I assumed from the summary that they'd work together to display something on multiple screens. But they don't, the multiple ones seem no better than single ones. Surely it wouldn't be too hard to use xdmx to get a bunch displaying a single big picture?
An industrial center, even one producing weapons, is not a military target. If it had been an army/naval base or whatever that would have been legitimate.
You clearly didn't read the post I replied to. If you require verifying the recipient you need a full keyboard, not just a calculator. And it would quickly become too annoying for people to use.
Please stop trying to make the web do things that there are much better-suited alternatives for. Wouldn't this be so much more usable and efficient as a perl or similar script/library, that you could use not only to get things manually but as part of a greater program?
Not combustion, but if you want to learn about how a car engine works, it really is worth getting an older car and looking at it. As long as you have all the manuals, you'll have a much better chance of understanding how the thing works with a model T than a modern car.
One great thing about my old Apple ][ was you got a fold-out circuit diagram in the back of the manual. And the hardware was mostly simple enough to understand. Anyone else remember coding delay loops and reading repeatedly from a special address to try and make a decent sound?
I don't know enough about Omaha Beach to comment, but WWI was very much about looking out for their own. US didn't care until a) a US passenger ship got sunk b) the Zimmerman telegram showed Hitler had plans to attack the US c) it was pretty clear the Brits and French were winning. That looks very much like a nation that cares only about itself. South Korea was also about their own interest. The invasion had a fair bit of popular support, and I can't imagine the US would think fighting back up the country (everything except the very tip had been invaded by the time the US got involved) would be the best thing for its people. No, they intervened to show the USSR that they wouldn't accept the spread of communism, and that they were in control of the world. Sounds like an overgrown bully to me.
The reason people don't accept any justification is because they believe some things are wrong regardless of what caused them. If you believe eating babies is wrong, you won't accept any justification someone tries to give you for having eaten babies. You'll just say they did wrong.
I think not being there gives you a better perspective. It's hard for someone whose husband/wife/brother/etc. was killed in a POW camp to be impartial.
Are you saying we can't condemn anything that we weren't there for? How about serial killers today? How about Nanking or anything else the pro-bomb side uses to argue the bomb was justified?
They stood up and cheered for the same reason all the guy up there whose grandmother's baby was starved in a POW camp is here defending the nukes. The British had bombed German cities, in fact it was us who made the change to attacking infrastructure rather than direct military targets (not saying it wouldn't have happened anyway, but as it is the British are responsible). They probably knew people who had been killed in their houses or working in the factory. People will justify anything in terms of "the enemy was worse". Many of the people here defending the nukes are not very different from those people cheering.
No, how about just bombing the actual military targets? And, people like you always point out that conventional firebombing was more effective. So, in that case, if we absolutely had to bomb hiroshima and nagasaki why not do it with ordinary firebombing and not be killing people with the radiation decades after the war ended?
There will be people who know who survive. I have only the basic ideas of how to make charcoal and use it to forge iron - but I know one person just in my village who knows it in enough detail to do it. As long as people still listen to each other, we can get things back up and running.
The people working in the factories were civilians, plain and simple. If people are actually carrying weapons then they aren't, but making parts in a factory doesn't make you non-civilian, and it sure as hell doesn't make you a legitimate military target. If people are part of the actual armed forces, or part of some unit having the properties "
that of being commanded by a person responsible for his subordinates;
that of having a fixed distinctive sign recognizable at a distance;
that of carrying arms openly;", are legitimate military targets. People working in factories aren't.
It doesn't always predict eventual triumph. There's plenty of SF about a post-apocalyptic setting where humanity is on the way out, or just dark hopeless futures. I've just read Dick's "Second Variety" (very good short story, with nothing that could be described as science) and am working my disordered way through Reynolds' revelation space series, which although it finishes on a high note for the moment has humanity's extinction being inevitable in another billion years or so, and a sort of epilogue about having to flee again.
FTFA: Zennström agrees the amount of adware in programs like Kazaa, and some of the other file-sharing networks, is "way too much". "It destroys the user experience", he says. Kazaa initially had a very limited number of advertisements, which he says "wasn't that bad in the beginning", but they grew over time. "That's something that me and Janus learnt as an experience, and with Skype we did not have any type of advertisements whatsoever."
The solution to this isn't to stay mundane. You just have to stay consistent. Make sure the social consequences of any innovation you introduce make sense. The old line about the car and the traffic jam is a good guide.
I think it was more because of him having reached the "singularity" with Neuromancer, and the sequels to that not really working, so he has to set anything else before it. (Or change his view of how the future will go, but I get the impression he wants to make everything he writes almost-fit together.
Slashdot Mirror
I assumed from the summary that they'd work together to display something on multiple screens. But they don't, the multiple ones seem no better than single ones. Surely it wouldn't be too hard to use xdmx to get a bunch displaying a single big picture?
An industrial center, even one producing weapons, is not a military target. If it had been an army/naval base or whatever that would have been legitimate.
Not that I can see on their site, and they seem to only support upgrading it in windows (which I used to dual-boot but has lately not been working)
It's their nearest and wealthiest potential trade partner. It does have a big impact.
You clearly didn't read the post I replied to. If you require verifying the recipient you need a full keyboard, not just a calculator. And it would quickly become too annoying for people to use.
Er, compare the 614000 results there with the 13900000 results for data bus. I think it's a misspelling.
Please stop trying to make the web do things that there are much better-suited alternatives for. Wouldn't this be so much more usable and efficient as a perl or similar script/library, that you could use not only to get things manually but as part of a greater program?
Not combustion, but if you want to learn about how a car engine works, it really is worth getting an older car and looking at it. As long as you have all the manuals, you'll have a much better chance of understanding how the thing works with a model T than a modern car.
One great thing about my old Apple ][ was you got a fold-out circuit diagram in the back of the manual. And the hardware was mostly simple enough to understand. Anyone else remember coding delay loops and reading repeatedly from a special address to try and make a decent sound?
I don't know enough about Omaha Beach to comment, but WWI was very much about looking out for their own. US didn't care until a) a US passenger ship got sunk b) the Zimmerman telegram showed Hitler had plans to attack the US c) it was pretty clear the Brits and French were winning. That looks very much like a nation that cares only about itself. South Korea was also about their own interest. The invasion had a fair bit of popular support, and I can't imagine the US would think fighting back up the country (everything except the very tip had been invaded by the time the US got involved) would be the best thing for its people. No, they intervened to show the USSR that they wouldn't accept the spread of communism, and that they were in control of the world. Sounds like an overgrown bully to me.
Yeah. Remember Koom Valley!
The reason people don't accept any justification is because they believe some things are wrong regardless of what caused them. If you believe eating babies is wrong, you won't accept any justification someone tries to give you for having eaten babies. You'll just say they did wrong.
Are you saying we can't condemn anything that we weren't there for? How about serial killers today? How about Nanking or anything else the pro-bomb side uses to argue the bomb was justified?
Because it shows that the US censors information about their wartime atrocities? I'd say that's pretty relevant to my rights online.
Of course it wasn't bombed _because_ it was civilian. That doesn't change the facts that it was civilian and it was bombed.
There are clean hands, just not the Brits in that particular war.
They stood up and cheered for the same reason all the guy up there whose grandmother's baby was starved in a POW camp is here defending the nukes. The British had bombed German cities, in fact it was us who made the change to attacking infrastructure rather than direct military targets (not saying it wouldn't have happened anyway, but as it is the British are responsible). They probably knew people who had been killed in their houses or working in the factory. People will justify anything in terms of "the enemy was worse". Many of the people here defending the nukes are not very different from those people cheering.
No, how about just bombing the actual military targets? And, people like you always point out that conventional firebombing was more effective. So, in that case, if we absolutely had to bomb hiroshima and nagasaki why not do it with ordinary firebombing and not be killing people with the radiation decades after the war ended?
There will be people who know who survive. I have only the basic ideas of how to make charcoal and use it to forge iron - but I know one person just in my village who knows it in enough detail to do it. As long as people still listen to each other, we can get things back up and running.
The people working in the factories were civilians, plain and simple. If people are actually carrying weapons then they aren't, but making parts in a factory doesn't make you non-civilian, and it sure as hell doesn't make you a legitimate military target. If people are part of the actual armed forces, or part of some unit having the properties " that of being commanded by a person responsible for his subordinates; that of having a fixed distinctive sign recognizable at a distance; that of carrying arms openly;", are legitimate military targets. People working in factories aren't.
It doesn't always predict eventual triumph. There's plenty of SF about a post-apocalyptic setting where humanity is on the way out, or just dark hopeless futures. I've just read Dick's "Second Variety" (very good short story, with nothing that could be described as science) and am working my disordered way through Reynolds' revelation space series, which although it finishes on a high note for the moment has humanity's extinction being inevitable in another billion years or so, and a sort of epilogue about having to flee again.
FTFA:
Zennström agrees the amount of adware in programs like Kazaa, and some of the other file-sharing networks, is "way too much".
"It destroys the user experience", he says.
Kazaa initially had a very limited number of advertisements, which he says "wasn't that bad in the beginning", but they grew over time.
"That's something that me and Janus learnt as an experience, and with Skype we did not have any type of advertisements whatsoever."
The solution to this isn't to stay mundane. You just have to stay consistent. Make sure the social consequences of any innovation you introduce make sense. The old line about the car and the traffic jam is a good guide.
I think it was more because of him having reached the "singularity" with Neuromancer, and the sequels to that not really working, so he has to set anything else before it. (Or change his view of how the future will go, but I get the impression he wants to make everything he writes almost-fit together.
How do you know they would have collapsed if they weren't waging an underground war and overt big-weapon contest?