of terrorists by creating a larger pool of potential recruits
but if you start attacking the very countries who supply you with all the goods and stuff you need, you have imposed a de facto embargo on yourself. Besides, there a 6 billion people on this planet and I can't really see American public opinion supporting attacking the rest of the world, however conservative you are. It always makes me laugh that you Americans conservatives like to tell everyone that you're the greatest, most compasionate, most law abiding, most God fearing nation on Earth, and that you are the only ones who know what freedom is like you invented the concept, all the while you intimidate, coerce and threaten everyone else into infringing their own citizens human rights just so you can sleep soundly in your beds, and have enough oil to drive your SUV's. American conservatives, you make me sick.
Being lazy is a good trait, as it tends to lead to greater efficiency. I spend hours trying to work out how I can either a) get away with doing as little actual coding as possible or b) Blame someone else.
I think stairs would be fairly easy, so long as you start at the bottom and work you way up. What I really want is one that will wash, iron and put away my dirty laundry while I'm at work.
The acceptable risk is the lowest achievable risk. If people are willing to risk their lives for humanity, then humanity has the moral duty to make it as safe as we possibly can. Otherwise we're just taking advantage of brave people and don't deserve their dedication.
Re:Why are we always nitpicking?
on
Shuttle Politics
·
· Score: 1
none stick frying pans?
Re:Why are we always nitpicking?
on
Shuttle Politics
·
· Score: 1
OK sure, the astronuts knew what they we're getting into, but there are cheaper extreme sports and the government doesn't usually foot the bill for base jumping. If people are willing to risk their lives, well great, but we owe it to them to make it as safe as possible, and the government owes it to taxpayers to see that money isn't wasted on an aging design. Taking your military example, Soldiers know what they are getting them selves into, but they'd not be happy if they were sent to war in tanks which were designed 20-30 years ago, or asked to fly wwII aircraft against modern fighters, just because the people holding the purse strings said they were brave cannon fodder. Thats the kind of attitude which saw soldiers sent "over the top" at the battle of the Somme into the face of machine guns
I don't think it's about oil. Just going over there and forcing a good deal for yourselves would be far too obvious. I thinks its about where US tax dollars are spent. I'm sure Bush had to buy a lot of favours to get where he is and he has lots of friends and family in oil, chemicals, defence etc. The war was probably about many things. The family connection, breaking the OPEC stranglehold, supporting his pre-election belief (and pre 9/11) that Saddam was a huge threat to the US, and making sure his buddies get a good chunk of the contracts for rebuilding Iraq, plus all the positive poll response he was always going to get for fighting and winning an easy war. It's all win for Bush and his friends. They must be secretly pleased about 9/11 because it gave them the excuse and public support for the hawkish line they always wanted to take. What scares me about the Bush administration is the way they feel they can ignore the rest of the world because they believe America is better and more righteous than everyone else. What I just don't understand is the kind of unquestioning support Bush seems to get from a large majority of Americans. Blair gets it too from a small proportion of the generally less well educated in this country too, but the kind of blind patriotism that Bush gets seems to be a American phenomenon. Its like Homers "USA USA USA" chant. I can't imagine any European chanting like that, at least not since Hilter and Mussolini.
Just because it's left wing, doesn't mean it's wrong, and just because it's media talk it doesn't mean it's not based in fact. As a disclaimer i'm a Brit, and I watched a number of news networks during the war CNN, BBC, ITV, MSNBC. What you notice is that American news networks tend to ignore stories that portray America in a bad light. They do this because they know that Americans are very patriotic and loyal to the flag, to the extent that stories which don't show america in a good light will lead to loss of ratings and loss of advertising revenue. They also tend to ignore some of the stuff your politicians get up to. On the other hand, the British public is generally slightly right of center and so our commercial media tends to reflect that, while the BBC is slightly left of center, but has no commercial agenda. You mention media talk, but is it really, when Haliburton got the very first Billion dollar contract to sort out Iraq's oil infrastructure, and we all know who Haliburton still pays a 1 million dollar salary to.
Sure the jubilent Iraqis look umm... jubilent, but the rest of them just look thirsty, scared and hungry. I was against the war, not because I thought Saddam should be left alone, but because the motives of Bush and his reasons for war were, and still are highly suspect. The WMD still have not been found and the links to global terrorism are still just as tenuous as before. If the initial justification had been to free Iraq, or prevent the human rights abuses I think Bush and Blair would have done a far better job of selling the war, but it wasn't. The whole driving force behind this war was the wave of FUD that Bush seems to be trying to ride all the way to the next election, while at the same time getting all his good corporate buddies a nice kick back in fedral spending. If Bush was acting within the rules perhaps he would be more morally justified in demanding that other countries do so too, however by ignoring the howls of protest from the UN and his former allies he has sent a much more powerful message to the rest of the world. Specifically "We're too good to follow the rules we dictate to the rest of you". Maybe i'd listen to Bush when he complains about WMD in the hands of terrorists if he wasn't spending money investigating nuclear bunker busters, and if rumsfeld hadn't sold them to Saddam in the first place. Perhaps I'd pay more attention to his calls for freedom for all people if he wasn't holding people without charge in cuba. There's even a possibility I'd support his calls for Iraqi soldiers to be tried for war crimes, if he would allow the same rules to be applied to his own soldiers conduct.
It is my belief that America is at a dangerous point in its history. It appears to believe that whatever it does is right, that it can do no wrong, and that if it does wrong then the good outweighs the bad. That may be true, America is on the whole a good country, however it is becoming blind to its faults, and those faults are being allowed to grow. Any attempt to focus on these faults is described as unamerican, or unpatriotic. There is an old saying, "Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel". Its an idea that America would be well advised to think about, because otherwise you are in danger of becoming a nation of flag wavers who will support whatever the government chooses to do because you still believe the country belongs to the people. Go away and read 1984 again and think how, although it is about communism, it could just as easily be applied to Bushes America.
Except that the whole point of OSS anywhere is to outsource your development cost. Seriously. If you wanted to get some software written, and you knew there was someone else who wanted it too, then you just start up a OSS project to do it and you get all the other developers time free, AND you get all their work back in your software. OK the license for resale might be different, but the tactic is virtually identical to MS. What MS are saying with this deal is "we are the only ones allowed to licence WinCE. You can add to it, change it, remove stuff, so long as you tell us. BUT a copy of WinCE is still ours to licence. Sounds fair to me.
Use Google and try and find the *original* reference to the 'Second Superpower'. No cheating and using the Register article as a hint for search terms. If you can do it at all, you'll have wade though pages of chaff. By definition, that's a bad search engine.
Well I took up your challenge and see what I got first time
Slashdot Mirror
yup sorry. I was wrong
facist == Stalinist?????????
dumbass.
facist == right wing authoritarian. Survival of the fitest etc. Hilter, Mussolini etc
Stalinist == left wing authoritarian. The state will assign everyone a job, a house, a doctor, a car if you need one, a school, enough food to survive but not enough to thrive. Stalin, Mao Tse Dung, etc
OK both type viciously put down opposition and have a state controlled single party system. Of course you americans have two virtually identical parties so you're nearly there.
I think you're wrong about state run health (and education), they work well and are efficient, but then I'm european and we care about our fellow man.
Also the security services and government are effectively immune from requests because they simply claim that all information they hold on you is secret and cannot be released for National Security reasons.
There is more to vote rigging than just playing with the ballots that were cast, there is also the issue of the thousands of people who were illegally and arbitrarily denied their right to vote on the grounds that their name was similar to someone who was not allowed to vote. Anyway, the point is moot. What is important is that Bush leaves office as soon as possible, before he creates a facist police state that no one can dismantle.
except that it should have been who's
I just wonder how long it will be before wierdo groups start trying to gain respectibilty by jumping on the anti-terrorism bandwagon. You can almost imagine Satanists Against Terrorism, or Kiddie Rapists Against Terrorism etc
One of the aims of terrorists tends to be to make governments over react and behave like totalitarian regimes. Coming up with ever more extreme, xenophobic and invasive responses only furthers the goals of terrorists by creating a larger pool of potential recruits
can you run a webserver on it, and if it gets slashdotted, will the Aibo roll over and play dead?
but if you start attacking the very countries who supply you with all the goods and stuff you need, you have imposed a de facto embargo on yourself. Besides, there a 6 billion people on this planet and I can't really see American public opinion supporting attacking the rest of the world, however conservative you are. It always makes me laugh that you Americans conservatives like to tell everyone that you're the greatest, most compasionate, most law abiding, most God fearing nation on Earth, and that you are the only ones who know what freedom is like you invented the concept, all the while you intimidate, coerce and threaten everyone else into infringing their own citizens human rights just so you can sleep soundly in your beds, and have enough oil to drive your SUV's. American conservatives, you make me sick.
Being lazy is a good trait, as it tends to lead to greater efficiency. I spend hours trying to work out how I can either a) get away with doing as little actual coding as possible or b) Blame someone else.
I think stairs would be fairly easy, so long as you start at the bottom and work you way up. What I really want is one that will wash, iron and put away my dirty laundry while I'm at work.
so long as it doesn't blow
No, loosed is correct if a little archaic. Loosed is to release of let go, as in "Loosed an arrow".
No. My right hand is busy elsewhere.
The acceptable risk is the lowest achievable risk. If people are willing to risk their lives for humanity, then humanity has the moral duty to make it as safe as we possibly can. Otherwise we're just taking advantage of brave people and don't deserve their dedication.
none stick frying pans?
OK sure, the astronuts knew what they we're getting into, but there are cheaper extreme sports and the government doesn't usually foot the bill for base jumping. If people are willing to risk their lives, well great, but we owe it to them to make it as safe as possible, and the government owes it to taxpayers to see that money isn't wasted on an aging design. Taking your military example, Soldiers know what they are getting them selves into, but they'd not be happy if they were sent to war in tanks which were designed 20-30 years ago, or asked to fly wwII aircraft against modern fighters, just because the people holding the purse strings said they were brave cannon fodder. Thats the kind of attitude which saw soldiers sent "over the top" at the battle of the Somme into the face of machine guns
I not a llama
I don't think it's about oil. Just going over there and forcing a good deal for yourselves would be far too obvious. I thinks its about where US tax dollars are spent. I'm sure Bush had to buy a lot of favours to get where he is and he has lots of friends and family in oil, chemicals, defence etc. The war was probably about many things. The family connection, breaking the OPEC stranglehold, supporting his pre-election belief (and pre 9/11) that Saddam was a huge threat to the US, and making sure his buddies get a good chunk of the contracts for rebuilding Iraq, plus all the positive poll response he was always going to get for fighting and winning an easy war. It's all win for Bush and his friends. They must be secretly pleased about 9/11 because it gave them the excuse and public support for the hawkish line they always wanted to take. What scares me about the Bush administration is the way they feel they can ignore the rest of the world because they believe America is better and more righteous than everyone else. What I just don't understand is the kind of unquestioning support Bush seems to get from a large majority of Americans. Blair gets it too from a small proportion of the generally less well educated in this country too, but the kind of blind patriotism that Bush gets seems to be a American phenomenon. Its like Homers "USA USA USA" chant. I can't imagine any European chanting like that, at least not since Hilter and Mussolini.
Just because it's left wing, doesn't mean it's wrong, and just because it's media talk it doesn't mean it's not based in fact. As a disclaimer i'm a Brit, and I watched a number of news networks during the war CNN, BBC, ITV, MSNBC. What you notice is that American news networks tend to ignore stories that portray America in a bad light. They do this because they know that Americans are very patriotic and loyal to the flag, to the extent that stories which don't show america in a good light will lead to loss of ratings and loss of advertising revenue. They also tend to ignore some of the stuff your politicians get up to. On the other hand, the British public is generally slightly right of center and so our commercial media tends to reflect that, while the BBC is slightly left of center, but has no commercial agenda. You mention media talk, but is it really, when Haliburton got the very first Billion dollar contract to sort out Iraq's oil infrastructure, and we all know who Haliburton still pays a 1 million dollar salary to.
Sure the jubilent Iraqis look umm... jubilent, but the rest of them just look thirsty, scared and hungry. I was against the war, not because I thought Saddam should be left alone, but because the motives of Bush and his reasons for war were, and still are highly suspect. The WMD still have not been found and the links to global terrorism are still just as tenuous as before. If the initial justification had been to free Iraq, or prevent the human rights abuses I think Bush and Blair would have done a far better job of selling the war, but it wasn't. The whole driving force behind this war was the wave of FUD that Bush seems to be trying to ride all the way to the next election, while at the same time getting all his good corporate buddies a nice kick back in fedral spending. If Bush was acting within the rules perhaps he would be more morally justified in demanding that other countries do so too, however by ignoring the howls of protest from the UN and his former allies he has sent a much more powerful message to the rest of the world. Specifically "We're too good to follow the rules we dictate to the rest of you". Maybe i'd listen to Bush when he complains about WMD in the hands of terrorists if he wasn't spending money investigating nuclear bunker busters, and if rumsfeld hadn't sold them to Saddam in the first place. Perhaps I'd pay more attention to his calls for freedom for all people if he wasn't holding people without charge in cuba. There's even a possibility I'd support his calls for Iraqi soldiers to be tried for war crimes, if he would allow the same rules to be applied to his own soldiers conduct.
It is my belief that America is at a dangerous point in its history. It appears to believe that whatever it does is right, that it can do no wrong, and that if it does wrong then the good outweighs the bad. That may be true, America is on the whole a good country, however it is becoming blind to its faults, and those faults are being allowed to grow. Any attempt to focus on these faults is described as unamerican, or unpatriotic.
There is an old saying, "Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel". Its an idea that America would be well advised to think about, because otherwise you are in danger of becoming a nation of flag wavers who will support whatever the government chooses to do because you still believe the country belongs to the people. Go away and read 1984 again and think how, although it is about communism, it could just as easily be applied to Bushes America.
Why do they have women in (n)?
Sheep can't cook.
(where n = Australia or New Zealand, depending upon who you wish to insult. Also works well for Wales)
Also welsh joke.
Woman 1: Did you hear about mr Jones?
Woman 2: No, what?
Woman 1: He was caught up in the top field making love to one of his sheep!
Woman 2: Was it a male sheep?
Woman 1: Oh no. There's nothing wrong with mr Jones.
Except that the whole point of OSS anywhere is to outsource your development cost. Seriously. If you wanted to get some software written, and you knew there was someone else who wanted it too, then you just start up a OSS project to do it and you get all the other developers time free, AND you get all their work back in your software. OK the license for resale might be different, but the tactic is virtually identical to MS. What MS are saying with this deal is "we are the only ones allowed to licence WinCE. You can add to it, change it, remove stuff, so long as you tell us. BUT a copy of WinCE is still ours to licence. Sounds fair to me.
mod parent -1 Pedantic
Well I took up your challenge and see what I got first time