It's interesting to me that the PRESS RELEASE (which doesn't reflect the report very well) generated 290 comments.
You do realize what site this is. Most of us just read the summary and jump in (I know this because most of us have no idea what we're talking about.) That's part of makes this place so entertaining: we can get up on a soapbox, tell people they're idiots, express opinions reasonable or otherwise, even just tell a story we think others might find interesting... all spewn forth from a single paragraph at the top. It is kinda impressive.
Nuclear weapons, by their very nature are NOT defensive.
I disagree. You're assuming that any conflict involving such weapons would be a nuclear exchange, or would be part of an offensive of some kind. That's not necessarily true (and in fact, the one time atom bombs have ever been used in war, the other side did not possess them.)
The fact is that nuclear weapons serve as both a deterrent, and an equalizer. Any nation with tactical nuclear devices is going to be a damned hard target for a conventional military operation. Yeah, it'll be messy, but would you send a couple hundred thousand troops and your navy against an enemy that could wipe them out at the press of a button?
Absolutely, but I don't even think that's the biggest threat. I think the biggest threat is the Soviet nukes that are unaccounted for. When the Soviet Union collapsed, there were a lot of local military commanders that were looking to make some cash selling the hardware they controlled.
That becomes less and less of a threat as time goes on. Nuclear weapons are not like bullets: you can't put them on the shelf for twenty years and expect them to go off on command. They deteriorate over time, and require constant maintenance.
About the only thing some Cold War-era nukes would be good for would be a source of weapons-grade nuclear material.
hey make a big show of being hospitable (and actually are), they smile and talk, but the people interviewed mentioned how this isn't actually what they're like. In private they're different, but in a culture that is constantly being invaded and attacked, they've learned that it is in their interests not to openly talk about what they really believe.
That's not actually all that different from the way people living under any totalitarian regime have to behave, whether they agree with that regime's politics and policies... or not. It becomes a matter of survival. The Persians are afraid that if their true feelings become known, they will suffer persecution and death at the hands of their neighbors and their government. They aren't the only subculture living under such constraints, and won't be the last.
Higher prices would encourage exploration of alternative fuels.
What usually happens is that it encourages the production of more fuel-efficient vehicles. Every time we've had an "energy crisis" since the 70's, and everyone starts buying smaller cars, crude prices magically drop so that we'll start buying the big boys again. Insane.
Who is selfish? The person who wants everyone to be as free as is reasonably possible? Or the person who wants to punish anyone who does things they don't like even when they aren't infringing anyone else's rights? Seems easy enough to me.
Surprisingly hard for many. I suspect that, were that idea so easy to absorb, it would have rendered our history a bit less bloody.
The whole point of a justice system is so that the people can see that justice was done by the proper officials, that the matter has been settled and needs no further response. Fail to achieve that and what you will find is that the difference between decent people and bad people is that decent people will wait longer before taking matters into their own hands. Right or wrong, this is quite predictable.
I agree, but I would say the difference is between "patient" people and "impatient" ones. The end result is the same.
Virtually nobody is taxing their computer except for gamer
I agree. Well, games and also people doing high-end CAD and that sort of thing. But that was kinda my point... other than for certain specialized applications, the desktop market no longer needs the speed.
The point was made we SHOULD learn from the Israel
Actually, I was the one who made that point. Credit where credit is due. The next guy in the thread simply decided to make a generalization with which I disagreed. He said "all Slashdotters" (the implication being, "all Americans") and I simply pointed out that he was being overbroad in his claim.
And do not believe that I was being unreasonable in stating that, if we're going to suffer more encroachment on our privacy and what freedoms we have left, it should be for a goddamn good reason. I didn't say that there were no good reasons. I was also, in my original post (which you apparently didn't read) commented that I believed that security theater was worthless.
And furthermore, if the government would like us to accept that what they've done since 9/11 in the shadow of the Patriot Act has been worth it, then a little more transparency would be helpful. However, they are asking us to spend untold billions of dollars on arguably ineffective security measures with little or no public accountability. Sorry, that's just not good enough.
As IT staff who've had to deal with the mess, I'm forced to say "you're not telling the whole story".
No, pretty much I am. And you're not listening.
Network security is largely a non-issue for engineering networks because the goddamn things should never, ever, be physically connected to your business network, much less the Internet. Any time I see a major industrial operation that runs its PLCs, process controllers and other critical systems from its business network... well, I try to minimize my time on-site. You never know when something is going to detonate. Yah, I've seen that happen: wrong place at the wrong time. Nobody got hurt but that was just luck.
The reason that happens, every time, is because IT personnel refuse to fight for, and to budget, the requisite independent network infrastructure. Generally that's because they don't see the need. They also want all engineering systems to be conveniently accessible to them, so they can perform remote "support". That generally means placing them on the business side of things, regardless of risk (and that's because, as IT people not production engineers, they don't have the training or expertise to evaluate that risk.)
You need took at yourselves in the proper role: support. Only rarely have I encountered an IT department that understands that, that will come to the engineers and offer their services without rancor, and make a sincere effort to understand the requirements (and how much they different from the business environment.) Engineers don't particularly want to deal with computing matters: they have plenty on their plates already. However, what they absolutely cannot tolerate (because of penalties for failure are so high) is an Information Technology department that has mandated certain things will be done a certain way, regardless of consequences.
Now, you are within your rights to disagree, but I've witnessed firsthand plantwide system shutdowns due to that attitude. So I am speaking from experience.
There have been no new Googles for over a decade and we wonder where all of the jobs are going.
Every empire throughout history (whether military or economic) has eventually failed. It's inevitable. Now, sometimes another empire with more on the ball rolls over them. That happens. In most cases, though, it's because they shot themselves in the foot. In other words, their own governments failed to perform their duties under the law, became corrupt, sold out their own citizens and caused the entire house of cards to collapse. Fact is, Uncle Sam's feet are stumps at this point. Yeah, it will suck to be an American when the lights finally go out, but that's the way it's going. I'm trying to decide if I should get out before it's too late. Where to, that's the question. I want good food and fast broadband. Cool smartphones would be a plus.
See, this is why the media cartels are so evil. It's not just because they want to protect their movies and music... it's that they're willing to throw the entire country, all of us in fact, to the wolves, under the train, under the bus, into the fire, in order to get what they want. Worse, it's the naked corruption and malfeasance in office (if not outright treason) of Federal officials that is allowing to happen.
Ha. You don't have to work very hard to do better than we do in that regard. Some are better than others, of course. Currently I'm on AT&T, and I am getting better than my rated download speed, a faster backchannel than I ever got from Comcast, and haven't heard a peep about caps or limits. Of course, in my area I'm fortunate to have several options for broadband... if anyone needed to know why competition is good, well, there you go. They fight for my business.
I remember when we were house shopping a few years ago, my realtor told me that her customers were asking about broadband availability when looking at homes. It complicated matters for her, because a lack of adequate Internet access would often blow the deal. When I eventually move to a new house, I'll be looking for places served by multiple providers. I like it when they have to work for it.
I don't care what you say... If Socialism creates hell holes
Socialism doesn't create hellholes in and of itself. Corrupt bureaucracies and greed-ridden public officials do that.
Now, when you get right down to it that is why I object to (for example) Obama's health care plan and any other major expenditure of public funds in the United States. It's not that some good can't come out of them: it's that they usually end up wasting too much of those funds. That's because our leaders, our bureaucrats, and the private sector corporations that actually provide most of the services, cannot be trusted not to steal the money or otherwise waste it.
So, please, don't hold up Japan or Germany as examples of how well socialism works. In many respects, it works very well for those countries, and for others on your list. But those are different cultures, with very, very different ways of going about things.
. Just piling up agricultural byproducts would only produce a large compost heap. It would remain bioactive until it either caught fire through spontaneous combustion or turned into soil.
I don't think that's necessarily true. Take our major garbage dumps, the ones that have been around a long time. It was always presumed that the things would biodegrade spontaneously over time. We now know that isn't true... at the bottom of a large dump the cold and lack of oxygen inhibit aerobic bacterial growth. Make these sequestration piles big enough, and only the outer layers will be bioactive. The rest be well-preserved.
Slashdot Mirror
I believe that's what the old folks call an "I coulda had a V-8" moment...
Whaddya mean, "old folks"?
I've yet to hear anyone make a remotely plausible argument for how we're going to go significantly denser than one bit per atom.
One bit per subatomic particle.
It's interesting to me that the PRESS RELEASE (which doesn't reflect the report very well) generated 290 comments.
You do realize what site this is. Most of us just read the summary and jump in (I know this because most of us have no idea what we're talking about.) That's part of makes this place so entertaining: we can get up on a soapbox, tell people they're idiots, express opinions reasonable or otherwise, even just tell a story we think others might find interesting ... all spewn forth from a single paragraph at the top. It is kinda impressive.
Dude, Israel is not *that* evil. They just like poking the Palestinians with a stick by building settlements.
They just like pissing off the rest of the Middle East by existing.
Nuclear weapons, by their very nature are NOT defensive.
I disagree. You're assuming that any conflict involving such weapons would be a nuclear exchange, or would be part of an offensive of some kind. That's not necessarily true (and in fact, the one time atom bombs have ever been used in war, the other side did not possess them.)
The fact is that nuclear weapons serve as both a deterrent, and an equalizer. Any nation with tactical nuclear devices is going to be a damned hard target for a conventional military operation. Yeah, it'll be messy, but would you send a couple hundred thousand troops and your navy against an enemy that could wipe them out at the press of a button?
Absolutely, but I don't even think that's the biggest threat. I think the biggest threat is the Soviet nukes that are unaccounted for. When the Soviet Union collapsed, there were a lot of local military commanders that were looking to make some cash selling the hardware they controlled.
That becomes less and less of a threat as time goes on. Nuclear weapons are not like bullets: you can't put them on the shelf for twenty years and expect them to go off on command. They deteriorate over time, and require constant maintenance.
About the only thing some Cold War-era nukes would be good for would be a source of weapons-grade nuclear material.
hey make a big show of being hospitable (and actually are), they smile and talk, but the people interviewed mentioned how this isn't actually what they're like. In private they're different, but in a culture that is constantly being invaded and attacked, they've learned that it is in their interests not to openly talk about what they really believe.
That's not actually all that different from the way people living under any totalitarian regime have to behave, whether they agree with that regime's politics and policies ... or not. It becomes a matter of survival. The Persians are afraid that if their true feelings become known, they will suffer persecution and death at the hands of their neighbors and their government. They aren't the only subculture living under such constraints, and won't be the last.
The saying is, "up like a rocket, down like a feather."
Or as Lewis Black says, "It goes up it goes down it goes up it goes down ... and nobody can fuckin' tell you why!"
Higher prices would encourage exploration of alternative fuels.
What usually happens is that it encourages the production of more fuel-efficient vehicles. Every time we've had an "energy crisis" since the 70's, and everyone starts buying smaller cars, crude prices magically drop so that we'll start buying the big boys again. Insane.
Who is selfish? The person who wants everyone to be as free as is reasonably possible? Or the person who wants to punish anyone who does things they don't like even when they aren't infringing anyone else's rights? Seems easy enough to me.
Surprisingly hard for many. I suspect that, were that idea so easy to absorb, it would have rendered our history a bit less bloody.
The whole point of a justice system is so that the people can see that justice was done by the proper officials, that the matter has been settled and needs no further response. Fail to achieve that and what you will find is that the difference between decent people and bad people is that decent people will wait longer before taking matters into their own hands. Right or wrong, this is quite predictable.
I agree, but I would say the difference is between "patient" people and "impatient" ones. The end result is the same.
I'm sorry I have no mod points today, but that's okay, I think some other kind folks will take care of it.
Virtually nobody is taxing their computer except for gamer
I agree. Well, games and also people doing high-end CAD and that sort of thing. But that was kinda my point ... other than for certain specialized applications, the desktop market no longer needs the speed.
I believe that's what the old folks call an "I coulda had a V-8" moment...
I think it's more akin to House saying, "You're an idiot."
The point was made we SHOULD learn from the Israel
Actually, I was the one who made that point. Credit where credit is due. The next guy in the thread simply decided to make a generalization with which I disagreed. He said "all Slashdotters" (the implication being, "all Americans") and I simply pointed out that he was being overbroad in his claim.
And do not believe that I was being unreasonable in stating that, if we're going to suffer more encroachment on our privacy and what freedoms we have left, it should be for a goddamn good reason. I didn't say that there were no good reasons. I was also, in my original post (which you apparently didn't read) commented that I believed that security theater was worthless.
And furthermore, if the government would like us to accept that what they've done since 9/11 in the shadow of the Patriot Act has been worth it, then a little more transparency would be helpful. However, they are asking us to spend untold billions of dollars on arguably ineffective security measures with little or no public accountability. Sorry, that's just not good enough.
But one technology site notes the study was conducted in Britain, which could have an impact on its conclusions."
Ya think, Dinozzo?
I'm assuming it's a common case scenario and not a 0.01% thing.
I know. I was just nitpicking. One of those days.
As IT staff who've had to deal with the mess, I'm forced to say "you're not telling the whole story".
No, pretty much I am. And you're not listening.
... well, I try to minimize my time on-site. You never know when something is going to detonate. Yah, I've seen that happen: wrong place at the wrong time. Nobody got hurt but that was just luck.
Network security is largely a non-issue for engineering networks because the goddamn things should never, ever, be physically connected to your business network, much less the Internet. Any time I see a major industrial operation that runs its PLCs, process controllers and other critical systems from its business network
The reason that happens, every time, is because IT personnel refuse to fight for, and to budget, the requisite independent network infrastructure. Generally that's because they don't see the need. They also want all engineering systems to be conveniently accessible to them, so they can perform remote "support". That generally means placing them on the business side of things, regardless of risk (and that's because, as IT people not production engineers, they don't have the training or expertise to evaluate that risk.)
You need took at yourselves in the proper role: support. Only rarely have I encountered an IT department that understands that, that will come to the engineers and offer their services without rancor, and make a sincere effort to understand the requirements (and how much they different from the business environment.) Engineers don't particularly want to deal with computing matters: they have plenty on their plates already. However, what they absolutely cannot tolerate (because of penalties for failure are so high) is an Information Technology department that has mandated certain things will be done a certain way, regardless of consequences.
Now, you are within your rights to disagree, but I've witnessed firsthand plantwide system shutdowns due to that attitude. So I am speaking from experience.
There have been no new Googles for over a decade and we wonder where all of the jobs are going.
Every empire throughout history (whether military or economic) has eventually failed. It's inevitable. Now, sometimes another empire with more on the ball rolls over them. That happens. In most cases, though, it's because they shot themselves in the foot. In other words, their own governments failed to perform their duties under the law, became corrupt, sold out their own citizens and caused the entire house of cards to collapse. Fact is, Uncle Sam's feet are stumps at this point. Yeah, it will suck to be an American when the lights finally go out, but that's the way it's going. I'm trying to decide if I should get out before it's too late. Where to, that's the question. I want good food and fast broadband. Cool smartphones would be a plus.
... it's that they're willing to throw the entire country, all of us in fact, to the wolves, under the train, under the bus, into the fire, in order to get what they want. Worse, it's the naked corruption and malfeasance in office (if not outright treason) of Federal officials that is allowing to happen.
See, this is why the media cartels are so evil. It's not just because they want to protect their movies and music
I hate them all.
much better than in the US, say
Ha. You don't have to work very hard to do better than we do in that regard. Some are better than others, of course. Currently I'm on AT&T, and I am getting better than my rated download speed, a faster backchannel than I ever got from Comcast, and haven't heard a peep about caps or limits. Of course, in my area I'm fortunate to have several options for broadband ... if anyone needed to know why competition is good, well, there you go. They fight for my business.
I remember when we were house shopping a few years ago, my realtor told me that her customers were asking about broadband availability when looking at homes. It complicated matters for her, because a lack of adequate Internet access would often blow the deal. When I eventually move to a new house, I'll be looking for places served by multiple providers. I like it when they have to work for it.
I don't care what you say... If Socialism creates hell holes
Socialism doesn't create hellholes in and of itself. Corrupt bureaucracies and greed-ridden public officials do that.
Now, when you get right down to it that is why I object to (for example) Obama's health care plan and any other major expenditure of public funds in the United States. It's not that some good can't come out of them: it's that they usually end up wasting too much of those funds. That's because our leaders, our bureaucrats, and the private sector corporations that actually provide most of the services, cannot be trusted not to steal the money or otherwise waste it.
So, please, don't hold up Japan or Germany as examples of how well socialism works. In many respects, it works very well for those countries, and for others on your list. But those are different cultures, with very, very different ways of going about things.
FTA: These devices are for "communicating back to the bay station." Think the author knows anything about wireless?
All he's saying is that the things only work near large bodies of water.
As far as I'm aware, no one was threatened, other than those actually sending Xbox SDKs.
Developers, developers, developers, Developers!
why is the east coast that must more dense?
Population density. Many of the Western states are comparatively sparsely populated.
. Just piling up agricultural byproducts would only produce a large compost heap. It would remain bioactive until it either caught fire through spontaneous combustion or turned into soil.
I don't think that's necessarily true. Take our major garbage dumps, the ones that have been around a long time. It was always presumed that the things would biodegrade spontaneously over time. We now know that isn't true ... at the bottom of a large dump the cold and lack of oxygen inhibit aerobic bacterial growth. Make these sequestration piles big enough, and only the outer layers will be bioactive. The rest be well-preserved.