Post #32,312
3/15/02 9:27:26 AM
|
Why Star Wars II won't work
Aside from inability to handle decoys and ECM jammers, the crap is based on known faulty tech.
[link|http://www.alternet.org/story.html?StoryID=12628|url]
With this much manure around, there must be a pony somewhere.
|
Post #32,319
3/15/02 10:39:33 AM
|
skeet shoot scaled up is faulty tech?
Maybe decoys, etc is crap use the skeet shooting model.
thanx,
bill
There is no difference between a "settler," "soldier," "secular," or "Chassidic Jew." The target is the JEW.
\ufffd Harvey Tannenbaum
|
Post #32,324
3/15/02 11:02:20 AM
3/15/02 4:11:09 PM
|
True. And we'll never put a man on the moon either.
[link|http://library.thinkquest.org/C003763/pdf/concepts04.pdf|Its technologically impossible.]
======
post edit:
Hmm...click on the pdf link on the site...apparently they don't let you get straight to it.
You were born...and so you're free...so Happy Birthday! Laurie Anderson
[link|mailto:bepatient@aol.com|BePatient]
Edited by bepatient
March 15, 2002, 04:11:09 PM EST
|
Post #32,388
3/15/02 4:22:19 PM
|
Gunpowder, hell! Imagine the rifling, and what THAT would do
Imric's Tips for Living- Paranoia Is a Survival Trait
- Pessimists are never disappointed - but sometimes, if they are very lucky, they can be pleasantly surprised...
- Even though everyone is out to get you, it doesn't matter unless you let them win.
|
Post #32,329
3/15/02 11:24:04 AM
|
The GAO reports are here.
PDFs are [link|http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d02124.pdf|here] and [link|http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d02125.pdf|here]. I've only skimmed them them myself. The second seems to be what Huffington's addressing.
If anyone's intested in this topic, it might be better to read the original report than to take Huffington's article as gospel. The second report doesn't sound (to me) nearly as damning as Huffington claims.
Cheers,
Scott.
|
Post #32,344
3/15/02 12:49:53 PM
|
So fire TRW & Boeing and get another contractor.
And then get on with it. (Probably not Raytheon, though. I've heard bad rumors.) Accountability is what works.
Oh, and maybe some people should go to jail, too.
[link|http://www.angelfire.com/ca3/marlowe/index.html|http://www.angelfir...e/index.html]
Truth is that which is the case. Accept no substitutes.
If competence is considered "hubris" then may I and my country always be as "arrogant" as we can possibly manage.
|
Post #32,369
3/15/02 3:14:57 PM
3/15/02 3:31:00 PM
|
Hmmm. Link managed to bomb Mozilla .9.8 TWICE
not even Task Manager, to kill it. Reboot. And this with f/wall, filters, no j-script, etc. yada yada. First clear-cut .9.8 Achilles heel - wonder what noxiou-M$ spawn resides there.. Anyone else see weirdness? (The page began to load, so Ariana's name and some sentences appeared before lock-up.)
Gotta try 4.5 now ;-) I'll get back with this riveting tale of adventure in the *New* Dismal Science: vying with Econ. for, #1 in turgidity.
Hah!! NS 4.5 loads it just fine. So much for the cognoscenti's appellation of 4.5 as "a POS". Something glass-fragile in .9.8? SO ugly it needs a &^$#$% reboot, on two occasions?
Sheesh, maybe time to trot out NS 3.05 - smaller yet, seemed quite stable for *years* - even if it hasn't a prayer of playing with the new gyrating otters and translucent skins on radio buttons and... what a crock webpages are becoming. ('Cept zIWE natch.)
{sigh} Can't anybody make a fucking browser that doesn't eat itself?
|
Post #32,377
3/15/02 3:39:41 PM
|
I'm running .98, and didn't have any problem
Where each demon is slain, more hate is raised, yet hate unchecked also multiplies. - L. E. Modesitt
|
Post #32,370
3/15/02 3:19:33 PM
|
What a manure-laced article
Basic problem is, you can't prove a negative.
So the things they did may not work (or, depending on your interpretation, may not work as well as reported.) So? Space-based lasers, ground-based lasers, intercepting missiles, etc. cannot be proven to not work.
I'd rather at least have someone working on the problem than continue to rely on MAD (Mutual Assured Destruction) to protect me from some current or future nuclear-capable country. Sure, that doesn't protect against someone smuggling a bomb into New York's harbor, but the smuggle-bomb, while destructive, is sure as hell going to be less destructive than an all-out ballistic missile attack.
Where each demon is slain, more hate is raised, yet hate unchecked also multiplies. - L. E. Modesitt
|
Post #32,428
3/16/02 7:59:47 AM
|
It's not that it can't work
It's that, as currently designed, it won't work well enough to provide an acceptable level of defense. There are ways around this. I am not an engineer, so my ideas lack definition, but it seems to me that targetting must be more accurate than is currently possible with known tech. It also wouldn't hurt to have contractors stop falsifying data on the tech.
With this much manure around, there must be a pony somewhere.
|
Post #32,485
3/16/02 10:16:17 PM
|
It's the marketing that bugs me
It's sold as a space sheild, protecting us all. But designed (correctly, I think, if you take as given that the thing is worth building at all) to protect a few key military assets.
It isn't an end to MAD. It is just another strategic asset, yet another way of assuring the other side's destruction.
The most positive interpretation of Star Wars I: Bonzo shoots skeet was that it was intended to up the ante so that we would have second-strike capability, requiring more expensive Soviet hardware to restore the balance of terror. It (assuming that the people who said communism can't fly were wrong and the USSR wasn't about to self destruct anyway) worked, in that the USSR couldn't afford the hardware.
Version 2 has no such use. It's just a way to pay back some campaign contributions.
----
United we stand
Divided we dominate the planet without really trying
|
Post #32,492
3/16/02 11:58:14 PM
|
But it is a great 'umbrella' for
An overall aim, as seems to fit the machinations all around:
Unilateral US control of space, by any other euphemism - whether or not a part of this 'officially' includes also: future explorations, *mining* of the moon, asteroids yada yada.
The short-term vastly increased expenditures to select Mil-spec Corps - is only the tip of this simplistic-minded iceberg. The tech details have been discussed for decades already - physics hasn't changed, but attention span has noticeably shortened.
I heard Bushie admonishing Congress just recently to, "get with the program" and not do anything to destroy this (~~) "unity of purpose'.
Shit. Will we *ever* learn how to substitute blab for such doggerel? and immediately laugh in its face, forcing a rewording into English. ('Course it's hard to rebut a Resident on Tee Vee; that's never part of the format - to hear the minority / the loyal opposition - except after that annual pageant, The State of the Nation ghost-speech.)
Hmmm a precedent?
Ashton
|
Post #32,379
3/15/02 3:42:54 PM
|
Doesn't matter if it (ever) would work. It's about
US unilateral militarization of space - for the duration (of sentient life [??] on the planet). 'Star Wars' is just the rubric for obtaining unlimited fear-funds, to further embed the Military Budget, at ever-increasing %-GNP: for our comfort and safety as we expand Empire. But please to call it "defense". (We disbanded The War Department long ago - back when we used language often correctly)
Never mind.. what Other programs, especially any aimed at the unwashed lower 40%, or education, housing, medical -- as have to be gutted next, to support this Master of the Planet megalomania.
Ever thus: declare a nice little open-ended War on Evil, or maybe War on Not Nice-to-USness. Get 99% votes "for mythical Unity". Speak often about Patriotism, Liberty, Freedom and.. God.
Pshaw. Child-politics R' US.
|
Post #32,392
3/15/02 4:39:21 PM
|
But there's Stormtroopers in this one!
And lots of jedi and lightsabres and ship battles and city scenes... Oh. Nevermind... :-)
lister
|
Post #32,429
3/16/02 8:04:35 AM
|
Hyuck, yuck yuck. :)
They lost a customer with the last craptacular event. No more money from me for any more Star Wars.
With this much manure around, there must be a pony somewhere.
|
Post #32,449
3/16/02 3:32:11 PM
|
Don't forget Boba Fett and his daddy
as well as Anakin Skywalker's walk to the dark side. But I've said too much already! :)
Star Wars II: Attack Of The Clones will redefine what it means to be a real "Space Opera". The love/hate relationship between the Queen and Anakin will maybe get some more of the girl/women audience. If it has Soap Opera elements, maybe the guy's date won't dump a bucket of popcorn on his head for dragging her to see the movie?
I am free now, to choose my own destiny.
|
Post #32,426
3/16/02 12:03:51 AM
|
Star Wars II: Missile Command
I swear, someone gave Ronald Regan a Missile Command game and told him it was a demo of our Star Wars defence project? Had the Russians and Chinese shaking in their boots that we could knock out their nuclear missiles from the sky, until level 25 where it gets too darn fast to knock them all out and even the low flying planes and satelites can bomb our cities.
I am free now, to choose my own destiny.
|
