Forgot your password?

typodupeerror

Comment: Re:Sounds reasonable to me. (Score 4, Insightful) 498

by squiggleslash (#43813107) Attached to: FiOS User Finds Limit of 'Unlimited' Data Plan: 77 TB/Month

It sounds like the objection was that he ran servers, the bandwidth thing was merely the trigger to ask.

I'm baffled ISPs still think "servers" are something that needs banning. Reminds me of when so many clueless ISPs banned NAT (or rather connection sharing between multiple PCs in general.)

Comment: Satellite must not have been working for some time (Score 2) 229

by smooth wombat (#43805607) Attached to: Main US Weather Satellite Fails As Hurricane Season Looms

Based on how poor the weather reports along the East Coast have been for the last few months, the satellite must have gone down much earlier.

Case in point, the weather for New York on 5/20, after looking at several different sources the day before, all said the same thing: low 70s with partly cloudy skies. The result: cloud blocked skies and light rain.

If you can't get the report right 12 hours before something happens, why should we listen to you for something a few days down the road?

Comment: Do we really need to go over this AGAIN? (Score 1) 297

by Sloppy (#43803603) Attached to: Terrorist Murder In London Could Revive Snooper's Charter

Perhaps I missed it, but how was this murder terrorism?

I thought everyone was familiar with the process thanks to the Saturday morning cartoons, but perhaps some of you Delinquent Terrorees need it spelled out.

After a crime or crime-like event, what'll happen is that someone on the Terroree Committee announces their IBA (Intent to Become Afraid). Another committee member seconds this, possibly after some out-of-band side-dealing. This brings the terror (small "t") to the floor, where a wider discussion ensues. If seven ninths of the committee supports Afraidity, then goes to the larger Terroree Assembly for more debate and ultimately a straight majority vote. (I'm oversimplifying here, but I'm not sure how much detail you were requesting.)

If it wins the vote, it is promoted to a Terror (large "T"). A Terror's actors become "terrorists" and the action "terrorism" and so on. If no motive for the terrorism is found (no one comes forth and explains their demands and that they performed the act in order to persuade the public to see things their way, the classic boilerplate being "I committed that violent action in order to prove that my views are the wisest views") then something can be made up -- technically after being sent back to the Terroree Committee. To save time, the original committee's meeting may come with a non-binding suggested motive, and after the assembly's Terror vote, a popular Terror will often immediately proceed to a vote on the suggested Terror Motive.

All members of the Terroree Assembly agree, as a condition for joining the assembly, that they will comport Afraidity with any and all Terrors, without exception, and regardless of however they voted upon the original terror (the "Mandated Afraidity"). This helps to address charges of illegitimacy, so that we don't have a repeat of the Cole incident (where it languished in Terror Court after passing the assembly (with high absenteeism) and a poll of the assembly members found that 87% of its members hadn't been Afraid).

The Mandated Afraidity, while once thought of as draconian and overburdensome, is now widely accepted thanks to a notification network which helps to keep assembly members up-to-date and informed about exactly what to fear, how to persuade the public to comport Afraidity, etc.

Comment: Re:interesting quote FTFA (Score 1) 120

Yeah, it's the old "Something related to X did this to me, therefore I'm going to attack people also related to X but in another way that doesn't mean they had any control over the first thing" thing.

See also numerous wars we've been involved in over the last few decades.

Technology

3D Printers For Peace Contest 272

Posted by samzenpus
from the peace-love-and-toner dept.
First time accepted submitter Bas_Wijnen writes "3D printing is being condemned in the media because of the potential for printing guns. Engineers at Michigan Tech believe there is far more potential for 3D printers to make our lives better rather than killing one another. To encourage thinking about constructive uses of 3D printing technology Michigan Tech Open Sustainability Technology (MOST) Lab and Type A Machines sponsor the first 3-D Printers for Peace Contest. Designers are encouraged to consider: If Mother Theresa of Ghandi had access to 3D printing what would they print? What kind of designs could help reduce military spending and conflict while making us all safer and more secure? Anyone in the United States may enter and there is no cost."

If the ends don't justify the means, then what does? -- Robert Moses

Working...