Well, in that case, wouldn't a portable and easily removed nuke plant be even better than a solar farm? Since, you know, it operates 24-7 without batteries?
In a side note, what did you do over in Iraq? I know we have alot of contractors and civilians over there in addition to the military personnel, were you a civilian or on tour?
Um, we're there fighting a war against tribal extremists who used to use the locals that they didn't like as 80MM target practice. I doubt that environmental issues are first on the list of the locals. Most of them are more concerned with day to day survival, and frankly, the amount of LEAD being unloaded into their environment right now is of far greater concern than a few isolated and REMOVABLE TWRs.
Well, the claymores wouldn't be there to "protect" it per-se, but to destroy it if the base is about to be overrun. Keep in mind that a TWR is fully automatic, small enough and durable enough that it can be BURIED, which means that you might not even be able to SEE the thing from outside the base. People could walk right over it and not know it's there.
As far as putting it in a tank, I think you MAY have played a few too many rounds of Mechwarrior. We aren't at a technology level where we can build (or easily transport) any military land vehicle of that size. Although the idea does sound cool, I'll grant you that.
Just in case you don't FOB stands for Forward Operations Base. It is a small, "tip of the spear" base, usually about the footprint of your average American home. It's walls, if it has them, are often dirt, wood and sandbag affairs, and they frequently take advantage of local terrain for defense.
FOBs are NOT the large "tent city" affairs that you see on the news reports.
As if "staying hidden" was an objective. From what I've seen, the average base is HUGE. A few solar panels make no difference. This isn't some TV series historic war show where camo net is deployed 'cause it looks mighty military-ish.
Staying "hidden" isn't the issue. Protecting high-value targets IS. If your primary power source is a large, shiny, fragile (relatively speaking) object that CANNOT be disguised or hidden in any way because that would impact it's ability to function, then you have a logistical and tactical nightmare.
FOB's in Afghanistan of often involved in heavy firefights. Bullets, even small caliber ones, are VERY BAD for solar panels. And YES, they do use camo netting, sandbags, and other methods of obfuscation to make it non-obvious to the Taliban where the soft targets are in the base.
Frankly, this request sounds like it came down from some desk-jockey paper-star type who's never even gotten his boots dirty, much less had to draw his service weapon for anything other than a cleaning and shining. Nice sounding on the surface, but utterly impossible and idiotic in practice.
True for a traditional nuclear reactor. But when one is simply wanting to supply a base with power one doesn't need a power source large enough to supply a city. Enough to supply a single family home would be acceptable. As I noted in a response to another poster, there are TWRs currently in development that are the size of a small car. While still heavy, they could be transported to an FOB if needed, and then buried in the ground and protected from capture by a ring of claymores or other HE method.
TWRs use depleted uranium as a fuel source, the same stuff used in armor piercing rounds by the military. It is minimally radioactive, just above background levels. So it's safe to use both for the servicemen, and if it needs to be destroyed by way of HE to prevent capture.
Now, for vehicles, yes. We simply don't have the technology to produce a small, safe, useful reactor for a vehicle. Yet. However I don't doubt that day is coming.
Yes. Because putting portable nukes on convoys being attacked all the time is really, really... safe.
Well, considering that TWR's and Breeder reactors can be made VERY small (think smart car sized) and can then be encased in hardened concrete or some other armor and cannot "go critical" even when severely damaged or destroyed AND use minimally radioactive depleted uranium as a fuel source, I would say that transporting THAT to an FOB is a heck of alot safer than transporting a thin-skinned tanker full of explosive fuel over the same area.
That and solar panels are a REALLY stupid idea for an FOB. Big... Shiny... Targets of high value. That'll work well. Yeah...
I've often wondered why we have compact portable atomic bombs, but no compact portable atomic generators. Perhaps now some will finally be developed! Besides, I can't imagine that solar panels would be a good idea at an FOB. I mean, big square shiny targets? Not good. And they really work poorly when disguised with that camo netting stuff.
No, I'm thinking that some portable nuke plants are in order here. Even something that has to be mounted on a semi flatbed is going to be more useful than a solar panel. At least the flatbed could be rolled into a large trench and covered with camo netting and guarded by dirt and sandbag berms.
Heh, haven't you learned yet? Don't feed the trolls.
This is why I browse with AC's auto-set to -1. If someone hasn't the courage to mate their statement to their nick, then I have no interest in what they have to say. Especially trolls that post nothing but foul language.
Otherwise, thank you for your attempt to bring civility to/. It is appreciated.
But I'm having a really hard time getting upset over the Iranian government being brought to a crawl by a computer virus. These ARE the same people that have made no bones about wanting to commit genocide against all Jews, and have tortured and murdered millions of their own people.
Personally, I hope it causes a total collapse. Perhaps then the Green Revolution people (those that are still alive, anyway) can have a chance at creating a true Democracy in Persia. The Persian people certainly deserve it.
What DOES worry me is that this is, in some ways, a "genie out of the bottle" moment. Formal "Weaponized" use of a computer virus to attack a state. While I'm sure it was inevitable, it is still a bit of a shock to know that the day has arrived.
All the more reason to be sure to be using a variety of redundant and disparate OS types to support your infrastructure I guess.
For some reason, "Leo Strut" always makes me think of the opening bars to "Stayin' Alive" playing as it's soundtrack. Does anyone else have that happen, or is it just me?
Frankly, I always thought that That Intel statement was FUD anyway. Intel knew it could be software implemented. I doubt they thought it would be done this fast though. They really should know by now. NEVER underestimate a determined hacker.
Personally I LOVE it when rabid greenies state so proudly their intention to not reproduce. Why? Because the NON rabid greenies, AKA, the people with good sense, will MASSIVELY out-breed the greenies resulting in their eventual extinction. So yeah, you greenies go ahead and NOT breed. Way to go!
Seriously. It's not even HARD to find images of Muslims burning things (Warning, some graphic images!)
If you don't understand what a danger Islam is to pretty much everyone else in the world, then you are either ignorant, willfully ignorant, or a useful idiot.
Keep in mind that I have Muslim friends, and I respect their right to believe what they wish. I also think burning the Qurans is unnecessary and doesn't help at all. But let's not even PRETEND to try and draw moral equivalence between Modern Christianity and Modern Islam. That's just stupid and makes you look like a fool for trying.
As far as the Rackspace issue goes, I personally think that Property Rights trump Free Speech rights. However, I think Rackspace should have just left well enough alone, while some will support them, many others won't. I also think it might have a chilling effect on their ability to sell web hosting to other religious groups. Nobody wants to think that they could just get shut down because someone, somewhere gets offended at what they said. Nowadays, with the formal grievance industry we have in the US, ANY religious group is a target for a "hate speech" legal attack. Rackspace is setting a bad precedent and I think they will end up regretting it, even though they have the right do do it.
my objection is more about replacing simple solutions with complicated solutions that are harder to keep under control.
If someone goes to prison and stays there, the objective of stopping them from committing more offences is met for the duration of the imprisonment. The objective of punishing the person is also met. The objective of getting them back to a useful role in society is up to the offender.
If someone gets a portable GPS+torture bracelet as punishment, I don't see how the rest of the community is spared from the risk of immediate reprisals or further offences.
On top of that, it actually opens the door to vigilante-type initiatives. The neighbourhood watch (or the opposing gang) finds that someone is carrying the bracelet, take him on a van and just watch as he gets zapped by remote control. Not fun.
Indeed. It also does nothing to stop gang-related activities if the perpetrator is in charge. Even traditional prisons have had difficulty with this (See history of various Mafia bosses still running their "families" out of a prison cell) But not even incarcerating the boss leaves no chance at all of stopping them from running their "business". Let's face it, electric shock belt or not, it isn't much of a prison term if you are "confined" to your Miami Beach mansion as you send out hit men to kill the witnesses against you.
Prisons may not be perfect, but they are the best solution we have yet come up with.
I agree. We should stop simply imprisoning murderers and violent felons and go back to executing them. That would free up quite a bit of space in our prisons./chainyank
I'd much rather read two partisan sources (one from each side) as they'll get to the heart of the issue better and faster than a neutral source will most of the time.
Fair enough. As long as they are up front about their biases, I'm fine with it. I might not agree with their conclusions, but at least I can see it from their side honestly.
circletimessquare, I love how you spend line after line after line trying to defend an article that is essentially the very biased opinion that you claim to hate.
Even more ironically, while you claim to want to have an honest discussion with a "real" conservative, you are so blinkered blind by your own ideology that you fail comprehend that you HAVE been having that conversation, right here, and you have spent the entire time screaming, ranting and throwing personal insults at me.
Incredible.
circletimessquare, another/. poster relegated to the troll bin.
Heh, yeah, I know. I find it amusing as well. Such great bastions of "Free Thought" these Leftists are. Unless you disagree with them, of course. Then you are "Fair Game." (You know, the similarities between Scientologist and Leftist behavior patterns are remarkable. Don't you think?)
I gave a post from one of the accused responding in a logical and intelligent manner to an accusation. the fact that it is an overtly political blog has no relevance other than the fact that it is one of the targeted by the original Daily Caller story.
Or does the accused not get a chance to speak for themselves in your little crazy world?
Frankly, I'll always take an openly partisan blog over a supposed "news" outlet that pretends to balance when they are really staffed almost completely by leftists. At least the partisan blog is up front about their biases.
This is some guy offering this reporter the quote he wants -- but it's not SOP, at least not that I've heard.
So the guy quoted in the article is just confirming the biases of the Daily Caller reporter, who then, rather than look for information to back up this claim, simply reports it as truth, thus confirming biases of his leftist readers.
I see this OVER and OVER AGAIN in the establishment media. They all repeat the same story without ANY of them bothering to actually do investigative journalism to find out if it's true, and an entire bloc of people get tarred with a phoney accusation of payola.
Even worse is the way so many people here just lap it up without even giving it an OUNCE of critical thought. And this is supposed to be a bastion of "Nerds" AKA: more intelligent people. Sad.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, in that case, wouldn't a portable and easily removed nuke plant be even better than a solar farm? Since, you know, it operates 24-7 without batteries?
In a side note, what did you do over in Iraq? I know we have alot of contractors and civilians over there in addition to the military personnel, were you a civilian or on tour?
Um, we're there fighting a war against tribal extremists who used to use the locals that they didn't like as 80MM target practice. I doubt that environmental issues are first on the list of the locals. Most of them are more concerned with day to day survival, and frankly, the amount of LEAD being unloaded into their environment right now is of far greater concern than a few isolated and REMOVABLE TWRs.
Well, the claymores wouldn't be there to "protect" it per-se, but to destroy it if the base is about to be overrun. Keep in mind that a TWR is fully automatic, small enough and durable enough that it can be BURIED, which means that you might not even be able to SEE the thing from outside the base. People could walk right over it and not know it's there.
As far as putting it in a tank, I think you MAY have played a few too many rounds of Mechwarrior. We aren't at a technology level where we can build (or easily transport) any military land vehicle of that size. Although the idea does sound cool, I'll grant you that.
You do know what FOB stands for, right?
Just in case you don't FOB stands for Forward Operations Base. It is a small, "tip of the spear" base, usually about the footprint of your average American home. It's walls, if it has them, are often dirt, wood and sandbag affairs, and they frequently take advantage of local terrain for defense.
FOBs are NOT the large "tent city" affairs that you see on the news reports.
Staying "hidden" isn't the issue. Protecting high-value targets IS. If your primary power source is a large, shiny, fragile (relatively speaking) object that CANNOT be disguised or hidden in any way because that would impact it's ability to function, then you have a logistical and tactical nightmare.
FOB's in Afghanistan of often involved in heavy firefights. Bullets, even small caliber ones, are VERY BAD for solar panels. And YES, they do use camo netting, sandbags, and other methods of obfuscation to make it non-obvious to the Taliban where the soft targets are in the base.
Frankly, this request sounds like it came down from some desk-jockey paper-star type who's never even gotten his boots dirty, much less had to draw his service weapon for anything other than a cleaning and shining. Nice sounding on the surface, but utterly impossible and idiotic in practice.
True for a traditional nuclear reactor. But when one is simply wanting to supply a base with power one doesn't need a power source large enough to supply a city. Enough to supply a single family home would be acceptable. As I noted in a response to another poster, there are TWRs currently in development that are the size of a small car. While still heavy, they could be transported to an FOB if needed, and then buried in the ground and protected from capture by a ring of claymores or other HE method.
TWRs use depleted uranium as a fuel source, the same stuff used in armor piercing rounds by the military. It is minimally radioactive, just above background levels. So it's safe to use both for the servicemen, and if it needs to be destroyed by way of HE to prevent capture.
Now, for vehicles, yes. We simply don't have the technology to produce a small, safe, useful reactor for a vehicle. Yet. However I don't doubt that day is coming.
Well, considering that TWR's and Breeder reactors can be made VERY small (think smart car sized) and can then be encased in hardened concrete or some other armor and cannot "go critical" even when severely damaged or destroyed AND use minimally radioactive depleted uranium as a fuel source, I would say that transporting THAT to an FOB is a heck of alot safer than transporting a thin-skinned tanker full of explosive fuel over the same area.
That and solar panels are a REALLY stupid idea for an FOB. Big... Shiny... Targets of high value. That'll work well. Yeah...
I've often wondered why we have compact portable atomic bombs, but no compact portable atomic generators. Perhaps now some will finally be developed! Besides, I can't imagine that solar panels would be a good idea at an FOB. I mean, big square shiny targets? Not good. And they really work poorly when disguised with that camo netting stuff.
No, I'm thinking that some portable nuke plants are in order here. Even something that has to be mounted on a semi flatbed is going to be more useful than a solar panel. At least the flatbed could be rolled into a large trench and covered with camo netting and guarded by dirt and sandbag berms.
BobMcD,
Heh, haven't you learned yet? Don't feed the trolls.
This is why I browse with AC's auto-set to -1. If someone hasn't the courage to mate their statement to their nick, then I have no interest in what they have to say. Especially trolls that post nothing but foul language.
Otherwise, thank you for your attempt to bring civility to /. It is appreciated.
But I'm having a really hard time getting upset over the Iranian government being brought to a crawl by a computer virus. These ARE the same people that have made no bones about wanting to commit genocide against all Jews, and have tortured and murdered millions of their own people.
Personally, I hope it causes a total collapse. Perhaps then the Green Revolution people (those that are still alive, anyway) can have a chance at creating a true Democracy in Persia. The Persian people certainly deserve it.
What DOES worry me is that this is, in some ways, a "genie out of the bottle" moment. Formal "Weaponized" use of a computer virus to attack a state. While I'm sure it was inevitable, it is still a bit of a shock to know that the day has arrived.
All the more reason to be sure to be using a variety of redundant and disparate OS types to support your infrastructure I guess.
Awwww Yeaaaahhh....
For some reason, "Leo Strut" always makes me think of the opening bars to "Stayin' Alive" playing as it's soundtrack. Does anyone else have that happen, or is it just me?
Certainly appears that way.
Frankly, I always thought that That Intel statement was FUD anyway. Intel knew it could be software implemented. I doubt they thought it would be done this fast though. They really should know by now. NEVER underestimate a determined hacker.
Yep. Doesn't take long.
Any bets on when we see this implemented in more full-featured software suites?
I'm thinking maybe a month at the outside.
HDCP is dead. And nothing of value was lost. :)
Likely they just placed the baby in the bag and only zipped the top partway closed. Easier than cutting holes.
Personally I LOVE it when rabid greenies state so proudly their intention to not reproduce. Why? Because the NON rabid greenies, AKA, the people with good sense, will MASSIVELY out-breed the greenies resulting in their eventual extinction. So yeah, you greenies go ahead and NOT breed. Way to go!
I've never had kids. I won't have kids
And we all thank you for voluntarily removing yourself from the gene pool.
citation needed.
Your
google-fu
is inferior.
Seriously. It's not even HARD to find images of Muslims burning things (Warning, some graphic images!)
If you don't understand what a danger Islam is to pretty much everyone else in the world, then you are either ignorant, willfully ignorant, or a useful idiot.
Keep in mind that I have Muslim friends, and I respect their right to believe what they wish. I also think burning the Qurans is unnecessary and doesn't help at all. But let's not even PRETEND to try and draw moral equivalence between Modern Christianity and Modern Islam. That's just stupid and makes you look like a fool for trying.
As far as the Rackspace issue goes, I personally think that Property Rights trump Free Speech rights. However, I think Rackspace should have just left well enough alone, while some will support them, many others won't. I also think it might have a chilling effect on their ability to sell web hosting to other religious groups. Nobody wants to think that they could just get shut down because someone, somewhere gets offended at what they said. Nowadays, with the formal grievance industry we have in the US, ANY religious group is a target for a "hate speech" legal attack. Rackspace is setting a bad precedent and I think they will end up regretting it, even though they have the right do do it.
Sexbot? Bah. I'd rather have a Persocom anyday. Not only are they cuter, they will do the laundry and cook.
my objection is more about replacing simple solutions with complicated solutions that are harder to keep under control.
If someone goes to prison and stays there, the objective of stopping them from committing more offences is met for the duration of the imprisonment. The objective of punishing the person is also met. The objective of getting them back to a useful role in society is up to the offender.
If someone gets a portable GPS+torture bracelet as punishment, I don't see how the rest of the community is spared from the risk of immediate reprisals or further offences.
On top of that, it actually opens the door to vigilante-type initiatives. The neighbourhood watch (or the opposing gang) finds that someone is carrying the bracelet, take him on a van and just watch as he gets zapped by remote control. Not fun.
Indeed. It also does nothing to stop gang-related activities if the perpetrator is in charge. Even traditional prisons have had difficulty with this (See history of various Mafia bosses still running their "families" out of a prison cell) But not even incarcerating the boss leaves no chance at all of stopping them from running their "business". Let's face it, electric shock belt or not, it isn't much of a prison term if you are "confined" to your Miami Beach mansion as you send out hit men to kill the witnesses against you.
Prisons may not be perfect, but they are the best solution we have yet come up with.
I agree. We should stop simply imprisoning murderers and violent felons and go back to executing them. That would free up quite a bit of space in our prisons. /chainyank
I'd much rather read two partisan sources (one from each side) as they'll get to the heart of the issue better and faster than a neutral source will most of the time.
Fair enough. As long as they are up front about their biases, I'm fine with it. I might not agree with their conclusions, but at least I can see it from their side honestly.
circletimessquare, I love how you spend line after line after line trying to defend an article that is essentially the very biased opinion that you claim to hate.
Even more ironically, while you claim to want to have an honest discussion with a "real" conservative, you are so blinkered blind by your own ideology that you fail comprehend that you HAVE been having that conversation, right here, and you have spent the entire time screaming, ranting and throwing personal insults at me.
Incredible.
circletimessquare, another /. poster relegated to the troll bin.
Heh, yeah, I know. I find it amusing as well. Such great bastions of "Free Thought" these Leftists are. Unless you disagree with them, of course. Then you are "Fair Game." (You know, the similarities between Scientologist and Leftist behavior patterns are remarkable. Don't you think?)
I gave a post from one of the accused responding in a logical and intelligent manner to an accusation. the fact that it is an overtly political blog has no relevance other than the fact that it is one of the targeted by the original Daily Caller story.
Or does the accused not get a chance to speak for themselves in your little crazy world?
Frankly, I'll always take an openly partisan blog over a supposed "news" outlet that pretends to balance when they are really staffed almost completely by leftists. At least the partisan blog is up front about their biases.
Now begone you leftist troll.
That's rather what I was trying to point out.
As Ace says in his article:
This is some guy offering this reporter the quote he wants -- but it's not SOP, at least not that I've heard.
So the guy quoted in the article is just confirming the biases of the Daily Caller reporter, who then, rather than look for information to back up this claim, simply reports it as truth, thus confirming biases of his leftist readers.
I see this OVER and OVER AGAIN in the establishment media. They all repeat the same story without ANY of them bothering to actually do investigative journalism to find out if it's true, and an entire bloc of people get tarred with a phoney accusation of payola.
Even worse is the way so many people here just lap it up without even giving it an OUNCE of critical thought. And this is supposed to be a bastion of "Nerds" AKA: more intelligent people. Sad.