That's one thing alarmists can't wrap their heads around, the idea that businesses are just shells. If GM had gone under, competitors would have bough tup the viable parts and rehired as many workers as they needed. GM the shell would have gone out of business, its investors would have lost their shirts, but just as many cars would still be produced, and if not by rehired GM workers in ex-GM plants, then by competing workers in competing plants.
No no no. You are like every other statist, assuming people are too dumb to change and fix things, that they will sit their like grinning idiots waiting for the government to change their diapers.
In reality, it's the government which wants everyone in diapers, and the people who want to shed them and get on with their lives.
Look at how many disasters where people solved their problems and began rebuilding before FEMA even got a memo passed around for revision.
You probably stocked up five years food for Y2K also. Stores and businesses were too stupid to prepare properly. Statists think if the ATMs or banking system had rolled over dead from Y2K that businesses would have just shut their doors and sat on their thumbs while food rotted. Businesses, on the other hand, would have done a hell of a lot of credit business using pencil and paper.
People and businesses are incredibly resilient. They make things work, and the proof is how the statists have to come up with ever more stifling regulations to suffocate the people who found their way around the last set of stifling regulations. Statists assume people are stupid and ignorant, too dumb to run their own lives, and that is their excuse for ever more interference when they are proved wrong.
Bullshit. The GDP is $16T. The bailout was what, $1T? The economy would have shaken and been upset for a year or two, then be booming along. What we got instead of a still crappy economy not in the midst of what anyone decent would call a recovery.
And it's a bullshit definition and a bullshit solution.
The story goes that subprime borrowers were delinquent, endangering the institutions who held the mortgages. Therefore the government had to borrow a trillion dollars and pay ff those delinquent mortgages.
Why did they not pay off the mortgages directly, send money to the delinquent borrowers to help with their mortgage payments? Why did they have to send the money directly to the banks, and then piss and moan and beg the banks to take care of the delinquent mortgages?
Because they had to bail out their cronies. They don't give a rat's ass about the mortgages except that their buddies were in danger of not getting their million dollar bonuses.
Bankrupting those big banks would have sent a very clear message: don't make subprime mortgages. The economy would have shuddered, had a year or two fright, and we'd be oh so much better off now.
Look at the 1920 recession, which was about as bad as the 1929 recession. It recovered in 18 months and was roaring away; the 1929 recession got worse and worse, and didn't recover for SIXTEEN years. The difference is that in 1920, President Harding shrank the federal budget to a balanced state, whereas Hoover, and later FDR, borrowed like crazy to try to bribe the recession into keeping quiet. That 18 months of disruption was far better in the end that the 16 years of agony following 1929.
"debug" has been used since Edison days at least, over a hundred years ago. It means get the bugs out. It applies to far more than just debugging programs.
This post is part of the process of debugging your post.
Training? Like those New York cops who injured 9 bystanders in a wild street shootout when the suspect was done shooting and headed home where he could have been arrested a lot more safely? Or did you mean like the Clackamas CCW holder who used his training to NOT shoot when there were innocent bystanders in the background, but still stopped the massacre because the killer shot himself?
What do you think CCW guns are if not secured? Do you think they hold them in their hand at all times, or wear them on a lanyard around their neck, or just leave them lying all over the place?
Oversight, as in cops kill 200,000 dogs a year. SWAT teams break into and shoo tup the wrong house every day of the year. Any oversight? Show me.
A Florida study -- you know Florida, the only state with its own Fark tag -- showed that off-duty cops commit more crimes than CCW holders.
Interesting that most of Europe has a higher violent crime rate than the US, by a factor of 2 or 3. Britain has the highest violent crime rate in the EU.
Burglars prefer to rob occupied houses in the evening in disarmed societies because alarms will be off, the occupants have wallets and purses, and can be scared into opening safes and pointing out where the valuables are.
Burglars in the US prefer to rob empty houses in daylight when there is less likelihood of finding an armed occupant.
The statistics are quite clear on that.
The US has somewhere around 2M defensive gun uses a year, most involving just racking the slide or showing the gun, not even firing it. That's a lot of death and injury prevented, and it sure outweighs the killings, 2/3 of which are criminals killing criminals anyway.
The US murder rate is NOT connected to easy availability of guns; the murder rate using other than guns is higher than elsewhere too.
But our overall violent crime rate is way down, and most murder victims are criminals.
You could look up these and more actual facts with google. But I suspect your mind is already made up; guns are scary and evil and MUST BE STOPPED, never mind that none of the proposed laws would have prevented any of the massacres in the last 50 years.
What would stop massacres much quicker is getting rid of the gun-free zones. Let teachers and staff carry if they already have the conceal carry permit. Heck, even throw in extra mandatory training if that idea scares you too much. A study of stranger massacres stopped by an outsider, not counting family murder-suicides, found that those stopped by a called policeman had an average death rate of 14. Those stopped by someone on the spot, whether a civilian or off-duty police, had an average death rate of 2.x.
What's that you say, that CCW hodlers are useless and even dangerous?
The Clackamas mall shooter, who stole his killing rifle, was stopped by a CCW holder who pointed his gun at him but refrained from shooting because there were bystanders in the background; the killer shot himself at that point. Contrast that with the limited Empire State Building shooter, where all the bystander injuries, 9 of them, were caused by police engaging in a wild west shootout on a crowded street.
Florida, I believe, ran a study and found CCW holders commited far fewer crimes than off-duty police.
Oh, you want to ban "high capacity" magazines?
Jared Loughner, who shot Gabby Giffords and killed 12 (?) people in Arizona, was slowed down when his 33 round magazine jammed. I think the Aurora movie theater killer was similar stopped by a jammed "high capacity" magazine.
The Sandy Hook iller fired 150 shots in 20 minues (20 minutes! When seconds count, the police are only TWENTY MINUTES away!). That's 8 shots a minute, every 8 seconds. It takes 2-3 seconds to swap magazines. He was changing magazines long before than ran out. Do you really think 10 round magazines would have made any difference?
What's that you say, don't confused you with facts?
Google, buddy, look up some real facts and find some REAL ways to stop these massacres.
One of the most interesting things about gun grabbers is that all they care about is 20 dead children at a school; they utterly ignore any affect they might have on the 500 people who died in Chacago last year.
You don't even know what "assault weapons" are, because there is no standard definition; they are just ordinary semi-auto rifles with various laws defining them as "assault weapons" because they have nasty evil features like bayonet lugs -- how many crimes have been committed with bayonets? They are not machine guns, they don't shoot infrared-guided heat seeking bullets, and they are in fact used in so few crimes that e government agency, tasked for studying the effect of the 1994 ban, found no effect.
If "assault rifles" include AR-15s, and are only used for mass killing, then why do police need them?
If 30 round magazines are only used for mass killings, why do police have them?
Rifles of all categories, including the bogus "assault weapons", ate used in something like 3% of all gun crimes.
Do SOMETHING, ANYTHING. Don't let utility get in your way. Don't try to actually solve a problem, just do SOMETHING, ANYTHING! NOW! Before the brain cells can become engaged, I presume.
Or more to the point, the Deacons for Defense. Blacks in 1960s Louisiana who got fed up with the KKK-infested state and local governments, things like the sheriff leading a caravan of 50 KKK cars through their neighborhoods to throw KKK leaflets all over. They used their WW II and Korean War training and their guns and rifles to finally get some justice. There's a movie and a book; the movie is a made-for-TV composite scene kind of thing, decent enough, and all the happenings are documented in the book IIRC.
My favorite scene was when they spent a night in trees, on roofs, and in bushes when they got word the KKK was coming in for some shooting, ambushed them, and the KKK was so thoroughly shamed that they drove an injured man to a hospital across two state lines because they didn't want anyone local to hear about it.
Genuine 2nd amendment functionality within living memory. You can't get better than that.
These people ride rockets tinto orbit at 17,000 mph and come back in something which burns itself up to save their skins, all dependent on incredibly precise control, and you think they would waste any brain power to worry about the module popping from decompression?
Astronauts are probably the most anal-lytic of all adventurers, calculating everything to a fare-thee-well, practicing their missions for years in swim tanks to get every last detail down pat. The last thing they are going to do is become emotional about such an easily proved design.
A specious claim; there are no sources to back your claim. Regulations exist to (a) so the people in charge get their cut, and (b) fix the problems caused by previous regulations while maintaining (a).
A real free market would not cause the problems that governments purport to solve. Read up on AT&T's history for an example. There were hundreds of independent phone operators around the country, all getting along in spite of having different hardware standards and different protocols. All their differences were the usual sort to be expected from a new technology, and were being worked out peaceably with interface equipment, gradual standardization, and direct company-to-company agreements.
AT&T did it differently. They bullied smaller operators, isolated them, refused to cooperate, and it was a race between world domination and lawsuits. When the lawsuits appeared to be winning, AT&T begged the government to rescue them, using the excuse that they were too big to fail, too important, and needed to be regulated as a national public utility.
Occupational licensing began during the late 1800s as a way for existing providers to keep newcomers out. Do you know that licenses to cut hair or do nails generally require 500-2000 hours of schooling, while EMT requires less than 100? That's probably because anybody can actually learn to cut hair or do nails so quickly that there would be no barrier to entry if it weren't for the ridiculous artificial entry requirements.
Almost everywhere, taxis are regulated to a fair-thee-well, where the guiding goal is keeping taxi companies happy by keeping the number low. I could understand requiring taxi drivers to have decent training, a good driving record, and specific levels of insurance, but that should be the end of it. Anyone who could meet those requirements should be able to slap a magnetic sign on their car and give rides, at whatever price they and the passengers could agree on. The new smart phone apps which call taxis shouldn't have to jump thru hoops and go out of their ay to not look like taxis. Once again regulations to freeze the status quo for the benefit of a few have made life worse for most everybody.
Both these and countless other cases are classic examples of how not to help the poor. These are tremendous opportunities for poor people; cut hair on a door step or in a living room to earn a few books, and open a shop once you get busy enough -- but not if you have to go to school full time for a year first. Pick up a few rides on your way home from work when the commute hour needs it most, or on weekends when airport traffic could use the help -- but only if you pay a fortune (one million dollars in NYC) for the permit of an existing taxi driver.
That's what cronyism is. To call it capitalism or laissez-faire is ignorance so pathetic as to be comedy gold.
The alleged threats against the newspaper were not proved, or at least not taken seriously by the police.
It is the hoplophobes who have been crying for the deaths of gunnies and want to drag gunnies around parking lots. It does not take much google-fu to find that the most vitriloic bloody diatribes ahve come from hoplophobes.
And then these jerks, first complaining that no one needs guns for self-protection, and then hiring guns for protection against bogus threats.
If that demonstrates anything, it demonstrates that hoplophobes are more erratic than gunnies.
Planes are vastly simpler in one aspect: engines. It is almost unheard of for engines to fail during flight, other than contaminated fuel or bird strike. It used to be common for transatlantic flights to land with one engine out.
Is this going to make it harder to translate pictures from cameras to displays? I understand that displays will still have pixels, it's just the drawing that is different (AIUI). But cameras detect and report pixels, not vectors. Wouldn't it be better to translate those camera pixels directly to display pixels, instead of storing some information suitable forvector analysis?
I may be completely ignorant here, knowing just enough to be dangerous to my reputation:-)
Planes especially very much rely on GPS, it's at the heart of all navigation systems in airliners. Even most private GA pilots use handheld ones if it's not part of the panel, unless they are intentionally flying by railroad tracks and highways. I believe LORAN was shut down a few years ago. The US Navy considers sextant use so useless that it was dropped from required study at the Academy some years ago, although it may still be taught as an elective.
GPS is also at the heart of many military precision guided missiles and shells.
Prop plane max ceiling is due to losing lift for the wings and oxygen for the engines at high altitudes, same as jet planes. Jets being faster, and lift being proportional to the square of the speed, jets can go higher, but it's got nothing to do with resistance of props.
Prop planes have a lot more trouble breaking the sound barrier. I know sometimes prop tips go supersonic, but they lose efficiency, and I don't think any prop plane has ever gone supersonic, even in a dive out of control.
Cars have been a significant factor for less than a hundred years, considering early cars were a lot slower and not that common. Evolution takes a lot longer to effect changes.
Slashdot Mirror
Also, the currency didn't matter so as long as the value of the boat was correct (either in US or canadian dollars).
Really. Good on you then, I have some money trading I'd like to discuss with you, a proven way to make money!
That's one thing alarmists can't wrap their heads around, the idea that businesses are just shells. If GM had gone under, competitors would have bough tup the viable parts and rehired as many workers as they needed. GM the shell would have gone out of business, its investors would have lost their shirts, but just as many cars would still be produced, and if not by rehired GM workers in ex-GM plants, then by competing workers in competing plants.
No no no. You are like every other statist, assuming people are too dumb to change and fix things, that they will sit their like grinning idiots waiting for the government to change their diapers.
In reality, it's the government which wants everyone in diapers, and the people who want to shed them and get on with their lives.
Look at how many disasters where people solved their problems and began rebuilding before FEMA even got a memo passed around for revision.
You probably stocked up five years food for Y2K also. Stores and businesses were too stupid to prepare properly. Statists think if the ATMs or banking system had rolled over dead from Y2K that businesses would have just shut their doors and sat on their thumbs while food rotted. Businesses, on the other hand, would have done a hell of a lot of credit business using pencil and paper.
People and businesses are incredibly resilient. They make things work, and the proof is how the statists have to come up with ever more stifling regulations to suffocate the people who found their way around the last set of stifling regulations. Statists assume people are stupid and ignorant, too dumb to run their own lives, and that is their excuse for ever more interference when they are proved wrong.
Bullshit. The GDP is $16T. The bailout was what, $1T? The economy would have shaken and been upset for a year or two, then be booming along. What we got instead of a still crappy economy not in the midst of what anyone decent would call a recovery.
And it's a bullshit definition and a bullshit solution.
The story goes that subprime borrowers were delinquent, endangering the institutions who held the mortgages. Therefore the government had to borrow a trillion dollars and pay ff those delinquent mortgages.
Why did they not pay off the mortgages directly, send money to the delinquent borrowers to help with their mortgage payments? Why did they have to send the money directly to the banks, and then piss and moan and beg the banks to take care of the delinquent mortgages?
Because they had to bail out their cronies. They don't give a rat's ass about the mortgages except that their buddies were in danger of not getting their million dollar bonuses.
Bankrupting those big banks would have sent a very clear message: don't make subprime mortgages. The economy would have shuddered, had a year or two fright, and we'd be oh so much better off now.
Look at the 1920 recession, which was about as bad as the 1929 recession. It recovered in 18 months and was roaring away; the 1929 recession got worse and worse, and didn't recover for SIXTEEN years. The difference is that in 1920, President Harding shrank the federal budget to a balanced state, whereas Hoover, and later FDR, borrowed like crazy to try to bribe the recession into keeping quiet. That 18 months of disruption was far better in the end that the 16 years of agony following 1929.
They have better things to do than snipe at you on slashdot.
I don't.
"debug" has been used since Edison days at least, over a hundred years ago. It means get the bugs out. It applies to far more than just debugging programs.
This post is part of the process of debugging your post.
Look again.
Training? Like those New York cops who injured 9 bystanders in a wild street shootout when the suspect was done shooting and headed home where he could have been arrested a lot more safely? Or did you mean like the Clackamas CCW holder who used his training to NOT shoot when there were innocent bystanders in the background, but still stopped the massacre because the killer shot himself?
What do you think CCW guns are if not secured? Do you think they hold them in their hand at all times, or wear them on a lanyard around their neck, or just leave them lying all over the place?
Oversight, as in cops kill 200,000 dogs a year. SWAT teams break into and shoo tup the wrong house every day of the year. Any oversight? Show me.
A Florida study -- you know Florida, the only state with its own Fark tag -- showed that off-duty cops commit more crimes than CCW holders.
Your ignorance is appaling. Educare yourself.
Interesting that most of Europe has a higher violent crime rate than the US, by a factor of 2 or 3. Britain has the highest violent crime rate in the EU.
Burglars prefer to rob occupied houses in the evening in disarmed societies because alarms will be off, the occupants have wallets and purses, and can be scared into opening safes and pointing out where the valuables are.
Burglars in the US prefer to rob empty houses in daylight when there is less likelihood of finding an armed occupant.
The statistics are quite clear on that.
The US has somewhere around 2M defensive gun uses a year, most involving just racking the slide or showing the gun, not even firing it. That's a lot of death and injury prevented, and it sure outweighs the killings, 2/3 of which are criminals killing criminals anyway.
The US murder rate is NOT connected to easy availability of guns; the murder rate using other than guns is higher than elsewhere too.
But our overall violent crime rate is way down, and most murder victims are criminals.
You could look up these and more actual facts with google. But I suspect your mind is already made up; guns are scary and evil and MUST BE STOPPED, never mind that none of the proposed laws would have prevented any of the massacres in the last 50 years.
What would stop massacres much quicker is getting rid of the gun-free zones. Let teachers and staff carry if they already have the conceal carry permit. Heck, even throw in extra mandatory training if that idea scares you too much. A study of stranger massacres stopped by an outsider, not counting family murder-suicides, found that those stopped by a called policeman had an average death rate of 14. Those stopped by someone on the spot, whether a civilian or off-duty police, had an average death rate of 2.x.
What's that you say, that CCW hodlers are useless and even dangerous?
The Clackamas mall shooter, who stole his killing rifle, was stopped by a CCW holder who pointed his gun at him but refrained from shooting because there were bystanders in the background; the killer shot himself at that point. Contrast that with the limited Empire State Building shooter, where all the bystander injuries, 9 of them, were caused by police engaging in a wild west shootout on a crowded street.
Florida, I believe, ran a study and found CCW holders commited far fewer crimes than off-duty police.
Oh, you want to ban "high capacity" magazines?
Jared Loughner, who shot Gabby Giffords and killed 12 (?) people in Arizona, was slowed down when his 33 round magazine jammed. I think the Aurora movie theater killer was similar stopped by a jammed "high capacity" magazine.
The Sandy Hook iller fired 150 shots in 20 minues (20 minutes! When seconds count, the police are only TWENTY MINUTES away!). That's 8 shots a minute, every 8 seconds. It takes 2-3 seconds to swap magazines. He was changing magazines long before than ran out. Do you really think 10 round magazines would have made any difference?
What's that you say, don't confused you with facts?
Google, buddy, look up some real facts and find some REAL ways to stop these massacres.
One of the most interesting things about gun grabbers is that all they care about is 20 dead children at a school; they utterly ignore any affect they might have on the 500 people who died in Chacago last year.
But think of the children, eh?
You don't even know what "assault weapons" are, because there is no standard definition; they are just ordinary semi-auto rifles with various laws defining them as "assault weapons" because they have nasty evil features like bayonet lugs -- how many crimes have been committed with bayonets? They are not machine guns, they don't shoot infrared-guided heat seeking bullets, and they are in fact used in so few crimes that e government agency, tasked for studying the effect of the 1994 ban, found no effect.
If "assault rifles" include AR-15s, and are only used for mass killing, then why do police need them?
If 30 round magazines are only used for mass killings, why do police have them?
Rifles of all categories, including the bogus "assault weapons", ate used in something like 3% of all gun crimes.
Do SOMETHING, ANYTHING. Don't let utility get in your way. Don't try to actually solve a problem, just do SOMETHING, ANYTHING! NOW! Before the brain cells can become engaged, I presume.
Or more to the point, the Deacons for Defense. Blacks in 1960s Louisiana who got fed up with the KKK-infested state and local governments, things like the sheriff leading a caravan of 50 KKK cars through their neighborhoods to throw KKK leaflets all over. They used their WW II and Korean War training and their guns and rifles to finally get some justice. There's a movie and a book; the movie is a made-for-TV composite scene kind of thing, decent enough, and all the happenings are documented in the book IIRC.
My favorite scene was when they spent a night in trees, on roofs, and in bushes when they got word the KKK was coming in for some shooting, ambushed them, and the KKK was so thoroughly shamed that they drove an injured man to a hospital across two state lines because they didn't want anyone local to hear about it.
Genuine 2nd amendment functionality within living memory. You can't get better than that.
These people ride rockets tinto orbit at 17,000 mph and come back in something which burns itself up to save their skins, all dependent on incredibly precise control, and you think they would waste any brain power to worry about the module popping from decompression?
Astronauts are probably the most anal-lytic of all adventurers, calculating everything to a fare-thee-well, practicing their missions for years in swim tanks to get every last detail down pat. The last thing they are going to do is become emotional about such an easily proved design.
A specious claim; there are no sources to back your claim. Regulations exist to (a) so the people in charge get their cut, and (b) fix the problems caused by previous regulations while maintaining (a).
A real free market would not cause the problems that governments purport to solve. Read up on AT&T's history for an example. There were hundreds of independent phone operators around the country, all getting along in spite of having different hardware standards and different protocols. All their differences were the usual sort to be expected from a new technology, and were being worked out peaceably with interface equipment, gradual standardization, and direct company-to-company agreements.
AT&T did it differently. They bullied smaller operators, isolated them, refused to cooperate, and it was a race between world domination and lawsuits. When the lawsuits appeared to be winning, AT&T begged the government to rescue them, using the excuse that they were too big to fail, too important, and needed to be regulated as a national public utility.
Occupational licensing began during the late 1800s as a way for existing providers to keep newcomers out. Do you know that licenses to cut hair or do nails generally require 500-2000 hours of schooling, while EMT requires less than 100? That's probably because anybody can actually learn to cut hair or do nails so quickly that there would be no barrier to entry if it weren't for the ridiculous artificial entry requirements.
Almost everywhere, taxis are regulated to a fair-thee-well, where the guiding goal is keeping taxi companies happy by keeping the number low. I could understand requiring taxi drivers to have decent training, a good driving record, and specific levels of insurance, but that should be the end of it. Anyone who could meet those requirements should be able to slap a magnetic sign on their car and give rides, at whatever price they and the passengers could agree on. The new smart phone apps which call taxis shouldn't have to jump thru hoops and go out of their ay to not look like taxis. Once again regulations to freeze the status quo for the benefit of a few have made life worse for most everybody.
Both these and countless other cases are classic examples of how not to help the poor. These are tremendous opportunities for poor people; cut hair on a door step or in a living room to earn a few books, and open a shop once you get busy enough -- but not if you have to go to school full time for a year first. Pick up a few rides on your way home from work when the commute hour needs it most, or on weekends when airport traffic could use the help -- but only if you pay a fortune (one million dollars in NYC) for the permit of an existing taxi driver.
That's what cronyism is. To call it capitalism or laissez-faire is ignorance so pathetic as to be comedy gold.
Well, free minds terrify politicians of all stripes, not to mention bureaucrats :-)
The alleged threats against the newspaper were not proved, or at least not taken seriously by the police.
It is the hoplophobes who have been crying for the deaths of gunnies and want to drag gunnies around parking lots. It does not take much google-fu to find that the most vitriloic bloody diatribes ahve come from hoplophobes.
And then these jerks, first complaining that no one needs guns for self-protection, and then hiring guns for protection against bogus threats.
If that demonstrates anything, it demonstrates that hoplophobes are more erratic than gunnies.
Planes are vastly simpler in one aspect: engines. It is almost unheard of for engines to fail during flight, other than contaminated fuel or bird strike. It used to be common for transatlantic flights to land with one engine out.
Is this going to make it harder to translate pictures from cameras to displays? I understand that displays will still have pixels, it's just the drawing that is different (AIUI). But cameras detect and report pixels, not vectors. Wouldn't it be better to translate those camera pixels directly to display pixels, instead of storing some information suitable forvector analysis?
I may be completely ignorant here, knowing just enough to be dangerous to my reputation :-)
Spoofing the signals to make receivers mistake their position isn't the point of this report. It's the potential to brick the receivers which is new.
Planes especially very much rely on GPS, it's at the heart of all navigation systems in airliners. Even most private GA pilots use handheld ones if it's not part of the panel, unless they are intentionally flying by railroad tracks and highways. I believe LORAN was shut down a few years ago. The US Navy considers sextant use so useless that it was dropped from required study at the Academy some years ago, although it may still be taught as an elective.
GPS is also at the heart of many military precision guided missiles and shells.
You are a really misinformed troll.
should be a treasonable offense by public officials. String the state dept up, every single last one of them.
Please check the words written, not the words read.
Think of them as more efficient higher capacity longer range helicopters.
Prop plane max ceiling is due to losing lift for the wings and oxygen for the engines at high altitudes, same as jet planes. Jets being faster, and lift being proportional to the square of the speed, jets can go higher, but it's got nothing to do with resistance of props.
Prop planes have a lot more trouble breaking the sound barrier. I know sometimes prop tips go supersonic, but they lose efficiency, and I don't think any prop plane has ever gone supersonic, even in a dive out of control.
Cars have been a significant factor for less than a hundred years, considering early cars were a lot slower and not that common. Evolution takes a lot longer to effect changes.