Like the NSA doesn't have an archive of or at least keyword search every call we make on cell phones.
That's nothing! The illuminati have a record of not only how often you go to the bathroom, but what ply paper you use to wipe your bunghole! If you're not afraid, you're not paying attention!!!!!!!!!!!
But this is, after all, slashdot. And with the new conservative bend on this site (notice how often townhall.com advertises here with various anti-Obama rhetoric) this is exactly what slashdot wants to have on the front page.
I know, eh? At this point, slashdot must be at least 15% conservative. Maybe even 20%. It's disgusting!
In theory, sure. In practice, you're advocating mob rule, which is the default system in the absence of a strong central power. I find it extremely difficult to believe that "the people" could ever get their shit together long enough to even depose a modern western government, let alone have the kind of rational, intelligent, fair-minded principles needed to replace it with a superior form of government. If "the people" want to launch us into a new dark age, the mentality you're talking about is exactly what they'll need.
Not really true - it only takes one piece of non launch-rated equipment to mess up the whole works. Imagine it shorting out or breaking into a zillion pieces on launch and getting into the science instruments.
Sure, placement matters. Imagine if a baguette were to be dropped on a part of the LHC. Not sure how a solid-state camera would break though.
Naw, what you've done is told him that only one definition is acceptable to you, and that you reject the idea that different words can have different meanings when used in different fields or contexts. You've then demanded a ridiculously high standard of proof for him to meet in order to placate you. Personally, I think the correct answer at this point is "fuck off", but he's apparently a lot more polite and patient than I am.
Those things are a necessity when the camera is a mission-critical piece of kit that needs to survive and function perfectly for a couple years; they're just a nice-to-have when the camera is meant to take pictures - which you probably won't even need - bare minutes after achieving orbit.
You jest, but I was reading the title, and had this reaction: Diabetic Men Hmm, I'm not diabetic, but I am a man, this could be interesting May Be Able To Grow ? Their Own ???? Insulin- meh
Now of course, if you make up definitions of words and it catches on, that becomes the definition. If I use the word "inflammable" to mean "not flammable", it's wrong. If it catches on and that's how people really start using the word, then it eventually becomes correct.
Here's why it's required: I'm not going to readily accept a drastic and nonsensical redefinition of well-established words on the insistence of a poor thinker.
That's the wonderful thing about a false premise - you can kick back and ask others for ridiculous amounts of evidence while smugly insisting that your interpretation is the correct one, and when they fail to find a scholar who has commented on the existence of your purple space-lizards from Titan, you can declare victory without ever having had to provide any evidence at all.
And this is Canada, we go for security through co-operation and support, rather than intimidation and manipulation.
No. What you're describing isn't security. Sure, you can feel "secure" by being Little Miss Popular, liked and admired by everyone. You won't have to worry about random bullies stuffing you in a locker, or stealing your lunch. But when the players on the football team say "bend over", there's dick all you can do to stop them. That's why here in Canada - much like they do in the US - we take the two-prong approach. Use cooperation and support when possible, while not hesitating to use force and manipulation when needed.
Well a lot of the mine fields left behind by the US are not what folks think of as "responsible with its landmines".
I'm gonna go out on a limb here and suggest that the insane amount of landmines currently present in neighbouring Cambodia tend to suggest that the vast majority of landmines in Vietnam are probably of other-than-American origin. However, if you've got some statistics that show the actual number of mines left behind by US forces, feel free to share.
And well then there is the agent orange thing.
Never heard of that landmine. Who makes it?
The US is a lot of things. Responsible in warfare is not one of them.
Hah! Good one:) If only those fucking Americans could live up to the standards of the Glorious Motherland!:p
If your only experience with mines comes from Wikipedia, I can see why you might come to that conclusion. Anyone who's ever employed a claymore will know better.
That's exactly why so many children wind up with missing limbs
According to the-monitor.org, in 2008 there were 3,891 people wounded by landmines, and 1,266 killed. I picked that one because it's the most lopsided - other sources show a more balanced ratio. The point is, if mines were actually designed to maim instead of kill, they'd be doing a really shit job at it (yeah, a 3-to-1 ratio is shit - grenades probably fall into the same ballpark, and IED's have an even higher ratio).
Land mines are specifically designed to injure - not kill.
Sorry, not true. First off, there are thousands of different types of mines, so any such blanket declaration is bound to be inaccurate. Secondly, the vast majority of "professional" mines are large enough to at least kill a person, and sometimes are designed to kill and maim several individuals. Some mines are meant to injure, but they are in the minority.
Everyone who saw the soldier step on that mine is now very fearful, lacking a desire to more forward. They too are demoralized.
Right, and seeing the head of the guy in front of you suddenly erupt in a cloud of pink mist and bone chips, before you can even hear the shot that killed him... that's not demoralizing of frightening at all. You will, of course, continue to walk forward, completely ignoring the robotic death-machine spewing streams of lead in your direction.
Whereas an auto-cannon requires electricity. As such, offers a very finite threat window and/or a dramatic restriction as to where they can be deployed - unlike a mine.
No problem - we're all "green" now; just make them solar-powered:) Their power demands would be minimal most of the time, so a small solar-array would be sufficient to charge the battey for regular use. You'd just have to make sure that, in a battle, the battery is big enough to outlast the ammunition supply.
Not to mention a single soldier can deploy dozens of mines.
A dozen mines can cover maybe 50 square meters, if you don't mind spreading them too thinly. A 50 calibre auto cannon can cover a 4 kilometre circle, minus any dead-zones. You're comparing apples and oranges.
If it came to all-out war, I doubt the landmines would slow them much. Knowing the North Korean mentality, they'd just have a walking wall of political prisoners march through a kilometer wide strech, and have the military follow behind. Besides which, any serious military buildup would be easily visible to the south, and the SK military would have plenty of time to mobilize and deploy to the border. The landmines are mainly there in order to discourage regular infiltration by small units.
Slashdot readers are also not a hive mind. Just because some naive anti-establishment nutjobs have gotten their panties in a bunch and flooded these threads with bitching and moaning doesn't mean that their claims are representative of slashdot as a whole.
Sarcasm aside, what troubles me is that those defensive weapons are not about defense, it's about eliminating any (by any I mean literally 100%) risk for defender.
So it's not about defence... it's about defence? Sorry, run that by me one more time?
When war becomes like this: drones and roboturrets - there is no factor of retribution holding back the application of war as one of the solutions.
Nonsense. That's like saying that the only reason I don't go around raping every woman I can get my hands on is because I'd get imprisoned, and raped in turn. Sure, quid-pro-quo retribution can have a deterrent effect, but it's far from being the only (or even the major) motivational factor. Humans are social animals. We seek cooperation just as often as we seek conflict. There are hundreds of factors which influence a decision to go to war, or to pursue peace. If, say, the UK disbanded it's entire military tomorrow, and every nation in the world promised not to go to their aid, I can still guarantee that we wouldn't invade them. If you think that the reason we don't attack other nations is because we might get hurt, you are truly deluded. Political good-will, support from your own populace (in democratic nations), the monetary cost of funding an invasion and maintaining an occupation, the monetary cost of disrupting commerce... all of these things are far more important to politicians than how many soldiers they lose.
Apparently other than being insulting you don't know jack shit about the south.
I just know too much about the "OMG DA COPS SUCK!" mentality. Police aren't perfect, but their irrational detractors are far worse, and a lot more common. As long as it's just a lone voice slandering them on a forum, I'm gonna go with the most logical explanation.
And did you ever stop to think that maybe...juuuust maybe...you could use this on a manned Mars mission WITHOUT needing thousand mile sails? Like maybe send the supplies in smaller unmanned probes using this tech to save fuel that the astronauts could then use to get home?
Ah, yes, that'll work. We'll just manufacture 1,000 50-mile sails so that they can get the needed supplies there. And we'll launch all those tens of thousands of tonnes of sail material into orbit using pixie dust. I mean, the amount of rocket-fuel necessary to launch the sail(s) into space would be about a hundred times more than what we'd need to just send the fucking payload by conventional means, so obviously we'll have to get the pixies to help. Meanwhile, the astronauts can eat, breath, and drink vacuum during their trip. It's a small price to pay in order to be the first corpses on mars!
For someone who's put so little thought into this, you sure are quick to accuse others of not thinking. Solar sails will have their uses, primarily in moving robotic probes, and maybe eventually for long-duration cargo missions if we ever have established colonies on Mars. But they certainly won't be useful if you're trying to get men to other planets.
Slashdot Mirror
Like the NSA doesn't have an archive of or at least keyword search every call we make on cell phones.
That's nothing! The illuminati have a record of not only how often you go to the bathroom, but what ply paper you use to wipe your bunghole! If you're not afraid, you're not paying attention!!!!!!!!!!!
But this is, after all, slashdot. And with the new conservative bend on this site (notice how often townhall.com advertises here with various anti-Obama rhetoric) this is exactly what slashdot wants to have on the front page.
I know, eh? At this point, slashdot must be at least 15% conservative. Maybe even 20%. It's disgusting!
In theory, sure. In practice, you're advocating mob rule, which is the default system in the absence of a strong central power. I find it extremely difficult to believe that "the people" could ever get their shit together long enough to even depose a modern western government, let alone have the kind of rational, intelligent, fair-minded principles needed to replace it with a superior form of government. If "the people" want to launch us into a new dark age, the mentality you're talking about is exactly what they'll need.
You're right, it's not hypocritical. It's just incredibly naive.
Not really true - it only takes one piece of non launch-rated equipment to mess up the whole works. Imagine it shorting out or breaking into a zillion pieces on launch and getting into the science instruments.
Sure, placement matters. Imagine if a baguette were to be dropped on a part of the LHC. Not sure how a solid-state camera would break though.
Naw, what you've done is told him that only one definition is acceptable to you, and that you reject the idea that different words can have different meanings when used in different fields or contexts. You've then demanded a ridiculously high standard of proof for him to meet in order to placate you. Personally, I think the correct answer at this point is "fuck off", but he's apparently a lot more polite and patient than I am.
Those things are a necessity when the camera is a mission-critical piece of kit that needs to survive and function perfectly for a couple years; they're just a nice-to-have when the camera is meant to take pictures - which you probably won't even need - bare minutes after achieving orbit.
You jest, but I was reading the title, and had this reaction:
Diabetic Men
Hmm, I'm not diabetic, but I am a man, this could be interesting
May Be Able To Grow
?
Their Own
????
Insulin-
meh
from their testicular tissue.
ARGH!
Now of course, if you make up definitions of words and it catches on, that becomes the definition. If I use the word "inflammable" to mean "not flammable", it's wrong. If it catches on and that's how people really start using the word, then it eventually becomes correct.
Tell that to Dr. Nick.
Here's why it's required: I'm not going to readily accept a drastic and nonsensical redefinition of well-established words on the insistence of a poor thinker.
That's the wonderful thing about a false premise - you can kick back and ask others for ridiculous amounts of evidence while smugly insisting that your interpretation is the correct one, and when they fail to find a scholar who has commented on the existence of your purple space-lizards from Titan, you can declare victory without ever having had to provide any evidence at all.
Because there are always at least 2 or 3 anti-science morons who happen to have mod points.
And this is Canada, we go for security through co-operation and support, rather than intimidation and manipulation.
No. What you're describing isn't security. Sure, you can feel "secure" by being Little Miss Popular, liked and admired by everyone. You won't have to worry about random bullies stuffing you in a locker, or stealing your lunch. But when the players on the football team say "bend over", there's dick all you can do to stop them. That's why here in Canada - much like they do in the US - we take the two-prong approach. Use cooperation and support when possible, while not hesitating to use force and manipulation when needed.
Sure, and by that reasoning, all libel laws would be unconstitutional. But they're not.
Well a lot of the mine fields left behind by the US are not what folks think of as "responsible with its landmines".
I'm gonna go out on a limb here and suggest that the insane amount of landmines currently present in neighbouring Cambodia tend to suggest that the vast majority of landmines in Vietnam are probably of other-than-American origin. However, if you've got some statistics that show the actual number of mines left behind by US forces, feel free to share.
And well then there is the agent orange thing.
Never heard of that landmine. Who makes it?
The US is a lot of things. Responsible in warfare is not one of them.
Hah! Good one :) If only those fucking Americans could live up to the standards of the Glorious Motherland! :p
Sorry...absolutely is true. Period.
If your only experience with mines comes from Wikipedia, I can see why you might come to that conclusion. Anyone who's ever employed a claymore will know better.
That's exactly why so many children wind up with missing limbs
According to the-monitor.org, in 2008 there were 3,891 people wounded by landmines, and 1,266 killed. I picked that one because it's the most lopsided - other sources show a more balanced ratio. The point is, if mines were actually designed to maim instead of kill, they'd be doing a really shit job at it (yeah, a 3-to-1 ratio is shit - grenades probably fall into the same ballpark, and IED's have an even higher ratio).
Or just one way really. I am pretty sure NK has enough artillery aimed at the SK capital to level it. What is SK going to aim at?
The NK artillery, mainly.
Land mines are specifically designed to injure - not kill.
Sorry, not true. First off, there are thousands of different types of mines, so any such blanket declaration is bound to be inaccurate. Secondly, the vast majority of "professional" mines are large enough to at least kill a person, and sometimes are designed to kill and maim several individuals. Some mines are meant to injure, but they are in the minority.
Everyone who saw the soldier step on that mine is now very fearful, lacking a desire to more forward. They too are demoralized.
Right, and seeing the head of the guy in front of you suddenly erupt in a cloud of pink mist and bone chips, before you can even hear the shot that killed him ... that's not demoralizing of frightening at all. You will, of course, continue to walk forward, completely ignoring the robotic death-machine spewing streams of lead in your direction.
Whereas an auto-cannon requires electricity. As such, offers a very finite threat window and/or a dramatic restriction as to where they can be deployed - unlike a mine.
No problem - we're all "green" now; just make them solar-powered :) Their power demands would be minimal most of the time, so a small solar-array would be sufficient to charge the battey for regular use. You'd just have to make sure that, in a battle, the battery is big enough to outlast the ammunition supply.
Not to mention a single soldier can deploy dozens of mines.
A dozen mines can cover maybe 50 square meters, if you don't mind spreading them too thinly. A 50 calibre auto cannon can cover a 4 kilometre circle, minus any dead-zones. You're comparing apples and oranges.
Tell that to the Vietnamese.
Sure. Is there any particular reason to do so, or are the Vietnamese just getting lonely?
If it came to all-out war, I doubt the landmines would slow them much. Knowing the North Korean mentality, they'd just have a walking wall of political prisoners march through a kilometer wide strech, and have the military follow behind. Besides which, any serious military buildup would be easily visible to the south, and the SK military would have plenty of time to mobilize and deploy to the border. The landmines are mainly there in order to discourage regular infiltration by small units.
Slashdot readers are also not a hive mind. Just because some naive anti-establishment nutjobs have gotten their panties in a bunch and flooded these threads with bitching and moaning doesn't mean that their claims are representative of slashdot as a whole.
Sarcasm aside, what troubles me is that those defensive weapons are not about defense, it's about eliminating any (by any I mean literally 100%) risk for defender.
So it's not about defence ... it's about defence? Sorry, run that by me one more time?
When war becomes like this: drones and roboturrets - there is no factor of retribution holding back the application of war as one of the solutions.
Nonsense. That's like saying that the only reason I don't go around raping every woman I can get my hands on is because I'd get imprisoned, and raped in turn. Sure, quid-pro-quo retribution can have a deterrent effect, but it's far from being the only (or even the major) motivational factor. Humans are social animals. We seek cooperation just as often as we seek conflict. There are hundreds of factors which influence a decision to go to war, or to pursue peace. If, say, the UK disbanded it's entire military tomorrow, and every nation in the world promised not to go to their aid, I can still guarantee that we wouldn't invade them. If you think that the reason we don't attack other nations is because we might get hurt, you are truly deluded. Political good-will, support from your own populace (in democratic nations), the monetary cost of funding an invasion and maintaining an occupation, the monetary cost of disrupting commerce ... all of these things are far more important to politicians than how many soldiers they lose.
You have WAAAAAY too much free time.
If you've ever seen the things a drunken Aussie can do, you'd expect the wildlife to be capable of insanely impressive feats.
Apparently other than being insulting you don't know jack shit about the south.
I just know too much about the "OMG DA COPS SUCK!" mentality. Police aren't perfect, but their irrational detractors are far worse, and a lot more common. As long as it's just a lone voice slandering them on a forum, I'm gonna go with the most logical explanation.
And did you ever stop to think that maybe...juuuust maybe...you could use this on a manned Mars mission WITHOUT needing thousand mile sails? Like maybe send the supplies in smaller unmanned probes using this tech to save fuel that the astronauts could then use to get home?
Ah, yes, that'll work. We'll just manufacture 1,000 50-mile sails so that they can get the needed supplies there. And we'll launch all those tens of thousands of tonnes of sail material into orbit using pixie dust. I mean, the amount of rocket-fuel necessary to launch the sail(s) into space would be about a hundred times more than what we'd need to just send the fucking payload by conventional means, so obviously we'll have to get the pixies to help. Meanwhile, the astronauts can eat, breath, and drink vacuum during their trip. It's a small price to pay in order to be the first corpses on mars!
For someone who's put so little thought into this, you sure are quick to accuse others of not thinking. Solar sails will have their uses, primarily in moving robotic probes, and maybe eventually for long-duration cargo missions if we ever have established colonies on Mars. But they certainly won't be useful if you're trying to get men to other planets.
Ohhh, a free-for-all. Sounds awesome. Throw in some nudity and olive oil, and you've got yourself a date!