Much of that crowd was made up of college students and young professionals, many who were very technically competent
This is how Google and the OHA planned for Android to become accepted and why ultimately Android will win. They deliberately targeted the geeks, if a mundane is to come to a person for technology advice chances are that person will be a geek, as a sociable geek (I'm sociable for a geek) I get asked for advice all the time. The last time this happened a girl commented that the three smartest people she knew were running Google [Android] phones. Android has a large support base of technically competent people who can fix most phone problems quickly, the mundane hates calling the phone co. for support so they'd rather talk to a friend. This alone will make it easier to accept but result in slower adoption.
Apple on the other hand has gone down the popular route, by making their devices appear "cool" and "trendy" but leaving a fairly large support gap with the community. This results in faster adoption but cool is a fickle mistress and wanes quickly. This is why manufacturers like LG, Nokia and Samsung typically have more then one product line targeting the same audience. Apple's always going to have a niche with the Fanboys but their popularity in mainstream society stands to wane quite a bit if the bad press keeps up, or if Apple stop getting press. Already I've noticed the Iphone has become passe as there are just too many about and the lustre has worn off.
Comparing Android and Iphone marketing and sales strategies analogous to the tortoise and the hare. Apple are quick moving, rapidly changing pace and confident to the point of being cocksure whist Android is slow moving (as far as marketing goes) but has a clear plan and steady albeit slower pace.
Either your English is terrible or you really meant that.
In either case you shouldn't be a dick when you're clearly in the wrong and back-pedalling. You could have done something as mature as thanked the AC for correcting your mistake. Personally I hate people who confuse UAT with other forms of testing, this in my experience normally comes from uninformed or inexperienced developers.
UAT is done with finished products, in the case of software a release candidate. Feature complete does not imply it is a release candidate, it just implies that the developer has stopped adding features and is focusing on fixing bugs/problems (a good thing(TM), and I wish software developers and engineers would actually do this more often). UAT is one of the last tests done with software, so it is definitely not in the beta stage. UAT is acceptance testing not usability testing, usability testing should have been completed long before acceptance testing. If you're up to UAT, you should be done making any changes and confident that your product is fit to be released to the client.
Interestingly, there's a "Your Rights Online" story active on Slashdot right now about a Supreme Court case involving "the ability of resellers to offer legitimate, non-pirated versions of copyrighted goods, manufactured in foreign nations, to US consumers at prices that undercut those charged by the copyright holders."
This is called Parallel importing and is quite legal here in Australia. This has been a great boon to those of us who like games at half price and don't mind waiting two weeks for them to be delivered. Parallel importing is tax free up until A$1000, then the govt simply asks for it's cut.
There was a legal case where a store was selling legitimate branded clothing at a reduced price, the company sued the store but because the imports were above board (not counterfeit, taxes paid) the court ruled in the stores favour. Reference - Polo\Loren vs Ziliani Holdings Pty Ltd.
This is also the easiest way to fight price discrimination, which as I pointed out happens with video games, from Play-Asia.com I can get US, Euro or even Australian versions of games for A$40-45. From local Australian retailers the exact same products go for at least A$80.
Way to have half a piece of information. The French had a plan - advance into Belgium and meet the Germans head-on. Who could have guessed that the Germans would pass through impassable terrain and precisely hit the single weak point between the strong Maginot Line and the first-string armies in Belgium?
The same guys who thought they couldn't do it 3 and 1/2 years later.
When you are visiting a foreign country, you always need to have some paperwork showing you status.
Wrong.
You only need to do that if you're crossing a border. That's probably why they tell you to carry it in Europe. It's easy to cross a border, even in western Europe and not know it.
I've travelled extensively around Asia. I have never been required to constantly carry my passport or Visa papers around with me. In fact, any experienced traveller, including myself will tell you DO NOT carry your passport around with you when you don't need it. Keep it locked in your hotel safe, if you have it with you 24/7 it is likely to get stolen and you passport is your lifeline, you need it to get home, you need it to get money from a bank or Western Union, if you lose it you're screwed and it will cost a mint to get a new one from your embassy.
Personally I can confirm that:
Thailand
Cambodia
Vietnam
Laos
China
Malaysia
Singapore
and the Philippines
to be non-"papers please" nations.
It is your responsibility to have a visa and produce it when needed, it is not a good idea to have it on you at all times as the police will quite happily issue you with a fine (invalidated when you produce the paperwork) or take you to your hotel room to get it. In most nations the regular police do not handle immigration issues, the immigration service does this and issues fines or arrest warrants for over-stayers.
Non-citizens do not have all of the rights that a citizen does. And frankly, I don't see what the big deal here is. In most places in the world... the first world included... visitors are required to have documentation on them of some kind, be it visa papers or a passport.
On entry exit and renewal. I've been to some 3rd world shitholes (most were nice places, but places like Phnom Pehn were bad but I recommend everyone go there once, if only to see the killing fields and genocide museum) and I've never been hit with the "papers please" outside of an airport, bank or official government building. Visitors to Australia are required to have and be able to produce a valid visa, just not on them at all times. You may be asked for ID at a pub, but all they can do is refuse to serve you if you fail to present it (or deny you entry). You can be asked for ID by a police officer but are not required to present it, with the exception of a drivers license whilst driving a car (driving without a valid license is an offence).
Sorry but this is just a justification for a xenophobic police state, not an actually useful law.
Simple point is, technology like this exists already. 1 no one is willing to sell to nobodies, you don't get it unless you can be trusted. 2. Many standing armies with a nations economy supporting them cannot afford to purchase and operate such equipment. How many nations do you think operate cruise missiles (50, maybe 60) let alone can produce them locally.
Some people say I'm paranoid. Such people just aren't paying attention.
You sir, are both.
War is an extension of politics, no-one would even dare using gas these days as everyone would turn on them. Not like Saddam, if the Syrians used gas everyone would invade and no one would say a word. The Russians and the Americans would both run in hammer and tongs without a second thought. The Chinese would stay completely silent and Europe would even join in. Using gas against another country is suicide.
Secondly gas degrades. The active components of some chemical weapons can degrade in less then a few weeks. Most last a few months to a few years. Sarin has a shelf life of 18 months if there are no impurities in the manufacturing process. Not to mention that they are incredibly hard to manufacture and quality varies wildly.
This is to say, if they have chemical weapons at all. They might say they do to stave off invasion, especially after Saddam said the opposite (and was right, no unlisted chemical weapons were found) and was invaded.
Lets see, the biggest ships, emma maersk, can have (if they load a little light) 506 40' containers with open top, these suckers look like the longer 80' type tho, and would likely need some extra room for the hinge system on the end.... lets say 126 launch containers with 4 cruise missiles each. I want to see the carrier battle group that can stop that many incoming missiles:)
Lets see,
Bulk carrier costs $145,000,000 US dollars (construction cost of Emma Maersk).
Each missile costs, lets assume they are cheap at only 50,000 USD each (each Javelin round costs US 2 Million) multiplied by 504 = 25,200,000.
Just in materials alone it will cost you 170 billion dollars.
But you have that kind of cash, simply not being noticed by anyone spending it all on weapons is going to be a bit of a hassle. As another poster pointed out, Stinger and other MANPADs are far more of a threat but well established and supported terrorist organisations like Hamas and Hezbolla are still using WWII katyusha rockets. Getting something like a BM21 Grad is a stretch for them, so you're not really threatened by this, modern radar is more then capable of picking up the launch and trajectory of these missiles and counter measures are quite effective.
At 170 Billion USD, you can afford some real military hardware, late model MIG and Sukhoi fighters equipped with Exocet or other anti ship missiles will be more effective, but many armies struggle to field these.
It's much easier to throw together 10 half-assed apps hoping just ONE will be a decent seller and pay your bills
This, ultimately is why the platform will fail. Throw together 10 low quality applications, hope that some pass the censors and then hope that one makes some money. This plan relies on hope, which is a terrible business model. Android will be better off without supporting this kind of thinking.
Now where this business model falls apart is that very few are making money using this model. It requires constant releases in an ever diluting market, which increases overheads. Fortunately people still believe that there is money to be made here so there is no shortage of suckers. Notorious Time Share touts like Absolute Resorts are still in business despite being revealed on several current affairs programs because many people just cant use logic to figure out a bad deal.
Android platform, where even if it does become a "good seller", your still barely covering your overhead.
This is where you completely stop making sense (not that you were doing to well before).
OK if your ratio of 10 applications for every 1 success is true then you need to do 10 times the coding, so that one success needs to cover 10 times the work + iphone + mac + yearly fee. Most US$0.99 applications wont cover the $99 yearly fee, let alone the developers time and definitely not the A$1,500 starting price of a Mac, I'll ignore phone costs as both Android and Iphone handsets cost money although it is worth mentioning you can almost buy two Motorola Milestones (Droid) outright for the price of an Iphone 3GS outright (A$540 vs A$950 before delivery).
With Android, if you want to make a simple application it can be tested using the Android VM's available in the SDK. If you make a complex application you need to do extensive testing on handsets (wait until someone develops the idea of using a beta program, just like PC game development). If you want to make money in the Android market, you need a good idea and some coding skills, it doesn't support bad clones of existing applications like the Iphone market. You simply cannot charge for simple applications in Android because someone will or has already coded a free application that does the same thing (ye olde market at work).
They are a lot harder to sink than you might imagine. It's not that easy to sink a ship that displaces 100,000 tons, short of nuclear weapons.
Not as hard as you would imagine. A good shot below the waterline would do it (or fuel tanks or munitions stores).
The hard part is getting the weapon there un-harassed. First you have to get in range undetected. launch the weapons (preferably undetected) and hope that it is not intercepted and successfully strikes the target. With modern guidance jammers and countermeasures (flares/phalanx) the last bit is the most difficult part.
But with drones and VTOL aircraft becoming common the fleet carrier is going the way of the battleship. Oversized and inefficient compared to assault carriers which most Navies are now using.
(Damn but the UK is fucked, they used to be a contender).
BAE systems was sold to EADS (Airbus). The Enfield Armoury is now producing German designed rifles for the Royal Army (G36) and British naval designs just cant keep up with Australian, Spanish and US designs (no-body mention the Collins class underwater vacuum cleaner).
The only thing the UK is really selling is the Harrier, most of which are made under license somewhere else and will eventually be superseded by the JSF.
Much like the bible, your post makes little sense and is full of contradictions.
So we don't see it so much as curtailing our freedoms, as more a parent saying, "Please don't do that, you're hurting yourself". That's not to say we don't rebel. Pftt, I have heaps *grins*. But at the end of the day, the whole *point* of Christianity is that you believe it helps you, and that God knows best.
You don't see that accepting the judgement of a being you've never met, via the proxy of men without hesitation as giving up freedom.
I stopped being "Christian" from a quite young age because it didn't make any logical sense to accept without evidence or question, the will of a being I've never met who's message was being delivered by people I couldn't trust.
The bible you profess to know and love was not the one written originally, go have a look at the old testament. God was a vengeful god, this was watered down in the King James version.
And atheist are undoubtedly going to do the whole "He's evil, he'll condemn you to hell!" speech. He'll do no such thing. Hell is just the absence of God -
No, hell is the eternal damnation of your soul. Limbo is the absence of god, this is where the non-believers go according to older testaments and is not a place of torture like Hell, but rather as you describe, being denied "his" glory (so on and so forth). Hell is where you are sent for not repenting on your sins. sinning is such a wonderful concept, seeing as sex is a sin we are essentially born guilty (the original sin) and many of our natural behaviours are sins so we are constantly re-offending, thus you must constantly be repenting which ties you to the church.
You see we atheists (or agnostics) tend to have a better understanding of religion (most often the Christian ones) then the true believers because we do not accept, without question (the without question part is important, I know many level headed Christians who know better then to start a religious debate, because there is so much to question). I've got similar complaints against Judaism and Islam, even a few against Hinduism and Buddhism but I've never had a Hindu or Buddhist tell me I'll burn in hell for not believing, in fact the last (semi) religious message I received from a Buddhist was to tell me I was "Jai Dee" (kind hearted).
Then again, I live in a place where the Church of England is dominant, not the Vatican so most Christians are level headed and wilfully admit that their religion is constantly modified and not beyond question (they did openly start a debate on the existence of god). Atheist is not a dirty word.
Yes... it was mandatory for boys from 10 YO to 14 YO to join Deutsche Jungvolk and he somehow avoided joining then. Why did he decide to join Hitlerjugend in "42?
First, he was not 14 until 1942. A German kid could avoid it until he was 14.
Secondly, you should well know that volunteers get better treatment then conscripts.
Thirdly, at the age of 14, who know how to make good decisions? Maybe he was pushed by his friends/family into joining (peer pressure) or seduced by a recruitment officer. I think it's unfair to single Ratzinger out from other German boys at the time (please read my last paragraph before responding to this).
Resistance to the reich was possible; in fact only 100 yards from his house Hans Braxenthaler, a resistance fighter, was hiding out.
Lose these romantic notions.
Very few who resisted ended the war alive. People are inherently cowards, they want to survive (shock horror, its a base instinct). I doubt you'd be any different in the same situation.
isn't qualified to be the "moral leader" of anyone.
I've been saying this about the church in general. I think your distrust is misplaced. The problem is not the pope but the institutions that put him into power in the first place. I think it is fair to say that Ratzinger was chosen because he pretty much was the antithesis of John Paul, whilst John Paul was a populist pope being mostly ceremony and nice speeches the Vatican chose Ratzinger because he is more hard-line to try and crowbar the Vatican's influence back into society.
What I mean to say is, we can win the argument without resorting to this. By fighting an extremist argument by flinging Godwin-istic mud only helps them paint us as greater extremists.
Actually, he signed up voluntarily for both the Hitler Youth and military service. When he joined the Hitler Youth, for example, it was after mandatory conscription.
Ratzinger (spelling) was born in 1927, conscription into the Hitler Youth began in 1939, he was 12. In 1942 when he joined membership was practically mandatory for 14 yr old German boys, only 10% of Germans avoided it and joining was completely mandatory if you were Aryan. Like many Germans male teenagers at the time he really had the choice of joining or being forced to join.
Don't get me wrong, personally I think the guy is a twat and trying to prop up an ancient institution that we just don't need any more. Further more he wants to cover the bad press the church has been getting lately (paedophilia charges). I don't think we need to keep dragging this old chestnut up, I think his recent actions are enough to bash him with.
Monumentally absurd can be used to describe the level of Apple's marketing efforts. This fits with their modus operandi.
What's more, involving the police? Just look at how well that worked for the balloon boy's parents!
Apple: rich, balloon boy: poor.
Do you need this one drawn in crayon. Even if the police do not ignore the entire thing out of good faith to a good corporate citizen Apple has enough money to tie this one up for years in the court.
Apple isn't the one who presses charges. It's the DA. And as of yet, there are no charges, merely an investigation, which are at the sole discretion of the police, not Apple.
This is why your post is ridiculous.
Investigations need to be instigated by someone. Unless in your nation, a bastion of freedom police initiate their own investigations without a complaint being made or evidence of serious wrongdoing (I.E. a dead body). In Australia an investigation into corporate espionage needs to be started by an external complaint otherwise "the police have not been informed of a crime", if I come home to find my house robbed, it is MY responsibility to inform the police. The police cannot act without my complaint unless the criminal was caught in the act (the fact it was published after the fact means this is not the case). Even if they were caught in the act I'd still need to make a statement, I'd be advised to file a complaint or press charges at the same time (HINT: I can opt not to press charges). Are you honestly suggesting that Apple has not made a complaint and the police are acting of their own accord by searching the home of a journalist (amateur, yes but still a journo).
This simply cannot stand, I will speak with Senator Conroy post haste and see what we can do to hasten the erosion of our freedoms. As one of the few first world nations with money, we cannot allow a tyranny gap to develop.
Apple has yet to realize that attacks against the news media like this are like playing global thermonuclear war - the only winning move is not to play.
Au contraire,
Apple has learned the meaning of the old saying "any publicity is good publicity". Anything that gets Apple's name mentioned in the media is a good thing to them as it gets their name mentioned above that of their competition.
Do you think ANYONE is going to buy a 3G or 3GS iPhone in the next few months, with new and superior Android phones being released by HTC.
There, fixed that for you.
Right now Apple's biggest threat are the new Android phones by HTC, the Desire, Nexus One and Evo 4G as well as the inroads made by the Droid/Milestone. HTC were smart to get the Desire and Evo out before the Iphone 4G to capitalise on the "I want it now" reaction, many people aren't simply willing to wait for the latest Iphone when they have an alternative that is just as good (often better) available right now.
This is why this is an Apple marketing stunt. They desperately need their name in the press in order to keep people interested in the Iphone. The Iphone hardware was matched by the Droid/Milestone then eclipsed by the N1 and Desire. Apple needs their name mentioned as much as possible right now seeing as their phone wont be released for another two months which by comparison is hard pressed to compete with phones available now. Also Apple needs to ramp up the hype to beyond 3GS levels (that went to 11) as people have become accustomed to the extreme levels of hype surrounding the Iphone and are less inclined to believe it. Without the hype being believed, Apple's sales will suffer.
There is no way apple would be so outrageously stupid to bring in the police if this was just a matter of a PR stunt: the potential damage would be huge.
You doubt the hubris of Apple.
I have a reality check for you.
I have no doubt that Apple is trying to dispel that rumour but the old saying "any publicity is good publicity" stands. No doubt in a few days we'll read yet another fanboy submission on/. that Apple has dropped all charges against Chen and Gizmodo in good faith (thus getting more praise from fanboys and their name in the press again). Apple would happily misappropriate police resources if it meant free marketing.
Apple is scared, Android has eclipsed the Iphone in both hardware and software (the OS was always better, now the HW has caught up). Apple never though it would happen this fast and are desperately trying to stay relevant against an incredibly fast moving juggernaut.
Finders keepers isn't the rule generally. Even small children are taught that.
Bingo, flotsam and jetsam laws work differently. Even with Cash in Australia you are meant to turn it in but this is never enforced unless the amount is fairly high (E.G. A$5000). If there is a way to determine who the owner is then you are meant to turn the object in, if the object is not claimed in a set amount of time (3 months IIRC) often you are permitted to collect and keep it.
However this still reeks of Apple marketing to me, Gizmodo are Apple fanboys in the first degree, this would not have happened without Apples explicit permission. Next week we'll read about how Apple and Gizmodo talked and Apple have in good faith dropped all charges. Personally Apple should be charged with misusing police resources, I'm certain the Californian cops would have something better to do, if only to prop up the ailing doughnut industry.
For someone who believes us to be made in God's image, and to have free will, he clearly has little faith in the ability of humans to handle themselves.
Have you read the bible?
God never indented for us (the plebs) to have this level of freedom. The bible is all about installing restrictions onto human activities (Anti-sex until marriage, decides where you must be on Sunday morning, prayer every night and so forth). Don't be fooled by modern interpretations given by populist priests, large tracts of the bible are about the punishments for defying god and informing people of what they cannot dof.
8 of the 10 commandments begin with "you shall not". The common sense ones like "you shall not steal" were covered by previous governments for thousands of years before the bible was written. Also remember that the bible has been revised by at least two kings to fit their needs, not to mention various other forks and revisions like Luther and the Church of England.
Ugh, there goes my karma. But fuck it, eh. It's a downhill battle regardless.
First off, I get the joke.
Technically he was in the Luftwaffe as part of an AA crew, members of the Luftwaffe, Wermacht and Kreigsmarine were absolved of involvement with the Nazi government (with exceptions for those who personally committed war crimes) by the allies as most of them were ordinary Germans unlike the Waffen SS (one had to be a Nazi in order to join the SS). Being a member of the Hitler Youth was something that was kind of mandatory after 1939.
I dislike the Church but I insist on being accurate. If anything, people should bash him for being a deserter but then again that would not have been uncommon at the time. I'm sure there is a Hitler parody for this out there though.
Exactly but at least take a photocopy if you are in a country that if you get arrested have no limits on how much they can beat you for interrogation (I think they only reserve this for us Americans tho:) ) When I was in Kuwait tho I carried my passport on me everyday just in case.
The vast majority of travellers wont ever visit a place like that, however the last thing you want is for your passport to be stolen (tourist zones in 3rd world nations tend to attract the quick fingered). Most places would accept a US/UK/EURO/AU/CA drivers license as a form of ID. Personally I have a laminated colour photocopy of my passport for ID purposes. Without your real passport it quickly becomes very difficult to enter or leave a country and replacing them is very expensive (A$250+ for Australians)
Slashdot Mirror
This is how Google and the OHA planned for Android to become accepted and why ultimately Android will win. They deliberately targeted the geeks, if a mundane is to come to a person for technology advice chances are that person will be a geek, as a sociable geek (I'm sociable for a geek) I get asked for advice all the time. The last time this happened a girl commented that the three smartest people she knew were running Google [Android] phones. Android has a large support base of technically competent people who can fix most phone problems quickly, the mundane hates calling the phone co. for support so they'd rather talk to a friend. This alone will make it easier to accept but result in slower adoption.
Apple on the other hand has gone down the popular route, by making their devices appear "cool" and "trendy" but leaving a fairly large support gap with the community. This results in faster adoption but cool is a fickle mistress and wanes quickly. This is why manufacturers like LG, Nokia and Samsung typically have more then one product line targeting the same audience. Apple's always going to have a niche with the Fanboys but their popularity in mainstream society stands to wane quite a bit if the bad press keeps up, or if Apple stop getting press. Already I've noticed the Iphone has become passe as there are just too many about and the lustre has worn off.
Comparing Android and Iphone marketing and sales strategies analogous to the tortoise and the hare. Apple are quick moving, rapidly changing pace and confident to the point of being cocksure whist Android is slow moving (as far as marketing goes) but has a clear plan and steady albeit slower pace.
From your parent post
Either your English is terrible or you really meant that.
In either case you shouldn't be a dick when you're clearly in the wrong and back-pedalling. You could have done something as mature as thanked the AC for correcting your mistake. Personally I hate people who confuse UAT with other forms of testing, this in my experience normally comes from uninformed or inexperienced developers.
UAT is done with finished products, in the case of software a release candidate. Feature complete does not imply it is a release candidate, it just implies that the developer has stopped adding features and is focusing on fixing bugs/problems (a good thing(TM), and I wish software developers and engineers would actually do this more often). UAT is one of the last tests done with software, so it is definitely not in the beta stage. UAT is acceptance testing not usability testing, usability testing should have been completed long before acceptance testing. If you're up to UAT, you should be done making any changes and confident that your product is fit to be released to the client.
This is called Parallel importing and is quite legal here in Australia. This has been a great boon to those of us who like games at half price and don't mind waiting two weeks for them to be delivered. Parallel importing is tax free up until A$1000, then the govt simply asks for it's cut.
There was a legal case where a store was selling legitimate branded clothing at a reduced price, the company sued the store but because the imports were above board (not counterfeit, taxes paid) the court ruled in the stores favour. Reference - Polo\Loren vs Ziliani Holdings Pty Ltd.
This is also the easiest way to fight price discrimination, which as I pointed out happens with video games, from Play-Asia.com I can get US, Euro or even Australian versions of games for A$40-45. From local Australian retailers the exact same products go for at least A$80.
No, they were always like this.
They're just trying figure out how much you'll will take.
The same guys who thought they couldn't do it 3 and 1/2 years later.
Wrong.
You only need to do that if you're crossing a border. That's probably why they tell you to carry it in Europe. It's easy to cross a border, even in western Europe and not know it.
I've travelled extensively around Asia. I have never been required to constantly carry my passport or Visa papers around with me. In fact, any experienced traveller, including myself will tell you DO NOT carry your passport around with you when you don't need it. Keep it locked in your hotel safe, if you have it with you 24/7 it is likely to get stolen and you passport is your lifeline, you need it to get home, you need it to get money from a bank or Western Union, if you lose it you're screwed and it will cost a mint to get a new one from your embassy.
Personally I can confirm that:
Thailand
Cambodia
Vietnam
Laos
China
Malaysia
Singapore
and the Philippines
to be non-"papers please" nations.
It is your responsibility to have a visa and produce it when needed, it is not a good idea to have it on you at all times as the police will quite happily issue you with a fine (invalidated when you produce the paperwork) or take you to your hotel room to get it. In most nations the regular police do not handle immigration issues, the immigration service does this and issues fines or arrest warrants for over-stayers.
On entry exit and renewal. I've been to some 3rd world shitholes (most were nice places, but places like Phnom Pehn were bad but I recommend everyone go there once, if only to see the killing fields and genocide museum) and I've never been hit with the "papers please" outside of an airport, bank or official government building. Visitors to Australia are required to have and be able to produce a valid visa, just not on them at all times. You may be asked for ID at a pub, but all they can do is refuse to serve you if you fail to present it (or deny you entry). You can be asked for ID by a police officer but are not required to present it, with the exception of a drivers license whilst driving a car (driving without a valid license is an offence).
Sorry but this is just a justification for a xenophobic police state, not an actually useful law.
Trillions then?
Simple point is, technology like this exists already. 1 no one is willing to sell to nobodies, you don't get it unless you can be trusted. 2. Many standing armies with a nations economy supporting them cannot afford to purchase and operate such equipment. How many nations do you think operate cruise missiles (50, maybe 60) let alone can produce them locally.
You sir, are both.
War is an extension of politics, no-one would even dare using gas these days as everyone would turn on them. Not like Saddam, if the Syrians used gas everyone would invade and no one would say a word. The Russians and the Americans would both run in hammer and tongs without a second thought. The Chinese would stay completely silent and Europe would even join in. Using gas against another country is suicide.
Secondly gas degrades. The active components of some chemical weapons can degrade in less then a few weeks. Most last a few months to a few years. Sarin has a shelf life of 18 months if there are no impurities in the manufacturing process. Not to mention that they are incredibly hard to manufacture and quality varies wildly.
This is to say, if they have chemical weapons at all. They might say they do to stave off invasion, especially after Saddam said the opposite (and was right, no unlisted chemical weapons were found) and was invaded.
Lets see,
Bulk carrier costs $145,000,000 US dollars (construction cost of Emma Maersk).
Each missile costs, lets assume they are cheap at only 50,000 USD each (each Javelin round costs US 2 Million) multiplied by 504 = 25,200,000.
Just in materials alone it will cost you 170 billion dollars.
But you have that kind of cash, simply not being noticed by anyone spending it all on weapons is going to be a bit of a hassle. As another poster pointed out, Stinger and other MANPADs are far more of a threat but well established and supported terrorist organisations like Hamas and Hezbolla are still using WWII katyusha rockets. Getting something like a BM21 Grad is a stretch for them, so you're not really threatened by this, modern radar is more then capable of picking up the launch and trajectory of these missiles and counter measures are quite effective.
At 170 Billion USD, you can afford some real military hardware, late model MIG and Sukhoi fighters equipped with Exocet or other anti ship missiles will be more effective, but many armies struggle to field these.
This, ultimately is why the platform will fail. Throw together 10 low quality applications, hope that some pass the censors and then hope that one makes some money. This plan relies on hope, which is a terrible business model. Android will be better off without supporting this kind of thinking.
Now where this business model falls apart is that very few are making money using this model. It requires constant releases in an ever diluting market, which increases overheads. Fortunately people still believe that there is money to be made here so there is no shortage of suckers. Notorious Time Share touts like Absolute Resorts are still in business despite being revealed on several current affairs programs because many people just cant use logic to figure out a bad deal.
This is where you completely stop making sense (not that you were doing to well before).
OK if your ratio of 10 applications for every 1 success is true then you need to do 10 times the coding, so that one success needs to cover 10 times the work + iphone + mac + yearly fee. Most US$0.99 applications wont cover the $99 yearly fee, let alone the developers time and definitely not the A$1,500 starting price of a Mac, I'll ignore phone costs as both Android and Iphone handsets cost money although it is worth mentioning you can almost buy two Motorola Milestones (Droid) outright for the price of an Iphone 3GS outright (A$540 vs A$950 before delivery).
With Android, if you want to make a simple application it can be tested using the Android VM's available in the SDK. If you make a complex application you need to do extensive testing on handsets (wait until someone develops the idea of using a beta program, just like PC game development). If you want to make money in the Android market, you need a good idea and some coding skills, it doesn't support bad clones of existing applications like the Iphone market. You simply cannot charge for simple applications in Android because someone will or has already coded a free application that does the same thing (ye olde market at work).
Not as hard as you would imagine. A good shot below the waterline would do it (or fuel tanks or munitions stores).
The hard part is getting the weapon there un-harassed. First you have to get in range undetected. launch the weapons (preferably undetected) and hope that it is not intercepted and successfully strikes the target. With modern guidance jammers and countermeasures (flares/phalanx) the last bit is the most difficult part.
But with drones and VTOL aircraft becoming common the fleet carrier is going the way of the battleship. Oversized and inefficient compared to assault carriers which most Navies are now using.
BAE systems was sold to EADS (Airbus). The Enfield Armoury is now producing German designed rifles for the Royal Army (G36) and British naval designs just cant keep up with Australian, Spanish and US designs (no-body mention the Collins class underwater vacuum cleaner).
The only thing the UK is really selling is the Harrier, most of which are made under license somewhere else and will eventually be superseded by the JSF.
You don't see that accepting the judgement of a being you've never met, via the proxy of men without hesitation as giving up freedom.
I stopped being "Christian" from a quite young age because it didn't make any logical sense to accept without evidence or question, the will of a being I've never met who's message was being delivered by people I couldn't trust.
The bible you profess to know and love was not the one written originally, go have a look at the old testament. God was a vengeful god, this was watered down in the King James version.
No, hell is the eternal damnation of your soul. Limbo is the absence of god, this is where the non-believers go according to older testaments and is not a place of torture like Hell, but rather as you describe, being denied "his" glory (so on and so forth). Hell is where you are sent for not repenting on your sins. sinning is such a wonderful concept, seeing as sex is a sin we are essentially born guilty (the original sin) and many of our natural behaviours are sins so we are constantly re-offending, thus you must constantly be repenting which ties you to the church.
You see we atheists (or agnostics) tend to have a better understanding of religion (most often the Christian ones) then the true believers because we do not accept, without question (the without question part is important, I know many level headed Christians who know better then to start a religious debate, because there is so much to question). I've got similar complaints against Judaism and Islam, even a few against Hinduism and Buddhism but I've never had a Hindu or Buddhist tell me I'll burn in hell for not believing, in fact the last (semi) religious message I received from a Buddhist was to tell me I was "Jai Dee" (kind hearted).
Then again, I live in a place where the Church of England is dominant, not the Vatican so most Christians are level headed and wilfully admit that their religion is constantly modified and not beyond question (they did openly start a debate on the existence of god). Atheist is not a dirty word.
First, he was not 14 until 1942. A German kid could avoid it until he was 14.
Secondly, you should well know that volunteers get better treatment then conscripts.
Thirdly, at the age of 14, who know how to make good decisions? Maybe he was pushed by his friends/family into joining (peer pressure) or seduced by a recruitment officer. I think it's unfair to single Ratzinger out from other German boys at the time (please read my last paragraph before responding to this).
Lose these romantic notions.
Very few who resisted ended the war alive. People are inherently cowards, they want to survive (shock horror, its a base instinct). I doubt you'd be any different in the same situation.
I've been saying this about the church in general. I think your distrust is misplaced. The problem is not the pope but the institutions that put him into power in the first place. I think it is fair to say that Ratzinger was chosen because he pretty much was the antithesis of John Paul, whilst John Paul was a populist pope being mostly ceremony and nice speeches the Vatican chose Ratzinger because he is more hard-line to try and crowbar the Vatican's influence back into society.
What I mean to say is, we can win the argument without resorting to this. By fighting an extremist argument by flinging Godwin-istic mud only helps them paint us as greater extremists.
Which one?
Mohammed al Fayed?
Mohammed Atta?
Mohammed Ali?
For Christ's sake man, it's the most popular first name in the world, you need to be more specific.
Ratzinger (spelling) was born in 1927, conscription into the Hitler Youth began in 1939, he was 12. In 1942 when he joined membership was practically mandatory for 14 yr old German boys, only 10% of Germans avoided it and joining was completely mandatory if you were Aryan. Like many Germans male teenagers at the time he really had the choice of joining or being forced to join.
Don't get me wrong, personally I think the guy is a twat and trying to prop up an ancient institution that we just don't need any more. Further more he wants to cover the bad press the church has been getting lately (paedophilia charges). I don't think we need to keep dragging this old chestnut up, I think his recent actions are enough to bash him with.
Monumentally absurd can be used to describe the level of Apple's marketing efforts. This fits with their modus operandi.
Apple: rich, balloon boy: poor.
Do you need this one drawn in crayon. Even if the police do not ignore the entire thing out of good faith to a good corporate citizen Apple has enough money to tie this one up for years in the court.
This is why your post is ridiculous.
Investigations need to be instigated by someone. Unless in your nation, a bastion of freedom police initiate their own investigations without a complaint being made or evidence of serious wrongdoing (I.E. a dead body). In Australia an investigation into corporate espionage needs to be started by an external complaint otherwise "the police have not been informed of a crime", if I come home to find my house robbed, it is MY responsibility to inform the police. The police cannot act without my complaint unless the criminal was caught in the act (the fact it was published after the fact means this is not the case). Even if they were caught in the act I'd still need to make a statement, I'd be advised to file a complaint or press charges at the same time (HINT: I can opt not to press charges). Are you honestly suggesting that Apple has not made a complaint and the police are acting of their own accord by searching the home of a journalist (amateur, yes but still a journo).
This simply cannot stand, I will speak with Senator Conroy post haste and see what we can do to hasten the erosion of our freedoms. As one of the few first world nations with money, we cannot allow a tyranny gap to develop.
Au contraire,
Apple has learned the meaning of the old saying "any publicity is good publicity". Anything that gets Apple's name mentioned in the media is a good thing to them as it gets their name mentioned above that of their competition.
There, fixed that for you.
Right now Apple's biggest threat are the new Android phones by HTC, the Desire, Nexus One and Evo 4G as well as the inroads made by the Droid/Milestone. HTC were smart to get the Desire and Evo out before the Iphone 4G to capitalise on the "I want it now" reaction, many people aren't simply willing to wait for the latest Iphone when they have an alternative that is just as good (often better) available right now.
This is why this is an Apple marketing stunt. They desperately need their name in the press in order to keep people interested in the Iphone. The Iphone hardware was matched by the Droid/Milestone then eclipsed by the N1 and Desire. Apple needs their name mentioned as much as possible right now seeing as their phone wont be released for another two months which by comparison is hard pressed to compete with phones available now. Also Apple needs to ramp up the hype to beyond 3GS levels (that went to 11) as people have become accustomed to the extreme levels of hype surrounding the Iphone and are less inclined to believe it. Without the hype being believed, Apple's sales will suffer.
You doubt the hubris of Apple.
/. that Apple has dropped all charges against Chen and Gizmodo in good faith (thus getting more praise from fanboys and their name in the press again). Apple would happily misappropriate police resources if it meant free marketing.
I have a reality check for you.
I have no doubt that Apple is trying to dispel that rumour but the old saying "any publicity is good publicity" stands. No doubt in a few days we'll read yet another fanboy submission on
Apple is scared, Android has eclipsed the Iphone in both hardware and software (the OS was always better, now the HW has caught up). Apple never though it would happen this fast and are desperately trying to stay relevant against an incredibly fast moving juggernaut.
Bingo, flotsam and jetsam laws work differently. Even with Cash in Australia you are meant to turn it in but this is never enforced unless the amount is fairly high (E.G. A$5000). If there is a way to determine who the owner is then you are meant to turn the object in, if the object is not claimed in a set amount of time (3 months IIRC) often you are permitted to collect and keep it.
However this still reeks of Apple marketing to me, Gizmodo are Apple fanboys in the first degree, this would not have happened without Apples explicit permission. Next week we'll read about how Apple and Gizmodo talked and Apple have in good faith dropped all charges. Personally Apple should be charged with misusing police resources, I'm certain the Californian cops would have something better to do, if only to prop up the ailing doughnut industry.
Have you read the bible?
God never indented for us (the plebs) to have this level of freedom. The bible is all about installing restrictions onto human activities (Anti-sex until marriage, decides where you must be on Sunday morning, prayer every night and so forth). Don't be fooled by modern interpretations given by populist priests, large tracts of the bible are about the punishments for defying god and informing people of what they cannot dof.
8 of the 10 commandments begin with "you shall not". The common sense ones like "you shall not steal" were covered by previous governments for thousands of years before the bible was written. Also remember that the bible has been revised by at least two kings to fit their needs, not to mention various other forks and revisions like Luther and the Church of England.
First off, I get the joke. Technically he was in the Luftwaffe as part of an AA crew, members of the Luftwaffe, Wermacht and Kreigsmarine were absolved of involvement with the Nazi government (with exceptions for those who personally committed war crimes) by the allies as most of them were ordinary Germans unlike the Waffen SS (one had to be a Nazi in order to join the SS). Being a member of the Hitler Youth was something that was kind of mandatory after 1939.
I dislike the Church but I insist on being accurate. If anything, people should bash him for being a deserter but then again that would not have been uncommon at the time. I'm sure there is a Hitler parody for this out there though.
The vast majority of travellers wont ever visit a place like that, however the last thing you want is for your passport to be stolen (tourist zones in 3rd world nations tend to attract the quick fingered). Most places would accept a US/UK/EURO/AU/CA drivers license as a form of ID. Personally I have a laminated colour photocopy of my passport for ID purposes. Without your real passport it quickly becomes very difficult to enter or leave a country and replacing them is very expensive (A$250+ for Australians)