A number of terrorist groups have been know to operate shell corporations, or have intimate connections with companies that can ship and receive such containers.
It's interesting to see how easy it is to get a seal on a container which allows free passage through customs here, based on an inspection in Rotterdam, for example.
Well, if we can find the resources to unpack them for sale, we can find the resources to inspect them... Isn't it the customer that unpacks a container, after it's been slid onto a truck and reached its destination?
"Time for the required DOT inspection, Ahmad!"
"The plutonium spheres are all intact and accounted for, O'Reilly."
... If the enemy is using civilian computers in his country so as to cause us harm, then we may attack them. So... if the enemy is using civilian computers in our country... will the USAF still take them out?
What if these computers (in our country or another, third country) are running critical infrastructure? Or are essential to a hospital, school, or business?
CEO Peerstone Research Member of the Technology Council Jeff Gould is the Chief Executive Officer and Director of Research at Peerstone Research. He produces primary research and independent analysis focused on enterprise applications software, middleware software and server hardware.
Mr. Gould uses proprietary primary research to identify and quantify the impact of emerging user trends on enterprise applications, middleware stack and server hardware vendors. The Application Vendors inlcude: ORCL, SEBL, SAP, LWSN, MSFT, QADI, MANU, ITWO Software Stack Vendors: MSFT, ORCL SUNW, BEAS, IBM, NOVL, RHAT, SAP (Netweaver); and Hardware Stack Vendors include: IBM, DELL, SUNW, HPQ, UNI, INTC, AMD. (This is me - Update Profile)
Employment History 2001 - present CEO Peerstone Research 1995 - 2001 Editor in Chief - International Editions InformationWeek Magazine
I'm a writer... previously published a decade or so ago, and now polishing my skills once more to re-enter the market.
Michael J. Ross would be a perfect editor for me; he's ruthless and cuts right to the problems in a chunk of prose. However, judging by this article, I would pay a large sum of money to ensure he never reviewed my book.
If he has an overall favorable opinion, he should allow that to be the tone, with his reservations being an undertone, suggestions for improvement, and a notice to the reader that the book needs a little more polishing. I felt his tone was overly negative.
If you love something, or even like it, show this in your review...
Then again, perhaps I'm being overly critical.
*Note: This post contains some obvious cliches, grammatical errors, and dodgy spelling choices.
I feel your characterization of lulu.com as a "vanity-press" publisher is pejorative. A more accurate description would be 'print-on-demand' publisher.
In my opinion, one of the big differences between the two is marketing to the author, and the requirement of a minimum press run by vanity publishers.
Looks like if they want to get trolled, they can just log on Slashdot and EmagGeek will do the honors.
"You've got an OLPC? You must be starving to death! Turn that sucker off and go gather grubs! Bet you wish you had clean water instead! I'm sure no one built any infrastructure in your country, 'cause they're all spending the dough on education, and we all know education is useless! Back to the Stone Age for you!"
It works like this for the airline industry, or it did until 9-11 changed the paradigm: If terrorism => mechanical failure If mechanical failure => pilot error. .. Spoken by someone who's never read an NTSB report.
... My aunt had a friend who... The plural of anecdote is not data.
I see no cited sources.
. . .
Can we move on to something more substantive, such as your evidence for the existence of Santa Claus?
The error made in the TWA 800 investigation was that the government assumed it was a missile strike, and made knee-jerk changes in airport security because of this assumption. When the evidence for a missile strike proved non-existent, they had to start from scratch. People jumped on the explanation, and then tried to turn it around on the government (The U. S. Navy shot it down!).
A List Apart is a great site. I learned a lot about design, style, and usability. There is quite an archive of articles going years back - some of those were critical in my (somewhat enhanced) understanding of how to design a site.
Simple is better, but it doesn't have to be ugly.
As far as SEO and webcrawlers, that is quite a complex subject once you dig down a layer or two.
CSS Zen Garden is one of the first sites I stumbled across, after W3C... it's amazing how you can 'skin' the same site so many different ways just by changing the CSS.
I'm rewriting my (presently not so good) website from scratch so I can learn more about CSS and W3C-compliant HTML. I'm coding to standards. Style separate from content.
I notice the standards-compliant code I'm creating is accessible pretty much by default. If I pay proper attention to design (minimalist, easy to navigate) and not add features just because I think they look swell, the final design will be far more accessible than my present one.
It will be much leaner and easier to update as well. I am adding a content management system. Updates will be easier, and I will test the results using common screen readers.
Slashdot Mirror
Fascinating. This may be the first time 'angle of dangle' could be used in an actual scientific context.
Hmm. I would have modded you 'Offtopic' or 'Flamebait'.
:)
- Offtopic because the topic was about the hardware, not the mission - (there are a lot of us disappointed by recent events).
- Flamebait because of the name-calling, which is pointless and typical of flamebait posts.
Mod this post 'Offtopic' because there is no 'Condescending' mod.
Wouldn't a 'Simpson moment' involve a knife and some leather gloves?
If you order a container of machine parts...
The end customer unpacks the entire container.
A number of terrorist groups have been know to operate shell corporations, or have intimate connections with companies that can ship and receive such containers.
It's interesting to see how easy it is to get a seal on a container which allows free passage through customs here, based on an inspection in Rotterdam, for example.
"Time for the required DOT inspection, Ahmad!"
"The plutonium spheres are all intact and accounted for, O'Reilly."
(Trying to be fair and multicultural here)
Psst. Asimov.
Not trying to make you feel worse, though.
I advise you blame the keyboard. Get a new one. Something nice.
Alex:
A very well-written synopsis of the OLPC mess. A better description of the disconnect between goals and results would be hard to find.
... If the enemy is using civilian computers in his country so as to cause us harm, then we may attack them. So... if the enemy is using civilian computers in our country... will the USAF still take them out?What if these computers (in our country or another, third country) are running critical infrastructure? Or are essential to a hospital, school, or business?
/waves at twitter's sockpuppet, one of many.
Would 'BS' count as a reference to Ms. Spears? Just asking.
I googled 'Jeff Gould Peerstone Research' (minus the single quotes) and found:
http://www.glgroup.com/Council-Member/Jeff-Gould-110923.html
CEO
Peerstone Research
Member of the Technology Council
Jeff Gould is the Chief Executive Officer and Director of Research at Peerstone Research. He produces primary research and independent analysis focused on enterprise applications software, middleware software and server hardware.
Mr. Gould uses proprietary primary research to identify and quantify the impact of emerging user trends on enterprise applications, middleware stack and server hardware vendors. The Application Vendors inlcude: ORCL, SEBL, SAP, LWSN, MSFT, QADI, MANU, ITWO Software Stack Vendors: MSFT, ORCL SUNW, BEAS, IBM, NOVL, RHAT, SAP (Netweaver); and Hardware Stack Vendors include: IBM, DELL, SUNW, HPQ, UNI, INTC, AMD. (This is me - Update Profile)
Employment History 2001 - present CEO
Peerstone Research
1995 - 2001 Editor in Chief - International Editions
InformationWeek Magazine
Fork goin do plenny good kine stuff fo Pidgin.
I'm a writer... previously published a decade or so ago, and now polishing my skills once more to re-enter the market.
Michael J. Ross would be a perfect editor for me; he's ruthless and cuts right to the problems in a chunk of prose. However, judging by this article, I would pay a large sum of money to ensure he never reviewed my book.
If he has an overall favorable opinion, he should allow that to be the tone, with his reservations being an undertone, suggestions for improvement, and a notice to the reader that the book needs a little more polishing. I felt his tone was overly negative.
If you love something, or even like it, show this in your review...
Then again, perhaps I'm being overly critical.
*Note: This post contains some obvious cliches, grammatical errors, and dodgy spelling choices.
I feel your characterization of lulu.com as a "vanity-press" publisher is pejorative.
A more accurate description would be 'print-on-demand' publisher.
In my opinion, one of the big differences between the two is marketing to the author, and the requirement of a minimum press run by vanity publishers.
Correct. However, OLPC is being placed in areas ready for the next step - upgrading the educational infrastructure.
You know this, and are just being a dick.
Hence I will filter you out.
Bye.
Looks like if they want to get trolled, they can just log on Slashdot and EmagGeek will do the honors.
"You've got an OLPC? You must be starving to death! Turn that sucker off and go gather grubs! Bet you wish you had clean water instead! I'm sure no one built any infrastructure in your country, 'cause they're all spending the dough on education, and we all know education is useless! Back to the Stone Age for you!"
Victoria Clarke was the Pentagon flack that organized this, so as punishment, I shall link to a picture of her - check out the sweater.
Yeah. Sure is encouraging to see their PR budget cut.
Just interested... what's your source on that?
Oh, and your suggestion about all their non-space research being moved to another agency? I suggest NACA... I hear they've got quite the history.
If terrorism => mechanical failure
If mechanical failure => pilot error. .
... My aunt had a friend who... The plural of anecdote is not data.I see no cited sources.
. . .
Can we move on to something more substantive, such as your evidence for the existence of Santa Claus?
The error made in the TWA 800 investigation was that the government assumed it was a missile strike, and made knee-jerk changes in airport security because of this assumption. When the evidence for a missile strike proved non-existent, they had to start from scratch. People jumped on the explanation, and then tried to turn it around on the government (The U. S. Navy shot it down!).
Remember Pierre Salinger?
So, post your evidence.
We've seen that if you have three feds in a conspiracy, one will blab to the Washington Post, so... name your source.
. . .
I suspect I'll be waiting a long time.
The center tank on TWA Flight 800 was almost empty, overheated and full of fumes, and likely a spark from a poorly wired fuel sensor detonated it.
Oh, if you were kidding, it wasn't funny, emoticon or no.
You don't chew with canines - you tear stuff apart. I use my canines every time I eat chicken off the bone, or ribs, or even some fruit and veggies.
*RIP-SNARL-GNASH-TEAR-GRRR*
Another dead carrot...
A List Apart is a great site. I learned a lot about design, style, and usability. There is quite an archive of articles going years back - some of those were critical in my (somewhat enhanced) understanding of how to design a site.
Simple is better, but it doesn't have to be ugly.
As far as SEO and webcrawlers, that is quite a complex subject once you dig down a layer or two.
CSS Zen Garden is one of the first sites I stumbled across, after W3C... it's amazing how you can 'skin' the same site so many different ways just by changing the CSS.
I'm rewriting my (presently not so good) website from scratch so I can learn more about CSS and W3C-compliant HTML. I'm coding to standards. Style separate from content.
I notice the standards-compliant code I'm creating is accessible pretty much by default. If I pay proper attention to design (minimalist, easy to navigate) and not add features just because I think they look swell, the final design will be far more accessible than my present one.
It will be much leaner and easier to update as well. I am adding a content management system. Updates will be easier, and I will test the results using common screen readers.