Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Sirus]

I just found out that the computers that guided the Apollo missions was 2.048 Mhz. My phone is a dual-core 1Ghz. o_o

I heard it a slightly different way, that the average microwave oven has more computing power than the Apollo guidance computers had. Kinda pisses me off that we haven't been back to the moon yet :|

[MaximumZero]

Well, the idiots in our government are short sighted. We should have a form on the census or a yearly sign up or something that dictates how our individual taxes are spent. I would pull all support for faith-based crap and pork, and dump it all in infastructure, science and education.

[Aklyon]

I blame the military stealing all the budget.

[Karnewarrior]

I just found out that the computers that guided the Apollo missions was 2.048 Mhz. My phone is a dual-core 1Ghz. o_o

I heard it a slightly different way, that the average microwave oven has more computing power than the Apollo guidance computers had. Kinda pisses me off that we haven't been back to the moon yet :|

Or, you know, to Mars.

If we can go to the moon in a stopwatch we can go to Mars in a supercomputer. We just lack the coinage.

I blame the military stealing all the budget.

The military at least has a legitimate reason to exist.

But there are billions of dollars tied up in American expendiatures alone that go... Nowhere. Into politicians greasy palms or corporate hoarders. 200 years of gunk from Democracy that really needs a cleaning system. Political Draino, if you will.

[Sirus]

Er, one step at a time. Let's at least get back to the Moon, maybe set up a sort of semi-permanent habitat up there before we worry about Mars.

[JoshuaFH]

I blame the military stealing all the budget.

I know I don't make political comments very often, but I blame politicians for generally being bastards for the last couple decades forcing them to indulge in the military industrial-complex and entrenching the American people's money and patience in wars we can't pull out of due to the otherwise disastrous political consequences.

I'll go back in my serious discussion hidey-hole now.

[MaximumZero]

Er, one step at a time. Let's at least get back to the Moon, maybe set up a sort of semi-permanent habitat up there before we worry about Mars.

You're not going to vote Gingrich, are you? >.>

[Sirus]

Er, one step at a time. Let's at least get back to the Moon, maybe set up a sort of semi-permanent habitat up there before we worry about Mars.

You're not going to vote Gingrich, are you? >.>

HELL no. While I would like a moon base, I recognize that we've got other problems as well. Besides, there's no reason that Gingrich is the only dude who can build a moon base.

[Aklyon]

Er, one step at a time. Let's at least get back to the Moon, maybe set up a sort of semi-permanent habitat up there before we worry about Mars.

We've been to the moon at least twice if you count other contries, and the ISS is a kinda-semipermanent habitat. But the only things we have on mars are rovers that continue to rove years after they're supposed to. And broken rovers.

[Sirus]

Er, one step at a time. Let's at least get back to the Moon, maybe set up a sort of semi-permanent habitat up there before we worry about Mars.

We've been to the moon at least twice if you count other contries, and the ISS is a kinda-semipermanent habitat. But the only things we have on mars are rovers that continue to rove years after they're supposed to. And broken rovers.

The Moon could be a launchpad/way station for Mars voyages, plus the orbital motion around the Earth could conceivably be used as a sort of booster to make the trip. Honestly, a moon base is the logical first step. I just hope that happens when I'm still young enough to take a vacation up there.

[Flying Dice]

I blame the military stealing all the budget.

Not the main issue. Defenses expenditures are greater than anything else-except Social Security and Medicare/Medicaid. The U.S. federal budget for the 2011 fiscal year alloted ~$700b (19%) to defense spending. ~$725b (20%) went to Social Security, and ~$835 (23%) went to Medicare/Medicaid. Both of the latter will only get worse as the babyboomers get into retirement age. I'm not about to argue that the defense budget isn't inflated, or that there isn't a lot of waste, but we have bigger monetary fish to fry.

[Truean]

http://www.dailycamera.com/lafayette-news/ci_20176992/lafayette-police-cat-refuses-jog-around-lake-owner

http://library.municode.com/HTML/10101/level3/COOR_CH25ANFO_ARTIINGE.html#COOR_CH25ANFO_ARTIINGE_S25-1DOANCRTRPR

One reason dogs are (arguably) better than cats: you can take them out jogging.

According to the Boulder Daily Camera, a 19-year-old man was ticketed in nearby Lafayette, Colorado, last week "on suspicion of tethering his cat to a rock after the pet refused to go jogging with him." An officer was quoted as saying that a passerby called police after allegedly seeing the cat's leash tied to a rock in a local park. "Apparently," said Sgt. Fred Palmer, "the individual was trying to jog with the animal on a leash and the animal was either unwilling or unable to keep up." Well, it was a cat so I think we can guess which it was, but the end result was the same: the "individual" tied the cat's leash to a rock so he could finish his run.

The cat wasn't harmed by the alleged tethering. (The report cites "police radio traffic" in support of a claim that the cat "was being attacked by a flock of birds while it was tied to the rock," but while that is highly amusing it's also highly unlikely. Birds aren't that stupid.) The owner was ticketed for "domestic animal cruel treatment," but this is explained by the fact that the town's animal-cruelty ordinance states that "tethering" is considered "cruel" by definition.

Specifically, the ordinance makes it illegal to "tether" any animal in Lafayette except as follows:

"Animals may, only upon an owner's property, be restrained by a tether; however any such tether must be at least ten (10) feet in unobstructed length and attached to a pulley or trolley mounted cable which is at least ten (10) feet in unobstructed length and mounted no more than seven (7) feet above ground level. The tethering system must be entirely contained within the owner's property, any tether shall weigh no more than one-eighth (⅛) of the animal's weight, have swivels on both ends and be attached to a properly fitted collar or harness."

That is, even on your own property, no matter how briefly and regardless of any harm to the animal, you cannot tie your pet's leash to anything except one of these ridiculous contraptions. (The ordinance defines "tethering" as securing the animal to a "fixed base," so they do at least permit you to walk your dog - or cat - on a leash, which is nice of them.) It is, of course, already illegal to abuse or neglect an animal, so it's not clear to me what the anti-tethering rule adds. Maybe somebody's cousin owns a pet-tethering-contraption company?

The Daily Camera located a Facebook account that may or may not be the defendant's -- the name is identical, the owner lives in the Boulder area and has adopted a cat (named "Stella!," apparently with the exclamation point). In one of the pictures posted to the account, Stella! is wearing a leash or harness, although whether she is actually "tethered" to something is not clear. She certainly doesn't appear to have been mistreated.

She doesn't seem too happy about things, but then she is a cat.

Screw it, cats are simply better than most dogs and this man failed to recognize this. He will learn sooner or later.
__________________________________________________________________


This man is being arrested for burglary, no really....
http://www.wjbdradio.com/index.php?f=news_single&id=32460
Being fashion conscious myself, I applaud him for dressing for the occasion. I also snicker....

[Aklyon]

I blame the military stealing all the budget.

Not the main issue. Defenses expenditures are greater than anything else-except Social Security and Medicare/Medicaid. The U.S. federal budget for the 2011 fiscal year alloted ~$700b (19%) to defense spending. ~$725b (20%) went to Social Security, and ~$835 (23%) went to Medicare/Medicaid. Both of the latter will only get worse as the babyboomers get into retirement age. I'm not about to argue that the defense budget isn't inflated, or that there isn't a lot of waste, but we have bigger monetary fish to fry.

I know that, I was talking about the budget bits that weren't preclaimed by SS & Medicare/Medicaid, or other things we can't really cut very easily like the debt.

[Flying Dice]

I blame the military stealing all the budget.

Not the main issue. Defenses expenditures are greater than anything else-except Social Security and Medicare/Medicaid. The U.S. federal budget for the 2011 fiscal year alloted ~$700b (19%) to defense spending. ~$725b (20%) went to Social Security, and ~$835 (23%) went to Medicare/Medicaid. Both of the latter will only get worse as the babyboomers get into retirement age. I'm not about to argue that the defense budget isn't inflated, or that there isn't a lot of waste, but we have bigger monetary fish to fry.

I know that, I was talking about the budget bits that weren't preclaimed by SS & Medicare/Medicaid, or other things we can't really cut very easily like the debt.

Thing is, even if we cut defense spending to $0 (which just flat out isn't possible, for a number of reasons), that might not even make up the gap between what we're spending and revenues. All other discretionary spending combined is even less than defense spending (and yet is still cut more often), and cutting it would be equally pointless and more harmful. Discretionary spending isn't the thing that is killing the federal budget, the entitlement programs (S.S., Medicare, and Medicaid) are. The only long run solution will require the government to admit that the model for those programs just plain isn't sustainable with current population demographics. Yes, defense cuts could help. Yes, cuts to other types of discretionary spending could help. Would either actually pull the federal govt. back into the black? No. Would both together? No. Which makes it all the more unfortunate that the last things to be cut are the entitlement programs, and the first to go are social discretionary spending programs (education, etc.). So not only is the nation's budget being driven into the ground by the unbalanced demographic spread, but the programs helping the new generations of citizens are going to go even further downhill. Is it fair to cut S.S., Medicare, and Medicaid after the boomers have paid into it their whole lives? No. Is it necessary? Yes.


_______
Unrelated: Oh gog that picture... XD

[Nadaka]

I blame the military stealing all the budget.

Not the main issue. Defenses expenditures are greater than anything else-except Social Security and Medicare/Medicaid. The U.S. federal budget for the 2011 fiscal year alloted ~$700b (19%) to defense spending. ~$725b (20%) went to Social Security, and ~$835 (23%) went to Medicare/Medicaid. Both of the latter will only get worse as the babyboomers get into retirement age. I'm not about to argue that the defense budget isn't inflated, or that there isn't a lot of waste, but we have bigger monetary fish to fry.

I know that, I was talking about the budget bits that weren't preclaimed by SS & Medicare/Medicaid, or other things we can't really cut very easily like the debt.

Pretty much none of the budget is the kind of thing we can cut dramatically without damaging the country, even defense. We are about 40% over budget, even the 3 big items listed are each around 20%. What I would like to see happen to the military budget is cut it by 1% (of the military budget) per year every year until it is no greater than 10% of the the total budget. I would also set aside an amount starting at 1% of (the military budget) increasing by 1% of the military budget every year for 5 years to be held for emergency operational costs. That way expedient military responses do not become subject to right wing budgetary brinkmanship. That is actually a pretty mild draw down compared to what a lot of other liberals want.

What we really need is tax reform. And by tax reform I do not mean cutting loopholes (but only if we also cut the rate of taxation on the wealthiest Americans to remain revenue neutral). I mean cutting those loopholes and raising the tax rates on the wealthiest Americans (first, possibly everyone later). But really, balancing the budget would be priority 2 or 3, after recovery from the great recession and probably restoring civil liberties eroded in the last few decades. Though there is no reason that restoring civil liberties can't happen at the same time as balancing the budget and even economic recovery.

But I am a weirdo crazy dude.