I thought we neutralized the ICBM boogey man with our missile defense stuff. Isn't that why Russia's pissed at Poland right now?
This is the problem with having a defense that is somewhat effective but not perfect. If you have a system that can shoot down, say, 50% of nuclear missiles, the Russians look at it and see that their nuclear arsenal is only half as effective a threat as it once was, and get annoyed. However, you still don't want to trust your life to something that has become a coin toss (maybe the shield will shoot the missile down, maybe the city will be obliterated, who knows?) The Russians also want to discourage further development of missile defense, because if America ever does manage to get it reliable enough to count on, that leaves them in the same losing position that unilateral disarmament would.
When a contractor lands a big contract, there will typically be a ramp-up as they hire people do do the work. This gives you a window of opportunity, since there won't be enough already cleared people out there looking for a job like there are to replace normal turnover. And once you've gotten your clearance, the high barrier to entry problem you mention works in your favor, since you're a more attractive candidate than someone they have to sponsor and wait and hope is granted theirs.
I must confess, I am the computer programmer identified as "**********" in the second letter who used Mike's Pin# and password to steal 100 billion dollars from National Security and who has been reading people's minds and brainwashing them.
Thanks to this human computer discovering my evil scheme, and the Slashdot editors posting it for all the world to see, it appears I have to do some damage control to keep my "black market industry" a secret. I am now forced to take drastic action, including but not limited to: emailing everyone I know or reading my news else where. Your move ***hole!
And of course, there's the problem that reality has a well known liberal bias. There are times when "balanced" coverage is really not representative of the truth. Think of the coverage of the intelligent design controversy. If you were to give each side the coverage it is due based on the facts, you'd have a pretty one sided article.
Not really. The entire controversy over whether whatever caused the existence of the universe happened randomly or as the result of as the result of some intelligent entity's actions inevitably deals with events outside of observable spacetime, and thus outside the realm of science. It's a purely philosophical distinction, much like rationalism vs. empiricism, and claiming that "reality" and "facts" favor your own viewpoint only confirms that your biases on the issue are highly internalized.
When I went there, there was nothing I wanted to take a picture of. Exhibits include:
A urinal on a pedestal
A set of three identical canvases painted completely white, without even texture to the paint
A fluorescent blacklight hanging on the wall
I'm pretty sure whatever pictures this guy was taking, they have more artistic value than that museum's collection does.
As a side note, while the guy in charge of the museum sounds like an idiot, at least he correctly identified the lens as a "telephoto" instead of mis-substituting "zoom" like most non-photographers do.
I've always pictured the life of a Slashdot editor as a glamorous one. Partying with hot supermodels like Hugh Heffner, flying around the world in the Slashdot Learjet, racing Ferraris against CowboyNeal, pouring hot grits on Natalie Portman... that sort of thing.
After reading this article and discovering that the above emails were "very special" "gems" that brightened the editors' day, I think I may have to lower my image of them a bit.
Okay, so a power plant is more efficient than an internal combustion engine. But with a power plant you have to transmit the power across the grid, charge up a battery, have it lose a bit of charge sitting in the battery, then use the energy to run a motor. With the ICE, less energy is produced per amount of input, but it's already in the form of mechanical energy.
So what I'm wondering, given comparable amounts of fuel in the gas tank / power plant, which method produces more work not at the end of the combustion process, but at the point where you are actually turning the driveshaft?
Why is it OK to break Apple's license? Would you be saying "good for them" if the news article was about someone breaking the GPL?
There's a huge difference. GPL violators are distributing copyrighted software without permission from the copyright holder, and being particularly obnoxious about it since the GPL offers them a straightforward option to secure such permission. EULA violators on the other hand are just daring to use the software that they bought and paid for, without also acquiescing to a bunch of additional demands that the creator has dubious legal grounds to make.
If Psystar was distributing these Mac clones with a warez copy of OSX, your analogy would be valid.
I recently had someone fraudulently use my credit card info to open accounts in my name on Netflix, Blockbuster.com, and Stamps.com. They were using identity theft to create sock puppet referrals to online services, then use those bogus referrals in one of those Transcendent Innovations promotions (free iPod, free PlayStation, or whatever).
The police took down my information and gave me a case number, but that was the extent of their investigation. The case was never assigned to anyone to actually work, and when I contacted them again to provide further details for my report, it was obvious that they didn't care.
I doubt you have meaningful conversations with anyone. The limits of your discourse seem to be calling anyone you disagree with (first the poster above, now me) a "racist" with absolutely no factual basis, simply to substitute mindless name calling for ability to articulate a valid counterpoint. The only difference between trying to have a "meaningful conversation" with you and with a three year old is that you use "racism" where they would opt for "poopyhead".
Out of curiosity, what race am I supposedly "racist" against? The only entity I've made any negative comment towards in this thread is you, and I have no idea what your ethnicity is.
Your denouncing his post as "racism" is the same kind of move as Bush randomly invoking "terrorism" - a way to shut down rational debate by waving some boogyman.
It's not even remotely applicable in this case. Do you really think this "racist" poster would be happy if it were white criminals sneaking into America to engage in gang activity and burden the tax system without contributing to it?
"The 410 (Gone) status code SHOULD be used if the server knows, through some internally configurable mechanism, that an old resource is permanently unavailable and has no forwarding address." (RFC 2616)
There's no excuse for such incorrect implementation of standard protocols, even if the catastrophic destruction of the earth is involved.
...and the gap between the poor and rich is widening.
If anything, that would be a sign of becoming more First World. First World countries are capitalist, with the potential for some people to make a lot of money. Second World countries are communist, so (theoretically) everyone's wealth is at the least common denominator, and in the Third World the economy is undeveloped and pretty much everyone is poor aside from the occasional despot.
You make a very good point in general, but there is one part I have to take issue with:
And it is not the "real" criminals who are the victims. For example, a 17-year-old boy was gang-raped in prison after he robbed a guy with a toy gun.
How is he not a "real" criminal? He explicitly threatened his victim with death, while brandishing a weapon that, as far as the victim could tell, was perfectly capable of carrying out the threat. If you're going to argue that that's not a "real" crime, would it not follow that other coercion with death threats, like, say, "hold still while I rape you or I will kill you" could also be dismissed in a similarly cavalier way? Perhaps if the perpetrator later reveals it was just a bluff, somehow making it all okay.
This guy didn't deserve what happened to him, but he most definitely is a "real" criminal.
So, you don't have a system of beliefs as to which gods do and don't exist? Perhaps one that you hold with ardor, and seek to convert unbelievers to? Perhaps even a belief system that tackles topics like the origin of the universe, or what happens to one's consciousness after death?
What the heck is all this "50 years" garbage? The tsunami took place 1.578 gigaseconds ago. Who wants to have to remember the number of hours in a day or day in a year or any of those other weird non-base unit conversions. SI units for the win!
Anyone who mods lame "Anyone who disagrees with my political views is wilfully (sic) ignorant" troll posts up to "+5, Insightful" could also be described as willfully ignorant.
Then there's the suggestion that keeping taxes high during an economic slowdown will somehow fix things. Trying to tax your way to prosperity sounds pretty willfully ignorant.
And then there's your comment on what appears to be Afghanistan. I'm assuming from the way you pluralized "nations" this is who you mean besides Iraq, correct me if I'm wrong. Calling Afghanistan under the Taliban a "relatively innocent nation", with whom the U.S. only went to war "on the basis of dishonest 9/11 rhetoric"? Sounds like you really have a knack for this willful ignorance thing.
We could still try it on Obama. One he realizes there aren't 57 states however, he might have to adjust his schedule to avoid campaigning in the imaginary ones. Not seeing the ghosts of fallen heroes in the audience anymore will come as a disappointment too.
I just wanted to reply and thank you for the well articulated response. I still don't agree with the Supreme Court's decision on this issue, but your explanation of the rationale from which it could be seen as a positive one was much appreciated.
First, why does the U.S. Constitution apply to foreign nationals captured and held in places that are not the U.S.? Usually when America tries to apply its laws abroad ("Screw your national sovereignty, you're following _our_ IP laws now") people complain, but in this case it's a good thing? Also, who picks and chooses which parts of the Constitution applies to foreigners abroad? They have the right to a speedy trial, remain silent, and protection from cruel and unusual punishment, etc. but not the right to vote in U.S. elections (yet), to bear arms, or the responsibility to pay U.S. income taxes. Who picks which applies?
Second, will Al Qaeda reciprocate? I'm thinking not. "Hi. We have kidnapped you and are planning on beheading you in our next propaganda video, but first you have the right to challenge being detained at this terrorist training camp in a court of law. Would you like a court-appointed Sharia expert to act as your attorney, or should we fly in private counsel for you?"
Also, how do you fight a war under rules that were designed for domestic law enforcement? Dust the battlefield for fingerprints, stick his AK-47 in an evidence bag, and make sure to read the guy who was firing the rocket launcher at you his Miranda rights in the correct Arabic dialect or he walks. And of course if Al Qaeda manages to kill off the solider who carried out the arrest, all the prisoners he's captured get released since they can no longer cross-examine the arresting officer.
Slashdot Mirror
I thought we neutralized the ICBM boogey man with our missile defense stuff. Isn't that why Russia's pissed at Poland right now?
This is the problem with having a defense that is somewhat effective but not perfect. If you have a system that can shoot down, say, 50% of nuclear missiles, the Russians look at it and see that their nuclear arsenal is only half as effective a threat as it once was, and get annoyed. However, you still don't want to trust your life to something that has become a coin toss (maybe the shield will shoot the missile down, maybe the city will be obliterated, who knows?) The Russians also want to discourage further development of missile defense, because if America ever does manage to get it reliable enough to count on, that leaves them in the same losing position that unilateral disarmament would.
When a contractor lands a big contract, there will typically be a ramp-up as they hire people do do the work. This gives you a window of opportunity, since there won't be enough already cleared people out there looking for a job like there are to replace normal turnover. And once you've gotten your clearance, the high barrier to entry problem you mention works in your favor, since you're a more attractive candidate than someone they have to sponsor and wait and hope is granted theirs.
I must confess, I am the computer programmer identified as "**********" in the second letter who used Mike's Pin# and password to steal 100 billion dollars from National Security and who has been reading people's minds and brainwashing them.
Thanks to this human computer discovering my evil scheme, and the Slashdot editors posting it for all the world to see, it appears I have to do some damage control to keep my "black market industry" a secret. I am now forced to take drastic action, including but not limited to: emailing everyone I know or reading my news else where. Your move ***hole!
intelligence of a (domesticated) chicken doesn't improve its survival ratio the least bit.
Oh, but it does!
And of course, there's the problem that reality has a well known liberal bias. There are times when "balanced" coverage is really not representative of the truth. Think of the coverage of the intelligent design controversy. If you were to give each side the coverage it is due based on the facts, you'd have a pretty one sided article.
Not really. The entire controversy over whether whatever caused the existence of the universe happened randomly or as the result of as the result of some intelligent entity's actions inevitably deals with events outside of observable spacetime, and thus outside the realm of science. It's a purely philosophical distinction, much like rationalism vs. empiricism, and claiming that "reality" and "facts" favor your own viewpoint only confirms that your biases on the issue are highly internalized.
When I went there, there was nothing I wanted to take a picture of. Exhibits include:
I'm pretty sure whatever pictures this guy was taking, they have more artistic value than that museum's collection does.
As a side note, while the guy in charge of the museum sounds like an idiot, at least he correctly identified the lens as a "telephoto" instead of mis-substituting "zoom" like most non-photographers do.
I've always pictured the life of a Slashdot editor as a glamorous one. Partying with hot supermodels like Hugh Heffner, flying around the world in the Slashdot Learjet, racing Ferraris against CowboyNeal, pouring hot grits on Natalie Portman... that sort of thing.
After reading this article and discovering that the above emails were "very special" "gems" that brightened the editors' day, I think I may have to lower my image of them a bit.
Okay, so a power plant is more efficient than an internal combustion engine. But with a power plant you have to transmit the power across the grid, charge up a battery, have it lose a bit of charge sitting in the battery, then use the energy to run a motor. With the ICE, less energy is produced per amount of input, but it's already in the form of mechanical energy.
So what I'm wondering, given comparable amounts of fuel in the gas tank / power plant, which method produces more work not at the end of the combustion process, but at the point where you are actually turning the driveshaft?
Why is it OK to break Apple's license? Would you be saying "good for them" if the news article was about someone breaking the GPL?
There's a huge difference. GPL violators are distributing copyrighted software without permission from the copyright holder, and being particularly obnoxious about it since the GPL offers them a straightforward option to secure such permission. EULA violators on the other hand are just daring to use the software that they bought and paid for, without also acquiescing to a bunch of additional demands that the creator has dubious legal grounds to make.
If Psystar was distributing these Mac clones with a warez copy of OSX, your analogy would be valid.
I recently had someone fraudulently use my credit card info to open accounts in my name on Netflix, Blockbuster.com, and Stamps.com. They were using identity theft to create sock puppet referrals to online services, then use those bogus referrals in one of those Transcendent Innovations promotions (free iPod, free PlayStation, or whatever).
The police took down my information and gave me a case number, but that was the extent of their investigation. The case was never assigned to anyone to actually work, and when I contacted them again to provide further details for my report, it was obvious that they didn't care.
In Soviet Russia, archive keeps records on YOU!
I doubt you have meaningful conversations with anyone. The limits of your discourse seem to be calling anyone you disagree with (first the poster above, now me) a "racist" with absolutely no factual basis, simply to substitute mindless name calling for ability to articulate a valid counterpoint. The only difference between trying to have a "meaningful conversation" with you and with a three year old is that you use "racism" where they would opt for "poopyhead".
Out of curiosity, what race am I supposedly "racist" against? The only entity I've made any negative comment towards in this thread is you, and I have no idea what your ethnicity is.
Your denouncing his post as "racism" is the same kind of move as Bush randomly invoking "terrorism" - a way to shut down rational debate by waving some boogyman.
It's not even remotely applicable in this case. Do you really think this "racist" poster would be happy if it were white criminals sneaking into America to engage in gang activity and burden the tax system without contributing to it?
That would be HTTP 410.
"The 410 (Gone) status code SHOULD be used if the server knows, through some internally configurable mechanism, that an old resource is permanently unavailable and has no forwarding address." (RFC 2616)
There's no excuse for such incorrect implementation of standard protocols, even if the catastrophic destruction of the earth is involved.
Just don't take your cat to any Eastern bloc countries. In Soviet Russia, TFA slashdots YOU!
I'm a married man, and I haven't had a conjugal visit in 6 months.
That's really unfortunate. Your wife is awesome in bed.
...and the gap between the poor and rich is widening.
If anything, that would be a sign of becoming more First World. First World countries are capitalist, with the potential for some people to make a lot of money. Second World countries are communist, so (theoretically) everyone's wealth is at the least common denominator, and in the Third World the economy is undeveloped and pretty much everyone is poor aside from the occasional despot.
You make a very good point in general, but there is one part I have to take issue with:
And it is not the "real" criminals who are the victims. For example, a 17-year-old boy was gang-raped in prison after he robbed a guy with a toy gun.
How is he not a "real" criminal? He explicitly threatened his victim with death, while brandishing a weapon that, as far as the victim could tell, was perfectly capable of carrying out the threat. If you're going to argue that that's not a "real" crime, would it not follow that other coercion with death threats, like, say, "hold still while I rape you or I will kill you" could also be dismissed in a similarly cavalier way? Perhaps if the perpetrator later reveals it was just a bluff, somehow making it all okay.
This guy didn't deserve what happened to him, but he most definitely is a "real" criminal.
So, you don't have a system of beliefs as to which gods do and don't exist? Perhaps one that you hold with ardor, and seek to convert unbelievers to? Perhaps even a belief system that tackles topics like the origin of the universe, or what happens to one's consciousness after death?
What the heck is all this "50 years" garbage? The tsunami took place 1.578 gigaseconds ago. Who wants to have to remember the number of hours in a day or day in a year or any of those other weird non-base unit conversions. SI units for the win!
Anyone who mods lame "Anyone who disagrees with my political views is wilfully (sic) ignorant" troll posts up to "+5, Insightful" could also be described as willfully ignorant.
Then there's the suggestion that keeping taxes high during an economic slowdown will somehow fix things. Trying to tax your way to prosperity sounds pretty willfully ignorant.
And then there's your comment on what appears to be Afghanistan. I'm assuming from the way you pluralized "nations" this is who you mean besides Iraq, correct me if I'm wrong. Calling Afghanistan under the Taliban a "relatively innocent nation", with whom the U.S. only went to war "on the basis of dishonest 9/11 rhetoric"? Sounds like you really have a knack for this willful ignorance thing.
We could still try it on Obama. One he realizes there aren't 57 states however, he might have to adjust his schedule to avoid campaigning in the imaginary ones. Not seeing the ghosts of fallen heroes in the audience anymore will come as a disappointment too.
So, a society where robbery is safe, profitable, and presumably therefore quite common is something we should enact laws to encourage?
I just wanted to reply and thank you for the well articulated response. I still don't agree with the Supreme Court's decision on this issue, but your explanation of the rationale from which it could be seen as a positive one was much appreciated.
I find this troubling for many reasons:
First, why does the U.S. Constitution apply to foreign nationals captured and held in places that are not the U.S.? Usually when America tries to apply its laws abroad ("Screw your national sovereignty, you're following _our_ IP laws now") people complain, but in this case it's a good thing? Also, who picks and chooses which parts of the Constitution applies to foreigners abroad? They have the right to a speedy trial, remain silent, and protection from cruel and unusual punishment, etc. but not the right to vote in U.S. elections (yet), to bear arms, or the responsibility to pay U.S. income taxes. Who picks which applies?
Second, will Al Qaeda reciprocate? I'm thinking not. "Hi. We have kidnapped you and are planning on beheading you in our next propaganda video, but first you have the right to challenge being detained at this terrorist training camp in a court of law. Would you like a court-appointed Sharia expert to act as your attorney, or should we fly in private counsel for you?"
Also, how do you fight a war under rules that were designed for domestic law enforcement? Dust the battlefield for fingerprints, stick his AK-47 in an evidence bag, and make sure to read the guy who was firing the rocket launcher at you his Miranda rights in the correct Arabic dialect or he walks. And of course if Al Qaeda manages to kill off the solider who carried out the arrest, all the prisoners he's captured get released since they can no longer cross-examine the arresting officer.