The underpants bomber, show bomber, etc. were all to stupid to manage to set off their bombs, they were on "Law Enforcement" lists, they travelled one way with no luggage...but they were both allowed to board aircraft.
Counting on the enemy being stupid is a pretty stupid thing to do. If that's your reason for giving up your freedom, you need to get out more.
If you were a terrorist organization, you would...
If I were a terrorist organization I would download on of the dozens of free encryption programs on the web and USE IT. Even a zip file with a long password would do the job.
Any belief that the NSA is catching real, dangerous terrorists with all their spying is fucking stupid. The same goes for the TSA. The only reason nobody's shooting random people or blowing stuff up all over the place is because nobody wants it badly enough. If they did, well, look at what happened in Boston...
Funny. Seems to me technology is killing this world. People living longer and using up all the resources. Imminent nuclear conflict. People being dumbed down by electronic toys. People evolving into creatures with less and less muscle density. Weapons of greater and greater mass destruction.
No. Technology will kill us.
The only problem there is "using up all the resources". Resources don't *have* to be used up, things can be done sustainably, it just costs a bit more in the short term. Population can be controlled by giving people plenty of electronic toys and making real human interaction less desirable than the fantasy worlds (some countries are already doing this, eg. Japan), leave the breeding to people with more muscle mass.
Imagine if all that money had been spent on energy research (solve the remaining engineering problems to build working thorium reactors, develop fusion, whatever it takes...energy is a solvable problem if you have trillions of dollars to spend and enough political willpower)
The USA would be world leader in cheap energy, and by extension industry, transportation, etc. (cheap energy opens all sort of doors, not just helping the environment). The USA could export power plants all over the world on its own terms. The US economy would be untouchable and if they were running the reactors they'd have the world by the balls, no military needed (see Asimov's "Foundation" for details).
How is that not a plan of action that meets all American goals?
Environmentalist over-reaction to damn near everything doesn't do them any favors. It just makes you look like reactionary nutjobs.
Fail.
My personal belief is that technology is the *only* thing that can save the planet. Trying to educate the people and/or get them to change their behavior is a complete waste of time.
Opposing nuclear power, etc., is a very destructive behavior in the long term, I want no part of that aspect of environmentalism. I want technology *and* I want conservation. There's easily enough money circulating for us to have both of those but most of it is wasted on wars, bailouts of GM, bailouts of banks, etc.
Which is one of the least-frequent types of collision.
Most car accidents are where somebody stops paying attention and drifts into something else. SUVs do worse in that department because they usually flip over.
The body obeys laws of thermodynamics, but it is a complex system with feedback loops. Eat less, and the body reduce the energy it spends so that you do not loose fat.
Have you ever thought about why people accumulate fat? It's for times when there's no food (just like bears).
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah, that plan's working out well for all the countries who're trying to build 1950's-tech nuclear reactors right now.
My bad, it was 20% of government spending, not GDP.
The underpants bomber, show bomber, etc. were all to stupid to manage to set off their bombs, they were on "Law Enforcement" lists, they travelled one way with no luggage...but they were both allowed to board aircraft.
Counting on the enemy being stupid is a pretty stupid thing to do. If that's your reason for giving up your freedom, you need to get out more.
If you were a terrorist organization, you would...
If I were a terrorist organization I would download on of the dozens of free encryption programs on the web and USE IT. Even a zip file with a long password would do the job.
Any belief that the NSA is catching real, dangerous terrorists with all their spying is fucking stupid. The same goes for the TSA. The only reason nobody's shooting random people or blowing stuff up all over the place is because nobody wants it badly enough. If they did, well, look at what happened in Boston...
Well, that was insightful.
unless you think diverting miltary spending to water resources has some sort of merrit. I do not.
More proof of my original assertion: If we have to depend on education and people doing the right thing, well ... the planet is screwed.
Funny. Seems to me technology is killing this world. People living longer and using up all the resources. Imminent nuclear conflict. People being dumbed down by electronic toys. People evolving into creatures with less and less muscle density. Weapons of greater and greater mass destruction.
No. Technology will kill us.
The only problem there is "using up all the resources". Resources don't *have* to be used up, things can be done sustainably, it just costs a bit more in the short term. Population can be controlled by giving people plenty of electronic toys and making real human interaction less desirable than the fantasy worlds (some countries are already doing this, eg. Japan), leave the breeding to people with more muscle mass.
Imagine if all that money had been spent on energy research (solve the remaining engineering problems to build working thorium reactors, develop fusion, whatever it takes...energy is a solvable problem if you have trillions of dollars to spend and enough political willpower)
The USA would be world leader in cheap energy, and by extension industry, transportation, etc. (cheap energy opens all sort of doors, not just helping the environment). The USA could export power plants all over the world on its own terms. The US economy would be untouchable and if they were running the reactors they'd have the world by the balls, no military needed (see Asimov's "Foundation" for details).
How is that not a plan of action that meets all American goals?
For the most part, the rest of the world has outsourced their security to the United States.
Citation?
Actually, it is current technology and it is more expensive which is why cheaper solutions are prefered.
Meanwhile ...10% of GDP on military seems perfectly OK.
It is basically a scientific certainty that there are other habitable planets out there.
The problem is getting to them. There's no reason to believe interstellar travel is possible.
there is something to be said for harnessing resources in a responsible way with clear goals
That's never happened to any resource discovered so far.
LOL!
Don't worry though, it's not the only lie the recruiter told you...
Environmentalist over-reaction to damn near everything doesn't do them any favors. It just makes you look like reactionary nutjobs.
Fail.
My personal belief is that technology is the *only* thing that can save the planet. Trying to educate the people and/or get them to change their behavior is a complete waste of time.
Opposing nuclear power, etc., is a very destructive behavior in the long term, I want no part of that aspect of environmentalism. I want technology *and* I want conservation. There's easily enough money circulating for us to have both of those but most of it is wasted on wars, bailouts of GM, bailouts of banks, etc.
As for saying that "there's nowhere to go" after draining these reserves.. well, it's possible to desalinate salt water by various means.
Did I say that? I could have sworn I said "after trashing the planet".
The point is: Why don't they use the "various means" right now instead of using up all the natural resources first (with unknown consequences)?
This may be many things, but it's not a "scientific advance".
You jest, but a change in salinity could have a big impact.
This will turn into just another way to rape the planet instead of trying to do things sustainably.
Remember: There's no place to go once it's trashed
(Which it will be, I have no doubt about that. So long as somebody, somewhere can make a buck doing so, they'll do it...)
...in a head-on collision.
Which is one of the least-frequent types of collision.
Most car accidents are where somebody stops paying attention and drifts into something else. SUVs do worse in that department because they usually flip over.
You don't think Turbines are noisy? You don't live near a wind farm, do you? A wind farm generates lots of low frequency impulsive sound.
Sure, but to suggest they generate a 1Hz sound that makes people ill from a mile away is ludicrous.
If they were that loud the shockwaves would make your internal organs explode if you went anywhere near them.
Face it, it doesn't take a special mind or superior intellect to write code. It does not make you special. Get over it.
Let me guess, you're one of the people who hire the 'coders' on the daily WTF?
For gods sake man, just get him an iPad. The 9.7" model has lower DPI/bigger buttons. It's easy to use.
The older models are cheap. Get a 2 or an Air, the other ones haven't got enough GPU power.
Hate to agree, but yes.
Sometimes the right tool for the job is just that, the right tool for the job.
Since you're a market expert you should quantify this prediction, short bitcoin, and make a boatload of money in 10 years or so.
There's people out there who'll let me short Bitcoin over a ten year period...?
PS: It dropped 40% since you wrote that.
What if some day the "Hollywood model" is proven right?
Penn and Teller said it best: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RfdZTZQvuCo
The body obeys laws of thermodynamics, but it is a complex system with feedback loops. Eat less, and the body reduce the energy it spends so that you do not loose fat.
Have you ever thought about why people accumulate fat? It's for times when there's no food (just like bears).
... vertical wind turbines which are far safer and quieter.
Turbines aren't noisy. They're not motor-driven propellers, they move *with* the air.
So why bother with the exemption. If the number is so few, what possible difference can the equally small fine really amount to.
Because killing eagles is illegal and there's thousands of the lawyers who'll just see "free money" and make people's lives miserable.