FRA is not a military organization, despite its name. FRA is civilian and is govern by a civilian, not a military.
This is from SFS 1994:714 (where new laws are published): 1 Försvarets radioanstalt är en central förvaltningsmyndighet med uppgift att bedriva signalspaning enligt den inriktning som regeringen, Försvarsmakten och övriga uppdragsgivare anger.
What it state is that FRA is a central civilian agency that is tasked to perform radio survilliance on behalf of the government, defense or other assigners.
You is also wrong when you assume that there was a military organization monitoring Sovjet. Yes, it was FRA but it was civilian already at that time. The DC-3 airplane that was shot down by Sovjet in 1952 was manned by FRA. The pilots and the airplane might have been military but the FRA operators where civilians.
Last, the reason behind the calling the defense for defense and not military is that the law forbid the Swedish military to perform any aggression. Even on the order from the riksdagen. The purpose of the military in Sweden is strictly defense and hence it is called Försvarsmakten.
I think that the reason for the new law is simple: FRA (Swedish NSA) already do this and now they want to make it legal. I belive that Sweden is one of the members of Echelon but I have no proof whatsoever of this.
However, I find it quite strange that the some of the government parties was against the law before they come to power and swiftly changed opinion when they came to power. My guess is that they simply was shown how much spying FRA already was doing when they came to power, something they hadn't knew of before because it was very secret.
Re:Widgets in QGraphicsView look *really* promisin
on
In-Depth With Qt 4.4
·
· Score: 1
Sorry. He wrote "cross platform" also. Show me how you get Cocoa cross platform.
I think the biggest scandal isn't that the police officer has changed employer. The biggest scandal is that the prosecutor Håkan Roswall don't see this as having any impact on the case. He is still going to use this ex police officer as a technical expert witness and he also say that this has happend before.
One annoying thing with 4.0 is that they seam to have removed some parts that existed in 3.x and that was good. One exemple is kprinter, the printer tool. This is to make a comeback in 4.1. Since I love kprinter, I am waiting for 4.1 before switching to a 4x codebase.
I was going to comment on this to. All of the Nordic countries have a lover population density than US and yet we have a pretty good public transport. The secret? Government funding - we use the taxes to pay for public transport. There is no other way when you have a low population density.
I remember one of the last times that Slashdot had a discussion about KDE and Gnome. That time it become painfully obvious that many Gnome followers has some of strange hatred of KDE and that they wish it dead and buried. KDE followers more seamed to be content to be able to choose whatever desktop environment they liked, thus not choosing Gnome.
So, while Gnome followers would like to have KDE buried, KDE followers don't seam to really care if Gnome lives, as long as they don't have to use it.
It would be funny to know why Gnome followers has a such more extreme view of DE choice - is it because they are the majority? Why can't you leave us that like KDE alone? Why continue to show your opinions down your throat?
Gnome is a bad ripoff MacOS interface. Some people simply don't like the MacOS interface. And since Gnome is a BAD ripoff, I don't see why anyone can like it.
I would say that Gnome still is behind KDE. The only thing I ever configure in KDE is that I enable double clicking to start programs in folders (to make it behave like in Windows). Then I put the taskbar on top of the desktop but that is something I do in Windows to.
Of course, I am northern European so perhaps I don't count.
"People are living longer and 50 years of copyright protection no longer give lifetime income to artists who recorded hits in their late teens or early twenties".
Why should it? All other have to work for their income, why not artists?
And how much thinner could they make it by making this decision? Probably not much.
The Air is a strange thing that is mostly sold of being thin. I don't really understand the purpose of that. What if it was a bit thicker? The Air is still a large computer even if it is thin, since it is quite large in depth and length (which it of course have to be to have the large screen). The most important factors for people is usually the weight and that the computer isn't unreasonable large. Air is very thin but not impressive when it comes to other dimensions.
Another strange thing about the Air is that it is thinner on one side. What is to stop anyone from making a computer that has a 0.1 mm sharp edge and that is 30 mm on the other side? Would that still be thin or large? If Apple had made the Air the same height on each side, they could probably have fitted a replaceable battery.
Ok, so it is rather easy to change at home. However, don't this opening of it void the guaranty?
Also, why did Apple made the battery internal like this in the first place? Why don't simply make it as easy to change as on a Mac-book or any other laptop? I don't see the rational in the decision to not make it easy to change it without opening the case.
I am sorry to report this, but since you always support US in all conflicts and really don't want to involve yourself in EU, we have decided to count UK as a part of USA.
The opinion in Sweden has changed since 1980. Current opinion is a strong support for nuclear power and a new referendum would probably mean victory for the nuclear power positive parties. One of the government coalition parties have recently also gone public with a desire to build more nuclear power plants and the largest of the coalition parties don't want nuclear power gone to 2010.
A mostly forgotten part of the referendum in 1980 is also the fact that the year 2010 was put forward as a good year to close the current reactors because of two things: 1) The reactors where only supposed to last until this year (now not true because of new methods of repairing) 2) By 2010 a suitable replacement for nuclear power would have been found. Exactly what this replacement was supposed to be was never established, but more or less supposed to be fusion power.
Since none of this two points is meet, there is a real question of how valid the referendum is. Also, you can ask how long a referendum should hold - a great number of the current voters wasn't allowed to vote in this referendum due too simply being underage or not born when it was held. I have some doubt why we should follow a decision that my grandfather voted on, when he isn't alive now and don't have to face the consequence of the decision.
It might sound great but it isn't much different from your system. First of all, the two greatest parties gets to decide most who ever wins. For instance, now we have a coalition of four parties in government but over half of the minister posts is held by the largest of the four parties. Since the same parties always support each other, you know that a vote for some of the smaller parties in essence is the same as a vote on the big party that it supports.
Secondly, the two big parties has only become more and more similar over the years. Now days it almost don't matter which of them you vote for, most of their opinions is the same anyway.
Third, both of the large parties are corrupted. The left social democratic party by the union, the right wing (moderate) party by the corporations.
Another large problem is that the political parties in riksdagen (congress) don't have the same opinions as the people. A couple of examples: *) A majority of the people wants to keep nuclear power. A majority of the riksdag want it closed. *) In a referendum Sweden decided to not use the Euro. Over 80% of the politicians wants the Euro.
"It was agreed that each state registers its own separate elements, which means that you now have a piece of the US annexed to a piece of Europe annexed to a piece of Japan in outer space, legally speaking".
Ok, anybody besides me that see an obvious question regarding this: which European states law apply in ESA's sections? There is no "Europe" when it comes to laws - each country have their own. So which is it? English? French? German? Dutch? Italian? Spanish? Or another European law?
Of course it is an artificial lock. Apple checks to see if the hardware is genuine Apple hardware and if it isn't, the software don't run. It don't have to do with the drivers or other things, its a lock pure and simple. You could build a computer with the exact same parts as Apple does and it would still not run legally. You can't blame driver or other issues if the hardware is identical.
This is an artificial implemented lock. Don't make it out to be anything else.
And what is your suggestion than? That all markets should be unregulated?
Perhaps we should allow broadcasting from mobile phones on any frequency? Cars shouldn't need brakes and safety belts nor airbags. Airplanes wouldn't need to go through certification. This is a consumer protection law that was created because telephone companies used to lock people in on their network.
Typical American centered vision: it isn't the EU that locks out Apple. It is Apple that have locked them self out of EU by not obeying our laws!
The EU directive is much, much older than the iPhone and it is an extremely good law. Apple can't come and think that our rules don't apply to them - if they want to sell here, they follow our laws. It is as simple as that.
For all us using latin characters, it would be a pain to switch to Chinese. Not only would we need to learn a new language, we would also need to learn a totally different way of writing. I would rather learn Arabic than Chinese since they at least have characters in the same sense that English.
Also, according to most people Chinese are hard to learn. And do you mean mandarin or cantonese?
First, the possibility that US would attack Vatican is so remote that it is almost impossible to discuss it.
However, don't count on the northern part of EU to come to the popes help. We are still pissed about the 30 years war in the 17th century. Northern Europe is protestant and don't care for the pope. Actually, the present pope have said some things about protestant that haven't really made the relationship between Vatican and northern Europe better.
Btw, Russia is orthodox and don't care about the pope either.
Slashdot Mirror
FRA is not a military organization, despite its name.
FRA is civilian and is govern by a civilian, not a military.
This is from SFS 1994:714 (where new laws are published):
1 Försvarets radioanstalt är en central förvaltningsmyndighet
med uppgift att bedriva signalspaning enligt den inriktning som
regeringen, Försvarsmakten och övriga uppdragsgivare anger.
What it state is that FRA is a central civilian agency that is tasked to perform radio survilliance on behalf of the government, defense or other assigners.
You is also wrong when you assume that there was a military organization monitoring Sovjet. Yes, it was FRA but it was civilian already at that time. The DC-3 airplane that was shot down by Sovjet in 1952 was manned by FRA. The pilots and the airplane might have been military but the FRA operators where civilians.
Last, the reason behind the calling the defense for defense and not military is that the law forbid the Swedish military to perform any aggression. Even on the order from the riksdagen. The purpose of the military in Sweden is strictly defense and hence it is called Försvarsmakten.
I think that the reason for the new law is simple: FRA (Swedish NSA) already do this and now they want to make it legal. I belive that Sweden is one of the members of Echelon but I have no proof whatsoever of this.
However, I find it quite strange that the some of the government parties was against the law before they come to power and swiftly changed opinion when they came to power. My guess is that they simply was shown how much spying FRA already was doing when they came to power, something they hadn't knew of before because it was very secret.
Sorry. He wrote "cross platform" also.
Show me how you get Cocoa cross platform.
I was just thinking the same thing.
I think the biggest scandal isn't that the police officer has changed employer.
The biggest scandal is that the prosecutor Håkan Roswall don't see this as having any impact on the case. He is still going to use this ex police officer as a technical expert witness and he also say that this has happend before.
One annoying thing with 4.0 is that they seam to have removed some parts that existed in 3.x and that was good. One exemple is kprinter, the printer tool.
This is to make a comeback in 4.1. Since I love kprinter, I am waiting for 4.1 before switching to a 4x codebase.
I was going to comment on this to. All of the Nordic countries have a lover population density than US and yet we have a pretty good public transport. The secret? Government funding - we use the taxes to pay for public transport. There is no other way when you have a low population density.
I remember one of the last times that Slashdot had a discussion about KDE and Gnome. That time it become painfully obvious that many Gnome followers has some of strange hatred of KDE and that they wish it dead and buried. KDE followers more seamed to be content to be able to choose whatever desktop environment they liked, thus not choosing Gnome.
So, while Gnome followers would like to have KDE buried, KDE followers don't seam to really care if Gnome lives, as long as they don't have to use it.
It would be funny to know why Gnome followers has a such more extreme view of DE choice - is it because they are the majority? Why can't you leave us that like KDE alone? Why continue to show your opinions down your throat?
Bah.
Gnome is a bad ripoff MacOS interface. Some people simply don't like the MacOS interface.
And since Gnome is a BAD ripoff, I don't see why anyone can like it.
I would say that Gnome still is behind KDE. The only thing I ever configure in KDE is that I enable double clicking to start programs in folders (to make it behave like in Windows). Then I put the taskbar on top of the desktop but that is something I do in Windows to.
Of course, I am northern European so perhaps I don't count.
"People are living longer and 50 years of copyright protection no longer give lifetime income to artists who recorded hits in their late teens or early twenties".
Why should it? All other have to work for their income, why not artists?
And how much thinner could they make it by making this decision?
Probably not much.
The Air is a strange thing that is mostly sold of being thin. I don't really understand the purpose of that. What if it was a bit thicker? The Air is still a large computer even if it is thin, since it is quite large in depth and length (which it of course have to be to have the large screen). The most important factors for people is usually the weight and that the computer isn't unreasonable large.
Air is very thin but not impressive when it comes to other dimensions.
Another strange thing about the Air is that it is thinner on one side. What is to stop anyone from making a computer that has a 0.1 mm sharp edge and that is 30 mm on the other side? Would that still be thin or large?
If Apple had made the Air the same height on each side, they could probably have fitted a replaceable battery.
Ok, so it is rather easy to change at home.
However, don't this opening of it void the guaranty?
Also, why did Apple made the battery internal like this in the first place?
Why don't simply make it as easy to change as on a Mac-book or any other laptop?
I don't see the rational in the decision to not make it easy to change it without opening the case.
I am sorry to report this, but since you always support US in all conflicts and really don't want to involve yourself in EU, we have decided to count UK as a part of USA.
The opinion in Sweden has changed since 1980.
Current opinion is a strong support for nuclear power and a new referendum would probably mean victory for the nuclear power positive parties. One of the government coalition parties have recently also gone public with a desire to build more nuclear power plants and the largest of the coalition parties don't want nuclear power gone to 2010.
A mostly forgotten part of the referendum in 1980 is also the fact that the year 2010 was put forward as a good year to close the current reactors because of two things:
1) The reactors where only supposed to last until this year (now not true because of new methods of repairing)
2) By 2010 a suitable replacement for nuclear power would have been found. Exactly what this replacement was supposed to be was never established, but more or less supposed to be fusion power.
Since none of this two points is meet, there is a real question of how valid the referendum is. Also, you can ask how long a referendum should hold - a great number of the current voters wasn't allowed to vote in this referendum due too simply being underage or not born when it was held. I have some doubt why we should follow a decision that my grandfather voted on, when he isn't alive now and don't have to face the consequence of the decision.
It might sound great but it isn't much different from your system.
First of all, the two greatest parties gets to decide most who ever wins. For instance, now we have a coalition of four parties in government but over half of the minister posts is held by the largest of the four parties. Since the same parties always support each other, you know that a vote for some of the smaller parties in essence is the same as a vote on the big party that it supports.
Secondly, the two big parties has only become more and more similar over the years. Now days it almost don't matter which of them you vote for, most of their opinions is the same anyway.
Third, both of the large parties are corrupted. The left social democratic party by the union, the right wing (moderate) party by the corporations.
Another large problem is that the political parties in riksdagen (congress) don't have the same opinions as the people. A couple of examples:
*) A majority of the people wants to keep nuclear power. A majority of the riksdag want it closed.
*) In a referendum Sweden decided to not use the Euro. Over 80% of the politicians wants the Euro.
"It was agreed that each state registers its own separate elements, which means that you now have a piece of the US annexed to a piece of Europe annexed to a piece of Japan in outer space, legally speaking".
Ok, anybody besides me that see an obvious question regarding this: which European states law apply in ESA's sections? There is no "Europe" when it comes to laws - each country have their own.
So which is it? English? French? German? Dutch? Italian? Spanish? Or another European law?
Of course it is an artificial lock. Apple checks to see if the hardware is genuine Apple hardware and if it isn't, the software don't run. It don't have to do with the drivers or other things, its a lock pure and simple. You could build a computer with the exact same parts as Apple does and it would still not run legally. You can't blame driver or other issues if the hardware is identical.
This is an artificial implemented lock.
Don't make it out to be anything else.
This still isn't a law - that is simply economics.
And what is your suggestion than?
That all markets should be unregulated?
Perhaps we should allow broadcasting from mobile phones on any frequency? Cars shouldn't need brakes and safety belts nor airbags. Airplanes wouldn't need to go through certification.
This is a consumer protection law that was created because telephone companies used to lock people in on their network.
Typical American centered vision: it isn't the EU that locks out Apple.
It is Apple that have locked them self out of EU by not obeying our laws!
The EU directive is much, much older than the iPhone and it is an extremely good law. Apple can't come and think that our rules don't apply to them - if they want to sell here, they follow our laws. It is as simple as that.
Good point.
I started out in Truespace and I have tried to use Blender on several occasions and failed totally every time.
For all us using latin characters, it would be a pain to switch to Chinese.
Not only would we need to learn a new language, we would also need to learn a totally different way of writing. I would rather learn Arabic than Chinese since they at least have characters in the same sense that English.
Also, according to most people Chinese are hard to learn. And do you mean mandarin or cantonese?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_subject
This link says that British are no longer "subject" but called "citizen".
So they seam not to be the monarchs property anymore.
"Do lie detectors really belong in the court room?"
No. Next question please.
First, the possibility that US would attack Vatican is so remote that it is almost impossible to discuss it.
However, don't count on the northern part of EU to come to the popes help. We are still pissed about the 30 years war in the 17th century. Northern Europe is protestant and don't care for the pope. Actually, the present pope have said some things about protestant that haven't really made the relationship between Vatican and northern Europe better.
Btw, Russia is orthodox and don't care about the pope either.