Relative to what? A solid-gold-plated Saturn V maybe - as the Saturn V was anything but cheap.
Relative to the space shuttle or developing a missile system from scratch.
This is roughly on par with claiming one can learn detailed [IC] chip design theory from one of those posters of the 8088's silicon wafers. I.E. it's bunk.
I wrote and studied plenty of Motorola 6800 assembly code during my undergraduate work. Even though the technology was simple and 20 years out of date, it taught me a hell of a lot that is still useful on my modern workstation.
From a missile perspective, studying an old design could be very helpful. If I remember correctly, Iran's missile design is was originally Russian. North Korea's was from China, and before that Russia. And, both the US and Russia based their designs on earlier work by the Germans.
No, the defense department has had them for a bit longer than 5 years.
Reread the original sentence. I was referring to the US's enemies, not the defense department. Unless, perhaps you are referring to the Soviets, in which case I would assert they are no longer an enemy.
Whatever reason there was for the suppression of the Saturn V plans I'm sure it has nothing to do with spreading peace and understanding, nor coming to common ground to work out differences.
What the hell are you talking about? Who said anything about spreading peace?
North Korea is a tangible enemy because we are technically still at war with them, which, I think would qualify as tangible.
The most "tangible" enemy of the American people at this point in time is the American Government's
Yep. Things have gotten pretty shitty since 9/11. I never thought America could be turned into an entity that disregards human rights so callously. But spreading anger at the American government is not going to help in the slightest. Get involved. Write letters to your congressmen. Work within the system to change it. If someone asks to search you, say "I do not consent" over and over and over.
Stop giving up MY freedoms to ease YOUR fear!
Dude, chill the fuck out. I'm not G.W. I didn't write the Patriot act. But like I said, getting angry and yelling doesn't do any good. Redirect some of that hostility into something productive. We can learn a lot from the Vietnam war generation. They grew up in a world nearly as f'd as this one, maybe more. But they took from that experience and made the world better by passing the Freedom of Information Act and reigning back government spying programs. They valued freedom, and from the sounds of it, so do you.
Comparing terrorists to the founding fathers is completely wrong.
The founding fathers attempted to work within the existing legal frameworks before declaring independence. "No taxation without representation" was simply a request to vote on issues that affected them. Without a nonviolent mechanism to resolve differences the founding fathers were forced into violence. Today, on the other hand, there are numerous world wide, regional, local, you name it, organizations that can be worked within to resolve problems. Terrorists are not patriots because they went to violence first -- not last.
Because no matter how crazy you are you realize that if you actually ever use this type of technology in a strike, then you will quickly be hit with a US arsenal with > 550 land based ICBMs (most which are in europe/asia)
You grossly misunderestimate (hehe) our enemies. The Theocracy in charge of Iran is first a religious organization, and second a government. Perhaps you have been lucky enough to never meet anyone religious enough to actually want the apocolypse to happen. I have, and don't put the same trust in their ability to think rationally anymore. Moreover, Iran would be unlikely to attack us so long as their hatred is focused on Israel. Iran's president has said that he will wipe Israel from the map and that all it would take is one nuclear weapon.
Do you share his anti-Semitism? Are you simply ignorant of Israel's tragic past? I would guess that you simply don't care or don't understand the situation.
So why do these countries want atomic weapons? Three reasons. First, to convey political power in your region, which is why Iran wants them. Second, to try to get communications lines established with the US. (North Korea) Third, to prevent any potential future invasion. (Iran, North Korea, India, and Pakistan)
Says who? You? Get real. Those may seem like great reasons to you. However you ignore a fourth reason: Iran denies Israel's right to exist. Let me repeat, the Iranian government would love to see every Jew in the middle east dead. Perhaps you missed this development:
North Korea could have had normal communications with us 13 years ago when they signed and then promptly disregarded 1994 framework from nuclear disarmament. Contrary to your argument, North Korea's nuclear weapons program kept them from having normal relations. North Korea doesn't need nuclear weapons. Only its leaders do. Since 1994 millions of North Koreans have starved while its leaders squander a ridiculous 1/4 of GDP on military defense. Why? The Korean war ended long before the Vietnam war. Yet, today we do ample business with Vietnam and have almost zero relations with North Korea. Its them, not US.
Also, dont believe the argument of "they could give it to the terrorists and use a dirty bomb".
You're putting words in my mouth. I never said anything to that effect.
Name the last time Iran invaded any nation? Go ahead.. Ill wait...
You arrogance belies your ignorance. From my memory: - Iran supported Hezbollah with money and weapons and people during the Israeli-Lebanon conflict less than a year ago. - More recently, Iran crossed into international waters and attacked British troops, taking some hostage. That was in March. - US forces have arrested a number of Iranian military units operating illegally within Iraq. Is sending troops into a country and invasion?
As I've said before, the Iranian president has declared his desire to wipe Israel off the map, and to bring an end to the Great White Satan (USA). We're talking about a regime that denies basic human rights to freedom of speech and freedom of religion. The support militant groups and sow violence. Their policies have decimated the Iranian economy, reduced the standard of living for all Iranians, and caused at least one war within recent history (Israel - Lebanon 2006).
If the UN, Russia, China, or the EU (France in particular) would take some responsibility on the world's stage then we wouldn't be in this situation in the first place. It is their policies of appeasement that has allowed North Korea to gain nuclear weapons. Moreover, if we accept the stated opinion of French ex-President Jacque Chirac, we will soon learn to accept a nuclear Iran. Thanks.
Russia has provided the missile designs and ample uranium to Iran. China props up the government of Kim Jong Ill. The UN issues directives yet never gets involved. Yet, somehow, you see the United States as evil for trying to take a step (though probably fruitless) in the right direction.
Saturn V would be a ridiculously poor choice to use as basis of an ICBM.
Whether or not the Saturn V makes a poor choice for missile delivery is irrelevant. It is a working missile, capable of delivering payload to space. The value isn't in the missile's size or weight, but in the fact that it works. If you've followed developments in North Korea, for example, then you would know that North Korea has nuclear weapons technology but are unable to deliver a long range missile.
An analogy in software would be like saying that Windows source code would be completely unusable to an OS designer because its big and bloated.
A good ICBM needs to be compact, so that is easily hidden.
Why? We know where most of Iran and North Korea's nuclear sites are yet are completely unable to do anything about it. If North Korea set a Taepodong-2 missile in downtown Pyonyang and emailed coordinates to the NSA, it still wouldn't matter. Our hands are tied.
I still had it now and some government agent decides its a military component and wants to take it away from me, well, over my dead body.
Great attitude. Forget working within society's existing frameworks and threaten violence when someone in authority does something you don't like. Where have I seen this behavior before?
Forget the terrorists. Lets focus on our tangible enemies (North Korea and Iran). True, they probably won't use the Saturn V to deliver missles. They don't have to when the Russians have provided them perfectly usable missile systems (SCUD for instance).
That being said, the Saturn V was a relatively cheap way of delivering payload to space. There is plenty to be learned from old designs, even if they aren't duplicated. If you've kept up with the news the last few years then you've seen North Korea master nuclear technology, but not the missiles to deliver it. While we seem powerless to stop these countries from acquiring nuclear weapons, we don't need to help them develop the technology to deliver those weapons.
Let me start by saying tearing down posters seems a bit excessive. But, not everything is giant Neo-Con conspiracy. Even if it was a conspiracy it doesn't necessarily mean its a bad thing. I think an overlooked fact is that within the last 5 years the US's main enemies have acquired or are quickly acquiring nuclear weapons. While it won't stop them from building missile, I don't understand why we should make it easy by providing them plans for a relatively cheap and relatively reliable ICBM system.
I think you missed poster's point. He is simply trying to point out that the same features reevolve over and over again. Yes, fish and mammals are the same phylum. But one stayed in the water over the last 200 million years. The other left the water, evolved legs and feet, reentered the water (like a hippo) and reevolved fish-like features.
I agree with the poster. Nature seems confined to a set of configurations -- no matter the evolutionary history.
Instead of getting the Attorney General involved, why don't people vote with their wallets and take their business elsewhere?
For example, I bought a $2200 laptop at best buy in the late 90's. "Sure I'll take the warranty", I said after the salesman promised it would cover any problems with the laptop.
Less than a year later the power input broken. I took it back to Best Buy, confident in the warrant that I had so wisely purchased.
"Sorry, we can't fix it, that's normal wear and tear. Not covered by the warranty", they told me. Offering to pay for repair didn't work; speaking to a manager didn't work; arguing didn't work. Best Buy simply would not do the work.
What should I do? "Buy a new laptop", the Best Buy rep suggested. Maybe he didn't know I spent the summer of 1997 cleaning greenhouses, in Florida, in the summer, in Florida, summer, Florida... $2200 / minimum wage = a lot of damn greenhouses + sunstroke.
Long story short (too late), I never got the laptop fixed. Worked the next summer laying concrete to buy a desktop, off the Internet. In the last 10 years, I can safely say I have spent exactly 0 dollars and 0 cents at Best Buy.
1. If external Internet connectivity goes down, or is degraded it is still nice to have access to your calendars
Yes, if your company is the minority that operates out of one location with no home employees, then hosting locally will be better if your office's internet goes out. However, many companies have multiple locations and people working remotely. Hosting a calendar at a disconnected office won't do them any good. However, if you host with Google, only the disconnected office will be affected.
2. Having control of the actual data means you can present it in a wide variety of formats, within a variety of applications, linked up in a variety of ways that aren't possible when it is hosted externally - even when that external host offers an API
You seem to realize Google Calendar has an API. Try it, it's powerful. If that doesn't work, download the data into XML format and use that. I don't see how your are limited in anyway by using Google in this aspect.
3. Hosting it internally makes single sign-on easier.
Maybe you need to reexamine your architecture if your single sign-on solution cannot support a third party site. Or, switch to Google Apps for your domain and let them manage the sign on for you.
True, if you're an online casino, you might not want to use Google as your email host.
But, hosting outside of the US is not the protection you presuppose. Take, for example: Neteller.
Neteller was the largest company providing financial services to online gamblers. They operated out of the "Isle of Man", and independent state near Britain. Many unfortunate souls made the same mistake you have, and assumed their data was safe.
Earlier this year the principals of Neteller were arrested. They live in Britain, operate a corporation out of the Isle of Man, but were arrested during a layover here in the US. Long story short (too late) they settled with the Department of Justice. As part of that agreement they'll be handing over all customer records to the DOJ so that the United States government can collect taxes (and penalties and interest) on any winnings.
So, I guess your cool unless you ever need to pass through the US for any reason whatsoever. Gamble on little buddy.
Keeping it local reduces your chances of becoming a victim of DoJ fishing expeditions. Your lawyers are more likely to fight for your rights than Google's. Wrong.
I think by Google you mean Microsoft and Yahoo. If you remember, Google was the only large search provider that fought the Department of Justice on handing over customer data.
Most places in Arizona have plenty of water thanks to the Central Arizona Project, the Salt River Project, and our allotment of the Colorado river. The link you posted talks about water problems in Northern Arizona (Arizona is the 6th largest state by land area). If there is any threat to our water supply, it is not fault of Arizona's, but Californians who are all to ready to take AZ's allotment of the Colorado River.
But, it's not like California ever has natural disasters, does it?
the threat of "Soviet aggression" never materialized,
If you lived through the cold war, then you must remember reality of Soviet Aggression: short range missiles in Cuba, the financing of communist rebels in South America, the partitioning of Eastern Europe, the Berlin blockade, the tank buildup, etc, etc, etc.
The US has every right to defend its frontiers, but this right end there - at the frontiers.
By that logic, we had no right to enter World War I or II -- I can't say I agree with you. Sometimes it is necessary to take the fight to the enemy and not wait for them to come to you. Other times, it is important to protect your allies. The US vs. USSR was not a fair fight, that's why we created NATO.
we all must deal with these populist dictatorships within the limits of the law.
Hugo Chavez was elected within the law, he has changed the law (lawfully) to make himself a defacto dictator. I would agree that the US shouldn't do anything to remove him -- up to a point. If he follows Iran or North Korea's footsteps and starts to threaten the existence of others, then he, too, must be removed.
Bush being re-elected was not something to be proud of
Most of the Republicans (Bush's party) I know aren't even proud of Bush being reelected. Bush's approval ratings are almost as low in the US as they are elsewhere. But, I wouldn't take this example (or even Hugo Chavez's example) as a reason to put down democracy entirely. It's not perfect, but its far and away better than the alternatives.
You may not like what is happening in the US right now. With Guantanamo Bay, the Patriot Act, secret prisons, Abu Ghraib, warrantless wiretaps, domestic spying, and everything else undemocratic this government has accomplished I understand. I don't like it either.
But, that's the beauty of a democracy. We hear about the bad stuff. We talk about it and hate those who perpetrated it. We replace them (sometimes slowly) and setup systems to keep it from happening again. The alternative is not hearing about those things, not getting angry, not changing them. Stalin's secret Gulags weren't revealed to the world by CNN or BBC. It took another party leader (Khrushchev) with enough power to finally blow open the operation -- but not before those millions of Russian lives were wasted.
On a final note, the US's government is unique in that it gives foreigners, like yourself, a say in its policy. Many countries send lobbyists to Washington, to make sure their interests are protected. Foreigners can contribute to political campaigns. You can even be born in Austria, move here, and become governor of California -- probably the 2nd or 3rd most powerful man in America when measured by political backing.
The US government allows more drastic measures, if so desired. Any country may petition to become a US territory, and any territory may vote to become a state -- with full rights and privileges. Some have humorously suggested that Britain should follow this path to become the 51st and (by far) most powerful state in the union. In other words: if you can't beat them, join them (and change things from the inside).
So, while I respect your right to criticize the US and its citizens and its decisions, I must respectfully disagree that something is fundamentally wrong with the US.
Ignoring the cold war ignores the realities of the time. The US strategy has needed to be a certain way to contain Soviet aggression. Sorry. But, times have changed.
What interests me now, is how South Americans are freely electing their Dictators (Hugo Chavez).
BTW, I am quite happy my country barely needs a national defense.
What country is that? Is it a European country? You are aware that since 1960 the United States has funded 60% of all NATO funding - so while your country may not need a national defense, maybe it benefits from the US's.
Or maybe you hail from an Asian country like Japan or South Korea or Taiwan. In which case you don't need a national defense because you are under the shield of the US. Perhaps you live in Afghanistan or Iraq, in which case, the US's national defense is all that stands between the current situation and an oppressive Islamic regime.
Or maybe you live in South America. Even with all its recent talk of independence from the "Great White Satan", all of North, Central, and South America is directly protected by the Monroe Doctrine. Thanks be to many US presidents and the US military that South American didn't follow Cuba into Communism.
Maybe you live in a country that has no formal relations with the United States, perhaps an enemy or some country in Africa. Even still, every piece of food, clothing, or medicine that comes into our out of your country is implicitly protected by the US Navy. Why are pirates mostly a thing of the past? Thanks to the US national defense.
You know what? I too am quite happy your country barely needs a national defense. It says a lot about mine.
You're dead right. Quite frankly I am horrified by this incident. If they don't have processes in place to make sure a plane can fly around the world in all directions before deployment it is an indication that the engineering process is seriously FUBAR. Jesus F'ing Christ, these people are responsible for our national defense, our lives are literally in their hands.
Everyone that worked on this system needs to be sacked. Their managers need to be sacked. QA needs to be sacked. They are a disgrace to us all. Hell, lets just outsource it to India, maybe they can get it right.
Before some 13 year old jumps in about how I'm overreacting, and this is just how computers are, let me ask this: What if these Raptors had been flying to Japan to respond to a Chinese/Tiawanese conflict? Or a North Korean crossing of the DMZ?
Slashdot Mirror
Relative to what? A solid-gold-plated Saturn V maybe - as the Saturn V was anything but cheap.
Relative to the space shuttle or developing a missile system from scratch.
This is roughly on par with claiming one can learn detailed [IC] chip design theory from one of those posters of the 8088's silicon wafers. I.E. it's bunk.
I wrote and studied plenty of Motorola 6800 assembly code during my undergraduate work. Even though the technology was simple and 20 years out of date, it taught me a hell of a lot that is still useful on my modern workstation.
From a missile perspective, studying an old design could be very helpful. If I remember correctly, Iran's missile design is was originally Russian. North Korea's was from China, and before that Russia. And, both the US and Russia based their designs on earlier work by the Germans.
No, the defense department has had them for a bit longer than 5 years.
Reread the original sentence. I was referring to the US's enemies, not the defense department. Unless, perhaps you are referring to the Soviets, in which case I would assert they are no longer an enemy.
Whatever reason there was for the suppression of the Saturn V plans I'm sure it has nothing to do with spreading peace and understanding, nor coming to common ground to work out differences.
What the hell are you talking about? Who said anything about spreading peace?
WTF? This makes them "tangible enemies"?
o r.vows.to.destroy.america.htm
Iran is a tangible enemy because they have threatened direct military action:
http://www.jtf.org/america/america.iranian.dictat
North Korea is a tangible enemy because we are technically still at war with them, which, I think would qualify as tangible.
The most "tangible" enemy of the American people at this point in time is the American Government's
Yep. Things have gotten pretty shitty since 9/11. I never thought America could be turned into an entity that disregards human rights so callously. But spreading anger at the American government is not going to help in the slightest. Get involved. Write letters to your congressmen. Work within the system to change it. If someone asks to search you, say "I do not consent" over and over and over.
Stop giving up MY freedoms to ease YOUR fear!
Dude, chill the fuck out. I'm not G.W. I didn't write the Patriot act. But like I said, getting angry and yelling doesn't do any good. Redirect some of that hostility into something productive. We can learn a lot from the Vietnam war generation. They grew up in a world nearly as f'd as this one, maybe more. But they took from that experience and made the world better by passing the Freedom of Information Act and reigning back government spying programs. They valued freedom, and from the sounds of it, so do you.
Comparing terrorists to the founding fathers is completely wrong.
The founding fathers attempted to work within the existing legal frameworks before declaring independence. "No taxation without representation" was simply a request to vote on issues that affected them. Without a nonviolent mechanism to resolve differences the founding fathers were forced into violence. Today, on the other hand, there are numerous world wide, regional, local, you name it, organizations that can be worked within to resolve problems. Terrorists are not patriots because they went to violence first -- not last.
Are you serious? Are you believing the propoganda of North Korea "mastering nuclear technology"?
. nuclear.test/index.html
p hp
Honest, I'm surprised you missed the news:
http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/asiapcf/10/08/korea
Because no matter how crazy you are you realize that if you actually ever use this type of technology in a strike, then you will quickly be hit with a US arsenal with > 550 land based ICBMs (most which are in europe/asia)
You grossly misunderestimate (hehe) our enemies. The Theocracy in charge of Iran is first a religious organization, and second a government. Perhaps you have been lucky enough to never meet anyone religious enough to actually want the apocolypse to happen. I have, and don't put the same trust in their ability to think rationally anymore. Moreover, Iran would be unlikely to attack us so long as their hatred is focused on Israel. Iran's president has said that he will wipe Israel from the map and that all it would take is one nuclear weapon.
http://www.iht.com/articles/2005/10/26/news/iran.
Do you share his anti-Semitism? Are you simply ignorant of Israel's tragic past? I would guess that you simply don't care or don't understand the situation.
So why do these countries want atomic weapons? Three reasons. First, to convey political power in your region, which is why Iran wants them. Second, to try to get communications lines established with the US. (North Korea) Third, to prevent any potential future invasion. (Iran, North Korea, India, and Pakistan)
Says who? You? Get real. Those may seem like great reasons to you. However you ignore a fourth reason: Iran denies Israel's right to exist. Let me repeat, the Iranian government would love to see every Jew in the middle east dead. Perhaps you missed this development:
http://www.iranholocaustdenial.com/
North Korea could have had normal communications with us 13 years ago when they signed and then promptly disregarded 1994 framework from nuclear disarmament. Contrary to your argument, North Korea's nuclear weapons program kept them from having normal relations. North Korea doesn't need nuclear weapons. Only its leaders do. Since 1994 millions of North Koreans have starved while its leaders squander a ridiculous 1/4 of GDP on military defense. Why? The Korean war ended long before the Vietnam war. Yet, today we do ample business with Vietnam and have almost zero relations with North Korea. Its them, not US.
Also, dont believe the argument of "they could give it to the terrorists and use a dirty bomb".
You're putting words in my mouth. I never said anything to that effect.
Name the last time Iran invaded any nation? Go ahead.. Ill wait...
You arrogance belies your ignorance. From my memory:
- Iran supported Hezbollah with money and weapons and people during the Israeli-Lebanon conflict less than a year ago.
- More recently, Iran crossed into international waters and attacked British troops, taking some hostage. That was in March.
- US forces have arrested a number of Iranian military units operating illegally within Iraq. Is sending troops into a country and invasion?
As I've said before, the Iranian president has declared his desire to wipe Israel off the map, and to bring an end to the Great White Satan (USA). We're talking about a regime that denies basic human rights to freedom of speech and freedom of religion. The support militant groups and sow violence. Their policies have decimated the Iranian economy, reduced the standard of living for all Iranians, and caused at least one war within recent history (Israel - Lebanon 2006).
If the UN, Russia, China, or the EU (France in particular) would take some responsibility on the world's stage then we wouldn't be in this situation in the first place. It is their policies of appeasement that has allowed North Korea to gain nuclear weapons. Moreover, if we accept the stated opinion of French ex-President Jacque Chirac, we will soon learn to accept a nuclear Iran. Thanks.
Russia has provided the missile designs and ample uranium to Iran. China props up the government of Kim Jong Ill. The UN issues directives yet never gets involved. Yet, somehow, you see the United States as evil for trying to take a step (though probably fruitless) in the right direction.
Saturn V would be a ridiculously poor choice to use as basis of an ICBM.
Whether or not the Saturn V makes a poor choice for missile delivery is irrelevant. It is a working missile, capable of delivering payload to space. The value isn't in the missile's size or weight, but in the fact that it works. If you've followed developments in North Korea, for example, then you would know that North Korea has nuclear weapons technology but are unable to deliver a long range missile.
An analogy in software would be like saying that Windows source code would be completely unusable to an OS designer because its big and bloated.
A good ICBM needs to be compact, so that is easily hidden.
Why? We know where most of Iran and North Korea's nuclear sites are yet are completely unable to do anything about it. If North Korea set a Taepodong-2 missile in downtown Pyonyang and emailed coordinates to the NSA, it still wouldn't matter. Our hands are tied.
I still had it now and some government agent decides its a military component and wants to take it away from me, well, over my dead body.
Great attitude. Forget working within society's existing frameworks and threaten violence when someone in authority does something you don't like. Where have I seen this behavior before?
Forget the terrorists. Lets focus on our tangible enemies (North Korea and Iran). True, they probably won't use the Saturn V to deliver missles. They don't have to when the Russians have provided them perfectly usable missile systems (SCUD for instance).
That being said, the Saturn V was a relatively cheap way of delivering payload to space. There is plenty to be learned from old designs, even if they aren't duplicated. If you've kept up with the news the last few years then you've seen North Korea master nuclear technology, but not the missiles to deliver it. While we seem powerless to stop these countries from acquiring nuclear weapons, we don't need to help them develop the technology to deliver those weapons.
Let me start by saying tearing down posters seems a bit excessive. But, not everything is giant Neo-Con conspiracy. Even if it was a conspiracy it doesn't necessarily mean its a bad thing. I think an overlooked fact is that within the last 5 years the US's main enemies have acquired or are quickly acquiring nuclear weapons. While it won't stop them from building missile, I don't understand why we should make it easy by providing them plans for a relatively cheap and relatively reliable ICBM system.
I think you missed poster's point. He is simply trying to point out that the same features reevolve over and over again. Yes, fish and mammals are the same phylum. But one stayed in the water over the last 200 million years. The other left the water, evolved legs and feet, reentered the water (like a hippo) and reevolved fish-like features.
I agree with the poster. Nature seems confined to a set of configurations -- no matter the evolutionary history.
Instead of getting the Attorney General involved, why don't people vote with their wallets and take their business elsewhere?
For example, I bought a $2200 laptop at best buy in the late 90's. "Sure I'll take the warranty", I said after the salesman promised it would cover any problems with the laptop.
Less than a year later the power input broken. I took it back to Best Buy, confident in the warrant that I had so wisely purchased.
"Sorry, we can't fix it, that's normal wear and tear. Not covered by the warranty", they told me. Offering to pay for repair didn't work; speaking to a manager didn't work; arguing didn't work. Best Buy simply would not do the work.
What should I do? "Buy a new laptop", the Best Buy rep suggested. Maybe he didn't know I spent the summer of 1997 cleaning greenhouses, in Florida, in the summer, in Florida, summer, Florida...
$2200 / minimum wage = a lot of damn greenhouses + sunstroke.
Long story short (too late), I never got the laptop fixed. Worked the next summer laying concrete to buy a desktop, off the Internet. In the last 10 years, I can safely say I have spent exactly 0 dollars and 0 cents at Best Buy.
There is a difference between stress and trauma.
1. If external Internet connectivity goes down, or is degraded it is still nice to have access to your calendars
Yes, if your company is the minority that operates out of one location with no home employees, then hosting locally will be better if your office's internet goes out. However, many companies have multiple locations and people working remotely. Hosting a calendar at a disconnected office won't do them any good. However, if you host with Google, only the disconnected office will be affected.
2. Having control of the actual data means you can present it in a wide variety of formats, within a variety of applications, linked up in a variety of ways that aren't possible when it is hosted externally - even when that external host offers an API
You seem to realize Google Calendar has an API. Try it, it's powerful. If that doesn't work, download the data into XML format and use that. I don't see how your are limited in anyway by using Google in this aspect.
3. Hosting it internally makes single sign-on easier.
Maybe you need to reexamine your architecture if your single sign-on solution cannot support a third party site. Or, switch to Google Apps for your domain and let them manage the sign on for you.
True, if you're an online casino, you might not want to use Google as your email host.
But, hosting outside of the US is not the protection you presuppose. Take, for example: Neteller.
Neteller was the largest company providing financial services to online gamblers. They operated out of the "Isle of Man", and independent state near Britain. Many unfortunate souls made the same mistake you have, and assumed their data was safe.
Earlier this year the principals of Neteller were arrested. They live in Britain, operate a corporation out of the Isle of Man, but were arrested during a layover here in the US. Long story short (too late) they settled with the Department of Justice. As part of that agreement they'll be handing over all customer records to the DOJ so that the United States government can collect taxes (and penalties and interest) on any winnings.
So, I guess your cool unless you ever need to pass through the US for any reason whatsoever. Gamble on little buddy.
http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2006/03/judge-tell
I think by Google you mean Microsoft and Yahoo. If you remember, Google was the only large search provider that fought the Department of Justice on handing over customer data.
s -doj-no-on-search-queries.html
http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2006/03/judge-tell
And they won! But not before Yahoo and Microsoft eagerly capitulated.
we won't be relying on a 3rd party to host everything.
Why? Do you really think you can out do Google on the uptime front?
Do you assume that keeping the data locally will protect it from government subpoena?
Are you thinking that you can somehow do a better job keeping your systems patched and hacker safe than Google?
Do you think that people who work for your University are somehow more trustworthy than those who work for Google?
Sounds to me like you're denying your users the best solution because you're a control freak.
Bill Clinton couldn't get blown without the world finding out.
Ignorance is thinking the next president could blow up the WTC without anyone finding out.
Most places in Arizona have plenty of water thanks to the Central Arizona Project, the Salt River Project, and our allotment of the Colorado river. The link you posted talks about water problems in Northern Arizona (Arizona is the 6th largest state by land area). If there is any threat to our water supply, it is not fault of Arizona's, but Californians who are all to ready to take AZ's allotment of the Colorado River.
But, it's not like California ever has natural disasters, does it?
the threat of "Soviet aggression" never materialized,
If you lived through the cold war, then you must remember reality of Soviet Aggression: short range missiles in Cuba, the financing of communist rebels in South America, the partitioning of Eastern Europe, the Berlin blockade, the tank buildup, etc, etc, etc.
The US has every right to defend its frontiers, but this right end there - at the frontiers.
By that logic, we had no right to enter World War I or II -- I can't say I agree with you. Sometimes it is necessary to take the fight to the enemy and not wait for them to come to you. Other times, it is important to protect your allies. The US vs. USSR was not a fair fight, that's why we created NATO.
we all must deal with these populist dictatorships within the limits of the law.
Hugo Chavez was elected within the law, he has changed the law (lawfully) to make himself a defacto dictator. I would agree that the US shouldn't do anything to remove him -- up to a point. If he follows Iran or North Korea's footsteps and starts to threaten the existence of others, then he, too, must be removed.
Bush being re-elected was not something to be proud of
Most of the Republicans (Bush's party) I know aren't even proud of Bush being reelected. Bush's approval ratings are almost as low in the US as they are elsewhere. But, I wouldn't take this example (or even Hugo Chavez's example) as a reason to put down democracy entirely. It's not perfect, but its far and away better than the alternatives.
You may not like what is happening in the US right now. With Guantanamo Bay, the Patriot Act, secret prisons, Abu Ghraib, warrantless wiretaps, domestic spying, and everything else undemocratic this government has accomplished I understand. I don't like it either.
But, that's the beauty of a democracy. We hear about the bad stuff. We talk about it and hate those who perpetrated it. We replace them (sometimes slowly) and setup systems to keep it from happening again. The alternative is not hearing about those things, not getting angry, not changing them. Stalin's secret Gulags weren't revealed to the world by CNN or BBC. It took another party leader (Khrushchev) with enough power to finally blow open the operation -- but not before those millions of Russian lives were wasted.
On a final note, the US's government is unique in that it gives foreigners, like yourself, a say in its policy. Many countries send lobbyists to Washington, to make sure their interests are protected. Foreigners can contribute to political campaigns. You can even be born in Austria, move here, and become governor of California -- probably the 2nd or 3rd most powerful man in America when measured by political backing.
The US government allows more drastic measures, if so desired. Any country may petition to become a US territory, and any territory may vote to become a state -- with full rights and privileges. Some have humorously suggested that Britain should follow this path to become the 51st and (by far) most powerful state in the union. In other words: if you can't beat them, join them (and change things from the inside).
So, while I respect your right to criticize the US and its citizens and its decisions, I must respectfully disagree that something is fundamentally wrong with the US.
Ignoring the cold war ignores the realities of the time. The US strategy has needed to be a certain way to contain Soviet aggression. Sorry. But, times have changed.
What interests me now, is how South Americans are freely electing their Dictators (Hugo Chavez).
BTW, I am quite happy my country barely needs a national defense.
What country is that? Is it a European country? You are aware that since 1960 the United States has funded 60% of all NATO funding - so while your country may not need a national defense, maybe it benefits from the US's.
Or maybe you hail from an Asian country like Japan or South Korea or Taiwan. In which case you don't need a national defense because you are under the shield of the US. Perhaps you live in Afghanistan or Iraq, in which case, the US's national defense is all that stands between the current situation and an oppressive Islamic regime.
Or maybe you live in South America. Even with all its recent talk of independence from the "Great White Satan", all of North, Central, and South America is directly protected by the Monroe Doctrine. Thanks be to many US presidents and the US military that South American didn't follow Cuba into Communism.
Maybe you live in a country that has no formal relations with the United States, perhaps an enemy or some country in Africa. Even still, every piece of food, clothing, or medicine that comes into our out of your country is implicitly protected by the US Navy. Why are pirates mostly a thing of the past? Thanks to the US national defense.
You know what? I too am quite happy your country barely needs a national defense. It says a lot about mine.
In a real dogfight, the Eurofighter likely wins
Hahahahahaha. Hahahahaha. Hahahahaha. Oh man, I'm tearing up. Stop you're killing me.
You're dead right. Quite frankly I am horrified by this incident. If they don't have processes in place to make sure a plane can fly around the world in all directions before deployment it is an indication that the engineering process is seriously FUBAR. Jesus F'ing Christ, these people are responsible for our national defense, our lives are literally in their hands.
Everyone that worked on this system needs to be sacked. Their managers need to be sacked. QA needs to be sacked. They are a disgrace to us all. Hell, lets just outsource it to India, maybe they can get it right.
Before some 13 year old jumps in about how I'm overreacting, and this is just how computers are, let me ask this: What if these Raptors had been flying to Japan to respond to a Chinese/Tiawanese conflict? Or a North Korean crossing of the DMZ?