When you say "a push" keep in mind you're talking about "nudging" a 417 metric ton (a bit under 1 million pounds on Earth) object that is constantly falling around the Earth at over 27,000 kph. The amount of energy and fuel needed to even push the ISS to a slightly higher orbit (Say 375km perigee instead of 355km) is more than you can physically store on the station, let alone the amount of lift you'd need to bring it up to the station itself.
If you follow that along to the amount of force a bomb would need to "nudge" a bomb would give to the station, it would definitely nudge whatever is left into an extraorbital path, leaving the rest of the debris on unpredictable orbits around the Earth, crashing into satellites, spacecraft, astronauts, what have you.
As a celiac'er myself, I can say that's not true. I ate dirt, played in the mud, my mom was not overprotective, and I still got critical anemia from damage to my gut from gluten.
Also, as noted below, celiac/gluten intolerance is not an allergy - it's an autoimmune disorder.
So by your reasoning, a terrorist is a revolutionary, and (at the risk of sounding jingoistic) the 9/11 attacks, Madrid bombings, London, Moscow, etc., were all on a par with Tienamen Square or any number of peaceful demonstrations for Tibet or human rights in general.
And are you seriously suggesting that the US at large is culpable for the actions of William Calley, Jesse England, and any other rapist, murderer, or degenerate who manages to make it into the uniformed service.
Careful using a broad brush when you paint your pictures, it smacks of an untrained eye and mind.
Now how come the print media hasn't taken on broadcast media over the now-ubiquitous "An article in today's says...", or even better, the roll-up segments of print articles, pieces, even cartoons! Flipped the other way, the print will do articles occaisionally on broadcast pieces. So really, a notable chunk of "work" done by both media is really just parroting the work of the other.
Of course, the question of fair use here is muddled by the fact that print and broadcast media are often arms of the same entity, so it can't really be "stealing". It's the Old Media taking care of itself.
What this all comes down to is that this is another in a series of death knells for the Old Media business model. All of these issues; Google News, Google Print, DRM, VOIP fees, blogs; are all just different faces on the same issue: The death of the Old Media business model. The writing has been on the wall for years now since the Internet started becoming the New Media: adapt or die. And rather than seek out and embrace revenue streams evolving from the New Media, they cling to feeble kludges of the Old, and when those start falling apart, they seek legal protection, often to the detriment of the New Media. The sooner the business and political world absorbs this fact the sooner they can move ahead to bigger and better things.
I appreciate all the advice on securing my laptop post deployment (and the wishes of wellness, also). I guess what I was really curious about though was the last bit of my post, regarding the lifecycle of some of these malignant phenomena. Is there a measurable lifespan for a virus, or browser exploit? Or do they never really go away, just lurk in the dark corners of the web like some hidden pocket of smallpox cozened away in the rainforest?
During my last deployment to Iraq (and surely, during my upcoming one) we had a number of communication options, ranging from cheap to pricey, crappy to great.
The first mode I was introduced to is free for most soldiers. It's called DNVT (don't ask me what it stands for, I'm not a commo guy). Basically it's a phone that connects either through hard-wired connection or via a line of sight radio connection. It's relayed through to the military's DSN network (a military-only phone system) where you can call any military facility in the world. Up to this point it's free, but notoriously spotty, mainly because of communication priorities of different units (my squadron had lower pri vs. our regiment), and that "morale" calls have low priority as well (keep in mind, these commo networks are used for operational needs primarily).
Once you contact the military base of your choice, the operator on base can connect you with any local number for free, or with a long distance operator for collect or calling card calls. (For a good example of this in reverse, watch Heartbreak Ridge.
The second option is through a satellite phone. Several providers are available out there, from AT&T to Thuraya, and they're all expensive.
The third option is through an AT&T call center, which is basically satellite as well. More expensive than the DNVT, but not too bad.
The fourth option was actually VOIP through Segovia, which was paid for through the military. Segovia provided a satellite internet connection for various FOBs (forward operating base), plus set up Cisco VOIP phones. You had to buy minutes through Segovia , but it worked out to about $.05/minute. Reliability was a bit of an issue. If bandwidth or the connection crapped out, calls either became unintelligible or just didn't go through in the first place.
Many comments have been made that communication home should be free, and in a lot of places it is, just not high quality or convenient all the time. Some units provide video tele-conferencing for their soldiers, when available, so they can talk "face to face" with their families. Commanders realize how important communication with "the rear" is, and by and large make every effort to make that happen. Plus, many organizations provide free calling cards to soldiers.
But I'd agree with most posters that every effort should be provided to maintain communication with the homefront for our soldiers.
If this does pass and the VCR is held accountable for copyright infringement, then it sets some interesting precedent: Who's to say then that gun manufacturers couldn't be held liable for shooting deaths - They know their products, which some contend have "legitmate uses", are also used to conduct violent crimes. Auto manufacturers know their products are used as getaway vehicles, cell phone manufacturers know that drug dealers and pimps use their products to conduct "business", etc, etc, etc...Heck, even Dixon Ticonderoga and Cross could be held liable - people write down shady things, bad checks, commit plagerism, and stab people in the neck with their products, and where's the public outcry? Where's the massive multicorporate lobbyist pressure to outlaw these sticks of doom?
Slashdot Mirror
When you say "a push" keep in mind you're talking about "nudging" a 417 metric ton (a bit under 1 million pounds on Earth) object that is constantly falling around the Earth at over 27,000 kph. The amount of energy and fuel needed to even push the ISS to a slightly higher orbit (Say 375km perigee instead of 355km) is more than you can physically store on the station, let alone the amount of lift you'd need to bring it up to the station itself. If you follow that along to the amount of force a bomb would need to "nudge" a bomb would give to the station, it would definitely nudge whatever is left into an extraorbital path, leaving the rest of the debris on unpredictable orbits around the Earth, crashing into satellites, spacecraft, astronauts, what have you.
As a celiac'er myself, I can say that's not true. I ate dirt, played in the mud, my mom was not overprotective, and I still got critical anemia from damage to my gut from gluten. Also, as noted below, celiac/gluten intolerance is not an allergy - it's an autoimmune disorder.
So by your reasoning, a terrorist is a revolutionary, and (at the risk of sounding jingoistic) the 9/11 attacks, Madrid bombings, London, Moscow, etc., were all on a par with Tienamen Square or any number of peaceful demonstrations for Tibet or human rights in general.
And are you seriously suggesting that the US at large is culpable for the actions of William Calley, Jesse England, and any other rapist, murderer, or degenerate who manages to make it into the uniformed service.
Careful using a broad brush when you paint your pictures, it smacks of an untrained eye and mind.
Now how come the print media hasn't taken on broadcast media over the now-ubiquitous "An article in today's says...", or even better, the roll-up segments of print articles, pieces, even cartoons! Flipped the other way, the print will do articles occaisionally on broadcast pieces. So really, a notable chunk of "work" done by both media is really just parroting the work of the other.
Of course, the question of fair use here is muddled by the fact that print and broadcast media are often arms of the same entity, so it can't really be "stealing". It's the Old Media taking care of itself.
What this all comes down to is that this is another in a series of death knells for the Old Media business model. All of these issues; Google News, Google Print, DRM, VOIP fees, blogs; are all just different faces on the same issue: The death of the Old Media business model. The writing has been on the wall for years now since the Internet started becoming the New Media: adapt or die. And rather than seek out and embrace revenue streams evolving from the New Media, they cling to feeble kludges of the Old, and when those start falling apart, they seek legal protection, often to the detriment of the New Media. The sooner the business and political world absorbs this fact the sooner they can move ahead to bigger and better things.
I appreciate all the advice on securing my laptop post deployment (and the wishes of wellness, also). I guess what I was really curious about though was the last bit of my post, regarding the lifecycle of some of these malignant phenomena. Is there a measurable lifespan for a virus, or browser exploit? Or do they never really go away, just lurk in the dark corners of the web like some hidden pocket of smallpox cozened away in the rainforest?
During my last deployment to Iraq (and surely, during my upcoming one) we had a number of communication options, ranging from cheap to pricey, crappy to great.
The first mode I was introduced to is free for most soldiers. It's called DNVT (don't ask me what it stands for, I'm not a commo guy). Basically it's a phone that connects either through hard-wired connection or via a line of sight radio connection. It's relayed through to the military's DSN network (a military-only phone system) where you can call any military facility in the world. Up to this point it's free, but notoriously spotty, mainly because of communication priorities of different units (my squadron had lower pri vs. our regiment), and that "morale" calls have low priority as well (keep in mind, these commo networks are used for operational needs primarily).
Once you contact the military base of your choice, the operator on base can connect you with any local number for free, or with a long distance operator for collect or calling card calls. (For a good example of this in reverse, watch Heartbreak Ridge.
The second option is through a satellite phone. Several providers are available out there, from AT&T to Thuraya, and they're all expensive.
The third option is through an AT&T call center, which is basically satellite as well. More expensive than the DNVT, but not too bad.
The fourth option was actually VOIP through Segovia, which was paid for through the military. Segovia provided a satellite internet connection for various FOBs (forward operating base), plus set up Cisco VOIP phones. You had to buy minutes through Segovia , but it worked out to about $.05/minute. Reliability was a bit of an issue. If bandwidth or the connection crapped out, calls either became unintelligible or just didn't go through in the first place.
Many comments have been made that communication home should be free, and in a lot of places it is, just not high quality or convenient all the time. Some units provide video tele-conferencing for their soldiers, when available, so they can talk "face to face" with their families. Commanders realize how important communication with "the rear" is, and by and large make every effort to make that happen. Plus, many organizations provide free calling cards to soldiers.
But I'd agree with most posters that every effort should be provided to maintain communication with the homefront for our soldiers.
If this does pass and the VCR is held accountable for copyright infringement, then it sets some interesting precedent: Who's to say then that gun manufacturers couldn't be held liable for shooting deaths - They know their products, which some contend have "legitmate uses", are also used to conduct violent crimes. Auto manufacturers know their products are used as getaway vehicles, cell phone manufacturers know that drug dealers and pimps use their products to conduct "business", etc, etc, etc...Heck, even Dixon Ticonderoga and Cross could be held liable - people write down shady things, bad checks, commit plagerism, and stab people in the neck with their products, and where's the public outcry? Where's the massive multicorporate lobbyist pressure to outlaw these sticks of doom?