Ladies and gentleman, one way or another we as a species are going to have to band together and figure out how to get off this lovely little rock we call Earth or our species will eventually go bye, bye. Granted we have billions of years before the sun engulfs the Earth in flames but it's eventually going to happen. The Sun won't last forever, all stars die. When the Sun enters it's latter stages it's going to expand and engulf the Earth, killing everything on it. That is, if we can even make it that long without a really big asteroid heading our way and colliding with our planet taking us all out first.
We've got to figure out a way to get people off of Earth and Mars is pretty good way to start. I mean just think of what a great accomplishment it would be for humanity. No human has ever set foot on another planet before and after hundreds of thousands of years humanity is finally very near the point where we are finally ready to do so. What an absolutely amazing accomplishment considering that a few hundred years ago the vast majority of us still though the Earth was flat.
We finally have a president that is going to set out a proposal for getting us to Mars and half of you poo poo it because you don't like the guy. While I'm no huge fan of Bush, I don't really care who the heck proposes the trip to Mars. At least it's out there now; at least it will be talked about. At least there is a possibility that it will happen. 10 years is a realistic goal considering how much it will cost. Even if it ultimately takes 15 - 20 years, so what? If NASA starts now and plans correctly, there will be plenty of money available. It just won't be there all at once. It will require careful planning and probably scaling back and eventually ditching the aging shuttle fleet, but again, so what? The current shuttle fleet has nearly outlived it's usefulness. Perhaps many of you don't like the idea because we've already been to the moon. Well I was born in 1981 and there hasn't been anyone on the Moon in my lifetime, nor in the lifetimes of subsequent generations. I, for the life of me, cannot figure out why, after so many successful missions, we would stop sending people into space with the hopes of going father and farther and exploring more and more. Heck, I would be happy just to see us send someone back to the moon so I could witness it with my own eyes (via TV that is). Think of all the good things that could happen if we do send someone to Mars. Think of all the technological advances that are sure to arise as a result. Think of all of the children that might be inspired to become engineers and scientists.
American scientists and engineers are a dieing breed. There were very few from my graduating class in high school that planned on studying science or engineering when they went to college. A manned mission to Mars could provide an inspiration to all of the young kids out there to become interested in science and engineering. Hey, it happened during the space race in the 50's and 60's and it could certainly happen again.
In short, don't shoot down the idea because it comes from Bush. A manned mission to Mars wouldn't require a huge increase in funding if it is something that NASA starts planning for and funding now with the goal of getting someone there in say 10 - 20 years. We have absolutely nothing to lose by trying to go and we have quite a lot to gain. With all of the things that presently divide this great nation, a manned mission to Mars is something that almost every single American man, woman and child could get behind and be excited about regardless of who the president happens to be and regardless of what other circumstances we may find ourselves in. In my humble opinion, something like that is definitely worth pursuing, no matter the cost or the time it actually takes to get it done.
So let's see. First, we connect our brains to the computer. Then we create Internet 3, by directly linking our brains. Then a new anti-terrorism bill outlaws firewalls, and our brains will be wide open to each other. Can anybody say "collective consciousness"?
Sweet! Sign me up anytime. Come across a hard question during a college exam... access the collective and get the answer. Want to know how to prepare a certain meal to impress your date... access the collective. Too drunk to determine if the chick your about to take home from the bar is a sea donkey... look at her then upload her image and ask for some advice from the collective. Of course other people could always be dicks and tell you to take her home anyway.
Well said! I find it incredibly hypocritical that so many geeks are getting so upset by the recent trend in outsourcing in the tech sector when it has been going on in other industries for years. It was bound to happen sooner or later, especially to tech support workers. Look if you can find people who can speak basic English, follow a written script and are willing to work for half of what an American will work for then it's a complete no-brainer for a company to outsource tier one tech support reps. If you've got a problem with that then don't deal with companies who have done it. I just think it's laughable that so many geeks are only complaining now, when it's happening to them. If you really want to do something about it then buy products that are made in American whenever you can, don't deal with companies that outsource their workers whenever it is humanly possible and avoid Wal-Mart and like the fucking plague! You'll be spending more money than you otherwise would but you will be supporting fellow American workers. The problem is it's easy to talk this way, but when you've got to spend a few hundred dollars more on your next mid-sized purchase in order to buy a product made in America, most people start thinking with their wallet.
Going to Mars and taming space is the only way forward for humanity as a whole.
You hit the nail right on the head with that one. Ladies and gentleman, one way or another we as a species are going to have to band together and figure out how to get off this lovely little rock we call Earth or our species will eventually go bye, bye. Granted we have billions of years before the sun engulfs the Earth in flames but it's eventually going to happen. The Sun won't last forever, all stars die. When the Sun enters it's latter stages it's going to expand and engulf the Earth, killing everything on it. That is, if we can even make it that long without a really big asteroid heading our way and colliding with our planet taking us all out first.
We've got to figure out a way to get people off of Earth and Mars is pretty good way to start. I mean just think of what a great accomplishment it would be for humanity. No human has ever set foot on another planet before and after hundreds of thousands of years humanity is finally very near the point where we are finally ready to do so. What an absolutely amazing accomplishment considering that a few hundred years ago the vast majority of us still though the Earth was flat.
We finally have a president that is going to set out a proposal for getting us to Mars and half of you poo poo it because you don't like the guy. While I'm no huge fan of Bush, I don't really care who the heck proposes the trip to Mars. At least it's out there now; at least it will be talked about. At least there is a possibility that it will happen. 10 years is a realistic goal considering how much it will cost. Even if it ultimately takes 15 - 20 years, so what? If NASA starts now and plans correctly, there will be plenty of money available. It just won't be there all at once. It will require careful planning and probably scaling back and eventually ditching the aging shuttle fleet, but again, so what? The current shuttle fleet has nearly outlived it's usefulness.
Perhaps many of you don't like the idea because we've already been to the moon. Well I was born in 1981 and there hasn't been anyone on the Moon in my lifetime, nor in the lifetimes of subsequent generations. I, for the life of me, cannot figure out why, after so many successful missions, we would stop sending people into space with the hopes of going father and farther and exploring more and more. Heck, I would be happy just to see us send someone back to the moon so I could witness it with my own eyes (via TV that is). Think of all the good things that could happen if we do send someone to Mars. Think of all the technological advances that are sure to arise as a result. Think of all of the children that might be inspired to become engineers and scientists.
American scientists and engineers are a dieing breed. There were very few from my graduating class in high school that planned on studying science or engineering when they went to college. A manned mission to Mars could provide an inspiration to all of the young kids out there to become interested in science and engineering. Hey, it happened during the space race in the 50's and 60's and it could certainly happen again.
In short, don't shoot down the idea because it comes from Bush. A manned mission to Mars wouldn't require a huge increase in funding if it is something that NASA starts planning for and funding now with the goal of getting someone there in say 10 - 20 years. We have absolutely nothing to lose by trying to go and we have quite a lot to gain. With all of the things that presently divide this great nation, a manned mission to Mars is something that almost every single American man, woman and child could get behind and be excited about regardless of who the president happens to be and regardless of what other circumstances we may find ourselves in. In my humble opinion, something like that is definitely worth pursuing, no matter the cost or the time it actually takes to get it done.
Let's start by taking a logical look at this program as it stands today and where we are ultimately planning on going with this.
As it stands today it is only being used in selected airports on citizens from selected countries. Most of Europe is being excluded entirely. Presently this system is extremely ineffective at stopping terrorists from entering the country. Simply avoid coming in through airports equipped with the technology.
If this system is eventually deployed in every international airport there will still be several ways to avoid it. You could obtain fake documentation forged to look like you're a citizen of one of the exempt countries. You could enter the USA via a land crossing or by sea. If all else fails you could enter illegally by bypassing a land border crossing altogether, entering via Canada or Mexico. The government, IMHO, is also overlooking a huge issue. Many of the 9/11 hijackers came into this country on valid visas. This system is never going to be able to stop that. If a person is recruited and is going to attack this country, this new system will do nothing if that person is not on a watch list and is able to get a valid visa.
All in all I'd say the system, even if it is fully implemented at all land, sea, and airports, is never going to be able to protect us from determined terrorists. What this system will probably end up doing is giving us better border control in other areas. I'm up in the air about these effects. While I respect others right to privacy, I strongly believe every country is completely within it's bounds to try and effectively control it's borders. No foreigner has the "right" to enter into any other country. It's up to each individual nation to decide who it's going to let in and who it is going to keep out. It's also within every nation's rights to implement some kind of system to try an enforce it's policy.
The stated goal of this system is to stop terrorists from entering this country and I don't think it's really going to accomplish that. If fully implemented it will certainly make it harder to get in, but a determined individual on a watch list can still sneak in. Finally, it is never going to stop terrorists, like many of those who took part in 9/11, who are able to obtain valid visas and are not on any of the watch lists. Given all these facts and the associated costs I'm still in favor of the system because it's going to allow us to tighten control of our borders. We desperately need to tighten our control of our borders and this will certainly help in some respects. I am, however, not under the illusion that this is a perfect system. I know even if it is fully implemented at all land crossings, seaports and airports a determined known terrorist can still sneak in and an unknown/unidentified terrorist will always be able to get in if they get a visa and are not on the watch list. In the end the bottom line is that we have to try and do something and I have not heard anyone else propose anything better. I'm afraid that given the current technology and the current global realities, a system like this was bound to be implemented sooner or later. Let us hope, and constantly seek to ensure via some kind of oversight, that this system is never abused.
That is exactly why PACS and other such political organizations (read special interests) exist in the first place. That is how the citizens can persuade government. We've got to band together and form groups that will fight for our various points of view. Take the NRA for instance. The NRA primarily consists of average citizens. They money used by that organization to influence government consists primarily membership dues and members who make additional donation. Say what you will about the organization, but what cannot be denied is that is a very organized group of citizens that has been very, very effective in getting politicians to listen.
My point is that the only way the average citizen is every going to get their point across in the USA is to band together with other like-minded individuals and raise money. The more people who join and the more money you raise the more likely it is that your views will be heard. If you have a large organization with millions and millions of voting members the politicians are going to listen to what you've got to say. If you're an organization capable of raising a lot of money the politicians are going to listen to what you've got to say. If you can do both, they are really going to listen. Therein lies the power of the NRA. Not only do they have millions of voting members, but they are also able to raise a ton of money.
If we are serious about combating the DMCA and other such legislation we need to band together. The EFF seems to me to be a pretty good organization that generally comes down on the right side of many of these issues. If you really care about said issues, join the EFF today and donate some money! If everyone who bitches and moans about the copyright laws would join the EFF and make some kind of donation I can guarantee you that it would have a lot political influence than it presently has. Imagine if it had millions of voting members paying millions of dollars in membership dues. It could then publish a list of politicians who back the opposing point of view and make it clear that it's going to give the list to voting members and let them know what their real record on consumer rights is. That's would make a lot of politicians turn their head. It could then use the money raised to buy television commercials to educate the general public on these issue, recruit more members, and to communicate our position on copyright laws to politicians the way the NRA is able to communicate their position on guns.
The bottom line is that you need to get off your butt and do something. If all you do is bitch and moan on slashdot you are a part of the problem and not a part of the solution. Ordinary citizens can make a difference but we have to do it by banding togather. Only then will we be able to exert the influence necessary (e.g. enough registered voters screaming loudly enough to get noticed and/or vast amounts of money that can be used to advance our collective take on the issues) to make the politicans listen.
Nice little swipe at the USA there man. You must feel proud. It makes you look just as ignorant as the idiot you were responding to. Let me guess? You're not an American. Ironic, in that it show that ignorant idiots aren't exclusive to any one country, including your own.
No one uses BSD,
those that do smoke PCP!
You know your not hearing someone lying,
when they say that BSD is dieing.
I know of many who are sick of trying,
to install BSD without screaming and crying.
Most complain BSD has no graphical interface,
while a minority scream "but it still has it's place."
BSD was once well renowned and great,
but I'm afraid recent releases have sealed it's fate.
To all of you who say BSD is here to stay,
You're probably right but I'll keep trolling anyway!
Hollywood actors and actresses are mostly liberal. That leads people to make the blanket statement that Hollywood is liberal. Quick, name as many well known conservative actors as you can that make no bones about being a conservative. Now list the liberals who make no bones about being liberal. Huge difference in the totals there.
Outspoken conservatives are hard to come by in Hollywood. Outspoken liberals are a dime a dozen.
On the contrary, Fox grabbed ratings, one could argue, because they had no competition when providing a perspective from the right.
Exactly. I talk to a lot of self identified liberals who just can't understand why Fox News does so well. My answer is always the same. If you want a liberal slant you've got ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, MSNBC. If you want a conservative slant all you've got is Fox News.
This of offtopic but I must ask. When will Diane Rehm die? I... c...a...n..'..t... s... t... a... n...d... h...o..w... s..l..o..w... s..h..e... t..a..l..k...s! Seriously floks, she sounds like she is dieing. I'd rather hear finger nails scratch across a chalkboard then listen to her. It takes her 15 minutes to get a freaking sentence out.
I don't know what's funnier... your comment or the possibility that, given the political leanings of a lot of the people who post here, some people will think your serious and not realize it's a joke.
This move by AMD is clearly the result of Intel not contributing enough to Bush's reelection fund. Bush and his evil neo-con allies have it in for Intel and are using AMD as a front to destroy it. No blood for processor preformance!
Ahh, a shining example of a "progressive" thinker who is so open and "tolerant" of others. Tolerant until they come across someone who has a different political point of view. When that happens the "tolerant progressives" can't seem to shut the other side up fast enough. The blatant hypocrisy of the far left never ceases to amaze me. Peddle your partisan b.s. somewhere else.
Settle down there fruit cake. A little backgound information for you. It was Bill Clinton that signed the DMCA into law. Yes I'm aware that it was passed by a Republic controlled House and Senate, but the buck stops with the president. Clinton had veto power, he could have stopped the bill from ever becoming law and he opted not to. Both Republicans and Democrats are respondible for the DCMA and for it's abuses. There are RIAA / MPAA / DCMA advocates on both sides of the isle (Frits Hollings springs to mind on the Democratic side). There are also those on both sides of the isle that oppose the abuses by the RIAA. Norm Coleman (Republican - MN) is having hearings in the Senate on the RIAA tatics.
The bottom line is that both sides are responsible for the DMCA. Peddle your bull shit somwhere else.
Right on man! I'm boycotting them too. I'm doing it for all of the reasons you stated and, I have to confess, because I can't stand the white trash that it attracts. Time after time I see 350 pound women in sweat pants with 5 kids who are also wearing sweats, are in desperate need of a hair cut and are yelling and screaming and won't shut the hell up. A Wal-Mart opened up in my town about 2 years ago and I have yet to set foot in the place.
What I find increadibly ironic is that most of the white trash that shops in Wal-Mart are the same people that are adversily affected by it's business practices. I laugh out loud when I hear them bitch about jobs moving over-seas or the reduction in their benefits. They refuse to spend the extra money to buy American or to buy from a retailer that treats their employees with a little respect then they turn around and bitch and moan about lost benefits and jobs moving over-seas. People like that make me sick. They are too fucking stupid to realize that they are contributing to the problem with their own shopping habbits.
BEGIN RANT
Come on people, you know the kind. The 350 pound sea-donkey in sweats, with 7 kids running around yelling and screaming who orders 4 Big Macs and a diet coke. Yeah right bitch, it's the fucking coke that is contibuting to the size of you ass. The 4 Big Macs you ordered have nothing to do with it. Oh and while you at it, why don't you have 7 more kids that you clearly cannot control. Then, why don't you go over to Wal-Mart and spend all of your money to save and grand total of $10, then scratch your head and ponder why it is that you can't seem to find a job in the service industry that pays a decent wage and has some benefits.
To these people, and make no mistake about it there are many, I say two things:
1) Do not reproduce
2) Do us all a favor and drive yourself off a cliff
I don't know but given the speed of our court system, Microsoft's vast resources and the inventible appeals, I'd say we'll find out in about 5 - 7 years.
What you say is true but your forgetting that the only version of IE to block pop up adds is the version in Windows XP SP2. The majority of Windows users are not running XP, therefore after XP SP2 is released even if everyone who is running XP upgrades to SP2 (which isn't going to happen), the majority of Windows users will still not have a version of IE with pop up blocking.
When you consider that, pop up ads are going to be around and remian effective for a long time to come.
I hear you man. As soon as I heard the news I had to come here just to hear what the loonies would say. This is great news for the Iraqi people! The man was a thug. Millions where tourtured, murdered and raped by his regime and now the Iraqi people will have a chance to put him on trial and seek justice. However you feel about the war and this administration, you cannot deny that this is wonderfull news for the vast majority of Iraqi's.
Joe Sixpack doesn't care about keeping up with the latest and greatest. Take my parents for instance. The use their pc for browsing the web, e-mail, AOL instant messenger, word processing and CD burning. Their current system is fast enough for what they need to do, all the software runs fairly well and they have no real reason to upgrade anytime soon.
I'm sure a lot of corporations, especially small businesses, are the same way. If the system runs the software they need at an acceptable speed there is really no reason to upgrade. I service a lot of small businesses happily running Windows 98 (I don't see too many systems with 95 any more) on several systems and they don't plan on upgrading anytime soon. The larger businesses I service, on the other hand, are largely running Windows 2000 with some XP systems in the mix mainly do to the additional security and for group policy.
If your running Windows 98 and everything is working alright for you, there really isn't any incentive to upgrade to Windows XP IMHO. I can't think of any single must have feature for the average computer user. If corporations are using Windows 2000 or 2003 Server there are some incentives to running Windows 2000 or XP on the client end.
I do feel that your going to see more and more users upgrade, albeit at a slower rate than Microsoft is used to. There are applications being released (iTunes springs to mind) that simply will not run on Windows 98 and Me. I have a feeling that this will increasingly be the case. Eventually users will come across an application they need, or an upgrade to an existing application they run that has some new feature they want to use, that simply will not run on 98/Me and they will be forced to upgrade.
Newslfash you ignorant twat, gerrymandering has been going on for a long, long time. You liberal asses didn't seem to have much of a problem doing it when you had a majority and you were doing the gerrymandering. Republicans finally get a majority and start to do it and you throw a damn fit. What's good for the gander is good for the goose. It's the Republican's turn to draw district lines. Deal with it.
Slashdot Mirror
Ladies and gentleman, one way or another we as a species are going to have to band together and figure out how to get off this lovely little rock we call Earth or our species will eventually go bye, bye. Granted we have billions of years before the sun engulfs the Earth in flames but it's eventually going to happen. The Sun won't last forever, all stars die. When the Sun enters it's latter stages it's going to expand and engulf the Earth, killing everything on it. That is, if we can even make it that long without a really big asteroid heading our way and colliding with our planet taking us all out first.
We've got to figure out a way to get people off of Earth and Mars is pretty good way to start. I mean just think of what a great accomplishment it would be for humanity. No human has ever set foot on another planet before and after hundreds of thousands of years humanity is finally very near the point where we are finally ready to do so. What an absolutely amazing accomplishment considering that a few hundred years ago the vast majority of us still though the Earth was flat.
We finally have a president that is going to set out a proposal for getting us to Mars and half of you poo poo it because you don't like the guy. While I'm no huge fan of Bush, I don't really care who the heck proposes the trip to Mars. At least it's out there now; at least it will be talked about. At least there is a possibility that it will happen. 10 years is a realistic goal considering how much it will cost. Even if it ultimately takes 15 - 20 years, so what? If NASA starts now and plans correctly, there will be plenty of money available. It just won't be there all at once. It will require careful planning and probably scaling back and eventually ditching the aging shuttle fleet, but again, so what? The current shuttle fleet has nearly outlived it's usefulness.
Perhaps many of you don't like the idea because we've already been to the moon. Well I was born in 1981 and there hasn't been anyone on the Moon in my lifetime, nor in the lifetimes of subsequent generations. I, for the life of me, cannot figure out why, after so many successful missions, we would stop sending people into space with the hopes of going father and farther and exploring more and more. Heck, I would be happy just to see us send someone back to the moon so I could witness it with my own eyes (via TV that is). Think of all the good things that could happen if we do send someone to Mars. Think of all the technological advances that are sure to arise as a result. Think of all of the children that might be inspired to become engineers and scientists.
American scientists and engineers are a dieing breed. There were very few from my graduating class in high school that planned on studying science or engineering when they went to college. A manned mission to Mars could provide an inspiration to all of the young kids out there to become interested in science and engineering. Hey, it happened during the space race in the 50's and 60's and it could certainly happen again.
In short, don't shoot down the idea because it comes from Bush. A manned mission to Mars wouldn't require a huge increase in funding if it is something that NASA starts planning for and funding now with the goal of getting someone there in say 10 - 20 years. We have absolutely nothing to lose by trying to go and we have quite a lot to gain. With all of the things that presently divide this great nation, a manned mission to Mars is something that almost every single American man, woman and child could get behind and be excited about regardless of who the president happens to be and regardless of what other circumstances we may find ourselves in. In my humble opinion, something like that is definitely worth pursuing, no matter the cost or the time it actually takes to get it done.
Sweet! Sign me up anytime. Come across a hard question during a college exam ... access the collective and get the answer. Want to know how to prepare a certain meal to impress your date ... access the collective. Too drunk to determine if the chick your about to take home from the bar is a sea donkey ... look at her then upload her image and ask for some advice from the collective. Of course other people could always be dicks and tell you to take her home anyway.
Well said! I find it incredibly hypocritical that so many geeks are getting so upset by the recent trend in outsourcing in the tech sector when it has been going on in other industries for years. It was bound to happen sooner or later, especially to tech support workers. Look if you can find people who can speak basic English, follow a written script and are willing to work for half of what an American will work for then it's a complete no-brainer for a company to outsource tier one tech support reps. If you've got a problem with that then don't deal with companies who have done it. I just think it's laughable that so many geeks are only complaining now, when it's happening to them. If you really want to do something about it then buy products that are made in American whenever you can, don't deal with companies that outsource their workers whenever it is humanly possible and avoid Wal-Mart and like the fucking plague! You'll be spending more money than you otherwise would but you will be supporting fellow American workers. The problem is it's easy to talk this way, but when you've got to spend a few hundred dollars more on your next mid-sized purchase in order to buy a product made in America, most people start thinking with their wallet.
First comes the mod, then comes the marriage then comes the moderator in the baby carriage!
Great post!
Going to Mars and taming space is the only way forward for humanity as a whole.
You hit the nail right on the head with that one. Ladies and gentleman, one way or another we as a species are going to have to band together and figure out how to get off this lovely little rock we call Earth or our species will eventually go bye, bye. Granted we have billions of years before the sun engulfs the Earth in flames but it's eventually going to happen. The Sun won't last forever, all stars die. When the Sun enters it's latter stages it's going to expand and engulf the Earth, killing everything on it. That is, if we can even make it that long without a really big asteroid heading our way and colliding with our planet taking us all out first.
We've got to figure out a way to get people off of Earth and Mars is pretty good way to start. I mean just think of what a great accomplishment it would be for humanity. No human has ever set foot on another planet before and after hundreds of thousands of years humanity is finally very near the point where we are finally ready to do so. What an absolutely amazing accomplishment considering that a few hundred years ago the vast majority of us still though the Earth was flat.
We finally have a president that is going to set out a proposal for getting us to Mars and half of you poo poo it because you don't like the guy. While I'm no huge fan of Bush, I don't really care who the heck proposes the trip to Mars. At least it's out there now; at least it will be talked about. At least there is a possibility that it will happen. 10 years is a realistic goal considering how much it will cost. Even if it ultimately takes 15 - 20 years, so what? If NASA starts now and plans correctly, there will be plenty of money available. It just won't be there all at once. It will require careful planning and probably scaling back and eventually ditching the aging shuttle fleet, but again, so what? The current shuttle fleet has nearly outlived it's usefulness.Perhaps many of you don't like the idea because we've already been to the moon. Well I was born in 1981 and there hasn't been anyone on the Moon in my lifetime, nor in the lifetimes of subsequent generations. I, for the life of me, cannot figure out why, after so many successful missions, we would stop sending people into space with the hopes of going father and farther and exploring more and more. Heck, I would be happy just to see us send someone back to the moon so I could witness it with my own eyes (via TV that is). Think of all the good things that could happen if we do send someone to Mars. Think of all the technological advances that are sure to arise as a result. Think of all of the children that might be inspired to become engineers and scientists.
American scientists and engineers are a dieing breed. There were very few from my graduating class in high school that planned on studying science or engineering when they went to college. A manned mission to Mars could provide an inspiration to all of the young kids out there to become interested in science and engineering. Hey, it happened during the space race in the 50's and 60's and it could certainly happen again.
In short, don't shoot down the idea because it comes from Bush. A manned mission to Mars wouldn't require a huge increase in funding if it is something that NASA starts planning for and funding now with the goal of getting someone there in say 10 - 20 years. We have absolutely nothing to lose by trying to go and we have quite a lot to gain. With all of the things that presently divide this great nation, a manned mission to Mars is something that almost every single American man, woman and child could get behind and be excited about regardless of who the president happens to be and regardless of what other circumstances we may find ourselves in. In my humble opinion, something like that is definitely worth pursuing, no matter the cost or the time it actually takes to get it done.
Let's start by taking a logical look at this program as it stands today and where we are ultimately planning on going with this.
As it stands today it is only being used in selected airports on citizens from selected countries. Most of Europe is being excluded entirely. Presently this system is extremely ineffective at stopping terrorists from entering the country. Simply avoid coming in through airports equipped with the technology.
If this system is eventually deployed in every international airport there will still be several ways to avoid it. You could obtain fake documentation forged to look like you're a citizen of one of the exempt countries. You could enter the USA via a land crossing or by sea. If all else fails you could enter illegally by bypassing a land border crossing altogether, entering via Canada or Mexico. The government, IMHO, is also overlooking a huge issue. Many of the 9/11 hijackers came into this country on valid visas. This system is never going to be able to stop that. If a person is recruited and is going to attack this country, this new system will do nothing if that person is not on a watch list and is able to get a valid visa.
All in all I'd say the system, even if it is fully implemented at all land, sea, and airports, is never going to be able to protect us from determined terrorists. What this system will probably end up doing is giving us better border control in other areas. I'm up in the air about these effects. While I respect others right to privacy, I strongly believe every country is completely within it's bounds to try and effectively control it's borders. No foreigner has the "right" to enter into any other country. It's up to each individual nation to decide who it's going to let in and who it is going to keep out. It's also within every nation's rights to implement some kind of system to try an enforce it's policy.
The stated goal of this system is to stop terrorists from entering this country and I don't think it's really going to accomplish that. If fully implemented it will certainly make it harder to get in, but a determined individual on a watch list can still sneak in. Finally, it is never going to stop terrorists, like many of those who took part in 9/11, who are able to obtain valid visas and are not on any of the watch lists. Given all these facts and the associated costs I'm still in favor of the system because it's going to allow us to tighten control of our borders. We desperately need to tighten our control of our borders and this will certainly help in some respects. I am, however, not under the illusion that this is a perfect system. I know even if it is fully implemented at all land crossings, seaports and airports a determined known terrorist can still sneak in and an unknown/unidentified terrorist will always be able to get in if they get a visa and are not on the watch list. In the end the bottom line is that we have to try and do something and I have not heard anyone else propose anything better. I'm afraid that given the current technology and the current global realities, a system like this was bound to be implemented sooner or later. Let us hope, and constantly seek to ensure via some kind of oversight, that this system is never abused.
That is exactly why PACS and other such political organizations (read special interests) exist in the first place. That is how the citizens can persuade government. We've got to band together and form groups that will fight for our various points of view. Take the NRA for instance. The NRA primarily consists of average citizens. They money used by that organization to influence government consists primarily membership dues and members who make additional donation. Say what you will about the organization, but what cannot be denied is that is a very organized group of citizens that has been very, very effective in getting politicians to listen.
My point is that the only way the average citizen is every going to get their point across in the USA is to band together with other like-minded individuals and raise money. The more people who join and the more money you raise the more likely it is that your views will be heard. If you have a large organization with millions and millions of voting members the politicians are going to listen to what you've got to say. If you're an organization capable of raising a lot of money the politicians are going to listen to what you've got to say. If you can do both, they are really going to listen. Therein lies the power of the NRA. Not only do they have millions of voting members, but they are also able to raise a ton of money.
If we are serious about combating the DMCA and other such legislation we need to band together. The EFF seems to me to be a pretty good organization that generally comes down on the right side of many of these issues. If you really care about said issues, join the EFF today and donate some money! If everyone who bitches and moans about the copyright laws would join the EFF and make some kind of donation I can guarantee you that it would have a lot political influence than it presently has. Imagine if it had millions of voting members paying millions of dollars in membership dues. It could then publish a list of politicians who back the opposing point of view and make it clear that it's going to give the list to voting members and let them know what their real record on consumer rights is. That's would make a lot of politicians turn their head. It could then use the money raised to buy television commercials to educate the general public on these issue, recruit more members, and to communicate our position on copyright laws to politicians the way the NRA is able to communicate their position on guns.
The bottom line is that you need to get off your butt and do something. If all you do is bitch and moan on slashdot you are a part of the problem and not a part of the solution. Ordinary citizens can make a difference but we have to do it by banding togather. Only then will we be able to exert the influence necessary (e.g. enough registered voters screaming loudly enough to get noticed and/or vast amounts of money that can be used to advance our collective take on the issues) to make the politicans listen.
Nice little swipe at the USA there man. You must feel proud. It makes you look just as ignorant as the idiot you were responding to. Let me guess? You're not an American. Ironic, in that it show that ignorant idiots aren't exclusive to any one country, including your own.
Clearly the Beagle 2 didn't land because of Bush. He shot the fucker down for oil!
No one uses BSD, those that do smoke PCP! You know your not hearing someone lying, when they say that BSD is dieing. I know of many who are sick of trying, to install BSD without screaming and crying. Most complain BSD has no graphical interface, while a minority scream "but it still has it's place." BSD was once well renowned and great, but I'm afraid recent releases have sealed it's fate. To all of you who say BSD is here to stay, You're probably right but I'll keep trolling anyway!
Hollywood actors and actresses are mostly liberal. That leads people to make the blanket statement that Hollywood is liberal. Quick, name as many well known conservative actors as you can that make no bones about being a conservative. Now list the liberals who make no bones about being liberal. Huge difference in the totals there.
Outspoken conservatives are hard to come by in Hollywood. Outspoken liberals are a dime a dozen.
Exactly. I talk to a lot of self identified liberals who just can't understand why Fox News does so well. My answer is always the same. If you want a liberal slant you've got ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, MSNBC. If you want a conservative slant all you've got is Fox News.
Nope. They take one look at Flint or some of shady (read most) parts of Detroit and run like hell.
This of offtopic but I must ask. When will Diane Rehm die? I ... c...a...n..'..t ... s ... t ... a ... n ...d ... h...o..w ... s..l..o..w ... s..h..e ... t..a..l..k...s! Seriously floks, she sounds like she is dieing. I'd rather hear finger nails scratch across a chalkboard then listen to her. It takes her 15 minutes to get a freaking sentence out.
:-) ... hehe .... I know ...
This move by AMD is clearly the result of Intel not contributing enough to Bush's reelection fund. Bush and his evil neo-con allies have it in for Intel and are using AMD as a front to destroy it. No blood for processor preformance!
Ahh, a shining example of a "progressive" thinker who is so open and "tolerant" of others. Tolerant until they come across someone who has a different political point of view. When that happens the "tolerant progressives" can't seem to shut the other side up fast enough. The blatant hypocrisy of the far left never ceases to amaze me. Peddle your partisan b.s. somewhere else.
Settle down there fruit cake. A little backgound information for you. It was Bill Clinton that signed the DMCA into law. Yes I'm aware that it was passed by a Republic controlled House and Senate, but the buck stops with the president. Clinton had veto power, he could have stopped the bill from ever becoming law and he opted not to. Both Republicans and Democrats are respondible for the DCMA and for it's abuses. There are RIAA / MPAA / DCMA advocates on both sides of the isle (Frits Hollings springs to mind on the Democratic side). There are also those on both sides of the isle that oppose the abuses by the RIAA. Norm Coleman (Republican - MN) is having hearings in the Senate on the RIAA tatics.
The bottom line is that both sides are responsible for the DMCA. Peddle your bull shit somwhere else.
Right on man! I'm boycotting them too. I'm doing it for all of the reasons you stated and, I have to confess, because I can't stand the white trash that it attracts. Time after time I see 350 pound women in sweat pants with 5 kids who are also wearing sweats, are in desperate need of a hair cut and are yelling and screaming and won't shut the hell up. A Wal-Mart opened up in my town about 2 years ago and I have yet to set foot in the place.
What I find increadibly ironic is that most of the white trash that shops in Wal-Mart are the same people that are adversily affected by it's business practices. I laugh out loud when I hear them bitch about jobs moving over-seas or the reduction in their benefits. They refuse to spend the extra money to buy American or to buy from a retailer that treats their employees with a little respect then they turn around and bitch and moan about lost benefits and jobs moving over-seas. People like that make me sick. They are too fucking stupid to realize that they are contributing to the problem with their own shopping habbits.
BEGIN RANT
Come on people, you know the kind. The 350 pound sea-donkey in sweats, with 7 kids running around yelling and screaming who orders 4 Big Macs and a diet coke. Yeah right bitch, it's the fucking coke that is contibuting to the size of you ass. The 4 Big Macs you ordered have nothing to do with it. Oh and while you at it, why don't you have 7 more kids that you clearly cannot control. Then, why don't you go over to Wal-Mart and spend all of your money to save and grand total of $10, then scratch your head and ponder why it is that you can't seem to find a job in the service industry that pays a decent wage and has some benefits.
To these people, and make no mistake about it there are many, I say two things:
1) Do not reproduce
2) Do us all a favor and drive yourself off a cliff
END RANT
I don't know but given the speed of our court system, Microsoft's vast resources and the inventible appeals, I'd say we'll find out in about 5 - 7 years.
What you say is true but your forgetting that the only version of IE to block pop up adds is the version in Windows XP SP2. The majority of Windows users are not running XP, therefore after XP SP2 is released even if everyone who is running XP upgrades to SP2 (which isn't going to happen), the majority of Windows users will still not have a version of IE with pop up blocking.
When you consider that, pop up ads are going to be around and remian effective for a long time to come.
I hear you man. As soon as I heard the news I had to come here just to hear what the loonies would say. This is great news for the Iraqi people! The man was a thug. Millions where tourtured, murdered and raped by his regime and now the Iraqi people will have a chance to put him on trial and seek justice. However you feel about the war and this administration, you cannot deny that this is wonderfull news for the vast majority of Iraqi's.
Joe Sixpack doesn't care about keeping up with the latest and greatest. Take my parents for instance. The use their pc for browsing the web, e-mail, AOL instant messenger, word processing and CD burning. Their current system is fast enough for what they need to do, all the software runs fairly well and they have no real reason to upgrade anytime soon.
I'm sure a lot of corporations, especially small businesses, are the same way. If the system runs the software they need at an acceptable speed there is really no reason to upgrade. I service a lot of small businesses happily running Windows 98 (I don't see too many systems with 95 any more) on several systems and they don't plan on upgrading anytime soon. The larger businesses I service, on the other hand, are largely running Windows 2000 with some XP systems in the mix mainly do to the additional security and for group policy.
If your running Windows 98 and everything is working alright for you, there really isn't any incentive to upgrade to Windows XP IMHO. I can't think of any single must have feature for the average computer user. If corporations are using Windows 2000 or 2003 Server there are some incentives to running Windows 2000 or XP on the client end.
I do feel that your going to see more and more users upgrade, albeit at a slower rate than Microsoft is used to. There are applications being released (iTunes springs to mind) that simply will not run on Windows 98 and Me. I have a feeling that this will increasingly be the case. Eventually users will come across an application they need, or an upgrade to an existing application they run that has some new feature they want to use, that simply will not run on 98/Me and they will be forced to upgrade.
Newslfash you ignorant twat, gerrymandering has been going on for a long, long time. You liberal asses didn't seem to have much of a problem doing it when you had a majority and you were doing the gerrymandering. Republicans finally get a majority and start to do it and you throw a damn fit. What's good for the gander is good for the goose. It's the Republican's turn to draw district lines. Deal with it.