| Monday
September 2, 2002 Labor Day USA
Roland sends this, which continues a
discussion from last week:
Subject: More good travel news.
Idiots.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/5/26910.html
We cannot entirely insure safety. We
particularly cannot insure the safety of each airplane and traveler.
Someone sufficiently determined and resigned to certain death will be able
to get a bomb capable of destroying an airplane aboard that airplane, and
set it off. But then that's true of airport waiting lines, busses, very
likely speeding trains. The means to kill a dozen to a hundred people is
easily obtained, and nothing we can do will change that.
We can prevent airplanes from being
hijacked and used as cruise missiles, but that's pretty simple too.
Secure the cabin, and arm the pilots, and make certain that no threat will
cause the pilot to surrender control of the airplane.
We endure 50,000 and more automobile
fatalities each year. This Labor Day weekend could easily see half
as many people dead on the highways as were killed on 9-11 in the Arab
attack on the United States. We could prevent all that by shutting down
the highways, but we don't do it. We can prevent all air casualties by
shutting down the airlines -- and that we seem to be working toward.
Dear dr. Pournelle,
I know the asteroid hype is pretty well over, but
after reading an item about using a sort of airbag to change an asteroids
path the following thought occured to me: "It may miss Earth, but
what if it hits the moon?" An asteroid hitting the moon and maybe
changing its orbit should at least have some effect on tides I think...
Patrick de Haan
You'd think so, but if you run the
numbers you'll find that anything that would have a significant effect on
the Moon's mass or orbital distance would REALLY mess things up. Of course
the Moon has been hit with some BIG stuff, as you can see by looking at it
with good binoculars...
On languages:
I haven't been bothering you about APL for more than
a decade, and I think it's time again. Ken Iverson's latest language,
called j, does not require the funny APL characters, but is even more
powerful than APLs. You can download it for free from http://www.jsoftware.com/.
Windows, Mac, and Unix versions are available. The package includes an
extensive tutorial and numerous examples, including the game of Pousse.
Iverson's team won the Judges' Prize in a programming contest with their
111-line program. It wasn't the best player in the tournament, but it was
by far the most elegant entry.
This version can do graphics, UIs, and all sorts of
other things that APLs didn't do when they were text-only math languages.
-- Edward Cherlin Generalist "A knot! Oh, do let me help to undo
it!" --Alice in Wonderland
I know a lot of people who purport
to be APL enthusiasts, but I never saw them do much with it. The exception
was Marvin Minsky who could use it to do miracles. He'd look blank, then
suddenly type a line of incomprehensible code at a furious pace, and
Voila! there would be the answer. But he is a rare exception...
===
I have the
following from someone for whom I have some respect. I do not endorse what
is said here: I have not looked into the matter at all. Ordinarily I
wouldn't post something without looking into it, but if I don't do it now
I never will. If anyone is impelled to go look, I would appreciate a
report.
URL - http://emperors-clothes.com/Film/judge.htm
A People Have Been Slandered JUDGMENT!
[ Order information below ]
In 1992 the world was shocked by pictures of a
supposed Bosnian Serb death camp.
The photos were distributed to newspapers and TV by
ITN, the British news station. The pictures were a fraud. This is proved
in the movie, 'JUDGMENT!'
The most famous picture showed an emaciated man,
naked to the waist. It looked as if he were imprisoned behind a barbed
wire fence. As it turns out, the fence was almost all chicken wire and the
man was part of a group on the outside, talking to ITN reporters inside an
enclosure.
On August 6th, 1992, twenty minutes after the
doctored photos were shown on TV, George Bush, Sr., held a press
conference. With the world horrified by what they thought they had seen,
Bush demanded:
"tighten[ing] economic sanctions on Serbia so
that all understand that there is a real price to be paid for the Serbian
government's continued aggression."
On the day the ITN people filmed in Bosnia, a crew
from Serbian Television (RTS) accompanied them. They filmed right beside
the ITN people, sometimes even mistakenly filming them. Using this almost
identical footage, 'JUDGMENT!' shows, step by step, how a humanitarian
refugee center (at Trnopolje) and a humanely run detention center (at
Omarska) were made to look like cruel concentration camps. The film
includes interviews with Muslims and the Serb commander at Omarska. These
interviews suggest that, absent outside interference, there never would
have been a war in Bosnia. ITN never broadcast the interviews.
It is ironic that by slandering the Serbian people
and their moderate Muslim allies, British ITN aided the Islamist Bosnian
government. For that government was based on fanaticism. It worked closely
with Islamist terrorists like Osama bin Laden.
If after viewing 'JUDGMENT!' you feel we are not
telling the truth, we will refund your payment.
As I said above, I do not endorse
this, and I have not examined it; I did get the email from someone for
whom I have some respect. And as invited, there is a comment below
from a reader who looked into it.
And PDA
Information from Dr. Mark Huth:
Jerry,
I've mentioned this before and it had some excellent
press several years ago. I use a program called Zoot which is written and
supported by one man, Tom Davis. It is stunningly good at gathering
organizing, and synthesizing information. Tom has made, by my count, about
200 major improvements in the product in the last 4 years. One reviewer
http://www.zootsoftware.com/News/Press/Hemispheres.htm says that calling
Zoot a personal information manager is like calling the QE2 a boat. I'll
say that you can do almost anything in it. It is sensational software. Bit
of a learning curve, but I can't imagine that you wouldn't rave about it,
too. In my view it is all that is good in computer software.
James Fallows writes about it: Zoot is
designed to solve two problems: how to take in data randomly and rapidly
from many sources - the Web, e-mail, your own documents - and get it into
a usable form; and how to manage the increase in sheer volume of data,
which raises questions about archives, portability, search speed and so
on. He deals with the first problem through a combination of clever ad-hoc
search routines and a powerful toolkit for building
artificial-intelligence rules, so the data comes back to you organized.
His solution to the second issue is to break large data chunks (think of a
gargantuan Outlook PST file) into small, independent components, tied
together with a browser-like viewer that can address an unlimited number
of data sources simultaneously. Although Zoot handles data from virtually
any program or source, several features are designed to complement
Outlook, so e-mail and "task" items will be far easier to
search, organize, archive and to generally make sense of.
www.zootsoftware.com
a few reviews at:
http://www.zootsoftware.com/News/Press/Hemispheres.htm
http://www.zootsoftware.com/News/Press/Jimbo.htm
http://www.theatlantic.com/issues/97aug/zoot.htm
I have heard of this, and I have
neglected to look into it, and I hope to remedy that. Thanks!
And we have
this imbecility:
Subject: Bridge Player Is Stripped Of
Medal For Refusing Drug http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v02.n1632.a09.html
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/
Pubdate: Mon, 02 Sep 2002 BRIDGE PLAYER IS STRIPPED OF MEDAL FOR REFUSING
DRUG TEST Author: Patrick Jourdain, Bridge Correspondent, in Montreal The
world of bridge was in uproar yesterday after a drug scandal at the world
open championships in Montreal. Disa Eythorsdottir, an American
professional, was stripped of her silver medal for refusing to take a drug
test. The World Bridge Federation was forced to hold an unprecedented
emergency meeting to determine how to discipline her. Random drug testing
for bridge players at world championships was introduced in January 2000 as
part of the WBF campaign for bridge to become an Olympic sport. Four US team
members were chosen for the tests but Eythorsdottir, who is orginally from
Iceland, refused. Close to tears, she said "They have taken everything,
my medal, my name. I am on a diet drug connected with a back condition. I
asked the authorities whether the drug was on the banned list and they did
not know." She added: "The drug is on prescription but I did not
obtain a certificate to cover it." There are no prohibited
performance-enhancing drugs for bridge, so the WBF relies on the list of
banned substances supplied by the International Olympic Committee. Jose
Damiani, WBF president, said: "Since we introduced random testing two
players have failed, but both so narrowly that we did not publish the names,
informing only the player and their federation of the problem. He added:
"However, she [Eythorsdottir] refused the test. She is deemed to have
failed the test. Her medal has been removed and her name has been referred
to her federation." Eythorsdottir, who is well-known in the bridge
world, is from Iceland but married an American, Curtis Cheek, and is
eligible to represent the US. She had to stand aside as her five team-mates
received their medals. The WBF suffered another blow when Mr Damiani said
that the IOC programme commission was advising against accepting bridge.
Copyright: 2002 Telegraph Group Limited
After all, rules are rules, and
rules must be obeyed.
What the classical Greeks would have
thought of Olympic Bridge I don't know. The Olympiads were a celebration
and not heavy on team sports at all. If we must have team sports I have
always thought we ought to have practical events, like two men carrying to
4 x 8 sheets of plywood through a construction site with narrow turns;
hockey and baseball aren't what I think of as Olympic events. And bridge
certainly isn't. But what in the world is to be made of this?
But we were born free. So were
Icelanders.
And on another front:
From http://www.strategypage.com/fyeo/
qndguide/default.asp?target=BALKANS.HTM
Turkish Generals Threaten Islamic Fundamentalists
August 28, 2002; Pay attention to this, because they
mean it. The Turkish Army issued a statement vowing to keep true to its
Kemalist roots. The Turkish Army intends to fight Islamism. It will also
continue to oppose Kurdish separatism. An AFP report included this quote
from retiring Chief of Staff General Huseyin Kivrikoglu: "Everybody
must know that the Turkish armed forces will not tolerate the use of the
opportunities of democracy by the enemies of the system as a means to
dynamite the basic principles of our state...Even though significant
progress has been achieved in this field, the separatist and reactionary
threat is potentially continuing. All measures should be taken against the
continuation of the separatist and reactionary threats under the masks of
politicization." Note the vocabulary. The Turkish military prefers to
refer to Islamism as "reactionary," which it is. Is this a
"coup threat" if an Islamist party were to take power in Ankara
(even in a democratic election) and begin to dismantle Turkey's secular
institutions? Yes, it most certainly is. (Austin Bay)
Periodically there is an attempt to
restore Islamic government in Turkey. Periodically the Army comes out of
barracks and hangs those who try it. Then it goes back to barracks: a form
of military rule unlike any I know of in history, where the army rules but
does not reign; and doesn't govern either.
We have a web
page on the discussion of new Infantry weapons and tactics. This
letter arrived, and has been posted
there, with my reply. I expect it to reopen the discussion.
I don't know how old the articles you have on
"Queen of War" are, so I may be replying to a long dead topic. I
have to voice my concern though.
First off, The man who spoke about China having the
right idea:
China has the wrong Idea, they've had the wrong Idea
for a long time. I'm only fifteen years old, and I know about the battle
for Chosin. After the engagement, I think about six Chinese DIVISIONS were
completely destroyed, with about another five with terrible losses. All of
this done by ONE MARINE Division, surrounded, using the problematic M1
Carbine (Which was prone to jamming or misfiring in cold weather, mind
you). At some points the Marines were reduced to throwing Rocks. They also
carried out a manuever called "Final Protective Fire". That
alone killed tons of Chinese, and sometimes had some American Fratricide,
but the Chinese paid for every inch they gained, even though they ended up
losing.
Second:
Computers on the battlefield, at least for the time
being is a bad idea. They are, for one, too cumbersome (Eg. Land Warrior),
and require to much power. The last thing you need is Delta Force or Navy
SEALS fifty miles behind enemy territory trying to carry out some
high-stakes, classified mission, and get cut to ribbons because thier
batteries run out...
The Weapons that have been developed by companies
such as HK, and Colt as a compromise are flops. The G11? The gun shoots a
cartridge as wide as a BB or Pellet. No matter how fast it goes, like we
learned with the M16, it's going to take more than one shot to knock them
down, and in some times you don't have the time or ammo to plug everyone
five to ten times.
The G36 has the right idea, use a proven (though not
the most capable) cartridge in a streamlined package, with a integrated
scope. Allows the basic rifleman, if using the rifle correctly, to become
a marksman or even expert with his weapon. The lightweight contruction,
and pure ergonomics give it a rather nice appeal to it as well.
I wonder what ever happened to the 7.62mm Cartridge
as a mainstay. It would be much simpler if you could make a GPMG, much
like the M249 SAW, which would have the ability to use magazines from
rifles of the same caliber. You can't do that now because the GPMG and the
M16 don't fire the same cartridge. That would be cheaper, and more useful.
The 7.62mm Cartridge is also very hard to stop, even by today's standards.
The only thing that will stop it is a SPECTRASHEILD (R) Plate, which
weighs a good 5-7 pounds, on top of a ballistic vest. The entire thing
would be around 20 Pounds.
Thrid:
Gallmeier has it wrong as well. Twenty Millimeter
fragmentation from an OICW grenade would be more than enough to be
effective in combat. The goal is to wound someone, not kill them. Why? If
you take Enemy #1's legs off, Enemy #2 and in most cases, an Enemy #3 will
come to his aid, and try to drag him off to thier Aid Station, if such a
thing exists (Obviously Somolia would not have such a facility),
regardless, his freinds would carry them off. THEN you do the same to
them, aiming for shots that will take the out of the battle, but keep
thier little hearts-a-thumping. I'm not saying it's not wise to kill them,
it is, but it would be adventageous to incapacitate all the men you can
with the least trouble.
They had no problem hosing them down with Machine
guns and chainguns at hamburger hill. It was a mess, but look who was
fighting...
And I WOULD LIKE TO SEE YOU FIRE A .50 Caliber
Rifle! Unless you alter the cartridge, or have really good recoil
mitigation, it's going to beat the hell out of you. Ammunition will be
heavy as a damned mule, and It will be HEAVY overall, because the gun will
have to be pretty big. I think your nuts. .50 Caliber? I wouldn't want to
hump that on a ten mile march.
Stealth Gliders? Are you sure you're in the right
universe, pal?
1.5 Pound Shaped Charge Warhead being Small? C4,
Comp B, etc, etc are all high yeild explosives. If you were even close,
Which the engagements of tomorrow will be, we're not fighting in open
desert with ten miles of nothing in any direction. Close Combat, Close
Contact. 1.5 Pounds of HE would be suicide.
*Ahem*, Fragmentation more penetrative than 7.62
NATO Ball? You're refering to the fact they'd have nifty Ballistic Vests.
Here are the areas, VITAL Areas, that are still vunerable:
Face! Neck! Brachial Artery Femoral Artery Groin
Legs Knees Etc. Etc.
Wounding either of those Arteries can bleed you out
real quick-like, about two minutes...
My Final point:
High Tech Weapons are dreamy at best. Scientists and
military men alike want to slap gizmos and gadgets onto guns, forgetting
that the gun will be thrown, tossed, dropped, sometimes hit with gunfire,
be dropped in mud, have to operate in adverse conditions: wet, dry, hot,
cold, and everything inbetween. LCD screens can fog up, break, run out of
batteries. Batteries run out! When it comes down to close combat, which is
the combat of tomorrow, it doesn't matter how many microchips your
sighting system has, how how far off you can shoot targets with
precision...
What matters is that your gun is light, accurate at
close and intermediate ranges, easy to weild and maneuver at close ranges
(Which points more towards "Bullpup" Style Weapons, which are
Ambedextrious, EG F2000) and are SIMPLE AS POSSIBLE. Why do you think half
the world uses old AK-47's and AK-47 Knock-offs? They are HORRIBLY
reliable! They can be counted on in any situation. You can throw them in
dirt and mud, they will fire whether it be hot, cold, or wet. High Tech
Weapons can't, or would fail or break...
I am fortunate enough to have taken apart the M14,
and Simonov SKS-45 Carbine. Two reliable weapons, though they are aging,
they break down into seven and five parts, respectively for the average
feild stripping. High tech guns would break down into nine or higher. It
would be a shame to have your gun jam in the middle of a firefight (EG
M-16) and have to take a complicated gun with multiple peices apart, and
clean them.
Final Word: Simple = Better. High-Tech = Fiction,
and CRAP on the battlefield.
Lupton Daniel (who calls
himself, perhaps significantly, thanatos in his mail address)
_
If you are in fact only 15 years old, you are a
living refutation to the charge that no one gets a decent education or
learns to write in the United States. I'll reserve comments for later. Discussion
continues below.
TOP
CURRENT
VIEW |
CLICK HERE for
a Special Request. 
