No. A site slowdown could hurt Amazon's holiday sales, but not nearly as much as the government could for aiding a "terrorist."

How about putting an existing warhead into a pressure vessel?

Dinegrating technology and it's uses is a thinly veiled attempt to overlay the "public service" meme onto the young people he was addressing.

To say one particular mode of living is "correct" for everyone is wrongheaded. Far better for these graduates to explore their own way of living - not because it is any better or worse than any other, but because it is their own. From such insight true progress is made.

BSA discovers way to increase size of anus, so they can pull larger numbers out of it.

You know, the CLI might very well be one of the things that people feel is faster, but actually isn't. Do you have any studies to shoe that a CLI is faster for power users (by which I suspect you mean sysadmins and tinkerers mainly)? I am genuinely curious, because I often find myself pausing to remember a keyboard shortcut (or hitting the wrong one) for long enough that I could have used a mouse-driven menu to get what I want faster. I really do wonder what the best approach is.

It probably wouldn't have been like Britain, at least not for a while - Nicholas II was definitely "old school" as far as monarchs went and had zero desire to share power with anyone. The German Empire was closer to a constitutional monarchy than Russia was going into World War 1 and, thanks to Wilhelm II's idolization of the military, was basically a military dictatorship with a "representative" rubber-stamping committee in the Reichstag.

That said, Russia's military probably would've been in better shape going into '39 under Tsarist rule than it was under Stalin. Russia's military was undergoing a modernization program (increased mechanization, greater operational staff independence, etc.) going into World War 1 that was a few years from completion. If World War 1 started in 1917 instead of 1914, Germany wouldn't have had a poorly organized, slowly mobilizing, poorly equipped army of peasants on its eastern frontier - it would've had an impossibly large, well-equipped professional army backed by a relatively modern infrastructure (Russia was working on getting their railroads up to international spec, among other things) bearing down on it instead and Germany knew it. That's part of the reason Moltke and the rest of the German General Staff were in such a hurry to start World War 1; their window of opportunity, rather small to begin with, was closing fast. Instead of completing the modernization program, though, Russia's military was quickly chewed to shreds by the Germans (note that the Russian military, poorly run as it was, easily handled the Austro-Hungarians without serious issue), devoured what was left of itself during the October Revolution and its aftermath, then re-adopted the grand Russian tradition of promoting officers based on political considerations instead of tactical merit under Stalin; granted, Nicholas II wasn't much better than Stalin on that front, but at least he didn't make a regular habit of killing large portions of his General Staff whenever he came down with a case of the "vapors". Similarly, Tsarist Russia's economy wouldn't have had to suffer through the pre-NEP "War Communism" economy, nor through Stalin's abandonment of the NEP and the Holomodor. Of course, some of the resulting gains would've undoubtedly been lost in the Great Depression, but millions of displaced Ukrainian peasants probably wouldn't have starved.

Long story short, Nicholas II's "divine" leadership would almost certainly have been no worse for Russia and its military than Stalin's leadership ultimately proved to be.

Also, the "tanks on horseback" bit is actually a magnificent bit of Nazi propaganda - like most militaries of the time, horses were used for reconnaissance and scouting. Don't forget that small, inexpensive, reliable all-terrain vehicles were a rather recent development; full scale production of the Kübelwagen didn't begin until 1940 and the Jeep didn't enter production until 1941.

Slackware had the uncertainty of Patrick's situation, the perception that the base was allowed to become stale, and the removal of gnome from the officially supported base. RedHat had a nice little garden that they diced up with paywalls... No too hard to build from source, but still, it turned me onto deb.

Anyhow, the GP has a pretty valid point IMO.

Seems like it might be useful for finding downed aircrafts and other missing objects....maybe even people?

You could also try finding out microbes with magnifying glass. Mayan pyramids are 10 times bigger than normal humans. downed aircraft looks like lots of garbage scattered in large area.

Well, for one thing I thought that big underwater explosions tend to make some rather large waves.

Unfortunately the US system is rigged so that if you vote for the party you like a lot instead of the party you like a little, the party you don't like at all wins.

But that's the problem, I no longer like either party and I'm not alone in this. It's sounds cliche, but in all reality if you don't stop thinking this way, then it will never change... ever. The best thing you can do is vote neither of these parties and start making some change. Start locally, grow nationally.

Yes, it won't happen over night, but if we start electing some independent congressman and senators and get rid of the status quo or at least throw a monkey wrench into the existing system, then I'm afraid of what this country will become in 20-50 years. We're slowing turning into what we fear, a police state nation. Our freedoms are being stripped in the name of liberty and corporate profit.

It's sad really, but looking back in history you see all these government controlled "police" agencies, like the KGB, SS, etc, things we were brought up to fear so much all got their start the same way. To protect the people in the name of national security. Look at what's happening with the TSA and Border Police. I'm not saying they're that evil yet, but we are just seeing the tip of what happens when someone gets to much "power". We have to make a change.

Actually, there is, with the new high-gamut color systems now commonly supported by things like camcorders and Blu-Ray players. Or your computer - I mean nobody would ever hook up a computer to a large LCD display, right?

Considering that people fairly regularly go nuts on airplanes for non-political or -religious reasons it's strange that airlines didn't try to keep people out of the cockpit to begin with. Maybe the proof that those people throwing fits are not really crazy is that they refrain from endangering the plane. Instead of attacking the pilots they try to open the door, knowing that it won't open.

If Muslims refuse to fly because of these scanners, terrorism will have been defeated after all. Maybe the TSA is a little smarter than we give them credit for.

I think any farmer recognizes that the manual methods of weed control are much more effective than herbicides. They're just not nearly as cost-effective.

Not peer reviewed literature. Not a comittee with oversight of the scientific process. That was a book in response to a book Lomborg published, one that wasn't subject to peer review. In said book Lomborg borders on accusing an entire academic community of committing fraud himself.
When Alistair McGrath published "The Dawkin's Delusion" no one cared. Clearly this was intended as a personal refutation to the "The God Delusion" but if Dawkins had wanted the discussion conducted with the usual regards for measure and decorum found in the peer reviewed literature he would have published his theological work there. McGrath comes very close to suggesting that Dawkin's is deliberately misrepresenting the issue (although again there the conclusion of the refutation is that Dawkins is incompetent rather than fraudulent) and Dawkins didn't give a rats backside. Why? Not peer reviewed, not a real accusation of scientific fraud.
The book is titled "The Lomborg Deception" because just as in the above case the person writing the refutation believes (correctly in my opinion, although Lomborg hasn't successfully submitted his more outlandish claims for peer review in any respected journals that I know of so perhaps I'm wrong and his ideas just need tidying up) that Lomborg is either committing fraud or incompetent. Again the writer errs on the side of suggesting incompetence and again this is not an accusation dealt with by an body with oversight.
There is such a case if you look at the poster below you, and I point out why the DCSD investigation into Lomborg also doesn't represent an accusation of fraud either. There the committee again concluded that Lomborg is simply incompetent rather than fraudulent.
The entire Lomborg case is an excellent illustration of why new and original ideas in the sciences generally have to go through peer review first.