Like it or not, indescriminate bombing of civilians is a war crime as defined by the Fourth Geneval Convention.
I think it's a bit daft to assert any civilian massacre is OK because they did it to us first. By that logic, the battle would never end. Each side would continue attack in crazily justified retribution.
Also, the sins of the master can in no way be deemed a crime punishable with instant death of millions.
It amazes me that tripe like the parent is insightful to anyone.
I've heard the people on the Sun have had problems with global warming and high levels of background radation. In their favour though, they do seem to have got nuclear fusion working, which we have so far failed to do here on Earth.
Not to nitpick, but we seem to have had some success (dare I really call it that?) with the same type of fusion reaction observed on Sol. I believe they call it a "thermonuclear bomb"
Our success at controlling this type of reaction is a different story of course.
A well-known scientist (some say it was Bertrand Russell) once gave a
public lecture on astronomy. He described how the earth orbits around the
sun and how the sun, in turn, orbits around the centre of a vast collection
of stars called our galaxy.
At the end of the lecture, a little old lady at
the back of the room got up and said: "What you have told us is rubbish.
The world is really a flat plate supported on the back of a giant
tortoise."
The scientist gave a superior smile before replying, "What is
the tortoise standing on?"
"You're very clever, young man, very clever,"
said the old lady. "But it's turtles all the way down."
I don't control what the media airs. They air what they want us to hear. Now on the other hand, sure Fox would show something on the subject because that is what they do, show BOTH sides.
So you are admitting that there is no proof for your argument that our POW's are treated better than they would be in their own care.
I'm glad you came to that realization.
As to Fox covering 'both' sides, I think that's a bit of an odd claim. To even suggest that there are only two sides, or that one source could cover two sides fairly is ridiculous.
As you call me a professional killer, you have to remind yourself that if there weren't people like me, you wouldn't have the freedoms you do today. Whether you believe it or not, I served my country to protect people like yourself.
Well, as I understand it, that's what the US military does. They train people to kill other people, and then pay them to do so.
Also, I would like to note that my freedoms do not come from force of strength, but from rule of law and pervasiveness of thoughts. Military might only seeks to suppress such ideas, and the nations that have chosen not to participate in that idiotic pursuit have, for the most part, existed peacefully and in prosperity.
Well of course not, the media only reports the bad not the good.
There you go. Blame the media. Of course the media is doing the world a disservice and not reporting on the heroic job we are doing for our poor uneducated brown brothers.
Wait. I seem the remember some interesting statistics on the subject...
Oh yeah. FOX news, the most conservative network in America, is king right now. You can't really expect me to believe they wouldn't jump for a story about how well we treat our POW's.
You have to admit war is not perfect, but your still judging us. Until you've been in combat, you will never know.
I'm really sorry to hear you were a professional killer. That's sad.
You are right. War is not perfect. As Senator Jeannette Rankin said so many years ago, you can no more win a war than you can win an earthquake.
Does that mean we have to mindlessly kill the innocent, disregard human rights, and torture civilians? I can't believe this could be true.
The only regulation I can see is restricting flightpaths from crossing over large cities. Nascent or no, a flaming pile of wreckage that can ruin your whole day.
Exactly my point. You don't need a new agency to do this.
Hello, McFly, WiFi is a network technology set up in a band that is specifically declared as unregulated. How are you going to regulate that?
Now, now, no need to start calling names. You know what I'm talking about here, or at least I think you do. There are plenty of voices asking to restrict the use of WiFi in ways that are counter to the growth of the technology.
The first one that comes to mind is the media companies who see it as a potential competitor. Also notable are the ludites who note that the unsecured node can be used to mask identity to a large degree.
NASA is a bloated, inept bureaucracy that needs to die. Kill them and set up something akin to the FAA to regulate takeoffs and landings.
That would just be worse. The FAA already regulates atmospheric travel in the US, so I'm sure they are more than capable of regulating rockets traveling through that space.
Setting up more agencies to 'regulate' an industry that has yet to prove commercial viability is insane. Unless there is a breakthrough of major proportions, for-profit space missions are going to be sparse at best.
Would you like to 'regulate' WiFi as well? Infant industries need space to play, not regulations to follow.
Also, there is no real problem with most of what NASA does in terms of exploration. It just has some massive bloat in a few programs (Shuttle, ISS, etc.) that could be overhauled with less expensive and more scientific solutions.
MS can win a PR battle, because they have an endless amount of cash to pursue the cause.
On the other hand, OS can win the desktop domination war by creating better systems that are less vulnerable in real world situations if we focus on grass roots marketing.
Slashdot Mirror
Like it or not, indescriminate bombing of civilians is a war crime as defined by the Fourth Geneval Convention.
I think it's a bit daft to assert any civilian massacre is OK because they did it to us first. By that logic, the battle would never end. Each side would continue attack in crazily justified retribution.
Also, the sins of the master can in no way be deemed a crime punishable with instant death of millions.
It amazes me that tripe like the parent is insightful to anyone.
Nope, you got it wrong. It's important to use CMYK when printing money.
FYI:
Fusion bomb
Fusion Sun
I've heard the people on the Sun have had problems with global warming and high levels of background radation. In their favour though, they do seem to have got nuclear fusion working, which we have so far failed to do here on Earth.
Not to nitpick, but we seem to have had some success (dare I really call it that?) with the same type of fusion reaction observed on Sol. I believe they call it a "thermonuclear bomb"
Our success at controlling this type of reaction is a different story of course.
However, if he had said Windows ME he would have had an even better point!
Just Turtles.
It's from "A Brief History Of Time" (Stephen Hawking)
From http://www.the-funneled-web.com/hawking.htm:
A well-known scientist (some say it was Bertrand Russell) once gave a public lecture on astronomy. He described how the earth orbits around the sun and how the sun, in turn, orbits around the centre of a vast collection of stars called our galaxy.
At the end of the lecture, a little old lady at the back of the room got up and said: "What you have told us is rubbish.
The world is really a flat plate supported on the back of a giant tortoise."
The scientist gave a superior smile before replying, "What is the tortoise standing on?"
"You're very clever, young man, very clever," said the old lady. "But it's turtles all the way down."
Turtles all the way down
Feeding trolls is bad.
I'm glad I still support copyrights.
I'm actually quite disappointed that I support copyrights.
Sometimes it helps to read an RFC when you have a question like this.
Screaming people going down is always fun at parties.
Dvdbarn.com does video game rentals by mail. I've always been happy with the service, but they mostly stock Xbox games.
I don't control what the media airs. They air what they want us to hear. Now on the other hand, sure Fox would show something on the subject because that is what they do, show BOTH sides.
So you are admitting that there is no proof for your argument that our POW's are treated better than they would be in their own care.
I'm glad you came to that realization.
As to Fox covering 'both' sides, I think that's a bit of an odd claim. To even suggest that there are only two sides, or that one source could cover two sides fairly is ridiculous.
As you call me a professional killer, you have to remind yourself that if there weren't people like me, you wouldn't have the freedoms you do today. Whether you believe it or not, I served my country to protect people like yourself.
Well, as I understand it, that's what the US military does. They train people to kill other people, and then pay them to do so.
Also, I would like to note that my freedoms do not come from force of strength, but from rule of law and pervasiveness of thoughts. Military might only seeks to suppress such ideas, and the nations that have chosen not to participate in that idiotic pursuit have, for the most part, existed peacefully and in prosperity.
Well of course not, the media only reports the bad not the good.
There you go. Blame the media. Of course the media is doing the world a disservice and not reporting on the heroic job we are doing for our poor uneducated brown brothers.
Wait. I seem the remember some interesting statistics on the subject...
Oh yeah. FOX news, the most conservative network in America, is king right now. You can't really expect me to believe they wouldn't jump for a story about how well we treat our POW's.
You have to admit war is not perfect, but your still judging us. Until you've been in combat, you will never know.
I'm really sorry to hear you were a professional killer. That's sad.
You are right. War is not perfect. As Senator Jeannette Rankin said so many years ago, you can no more win a war than you can win an earthquake.
Does that mean we have to mindlessly kill the innocent, disregard human rights, and torture civilians? I can't believe this could be true.
What they never tell you is that we feed and house them better than if they weren't prisoners.
I call bullshit. Name any investigation that has determined that. I don't believe you can.
Also, I want to call to your attention the events of nearly two years ago. Not the WTC attack, but our illegal, immoral, and unlawful response to it.
Yeah, they were better off in out death camps. Sure. Maybe you would like to be set on fire with your hands tied, but I don't like that game.
Shockingly, we are one of the worst violators
The only regulation I can see is restricting flightpaths from crossing over large cities. Nascent or no, a flaming pile of wreckage that can ruin your whole day.
Exactly my point. You don't need a new agency to do this.
Hello, McFly, WiFi is a network technology set up in a band that is specifically declared as unregulated. How are you going to regulate that?
Now, now, no need to start calling names. You know what I'm talking about here, or at least I think you do. There are plenty of voices asking to restrict the use of WiFi in ways that are counter to the growth of the technology.
The first one that comes to mind is the media companies who see it as a potential competitor. Also notable are the ludites who note that the unsecured node can be used to mask identity to a large degree.
NASA is a bloated, inept bureaucracy that needs to die. Kill them and set up something akin to the FAA to regulate takeoffs and landings.
That would just be worse. The FAA already regulates atmospheric travel in the US, so I'm sure they are more than capable of regulating rockets traveling through that space.
Setting up more agencies to 'regulate' an industry that has yet to prove commercial viability is insane. Unless there is a breakthrough of major proportions, for-profit space missions are going to be sparse at best.
Would you like to 'regulate' WiFi as well? Infant industries need space to play, not regulations to follow.
Also, there is no real problem with most of what NASA does in terms of exploration. It just has some massive bloat in a few programs (Shuttle, ISS, etc.) that could be overhauled with less expensive and more scientific solutions.
From their FAQ:
"As we all know, computers aren't smart enough to really understand all our human idiosyncrasies"
Driving while on a cell phone is only illegal in NY state as far as I have heard. It's certainly not illegal in even most places.
(That does not mean it's safe however)
IANAL, but I believe he would have to be sued to see privileged documents.
At this point, he's just being asked to testify for discovery against IBM IIRC.
MS can win a PR battle, because they have an endless amount of cash to pursue the cause.
On the other hand, OS can win the desktop domination war by creating better systems that are less vulnerable in real world situations if we focus on grass roots marketing.
Well despite the fact that they are quite malicious, some of those viruses are pretty clever.
Think about it. This really is something to celebrate.
Next year the viruses can legally drink.
A drunken virus should be much easier to thwack.
Sorry, but that story is really old.
Here is a story about the appeal to the US Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court decision was as close and conflict-ridden as nine justices can get: 5 to 4 against Andrade and upholding the three strikes law.
Three strikes is really evil, and needs to be repealed. It's a lot like the rockafeller law in New York.
It also still amazes me that we are the only democracy that executes kids. In fact we join only Iran, Nigeria, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and Yemen in the practice.
"Up next: inferring a person's religion based on his choice of toothpaste."
I don't like the implication of this statement. I'm an Atheist, but I still brush.