New York Times Forums
The New York Times

Home
Job Market
Real Estate
Automobiles
News
International
National
Washington
Business
Technology
Science
Health
Sports
New York Region
Education
Weather
Obituaries
NYT Front Page
Corrections
Opinion
Editorials/Op-Ed
Readers' Opinions


Features
Arts
Books
Movies
Travel
Dining & Wine
Home & Garden
Fashion & Style
Crossword/Games
Cartoons
Magazine
Week in Review
Multimedia
College
Learning Network
Services
Archive
Classifieds
Book a Trip
Personals
Theater Tickets
Premium Products
NYT Store
NYT Mobile
E-Cards & More
About NYTDigital
Jobs at NYTDigital
Online Media Kit
Our Advertisers
Member_Center
Your Profile
E-Mail Preferences
News Tracker
Premium Account
Site Help
Privacy Policy
Newspaper
Home Delivery
Customer Service
Electronic Edition
Media Kit
Community Affairs
Text Version
TipsGo to Advanced Search
Search Options divide
go to Member Center Log Out
  

 [F] New York Times on the Web Forums  / Science  /

    Missile Defense

Technology has always found its greatest consumer in a nation's war and defense efforts. Since the last attempts at a "Star Wars" defense system, has technology changed considerably enough to make the latest Missile Defense initiatives more successful? Can such an application of science be successful? Is a militarized space inevitable, necessary or impossible?

Read Debates, a new Web-only feature culled from Readers' Opinions, published every Thursday.


Earliest Messages Previous Messages Recent Messages Outline (16746 previous messages)

cantabb - 01:14pm Nov 7, 2003 EST (# 16747 of 16750)

rshow55 - 12:42pm Nov 7, 2003 EST (# 16739 of 16741)

Cantabb: What else do you think has been happening in exchanges here ?

rshow55: In decision making - one needs nonoscillatory answers under many circumstances for stability.

We're debating here, NOT "deciding" anything.

Here is a basic logical point. If I had a signed piece of paper from the NYT saying that Cantabb either was or was not a NYT employee - I could accomodate to either answer - whether I happened to believe it or not.

TRY this "basic logical point" on NYT.

You had my answer, and you still demanded it over and over again. That is poster harassment, as far as I'm concerned.

Your obsession is NOT my problem.

Stably.With oscillation of answers - many sociotechnical systems cannot be built stably.

That's a very basic fact - and if some people know it - many, many people (including diplomats ) do not.

Makes NO sense whatsoever. But few thing you say, do.

In the usages of this board, Cantabb acts both as a NYT employee - and denies that he is.

You're calling me a liar ?

Where is the evidence ? I expect it in your NEXT post !

rshow55 - 12:46pm Nov 7, 2003 EST (# 16740 of 16741)

Often, for administrative purposes, you need clear answers - and sometimes fictions will do. But for stability under complicated circumstances, with many unforseeable problems to be expected - right answers are very, very important.

Fuzzy generalities. Makes NO sense.

The struggles that the NYT is having making a simple agreement with me illustrates just how messed up our dealmaking procedures - including diplomatic procedures - have come to be - and how messed up in them the NYT now is.

Actually, all the "struggles" seem ONLY on YOUR part. NYT showed you the door, and didn't even want to meet you. Didn't they ?

We have a mess - and this thread is exemplary.

And, YOU created most of it, along with lchic ! And did this over a LONG time -- totally unchecked by NYT moderators.

We need to clean some things up.

With your interest in STILL doing the very same that created the mess -- continued abuse of forum privileges -- you're in NO position to "clean" anything up -- AND, in its LAST week !

In my particular case - I'm insisting that it happen - one way or another - to the extent that I have power to see that it is clarified. I'll be responsible for what I do - but I'm intending to hold other people responsible, too. Even if they work for the sainted New York Times.

You may be "insisting," but you see any body listening ? We ARE responsible for what we do. And, NYT people seem to have just realized what YOU have done.

rshow55 - 12:48pm Nov 7, 2003 EST (# 16741 of 16741)

If things are to be effectively hidden - without untoward troubles, or dishonesty - the people involved need to agree on enough details for it to happen.

I do not owe the New York Times, or any of its people, any agreement of confidentiality, either express or implied - unless we talk about it and get the matter clear.

But NO body at NYT wants to meet you, as you say. The letters you posted lays it out clearly.

rshow55 - 01:15pm Nov 7, 2003 EST (# 16748 of 16750)
Can we do a better job of finding truth? YES. Click "rshow55" for some things Lchic and I have done and worked for on this thread.

Bluestar23 , are you a legitimate representative of The New York Times - and do responsible NYT officers know who you are - and approve of your postings?

Yes or no ?

If I could have that simple issue determined - in writing - from a responsible member of the "control group" of the New York Times Company - much would clarify.

It would be progress for me, whichever determination was given.

Though the answer would make a difference.

If the answer is no, why should I have the tiniest concern for what you tell me?

If the answer is yes, how can The New York Times Company not be responsible for what you've said and done in their name ?

rshow55 - 01:16pm Nov 7, 2003 EST (# 16749 of 16750)
Can we do a better job of finding truth? YES. Click "rshow55" for some things Lchic and I have done and worked for on this thread.

Cantabb , I have no particular reason to believe your word - especially if you're in a situation where, to stay employed, you may have to lie.

Still, it makes sense to ask.

Cantabb, are you a legitimate representative of The New York Times - and do responsible NYT officers know who you are - and approve of your postings?

Yes or no ?

If I could have that simple issue determined - in writing - from a responsible member of the "control group" of the New York Times Company - much would clarify.

It would be progress for me, whichever determination was given.

Though the answer would make a difference.

If the answer is no, why should I have the tiniest concern for what you tell me?

If the answer is yes, how can The New York Times Company not be responsible for what you've said and done in their name ?

More Messages Recent Messages (1 following message)

 Read Subscriptions  Subscribe  Search  Post Message
 Your Preferences

 [F] New York Times on the Web Forums  / Science  / Missile Defense