For precision work yes, but to really level a country you need bombers, at least cheaply. Drone bombers are a possibility I suppose, but you are really scaling up at that point. If you are going to have manned bombers, you will need planes or drones to defend them. Perhaps air command filled with drone operators for low lantancy operations...
Against a single individual yes. Against all phones by RIM, Apple, Nokia...
You can't go out and drug and beat with a wrench millions of people to defeat crypto. (Well you could, but people would probably get really mad)
Whereas you can simply spy on everyone without.
Sure they can single someone out for drug/beatings, but they are probably going to do that anyway, and having or not having crypto will probably make very little difference.
Not to mention that the whole reason they decided to use the bombs was that a full invasion was calculated to cost up to 500,000 US troops as casualties. With the state of Japan at the time, its resources, and troops, being told to fight to the death, I would have to assume that their casualty rate would be several times higher than that of the US.
So not even counting civilians deaths due to the prolonged war as you mentioned, you can add say another 2 million combined troops on top of that, conservatively.
So yeah, you can see why it was seen that nuclear bombing that killed 110k people might be thought of as a lesser evil. That would be probably the definition of "tough" choices that a leader might have to make.
Though to be honest, I don't know how much I would attribute that to thinking about the Japanese people, so much as it probably was a simply calculation of how politically unpopular it would be to lose 500k+ US soldiers.
Don't forget all the contradictory stuff as part of their ideology.
In addition to all the above:
Believes in smaller Government, but has the biggest government ever of any Canadian government. Believes is conservative spending, but has spent more, and had more debt than any government ever. Believes in reforming the Senate, but has appointed more senators than any Canadian government ever. Etc...
Um wouldn't one of the obvious problems be the build up of ice and snow and the necessity of its removal constantly?
also
Day 215: "Trapped in Telescope again. Polar bears are circling like sharks. Loyd and Weber are gone.I don't know how much longer I can hold out." Day 216: "Discovered another exoplanet. Tentatively named it Ursa Polaris Pallas Meas Lambe 12." Day 217: "Another supply air drop came today. Bears ate it. Played with the rest. They are just taunting me now."
So if I hear some news, and tell a friend I just copied their creative works, and violated their IP?
If I hear about a hockey trade and tweet about it, should I be sued for possibly allowing the sharing of this information, with millions?
I don't buy it, literately.
If I copy word for word your entire article and call it my own and do not cite the source, then yes that would be a problem.
However posting a quote or making a summary is not. Besides most news aggregators link the original source anyway, which would benefit them with greater exposure and page hits... So I do not get what they are bitching about.
"Forced"? Was he under duress? Did they beat him with a hammer until he signed the papers?
Of course they could have transferred your position to the North Pole. While dick move, unless you have written into your job, contract, or agreement, preventing it I don't see how this or something like it would be illegal.
I guess bottom line, is if they are going to treat you that way anyway, do you really want to work there...
If anything proved that point, is was France (!?) leading the freedom charge into Libya to help the poor people under the evil boot heal of a vicious dictator.
It probably doesn't help that that is where France is the main importer of oil either. Amazing how fast those planes got there.
Seriously when was the last time that France led the charge in anything but the wrong direction?:)
I don't know about Korean or Vietnam wars, but the rest of those claims are BS I think.
1) The US has likely sold/given as many or more weapons to those countries as China. Russia as well. 2) Like Libya, these countries have huge stockpiles of conventional weapons. Some in the hands of tribal, warlords, or simple circulation. Even larger amounts are concentrated by central government, which when it falls like in Libya and Afghanistan, all those weapons go into circulation. This has just recently become an issue for Libya, who is not used to having quite so many arms in the hands of private citizens. These stockpiles have been growing for decades. 3) As for Pakistan, this is less China involvement, and more of an area that is barely run by government. In the north, it is really Pakistan in name only, and is run tribally (or so I have heard). The government itself, is more less run by the military. There are factions within both that aren't exactly pro-USA. They seem to be a pretty loosely run country which is nuts because they have nuclear weapons. Fortunately the army seems pretty solid and stable, at least insofar as its influence extends. They also have limited delivery capability, which probably suits them, as they only seem to in deathly fear that India will swallow them whole. It seems much of the official foreign relations revolves around this. So when the US does something that supports or doesn't support those aims, well it acts accordingly. Many reports indicate many people in the Pakistan Intelligence were not exactly pro-USA. The fact that the US was/is giving BILLIONS in aid to Pakistan, and likely a fair chunk of that would go to buying weapons and support for fight the US is how insane the whole situation is. I recall a US politician actually saying so on the record on TV, but saying that due to other strategic issues, there is no way they can stop sending that aid, as the consequences would be much worse.
So anyway I don't see China being the boogy man in at least those examples, in modern times. Sure they may have sold some weapons, but I don't think it is any ulterior motive, other than to sell weapons, just like the US and Russia.
The problem now, is you have companies like Google spending BILLIONS on acquiring Patents. What would happen if someone just said one day, "Oh by the way, no more Patents!"
Billions of dollars in "assets" would evaporate. I suspect they might resist that or require compensation.
It's a snowball that just continues to get bigger gathering momentum along the way. Stopping it may prove a challenge.
1) Create super genetically enhanced silkworms. Patent it! 2) Allow Super Silkworms (TM) to out compete and kill off all other silkworms. 3) Sue into oblivion anyone using your patent. 4) Profit!
Bioengineering/Patenting is like the (only) perfect business model, whereby your actual product will actively kill off your competition for you, so you profit twice, once on the actual product, and twice legally when you are the only game in town!
Same. Also when you are running hundreds of legacy applications, and testing show that half of them break somehow, then you have to have some plan to fix them.
Also making any application is hard, because roll out is usually done gradually and systematically, which means your users will be using both XP AND 7, and you have to make sure stuff works for both...
Large budgets are too much for people to process. When I explain things to people I try to use values they can relate to.
So to the Conservative supporters up here in Canada, complaining about wasting 3 million dollars annually on a national gun registry, I try to explain it as thus:
If you just bought a 30,000$ car last year, and found out this year you had to actually pay out 30$ on maintenance, do you think it is reasonable to torch it or throw it away. Heck even if you decided to keep it for a decade it would only cost you 300$ to find out.
It is sort of hard to argue that. I find most people have a hard time evaluating much more than 7 figures. Once you get into Billions with a capitol B, I think it is lost on most people how much money that is. With the US, you start getting into the Trillions with a big capitol T, which I have a hard time getting my head around... XKCD had a great chart not too long ago, that illustrates the issue.
Those were freedom fighters for sure! I am sure at the time it was thought that the bigger problem was the worldwide domination of the communists.
I don't think it is our place to remove religious nuts. That is the peoples job. Lately at least it seems they are doing a pretty good job (well not specifically religious nutjobs, but totalitarian regimes).
They can do whatever they like really, with two big exceptions.
1) Sponsoring terrorists that do "bad things" should not be looked at like arms length organizations. They should be identified as combatants working for the state that sponsored them. Thus if you give bombs to some nutjobs that attack the US, then it is the exact same as if the state actually did so itself. Perhaps that would make it think twice about its actions. I think this would lead to some definite "repercussions" likely of the military variety.
2) Nuclear weapons. Enough countries have them. Sorry, no more are allowed in that club. It might not be fair, but it is for the best really. So continued development will not be tolerated. As to actions, certainly sanctions to start... Its a tough one.
lol ya... well rather than pilot I was going to say an officer title, but wasn't sure what rank to use, captain or lower, or whatever... Yeah generally was a bit much in retrospect... maybe commander?
Obviously I'm not up on on this stuff.
Though I do remember reading that these missiles were supposed to be anti-radar. That may well be a load of hogwash, but I remember reading it someplace.
Show me a solar powered tank, ship, or plane. No? Well then it will still be strategically important. Convert every US car to solar tomorrow, and so long as you employ a war machine you need to feed it oil. Also global trade depends on massive container ships, which also depend on oil, no amount of sail, solar, wind is going to budge them. Commercial tourism is dependent on passenger plans, again not flying on solar beams and rainbows. We also make just about everything from it. Simply removing it from our grid, and personal transportation is a step, but we are far from independent.
Would it be less important? Sure only because you move the horizon back slightly. Anyway anyone that messes with the flow will be subject to trouble.
Oil is our Spice. Shaddam will not tolerate any disruption of the Spice!
Slashdot Mirror
Erm, you are assuming a level playing field. If History has suggesting anything, it is that most wars are not.
When was the last time the US was in a shooting war where its air superiority was ever really challenged? WW2?
So in order to go to work I would have to pay you a licence fee? Fsck that I quit!
Nah!
For precision work yes, but to really level a country you need bombers, at least cheaply. Drone bombers are a possibility I suppose, but you are really scaling up at that point. If you are going to have manned bombers, you will need planes or drones to defend them. Perhaps air command filled with drone operators for low lantancy operations...
Bluish Green.
Its OK, they all use AOL anyway.
Against a single individual yes. Against all phones by RIM, Apple, Nokia...
You can't go out and drug and beat with a wrench millions of people to defeat crypto. (Well you could, but people would probably get really mad)
Whereas you can simply spy on everyone without.
Sure they can single someone out for drug/beatings, but they are probably going to do that anyway, and having or not having crypto will probably make very little difference.
Not to mention that the whole reason they decided to use the bombs was that a full invasion was calculated to cost up to 500,000 US troops as casualties. With the state of Japan at the time, its resources, and troops, being told to fight to the death, I would have to assume that their casualty rate would be several times higher than that of the US.
So not even counting civilians deaths due to the prolonged war as you mentioned, you can add say another 2 million combined troops on top of that, conservatively.
So yeah, you can see why it was seen that nuclear bombing that killed 110k people might be thought of as a lesser evil. That would be probably the definition of "tough" choices that a leader might have to make.
Though to be honest, I don't know how much I would attribute that to thinking about the Japanese people, so much as it probably was a simply calculation of how politically unpopular it would be to lose 500k+ US soldiers.
Don't forget all the contradictory stuff as part of their ideology.
In addition to all the above:
Believes in smaller Government, but has the biggest government ever of any Canadian government.
Believes is conservative spending, but has spent more, and had more debt than any government ever.
Believes in reforming the Senate, but has appointed more senators than any Canadian government ever.
Etc...
Um wouldn't one of the obvious problems be the build up of ice and snow and the necessity of its removal constantly?
also
Day 215: "Trapped in Telescope again. Polar bears are circling like sharks. Loyd and Weber are gone.I don't know how much longer I can hold out."
Day 216: "Discovered another exoplanet. Tentatively named it Ursa Polaris Pallas Meas Lambe 12."
Day 217: "Another supply air drop came today. Bears ate it. Played with the rest. They are just taunting me now."
So if I hear some news, and tell a friend I just copied their creative works, and violated their IP?
If I hear about a hockey trade and tweet about it, should I be sued for possibly allowing the sharing of this information, with millions?
I don't buy it, literately.
If I copy word for word your entire article and call it my own and do not cite the source, then yes that would be a problem.
However posting a quote or making a summary is not. Besides most news aggregators link the original source anyway, which would benefit them with greater exposure and page hits... So I do not get what they are bitching about.
Sounds pretty shaky legally.
"Forced"? Was he under duress? Did they beat him with a hammer until he signed the papers?
Of course they could have transferred your position to the North Pole. While dick move, unless you have written into your job, contract, or agreement, preventing it I don't see how this or something like it would be illegal.
I guess bottom line, is if they are going to treat you that way anyway, do you really want to work there...
http://www.economist.com/blogs/dailychart/2011/02/libyan_oil
Hmm apparently Italy did even more. Never heard about that. I wonder what their participation was if any.
If anything proved that point, is was France (!?) leading the freedom charge into Libya to help the poor people under the evil boot heal of a vicious dictator.
It probably doesn't help that that is where France is the main importer of oil either. Amazing how fast those planes got there.
Seriously when was the last time that France led the charge in anything but the wrong direction? :)
I don't know about Korean or Vietnam wars, but the rest of those claims are BS I think.
1) The US has likely sold/given as many or more weapons to those countries as China. Russia as well.
2) Like Libya, these countries have huge stockpiles of conventional weapons. Some in the hands of tribal, warlords, or simple circulation. Even larger amounts are concentrated by central government, which when it falls like in Libya and Afghanistan, all those weapons go into circulation. This has just recently become an issue for Libya, who is not used to having quite so many arms in the hands of private citizens. These stockpiles have been growing for decades.
3) As for Pakistan, this is less China involvement, and more of an area that is barely run by government. In the north, it is really Pakistan in name only, and is run tribally (or so I have heard). The government itself, is more less run by the military. There are factions within both that aren't exactly pro-USA. They seem to be a pretty loosely run country which is nuts because they have nuclear weapons. Fortunately the army seems pretty solid and stable, at least insofar as its influence extends. They also have limited delivery capability, which probably suits them, as they only seem to in deathly fear that India will swallow them whole. It seems much of the official foreign relations revolves around this. So when the US does something that supports or doesn't support those aims, well it acts accordingly. Many reports indicate many people in the Pakistan Intelligence were not exactly pro-USA. The fact that the US was/is giving BILLIONS in aid to Pakistan, and likely a fair chunk of that would go to buying weapons and support for fight the US is how insane the whole situation is. I recall a US politician actually saying so on the record on TV, but saying that due to other strategic issues, there is no way they can stop sending that aid, as the consequences would be much worse.
So anyway I don't see China being the boogy man in at least those examples, in modern times. Sure they may have sold some weapons, but I don't think it is any ulterior motive, other than to sell weapons, just like the US and Russia.
Yes. Develop Plans.
Plan: Scan everything.
Cost: A lot!
Budget: Cut.
Action: None.
The problem now, is you have companies like Google spending BILLIONS on acquiring Patents. What would happen if someone just said one day, "Oh by the way, no more Patents!"
Billions of dollars in "assets" would evaporate. I suspect they might resist that or require compensation.
It's a snowball that just continues to get bigger gathering momentum along the way. Stopping it may prove a challenge.
1) Create super genetically enhanced silkworms. Patent it!
2) Allow Super Silkworms (TM) to out compete and kill off all other silkworms.
3) Sue into oblivion anyone using your patent.
4) Profit!
Bioengineering/Patenting is like the (only) perfect business model, whereby your actual product will actively kill off your competition for you, so you profit twice, once on the actual product, and twice legally when you are the only game in town!
Not really. You can make a crappy knock off that you can try and pass off as the real thing...
But that's probably a trademark violation, not a copyright violation.
It was the main reason I got out of Physics. I liked the theroy, but could never remember the formulas for test time, which made it difficult.
Same. Also when you are running hundreds of legacy applications, and testing show that half of them break somehow, then you have to have some plan to fix them.
Also making any application is hard, because roll out is usually done gradually and systematically, which means your users will be using both XP AND 7, and you have to make sure stuff works for both...
Large budgets are too much for people to process. When I explain things to people I try to use values they can relate to.
So to the Conservative supporters up here in Canada, complaining about wasting 3 million dollars annually on a national gun registry, I try to explain it as thus:
If you just bought a 30,000$ car last year, and found out this year you had to actually pay out 30$ on maintenance, do you think it is reasonable to torch it or throw it away. Heck even if you decided to keep it for a decade it would only cost you 300$ to find out.
It is sort of hard to argue that. I find most people have a hard time evaluating much more than 7 figures. Once you get into Billions with a capitol B, I think it is lost on most people how much money that is. With the US, you start getting into the Trillions with a big capitol T, which I have a hard time getting my head around... XKCD had a great chart not too long ago, that illustrates the issue.
http://xkcd.com/980/
Those were freedom fighters for sure! I am sure at the time it was thought that the bigger problem was the worldwide domination of the communists.
I don't think it is our place to remove religious nuts. That is the peoples job. Lately at least it seems they are doing a pretty good job (well not specifically religious nutjobs, but totalitarian regimes).
They can do whatever they like really, with two big exceptions.
1) Sponsoring terrorists that do "bad things" should not be looked at like arms length organizations. They should be identified as combatants working for the state that sponsored them. Thus if you give bombs to some nutjobs that attack the US, then it is the exact same as if the state actually did so itself. Perhaps that would make it think twice about its actions. I think this would lead to some definite "repercussions" likely of the military variety.
2) Nuclear weapons. Enough countries have them. Sorry, no more are allowed in that club. It might not be fair, but it is for the best really. So continued development will not be tolerated. As to actions, certainly sanctions to start... Its a tough one.
Silkworm? Ewww. Who the hell comes up with these names!
lol ya... well rather than pilot I was going to say an officer title, but wasn't sure what rank to use, captain or lower, or whatever... Yeah generally was a bit much in retrospect... maybe commander?
Obviously I'm not up on on this stuff.
Though I do remember reading that these missiles were supposed to be anti-radar. That may well be a load of hogwash, but I remember reading it someplace.
Show me a solar powered tank, ship, or plane. No? Well then it will still be strategically important. Convert every US car to solar tomorrow, and so long as you employ a war machine you need to feed it oil. Also global trade depends on massive container ships, which also depend on oil, no amount of sail, solar, wind is going to budge them. Commercial tourism is dependent on passenger plans, again not flying on solar beams and rainbows. We also make just about everything from it. Simply removing it from our grid, and personal transportation is a step, but we are far from independent.
Would it be less important? Sure only because you move the horizon back slightly. Anyway anyone that messes with the flow will be subject to trouble.
Oil is our Spice. Shaddam will not tolerate any disruption of the Spice!