Let's put it in simpler terms. If we had an effective missile defense, we could tell Kim Il Jong to go hang himself instead of having to play nice with him.
Why don't you try to tell some crackpot lunatic that we'll fry your country if you nuke one of our cities. That threat only works on rational people, not suicidal maniacs, and not people like former leaders of China who actually commented a nuclear war would be good for them if it could kill off a couple of hundred million chinese and reduce their population pressures.
And what if that one missile hits DC? Or NYC, or Los Angeles?
Secondly, that anti-Americanism you talk about is 90% fostered and fomented by liberals who hate capitalism, and dictators who see it as a psychological weapon they can wield to maintain their power.
Man, we really need to slap the Bush administration around. All their censored and blacklisted stories show up in a book on Amazon, and are a topic of discussion on slashdot?
It's time to demand the head of whoever's responsible for Conspiracies and Coverups in the Bush administration. Incompetents!
>I have nothing against this, but I also also think an overwhelmingly strong force is corrupting.
Which is why our military is under civilian leadership answerable to the voice of the people and the respective states of the Union, which have their own militias (national guard) with the same high-tech weapons under the civilian control of governers answerable to the voice of the people. Isn't it neat how federalism has a built-in structure to prevent the very thing you're worried about?
It is not a situation that lends itself easily to totalitarianism. I think you can probably relax.
You're other comments just show an ignorance of fact or just plain foolishness, like suggesting we put the armed troops of military tyrranies like China and North Korea in Rwanda to establish peace.
What are you smoking? Any curriculum that DOESN'T acknowledge that the U.S. was the decisive force in Europe in WWII is pure propaganda. Sorry if that bruises some poor little European egos.
Actually, since American military might is the ONLY thing in the world holding back tyrants who would just as soon see the entire world under their thumb as spit, the most ethical thing you can do is take DOD grant money and build something so impressive that it scares tyrants like Kim Il Jong to death.
Unfortunately, as long as countries like Iraq have useful idiots like you to help them out, the adults in America will have to go to war to clean up your messes.
Question: You're walking down a deserted street with your wife and two small children. Suddenly, a dangerous looking man with a huge knife comes around the corner and is running at you while screaming obscenities. In your hand is a Glock.40 and you are an expert shot. You have mere seconds before he reaches you and your family. What do you do?
Liberal Answer: Well, that's not enough information to answer the question! Does the man look poor or oppressed? Have I ever done anything to him that is inspiring him to attack? Could we run away? What does my wife think? What about the kids? Could I possibly swing the gun like a club and knock the knife out of his hand? What does the law say about this situation? Is it possible he'd be happy with just killing me? Does he definitely want to kill me or would he just be content to wound me? If I were to grab his knees and hold on, could my family get away while he was stabbing me? This is all so confusing! I need to debate this with some friends for a few days to try to come to a conclusion.
Conservative Answer:
BANG!
Texan's Answer:
BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! click... (sounds of clip being ejected and fresh clip installed)
Wife: "Sweetheart, he looks like he's still moving, what do you kids think?"
Son: "Mom's right Dad, I saw it too..."
BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG!
Daughter: "Nice grouping Daddy!"
So what? It means that I expect to get what I paid for, which is an actual education and not some propagandistic indoctrination.
And "fair and balanced" from a college professor is code for: The liberal crap I'm going to shove down your throat because I run a little dictatorship in my classroom. I just wish I coul be dictator of the United States, too and get rid of all the stupid decisions the great unwashed make.
The RIAA are NOT suing the 12-year old girl. They're suing her MOTHER.
Sheesh. Get informed. The RIAA is suing the ISP subscribers that are engaging in massive copyright violation. Unless the 12-year old has a credit card and has purchased the ISP account in her own name she is NOT the named defendent. The mother is.
However, like the cowardly thief she is, the mother is throwing her 12-year old daughter on the altar to be sacrificed in a propaganda campaign to save her own butt from the lawsuit. What a wonderful human being. But, then again, she illegally downloaded and uploaded thousands of music files, so why should we be surprised?
You're close, but not on the mark. The reason no one reads SF anymore is because SF paints a future just like you described.
People DON'T imagine the future the way you described it, and don't want to read some depressing twit tell them how horrible and miserable it's all going to be for eveyone one hundred years from now.
Fantasy is appealing because good wins. Modern SF is depressing because evil wins.
IANAL, so this is a legit question. SCO has not proven their case, it has yet to go to trial, yet they are threatening lawsuits, putting out invoices, etc. This seems like classic extortion to me, so why has no one brought suit against SCO on these grounds?
>As for high-vacuum microgravity manufacturing, can you give me one application in which this is even useful, let alone worth the cost of hauling all the raw materials into orbit?
The author of the article states that people-powered service industries are prime targets for robotic replacement.
Bull crap.
Manufacturing is the ideal target for robotic replacement. Service industries are the LAST place. People don't want to deal with a machine, they want to deal with another person.
How many commercials have you heard where the main convincing argument is that you get to talk to another person, and not a computer recording.
The author also assumes that the economy won't adapt quickly enough to absorb the displaced workers. What does he think is going to happen? Robots, Inc. opens up next door and within six months every retail chain in the Nation is 100% roboticized?
This shows such an amazing lack of understanding on how technology is adopted as to make the author nothing more than a fool. Why anyone even listens to him is beyond me.
The one ring was the embodiment of evil. It could no more be controlled by any individual than evil can be controlled. Those who were fools enough to try were consumed by it and became its slave.
It's a pretty simple theme, but probably quite beyond the comprehension of the relativism that makes up modern-day morality.
Slashdot Mirror
Let's put it in simpler terms. If we had an effective missile defense, we could tell Kim Il Jong to go hang himself instead of having to play nice with him.
Why don't you try to tell some crackpot lunatic that we'll fry your country if you nuke one of our cities. That threat only works on rational people, not suicidal maniacs, and not people like former leaders of China who actually commented a nuclear war would be good for them if it could kill off a couple of hundred million chinese and reduce their population pressures.
And what if that one missile hits DC? Or NYC, or Los Angeles?
MADD is just what it spells: Insanity.
It isn't arrogance when it is truth.
Secondly, that anti-Americanism you talk about is 90% fostered and fomented by liberals who hate capitalism, and dictators who see it as a psychological weapon they can wield to maintain their power.
Tuquoque fallacy. Two wrongs don't make a right, my friend.
Bad analogy. A better one would be Churchill gassing the Welsh.
Man, we really need to slap the Bush administration around. All their censored and blacklisted stories show up in a book on Amazon, and are a topic of discussion on slashdot?
It's time to demand the head of whoever's responsible for Conspiracies and Coverups in the Bush administration. Incompetents!
>I have nothing against this, but I also also think an overwhelmingly strong force is corrupting.
Which is why our military is under civilian leadership answerable to the voice of the people and the respective states of the Union, which have their own militias (national guard) with the same high-tech weapons under the civilian control of governers answerable to the voice of the people. Isn't it neat how federalism has a built-in structure to prevent the very thing you're worried about?
It is not a situation that lends itself easily to totalitarianism. I think you can probably relax.
You're other comments just show an ignorance of fact or just plain foolishness, like suggesting we put the armed troops of military tyrranies like China and North Korea in Rwanda to establish peace.
Where are my mod points! I'd use all five of them on this comment alone.
What are you smoking? Any curriculum that DOESN'T acknowledge that the U.S. was the decisive force in Europe in WWII is pure propaganda. Sorry if that bruises some poor little European egos.
Actually, since American military might is the ONLY thing in the world holding back tyrants who would just as soon see the entire world under their thumb as spit, the most ethical thing you can do is take DOD grant money and build something so impressive that it scares tyrants like Kim Il Jong to death.
Unfortunately, as long as countries like Iraq have useful idiots like you to help them out, the adults in America will have to go to war to clean up your messes.
Question: You're walking down a deserted street with your wife and two small children. Suddenly, a dangerous looking man with a huge knife comes around the corner and is running at you while screaming obscenities. In your hand is a Glock .40 and you are an expert shot. You have mere seconds before he reaches you and your family. What do you do?
Liberal Answer:
Well, that's not enough information to answer the question! Does the man look poor or oppressed? Have I ever done anything to him that is inspiring him to attack? Could we run away? What does my wife think? What about the kids? Could I possibly swing the gun like a club and knock the knife out of his hand? What does the law say about this situation? Is it possible he'd be happy with just killing me? Does he definitely want to kill me or would he just be content to wound me? If I were to grab his knees and hold on, could my family get away while he was stabbing me? This is all so confusing! I need to debate this with some friends for a few days to try to come to a conclusion.
Conservative Answer:
BANG!
Texan's Answer:
BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! click... (sounds of clip being ejected and fresh clip installed)
Wife: "Sweetheart, he looks like he's still moving, what do you kids think?"
Son: "Mom's right Dad, I saw it too..."
BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG!
Daughter: "Nice grouping Daddy!"
One of the fundamental pillars of personal liberty is the right to be secure in your property (hence the fourth amendment).
Without the ability to use deadly force if necessary to preserve that right, the idea of personal property is meaningless (thus the second amendment).
Making it impossible to be utlimately secure in your property is Communist Russia, friend, not "Amerika."
This is a bogus argument. The warrants were sworn out by a court. That gives the RIAA the right.
The validity and legality of the warrants have been upheld several times now.
The RIAA is acting legally. Get over it.
Injustices exist because of the actions of evil men, not because some people are poor and other people are rich.
Until you identify the problem correctly, you will never be able to see the solution.
So what? It means that I expect to get what I paid for, which is an actual education and not some propagandistic indoctrination.
And "fair and balanced" from a college professor is code for: The liberal crap I'm going to shove down your throat because I run a little dictatorship in my classroom. I just wish I coul be dictator of the United States, too and get rid of all the stupid decisions the great unwashed make.
The thou shalt not kill commandment is better translated as: Thou shalt not shed innocent blood.
But of course, actual research might upset your carefully crafted anti-Christian bigotry.
The RIAA are NOT suing the 12-year old girl. They're suing her MOTHER.
Sheesh. Get informed. The RIAA is suing the ISP subscribers that are engaging in massive copyright violation. Unless the 12-year old has a credit card and has purchased the ISP account in her own name she is NOT the named defendent. The mother is.
However, like the cowardly thief she is, the mother is throwing her 12-year old daughter on the altar to be sacrificed in a propaganda campaign to save her own butt from the lawsuit. What a wonderful human being. But, then again, she illegally downloaded and uploaded thousands of music files, so why should we be surprised?
You're close, but not on the mark. The reason no one reads SF anymore is because SF paints a future just like you described.
People DON'T imagine the future the way you described it, and don't want to read some depressing twit tell them how horrible and miserable it's all going to be for eveyone one hundred years from now.
Fantasy is appealing because good wins. Modern SF is depressing because evil wins.
Ah, but are carnations pinker than all the elephants you've ever seen?
This is a NY Times expose. Please check Snopes for factual accuracy...
IANAL, so this is a legit question. SCO has not proven their case, it has yet to go to trial, yet they are threatening lawsuits, putting out invoices, etc. This seems like classic extortion to me, so why has no one brought suit against SCO on these grounds?
iDVD comes with its own on-line help system. It's a Mac, not gentoo Linux for crying out loud. You don't NEED a 300 page manual to use it.
>As for high-vacuum microgravity manufacturing, can you give me one application in which this is even useful, let alone worth the cost of hauling all the raw materials into orbit?
I'll give you three:
Pharmecuticals.
Nanomachinery.
Integrated circuits
The author of the article states that people-powered service industries are prime targets for robotic replacement.
Bull crap.
Manufacturing is the ideal target for robotic replacement. Service industries are the LAST place. People don't want to deal with a machine, they want to deal with another person.
How many commercials have you heard where the main convincing argument is that you get to talk to another person, and not a computer recording.
The author also assumes that the economy won't adapt quickly enough to absorb the displaced workers. What does he think is going to happen? Robots, Inc. opens up next door and within six months every retail chain in the Nation is 100% roboticized?
This shows such an amazing lack of understanding on how technology is adopted as to make the author nothing more than a fool. Why anyone even listens to him is beyond me.
The one ring was the embodiment of evil. It could no more be controlled by any individual than evil can be controlled. Those who were fools enough to try were consumed by it and became its slave.
It's a pretty simple theme, but probably quite beyond the comprehension of the relativism that makes up modern-day morality.