Not sure why I drew a blank on that... Oh well, it's not quite so bad, it should take half the time you suggested & Valeri Polyakov might still hold to his record; Soyuz flies on average around every 3 months (and it would reduce the Station's effective crew from six to four... but not quite, since there would be plenty of closely-enough qualified personnel at hand;p )
At least we know it shouldn't be too hard with four Shuttle crew members, considering that's the size for last mission (and, hm, in a given time frame it should be trivial to make a Soyuz fly up unmanned, like Progress...)
Just a small trick of "how to portray an interaction of actors with the computer, using methods they and the audiences are comfortable with, on a grainy screen, without braking flow"
And not an overboard one, in the case of Wargames. Not in comparison to, say, Star Trek - where "whoa, that's just...advanced, man!" factor was probably much stronger & the advancement of computer makes the crew mostly redundant (as sort of demonstrated by the Doctor)
You almost seem perplexed at a possibility of propaganda without much of (moral or otherwise) backing; like it's something new?...
After myths of bomber gap, missile gap, mine shaft gap; overall willful self-terrorizing with fiction in the style of Team B or "...because we act again the evil ones!" (and that's of course largely simply just about already discussed state actor) - it might be just time for similar smokescreens in the internet era.
And I'm not even in the Commonwealth... (or in any of markets which "matter"; though who knows what could be the results of my newish EU memberstate sort of invading the UK)
Well sure, it's easy to see where the disaster myths came from (all the more reason not to invoke gods now). But it's also interesting how many weren't exactly "biblical" (as described!) in the first place... and moreover we don't really have them recently, not when it comes to visible and vocal societies driving this "debate" (certainly not "decimation" - even not only in modern colloquial meaning, also old Roman one; perhaps some people prefer to make them sound worse than they are... to make the "force behind them" seem that much more powerful?;) )
Even better - we actually do have a large degree of control... (though in many cases not the form people would wish for / that also sounds like AGW "debate")
It could be seen even with the Millennium Flood from my place. Yes, very high precipitation (and let's ignore how more extreme weather is one of predictions)... but also largely destroyed old forests and their floor in affected mountains, or building on what was over the past centuries a "designated" flooding areas & with transverse embankments completely neglected (NVM picturesque homes at the banks of mountain rivers). And the best example: at one mountain resort I frequented, the river made a second "flood channel" (too high to be wet during normal levels), outside of town. Last time I checked it was being slowly filled by bulldozers... why?
Similar with fires / "farm forests", misuse of pesticides or antibiotics (& inevitable "superbugs")
Anyway, it might be slightly revealing to have an averaged (across many "AGW deniers") response for slightly covert question, for example in the style of "OK, nvm why it happens - what we're gonna do if it becomes really bad?" (including "oh, it won't be...")
Using any decent search engine already means delegating decisions largely to a machine / AI / algorithm (vs. quite poor human-search-edited directories of old times)
Seriously? BBC has live (flash) coverage, for one - together with the occasional & fabulous apocalyptic(*) rave BBC World News theme (*fitting...)
(via Bill Bailey This is the BBC!
Do not listen to the others!
They are the false prophets!
This is the true way, follow us!
Not the others, they are the evil ones! )
So is technically a seiche in the Baltic, giving floods around St. Petersburg (OK, now a dam mostly protects it), but with probably even much longer wavelength than any tsunami. And we even say "flood wave" when some river misbehaves...
Thing is, "tsunami flood" would portray issues much better than "tsunami wave" (also because it's virtually unnoticeable in open water)
Or is this just another one of those strange religious things, like where the vengeful, hateful and all powerful being is going to condemn us all to to suffer in fire for ever and ever until the end of time - yet somehow still loves us?
No, he's a good guy if you give him a chance; he just sometimes can't help hitting me when I deserve it...
Fundamentally, it was probably an attempt to help cancellations of other "heavyweight" architectures. At that it performed admirably (and for Intel it doesn't make too much difference if the shift ended up being to x86)
What might rescue the iBerg someday is an optical memory interconnect, if they're looking to blow another $4b burning a hole in the other pocket.
No reason, really? Itanium seems to have done its job - killing virtually every other "heavyweight" architecture (and IBM wouldn't cancel theirs "in anticipation of new great thing from Intel", anyway)
And... unremarkably, it's one of many, many places where even supposedly versed individuals [1] ignore how people work in general. No, what you describe is not how our minds work, it's one of fantasies we like to convince ourselves in at best (go through a list of cognitive biases). If we get / have something, we have a profound need to see it as the best, period (not "I like it, even for silly [2] reasons")
[1] plus here self-selection, "technical", "non-people" background, might even solidify it.
[2] Which would be, again, still absolutely valid.
I can comfortably say that govs are mostly a reflection of their societies... from the perspective of a place formerly behind Iron Curtain. Don't play with smokescreens, no need for "us vs. them" (or myths in the style of "schools were better few decades ago, youth unspoiled")
Like that "inherent rights" - there are none. Each and every one is granted by the society you're part of. If you are comfortable with limits imposed on you by your society, you call it "freedom". "Sharing values" is another way of saying "accepting strict rules of conduct". You didn't actually convinced yourselves it's otherwise, right? (not when readily using benefits of living in comfy modern society & gov - which are also responsible for recently introducing a radical idea of "equal breeding potential to virtually anybody", contrary to what you implied)
BTW, those UN data suggest that you are very much in competition - but it's beside the point really. It was about destabilization, for one (say, places like Columbia; or...take your pick; though strangely little about Operation Condor), which tends to increase breeding.
It isn't appropriate for govs (which are mostly a reflection of their societies) to try limiting destructive tendencies of... their societies? Then... what would be their point?
(and with currently interconnected world, that's not only a global issue - many prosperous, hence with population growth under wraps, places own a thing or two to "lesser" ones; if only because past destabilizing actions)
Relatively few people (any people, about anything) say "they like it better" (and, heck, even "being used to" or "lazy" or good reasons in my book); more often than not it's a tirade about how their choice "is better".
Slashdot Mirror
Not sure why I drew a blank on that... Oh well, it's not quite so bad, it should take half the time you suggested & Valeri Polyakov might still hold to his record; Soyuz flies on average around every 3 months (and it would reduce the Station's effective crew from six to four... but not quite, since there would be plenty of closely-enough qualified personnel at hand ;p )
At least we know it shouldn't be too hard with four Shuttle crew members, considering that's the size for last mission (and, hm, in a given time frame it should be trivial to make a Soyuz fly up unmanned, like Progress...)
Well, I guess it might boil down to who gets first to Makarovs (last time I checked) in Soyuz descent modules... ;)
Just a small trick of "how to portray an interaction of actors with the computer, using methods they and the audiences are comfortable with, on a grainy screen, without braking flow"
And not an overboard one, in the case of Wargames. Not in comparison to, say, Star Trek - where "whoa, that's just...advanced, man!" factor was probably much stronger & the advancement of computer makes the crew mostly redundant (as sort of demonstrated by the Doctor)
How could it be any different? (also, apparently, decently sound)
You almost seem perplexed at a possibility of propaganda without much of (moral or otherwise) backing; like it's something new?...
After myths of bomber gap, missile gap, mine shaft gap; overall willful self-terrorizing with fiction in the style of Team B or "...because we act again the evil ones!" (and that's of course largely simply just about already discussed state actor) - it might be just time for similar smokescreens in the internet era.
OTOH how much we have to depend on anonymity reveals how much of a functional & honest free speech we really have, on a case basis.
And I'm not even in the Commonwealth... (or in any of markets which "matter"; though who knows what could be the results of my newish EU memberstate sort of invading the UK)
Well sure, it's easy to see where the disaster myths came from (all the more reason not to invoke gods now). But it's also interesting how many weren't exactly "biblical" (as described!) in the first place ... and moreover we don't really have them recently, not when it comes to visible and vocal societies driving this "debate" (certainly not "decimation" - even not only in modern colloquial meaning, also old Roman one; perhaps some people prefer to make them sound worse than they are... to make the "force behind them" seem that much more powerful? ;) )
Even better - we actually do have a large degree of control... (though in many cases not the form people would wish for / that also sounds like AGW "debate")
It could be seen even with the Millennium Flood from my place. Yes, very high precipitation (and let's ignore how more extreme weather is one of predictions)... but also largely destroyed old forests and their floor in affected mountains, or building on what was over the past centuries a "designated" flooding areas & with transverse embankments completely neglected (NVM picturesque homes at the banks of mountain rivers). And the best example: at one mountain resort I frequented, the river made a second "flood channel" (too high to be wet during normal levels), outside of town. Last time I checked it was being slowly filled by bulldozers... why?
Similar with fires / "farm forests", misuse of pesticides or antibiotics (& inevitable "superbugs")
Anyway, it might be slightly revealing to have an averaged (across many "AGW deniers") response for slightly covert question, for example in the style of "OK, nvm why it happens - what we're gonna do if it becomes really bad?" (including "oh, it won't be...")
Using any decent search engine already means delegating decisions largely to a machine / AI / algorithm (vs. quite poor human-search-edited directories of old times)
Though that gives a carte blanche to, say, any abusive cult - to use just one stark example.
Seriously? BBC has live (flash) coverage, for one - together with the occasional & fabulous apocalyptic(*) rave BBC World News theme (*fitting...)
(via Bill Bailey
This is the BBC!
Do not listen to the others!
They are the false prophets!
This is the true way, follow us!
Not the others, they are the evil ones! )
If only a flying car...
So is technically a seiche in the Baltic, giving floods around St. Petersburg (OK, now a dam mostly protects it), but with probably even much longer wavelength than any tsunami. And we even say "flood wave" when some river misbehaves...
Thing is, "tsunami flood" would portray issues much better than "tsunami wave" (also because it's virtually unnoticeable in open water)
Or is this just another one of those strange religious things, like where the vengeful, hateful and all powerful being is going to condemn us all to to suffer in fire for ever and ever until the end of time - yet somehow still loves us?
No, he's a good guy if you give him a chance; he just sometimes can't help hitting me when I deserve it...
;p ): maltheism)
( http://groups.google.com/group/net.religion/msg/30925fd2c9a20cbd?
http://groups.google.com/group/net.origins/browse_thread/thread/2511f7a6ccacd6a9/7179db188c826528?lnk=st&q=%22Damager+God%22&rnum=5&pli=1
also, apart from classic dystheism and gnosticism (too bad the Demiurge preffered to brand gnostics as heretics and to supress them...
And probably wouldn't even feel nearly so good in the end.
We probably need to stop calling it "wave", it might be painting a wrong collective picture for what is more a sudden flood from the sea / lake.
Fundamentally, it was probably an attempt to help cancellations of other "heavyweight" architectures. At that it performed admirably (and for Intel it doesn't make too much difference if the shift ended up being to x86)
What might rescue the iBerg someday is an optical memory interconnect, if they're looking to blow another $4b burning a hole in the other pocket.
No reason, really? Itanium seems to have done its job - killing virtually every other "heavyweight" architecture (and IBM wouldn't cancel theirs "in anticipation of new great thing from Intel", anyway)
...and so it just wraps it up under "gods"
I'd better go see a doctor.
Or a veterinarian.
Or receptive feline female (dare I say... tight pussy?)
And... unremarkably, it's one of many, many places where even supposedly versed individuals [1] ignore how people work in general. No, what you describe is not how our minds work, it's one of fantasies we like to convince ourselves in at best (go through a list of cognitive biases). If we get / have something, we have a profound need to see it as the best, period (not "I like it, even for silly [2] reasons")
[1] plus here self-selection, "technical", "non-people" background, might even solidify it.
[2] Which would be, again, still absolutely valid.
I can comfortably say that govs are mostly a reflection of their societies... from the perspective of a place formerly behind Iron Curtain. Don't play with smokescreens, no need for "us vs. them" (or myths in the style of "schools were better few decades ago, youth unspoiled")
Like that "inherent rights" - there are none. Each and every one is granted by the society you're part of. If you are comfortable with limits imposed on you by your society, you call it "freedom". "Sharing values" is another way of saying "accepting strict rules of conduct". You didn't actually convinced yourselves it's otherwise, right? (not when readily using benefits of living in comfy modern society & gov - which are also responsible for recently introducing a radical idea of "equal breeding potential to virtually anybody", contrary to what you implied)
BTW, those UN data suggest that you are very much in competition - but it's beside the point really. It was about destabilization, for one (say, places like Columbia; or...take your pick; though strangely little about Operation Condor), which tends to increase breeding.
It isn't appropriate for govs (which are mostly a reflection of their societies) to try limiting destructive tendencies of... their societies? Then... what would be their point?
(and with currently interconnected world, that's not only a global issue - many prosperous, hence with population growth under wraps, places own a thing or two to "lesser" ones; if only because past destabilizing actions)
Relatively few people (any people, about anything) say "they like it better" (and, heck, even "being used to" or "lazy" or good reasons in my book); more often than not it's a tirade about how their choice "is better".
So neutron stars are out... :/
;)