...Voyager VI, which never actually existed. NASA only ever made Voyager I and II
So you think NASA is done building Voyagers for all time? You may be right, but I wouldn't rule out the rice voyagers, and maybe at some point the Persian, Indian, or African voyagers.
I would like to believe it is specific enough, believe me.
"The Congress shall have Power To... provide for the... general Welfare... To regulate Commerce... among the several States..."
"The Congress shall have Power - To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper..."
These clause have allowed an endless train of overreaches. You can justify any goddam thing you want as furthering the welfare of the US, or as being neccesary and proper, and you can browbeat states to any insane degree under the supposed aegis of interstate commerce. Patrick Henry actually foresaw the limitless federal power and the destruction of individual liberty and argued against this puffery.
But in the end, my point is that there's no way it COULD have been made specific enough. Not at ten or a hundred times the length. The whole thing always rested, and had to rest, with the sustained wisdom and goodwill of the body politic and their leaders. When you compromise away all your original principles, your enterprise is doomed.
Hence the reason that the Constitution lays out what powers the government actually has so specifically.
Not nearly specifically enough to deal with 20th century stupidity, greed, and corruption, clearly. I don't really think any constitution could ever be clear enough to save a nation which has become that stupid, greedy, and corrupt.
Is there any rational point to your comparison of scale? It doesn't seem to me that "he could have killed tens or hundreds of thousands; therefore 3 dead and over 200 injured do not count" is very rational.
The shocking thing, to my mind is that Bush never used this to his advantage.
Maybe because Bush, be he many things, was not stupid or ignorant. The definition of WMD is completely different in a military context than a civil context, as amply pointed out in the discussion on this page.
He is guilty as HELL. That's an assumption based on evidence I have seen reported; an assumption I am perfectly free to make and one which is entirely warranted. He just hasn't been found guilty in a court of law yet.
The consequence of my assumption is nil. The consequence of false procedure in a court of law, including presumption of guilt, would be very serious.
Before you respond with any of that , "at war blah blah blah" nonsense, keep in mind that Congress has not declared war on Pakistan.
The point is that it was during the course of armed conflict. The simple fact is that no one has succeeded in having the armed conflict ruled illegal. Not before the Supreme Court or any other agency which has true jurisdiction.
If that's the case, every bomb the US has ever dropped counts as a WMD.
Of course. Captain Obvious here. Is that supposed to shake anybody up? In an armed conflict, massively destroying enemy installations and personnel is a matter of course.
Doesn't make them smart. In this case they can't distinguish between external, informally declassified data and internal, formally classified data. How unfortunate.
An organization with any sanity would have its rules set up so it does not need to block any publicly accessible point in the internet just to satisfy some stupid rule.
I suppose the NSA could classify the fact that Clorox bleach plus ammonia makes POISON GAS. Just about every man, woman and child on the planet already knows it, but I am not aware of any limit to what they can arbitrarily classify.
This isn't about preventing employees from knowing. It's about keeping classified information off of unclassified networks.
Do you actually believe the NSA is that cussed stupid? The stuff they're talking about IS ALREADY ALL OVER THE INTERNET. Sorry, NSA, events have overtaken your classification system for this particular material. Actually, to the best I can determine, the Guardian has nothing of any substance whatsoever in terms of genuine security concerns; it's just information about information-gathering. This s about protecting asses.
Mod anonymous parent up. He actually knows something about the subject, unlike grandparent. What I am always struck by is not that someone is ignorant. There is nothing wrong with ignorant. It means nothing more than not knowing anything about some subject. What amazes me is that people who are ignorant about some subject nonetheless feel the need to expound on that subject and spread patently false information.
the RC plane is already at its maximum load with its fuel
Who told you that? It's hogwash. This thing can lift 4 pounds of payload and it is VTOL and powered by electric motors using lithium ion batteries. A conventional model plane could do at least as much. It just so happens that most recreational model plane flying does not require any payload to be lifted. That doesn't mean they CAN'T do so.
Do you think maybe you could get hurt a little by a hand grenade (call it one pound)?
What is actually possible is not limited by what seems plausible to you.
IMO the case of Mr. Ferdaus is an example of an actual threat caught and foiled, cherry picked from maybe a hundred false leads.
So the anti-terror agents supplied: the explosive and the plane and the plot for that one.
The NSA and other agencies have a lot to answer for, but that is not an example of one of them if the story is to be believed. You can say "agents supplied", but the fact appears to be that Mr. Ferdaus procured the illegal and incriminating material from an unwisely chosen source. Or do you think they said out of the blue "here; take these machine guns and hand grenades or we will kill you right now".
And it's complete nonsense to say that you can "see" that plane is not carrying anything dangerous. It looks like any other model plane to me. It has a hollow fuselage with opaque surfaces. You could put anything in there that fits and that it could lift. Do you know how compact and light a hand grenade is? That is well within the carrying capacity of a plane like that. Model planes do not use "runways". You can throw them into the air or lift off a small grassy patch. They are not limited to "short range". Every day in normal use they can fly easily for a half hour at 60 mph, which would be 30 miles in a straight line. In point of fact if you know what you are doing you can do a lot better than that. In 2003 a 6 foot 11 pound autonomous plane build by a 77 year old hobbyist flew 1882 miles from Newfoundland to Ireland in 39 hours.
Not unusually big, and the injuries and fatalities would be practically guaranteed.
Admittedly, "state threatening" is a joke unless you are talking about hundreds or thousands of model planes in a coordinated campaign, but a single model plane of average size could easily carry a couple of hand grenades or the equivalent, and a couple of hand grenade set off at optimal height above the ground in a crowd is easily capable of killing as many people as the Marathon Bombers did.
Ever heard of a German Bouncing Betty S-mine or an M-16 American copy? The fiendish part was that the mine was designed for the victim who triggered it to be aware that he had done so, and step away to begin to flee. If he left his foot on the mine it would after several seconds blow up where it was, embedded in the ground, killing or maiming the victim. But if the victim flinched or ran, the first powder charge after several seconds propelled the mine a meter up into the air where the main TNT charge detonated. From that position, the lethal range was considered to be 30 meters, with casualties to 100 meters. Even scaled down from 4 kg to the size of a hand grenade, that is much more effective than having it explode on the ground.
The model plane attack could remotely detonate the payload at an optimum height. All it is, is a replacement for the suicide bomber, the supply and detectability of which does pose a problem.
Readily available inexpensive technology and widespread technical skills definitely tilt the equation in favor of the asymmetric attacker with little funding. The authorities charged with the protection of the people know they cannot wish this stuff away. It's not stupid on the face of it that they should have an interest in who is acquiring model planes AND perhaps does not fit the profile of the R/C hobbyist AND exhibits an unseemly interest in explosives. The controversial part is just how intrusive the net cast to find likely suspects is, and whether or not they disturb the lives of innocent people and violate people's rights. You can fit an awful lot of prototypical geeks into that suspect list. A geek with an academic interest in military history could be in a bad spot [looks over shoulder]. Obviously they didn't "foil" any "attack" this time, since they didn't arrest anyone. All they did was spend a lot of money.
Wouldn't it have been cheaper and the goods just about as successful if they had paid $0 million for the brand and just called them Trinkies, Ha-Ha's and Ding-a-Lings?
Slashdot Mirror
So you think NASA is done building Voyagers for all time? You may be right, but I wouldn't rule out the rice voyagers, and maybe at some point the Persian, Indian, or African voyagers.
Maybe. If somebody thinks they are man enough.
Over 200 injuries is mass destruction in any sane man's book. End of story.
I would like to believe it is specific enough, believe me.
"The Congress shall have Power To ... provide for the ... general Welfare ... To regulate Commerce ... among the several States ..."
"The Congress shall have Power - To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper ..."
These clause have allowed an endless train of overreaches. You can justify any goddam thing you want as furthering the welfare of the US, or as being neccesary and proper, and you can browbeat states to any insane degree under the supposed aegis of interstate commerce. Patrick Henry actually foresaw the limitless federal power and the destruction of individual liberty and argued against this puffery.
But in the end, my point is that there's no way it COULD have been made specific enough. Not at ten or a hundred times the length. The whole thing always rested, and had to rest, with the sustained wisdom and goodwill of the body politic and their leaders. When you compromise away all your original principles, your enterprise is doomed.
So it's hate now to point out stupid, pointless design choices?
Except to save one tenth of a square inch they have made it so you can't plug in USB and SD at the same time. Fail.
I don't disagree with any of it.
Not nearly specifically enough to deal with 20th century stupidity, greed, and corruption, clearly. I don't really think any constitution could ever be clear enough to save a nation which has become that stupid, greedy, and corrupt.
Is there any rational point to your comparison of scale? It doesn't seem to me that "he could have killed tens or hundreds of thousands; therefore 3 dead and over 200 injured do not count" is very rational.
Maybe because Bush, be he many things, was not stupid or ignorant. The definition of WMD is completely different in a military context than a civil context, as amply pointed out in the discussion on this page.
He is guilty as HELL. That's an assumption based on evidence I have seen reported; an assumption I am perfectly free to make and one which is entirely warranted. He just hasn't been found guilty in a court of law yet.
The consequence of my assumption is nil. The consequence of false procedure in a court of law, including presumption of guilt, would be very serious.
The point is that it was during the course of armed conflict. The simple fact is that no one has succeeded in having the armed conflict ruled illegal. Not before the Supreme Court or any other agency which has true jurisdiction.
Decidedly not. What has that to do with definitions of terms?
Of course. Captain Obvious here. Is that supposed to shake anybody up? In an armed conflict, massively destroying enemy installations and personnel is a matter of course.
How about slashdot?
An organization with any sanity would have its rules set up so it does not need to block any publicly accessible point in the internet just to satisfy some stupid rule.
I suppose the NSA could classify the fact that Clorox bleach plus ammonia makes POISON GAS. Just about every man, woman and child on the planet already knows it, but I am not aware of any limit to what they can arbitrarily classify.
Do you actually believe the NSA is that cussed stupid? The stuff they're talking about IS ALREADY ALL OVER THE INTERNET. Sorry, NSA, events have overtaken your classification system for this particular material. Actually, to the best I can determine, the Guardian has nothing of any substance whatsoever in terms of genuine security concerns; it's just information about information-gathering. This s about protecting asses.
The difference is, your system is stupid!! :-) Relax, I'm only kidding. There needs to be a standard that works on BOTH our systems.
Mod anonymous parent up. He actually knows something about the subject, unlike grandparent. What I am always struck by is not that someone is ignorant. There is nothing wrong with ignorant. It means nothing more than not knowing anything about some subject. What amazes me is that people who are ignorant about some subject nonetheless feel the need to expound on that subject and spread patently false information.
Who told you that? It's hogwash. This thing can lift 4 pounds of payload and it is VTOL and powered by electric motors using lithium ion batteries. A conventional model plane could do at least as much. It just so happens that most recreational model plane flying does not require any payload to be lifted. That doesn't mean they CAN'T do so.
Do you think maybe you could get hurt a little by a hand grenade (call it one pound)?
What is actually possible is not limited by what seems plausible to you.
IMO the case of Mr. Ferdaus is an example of an actual threat caught and foiled, cherry picked from maybe a hundred false leads.
The NSA and other agencies have a lot to answer for, but that is not an example of one of them if the story is to be believed. You can say "agents supplied", but the fact appears to be that Mr. Ferdaus procured the illegal and incriminating material from an unwisely chosen source. Or do you think they said out of the blue "here; take these machine guns and hand grenades or we will kill you right now".
And it's complete nonsense to say that you can "see" that plane is not carrying anything dangerous. It looks like any other model plane to me. It has a hollow fuselage with opaque surfaces. You could put anything in there that fits and that it could lift. Do you know how compact and light a hand grenade is? That is well within the carrying capacity of a plane like that. Model planes do not use "runways". You can throw them into the air or lift off a small grassy patch. They are not limited to "short range". Every day in normal use they can fly easily for a half hour at 60 mph, which would be 30 miles in a straight line. In point of fact if you know what you are doing you can do a lot better than that. In 2003 a 6 foot 11 pound autonomous plane build by a 77 year old hobbyist flew 1882 miles from Newfoundland to Ireland in 39 hours.
Not unusually big, and the injuries and fatalities would be practically guaranteed.
Admittedly, "state threatening" is a joke unless you are talking about hundreds or thousands of model planes in a coordinated campaign, but a single model plane of average size could easily carry a couple of hand grenades or the equivalent, and a couple of hand grenade set off at optimal height above the ground in a crowd is easily capable of killing as many people as the Marathon Bombers did.
Ever heard of a German Bouncing Betty S-mine or an M-16 American copy? The fiendish part was that the mine was designed for the victim who triggered it to be aware that he had done so, and step away to begin to flee. If he left his foot on the mine it would after several seconds blow up where it was, embedded in the ground, killing or maiming the victim. But if the victim flinched or ran, the first powder charge after several seconds propelled the mine a meter up into the air where the main TNT charge detonated. From that position, the lethal range was considered to be 30 meters, with casualties to 100 meters. Even scaled down from 4 kg to the size of a hand grenade, that is much more effective than having it explode on the ground.
The model plane attack could remotely detonate the payload at an optimum height. All it is, is a replacement for the suicide bomber, the supply and detectability of which does pose a problem.
Readily available inexpensive technology and widespread technical skills definitely tilt the equation in favor of the asymmetric attacker with little funding. The authorities charged with the protection of the people know they cannot wish this stuff away. It's not stupid on the face of it that they should have an interest in who is acquiring model planes AND perhaps does not fit the profile of the R/C hobbyist AND exhibits an unseemly interest in explosives. The controversial part is just how intrusive the net cast to find likely suspects is, and whether or not they disturb the lives of innocent people and violate people's rights. You can fit an awful lot of prototypical geeks into that suspect list. A geek with an academic interest in military history could be in a bad spot [looks over shoulder]. Obviously they didn't "foil" any "attack" this time, since they didn't arrest anyone. All they did was spend a lot of money.
On the other hand, the Flash version actually WORKS on my system. The mobile one does not.
Our esteemed union toadie contributors and moderators will never admit that.
Wouldn't it have been cheaper and the goods just about as successful if they had paid $0 million for the brand and just called them Trinkies, Ha-Ha's and Ding-a-Lings?