Lord Blackadder
Mar 23, 05:50 PM
Here we have an article laying out the case for non intervention (http://english.aljazeera.net/indepth/opinion/2011/03/2011322135442593945.html) by a Princeton law professor (emeritus) published by Al Jazeera. A worthy read, and here are two exerpts I've commented on.
In effect, overall historical trends vindicate trust in the dynamics of self-determination, even if short-term disasters may and do occur, and similarly underscores the problematic character of intervention, even given the purest of motivations, which rarely, if ever, exists in world politics.
I find it hard to disagree with this, but watching Gaddafi strongarm his way back into authority is a very bitter pill to swallow - plus, historical trends also suggest that other nations rarely resist the temptation to intervene when they feel they have something to gain by intervention (be it increased political influence, territorial gains, economic interests etc). The current structure of the UN is unable to prevent this. Also, even without direct intervention, the process of self-determination does not exist in a total vaccum. I wonder how the author regards more passive measures such as official censure, economic sanctions, asset-freezing etc etc? Do he consider those to be intereferences to self-determination?
The Charter in Article 2(7) accepts the limitation on UN authority to intervene in matters "essentially within the domestic jurisdiction" of member states unless there is a genuine issue of international peace and security present, which there was not, even in the claim, which was supposedly motivated solely to protect the civilian population of Libya.
But such a claim was patently misleading and disingenuous as the obvious goals, as manifest from the scale and character of military actions taken, were minimally to protect the armed rebels from being defeated, and possibly destroyed, and maximally, to achieve a regime change resulting in a new governing leadership that was friendly to the West, including buying fully into its liberal economic geopolitical policy compass.
Using a slightly altered language, the UN Charter embedded a social contract with its membership that privileged the politics of self-determination and was heavily weighted against the politics of intervention.
Neither position is absolute, but what seems to have happened with respect to Libya is that intervention was privileged and self-determination cast aside.
It is an instance of normatively dubious practise trumping the legal/moral ethos of containing geopolitical discretion with binding rules governing the use of force and the duty of non-intervention.
We do not know yet what will happen in Libya, but we do know enough to oppose such a precedent that exhibits so many unfortunate characteristics.
It is time to restore the global social contract between territorial sovereign states and the organised international community, which not only corresponds with the outlawry of aggressive war but also reflect the movement of history in support of the soft power struggles of the non-Western peoples of the world.
I do agree with him that it would be foolish not to recognize that the ultimate goal here is - yet again - regime change regardless of what the official statements and resolutions state.
But while the author adheres to a legal argument, reality is more expansive in my mind. Isn't the UN, by it's very nature, interventionalist on some level? Also, at what point does outside influence affect "self-determination" to the point that it is no longer that? Surely there will always be outside influence - but when does it interfere with self-determination?
Of course, all of these considerations are irrelevant if you are against the concept of the UN or even foreign alliances, as a vocal minority of conservatives are in the US. I imagine they'd prefer to let the "free market" somehow decide what happens.
In effect, overall historical trends vindicate trust in the dynamics of self-determination, even if short-term disasters may and do occur, and similarly underscores the problematic character of intervention, even given the purest of motivations, which rarely, if ever, exists in world politics.
I find it hard to disagree with this, but watching Gaddafi strongarm his way back into authority is a very bitter pill to swallow - plus, historical trends also suggest that other nations rarely resist the temptation to intervene when they feel they have something to gain by intervention (be it increased political influence, territorial gains, economic interests etc). The current structure of the UN is unable to prevent this. Also, even without direct intervention, the process of self-determination does not exist in a total vaccum. I wonder how the author regards more passive measures such as official censure, economic sanctions, asset-freezing etc etc? Do he consider those to be intereferences to self-determination?
The Charter in Article 2(7) accepts the limitation on UN authority to intervene in matters "essentially within the domestic jurisdiction" of member states unless there is a genuine issue of international peace and security present, which there was not, even in the claim, which was supposedly motivated solely to protect the civilian population of Libya.
But such a claim was patently misleading and disingenuous as the obvious goals, as manifest from the scale and character of military actions taken, were minimally to protect the armed rebels from being defeated, and possibly destroyed, and maximally, to achieve a regime change resulting in a new governing leadership that was friendly to the West, including buying fully into its liberal economic geopolitical policy compass.
Using a slightly altered language, the UN Charter embedded a social contract with its membership that privileged the politics of self-determination and was heavily weighted against the politics of intervention.
Neither position is absolute, but what seems to have happened with respect to Libya is that intervention was privileged and self-determination cast aside.
It is an instance of normatively dubious practise trumping the legal/moral ethos of containing geopolitical discretion with binding rules governing the use of force and the duty of non-intervention.
We do not know yet what will happen in Libya, but we do know enough to oppose such a precedent that exhibits so many unfortunate characteristics.
It is time to restore the global social contract between territorial sovereign states and the organised international community, which not only corresponds with the outlawry of aggressive war but also reflect the movement of history in support of the soft power struggles of the non-Western peoples of the world.
I do agree with him that it would be foolish not to recognize that the ultimate goal here is - yet again - regime change regardless of what the official statements and resolutions state.
But while the author adheres to a legal argument, reality is more expansive in my mind. Isn't the UN, by it's very nature, interventionalist on some level? Also, at what point does outside influence affect "self-determination" to the point that it is no longer that? Surely there will always be outside influence - but when does it interfere with self-determination?
Of course, all of these considerations are irrelevant if you are against the concept of the UN or even foreign alliances, as a vocal minority of conservatives are in the US. I imagine they'd prefer to let the "free market" somehow decide what happens.
Chris Bangle
Aug 11, 11:43 AM
I agree at least since the iPod. As an investor, I hope Apple executes their plan well. The mobile phone business is getting crowded all of a sudden e.g. Best Buy, Disney, ESPN etc. I think it will come down to design e.g. Razr.
Cinch
I think the main reason the razr's such a sucess is beacuse it soo cheap. It so easy to get one free with your contract in the UK. Not only does it look alrite but its massivly affordable
Cinch
I think the main reason the razr's such a sucess is beacuse it soo cheap. It so easy to get one free with your contract in the UK. Not only does it look alrite but its massivly affordable
mdntcallr
Nov 28, 06:27 PM
it's ridiculous for Universal to even be thinking this. NONE of the money would get to artists or anything like that. it would just go to the company.
also. i dont pirate music.
alot of itunes people don't. we are the people actually paying for it. so screw that.
also. i dont pirate music.
alot of itunes people don't. we are the people actually paying for it. so screw that.
mc68k
Dec 3, 07:50 PM
well i havent posted a lot at MR recently. i'm a long time fan of the GT series. played GT1, 2, 4. 100% completed all i think (to the extent that you could ie GT4) . memorized every track, every braking point, how to ram cars, how to cut parts of the track off, how to handle all drivetrains, how to race with dpad or analog stick, how to variate braking/accel. never used a race wheel. i'm really a purist, i won't cheat unless i have to get to the front of the pack. i like to race low HP cars or poorer handling cars or compete with a lower HP car. i read all the descriptions. i scour the used car lot for rarities. i spot cars all the time in real life and like to see them well represented in the game. i would've bought a PS3 just for this game, but i ended up getting the PS3 sooner. ive been waiting for this game for years. i like to watch car shows on tv like the spike powerblock shows, 2 guys garage, gearz, top gear (new US one sucks), battle of the supercars, mecum auctions, barrett jackson auctions, my classic car, etc
pre ordered but didnt get any of the special packs. those are pretty cool and have some nice things but i'm more about the game itself. collectors editions of games to me are akin to special editions of DVDs where u don't really get much for the extra $ u are paying.
i havent raced online yet. i read in a review where you dont really get any rewards like points or $ for the RPG part of the game. im a bit hesitant too at the online play because the fact that every other game i've played online there's a ton of ppl who basically just play the game 12+ hrs a day and cheat, or talk **** or memorize everything. if the online thing is fun though i think that'll be the best lasting part of the game after all the solo A-spec and B-spec stuff is done.
right now i'm at L18 A and 8 B. id be WAY higher but have been putting more emphasis on 'leveling up' my social life rather than the game. :) plus itll always be there when i get home! playing on a 52" Sony W Bravia too so that's made the whole experience that much better. just bought/pimped out a F40 and won the ferrari race. a bit dissapointed to get a car i can buy from the dealership. a lot of cars you win you can buy, so i usually just end up selling those. bought a lot of used cars and used most, but that's been slowing down my progress too. ive been following the patterns of availiability in the used car section and some hardly ever come up, so ive been buying so i dont have to wait later on in the game.
in real life i bought a black BMW 2003 540i wagon m-sport. modded the intake to an AFE and the exhaust to a remus, probably due in part to this game and liking cars. now that they have ferrari/lambo i think i'll get better in telling the diff between the models when i see them here in this rich neighborhood where i work. saw a ferrari or lambo at lunch with 3 bunched low tailpipes. be fun to go home and look at the game and see if that car is available in the game!
anyways now that i know this thread exists i'll read the new posts (read all the old today) and chime in from time to time. maybe get some of your online names too so we can race!
pre ordered but didnt get any of the special packs. those are pretty cool and have some nice things but i'm more about the game itself. collectors editions of games to me are akin to special editions of DVDs where u don't really get much for the extra $ u are paying.
i havent raced online yet. i read in a review where you dont really get any rewards like points or $ for the RPG part of the game. im a bit hesitant too at the online play because the fact that every other game i've played online there's a ton of ppl who basically just play the game 12+ hrs a day and cheat, or talk **** or memorize everything. if the online thing is fun though i think that'll be the best lasting part of the game after all the solo A-spec and B-spec stuff is done.
right now i'm at L18 A and 8 B. id be WAY higher but have been putting more emphasis on 'leveling up' my social life rather than the game. :) plus itll always be there when i get home! playing on a 52" Sony W Bravia too so that's made the whole experience that much better. just bought/pimped out a F40 and won the ferrari race. a bit dissapointed to get a car i can buy from the dealership. a lot of cars you win you can buy, so i usually just end up selling those. bought a lot of used cars and used most, but that's been slowing down my progress too. ive been following the patterns of availiability in the used car section and some hardly ever come up, so ive been buying so i dont have to wait later on in the game.
in real life i bought a black BMW 2003 540i wagon m-sport. modded the intake to an AFE and the exhaust to a remus, probably due in part to this game and liking cars. now that they have ferrari/lambo i think i'll get better in telling the diff between the models when i see them here in this rich neighborhood where i work. saw a ferrari or lambo at lunch with 3 bunched low tailpipes. be fun to go home and look at the game and see if that car is available in the game!
anyways now that i know this thread exists i'll read the new posts (read all the old today) and chime in from time to time. maybe get some of your online names too so we can race!
PhantomPumpkin
Apr 27, 10:24 AM
Laugh all you want, but they are being sensible. If the media hype gets too great, they act, as they should.
I have no antenna issue with my iPhone 4, and I don't use a case or a bumper. I understand what Apple meant by calling it a non-issue.
Apple did not track you, it sent anonymized cell tower location information back to itself. But there was a bug that kept a locally-stored database file from being culled from all but the most recent data. So they will now provide an update to fix that bug.
But if you want to pretend that Apple is in denial mode, and use exclamation points as if your hair were on fire, go right ahead. You nicely prove the point I was just making with samcraig.
Don't you just love it? Apple identifies an potential issue, and does something to remedy it, and they get yelled at for doing so. If they do nothing, they get yelled at for doing nothing.
Catch 22.
I have no antenna issue with my iPhone 4, and I don't use a case or a bumper. I understand what Apple meant by calling it a non-issue.
Apple did not track you, it sent anonymized cell tower location information back to itself. But there was a bug that kept a locally-stored database file from being culled from all but the most recent data. So they will now provide an update to fix that bug.
But if you want to pretend that Apple is in denial mode, and use exclamation points as if your hair were on fire, go right ahead. You nicely prove the point I was just making with samcraig.
Don't you just love it? Apple identifies an potential issue, and does something to remedy it, and they get yelled at for doing so. If they do nothing, they get yelled at for doing nothing.
Catch 22.
sierra oscar
Sep 19, 08:53 AM
It's not quite 0700 Cupertino time - so maybe? :)
iMrNiceGuy0023
Jun 15, 10:34 AM
are you able to reserve more than one phone on a family plan??
digitalbiker
Aug 25, 03:31 PM
Over the years I have bought a lot of computers for my business from a lot of different venders. To be honest Apple hardware support has never impressed me! :mad: I have actually had much better support from Dell than from Apple.
As far as .Mac goes it is one of the most poorly supported systems I have ever used in my life. They have a lousey limited faq sheet, common problems, email support is pitiful, and they don't take voice support. .Mac is a joke for $100.00 a year.
In general Apple's entire help system in OS X sucks. Searchs within the context of an application gives you all kinds of crap from every application on the system. Also there is no depth to the system. If your problem isn't the most elementary problem possible (99% of which you can figure out yourself) then it won't be in any of the help files.
As far as .Mac goes it is one of the most poorly supported systems I have ever used in my life. They have a lousey limited faq sheet, common problems, email support is pitiful, and they don't take voice support. .Mac is a joke for $100.00 a year.
In general Apple's entire help system in OS X sucks. Searchs within the context of an application gives you all kinds of crap from every application on the system. Also there is no depth to the system. If your problem isn't the most elementary problem possible (99% of which you can figure out yourself) then it won't be in any of the help files.
tripjammer
Apr 11, 01:04 PM
You guys really believe this? We all know the Iphone 5 will basically have the guts of the Ipad 2...so all the componets are ready...it will be out this summer. These rumors are just to keep Android and Microsoft not knowing.
Ipad in the spring
Iphone in the summer
Itouch\AppleTV\IPODs in the fall
Its like that and it will always be...it works for apple.
Ipad in the spring
Iphone in the summer
Itouch\AppleTV\IPODs in the fall
Its like that and it will always be...it works for apple.
freeny
Jul 20, 08:18 AM
I wonder what they're going to call them, Quad sounds cool but "Octa or Octo" just sounds a bit silly.
MacPro8?
The Mactopus??
Ive already trademarked "OctoCore" and "CoreOcto";)
Just keep saying it to yourself. After about the 12th time it just starts rolling off your tongue...
MacPro8?
The Mactopus??
Ive already trademarked "OctoCore" and "CoreOcto";)
Just keep saying it to yourself. After about the 12th time it just starts rolling off your tongue...
AppliedVisual
Oct 22, 03:14 PM
I heard Leo Laporte talking about this on his KFI podcast... exciting... one question... how many softwares take advantage of multi cores? I understand that the OS can deal with it for multi tasking, but how many programs multi thread?
DD
Unfortunately not many multithreaded apps - yet. For a long time most of the multi-threaded apps were just a select few pro level things. 3D/Visualization software, CAD, database systems, etc.. Those of us who had multiprocessor systems bought them because we had a specific software in mind or group of software applications that could take advantage of multiple processors. As current CPU manufacturing processes started hitting a wall right around the 3GHz mark, chip makers started to transition to multiple CPU cores to boost power - makes sense. Software developers have been lazy for years, just riding the wave of ever-increasing MHz. Now the multi-core CPUs are here and the software is behind as many applications need to have serious re-writes done in order to take advantage of multiple processors. Intel tried to get a jump on this with their HT (Hyper Threading) implementation that essentially simulated dual-cores on a CPU by way of two virtual CPUs. Software developers didn't exactly jump on this and warm up to it. But I also don't think the software industry truly believed that CPUs would go multi-core on a mass scale so fast... Intel and AMD both said they would, don't know why the software industry doubted. Intel and AMD are uncommonly good about telling the truth about upcoming products. Both will be shipping quad-core CPU offerings by year's end.
DD
Unfortunately not many multithreaded apps - yet. For a long time most of the multi-threaded apps were just a select few pro level things. 3D/Visualization software, CAD, database systems, etc.. Those of us who had multiprocessor systems bought them because we had a specific software in mind or group of software applications that could take advantage of multiple processors. As current CPU manufacturing processes started hitting a wall right around the 3GHz mark, chip makers started to transition to multiple CPU cores to boost power - makes sense. Software developers have been lazy for years, just riding the wave of ever-increasing MHz. Now the multi-core CPUs are here and the software is behind as many applications need to have serious re-writes done in order to take advantage of multiple processors. Intel tried to get a jump on this with their HT (Hyper Threading) implementation that essentially simulated dual-cores on a CPU by way of two virtual CPUs. Software developers didn't exactly jump on this and warm up to it. But I also don't think the software industry truly believed that CPUs would go multi-core on a mass scale so fast... Intel and AMD both said they would, don't know why the software industry doubted. Intel and AMD are uncommonly good about telling the truth about upcoming products. Both will be shipping quad-core CPU offerings by year's end.
Benjy91
Mar 22, 01:07 PM
I love the way the Playbook handles Multi-tasking, and how the OS looks. But not enough to make me switch.
GenesisST
Mar 31, 02:53 PM
Oh, then I can take the Honeycomb source code and do whatever I want with it?
Oh, wait, I can't? Then how doesn't this make Android 'closed source'?
At least with Gingerbread (2.3), the source code wasn't available until it was officially released (on android.git.kernel.org). A few days after the release of Gingerbread, I could see the gingerbread branch.
Honeycomb is still not released as far as I know. When it's released and the code is not available, then we can talk.
Until then, it like a G5 powerbook :-D
Oh, wait, I can't? Then how doesn't this make Android 'closed source'?
At least with Gingerbread (2.3), the source code wasn't available until it was officially released (on android.git.kernel.org). A few days after the release of Gingerbread, I could see the gingerbread branch.
Honeycomb is still not released as far as I know. When it's released and the code is not available, then we can talk.
Until then, it like a G5 powerbook :-D
KT Walrus
Apr 7, 10:58 PM
I know some Apple Stores hold back iPad 2 stock for "special customers". I was talking to a retired school teacher who had a contact at an Apple Store and she said she got her iPad 2 by having her contact hold one for her when he could. She got hers a few days after they first went on sale when her contact called and all she had to do was pick it up at her convenience.
Best Buy employees aren't the only ones setting aside stock of iPad 2s. It isn't about first come first served, but who you know.
Best Buy employees aren't the only ones setting aside stock of iPad 2s. It isn't about first come first served, but who you know.
Midirose
Nov 28, 10:56 PM
Here is another little tid bit about Universal Music you may not be aware of. The original MP3.com was bought out by Universal Music a few years back. Prior to Universal, MP3.com was privately owned and had music from thousands of indie artist from around the world and no major label artist. You could listen to the artist music for free, but you could also purchase their music for download or actual CD. There was a lot of really awful music there but there was a lot of very good music there also. Some unsigned artist sold thousands of CD around the world like my band. After Universal bought MP3.com they destroyed the catalog even though the original owner offered to purchase it. Economics would lead me to think that Universal believed that the millions of indie songs sold on MP3.com was a direct threat to them not meeting their year over year projections, and it was. Get rid of the competition and get money for nothing.........sounds like big business trying to please their share holders. It is no wonder that our culture is going to hel#, when fair play and morals give way to profits. And yes most labels are pimps and you know who their hoes are.......our favorite artists. I hope Apple does not cave to this type of extortion!!!
zacman
Apr 6, 04:05 PM
Yeah, good luck to Android tablets without carrier BOGO deals, Apple carrier exclusivity, and greater retail distribution than Apple. None of these factors apply in the tablet market.
That's why Apple lost around 30% marketshare in less than two months when the Galaxy tab was released? You know: That's the tablet that runs an outdated phone OS and not even a tablet OS...
That's why Apple lost around 30% marketshare in less than two months when the Galaxy tab was released? You know: That's the tablet that runs an outdated phone OS and not even a tablet OS...
Chris Bangle
Aug 11, 11:43 AM
I agree at least since the iPod. As an investor, I hope Apple executes their plan well. The mobile phone business is getting crowded all of a sudden e.g. Best Buy, Disney, ESPN etc. I think it will come down to design e.g. Razr.
Cinch
I think the main reason the razr's such a sucess is beacuse it soo cheap. It so easy to get one free with your contract in the UK. Not only does it look alrite but its massivly affordable
Cinch
I think the main reason the razr's such a sucess is beacuse it soo cheap. It so easy to get one free with your contract in the UK. Not only does it look alrite but its massivly affordable
janstett
Sep 16, 10:10 AM
Any description of the history of NT that doesn't say "Mica" and "Prism" is missing some major details ;) !
Well, come on! I wrote a synopsis that was already too lengthy. I felt it sufficient to say that Dave Cutler's life at DEC gave him OS Guru status and left it at that. I didn't mention Gordon Letwin either. On either point it's rather like mentioning Brian Kernighan and Rob Pike in a history of OSX -- technically accurate but of marginal relevance.
Well, come on! I wrote a synopsis that was already too lengthy. I felt it sufficient to say that Dave Cutler's life at DEC gave him OS Guru status and left it at that. I didn't mention Gordon Letwin either. On either point it's rather like mentioning Brian Kernighan and Rob Pike in a history of OSX -- technically accurate but of marginal relevance.
NoNothing
Mar 31, 04:07 PM
How is it biting them in the ass? Android is the fastest growing OS with a larger share than IOS. I think it's been a very succesfull strategy.
Only if you do not add products like the iPad and the iPod Touch. In other words, if you throw out 50% of the iOS products.
Only if you do not add products like the iPad and the iPod Touch. In other words, if you throw out 50% of the iOS products.
bedifferent
Apr 27, 11:13 AM
Maybe you'd prefer discourse where everyone agreed and had the same opinion as you. Maybe some white fluffy bunnies too? ;) I kid.
At the end of the day - an issue was indentified. Apple is responding. Arguing whether or not there is an issue is silly. Arguing whether or not Apple is responding is silly.
That's not addressed to you - but everyone at this point
Civil discourse is great, arguing over silly semantics on an issue when all the facts have not been fully presented seems to be "putting the cart before the horse."
As they say, opinions are like a**holes, everyone has em and they all stink ;)
At the end of the day - an issue was indentified. Apple is responding. Arguing whether or not there is an issue is silly. Arguing whether or not Apple is responding is silly.
That's not addressed to you - but everyone at this point
Civil discourse is great, arguing over silly semantics on an issue when all the facts have not been fully presented seems to be "putting the cart before the horse."
As they say, opinions are like a**holes, everyone has em and they all stink ;)
Mac-key
Apr 6, 09:25 AM
BRING IT!
Anxiously waiting to see what's coming!
Anxiously waiting to see what's coming!
claus1225
Mar 31, 05:44 PM
I personally don't believe in "open source code". Seriously, what is the % of population who can understand and take the time to tweak the source code for an OS?
portishead
Apr 12, 01:05 PM
Good for you ;)
Used to be like that for me but on the projects I work on everybody's gone crazy over DSLRs so I'm stuck with converting.
I know. I'm lucky that I don't have to deal with that. That's what I mean by different people, different workflows. If I had to work with the DSLR workflow, it would drive me crazy. Dealing with source files, converting, proxies, offline, online.
One thing I have never had to deal with in FCP is having an offline/online workflow. It's saved me a lot of headaches I used to have to deal with in Avid. Not that Avid was bad, but capturing once is always easier than twice.
Used to be like that for me but on the projects I work on everybody's gone crazy over DSLRs so I'm stuck with converting.
I know. I'm lucky that I don't have to deal with that. That's what I mean by different people, different workflows. If I had to work with the DSLR workflow, it would drive me crazy. Dealing with source files, converting, proxies, offline, online.
One thing I have never had to deal with in FCP is having an offline/online workflow. It's saved me a lot of headaches I used to have to deal with in Avid. Not that Avid was bad, but capturing once is always easier than twice.
bdkennedy1
Aug 7, 04:09 PM
heh... they give MS so much crap for photocopying, but if anything, this is more or less taking a page out of MS's book with System Restore. Granted, it looks like it will be better, but still, MS had this kind of thing first.
I wouldn't say this was copying. A way to backup and restore your files is just common sense. Even if Microsoft didn't have a restore feature, Apple would have come up with it anyway.
I wouldn't say this was copying. A way to backup and restore your files is just common sense. Even if Microsoft didn't have a restore feature, Apple would have come up with it anyway.
No comments:
Post a Comment