This is indeed the case. The USS Akron and USS Macon, built for the US Navy in the early 30s, could launch and retrieve Curtiss F9C Sparrowhawk biplanes.
Gun deaths are the same thing: not visible, so ignored.
You obviously didn't experience the sniper shootings in the DC area a few years ago. I used to live a couple miles from and went shopping at the shopping center where one of the shootings took place. Though I moved a couple months earlier, I still had many friends in the area, and those "gun deaths" were anything but ignored!
I lived in Sweden last year, and while I didn't personally try to test how transparent the scoiety is, it is much more open than the US. There was a case not long ago where an archbishop or something was forced to release personal communications with the subordinate bishops in the area (I'm not too clear on the details, but Sweden has a state church, so archbishop is a government position). There was also a case where a high-level minister (government, not church) was forced to resign after the press learned that she had bought herself a candy bar on her government credit card. So yes, Sweden takes transparency and very seriously and they aren't afraid to boot somebody who doesn't live up the standards out of office.
It causes constant problems in relations between the US and Sweden, because Sweden wants the US to tell them things which may be sensitive or classified, but the US is afraid that if they do tell them then by Swedish law they would become publically available.
You are behind the times. A judge has already blocked the plan from being carried forward with; the school district has roughly until the end of the month to appeal, if they want to.
I hope it fails--not because I'm a luddite or anything, or because I dislike Apple, or because I think that this particular case is badly planned--but because I think that technology should not be central to an academic education. Technology is a tool, and students should be taught how to use it, but any time you make the tool central to the process, the real goals tend to become obscured. They'll spend time teaching kids how to use the laptop instead of teaching them how to read and think critically.
Additionally, I think the pervasive presence of spellcheckers which would come with such a program should be avoided at all costs. If the kids are to be taking notes on these laptops, they should be doing it in a program which offers no spelling help--MS Word and other programs which automatically correct common mistakes without even notifying the user are particularly bad, because it reinforces those mistakes.
While I think perhaps you go a little too far, I strongly agree that access to spellcheckers in the early years should be strongly discouraged. I started doing all my work on the computer, and using a spellchecker, around 5th grade, and my spelling grew increasingly worse for several years after that, until I decided that I'd better learn to spell again. A combination of doing much more writing by hand and avoiding spellcheckers (especially automatic ones which correct your mistakes without even bringing them to your attention, like in MS Word) as far as possible.
Spell checkers should never be used in elementary school, and only very sparingly in the years after that. It is better for everybody involved if the kid has Mom or Dad proof read it rather than running it through a computer spellchecker: the kid will learn more, and the parents will be slightly more involved in his education. Running a final draft through a spellchecker before turning it in may be acceptable.
So because some people misuse the technology by playing solitaire, you decide that it is bad?
I bought a laptop when I went to college, and it was an immense help. That may because I had the disciplain not to play solitaire in class. But that's a matter of disciplain, not technology.
Not everybody, believe it or not, prefers Firefox.
I asked my brother about it a couple months ago when I noticed he was still running IE. He's really into little gadgets and the cutting edge and such--much more than I am--and so I was a bit surprised. He told me that he tried it, but didn't see anything special about it and continued using IE.
Maybe I'll convince him to try it again when we get another major update...
I hardly think you can call using someone else's IP identity theft, seeing as most dialup (and some broadband) users don't have a static IP.
The question of illegal activity is more interesting, because the article says that the person who owns the AP is responsible for anything that happens:
Such a defence would hold little water as the person installing the network, be they a home user or a business, has ultimate responsibility for any criminal activity that takes place on that network, whether it be launching a hack attack or downloading illegal pornography.
I've been having similar thoughts, but on a broader scale. Bear with me.
They were precipitated by reading the following quote on the BBC website, after the London bombings:
This is a nation which has been tested in adversity, which has survived physical destruction and catastrophic loss of life.
"I do not underestimate the ability of fanatical groups of terrorists to kill and destroy, but they do not threaten the life of the nation.
"Whether we would survive Hitler hung in the balance, but there is no doubt that we shall survive al-Qaeda.
"The Spanish people have not said that what happened in Madrid, hideous crime as it was, threatened the life of their nation. Their legendary pride would not allow it.
"Terrorist violence, serious as it is, does not threaten our institutions of government or our existence as a civil community."
From one Lord Hoffman.
I've come to the conclusion that most of the things we are fighting so vicously these days--whether it be through the War on Terror, the War on Drugs, or the War on anything else--are not capable of destroying our society. I do ont believe that Al Qaeda have hte capability to destry western society, however much they may wish to.
On the other hand, in our own misguided efforts to fight back, we might just go off the deep end--perhaps we have, in some aspects--and have a heck of a hard time staying afloat.
Imagine putting Jow Sixpack in there. He'd probably read the summary, scan the rest of the first page, look at the pretty pictures, and pull out the Approved stamp.
I get searched nearly every time I fly. Probably because I fly to odd places like Ukraine and Nicaragua. And Sweden.
Which, of course, wouldn't have anything to do with the fact that my dad works for the US State Department in those countries. Oh no, I must be a dangerous terrorist.
Slashdot Mirror
This is indeed the case. The USS Akron and USS Macon, built for the US Navy in the early 30s, could launch and retrieve Curtiss F9C Sparrowhawk biplanes.
Wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Akron_(ZRS-4)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Macon_(ZRS-5)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F9C_Sparrowhawk
Gun deaths are the same thing: not visible, so ignored.
You obviously didn't experience the sniper shootings in the DC area a few years ago. I used to live a couple miles from and went shopping at the shopping center where one of the shootings took place. Though I moved a couple months earlier, I still had many friends in the area, and those "gun deaths" were anything but ignored!
I lived in Sweden last year, and while I didn't personally try to test how transparent the scoiety is, it is much more open than the US. There was a case not long ago where an archbishop or something was forced to release personal communications with the subordinate bishops in the area (I'm not too clear on the details, but Sweden has a state church, so archbishop is a government position). There was also a case where a high-level minister (government, not church) was forced to resign after the press learned that she had bought herself a candy bar on her government credit card. So yes, Sweden takes transparency and very seriously and they aren't afraid to boot somebody who doesn't live up the standards out of office.
It causes constant problems in relations between the US and Sweden, because Sweden wants the US to tell them things which may be sensitive or classified, but the US is afraid that if they do tell them then by Swedish law they would become publically available.
iTunes already isn't profitable. Apple just uses it to drive sales of iPods, which are very profitable.
Try turning safe search off.
Strangely enough, strict safe search finds more results than moderate safe search.
You are behind the times. A judge has already blocked the plan from being carried forward with; the school district has roughly until the end of the month to appeal, if they want to.
I hope it fails--not because I'm a luddite or anything, or because I dislike Apple, or because I think that this particular case is badly planned--but because I think that technology should not be central to an academic education. Technology is a tool, and students should be taught how to use it, but any time you make the tool central to the process, the real goals tend to become obscured. They'll spend time teaching kids how to use the laptop instead of teaching them how to read and think critically.
Additionally, I think the pervasive presence of spellcheckers which would come with such a program should be avoided at all costs. If the kids are to be taking notes on these laptops, they should be doing it in a program which offers no spelling help--MS Word and other programs which automatically correct common mistakes without even notifying the user are particularly bad, because it reinforces those mistakes.
While I think perhaps you go a little too far, I strongly agree that access to spellcheckers in the early years should be strongly discouraged. I started doing all my work on the computer, and using a spellchecker, around 5th grade, and my spelling grew increasingly worse for several years after that, until I decided that I'd better learn to spell again. A combination of doing much more writing by hand and avoiding spellcheckers (especially automatic ones which correct your mistakes without even bringing them to your attention, like in MS Word) as far as possible.
Spell checkers should never be used in elementary school, and only very sparingly in the years after that. It is better for everybody involved if the kid has Mom or Dad proof read it rather than running it through a computer spellchecker: the kid will learn more, and the parents will be slightly more involved in his education. Running a final draft through a spellchecker before turning it in may be acceptable.
So because some people misuse the technology by playing solitaire, you decide that it is bad?
I bought a laptop when I went to college, and it was an immense help. That may because I had the disciplain not to play solitaire in class. But that's a matter of disciplain, not technology.
It still says 771,000 over here...
Perhaps my google is just better than your google, eh?
Yes, because that never happens with other manufacturers.
So you got unlucky with Apple. The guy in the story got unlucky with Dell.
The difference is...?
Since we all know that 771,000 results for "ferrari" on google images isn't enough.
Yeah, I can see that it might be helpful in some cases. Ferrari just isn't a good example.
Not everybody, believe it or not, prefers Firefox.
I asked my brother about it a couple months ago when I noticed he was still running IE. He's really into little gadgets and the cutting edge and such--much more than I am--and so I was a bit surprised. He told me that he tried it, but didn't see anything special about it and continued using IE.
Maybe I'll convince him to try it again when we get another major update...
Toeing the line. As in having your toe right on the line.
Sorry, that's just one of my pet peeves.
Remember, if you outlaw modems without backdoors, only criminals will have modems without backdoors.
Eerily applicable.
It's obviously because all the worms are being written by those Apache hackers just out of spite.
Duh.
Cool! I didn't know Bush was president in 1999!
Oh, wait.
The Ubuntu foundation already does do this--they will mail you (a reasonable number of) Ubuntu CDs for free, no questions asked.
This is just another way of spreading it.
You oppose the War on Terror? Why, you must be a terrorist yourself! It's Guantanamo for you, my friend!
I assume you are referring to Guantanamo Bay. Did it ever occur to you that there are no citizens of the United States being held there?
Really?
The question of illegal activity is more interesting, because the article says that the person who owns the AP is responsible for anything that happens:
I've been having similar thoughts, but on a broader scale. Bear with me.
They were precipitated by reading the following quote on the BBC website, after the London bombings:
This is a nation which has been tested in adversity, which
has survived physical destruction and catastrophic loss of life.
"I do not underestimate the ability of fanatical groups of terrorists
to kill and destroy, but they do not threaten the life of the nation.
"Whether we would survive Hitler hung in the balance, but there is no
doubt that we shall survive al-Qaeda.
"The Spanish people have not said that what happened in Madrid,
hideous crime as it was, threatened the life of their nation. Their
legendary pride would not allow it.
"Terrorist violence, serious as it is, does not threaten our
institutions of government or our existence as a civil community."
From one Lord Hoffman.
I've come to the conclusion that most of the things we are fighting so vicously these days--whether it be through the War on Terror, the War on Drugs, or the War on anything else--are not capable of destroying our society. I do ont believe that Al Qaeda have hte capability to destry western society, however much they may wish to.
On the other hand, in our own misguided efforts to fight back, we might just go off the deep end--perhaps we have, in some aspects--and have a heck of a hard time staying afloat.
Have you ever read a patent application?
Imagine putting Jow Sixpack in there. He'd probably read the summary, scan the rest of the first page, look at the pretty pictures, and pull out the Approved stamp.
Not a good idea.
I reckon the trademark would no longer stand up in court.
Not a problem.
I get searched nearly every time I fly. Probably because I fly to odd places like Ukraine and Nicaragua. And Sweden.
Which, of course, wouldn't have anything to do with the fact that my dad works for the US State Department in those countries. Oh no, I must be a dangerous terrorist.
Bah.
Same here. I get singled out for "random" searches nearly every time I fly.