Yes, of course. Corps should be restricted as well. I just feel that the gov is in a different category than corps. The gov can do more damage with the invasion of our privacy. Just look at history. Anytime a gov gets it's hands on our personal lives, it's always downhill from there.
Let the DoD have their TV commercials, etc, but stay away from my personal info. That's mine.
Do you really think the US will allow Japan to get to the moon first? The US will do anything to dominate the lunar surface first. Its is a matter of strategic and symbolic power.
I can't wait for the day that Google is overtaken by its competitors. It much easier to get ranked in MSN and Yahoo, so I suggest more people optimize for those engines to bring the Google giant to its knees.
This mouse has been out for a while, and I bought one a few months back. It's pretty sweet, and worth the money imho.
The side to side scroll doesn't really work very well, but who really uses that function anyway? The standard up and down scroll is responsive with the only drawback being that sometimes when you touch it for the first time, it jumps up a screen instead of scrolling down. But overall, it's just a matter of getting the dexterity down.
The hidden USB connector carrying slot is really nice too. It's almost impossible to forget to put it back inside because you have to close the mouse to store it (so you have to put the USB connector back inside for all the lights to go off).
I never noticed the mouse going dead, so it was always receptive. The design is sleek and looks sharp without a nasty wire getting in the way. This is especially cool at the coffee shop when you don't know what cramped situation you might be in.
The mouse tracks well on most surfaces (even a stick coffee shop table).
Overall, it's a good little mouse with a few issues. And for the record, I got mine cheaper than $70 by shopping around (around $60).
The problem is, is that if Microsoft doesn't censor itself, then some other company will come in an do it. So, in that sense, Microsoft is being business-savvy. On the other hand, if all like-companies could ban together and refuse to censor per China's wishes, then China would be in a corner. But we all know that would never happen.
I don't know if this Blue Origin is related to the X Prize winner, but this space flight stuff is very real and very doable. I watched this whole flight, and it's pretty exciting that low-cost, safe space flight is a real possibility. Check out the photos or webcasts here: X Prize
I guess it was only a matter of time before Microsoft got serious and decided to play hardball. I just wish both Apple an MS would think more about the user instead of their respective monopolies. Yes, I have an ipod, and yes, I hate the fact that I can't just get a simple mp3 from iTunes. Looks like the same will be true of MS.
These giants should have more respect for their customers by just selling a good product that is universally applicable across all media players.............oh wait, this is MS we're talking about. Never mind.
I understand the need for Homeland Security to become a powerful agency, but do we really need a KGB in this country? I hate to cry "slippery slope," but isn't that what this is? With these subpoenas being extra secretive, and punishable by a year in prison if disclosed(!), doesn't that just fly in the face of anything resembling personal privacy?
I'm all for catching the bad guys, but let's not give Homeland Security too much power. We should let them drive, but let's not give them the keys and the pinkslip too.
Wow, that's pretty fast. Don't let Kinko's find out or they'll charge you $2 a sheet for color copies.
I'd really like to see an actual printout before I pass judgment, but my suspicions are pretty high that the quality isn't all that good. I've seen "fast" printers before, and the images are usually less than stellar. But who knows, maybe I'm wrong on this one.
Who cares about Lexmark. If you don't want to use their monopolistic machines, buy another brand. It's called free market, deal with it. Plus, Lexmark machines aren't that great to begin with. There are better brands on the market.
I say, have the courts leave Lexmark alone. After all, it's only toner, folks.
I think the anonymous cash cards are a great idea. I don't know why they didn't think of this long ago (I guess there was no real reason to). Libraries are now having fight with their patrons over identity privacy and they shouldn't have to. It's already hard enough to get people to utilize their local libraries, now with the Patriot Act, that is even harder.
So I say, use the cash-based system and check out books to your hearts content. I know in my day I've checked out books that might send up a red flag, but my intent was usually for school reports, not terrorism. Uncle Sam doesn't know my intent when I check out a book, so just putting up a red flag on Mein Kampf doesn't asses my intentions on reading it.
I'm just glad to see that someone has finally come up with a viable alternative to carbon emissions. I'm sure battery power will not be a problem in the future as the article suggests. The only thing we have to worry about now is how environmentally UN-friendly creating more electricity will be(?)
I'm torn about the future of Space exploration. On the one hand, I've always been a strong proponent of it because it's always been that great symbol of American "can do attitude" that Kennedy so eloquently spoke of. On the other hand, Space exploration is very, very expensive with the results usually being less than stellar (no pun intended). But then again, I see Space in the same light as the first sea explorers: sure, it would be easy to just stay at home and tell everyone that there's a cliff at the edge of the horizon, but look how wrong we were. And we only found out what was beyond the horizon when we sank some money into it, made a few educated guesses, and just went for it.
So, even though this may be a diversion away from Tom DeLay as some have suggested, I can over look it for now in the grander scope of getting a viable space program off the ground. Mars could hold much knowledge for us. And yes, if the Chinese and other countries are trying to get to the moon first, shouldn't we be the leaders in that arena? We should be leading the world (by example) not following it.
That's a tough call. On one hand, I think this new technology solves the problem of strip searches and groping of female passengers. But on the other hand, it's almost the same as strip searching.
But let's say a woman wearing a berka is being escorted by a suspicious man. Which scenario is more preferable:
1. Pulling those two out of line and publicly humiliating them. Then furthering the humiliation to the man and the woman by giving the woman a thorough pat-down. Then furthering the humiliation by requiring a strip search of the woman.
OR
2. Never having to speak to the suspected woman/man, but having them walk through this x-ray machine just like everyone else.
I think option 2 is the lesser of two evils. Sure, it violates some personal privacy, but isn't it worth it for airline security? I mean, it's not like their doing this in grocery stores or other public places (not yet at least). Just think of it like going to get a physical. You have to get naked for the doctor if you want to stay healthy. So this is the same: you have to get naked to stay alive in the sky.
In the long run, you're going to find the same problems with Mac. Since their software/hardware is so tightly governed, eventually you will be their slave if you put all your trust there. Macs have great appeal because of their promise of a stable, market-friendly machine, but absolute control over their product will be their downfall. Mac has/will created a niche that is so opposite of natural, capitalistic competition, that it will eventually evolve itself out of existence. Sure, a few diehards will hang on until the end, but it's only a matter of time before the world catches on to the fact that Macs are mostly a brilliant marketing campaign designed to fool you..........and it worked.
I think it's funny that Britain faired the best in this "contest" considering they are generally considered the "least European" of all the nations.
However, this is and interesting phenomenon if the researchers are correct about how this show is used as a barometer for European countries judging each other. But in the end, what does it all mean? So what if Europeans hate their neighbors? That's nothing new. And even so, better for them to take out their aggressions on a TV show than to dive back into their long history of war, right?
One issue that I rarely hear is the fact that the Star Wars ships fly as though they are airplanes cutting through the atmosphere. From an X-wing up to the Star Destroyers, all of the ships have big engines that would thrust them forward, but would not allow for any turning in space. In other words, airplanes use the air around their wings to lift, dive, turn left and right. In space, of course, there is no air, but the space ships behave just like airplanes would behave in an atmosphere. This is impossible. The Star Wars space ships don¦t seem to have any noticeable thrusters on the front end of the ship that could give them maneuverability in space. Unless there is some magical field surrounding each ship that helps them to maneuver, their current designs are implausible in space.
I¦ll give the X-wing some slack because it¦s a ship that can enter the atmosphere as well as space (so it could use its wings in the atmosphere like an airplane). But what about the Millennium Falcon? It only has a big thruster in the back. How does it maneuver in zero gravity and zero air resistance?
That being said, I¦m a total Star Wars nerd and I worship the ground George Lucas walks on. I¦m super stoked about Episode III. f
At least somebody is doing their job. I find it strange that the flight crew seemed to have no idea that they may be in restricted airspace. I mean, three miles would seem like a safe distance based on pre-911 common sense, but these guys should've known that getting anywhere near the White House could be nothing but trouble.
I'm just glad to see that the Secret Service took this "threat" seriously and acted accordingly. I just wish they would use that same diligence in response to threats to our nuclear and chemical plants. Sure, I don't want to see anyone in the White House die, but an attack on our nuclear or chemical plants would kill a lot more people.
Too bad the Hubble program is being scrapped. This was one of the important space programs that has taught us the most. But leave it to bureaucrats to screw everything up.
Sounds like a reasonable idea, however, corporations would just get around this by having their CEO "privately" give contributions out of his own pocket: Instead of Turner Broadcasting giving a contribution, it would just shift to Ted Turner himself giving the contribution out of pocket.
We should just do away with lobbyists alltogether.
"Former New Jersey governor and Environmental Protection Agency head for the Bush administration Christine Todd Whitman. She is a moderate Republican and in her new book argues against the hijacking of her party by zealous "social fundamentalists." Her new book is It's My Party, Too: The Battle for the Heart of the GOP and the Future of America."
This is a good interview and very interesting to listen to. I also saw her interview on Hannity and Colmes (FNC).
The question: Do you think there is a split in the conservative party between what Whitman calls "moderates" and "social fundamentalists?"
In her interview, she makes it a point to say that she supports the President in general, and is deeply committed to conservatism, but that many in the Right have began to isolate themselves at the exclusion of others in the same party. She claims an implied and sometimes active "litmus test" is being issued to those in the GOP who don't think identically to those on the "far right." For instance, she feels excluded from the Right because of either-or-issues such as the environment and abortion: either you're with us or against us in the GOP, there can be no other way.
In my opinion, this new book of hers is her way of saying the Right is being over-run with "social fundamentalists" as she calls them: the far-Right. Since she is exiting politics, and has no political agenda (she claimed on Hannity and Colmes), she felt unrestrained in exposing a potential rift in the party. Also, her resignation from the EPA over some document "revisions" by the Bush admin suggests she wants to disagree with Bush policies, but still wants to support the Right's core agendas.
Here is her website: http://www.mypartytoo.com/
Is this one woman's opinion, or a greater problem?
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, of course. Corps should be restricted as well. I just feel that the gov is in a different category than corps. The gov can do more damage with the invasion of our privacy. Just look at history. Anytime a gov gets it's hands on our personal lives, it's always downhill from there.
Let the DoD have their TV commercials, etc, but stay away from my personal info. That's mine.
I understand the need for the DoD to market for new recruits, but this is ridiculous. The gov needs less information, not more.
Do you really think the US will allow Japan to get to the moon first? The US will do anything to dominate the lunar surface first. Its is a matter of strategic and symbolic power.
I can't wait for the day that Google is overtaken by its competitors. It much easier to get ranked in MSN and Yahoo, so I suggest more people optimize for those engines to bring the Google giant to its knees.
This mouse has been out for a while, and I bought one a few months back. It's pretty sweet, and worth the money imho.
The side to side scroll doesn't really work very well, but who really uses that function anyway? The standard up and down scroll is responsive with the only drawback being that sometimes when you touch it for the first time, it jumps up a screen instead of scrolling down. But overall, it's just a matter of getting the dexterity down.
The hidden USB connector carrying slot is really nice too. It's almost impossible to forget to put it back inside because you have to close the mouse to store it (so you have to put the USB connector back inside for all the lights to go off).
I never noticed the mouse going dead, so it was always receptive. The design is sleek and looks sharp without a nasty wire getting in the way. This is especially cool at the coffee shop when you don't know what cramped situation you might be in.
The mouse tracks well on most surfaces (even a stick coffee shop table).
Overall, it's a good little mouse with a few issues. And for the record, I got mine cheaper than $70 by shopping around (around $60).
The problem is, is that if Microsoft doesn't censor itself, then some other company will come in an do it. So, in that sense, Microsoft is being business-savvy. On the other hand, if all like-companies could ban together and refuse to censor per China's wishes, then China would be in a corner. But we all know that would never happen.
I don't know if this Blue Origin is related to the X Prize winner, but this space flight stuff is very real and very doable. I watched this whole flight, and it's pretty exciting that low-cost, safe space flight is a real possibility. Check out the photos or webcasts here: X Prize
I guess it was only a matter of time before Microsoft got serious and decided to play hardball. I just wish both Apple an MS would think more about the user instead of their respective monopolies. Yes, I have an ipod, and yes, I hate the fact that I can't just get a simple mp3 from iTunes. Looks like the same will be true of MS.
These giants should have more respect for their customers by just selling a good product that is universally applicable across all media players.............oh wait, this is MS we're talking about. Never mind.
I understand the need for Homeland Security to become a powerful agency, but do we really need a KGB in this country? I hate to cry "slippery slope," but isn't that what this is? With these subpoenas being extra secretive, and punishable by a year in prison if disclosed(!), doesn't that just fly in the face of anything resembling personal privacy?
I'm all for catching the bad guys, but let's not give Homeland Security too much power. We should let them drive, but let's not give them the keys and the pinkslip too.
Wow, that's pretty fast. Don't let Kinko's find out or they'll charge you $2 a sheet for color copies.
I'd really like to see an actual printout before I pass judgment, but my suspicions are pretty high that the quality isn't all that good. I've seen "fast" printers before, and the images are usually less than stellar. But who knows, maybe I'm wrong on this one.
Who cares about Lexmark. If you don't want to use their monopolistic machines, buy another brand. It's called free market, deal with it. Plus, Lexmark machines aren't that great to begin with. There are better brands on the market.
I say, have the courts leave Lexmark alone. After all, it's only toner, folks.
I think the anonymous cash cards are a great idea. I don't know why they didn't think of this long ago (I guess there was no real reason to). Libraries are now having fight with their patrons over identity privacy and they shouldn't have to. It's already hard enough to get people to utilize their local libraries, now with the Patriot Act, that is even harder.
So I say, use the cash-based system and check out books to your hearts content. I know in my day I've checked out books that might send up a red flag, but my intent was usually for school reports, not terrorism. Uncle Sam doesn't know my intent when I check out a book, so just putting up a red flag on Mein Kampf doesn't asses my intentions on reading it.
I'm just glad to see that someone has finally come up with a viable alternative to carbon emissions. I'm sure battery power will not be a problem in the future as the article suggests. The only thing we have to worry about now is how environmentally UN-friendly creating more electricity will be(?)
I'm torn about the future of Space exploration. On the one hand, I've always been a strong proponent of it because it's always been that great symbol of American "can do attitude" that Kennedy so eloquently spoke of. On the other hand, Space exploration is very, very expensive with the results usually being less than stellar (no pun intended). But then again, I see Space in the same light as the first sea explorers: sure, it would be easy to just stay at home and tell everyone that there's a cliff at the edge of the horizon, but look how wrong we were. And we only found out what was beyond the horizon when we sank some money into it, made a few educated guesses, and just went for it.
So, even though this may be a diversion away from Tom DeLay as some have suggested, I can over look it for now in the grander scope of getting a viable space program off the ground. Mars could hold much knowledge for us. And yes, if the Chinese and other countries are trying to get to the moon first, shouldn't we be the leaders in that arena? We should be leading the world (by example) not following it.
That's a tough call. On one hand, I think this new technology solves the problem of strip searches and groping of female passengers. But on the other hand, it's almost the same as strip searching.
But let's say a woman wearing a berka is being escorted by a suspicious man. Which scenario is more preferable:
1. Pulling those two out of line and publicly humiliating them. Then furthering the humiliation to the man and the woman by giving the woman a thorough pat-down. Then furthering the humiliation by requiring a strip search of the woman.
OR
2. Never having to speak to the suspected woman/man, but having them walk through this x-ray machine just like everyone else.
I think option 2 is the lesser of two evils. Sure, it violates some personal privacy, but isn't it worth it for airline security? I mean, it's not like their doing this in grocery stores or other public places (not yet at least). Just think of it like going to get a physical. You have to get naked for the doctor if you want to stay healthy. So this is the same: you have to get naked to stay alive in the sky.
In the long run, you're going to find the same problems with Mac. Since their software/hardware is so tightly governed, eventually you will be their slave if you put all your trust there. Macs have great appeal because of their promise of a stable, market-friendly machine, but absolute control over their product will be their downfall. Mac has/will created a niche that is so opposite of natural, capitalistic competition, that it will eventually evolve itself out of existence. Sure, a few diehards will hang on until the end, but it's only a matter of time before the world catches on to the fact that Macs are mostly a brilliant marketing campaign designed to fool you..........and it worked.
I think it's funny that Britain faired the best in this "contest" considering they are generally considered the "least European" of all the nations. However, this is and interesting phenomenon if the researchers are correct about how this show is used as a barometer for European countries judging each other. But in the end, what does it all mean? So what if Europeans hate their neighbors? That's nothing new. And even so, better for them to take out their aggressions on a TV show than to dive back into their long history of war, right?
One issue that I rarely hear is the fact that the Star Wars ships fly as though they are airplanes cutting through the atmosphere. From an X-wing up to the Star Destroyers, all of the ships have big engines that would thrust them forward, but would not allow for any turning in space. In other words, airplanes use the air around their wings to lift, dive, turn left and right. In space, of course, there is no air, but the space ships behave just like airplanes would behave in an atmosphere. This is impossible. The Star Wars space ships don¦t seem to have any noticeable thrusters on the front end of the ship that could give them maneuverability in space. Unless there is some magical field surrounding each ship that helps them to maneuver, their current designs are implausible in space. I¦ll give the X-wing some slack because it¦s a ship that can enter the atmosphere as well as space (so it could use its wings in the atmosphere like an airplane). But what about the Millennium Falcon? It only has a big thruster in the back. How does it maneuver in zero gravity and zero air resistance? That being said, I¦m a total Star Wars nerd and I worship the ground George Lucas walks on. I¦m super stoked about Episode III. f
At least somebody is doing their job. I find it strange that the flight crew seemed to have no idea that they may be in restricted airspace. I mean, three miles would seem like a safe distance based on pre-911 common sense, but these guys should've known that getting anywhere near the White House could be nothing but trouble. I'm just glad to see that the Secret Service took this "threat" seriously and acted accordingly. I just wish they would use that same diligence in response to threats to our nuclear and chemical plants. Sure, I don't want to see anyone in the White House die, but an attack on our nuclear or chemical plants would kill a lot more people.
Too bad the Hubble program is being scrapped. This was one of the important space programs that has taught us the most. But leave it to bureaucrats to screw everything up.
Sounds like a reasonable idea, however, corporations would just get around this by having their CEO "privately" give contributions out of his own pocket: Instead of Turner Broadcasting giving a contribution, it would just shift to Ted Turner himself giving the contribution out of pocket. We should just do away with lobbyists alltogether.
"Former New Jersey governor and Environmental Protection Agency head for the Bush administration Christine Todd Whitman. She is a moderate Republican and in her new book argues against the hijacking of her party by zealous "social fundamentalists." Her new book is It's My Party, Too: The Battle for the Heart of the GOP and the Future of America."
h p? prgId=13&prgDate=01-27-2005 -- audio interview
http://www.npr.org/templates/rundowns/rundown.p
This is a good interview and very interesting to listen to. I also saw her interview on Hannity and Colmes (FNC).
The question: Do you think there is a split in the conservative party between what Whitman calls "moderates" and "social fundamentalists?"
In her interview, she makes it a point to say that she supports the President in general, and is deeply committed to conservatism, but that many in the Right have began to isolate themselves at the exclusion of others in the same party. She claims an implied and sometimes active "litmus test" is being issued to those in the GOP who don't think identically to those on the "far right." For instance, she feels excluded from the Right because of either-or-issues such as the environment and abortion: either you're with us or against us in the GOP, there can be no other way.
In my opinion, this new book of hers is her way of saying the Right is being over-run with "social fundamentalists" as she calls them: the far-Right. Since she is exiting politics, and has no political agenda (she claimed on Hannity and Colmes), she felt unrestrained in exposing a potential rift in the party. Also, her resignation from the EPA over some document "revisions" by the Bush admin suggests she wants to disagree with Bush policies, but still wants to support the Right's core agendas.
Here is her website: http://www.mypartytoo.com/
Is this one woman's opinion, or a greater problem?