That makes more sense. Thanks.

I did that with Slashdot. I don't like the way it worked out.

Hi,

So, it is tempting to resurrect Technocrat.net now that Slashdot stinks worse than the last two times I shut down technocrat.net .

If you remember, we didn't get very many readers. We didn't get them because not enough people submitted usable articles.

As it happens, we don't just need a better Slashdot. We need a replacement for Groklaw. And I personally would be happier reading something with the absolute minimum of Javascript except perhaps in the submission editor. Maybe I'm old-fashioned.

I know that I can do it technically, and I have the server, and Cloudflare should be able to help me handle the load. But if it is like last time, and my wife observes that I'm talking to the same dozen guys all of the time, it's not going to work.

What do you think?

You dial 1-510-4PERENS. Email is probably better, though. bruce@perens.com .

That's just confirming that I'm on the right path, when I buy an ebook, the first thing I do is to strip-out the DRM and then save this copy in my backed-up storage. If I paid for it, I want to make sure I own it, period.

Like zero?

Does anyone else see the ridicule of this attempt? People on the banned countries that really want to continue their courses will use proxies and other technological measures to bypass it?

Sure enough. I do not think the Gripen will be it. I think it could be, just as ðe Harrier was; but in ðe end ðe probability is more of a massively expensive, not quite up to ðe task fleet of F-35s, and as a B plan ðe evolution of current aircraft while new, simpler ones are designed.

Wrong on all counts.

First, if you reread my post, I said it was just an option, besides revamping current models and creating a more focused aircraft.

Second, ðe US already did something like ðat with ðe Harrier II.

Third, ðe Sea Gripen is already in development and will probably be built as a result of Brazil’s need of new aircraft for its current and future carriers. 24 or such units is not a bad first order for a modification of an existing, & already cheap, model.

Is this evidence of time travel? ;)

So many failures by trying to be all things to all people as long as the taxpayer foots it all.

My native Brazil has decided on ðe Saab JAS 39E Gripen NG, as did Switzerland where I lived. Two very different countries, very different needs, and sure enough the Gripen even in its NG version cannot do all the F-35 should be able to do — but it does not need to. It is more of a versatile aircraft, doing passably well in its intended deployments at a reasonable cost, than a do-it-all.

It is not to say the US should just ditch ðe F-35 and localise ðe Gripen just as ðey did with ðe Harrier. But it could be an strategy: to have a flexible (‘swing role’ is what Saab calls it) main aircraft, perhaps the evolution of ðe F-18, perhaps a pared down F-35 just as ðe Chinese did, and dedicated planes to do things ðe main platform cannot do, such as ðe A and B planes: ðe A-10, ðe Harrier &, yes, ðe B-52, or evolutions or replacements ðereof. Theoretically a single plane should be cheaper to keep ðan several ones, but not when its costs spiral out of control.

Anyway, TNW's article reveals some read comprehension error (on everyone's part?); according to Ramaswamy's email, “We are working in the payments team to figure out how to incorporate bitcoin into our plans” but TNW interprets this as "it would suggest Google was getting ready to support the virtual currency". NO. It suggests that Google is thinking about how it could possibly do that.

Assuming you are right, and THEY exist: As long as none of us peek behind the curtain, we'll never be capable of doing that. Even after we remove the puppetmasters, I am fairly certain new, improved puppetmasters will show up. (obviously, if you are wrong and there is no THEM, changing puppets does change things) (or at least create the conditions for changing things) The truth, IMNSHO, is that the will to get to power usually generates power, and no people have more will to have power over others than psychopats/sociopaths, and so those naturally drawn to power. Non-empathically-challenged people have to put safeguards in the social fabric and system just to be protected from the empathically-challenged people that will undoubtedly rise to power.

Even so, 20M in 2000 (6G pop) is 0.3% ... 1.2G in 2014 (7.1G pop) is 16.9%. Still an enormous difference...