Sayonara

Very well. Your comment of "Oh I see. For the same reason you posted about it on the Politics board", combined with the fact that you seemed to miss the point, made me think you perhaps skimmed the article, got the jist of it, and made assumptions about motive rather than simply - as directed - telling me what you think. What "same reason" would this be? Perhaps you assumed I put it here because you see the Politics forum as being some kind of country-bashing arena, rather than for the more obvious reason that the relationships between countries and developments pertaining to or affecting them are the stuff of topics which best belong in this forum. I'm getting pretty tired of having people approach any thread in the politics forum in a manner that suggests if they can pigeon-hole as many people's opinions as possible, they'll win a prize. This is infinitely worse when you're trying to do it to someone before they even express an opinion on the topic. I am not a subject of your political system and randomly shouting or intimating "lefty, righty!" at me depending on what I say is not going to make objective analysis go away. Back to the issue at hand: No, you missed the point entirely. The Air Force is asserting that it has the ability, will and desire to fire on assets owned by neutral countries and commercial third parties in order to ensure that the USA maintains "space superiority", an undefined phrase that could mean anything from global coverage of counterstrike defenses (which would be reasonable, although slightly illegal), to forcible sequesterment of viable inner space resources (which would flatly contravene international law and no doubt see the USA pulling out of another treaty). The issue is not "are we happy with the USA putting weapons in space?" - remember that I am a citizen of one of America's few close allies. I live very close to your missile shield early warning system, so I am already potentially at risk due to your military technology. I can live with that - I have my doubts about whether or not such technology will work, but I'm relatively happy that there are few who will want to test the theory so the benefit of this alliance outweighs the potential for cost as far as I'm concerned. The same would apply for orbital weapons. Rather the issue is that given the USA's history of chosing the wrong battles, and given your frightful foreign policy, can the USA be trusted to use such weapons responsibly once they are up there? And if not, who will be able to do anything about it? (Bearing in mind that responsible use doesn't mean that if you can justify an attack ex post facto, then it suddenly becomes the "right thing to do".) It was not the thrust of the artile, but it is a definite theme. It is certainly the entire reason I created this thread. The following comments summarise some of the concerns this plan has raised:

Maybe you should read the article. Also read the attached report.

Firstly, if you copy a block of someone else's information and do not reference where it came from, most academics will consider this plagiarism (whether that's what you intended or not). Secondly it allows your peers to follow up the citation and get an idea of how good the source is (as an example of why this is still ueful on the web, put the exact phrase "the Earth is flat" into google).

5614 may have a point though, I mean most people working in industries that require them to move massive amounts of data will be using dockable hard drives. I would expect though that as with virtually every hardware advance in computing, we won't come up with most of our uses for 1Tb discs until after they are available (and cheap )

http://www.wired.com/news/space/0,2697,65151,00.html What do you all think of this?

It handles IMAP properly and has a lovely folder column thingy. And of course it uses extensions. And it's secure.

Digital artists, musicians, system administrators, network administrators, anyone who uses 3D applications, CAD, DV editing suites, or any other software that produces large production files.

If those are LiveJournal entries, why didn't you just post a link?

Teatimer is part of the Spybot installation, but you have to select it as an option. It intercepts system changes and prompts you for a decision on whether or not they can be made.

I have one of those that I bought about 12 years ago. I dug it out yesterday and the battery still works. Ace. My TI ought to arrive this weekend.

By the way, the Bhopal disaster actually resulted in 2000 deaths, not 50,000. Most of them were caused by insufficient access to emergency services rather than exposure per se to the chemicals. The damage was compounded by the fact that in India the cities are massively overcrowded and poorer segments of the population do actually live right in industrial and commercial sectors, depending on their means. Also, your assertion that the safety equipment was "substandard" is not true - it was simply not capable of handling the build-up that occured. Not that this has anything to do with WMD, there's just no excuse for throwing exagerrated red herrings around.

See your other thread.

I actually said "only", not "less than", but for the sake of argument over here we would call a population of 50,000 a town. The point does not really relate to any specific number, but rather to the percentage killed. Then why bring them up in a discussion about WMDs? Virtually anything involving technology or abiotics can be abused, but that's not the same as being weaponised.

Install "Spybot: Search and Destroy" (ensuring you also install TeaTimer along with it), update it, use the Immunise function, then use Search for Problems.

Very interesting. It does however reinforce the idea that the high rate of gun deaths in the USA is related to something in the American psyche, as Michael Moore was over-enthusiastically trying to point out in Bowling for Columbine (the bit people carefully ignored). I find it quite disturbing that people think they need guns to defend themselves from their neighbours - to the point where they expect to be attacked and train for lethal self-defence - and everyone seems to get on as if that's just life.

Only the pseudoscientific ones, and nobody cares what they think.

I vote and complain, because I am English.

To make the bubbles all I had to do was write the HTML and load it into the vb tags system. We might be able to rig the read posts bit but it will mean figuring out how the flagging system works.

I have a better idea. [edit] Snigger.

If he can't multiply numbers just because they're on the wrong side of a decimal place I'd have concerns about what his maths teacher is doing all day.

I think he means arbitrary in the sense that we could call the extremes "infra red" and "ultra violet" instead of 0 and 14.

Why don't you pipe down while you wait for science to catch up with you?

What's their system?

Quote of the week.