We shall define Jagware as any software which offends the corpus of the/. community, for any reason. The Jagware designation shall be bestowed by popular acclaim as measured by stochastic analysis of/. postings. Once designated Jagware, a program shall be so designated for all time, or until a special declaration is affirmed by popular acclaim in/. Jagware may optionally be extensible i.e. bloated/spying/overpricedJagware. This list of extensions is illustrative and not comprehensive.
SBC's FUD campaign was so transparently BS, so over the top, that i thought sure they'd shot themselves in the foot. Their entire campaign boiled down to: competition will make Broadband expensive. I guess the lesson is: Stupid people are my neighbors. Or something.
What you cited is a meaningless declaration with no power of enforcement. A declaration is an impotent expression of opinion, without force of law. Find me a treaty which says the same thing and backs it up with the coercive power of the law.
this has some interesting implications: anything which does not violate physical laws is possible, given enough funding.
Of course, funding isn't infinite, so only certain possible things can be funded. Note that "possible" and "funded" can cover a lot of territory, such as the Glomar Explorer, the SR-71, Keyhole, and 1vy Be11s [sic].
Thus, from a Capabilities Analysis, we must conclude that a rich nation can and may be doing Anything, while a poor nation is not. The poor nation -- and the clueful, independant insurgent, must therefore calculate the phase-space of his known/unknown unknowns, and plan against capabilities he doesn't even know about. IOW, the poor nations, and foreign nationals of interest must conclude that we know much more about them than they know about us. (Sorry for the Rumsfeldian riff.)
This makes opsec and comsec for the other guy a blood curdling nightmare and reduces his operational efficiency, even if we're not looking at him.
you're not merely mistaken, you are abosolutely WRONG. Every country has the absolute right to know exactly where you are in international waters at every microsend you're there.
They don't _necessarily_ have the right to make you do anything, nor answer any questions, but they have the right under an infinitude of international treaties, and maritime law, to track your whiny ignorant butt.
Furthermore, while they cannot compel you to answer questions about yourself while out there, they can use your silence to keep you out of their country, or put another way, they can require you to answer questions -- with great specificity and lattitute -- prior to entry.
This is not a whole lot different than applying for a travel visa, in case the distinctions of national soveriegnty and border control are beyond you.
Bloggers can do good work, but there is no institutional/programatic/architectural assurance that they're telling the truth.
Bloggers can post anything they want, w/o refutation, or consequence (barring libel suit, natch)-- there's no way to proximally refute a blog's BS. Journalists, at least, are held to some standard, and their outlets -- papers, magazines, networks, have to at least occasionally genuflect at the altar of veracity. A journalist who lies and is caught becomes unemployed; not so the blogger, who can spew and rave unchallenged.
A much better modality than blogging is usenet news..max
I find it distincly difficult to speak, or dictate, with the same level of concision i can achieve with single-pass typing.
The different cognative processes involved can make STT, in my experience, quite difficult to master, rendering it less useful for long-form composition than one might think.
I'm just guessing, but i suspect that the difference is due to the increased processing impedance required to get words out with a keyboard -- the longer time constant gives us more time to think about what we're saying.
One way (almost the only way) it can work (to my naive mind) is if it's looking for a spectral component assoc. with CCD litho or possibly p/n junctions or.x mm-sized diffractive features. IOW, it's looking for an optical characteristic specific to a chip. Big tautology, but i'm a simple mind...
This suggests that if we were to deploy a handful of EEPROM-typ chips (the UV-erasable things with the little windows) around the theater, we could probably spoof the system with false positives.
I personally knew (he died a few years ago) one of the guys who designed built NERVA's LH2 cryo systems. I've been to Jackass Flats. NERVA blew CURIES of radioactive partially reacted fuel element chunks across the desert.
You can call me infinitely better informed than you, because I am, but this sort of tech is a little risky and worthy of a skeptical eye. Doubly so given that it's part of a program explicitly promoted by the current administration, the head of which can't even spell Mars without visiting the candy machine.
Was not NERVA somehow proscribed by the NTB? Wouldn't this be a deal-killer? Is it reasonable to believe the rest of the world will rescope the NTB to allow us to run nuclear rockets in space (i.e., why should the world trust the US?). I'm serious about this.
aside: I used to work with a cryogenics engineer who designed the Fermilab Tevatron LHe system, who had earlier worked on NERVA. He told some pretty interesting stories about bundle dissasembly during criticality tests. They used a tank with arms to pick up the pieces...
what is your POINT? You clearly are posting from a position of factual and experiential deficit. Evaluation is part of training. Train-eval-train-eval-repeat ad infinitum.
To bring this back to where i jumped in, it's smarmy nonesense for Norwegians -- or anyone to prance around in their Homer Simpson I'm So Smart Dance for having bunged a bunch of New York and LA and Chicago city kids (bulk of the Marines), or any other Opfor, who were sent to Norway, or anyplace else, to learn about fighting in the snow, or whatever. Excercises are not just for proving how perfect you are, they're specivically for finding out what you don't know so you can fix it.
Put another way, would you support the same gloating arguements about a bunch of Norwegians getting their asses handed to them in desert or jungle warfare excercise? I wouldn't. I'd say they learned a valuable lesson.
The REAL question is: what happened during the rematch? Did the losing OPFOR learn anything??
I'd get three... and a good vacuum pump. and some liqud nitrojen.too.
Just call. We cet calls all the time; tthey'll know what to0 do.
i'm sorry, ican't tellf if yoryu serious or teeasimg,,, i took a prescription/ambien and my mind is turning into mushl I would hovever be happy to shoyou seound and buy a lunch.
very strange effects w/ the input device and the activity on the screen,,, have a pleasant tonight. where ever you are..max
Not so much defensive as suffused with a low level annoyance, having been subject to almost 15 years of a-scientific drivel on the subject. but yes, i missed that line and jumped to the subsequent borken eardrum statement.
I'm not a rocket scientist. But i do run a large proton-antiproton colliding superconducting synchrotron for fun and profit.
another one. A guy who lives in Norway thumping his chest because a bunch of americans on a training op got their butts kicked in 2 meters of snow. Hint: most americans only see Norwegian-grade snowfalls on tv. Oh, and you violated your orders by gassing your trainees. smooth.
Nonsense. The us navy is painfully aware of the dangers posed by quiet -- be they ultra quieted SEAWOLF class nukes, DE's (diesel electrics) or the new generation of european AIP (Air Independant Propulsion) boats.
Oh, and there were 3 DE's, not one. Oh, and your "noisy" comment: a DE is only noisy while it's snorkeling. When she's on battery propulsion, she's as quieter than a nuke, generally speaking. Trust me, nobody in the US Navy thinks DEs are rattle buckets.
And the Navy knows, having been taught this lesson by its own submarine fleet, that a quiet boat is a fearsome, almost invincible enemy. The purpose of the excercise was to help the Navy figure out how to take out a DE operating in the littorals. It ain't easy.
The one and only reason the Collins's survived is because the engagement orders required the CVBG to enter into her backyard, where the DE's advantages were best put to use.
No one was surprised, only highly irritated.
The biggest danger to the navy is littoral DE and AIP submarine proliferation, mines, and high speed small boats packed with explosives, manned by the willing-to-die. The biggest danger to the navy isn't hubris, and frankly, i find the implication offensive.
Slashdot Mirror
It's a great show and all, but i want a disk with just the hott blonde cylon chick in balthazar's head. .max
p.s. she's hot.
We shall define Jagware as any software which offends the corpus of the /. community, for any reason. The Jagware designation shall be bestowed by popular acclaim as measured by stochastic analysis of /. postings. Once designated Jagware, a program shall be so designated for all time, or until a special declaration is affirmed by popular acclaim in /. Jagware may optionally be extensible i.e. bloated/spying/overpriced Jagware. This list of extensions is illustrative and not comprehensive.
SBC's FUD campaign was so transparently BS, so over the top, that i thought sure they'd shot themselves in the foot. Their entire campaign boiled down to: competition will make Broadband expensive. I guess the lesson is: Stupid people are my neighbors. Or something.
This is a joke, right?
What you cited is a meaningless declaration with no power of enforcement. A declaration is an impotent expression of opinion, without force of law. Find me a treaty which says the same thing and backs it up with the coercive power of the law.
Preeee-cisely.
this has some interesting implications: anything which does not violate physical laws is possible, given enough funding.
Of course, funding isn't infinite, so only certain possible things can be funded. Note that "possible" and "funded" can cover a lot of territory, such as the Glomar Explorer, the SR-71, Keyhole, and 1vy Be11s [sic].
Thus, from a Capabilities Analysis, we must conclude that a rich nation can and may be doing Anything, while a poor nation is not. The poor nation -- and the clueful, independant insurgent, must therefore calculate the phase-space of his known/unknown unknowns, and plan against capabilities he doesn't even know about. IOW, the poor nations, and foreign nationals of interest must conclude that we know much more about them than they know about us. (Sorry for the Rumsfeldian riff.)
This makes opsec and comsec for the other guy a blood curdling nightmare and reduces his operational efficiency, even if we're not looking at him.
You might want to familiarize yourself with the meaining of "enemy combatant".
That's great. Your "right to privacy" (assuming you're in the us) derives from the 10th amendment and various SCOTUS decisions.
In Other Words: Tell it to the rest of the world, bub. They, the international community, the World Court, the UN etc^100 will laugh themselves blue.
Your "right to privacy" is extinguished when you leave the jurisdiction of the US.
you're not merely mistaken, you are abosolutely WRONG. Every country has the absolute right to know exactly where you are in international waters at every microsend you're there.
They don't _necessarily_ have the right to make you do anything, nor answer any questions, but they have the right under an infinitude of international treaties, and maritime law, to track your whiny ignorant butt.
Furthermore, while they cannot compel you to answer questions about yourself while out there, they can use your silence to keep you out of their country, or put another way, they can require you to answer questions -- with great specificity and lattitute -- prior to entry.
This is not a whole lot different than applying for a travel visa, in case the distinctions of national soveriegnty and border control are beyond you.
Blaze's article just helped me pay for a new dualie 2.5 GHz G5 and one of those cool teevees you hang on the wall. Thanks, /.!
Bloggers can do good work, but there is no institutional/programatic/architectural assurance that they're telling the truth.
.max
Bloggers can post anything they want, w/o refutation, or consequence (barring libel suit, natch)-- there's no way to proximally refute a blog's BS. Journalists, at least, are held to some standard, and their outlets -- papers, magazines, networks, have to at least occasionally genuflect at the altar of veracity. A journalist who lies and is caught becomes unemployed; not so the blogger, who can spew and rave unchallenged.
A much better modality than blogging is usenet news.
I find it distincly difficult to speak, or dictate, with the same level of concision i can achieve with single-pass typing. The different cognative processes involved can make STT, in my experience, quite difficult to master, rendering it less useful for long-form composition than one might think. I'm just guessing, but i suspect that the difference is due to the increased processing impedance required to get words out with a keyboard -- the longer time constant gives us more time to think about what we're saying.
Finally, a chance for my girlfriend to show me how much she cares!
One way (almost the only way) it can work (to my naive mind) is if it's looking for a spectral component assoc. with CCD litho or possibly p/n junctions or .x mm-sized diffractive features. IOW, it's looking for an optical characteristic specific to a chip. Big tautology, but i'm a simple mind...
This suggests that if we were to deploy a handful of EEPROM-typ chips (the UV-erasable things with the little windows) around the theater, we could probably spoof the system with false positives.
it's a thought.
I personally knew (he died a few years ago) one of the guys who designed built NERVA's LH2 cryo systems. I've been to Jackass Flats. NERVA blew CURIES of radioactive partially reacted fuel element chunks across the desert.
You can call me infinitely better informed than you, because I am, but this sort of tech is a little risky and worthy of a skeptical eye. Doubly so given that it's part of a program explicitly promoted by the current administration, the head of which can't even spell Mars without visiting the candy machine.
Was not NERVA somehow proscribed by the NTB? Wouldn't this be a deal-killer? Is it reasonable to believe the rest of the world will rescope the NTB to allow us to run nuclear rockets in space (i.e., why should the world trust the US?).
I'm serious about this.
aside:
I used to work with a cryogenics engineer who designed the Fermilab Tevatron LHe system, who had earlier worked on NERVA. He told some pretty interesting stories about bundle dissasembly during criticality tests. They used a tank with arms to pick up the pieces...
i have nothign to say, just that I beat all of you.
what is your POINT? You clearly are posting from a position of factual and experiential deficit. Evaluation is part of training. Train-eval-train-eval-repeat ad infinitum.
To bring this back to where i jumped in, it's smarmy nonesense for Norwegians -- or anyone to prance around in their Homer Simpson I'm So Smart Dance for having bunged a bunch of New York and LA and Chicago city kids (bulk of the Marines), or any other Opfor, who were sent to Norway, or anyplace else, to learn about fighting in the snow, or whatever. Excercises are not just for proving how perfect you are, they're specivically for finding out what you don't know so you can fix it.
Put another way, would you support the same gloating arguements about a bunch of Norwegians getting their asses handed to them in desert or jungle warfare excercise? I wouldn't. I'd say they learned a valuable lesson.
The REAL question is: what happened during the rematch? Did the losing OPFOR learn anything??
Feel free to try again.
i'm thinking they did check conditions, and the whole reason they were in NORWAY in the first place was to "train them to deal with it". oh.
are you agreein with me or disagreeing with me?
I'd get three... and a good vacuum pump. and some liqud nitrojen.too. Just call. We cet calls all the time; tthey'll know what to0 do. i'm sorry, ican't tellf if yoryu serious or teeasimg,,, i took a prescription /ambien and my mind is turning into mushl I would hovever be happy to shoyou seound and buy a lunch.
very strange effects w/ the input device and the activity on the screen,,, have a pleasant tonight. where ever you are. .max
kist come dowm with a jar and a tight fitting lid. and magnets. always with the nagnets.....
Not so much defensive as suffused with a low level annoyance, having been subject to almost 15 years of a-scientific drivel on the subject. but yes, i missed that line and jumped to the subsequent borken eardrum statement. I'm not a rocket scientist. But i do run a large proton-antiproton colliding superconducting synchrotron for fun and profit.
another one. A guy who lives in Norway thumping his chest because a bunch of americans on a training op got their butts kicked in 2 meters of snow. Hint: most americans only see Norwegian-grade snowfalls on tv. Oh, and you violated your orders by gassing your trainees. smooth.
Nonsense. The us navy is painfully aware of the dangers posed by quiet -- be they ultra quieted SEAWOLF class nukes, DE's (diesel electrics) or the new generation of european AIP (Air Independant Propulsion) boats.
Oh, and there were 3 DE's, not one. Oh, and your "noisy" comment: a DE is only noisy while it's snorkeling. When she's on battery propulsion, she's as quieter than a nuke, generally speaking. Trust me, nobody in the US Navy thinks DEs are rattle buckets.
And the Navy knows, having been taught this lesson by its own submarine fleet, that a quiet boat is a fearsome, almost invincible enemy. The purpose of the excercise was to help the Navy figure out how to take out a DE operating in the littorals. It ain't easy.
The one and only reason the Collins's survived is because the engagement orders required the CVBG to enter into her backyard, where the DE's advantages were best put to use.
No one was surprised, only highly irritated.
The biggest danger to the navy is littoral DE and AIP submarine proliferation, mines, and high speed small boats packed with explosives, manned by the willing-to-die. The biggest danger to the navy isn't hubris, and frankly, i find the implication offensive.
from a former seawolf (SSN-575) sailor.