Personally I'd go for non violent and persistent protest in person. Its hard to demonise a person who refuses to fight back, but also refuses to give up.
Rosa Parks is a bad example, because her case was something was relevant to everyone at the time, and everyone understood that (racism has long been a huge part of American culture, like it or not.) What she did polarized people, hit them where they lived, and was able to open more than few people's eyes. Not that she was even trying to do that... little Rosa Parks had just suffered enough.
Secrecy on the part of the EPA is not going to get people riled up enough to effect any change. The problem is that, unlike Rosa Parks, we haven't suffered enough.
YOU, unfortunately, shot your mouth off without understanding what I was saying. I wasn't referring to the little guys.
If you'd followed this very much, you might realize a few things. Over the past few decades, the big boys have made noises about building their own stuff: there's a market in space launch and they'd like to profit from it (much like the Russians are now.) However, all those corporations are heavily dependent upon Federal contracts, and every time they talk about building a commercial launch vehicle of their own, NASA suits start quietly circulating around various boardrooms pointing out that certain juicy contracts are up for renewal, and that it would be a shame if they went to somebody else. My point is that NASA is deliberately preventing the same companies that are building NASA's vehicles from using that experience outside NASA's control. In that sense, NASA politics are holding back greater commercialization of near-space.
That's what I'm talking about, bucko. So try being a tad more civil next time before you starting calling people "dumbest of the dumb", and maybe find out what they're actually talking about before you jump in.
About the only thing I can do is write letters to Congresspeople. Which I do. And vote. Which I do. I contribute to political organizations that I believe are helping to improve matters. What else would you suggest I do?
We're a ways yet from taking up arms against our Federal Government and attempting to overthrow it in hopes that whatever replaces it will be better. If that happens, so be it, but people talking about the problems we face are the first step in trying to fix them, and people generally talk to people they think will understand what they're talking about.
The next step is to make more people aware of these issues. That's a tad bit more complicated.
I didn't really have a problem with George Bush, Sr., so I didn't count him. I know a lot of the people that voted for Clinton instead of Bush Sr. later regretted that decision. I mean, yes both Bushes got us involved in a conflict with Iraq, but in the case of the first Gulf War it was in direct response to an overt act of aggression against a Middle Eastern ally. We also simply fulfilled our treaty obligations, packed up and left. Contrast that to the way the current War in Iraq has been handled. Consequently, I don't think it's fair to put the elder Bush in the same category of mental defective as his son.
Just out of curiosity, who is that guy? I'd really like to know, so I can vote for him (or her, and no Hillary is not the one.) All the candidates I see out there at the moment are liars and/or hypocrites, to one degree or another.
PLEASE don't get me started on Clinton... either of them. The great tragedy of our times is that after eight years of a Clinton we got eight years of Bush, and now possibly another 4+ years of a Clinton.
However, what I'm concerned about is the increasing opaqueness of our government. This is just one more example, one more powerful group infected with the disease of unaccountability. "We don't have to tell you anything so why should we? What, you think we're some kind of public servants or something?"
... the chilling effect that would occur if agency employees believed their frank and honest opinions and analysis expressed as part of assessing California's waiver request were to be disclosed in a broad setting.
You people work for us, We the People. Any analyses you perform should be a matter of public record. Get over yourselves.
Furthermore, what is with "executive privilege" being used as a cover for bureaucratic malfeasance? We aren't talking nuclear secrets here, but matters of public policy.
Like, for users who love spending >$4000 on their laptop and having it plugged it permanently.
Which is the whole problem with spending >$4000 on a laptop. With something that expensive, who wants to risk carrying it around with them? It might get dropped or stolen.
Yes, but we aren't talking about the relative financial success here: we're talking about the usability and sophistication of the product itself. And there Microsoft is way behind. Make no mistake... I don't like Apple, I don't like Jobs, and it's unlikely I'll ever own an Apple product again (the last one was an Apple ][.) So I'm not defending Apple Computer, per se, but as a Windows programmer I'm more than familiar with the shortcomings of that particular OS.
Apple also has OSX, and Lenovo has Windows. The difference in operating systems is more than branding (I don't own a Mac, but let's face it, Microsoft is still playing catch-up.)
Most failures of any electrical or electronic system occur during startup. That's when subsystems haven't fully stabilized and experience high inrush currents, with concomitant spike heating and other stresses. It's the same reason incandescent lights usually pop when switched on, but rarely fail when left lit.
I never switch any of my systems off, and failures are extremely rare. I have all monitors and flat panels automatically power down, but I leave hard drives running continuously. About the only time I have to replace something is when I upgrade every few years. Yes, it adds a few dollars to my electric bill, but I save in other areas there, and it is worth the peace of mind.
Even fans (which are the weak link in most PCs) can run for ages if you spend the money to buy quality parts. It helps to have a good HEPA filter in your computer room, and keep the machines off the floor. Fans last a long time without dust in the bearings, and a dust-free computer runs cooler as well.
The GP is right. The outfits that are currently taking data from the NOAA and disseminating it (for a fee) are dead-set against the NOAA releasing weather data in an open format. They apparently have a sense of entitlement here, feeling that it's their data, even though it was acquired by a taxpayer-funded agency.
NASA's been doing this for decades... protecting their turf. If Congress really wanted to help space flight, they'd tell NASA to back off and leave the private sector alone. Not that it matters: eventually these outfits will just give up on the United States and move offshore. The more we hamstring our domestic spaceflight companies, the more likely it is they'll just leave.
Slashdot Mirror
Personally I'd go for non violent and persistent protest in person. Its hard to demonise a person who refuses to fight back, but also refuses to give up.
... little Rosa Parks had just suffered enough.
Rosa Parks is a bad example, because her case was something was relevant to everyone at the time, and everyone understood that (racism has long been a huge part of American culture, like it or not.) What she did polarized people, hit them where they lived, and was able to open more than few people's eyes. Not that she was even trying to do that
Secrecy on the part of the EPA is not going to get people riled up enough to effect any change. The problem is that, unlike Rosa Parks, we haven't suffered enough.
YOU, unfortunately, shot your mouth off without understanding what I was saying. I wasn't referring to the little guys.
If you'd followed this very much, you might realize a few things. Over the past few decades, the big boys have made noises about building their own stuff: there's a market in space launch and they'd like to profit from it (much like the Russians are now.) However, all those corporations are heavily dependent upon Federal contracts, and every time they talk about building a commercial launch vehicle of their own, NASA suits start quietly circulating around various boardrooms pointing out that certain juicy contracts are up for renewal, and that it would be a shame if they went to somebody else. My point is that NASA is deliberately preventing the same companies that are building NASA's vehicles from using that experience outside NASA's control. In that sense, NASA politics are holding back greater commercialization of near-space.
That's what I'm talking about, bucko. So try being a tad more civil next time before you starting calling people "dumbest of the dumb", and maybe find out what they're actually talking about before you jump in.
You'll seem smarter that way.
About the only thing I can do is write letters to Congresspeople. Which I do. And vote. Which I do. I contribute to political organizations that I believe are helping to improve matters. What else would you suggest I do?
We're a ways yet from taking up arms against our Federal Government and attempting to overthrow it in hopes that whatever replaces it will be better. If that happens, so be it, but people talking about the problems we face are the first step in trying to fix them, and people generally talk to people they think will understand what they're talking about.
The next step is to make more people aware of these issues. That's a tad bit more complicated.
I didn't really have a problem with George Bush, Sr., so I didn't count him. I know a lot of the people that voted for Clinton instead of Bush Sr. later regretted that decision. I mean, yes both Bushes got us involved in a conflict with Iraq, but in the case of the first Gulf War it was in direct response to an overt act of aggression against a Middle Eastern ally. We also simply fulfilled our treaty obligations, packed up and left. Contrast that to the way the current War in Iraq has been handled. Consequently, I don't think it's fair to put the elder Bush in the same category of mental defective as his son.
Have you been to Los Angeles?
Yes. Recently. And I wouldn't choose to live there.
instead of the guy who tells the truth
Just out of curiosity, who is that guy? I'd really like to know, so I can vote for him (or her, and no Hillary is not the one.) All the candidates I see out there at the moment are liars and/or hypocrites, to one degree or another.
PLEASE don't get me started on Clinton ... either of them. The great tragedy of our times is that after eight years of a Clinton we got eight years of Bush, and now possibly another 4+ years of a Clinton.
However, what I'm concerned about is the increasing opaqueness of our government. This is just one more example, one more powerful group infected with the disease of unaccountability. "We don't have to tell you anything so why should we? What, you think we're some kind of public servants or something?"
There needs to be an attitude readjustment.
They hide information for the sake of hiding information.
I've always said that bureaucrats have a lot in common with squirrels.
... the chilling effect that would occur if agency employees believed their frank and honest opinions and analysis expressed as part of assessing California's waiver request were to be disclosed in a broad setting.
You people work for us, We the People. Any analyses you perform should be a matter of public record. Get over yourselves.
Furthermore, what is with "executive privilege" being used as a cover for bureaucratic malfeasance? We aren't talking nuclear secrets here, but matters of public policy.
No, I just chose to ignore it.
Like, for users who love spending >$4000 on their laptop and having it plugged it permanently.
Which is the whole problem with spending >$4000 on a laptop. With something that expensive, who wants to risk carrying it around with them? It might get dropped or stolen.
Yes, but we aren't talking about the relative financial success here: we're talking about the usability and sophistication of the product itself. And there Microsoft is way behind. Make no mistake ... I don't like Apple, I don't like Jobs, and it's unlikely I'll ever own an Apple product again (the last one was an Apple ][.) So I'm not defending Apple Computer, per se, but as a Windows programmer I'm more than familiar with the shortcomings of that particular OS.
Catch up, indeed.
All Presidents, especially his predecessor. I mean, they called him Slick Willie for a reason. Well, okay ... two reasons.
Reducing energy consumption isn't just about saving money, it's about not fucking up the planet too.
I think I should change my sig to "Instant +5 Insightful: Use the phrase "it's about not fucking up the planet" at least once.
Well, and I think you missed the point of my sig, but that's okay.
Apple also has OSX, and Lenovo has Windows. The difference in operating systems is more than branding (I don't own a Mac, but let's face it, Microsoft is still playing catch-up.)
I'm sure he'd be happy to after you give him a job in a developed country.
This was the top result in Google when I searched for "windows remote power down API".
Most failures of any electrical or electronic system occur during startup. That's when subsystems haven't fully stabilized and experience high inrush currents, with concomitant spike heating and other stresses. It's the same reason incandescent lights usually pop when switched on, but rarely fail when left lit.
I never switch any of my systems off, and failures are extremely rare. I have all monitors and flat panels automatically power down, but I leave hard drives running continuously. About the only time I have to replace something is when I upgrade every few years. Yes, it adds a few dollars to my electric bill, but I save in other areas there, and it is worth the peace of mind.
Even fans (which are the weak link in most PCs) can run for ages if you spend the money to buy quality parts. It helps to have a good HEPA filter in your computer room, and keep the machines off the floor. Fans last a long time without dust in the bearings, and a dust-free computer runs cooler as well.
In America, we read the president's lips.
... we just take note of when they're moving so we can tell when he's lying to us again.
We don't bother actually reading his lips
He said, "watch your step, my son's a jackass."
The GP is right. The outfits that are currently taking data from the NOAA and disseminating it (for a fee) are dead-set against the NOAA releasing weather data in an open format. They apparently have a sense of entitlement here, feeling that it's their data, even though it was acquired by a taxpayer-funded agency.
checked for temporary and spatial consistency
I think he meant "temporal".
NASA's been doing this for decades ... protecting their turf. If Congress really wanted to help space flight, they'd tell NASA to back off and leave the private sector alone. Not that it matters: eventually these outfits will just give up on the United States and move offshore. The more we hamstring our domestic spaceflight companies, the more likely it is they'll just leave.
But I think my most concern is fuck the people. I want see the same story from the army point of view.
Here you go
Well ... there is this thing called "Google" which might be able to help you there.