Pangloss

Well I think it's probably a good thing that some new interrogation techniques were explored, and I think it's very notable that not all of those techniques are being condemned. Even the far left seems to have abandoned the notion that anything more than standard police procedures is unacceptable -- the fact that the new techniques saved lives and stopped terrorist attacks is probably responsible for that. Those die-hard Al Qaeda types weren't going to give it up while sitting fat and happy in Sing-Sing. But that's exactly what would have happened had the Bush administration not been willing to go down a road that previous presidents avoided. If we've now identified some of those methods as unacceptable, fine, let's codify that, and also codify what IS acceptable, and at least learn something from the experience.

But apparently one side breaking it doesn't seem to work either. What is this ghost organization that you think can operate in Gaza right under the nose of Hamas?

The only cabinet pick I've had any real reservations about is Clinton, about whom the words "Foggy Bottom" rarely seem to refer to the location of her... office. (... typed Pangloss, oh so carefully.) It's a choice I just don't understand. I don't understand why Obama offered it to her (since it marginalizes Biden), I don't understand why she accepted it (being a step down from the Senate), and I don't understand why it would be a good idea. The only "reasons" I've heard seem trite and superficial, such as "her overseas experience as First Lady" (taking sniper fire, no doubt). Which means it's either going to be a total disaster, or I'm about to get schooled once again in the art of politics -- which is fine by me. I've got my pen and notepaper primed and ready.

Speaking of which, there was an amusing story today about how he had dinner last night at George Will's house with a collection of conservatives that included, Bill Kristal (the co-founder of PNAC!), David Brooks, Charles Krauthammer, and others. The far-lefties might've flipped out about it, except for the fact that he apparently had brunch this morning with E.J. Dionne, Frank Rich and Maureen Dowd. Seems only fair.

Well yes, movies can reflect society, they just don't constitute valid evidence. That was a poor choice of words on my part. I can't seem to catch a break from my own errors in this thread.

Interesting post, a good summary of the current situation and your ideas about Erlang sound intriguing. You know, if you whipped together some sort of project to test some concurrency ideas, I'm sure we could find some volunteers here to run your program on a set of test data and report back their calculation times and hardware configurations for comparison. You could have the program run a set of single-core and multi-core benchmarks.

I'm not validating his position, I'm simply saying that I was mistaken to assume that he was saying that one movie was a valid reflection of society and other movies are not.

I guess that kinda depends on whose expectations we're talking about.

No no, the apology would have to be mine -- I get you now. I just assumed that because you were saying that one movie was relevant but that others were not, that you were having a little fun with iNow. But if you're just saying that Deliverance just popularized a certain concept, and then you back it up with studies and statistics as you have, that's different, I agree. Thanks for clarifying.

I think that there's at least a reasonable point to be made about the cease fire (re: bascule's point above), but I also think these statistics underscore my point about proportionality -- don't bother me with a little violence, just let me know if it tips onto the evening news. I have to say that from watching the newsosphere and blogosphere over the last couple of weeks I've learned something about the pacifist movement. I had no idea it was so thoroughly fixated on proportionality. I thought they just auto-judged any Israeli violence based on their history of repressing the poor Palestinian people. Boy was I wrong. Who'd have thought that pacifists, of all people, would have a quota?

World War Z also proved that zombies were caused by Republicans and global warming deniers, and that being a good, progressive liberal will save you from certain destruction. "The Aristocrats!"

Amusing video about grammar and punctuation in YouTube video comments. Thought you all might get a kick out of it.

This article looks like it might be helpful in that regard: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_rocket_and_mortar_attacks_in_Israel_in_2008

Even if we assume for the sake of the argument that Hamas's position was "we hate Israel and our policy is that it should be destroyed, but we don't want our people to actually go out and do that right now because we really want peace with Israel, honest", I'm not sure how that would make any difference.

How about an ice cream based on this candy? Only problem is it might disappear in a puff of logic before you can eat it.

I can't tell if DrDNA was serious or if iNow just got punk'd. I grew up all around that area, btw, and we saw people like that from time to time up in the mountains. I was in the Boy Scouts and we often went camping in North Georgia, and I have an uncle who had some land along the Chattahoochee. He had this one neighbor who was a backwoods recluse, and he used to SHOOT at people tubing down the river past his land (don't think he ever hit anyone, probly just tried to scare 'em). This was WAY above the areas that were depicted in the movie, though. Lake Lanier, the lake they're creating by damming the river in the movie, is really quite close to Atlanta, and the idea that there were people that crazy living that close to the city, even in the 1970s, is kinda laughable. There's even a long history of manufacturing and high-tech businesses in that area. The old Hayes modem company got its start not too far west of there, and long-time Macintosh owners may remember a company called "Daystar" that used to make Photoshop accelerators boards -- they were in that area (I used to work there). It's not even mountainous, just rolling hills really. You have to go quite a bit farther north and/or west for real mountains and inbred yocals. But hey, that's Hollywood for ya. I happen to love that movie, btw -- an early John Boorman masterpiece. He went on to do Excalibur, Hope & Glory, Beyond Rangoon and The Emerald Forest, and is currently working on an interesting-looking film about the Emperor Hadrian.

Quite right. The longer it goes on the more strained the situation gets, and the more one has to ask why Israel can't accept the win it's already achieved and stop the fighting so it can reap some more benefits from a renewed diplomatic interest. Surely it would look better to stop and let the diplomats have another go, even if it means they fail and the fighting has to start up again. Politically speaking, a cease fire just makes sense. And it makes more sense sooner than later -- the longer they wait, the more foreign support Israel loses. Merged post follows: Consecutive posts merged Yeah I can't really imagine what Israel must be thinking there. I mean, this could be anybody.

If you say so. I can think of a few families that might feel otherwise. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Iowa_turret_explosion Personally I think the Nimitz-class carriers are quite effective and capable, but modernization does matter, and that is in fact where the Navy is heading. As it should.

You're the one who called it "fishy" and suggested it as an ulterior motive for the invasion of Gaza, not the Jerusalem Post. Merged post follows: Consecutive posts merged That reminds me of a little reminder I got this morning about my annoyance with the news media over this. An announcer in NBC's Today show, talking about Israel moving into Gaza City, described that city as being "filled with women and children". As if there's nothing else that could possibly be in that location other than women and children, standing wall to wall just waiting to die at the hands of those evil villains, the Israelis. His emphasis on the word "filled" with positively DRIPPED with emotional outrage over the presumed death and destruction that is sure to follow.

Nope, clearly not. http://www.scienceforums.net/forum/showthread.php?t=37585 But since you raised the subject of personal motives, I'll give you my opinion on yours. I think you've been posting conspiracy theories since this business started, I think you're pre-disposed to oppose Israel on this because of the level of violence they're committing (not that you support Hamas, but you oppose them less assiduously because they commit less violence, and this actually seems to make sense to you), and I think you're going out of your way to find things to throw at Israel no matter how off the wall they may be. And I think it's very revealing that it's been your iNow, your "fellow moonbat" (your words) that has answered most of your claims in the negative. Mind you, I don't think I've attacked you on any of this (as you attack me above), because hey, it's your opinion, and you're welcome to it. Doesn't mean I won't answer it with my own, though.

There's also some chatter today about him possibly running for the Senate seat of the retiring Voinovich. I think it's a sad statement about the current state of the Republican party. Oh well.

Spaghetti Bolognaise.

Shazbot.

You will see American Carol. Resistance is futile.

It was a surprisingly conservative panel this week. Not a pure liberal in the bunch. The "stop Israel" point of view wasn't even represented. I was surprised, especially given that last week's panel had Hurricane Katrina and in general he's pretty balanced with his panels. But needless to say I agreed with the majority view. I don't know about NATO occupation, and I'm not even sure I agree with the "radically different approach" suggestion, but he's certainly right about the situation being untenable.