[Mark Hamill] Luke be a Jedi tonight!
Just be a Jedi tonight!
[Mark Hamill & Backing Chorus] Do it for Yoda while we serve our guests a soda!
[Mark Hamill] And do it for Chewie and the Ewoks, and all the other puppets
[Mark Hamill & Backing Chorus] Luke, be a Jedi tonight!
My tinfoil hat tells me it's the american influence that's preventing full legalisation. They're all upset about the safe injection sites in Vancouver too.
It's not a war because there's no other side. At least with the Japanese there is a definite enemy, and you can win the war when they formally surrender. You can't declare war on an idea.
When I said torture I was refering to sleep deprivation. Sure, there are worse things you could do to someone, but how long have they been there now, a year or more?
The real problem is when you look at things in black and white, good and evil terms you never stop to examine the evil you may be doing yourself (not that you're personally responsible, it's your society, but that's another issue).
Painting terrorists as "evildoers" implies that they live just to perpetrate evil acts. Therefore, since America is good, they attack America simply for that reason. When you think like that you never stop to realize that these are real people with real concerns.
Terrorism is wrong, it's self defeating and it's not at all a good way to solve the injustices in the world. However, simply declaring war on terror does nothing to solve the underlying problems. On 9/11 2001 ~3000 Americans died. On any given day ~30,000 children starve to death. If 1% of the attention given to the Americans who died on 9/11 was given to improving infrastructure worldwide we'd be living in a much better world.
But that's exactly my point. In your original post you suggested that the attack on the world trade centre was an act of war. I'm suggesting that if you don't treat any of the combatants the way you would soldiers you can't call the attack on the WTC an act of war.
Can't have it both ways. If the WTC was an act of war, then all the people being held without trial in guantanimo (sp) bay should be prisoners of war and subject to the geneva convention, instead of being "enemy combatants" and tortured.
There is an argument why you might want to protect the production of some food. You'd never want to get into a situation where you're producing goods for export while your own people starve, and you're still not getting back enough to feed your people (like many third world countries).
Because if you enter into a free trade agreement, then get all the benifits when your trading partners don't protect their own industry, you can't complain when you aren't allowed to protect your own. You should never have signed the agreement in the first place if you weren't going to honour your side of the bargain.
If I hadn't been commenting on this article already I'd mod this post to infinity.
Speaking of WW2, it drives me nuts when americans say they saved the world, won the war, etc. Along with your point about the US not joining in until it was nearly over, also remember that most of the fighting and death was on the eastern front. It was Russia that really beat Germany.
Maybe because the US (or the west in general) has been hoarding the world's wealth and exploiting developing nations through the world bank, forcing them to produce material for export while their own citizens starve? (I'm talking about South America and Africa mostly).
Head over to the south bronx some time and tell me how great the US is, or read Amazing Grace. There's plenty of room for improvement.
Traitors? Maybe you should take a bit more of a global view. If you accept the premise that all men are created equal how can you justify the tens of thousands of children who starve to death every day just because they were born into the wrong country?
The west has far more money/resources than are morally justifiable. If the privledged few are all so protectionist that they see the global economy as a competition, and people who leave their wealthy society behind or question its values as traitors, the situation will never improve.
Plus, you've got to assume that they're making a profit on these things. Even if someone is just buying the ipod to take it apart, it's still $$$ in apple's pocket. No real reason to discourage that.
If there's a north america, and a south america, then collectively the whole thing is america. The united states of america is just what it sounds like, a bunch of states in a union inside america. The united states is not the whole of america, they're maybe a quarter.
I'm already drooling at the thought of a $200 modded xbox running osx. That would make an awesome terminal to put in every room of my house, especially when they've been out a few years and you can get them used.
1)x-box games
2)shared playlists with itunes
3)web browsing with safari (I like it better than firefox)
4)RSS with net news wire
5)ichat has good quality video conferencing, and it auto-configures finding everyone on the local network
Sounds to me like the question is from a high school teacher. I seriously doubt spending any more on a scope would be worthwhile, since I'd bet it's primarily going to be used to show students wavy lines, or maybe as a glorified multimeter (he's only buying one, so it's not like the students will be using it regularly). I wish the poster gave a few examples of the types of projects his class works on.
That said, I wish schools would stop blowing their entire budgets on computer labs. I hate to see a school paying for a computer that isn't at least two years old when the money could be going to text books that aren't twenty years old and falling apart.
It would be really nice to see high school electronics courses teaching students how to properly work a scope, but you'd need enough for an entire class. It's amazing how many engineering students get 2 years into a computer/electrical engineering program and don't know how to use a scope to read important parameters from a circuit.
Well, you're going to have to recharge it when on the ground, and you're only going to have a limited amount of time in the air before you run out of power, because otherwise they've created a perpetual motion machine.
You've got to wonder if the drag created by turbines justifies the power they generate.
Slashdot Mirror
[Mark Hamill] Luke be a Jedi tonight! Just be a Jedi tonight!
[Mark Hamill & Backing Chorus] Do it for Yoda while we serve our guests a soda!
[Mark Hamill] And do it for Chewie and the Ewoks, and all the other puppets
[Mark Hamill & Backing Chorus] Luke, be a Jedi tonight!
I don't know about you, but I've never set up a warez group. That's completly different from downloading an mp3.
My tinfoil hat tells me it's the american influence that's preventing full legalisation. They're all upset about the safe injection sites in Vancouver too.
It's not a war because there's no other side. At least with the Japanese there is a definite enemy, and you can win the war when they formally surrender. You can't declare war on an idea.
When I said torture I was refering to sleep deprivation. Sure, there are worse things you could do to someone, but how long have they been there now, a year or more?
The real problem is when you look at things in black and white, good and evil terms you never stop to examine the evil you may be doing yourself (not that you're personally responsible, it's your society, but that's another issue).
Painting terrorists as "evildoers" implies that they live just to perpetrate evil acts. Therefore, since America is good, they attack America simply for that reason. When you think like that you never stop to realize that these are real people with real concerns.
Terrorism is wrong, it's self defeating and it's not at all a good way to solve the injustices in the world. However, simply declaring war on terror does nothing to solve the underlying problems. On 9/11 2001 ~3000 Americans died. On any given day ~30,000 children starve to death. If 1% of the attention given to the Americans who died on 9/11 was given to improving infrastructure worldwide we'd be living in a much better world.
But that's exactly my point. In your original post you suggested that the attack on the world trade centre was an act of war. I'm suggesting that if you don't treat any of the combatants the way you would soldiers you can't call the attack on the WTC an act of war.
Even better, open a connection to a server in north korea and send random data/encrypted random data. See them try and decrypt that.
....just hope you don't get thrown in prison without trial and tortured...
Can't have it both ways. If the WTC was an act of war, then all the people being held without trial in guantanimo (sp) bay should be prisoners of war and subject to the geneva convention, instead of being "enemy combatants" and tortured.
And, it means our body has an efficiency of 99.5%. That's quite good.
There is an argument why you might want to protect the production of some food. You'd never want to get into a situation where you're producing goods for export while your own people starve, and you're still not getting back enough to feed your people (like many third world countries).
Because if you enter into a free trade agreement, then get all the benifits when your trading partners don't protect their own industry, you can't complain when you aren't allowed to protect your own. You should never have signed the agreement in the first place if you weren't going to honour your side of the bargain.
If I hadn't been commenting on this article already I'd mod this post to infinity.
Speaking of WW2, it drives me nuts when americans say they saved the world, won the war, etc. Along with your point about the US not joining in until it was nearly over, also remember that most of the fighting and death was on the eastern front. It was Russia that really beat Germany.
Maybe because the US (or the west in general) has been hoarding the world's wealth and exploiting developing nations through the world bank, forcing them to produce material for export while their own citizens starve? (I'm talking about South America and Africa mostly).
Head over to the south bronx some time and tell me how great the US is, or read Amazing Grace. There's plenty of room for improvement.
Traitors? Maybe you should take a bit more of a global view. If you accept the premise that all men are created equal how can you justify the tens of thousands of children who starve to death every day just because they were born into the wrong country?
The west has far more money/resources than are morally justifiable. If the privledged few are all so protectionist that they see the global economy as a competition, and people who leave their wealthy society behind or question its values as traitors, the situation will never improve.
Hunger is violence.
No no no, Saxons with deep voices.
The Red Hat guy always reminds me of Carmen Sandiego, I guess that's where in the world she went.
Um, I think the comb was supposed to be given to the kid with uncombed hair. It wasn't completly clear, but that's the way I read it.
Plus, you've got to assume that they're making a profit on these things. Even if someone is just buying the ipod to take it apart, it's still $$$ in apple's pocket. No real reason to discourage that.
They can also find out "wether" you can spell common words. Might be a useful skill for email and code comments.
If there's a north america, and a south america, then collectively the whole thing is america. The united states of america is just what it sounds like, a bunch of states in a union inside america. The united states is not the whole of america, they're maybe a quarter.
Good way to encourage people to buy a mac :)
I'm already drooling at the thought of a $200 modded xbox running osx. That would make an awesome terminal to put in every room of my house, especially when they've been out a few years and you can get them used.
1)x-box games
2)shared playlists with itunes
3)web browsing with safari (I like it better than firefox)
4)RSS with net news wire
5)ichat has good quality video conferencing, and it auto-configures finding everyone on the local network
Sounds to me like the question is from a high school teacher. I seriously doubt spending any more on a scope would be worthwhile, since I'd bet it's primarily going to be used to show students wavy lines, or maybe as a glorified multimeter (he's only buying one, so it's not like the students will be using it regularly). I wish the poster gave a few examples of the types of projects his class works on.
That said, I wish schools would stop blowing their entire budgets on computer labs. I hate to see a school paying for a computer that isn't at least two years old when the money could be going to text books that aren't twenty years old and falling apart.
It would be really nice to see high school electronics courses teaching students how to properly work a scope, but you'd need enough for an entire class. It's amazing how many engineering students get 2 years into a computer/electrical engineering program and don't know how to use a scope to read important parameters from a circuit.
Well, you're going to have to recharge it when on the ground, and you're only going to have a limited amount of time in the air before you run out of power, because otherwise they've created a perpetual motion machine.
You've got to wonder if the drag created by turbines justifies the power they generate.
Wow, being from Canada this discussion blows my mind!
You've got to wonder if they're spending all the revenue from the TV licences trying to enforce the policy.