The last movie my wife and I went to see (Deadpool) was just about $50; that's two tickets, two medium popcorns, two pops and a bag of M&Ms and a bag of sour candies. Not cheap at all, but Deadpool is the kind of movie that really is best seen with a theater full of people.
Not to worry. Wait until some dumbass CIO convinces his company to move all the infrastructure over to the "on-demand cloud", and the whole thing melts down in a sea of buzz words and marketspeak.
It will be a good day for pitchfork manufacturers on that day, let me tell you!
And Facebook, an app that just eats cycles and battery life on both iOS and Android. That such a major player as Facebook writes such a shitty awful resource hogging app frankly shocks me... until I remember iTunes on Windows.
I think, save for the very high value items, the ones you listed (and probably, in time, He3), we won't be using a lot of asteroid minerals on Earth itself.
I have my doubts that asteroid mining will ever be economical for filling the need for raw materials on Earth. What I think is that asteroid mining will end the need to have to launch anything other than human beings from the surface of the planet. The biggest cost of getting into orbit and beyond is the cost of accelerating large amounts of matter to or beyond 11.2km/s. If you could get all the raw material for your satellites, space stations and space craft from asteroids, process it, refine it and manufacture all of it in space, then you would have a space-based economy that wasn't reliant on Earth for most of its raw materials; including volatiles.
Krauthammer is an asshat. At the moment the public opinion in Japan is sharply against nuclear weapons. American nukes are barely tolerated, only because Japan had a pacifist constitution imposed on it (which has since become rather popular), and someone had to protect the country from having more of its territory seized (as the Soviets did when they seized the Kuril Islands and never gave them back, despite having spent most of the Second World War not actually directly fighting Japan). People like Krauthammer are essentially paid to write masturbatory columns about saber rattling and to attack Obama.
The only way Japan will ever arm itself is if the US does indeed withdraw its nuclear shield.
The point of MAD is that Beijing wouldn't have the nerve either. The whole point of mutually assured destruction is that all parties are rational actors. China would not risk retaliation from the US, so it wouldn't launch an attack on Japan to begin with.
This is why the Cold War was a whole host of proxy wars fought in Africa, Asia and Latin America, rather than all sides lobbing nukes at each other, and this is why this new "Cool War" has the same sorts of proxies in Ukraine and Syria, and why China can only shake its fist when the US flies military aircraft over its man-made island.
Even if you're right, you cannot be certain you're right, and if you're wrong, vast sections of your nation, and likely your military capability, are eliminated. So no one will take the risk.
The second Japan and South Korea don't think the US will keep its bargain is the very second the two countries become nuclear powers, and that, more than anything else, is what China does not want to happen. It already has four neighbors with nukes; Russia, North Korea (though it is effectively a client state), India and Pakistan, and a fourth, Iran in some state of acquiring the technology.
So we'll continue to have dust ups in the South China Sea, and the US will continue the role it inherited from Britain in keeping international waters international. Besides, China is utterly reliant upon the West for its economic fortunes. Even a conventional war would take a huge portion of its economy out of action, and the US's ability to blockade China would rob it fully of its economic lifeblood.
Even Churchill was not unmoved by the Finnish plight, and regretted that the necessities of war required that Britain turn a blind eye to the Soviet aggression in Karelia. I view Finland's alignment with the Axis is a sad twist of history that somehow left Finland stained as a collaborator state, and let Russia off the hook for what was an aggressive war to annex Finnish territory.
Churchill did everything he could to try to stop the French surrender. Even when it became clear France was going to fall, the British government under Churchill proposed the Franco-British Union, in which the two states would effectively merge. While this would not have prevented France's collapse, it would have meant that there would have been no collaborator government in France, and it would have meant that France's military assets, such as its navy, not in the path of Germany, would have remained under Allied control. It would have meant French North Africa and France's other colonies would have been undisputedly in Allied hands. It would have meant that, even if France itself was fully occupied, France would remain at war with Germany.
Who knows how different history might have been if Britain and France had merged in such a way. It certainly would have created a state of such significant economic, military and demographic resources that it would have served, even after the war, as a significant counterbalance to Germany.
They can get it done in time because the US nuclear shield means China and Russia wouldn't do it at all. If, eventually, the US does withdraw its nuclear shield from its East Asian allies, you can be sure Japan and South Korea would be nuclear states in very short order.
And if China or Russia did that, they'd be saying hello to US ICBM's in a few minutes. There won't be any nuclear strikes on Japan or South Korea. The Chinese won't do it, the Russians have no reason to, and China would never allow North Korea to do it (if NK could even do it, there are significant doubts about its rocket abilities).
Finland was forced by Soviet aggression into the Axis. The Soviets were nearly two years away from war with Germany when they invaded Finland, so I view the Winter War and Finland's attempts to find alliances to maintain its territorial integrity a little differently than, say, Vichy France.
Turkey has been a member of NATO since 1952, and considering that the Bosporus is the chief gateway for a large part of Russia's navy, Turkey's membership was pretty integral to the Soviet containment policy.
That may be so, but the bulk of the PLA's forces are relatively poorly equipped. China has long had the largest army in the world, in theory, but if you compare the average PLA soldier to the average NATO or Russian soldier, they're not in the same league. China is trying to catch up, but it's going to take decades, and it's not as if NATO will be standing still all that time
It is generally understood that Japan could become a nuclear power in fairly short order if it needed to. This isn't Iran desperately trying to gain nuclear capability, this is one of the most advanced industrial powers in the world.
This isn't some Englishmen still taking the piss out of the Germans for WWII. Microsoft's turning over a new leaf is a very new phenomenon, so I don't see why a healthy dose of skepticism isn't in order. Microsoft has a lot of road to repair before a lot of people will be willing to fully trust it, and that's as it should be.
That would be my big thought, and it's likely why.NET and SQL Server are being ported over to Linux. They're gunning for the big enterprise Java applications, and they know they'll never get these guys to move over to Windows. This looks to me like after 15 years of trying to bring Mohamed to the mountain, they're finally going to bring the mountain to Mohamed.
Frankly, as much as I generally dislike Microsoft and its products, I'm hoping they give Oracle a big nasty kick in the ass. I hate Oracle that much more.
What in the hell kind of hardware are you running Eclipse on? Shared drives on 10mb network cards plugged into hubs? It can be a bit slow at times for me, but I've never seen anything like that.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, all eight are completely thrilled.
I miss my 2400 baud modem hooked up to my Radio Shit computer with my 40x24 display. Now get off my lawn!
The last movie my wife and I went to see (Deadpool) was just about $50; that's two tickets, two medium popcorns, two pops and a bag of M&Ms and a bag of sour candies. Not cheap at all, but Deadpool is the kind of movie that really is best seen with a theater full of people.
Not to worry. Wait until some dumbass CIO convinces his company to move all the infrastructure over to the "on-demand cloud", and the whole thing melts down in a sea of buzz words and marketspeak.
It will be a good day for pitchfork manufacturers on that day, let me tell you!
For dark is the suede that mows like a harvest!
And Facebook, an app that just eats cycles and battery life on both iOS and Android. That such a major player as Facebook writes such a shitty awful resource hogging app frankly shocks me... until I remember iTunes on Windows.
I think, save for the very high value items, the ones you listed (and probably, in time, He3), we won't be using a lot of asteroid minerals on Earth itself.
I have my doubts that asteroid mining will ever be economical for filling the need for raw materials on Earth. What I think is that asteroid mining will end the need to have to launch anything other than human beings from the surface of the planet. The biggest cost of getting into orbit and beyond is the cost of accelerating large amounts of matter to or beyond 11.2km/s. If you could get all the raw material for your satellites, space stations and space craft from asteroids, process it, refine it and manufacture all of it in space, then you would have a space-based economy that wasn't reliant on Earth for most of its raw materials; including volatiles.
Krauthammer is an asshat. At the moment the public opinion in Japan is sharply against nuclear weapons. American nukes are barely tolerated, only because Japan had a pacifist constitution imposed on it (which has since become rather popular), and someone had to protect the country from having more of its territory seized (as the Soviets did when they seized the Kuril Islands and never gave them back, despite having spent most of the Second World War not actually directly fighting Japan). People like Krauthammer are essentially paid to write masturbatory columns about saber rattling and to attack Obama.
The only way Japan will ever arm itself is if the US does indeed withdraw its nuclear shield.
The point of MAD is that Beijing wouldn't have the nerve either. The whole point of mutually assured destruction is that all parties are rational actors. China would not risk retaliation from the US, so it wouldn't launch an attack on Japan to begin with.
This is why the Cold War was a whole host of proxy wars fought in Africa, Asia and Latin America, rather than all sides lobbing nukes at each other, and this is why this new "Cool War" has the same sorts of proxies in Ukraine and Syria, and why China can only shake its fist when the US flies military aircraft over its man-made island.
Even if you're right, you cannot be certain you're right, and if you're wrong, vast sections of your nation, and likely your military capability, are eliminated. So no one will take the risk.
The second Japan and South Korea don't think the US will keep its bargain is the very second the two countries become nuclear powers, and that, more than anything else, is what China does not want to happen. It already has four neighbors with nukes; Russia, North Korea (though it is effectively a client state), India and Pakistan, and a fourth, Iran in some state of acquiring the technology.
So we'll continue to have dust ups in the South China Sea, and the US will continue the role it inherited from Britain in keeping international waters international. Besides, China is utterly reliant upon the West for its economic fortunes. Even a conventional war would take a huge portion of its economy out of action, and the US's ability to blockade China would rob it fully of its economic lifeblood.
Even Churchill was not unmoved by the Finnish plight, and regretted that the necessities of war required that Britain turn a blind eye to the Soviet aggression in Karelia. I view Finland's alignment with the Axis is a sad twist of history that somehow left Finland stained as a collaborator state, and let Russia off the hook for what was an aggressive war to annex Finnish territory.
Churchill did everything he could to try to stop the French surrender. Even when it became clear France was going to fall, the British government under Churchill proposed the Franco-British Union, in which the two states would effectively merge. While this would not have prevented France's collapse, it would have meant that there would have been no collaborator government in France, and it would have meant that France's military assets, such as its navy, not in the path of Germany, would have remained under Allied control. It would have meant French North Africa and France's other colonies would have been undisputedly in Allied hands. It would have meant that, even if France itself was fully occupied, France would remain at war with Germany.
Who knows how different history might have been if Britain and France had merged in such a way. It certainly would have created a state of such significant economic, military and demographic resources that it would have served, even after the war, as a significant counterbalance to Germany.
Which might be something if that was actually the way it happened.
They can get it done in time because the US nuclear shield means China and Russia wouldn't do it at all. If, eventually, the US does withdraw its nuclear shield from its East Asian allies, you can be sure Japan and South Korea would be nuclear states in very short order.
And if China or Russia did that, they'd be saying hello to US ICBM's in a few minutes. There won't be any nuclear strikes on Japan or South Korea. The Chinese won't do it, the Russians have no reason to, and China would never allow North Korea to do it (if NK could even do it, there are significant doubts about its rocket abilities).
Finland was forced by Soviet aggression into the Axis. The Soviets were nearly two years away from war with Germany when they invaded Finland, so I view the Winter War and Finland's attempts to find alliances to maintain its territorial integrity a little differently than, say, Vichy France.
Turkey has been a member of NATO since 1952, and considering that the Bosporus is the chief gateway for a large part of Russia's navy, Turkey's membership was pretty integral to the Soviet containment policy.
That may be so, but the bulk of the PLA's forces are relatively poorly equipped. China has long had the largest army in the world, in theory, but if you compare the average PLA soldier to the average NATO or Russian soldier, they're not in the same league. China is trying to catch up, but it's going to take decades, and it's not as if NATO will be standing still all that time
It is generally understood that Japan could become a nuclear power in fairly short order if it needed to. This isn't Iran desperately trying to gain nuclear capability, this is one of the most advanced industrial powers in the world.
How much does Redmond pay you to be a shill?
They deliberately broke with a standard to damage interoperability with a well defined protocol. It's bad behavior, period.
Look what Microsoft did to Kerberos... There are different kinds of poison pills.
This isn't some Englishmen still taking the piss out of the Germans for WWII. Microsoft's turning over a new leaf is a very new phenomenon, so I don't see why a healthy dose of skepticism isn't in order. Microsoft has a lot of road to repair before a lot of people will be willing to fully trust it, and that's as it should be.
That would be my big thought, and it's likely why .NET and SQL Server are being ported over to Linux. They're gunning for the big enterprise Java applications, and they know they'll never get these guys to move over to Windows. This looks to me like after 15 years of trying to bring Mohamed to the mountain, they're finally going to bring the mountain to Mohamed.
Frankly, as much as I generally dislike Microsoft and its products, I'm hoping they give Oracle a big nasty kick in the ass. I hate Oracle that much more.
What in the hell kind of hardware are you running Eclipse on? Shared drives on 10mb network cards plugged into hubs? It can be a bit slow at times for me, but I've never seen anything like that.