Pangloss

This is another great example of how Microsoft often wins with an inferior product. The Playstation 3 has better graphics, but MS has really slick development solution with XNA Studio and its integration with XBox Live. The result is that anybody and their mother can crank out Xbox 360 games, but no sane person wants to develop for the PS3. If it wasn't for the built-in Blu-Ray support I seriously doubt the PS3 would have out-sold the 360 for the first time last month.

I'm sorry, YT, but I don't understand a word of this, or how it relates to what I said.

Why not? There's been relative peace there, but mainly because the Catholic side more or less threw in the towel, and some say it's still simmering beneath the surface. What if it comes back again? Will you still consider it peacefully resolved? And even if that worked for Northern Ireland, does anyone really envision that working for Palestine and Israel? Come on. I'm saying your solution isn't (a) always applicable, nor (b) an honest example of the world staying out of their affairs. I think the world has every right, for example, to keep an eye on the human rights situation in Northern Ireland, and recommend or even support changes if it gets out of hand again. And if the UK doesn't like it, too bad. I don't really envision that becoming a problem again, because good, smart people are working hard to ensure it doesn't. But I think the comparison is valid.

In other news, Northern Ireland was reunited with Ireland today............................. ...................... .....(thinkaboutit)..... ...(hinthint)... (...) (psst, thinkabout it!)

The Lehrer News Hour had an MIT physics professor on last night talking about how it couldn't possibly work and then going on to talk about how it would have a negative impact on foreign relations. I hope he's very embarassed today. It was a classic example of subverting science to advance political agenda. He had a perfectly reasonable point on the political impact, but he was apparently quite wrong about the science.

Well don't get me wrong, I totally agree the subject may come back up again with a vengeance, and the logical conclusion of that concern is that we should remain watchful for more outbreaks. But look how different the situations you mentioned are. At least in the case of Florida, which I've seen a lot of localized reporting on, they're acting from the perspective of the LOST Dover case. And really most of the story there is about SUPPORTERS of evolution trying to reframe the subject so that it's less objectionable to religious types, not remove the subject from school. The point being that that's a far cry from where we were in this country before Dover. So I think we should celebrate that success, because look at how much better the situation is because of it. If we hadn't fought that battle, we'd not have made as much progress at this point. Isn't it better to have fought and won than to have a lot more disagreement simmering just beneath the surface? With that many more parents undermining school lessons at home, and that many more children nodding in the classroom but feeling differently once they leave the schoolhouse? I don't mean to change the subject, I just think it's an important point.

Oh cool. I was wondering the other day how long it's been since I installed our CFL lighting, and this thread bump answered my question nicely. Thanks YT! (Not one single burnout so far!)

(shrug) True enough. Different subject, though.

At risk of digressing too far, that's one of the best arguments for making college accessible and affordable for every single high school student in the country, IMO.

Well I think you raise a legitimate concern, which in my opinion is outweighed by the merits of independence. At any rate, this is not a black and white issue. Certainly, but I've already stipulated this. As I said: And my response is adequate to that example.

Changing terminology was also tried by creationists, I mean intelligent design proponents, I mean the cdesign proponentsists. How'd that work out for them? Can we not take a page from their book? This touches on something that I think is really important here, which is that, by and large, it's a GOOD thing that society has had this huge debate over evolution's place in the school. It's not just about hashing it out and putting it behind us, either, it's about getting the point across as to WHY creationism shouldn't be "taught alongside as equal" and WHY it isn't the same kind of thing -- this wasn't just a matter of science education, there was a disparity in comprehension at a lower level than that. By having the discussion, and having the issue be front-and-center for a while, we had a rare and important opportunity to "do some real science education", in a great way. And it WORKED! People keep forgetting that, but I think it's really important. It really sunk in with a lot of christian conservatives, as well as their kids. It's going to pay off dividends for at least a couple of generations. Hell it may NEVER come up again. So the next time one of these things comes up and people start groaning, why not instead cheer and jump up and down and get EXCITED about the opportunity to teach people how things really are? We should continue to confront these things, front and center. Even if we lose now and then. It's worth it.

Each of those cases, including cases in the US, has its share of merits and drawbacks -- some are credible, others are not. I believe each case has to be looked at independently, not pawned off in a blanket statement one way or the other. I'm not even convinced independence is best for Kosovo. All I can say for sure is that the Serbian government is hardly a neutral, objective arbiter in this matter. In general I think myriads of smaller states is less productive/beneficial than a small number of large ones, and ultimately just one. But in some cases it appears to still be necessary from time to time to fracture an existing political order so that we may mend the underlying issues. Kind of a "break some eggs to make an omelet" approach. And yes, I believe we have no only a right to do that, but an obligation. We're all world citizens now, like it or not. Technology has made us so.

Elections are free and fair in the United States, and no credible evidence to the contrary exists, only partisan speculation. Something a scientist should not lend credence to (unless of course you want to join the 9/11 conspiracy theorists in Pseudoscience and Speculation). And an ellipses is not an argument. I appreciate the correction. I'm afraid I really don't understand these parliamentary governments. (But of course I don't drop an ellipses and hint that they're not real democracies, as seems to be the trend around here lately.) I did note a news item yesterday saying that Musharraf doesn't plan to step down, and I guess this will go on for a while longer. I'll adjust the subject accordingly.

I think he must be talking about the planned shoot-down of the US spy sat by the US Navy. I believe a number of other satellites have re-entered the atmosphere since Skylab. Mir comes to mind, for example, but I'm sure there have been many. I don't know what the odds are for them hitting it, but that information may not be known outside of security-cleared folks at the moment, although I'm sure industry analysts have a fair notion. We're really just going to have to wait and see if they hit it or not. Of course, I would hit it. (sorry -- that was a long way to go for a very small joke, wasn't it?)

Don't look for it, DrDNA, you may not like what you find. After all, some apes are more equal than others. It's a mad house, a mad house! (DrDNA, would an ape make a human doll that TALKS?)

Well maybe I misunderstood your last post, then, because we're on the same page here. I was trying to point out that it was incorrect for them to call it "licensing" because what they're doing doesn't seem to fit the definition of that word. It seems to really be about further restrictions.

Of course it's a good thing that Serbia was "opening up". They're certainly making progress. More progress is required. Not asked. Required. And yes, it was self-serving. Had America taken a position like that you'd have half this country and most of the rest of the world screaming "American imperialism" right now. Europeans have a stake in this fire, whether they like it or not. In fact it's incredibly hypocritical to suggest that Europe should "staying out of" the Kosovo issue when in fact what was being suggested is that Europe take Serbia's SIDE.

That's true they were lousy governments (or at least had serious problems), and I would say that we simplistically associate democracy with "good", so I agree with that part of what you're saying. I would differ at that point -- I think democracy IS better than anything else. Or more accurately put, it's the worst form of government except for all the others (as Churchill is so often quoted as saying). But that's an ideological point and you're welcome to disagree -- I can't honestly say that history has proven me unequivocally right and you unequivocally wrong. I am curious, though, about this point you made: Is it? How do we know this, and is the majority that's not voting represented by a specific group, or is it just that most people don't have enough confidence to vote?

Better just to eat them, like we do with all our hard-working bovine friends.

Yes, this is where new countries learn that having is not the same as wanting. Your government is now responsible for the protection of millions of people it wanted dead three days ago. And the whole world will be watching how it handles that responsibility. It will not be easy, nor is there any particular reason for anyone to think that Kosovo any better equipped to deal with this issue than anybody else (and quite a lot of reason to think them less well equipped). For what it's worth, I wish them luck. I disagree with the above, I think the Serbs are the ones who need to mind their own business. It never was their country, and their rhetoric is wrong. This is EXACTLY what the west needs to be doing with regard to foreign relations, and EXACTLY how the west needs to be doing it. And the fact that Serbs elected a pro-western government and wanted to join the EU is irrelevent and self-serving. You know, kinda like we were with Iraq. That was a very Bush-like statement, guy.

That's a different subject. We're not talking about illegalization, we're talking about licensing. Different rules apply. I think this hits the mark squarely, and I would add that the emphasis should be on helping people kick their nicotine addictions, not "licensing" them so they can just continue to do the same. I had no idea about the Nazi smoking ban either, btw. Thanks for passing that along, YT.

Hehe, I think it was sarcasm -- you guys know Sisyphus better than that! And the OP met with quite a chuckle from this South Floridian.

Pakistan has been by far the most politically interesting country to observe during the War on Terror, and this week's events were certainly no exception. It's very promising to see Pakistani moderates returned to power, as voters denied both the continuation of Musharraf's policies and the rise of Muslim extremism. I thought Senator Biden had the most interesting comments today, saying (paraphrased) that our safety (as it relates to Pakistan's impact on the WoT) is based not on the continuance of a hated government, but on the willingness and determination of the moderate Pakistani citizen. He went on to say that America should be willing to continue to aid Pakistan as it forms a new government. http://www.mlive.com/newsflash/index.ssf?/base/international-0/1203446664164200.xml&storylist=international I agree. What do you all think? Is this a positive sign for Pakistan, and the larger issues regarding Pakistan's impact on the War on Terror? Or are we in for more-troubled times?

Cool. I can stop working, then, and rely on others to take care of me. Sounds great.

The thing is, this seems to violate the whole concept of licensing. The purpose of permits is to ensure OTHER people's safety, not the one carrying the permit. Okay it's maybe a LITTLE bit about the license-holder, but the point here doesn't seem to be about second-hand smoke, it seems to be about ensuring that the license-holder knows that smoking is not only bad for them, but that it has no redeeming worth whatsoever. It's pure demonization. So doesn't that automatically make it a "nanny-state" rule? Isn't the ENTIRE purpose of this suggestion SOLELY about beating up smokers? Let me guess -- you have to wear the license on your forehead at all times, right? There's a great big scarlet "S" stamped on your shirt?