Have you ever tested this theory, or do you just believe it so much that you make it true? I have participated in non-violent protests a few times, and I have never, ever seen the barrel of a gun pointed at me - although I was pushed with a billy club once.
Let's play with your income tax example. Try not paying the income tax (hypothetically unless you feel like making your life more interesting). At what point do you honestly think that someone is going to point a gun at you? Be honest now.
You may realize that there are people who don't pay income tax. I doubt many of them ever had guns pointed at them.
"Barrel of a gun" sounds really poetic. However, if you mean force, say force. I wouldn't argue with that. Were there no laws prior to the invention of guns?
Basically, I'm just sick and tired of this cow-replaced-by-a-sphere mentality.
You (not me) are actually comparing laws against speeding to rape? Or perhaps you're comparing arrest to rape? I don't know which, but either way, your argument is inane.
Or perhaps you don't understand my point. Jail != barrel of a gun. Perhaps that is too logical for you, however. More than likely you're upset because your favorite pet argument has been shown to be lame.
Actually, you'll probably only find yourself looking down the barrel of a gun if you resist arrest (after failing to follow some of the laws/regulations you mention) or if you threaten violence yourself.
I challenge you to give me one instance where any of the items in your list have resulted in someone looking down the barrel of a gun otherwise.
Some of the items on your list have even more degrees of separation from a barrel of a gun. Fail to abide by the oh-so-intrusive I-can't-possibly-keep-my-car-under speed limits and what will happen? Most likely, you'll get a speeding ticket. Fail to pay that, and you'll might get a nasty letter and a second and possibly a third chance to pay. Do this enough times and you'll be threatened with arrest. Resist arrest, and then you might be looking down the barrel of a gun. Of course, if you don't have a weapon on you, they'll probably just forceably arrest you even then.
This isn't to say that some of these laws/regulations aren't unjust. Just that you're engaging in just a little bit of hyperbole that has become cliche'.
The Betamax decision merely stated that companies that sell technology that can be used to violate copyright laws are not responsible for those violations - as long as that is not the intention of said technology. It did not make it legal to violate copyrights, however.
Elements past iron can only be created in a supernova explosion. Google on "supernova elements" for more information. Of course, the element synthesis during a supernova explosion is due to fusion, but I'm not sure one could call it "star fusion".
But perhaps it's because you've unfairly maligned our C-in-C. He believes (quoting from the above URL) that global warming is "an issue that we need to take very seriously." For making such a bold claim, he deserves a doctorate in science! (Btw, I recall him not only admitting the reality that is global warming, but also admitting that it was due to anthropogenic factors. Unfortunately, I cannot find this quote.)
Apparently, you forgot the first and second rules of the Unmanned Space Flight Mafia. Not that I would know, of course. It's not my knees that are going to be broken...
There can be more than one mafia. Just as in the underground there's the Yakuza, the Dolgopruadnanskaya, and the Cosa Nostra, the space movement has the unmanned space mafia and the manned space mafia. (I know the names aren't as sexy, but we're talking outspace, purview of the nerds.) Surt has admitted to being a member of the former, and now you've accused me of being a member of the latter. (Presumably for pointing out that Surt slipped and revealed his membership to the former.) Unfortunately, I am not a member of the latter - either that, or I'm not stupid enough (sorry, Surt) to admit to it!
Of course, this does raise some interesting questions. What kind of rackets do these mafias engage in? Where does the money come from? What kind of threats do they make, and how do they deliver on these threats. Enquiring minds want to know!
The unmanned spaceflight mafia isn't really about saving human lives, its about sparing costs and avoiding unnecessary risks. If it was necessary to send humans to do these missions, then we'd be all for it.
Aha! So you admit to being a member of the unmanned spaceflight mafia?:)
I agree he supported terrorists in other parts of the world, used gas on his own (Kurdish) people, and deserved no better treatment than we gave him. In short, he was a very, very bad man.
However, it would behoove us to remember what has happened in the past when we've taken it upon ourselves to "encourage" regime change.
Short version:
In 1953, the CIA ousted Iranian President Mohammad Mossadegh. This resulted in the US-friendly Shah (Mohammed Reza Pahlavi), followed by the not-so-friendly Ayatollah Khomeini.
In 1954, the CIA ousted Guatemalan President Jacobo Arbenz. Result: civil war lasting until 1996.
In 1960, the US and Belgium organized a coup resulting in the assassination of a democratically elected prime minister (backed by the USSR), who was replaced by the oh-so-lovable Joseph Sese Seko Mobuto.
In 1973, we helped bring Pinochet to power.
Ignoring our history, it seems like things can only get better in Iraq with Saddam out of the way, and I sincerely hope that in 5-10 years you can tell me that you told me so.
Of course, I can't finish this comment without pointing out this gem. By your logic, it would seem that those who supported Saddam can also be blamed for 9/11.
Because the Republicans would never stifle free-speech.
Before you point out that the Dems did more or less the same thing, I'm not even attempting to exonerate them. It's actually possible to see the flaws in both parties.
However, from my perception, the Republican track record does seem worse than the Democratic one. Many right-wingers like to talk about the shackles of political correctness, but have no problem with calling you anti-American if you point out that Saddam had nothing to do with 9/11.
Doing a little google research bears out your claim (to my surprise). Of course, the Prius is rated at 60 mpg, without using diesel engines. A big difference (between the Prius and my Civic) is that the Prius is primarly an electric motor with gasoline support and the Civic is primarily a gasoline engine with electric support.
Perhaps a electric-diesel hybrid would be a great way to go. GM has developed e-d hybrid buses to national parks, but of course comparing their mpg to a car wouldn't exactly be fair.
Nevertheless, every additional car with good mpg strikes another blow for the environment. I've even heard Ford bragging recently on a commercial about having several cars with mpg greater than 30!
My guess (based on experience from commercial fishing on not from submarines) is that a 0.5 mile wide plow would slow the sub down to 0 mph (or 0 knots, for that matter).
CD players take 45-200 Watts, and power supplies on PCs take 250-400 Watts (these are some numbers I got from Google - they could be wrong, but I'm pretty sure they're in the ballpark). That means if you're listening to your CD player while posting to Slashdot for, oh say, 24 hours in a row, you've consumed 86,400 seconds * 600 Joules/second = about 52 MJ. (A Watt is a Joule/second.)
OTOH, a gallon of gas has 125 MJ. The average daily commute (one-way) in the US is 24.3 minutes (2003 numbers). From what I can tell, the corresponding distance is 37 miles. So, someone in an SUV with 13 MPG will burn 37/13 * 125 MJ = 356 MJ. Driving a hybrid that gets 45 MPG (my recent MPG in a Civic Hybrid) for the same distance will use only 37/45 * 125 MJ = 103 MJ. That's a saving of 253 MJ - in one day of driving.
Keeping in mind that (almost) no one slashdots 24 hrs/day (while listening to their CD player), these are obviously quite different numbers we're talking about here.
The current generation are nothing more than marketing gimmicks.
I love my marketing gimmick! It's a 2005 Honda Civic Hybrid (my previous 1995 Civic was hit by a semi-truck - with me and my wife in it) and I've only had to put gas in the tank twice since buying it in June.
I've got to hand it to Honda, making a car that uses less gas is quite a gimmick!
In theory, ¢ or ¢ should also get you this result. If you type these in an html document they work. However, it appears that/. edits these out (although they allow &).:P
Slashdot Mirror
Have you ever tested this theory, or do you just believe it so much that you make it true? I have participated in non-violent protests a few times, and I have never, ever seen the barrel of a gun pointed at me - although I was pushed with a billy club once.
Let's play with your income tax example. Try not paying the income tax (hypothetically unless you feel like making your life more interesting). At what point do you honestly think that someone is going to point a gun at you? Be honest now.
You may realize that there are people who don't pay income tax. I doubt many of them ever had guns pointed at them.
"Barrel of a gun" sounds really poetic. However, if you mean force, say force. I wouldn't argue with that. Were there no laws prior to the invention of guns?
Basically, I'm just sick and tired of this cow-replaced-by-a-sphere mentality.
Founder of the University of Virginia (amongst other things). :)
Or at least try to find a valid thought.
You (not me) are actually comparing laws against speeding to rape? Or perhaps you're comparing arrest to rape? I don't know which, but either way, your argument is inane.
Or perhaps you don't understand my point. Jail != barrel of a gun. Perhaps that is too logical for you, however. More than likely you're upset because your favorite pet argument has been shown to be lame.
So that I'll know you're making a self-referential joke. ;)
Actually, you'll probably only find yourself looking down the barrel of a gun if you resist arrest (after failing to follow some of the laws/regulations you mention) or if you threaten violence yourself.
I challenge you to give me one instance where any of the items in your list have resulted in someone looking down the barrel of a gun otherwise.
Some of the items on your list have even more degrees of separation from a barrel of a gun. Fail to abide by the oh-so-intrusive I-can't-possibly-keep-my-car-under speed limits and what will happen? Most likely, you'll get a speeding ticket. Fail to pay that, and you'll might get a nasty letter and a second and possibly a third chance to pay. Do this enough times and you'll be threatened with arrest. Resist arrest, and then you might be looking down the barrel of a gun. Of course, if you don't have a weapon on you, they'll probably just forceably arrest you even then.
This isn't to say that some of these laws/regulations aren't unjust. Just that you're engaging in just a little bit of hyperbole that has become cliche'.
Short attention spans.
Nevermind, I read that site I posted a little more carefully, and it does make claims about fair use as well.
The Betamax decision merely stated that companies that sell technology that can be used to violate copyright laws are not responsible for those violations - as long as that is not the intention of said technology. It did not make it legal to violate copyrights, however.
See this site for (much) more information.are correct. Thanks for the correction.
Elements past iron can only be created in a supernova explosion. Google on "supernova elements" for more information. Of course, the element synthesis during a supernova explosion is due to fusion, but I'm not sure one could call it "star fusion".
But perhaps it's because you've unfairly maligned our C-in-C. He believes (quoting from the above URL) that global warming is "an issue that we need to take very seriously." For making such a bold claim, he deserves a doctorate in science! (Btw, I recall him not only admitting the reality that is global warming, but also admitting that it was due to anthropogenic factors. Unfortunately, I cannot find this quote.)
Apparently, you forgot the first and second rules of the Unmanned Space Flight Mafia. Not that I would know, of course. It's not my knees that are going to be broken...
P.S. Don't answer that doorbell! :o
There can be more than one mafia. Just as in the underground there's the Yakuza, the Dolgopruadnanskaya, and the Cosa Nostra, the space movement has the unmanned space mafia and the manned space mafia. (I know the names aren't as sexy, but we're talking outspace, purview of the nerds.) Surt has admitted to being a member of the former, and now you've accused me of being a member of the latter. (Presumably for pointing out that Surt slipped and revealed his membership to the former.) Unfortunately, I am not a member of the latter - either that, or I'm not stupid enough (sorry, Surt) to admit to it!
Of course, this does raise some interesting questions. What kind of rackets do these mafias engage in? Where does the money come from? What kind of threats do they make, and how do they deliver on these threats. Enquiring minds want to know!
Aha! So you admit to being a member of the unmanned spaceflight mafia? :)
and you should be fine.
I agree he supported terrorists in other parts of the world, used gas on his own (Kurdish) people, and deserved no better treatment than we gave him. In short, he was a very, very bad man.
However, it would behoove us to remember what has happened in the past when we've taken it upon ourselves to "encourage" regime change.
Short version:
Ignoring our history, it seems like things can only get better in Iraq with Saddam out of the way, and I sincerely hope that in 5-10 years you can tell me that you told me so.
Of course, I can't finish this comment without pointing out this gem. By your logic, it would seem that those who supported Saddam can also be blamed for 9/11.
Because the Republicans would never stifle free-speech.
Before you point out that the Dems did more or less the same thing, I'm not even attempting to exonerate them. It's actually possible to see the flaws in both parties.
However, from my perception, the Republican track record does seem worse than the Democratic one. Many right-wingers like to talk about the shackles of political correctness, but have no problem with calling you anti-American if you point out that Saddam had nothing to do with 9/11.
Doing a little google research bears out your claim (to my surprise). Of course, the Prius is rated at 60 mpg, without using diesel engines. A big difference (between the Prius and my Civic) is that the Prius is primarly an electric motor with gasoline support and the Civic is primarily a gasoline engine with electric support.
Perhaps a electric-diesel hybrid would be a great way to go. GM has developed e-d hybrid buses to national parks, but of course comparing their mpg to a car wouldn't exactly be fair.
Nevertheless, every additional car with good mpg strikes another blow for the environment. I've even heard Ford bragging recently on a commercial about having several cars with mpg greater than 30!
But now, try to express the power of a race car engine expressed as butterfly-wing flaps/second!
CD players take 45-200 Watts, and power supplies on PCs take 250-400 Watts (these are some numbers I got from Google - they could be wrong, but I'm pretty sure they're in the ballpark). That means if you're listening to your CD player while posting to Slashdot for, oh say, 24 hours in a row, you've consumed 86,400 seconds * 600 Joules/second = about 52 MJ. (A Watt is a Joule/second.)
OTOH, a gallon of gas has 125 MJ. The average daily commute (one-way) in the US is 24.3 minutes (2003 numbers). From what I can tell, the corresponding distance is 37 miles. So, someone in an SUV with 13 MPG will burn 37/13 * 125 MJ = 356 MJ. Driving a hybrid that gets 45 MPG (my recent MPG in a Civic Hybrid) for the same distance will use only 37/45 * 125 MJ = 103 MJ. That's a saving of 253 MJ - in one day of driving.
Keeping in mind that (almost) no one slashdots 24 hrs/day (while listening to their CD player), these are obviously quite different numbers we're talking about here.
I love my marketing gimmick! It's a 2005 Honda Civic Hybrid (my previous 1995 Civic was hit by a semi-truck - with me and my wife in it) and I've only had to put gas in the tank twice since buying it in June.
I've got to hand it to Honda, making a car that uses less gas is quite a gimmick!
According to this story, the Japanese can already control hurricanes.
(And no, I don't take this seriously.)
In theory, ¢ or ¢ should also get you this result. If you type these in an html document they work. However, it appears that /. edits these out (although they allow &). :P
Additional character codes can be found at http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/sgml/entities.html
I think it's a transit of Vulcan! (For those unfamiliar with the rich history of Vulcan, you should really follow the link.)