There is no such thing as "political morality". It never existed. Never. If it exists at all, it just means "protect your own interests". Yeah, that's Machiavellian, but that's how the game has always been played, and there is no sign of it changing. The US is just is little more upfront about it's interests, that's all. Clinton pushed hard for peace in Israel because he wanted that Nobel Prize (dumbass). Bush obviously doesn't give a shit, at least it's not a priority. It's not our problem. And if it gets fixed it will likely be fixed with guns, not with negotiations. Although there might not be a lot of Palistinians left... So far, the Bush administration is putting it's money where it's mouth is. And getting shit done. Every other country/organisation is complaining, but they aren't really doing anything, either.
Global interdependance sounds nice, but it's a horrible idea. It's the opposite of current US policy, which would seem to be "do whatever the hell you want unless it hurts us, in which case we will kick your ass and take over your country". Which is certainly an effective approach, even if it pisses off weaker countries. I mean, it has to be frustrating... what are you going to do, whine to France? Protest at the UN? The US doesn't give a shit, doesn't have to, and the EU hasn't really come up with any reasons why it should. Neither has the UN.
You know, you're right. Europe is our last hope. It really wouldn't make a whole lot of sense to bet on africa or the middle east... Slavery, forced mutilation of women, tribal warfare (oh wait, the tribal warfare part is STILL going on in Europe... or it was until the U.S. bombed the shit out of whatever little dictatorship caused problems the last time). Europeans would make more convincing whiners if the U.S. didn't have to keep stepping in and solving their problems. Bosnia? Kosovo? Ring any bells? And I didn't see the UN doing much either, other than standing around taking notes on "500 got shot, 500 were put into trucks, thye marched another 500 out of town, heard heavy machine gun fire half an hour later". Face it: The U.S. is the sole surviving superpower. The EU, the Chinese, the Russians, and the UN are envious of that. Hence the problems when the U.S. tries to get shit done lately. However, no other country or organisation is stepping up to the plate in terms of "policing the world". I don't like my tax dollars being used for that, but who else is going to it? France? Honestly, if another ethnic "tribal" war erupts in eastern Europe tomorrow, whose troops, whose brothers and fathers, will be there putting the fires out? Big hint: It would not be the UN, and it would not be the EU. Learn to fix your own problems and maybe people would take you more seriously... America the barbaric? Learn to handle your OWN fucking problems, like genocide and ethnic cleansing, THEN come back with this whiny argument. In the mean time, the EU comes across as impotent, useless, and WHINY. Very whiny.
I certainly agree with your point on using cash... I do that anyway, as I tend to spend less when there is a tangible finite amount of money available. Plus it's faster. I hate getting stuck in line behind some old lady writing a damn diary entry in her checkbook in the grocery store. Oh yeah, maturity matters a lot more than age, so don't sweat it. Neither does the age of your car. The newest vehicle I own has a 1986 VIN, although a couple have newer/bigger engines shoehorned into them:) Keep the oil changed on the Camry and don't forget to change the timing belt and you could easily get another 100K out of it.
Naw, cars are still easy to fix. In the case of something well-designed (and expensive) like a high-end Mercedes, REALLY easy to fix... you can get right at the parts most likely to fail. It's just harder to figure out WHAT to fix these days, especially if you need an expensive electronic interface. Ever price the tool you use to reset the "service engine soon" light on a late-model BMW that lets you know that you need an oil change? Trust me, unless you plan on keeping the car for 20 years it's cheaper to take it to a garage that already has said tool. That being said, I still fix my own cars. I haven't taken a car to a repair shop for anything but tire changes in almost 15 years. And yeah, I worked as a mechanic on european imports to pay the bills while I was in school, and have kept up with the newer onboard diagnostics. Still, any slashdotter who can handle sendmail config files can figure out OBD2 output. If you don't, it's either because you don't want to or don't have time, either of which plays right into the hands of those who critisize our current soft, service-based culture.
It did happen, at least once that I know of. The lady had a very small dog, and Alzheimers. The microwave was fine, the dog was not. Not as spectacular and messy as you might have heard, although the smell was unbelievable.
You never know, you might do some time for that kind of blatent disregard for the public welfare if you get the wrong judge. Hell, I've gotten pulled because I had a Roots-style blower coming through the hood. And no, there are no emission controls where I live... and if there were, I still wouldn't have been busted. It's just that there are a hell of a lot of 15 year old Chrysler minivans with bad valve guides leaving a trail of blue smoke out there, and I'ME the bad guy? Come on, I WANT that fuel burned before it leaves the tailpipe, and rebuild the engine when wear shows. Oh well... life ain't fair, is it?
Yes, there are. Rocks. Heavy machine guns. Cruise missiles:) I think that, with adequate checks, civilians should be able to buy military weaponry. Be adequate I mean "really damn detailed", and that honestly is the case now for most types of weapons. Which is why (hopefully) my neighbors don't have any howitzers in the garage. My real problem with the current situation is amount of red tape required for an individual inventer who is not associated with a defense contractor to develop an idea that is considered a "destructive device". As a senior design project in college, I developed a three-shot burst mechanism that used only 3 parts to control the burst, and 4 more to control full-auto, burst, and semi-auto operation. It worked, when tested using CO2 to drive the mechanism. It works fine... cheaper and more dirt proof (at an artificially high rate of fire) than anything else I've seen... take an MP5 apart sometime. Then I made the mistake of talking to the ATF about a manufacturing permit to do a proof of concept using and existing firearm. Was it a good idea? I think so. Did it work? Yes. Will it ever see the light of day? No, those blueprints are going to sit in my advisor's safe until either I get an investor who is willing to develop the project and PAY for all that red tape (meaning starting a defense contracting company) or the liscense fees get brought back down to a reasonable level. Clinton jacked them up to the point that only a company with serious financial backing can take the risk; an individual can't. Of course, there is also the ethical issue: my design would be most useful for third-world countries trying to save ammo in their cheap submachineguns, so would I really want to develop it? Point is, someone like John Browning wouldn't get far in this day and age unless he already worked for a defense contracter.
Ok, I'd agree, if they stayed in Lebanon and didn't cross into Israel themselves to blow shit up or support people that did. If Israel feels the need to lob a shell or two across the border to keep 'em in line, that's fine, and there is a reason.
No, the extra cost is caused by two things: 1) it has to be reliable and accurate, or you might blow up a Chinese embassy or two and 2) layer upon layer of beurocrats and decisions by committee. Do you remember that useless lab partner from college? The one the professor stuck you with so that you had to carry them and the prof could free up his office hours? Combine those two and you should see the problem.
They have the money to buy anything they want, but so far they have NOT shown the expertise to do much in the way of high-tech weapons. That is why the Israelis have the sense to surgically kill their bombmakers (primitive bombmakers, compared to this). That way, the rest of the terrorists have to take the chance of blowing themselves into little bitty pieces before they get good enough to crank bombs out without getting killed.
What difference would this site possibly make? It would be kind of hard to build one of these in a cave in Pakistan with no electricity except what you can get from the generator. On the other hand, if your cell phone is charged, you can just order up an Excocet or two from your favorite French arms dealer. I'd say the Exocet option is easier... leaves you more time for the important things in life, like roasting mutton and reading the Koran.
No, I think Clearchannel would have something to say about that. God, you would have congressional committees of their flunkies arguing with committees of their opponents (assuming that they have any opponents in congress) for WEEKS before you could turn off the Brittany. I would assume that the pulsejet driven widget would have arrived long before then.
See, now you've hit the nail on the head. You can't put the genie (the info) back in the bottle, and some of us already knew how to do this. The problem is (drum roll) you don't trust your neighbors! Or fellow slashdotters! The problem is NOT the technical knowledge required, that only takes some creativity and an education (self-supplied or from a university). The problem, for you, is whether that knowledge will be used responsibly. If, like you, I truly believed that my fellow slashdotters would 1) build a version 2) put a warhead on it (or just fuck up their programming on the guidance system and run it through my living room window) and 3) actually launch it where it could do damage, the only soluting is to ban the knowledge (burn the books, shut down those universities that have the audacity to teach engineering) and then jail all the people who allready know how or could figure it out. People who think the way you do should keep out of technology, as your views will not change anything anyway. Maybe you should focus your energies social issues like raising children with a proper sense of personal responsibily for thier actions, love thy neighbor, that kind of thing. I would not at all be worried if the guy next door was putting one of these together. I would be worried if he was a religious extremist who was abused as a child and who thought that I was the antichrist, AND had a cruise missile in his garage. Seriously, what does it hurt if people build these just for the fun of it?
Actually, building one of these would be illegal under current law, especially if it had a warhead. Launching it, even without a warhead, would probably also be illegal in a populated area. But that's not really what you have to worry about. The government will likely never know that you're building a missile in your garage. What you have to worry about are LAWYERS. Ever wonder why you never see people flying radio controlled planes or helicopters in the park? What if you lose control or have a malfunction and hit someone or something? What if your falling chopper decapitates a poodle as it digs a hole for itself? You get sued. So, in this case I don't think the anti-gun lobby is the problem. This could be a really neat hobby, you'd just need to change those pesky laws that regulate "destructive devices" and get rid of all the lawyers first.
You are replying to someone who thinks that the constitution and/or its amendments are out of date and do not apply to "modern society". You may as well try to explain a quasar to someone who thinks the earth is flat.
Let me get this straight. We should nuke Israel, and all of the Muslim terrorists will go away? Go back to raising goats and camels, or chewing khat all day? They'll stop attacking India and beheading tourists and missionaries in the Phillipines? Hell, maybe they'll stop butchering the Christians in Indonesia! Or stop slavery in the Sudan! All would be right with the world! Dumbass.
No, those mentioned in the parent post ARE terrorists. They all target(ed) civilians to further political ends. Kim Chong-il kidnapped Japanese civilians to help train his spies. Now he's essentially using his nuclear weapons program to hold a gun to the worlds head (give me food and oil, so I don't have to get my own, freeing my money for my weapons programs, and I won't sell this shit to terrorists). Timothy McVeigh blew up a building that had a DAYCARE center in it. He qualifies in my book. Bin Laden, well, no need to explain that one. The Unibomber? A whacked out leftist tree hugger, but still a terrorist. He wasn't mailing his little hand-carved contraptions to the military, was he? So yes, these people are all terrorists, unless you have a definition other than the one in the dictionary.
You, sir, are mistaken. I'm going to assume that you live in the USA. If you live in Europe, there are limits on the amount of power a BB gun can have, so good luck resisting an invasion. Back to the point... under my state law EVERY able-bodied male between the ages of 18 and 30 is part of the militia if they don't have a criminal record. Barring the felons, that means everyone in that age group. The real question is, why would you have a problem with that?
Slashdot Mirror
There is no such thing as "political morality". It never existed. Never. If it exists at all, it just means "protect your own interests". Yeah, that's Machiavellian, but that's how the game has always been played, and there is no sign of it changing. The US is just is little more upfront about it's interests, that's all. Clinton pushed hard for peace in Israel because he wanted that Nobel Prize (dumbass). Bush obviously doesn't give a shit, at least it's not a priority. It's not our problem. And if it gets fixed it will likely be fixed with guns, not with negotiations. Although there might not be a lot of Palistinians left... So far, the Bush administration is putting it's money where it's mouth is. And getting shit done. Every other country/organisation is complaining, but they aren't really doing anything, either.
Oh good! Europe is getting an independant streak? that means we can bring all of our soldiers home from Kosovo, right?
Global interdependance sounds nice, but it's a horrible idea. It's the opposite of current US policy, which would seem to be "do whatever the hell you want unless it hurts us, in which case we will kick your ass and take over your country". Which is certainly an effective approach, even if it pisses off weaker countries. I mean, it has to be frustrating... what are you going to do, whine to France? Protest at the UN? The US doesn't give a shit, doesn't have to, and the EU hasn't really come up with any reasons why it should. Neither has the UN.
You know, you're right. Europe is our last hope. It really wouldn't make a whole lot of sense to bet on africa or the middle east... Slavery, forced mutilation of women, tribal warfare (oh wait, the tribal warfare part is STILL going on in Europe... or it was until the U.S. bombed the shit out of whatever little dictatorship caused problems the last time). Europeans would make more convincing whiners if the U.S. didn't have to keep stepping in and solving their problems. Bosnia? Kosovo? Ring any bells? And I didn't see the UN doing much either, other than standing around taking notes on "500 got shot, 500 were put into trucks, thye marched another 500 out of town, heard heavy machine gun fire half an hour later". Face it: The U.S. is the sole surviving superpower. The EU, the Chinese, the Russians, and the UN are envious of that. Hence the problems when the U.S. tries to get shit done lately. However, no other country or organisation is stepping up to the plate in terms of "policing the world". I don't like my tax dollars being used for that, but who else is going to it? France? Honestly, if another ethnic "tribal" war erupts in eastern Europe tomorrow, whose troops, whose brothers and fathers, will be there putting the fires out? Big hint: It would not be the UN, and it would not be the EU. Learn to fix your own problems and maybe people would take you more seriously... America the barbaric? Learn to handle your OWN fucking problems, like genocide and ethnic cleansing, THEN come back with this whiny argument. In the mean time, the EU comes across as impotent, useless, and WHINY. Very whiny.
I certainly agree with your point on using cash... I do that anyway, as I tend to spend less when there is a tangible finite amount of money available. Plus it's faster. I hate getting stuck in line behind some old lady writing a damn diary entry in her checkbook in the grocery store. Oh yeah, maturity matters a lot more than age, so don't sweat it. Neither does the age of your car. The newest vehicle I own has a 1986 VIN, although a couple have newer/bigger engines shoehorned into them :) Keep the oil changed on the Camry and don't forget to change the timing belt and you could easily get another 100K out of it.
Naw, cars are still easy to fix. In the case of something well-designed (and expensive) like a high-end Mercedes, REALLY easy to fix... you can get right at the parts most likely to fail. It's just harder to figure out WHAT to fix these days, especially if you need an expensive electronic interface. Ever price the tool you use to reset the "service engine soon" light on a late-model BMW that lets you know that you need an oil change? Trust me, unless you plan on keeping the car for 20 years it's cheaper to take it to a garage that already has said tool. That being said, I still fix my own cars. I haven't taken a car to a repair shop for anything but tire changes in almost 15 years. And yeah, I worked as a mechanic on european imports to pay the bills while I was in school, and have kept up with the newer onboard diagnostics. Still, any slashdotter who can handle sendmail config files can figure out OBD2 output. If you don't, it's either because you don't want to or don't have time, either of which plays right into the hands of those who critisize our current soft, service-based culture.
It did happen, at least once that I know of. The lady had a very small dog, and Alzheimers. The microwave was fine, the dog was not. Not as spectacular and messy as you might have heard, although the smell was unbelievable.
Why should stupidity be a defense?
Ok, now that's really sad.
Neat idea...
You never know, you might do some time for that kind of blatent disregard for the public welfare if you get the wrong judge. Hell, I've gotten pulled because I had a Roots-style blower coming through the hood. And no, there are no emission controls where I live... and if there were, I still wouldn't have been busted. It's just that there are a hell of a lot of 15 year old Chrysler minivans with bad valve guides leaving a trail of blue smoke out there, and I'ME the bad guy? Come on, I WANT that fuel burned before it leaves the tailpipe, and rebuild the engine when wear shows. Oh well... life ain't fair, is it?
Yes, there are. Rocks. Heavy machine guns. Cruise missiles :) I think that, with adequate checks, civilians should be able to buy military weaponry. Be adequate I mean "really damn detailed", and that honestly is the case now for most types of weapons. Which is why (hopefully) my neighbors don't have any howitzers in the garage. My real problem with the current situation is amount of red tape required for an individual inventer who is not associated with a defense contractor to develop an idea that is considered a "destructive device". As a senior design project in college, I developed a three-shot burst mechanism that used only 3 parts to control the burst, and 4 more to control full-auto, burst, and semi-auto operation. It worked, when tested using CO2 to drive the mechanism. It works fine... cheaper and more dirt proof (at an artificially high rate of fire) than anything else I've seen... take an MP5 apart sometime. Then I made the mistake of talking to the ATF about a manufacturing permit to do a proof of concept using and existing firearm. Was it a good idea? I think so. Did it work? Yes. Will it ever see the light of day? No, those blueprints are going to sit in my advisor's safe until either I get an investor who is willing to develop the project and PAY for all that red tape (meaning starting a defense contracting company) or the liscense fees get brought back down to a reasonable level. Clinton jacked them up to the point that only a company with serious financial backing can take the risk; an individual can't. Of course, there is also the ethical issue: my design would be most useful for third-world countries trying to save ammo in their cheap submachineguns, so would I really want to develop it? Point is, someone like John Browning wouldn't get far in this day and age unless he already worked for a defense contracter.
Ok, I'd agree, if they stayed in Lebanon and didn't cross into Israel themselves to blow shit up or support people that did. If Israel feels the need to lob a shell or two across the border to keep 'em in line, that's fine, and there is a reason.
No, the extra cost is caused by two things: 1) it has to be reliable and accurate, or you might blow up a Chinese embassy or two and 2) layer upon layer of beurocrats and decisions by committee. Do you remember that useless lab partner from college? The one the professor stuck you with so that you had to carry them and the prof could free up his office hours? Combine those two and you should see the problem.
They have the money to buy anything they want, but so far they have NOT shown the expertise to do much in the way of high-tech weapons. That is why the Israelis have the sense to surgically kill their bombmakers (primitive bombmakers, compared to this). That way, the rest of the terrorists have to take the chance of blowing themselves into little bitty pieces before they get good enough to crank bombs out without getting killed.
What difference would this site possibly make? It would be kind of hard to build one of these in a cave in Pakistan with no electricity except what you can get from the generator. On the other hand, if your cell phone is charged, you can just order up an Excocet or two from your favorite French arms dealer. I'd say the Exocet option is easier... leaves you more time for the important things in life, like roasting mutton and reading the Koran.
No, I think Clearchannel would have something to say about that. God, you would have congressional committees of their flunkies arguing with committees of their opponents (assuming that they have any opponents in congress) for WEEKS before you could turn off the Brittany. I would assume that the pulsejet driven widget would have arrived long before then.
See, now you've hit the nail on the head. You can't put the genie (the info) back in the bottle, and some of us already knew how to do this. The problem is (drum roll) you don't trust your neighbors! Or fellow slashdotters! The problem is NOT the technical knowledge required, that only takes some creativity and an education (self-supplied or from a university). The problem, for you, is whether that knowledge will be used responsibly. If, like you, I truly believed that my fellow slashdotters would 1) build a version 2) put a warhead on it (or just fuck up their programming on the guidance system and run it through my living room window) and 3) actually launch it where it could do damage, the only soluting is to ban the knowledge (burn the books, shut down those universities that have the audacity to teach engineering) and then jail all the people who allready know how or could figure it out. People who think the way you do should keep out of technology, as your views will not change anything anyway. Maybe you should focus your energies social issues like raising children with a proper sense of personal responsibily for thier actions, love thy neighbor, that kind of thing. I would not at all be worried if the guy next door was putting one of these together. I would be worried if he was a religious extremist who was abused as a child and who thought that I was the antichrist, AND had a cruise missile in his garage. Seriously, what does it hurt if people build these just for the fun of it?
Actually, building one of these would be illegal under current law, especially if it had a warhead. Launching it, even without a warhead, would probably also be illegal in a populated area. But that's not really what you have to worry about. The government will likely never know that you're building a missile in your garage. What you have to worry about are LAWYERS. Ever wonder why you never see people flying radio controlled planes or helicopters in the park? What if you lose control or have a malfunction and hit someone or something? What if your falling chopper decapitates a poodle as it digs a hole for itself? You get sued. So, in this case I don't think the anti-gun lobby is the problem. This could be a really neat hobby, you'd just need to change those pesky laws that regulate "destructive devices" and get rid of all the lawyers first.
You are replying to someone who thinks that the constitution and/or its amendments are out of date and do not apply to "modern society". You may as well try to explain a quasar to someone who thinks the earth is flat.
Let me get this straight. We should nuke Israel, and all of the Muslim terrorists will go away? Go back to raising goats and camels, or chewing khat all day? They'll stop attacking India and beheading tourists and missionaries in the Phillipines? Hell, maybe they'll stop butchering the Christians in Indonesia! Or stop slavery in the Sudan! All would be right with the world! Dumbass.
No, those mentioned in the parent post ARE terrorists. They all target(ed) civilians to further political ends. Kim Chong-il kidnapped Japanese civilians to help train his spies. Now he's essentially using his nuclear weapons program to hold a gun to the worlds head (give me food and oil, so I don't have to get my own, freeing my money for my weapons programs, and I won't sell this shit to terrorists). Timothy McVeigh blew up a building that had a DAYCARE center in it. He qualifies in my book. Bin Laden, well, no need to explain that one. The Unibomber? A whacked out leftist tree hugger, but still a terrorist. He wasn't mailing his little hand-carved contraptions to the military, was he? So yes, these people are all terrorists, unless you have a definition other than the one in the dictionary.
God, people, this one isn't worth responding to... Next we will hear all about how how he/she brained the rapist with a skillet.
I think the Swiss have the right idea. And if you really believe what you are posting, I hope you have a lot of faith in that bat under your bed.
You, sir, are mistaken. I'm going to assume that you live in the USA. If you live in Europe, there are limits on the amount of power a BB gun can have, so good luck resisting an invasion. Back to the point... under my state law EVERY able-bodied male between the ages of 18 and 30 is part of the militia if they don't have a criminal record. Barring the felons, that means everyone in that age group. The real question is, why would you have a problem with that?