The US striving for a "single body of policy"? Not likely. The US is more likely to swing towards isolationism than massively global gov't, methinks -- 'tween resentment of the UN, unwillingness to risk major losses in battle for somebody else's banner (post DShield/DStorm), reluctance to enter treaties, a general paranoia towards Asia...
There *may* be a finite number of resources; it depends on whether you term knowledge and technology as resources, in which case I'd have to claim it's fundamentally unbounded.
In any event, a lot of the Third World nations aren't utilizing what they've got -- hell, there's at least one nation that hasn't had anything even resembling a government for years, let alone a stable, healthy economy; and plenty more are hurting similarly. If a corporation comes in and taps that resource, it can create whole new sectors of an economy, helping to create jobs and increase cash flow *into* the region. In addition, figure on the tax revenue to the local government, and if it invests in infrastructure instead of threatening its neighbors, the people should benefit as well.
Oh, and on Wal-Mart: it's public. You need far less than a billion to gain from WMT's growth.
The one factor that made me hesitate 'bout that is that this will screen out *all* non-moderated AC posts -- which often seem to be ignored by moderators in favor of sometimes less worthy non-anonymous posts, despite the fact that some *do* deserve to be upped...
There's a General Human Right to prevent everybody from possibly offending you with a *reference*?
C'mon. Even "Wolfenstein 3D" (or was it the Wolf3D homage in _Doom_ ?) got banned, and in Wolf3D the game involved _killing_ Nazis, not helping them...
Saying, "I'm sorry, I was evil before but won't be again" isn't a particularly good way of convincing a judge to let you go free instead of tossing you in the slammer for 10-20. The judicial system is largely there to judge you on what you have done, not what you will allegedly do.
Bill Gates could distribute all his wealth to the major tech universities with no strings attached, tomorrow. He could use his wealth explicitly to torment people, being a b*stard by, say, ostentatiously buying up hordes of lottery tickets and Porsches. In neither case does this in any way affect the guilt of MS in the events focused upon in this trial.
The users/administrators of the internet are not outside of this i-cology (I like that better than e-cology, because you can tell them apart. If it bugs you, tough) they are it's nutrients, they provide the energy.
Would heat dissipation be a barrier to adding more layers to a CPU? Letting the DRAM be basically underneath the rest would seem to increase power consumption per unit surface area... ?
Or are there other barriers (manufacturing?) that mean that they're not looking at N-layer processors yet, N > 2?
* There's only so much food a single person can eat. For many, this limit isn't particularly high.
* In addition, we can only breed so quickly, even w/ fertility drugs, which are unlikely to be distributed on a widespread basis for the purposes of maximizing food consumption...
The average chap now has more food than the average chap centuries ago -- in quality, volume *and* calories, despite Malthus. In practice, food production -- but NOT distribution, largely due to regional conflicts and corruption -- has more than kept pace with population growth.
Aye. Influenza, dysentery or even cholera would be better choices as pandemic-of-the-week than AIDS. They're both *far* easier to spread, and can punish a densely populated area very quickly...
Hell, the Times even puts 'em online, accessible after just a couple of clicks. A well-written letter that can make a national, mostly well-educated audience have a thoughtful, possibly *good* impression is more productive than being a hooligan and stealing TVs on national television.
Umm, unless you're suggesting that police equipment include different sets of armor in a variety of HappyFunFun(TM) colors, black is your *best* choice.
Think: camouflage for darkness, such as assaulting a building that's currently without power because they [the police] have already disconnected it. In this situation, a perp will just treat your nice little smiley face on your shining white armor as... a nice highly visible target.
I doubt they've the budget for "practical" AND "kindler, gentler" gear *color schemes*.
At least some years ago, rubber bullets tended to be rubber-COATED bullets. There were incidents during the Intifada of Palestinian (sp?) protestors dying after being shot with them...
...but over there, the "civillians" were frequently armed.
In case you haven't noticed, black clothing and ski masks aren't controlled substances or other contraband. If they all had, say, standard-issue 9mm Sig Sauers (or whatever they use in Seattle. That's standard for the Housing Police here, or was at one point), you *might* have a case.
*shrug*
But since you asked, the last time was probably a small-time bank robbery by robbers who realized that getting their mugs on camera wasn't clued.
And look around a high school -- plenty of dark clothing from those who think it makes a statement.
Without blocking anybody else. Without attacking people. Without vandalizing.
Basically, without breaking the law.
Look at the KKK for instance; whenever they assemble, they're careful to a) be not particularly numerous (which is easy, given their minimal appeal among the clued), and b) limit their confrontation to shouting. It's part of their current image, where they're clued enough to let the anti-Klan protesters be the ones to first be unruly and discredit themselves.
Being in a public park, holding up signs, and not interfering with anybody is fine, 'tho you may have to get a permit or reservation. Invite some reporters; hand out press releases; write letters to the editor; call your Congressmen.
How many people vote against it? You're often given opportunity to do so, with the fringe candidates. The CPUSA once had tens of thousands of declared members, who mostly vanished upon a) hearing about the Stalinist excesses of their "ideal" Rodina, and b) being persecuted after a number of spy scandals involving FDR's administration as well as the Manhattan Project.
Whatever. Dunno 'bout you, but I'm living in a representative democracy in which one of the two legislative houses -- full of elected folks, not appointed... -- has to power to *not* ratify a treaty.
And, wouldn't you know it, one of the members of that legislative body happens to be within easy walking distance today, here for a discussion on high tech.
Get a clue 'bout the moderation system. He's not being moderated up to 2, he *starts* at 2 because
a) he has the guts to post with his name, and b) he has a history of posting that DID get moderated up c) he's not clicking the "No Score +1 Bonus" that I'll do right now. {shrug}
Slashdot Mirror
The US striving for a "single body of policy"? Not likely. The US is more likely to swing towards isolationism than massively global gov't, methinks -- 'tween resentment of the UN, unwillingness to risk major losses in battle for somebody else's banner (post DShield/DStorm), reluctance to enter treaties, a general paranoia towards Asia...
Nope. It's more of a fortress mentality.
There *may* be a finite number of resources; it depends on whether you term knowledge and technology as resources, in which case I'd have to claim it's fundamentally unbounded.
In any event, a lot of the Third World nations aren't utilizing what they've got -- hell, there's at least one nation that hasn't had anything even resembling a government for years, let alone a stable, healthy economy; and plenty more are hurting similarly. If a corporation comes in and taps that resource, it can create whole new sectors of an economy, helping to create jobs and increase cash flow *into* the region. In addition, figure on the tax revenue to the local government, and if it invests in infrastructure instead of threatening its neighbors, the people should benefit as well.
Oh, and on Wal-Mart: it's public. You need far less than a billion to gain from WMT's growth.
The one factor that made me hesitate 'bout that is that this will screen out *all* non-moderated AC posts -- which often seem to be ignored by moderators in favor of sometimes less worthy non-anonymous posts, despite the fact that some *do* deserve to be upped...
*references*?
There's a General Human Right to prevent everybody from possibly offending you with a *reference*?
C'mon. Even "Wolfenstein 3D" (or was it the Wolf3D homage in _Doom_ ?) got banned, and in Wolf3D the game involved _killing_ Nazis, not helping them...
Does that strike you as free and democratic?
Just a quick note:
Saying, "I'm sorry, I was evil before but won't be again" isn't a particularly good way of convincing a judge to let you go free instead of tossing you in the slammer for 10-20. The judicial system is largely there to judge you on what you have done, not what you will allegedly do.
Bill Gates could distribute all his wealth to the major tech universities with no strings attached, tomorrow. He could use his wealth explicitly to torment people, being a b*stard by, say, ostentatiously buying up hordes of lottery tickets and Porsches. In neither case does this in any way affect the guilt of MS in the events focused upon in this trial.
...*almost* anything. Desktop OSes, office suites, mice, new standards...
...not that monstrosity called, say, "Bob".
And last I checked, IIS was losing market share; WinCE was still being crushed by PalmOS in the PDA market...
Bzzzzzzzt.
Presidents don't get to replace sitting judges, just fill vacancies.
The users/administrators of the internet are not outside of this i-cology (I like that better than e-cology, because you can tell them apart. If it bugs you, tough) they are it's nutrients, they provide the energy.
;-)
Oh my God. Somebody, call Neo, now...
Hm. I'm not a physicist, nor an engineer...
Would heat dissipation be a barrier to adding more layers to a CPU? Letting the DRAM be basically underneath the rest would seem to increase power consumption per unit surface area... ?
Or are there other barriers (manufacturing?) that mean that they're not looking at N-layer processors yet, N > 2?
...do they eat mice?
{ducks}
Sounds Malthusian.
Note, however, there are limiting factors.
* There's only so much food a single person can eat. For many, this limit isn't particularly high.
* In addition, we can only breed so quickly, even w/ fertility drugs, which are unlikely to be distributed on a widespread basis for the purposes of maximizing food consumption...
The average chap now has more food than the average chap centuries ago -- in quality, volume *and* calories, despite Malthus. In practice, food production -- but NOT distribution, largely due to regional conflicts and corruption -- has more than kept pace with population growth.
*chuckle*
Your sig is particularly apt in this case. The single largest polluter in the US... is... the Federal Government. Seriously.
It's mostly exempt from its own laws, and tends to play with LOTS of strange toxic chemicals for R&D...
Aye. Influenza, dysentery or even cholera would be better choices as pandemic-of-the-week than AIDS. They're both *far* easier to spread, and can punish a densely populated area very quickly...
You've got that backwards. Read 'bout Soviet-system treatment of dissidents (of *any* kind, including reformist Communists).
Putting 'em in mental hospitals was common treatment for the ones they didn't shoot, put in regular prisons, or relegate to labor camps.
Those folks *expected* to be fired on -- and quite possibly die -- and didn't run around whining about it later.
When a professor is quoted as complaining 'bout a little bruise on his leg, that's being remarkably thin-skinned for a "protestor".
Civil disobedience requires accepting the consequences. Did Ghandi flee the British form of "justice"?
Ever hear about "Letters to the Editor"?
Hell, the Times even puts 'em online, accessible after just a couple of clicks. A well-written letter that can make a national, mostly well-educated audience have a thoughtful, possibly *good* impression is more productive than being a hooligan and stealing TVs on national television.
*CS* tear gas?
You're not referring to the pyrotechic military-grade tear gas, are you?
Umm, unless you're suggesting that police equipment include different sets of armor in a variety of HappyFunFun(TM) colors, black is your *best* choice.
Think: camouflage for darkness, such as assaulting a building that's currently without power because they [the police] have already disconnected it. In this situation, a perp will just treat your nice little smiley face on your shining white armor as... a nice highly visible target.
I doubt they've the budget for "practical" AND "kindler, gentler" gear *color schemes*.
At least some years ago, rubber bullets tended to be rubber-COATED bullets. There were incidents during the Intifada of Palestinian (sp?) protestors dying after being shot with them...
...but over there, the "civillians" were frequently armed.
In case you haven't noticed, black clothing and ski masks aren't controlled substances or other contraband. If they all had, say, standard-issue 9mm Sig Sauers (or whatever they use in Seattle. That's standard for the Housing Police here, or was at one point), you *might* have a case.
*shrug*
But since you asked, the last time was probably a small-time bank robbery by robbers who realized that getting their mugs on camera wasn't clued.
And look around a high school -- plenty of dark clothing from those who think it makes a statement.
That's freedom to *peaceably* assemble.
Without blocking anybody else.
Without attacking people.
Without vandalizing.
Basically, without breaking the law.
Look at the KKK for instance; whenever they assemble, they're careful to a) be not particularly numerous (which is easy, given their minimal appeal among the clued), and b) limit their confrontation to shouting. It's part of their current image, where they're clued enough to let the anti-Klan protesters be the ones to first be unruly and discredit themselves.
Being in a public park, holding up signs, and not interfering with anybody is fine, 'tho you may have to get a permit or reservation. Invite some reporters; hand out press releases; write letters to the editor; call your Congressmen.
Deal.
*shrug*
How many people vote against it? You're often given opportunity to do so, with the fringe candidates. The CPUSA once had tens of thousands of declared members, who mostly vanished upon a) hearing about the Stalinist excesses of their "ideal" Rodina, and b) being persecuted after a number of spy scandals involving FDR's administration as well as the Manhattan Project.
Whatever. Just peaceful protest, mon'?
So, it's all right if we bulldoze your home? Burn all your property? Demolish your school? All right! We're on it.
Whatever. Dunno 'bout you, but I'm living in a representative democracy in which one of the two legislative houses -- full of elected folks, not appointed... -- has to power to *not* ratify a treaty.
And, wouldn't you know it, one of the members of that legislative body happens to be within easy walking distance today, here for a discussion on high tech.
Get a clue 'bout the moderation system. He's not being moderated up to 2, he *starts* at 2 because
a) he has the guts to post with his name, and
b) he has a history of posting that DID get moderated up
c) he's not clicking the "No Score +1 Bonus" that I'll do right now. {shrug}