Odd don't you think that this all started seriously for my friends in the UK during the tenure of another man named Blair? Personally I am happy I do not yet consider myself a "subject", even if the reality is that I am "subject" to more intrusions upon my liberty with each passing day.
Why was this modded as a troll? It seems pretty insightful to me. Whatever the reason for the recent tilt toward warmer conditions the advice is reasonable enough. For instance the idea of investing in new AC technology. Just today I noted to my boss that part of the reason a couple of our 100 ton air condensor AC units were struggling was that they were built optimized for efficiency in our locale (US midwest), however in the past week we have been experiencing Texas conditions. Units built for Texas would have a larger condensor surface area that ours but such would less efficient in normal midwest conditions. If these conditions do turn out to be long term or erratic then there is going to be a lot of money to be made designing a new generation of units and patching existing units condensors, control hardware and software. With water based condensors you simply add cooling tower cells, air based condensors are not quite that simple. Note this will be just as much an issue for homeowners as for industrial plants like ours.
"Here's a cool fact you can use to impress your friends:
It's actually Congress that is in charge of determining the federal budget, not the president!!"
Well that is not quite right either, while the process I describe below may not be 100% accurate and is certainly simplistic it is more representative of what actually happens than how you seem to think things work.
The state governors work with the state legislatures to project the required federal fund assistance required, the exact process for this varies with the state/commonwealth. The governors then submit these individual budgets to the president. In parallel the congress via the OMB assists the presidents appointed executive staff with data and recommendations on state and federal budget issues and the presidents appointed executive staff adds or subtracts as they see fit and compiles this data into what the president submits to congress for consideration. Congress rehashes the process in the house and submits the results to the senate, the senate repeats the same process and sends the results back to the house (note this part of the process may exist in a loop until the house and senate agree). Finally the congress as a whole submits the budget back to the president for approval. If the president fails to approve the budget he can resubmit the same or a modified version back to the congress for reconsideration. On final approval by the president the budget is official and the congress then has the responsibility of funds dispersal. While the congress does indeed have final control of the purse strings generally, they are not generally allowed to add to the total spending nor are they allowed to unilaterally disaffect budget items. Either the president or the congress may however via emergency measures effect actions that effectively and grossly ignore the budget (ie: Iraq war spending or Hurricane Katrina relief). Even judicial rulings can have an unexpected effect on the budget via issues such as requirements for EPA or ADA compliance in federal or state programs.
This republicans did this and democrats did that mentality is sometimes true but not usually going to change the opinion of someone with the opposing view. Both parties are responsible for both our economic successes and failures and thus so are we. The same logic applies to our liberty or lack thereof. I will agree that one or the other political party gets out of control at times. Often both are responsible for things breaking down, more often it seems to me that considering how complex the issues are it is amazing how well things manage to work out. But the assertional that a single branch of the government is the only ir/responsible one is ridiculous.
The rich depth of this type of object oriented approach is what I miss most about OS/2 and the better written native apps that were designed to take advantage of such features. I have become really fond of GNU/Linux for many reasons, philosophical, stability, security, flexibility, performance, new hardware support, value and even some interface features like the extensive and powerful CLI/terminal tools. Add these to the fact that IBM failed to keep OS/2 current all the while dragging users and developers along with expensive teases and there is no way I would ever go back. However OS/2 did have a elegance in some areas of the user interface that has never been matched, though KDE is getting pretty dang close.
"I would contend that they were very much an engineering shop back then. It isnt reasonable to compare MS products of the early 90s to Vista/Leopard/Whatever today. Back when windows 95 shipped it was head and shoulders technically better than the other operating systems targeting average everyday folks."
Most MS consumer market software has always been of a lower quality. Windows 95 was a horrible OS far below in quality, stability, security, features and ergonomics to what was offered by IBM in OS/2 at the time. Even Linux, barely 4 years old at the time could best Windows 95 in all areas except perhaps feature set and ergonomics. I will agree that there really were no "other operating systems targeting average everyday folks" for the PC platform. IBM upper management made only a half hearted effort before pulling the support for consumer marketing of OS/2. In some respects it is a shame because IBM had a superior product. At the time NT which shared a code base with OS/2 was relativity solid, since the origin of both were a joint MS/IBM project. However NT could not come close to matching OS/2 in the ergonomics and usability aspects. In may ways no version of Windows or even Linux ever has.
However the emergence of free software and GNU/Linux may have been thwarted by a strong OS/2 effort so in the end run things have worked out much better for us all. I for one have not booted OS/2 in years now and would never go back to any closed source OS. I would love to have VM support for it so I could run some of my favorite apps like Impos/2 or ProNews under Linux. Have any other/. ex OS/2 users run our old friend under a Parallels VM?
"I know this makes me a crazy radical, but I think I've had just about enough of being pissed on and told that it's a shower of gold."
But that's how "trickle down economics" works, you know some people pay for that fetish service.
"And best of all, I don't have to lay down at night feeling like I've been fucked all day against my will."
Another fetish service some pay for, you ungrateful heathen.;)
From high up in the trees all the upper most monkeys see below them are toothy grins, when the monkeys living below look up all they see above them are assholes.
Just bought the first major artist music CD/DVD I have in years because of all this mess that interferes with my ability to enjoy it how I want. The Eagles Farewell Tour, now I have spent mucho cash on the Eagles music before in many different formats/media, most of which I do not have access to today because it got damaged or is on obsolete media. I was perfectly willing to buy this because it included video of a live performance, new not anything I have had before. Of course I tried to rip the DVD's to my hardrive, not so I could distribute it, just so I could conveniently view/listen to it when I wanted and so I could lock the DVD's in my safe. Of course the DRM loaded DVD's give me all kinds of grief, I have of yet to get a valid rip of them. I hope the Eagles do not expect me to buy these again or to see my toothy grin at a live performance if they decide to have another "farewell tour", they probably just got their last friggin' dime from me. Same of course applies in spades to all those whose music I enjoy less.
"Soap goes one step further: It works in midair. With this new-age pointing device, now under development at Microsoft Research, you can navigate your PC using nothing but a bare hand."
Midair mouse like pointing devices have been out several years now. I know the technology is a bit different but the functional effect seems not so new to me and would actually seem to be inferior to gyro based technology. Like I said a typical PC Mag article suckin up as usual to one of its favorite advertisers know for over hyped behind the curve inferior products and vaporware. Classic. And so it goes...
"all someone needs to do is come up with a solution (or multitude of solutions) for turning the bulk CO2 of the Venusian atmosphere into something else (perhaps hydrocarbons, carbon nanotubes, hell it could be graphite or diamonds for whatever reason)."
I have had the same thought in regards to dealing with the excess CO2 here. It seems that carbon is a excellent building material and the value of free or hydrogen bound oxygen is pretty obvious. I suspect the problems lie in the energy required to break the molecular bonds of CO2. It would be nice if we could figure out a way to do this that we could afford. I seem to remember that plants have using solar energy. Heck with sequestering carbon in the bowels of the earth. Lets "fix" it and use it for the next generation of homes, vehicles, etc. The full replication of the process using water as well would provide free hydrogen as a fuel, and the remaining products for food/feedstock or pharma. I knew this was to elegant for no one else to have hit on it....
"so how about if i go out and buy myself a shiny new race car. I have NEVER had to handle a car with that much power, so i end up ramming it into a farmers market."
A race car and a farmers market? A 'race car' is built for a 'race track' not a public thruway adjacent to a farmers market. A 'race car' is not able to be licensed for operation on public roads. Now if you mean simply a 'high performance car', yea it seems to me that you simply acted in a reckless manner.
"The car is not defective in any way, so long as you have the skills to operate it."
So do you mean to imply that Windows is not defective in any way as long as you have the skills to operate it? My view is that sufficient skills in using an operating system allow one to circumvent or otherwise negate the defects that are inherent in ANY of them, especially in Windows. In fact the closed source nature and the excessively applied license restrictions on circumventions of the limitations in Windows interferes in ones ability to negate the defects that exist in all operating system code, again especially in Windows.
"I should be held responsible for being a jackass and buying a race car."
No you should be held responsible for operating a 'race car' on a public road and/or possibly reckless operation of the vehicle.
"Granted, windows == race car is not a very good comparison, but I still think that it works for the analogy."
Yea and I don't think it is an especially apt analogy either. Again I am not arguing for direct legal liability for Microsoft or any other software developer in respect to the security or reliability of the code in a consumer use area like desktop/internet functions. And yes I also believe that the user of such software is to some degree responsible for its proper operation. My view is that the whole industry, marketing or development houses and those that review them should be more responsible in what they promote, produce and how they review these products.
I would much prefer an honest market driven demand determine the direction of this technology than some horrible legal quagmire where we all lose. The technology of both computer hardware and software is in its infancy. We have much to learn and legal methods of interference in this process need to be mostly contained to the conventional aspects of the business. There is no such thing as perfect code and probably never will be. To be too aggressive in the requirements concerning its reliability would be a mistake that could bring the advancement of this technology to a halt. The same type of mess that can be seen today in regard to areas like patent and copyright issues. What can and should be done is to actually apply the existing legal framework to the marketing and business aspects of how these companies are run.
What ticks me off is the dishonest manipulation of the market with misinformation and disingenuous legal bush wacking. I see more of this type of behavior coming from Microsoft than anyone else. And BTW I was quite the Microsoft fan at one time, that is until I got bit by misinformation one time to many. The case that broke it for me concerned issues of scalability and reliability of the the MS Jet database engine implementation in MSAccess. I don't wish to see Microsoft gone, ruined or any such nonsense. I would like to see this party crashing 800 lb gorilla of a corporation legally tranked and caged until it can learn to enjoy the party with the rest of us in an honest and civilized manner. And as I noted in my other post they are far from the only corporation that needs a good judicial bitch slapping, maybe not even the one in most need of it.
"If my car comes flying through your bedroom window at 30 miles an hour because I parked it at the top of a hill in neutral, should General Motors be responsible?"
If you are going to use a car analogy here at least make it accurate. If the car indicated it was in park but was really in neutral, the entire industry including the manufacturer and yourself knew the shift indication mechanism was unreliable then I would say both you and the manufacturer should be liable for damages.
"Likewise, if i leave a completely unprotected winbox up on the internet and it gets rooted, should Microsoft be held responsible (which seems to be what some of you think)?
In both cases harm has been caused by my negligence, and i should be held accountable for both."
There are three parties that should be held responsible for this situation, A: The cracker thief that rooted your box, Microsoft for selling defective software, AND you for not taking action to correct the situation.
Now the real question is just how would YOU prefer to see the liability for damages divided. In an perfect world the cracker would be caught and forced to make full restitution for all damages. But lets stay within the confines of your car analogy where there was no primary or actionable party only the accessory or supporting parties. In such a case with your 'winbox' that leaves YOU and Microsoft.
If you are a windows networking tech guru I would agree that you have committed a act of omission in you responsibility. However for your pop, granny or other non tech expert whose windows networking skills are at a level less than your own, the level of responsibility cannot not be the same.
As for Microsoft who portray themselves as the tech gurus of all time, indeed as the technology saviors of the western world but continue to knowingly go to market with a defective product I see the same or higher level of responsibility as for you the guru. So I will agree that there should be accountability for the parties at fault here. I just can't see how you think Microsoft should not be held accountable for their omissions.
This is not to say I wish to see a legal quagmire where every possible omission by Microsoft or anyone else is acted upon with a judicial sledge hammer, this would be horrible for the progress of technology. What I would like to see are a few things like: The honest appraisal of Microsoft products by the pundits, which at least seems to be getting better as the products get worse relative to the alternatives. Real legal action on the monopolistic commissions by Microsoft, Exxon, BP, AT&T, the MPAA, the RIAA and others like big pharma corps. Cleanup in goverment agencys like the USJD, FCC, FDA, and especially Kellogg Street lobbyists.
What I would like to see more than anything is for people to pull their heads out of thier asses and see what is being done to the world, especially to and by this nation, and then that they should vote in an informed manner with both thier ballot and pocket.
Raise your children with compassionate independent minds, basic critical thinking skills and and a good dose of good old common sense and you will have much less reason to worry about them. Your children do not need a best friend or a dictator, they need emotionally stable and intelligent mentoring from one or more persons willing to invest the required time and effort.
The biggest problem with most people of all ages is due to a lack of proper 'raising'. There are all kinds of gray variations on this, but a few basic types of problems. There are those who act as an authoritarian overlord who uses mainly the 'because I said so' mentality and the fear of consequences, this produces fearful and lazy minds that rely on authorities to do all their critical thinking and decision making for them. Then there are those who try to be their children's best friend and use pleading and bribery to manipulate the responses they wish, this produces spoiled soft minds that have unreasonable expectations of life. There are a few that espouse a 'survival of the fittest' mentality in raising children and take a minimal role in the raising. Finally there are those who simply can't be bothered in dealing with the issues they need to the most. These last two methods often produce very strong independent minds, but alas just about as often they turn out emotional basket cases if not outright criminal sociopaths.
Anyone who has raised children to adulthood has at one time or another made a choice that put them in each of these bad categories. The secret is in doing the best you can as often as you can to do the right thing, good old repetition and consistency go a long way. This usually means dealing with a negative response from your child, spouse, or someone else that does not care for your decision. The main thing to remember is that it takes a lot of time, thats what they need the most, assuming of course you are not all screwed up yourself. Alas thats the biggest problem, so many parents are basket cases themselves. So a good deal of self examination and reflection would be an excellent place to start for all of us.
BTW, I have managed to raise two pretty good kids of my own, not perfect,but then I'm not either;) Did I leave them the ability to have privacy with a computer and the internet, yea somewhat after they were were about 15 or so. Did I monitor the usage? Yep, logged the IP addresses and did random checks. Did they ever get into things like p0rn or chat, sure they did. Did they use a reasonable amount of good sense in such activities? Yea from my best observation they did, I did not raise idiots. Did I confront them in these instances? Yep sure did, but I handled it in a logical manner, I told them such was not allowed, they lost internet privileges for a reasonable time period, and I also took the time to explain the reasons for my actions. Did it work? Yea not perfectly, there were some repetitions in some cases with my eldest son, but overall they took the direction pretty well. For one thing the time they spent online was limited by other activities like personal responsibilities and outdoor entertainment. Would I change anything? Of course I would, for instance I would push them into academic efforts like reading and writing for personal satisfaction a bit more than I did.
Good whiskey,fast horses and fine women. Or is that Good whiskey, fine horses and fast women? Being a native son myself I can attest to the quality of the 'whiskey', especially Makers Mark and a few local products. Horses I know just enough about to stay away from, ie they are very large and tend to be rather nervous and excitable. Now the women part I have to admit confuses me, I married a 'fine' little Kentucky wildcat about 30 years ago, but I have also been familiar with a few 'fast' Kentucky gals in the past. As to the topic at hand, this is as of yet another sad story among many these days. Rest assured though there are a good many intelligent and reasonable folk still around these parts.
Yea same here. I ended up with about two dozen 25 - 100k files. In fact mine got so big that it was easier to use perl to whack it apart and clean it up than to manually sort through it all. It was nice to have a responsive bookmarks file again. Dang nearly time to do it again with a 1.2mb bookmarks file, now where did I put that script. Ah but for being saddled with the interesting but cursed life habits of a packrat...
Something tells me that he might not make it to the fifth season. This would be a shame as Edward James Olmos has been my favorite actor in this series with both his acting and the writing making Admiral Adama the most interesting character, for me anyway. As for the future length of the series, well I can think of several spins on this. Many posters have noted that this story is limited by the goals of the respective elements, ie: humans and cylons. I see several interesting things that have already been introduced into the story and more that could be. For one the angst of the cylons about their god, place and purpose. Another cylon issue is their interest in hybrids, perhaps related to a genetic cloning disease, something similar to inbreeding in humans. Remember the obsession with what was it the last seven cylons. As for the humans, what kind of earth will they find? Just who populates it? A post holocaust civilization in ruin, a world with Star Trek level technology, is it populated with humans, cylons or how about hybrids? I can even see several valid spin offs that could easily be better than the average fare on TV.
As for the soap opera type twists and the relation to current events of a controversial nature, well these can both be over done and in my view have been somewhat. However such is what allows for people to feel a connection with the story. All the best stories be they TV, novels, short stories or what ever use this basic method of connecting the everyday lives of the audience with the drama of the story. This requires very extensive and well executed character development and the very best do it very well. The best, like say Hemingway or Blair, I have known do it in such an understated manner that it is almost subliminal. The danger for the writers then is in being to up front and obvious in their approach to using this method. This rule also applies to the acting trade as well, and in my view E.J.Olmos is in the same league as Anthony Hopkins and both are to the acting world what Papa Hemingway or Eric Blair are the world of literature. In whole and especially in the best episodes the writers and actors have done well by this rule. Occasionally both have strayed a bit and come off as being a bit too obvious and thus, well corny.
I do think they have done a pretty good job at staying idealistically neutral on the politically charged topics, mainly by exposing the multiple viewpoints even if the format only allows for shallow explorations. At least they attempt to address these in an intelligent and interesting manner. I find such interesting, I like the shootem up special effect stuff too but there is only so much I can take before I get bored with it. And they have done a pretty decent job with the SF conceptual stuff like the cylons angst and viral like mental transpostions and the humans devolution of networking technology as a defense. Overall I still give the series an A, and hope for several more seasons at a quality equal to those so far.
"One key comment that Mark makes in the interview is that he is for free software."
For most in the GNU/Linux community the focus is on freedom of use, flexibility and quality not on the creation of a cheap knock off of commercial software. This is often explained by the "free as in speech" as opposed to "free as in beer" examples. Perhaps I do not have the full text of the same interview you quoted. The ones I read that are topical to this thread are quoted below. They indicate to me that he was referring to the qualities that relate to the freedom of use qualities inherent in Linux that allow users and developers to freely build, deploy, customize and use superior software. Either you innocently have a very basic misunderstanding of the Free Software movement, you are a commercial developer upset that your coding efforts are being out classed by free software developers or you are acting as a shill for commercial interests. The Free Software movement is a true grass roots effort initiated by developers that also often use their own products. Many of them got tired of having the products of their own creative efforts being acquired and locked away by commercial interests, very often in the nefarious acquisitions and mergers of the last few decades. They were angered that in many cases the code they labored on had been used in ways contrary to their own ideals. They were frustrated that they often lost the right to use or alter a product of their own creation.
Nether the less I will still bite on the "free as in beer" argument. Commercial software development companies have simply over priced their product in relation to its usefulness. Given the prevalence of computers and the digital nature of software, especially commonly used software, the price per unit of deployment can be very low and still provide a substantial return. Commercial interests decided to use, or more correctly stated as misuse, copyright and patent laws in addition to morally if not legally questionable "agreements" (EULAS) to create an artificial scarcity of product and thus maximum returns. I believe they simply went a few steps too far in the restriction of rights and the price of the product when it is compared to the usefulness of the product. Via these return maximizing methods these companies have managed to build some of the most fiducially successful monopolies in history before they hit the wall of customer resistance. Nether the less the wall has been hit, and their greed has reached the limit of customer acceptance, at least by a minority of customers. These same customers have in the course of a couple decades created alternative software and development methods for themselves and others. They have done an excellent job, their product development model is based on a open and flat meritocracy and is thus able to recruit many thousands of skilled developers and create products of comparative or better quality. The license model, the GPL, has very few restrictions on the use of the end product. The movement holds the moral high ground in regards to the basic ideals of its development model and the rights of its developers and customers. Last, and in this case also the least, it by its base nature is thus priced very competitively;). These are the new rules, get used to them. The "free ride" for the bean counter and monopolists types at the helm of software development for the last thirty years may not yet be over but there is now a very viable alternative.
Wabi-Sabi Matthew
""I am a deep believer in the ideology of free software. I think it's morally better, but I'm also very conscious of the practical benefits of the free software movement."
"I do not want to position Ubuntu and Linux as a cheap alternative to Windows."
"While Linux is an alternative to Windows, it is not cheap Windows. Linux has its own strengths, and users should want it because of those strengths and not because it's a cheap copy of Windows.""
I suspect if vote selling is really an issue we may soon see electronics sweeps for people entering the voting booth to prevent digital recording or transmissions of the voting act as proof for the purchaser. Of course considering just how screwed up things are now, and how little actual effort is being made to effectively address the problems AND how much effort is being expended to downplay the importance of such problems, maybe not. And so it goes...
When they come for ya, good luck holding them off with your CD collection. Of course if your collection is horrid enough you could try the reverse approach of what the Marines did with Manuel Noregia. A rather ingenious offensive tool, somehow I suspect it would not be much of a defense though.
Wabi-Sabi Matthew
Quotes of relevant note:
"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote." Benjamin Franklin
"When the people fear their Government, there is tyranny. When the Government fears it's people, there is liberty." Thomas Paine
"It does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brush fires in people's minds." Samuel Adams
"I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it." Thomas Jefferson
"An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last." Winston Churchill
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." Benjamin Franklin
I had to Wikipedia "jump the shark", while I had heard the phrase before it was not in the context of anything that I found interesting enough to wonder about its source or meaning. Now I know why, I was right in the first place, I almost wish I never ingested this bit of trivia. I love a rich and free culture / language especially metaphorical transpositions, but this is well not so much rich as just tacky. To me "jumping the couch" belongs in the same trash bin, maybe even closer to the bottom. Oh well to late now this meme is forever burned into my cortex. Cruel how the mind works, more obnoxious something is to us the deeper it is burned in our memory. I do not mean to be critical of those that like these this type of language use, its just that certain items like this annoy me. . Wabi-Sabi Matthew
As someone with a bit of inside knowledge of the health care field I can assure you that while mouth, throat and lung cancer and yes acute heart related treatment cost is very high it is far from the most expensive health care expense. The most expensive is long term nursing care and treatment of the chronic diseases of the very old. Those that die before age 70 from acute disease or illness are a nominal expense compared to the cost of last 10-20 years of most those who live past 70. Now calm down, I am not suggesting that we do not take good care of these folks, just that we tell the truth about things. Smoking is a terrible self destructive addiction that can contribute to hideous diseases and it is fine that as a society we discourage it. However to demonize smokers with an excessive and undeserved tax burden while telling lies about their relative cost to society is shameless.
Whats next outrageous sporting goods taxes for the endomorphin addicts that suffer terribly expensive orthopedic trauma. How about a food fat content tax for the vast majority of western society, the hell with no sales tax on milk and butter, lets tax it cheese, ice cream just like tobacco. Don't get me started on what prion contaminated hormone saturated red meat, chicken or heavy metal laden fish does for colon cancer and mental health. Just wait until all the implications of prion based illness like CJD and the outrageous practices of the "meat factories" are exposed. And lord knows just what is actually in much of the processed foods you consume such as chips, dips, frozen pizza and breakfast cereals. Of course if you really want to be risque you can always eat out, may I suggest the latest redneck BBQ joint or Chinese diner in town.
""Defensive weapon" is an oxymoron. All weapons are offensive by definition. You may defend yourself by using a weapon, but you would be defending yourself by attacking back - it doesn't make the weapon defensive, and it doesn't change the fact that you are actively using it to hurt or kill, as opposed to something passively protecting you like a wall or a moat. Arguing that a weapon is defensive because it is heavy is disingenuous - plenty of things are difficult to do but it doesn't stop them being what they are."
Look I did not make the post as a philosophical argument defending the definition. I was simply stating the most probable reason for the military to declare it as they did using classic military logic, that is by tactical/strategic definition. Military tactical strategy and the logic supporting it do not always make sense to a layman. That you can feel correct in defining it as a oxymoron or as a disingenuous statement is simply a matter of definition by perspective and/or lack of knowledge of such tactical strategy. I am not a big fan of the military industrial behemoth that in many ways threatens our republic. I am also not a fan of warfare as it is a terrible, no make that a hideous way to settle disagreements. However the logical underpinnings of the methods of military tactical strategy that have evolved over thousands of years are more than worthy of my attention.
However since you insist, my observation of whether any weapon is defensive or offensive can be dependent on attributes of the weapon and/or relative to the incident of its use. There are static defenses like moats, walls, armor plating or anti ballistic missiles then there are active defenses like archers and tubs of hot oil atop the walls, crocodiles and snakes in the moats, large caliber stationary automatic firearms or retaliatory banks of second strike ballistic missiles. Even such can be muddied up by the intent of use. For instance anti ballistic missiles deployed to destroy only offensive ballistic missiles are viewed by many as part of an offensive strategy themselves as they could be used in strategic ways to support survivability of first and second strike offensive missiles and other strategic holdings, thus they are seen to destabilize parity in ballistic missile holdings. I personally wish there were no such thing as a ballistic missiles, but I could click my heels together for eternity and they would still exist. I can wish for the end to warfare, I can even be active in opposing unnecessary acts of violence, which BTW I am, more so than most. However I am at my root a objective realist, thus I realize that such will be with us for far past my lifetime. I also realize that sometimes though rarely, fighting will be the only acceptable choice.
In the end run if someone kicks my door in and attacks me with whatever, the fact that I shoot them dead with 12 ga shotgun is a defensive act regardless of how you personally wish to define the shotgun. I personally own mine just for such a purpose and no other, as believe it or not I am too soft hearted to hunt for sport and would rather buy my meat packaged these days.
"'Who'd've thought that a member of the "party of Reagan" would preside over the largest budget increase in history?"
Myself for one, given that Reagan AND a split congress (Senate=Rep House=Dem) were responsible for the second largest budget increase AND deficient in history, due mostly to defense spending and tax breaks. Remember kiddies the biggest difference between the two major parties is not how much they take or spend, is who they take it from and what they spend it on. I for one prefer they spend it on something with a real ROI. I have no problem with even massive tax breaks for the top percentage IF the breaks are designed in such a way that the savings have to be invested domestically in things with a reasonable ROI for all of us. That means not using them to play around in things like hedge funds or foreign markets. Such tax breaks should also not be available for investing in foreign industries that are decimating our own because they rely on paying shameful wages or ecological practices to be competitive. Though it is going to be necessary to prevent some group from simply appropriating the results of public investment like the debacle that has happened in telecom. Neither party is innocent in these things. Neither is innocent in issues concerning the lose of liberties our ancestors died for. However from my point of view, this executive administration and the last few Republican congresses have been by far the worst I have seen in my 50 years of direct experience.From my readings they may have very well found the historical bottom of the muck, which is not surprising with all the raking of it that they have been doing.
Slashdot Mirror
Odd don't you think that this all started seriously for my friends in the UK during the tenure of another man named Blair? Personally I am happy I do not yet consider myself a "subject", even if the reality is that I am "subject" to more intrusions upon my liberty with each passing day.
Wabi-Sabi
Matthew
Why was this modded as a troll? It seems pretty insightful to me. Whatever the reason for the recent tilt toward warmer conditions the advice is reasonable enough. For instance the idea of investing in new AC technology. Just today I noted to my boss that part of the reason a couple of our 100 ton air condensor AC units were struggling was that they were built optimized for efficiency in our locale (US midwest), however in the past week we have been experiencing Texas conditions. Units built for Texas would have a larger condensor surface area that ours but such would less efficient in normal midwest conditions. If these conditions do turn out to be long term or erratic then there is going to be a lot of money to be made designing a new generation of units and patching existing units condensors, control hardware and software. With water based condensors you simply add cooling tower cells, air based condensors are not quite that simple. Note this will be just as much an issue for homeowners as for industrial plants like ours.
Wabi-Sabi
Matthew
"I should be a super genius."
That would be MY p.s.tag you are claiming.
wilec
zzzuuueepp splat!!!
"Here's a cool fact you can use to impress your friends:
It's actually Congress that is in charge of determining the federal budget, not the president!!"
Well that is not quite right either, while the process I describe below may not be 100% accurate and is certainly simplistic it is more representative of what actually happens than how you seem to think things work.
The state governors work with the state legislatures to project the required federal fund assistance required, the exact process for this varies with the state/commonwealth. The governors then submit these individual budgets to the president. In parallel the congress via the OMB assists the presidents appointed executive staff with data and recommendations on state and federal budget issues and the presidents appointed executive staff adds or subtracts as they see fit and compiles this data into what the president submits to congress for consideration. Congress rehashes the process in the house and submits the results to the senate, the senate repeats the same process and sends the results back to the house (note this part of the process may exist in a loop until the house and senate agree). Finally the congress as a whole submits the budget back to the president for approval. If the president fails to approve the budget he can resubmit the same or a modified version back to the congress for reconsideration. On final approval by the president the budget is official and the congress then has the responsibility of funds dispersal. While the congress does indeed have final control of the purse strings generally, they are not generally allowed to add to the total spending nor are they allowed to unilaterally disaffect budget items. Either the president or the congress may however via emergency measures effect actions that effectively and grossly ignore the budget (ie: Iraq war spending or Hurricane Katrina relief). Even judicial rulings can have an unexpected effect on the budget via issues such as requirements for EPA or ADA compliance in federal or state programs.
This republicans did this and democrats did that mentality is sometimes true but not usually going to change the opinion of someone with the opposing view. Both parties are responsible for both our economic successes and failures and thus so are we. The same logic applies to our liberty or lack thereof. I will agree that one or the other political party gets out of control at times. Often both are responsible for things breaking down, more often it seems to me that considering how complex the issues are it is amazing how well things manage to work out. But the assertional that a single branch of the government is the only ir/responsible one is ridiculous.
Wabi-Sabi
Matthew
Bruce remember this is /. almost nobody reads TFA anyway.
\. argghh das dis dang it, wokwowkwok, oohhooo.
Wabi-Sabi
Matthew
Seriously, thanks for all....
The rich depth of this type of object oriented approach is what I miss most about OS/2 and the better written native apps that were designed to take advantage of such features. I have become really fond of GNU/Linux for many reasons, philosophical, stability, security, flexibility, performance, new hardware support, value and even some interface features like the extensive and powerful CLI/terminal tools. Add these to the fact that IBM failed to keep OS/2 current all the while dragging users and developers along with expensive teases and there is no way I would ever go back. However OS/2 did have a elegance in some areas of the user interface that has never been matched, though KDE is getting pretty dang close.
Wabi-Sabi
Matthew
"Velcro.. Yeah that was a NASA invention, riiiiight. I bet the egg was full of the stuff."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Velcro
"I would contend that they were very much an engineering shop back then. It isnt reasonable to compare MS products of the early 90s to Vista/Leopard/Whatever today. Back when windows 95 shipped it was head and shoulders technically better than the other operating systems targeting average everyday folks."
/. ex OS/2 users run our old friend under a Parallels VM?
Most MS consumer market software has always been of a lower quality. Windows 95 was a horrible OS far below in quality, stability, security, features and ergonomics to what was offered by IBM in OS/2 at the time. Even Linux, barely 4 years old at the time could best Windows 95 in all areas except perhaps feature set and ergonomics. I will agree that there really were no "other operating systems targeting average everyday folks" for the PC platform. IBM upper management made only a half hearted effort before pulling the support for consumer marketing of OS/2. In some respects it is a shame because IBM had a superior product. At the time NT which shared a code base with OS/2 was relativity solid, since the origin of both were a joint MS/IBM project. However NT could not come close to matching OS/2 in the ergonomics and usability aspects. In may ways no version of Windows or even Linux ever has.
However the emergence of free software and GNU/Linux may have been thwarted by a strong OS/2 effort so in the end run things have worked out much better for us all. I for one have not booted OS/2 in years now and would never go back to any closed source OS. I would love to have VM support for it so I could run some of my favorite apps like Impos/2 or ProNews under Linux. Have any other
Wabi Sabi
Matthew
"I know this makes me a crazy radical, but I think I've had just about enough of being pissed on and told that it's a shower of gold."
;)
But that's how "trickle down economics" works, you know some people pay for that fetish service.
"And best of all, I don't have to lay down at night feeling like I've been fucked all day against my will."
Another fetish service some pay for, you ungrateful heathen.
From high up in the trees all the upper most monkeys see below them are toothy grins, when the monkeys living below look up all they see above them are assholes.
Just bought the first major artist music CD/DVD I have in years because of all this mess that interferes with my ability to enjoy it how I want. The Eagles Farewell Tour, now I have spent mucho cash on the Eagles music before in many different formats/media, most of which I do not have access to today because it got damaged or is on obsolete media. I was perfectly willing to buy this because it included video of a live performance, new not anything I have had before. Of course I tried to rip the DVD's to my hardrive, not so I could distribute it, just so I could conveniently view/listen to it when I wanted and so I could lock the DVD's in my safe. Of course the DRM loaded DVD's give me all kinds of grief, I have of yet to get a valid rip of them. I hope the Eagles do not expect me to buy these again or to see my toothy grin at a live performance if they decide to have another "farewell tour", they probably just got their last friggin' dime from me. Same of course applies in spades to all those whose music I enjoy less.
Wabi-Sabi
Matthew
Hello Ice Station Zebra, are you there?
Ice Station Zebra? Over...
Please folks! Just don't forget to feed the bear.
Sorry, just showing my age I guess.
Wabi-Sabi
Matthew
FTFA:
& oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&clien t=firefox-a
"Soap goes one step further: It works in midair. With this new-age pointing device, now under development at Microsoft Research, you can navigate your PC using nothing but a bare hand."
Like say a GyroMouse.
http://www.gyration.com/en-US/Products.html
http://www.google.com/search?q=gyromouse&ie=utf-8
Midair mouse like pointing devices have been out several years now. I know the technology is a bit different but the functional effect seems not so new to me and would actually seem to be inferior to gyro based technology. Like I said a typical PC Mag article suckin up as usual to one of its favorite advertisers know for over hyped behind the curve inferior products and vaporware. Classic. And so it goes...
Wabi Sabi
Matthew
"all someone needs to do is come up with a solution (or multitude of solutions) for turning the bulk CO2 of the Venusian atmosphere into something else (perhaps hydrocarbons, carbon nanotubes, hell it could be graphite or diamonds for whatever reason)."
h esis
I have had the same thought in regards to dealing with the excess CO2 here. It seems that carbon is a excellent building material and the value of free or hydrogen bound oxygen is pretty obvious. I suspect the problems lie in the energy required to break the molecular bonds of CO2. It would be nice if we could figure out a way to do this that we could afford. I seem to remember that plants have using solar energy. Heck with sequestering carbon in the bowels of the earth. Lets "fix" it and use it for the next generation of homes, vehicles, etc. The full replication of the process using water as well would provide free hydrogen as a fuel, and the remaining products for food/feedstock or pharma. I knew this was to elegant for no one else to have hit on it....
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artificial_Photosynt
Wabi-Sabi
Matthew
"so how about if i go out and buy myself a shiny new race car. I have NEVER had to handle a car with that much power, so i end up ramming it into a farmers market."
A race car and a farmers market? A 'race car' is built for a 'race track' not a public thruway adjacent to a farmers market. A 'race car' is not able to be licensed for operation on public roads. Now if you mean simply a 'high performance car', yea it seems to me that you simply acted in a reckless manner.
"The car is not defective in any way, so long as you have the skills to operate it."
So do you mean to imply that Windows is not defective in any way as long as you have the skills to operate it? My view is that sufficient skills in using an operating system allow one to circumvent or otherwise negate the defects that are inherent in ANY of them, especially in Windows. In fact the closed source nature and the excessively applied license restrictions on circumventions of the limitations in Windows interferes in ones ability to negate the defects that exist in all operating system code, again especially in Windows.
"I should be held responsible for being a jackass and buying a race car."
No you should be held responsible for operating a 'race car' on a public road and/or possibly reckless operation of the vehicle.
"Granted, windows == race car is not a very good comparison, but I still think that it works for the analogy."
Yea and I don't think it is an especially apt analogy either. Again I am not arguing for direct legal liability for Microsoft or any other software developer in respect to the security or reliability of the code in a consumer use area like desktop/internet functions. And yes I also believe that the user of such software is to some degree responsible for its proper operation. My view is that the whole industry, marketing or development houses and those that review them should be more responsible in what they promote, produce and how they review these products.
I would much prefer an honest market driven demand determine the direction of this technology than some horrible legal quagmire where we all lose. The technology of both computer hardware and software is in its infancy. We have much to learn and legal methods of interference in this process need to be mostly contained to the conventional aspects of the business. There is no such thing as perfect code and probably never will be. To be too aggressive in the requirements concerning its reliability would be a mistake that could bring the advancement of this technology to a halt. The same type of mess that can be seen today in regard to areas like patent and copyright issues. What can and should be done is to actually apply the existing legal framework to the marketing and business aspects of how these companies are run.
What ticks me off is the dishonest manipulation of the market with misinformation and disingenuous legal bush wacking. I see more of this type of behavior coming from Microsoft than anyone else. And BTW I was quite the Microsoft fan at one time, that is until I got bit by misinformation one time to many. The case that broke it for me concerned issues of scalability and reliability of the the MS Jet database engine implementation in MSAccess. I don't wish to see Microsoft gone, ruined or any such nonsense. I would like to see this party crashing 800 lb gorilla of a corporation legally tranked and caged until it can learn to enjoy the party with the rest of us in an honest and civilized manner. And as I noted in my other post they are far from the only corporation that needs a good judicial bitch slapping, maybe not even the one in most need of it.
Wabi-Sabi
Matthew
"If my car comes flying through your bedroom window at 30 miles an hour because I parked it at the top of a hill in neutral, should General Motors be responsible?"
If you are going to use a car analogy here at least make it accurate. If the car indicated it was in park but was really in neutral, the entire industry including the manufacturer and yourself knew the shift indication mechanism was unreliable then I would say both you and the manufacturer should be liable for damages.
"Likewise, if i leave a completely unprotected winbox up on the internet and it gets rooted, should Microsoft be held responsible (which seems to be what some of you think)?
In both cases harm has been caused by my negligence, and i should be held accountable for both."
There are three parties that should be held responsible for this situation, A: The cracker thief that rooted your box, Microsoft for selling defective software, AND you for not taking action to correct the situation.
Now the real question is just how would YOU prefer to see the liability for damages divided. In an perfect world the cracker would be caught and forced to make full restitution for all damages. But lets stay within the confines of your car analogy where there was no primary or actionable party only the accessory or supporting parties. In such a case with your 'winbox' that leaves YOU and Microsoft.
If you are a windows networking tech guru I would agree that you have committed a act of omission in you responsibility. However for your pop, granny or other non tech expert whose windows networking skills are at a level less than your own, the level of responsibility cannot not be the same.
As for Microsoft who portray themselves as the tech gurus of all time, indeed as the technology saviors of the western world but continue to knowingly go to market with a defective product I see the same or higher level of responsibility as for you the guru. So I will agree that there should be accountability for the parties at fault here. I just can't see how you think Microsoft should not be held accountable for their omissions.
This is not to say I wish to see a legal quagmire where every possible omission by Microsoft or anyone else is acted upon with a judicial sledge hammer, this would be horrible for the progress of technology. What I would like to see are a few things like: The honest appraisal of Microsoft products by the pundits, which at least seems to be getting better as the products get worse relative to the alternatives. Real legal action on the monopolistic commissions by Microsoft, Exxon, BP, AT&T, the MPAA, the RIAA and others like big pharma corps. Cleanup in goverment agencys like the USJD, FCC, FDA, and especially Kellogg Street lobbyists.
What I would like to see more than anything is for people to pull their heads out of thier asses and see what is being done to the world, especially to and by this nation, and then that they should vote in an informed manner with both thier ballot and pocket.
Wabi-Sabi
Matthew
Raise your children with compassionate independent minds, basic critical thinking skills and and a good dose of good old common sense and you will have much less reason to worry about them. Your children do not need a best friend or a dictator, they need emotionally stable and intelligent mentoring from one or more persons willing to invest the required time and effort.
;) Did I leave them the ability to have privacy with a computer and the internet, yea somewhat after they were were about 15 or so. Did I monitor the usage? Yep, logged the IP addresses and did random checks. Did they ever get into things like p0rn or chat, sure they did. Did they use a reasonable amount of good sense in such activities? Yea from my best observation they did, I did not raise idiots. Did I confront them in these instances? Yep sure did, but I handled it in a logical manner, I told them such was not allowed, they lost internet privileges for a reasonable time period, and I also took the time to explain the reasons for my actions. Did it work? Yea not perfectly, there were some repetitions in some cases with my eldest son, but overall they took the direction pretty well. For one thing the time they spent online was limited by other activities like personal responsibilities and outdoor entertainment. Would I change anything? Of course I would, for instance I would push them into academic efforts like reading and writing for personal satisfaction a bit more than I did.
The biggest problem with most people of all ages is due to a lack of proper 'raising'. There are all kinds of gray variations on this, but a few basic types of problems. There are those who act as an authoritarian overlord who uses mainly the 'because I said so' mentality and the fear of consequences, this produces fearful and lazy minds that rely on authorities to do all their critical thinking and decision making for them. Then there are those who try to be their children's best friend and use pleading and bribery to manipulate the responses they wish, this produces spoiled soft minds that have unreasonable expectations of life. There are a few that espouse a 'survival of the fittest' mentality in raising children and take a minimal role in the raising. Finally there are those who simply can't be bothered in dealing with the issues they need to the most. These last two methods often produce very strong independent minds, but alas just about as often they turn out emotional basket cases if not outright criminal sociopaths.
Anyone who has raised children to adulthood has at one time or another made a choice that put them in each of these bad categories. The secret is in doing the best you can as often as you can to do the right thing, good old repetition and consistency go a long way. This usually means dealing with a negative response from your child, spouse, or someone else that does not care for your decision. The main thing to remember is that it takes a lot of time, thats what they need the most, assuming of course you are not all screwed up yourself. Alas thats the biggest problem, so many parents are basket cases themselves. So a good deal of self examination and reflection would be an excellent place to start for all of us.
BTW, I have managed to raise two pretty good kids of my own, not perfect,but then I'm not either
Wabi-Sabi
Matthew
Good whiskey,fast horses and fine women. Or is that Good whiskey, fine horses and fast women? Being a native son myself I can attest to the quality of the 'whiskey', especially Makers Mark and a few local products. Horses I know just enough about to stay away from, ie they are very large and tend to be rather nervous and excitable. Now the women part I have to admit confuses me, I married a 'fine' little Kentucky wildcat about 30 years ago, but I have also been familiar with a few 'fast' Kentucky gals in the past. As to the topic at hand, this is as of yet another sad story among many these days. Rest assured though there are a good many intelligent and reasonable folk still around these parts.
Wabi-Sabi
Matthew
Yea same here. I ended up with about two dozen 25 - 100k files. In fact mine got so big that it was easier to use perl to whack it apart and clean it up than to manually sort through it all. It was nice to have a responsive bookmarks file again. Dang nearly time to do it again with a 1.2mb bookmarks file, now where did I put that script. Ah but for being saddled with the interesting but cursed life habits of a packrat...
Wabi-Sabi
Matthew
Something tells me that he might not make it to the fifth season. This would be a shame as Edward James Olmos has been my favorite actor in this series with both his acting and the writing making Admiral Adama the most interesting character, for me anyway. As for the future length of the series, well I can think of several spins on this. Many posters have noted that this story is limited by the goals of the respective elements, ie: humans and cylons. I see several interesting things that have already been introduced into the story and more that could be. For one the angst of the cylons about their god, place and purpose. Another cylon issue is their interest in hybrids, perhaps related to a genetic cloning disease, something similar to inbreeding in humans. Remember the obsession with what was it the last seven cylons. As for the humans, what kind of earth will they find? Just who populates it? A post holocaust civilization in ruin, a world with Star Trek level technology, is it populated with humans, cylons or how about hybrids? I can even see several valid spin offs that could easily be better than the average fare on TV.
As for the soap opera type twists and the relation to current events of a controversial nature, well these can both be over done and in my view have been somewhat. However such is what allows for people to feel a connection with the story. All the best stories be they TV, novels, short stories or what ever use this basic method of connecting the everyday lives of the audience with the drama of the story. This requires very extensive and well executed character development and the very best do it very well. The best, like say Hemingway or Blair, I have known do it in such an understated manner that it is almost subliminal. The danger for the writers then is in being to up front and obvious in their approach to using this method. This rule also applies to the acting trade as well, and in my view E.J.Olmos is in the same league as Anthony Hopkins and both are to the acting world what Papa Hemingway or Eric Blair are the world of literature. In whole and especially in the best episodes the writers and actors have done well by this rule. Occasionally both have strayed a bit and come off as being a bit too obvious and thus, well corny.
I do think they have done a pretty good job at staying idealistically neutral on the politically charged topics, mainly by exposing the multiple viewpoints even if the format only allows for shallow explorations. At least they attempt to address these in an intelligent and interesting manner. I find such interesting, I like the shootem up special effect stuff too but there is only so much I can take before I get bored with it. And they have done a pretty decent job with the SF conceptual stuff like the cylons angst and viral like mental transpostions and the humans devolution of networking technology as a defense. Overall I still give the series an A, and hope for several more seasons at a quality equal to those so far.
Wabi-Sabi
Matthew
"One key comment that Mark makes in the interview is that he is for free software."
;). These are the new rules, get used to them. The "free ride" for the bean counter and monopolists types at the helm of software development for the last thirty years may not yet be over but there is now a very viable alternative.
For most in the GNU/Linux community the focus is on freedom of use, flexibility and quality not on the creation of a cheap knock off of commercial software. This is often explained by the "free as in speech" as opposed to "free as in beer" examples. Perhaps I do not have the full text of the same interview you quoted. The ones I read that are topical to this thread are quoted below. They indicate to me that he was referring to the qualities that relate to the freedom of use qualities inherent in Linux that allow users and developers to freely build, deploy, customize and use superior software. Either you innocently have a very basic misunderstanding of the Free Software movement, you are a commercial developer upset that your coding efforts are being out classed by free software developers or you are acting as a shill for commercial interests. The Free Software movement is a true grass roots effort initiated by developers that also often use their own products. Many of them got tired of having the products of their own creative efforts being acquired and locked away by commercial interests, very often in the nefarious acquisitions and mergers of the last few decades. They were angered that in many cases the code they labored on had been used in ways contrary to their own ideals. They were frustrated that they often lost the right to use or alter a product of their own creation.
Nether the less I will still bite on the "free as in beer" argument. Commercial software development companies have simply over priced their product in relation to its usefulness. Given the prevalence of computers and the digital nature of software, especially commonly used software, the price per unit of deployment can be very low and still provide a substantial return. Commercial interests decided to use, or more correctly stated as misuse, copyright and patent laws in addition to morally if not legally questionable "agreements" (EULAS) to create an artificial scarcity of product and thus maximum returns. I believe they simply went a few steps too far in the restriction of rights and the price of the product when it is compared to the usefulness of the product. Via these return maximizing methods these companies have managed to build some of the most fiducially successful monopolies in history before they hit the wall of customer resistance. Nether the less the wall has been hit, and their greed has reached the limit of customer acceptance, at least by a minority of customers. These same customers have in the course of a couple decades created alternative software and development methods for themselves and others. They have done an excellent job, their product development model is based on a open and flat meritocracy and is thus able to recruit many thousands of skilled developers and create products of comparative or better quality. The license model, the GPL, has very few restrictions on the use of the end product. The movement holds the moral high ground in regards to the basic ideals of its development model and the rights of its developers and customers. Last, and in this case also the least, it by its base nature is thus priced very competitively
Wabi-Sabi
Matthew
""I am a deep believer in the ideology of free software. I think it's morally better, but I'm also very conscious of the practical benefits of the free software movement."
"I do not want to position Ubuntu and Linux as a cheap alternative to Windows."
"While Linux is an alternative to Windows, it is not cheap Windows. Linux has its own strengths, and users should want it because of those strengths and not because it's a cheap copy of Windows.""
Mark Shuttleworth
I suspect if vote selling is really an issue we may soon see electronics sweeps for people entering the voting booth to prevent digital recording or transmissions of the voting act as proof for the purchaser. Of course considering just how screwed up things are now, and how little actual effort is being made to effectively address the problems AND how much effort is being expended to downplay the importance of such problems, maybe not. And so it goes...
Wabi-Sabi
Matthew
When they come for ya, good luck holding them off with your CD collection. Of course if your collection is horrid enough you could try the reverse approach of what the Marines did with Manuel Noregia. A rather ingenious offensive tool, somehow I suspect it would not be much of a defense though.
Wabi-Sabi
Matthew
Quotes of relevant note:
"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote." Benjamin Franklin
"When the people fear their Government, there is tyranny. When the Government fears it's people, there is liberty." Thomas Paine
"It does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brush fires in people's minds."
Samuel Adams
"I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it."
Thomas Jefferson
"An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last."
Winston Churchill
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." Benjamin Franklin
I had to Wikipedia "jump the shark", while I had heard the phrase before it was not in the context of anything that I found interesting enough to wonder about its source or meaning. Now I know why, I was right in the first place, I almost wish I never ingested this bit of trivia. I love a rich and free culture / language especially metaphorical transpositions, but this is well not so much rich as just tacky. To me "jumping the couch" belongs in the same trash bin, maybe even closer to the bottom. Oh well to late now this meme is forever burned into my cortex. Cruel how the mind works, more obnoxious something is to us the deeper it is burned in our memory. I do not mean to be critical of those that like these this type of language use, its just that certain items like this annoy me.
.
Wabi-Sabi
Matthew
As someone with a bit of inside knowledge of the health care field I can assure you that while mouth, throat and lung cancer and yes acute heart related treatment cost is very high it is far from the most expensive health care expense. The most expensive is long term nursing care and treatment of the chronic diseases of the very old. Those that die before age 70 from acute disease or illness are a nominal expense compared to the cost of last 10-20 years of most those who live past 70. Now calm down, I am not suggesting that we do not take good care of these folks, just that we tell the truth about things. Smoking is a terrible self destructive addiction that can contribute to hideous diseases and it is fine that as a society we discourage it. However to demonize smokers with an excessive and undeserved tax burden while telling lies about their relative cost to society is shameless.
Whats next outrageous sporting goods taxes for the endomorphin addicts that suffer terribly expensive orthopedic trauma. How about a food fat content tax for the vast majority of western society, the hell with no sales tax on milk and butter, lets tax it cheese, ice cream just like tobacco. Don't get me started on what prion contaminated hormone saturated red meat, chicken or heavy metal laden fish does for colon cancer and mental health. Just wait until all the implications of prion based illness like CJD and the outrageous practices of the "meat factories" are exposed. And lord knows just what is actually in much of the processed foods you consume such as chips, dips, frozen pizza and breakfast cereals. Of course if you really want to be risque you can always eat out, may I suggest the latest redneck BBQ joint or Chinese diner in town.
Wabi-Sabi
Matthew
""Defensive weapon" is an oxymoron. All weapons are offensive by definition. You may defend yourself by using a weapon, but you would be defending yourself by attacking back - it doesn't make the weapon defensive, and it doesn't change the fact that you are actively using it to hurt or kill, as opposed to something passively protecting you like a wall or a moat. Arguing that a weapon is defensive because it is heavy is disingenuous - plenty of things are difficult to do but it doesn't stop them being what they are."
Look I did not make the post as a philosophical argument defending the definition. I was simply stating the most probable reason for the military to declare it as they did using classic military logic, that is by tactical/strategic definition. Military tactical strategy and the logic supporting it do not always make sense to a layman. That you can feel correct in defining it as a oxymoron or as a disingenuous statement is simply a matter of definition by perspective and/or lack of knowledge of such tactical strategy. I am not a big fan of the military industrial behemoth that in many ways threatens our republic. I am also not a fan of warfare as it is a terrible, no make that a hideous way to settle disagreements. However the logical underpinnings of the methods of military tactical strategy that have evolved over thousands of years are more than worthy of my attention.
However since you insist, my observation of whether any weapon is defensive or offensive can be dependent on attributes of the weapon and/or relative to the incident of its use. There are static defenses like moats, walls, armor plating or anti ballistic missiles then there are active defenses like archers and tubs of hot oil atop the walls, crocodiles and snakes in the moats, large caliber stationary automatic firearms or retaliatory banks of second strike ballistic missiles. Even such can be muddied up by the intent of use. For instance anti ballistic missiles deployed to destroy only offensive ballistic missiles are viewed by many as part of an offensive strategy themselves as they could be used in strategic ways to support survivability of first and second strike offensive missiles and other strategic holdings, thus they are seen to destabilize parity in ballistic missile holdings. I personally wish there were no such thing as a ballistic missiles, but I could click my heels together for eternity and they would still exist. I can wish for the end to warfare, I can even be active in opposing unnecessary acts of violence, which BTW I am, more so than most. However I am at my root a objective realist, thus I realize that such will be with us for far past my lifetime. I also realize that sometimes though rarely, fighting will be the only acceptable choice.
In the end run if someone kicks my door in and attacks me with whatever, the fact that I shoot them dead with 12 ga shotgun is a defensive act regardless of how you personally wish to define the shotgun. I personally own mine just for such a purpose and no other, as believe it or not I am too soft hearted to hunt for sport and would rather buy my meat packaged these days.
Wabi-Sabi
Matthew
"'Who'd've thought that a member of the "party of Reagan" would preside over the largest budget increase in history?"
Myself for one, given that Reagan AND a split congress (Senate=Rep House=Dem) were responsible for the second largest budget increase AND deficient in history, due mostly to defense spending and tax breaks. Remember kiddies the biggest difference between the two major parties is not how much they take or spend, is who they take it from and what they spend it on. I for one prefer they spend it on something with a real ROI. I have no problem with even massive tax breaks for the top percentage IF the breaks are designed in such a way that the savings have to be invested domestically in things with a reasonable ROI for all of us. That means not using them to play around in things like hedge funds or foreign markets. Such tax breaks should also not be available for investing in foreign industries that are decimating our own because they rely on paying shameful wages or ecological practices to be competitive. Though it is going to be necessary to prevent some group from simply appropriating the results of public investment like the debacle that has happened in telecom. Neither party is innocent in these things. Neither is innocent in issues concerning the lose of liberties our ancestors died for. However from my point of view, this executive administration and the last few Republican congresses have been by far the worst I have seen in my 50 years of direct experience.From my readings they may have very well found the historical bottom of the muck, which is not surprising with all the raking of it that they have been doing.
Wabi-Sabi
Matthew