it would seem, based on an article in reuters, that we now have more to fear from those who live there than we do from those who live elsewhere. thats right, homegrown terrorists who initiate terror attacks will do so because the internet is the new afghanistan, eg. the de facto training ground for terrorists. and this from the chief of police, new york.
Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!
because you may not see it otherwise.
mine is the first post (my first ever). in light of the subsequent comments rated 4-Informative, its rather surprising that i was rated 'Offtopic', although i agree with the poster below that he is offtopic.
Note to self: when making an offtopic post, noting your offtopicness will often make it acceptable.
comments on this
i've driven in several countries outside of the US. in france, where the speed limit is 130kph (~85 mph for those that don't know metric), traffic in the left lane move at ~ 150 (95), and assholes that think you're not moving quickly enough are going > 160 (~100). i say assholes, because these people expect you to get out of the way _just_ because they're behind you, regardless of whether or not its convenient for you. (BTW - i tend to drive on the high side of legal just about everywhere, but i like to relax when i'm doing it). in germany, well don't stay out in the left hand lane unles you're *really* passing everyone, which means > 220 (~135). in greece, stay out of everyone's way unless its a rental
but you haven't seen left lane hell until you've driven on the Long Island Expresway, or anywhere in the NYC metro area. tailgating? i was on the hutchinson (look it up on maps). there was a 6-car pile-up in the left hand lane. the vehicle the worse for the wear was a mazda brand-new family van, which undoubtedly had the latest in ABS, and probably outbraked the vehicle in front of it to a stop. the problem? it was followed by a 70's lincoln continental, which at 2 tons+ and no ABS undoubtedly ploughed right into it and sent it into the vehicle in front. the topper of all the toppers? less than ten miles down the road i'm in the left lane, exceeding the speed limit with someone tailgating me despite the fact that there's nowhere to go *and* i'd like to go faster if i could, we come across another left lane fender bender.
the rule? at least 4 car lengths at 90 (55) in perfect conditions. any closer than that and you *are* tailgating. at 110-120 (~65-72) add another car length. there's a reason for it; i might have to brake very suddenly, and if you are any close than that you will bust my rear-end (i don't actually go in for that, mind you).
finally, use your turn indicators; they're the only method you have to convey your intentions. stay right unless you're actively passing someone, even if it seems to inconvenience you. my speeding does *not* give you the right to illegally impede me (ie, staying in the left-hand lane even though you're not passing). give the person in front of you time to pass the vehicles to his right and safely move over; if he/she doesn't give them a quick flip of the high beams.
favorite piece of never passed legislation: "ban low performance drivers, not high-perfomance cars!" (seen in a men's room in southern vermont in the 80's)
for some reason this post doesn't show up in my comment history so i decided to enter it here as well.
by non (130182) on 18-11-06 8:28 (#16894414)
(http://slashdot.org/ | Last Journal: 11-09-03 13:16)
all of you folks are on the right thread (as if anyone here could be on the wrong thread in this discussion; you can't be, unless you're a TROLL!). the only link i could possibly provide here for both levity and accuracy is a post i saw some years back, at the point when Microsoft 'got' the web, ie. had decided to purchase... damn, what was that browser called again? i'm joking, i had friends working for spyglass at the time.
anyway, the article pointed out that what MS, and by extension, BG, really wanted, more than anything else, was a dime, or even a penny, for every transaction conducted on the internet. full stop. as if they owned it or something (where did that NT network code come from again?). the day that MS 'owns' the internet is the day you can pry my cold dead ip stack from out of my buffer! there was another article, this one in the slashdot era, that occupied itself with the last non-windows user on earth. both probably exist in the wayback machine, and i'm surprised no one has yet seen fit to include them here.
i really hate to bring politics up in such an emotionally charged forum, but here it goes...
"all you fuckers who really believe that a 'free market' is the best thing for the common good, go stand up against that wall with all the MS execs."
drum roll, please...
there is *nothing* new about this pitch. nothing whatsoever. it is a variation of the same old tired "if you're not paying for windows then you're using an illegal copy" shtick. enough of this shit! lets put some teeth back into antitrust settlements, and straighten out the USPTO while we're at it. you'd be surprised how many high friends in high places we really have...
This is a reply to this post.
1. Prove Allende was overthrown by the CIA, please.
2. Prove the US Government had any control over the Venezuelan coup, please.
3. Prove the Pakistani government supports Al Qaeda, please.
4. Show me the reference where the United States government said Iraq would be a cakewalk. Please.
5. Show me proof that the international press is any more accurate than the NYT, please.
6. Please prove all your allegations against Bush, particularly regarding the election, please.
7. Prove the CIA is full of criminals, please.
You know what, I can't prove that Allende was overthrown by the CIA. But I can add at least two more instances to the above that you seem to have conveniently left out.
Perhaps you've heard of East Timor. If you have, and you're familiar with the history of East Timor you might also know that on the day before Suharto invaded East Timor President Gerald Ford and Secretary of State Henrey Kissinger visited Suharto. Now I suppose you'd like to tell me that the subject of the invasion wasn't at least one of the items discussed. No, I don't have any special knowledge of that meeting, nor can I cite any references, but the interesting item to note would be that the invasion started as soon as Ford and Kissinger were back in US territory.
And maybe you've even heard of Cyprus? I imagine that you think that Turkey just decided that they would launch an attack to save their citizens from being persecuted by the Greeks? And you thought they would do that on their own, without asking anyone's opinion? Maybe you know that in the year prior to the invasion Greece finally overthrew the dictatorship established by the US and England.
So by now you must be telling yourself that I'm some kind of european left-wing radical, right? Except that I'm not; I'm an american. But I'm one of those americans who think that questioning authority is one of the principles upon which our country was founded; and damn you if you think its treasonous to do so, for surely you failed to understand something about the history of the country that you profess to cherish. And I don't know about the parent post as I haven't bothered reading it.
As far as the foreign press being 'more' accurate than The New York Times, well, perhaps you'd like to tell me the The New York Times is more accurate than The Guardian or Le Monde. By the way, I usually read the International Herald Tribune, which is owned by The New York Times.
But if you're going to tell me that Fox is objective journalism, or even CNN for that matter, you're wrong. Not dumb or stupid, just plain wrong. I've seen it with my own eyes. And if you think for one second that the invasion of Iraq wasn't motivated by some ill-conceived power trip you're also wrong. Or maybe you should ask yourself why Halliburton has open-ended contracts worth tens of billions of dollars, awarded as quickly as they were announced, for which _your_ tax dollars are paying (I had $72,000 in exceptions which are being taken to pay for your tax break, or rather to finance the War on Iraq).
But lastly let me tell you about Chile. You see, I lived in Chile. So I think I might have a perspective that you're lacking, with your red, white and blue, dyed-in-the-wool mindset. Yeah, we (US) needed the copper, and yeah, Allende nationalized businesses that he had no need or reason or even sense in nationalizing (or perhaps you can tell me what relation a candy factory has to national security). But that most certainly doesn't justify the abuses that took place under Pinochet. Or should I start telling you about people held on islands and tortured for months at a time, for no other reason than that Allende picked them as his Minister of Culture.
I suggest that you consider foreign opinions as readily as you consider those from your own country, and ask yourself if there might not be some truth behind them. Truths that you most probably would be a little uncomfortable in acknowledging. As for myself, this much I know to be true. Or don't you, who work for the Department of Defense, know of some of our own dirty little secrets?