This galaxy was not created to 'accommodate music industry personas and enrichment and well being of them above all others' ?
To hell with them. Just for these bastards' sake, i am going to go get lyrics from places 'illegal', despite i have no business with lyrics and do not care for them.
Motherfucking load of crap. You u.s. people, are just a crowd to be herded it seems. These rich son of a bitches do WHATEVER they want with you, and through your congress and senate.
no division of Indians somewhere have unlimited unrestricted and unaudited access to 100% of my personal financial history, because we are not dumb enough to give out access to such finished, working systems outside.
From scratch projects, and only their infrastructure can be allowed to be outsourced to a risky environment such as this.
It is seldom that projects requiring extreme security and privacy are outsourced. And when they are done, they are done in a state that has no sensitive data yet, only the infrastructure.
Russia is some country to be cautious against i admit. It is practically governed by mafia.
You shouldnt view trying to show profitability as a bad thing. Going to the EXTREMES like handing out sensitive projects to for example russia is a bad thing however.
One needs to find a balance between things like all matters in life. Outsourcing ? Yes. Cheap ? REASONABLY cheap, not to risk any important stuff about the project.
Note that silicon valley was the first of its kind, and noone knew what it was going to be.
In countries that create silicon valleys after planning it, even ethnic minorities, the income level of the region to build it in is taken into account. At least in turkey.
You will find that almost all of the industrial and technological centers, important military installations, ie 'the core' of turkey is in its part that is in the middle of the range from its western coast to its center.
Im no indian, but i know that india is a HUGE country so that people there generally do not even hear about some things happening in other regions of it.
For your information a state of civil war is raging for over 20-30 years in its punjab region, yet it did not interfere with india's rise in it sector.
Governments are not idiot as to put silicon valleys, industrial centers in regions that are prone to any problems. But outsourcing enemies are idiot as to use every single shit for ranting against outsourcing.
Not net neutrality, but lack of it is a threat to all oses of any kind. Even linux.
Its now free to develop and distribute linux, but if the telco whores get their robbery laws, the free software foundations will have to pay tribute to telco whores, so that people will be able to download and update their operating systems.
What is the difference between soviet union and russia ?
Soviet union was something that was created en force by russia's own revolution, by its red army. And it was maintained as such. Same goes for today. If conditions turn around, or need/opportunity arises, it is just matter of some small time that russia will overrun all its old confederates and create anoter 'union'. They are already in some sort of loose union with russia in military matters still.
As for advantage in numbers for germany at the start of war against soviets, well actually i didnt imply such a thing, however it indeed still can be said to be so, as the russian hordes were extremely green and low in morale, and surrendered en masse.
Also while considering the initial losses of territory by russians to germans, you should take into account the fact that the antidote to blitzkrieg was not invented by then yet. Blitzkrieg blitzed, and poland, france, yugoslavia fell, north africa was overrun - the blitz was designed for overrunning large masses of land swiftly and riskily. But, as military analysts and historians tell, later its antidote was found - matching air power, deep minefields and guerillas. And it was the soviets that invented most of the counter-tactics, and also their own venerable tactics - an offensive that never does change style, order or method, but devastating everytime it is executed - starting from air raid, rockets, guns, tanks + apcs infantry.
Budgets, money, finances - these are just nothing when a nation is self sufficient and state of war declared - remember that soviet union was a closed economy, and it built its military while being as such. They dont need money if they declare martial law, and tell people to work in factories, just like they almost lived for 60-70 years. If it was great britain we were talking about, dependant on foreign imports for some important resources, id agree. But this is russia, and apart from itself being self sufficient, it has a number of neighbors that it can occupy in an instant if they feel the need, to increase their resources.
China is using foreign technology for its military. Around 70% of its military technology is of old soviet union tech, and not only the technology, but a considerable amount of the items were manufactured in soviet union.
1939-41 was exactly when the Germans were technically not superior with individual available and deployed weapons systems -- it was the superior tactics of combined arms, blitzkrieg and surprise attacks that enabled their early successes. The surviving units got upgraded weapons systems later on.
This i disagree, certainly in the field of air force at least, which was the defining factor of the war. Germans had much superior flying technology in their deployed units, even in relatively old ones like dornier bombers, which were match for allied counterparts. French air force could not even be considered anywhere near, they had 100-200 dewoitine 520s (from what i remember) as the most modern, at most.
Poland, France, even Barbarossa were largely "spearheaded" by PzIs and PzIIs -- I doubt you'd call them a worthy adversory for Char B1s, T-34s and KV-1s? PzI was a training tank (not really intended for actual combat use), PzII a light scout tank (a light, panicked reaction to the on-coming war) and early versions of PzIII and PzIV were pretty outgunned, too, and available only in small numbers early on. Actually, the German tanks available in the early WW2 were so few and bad, they had to use the 35(t)s and 38(t)s from the annexed Czechoslovakia instead of their own in their panzer formations.
Indeed, i mentioned this, and told that many of the german panzer were light tanks. However, in that state they were still superior to french and british tanks, as french tanks were of a long-past period, having numerous short barreled guns in awkward placements, hard to operate turrets that generally carried a short barrel gun for anti infantry, and they were extremely bulky to operate. It is not a matter of being outgunned, if the gun outgunning is something that is attached to the body of a very heavy tank, and can not even be turned sideways (not in a turret) you are at an advantage. pz35, 38s, yes. They were even better tanks compared to anyone had at that time.
AFAIK also the German infantry (many boasting to be "motorized") divisions rarely received enough transports (let alone fuel and spare parts) to actually operate as truly motorized.
But what they had, they had, and this was a defining factor. Those who were not motorized were 'bicyclized', and this even was a technological advantage, if you will.
Me109/BF109 was good and useful in acquiring local air-superiority (e.g., for the JU87s to fly in and attack), but it was only a fighter type -- and due to its short range it was quite useless against, e.g., Britain and other longer-distance operations in Russia. JU87 (StuKa) on the other hand was slow and unprotected without a fighter escort -- low chances of survival over England.
This is something much hyped, and much exagerrated. Yes, 109s had little range. But this was not even a factor during the occupation of poland, france and balkans, which were the major victories that made ww2 took so long. Also, in russian fields, any air superiority was supplemented with ground superiority and airfields were produced. In fact, at the start of ww2, nobody thought that that long range would be needed for a fighter, as noone influential enough have thought that the air war would be fought in extreme ranges in extreme conditions. As for stuka, any close support aircraft that is not a fighter bomber is ever vulnerable without fighter cover. In europe, stuka ruled.
As a matter of fact i have to say that i believe air superiority was the key in ww2, in early and later stages. Even in earlier stages, the french bt tanks, which were difficult to destroy with the light tanks you mention, were blasted by stukas. In fact, everytime a german infantry division met up with any resistance, they called in stukas. and they were around and many, and quick to answer, hence the blitzkrieg. Same thing happened later in the war when allies had air superiority with fighter bombers. Germans were even not able to move by day, no tank mattered when air w
T34 tanks, at 1941, defied everything the germans had. They were mesmerized when they met t34s the first time. Its inclined exteriors, small turret, speed, large palettes and good effect 76 mm gun. Later, they were mesmerized even more, when russians fitted a 88 mm long barrel gun to t34 chassis. This was also widely used. During the end of the war they were even putting 122 mm guns (with stalin tanks and other models) on tank turrets. Nay, russian tech was even better in many respects to germans.
Well actually im not with you on accepting german technology was inferior at 39-41. This is because it wasnt. Me109 was a much effective weapon, and bf109 versions had 30 mm gun even, the pzkw series light and medium tanks were superior to every other model allies had, especially the bulky french tanks. french items were heavy, but bulky. Stuka was a revolution and it had much effect in europe, submarines, parachuters, even some naval tech like in bismarck, their weapons, mg3 and other early standardized stuff, armored personnel carriers which were as good as very light tanks and such. And in operational tactics, yes they were even better.
Im with you on the nsa matter. I tend to give credit to conspiracy theories that the terrorist threat was invented, planted and staged by the bush adm in order to get a viable excuse for occupying oil fields though.
Lets get a little real here ; they were able to hide the fact that space age hero was an ss member from the public, which was much harder to hide anything about the cia members. Also there is not much difference between methods and manners of ss and gestapo.
The kursk was a last effort on behalf of the germans, whereas it was just another repetitive standard assault for russians. For kursk, germans have mobilized the last resources they had in their power, including the new panthers. Kursk battle was a concentrated battle of tanks, even if the germans won a marginal victor, russians would just replenish.
Entire air force being british built, escapes me. Russians did not use british products in air, from what i know. They did use goodly numbers of b17s, and some number of fighters, however the majority of the air force was home built.
They were so good at replacing that, eastern front german pilots even sometimes fall into psychological consequences as all russian planes were painted alike, and it seemed like how much you shot down, more was coming.
As for another ww2 technology versus medium quality, but outnumbering situation is the me262s versus other allied planes. Me262s always overpowered the allied planes. However, they eventually were shot down if they did not disengage after 2 passes or so. Because nomatter the 200 km/h speed difference between them, sooner or later allied fighters were able to hit them.
The examples you give about the allies vs germans in various theatres are just supporting my claim. Western air forces and tech are too complex to get the users to be trained overnight. What you told is what will happen with a western versus russia encounter.
First of all, russia is the other power, still. It has ever been. Yes it might have 20 million less men/women ready for service, but over and over again in the course of history they have mobilized innumerable masses to meet the foe. The last being 2nd ww, which they started with great disadvantage, both in experience, technology and numbers, and they have stormed all the way to berlin, and half of europe.
This is because their concept is 'durable, fast, many'. And it has proven to be the most effective for concept of war.
A Grumman f14 tomcat, in its abundant version, can track 12 enemies, and can direct 6 missiles to 6 of them at any given time.
However a grumman f14 tomcat is expensive and difficult to manufacture, operate, maintain. Any loss is a big loss. On the other hand, whatever is in russian hands is expendable, and replacable by around 10 in short time. this is what they did in ww2, this is what they were gonna do in ww3, and this is what they can do now.
As for electronics, simulations, battle tests, deployment en masse against technologically inferior enemies (iraq, vietnam) is one thing, meeting a foe in match is another.
The match of a-10 in russian air force can use anything from cologne to a multidude of petroleum distillates for fuel. It can fly with severe punishment.
And in the deployments against vietnam, afghanistan and iraq, we have seen that, even ragtag guerillas with negligible weapons can deal good damage to their foes. A galaxy was almost shot down in iraq. How many galaxies are there in strategic airlift command ? 12 ? How many awacs are there in sac ? What if russians spend 12 flankers apiece and get 10-15 existing awacs one by one ?
An analogy from history : germans had excellent technology, experience and perfect training to go with it, they favored extreme quality against quantity. Russians, favoring acceptable quality to go with enormous quantity had set them right. Same was the concept of u.s. in ww2, and this concept proved right. But from 45 to today, u.s. uk and west allies took to the mistake of germans "they have high numbers, we can match them in quality" - no you cant.
Yea, and even an example from a milder, more hard-to hide area; Werner von braun was an SS member, yet it led your nation's space effort and was counted as a hero.
In the end, its getting ahold of a group of people we are talking about. And there are much more experienced militaries in the world on that, than u.s.
And another note, modern, electronic reliant weapons never been tested in a big war. Noone certainly do not know, what the end result will be when thousands of such planes, tanks, ships are used against each other. It is so that the excessive electromagnetic communication (radios, radars, iffs, satellites, ecm and eccms and more) might create a chaos and the winner might be the one with the numbers, like russia.
Back in '45, gestapo members were taken into then newly-forming cia. The next 40 years have been a period where cia was run like a watered-down gestapo.
Google has to watch out that the microsoft ex'es do not spoil the formation of 'do no evil' they got going on at google.
As it was the congress who signed in to the geneva convention, approved it, and made neccessary connections with your own law, invading iraq was illegal according to u.s.'s own laws too.
Slashdot Mirror
In one shot.
What the fucking hellhole of a crap is this ?
This galaxy was not created to 'accommodate music industry personas and enrichment and well being of them above all others' ?
To hell with them. Just for these bastards' sake, i am going to go get lyrics from places 'illegal', despite i have no business with lyrics and do not care for them.
Motherfucking load of crap. You u.s. people, are just a crowd to be herded it seems. These rich son of a bitches do WHATEVER they want with you, and through your congress and senate.
Very strong point that is you made, pal. And very to the point indeed.
no division of Indians somewhere have unlimited unrestricted and unaudited access to 100% of my personal financial history, because we are not dumb enough to give out access to such finished, working systems outside.
From scratch projects, and only their infrastructure can be allowed to be outsourced to a risky environment such as this.
It is seldom that projects requiring extreme security and privacy are outsourced. And when they are done, they are done in a state that has no sensitive data yet, only the infrastructure.
Russia is some country to be cautious against i admit. It is practically governed by mafia.
You shouldnt view trying to show profitability as a bad thing. Going to the EXTREMES like handing out sensitive projects to for example russia is a bad thing however.
One needs to find a balance between things like all matters in life. Outsourcing ? Yes. Cheap ? REASONABLY cheap, not to risk any important stuff about the project.
Note that silicon valley was the first of its kind, and noone knew what it was going to be.
In countries that create silicon valleys after planning it, even ethnic minorities, the income level of the region to build it in is taken into account. At least in turkey.
You will find that almost all of the industrial and technological centers, important military installations, ie 'the core' of turkey is in its part that is in the middle of the range from its western coast to its center.
Thats contradictory to the news. Every now and then a state of unrest, violence and bombings happen in punjab, from what we see on tvs.
Im no indian, but i know that india is a HUGE country so that people there generally do not even hear about some things happening in other regions of it.
For your information a state of civil war is raging for over 20-30 years in its punjab region, yet it did not interfere with india's rise in it sector.
Governments are not idiot as to put silicon valleys, industrial centers in regions that are prone to any problems. But outsourcing enemies are idiot as to use every single shit for ranting against outsourcing.
Not net neutrality, but lack of it is a threat to all oses of any kind. Even linux.
Its now free to develop and distribute linux, but if the telco whores get their robbery laws, the free software foundations will have to pay tribute to telco whores, so that people will be able to download and update their operating systems.
Paid opinion and lobbying = shit
Telco whore = enemy of people
first it was our brains, now jaw, god knows what is next.
With voicechat option of course ...
What is the difference between soviet union and russia ?
Soviet union was something that was created en force by russia's own revolution, by its red army. And it was maintained as such. Same goes for today. If conditions turn around, or need/opportunity arises, it is just matter of some small time that russia will overrun all its old confederates and create anoter 'union'. They are already in some sort of loose union with russia in military matters still.
As for advantage in numbers for germany at the start of war against soviets, well actually i didnt imply such a thing, however it indeed still can be said to be so, as the russian hordes were extremely green and low in morale, and surrendered en masse.
Also while considering the initial losses of territory by russians to germans, you should take into account the fact that the antidote to blitzkrieg was not invented by then yet. Blitzkrieg blitzed, and poland, france, yugoslavia fell, north africa was overrun - the blitz was designed for overrunning large masses of land swiftly and riskily. But, as military analysts and historians tell, later its antidote was found - matching air power, deep minefields and guerillas. And it was the soviets that invented most of the counter-tactics, and also their own venerable tactics - an offensive that never does change style, order or method, but devastating everytime it is executed - starting from air raid, rockets, guns, tanks + apcs infantry.
Budgets, money, finances - these are just nothing when a nation is self sufficient and state of war declared - remember that soviet union was a closed economy, and it built its military while being as such. They dont need money if they declare martial law, and tell people to work in factories, just like they almost lived for 60-70 years. If it was great britain we were talking about, dependant on foreign imports for some important resources, id agree. But this is russia, and apart from itself being self sufficient, it has a number of neighbors that it can occupy in an instant if they feel the need, to increase their resources.
China is using foreign technology for its military. Around 70% of its military technology is of old soviet union tech, and not only the technology, but a considerable amount of the items were manufactured in soviet union.
Well indeed that is rather surprising.
It contains references to piracy, how it is done, and where it is done ? They should be sued outright !
America shouldnt let morons to be president of anything, neither the country, nor corporations or organisations.
1939-41 was exactly when the Germans were technically not superior with individual available and deployed weapons systems -- it was the superior tactics of combined arms, blitzkrieg and surprise attacks that enabled their early successes. The surviving units got upgraded weapons systems later on.
This i disagree, certainly in the field of air force at least, which was the defining factor of the war. Germans had much superior flying technology in their deployed units, even in relatively old ones like dornier bombers, which were match for allied counterparts. French air force could not even be considered anywhere near, they had 100-200 dewoitine 520s (from what i remember) as the most modern, at most.
Poland, France, even Barbarossa were largely "spearheaded" by PzIs and PzIIs -- I doubt you'd call them a worthy adversory for Char B1s, T-34s and KV-1s? PzI was a training tank (not really intended for actual combat use), PzII a light scout tank (a light, panicked reaction to the on-coming war) and early versions of PzIII and PzIV were pretty outgunned, too, and available only in small numbers early on. Actually, the German tanks available in the early WW2 were so few and bad, they had to use the 35(t)s and 38(t)s from the annexed Czechoslovakia instead of their own in their panzer formations.
Indeed, i mentioned this, and told that many of the german panzer were light tanks. However, in that state they were still superior to french and british tanks, as french tanks were of a long-past period, having numerous short barreled guns in awkward placements, hard to operate turrets that generally carried a short barrel gun for anti infantry, and they were extremely bulky to operate. It is not a matter of being outgunned, if the gun outgunning is something that is attached to the body of a very heavy tank, and can not even be turned sideways (not in a turret) you are at an advantage. pz35, 38s, yes. They were even better tanks compared to anyone had at that time.
AFAIK also the German infantry (many boasting to be "motorized") divisions rarely received enough transports (let alone fuel and spare parts) to actually operate as truly motorized.
But what they had, they had, and this was a defining factor. Those who were not motorized were 'bicyclized', and this even was a technological advantage, if you will.
Me109/BF109 was good and useful in acquiring local air-superiority (e.g., for the JU87s to fly in and attack), but it was only a fighter type -- and due to its short range it was quite useless against, e.g., Britain and other longer-distance operations in Russia. JU87 (StuKa) on the other hand was slow and unprotected without a fighter escort -- low chances of survival over England.
This is something much hyped, and much exagerrated. Yes, 109s had little range. But this was not even a factor during the occupation of poland, france and balkans, which were the major victories that made ww2 took so long. Also, in russian fields, any air superiority was supplemented with ground superiority and airfields were produced. In fact, at the start of ww2, nobody thought that that long range would be needed for a fighter, as noone influential enough have thought that the air war would be fought in extreme ranges in extreme conditions. As for stuka, any close support aircraft that is not a fighter bomber is ever vulnerable without fighter cover. In europe, stuka ruled.
As a matter of fact i have to say that i believe air superiority was the key in ww2, in early and later stages. Even in earlier stages, the french bt tanks, which were difficult to destroy with the light tanks you mention, were blasted by stukas. In fact, everytime a german infantry division met up with any resistance, they called in stukas. and they were around and many, and quick to answer, hence the blitzkrieg. Same thing happened later in the war when allies had air superiority with fighter bombers. Germans were even not able to move by day, no tank mattered when air w
Nay, nay,
T34 tanks, at 1941, defied everything the germans had. They were mesmerized when they met t34s the first time. Its inclined exteriors, small turret, speed, large palettes and good effect 76 mm gun. Later, they were mesmerized even more, when russians fitted a 88 mm long barrel gun to t34 chassis. This was also widely used. During the end of the war they were even putting 122 mm guns (with stalin tanks and other models) on tank turrets. Nay, russian tech was even better in many respects to germans.
Well actually im not with you on accepting german technology was inferior at 39-41. This is because it wasnt. Me109 was a much effective weapon, and bf109 versions had 30 mm gun even, the pzkw series light and medium tanks were superior to every other model allies had, especially the bulky french tanks. french items were heavy, but bulky. Stuka was a revolution and it had much effect in europe, submarines, parachuters, even some naval tech like in bismarck, their weapons, mg3 and other early standardized stuff, armored personnel carriers which were as good as very light tanks and such. And in operational tactics, yes they were even better.
Im with you on the nsa matter. I tend to give credit to conspiracy theories that the terrorist threat was invented, planted and staged by the bush adm in order to get a viable excuse for occupying oil fields though.
Lets get a little real here ; they were able to hide the fact that space age hero was an ss member from the public, which was much harder to hide anything about the cia members. Also there is not much difference between methods and manners of ss and gestapo.
The kursk was a last effort on behalf of the germans, whereas it was just another repetitive standard assault for russians. For kursk, germans have mobilized the last resources they had in their power, including the new panthers. Kursk battle was a concentrated battle of tanks, even if the germans won a marginal victor, russians would just replenish.
Entire air force being british built, escapes me. Russians did not use british products in air, from what i know. They did use goodly numbers of b17s, and some number of fighters, however the majority of the air force was home built.
They were so good at replacing that, eastern front german pilots even sometimes fall into psychological consequences as all russian planes were painted alike, and it seemed like how much you shot down, more was coming.
As for another ww2 technology versus medium quality, but outnumbering situation is the me262s versus other allied planes. Me262s always overpowered the allied planes. However, they eventually were shot down if they did not disengage after 2 passes or so. Because nomatter the 200 km/h speed difference between them, sooner or later allied fighters were able to hit them.
The examples you give about the allies vs germans in various theatres are just supporting my claim. Western air forces and tech are too complex to get the users to be trained overnight. What you told is what will happen with a western versus russia encounter.
First of all, russia is the other power, still. It has ever been. Yes it might have 20 million less men/women ready for service, but over and over again in the course of history they have mobilized innumerable masses to meet the foe. The last being 2nd ww, which they started with great disadvantage, both in experience, technology and numbers, and they have stormed all the way to berlin, and half of europe.
This is because their concept is 'durable, fast, many'. And it has proven to be the most effective for concept of war.
A Grumman f14 tomcat, in its abundant version, can track 12 enemies, and can direct 6 missiles to 6 of them at any given time.
However a grumman f14 tomcat is expensive and difficult to manufacture, operate, maintain. Any loss is a big loss. On the other hand, whatever is in russian hands is expendable, and replacable by around 10 in short time. this is what they did in ww2, this is what they were gonna do in ww3, and this is what they can do now.
As for electronics, simulations, battle tests, deployment en masse against technologically inferior enemies (iraq, vietnam) is one thing, meeting a foe in match is another.
The match of a-10 in russian air force can use anything from cologne to a multidude of petroleum distillates for fuel. It can fly with severe punishment.
And in the deployments against vietnam, afghanistan and iraq, we have seen that, even ragtag guerillas with negligible weapons can deal good damage to their foes. A galaxy was almost shot down in iraq. How many galaxies are there in strategic airlift command ? 12 ? How many awacs are there in sac ? What if russians spend 12 flankers apiece and get 10-15 existing awacs one by one ?
An analogy from history : germans had excellent technology, experience and perfect training to go with it, they favored extreme quality against quantity. Russians, favoring acceptable quality to go with enormous quantity had set them right. Same was the concept of u.s. in ww2, and this concept proved right. But from 45 to today, u.s. uk and west allies took to the mistake of germans "they have high numbers, we can match them in quality" - no you cant.
didnt they retain the majority share ?
Yea, and even an example from a milder, more hard-to hide area; Werner von braun was an SS member, yet it led your nation's space effort and was counted as a hero.
So how did 2 blocks of wtc got razed down ?
In the end, its getting ahold of a group of people we are talking about. And there are much more experienced militaries in the world on that, than u.s.
And another note, modern, electronic reliant weapons never been tested in a big war. Noone certainly do not know, what the end result will be when thousands of such planes, tanks, ships are used against each other. It is so that the excessive electromagnetic communication (radios, radars, iffs, satellites, ecm and eccms and more) might create a chaos and the winner might be the one with the numbers, like russia.
Back in '45, gestapo members were taken into then newly-forming cia. The next 40 years have been a period where cia was run like a watered-down gestapo.
Google has to watch out that the microsoft ex'es do not spoil the formation of 'do no evil' they got going on at google.
Nay.
As it was the congress who signed in to the geneva convention, approved it, and made neccessary connections with your own law, invading iraq was illegal according to u.s.'s own laws too.
DOH !
You DID have evidence of WHAT ? NON EXISTENT, PHANTOM wmd ?
Havent the bush adm, and together with it u.s. been the laughing stock of the world because of this nonexistence, for over 2.5 years ?
You might be thinking u.s. is the only country in the world with an army.
Spetsnaz, sas, or some others might get bush back in such a situation.
Or, better, maybe marines will arrest their own president. who knows.