Recognizing that you did something stupid is the first step towards recovery If the mother is sheltering him from realizing it, then she is part of his problem(s)
I do not believe that government is incompetent, that is simply a propaganda sound bite for people who do not want to pay taxes into the society that they live in. I find it odd that they same people complain about the intelligence services of said governments, since they would would be toothless if they were incompetent
Trade and economic co-dependence are functions of government as well as corporations
The fact that I hold an incredibly small share does not mean that I am in favor of deregulating said company because the majority share holders would certainly take advantage of me (and the rest of the small shareholders) if there was no oversight, just look at Enron
Hitler arose due to the severe depression that post ww1 Germany suffered while being controlled by the Treaty of Versailles Stalin was the top dog that came out of the Bolshevik revolution against the Tsars Mao was the Army of the North that harassed the Japanese in ww2 after they had taken the Mainland
All of these tyrants arose in destabilized environments, only Hitler turned a profit for the corporatists
The submitter seems to complain that there were past calls of Armageddon, and that the warnings given today are less sever.
The article that they linked demonstrating past testimony by Panetta speaks of a threat of a Cyber Pearl Harbor... was that Armageddon?
The report by Mr Rogers includes this section on risks: Risk. Despite ever-improving network defenses, the diverse possibilities for remote hacking intrusions, supply chain operations to insert compromised hardware or software, and malevolent activities by human insiders will hold nearly all ICT systems at risk for years to come . In short, the cyber threat cannot be eliminated ; rather, cyber risk must be managed. Moreover, the risk calculus employed by some private sector entities does not adequately account for foreign cyber threats or the systemic interdependencies between different critical infrastructure sectors
I dunno, but the line, 'will hold nearly all ICT systems at risk for years to come', seems pretty dire. I do not see what the submitter is talking about
Agree, and it is our place to control and reign in corporations. If not in hand-to-hand single conmbat, then with the tools that we have to figure out the propaganda, decide how our vote is going to best preserve our standing and convince those around us to support the same vote
The furor of... um who were they, you know the 98%rs... has died off and according to the last election they did not even bother to vote, since the most corporatist party made gains in all arenas.
Yeah , I know the D's play the same game, but they do not seem to have a soylent green scenario in their eyes, unlike the R's who are willing to drive any car off a cliff that their masters tell them to
However, when you are pulled over saying to the officer, 'I was not watching my speed, but I was moving with traffic', may well prevent you from ever having to appear in traffic court in the first place
Yeah, I suppose that there is still a pretty big Google fan base on/.
There will probably be a point in the future when Google has become recognized as Big Brother and the Snowden crowd turns on them, but that will probably be some time off in the future, long after Google's competitors have taken that stance
It may be difficult for people who have had Google for most of their life to realize that it is not a public utility, that it has to meet the desires of stockholders, and that it no longer even claims to 'not be evil' (dropped that in 2009)
Still, I am a little confused, what is it about the GP being honest that makes them a troll?
Ok, so what percentage of the population really wants to employ a hitman? What percentage wants to run a credit card scam?
How does that compare to the percentage that want to use an illegal drug?
There is a huge market for people using illicit drugs while the marketplace for hitmen is nearly nil.
It is completely appropriate to blame prohibition for the value of illicit drugs and popularity of markets which offer them because prohibition itself is a blatant hypocrisy in a nation where more than half of the population uses illicit drugs.
The next closest market that follows the 'people use it a lot, but it is illegal', may be pirated media, but that market is already taken by torrent sites that require no cash payments, so it is hard to make a buck there
Eliminating prohibition would wipe out a huge segment of the black market and send organizations that work in that space scrambling for a way to make a buck
Article II...not to manufacture or otherwise acquire nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices; and not to seek or receive any assistance in the manufacture of nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices.
What it does not infringe is the development of nuclear power for peaceful purposes
Article IV
1. Nothing in this Treaty shall be interpreted as affecting the inalienable right of all the Parties to the Treaty to develop research, production and use of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes without discrimination and in conformity with Articles I and II of this Treaty.
It's all political theater, leaders learned that people are more compliant when they believe that some bad guy is going to rain death and fire down on them if they do not keep their leaders in power
You end up with Kennedy/Kruschev or more recently Kahmeni/Netanyahu keeping each other in power by appearing to be in immediate threat to each other
With nuclear weapons critical mass is critical mass, you really can't cheat physics by using lower uranium concentrations or less mass
Refining uranium is a numbers game, and during ww2 the US was expending vast resources and numerous experimental approaches towards getting weapons grade material. Much more resources than a smaller country like Iran could afford. They also generated a significant amount of plutonium in addition to the uranium
It is called the Non Proliferation Treaty, and the idea is to not allow additional countries to develop nuclear weapons beyond the countries that had developed them before the treaty was finalized in 1996 http://www.un.org/disarmament/...
The central idea being that the existing countries had made it through the cold war without nuking each other and had developed control system mature enough to avoid an accident, while many of the banned countries did not have nukes yet and demonstrated aggressive behavior to wards their neighbors
The point of this exercise is to keep them from getting enough enriched uranium for one bomb Most of their enrichment now is below 5%, wit attempts to get up to 20% Weapons grade is over 85%
My assessment comes from what I pay at the pump, or from my local utility company If it does not include their costs, then they will go out of business, there are some caveats below:
In the case of fossil fuels, they have been giving a free pass on recognizing the costs of their pollution by the politicians (usually on the right) that they provide donations to. If fossil fuels (coal in particular) had to limit their release of pollutants (including CO2) to a similar level that nuclear power has to demonstrate, they would no longer be the least expensive source of power and would quickly lose their position as the main source of power for the US
If solar attains a rapid acceptance and development while it is heavily subsidized, then it will eventually have to demonstrate its merits to business on a cost basis. This is something that nuclear power has demonstrated, even when faced with extra costs of lawsuits that are placed on them by the environmental and nimby movements
Do I believe that solar can become cost competitive, sure... eventually. My money is on nuclear for the next hundred years, assume we do not decide to choke ourselves out by sticking to fossil fuels
If there is a large sell off in fossil fuels, then the remaining actors will be able to purchase those assets for less money and have ample reserves to support politicians to prevent fossil fuels from being outlawed
Actions like this will only may actors like the kochs more wealthy and more likely to seek political influence
There is every reason to consider the cost of the power inputs that are required to produce green energy.
Overly optimistic calculations made ethanol from corn look like a great thing because they did not consider the energy that is spent creating the farm equipment, sowing and harvesting the corn etc
Anybody coming to the table with a 'new' power source that seems to ignore these costs should be sent packing to do their homework
Carter blocked building any breeder reactors in America, not uranium fed nuclear reactors
Public opinion, constant lawsuits and rabid opposition from environmental groups has prevented the rapid use of nuclear power in America The growth of the Green Party in Europe has had a similar effect there
In particular, Greenpeace has become the single biggest proponent of fossil fuels through their complete refusal to recognize the merits of nuclear power They even tossed out one of their founders when he pointed out that nuclear power would represent a net positive by reducing the use of fossil fuels
I am not necessarily disagreeing with you just pointing out that Carter is not the bogey-man that you made him out to be. His opposition to the spread of breeder reactors was intended to reduce the possibility of non-nuclear countries getting plutonium
Feeling grumpy? From page 2 of the linked article: Apple Macintosh computers and servers running OSX use NTP, and Stenn said Apple developers have called him for help on several NTP issues. In the last such incident, he said he delayed a patch to give Apple more time to prepare OS X for it. When they were ready, he applied the patch and asked "whether Apple could send a donation to the Network Time Foundation," Stenn recalled. "They said they would do their best to see that Apple throws some money our way." But it hasn't happened yet.
Apparently somebody is under the impression that OSX still uses it, unfortunately this is how the business majors deal withit: "Everybody loves us," Stenn said. "But people with money say, 'We don't give to open source projects.'" http://www.informationweek.com...
I think that the 'synchronized time base' thing becomes an issue with transaction processing, surely there are other issues as well what with it having been accepted as part of the environment for the past three decades
Slashdot Mirror
Arizona was trying to attract conventions while enacting regressive policies
The conventions went elsewhere and Arizona changed the policies to bring them back
Voting with your pocketbook is a fundamental tenet of the free market
Recognizing that you did something stupid is the first step towards recovery
If the mother is sheltering him from realizing it, then she is part of his problem(s)
People don't eat corn?
You might want to mention that to all of the people on street corners and swap meets selling corn in the husk that they managed to get their hands on
I do not believe that government is incompetent, that is simply a propaganda sound bite for people who do not want to pay taxes into the society that they live in. I find it odd that they same people complain about the intelligence services of said governments, since they would would be toothless if they were incompetent
Trade and economic co-dependence are functions of government as well as corporations
The fact that I hold an incredibly small share does not mean that I am in favor of deregulating said company because the majority share holders would certainly take advantage of me (and the rest of the small shareholders) if there was no oversight, just look at Enron
Hitler arose due to the severe depression that post ww1 Germany suffered while being controlled by the Treaty of Versailles
Stalin was the top dog that came out of the Bolshevik revolution against the Tsars
Mao was the Army of the North that harassed the Japanese in ww2 after they had taken the Mainland
All of these tyrants arose in destabilized environments, only Hitler turned a profit for the corporatists
The submitter seems to complain that there were past calls of Armageddon, and that the warnings given today are less sever.
The article that they linked demonstrating past testimony by Panetta speaks of a threat of a Cyber Pearl Harbor... was that Armageddon?
The report by Mr Rogers includes this section on risks:
Risk.
Despite ever-improving network defenses, the diverse possibilities for remote hacking intrusions, supply chain operations to insert compromised hardware or software, and malevolent activities by human insiders will hold nearly all ICT systems at risk for years to come . In short, the cyber threat cannot be eliminated ; rather, cyber risk must be managed. Moreover, the risk calculus employed by some private sector entities does not adequately account for foreign cyber threats or the systemic interdependencies between different critical infrastructure sectors
I dunno, but the line, 'will hold nearly all ICT systems at risk for years to come', seems pretty dire.
I do not see what the submitter is talking about
Agree, and it is our place to control and reign in corporations. If not in hand-to-hand single conmbat, then with the tools that we have to figure out the propaganda, decide how our vote is going to best preserve our standing and convince those around us to support the same vote
The furor of ... um who were they, you know the 98%rs... has died off and according to the last election they did not even bother to vote, since the most corporatist party made gains in all arenas.
Yeah , I know the D's play the same game, but they do not seem to have a soylent green scenario in their eyes, unlike the R's who are willing to drive any car off a cliff that their masters tell them to
However, when you are pulled over saying to the officer, 'I was not watching my speed, but I was moving with traffic', may well prevent you from ever having to appear in traffic court in the first place
Yeah, I suppose that there is still a pretty big Google fan base on /.
There will probably be a point in the future when Google has become recognized as Big Brother and the Snowden crowd turns on them, but that will probably be some time off in the future, long after Google's competitors have taken that stance
It may be difficult for people who have had Google for most of their life to realize that it is not a public utility, that it has to meet the desires of stockholders, and that it no longer even claims to 'not be evil' (dropped that in 2009)
Still, I am a little confused, what is it about the GP being honest that makes them a troll?
Ok, so what percentage of the population really wants to employ a hitman? What percentage wants to run a credit card scam?
How does that compare to the percentage that want to use an illegal drug?
There is a huge market for people using illicit drugs while the marketplace for hitmen is nearly nil.
It is completely appropriate to blame prohibition for the value of illicit drugs and popularity of markets which offer them because prohibition itself is a blatant hypocrisy in a nation where more than half of the population uses illicit drugs.
The next closest market that follows the 'people use it a lot, but it is illegal', may be pirated media, but that market is already taken by torrent sites that require no cash payments, so it is hard to make a buck there
Eliminating prohibition would wipe out a huge segment of the black market and send organizations that work in that space scrambling for a way to make a buck
Has America given up on hydrogen fuel cells?
Do direct methanol fuel cells offer any competitive advantage
If DMFCs offer enough benefit, when would we expect to see them on a commercially available vehicle?
Read the link:
http://www.un.org/disarmament/...
Article II ...not to manufacture or otherwise acquire nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices; and not to seek or receive any assistance in the manufacture of nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices.
What it does not infringe is the development of nuclear power for peaceful purposes
Article IV
1. Nothing in this Treaty shall be interpreted as affecting the inalienable right of all the Parties to the Treaty to develop research, production and use of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes without discrimination and in conformity with Articles I and II of this Treaty.
There was a power struggle over the control of Islam after Mohammed died, it really hasn't worked itself out since then
Pu240 is incredibly unstable and can start fission reactions spontaneously
Pu238 is used in thermal batteries on space missions. The US stopped producing it in the late 80's, so we have been running out since then
It's all political theater, leaders learned that people are more compliant when they believe that some bad guy is going to rain death and fire down on them if they do not keep their leaders in power
You end up with Kennedy/Kruschev or more recently Kahmeni/Netanyahu keeping each other in power by appearing to be in immediate threat to each other
With nuclear weapons critical mass is critical mass, you really can't cheat physics by using lower uranium concentrations or less mass
Refining uranium is a numbers game, and during ww2 the US was expending vast resources and numerous experimental approaches towards getting weapons grade material. Much more resources than a smaller country like Iran could afford. They also generated a significant amount of plutonium in addition to the uranium
It is called the Non Proliferation Treaty, and the idea is to not allow additional countries to develop nuclear weapons beyond the countries that had developed them before the treaty was finalized in 1996
http://www.un.org/disarmament/...
The central idea being that the existing countries had made it through the cold war without nuking each other and had developed control system mature enough to avoid an accident, while many of the banned countries did not have nukes yet and demonstrated aggressive behavior to wards their neighbors
The point of this exercise is to keep them from getting enough enriched uranium for one bomb
Most of their enrichment now is below 5%, wit attempts to get up to 20%
Weapons grade is over 85%
Dirty business of governments that you are too squeamish to be bothered with
My assessment comes from what I pay at the pump, or from my local utility company
If it does not include their costs, then they will go out of business, there are some caveats below:
In the case of fossil fuels, they have been giving a free pass on recognizing the costs of their pollution by the politicians (usually on the right) that they provide donations to. If fossil fuels (coal in particular) had to limit their release of pollutants (including CO2) to a similar level that nuclear power has to demonstrate, they would no longer be the least expensive source of power and would quickly lose their position as the main source of power for the US
If solar attains a rapid acceptance and development while it is heavily subsidized, then it will eventually have to demonstrate its merits to business on a cost basis. This is something that nuclear power has demonstrated, even when faced with extra costs of lawsuits that are placed on them by the environmental and nimby movements
Do I believe that solar can become cost competitive, sure... eventually. My money is on nuclear for the next hundred years, assume we do not decide to choke ourselves out by sticking to fossil fuels
If there is a large sell off in fossil fuels, then the remaining actors will be able to purchase those assets for less money and have ample reserves to support politicians to prevent fossil fuels from being outlawed
Actions like this will only may actors like the kochs more wealthy and more likely to seek political influence
There is every reason to consider the cost of the power inputs that are required to produce green energy.
Overly optimistic calculations made ethanol from corn look like a great thing because they did not consider the energy that is spent creating the farm equipment, sowing and harvesting the corn etc
Anybody coming to the table with a 'new' power source that seems to ignore these costs should be sent packing to do their homework
Carter blocked building any breeder reactors in America, not uranium fed nuclear reactors
Public opinion, constant lawsuits and rabid opposition from environmental groups has prevented the rapid use of nuclear power in America
The growth of the Green Party in Europe has had a similar effect there
In particular, Greenpeace has become the single biggest proponent of fossil fuels through their complete refusal to recognize the merits of nuclear power
They even tossed out one of their founders when he pointed out that nuclear power would represent a net positive by reducing the use of fossil fuels
I am not necessarily disagreeing with you just pointing out that Carter is not the bogey-man that you made him out to be. His opposition to the spread of breeder reactors was intended to reduce the possibility of non-nuclear countries getting plutonium
Feeling grumpy?
From page 2 of the linked article:
Apple Macintosh computers and servers running OSX use NTP, and Stenn said Apple developers have called him for help on several NTP issues. In the last such incident, he said he delayed a patch to give Apple more time to prepare OS X for it. When they were ready, he applied the patch and asked "whether Apple could send a donation to the Network Time Foundation," Stenn recalled. "They said they would do their best to see that Apple throws some money our way." But it hasn't happened yet.
Apparently somebody is under the impression that OSX still uses it, unfortunately this is how the business majors deal withit:
"Everybody loves us," Stenn said. "But people with money say, 'We don't give to open source projects.'"
http://www.informationweek.com...
Um, don't forget timezone, daylight savings, leap seconds etc...
I think that the 'synchronized time base' thing becomes an issue with transaction processing, surely there are other issues as well what with it having been accepted as part of the environment for the past three decades