Riiight, I'm sure the giant government conspiracy to hide global warming is the main reason that this is being set up. Nice spin there, poster.
I'm sure you can come up with an equally valid reason to have USGS information screened for "politically-sensitive" reasons?
Translation: either they want to be alerted in advance of stuff they can take credit for, or they want to tweak press releases of embarassing info. It's a classic CYA move.
It may be that the government doesn't want to be caught unaware when the media gets a hold of a report with newsworthy or politically sensitive information. Other parts of the government already have similar practices in place.
I know you meant to be funny, but the reason for braille on drive-thru ATMs is so that the blind can take taxis to ATMs, reducing the risk of being mugged.
Here's a question. If you had to take a count of the number of lives saved by the military's med tech, versus the number of lives taken by the military's other tech, what's the difference?
That's a lot of math. We're talking Hiroshima, Agent Orange, Iraq, etc.
And how many more lives would have been lost if the US hadn't used the bomb, and tried a land assault against a Japan unwilling to surrender? It could be (and has been) argued that it would be in the neighborhood of a million. So, you could say that nuclear weapons technology has saved a lot of lives.
...The money IS all spent on Earth. It'll be a while before it can be outsourced to Mars. As for pork, why do you think NASA is based in Houston? Answer: LBJ
I completely agree with you that the money IS spent on Earh. Unfortunately, the words coming out of politicians mouths are more often aimed toward getting votes than toward speaking the truth. If politicians can get votes from the ignorant by using false rhetoric, they will.
... just hope they're not gonna be bean-counted to death on this one... those auditors are already sharpening up their knives to trim the budget... I'd hate to see an astronaut die because things were cut too fine...
I would guess that the lunar budget would be cut totally before it got that fine. There is plenty of time before an actual landing for Congress to cut that part of NASA's budget, saying "The money could be better spent here on Earth," leaving out the last part of the phrase. ("The money could be bettter spent here on Earth getting pork for my constituents so I get re-elected and/or my party gains more seats.")
Well, I have to try to get my geek card back. I had to turn it in after admitting that I had only seen one episode of Star Wars all the way through, and snippets of the other episodes.
The Wright brothers, who developed and flew the first airplane, were from Ohio.
Developed and flew the first _powered_ airplane.
You mean _powered_and_controllable_ airplane. Ader built a powered airplane before the Wright brothers, but the controls were not up to par. I seem to remember Lilienthal was also on the way to a powered craft, but it also would not have been as controllable as the Wright Brothers' craft. More here, if it helps.
This has nothing to do with rights, there never were any rights to those frequencies for the public, they were never anything more than a secondary user.
Isn't that a bit backwards? I mean, it's the government serving the people, eh? The people as a whole own the airwaves and we merely allow the government to regulate them for our own good. If the method and allocations they choose are disagreeable to us we have the right to petition them to change it.
The government was allocated that frequency band, and the USAF is using it to perform their mission, thus serving the needs of the people. Garage door opener manufacturers used part of that frequency band, even though it wasn't allocated to them. If the garage doors have problems with the USAF using part of a frequency that was allocated to the government, it is on the garage door opener manufacturers/owners to change their frequency.
This seems real similar to the arguments by folks who buy homes near airports and then complain about the jet noise.
"Colour is a very important part of fruit marketing," she says. "If fruit doesn't look good, consumers are far less likely to buy it, no matter how good it might taste..."
Is she a Golgafrincham? Has she researched into what people want from fruit, you know, how they relate to it, the image; do they want fruit that can be fitted nasally?
...Too bad HD programming usually has SD commercials.
When I was getting HDTV off air, there were a few instances where the program was SD and some of the commercials aired were HD. If those advertisers spent the extra money to make HD commercials, even if they were shown on SD programs, they must be willing to pay at least some premium for HD.
Either that, or there was a big mix-up, and the HD commercials were shown during the SD shows, and the SD commercials were shown during the HD shows.
How about hiring competent professionals who know better than to allow themselves to be baited by belligerent kids?
The union wouldn't allow that, because it would threaten the job security and promotion opportunities of those teachers who are completely incompetent but good due-paying members of the union.
...what would happen if the Shuttle is aloft during the year change. A lot of NASA employees have to work the normal shuttle work schedule, and miss their New Years parties, having probably just missed Christmas with their families.
You make a good point, and I agree with your point that there is a purpose to verifiable voting, but I don't think it should be left to the individual. For example, if I recall correctly, the Gore/Bush vote in Florida was done on voting cards, and the vote by vote recount proved Bush won, even though the votes of many overseas servicepeople (who vote Republican more than Democrat) weren't counted due to missing postmarks. The punch-card votes allowed the votes to be verified. A few overzealous (sp?) people came out and said that they didn't understand the ballot, and thus the punch cards weren't valid, either, causing some court hassles, but in the end not affecting the outcome. To me, this recount and vote verification proved that the system could work, but was too slow, and if left to individuals, was too likely to be abused by those individuals with extreme views.
In my opinion, if we are to use an independently verifiable electronic voting system, it should be an independent auditor (or two or three) that does the verification, not idividuals, so that extremists on either side cannot affect the outcome. Additionally, a machine readable paper trail that is verifiable as one votes would be ideal. In the Bush/Gore example, this would have provided a quicker answer to the question of the vote count, and would have probably decreased (but not eliminated*) the skepticism about his victory.
* - there will always be those with extra-thick tin foil hats who think all elections are/will be rigged. No technology will change their paranoia.
I agree. If your vote was counted wrong, there isn't anything that can be done about it. If you believed your vote was counted wrong and it could be changed if in error, there would be the problem of folks claiming their vote was counted wrong to tie up the process of acting on the election results. For example, if vote verification was implemented today in California, and people had the ability to contest the election, Proposition 85 (which would require parental notification 48 hours prior to performing an abortion on a minor) would never be resolved. If the proposition didn't pass, extreme right-to-lifers would contend that their votes were miscounted just to tie up the system. If it passed, the extreme pro-choicers would contend that their vote was miscounted. To avoid this possible debaucle (sp?), challenging votes cannot be allowed, thus, what is the point of verifiable voting?
Of course, I could be missing something - please enlighten me if so.
Although your argument is persuasive, a few links to the appropriate papers would do wonders for supporting your position. Hopefully, others will provide links, and still others will critique the papers, pointing out good/bad science/statistical analysis.
Oh, wait - this is slashdot - nevermind - ain't gonna happen.
Slashdot Mirror
It may be that the government doesn't want to be caught unaware when the media gets a hold of a report with newsworthy or politically sensitive information. Other parts of the government already have similar practices in place.
You forgot the Air Commerce Act of 1926, which started government regulation of air commerce.
I know you meant to be funny, but the reason for braille on drive-thru ATMs is so that the blind can take taxis to ATMs, reducing the risk of being mugged.
That had to be the second worst movie ever made, right behind this one. Then again, I haven't seen Gigli, which was the previous record holder for worst movie ever, from what I understand.
And how many more lives would have been lost if the US hadn't used the bomb, and tried a land assault against a Japan unwilling to surrender? It could be (and has been) argued that it would be in the neighborhood of a million. So, you could say that nuclear weapons technology has saved a lot of lives.
Ummm, I think you got usernames confused. You're ET Fleshy. I'm wasted.
I completely agree with you that the money IS spent on Earh. Unfortunately, the words coming out of politicians mouths are more often aimed toward getting votes than toward speaking the truth. If politicians can get votes from the ignorant by using false rhetoric, they will.
I would guess that the lunar budget would be cut totally before it got that fine. There is plenty of time before an actual landing for Congress to cut that part of NASA's budget, saying "The money could be better spent here on Earth," leaving out the last part of the phrase. ("The money could be bettter spent here on Earth getting pork for my constituents so I get re-elected and/or my party gains more seats.")
I hope that it doesn't happen that way.
Well, I have to try to get my geek card back. I had to turn it in after admitting that I had only seen one episode of Star Wars all the way through, and snippets of the other episodes.
You mean _powered_and_controllable_ airplane. Ader built a powered airplane before the Wright brothers, but the controls were not up to par. I seem to remember Lilienthal was also on the way to a powered craft, but it also would not have been as controllable as the Wright Brothers' craft. More here, if it helps.
I think it is spelled I O W A.
The ship out of Ohio will be sub-orbital, so the extra velocity gained by being near the equator isn't useful. The tax-breaks will be useful, though.
The government was allocated that frequency band, and the USAF is using it to perform their mission, thus serving the needs of the people. Garage door opener manufacturers used part of that frequency band, even though it wasn't allocated to them. If the garage doors have problems with the USAF using part of a frequency that was allocated to the government, it is on the garage door opener manufacturers/owners to change their frequency.
This seems real similar to the arguments by folks who buy homes near airports and then complain about the jet noise.
Is she a Golgafrincham? Has she researched into what people want from fruit, you know, how they relate to it, the image; do they want fruit that can be fitted nasally?
2004 was a leap year, so it had more days, which makes the difference even less meaningful. Someone else caught it before I did, though.
When I was getting HDTV off air, there were a few instances where the program was SD and some of the commercials aired were HD. If those advertisers spent the extra money to make HD commercials, even if they were shown on SD programs, they must be willing to pay at least some premium for HD.
Either that, or there was a big mix-up, and the HD commercials were shown during the SD shows, and the SD commercials were shown during the HD shows.
The union wouldn't allow that, because it would threaten the job security and promotion opportunities of those teachers who are completely incompetent but good due-paying members of the union.
Darn, and I thought they had invented a bigger beer mug down there.
I thought it was" "Nobody ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American public", or something to that effect.
...what would happen if the Shuttle is aloft during the year change. A lot of NASA employees have to work the normal shuttle work schedule, and miss their New Years parties, having probably just missed Christmas with their families.
You make a good point, and I agree with your point that there is a purpose to verifiable voting, but I don't think it should be left to the individual. For example, if I recall correctly, the Gore/Bush vote in Florida was done on voting cards, and the vote by vote recount proved Bush won, even though the votes of many overseas servicepeople (who vote Republican more than Democrat) weren't counted due to missing postmarks. The punch-card votes allowed the votes to be verified. A few overzealous (sp?) people came out and said that they didn't understand the ballot, and thus the punch cards weren't valid, either, causing some court hassles, but in the end not affecting the outcome. To me, this recount and vote verification proved that the system could work, but was too slow, and if left to individuals, was too likely to be abused by those individuals with extreme views.
In my opinion, if we are to use an independently verifiable electronic voting system, it should be an independent auditor (or two or three) that does the verification, not idividuals, so that extremists on either side cannot affect the outcome. Additionally, a machine readable paper trail that is verifiable as one votes would be ideal. In the Bush/Gore example, this would have provided a quicker answer to the question of the vote count, and would have probably decreased (but not eliminated*) the skepticism about his victory.
* - there will always be those with extra-thick tin foil hats who think all elections are/will be rigged. No technology will change their paranoia.
I agree. If your vote was counted wrong, there isn't anything that can be done about it. If you believed your vote was counted wrong and it could be changed if in error, there would be the problem of folks claiming their vote was counted wrong to tie up the process of acting on the election results. For example, if vote verification was implemented today in California, and people had the ability to contest the election, Proposition 85 (which would require parental notification 48 hours prior to performing an abortion on a minor) would never be resolved. If the proposition didn't pass, extreme right-to-lifers would contend that their votes were miscounted just to tie up the system. If it passed, the extreme pro-choicers would contend that their vote was miscounted. To avoid this possible debaucle (sp?), challenging votes cannot be allowed, thus, what is the point of verifiable voting?
Of course, I could be missing something - please enlighten me if so.
Although your argument is persuasive, a few links to the appropriate papers would do wonders for supporting your position. Hopefully, others will provide links, and still others will critique the papers, pointing out good/bad science/statistical analysis.
Oh, wait - this is slashdot - nevermind - ain't gonna happen.
I think the exact phrase was "WHAT DO YOU GET IF YOU MULTIPLY SIX BY NINE."
Pretty much means the same as the parent, though.