Slashdot Mirror


Are Geeks in Saudi Arabia Just Like Us?

Robin 'Roblimo' Miller (of NewsForge and sometimes Slashdot) spent five days in Saudi Arabia's capital, Riyadh, meeting with local Linux advocates and users, and wrote five articles while he was there. The article titles are Saudi Arabia: Linux advocates in white robes, Saudi Space Institute techies love their new Linux computer, Meet Saudi Arabia's most famous computer expert, Saudi open source conference opens minds, and Linux and open source opportunities in the Mideast. This is the first in-depth look ever at open source (and programming in general) in a conservative Islamic country. Roblimo concludes that under the robes, Saudi geeks are much like geeks everywhere, but from comments on the stories it looks like a lot of people don't agree.

477 of 837 comments (clear)

  1. Yes. by Limburgher · · Score: 1, Funny

    And? Geeks are the same everywhere.

    --

    You are not the customer.

    1. Re:Yes. by Limburgher · · Score: 1

      No, I was thinking intelligent problem-solvers who embrace technologies of all types for the capabilities they provide.

      --

      You are not the customer.

  2. Something In Common by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Hey, now the Israelis and the Saudis can team up! You knew Open Source was going to turn political.

    1. Re:Something In Common by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      KDE vs. GNOME on a whole new level!!!

    2. Re:Something In Common by Thomas+Miconi · · Score: 1

      Just after terrorism is stopped, Israeli colonies (or "settlements") in Palestine are dismantled, an agreement is reached over the holy sites, a stable democratic Palestinian state emerges sharing Jerusalem as a capital with Israel, free circulation between these two countries is instored and peace and collaboration treaties are signed between Israel and all Arab states, there'll be nothing to prevent Saudis from teaming up with Israelis.

      Breath holding is not recommended.

      Thomas Miconi

    3. Re:Something In Common by Billly+Gates · · Score: 2, Funny

      .... as well as the Indian and Pakistani ones.

      They hate each other but love FreeBSD over Linux/Windows. Oh how sweet. Lets hug each other.

    4. Re:Something In Common by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      [ Just after terrorism is stopped, Israeli colonies (or "settlements") in Palestine are dismantled, an agreement is reached over the holy sites, a stable democratic Palestinian state emerges sharing Jerusalem as a capital with Israel, free circulation between these two countries is instored and peace and collaboration treaties are signed between Israel and all Arab states, there'll be nothing to prevent Saudis from teaming up with Israelis.]

      "Linux" -- "BSD" -- "Linux" -- "BSD"

      aw, the hell with them, just push the button Ali.

  3. Too thorough comparision by Gyan · · Score: 5, Funny

    Roblimo concludes that under the robes, Saudi geeks are much like geeks everywhere

    What's that exactly supposed to mean?

    1. Re:Too thorough comparision by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      It means overweight, underhung, and covered with several varities of spicy mustard.

    2. Re:Too thorough comparision by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      It means that Saudi geeks have small penises, just like us!

      Right? Guys?

      Oh damn...

    3. Re:Too thorough comparision by brucmack · · Score: 1

      But seriously, that makes a good point... how exactly are they different from geeks everywhere above the robes? Just because they wear something different doesn't make them different people. I'm sure they've got more style than some of us anyway...

    4. Re:Too thorough comparision by October_30th · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Ok, and now take that idea a little bit further.

      Why restrict it to geeks in the first place...

      --
      The owls are not what they seem
    5. Re:Too thorough comparision by orangesquid · · Score: 1

      Actually, the minute I started listening to more NOFX than Weird Al and wearing more denim than sweatpants and khakis, I grew another inch or so.

      I'm not kidding!

      --
      --TheOrangeSquid Is it any wonder things seem so awry? We swim in a sea of confusion and don't have to think to survive
    6. Re:Too thorough comparision by TheWickedKingJeremy · · Score: 1

      how exactly are they different from geeks everywhere above the robes?

      Um, because their culture is completely different than ours. Different cultures have differnet values, instill differnet types and levels of education, emphasize different skills and trails, etc etc...

      --

      my religion lies somewhere between buddhism and super monkey ball - pamphlet?
    7. Re:Too thorough comparision by lunar_legacy · · Score: 1

      I wonder if they get same penis enlargement adds as spam?

    8. Re:Too thorough comparision by bhtooefr · · Score: 1

      RTFA, the Saudi government doesn't.

      BTW, where's any proof that those really work? I mean, has the FDA done any studies on it? Didn't think so.

    9. Re:Too thorough comparision by brucmack · · Score: 1

      So the idea is that the culture exists only on the outside, not the inside?

    10. Re:Too thorough comparision by TheWickedKingJeremy · · Score: 1

      I had accidentily cut myself short by hitting the Submit button instead of Preview ;) But what I intended to say was simply that I feel its naive to disregard the influence of culture on a person.

      I know its romantic to think that we are all independant, free-thinking and self-determining people but in truth we are all products of our cultures. Geeks from the United States and geeks from Saudi Arabia do share one common trait - a presumed love of technology, computers, what have you - but there are no doubt *significant* differences between a typical individual (geeks or not) on each side. Such being the case, I felt the article might have something interesting/important to say, whereas the poster that I responded to stated an essentially "we are all just geeks, whats the difference?" position.

      --

      my religion lies somewhere between buddhism and super monkey ball - pamphlet?
  4. True litmus test by UnknowingFool · · Score: 4, Funny
    Why don't they fill out the recent slashdot "Biggest Failure as a Nerd" survey?

    Or . . .

    Show them a picture of Natalie Portman and gauge their reaction.

    --
    Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
    1. Re:True litmus test by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Bad example. Natalie Portman (a.k.a. Natalie Hershlag) was born in Israel and would therefore be considered a monkey and/or pig.

    2. Re:True litmus test by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Hello, are you stupid? Grandparent was noting that the Arabs would be racist to Natalie, not claiming any racist feeling of his own.

      And he's right.

    3. Re:True litmus test by UnknowingFool · · Score: 1

      The thought that Natalie Portman was Jewish never even crossed my mind as a problem. When it comes to babes, I'm just oblivious. Maybe I should have said Jeri Ryan instead. But wait, she may be Christian. Damn, you can never win at the Politicol Correctness game.

      --
      Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
    4. Re:True litmus test by iminplaya · · Score: 2, Funny

      "Show them a picture of Natalie Portman and gauge their reaction."

      Then Roblimo would really see what's under their robes.

      --
      What?
    5. Re:True litmus test by FredFnord · · Score: 4, Insightful

      > Arabs don't hate Jews, they hate Israel.

      Well, it's nice to know that there aren't any Arabs who hate Jews. I'll sleep a lot better now that I know such an authority as yourself has declared the Arab world free of any such sentiments.

      Actually, of course, if you look at any semi-reputable news organization (and by this I mean some news organizations in Europe, because anything in the US, Israel, or most of the Arab world is just organized propoganda) the prejudice of Arabs against Jews, and Jews against Arabs, is quite marked. And equally unfortunate (and unfair) on both sides.

      > A racist state set up by terrorists and supported by racists.

      There are elements of truth and falsehood in this, as in most statements that are made by fanatics. With most fanatics, the elements of falsehood greatly outweigh the elements of truth. I won't presume to judge in this particular case.

      I also except statements made by people like Rush Limbaugh, which, as often as not, actually contain no element of truth what so ever. ("Styrofoam is biodegradable!")

      > EVERYONE should hate Israel, just as they shouldn't hate Jews.

      I'm always delighted to be told who to hate.

      However, I in general like to not actually hate anyone. I know this makes me a lousy American, as well as someone committing the fundamental solicism of disagreeing with you, Mr. Partridge, but I've always found that hating tendes to lead to suffering. On both sides.

      But hey, if that's what you're looking for, you have fun.

      -fred

      --
      Sign #11 of Slashdot overdose: You see the phrase 'moderate Republican' and you wonder if that would be a +1 or a -1.
    6. Re:True litmus test by quax · · Score: 1

      Ironically enough, most Palestinians are actually ancestors of the original Jewish population that converted to Christianity or Islam. It is almost like the longest most bloody family feud in the recent history of mankind. Makes me feel embarrassed to belong to the human specie every time I think about it.

    7. Re:True litmus test by z00z · · Score: 1
      > Arabs don't hate Jews, they hate Israel.

      Well, it's nice to know that there aren't any Arabs who hate Jews. I'll sleep a lot better now that I know such an authority as yourself has declared the Arab world free of any such sentiments.

      Actually, there is a lot of truth in the first statement I quoted. Arabs in general tend to try to differentiate between Judaism as a religion (which Islam believes in, and calls for its respect), and Zionism as a political movement to replace Palestinians by Jews. There are many Arabic Jews (a minority, yes, but a lot of them nevertheless), and they are not treated any differently from other Arabs.

      But, it's Israel who is trying to smear down the difference between Judaism and Zionism, and for a simple reason: this gives them the "right" (being promised that land by God, being the chosen people, etc) to occupy more land, and commit more atrocities against the "gentiles" currently living in the Holy Land. And there are many Jews who realize this, and refuse to live in Israel or support it. I have been to many a demonstration where Rabbis would chant anti-Israel slogan along side Arabs, protesting Israeli aggression against Palestinians and occupation of Arab land. But, you will *NEVER* find an Arab chanting anti-Palestinian slogans.

      Somehow, this point is more readily realized in Europe and most of the world than in the United States.

    8. Re:True litmus test by quax · · Score: 1

      Silly me, got the time arrow confused again. Yet, this opens an interesting alternative to the wall, that Israel builds. They should rather put that money into research for a time machine, so that the Palestinians can be beamed back in time to become their own descendants. Or alternatively all fundametalist settlers can be send back into the glorious days of king David's Israel. That'll take care of this problem once and for all.

    9. Re:True litmus test by vbdutch · · Score: 1

      There are many Arabic Jews (a minority, yes, but a lot of them nevertheless), and they are not treated any differently from other Arabs.

      In Jordan, Jews that were born there are not eligible to become Jordanian citizens. In Egypt, documentaries claiming the authenticity of The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion are transmitted over the national TV. In Iran (OK, not an Arab state, but still belongs to the region), a group of Jews was jailed for spying without any substantial evidence. In Palestinian Authority, Mein Kampf is openly sold and Arafat denies Holocaust. I wonder what equal treatment means to you.

    10. Re:True litmus test by pinkocommie · · Score: 1

      Look at the american media and to a large extent public perception. Howard Dean says that the US should treat Palestine and Israel equally in order to be (I think he said appear to be) a fair broker in peace talks. He gets lambasted for being anti-semitic. Politician X says something negative about Israel and they're labelled as Anti-Semetic. Same point, Israel tries to sell the image that they represent all Jews everywhere. The message does get a lot of coverage and 'surprisingly' people in the middle east also fall prey to the same propaganda. Israel != Judaism Separate the religion and state and its largely fine. Islam and Judaism co-existed for over a millenia in the middle east with only a few hiccups along the way. Compare that to the West and the frequent pogroms of Jews. Only from the beginning of this century (when Zionism started gaining popularity) did the two go up against each other. If you haven't read Holy War (By Karen Armstrong) I highly recommend it. Also about Saudia and all the other 'backward' countries. a) patience, it took the west a while to get where they are now, it'll take them a while as well b) quit supporting dictatorships AND (equally importantly) corrupt governments and it'll go in the right general direction c) encourage the study of Islam in the West to prevent misconceptions d) Resolve the Israel / Palestine conflict regardless of the cost and effort. Unless that issue is resolved nothing will really work. About your statement about the Elders of ZION again Zionism != Judaism factor in the marketing attempt to convert that fallacy into a tautology (sp?) and voila you understand the anti-jewish sentiment in the middle east.

    11. Re:True litmus test by lewko · · Score: 1
      "But, you will *NEVER* find an Arab chanting anti-Palestinian slogans."

      You're right. They just shoot them.

      Shouting slogans and waving placards is a principle of democratic protest. Democracy however is totally absent in the middle east (save for Israel).

      In 1970, Jordan shot thousands of Palestinians. Not a slogan in sight.

      Failing that, the Palestinians 'Arab Brethren' will just kick them out and use them as a bargaining tool against Israel (not giving two shits about the Palestinians of course).

      The reason Israelis and Jews are allowed to protest is because it is a fundamental democratic right which Jews and Israelis hold sacred. The fact that people like you use that against them (comments about Rabbis protesting etc) shows a clear misunderstanding of Middle East Politics or a deliberate anti-Israel/anti-Jewish slant.

      Indeed you will be hard pressed to even find left-wing or anti-Government protest in most of the Arab Middle East as this usually results in a heavy knock on the door in the middle of the night.

      --
      Do you or your partner snore? - Visit www.snoring.com.au
    12. Re:True litmus test by z00z · · Score: 1
      "But, you will *NEVER* find an Arab chanting anti-Palestinian slogans."

      You, like others who replied, seemed to have missed my point. What I meant by anti-Palestinian in the quote above is statements, by Arabs, that deny Palestinians the right to a homeland in Palestine. There aren't any. But, there are Jews who don't believe Israel has the right to that land (not until the real Messiah comes).

      In 1970, Jordan shot thousands of Palestinians. Not a slogan in sight.

      That was a political move against the PLO and Yasser Arafat, who decided to overthrow King Hussein. Nothing anti-Palestinian there. PLO does *NOT* represent all Palestinians.

      The reason Israelis and Jews are allowed to protest is because it is a fundamental democratic right which Jews and Israelis hold sacred. The fact that people like you use that against them (comments about Rabbis protesting etc) shows a clear misunderstanding of Middle East Politics or a deliberate anti-Israel/anti-Jewish slant.

      This is a touchy subject, and I always try to debate it in a civil manner, and keep my mind open. I do understand Middle East politics (being a Palestinian, with a Jordanian passport), and I'm not anti-Jewish. In fact I do have many Jewish friends whom I consider close. I'm anti-Israeli though, and for the obvious reasons. I admire Israel for one thing only: democracy, although Arab Israelis are openly considered second-class citizens. But, it also has its share of corruption, that is of a magnitude comparable to its neighbours. Think of Sharon's latest scandal, illegal settlements, unnecessary expanding of settlements, Yigal Amir, etc. The only difference is that leaders don't last long enough for it to be called dictatorship, due to democracy.

      Indeed you will be hard pressed to even find left-wing or anti-Government protest in most of the Arab Middle East as this usually results in a heavy knock on the door in the middle of the night.

      Again, I wasn't talking about Arab governments in my original post. Corruption there abounds. But, things are changing. Many Arabic countries are going through lots of reform where opposition parties are allowed and welcome (Lebanon, Qatar, Jordan & Egypt to a smaller extent), and the new generation understands the need for democracy.

      I believe that Israelis can live peacefully with their neighbours, and wish for it, given the contol over two things: Hamas and right-wing Israeli settlers.

    13. Re:True litmus test by Tackhead · · Score: 1
      > Arabs don't hate Jews, they hate Israel. A racist state set up by terrorists and supported by racists.
      >
      > EVERYONE should hate Israel, just as they shouldn't hate Jews.

      Yup Yup. And the Klan doesn't hate African Americans. Honest. Them's just a bunch of good ol' boys who are "proud to be white".

      Personally, I'm disappointed this guy got modded -1, Flamebait.

      He should have been modded +1, Informative. Because even though he's trolling, he exposes the Arab mindset perfectly: a culture of hatred, victimization, and self-pity, a culture that breeds nothing but violence and oppression. Brought up on a diet of propaganda such as that parroted by the above troll, most people in that region really do think like that. All of them would, if the "religious" "leaders" had their way. Inculating anti-Semitism has historically been one of the most effective ways to control a population.

      The best thing that could ever happen to Saudi Arabia would be for a fleet of C-5 Galaxies to airdrop pictures of of Natalie Portman, NAKED, PETRIFIED, IN HOT GRITS (there, we're on topic now!), over every square inch of that country in a wave of cultural imperialism that will consign his brand of Islam (and perhaps all of Islam) into the dustbin of history forever.

      Open Letter to the Fundamentalist Moslems of Planet Earth: Your impotent death cult is doomed, and neither your false God nor his false prophet can save it. We invite you to join the civilized world the fun way: DEMOCRACY. WHISKEY. SEXY. We're the civilized world. We're here, we drink beer, and we're not going away.

  5. Well... by Ice_Balrog · · Score: 4, Funny

    It depends. Do they use Vi or *shudder*Emacs?

    --
    #include "sig.h"
    1. Re:Well... by UnknowingFool · · Score: 1

      Can't we all get along? All this nerd on nerd violence has got to stop. PLEASE, won't someone think of the children?!

      --
      Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
    2. Re:Well... by Billly+Gates · · Score: 1
      .... its VI on FreeBSD and not that nasty Linux right?

    3. Re:Well... by dotwaffle · · Score: 2, Funny

      Imagine World War 3 being started over the fact they use Emacs... You'd have to arrest RMS for supplying a weapon of mass destruction... Hang on, why did I not think of this earlier???? ;)

    4. Re:Well... by Flower · · Score: 1
      Wow, you must be using a fubar'd keyboard or something. Surely you meant OpenBSD...

      Running on a SPARC.

      --
      I don't want knowledge. I want certainty. - Law, David Bowie
    5. Re:Well... by zangdesign · · Score: 1

      Emacs is for people who want their editor to do everything. vi is for people who just want an editor.

      --
      To celebrate the occasion of my 1000th post, I will post no more forever on Slashdot. Goodbye.
    6. Re:Well... by haystor · · Score: 1

      Sheesh. For that last time, Emacs is not an editor. It's a lifestyle.

      --
      t
    7. Re:Well... by Grab · · Score: 1

      I'd vote for a weapon of RMS destruction, myself.

      And call the target the GNU NURD, where NURD is a NERD who Undoubtedly Requires Destruction, and a NERD is a NURD who Evidently Rates Death...

      Grab.

    8. Re:Well... by zangdesign · · Score: 1

      * shakes head and stares at floor sadly *

      You are a sad, sad man.

      Or woman. Mustn't leave them out.

      --
      To celebrate the occasion of my 1000th post, I will post no more forever on Slashdot. Goodbye.
    9. Re:Well... by Felinoid · · Score: 1

      You forgot:
      Nano, Joe, qedit, notepad, tee, cat, edlin, ed, pico, hex keypad on rom burnner, electro magnet on var pot used to record on magnetic disk or tape, Quantum flux manipulations of the datapaths enerting the processor.

      Or just programming your own quantium realitys.

      Whatever...
      There are endless numbers of editers.
      We are all diffrent.

      Are they like us? Who is us?
      If you boil out the diffrences between all us geeks around the earth you'll find all that is left is the very basic deffinition of geek. Hence if they weren't "like us" they wouldn't be geeks.

      If you mean "like us american geeks" well du.. no. But no more diffrent than chinese geeks.

      We live in diffrent cultures but we all come to the same Internet and we are all human...
      Well most of us... as a rule...
      (I'm the exception that proves the rule)

      --
      I don't actually exist.
  6. That's a dumb question. by Gothic_Walrus · · Score: 1

    Geekiness knows no cultural bounds...

    --
    Goo goo g'joob.
    1. Re:That's a dumb question. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      That's true, although there they are only concerned about enforcing that females faces never get shown and several other religious nonsense.

      Saudi Arabia is probably the most fundamentalist contry in the world (followed closely by the USA), and you better wish to never have your ass sitting there.

      Roblimo may be happy to see all that hunks in long cloths, no underpants and big mustaches, but he's probably ignorant enough to avoid looking at the obvious big picture: none really criticizes saudis because they:

      detain the world's biggest oil reserves and

      have mecca and medina, the muslims holy cities on their territory. Iin other words, anyone who messes with Saudi Arabia would spawn a jihad (holy war) made by all muslims in world against himself.

      Saudi Arabia imposes a strong censorship, with a big firewall/proxy blocking them to access almost all relevant and independent news sources overseas. I wouldn't be surprised that most "geek" websites are blocked there.

      Some people even think the 9/11 attacks were produced by Saudis, despite the Bush administration propaganda against OB Laden (which is saudi too).

      The saudi royal family is the most screwed one in the world, read this book to check how things work there.

      I don't have anything against anyone specifically in Saudi Arabia (although they smell badly) or muslims culture, I have even met with some very nice people from there, but the fact is that the country is very screwed and it is quite hard to believe they can even hold a middle class to develop the country, and it's almost impossible to imagine a geek culture running there.

    2. Re:That's a dumb question. by bhtooefr · · Score: 1

      They said it's really easy to get around the porn filters, so my guess is that they look at the same porn we do.

  7. Geeks everywhere are (essentially) the same by drinkypoo · · Score: 4, Insightful
    You're a geek if you are passionate about something nerdy, but still have social skills of some sort. ("Geek" has often been defined as someone who is social about computers, but you can be a math geek, physics geek, et cetera.) To me, being a geek implies that you revel in understanding something difficult and you feel the same satisfaction from grokking the deep and apparently unexplainable that other people get from their "normal" pursuits.

    Perhaps this tendency is what causes geeks to be more or less similar in that we tend to care more about our field(s) of choice than things like government propaganda. Geeks tend not to be racist because hate takes time and effort that could be better applied to developing a better understanding of the universe. Besides, if you give in to stupid petty hatreds, you might miss something that some member of one of those social groups has to say about computers, or astronomy, or what have you.

    One thing that comes back to me time and time again is that people all over the world have the same potential. One thing that has led me to that conclusion is geekdom. Racism or most other -isms would just get in the way.

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    1. Re:Geeks everywhere are (essentially) the same by DAldredge · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Don't give me that crap. Look at how women and other religions are treated in Saudi Arabia before you spout off.

      Women aren't even allowed to drive in Saudi Arabia and they have religious police that murdered school girls by not allowing them out of a burning building because they where not 'dressed' correctly. When you make the decision that dress in more important than the lives of kids you are a majorly fucked up society.

      I could go on, but I have work to do. If you wish, please feel free to continue this via email.

    2. Re:Geeks everywhere are (essentially) the same by zonix · · Score: 1
      You're a geek if you are passionate about something nerdy, but still have social skills of some sort.

      Isn't that still a nerd? I think geek is the more hardcore nerd without the social skills. :-)

      z
      --
      What would an EWOULDBLOCK block, if an EWOULDBLOCK could block would? -- me
    3. Re:Geeks everywhere are (essentially) the same by Tango42 · · Score: 1, Informative

      The world is not at war with Islam, it is at war with Islam fundamentalists. How many times does the distinction have to be made before people will understand it? Fundamentalists of any religion are just as bad. Look at the Crusades, that was Christian Fundamentalists. Regular Muslims are no worse than regular Christians (or Jews, or Hindus, or whatever, i just chose Chistians because most Westerners, and therefore most /.ers know more about it (i would guess)). And, before anyone asks, I am an athiest, and am equally critical of all religions.

    4. Re:Geeks everywhere are (essentially) the same by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      Women aren't even allowed to drive in Saudi Arabia
      You say that like it's a bad thing...

    5. Re:Geeks everywhere are (essentially) the same by Cybrr · · Score: 1

      I thought so too, but after reading their entries at dictionary.com, i think a nerd is more of a single minded person and a geek more of an eccentric one.

      --
      Why did GEAR crush RDP?
    6. Re:Geeks everywhere are (essentially) the same by DAldredge · · Score: 1

      No. They stand by while this goes one. It is as much their fault as their rulers.

    7. Re:Geeks everywhere are (essentially) the same by d_i_r_t_y · · Score: 3, Insightful

      you are a majorly fucked up society.

      when you have to have metal detectors at schools you are in a majorly fucked up society. something to think about.

    8. Re:Geeks everywhere are (essentially) the same by GoofyBoy · · Score: 1

      >You're a geek if

      Could we please grow up and stop trying to classify people into neat little boxes?

      Every time people try to define if characteristic makes them a "geek" or "nerd" or "jock" or whatever always degrades into the level of passing-notes-in-high-school-class.

      >Geeks tend not to be racist because hate takes time and effort that could be better applied to developing a better understanding of the universe.

      And yet you just spent how much time and effort defining what a Geek is?

      Hate is easy. It takes NO time or effort to not think or not to care about others who are forigen or to let someone else think for you.

      --
      The surprise isn't how often we make bad choices; the surprise is how seldom they defeat us.
    9. Re:Geeks everywhere are (essentially) the same by GoofyBoy · · Score: 1

      When you are talking about the oppression of half of the population, including your mother, grandmother, aunts and sisters how can you be motivated NOT effect change?

      --
      The surprise isn't how often we make bad choices; the surprise is how seldom they defeat us.
    10. Re:Geeks everywhere are (essentially) the same by donutello · · Score: 1

      No, they are not. Society and the culture around you play a huge part in forming the individuals mindset.

      In India, for example, it is not considered a social disadvantage to be good at math and not so good at sports. On the other hand, the cool kids in school are the ones who get the better grades. Indian "geeks" are in general a lot better adjusted to the society around them - partly because society is more willing to adjust to them.

      Other societies and other cultures create their own unique set of circumstances.

      --
      Mmmm.. Donuts
    11. Re:Geeks everywhere are (essentially) the same by wideBlueSkies · · Score: 1

      >>Hate is easy. It takes NO time or effort to not think or not to care about others who are forigen or to let someone else think for you.

      Maybe for you. Myself, I need a reason to dislike someone, and a lot of really good reasons to HATE someone.

      Peace is easy. "Good morning, how are you today?" comes more naturally to me than "Oh, Hello. What do you want?" or "I don't wish to talk to you, please leave".

      wbs.

      --
      Huh?
    12. Re:Geeks everywhere are (essentially) the same by MochaMan · · Score: 2, Funny

      And before any of you smart-assed Euros ask me if I'm an American, I'm not. I'm Canadian.

      And from one Canadian to another, please do us all a favour and move somewhere where your brand of sophisticated political analysis and your fantastic social skills will be more thoroughly appreciated. I hear there's a lot of open land in Texas just waiting to be developed.

    13. Re:Geeks everywhere are (essentially) the same by localman · · Score: 2, Insightful

      And likewise the major cause of the Jihad is not religion but politics as well. It has little to do with Islam in particular, and is rather a common trait of all blendings politics and religion. Two powerful ideologies get wrapped up and all hell breaks loose. At least it would seem so according to history.

      Cheers.

    14. Re:Geeks everywhere are (essentially) the same by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      In certain places in America, individuals of a certain skin tone are not allowed to use a pay phone (Police harass them for loitering). In certain places in America they have police who murder individuals of a certain skin tone because...well because they are inidviduals of a certain skin tone. When you make the decesion that skin tone is more important than the lives of certain individuals you are a majorly fucked up society.
      One could conclude that American geeks stand by idle while this occurs, therefore are we just as guilty? I think not. One should not judge a person based solely upon the culture to which they belong .

    15. Re:Geeks everywhere are (essentially) the same by harkabeeparolyn · · Score: 1

      Geeks are what nerds call themselves to feel better about themselves. It's like that trekker/trekkie thing. It's like one flasher criticizing another because he's uncircumsized--- as if anyone else gives a fuck.

    16. Re:Geeks everywhere are (essentially) the same by JaredOfEuropa · · Score: 1
      No. They stand by while this goes one. It is as much their fault as their rulers.
      I think this is a particularly evil line of reasoning. When faced with injustice, many people have little choice but to bear it and get on with their lives. This is especially true under the more oppressive regimes. I applaud those few courageous individuals who endeavour to change these oppressive regimes, often at great personal cost and with live and limb at risk. But I will not condemn those who are too afraid to fight the system. Sitting in your comfy armchair in your safe country, do you have any idea what 'fighting the system' entails in countries like that? Don't be too quick to condemn those that stand idly by.

      Moreover, the political and religious leaders in those countries control the media and education. Read '1984' some time... if you control those, you can to some extend control the way people think. I know quite a few muslims (there's plenty to be found in the Netherlands), and some of these people have been brought up with the belief that women are less than men. They are educated and reasonable people otherwise, but they all cling to this belief, including the women. If this has been told to them from birth, how are they going to form an opinion to the contrary?
      --
      If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
    17. Re:Geeks everywhere are (essentially) the same by Mr_Icon · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Women aren't even allowed to drive in Saudi Arabia and they have religious police that murdered school girls by not allowing them out of a burning building because they where not 'dressed' correctly. When you make the decision that dress in more important than the lives of kids you are a majorly fucked up society.

      Is this *more* or *fewer* dead kids than all school shooting victims in the US in the past year? I'm thinking there is more than one fucked up society here...

      --
      If you open yourself to the foo, You and foo become one.
    18. Re:Geeks everywhere are (essentially) the same by corbettw · · Score: 1, Troll

      When you think trying to keep guns out of school is the same as locking little girls in a burning building, you are in a majorly fucked up society. Something else to think about.

      --
      God invented whiskey so the Irish would not rule the world.
    19. Re:Geeks everywhere are (essentially) the same by Bombula · · Score: 5, Insightful
      It's easy to rant against the ills of an entire society. America is a big target too, from the most deaths by guns, world's biggest gangs and sickest criminals (more serial killers than everyone else put together), largest corporate crimes, largest environmental crimes, state-sanctioned murder, blurring lines between church and state, right-wing fundamentalist nutcases, elections that make a mockery of democracy, KKK and entire regions thick with racist, ignorant scumbags - on and on and on.

      The whole point of this article, which is seemingly lost on the above poster, is that in contrast to whatever vast societal differences may separate individuals, we can share many things in common - often on profoundly meaningful levels.

      As an American aid worker living and working in the middle east, I can tell you point blank that the reason why there is conflict between our two societies is because there are assholes on both sides. The above post is demonstrative of that fact.

      --
      A-Bomb
    20. Re:Geeks everywhere are (essentially) the same by corbettw · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Fourteen little girls burned to death in the Saudi fire.[1] I couldn't find a reference for the past year, but for the year July 1, 1999, to June 30, 2000, there were sixteen homicides in schools where the victims were children.[2]

      So while more kids died in school shootings in the US for the years sampled than little girls burned to death in Saudi Arabia, you have to keep some other factors in mind:
      1: Saudi Arabia has a population of roughly 24 million. The US has a population of roughly 290 million. So for the two statistics to be equilivant, there would've had to have been 193 school shootings in one year. As is, the ratio of deaths is much lower in the US.
      2: People in the US recognize that school shootings are a problem. We take active steps to counter them, and from all indications those steps are working. The Saudis didn't seem to care that little girls burned to death, there haven't been any major sweeping changes of the Ministry for the Prevention of Vice and Promotion of Virtue.
      3: When school kids kill each other with guns, it is a criminal act not sanctioned by the government. When Saudi authorities lock little girls in their school and make them burn to death, it is a criminal act sanctioned by the government.

      --
      God invented whiskey so the Irish would not rule the world.
    21. Re:Geeks everywhere are (essentially) the same by Lady+Jazzica · · Score: 1

      Look at the Crusades, that was Christian Fundamentalists.

      What do the Crusades have to do with "fundamentalism"? The Muslims had invaded Christian lands a few hundred years before. While that wasn't exactly good from a Christian point of view, it was tolerable as long as people were treated more or less fairly. The problem started when the Ottomans (I believe) took over, and started killing Christian pilgrims. Christians do have a right to defend themselves, just like anyone else.

      I am an athiest, and am equally critical of all religions.

      Well, atheism is a religion in a way, or at least a belief about how the world is...

    22. Re:Geeks everywhere are (essentially) the same by corbettw · · Score: 1

      And likewise the major cause of the Jihad is not religion but politics as well.

      I'd suggest reading Islam and Terrorism: What the Quran Really Teaches About Christianity, Violence and the Goals of the Islamic Jihad. The book disproves the notion that jihad is just politics and not religion, because for one thing there is no distinction between the two in Islam. The writer is a former Moslim who was a teacher at Al-Azhar, and an imam at his local mosque. His quest to find the truth about the Quran, and the trevails he went through during it, is inspiring.

      --
      God invented whiskey so the Irish would not rule the world.
    23. Re:Geeks everywhere are (essentially) the same by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      *yawn* Two wrongs don't make a right.

      Or to be specific:

      The existence of evil in America does not change, mitigate or otherwise affect the existence of greater evil in Saudi Arabia.

      (And if your post was 'Insightful', I'm Toxie the Toxic Avenger.)

    24. Re:Geeks everywhere are (essentially) the same by tom's+a-cold · · Score: 1
      Before you consider talking about geek stuff, consider that this is a country that does not allow other religions other than islam to be followed here. I mean, how pathetic is that?


      You're making the mistake of confusing the Saudi government with the Saudi people. Remember, they're not elected; they've been kept in power largely by the US. Further isolating the people is just a case of blaming the victim. It suits some people's agendas to hold Middle Easterners down, but the right thing for us to do is to be on the side of meritocracy and open society and against the corrupt status quo.

      I lived and worked in Saudi Arabia for several years. Some of the things that other posters observed are true: women suffer many restrictions, and their criminal justice system is a brutal, crooked mess, mostly because the government is too close to the religious right (to a lesser extent, a problem here too). But it's an extremely complex society that has undergone a lot of changes in the past 50 years, and it is far different than the caricature presented in the US media. There are know-nothing religious reactionaries, thoughtful and tolerant believers, creeps who go whoring in Bangkok, honest technocrats, dodgy businessmen. A lot goes on under the surface.

      The Saudi programmers and software engineers I worked with were, like those in the US, a mixed bag. The best were as good as the best here. They have the ability bell curve same as everyone else. The only problems I saw were the result of the nepotism-based government, that removed incentives for achievement. Despite this, there are still talented people trying to do right for their people. Sadly, the system makes it an uphill struggle.

      I should add that many of the Americans I met there were the scum of the earth-- cheats, arrogant rip-off artists and ass-kissers, who have aligned themselves with the worst elements of Saudi society. One of the reasons people in the Middle East don't like us or trust us is because they have learned from experience. Direct contact between people who aren't just out to make a fast buck would be a positive step in correcting the view that we're all like those lying bastards. Continuing isolation only sustains corrupt interests in both Saudi Arabia and in the US.

      --
      Get your teeth into a small slice: the cake of liberty
    25. Re:Geeks everywhere are (essentially) the same by Lady+Jazzica · · Score: 1

      Actually, no, it was not about politics. The Muslims had begun to attack Christian pilgrims, and the Crusades were an attempt to take over the Holy Land in order to protect those pilgrims.

      Alexandria was under Muslim rule at the time, so it might theoretically make sense to attack it, just like the Allies in World War II initially invaded France, and not Berlin.

      Constantinople was attacked against the direct orders of the Pope, so clearly it was not part of what the Crusades were intended for. The Byzantines had been attacking Catholics, in particular the Venetians. The Doge of Venice had been blinded by the Byzantines, in fact. The Byzantine emperor had also conspired against the Crusaders with the Muslims, which the Crusaders saw as a betrayal. The attack on Constantinople was about revenge and/or retribution primarily.

    26. Re:Geeks everywhere are (essentially) the same by ErikZ · · Score: 1


      Here's a long article in "The New Yorker" about how one journalist went to Saudi Arbia to teach the journalists there.

      http://www.lawrencewright.com/art-saudi.html

      Shows you what Saudi life is like. It's a bit on the long side, but very interesting.

      --
      Democrats or Republicans. They are both taking us to the same place and they are not afraid of us anymore.
    27. Re:Geeks everywhere are (essentially) the same by md358 · · Score: 1

      I don't think the comparison quite meshes in those two cases.

      But if you must insist, let's pretend that the manner in which the police in Columbine handled the mass murder there was as morally bankrupt as the Saudi religious police watching young girls burn and asphyxiate to death.

      Let's also pretend that the desire of the Columbine police to keep the murder suspects from escaping and the Saudi's desire to keep girls in their night gowns out of public are equally laudable (or despicable, wherever the hell your warped values lie).

      The difference is that America, for all its failings, saw a grand fuckup, wrung its hands and decided to try and do something about it. Successful or not, American politicians lost sleep over it and were, I believe, genuinely remorseful. I doubt that was the case for the Saudi royal family.

      But to you, d i r t y, it's all the same isn't it? A tragedy in the west by socially retarded malcontents is just as evil as an unrestrained state authority that brutally represses at least half the population. Go ahead, pick apart my argument with as many high-schooler analogies you can think of - deep down you and every other reader on here know that the actions of the Saudi religious enforcers are undefendable.

    28. Re:Geeks everywhere are (essentially) the same by Alan+Partridge · · Score: 1

      And deep down you know that every foreign innocent life snuffed out by American imperial wars of conquest are equally indefensible.

      Collateral damage is MURDER.

      --
      That was classic intercourse!
    29. Re:Geeks everywhere are (essentially) the same by Curtman · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Look at how women and other religions are treated in Saudi Arabia before you spout off

      Think about how the Americans have conducted themselves around the world before you spout off. Some of the highlights include the genocide against the native Americans, slavery, and government sanctioned discrimination against those people until very recently, the supply of arms to these very same r'egimes, supplying arms to central America, etc, etc.

      And at least in muslim countries you know that Islam is the law of the land. Here they tell us there is seperation of church and state, but you get Dubya spouting off about God, and other foolishness that only helps paint us as "pro-jew". Why is it gays can't marry if its not related to religion? Why are you asked to pledge allegiance to God? Why can't people choose to end their own life to end their suffering? Why are people imprisoned for possessing marijuana?

      We're supposed to be frightened about the existence of WMD, and they are being developed here without any concern. Maybe someone should come along and liberate us.

    30. Re:Geeks everywhere are (essentially) the same by perdelucena · · Score: 1

      Look at how women and other religions are treated in Saudi Arabia before you spout off.

      Yeah, they dont give women any freedom for sure. On the other hand, we westerns give women all that freedom and they still treat us like shit and run away from us (geeks)...

    31. Re:Geeks everywhere are (essentially) the same by Curtman · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Fourteen little girls burned to death in the Saudi fire

      Thankfully that kind of stuff never happens here.

    32. Re:Geeks everywhere are (essentially) the same by Tango42 · · Score: 1

      OK. The Crusades was a bad example. History isn't really my strong suit, I just knew the Crusades were in the name of religion, so there was a certain parallel. Saudi Arabia isn't fundamentalist. It is a load of rock, it has no opinions or beliefs. The Saudi royal family is certainly fundamentalist, but that is not the same thing at all. The major difference between Saudi Arabia and Iraq, and SA is willing to trade its oil to the US. Call me a cynic, but...

    33. Re:Geeks everywhere are (essentially) the same by geekoid · · Score: 1

      yeah, those a similiar comparisons...

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    34. Re:Geeks everywhere are (essentially) the same by sufehmi · · Score: 1

      I used to spend my time doing dialogues with some atheists, and I've encountered some points that are raised by the author of that book as well. (sadly I barely have any spare time nowadays so unable to do it again now)

      I noticed that many of their conclusions are based on incomplete data. For example, translations alone most of the time is not enough to be used to fully understand a certain passage in the Quran, you'll also need to understand the asbabunNuzul (context of the passage, when and what occasion triggered its revelation) and check the tafseer (explanation) of it from the companions of the Prophet, people who'd understand it the most.

      Some of the passages who speak about waging war against infidels are actually talking about the Arab infidels of the time of the Prophet - which already tortured and killed members of the muslim community in many ways.

      So now I can understand why those atheists are enraged and misunderstood us, because I've seen muslims as well who took those passages out of context and wages war against just about everyone else.

      It's just one reason though, and it's the innocent one. Sadly the atheist community, just like any other communities, has its own share of zealots and liars, and they're not helping to make the current situation better.

      I can safely say that many muslims are not familiar anymore with what Islam is all about - even me, I'm still learning. The texts and the knowledge is still intact, thank to various rigorous methods of knowledge preservations (the science of hadith, the customofmemorising the whole quran, etc) - but somehow the soul of Islam has become alienated to many muslims.
      No surprise then if non-muslims/outsiders are getting an even worse picture about it.

      I just wish there's something that I can do about it.

    35. Re:Geeks everywhere are (essentially) the same by Steve+B · · Score: 1, Flamebait
      you have not read about the crusades, the inquisition


      If your point is that Saudi Arabia in 2003 is stuck at about the same level of civilization as Europe in 1203, I completely agree.

      --
      /. If the government wants us to respect the law, it should set a better example.
    36. Re:Geeks everywhere are (essentially) the same by dk4 · · Score: 1

      The first "crusade" was in 1095 and Muslims took Jerusalem in 638, so it was over 400 years difference.

      The first "crusade" was also most likely a plan by Pope Urban II to stop assist Christian turks in what is now western Turkey who were at war with Muslim Turks in what is now eastern Turkey. And his assistance? Send "Christian" knights to retake Jerusalem. These "Christian" knights did this, but in the process murdered innocent women and children, and most likely did even worse. The only clear winner was Rome, who now had less knights to challenge their authority.

    37. Re:Geeks everywhere are (essentially) the same by haystor · · Score: 1

      Please, oh please, name the country that was not built upon the burned bodies of its previous inhabitants.

      --
      t
    38. Re:Geeks everywhere are (essentially) the same by mikis · · Score: 1
      The problem started when the Ottomans (I believe) took over, and started killing Christian pilgrims. Christians do have a right to defend themselves, just like anyone else.
      No, Otomans came after the crusades, few hundred years later. And "right to defend christian pilgrims" did not prevent crusaders from trying to kick some Byzantine a** while they were at it. Partly as a result of Fourth Crusade, Byzantine power fell so that Selcuk Turks easily overrun them. And paradox is that it was Byzant brought Turks as mercenaries to Asia Minor to help them defend against Crusader...

      And "slaying of innocent pilgrims" was used just as excuse. It did not prevent crusaders from murdering and plundering of innocent Arabs. And *that* is one of the reasons for hatred that still exists.

      Of course it was all about fundamenalism and getting even more rich.

    39. Re:Geeks everywhere are (essentially) the same by oconnorcjo · · Score: 1
      Some of the highlights include the genocide against the native Americans, slavery, and government sanctioned discrimination against those people until very recently, the supply of arms to these very same r'egimes, supplying arms to central America, etc, etc.

      The past mistakes of ones ancestors has nothing to do with the present mistakes of others being done now. Hopefully enough ridicule and social condemnation will change the backward ways of the middle east like condemnation worked/works on other cultures like the US and South Africa.

      --
      I miss the Karma Whores.
    40. Re:Geeks everywhere are (essentially) the same by Alan+Partridge · · Score: 1

      Are hurricanes motivated by debts owed to their oil business partners, friends and family?

      --
      That was classic intercourse!
    41. Re:Geeks everywhere are (essentially) the same by True+Grit · · Score: 1
      • In certain places in America, individuals of a certain skin tone are not allowed to use a pay phone (Police harass them for loitering). In certain places in America they have police who murder individuals of a certain skin tone because...well because they are inidviduals of a certain skin tone. When you make the decesion that skin tone is more important than the lives of certain individuals you are a majorly fucked up society.


      No one denies that racism exists in the US, but to suggest that institutionalized racism, condoned and carried out by the government , is a regular practice here is absurd. We only need to look at the Rodney King incident to see that there is a huge difference between the US government's treatment of blacks and SA's treatment of women. So different as to simply be incomparable with one another.

      In the US for example the police won't shoot at you if you don't have a license to drive a car, unlike in SA where women can't drive :

      • "Jan.8, 2004: The Saudi Arabian security forces yesterday detained a Saudi girl, after they opened fire at her while [she was] driving a car on Monday late night in Tabouk, to the north of the Kingdom, where females are forbidden from driving a car."


      Also in the US, if police action leads to the death of someone, there is at the very least a public reporting and likely debate, usually there are charges or disciplinary actions brought against the police officers involved, even the federal government may, as in the Rodney King case, file civil rights charges on behalf of the victims if the state's actions are seen as deficient. And if the crime is caught on tape, as with Rodney King, you are almost guarantteed a national scandal played out on the evening news.

      In Saudia Arabia by contrast, the murder of 15 teenage girls is referred to as simply "carelessness", and after an initial promise of action and investigation into the matter, the promise is later revoked , when most of the international media has gone away, and the domestic media is too scared to continue its questioning of the untouchable Mutaween (religious police).

      Please don't try to equate the two, they aren't the same. Police in the US don't beat people for being improperly dressed, they don't beat up boys for publicly associating with girls, they certainly don't force people back into a burning building to their deaths simply because they aren't wearing a scarf, and they don't try to kill people just because the person doesn't have the government's permission to use a car.

      Finally, lets not also forget that the same government that defended its religious police in this incident, is the same government that supports and funds violently anti-Western Islamic extremist schools in its own country, even today, years after 9/11. It would be like the US government subsidizing a national KKK organisation today, even after the civil rights movement and the public outcry from Martin Luther King's assassination.

      There is no comparison here. For all of America's faults, and it has plenty (especially considering the current administration), it is not anywhere close to being in the same league as Saudi Arabia, Iran, and N. Korea.
    42. Re:Geeks everywhere are (essentially) the same by Pros_n_Cons · · Score: 2, Insightful

      when you have to have metal detectors at schools you are in a majorly fucked up society. something to think about.

      Those metal detecters are there because a handfull of people went nuts, The US saw a problem and is trying to rectify it. What has S.A. done to prevent locking children in and setting them ablaze? Oh wait, it was thier idea in the first place.. Yeah I can see how much worse the U.S. is.....

      What happens in the U.S. can only be compared if we are NOT activly trying to do something about it, enron scandles, school shootings, pervers, gangs, serial killers.. all those bad things are a problem we strongly try to prevent, not encourage! We have the free speech to fight our fights and not be shot in times square for daring to say it. If you don't see a difference there. Perhaps its time you take a step back and clear your head.

      --

      -- "of course thats just my opinion, I could be wrong." --Dennis Miller
    43. Re:Geeks everywhere are (essentially) the same by localman · · Score: 1

      Well I'd suggest reading the Old Testament of the Bible (an easy and fun read in lego). It pretty clearly states that the chosen people (in this case, the Jews) should kill pretty much anyone whom isn't chosen.

      In fact most religions at their core include some level of dehumanizing or at least devaluing other religions. This is a big part of how religions propagate.

      And I'm _not_ saying religion is bad. Just that they all play this game, and very few of the modern people of any religion buy the whole thing hook line and sinker. In America at least, my modern Jewish, Moslem, Hindu, Buddhist, Athiest friends, etc don't think it's okay to go around killing people.

      Yup, that's right. Even my Moslem friends. I'm talking real Moslems who actually pray six times a day. There is not a trace of Jihad in them. Because that is not how the majority of them think. Regardless of what the Koran says.

      So yes, I hate the Jihad. No, I do not hate Moslems, or their religion, or wish to eradicate the earth of them.

      Cheers.

    44. Re:Geeks everywhere are (essentially) the same by quax · · Score: 1

      The post war efforts in Iraq have shown that too many political mistakes are still made. The US military performed flawlessly but the administrative planning has been lousy.

      I monitor these Iraq blogs that I can highly recommend:

      salam&raed
      riverbend
      healing Iraq

      They are all happy that Saddam is gone, and want democracy in Iraq, but they also mercilessly shed light on all the mistakes that have been made, and that can have catastrophic consequences for these people. I very much feel for them.

      If the US does not manage to convert Iraq into a democratic and free society the whole effort was for naught. That'll be utterly depressing.

      The US can simply not afford to misunderstand the situation on the ground in Iraq, Palestine, Afghanistan, Pakistan etc. Too much depends on it.

    45. Re:Geeks everywhere are (essentially) the same by quax · · Score: 1

      I was always wondering how the Islamic culture came to the current state. During the middle age the Arab world was so far ahead of Europe in terms of science, culture and political tolerance, but this all seemed to have reversed. The European renaissance couldn't have taken off without the knowledge imported from the Arab world, but how come there has never been a similar development in Islam?

    46. Re:Geeks everywhere are (essentially) the same by tealover · · Score: 1

      Superpowers have the right, some would say the obligation, to kill indiscriminately. Britain did so when they were on top. China will probably do so when they're on top.

      I just hope the US starts nuking nations. We'd kill a lot more efficiently that way.

      --
      -- You see, there would be these conclusions that you could jump to
    47. Re:Geeks everywhere are (essentially) the same by tealover · · Score: 1

      America is no different than any other nation. We just get most of the publicity because everyone is fascinated by us. If it doesn't happen in America, no one really cares.

      Arabs and Muslism in general are filth and should be exterminated. I long for a war of civilizations, particularly a nuclear war because we'd have a great opportunity to cleanse those maggots from the earth.

      --
      -- You see, there would be these conclusions that you could jump to
    48. Re:Geeks everywhere are (essentially) the same by pinkocommie · · Score: 1

      ok, (some) they're stupid insane and inhumane. Totally agree, how do you 'fix' the problem as opposed to bashing the country? Perhaps by supporting moderates? By not undermining them by going psycho against neighbouring states? (Syria / Iran / Iraq)? By trying to counter the influence of nutty religious people?
      Yes most of the Islamic world is so backwards (and yes I am a muslim) that its insanely scary. But how do you counter that? How did the west rise above it? I dont know the answer. My pov would be education, research into the religion itself (how the Koran and science inter-relate - stuff like evolution etc). Maybe we could sponsor grants for stuff like that?
      Instead of viewing it as fanatic people , look at the real issues, religious people + backward society + Israel/Palestine conflict = BAD stuff. With sufficient effort I'm pretty sure its fixable but what needs to be understood here (the US in particular) is to compare Saudi society with what the US was 100-150 years ago? And then judge how barbaric it is? Yes that doesnt mean they're right, but that their society isnt as developed as ours (mentally younger? :)) Sorry for typing out loud? ;)

    49. Re:Geeks everywhere are (essentially) the same by pinkocommie · · Score: 1

      That's something that I never understood. america and allies have the 'right' to bear nukes (Israel :-D) while everyone else (Pakistan, Iran etc) are EVIL if they want to equal the status quo? Ok they're altering the status quo but evil? I'm pretty sure most treaties that the US touts about nuclear proliferation (CTBT) also called on the known Nuclear powers to drastically reduce and/or eliminate their Nukes but um, somehow dont see that happening :). But hey the US is 'sane' so we're allowed to keep nukes ;):)

    50. Re:Geeks everywhere are (essentially) the same by pinkocommie · · Score: 1

      Step 1) Answer your Question Step 2) ??? Step 3) World Peace :) Step 4) Profit? ;)

    51. Re:Geeks everywhere are (essentially) the same by corbettw · · Score: 1

      Those are all really good points, and in all honestly I don't know what would have to be done to better Islamic societies. It was only a few hundred years ago that Christians were burning each other at the stake over whether they believed that the Pope was the head of the Church or not, in many ways the problems with Wahabbists mirror some of the excesses of the Reformation and Counter-Reformation. Maybe the answer is that this is just the kind of thing religions go through. Given that Christianity is about 600 years older than Islam, it makes sense to think of Islam as being in the same mental place we were in the middle ages.

      Of course, the Renaissance and Age of Exploration lifted Europe out of the middle ages. So I guess some kind of modern day Renaissance and a new period of exploration is needed. You would think the information revolution would help, so maybe these geeks in Saudi Arabia really are the answer. And maybe we should encourage other countries to shoot for the moon and Mars, too, even if it does ensure wars in space in our lifetimes. In the long run, we all might benefit from it.

      Then again, it could just be that it's 2:00am and I'm tired and rambling.

      --
      God invented whiskey so the Irish would not rule the world.
    52. Re:Geeks everywhere are (essentially) the same by corbettw · · Score: 1

      I think it's important for you to realize that the author of the book is not an atheist. He's a Christian, who was raised Moslim, was a teacher at a respected Islamic school in Cairo, and an imam at his mosque. He was, in effect, an authority on what the Koran teaches. So much so that he could no longer live under it and sought out God for the real answers.

      Here's an anecdote which, for me, sums up all of the differences between Christianity and Islam: I'm sure you're aware of the story from the haddith of the adulterous woman who was brought before Mohammed. She was pregnant with another man's child, so he ordered her to brought back after the child was born. So it was done. Then, he ordered her to be brought back after the child had been weaned. Again, it was done as he ordered. The third time she appeared before him, he ordered her stoned to death. Sure enough, she was executed for having slept with a man not her husband.

      Compare this to a strikingly similar anecdote from the New Testament. Jesus was in the Temple, and a woman who had been (presumably, the details are sketchy) caught in bed by her husband with another man. She was dragged, half naked, before the Temple Court to be stoned. The law only allowed for one punishment for this crime. But the teachers in the Temple asked Jesus what he thought should be done with her. He replied "Let him among you who is without sin cast the first stone." Every man there realized they all had sin in their heart, and so they all went home. When Jesus saw this, he asked the woman "Does noone condemn you?" She responded, "No." He told her "Then neither do I. Go, and sin no more."

      So, Mohammed's response to sin: strict interpretation of the law. Jesus' response: mercy and love. Which one would you rather follow?

      Oh, and one other thing: you always hear about Moslims being killed for converting to Christianity. Ever wonder why you never hear of the reverse? Families might disown their children for leaving the church, but they wouldn't have them murdered.

      --
      God invented whiskey so the Irish would not rule the world.
    53. Re:Geeks everywhere are (essentially) the same by corbettw · · Score: 1

      Well I'd suggest reading the Old Testament of the Bible (an easy and fun read in lego). It pretty clearly states that the chosen people (in this case, the Jews) should kill pretty much anyone whom isn't chosen.

      True enough, but Christians don't live under the Old Testament. At least not to the extent that we have to kill off anyone in the Holy Land. So you're kind of comparing apples to oranges. What you should look at are the teachings of Jesus versus the teachings of Mohammed. Those are the two founders of Christianity and Islam, respectively, and what they have to say on various subjects is interesting, to say the least.

      As for "real" Moslims who don't believe in Jihad, I've known many Moslims who are basically Moslim in culture only, or because they were raised that way. But just like most Christians don't practice the core concepts of Christianity (I haven't sold off all my worldly goods and given them to the poor recently), most Moslims don't follow the core concepts of Islam (like tying explosives to your chest and detonating them in a movie theater).

      And like you, I hate Jihad, but don't hate Moslims. I'd really like to see all Moslims convert to Christianity, because I honestly and earnestly believe that their souls are in jeopardy. Let alone our chance for peace in this world. I don't want to eradicate the people from the earth, but would like to see their religion go away. BUT, those are personal decisions we all have to make on our own, so other than supporting missionaries I'm not in favor of doing anything overt to convert people.

      --
      God invented whiskey so the Irish would not rule the world.
    54. Re:Geeks everywhere are (essentially) the same by corbettw · · Score: 1

      And deep down you know that every foreign innocent life snuffed out by American imperial wars of conquest are equally indefensible.

      Well, then, it's a good thing we've never launched one. As Colin Powell has said, Americans have gone in harm's way for many other countries, and the only land we've asked for in return was enough to bury our war dead.

      Collateral damage is MURDER.

      Wait, I thought meat was MURDER? Does this mean you expect us to eat the remains from collateral damage? Man, you are sick!

      --
      God invented whiskey so the Irish would not rule the world.
    55. Re:Geeks everywhere are (essentially) the same by Alan+Partridge · · Score: 1

      You mean like live Slashdot ACs?

      --
      That was classic intercourse!
    56. Re:Geeks everywhere are (essentially) the same by Lady+Jazzica · · Score: 1

      The first "crusade" was in 1095 and Muslims took Jerusalem in 638, so it was over 400 years difference.

      Well, it was only then that the Byzantine emperor asked for help.

      Christian turks in what is now western Turkey

      They weren't Turks, they were Byzantines, Greeks living in the Eastern Roman Empire.

      And his assistance? Send "Christian" knights to retake Jerusalem. These "Christian" knights did this, but in the process murdered innocent women and children, and most likely did even worse.

      Sure, but then again the Allies in World War II committed certain war crimes too. That doesn't make the Allied effort wrong in itself - fighting the Nazis and Japanese was a good thing, and the war crimes were a bad thing.

      The only clear winner was Rome, who now had less knights to challenge their authority.

      Since when are knights automatically opposed to Rome?

    57. Re:Geeks everywhere are (essentially) the same by Lady+Jazzica · · Score: 1

      No, Otomans came after the crusades

      Sorry, I should have said Turks.

      And "right to defend christian pilgrims" did not prevent crusaders from trying to kick some Byzantine a** while they were at it.

      Well, sometime before the Fourth Crusade, one of the Byzantine Emperors had ordered attacks against the Venetians. The Emperors also conspired with the Muslims to attack the Crusaders. So some of the Crusaders wanted revenge for these attacks and betrayals.

      Partly as a result of Fourth Crusade, Byzantine power fell so that Selcuk Turks easily overrun them.

      Byzantine power had already been waning for a long time. And maybe if the Byzantines had cooperated a little more with the Crusaders instead of attacking them, the Turks wouldn't have been such a problem for them.

      And "slaying of innocent pilgrims" was used just as excuse.

      Not at all.

      And *that* is one of the reasons for hatred that still exists.

      Not really. In the 1800s or 1900s, some Arab nationalists started a propaganda campaign about how bad the Crusaders were, in order to get other Arabs annoyed with the West. Before that, the Crusades weren't really a big deal to Arabs. During the Crusades themselves, the Christian knights and their Muslim counterparts got along pretty well with each other. For instance, Saladin's nephew was knighted by one of the Christian kings leading the Crusades.

    58. Re:Geeks everywhere are (essentially) the same by Alan+Partridge · · Score: 1

      how do you know I'm NOT in Iraq, fuckwit?

      --
      That was classic intercourse!
    59. Re:Geeks everywhere are (essentially) the same by CowBovNeal · · Score: 1

      Thanks for the link my friend. Very interesting read.
      This article also contains what Im trying to highlight,
      "Although many of its own citizens struggle to make do, the Saudi government sends about two billion dollars a year in aid to other Islamic countries, building mosques and madrassas, underwriting religious universities, distributing books and tracts, funding charities--and supporting jihad".

      --
      Bush is on fire and its not good for my lungs.
    60. Re:Geeks everywhere are (essentially) the same by localman · · Score: 1

      True enough, but Christians don't live under the Old Testament.

      Ah yes, selective religion. My point exactly. I know very well the difference between the old and new testaments. I was raised Christian -- my grandfater was the pastor of our church, in fact. But the old and new testaments form one book, and Jesus did not say at any point to discard the old testament. If he had the Christians would likely have done so by now, as it is largely an embarassment to the religion.

      most Moslims don't follow the core concepts of Islam (like tying explosives to your chest and detonating them in a movie theater).

      I'm sorry, but you must know that that is not a core concept of Islam any more than it is Christianity. If you can point out to me where the Koran encourages terrorism (killing innocents to effect change) I will stand corrected.

      I'd really like to see all Moslims convert to Christianity, because I honestly and earnestly believe that their souls are in jeopardy.

      And therin lies the rub. The religions of the world are more alike than different: they all want to save you from yourself. Everyone thinks that everyone elses beliefs are dangerous. So dangerous in fact, that we might have to eliminate them somehow to save us all.

      So ask yourself what belief is _really_ dangerous. Perhaps this fear of others itself.

      To your credit, you support conversion in a fairly passive manner, but perhaps if we (and they) were not so interested in conversion (for each others' safety) there would be far less to worry about in the first place.

      Cheers.

    61. Re:Geeks everywhere are (essentially) the same by mikis · · Score: 1
      Well, sometime before the Fourth Crusade, one of the Byzantine Emperors had ordered attacks against the Venetians. The Emperors also conspired with the Muslims to attack the Crusaders. So some of the Crusaders wanted revenge for these attacks and betrayals.
      It all depends from the side which is telling you the story. Byzantines did no see it that way. Remember that before that Jerusalem and the Holy Land was under Byzantine rule. And that it was Crusaiders (supported by Rome) who came to the borders of Byzantine empire, not vice versa. So it is natural that Byzantians feeled threatened.
      And maybe if the Byzantines had cooperated a little more with the Crusaders instead of attacking them, the Turks wouldn't have been such a problem for them.
      Again, if you believe in only one side's story, it maybe so, but other side has some pretty strong arguments themself.
      Not really. In the 1800s or 1900s, some Arab nationalists started a propaganda campaign about how bad the Crusaders were, in order to get other Arabs annoyed with the West.
      As oposed to Rome spreading propaganda that Christian pilgrims are brutally slayed and that must be protected at any cost?

      You reminded me of a great book about history of Jerusalem that I read a while ago. It was written by Serbian historian, so you can not say he was biased toward Arabs. I remember that after one of the Arab counter-attacks, Crusaiders DID some terrible things, not only to Muslim/Arab population, but to Jews as well. They raped, looted, burned houses, killed anyone, including women and children. Of course, it was later used as an excuse for anti-christian/jewish hatred, but it is a historical fact.

    62. Re:Geeks everywhere are (essentially) the same by Wolfrider · · Score: 1

      --Check out http://thisistrue.com/ and wait for a Zero Tolerance story. We have a pretty f-'d up society over here too, sometimes.

      --
      .
      == WolfriderV6 == I'm willing to admit that *I just might* be wrong... Are you??
    63. Re:Geeks everywhere are (essentially) the same by corbettw · · Score: 1

      ...Jesus did not say at any point to discard the old testament.

      It's true that Jesus said He didn't come to abolish the law, but to fulfill it. But at the same time, the teachings in the New Testament make clear that much of the old law, aside from the actual commandments, are no longer required for justification. From Peter's vision in Acts, in which God showed him all sorts of "unclean" animals and told him to eat them, to Paul's teachings in Galatians about circumcision, it's made clear that the Old Testament laws don't apply in the same way.

      Also, it's important to remember the context of the wars Israel fought in the Old Testament. Yes, they were brutal, but wars have always been brutal. And they did have to follow strict rules in conducting warfare.

      I'm sorry, but you must know that that is not a core concept of Islam any more than it is Christianity. If you can point out to me where the Koran encourages terrorism (killing innocents to effect change) I will stand corrected.

      I'm going to cop out and take the easy way on this one. Rather than writing up an essay, summing up all of the verses from the Koran and the Haddith sanctioning violence against innocents, I'll just point you in the direction of some people who have done this work already: Islam & Terrorism, on the Answering Islam site. This site is maintained by Christians, for Christians, so I'm sure the Moslims on Slashdot who read the articles will disagree with their conclusions. Having lived in Islamic countries and lived with Moslims, I'm inclined to give the site the benefit of the doubt. Based on my personal experience, their conclusions seem accurate.

      The religions of the world are more alike than different: they all want to save you from yourself. Everyone thinks that everyone elses beliefs are dangerous.

      Well, in all honesty, if you're not willing to say someone else is wrong, you certainly can't say you're right. And if you're not certain your belief is right, why hold it? Also, I resent the idea that my concern is born of fear. It comes from a certainty that Christ is God, and you can't go to Heaven unless you follow Him; couple that with a desire to see people go to Heaven, and of course I want good Moslims to convert (of course, only God can know the inner workings of someone's heart, so I'm sure there are plenty of Moslims who will go to Heaven, and plenty of "Christians" who will fall short, I just think you're on safer ground by trying to follow Christ's teachings).

      --
      God invented whiskey so the Irish would not rule the world.
    64. Re:Geeks everywhere are (essentially) the same by corbettw · · Score: 1

      Are hurricanes motivated by debts owed to their oil business partners, friends and family?

      How do you know they're not? Have you asked one recently?

      --
      God invented whiskey so the Irish would not rule the world.
    65. Re:Geeks everywhere are (essentially) the same by localman · · Score: 1

      You seem like a reasonable fellow, and I don't want to argue too long, but I will respectfully respond.

      The new testament does adjust (if not contradict) the teachings of the old testament. But I must admit that such waffling doesn't seem very divine.

      I looked over the site you mentioned, and there are some strong words there from the Koran. But as I said there are a lot of strong words in the Bible as well. The premise of the site is that Islam is dangerous because members of the religion can justify their actions based on certain scriptures.
      Of course, they would have to ignore the other passages to do so, since there are many passages about peace in the Koran. This is similar to the Bible, where you can find justification and/or forgiveness for just about you might want to do.

      I guess my point is that religion doesn't make one act in a certain way... that comes from a deeper place and then we fit our religion to it. I am guessing you can already see that, though.

      I think that the Islamic countries are pretty well messed up, and their cultures are a bit disfunctional. But I don't think that springs directly from Islam. If it were, then the US Moslims would still have problems. But they don't seem to be any more troubled than anyone else over here.

      Well, in all honesty, if you're not willing to say someone else is wrong, you certainly can't say you're right. And if you're not certain your belief is right, why hold it?

      Oh, I'm sure you're wrong and I'm right :) But I don't think it's dangerous (for me or you) that you don't agree with me. That's the difference between religion and personal philosophy.

      Also, I resent the idea that my concern is born of fear. It comes from a certainty that Christ is God, and you can't go to Heaven unless you follow Him

      Well, we may just be arguing semantics, but it sounds like you're afraid you won't go to heaven if you don't believe in him. So that is a motivation of fear. Either of punishment, or the lack of reward.

      Maybe you're saying that before you worry about heaven and hell, you respect the historical figure of Christ enought to follow him regardless. I'm willing to believe that you feel that way.

      One could argue that my beliefs are born of fear in a manner as well: fear that if I don't see things as they are I will make poor decisions and live a less interesting life. But I think the real driving force for me is curiosity, not fear.

      Feel free to respond, but I am comfortable with our disagreement.

    66. Re:Geeks everywhere are (essentially) the same by corbettw · · Score: 1

      You seem pretty reasonable too. This will be my last post in this thread, just wanted to throw one more thing out there.

      Re: strong words in the Koran and the Bible. The difference is which part of which book (or collection of books, in the case of the Bible) focuses on what. The Old Testament is chock full of commands to burn villages, but these were specific instances, the Israelites weren't expected to make war on everybody. At the same time, by the time Jesus came along, they weren't warring with anybody, and Jesus commanded to "turn the other cheek". So as Judaism progressed into Christianity, it became less violent.

      With Islam, though, the earliest verses are the ones that are the most peaceful. This is most likely because it wasn't until after Mohammed was kicked out of Mecca that he went apeshit and ordered his followers to start killing people left and right. Given that his early converts were mostly nomadic Arabs, who lived a pretty violent life, this wasn't asking much of them. But we ended up with a religion which was basically founded in warfare, by a man obsessed with getting revenge against those who wronged him. Telling point: Mohammed's last words, as he lay dying of poison, were to curse Christians and Jews, Jesus' last words on the cross were to forgive the men who crucified Him. Given just those two facts, which religion would you rather join?

      This is another important point: individual followers of any religion can be nutjobs. Here in the States, we've got people who have tried to blow up medical clinics because they thought abortions were performed there. I'm not sure, but I seem to recall at least one instance where the building wasn't used for that purpose. Didn't stop the nutters from lighting the fuse, though. So you can't look at the followers of a religion to determine if it's worthwhile, you have to look at the founders, at the example they set. Even setting aside the question of Christ's divinity, the lives of Jesus and Mohammed are drastically different. One was tempered by compassion and mercy, the other by greed and bloodlust. Given that any group of people will strive to emulate those they think are closer to God, is it any wonder that so many Moslims get pulled into the trap of thinking it's a good idea to strap dynamite to their chest before catching the afternoon matinee?

      --
      God invented whiskey so the Irish would not rule the world.
    67. Re:Geeks everywhere are (essentially) the same by sufehmi · · Score: 1
      Hi corbettw,

      Here's an anecdote which, for me, sums up all of the differences between Christianity and Islam: I'm sure you're aware of the story from the haddith of the adulterous woman who was brought before Mohammed. She was pregnant with another man's child, so he ordered her to brought back after the child was born. So it was done. Then, he ordered her to be brought back after the child had been weaned. Again, it was done as he ordered. The third time she appeared before him, he ordered her stoned to death. Sure enough, she was executed for having slept with a man not her husband.


      Again, another story not presented in whole.

      First, it's the woman that came to Muhammad and asked him to have the law applied to her.
      So Muhammad asked that it's only to be done after she gave birth to the baby, and he told her family to treat her kindly.
      Second, he led the funeral prayer himself, which is considered to be a great honor. The companions were confused (seeing that she committed one of the greatest sin in Islam, but yet it's the Prophet himself that led the funeral for her), and one of them asked him about it. Muhammad replied that she repented in such away that if her repentance were to be spread over seventy people of Medina it would have sufficed them all.
      There cannot be a better or higher degree of repentance than this; she chose to speak the truth at the cost of her life.

      She could just told lies and saved her live (like what many hypocrites do at that time), but she didn't.

      The reference to this can be found for example [ here ]

      I could describe all your other points, but seeing that this is the one that sums up all of the differences between Christianity and Islam, I'll let you reflect on this for now.

      You're not the only one that got Islam wrong, and there are many that got it worse than you. Feel free to contact me if you have further questions.
    68. Re:Geeks everywhere are (essentially) the same by localman · · Score: 1

      Good points all around. One thing, though:

      So you can't look at the followers of a religion to determine if it's worthwhile, you have to look at the founders, at the example they set.

      I'm not sure I totally agree with that. You certainly shouldn't judge the founders by their followers, but rather their own actions. And Christ was certainly a very honorable man, seemingly more honorable than Mohammed.

      But since religion's aim is to make people live better, I think you have to judge on how effective it is at that. So if a very honorable man starts a religion whose followers are a bunch of dangerous nuts, then the religion isn't very effective.

      Modern American Chistianity is a pretty decent religion by that measure. Middle ages Christianity not so much.

      I've often wondered though, what the best religion in that regard is. It would probably be impossible to determine, but I wonder about that sometimes.

      Nice talking to you...

    69. Re:Geeks everywhere are (essentially) the same by corbettw · · Score: 1

      Hmm, interesting. Thanks for pointing me to the ull story, it certainly does have different implications. That said, it doesn't negate the idea that Jesus was more merciful. Mohammed may have been merciful in comparison with other tribal leaders, and as a tribal leader he probably did the right thing, but he still falls short of the example set by Christ.

      Here's another anecdote, this time I believe from the Koran. Hopefully you can point me to a more accurate interpretation, if there is one.

      One of Mohammed's lieutenants was captured by a rival tribe. When they threatened to kill him, he denounced Mohammed and Allah. After he escaped, he ran back to Mohammed and confessed his sin. Mohammed told him it was OK, and if the same thing happened again, he should lie to save his own skin.

      Compare this with Jesus admonishing his followers to always tell the truth; at one point He asked them, "What does it profit a man, to gain the whole world, but lose his soul?" He also said "Whoever denies the Son of Man, I will deny him at the end of time." In fact, Christ's chief disciple, Peter, denied him to save his own skin. While he was forgiven for doing so, he wasn't given blanket permission to do it again.

      Many Christians were martyred over the centuries for refusing to deny Christ's divinity. Yet Moslims are taught it's OK to lie about your beliefs and motives. This is especially troubling in light of terrorist attacks carried out by Wahhabists. At least with the Reformation and Counter-Reformation in Christianity five centuries ago (Christianity's most violent period), people were willing to stand up and say what their beliefs were, consequences be damned. After all, I'd rather be killed for my beliefs than deny them and go to Hell. But as long as Moslims are taught it's OK to lie, then how can any be trusted?

      --
      God invented whiskey so the Irish would not rule the world.
  8. Completely different by egg+troll · · Score: 4, Funny

    There is no comparison. Here in America we play Dungeons and Dragons. Over in the Middle East its Dunes and Djinis. Nope, nothing in common.

    --

    C - A language that combines the speed of assembly with the ease of use of assembly.
  9. Umm... by jabberjaw · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Why wouldn't they be "just like us"?

    1. Re:Umm... by DAldredge · · Score: 1, Informative

      Because they believe that women are lesser creatures that have next to no rights?

      Look at how women and other religious minorities are treated before you start saying that other geeks are just like them.

      Do some research.

    2. Re:Umm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Lets see... cultural differences...differences in governments and law... different educational systems... they smell like ass - oh wait, all nerds smell like that. Guess they're not so different after all.

    3. Re:Umm... by tomstdenis · · Score: 1, Insightful

      And this is much different then how blacks were/are treated? How people critical about religion down south are treated [or in government]?

      When's the last time someone said "God fuck America" out loud? Have you ever worn a Nazi emblem just for kicks? etc. etc.

      I think you'll find that things you take for granted right where you live can be construed by others as "extreme".

      Tom

      --
      Someday, I'll have a real sig.
    4. Re:Umm... by Haeleth · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Because they believe that women are lesser creatures that have next to no rights?

      Look at how women and other religious minorities are treated before you start saying that other geeks are just like them.


      Um, they do? Show me the bit in the articles where it said that all the Saudi geeks were 100% behind the fundamentalist excesses of their government.

      I might as well conclude that all American geeks are creationists? After all, some people in your government are creationists, so obviously that applies to every member of the population too!

    5. Re:Umm... by DAldredge · · Score: 1

      1: What happend to blacks was wrong. Never said it wasn't, but it was corrected. Saudi isn't trying to correct they way the mistreat women/other religions.
      2: You just did
      3: Any skinhead/kkk gathering.

      I look at the USA with the same critical eye that I look at other countries with, but just because the USA has done wrong in the past, and will do wrong in the future, is no reason to excuse the behavior of Saudi Arabia.

    6. Re:Umm... by tomstdenis · · Score: 1

      Is it Saudi Arabia or just some faction that is in power?

      Tom

      --
      Someday, I'll have a real sig.
    7. Re:Umm... by bstadil · · Score: 2, Informative
      Why wouldn't they be "just like us"?

      This is the scary part.

      Somehow you hoped that people in such a fucked up society that leaves little girls in a burning school as they were not dressed correctly, were different.

      I for one would like to be able to point to a special aberrant gene causing this crap.

      --
      Help fight continental drift.
    8. Re:Umm... by DAldredge · · Score: 1

      The current 'rulers' have been in power for dozens of years.

    9. Re:Umm... by gid13 · · Score: 1

      Preach on, brother (or sister).

      I know very few Arabs, but the one I've talked to the most has lived in Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, the U.S. and Canada. He rates them in the following order, from best to worst:
      U.S.
      Canada
      Pakistan
      Saudi Arabia
      and he claims that there's quite a jump in each step.
      While I think he may be a tad off on Canada being worse than the States, the fact remains that he's COMPLETELY against the Saudi government. The fact that he's afraid to do anything about it (especially when in that country) is very different than supporting the apparently sexist, racist, and dictatorial values the Saudi government upholds.

      Please note that he's the only person I know who's lived in Saudi Arabia, and having never been there myself, this is all the information I have about the place, and it's second hand.

    10. Re:Umm... by spectecjr · · Score: 1

      Because they believe that women are lesser creatures that have next to no rights?

      Look at how women and other religious minorities are treated before you start saying that other geeks are just like them.


      Humans are the same the world over. Anyone who thinks otherwise is a racist bigot.

      Unfortunately, that means being able to accept that all humans have the propensity to be nasty mean son-of-a-bitches who will happily trample one another for a cheap DVD player, or who will mindlessly kill one group because they look or smell funny.

      This applies the world over. It's not the exclusive province of one country or another. And every country and every race has a history of barbarism. Western society didn't invent the lynching, the iron maiden, the anal and vaginal pear, the gas chamber or the burning cross for nothing.

      Until recently, women weren't allowed to vote, and were treated as chattle. If you want to blame anything, blame religion.

      --
      Coming soon - pyrogyra
    11. Re:Umm... by dubstar · · Score: 1

      Somehow you hoped that people in such a fucked up society that leaves little girls in a burning school as they were not dressed correctly, were different.

      Yes, because surely something so heinously stupid would never happen in the United States of America.

      It's not a gene, it's little green men on pieces of little green paper... and some guys in funny hats and robes all vying for your 'faith', which equates to THEIR power. The Saudi's are certainly not the first to do something dumb in the name of 'religious beliefs', though.

    12. Re:Umm... by rahard · · Score: 1
      DAldrege wrote:
      Look at how women and other religious minorities are treated before you start saying that other geeks are just like them.

      You know, for all the talk of democracy, there hasn't (or won't) been a women elected as the leader of the country in America. Meanwhile in countries where there are lots of Muslims (eg. Indonesia) there has been women presidents / leaders.

      Back to the original topic. I'd say geeks are just the same everywhere! Coding is the major (only?) force that drives them daily. Who cares if you're white / black / brown / yellow / purple / green / red, as long as you have the urge to use vi daily, you're okay.

      # cat > /etc/motd
      vi rules!
      ^D

  10. Essentially the same, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    In Saudi Arabia the Linux zealot will blow himself up when his company goes with a Microsoft solution.

    1. Re:Essentially the same, but... by dema · · Score: 5, Funny

      While an MS zealot will run into a company using Linux and attempt to blow himself up, only to discover his explosion mechanism has given him the blue screen of no death.

  11. I, for one... by inode_buddha · · Score: 5, Insightful

    think it would be great if we all actually *did* get along just once. If geeks can help that, so much the better!

    --
    C|N>K
  12. Well.. by DAldredge · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Save for the fact that they treat women like lesser beings that have next to no rights...

    1. Re:Well.. by relrelrel · · Score: 1

      Yeah... us weaterners should really learn from their great example. I really mean that.

      --
      --- any post that takes longer than 20 seconds to write, isn't worth writing
    2. Re:Well.. by JaredOfEuropa · · Score: 1, Insightful
      Save for the fact that they treat women like lesser beings that have next to no rights...
      Where does this 'fact' come from? I imagine from the same place as the 'fact' that all Americans are uncultured fat cowbows with no knowledge of the rest of the world whatsoever, or the 'fact' that all Europeans are liberal hippies who smell like cheese. It comes from ignorance.

      You should know better than to generalise like that. Shame on you.
      --
      If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
    3. Re:Well.. by JewFish · · Score: 1

      As an uncultured fat cowboy with no knowledge of the rest of the world, I sir am offended.

    4. Re:Well.. by Imperator · · Score: 1

      Those are the Saudis in general. Let's not assume every Saudi agrees with that. I imagine many of them don't, in fact.

      How would you like it if they said "let's remember that every American likes to invade Arab countries and believes the Second Coming is at hand"?

      --

      Gates' Law: Every 18 months, the speed of software halves.
    5. Re:Well.. by tuxette · · Score: 4, Informative
      Where does this 'fact' come from?

      Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, reports from the women themselves, etc.

      Here's an example of Saudi Arabian barbarism towards women and girls: Religious police make girls die in fire because they aren't wearing headscarves

      --
      People say I'm crazy, I got diamonds on the soles of my shoes...
    6. Re:Well.. by GoofyBoy · · Score: 1

      > Those are the Saudis in general. Let's not assume every Saudi agrees with that. I imagine many of them don't, in fact.

      So you are saying "In general Saudis are like that but not the majority of them"?

      That makes no sense at all.

      --
      The surprise isn't how often we make bad choices; the surprise is how seldom they defeat us.
    7. Re:Well.. by Billly+Gates · · Score: 1

      Go to any human rights webpage. Amynesty internation has some information.

      Hell, woman are not even allowed to drive!

      They can not book hotel rooms because women who are not with their husbands are considered prostitutes and whores. This actually happened to a female western journalist. The hotel refused her because her husband was not present.

      Service women in the milatary can be spat at and fined if they do not cover their face, etc.

      They also persecute christians, jews, and even shi-ite muslims who are not the suni majority.

    8. Re:Well.. by Billly+Gates · · Score: 1

      Oh and they sponsor terrorism including Humas, and Al-Quada.

      Suadi Arabia was only one of two countries who reconigized the Taliban as the offical government of Afganistan.

    9. Re:Well.. by JaredOfEuropa · · Score: 3, Interesting

      The 'fact', and those websites, refer to the Saudi geeks, not to the people in general or their leaders. Perhaps the Saudi geeks are indeed like us, in the sense that they tend to be more openminded, better educated, more tolerant, and less dogmatic in their religions than the general populace. Instead of spending time on the Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International websites, you may find it worthwhile to try and get to know some Saudi's, so you can form an opinion firsthand.

      Also don't forget that it isn't very long ago when people in western civilisations thought of women in much the same way as certain Muslim zealots do.

      --
      If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
    10. Re:Well.. by Haeleth · · Score: 4, Insightful

      That's talking about Saudi fundamentalists, not Saudi geeks. You know, there are "Christian" fundamentalists in America who believe that women should have no rights, too, but we don't go round accusing all Americans of believing that.

      There are probably people in Norway who believe things that would disgust you as well as me, but I'm not going to accuse you of beliving the same things as they do just because you live in the same country. Please accord Saudis the same respect.

    11. Re:Well.. by C10H14N2 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I find it interesting that ANY attempt to portray any other aspect of Saudi life, with all that implies, that doesn't include the familiar propaganda, which of course may be true, is met with furious opposition as any statement other than the party line on the subject should be put down.

      The articles in question were vignettes on a much more human, reasonable side of Saudi life. Oh, the heresy. These complaints smack of 1980's propaganda about the Soviet Union wherein any attempt to humanize even the most lowly of citizens on the other side to a degree that didn't fit that approved portrayal was viewed as practically treasonous.

      If the articles concluded that Saudi Arabia was a wonderful idyllic land of nothing but brotherly and sisterly love with no social problems, fine, fire away. However, the writer has acknowledged the problems and chosen to move on, leaving that analysis to the droves of writers that have already written volumes on the subject and continue every day.

      This sort of journalism illustrates what isn't on the standard yellow journalistic boilerplate and does so with integrity. The endless spewing of vitriol at such an objective account shows the fragility of the standard-issue American view on all things foreign and belies its assumed basis in truth.

    12. Re:Well.. by XO · · Score: 1

      I work in an Arabic community in the U.S.. People tell me this all the time, but the only evidence i see of it, even in the media, are when people break laws (the LAWS are a bit draconian, for damn sure, but they are the laws of the land they are in). Maybe it happens in private. Sure, by culture, women aren't permitted to congregate in public. But from what I've seen, the Arabic men mostly treat the Arabic women as princesses.

      --
      "Champagne for my real friends - and real pain for my sham friends!" http://ericblade.postalboard.com/
    13. Re:Well.. by DAldredge · · Score: 1

      But what I have written of is the offical policy and law of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.

      It isn't some lone org or crazy doing this, it is the goverment.

    14. Re:Well.. by DAldredge · · Score: 1

      Once the Saudis change their laws and official goverment policy to be against what I have stated, then perhaps I will.

      I suggest you research the Saudi legal systems before you denfend it. I have, and once you do you will be shocked.

    15. Re:Well.. by Tim+C · · Score: 1

      Oh and they sponsor terrorism

      One word: NORAID.

      It may not have been official, but a number of US administrations at least turned a blind eye to NORAID's fund-raising efforts.

    16. Re:Well.. by GoofyBoy · · Score: 1

      >Perhaps the Saudi geeks are indeed like us, in the sense that they tend to be more openminded, better educated, more tolerant, and less dogmatic in their religions than the general populace.

      Or perhaps not. What the hell is the point?

      How can one be a "Geek" and then we suddenly know everything, from their political stance to religous views to their favourite colour?

      I can be a "Geek" and still be oppressive to women.

      >Instead of spending time on the Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International websites, you may find it worthwhile to try and get to know some Saudi's, so you can form an opinion firsthand.

      How do you think these groups form their opinions? By watching TV?

      --
      The surprise isn't how often we make bad choices; the surprise is how seldom they defeat us.
    17. Re:Well.. by Hobbex · · Score: 1, Troll

      Well, this is Roblimo writing, so that he overlooks this fact isn't exactly suprising. Read this article to find out more about this condescending, chauvinistic, closet misogynist.

      I quote:

      A woman just like you wouldn't be there for you when you wanted a hug. She'd be obsessively coding or posting on Slashdot herself, and would brush you off when you needed her. What you really want is a woman who will be there for you when you get tired of staring at your monitor and need some loving, but will leave you alone and not demand your attention when you're busy. You don't want a Geek Girl. You want a woman who is willing and able to meet a geek's needs, which is not the same thing at all.

      Men involved in activities that demand long periods of intense concentration (programmers, artists, writers, musicians, etc.) need women who will respect what they do and help them do it well, not women who compete with them.

      We need what are now called "old fashioned girls" who don't mind cooking our meals, rubbing our sore shoulders, and running our bath water for us. There are plenty of these women out there.


      Apparently being locked up in servitude of me is what many women want, so then the Saudi's are doing them a favor...

    18. Re:Well.. by HrothgarReborn · · Score: 2, Insightful

      This is a problem of their society. Are there not things in Western governments we disagree with. I have been to the Middle East. Geeks are a rare commodity but they are usually more liberal and less tied to traditional mindsets than their neighbors. These are the people most likely to effect change in thier country. I would no more saddle them with the womens right issues of Muslim countries than I would blame /.ers for the patent laws of Western governments.

    19. Re:Well.. by minairia · · Score: 3, Insightful

      true, but in America it isn't official policy supposedly based on the word of God to treat women like animals. In this country, it is the pefect right of someone to be a hard core Chrisitan fundamentalist male chauvinist. However, this person can not use these values in the work place or in society beyond a certain limit without being sued or arrested.

    20. Re:Well.. by minion · · Score: 1, Flamebait

      One of my friends went to the middle east once - someplace she hasn't been before, so she went there for vacation. If it wasn't for her brother being with her, she'd probably be dead. One of the people on the bus she was on was threatening her because she didn't have her arms or head covered.

      You think they're just like us huh? Did the Americans have kamakazi pilots? Suicide bombers? No. America is a "cultral melting pot" remember? That basically says we're fairly tolerant, because we see so many different races and religions each day. Until the Taliban fell over there, the ENTIRE freaking nation was one governemnt - one religion. So you can't tell me its only the few extremists there that would kill women for being head-garb-less. Actually, its only a few people there who aren't extemists, that would object to killing them for such a petty thing.

      --

      -- If we don't stand up for our rights, now, there will be no right to stand up for them later.
    21. Re:Well.. by ddrfemme · · Score: 1

      maybe i just hang out with the wrong american geeks. This gave me a mistaken perception of eqality and respect for women as human beings, maybe even intellectual ones. Its been a while since I've read this women = maids type thinking, but i guess it shows that the US is after all just like Saudi Arabia.

    22. Re:Well.. by Tim+C · · Score: 1

      He's not defending the Saudi legal system, he's giving individual people the benefit of the doubt.

      Just because a person isn't willing to sacrifice themself for the good of others, does not make them complicit. If that were the case, then we would all be just as guilty for sitting here in our nice homes, rather than travelling out there to help our oppressed fellow humans.

    23. Re:Well.. by Fnkmaster · · Score: 1

      Yes, there are crazy fundamentalists in America. The difference is that their words don't have the backing of law, and generally, if they try to act on them, they will go to jail.

    24. Re:Well.. by efflux · · Score: 1
      Until the Taliban fell over there

      Umm... are you just willy-nilly talking about various middle eastern countries as if they were a single entity? Shame on you.

      --
      Do I contradict myself? Very well, then I contradict myself, I am large, I contain multitudes. -- Walt Whitman
    25. Re:Well.. by myowntrueself · · Score: 1

      "There are probably people in Norway who believe things that would disgust you as well as me,"

      Fuckin' OATH!

      There are Norwegians that believe lutefisk is a foodstuff!

      --
      In the free world the media isn't government run; the government is media run.
    26. Re:Well.. by jgalun · · Score: 1
      The great majority of people worldwide will agree with the following two ideas:

      1) People everywhere are basically the same, with the same human desires, goals, motivations, etc.

      2) Different cultures organize themselves very differently, and some cultures are preferable to others in specific aspects.

      There are two problems with the discussion we're having about these articles. First of all, it's not clear whether we're talking about individuals or cultures. So when we're asked "why should Saudi geeks be any different from us," some people are responding by referencing culture (Saudi geek culture exists in a national culture that is very different from ours, so naturally it will be different) and some are responding by referencing human nature (people are people, people who likes playing with Linux in Saudi Arabia like playing with Linux for the same reason as we do in the US).

      These two groups of respondents are not really talking to each other, they're talking past each other, because they use the same words but with different meanings.

      This makes the discussion frustrating, but what makes it far worse is the small group of people who believe that because people are people it is unfair to judge between cultures. In their argument, because all cultures are made up of people, and people are the same at heart, we have no right to judge others just because they chose to organize their society along different cultural lines.

      So now, we have three groups:
      1. People doing cultural/political comparisons
      2. People doing comparisons of individuals
      3. People insisting that cultural/political comparisons are innately invalid.

      Most people in group 1 would have no problem with what group 2 is saying, and most people in group 2 would have no problem with group 1 are saying, provided they understood that to focus on cultural differences instead of similarities as individuals is not to deny the similarity of human nature across cultures (and vice versa).

      But once you introduce group 3 claiming that group 1 are racists, group 1 is obviously going to get very defensive. And the problem is, it's very hard for group 1 to distinguish between group 2 - the people who are simply framing the discussion differently - and group 3 - the people who are claiming racism. So they start reacting to all criticism as coming from group 3, even though most of it comes from group 2.

      Anyway, to go back to what you said about American journalism:

      The articles in question were vignettes on a much more human, reasonable side of Saudi life. Oh, the heresy. These complaints smack of 1980's propaganda about the Soviet Union wherein any attempt to humanize even the most lowly of citizens on the other side to a degree that didn't fit that approved portrayal was viewed as practically treasonous.

      This is a classic example of the problem we're seeing right now on the Slashdot message boards.

      Believe it or not, very few thought that Russians were different from us as individuals. And believe it or not, the neoconservatives (Paul Wolfowitz, for example) do not hate (for example) Iranians, but think that because Iranians are the same as us they should organize their political culture along the same lines as well, because democracy is a basic human right since all humans are essentially the same.

      But the problem is, group 3 uses arguments that all people are the same to deny all differences between political cultures. So in the 1980s, group 3 said that because people are people, that meant that we had no right to fear the Soviet government, no right to act against the Soviet Union, no right to try to bring down the Soviet system. They argued that because the average Russian feared war just as much as the average American, then the Soviet government is no different from the American government and we should not act in judgment of it.

      That's a premise conservatives (

    27. Re:Well.. by TKinias · · Score: 1

      Yes, there are crazy fundamentalists in America. The difference is that their words don't have the backing of law, and generally, if they try to act on them, they will go to jail.

      ...or get appointed attorney general...

      --
      In principio creauit Linus Linucem.
    28. Re:Well.. by FredFnord · · Score: 1

      > You think they're just like us huh? Did the Americans have kamakazi pilots? Suicide bombers?

      You're right. Having Timothy McVeigh (sp?) is infinitely better than having a suicide bomber, because after he's killed dozens of people, WE get to kill him back!

      -fred

      --
      Sign #11 of Slashdot overdose: You see the phrase 'moderate Republican' and you wonder if that would be a +1 or a -1.
    29. Re:Well.. by C10H14N2 · · Score: 1
      "when we are talking about how to deal with the Soviet Union or how to deal with Iran, we are talking about how to deal with another culture and the government system that is the reflection of that culture, and not how to deal with other individuals."

      Textbook Kenneth Waltz. However, levels of analysis are not inherently "liberal" or "conservative." If anything, your "group 3" is "conservative" as that represents a stock "realist" point of view where individuals, cultures and forms of government are of little to no importance in so much as the resulting global influence is the only real concern. Right. Lived on three continents, been to four and have a degree in IR. I'm clear on this idea.

      These articles are nothing more than journalism in the strictest sense of the term: a presentation of facts with as little emphasis as possible on analysis. We have seen in this country (the USA) a dramatic shift away from true journalism. These articles were very close to that ideal. A few judgements here and there, but generally, just a series of observations--a "journal" if you will.
      In that sense, my comments were directed at those who seeing facts that did not fit with their own analysis, reacted against them as if the writer's analysis was contrary to fact when the writer actually did very little, if any, real analysis, choosing instead to report the facts as seen. There is at least a tacit understanding that any such journalism is not complete and thus if I say "Arabs seem to wear white alot, they like computers, can be called geeks and these ones say XYZ about ABC," I'm not analyzing, I'm reporting. THAT is why the responses seen in this thread are completely out of context.

      In the current environment of 24/7 "news" that is almost nothing BUT editorializing analysis (read: by definition _not_ "journalism"), it is difficult for people to recognize actual journalism when it does appear. These articles, it is safe to say, are nothing more than journalism and damned good, timely journalism at that.

    30. Re:Well.. by Hobbex · · Score: 1

      Its been a while since I've read this women = maids type thinking, but i guess it shows that the US is after all just like Saudi Arabia.

      A joke along the lines of "Why do Xs always generalize?" comes to mind. It would seem a bit unfair to judge all geek men by Roblimo (who is somewhat atypical just by being 50+).

      Many of us disagreed with him at the time, more or less respectfully (I guess my response was the latter, since it has been deleted from the story now...)

    31. Re:Well.. by LadyLucky · · Score: 1
      That basically says we're fairly tolerant

      Read the comments from the Americans in this thread, I suspect you should change your opinion. It's sickening the intolerance displayed here. Should be ashamed. The main thing to take out of this thread is that intolerance is rife throughout the geek community, despite their protestations of intellectual superiority.

      --
      dominionrd.blogspot.com - Restaurants on
    32. Re:Well.. by nordicfrost · · Score: 1
      There are probably people in Norway who believe things that would disgust you as well as me


      I'm from Norway. I believe that Bill Gates is a misunderstood genius who makes his company put in all possible effort to make the Software Of Excellence; Windows. Windows is a remarkable, groundbreaking system and if we'd all just use it, Bill would get enough money to perfect it.

    33. Re:Well.. by minion · · Score: 1

      Perhaps we should all watch the news re-runs of 9/11. They were dancing in the street over there. I'm sorry. I have no love, respect, or any other nice feeling towards people who have time and time again shown their total hatred for us. America's news footage never showed Americans dancing in the street and shooting machine guns in the air when we heard Saddam was caught. We certainly never cheered when tons of innocent people lost their lives to some fucking terrorist asshole.

      --

      -- If we don't stand up for our rights, now, there will be no right to stand up for them later.
  13. Linux encroaching non Western countries by James+A.+D.+Joyce · · Score: 2, Interesting

    To be honest, I found the article on the takeup of Linux more interesting than whether or not geeks in another country are just like us. The fact that Linux is being used in the space infrastructure of Saudi Arabia will no doubt help to accelerate its adoption in poorer countries such as the Indian south subcontinent and the Democratic Republic of the Congo. I was also impressed by the sheer standard of Linux knowledge displayed by the Saudi computer expert considering that over there in the country they estimate its market share to be only 4%. (Note that that's greater than in the UK or the US, though.)

    --

    Ron dies in chapter 9 of book 7.
  14. Perceived Differences by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    When you can actually post a story about perceived differences it only goes to show that you harbor some sort of mentality which seperates you from the next man/geek whatever.

    The essence of this topic is that we are all human beings besides different culture, attitudes and religions. When someone sits at a keyboard the way they use it is going to be most likely the same way you use yours; key layout may be different but they are still using their fingers to do the typing.

    A geek is a geek is a geek. Before computers geeks existed and after they will exist, all over the world. Maybe Slashdot should concentrate more on that fact than the differences between people who aren't at all different in any respect when it comes to "geek" attitude and really Slashdot as a forum is really starting to become nothing but a troll board for half witted comics and "geek" sideliners; none of which are funny or know what they are talking about.

    Can we get back to News for Nerds, Stuff that matters.?

  15. Yep. by Black+Parrot · · Score: 5, Funny


    > Roblimo concludes that under the robes, Saudi geeks are much like geeks everywhere

    Even the most rudimentary biological knowledge should have tipped you off that what's under the robes is just like what's under the jeans, kilt, or lederhosen.

    --
    Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
  16. They don't have girlfriends, either. by The+I+Shing · · Score: 5, Funny

    They're just like the geeks in the USA, except that their non-existant girlfriends have fewer rights.

    --
    You are in error. No-one is screaming. Thank you for your cooperation.
    1. Re:They don't have girlfriends, either. by back_pages · · Score: 1
      haha

      I read a baker's dozen of half educated posts about the relationship between Saudi Arabia, Islam, and women's rights, but this one got a laugh.

      I don't envy the position of women in Saudi Arabia, but I'm informed enough to know that it's primarily a cultural, not religious situation. Even the religious police are pretty much peculiar to Saudi Arabia - a nation/region, not a religion.

      It feels better to toss in my two cents in response to a joke about geeks rather than half-truths about a major world religion. Thanks.

    2. Re:They don't have girlfriends, either. by md358 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I don't envy the position of women in Saudi Arabia, but I'm informed enough to know that it's primarily a cultural, not religious situation.

      Funny isn't it? Enslave a man and it's a crime against humanity. Enslave a woman and it's cultural.

      You won't find very many women in the world so blase over such a "cultural" difference.

    3. Re:They don't have girlfriends, either. by md358 · · Score: 1

      Wow, no point arguing with someone so full of themself - erm, "informed". Thanks for the name-calling too, you clearly got the better of this "idiot." And that free sociology lesson was great, you must have learned a lot from spying on your sister. Tell me little man, how do you fit that big head of yours through the door?

    4. Re:They don't have girlfriends, either. by DrCode · · Score: 1

      True. I got to attend a computer show in Dubai several years ago, and the first thing that struck me was that not only were there women working at the airport, but that they were wearing mini-skirts.

    5. Re:They don't have girlfriends, either. by forgotmypassword · · Score: 1

      Saudi Arabia is a theocracy.

      Islam has a sorid history of being oppressive towards women. For example women were once thought to not possess a soul.

      Saudi Arabia is 100% Moslim by law.

      Religion is a product of culture.

      In the case of Saudi Arabia you cannot possibly divide culture and religion as if they are two different things. They live in a culture of religion. Their world is nothing like America.

    6. Re:They don't have girlfriends, either. by HungWeiLo · · Score: 1

      True. I got to attend a computer show in Dubai several years ago, and the first thing that struck me was that not only were there women working at the airport, but that they were wearing mini-skirts.

      Dubai is in the United Arab Emirates, a state that is relatively much more liberal and open (alcohol is allowed there, IIRC)

      --
      There are a huge number of yeast infections in this county. Probably because we're downriver from the bread factory.
    7. Re:They don't have girlfriends, either. by joggle · · Score: 1
      You really aren't staying on topic at all. His points were valid and refuted yours. The style in which he did it is irrelevent. He's correct in that you essentially put words in his mouth and jumped to wrong conclusions.

      As another point, what religion was practiced in Nazi Germany? Or South Africa 20 years ago by the ruling class? As you can see, the religion of those countries (assuming you know your history) weren't indicative of the religion as a whole and were, in fact, regional (or cultural) problems. His point was that the (huge) difference of opinion on whether or not it is appropriate to treat women like they are treated in Saudi Arabia isn't a difference of religion, rather a difference of culture/government/region. That ISN'T being blase, just observant/insightful. While I think it was rash of him to call you a "stupid idiot," I think he would have been close to the mark to say that you are (too) quick to judge.

    8. Re:They don't have girlfriends, either. by md358 · · Score: 1

      Agreed on both points.

      I did indeed misread his initial post and didn't recognize the context. I am actually a big enough person to apologize and would have done so if he was not such an ass, both in his reply and just about every other post he's done.

      But on your last point, I still believe Islam represses women intolerably. Yes, there are extremists in all other religions, both in the past (your examples) and present (fringe Mormons, amongst others). It just amazes me how many guys are willing to act as apologists for Islamic and Arabic gender relations. Will it really be the end of the world to admit women are equal human beings, deserving of the same rights as everyone else? I'm not aiming that at you in particular, but all the devil's advocates on here who wonder why we should care what's going on in another country. Altruism is mankind's most powerful tool (or at least a close second to thumbs). It doesn't hurt to verbally or philosophically flex it once in a while, just to keep it in shape and avoid another decade like the '80s when nobody gave a crap.

    9. Re:They don't have girlfriends, either. by back_pages · · Score: 1
      I apologize.

      No excuses, just a bad day and I was primarily upset to see your post modded 'Insightful' when it really had little to do with what I had said.

      It was a simple misunderstanding but I had a bad day and apologize.

    10. Re:They don't have girlfriends, either. by back_pages · · Score: 1
      Islam has a sorid history of being oppressive towards women.

      And I never denied that. Research the origin of the 'chastity belt' in the western world. Christian Crusaders were leaving their wives while they went to battle to recover the Holy Land from the devilish Muslims, so they locked their wives' vaginas in steel armor and left them for many years.

      Because you never can trust a Christian woman, can you? Lock that up or you'll never know what white European was banging your lady while you were at Holy War for God Almighty, you religious zealot fanatic you.

      My point: Any region/culture/nation can oppress women, every religion has oppressed their women.

      There are plenty of rational reason to love or hate the USA vs. the Middle East, Whities like me vs. Folks who look differnt, Decent Americans vs. The World, the truth is that fighting a war against a major world religion is a moronic task.

      Even if it's 100% accurate, actually recognizing it as such is more harmful than anything. Have some perspective! This whole world is an economic machine - nobody with a decent job, education for their kids, and a bright hope for tomorrow is scheming to sacrifice their security to attack someone else. Sure, people are also prideful, miseducated, superstitious, prejudice, or buy lottery tickets "just in case".

      I'm not saying that there aren't undeniable correlations between Islam and terrorism - or black Americans and cops - or poor Americans and COPS the television show - or Latinos and tacos - Some of that is a absolutely true.

      To say that it's the RESULT of that relationship can easily be 100% false. The oppression of women is rather directly discouraged by the Koran, though a certain admission of guilt about current conditions in society is present. It's hardly different than various implications in the Bible that the contemporary people favored male children or men's rights over the women.

      And even if I'm 100% wrong, pointing that out and screaming it from the rooftops alienates a major segment of the world's population and doesn't do a damn thing toward solving anything. Just an observation.

      PS - That was a beer inspired rant. Eh, hope you enjoyed it or "Sorry" is all I have to say.

    11. Re:They don't have girlfriends, either. by forgotmypassword · · Score: 1

      Because you never can trust a Christian woman, can you? Lock that up or you'll never know what white European was banging your lady while you were at Holy War for God Almighty, you religious zealot fanatic you.

      I'm a non-Christian agnostic.

      Why do I have to defend the Christian to maintain that Islam has a bad history with women. That is completely irrelivant to the former discussion.

      My point: Any region/culture/nation can oppress women, every religion has oppressed their women.

      Then you would be wrong. Take a newer religion like the Bahai, they seem to exhibit common sense. Or to a better extreme, take Wicca, I highly doubt that Wiccans oppress women. There are countless examples.

      I would agree that humankind has a history of oppressing women, but most of us no longer partake in those cultures. So I fail to see how that true statement does anything but set up a straw man.

      Show me a country that still practices the Christianity that sets women below men. One that promises heaven to those that die in battle. Do that and I would say the same thing about them as I have said about Saudi Arabia.

    12. Re:They don't have girlfriends, either. by joggle · · Score: 1

      I basically agree with how you feel about the Muslim religion in that they generally treat woman as inferior to men, and certainly not equals. While it is easy to say that women should be equals to men, I think it is important to keep in mind that they are not equivalent to men, which is a point lost on many modern feminists it seems. I could go on and on, but suffice it to say that I believe women should have the same rights and privelages as men so long as the reverse is true (such as allowing men to have significant time off when their wife is giving birth, etc.). Anthing else simply isn't fair. On the other hand, I think men by their nature are more inclined to participate in sports so the law that forces college funding to be equal among women's and men's programs really doesn't reflect reality and ends up giving women a higher quality program (per person) than their male counterparts (where most of the money goes to football, leaving little for average joes). When men's programs are being cut and women programs are struggling to fill their teams, I think this is a sign that "equality" can occasionaly go too far.

    13. Re:They don't have girlfriends, either. by back_pages · · Score: 1
      Then you would be wrong. Take a newer religion like the Bahai, they seem to exhibit common sense. Or to a better extreme, take Wicca, I highly doubt that Wiccans oppress women.

      Try to not take this as an insult, but I personally don't consider those religions very seriously. While we'll obviously have to agree to disagree on this topic, I don't include minor religions in a discussion about history or current events. It is my opinion that doing so is terribly unproductive and very often irrelevant. I don't mean that as any sort of offense, but that's how I feel about it. As a result, most any point of debate founded on such a religion isn't going to convince me of anything.

      Which isn't to say that I think you're wrong - only that I'm not a person willing to give full legitimacy and equal weight to numerically miniscule, politically weak, and historically lightweight religions. I'm not trying to be offensive, but rather calling a duck a duck.

      Show me a country that still practices the Christianity that sets women below men.

      It's known as the Bible Belt and it comprises a very significant portion of American voters.

      You're right, Islam has a bad history with women. My point is that Muslims do not have a bad history with women BECAUSE of Islam, but rather many Arabic cultures have a bad history with women because of their cultural history. That in no way excuses the oppression of women, but it's important to understand that Islam very acutely condemns anything that brings harm to the individual or community's ability to prosper and praise God - oppressing women definitely falls into this category.

      Poor American women are beaten by their Bible-loving husbands, rednecks have white supremacist bumper stickers on one side and "Jesus is my copilot" on the other, and the result is the oppression of women in a Christian context. It isn't Christianity that leads to the oppression of women, it is the result of other influences. It is precisely the same in Saudi Arabia. They may justify it with Islam, define it in terms of Islam, speak Arabic while they're doing it, but the simple fact it that Islam allows the oppression of women no more than does Christianity (and it's quite easy to argue that Islam condemns it more strongly.)

      Where more minor religions fit into this doesn't really interest me - I'm only insisting that there is a relation between Islam and the oppression of women but that any attempt at establishing causation is completely and utterly false. Also, when I said, "you religious zealot fanatic you" I was not referring specifically to you, but rather abstractly to the mentality that led to chastity belts amongst Christian Europeans. That was my fault for unclear writing.

    14. Re:They don't have girlfriends, either. by forgotmypassword · · Score: 1

      Try to not take this as an insult, but I personally don't consider those religions very seriously.

      I don't take Wicca seriously. It is a joke. Though many religions are.

      But Bahai is the second most widespread religion in the world. If you are going to write Bahai off as a minor, unimportant religion, then this discussion has reached its ending point.

    15. Re:They don't have girlfriends, either. by back_pages · · Score: 1
      http://www.bahai-faith.com/

      I admit I had never heard of Bahai until your post. I'm extremely curious how they establish the "second most widespread religion in the world" claim, which I also found on what calls itself the official Bahai website.

      And even if this serves only to bring to my attention that Bahai is a significant group - news to me - it would seem that they have no shortage of critics, judging only from the extensive list of references and links at bahai-faith.com.

      I'm sure this article will be archived soon, but thanks for the conversation.

    16. Re:They don't have girlfriends, either. by forgotmypassword · · Score: 1

      It's not a claim, it is a fact. If you take a course in world religions, Bahai will come up.

      Most people haven't heard of them because they are not extremely vocal, they have no priesthood (no segregation of that kind), and they don't exactly worship at temples.

      The reason the religion is so widespread is probably because of 2 factors. Bahai is a unifying/world religion that ties in christianity, islam, and buhddism in particular. And secondly, Bahai exhibits much more common sense in its teaching than most religions. For instance, if science happend to discover something that disagreed with their teachings, then they would yield to science.

      I do not practice Bahai, I have only read one of their books.

    17. Re:They don't have girlfriends, either. by back_pages · · Score: 1
      It's not a claim, it is a fact.

      Well, fact or not, they're making a claim that it's true. It may very well be true, but when it comes to religions with which I'm unfamiliar, I like to start with the things that the critics and the proponents agree about.

      Thus far, I've read the Bahai sites say that it is the second most prevalent religion, but I haven't seen any numbers or any documentation from an impartial or even adverse group to back that up. I'm very interested the evidence they use to support that claim. To be perfectly honest, I find it very unlikely that a faith I've never heard of is more numerous than either Muslims or Protestant Christians, so perhaps they're using convenient definitions of religions (ie splitting Muslims between Sunni and Shiite and Protestants into the hundreds of different churches.)

      But I could be wrong - I'm just saying that I'm curious to see how they break down the sizes of different religions in a way that places them as the 2nd largest. I'm not an expert but I'm fairly well read on world religions for a layman and so I'm naturally suspicious about the claim that Bahai is the 2nd largest in the world.

    18. Re:They don't have girlfriends, either. by forgotmypassword · · Score: 1

      http://www.adherents.com/

      is a good website for numbers of adherents to major religions.

      And they are NOT the second largest, they are the second most widespread. BIG difference. But they are a popular religion whose numbers are probably underestimated relative to other religions.

  17. Roblimo's got balls by utahjazz · · Score: 4, Funny

    I found at least a dozen anonymous surfing sites that let me view all the porn anyone could want in less than 30 minutes

    Surfing pr0n in Saudi and then writing about it. I hope he gets out of the country.

  18. no.... by the_2nd_coming · · Score: 5, Funny

    in saudi arabia, geeks have the advantage of women being forced to marry them.....

    --



    I am the Alpha and the Omega-3
    1. Re:no.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You think living with a woman that doesn't want to be with you would be fun? Hell would be like a holiday camp after that.

  19. Ten differences... by pieterh · · Score: 5, Funny

    Ten differences between a Saudi geek and a Stateside geek:

    1. The Saudi geeks don't have cellars.

    2. They browse from right to left.

    3. Stateside geeks have longer hacking sessions, not being required to stop for prayers every few hours.

    4. Saudi geeks have better weather.

    5. Saudi geeks drink tea, while stateside geeks drink coffee.

    6. Saudi geeks get more work done, not reading Slashdot as often.

    7. Stateside geeks wear sandals, Saudi geeks wear Gucci.

    8. Stateside geeks rarely dress in white.

    9. Saudi geeks speak at least two languages - Arab and English. Stateside geeks hardly speak at all.

    10. Saudi geeks go camel-riding in the weekends. Stateside geeks don't have weekends.

    1. Re:Ten differences... by HrothgarReborn · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Saudi geeks drink tea

      Dude, have you tried Arab coffee?
      They serve it in a thimble and it will keep you wired all day.

    2. Re:Ten differences... by Rumagent · · Score: 1

      Nice, most of the other "funny" post has been pretty racist, while yours is fun (and to some extent probably true:) )

    3. Re:Ten differences... by dk4 · · Score: 1

      Actual the camel jockey reference is rather ignorant.

  20. Unlike us. Period. by lonesometrainer · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Us? So what's us? I thought this is somehow international here...

    Unlike us, because we have a solid middle-class with kids that can afford to be geeks. Geeks whom may surf for porn, express their political opinion and whear stuff people are wearing on MTV.

    Where's that free, liberal solid middle-class in SA?

  21. Nerds == Nerds by Col.+Panic · · Score: 2, Funny

    it's a brotherhood.

    (someone corrects my syntax)

    1. Re:Nerds == Nerds by Col.+Panic · · Score: 1

      they better have broadband :squint:

  22. Geeks from Saudi Arabia by presroi · · Score: 4, Informative

    Last week was an excellent example to see if geeks in Saudia Arabia work similar.

    As a part time team member of the (imho :)) excellent phpMyFAQ, I am eager to (let) translate them into as many languages as possible (actually, I'm working on a Latin translation right now).

    Last time we got to know that someone from the Arabic community has done this already.

    Unfortunatly, my Arabic is still far too broken to be used in daily conversation or even letters. It took some time and attempts to get into contact with them. Well, it seems that this week, the phpmyfaq will be shipped as a version 1.3.9-pl2, introducing Arabic support, thanks to these great people.

    If someone speaks this beatiful language, he/she might check out these forum threads:

    swalif
    or alqafelah

    This is one of the arabic phpmyfaqs: ksavb.com. Pretty interesting style imho.

    The arabic language file was first spotted on albakr

    Doesn't this look like the cute Arabic sister of freshmeat.net?

    1. Re:Geeks from Saudi Arabia by JaredOfEuropa · · Score: 1
      If someone speaks this beatiful language, he/she might check out these forum threads:

      swalif [swalif.net]
      Wow they are the same! L33t speak and alternating caps and all...
      --
      If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
    2. Re:Geeks from Saudi Arabia by Malcontent · · Score: 1

      I have heard that Arabic was one of the most beautiful languages around. One person I know described as having mathematical qualitites. Maybe it's time I tried learning it. You never know it could be more fun then learning programming language.

      --

      War is necrophilia.

    3. Re:Geeks from Saudi Arabia by bar-agent · · Score: 1

      As I recall, Arabic sound like someone hacking up a hairball in Klingon. That is not a beautiful language, no matter what the mathematical qualities of the syntax are.

      --
      i'd hit it so hard, if you pulled me out you'd be the king of britain [bash.org]
    4. Re:Geeks from Saudi Arabia by Malcontent · · Score: 1

      Although I haven't hung around too many arabs I have heard arabic music on occation. It sounded good to me.

      --

      War is necrophilia.

  23. Re:How do they spell by Thomas+Miconi · · Score: 2, Informative

    First Post: "Al bust al-awwal" (I don't think there is an equivalent to the word "post", but I may be wrong).

    Sorry, I don't have the unicode. Essentially: Alif -Lam Ba-Waw-Sod-Ta, Alif-Lam Alif(with hamza)-Waw(with shadda)-Lam, . The last letters for "bust" may differ (emphatic or not) depending on the original pronunciation.

    Thomas Miconi

  24. In Saudi Arabia... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    ...people in glass houses don't throw stones unless your adulterous sister is inside.

  25. Spamming for Free Speech ? by leoaugust · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Sadly, the Saudi Net filter doesn't stop spam. "If you could stop spam," I told Al-Hejery, "You could make a million dollars a day as a consultant for the U.S. government, and I'd even kick in some extra out of my own pocket."

    "If I could do that," he replied, "I would be a hero here, too."

    It does sound twisted, but because it is in context of a country where free speech is quite restricted - the thought did pop in my head.

    Could it happen that some day spamming techniques or "spammers" will be hired by people who want to exercise their free speech ? You could spam with censored information when every other means of getting your voice heard is suppressed ?

    Full Disclosure - I don't know spam. I have never sent spam. I don't like spam.

    --
    To see a world in a grain of sand, and then to step back and see the beach where the sand lies ...
    1. Re:Spamming for Free Speech ? by geekoid · · Score: 1

      Absolutly.

      If you wanted to get a messge out, spamming would be a great way to do it.
      1) You spam a lot of people, if you are being watched, the watchers have no idea who was supposed to get it, and who was a bystander.

      2) You could communicate with other governments

      3) This is just like broadcasting coded phrases over the radio during an occupation.

      If I invented a cold fusion device that was cheap easy and everybody could use it, I would spam the plans to the world.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  26. Women in Saudi computer industry by Shant3030 · · Score: 1

    Given the oppresive attitude towards women in the strict, wahabi society of Saudi Arabia, how are women in tech treated?

    Women are already an overwhelming minority in the field, and I can imagine that it is not only uncommon, but very difficult for them to make even a minimal impact in the tech world there.

    --
    100% Insightful
    1. Re:Women in Saudi computer industry by tm2b · · Score: 1
      how are women in tech treated?
      Ummm... are women even allowed to work in tech there? They aren't even allowed to drive cars. Heck, I don't even know to what extent they're allowed to work at all!
      --
      "It is our blasphemy which has made us great, and will sustain us, and which the gods secretly admire in us." - Zelazny
    2. Re:Women in Saudi computer industry by MichaelGCD · · Score: 1

      > how are women in tech treated?

      No open source alternatives for you!!

      --
      hate titty pee colon slash slash
    3. Re:Women in Saudi computer industry by heironymouscoward · · Score: 1

      I did say "most" women, and the fact that you are reading Slashdot is a good sign that technology interests you. This is a walk-up-and-use anonymous site, yet there are remarkably few women readers. That should be a good sign that technology interests only a small minority of women.

      Honestly: of all the women you know, how many seriously _like_ technology? And did you suffer prejudice at school when you chose physics instead of modern linguistics?

      --
      Ceci n'est pas une signature
  27. Bummer... by Pollux · · Score: 1

    Now it's time for a little disclaimer: The Saudi Internet filters are easy to defeat. I found at least a dozen anonymous surfing sites that let me view all the porn anyone could want in less than 30 minutes, and I have viewed more online porn while testing the Saudi content filters than I had looked at in my entire life before this experiment.

    Dang, must be tough having his job. Now...the average reader might read this and think that Roblimo's lying just for the journalistic effect here, but read his statement again... ...and I have viewed more online porn while testing the Saudi content filters...

    But children, where are other places where people can look at naaaaaaaaaaghty little pictures of fornicators?

  28. Roblimo, Saudia Arabia, Open Source and Freedom by LibrePensador · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Roblimo's article highlight -perhaps inadvertently- the important and profound differences between the open source and free software communities. While these communities collaborate as a practical matter, and may need each other for their survival, one is political and principled, the other pragmatic and concerned overall with technological imperatives.

    So is there a problem with this? I believe there is. You see, Microsoft, or any other software development house, can afford to optimize its development methodology or even start from scratch a la Apple, if it really became all that self-evident to them that they were technically and financially failing. So one of two things can happen:

    1) if they throw enough money at the problem, they will match our technical achivements. Apple started from scratch and has produced a decent OS built on top of BSD/Darwin/Mach. So it is doable.

    2) They do not match our technical achiviements. Yet at the end of the day, if the only thing we care about is having an open source operating system regardless of whether it advances the cause of freedom, then the labor of love of all these years will seem a little less meaningful to many of us. To me, it will be all seem pretty hollow.

    And here's where I have a problem with Roblimo's articles. He does not question the irony that the Saudy monarchy is using free software to exercise censorship and control. Even if some of can be circumvented, it is perversed to those that believe in Free Software to see this happen. And in respecting the freedom of the license, we must allow it, but we should call oppression by its name when we come across it and he did not have the guts to do it.

    He could have looked for hactivists in Saudi Arabia to see what tools they were using and how they were furthering the cause of freedom. He could have spoken to dissidents, but he didin't. It's easy to stay at a comfy hotel and write from the sidelines. It's easier to be an expectator paying lipservice to free softaware than to stand up for what free softare actually represents.

    In summary, being technically superior without being morally committed to the cause of freedom is a very hollow undertaking.

    --
    Pragmatism as an ideology is not particularly pragmatic in the long term. Keep it in mind when you dismiss Free Software
    1. Re:Roblimo, Saudia Arabia, Open Source and Freedom by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Apple started from scratch and has produced a decent OS built on top of BSD/Darwin/Mach. So it is doable.

      I don't feel like getting into the sociopolitical debate here, so instead I will speak up on your incorrect assertion here.

      Apple did not start from scratch. As you yourself point out, it's built on top of BSD and Mach. (Darwin is, guess what? BSD on Mach.) And their starting codebase? NeXTStep. MacOSX is not, repeat not a new operating system (revolution), it is an evolution of an old one.

      Free software is just that, Free software. It does not imply any particular use, unless you write such clauses into your license. As the GPL does not have such a clause, it can be used for any purpose so long as its terms are followed.

      There is no irony here because the same rules apply equally to all; the same software being used to rob people of their freedom can be used to grant it again, and that the very people using it to take away freedoms, when they contribute to it for their own purposes, must necessarily contribute to its use for the purposes of freedom as well.

      If you want to advance the cause of Freedom through Open Source, you will need to write a new license. (Though, I have seen assorted licenses saying that a piece of software cannot be used by a repressive regime already.) GPL'd software is simply not intended to achieve this goal.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    2. Re:Roblimo, Saudia Arabia, Open Source and Freedom by LibrePensador · · Score: 1

      "GPL'd software is simply not intended to achieve this goal."

      The GPL may not in the letter of the license require you to use to pursue some notion of the Aristotelian good, but the spirit of the license clear does. Anyone who is familiar with the work of the free software foundation and Richard Stallman's ideas and motivations must realize this much.

      --
      Pragmatism as an ideology is not particularly pragmatic in the long term. Keep it in mind when you dismiss Free Software
    3. Re:Roblimo, Saudia Arabia, Open Source and Freedom by Roblimo · · Score: 4, Informative

      1) I did not question the irony because I knew *you* would without my help.

      2) I did *not* stay in the hotel. I wandered all over Riyadh, and I met quietly with several social dissidents, but writing about them by name would not be safe -- for them. Sometimes it's better to leave a U.S. reader thinking less of me than to put someone's life in danger. At least *I* think so. You are free to disagree.

      3) I'm sure I'll eventually write other stories about Saudi Arabia that will go more deeply into the social/religious/political situation there, but not for NewsForge or Slashdot. There are other media where those stories would be more appropriate.

      - Robin

    4. Re:Roblimo, Saudia Arabia, Open Source and Freedom by wedg · · Score: 1

      I liked this comment for the most part. But there's one part that bothered me. If it is perverse for any oppressive government to use Free Software, how the hell is it Free? Freedom, with the capital Eff, is not subject to your or anyone else's beliefs. So if you really believe in Free Software, know now that the bad *always* comes with the good. And with any amount of freedom given, some will seek to use it to their own ends.

      And please, spellcheck.

      --
      Jake
      Dating: while( 1 ){ call_girl(); get_rejected(); drink_40(); } return 0;
    5. Re:Roblimo, Saudia Arabia, Open Source and Freedom by LibrePensador · · Score: 1

      Robin,

      I am sorry if this seemed unduly personal. It just seemed to me like you had a golden opportunity to do some real investigative reporting. This is not to say that the articles were not interesting.

      If I seem senstitive to the cause of freedom is, well, because I am. My parents spent the greater part of their lives under a repressive dictatorship. This made me very sensitive to the issue of free speech from an early age..

      I look forward to your future articles about what you saw in Saudi Arabia, but I don't believe that Newsforge/Slashdot are strictly technology sites because I don't think they can be. Technology lives at the intersection of society and politics and a good tech site must deal with both.

      Anyway, I am off to enjoy the beautiful weather.

      --
      Pragmatism as an ideology is not particularly pragmatic in the long term. Keep it in mind when you dismiss Free Software
  29. Geekness == culture by 2.246.1010.78 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Isn't geekness just a culture where people worship technology. And from my experience they are very conservative in their way.

    so there is no fundamental difference in my eyes and especially no cultural gap for the saudis.

    1. Re:Geekness == culture by FePe · · Score: 1

      I agree. There's no difference between a Saudi geek and an American geek when using technology, programming/browsing and so on. Technology has the same effects everywhere on people and has little or no connection with culture. The difference between the Saudi geek and the American geek in other activities is of course apparent.

      --
      "Until you do what you believe in, how do you know whether you believe in it or not?" -- Leo Tolstoy
  30. like us? by enkidu87 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    What are "we" like?

    1. Re:like us? by LPetrazickis · · Score: 1

      Some of us are women . While I am sure there are Saudi female geeks, I doubt they are free to pursue geekhood.

      --
      Is this a sigs-optional kind of place? 'Cause I am totally down with that if you know what I mean.
    2. Re:like us? by caluml · · Score: 1

      I'm disturbed. Are you collecting a list of female Slashdot readers?

    3. Re:like us? by LPetrazickis · · Score: 1

      Nah, but there are a few on my /. friends list.^-^

      --
      Is this a sigs-optional kind of place? 'Cause I am totally down with that if you know what I mean.
    4. Re:like us? by caluml · · Score: 1

      I'm still confused. How do you know they are females?

    5. Re:like us? by LPetrazickis · · Score: 1

      I read their Slashdot journals. That's good enough for me.

      How do you know there is a table in front of you? Are the photons that bounce off of it a good enough source of information? It is conceivable that we are all deluding ourselves.:P

      --
      Is this a sigs-optional kind of place? 'Cause I am totally down with that if you know what I mean.
  31. Hmmm by LS · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Does anyone else consider this topic to be implicitly racist? Arabs aren't fucking aliens. It reminds me of the Chris Rock joke (paraphrased):

    When Collin Powel considered running for president, all the white people mentioned that "He speaks so well. He speaks so well". How the fuck is he supposed to speak? "Ima be pres-o-dent!"

    geez.

    LS

    --
    There is a fine line between being a cultivated citizen and being someone else's crop. - A. J. Patrick Liszkie
    1. Re:Hmmm by HeghmoH · · Score: 1

      When Collin Powel considered running for president, all the white people mentioned that "He speaks so well. He speaks so well". How the fuck is he supposed to speak?

      Maybe they thought he would speak like that guy who actually won.

      --
      Mod down posts with a "Free Mac Mini/iPod" sig, they're spam!
    2. Re:Hmmm by autopr0n · · Score: 1

      When Collin Powel considered running for president, all the white people mentioned that "He speaks so well. He speaks so well". How the fuck is he supposed to speak? "Ima be pres-o-dent!"

      When was Collin Powel running for president?

      --
      autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
    3. Re:Hmmm by spectecjr · · Score: 1

      When Collin Powel considered running for president, all the white people mentioned that "He speaks so well. He speaks so well". How the fuck is he supposed to speak? "Ima be pres-o-dent!"


      I believe the word you're looking for is "eloquently".

      There's a difference between not speaking like a stereotypical black american (complete with comb sticking out of afro and doobie in one hand), and speaking with an elegant turn of phrase and great insight - which Colin Powell does on a regular basis.

      Basically, the guy is one damn smart mofo, and it shows in his speeches.

      --
      Coming soon - pyrogyra
    4. Re:Hmmm by 0x1337 · · Score: 1

      Are you one of those weird rejects that keep seeing "natsis" and "rascsists" everywhere you go?

  32. Yes by Mr.+Darl+McBride · · Score: 2, Funny

    Yes they are, only thinner.

  33. Bad Story!! by killfixx · · Score: 3, Insightful

    This smacks of something out of a teen girls magazine!

    Are Muslim field hockey players just like us other girls?

    GAH!

    --
    "Helping to keep you two steps ahead of the Thought Police!"
    1. Re:Bad Story!! by johnjay · · Score: 1

      Why is this insightful? Was your Saturday ruined because you were forced to read Roblimo's essays on a topic you find uninteresting? Go outside! He's not trying to take up your precious time.

      Sure the topic sounds a little cliched, but there's an ideological war on between parts of Saudi Arabia and the West. To end the war, it's worth something to ask simple questions like this. The answer might be "nothing interesting here, move along", but you have to ask the question to find that out.

  34. Geek is a g$$k by hrmrh · · Score: 1

    How different is a Geek from any other Geek in the developed Western countries minus the external appearance, gender differences and different accent ? Oh I almost forgot to add the $$$$$ per hour !!

  35. I had the opportunity by The+Tyro · · Score: 4, Interesting

    to work in Saudi Arabia, and after some thought, elected not to do so. I spent some time there during a military stint, and had the opportunity to interact with a number of Saudis (in the medical field, which is what I would have been doing there).

    I discussed the job possibility with my wife (the money was very, very good), but her life would have taken a dramatic turn for the worse in that country. Women there (particularly foreign, christian women) do NOT have the same rights as men. Among other things, you can be detained by the religious police (different from the regular police) if you are a female out in public, not accompanied by at least one male relative. Not wearing an abayah (female headgear) in public is asking for trouble.

    I should point out that lots of westerners live in walled compounds, so you don't really have to interact with the regular population if you don't really want to... but who wants to be cooped up in a walled compound for a year or two? The security we had at our military base was ridiculous (and necessary), and the compounds did not have the same level of security. Remember those car bomb attacks in Riyadh last year? They wouldn't have stood a snowball's chance at our military compound... that's the kind of security I'm talking about.

    It's a very different culture, and a tough environment to walk into as a freedom-loving american... despite the excellent cash compensation. You really have to bite your tongue, be polite, keep your opinions to yourself, and be a gracious guest. Saudi justice is not american justice (in court, if it's a muslim's word against a christian's word, the christian can lose automatically) You're NOT a citizen there, and if you forget that detail, you can get yourself in serious trouble.

    Good money, and I'm sure they could use a few geeks... but know what you're getting yourself into. Lots of TCNs (third country nationals) work there... Britts, French, etc, and some of them seemed to like it... but it wasn't for me.

    --
    Even if a man chops off your hand with a sword, you still have two nice, sharp bones to stick in his eyes.
    1. Re:I had the opportunity by TheLink · · Score: 1

      "in court, if it's a muslim's word against a christian's word, the christian can lose automatically)".

      Gonna be fun if an atheist admits to being an atheist there... Or erm, Satanists.

      --
    2. Re:I had the opportunity by certron · · Score: 1

      I used to live in Saudi Arabia, and I have to say that the real good boom times for us/uk/fr/de/no/se/etc expats are over. Things kinda stopped being so great after the Gulf War, and even before then. The best time to be in Saudi Arabia (money-wise) was probably around 1975-1990, when there was plenty of money being spread around, put into infrastructure, public spaces, shopping malls, and other things like that.

      I haven't been in the country since 1995, but things seem to have gone downhill in terms of culture and wealth distribution. Everyone that I used to know there is gone now, so there would be little point in returning, but I did have some great memories (as everyone growing up has). Some things are prety unique, I thought. Camping in the desert with friends, dealing with the odd sandstorm, and just plain enjoying the warm dry weather.

      Of course, there were a sprinkling of bulletin board systems up at the time, and remarkable number of modems out there, too... I was even wardialed twice (realized it later, though)

      Don't think that you missed too much by not 'visiting' Saudi Arabia. It is not easy to work there, but generally the support groups between other families are very good. You hit it right on the head with the things you have to watch out for, though. All in all, I wouldn't choose to work there now, and you made your decision with a lot of knowledge of the situation.

      --

      fair.org counterpunch.com truthout.com indymedia.org salon.com
      eff.org guerrilla.net debian.org gentoo.org
    3. Re:I had the opportunity by dubl-u · · Score: 1

      You really have to bite your tongue, be polite, keep your opinions to yourself, and be a gracious guest. Saudi justice is not american justice (in court, if it's a muslim's word against a christian's word, the christian can lose automatically) You're NOT a citizen there, and if you forget that detail, you can get yourself in serious trouble.

      I don't want to deny the seriousness of your comment at all, and I think overall America is much better than average about how we treat foreigners. But I have a number of Sikh and Muslim friends, and they have similar concerns about the US, even the ones who are citizens, even the ones who grew up here.

      They feel the threat not just from ignorant yutzes, but also from the government. Just last night a dear Indian-American friend who grew up in the Detroit area was telling me about her Sikh aunt and uncle's recent visit. Pulled aside for questioning, presumably because of his turban, the uncle did his best to answer their questions in English, a lanugage he's not so familiar with. Long story short, they decided he was being sneaky rather than puzzled and confiscated his passport. A two week visit turned into two months of lawsuit to get his passport back.

      Again, I say this not to undermine your point about Saudi Arabia, but just to remind everybody else that it's easy to forget that although we may feel safe in our country and generally trust in the government to behave responsibly, it's easy for foreigners to have a pretty different view of things.

    4. Re:I had the opportunity by thebigmacd · · Score: 1

      But at least here, in the courts, you can buy a good lawyer (White Anglo-Saxon if need be) no matter which race you are. In Canada, with our Human Rights Commission overruling both the courts and parliament, you have a better chance of winning your case if you are a hard-done-by "visible minority". There are many bleeding hearts out there who will fight for your cause no matter how evil or good you may actually be, as long as you have a good story about being oppressed.

    5. Re:I had the opportunity by dubl-u · · Score: 2, Interesting

      But at least here, in the courts, you can buy a good lawyer (White Anglo-Saxon if need be) no matter which race you are.

      Have you ever actually gone to court? For middle-class Americans, even a moderate court battle can be a devastating financial blow. For an immigrant, visitor, or somebody who's just poor, the costs can make good representation impossible.

      There are many bleeding hearts out there who will fight for your cause no matter how evil or good you may actually be, as long as you have a good story about being oppressed.

      That may be the case in Canada. In the US, there are certainly a number of lawyers that do fantastic pro bono work, but it's not a large number. The public defender system in many areas is woefully underfunded, and that doesn't cover civil cases at all.

      Some wags claim that in the US, you get all the justice you can afford. It's not that bad, but it's certainly far from perfect.

    6. Re:I had the opportunity by TheLink · · Score: 1

      Ssshh. There are a lot of them around here, and they're a bit touchy about these things.

      --
  36. Spam trives under repression. by twitter · · Score: 1
    Could it happen that some day spamming techniques or "spammers" will be hired by people who want to exercise their free speech ?

    The whole point of repression is to make people think and do what you want. "Spammers" sending the wrong message and those tolerating it will be hunted down. Real spam will thrive, however. It's co-opted by the state which owns all media anyway.

    --

    Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.

    1. Re:Spam trives under repression. by KnightStalker · · Score: 1

      Why do you think the Islamists would treat hardcore pornographic spam any different from explicit religious or political dissent? I think porn is actually *more* damaging to the fundamentalist government than some essay saying "Freedom is great." Outlaw porn spam *is* freedom (in much the same way as urban graffiti) and it explicitly pictures people freely doing extremely forbidden things. That's gotta be the most subversive message possible.

      That's not to say I want to get more of it though. Geeks in the West, the oppressed people of Saudi Arabia NEED YOUR SPAM! Donate some today. Spammers, do your evil work only within .sa domains! It's your duty to humanity!

      --
      * And remember, it's spelled N-e-t-s-c-a-p-e, but it's pronounced "Mozilla."
  37. Dromedary? by GQuon · · Score: 1

    Why doesn't this story have the Dromedary on it?
    They shoud have written a bit about Perl.

    --
    Irene KHAAAAAAN!
  38. Why Should We Be The Same Everywhere?!? by ivi · · Score: 1


    Just like our demand for diversity in software vendors, we should expect similar diversity in
    those who are interested in producing software

  39. Where's the camel? by CatGrep · · Score: 2, Funny

    Shouldn't this story have the camel logo which the previous one sported? How many penguins are in Saudi Arabia?

    1. Re:Where's the camel? by WEFUNK · · Score: 4, Funny

      How many penguins are in Saudi Arabia?

      Probably about the same number of (native) penguins that are in North America and Europe.

      --
      My next sig will be ready soon, but friends can beat the rush!
  40. No. by autopr0n · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I doubt this is true. The same love for computers and tech? Probably. But this doesn't make them "the same". I really doubt that many Saudi Geeks would have the same libertarian, open-society, atheistic outlook that many geeks here in the US seem to have.

    There seems to be this big misconception that anyone who likes computers is therefore a "geek" and also therefore has a similar political/philosophical outlook.

    This isn't to say that I think everyone in Saudi Arabia is some kind of crazy religious zealot, but if you grow up in that kind of environment, a lot of it would probably rub off on you.

    The Saudis, at least the people in charge, are like the Taliban with gold Rolexes.

    --
    autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
    1. Re:No. by sydlexic · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I guess you don't know any Arabs. They are quite liberal. This is especially true of the younger generation. The people in charge are not the Taliban ... but they are resposible for the rise of fundamentalism through corruption, cronyism and basically being too self-absorbed to really care about the countries they're in charge of. They've left that to the powerful, unelected religious leaders. And it's *these* people who are the prime benefactors of the Wests gross misconceptions and indifference to the Arab people. The anger that generates only fuels more fundamentalism.

    2. Re:No. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      This isn't to say that I think everyone in Saudi Arabia is some kind of crazy religious zealot, but if you grow up in that kind of environment, a lot of it would probably rub off on you.

      Okay, I dare say this will be taken as a troll, but to many of us outsiders the USA looks like a society with more than its fair share of crazy religious zealots, but I still realise that you're not all like that. Is religious fundamentalism more ingrained in Saudi Arabia than in the USA? Maybe, maybe not, but I'm sure there must be exceptions either way.

    3. Re:No. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Most Slashdot commenters these days seem to be avowed members of the antiamerican, antisemitic, antiwar left (and rather shrill ones at that).

      You missed out "anti-hot-coffee". Just try suggesting that serving hot coffee isn't such a bad idea and see what kind of reaction you get.

    4. Re:No. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      They are quite liberal. This is especially true of the younger generation.

      To test this hypothesis, try arguing about the Koran. The Arabs that I have known cannot debate religion in the way that we debate religion.

      Try asking them about the status of woemen; the same brick wall comes up.

      There is nothing wrong with this IMHO. They can live in whatever way that they want, as long as they dont try and make me live like them in my own country. In this way, we can have peace forever, and everyone can follow whatever life they want.

      These people are not like us, in every way that counts - but thats OK this is the breakthrough that people have to make.

    5. Re:No. by blamanj · · Score: 2, Insightful

      So you're saying they have a society where some people get involved in technology very heavily, where people tend to adopt the local culture rather than choose a foreign one, and their leaders once they get power want desperately to keep it?

      Sounds like people pretty much everywhere.

      Without condoning Saudi treatment of women, recall that in the grand scheme of things, our liberal culture is relatively recent. Only 30 years ago you could get the death penalty for rape (and you still can in Louisiana). We still had public executions 70 years ago. Women couldn't vote 100 years ago, 150 years ago slavery was not only condoned but a large part of the country's economy was built on it.

      Yes, we've advanced beyond all of that, but we're not so far from it as some people would like to think.

    6. Re:No. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      actually, neocons are rarely jewish. They just support Israel for "Pat Robertson" reasons.

    7. Re:No. by CaptainStormfield · · Score: 1

      Only 30 years ago you could get the death penalty for rape (and you still can in Louisiana).

      A minor nit, but it is unconstitutional (even in Lousiana) to give someone the death penalty for rape of an adult woman. See Coker v. Georgia, 433 U.S. 584 (1977) . Lousiana recently sentenced someone convicted of child rape to death; query whether the death penalty for child rape will ultimately withstand constitutional review.

      --
      "The dinosaurs died because they didn't have a space program." - Niven
    8. Re:No. by autopr0n · · Score: 1

      There is nothing wrong with this IMHO. They can live in whatever way that they want, as long as they dont try and make me live like them in my own country. In this way, we can have peace forever, and everyone can follow whatever life they want.

      You're wrong. There is something wrong with the way they treat women, and people in general. We should be respectful of other cultures, but at the same time you need to realize that some things are simply wrong.

      --
      autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
    9. Re:No. by Alan+Partridge · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Damn right - most Europeans have a REALLY hard time coming to terms with the American bible-thumping right wing. That's why we're never really sure if you're civilised or not - I mean, what the fuck are Bush's "faith based initiatives" doing in a country with a supposed strict segregation of church and state? The French are taking a lot of heat over their banning of school-worn hijabs, but it seems entirely consistent with their constitution to me.

      --
      That was classic intercourse!
    10. Re:No. by autopr0n · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Libertarian? I don't think so. Most Slashdot commenters these days seem to be avowed members of the antiamerican, antisemitic, antiwar left (and rather shrill ones at that). If you don't believe me, try arguing that maybe, just maybe, deposing a brutal dictator that has been steadily murdering his own people for decades (and who, by the way, was a Soviet client long before he recieved any American support) wasn't such a bad idea after all. Or pointing out that Clinton himself was convinced up to the very end that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction.

      So, Clinton is the archetypal libertarian now? That's news to me.

      When I say "libertarian" i mean "the government stays out of peoples lives as much as possible" not "The government lies about WMD to launch a war of conquest costing billions of dollars and hundreds of American lives." or "Agrees with ESR". How exactly is going to war in iraq furthering the goals of Individual liberty in america?

      --
      autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
    11. Re:No. by owlstead · · Score: 1

      Don't go comparing people with terrorists because you are diffent. That's going way to far, even if the target is a very religious group.

      Before you go antagonizing an entire country, please take a look at yourself and your government too. If you are an American take a look at (recent) history would you?

      I can understand most of the article, but that last sentence should be enough to put you on 0 for flamebait, instead of +5 insightful.

    12. Re:No. by Alan+Partridge · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The sheer amount of American anal porn spam that I get in my inbox each day would seem to suggest that it's Americans who treat women badly.

      --
      That was classic intercourse!
    13. Re:No. by spacecowboy420 · · Score: 1

      Damn right - most Europeans have a REALLY hard time coming to terms with the American bible-thumping right wing.

      Most Americans have a REALLY hard time coming to terms with the American bible-thumping right wing.

      --
      ymmv
    14. Re:No. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      LOL. Well, I do know quite a few Arabs, and 'liberal' is definitely not an adjective that comes to mind when describing their politics. Especially the younger ones, who tend to be far more fundamentalist than their (often fairly secular) parents.

    15. Re:No. by Alan+Partridge · · Score: 1

      So you admit that the Bush DIDN'T win the vote, then? :-]

      --
      That was classic intercourse!
    16. Re:No. by be-fan · · Score: 2, Informative

      Eh. I know lots of Arabs (I'm a Muslim) and I wouldn't say that they are quite liberal. I know lots of Southerners too (I live in Georgia) and I'd say that they are not very liberal either. They are, of course, good people, but they do have a conservative streak.

      --
      A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
    17. Re:No. by sydlexic · · Score: 1

      this is not something that has to be "admitted" ... it's a fact. he won on the technicality that we have an electoral college that's not 1:1 correlated with population. oh, and yeah, the funny business with Florida purging a few tens of thousands on blacks from the voter roles (a job left to a Republican run private business, no less). that's more than all the dangling and hanging chads combined. lest we forget, the margin of "victory" in FL was in the hundreds.

      to the previous post, right-wing bible-thumping is not mainstream in America. but Americans are more conservative and religious than Europeans by a wide margin.

      it's interesting to note how the far right in America who look forward to a judgement day (the end result of which is the extermination of the jews and muslims) see not a whiff of similarity with their intolerant views and those of, say, the Taliban. I guess it's OK to let someone else do your smiting and exterminating, but if you get your own hands dirty...

    18. Re:No. by Alan+Partridge · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Having lived in the USA, UK and France I would observe that I've never seen the kind of insane Chrisitian-nonsense (or, indeed, pro-gun) bumper stickers in Europe that are so commonplace in the US.

      You see the odd pro-hunting sticker in both the UK and France, but more for Greenpeace!

      --
      That was classic intercourse!
    19. Re:No. by Jonathan · · Score: 2, Insightful

      try arguing that maybe, just maybe, deposing a brutal dictator that has been steadily murdering his own people for decades (and who, by the way, was a Soviet client long before he recieved any American support) wasn't such a bad idea after all.

      Odd, that the US never lifted a finger against either Pinochet or Franco, who were much nastier dictators than Saddam.. and of course the North Korean communists, who without question have WMD merit nothing more than strong language. Hell, I'd *love* it if the US was a force against dictatorships in general, but it isn't -- it's just a force against dictatorships that somehow threaten US businesses.

    20. Re:No. by Zan+Zu+from+Eridu · · Score: 3, Insightful
      I really doubt that many Saudi Geeks would have the same libertarian, open-society, atheistic outlook that many geeks here in the US seem to have.

      Don't project your opinions on the group you think you belong to. To a lot of geeks, atheism is just as stupid as theism (you're still assuming things about "God", but can't define what "God" is), and uncontrolled libertarianism is just as stupid as unbridled socialism (why trust business more than government?).

      There seems to be this big misconception that anyone who likes computers is therefore a "geek" and also therefore has a similar political/philosophical outlook.

      Yes, and the misconception is yours. There is nothing that says you have to be a libertarian or an atheist to be a geek. Why would there be a PS geek code if we're all libertarians?

      This isn't to say that I think everyone in Saudi Arabia is some kind of crazy religious zealot, but if you grow up in that kind of environment, a lot of it would probably rub off on you.

      Probably just as much as that feeling of cultural superiority rubs off on a lot of westerners. There are a lot of little kings out there who think it's their godgiven right to pass judgement on everyone in the world (but get utterly nasty if you treat them the same way). It doesn't really matter if the superiority attidude comes from a religious or from a socio-economical background, the result is the same.

      The Saudis, at least the people in charge, are like the Taliban with gold Rolexes.

      Yeah cool, but what has this got to do with Saudi geeks?

    21. Re:No. by fenix+down · · Score: 1

      Da, Comrade. Is all part of secret plan to spread love of Glorious People's Tea.

      Seriously, if your coffee tastes so awful you need to heat it to the point where you can't taste it anymore just to choke it down, why bother? Boiling water and dirt is like $1 a gallon cheaper. Look, I don't even care if you burn your nuts off or not, it just pisses me off when people pull shit like setting cheap steak on fire, pouring black pepper all over it and acting like they're fucking Emeril. I'll "BAM!" you, you goddamn freak.

    22. Re:No. by fenix+down · · Score: 1, Funny

      Seriously, I'd take a few cocks up the ass if it meant I didn't have to wear wool in the middle of a fucking desert.

    23. Re:No. by odyrithm · · Score: 1

      atheistic outlook that many geeks here in the US seem to have.

      What, the, fuck is your majour malfunction? is your mind that small, that retarded that you think the internet somehow excists in the US only? you do relise with your obvious wealth of brain power that the internet is a global thing right? you do understand that even the Saudis have the internet? you do right? right?

      Proberly not, your an America, and as Americans all to often prove, there nothing but overly patriotic ignorant fucks.

      God you make me sick.

      --
      moo
    24. Re:No. by Stonent1 · · Score: 1

      Where are my Goddamned modpoints?

    25. Re:No. by sydlexic · · Score: 1

      And I guess that's what separates you from, um, people with experience. Wear a t-shirt and shorts in the desert for any period of time and you're in a whole lot worse shape. There's actually a basis for their attire.

      Magistrate's wigs, 3-piece suits, ties and the like, on the otherhand, are pure pomp and fashion.

    26. Re:No. by MuParadigm · · Score: 1


      How the hell did this Anti-American rant get modded "Insightful"?

      My own political stance is somewwere between Liberal Democrat and Libertian, check out their positions sometime and you'll notice that the Liberterians are usually closer to Democrats than Republicans on a lot of issues.

      But anyone who accuses people of being Anti-Semitic, just because they thought the timing of waging war against Hussein was pretty bad, obviously has no respect for the American traditions of free-speech and disagreement.

      Hey, don't get me wrong, I'm happy Hussein's out of power, but I'm not too thrilled about the price, neither in dollars nor in international good will. And if you don't realize that isolationism, unless there's a good cause that furthers American interests, is a Liberterian tradition, you really need to do some more reading.

    27. Re:No. by MuParadigm · · Score: 1


      Those things do exist, and yes, they are far less common in Europe, however, they're not particularly common in the US either. Maybe in the more thinly populated area between the Appalachians and the Rockies they're more so, and in the south too, I suppose, but hell, I live in New York City, and insane Christian nonsense and anti-gun control attitudes do *not* go over well here.

      And if you don't think that New York represents a good slice of the American population, well, just take into account that about 3% of the population lives here.

    28. Re:No. by Violent+when+angry · · Score: 1

      It's posts like these that make me wish that I'd save my mod points, hear hear!

      --
      If I get asked to fix one more windows install, I'm gonna loose it
    29. Re:No. by dk4 · · Score: 1

      So eco-nonsense is better than Christian-nonsense?

    30. Re:No. by sejanus · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Here's a newsflash for you.

      Though Australia "officially" actively supports America's stance on recent issues such as Afghanistan/Iraq - the people on the street generally don't, and more to the point they regard USA as *THE* place full of whacko's full of cults, school children with guns, snipers hunting the streets, death row full of hundreds of guys waiting for the chair, countless murders and robberies, areas where it isn't safe to go at night (or day) - and plenty more.

      And lets not forget Jerry Springer.

      Your message said ;

      "This isn't to say that I think everyone in Saudi Arabia is some kind of crazy religious zealot, but if you grow up in that kind of environment, a lot of it would probably rub off on you. "

      What if I wrote ;

      "This isn't to say that I think everyone in USA is some kind of crazy zealot and kills/robs, but if you grow up in that kind of environment, a lot of it would probably rub off on you. "

      Is that necessarily accurate? I don't believe so - but it's a common belief. I bet you wouldn't like to be associated with all the elements I wrote above, so conversely you should not point a finger at Saudi's with the same blanket outlook,a accusing them of having ties to the Taliban's outlook on life. What the hell would you know? How many Saudi's do you personally know? I'd bet zero.

    31. Re:No. by use_compress · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Is religious fundamentalism more ingrained in Saudi Arabia than in the USA? Maybe, maybe not, but I'm sure there must be exceptions either way.

      The difference between the religious zealots in America and those in Saudi Arabia is that the ones in America don't lock school girls in a burning school because they can't find their burkas. In America, we don't have massive public beheadings in soccer stadiums. In America, everybody has the right to practice their religion with out obstruction by the government. This does not happen in France and certainly does not happen in Saudi Arabia. There is no comparison.

    32. Re:No. by geekee · · Score: 2, Insightful

      "would have the same libertarian, open-society, atheistic outlook that many geeks here in the US seem to have."

      /. geeks are not libertarians. No libertarian believes in monopoly regulation, yet the majority of /.ers believe it is right to regulate Microsoft.

      --
      Vote for Pedro
    33. Re:No. by geekee · · Score: 1

      Libertarians are pacifists. They only believe in convincing other governments and peoples to change their ideas through reason. The objectivists are much more practical. They understand that you cannot use reason against irrational use of force.

      --
      Vote for Pedro
    34. Re:No. by Alan+Partridge · · Score: 1

      nonsense is nonsense

      --
      That was classic intercourse!
    35. Re:No. by Tyreth · · Score: 1
      atheistic outlook that many geeks here in the US seem to have.
      I know of many theistic geeks who consider atheism absurd. And it is. The closest anyone could hope to be to atheism is "agnostic". After all, until you know everything there is to know, you can't be certain there is no God. Don't impute your atheistic beliefs to the rest of us. We like to think too.
      There seems to be this big misconception that anyone who likes computers is therefore a "geek" and also therefore has a similar political/philosophical outlook.
      Exactly, and I'm sure this is true even within the USA (which I don't live in).
    36. Re:No. by True+Grit · · Score: 1

      How did this get the "Insightful" tag? If anything it probably deserves a "Troll" tag, since I'm falling for it. :)

      First of all,

      antiwar != antiamerican

      since that trap of accusing those who disagree with the war of being "unamerican" eventually led to the Vietnam tragedy, and also,

      antiwar != "the Left"

      since there are plenty of conservatives who aren't sure Bush Jr. handled Iraq the best way either.

      Maybe there are folks saying "Bush lied" because, well, he lied? It certainly appears so now. Maybe there are folks saying "its about the oil", because all of the other excuses Bush Jr. has given haven't panned out?

      No one is arguing that deposing bad dictators is a bad thing, its simply never been the official foreign policy of the US, prior to Bush Jr, to do so as a matter of course, and a lot of patriotic Americans are questioning the wisdom of us proclaiming ourselves the world's arbiter of what is a "good" govenment versus a "bad" government, never mind how the rest of the world feels about us just going around and deposing anyone that has ticked us off that week.

      If for no other reason, its simply because the lives of America's young are not seen as worth the price for ridding the world of one more 2 bit dictator. We've now lost ~500 kids in Iraq, and I still don't see justification for their loss and sacrifice. There are plenty other dictators like SH, and there will plenty more that follow him in the future, and they won't be worth the lives of our kids either.

      I don't believe you can catagorize people so easily as you think. Even among US geeks there are obviously very diverse views on larger issues. This thread certainly proves that.

    37. Re:No. by odyrithm · · Score: 1

      ah yeah, sorry, I just see so many American replys that seem to state /. or the internet is a US thing only; that I replied before I read.. I jumped the gun, sorry.

      --
      moo
    38. Re:No. by Gonoff · · Score: 2, Insightful

      As a European (Scottish) Christian, I have much less trouble with the ideas of tree huggers, veggies and dislikers of polluion than I do with some of the ideas I gear come from US "conservatives" and religious zealots.

      They are all in need of God.

      --
      I'll see your Constitution and raise you a Queen.
    39. Re:No. by geekee · · Score: 1

      European liberals aren't any better than American conservatives. You mentioned the French fiasco. How does banning someone from personal expression an affirmation of individual rights. This is not a church and state issue. Wearing a scarf to school by a student is not an endorsement of religion by the school or the state. It's simply a denial of religious freedom. France just wants to repress religion because they think it's dangerous. Whether it violates their constitution or not is irrelevant. They are against individual freedoms they don't like, just like American conservatives. At least people like Moore in America find out the US constitution does work, unlike the French constitution, apparently.

      --
      Vote for Pedro
    40. Re:No. by KingJoshi · · Score: 1
      Don't project your opinions on the group you think you belong to. To a lot of geeks, atheism is just as stupid as theism (you're still assuming things about "God", but can't define what "God" is)

      Though I agree with much of what you say, you make an assumption about atheism that's false. Atheism is a lack of belief in God. If you don't know what a god is or don't have an understanding, then it's not very likely that you'll believe in god either (though there are some that do). It just happens that a fair share of those that lack a belief in god also deny God's existence, but don't let that distinction go unnoticed.

      --
      In times like these, it is helpful to remember that there have always been times like these. - Paul Harvey
    41. Re:No. by LadyLucky · · Score: 1
      The Saudis, at least the people in charge, are like the Taliban with gold Rolexes.

      I'm astounded. You do acknowledge that what you are talking about is speculation. I can hardly complain about that. But to call that insightful is terribly terribly wrong.

      This is definitely a case of those living in glass houses should not throw stones. This may be hard to realise, but those of us living in the western world but not the US note some huge similarities between the US and the middle eastern countries. For the first, they are both highly religious. For the second, their governments are highly religious. Do you believe that the religious nature of your society necessarily rubs off on you? Do you really? Do you then really think it rubs off on them?

      Please remember that religious zealotry exists in many countries, and the US is one of them. This does in no way imply that every American is a religious zealot. Correctly so, many Americans strongly defend their country by saying that if someone wants to be highly religious they can be, and if they don't want to, they don't have to be. Freedom. It is absolutely a freedom that a number of countries (particularly non-western countries) do not have. But please do not try to imply that because you have seen some zealotry, it applies to everyone.

      We hear stories of American religious zealots trying to stop the teaching of evolution in high school. Yet in the spirit of tolerance and non judgement, this does not make every American insane. Please afford other cultures the same respect.

      --
      dominionrd.blogspot.com - Restaurants on
    42. Re:No. by use_compress · · Score: 1

      Please cite some reputable sources. I'd like to see one example where a judge denied custody to a parent expressly b/c they were a pagan. If that were the case, any appeals court would have overruled based on the first amendment.

    43. Re:No. by Spock+the+Baptist · · Score: 1

      Which majority? The majority in Texas? The majority in New York? The majority in Kanas? The majority in Maine? ...

      --
      "Oh drat these computers, they're so naughty and so complex, I could pinch them." --Marvin the Martian
    44. Re:No. by Spock+the+Baptist · · Score: 1

      "Though Australia "officially" actively supports America's stance on recent issues such as Afghanistan/Iraq - the people on the street generally don't, and more to the point they regard USA as *THE* place full of whacko's full of cults, school children with guns, snipers hunting the streets, death row full of hundreds of guys waiting for the chair, countless murders and robberies, areas where it isn't safe to go at night (or day) - and plenty more."

      Perhaps that's because that the folks in the land down under have been too influenced by the news from the US. Remember that 'When a dog bites a man that's not news, but when a man bites a dog that is news.'

      If it makes the news headlines in the US it's highly likely that it's not normal.

      --
      "Oh drat these computers, they're so naughty and so complex, I could pinch them." --Marvin the Martian
    45. Re:No. by quax · · Score: 1

      Saddam was a criminal, so were Franco as well as Pinochet. Stalin or Hitler After the 1st murder that they ordered it really becomes quite academic to argue who was worse.

    46. Re:No. by Zan+Zu+from+Eridu · · Score: 1
      Though I agree with much of what you say, you make an assumption about atheism that's false. Atheism is a lack of belief in God. If you don't know what a god is or don't have an understanding, then it's not very likely that you'll believe in god either (though there are some that do).

      Well I'm a hard agnosticist, so I support the argument that even though an atheist does not believe in (the existence of) God, he gets into arguments about the metaphysical; hence the atheist has some kind of understanding (gnosis) of what metaphysical reality is, even if he thinks of it as a void. I, as all hard agnosticists, deny that any objective gnosis is possible, there is no way to prove or disprove any claim about the metaphysical in a scientific fashion (because at that point it would stop being metaphysical).

    47. Re:No. by Spock+the+Baptist · · Score: 1

      cults;
      By definition they lie outside the norm.

      school children with guns;
      Well there are lots of kids that go deer hunting with their dads, but I don't think that's what you're alluding to here.

      snipers hunting the streets;
      While the recent D.C. sniper case has been in the headlines, you may rest assured that the VAST majority of Americans do not concern themselves with getting shot by a sniper of any sort. There is a much greater chance of being struck by lightning.

      death row full of hundreds of guys waiting for the chair:
      Well there are hundreds of guys on death row, though few are waiting for the electric chair. They're waiting on the needle for the most part. But you point is taken.

      countless murders and robberies:
      You're point is taken. I will say however that I've never worried that I, or any member of my family, or any of my friends would be murdered or robbed. Murder and robbery are still very much out of the norm for the US.

      areas where it isn't safe to go at night (or day):
      I've yet to find a place, at least here in Texas that I'd be afraid to go, outside the artillery range at Fort Hood or a similar place.

      On the other hand we have no excuse for Michael Jackson, but then y'all don't have an excuse for Steve Irwin.

      --
      "Oh drat these computers, they're so naughty and so complex, I could pinch them." --Marvin the Martian
    48. Re:No. by be-fan · · Score: 1

      Before anyone out there can make a comment on Islam/Muslims, try reading the Koran/Sunna/Hadith.
      ----------
      And? Try reading the Bible sometime. There is some crazy shit in there too. Specially around 2-Corinthians. I'm not even going to go into the Old Testament.

      Then do a google news on "sharia" and see how enlightened Muslims are..... daily beheadings, women STONED to death, al la 3000 BC.
      ------------
      Islam is the primary religion in a lot of backwards regions of the world, but its a corallation, not a causation. At their heyday, the Islamic cultures were the most advanced and progressive in the world at the time. In regions where people have been living mostly unchanged for hundreds of years (the countryside of many Islamic countries) its the cultural stagnation that is to blame, not the religion.

      But hey, it's all ok, because they had a few math and science advantages over the west... they invented human rights... all sorts of propaganda will flow in response.
      --------
      Its not propaganda. Read the Quran. Muslim women got the right to vote more than a thousand years before the 19th amendment was passed. Where the Bible stated that women got no inheritance if there were any male heirs, the Quran said that they'd get half as much as the male heirs (not quite fair, but commensurate with the fact that women were not the primary supporters of families at the time). Where the Bible treated divorced women as sinners, the Quran gave women the right to divorce their husbands at any time, for any reason. There is a lot of good stuff in there, if you care to read it.

      but he was a great guy cuz he waited until she was 9 before consummating the marriage.
      ---------
      Mohammad in Islam is not analogous to Jesus in Christianity. He is not a model that Muslims are supposed to emulate, like Jesus is for Christianity. He is considered the messenger of God, and his role was to bring the message of Islam to the people. Muslims are to pay attention to the message, not the messanger.

      Or that he separated the world into the world at peace (Islamic world) and the world FOREVER at war (non-Islamic world) and you'll realize we are in some crap here.
      ---------
      Kinda like how Christianity seperates the world into people who can go to heaven (Christians), and those who can't? At least Islam extends that to any Abramic religion.

      --
      A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
    49. Re:No. by Mantorp · · Score: 1
      Only 30 years ago you could get the death penalty for rape

      I think the death penalty is a great crime deterrent, just look at the stats compared to countries without it. Uhmm, nevermind.

      But hey, since people are allowed to carry concealed weapons there are fewer robberies because bad guys are afraid to pull one off when they know someone might carry a gun. Lost that argument too huh?

      At least this conservative country has a low rate of teen pregnancies compared to those liberal Western Europeans walking around condoning pre-marital sex. No, not that either?

      Let's discuss mandatory minimum sentences for those crazy hippies we bust for dealing acid and shrooms. Sure feels safer around here now.

      I've lived in the US for 14 years, like it very much, but some things still puzzle me.

    50. Re:No. by evanothespanishbasta · · Score: 1

      in fact you'll find in most cases since the end of world war 2 that the USA has not only supported brutal dictators but in fact put them in place...so I, like most of the world's population, find it quite amazing that GWB can suddenly claim that he this messenger from God sent down to clense to world from all the bad men...or was that just the speil after they discovered Iraq didn't have WMD...hmmm

    51. Re:No. by odyrithm · · Score: 1

      See why I get so fucked off with the Americans?

      --
      moo
    52. Re:No. by Shihar · · Score: 1

      The US IS a force against dictatorships in general, but they pick and choose their battles. Further, the US is willing to make 'deals with the devil' to further their ends against larger evils. The prime example of course is the Cold War. The US struggled with that dictatorship with fanatical zeal, and I don't think anyone can argue against that. The US sat with their finger hovering over nuclear oblivion because they had such a fanatical devotion to elimiting this oppressive regiem.

      Now, why does the US not directly fight all places and even let some off the hook? Simply because the US is limited. The US could not invade North Korea without destroying South Korea and racking up a body count to make all the wars since after World War II look like skirmishes. So, the US fights North Korea through sanctions and diplomacy.

      In the ideal US world, everyone is a democracy. It would be nice if they were all capitalist democracies, but the US only lets out the occasional grumble for those who choose the path of socialism. We might mumble about France, but to this day the US would not hesitate for even a second to send the entire US military to France's defense without thought of cost in lives or money. The US defends democracies and defends them fanatically. Just because they don't fight every war at once and still act out of pragmatism when it comes to picking battles does not mean the US is not a force a democracy in the world.

    53. Re:No. by Dirtside · · Score: 1
      Well I'm a hard agnosticist, so I support the argument that even though an atheist does not believe in (the existence of) God, he gets into arguments about the metaphysical; hence the atheist has some kind of understanding (gnosis) of what metaphysical reality is, even if he thinks of it as a void.
      Not all atheists claim to have some kind of "understanding" of metaphysical reality. The thing is, theists often do make such claims, and so they present us with their vision of a metaphysical reality. If we then poke holes in the logic of their metaphysics, it doesn't mean we know anything about what the actual metaphysical reality is (assuming there is one, which there may not be). It just means we know something about logic. :)

      The fact that I'm an atheist means that I hold no beliefs about the existence of God or gods, just as it means that I hold no beliefs about a set of hypothetical invisible magic unicorns who control your destiny. I'm not going to tell anyone that God can't exist, because that would be a ludicrous thing to say; but if someone makes any kind of affirmative proposition (such as, "God exists" or "the Bernoulli effect is not what gives airplanes lift"), I'm going to ask for evidence. Until I get sufficient evidence, I'm not going to hold the proposition as true, regardless of whether it's about God or aircraft.

      In other words, I'm both a hard agnostic AND an atheist.

      --
      "Destroy science and religion. Science would re-emerge exactly the same; but not religion." - Penn Jillette, paraphrased
    54. Re:No. by hoofie · · Score: 1

      Saudi executions are NOT carried out in Soccer stadiums. Public executions are often carried out opposite the main mosque in the city or town. The person is brought out (heavily drugged) and made to kneel. The executioner appears from the crowd, or a car and very quickly beheads the individual with a large scimitar-type sword. The sword is immediately taken off him and he goes away again. Its carried out very fast, and in public, but thats the whole point - the administration of justice is public. If I remember correctly, the family of the victim can commute the death sentence and have the murderer etc released on payment of blood money. When I lived in Jeddah, I once nonchantly sped down-town to 'chop square', completely forgetting it was midday prayers on a friday. I was stopped by a Saudi Policeman who politely suggested that I find another route.

      Also, the issue with the girls dying in the school in Makkah. The Committe for the Promulgation of Virtue and the Prevention of Vice (you can always spot them - they used to drive GMC Suburbans are are dirty looking bastards) stopped the girls being rescued. After this, the government replaced a lot of officials and carried out an inquiry. I'm not a supporter of the Saudi Government at all but they did react to it (even the newspapers got stuck into the government over that - something unheard of before).

      Saudi is a mad (and very young) country - full of contradictions. However, I had three fun-filled years (the booze, the nurses !!) there and I'll tell you this, it's the safest place I'll ever live.

    55. Re:No. by Zan+Zu+from+Eridu · · Score: 1
      I'm not going to tell anyone that God can't exist, because that would be a ludicrous thing to say;

      Ok, this is the agnostic viewpoint, but:

      but if someone makes any kind of affirmative proposition (such as, "God exists" or "the Bernoulli effect is not what gives airplanes lift"), I'm going to ask for evidence.

      This is not agnosticism but atheism. The (hard) agnosticist thinks you can never objectively prove or disprove anything in metaphysics, so asking for proof of the existence of God would be asking the impossible. In other words a hard agnosticist rejects any speculation about the metaphysical; the metaphysical to him is unknowable, a territory where logics and reason don't apply. The agnosticist doesn't know what metaphysical "proof" or "truth" would be like and thinks no one can know; hence he won't ask for it.

      I know this sounds like nitpicking but there is a definite difference between atheism and hard agnosticism, which I'm trying to make clear. A hard agnosticist will radically refuse to discuss metaphysics because he thinks logics and reason don't apply there, while an atheist thinks he can apply logics to metaphysics and builds a logical thesis which he is willing to discuss and defend.

    56. Re:No. by ZWithaPGGB · · Score: 1

      And Greenpeace aren't head cases? What do you call ramming Sailboats with powerboats because you don't like their sponsor?
      Believe it or not, some of us happen to think owning firearms and hunting are basic human rights and necessary survival skills, your religion ( which is what environmentalism is) notwithstanding.
      The "Deep Ecology" movement is at least as intolerant and militant a fundamentalist religion as militant Islam. It also presents a much greater threat to human life. After all, one of environmentalism's greatest "achievements", the banning of DDT, causes the deaths of over 1 Million people a year from Malaria.

    57. Re:No. by Dirtside · · Score: 1
      The (hard) agnosticist thinks you can never objectively prove or disprove anything in metaphysics, so asking for proof of the existence of God would be asking the impossible.
      The thing is, theists claim that God can affect our world. If that were true, then God would be part of the natural realm -- not the metaphysical (or supernatural, as some call it). So what the theists are doing is making claims about the natural world -- and even an agnostic can ask for evidence in that instance.

      What we call the "metaphysical" is really a meaningless construct -- it refers to everything which is not part of reality, but considering that everything we are, know, and imagine exists within reality, it doesn't actually mean anything to try to define something exterior to reality. It's not that we simply can't know anything about the "metaphysical realm;" the "metaphysical realm" is a literally meaningless concept.

      A hard agnosticist will radically refuse to discuss metaphysics because he thinks logics and reason don't apply there, while an atheist thinks he can apply logics to metaphysics and builds a logical thesis which he is willing to discuss and defend.
      Well, if the only attribute an agnostic would attach to the metaphysical realm is that it's "unknowable," that's kind of paradoxical, since how can you know that it's unknowable, if it's unknowable? Pedantry aside, someone can be both an atheist and an agnostic. Certainly, if I assume that a God must exist in the metaphysical realm and therefore cannot be discussed meaningfully, then it would be irrational for me to maintain a belief in that God. Therefore I would be both an agnostic and an atheist.
      --
      "Destroy science and religion. Science would re-emerge exactly the same; but not religion." - Penn Jillette, paraphrased
    58. Re:No. by Zan+Zu+from+Eridu · · Score: 1
      I agree with most things you state, except for:

      Certainly, if I assume that a God must exist in the metaphysical realm and therefore cannot be discussed meaningfully, then it would be irrational for me to maintain a belief in that God.

      This is the crucial passage, an agnosticist does not assume God must exist in the metaphysical realm (nor that he doesn't exist there), the agnosticist doesn't assume anything about the metaphysical realm because all assumptions would be both wrong and right at the same time. Of course the hard agnosticist, like an atheist, doesn't believe in God, but he thinks an atheist does it for all the wrong reasons: the atheist tries to reason about God.

    59. Re:No. by FunkyOldD · · Score: 1

      I am not the author of the original post, but I'd like to respond to a couple of your points.

      At their heyday, the Islamic cultures were the most advanced and progressive in the world at the time.

      At their heyday, the horse drawn carriages were the most advanced transportation device. Any organized religion in general, and especially a rigid one like Islam, is known to slow down progress. I would go as far as to say that the Islam is the main cause of the cultural stagnation you describe.

      Its not propaganda. Read the Quran. Muslim women got the right to vote more than a thousand years before the 19th amendment was passed.

      Last time I checked, all countries where Islam is a predominant religion were dictatorships, kingdoms, or ruled by islamic clerics. (Iran? Is ruled by clerics. Afghanistan just doesn't count.) The right to vote is not much use under those systems of government, no?

      Kinda like how Christianity seperates the world into people who can go to heaven (Christians), and those who can't? At least Islam extends that to any Abramic religion.

      Saying that someone will not go to heaven and being at war with someone are two very different things in my book.

    60. Re:No. by Dirtside · · Score: 1
      This is the crucial passage, an agnosticist does not assume God must exist in the metaphysical realm (nor that he doesn't exist there)
      I'm a little confused -- if you can't discuss the metaphysical meaningfully, and you can't discuss God meaningfully, that implies that you think God is metaphysical. But you said that you can't assume that God is metaphysical, either. So what is it about God that makes it an invalid target for discussion?
      but he thinks an atheist does it for all the wrong reasons: the atheist tries to reason about God.
      Same thing: If God can't be reasoned about (according to the agnostic), what is it about God that makes it so? So far only the metaphysical has been defined as something you can't reason about, so either God is separately defined as something you can't reason about (and if so, why is it defined that way?), or God is posited as being metaphysical and *therefore* can't be reasoned about. So hopefully you see why I'm confused :)

      For further elucidation, I'd ask, why exactly can't the metaphysical be discussed meaningfully?

      --
      "Destroy science and religion. Science would re-emerge exactly the same; but not religion." - Penn Jillette, paraphrased
    61. Re:No. by geekee · · Score: 1

      " So how do you seperate religion and state if you don't actually get rid of religious clothes, artifacts or references to any religion, in the state run institutions?"

      Separation of church and state means that the state doesn't endorse any particular religion. It has nothing to do with personal expression of religion by students, who are not representing the state in any way. How is an argument backed up by current events a straw man? It's a real case exemplifying censorship by the left that was mentioned by the parent, not me.

      --
      Vote for Pedro
    62. Re:No. by Zan+Zu+from+Eridu · · Score: 1
      I'm a little confused -- if you can't discuss the metaphysical meaningfully, and you can't discuss God meaningfully, that implies that you think God is metaphysical. But you said that you can't assume that God is metaphysical, either. So what is it about God that makes it an invalid target for discussion?

      It's a delicate affair :) Firstly, the agnosticist rejects "proper theism" just like the atheist does, he rejects the notion of an immanent (physical) God, which leaves a God that's transcendent (metaphysical) only (proper theism defines God as both transcendent and immanent).

      Secondly, metaphysics or the supernatural implies that laws of physics/nature are broken, hence all methodology to investigate natural phenomena (logics, reason, etc.) don't apply to metaphysics. This leads the agnosticist to conclude that metaphysics can't be discussed meaningfully, or to put it in other words that metaphysics are unknowable.

      To aswer your question: the (hard) agnosticist thinks that all metaphysics can't be discussed meaningfully, and since any proof of an immanent God is lacking, this confines God to transcendence; the unknowable/meaningless realm of metaphysics where everything is both true and false at the same time (so it's both true and false that God actually exists in that metaphysical realm).

    63. Re:No. by Dirtside · · Score: 1
      Firstly, the agnosticist rejects "proper theism" just like the atheist does, he rejects the notion of an immanent (physical) God
      That's not quite accurate. An atheist doesn't necessarily *reject* the notion of a physical God; he merely asks for evidence of that particular claim about reality, just as he would for any claim about reality. As long as metaphysics doesn't enter into it, an agnostic atheist can discuss the possibility and evidence for/against a physical God all day long.

      I think we do agree about the uselessness of trying to discuss metaphysics, but where we disagree is that discussions of God by necessity must incur the metaphysical realm and therefore God can never be meaningfully discussed.

      (proper theism defines God as both transcendent and immanent)
      Well, Christianity does. Not every religion defines their gods as such.
      --
      "Destroy science and religion. Science would re-emerge exactly the same; but not religion." - Penn Jillette, paraphrased
    64. Re:No. by Zan+Zu+from+Eridu · · Score: 1

      That's not quite accurate. An atheist doesn't necessarily *reject* the notion of a physical God;

      My point is that one doesn't have to believe in an immanent God, he should be provable/demonstable. The whole difference between agnosticism on one side and atheism and theism on the other, is the difference between knowledge and faith; the atheist rejects God on (lack of) faith, the agnosticist rejects God on (lack of) knowledge.

      Well, Christianity does. Not every religion defines their gods as such.

      Correct, though proper theism is not my invention but one by theologians and philosophers of religion. (By the way the wiki page about agnosticism is informative too.)

    65. Re:No. by geekee · · Score: 1

      You are not a libertarian. A libertarian believes in separation of busniess and state. A state shouldn't write laws that allow monopolies (e.g. Bell), nor should they interfere in free trade. No govt. legislation got MS where they are, and the govt. shouldn't interfere in their business, since it is interefering with their right to free trade. You do NOT have an individual right that comes at the expense of someone else's rights.

      --
      Vote for Pedro
    66. Re:No. by geekee · · Score: 1

      You don't understand the distinction between govt. and business. Govt. is unique in that the use force to enforce their will. A business can only offer contracts, which people accept or reject. To say a company can have the same power as a corrupt govt in a free society is irrational. If you are being exploited by MS, it's because you chose to be of your own free will.

      --
      Vote for Pedro
  41. People are pretty much the same around the world by arasinen · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It's not just geeks. It's not just USA and Saudi-Arabia.

    Physiologically people are quite the same. Some have folds in their eyes, some have lost pigment from their skin and some have fat in different places. These are only cosmetical differences. Inside we're all the same.

    If you look at Maslow's hierarchy of needs, you'll see that the bottom layers are physiological, safety, and love. These are what every person in the world wants. They don't want to sit in the cold, they don't want to be hungry and they don't want to be afraid. (Yet some are.) And people want love and want to love.

    The only substantial difference between different nations is due to culture. Some are born in conservative countries, some in liberal. Others live in religious areas, others have secular rule. Yet despite this, people still practice arts, science, whatever. You have geeks in Saudi-Arabia and deeply religious people in USA.

    Whatever group of people you look, you'll find innovative people there. I recently received a revelation about this subject while reading "Guns, Germs and Steel" by Jared Diamond. (Excellent book, recommended). His examples showed how people have adapted to all sorts of environments and made the best use of available resources. If this does not restore your faith in mankind, nothing will.

    It is true that there is a deep cultural divide between the Western world and the countries of the East, and I don't see the current political situation to lessen the situation at all. However, this is mostly due to ignorance. If you see two small children playing with toys, do you care if one of them is a Jew and another one an Arab? Do the children care? No.

    If Mr. Bush had met Mr. Hussein in a neutral and safe environment before the war, would they have fought with their bare fists. Probably not. Their nations fought one another, perhaps even their ideologies. But the people themselves... you can hardly ever find a good reason to strike at your fellow man. (This teaching, it would seem, lies at the heart of every religion. Sadly it is not observed very often.)

    The only way to fight this is to get rid of the prejudice and the fear. If you can, travel to different countries and try to see beneath the surface. People are the same, even in France. Try to learn about different cultures. If you can't spare the money, go to http://www.wikipedia.org/ and read about the different achievements of cultures both long gone and present. Read about their times of glory and downfall. Go to a library and read a book. (Once again I recommend "Guns, Germs and Steel".

    I'd like to end this rant with a quote from Charlie Chaplin. At the end of "The Dictator," the Jewish barber (who looks like Adolf Hynkel) gives a rather touching speech about universal harmony. (Emphasis mine.)

    "I'm sorry but I don't want to be an emperor. That's not my business. I don't want to rule or conquer anyone. I should like to help everyone if possible; Jew, Gentile, black men, white. We all want to help one another. Human beings are like that. We want to live by each others' happiness, not by each other's misery. We don't want to hate and despise one another.

    In this world there is room for everyone. And the good earth is rich and can provide for everyone. The way of life can be free and beautiful, but we have lost the way. Greed has poisoned men's souls; has barricaded the world with hate; has goose-stepped us into misery and bloodshed. We have developed speed, but we have shut ourselves in. Machinery that gives abundance has left us in want. Our knowledge as made us cynical; our cleverness, hard and unkind. We think too much and feel too little.

    More than machinery we need humanity. More than cleverness, we need kindness and gentleness. Without these qualities, life will be violent and all will be lost. The aeroplane and the radio have brought us closer together. The very nature of these things cries out for the goodness in man; cries out for universal brotherhood; for the unity of us all."

    --
    [ Antti Rasinen ]
  42. Re:Open your eyes. Look up to the skies and see... by bluetrident · · Score: 1

    I can see that you've got your MBA degrees, fine, but your post rather frightens me.

    will make us a better, truer, purer race of people

    That statement worries me--sounds a bit too nazi-ish. i enjoy diversity, i enjoy the fact that not everyone sees things from the same side of the fence.

    Granted, this might be a bit OT. I was more responding to this post and the *apparent* knowledge that just because they've got more than an undergraduate degree to hang on their wall they understand that the world consists of many different people.

  43. about women... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    ...me thinks that their women geeks and our women geeks are somehow a bit different.... we allow ours to work more freely (driving, education, clothing, status, etc...)

  44. Oh, the horror! by Saeed+al-Sahaf · · Score: 1
    Not wearing an abayah (female headgear) in public is asking for trouble.

    Terrible. I defiantly would not want my wife to have to ware an abayah just so that we could make "very very good money" (generally, $120,000 and up, plus signing bonus.).

    You really have to bite your tongue, be polite, keep your opinions to yourself, and be a gracious guest.

    Oh, the horror. Be polite? Gracious? These people are animals to demand that of foreign guests!

    --
    "Who are in control, they are not in control of anything - they don't even control themselves!" - Glen Beck
    1. Re:Oh, the horror! by Wavicle · · Score: 1

      Terrible. I defiantly would not want my wife to have to ware an abayah just so that we could make "very very good money" (generally, $120,000 and up, plus signing bonus.).

      Yes, I wouldn't either. Although my more pressing concern would be that my wife wouldn't be allowed to drive somewhere to go shopping, and if she took some other form of transportation she'd be arrested for being out without a male relative.

      --
      Education is a better safeguard of liberty than a standing army.
      Edward Everett (1794 - 1865)
    2. Re:Oh, the horror! by FredFnord · · Score: 1

      > Terrible. I defiantly would not want my wife to have to ware an abayah just so that we could make "very very good
      > money" (generally, $120,000 and up, plus signing bonus.).

      That's hysterical! So basically, you'd say, 'Honey, from now on you're wearing an abayah so that I can get loads of money!'

      See? There ARE some non-religious people who think treating their women like chattel is okay, as long as it is lucrative!

      > Oh, the horror. Be polite? Gracious? These people are animals to demand that of foreign guests!

      That's right. Because, as everybody with a conscience knows, politely and graciously agreeing with a system of beliefs that encourages the treatment of women as chattel, and going there and helping perpetuate such a system (by contributing to their economic base, etc) is frankly a poor idea, unless you actually do agree with it.

      In fact, in my opinion, the only person dramatically worse than the people who believe that this is how women should be treated are the people who don't really believe that, but are so apathetic that they sell what few convictions at the door and allow these people to treat 'their' women this way.

      Frankly, I see it as an issue like Apartheid in South Africa. Perhaps you thought Apartheid was great as long as you could make money from it. In that case, I despise you, but it's not like you could possibly care about that. But in any case, perhaps you can at least grasp, with that parallel, why some of us wouldn't go for a chance at a lot of money here.

      -fred

      --
      Sign #11 of Slashdot overdose: You see the phrase 'moderate Republican' and you wonder if that would be a +1 or a -1.
    3. Re:Oh, the horror! by pinkocommie · · Score: 1

      Frankly, I see it as an issue like Apartheid in South Africa. Perhaps you thought Apartheid was great as long as you could make money from it. In that case, I despise you, but it's not like you could possibly care about that. But in any case, perhaps you can at least grasp, with that parallel, why some of us wouldn't go for a chance at a lot of money here. And yet Palestinians have no vote, are now being walled out of the rest of the state and Israel rules n rocks :) Yes I know OT. The state of women in those countries (country?) is relatively recent and does not have to do with religion. Many Islamic scholars say that the whole burka / abaya thing (head to toe covering) was a cultural thing that caught on. Karen Armstrong in one of her books said something akin to it being imported from the Easten Orthodox people at the gates of Arabia (Constantinople etc). Regardless of the nit-picking, the Koran itself never mentions anythng like that, the only passage I've ever found related to that enjoins women to cover themselves 'decently'. Kinda leaves it up for grabs what the 'definition' of decently is. From some source I've read (right or wrong) nudity was quite common in Arabia prior to Islam and the passage basically meant for women to wear clothes :). Read the Koran yourself, and THEN make up your mind how crazy the religion is. oh yeah remember to read the Old / New Testament as well while your at it :).

  45. Article says by $exyNerdie · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Conversations with geeks in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia are similar to conversations with geeks anywhere, and most of the ones I have met so far are smart, young, single men who are addicted to the problem-solving aspect of programming.

    I know of many geeks who are not single. For the rest, it is the society/media that glamorizes football jocks and the thugs these days over people who are in the field of science/technology ....

  46. Sure, unless they're women. by autopr0n · · Score: 5, Insightful

    In which case, they need to wear burkas, not work, and be totally subservient to their man.

    Geeks tend not to be racist because hate takes time and effort that could be better applied to developing a better understanding of the universe.

    Please. Most American geeks tend not to be white-supremacists or anything like that because modern American culture abhors that kind of thinking. You won't find any kind of "racist" anywhere, unless you look very hard.

    On the other hand, have you ever read slashdot? Look at all the anti-Indian hysteria in any thread about H1-B or off shoring. It's the same unthinking "us vs. them, they're taking our jobs" attitude that all racism is borne out of. Maybe they won't take the final step to true racism (i.e. anyone of Indian decent == bad), but it's just as bad (any Indian == bad job stealer).

    A couple years ago, there was an article about a fiber-optic link around Africa. I was shocked when I read the comments. People were pissed, like it was some kind of a waste (even though it was being done by African countries expecting to make a profit). The racist comments in that thread were beyond the pail.

    Geeks have just as much capacity for ugliness as anyone else. I'm willing to bet that "geeks" in SA have the same sort of opinions on religious diversity, women's rights, etc that most of the country does, which is pretty bad.

    --
    autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
    1. Re:Sure, unless they're women. by HiThere · · Score: 1

      Most of the anger I've seen about H1B's is directed at the government and the corporations, who deserve it.

      The "Indian's" may be getting the jobs, but nobody is deceived into thinking that they wouldn't do the same thing in their shoes. I've seen more arguments that companies shouldn't be allowed to pay H1B's cut rate prices than personal denigrations directed at H1B's (though I admit there were some of those, too).

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
    2. Re:Sure, unless they're women. by swillden · · Score: 4, Interesting

      In which case, they need to wear burkas, not work, and be totally subservient to their man.

      RTFA.

      One of the things that Saudi geeks are apparently actively discussing (privately) is how software development work makes it possible for women to work without incurring the wrath of fundamentalist Muslims. Sure, that's mainly because they can work from home so the fundamentalists never see them, but the point is that these Islamic geeks in Saudi Arabia are actively considering how they can utilize technology to allow women to work. Their goal is to exploit an untapped resource, but even if they're underpaid and hidden from sight, working women will have a new power and level of influence they've not had before -- and these geeks don't see any problem with that.

      Geeks tend not to be racist because hate takes time and effort that could be better applied to developing a better understanding of the universe.

      Or, in this case, hacking out more code.

      It's this sort of understated change that ultimately changes whole cultures. It's also precisely what a lot of the radicals are afraid of and can not stop, no matter how many car bombs they detonate.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    3. Re:Sure, unless they're women. by Stonent1 · · Score: 1

      I have no problems with India, Indians or Indian culture. I just don't like being undercut by a person that I can't compete with on a money basis. And that is not necessarily their fault. If 6$ US per hour is a good wage for them, then fine. But if you move 1000 American (and Canadian) tech jobs to India to watch your stock raise a few points, it really pisses me off. Plus a lot of customers don't like knowing that they are talking to someone who was taught English as a second language. I don't have as much of a problem with H1-B because it levels the playing ground. At least in order to live in America, you're probably going to have to get somewhat of an American wage. We were commenting the other day about people advertising for H1 positions with things like SQL, Java, Oracle admin, C programming and then want to pay 11$ per hour. No where did they say that was who they wanted, but that was who they were targetting.

  47. Re:What The Fuck? by trg83 · · Score: 1

    You were already modded offtopic, but you are such an idiot that I am going to reply. Hitler was allied with the Arabs. So what was Hitler right about?

  48. we are all individuals ... by twitter · · Score: 1
    ... just like everyone else.

    The very concept of "just like us" is wrongheaded . I've had this conversation before. Some people have wrongly projected the influence of TV on the US into what the internet will do to the world. They predict a growing uniformity of culture and are dead wrong. Unlike bulky and expensive broadcast technology, the internet gives everyone the abiltity to expres and preserve their cultures on an equal footing. Different is good and we should respect that.

    There are many things that are subjective and cannot and should not be reconciled. Dogs are my favorite example. Differnt people have bred different animals according to their taste. I doubt seriously that people will adopt some kind of universal and average dog. The same can be said of human beauty. We are different looking because we selct each other for what we desire. Broadcast technology did much to damage people's self respect, but the proliferation of technology will restore it. People will present themselves as they see fit and it will be wonderful.

    The issues that most of us hope will proliferate already exist in most of the modern religions. Love your neighbor as yourself and the universal brother hood of man are concepts that most people profess. Given time and resources, people can actually practice such concepts.

    --

    Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.

  49. I think that... by Greyfox · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Most people are just people trying to live their lives, with the nutbag assholes being in the vast minority. Unfortunately it doesn't take many nutbag assholes to ruin the image of everyone else.

    --

    I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?

  50. A lot more complicated than that. by khasim · · Score: 1

    On one side, you have their rulers, backed by the US military.

    On a different side, you have the anti-US fundamentalists.

    On a different side, you have pro-Democracy.

    On a different side....

    Opposing the rulers can get you labeled as an anti-US "terrorist" or an Islamic fundamentalist anti-US "terrorist" or just anti-government criminal.

    Think about what the US's official reaction would be if these geeks decided to oppose the government.

  51. He peeked. by jhines · · Score: 4, Funny

    He peeked under the robes to see if they are like Scotsman.

  52. Support all Moslem geeks with free beer! by Spoing · · Score: 4, Funny
    It'll be the cheapest round you'll never buy!

    [leaps behind politically correct flame-proof wall]

    --
    A firewall can not protect you from yourself. Turn off what you do not need. Do not use the firewall to do your work.
    1. Re:Support all Moslem geeks with free beer! by utahjazz · · Score: 1

      More like insigthful. I've spent a lot of time with Muslims, and honestly found the biggest showstopper difference between me and them to be the part about not drinking.

      Seriously, how do you hang with people that don't drink?

      I mean, some of the guys will drink, but the chicks don't. Not behind closed doors, or in private or whatever. Never.

      I truly believe this is one of the major issues with that region. They need to get drunk now and then. Hell maybe that's Bush's problem too.

    2. Re:Support all Moslem geeks with free beer! by thebigmacd · · Score: 1

      Don't worry, not all hope is lost...they have lots of opium in the Middle East.

  53. No you moron. by autopr0n · · Score: 1

    There's a difference between a stereotype and a fact. If I say "teenagers are not allowed to buy alcohol in the US." it's not a stereotype, it's a fact. SA's laws are out in the open, not a secret, and they are horrible.

    --
    autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
    1. Re:No you moron. by JaredOfEuropa · · Score: 3, Insightful
      SA's laws are out in the open, not a secret, and they are horrible.
      And SA's laws were written by their geeks? I don't see how the statement 'Saudi Geeks, all Saudi Geeks, treat their women like lesser beings' can be construed as a fact, rather that the obvious stereotype that it is.
      --
      If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
  54. nice flame. by twitter · · Score: 1, Insightful
    [Collin Powel] He speaks so well". How the fuck is he supposed to speak?

    Better than GW Bush?

    Better than you write, that's for sure.

    Does anyone else consider this topic to be implicitly racist?

    No, ding-a-ling. Islam's got it's own thing going on and Saudi Arabia is where it comes from. Get a clue - not everyone thinks like you do.

    It's not what you don't know. It's what you don't know you don't know that's overwhelming.

    --

    Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.

  55. Re:People are pretty much the same around the worl by Zachary+Kessin · · Score: 1, Troll

    Nice theory. Tell that to the "Mother" of two who blew herself up at the Erez crossing point last week. She killed 4 Israelis and left about 6000 Palistianians out of work for the near future.

    --
    Erlang Developer and podcaster
  56. Opinion of someone more informed by joggle · · Score: 1

    Here is a link to a post by an Iraqi woman complaining angrily about the new Shari'a law passed in Iraq (similar to what is in effect in Saudi Arabia). It is a pretty thorough, though not exhaustive, list of complaints about how women are treated under that law. Perhaps you should try to make yourself less ignorant, eh?

  57. Re:How do they spell by Zachary+Kessin · · Score: 1

    Wow, I almost understood that! I can't under stand arabic script at all, but the letters are similar enough to the hebrew ones in name and sound that I can figure it out.

    Actually there are a number of Jewish works that have been written in Arabic but using hebrew script.

    --
    Erlang Developer and podcaster
  58. Please, let's not! by pair-a-noyd · · Score: 2, Funny

    "Roblimo concludes that under the robes,"

    Um, I don't know about you guys, but I really, really don't want to go there.

  59. When there's a common interest.. by ShadowRage · · Score: 1

    people are generally the same.

  60. This is slashdot. by khasim · · Score: 1

    If you were discussing US history here, you'd have people demanding proof that the US used to be a British colony.

    You are correct about their laws.

    You are correct about documented instances of their treatment of women and girls.

    Whether such can be said to apply to "all" of the "geeks" over there or not is meaningless to debate. Anyone can claim to not support what the "majority" supports. But very few of them oppose the majority enough to go to jail for their beliefs or to even risk social antagonism.

    As long as those "geeks" are not personally throwing the stones at the women, or posting in their websites about how it is right that women should be treated that way, anyone can believe anything they want about what those "geeks" believe.

    You're presenting facts, others are presenting what they believe those "geeks" believe. Both could be correct.

    1. Re:This is slashdot. by DAldredge · · Score: 1

      Till they try to change things they are just as guilty for the actions of their goverment.

    2. Re:This is slashdot. by pinkocommie · · Score: 1

      As we are for what Bush does (deaths of any Iraqi's :)) and the deaths of Palestinians by weapons paid for by us Tax payers :)

  61. maybe not anymore... by I+Be+Hatin' · · Score: 1
    Surfing pr0n in Saudi and then writing about it. I hope he gets out of the country.

    ...in one piece, that is. After all, you know what they do to thieves... I wonder what the punishment is for vieweing pr0n...

    --
    I know god exists. I read it on the internet, so it must be true.
  62. Geeks vs. Nerds by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

    Geeks are knowledge enthusiasts. Nerds are antisocial. Some people are both - solitary geeks are nerds. But geeks usually fraternize with other geeks, so are not nerds. While many nerds know nothing, far from geekdom. Of course, they're as indistinguishable by jocks as crackers and hackers.

    --

    --
    make install -not war

  63. class vs. race by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 2, Insightful

    When people get mad at foreigners for "taking their jobs away", it's not racism - it's economics. People get just as mad when the foreigners are of the same race. It's rational competition. Even though it's wrong. People should be mad at their fellow countrymen, who run the corporations that offshore their jobs. Those suits get subsidized every which way to develop their corporations, then break the system that supports them by sending the labor dollar into an unconnected economy overseas. Geeks should see the light better than their failed predecessors in the car, steel and other uneducated industries, and rein in the corporations that are squandering their civilization for an unsustainable fast buck.

    --

    --
    make install -not war

    1. Re:class vs. race by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      People get just as mad when the foreigners are of the same race. It's rational competition.

      Or when it's people with green eyes. If they weren't taking jobs there would be more for the rest of us. It's rational competition.

    2. Re:class vs. race by samantha · · Score: 1

      What do you mean by "foreigners taking their jobs away"? First, it is our company management folks hiring non-domestic people. Those hired are not "taking" they are being offered employment. Second, in what since is it "their jobs"? On what basis are the jobs owned by domestic workers? Being at one time hired in such a capacity does not mean that similar jobs belong to you.

      What is actually going on is a function of opening up markets worldwide (globalization), the way the corporate world bottom-line-centered view plays out, that over time fewer and fewer jobs remain to be done by humans, and most of all that there is no plan at all to have all human benefit by advancing technology and abilities regardless of whether they have normal "jobs" or not. The world has changed and will changed further from the contexts where the old formulas, platitudes and practices formed and made sense. Unfortunately we will cling to the old and apply a more and more haphazard set of patches and assignations of blame the worst it gets.

    3. Re:class vs. race by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      If you'd change the level you browse at to eliminate the -1s and 0s, so you don't waste time reading the comments by the moronic minority and trolls, you'd have a different perspective of Slashdot comments.

    4. Re:class vs. race by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      These companies are based in America, and enjoy many benefits that this country affords them, like tax breaks. They therefore have a reciprocal duty to provide employment for Americans, and strengthen the economy that makes their company's existence possible. If they don't like that, they can move all their operations overseas, including their corporate headquarters, and see how well they get along there.

    5. Re:class vs. race by Christopher+Whitt · · Score: 1

      Then be pissed off at the companies, not the foreign workers. People everywhere just want to earn a living, the same as you do.

    6. Re:class vs. race by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      What the hell are you talking about? American companies do NOT pay taxes, unless they are small. The information is all public; I invite you to look for yourself.

      American employees pay taxes, but the corporations themselves do not. Why should these companies be allowed to reap benefits from our economy when they contribute nothing in return?

    7. Re:class vs. race by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      Where did I ever say I was pissed at foreign workers? I never said that. Don't put words in my mouth.

      I AM pissed off at the companies, and even more so at our crappy government that isn't doing anything to protects its own citizens and economy just so some corporate executives can get richer. Lastly, I'm somewhat pissed at regular everyday Americans for being morons and voting this government into office.

    8. Re:class vs. race by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

      My point exactly. Except that governments exist to protect their local economies. By cooperating with foreign economies, or competing with them when that's more practical. Greeneyed people have to get their own representation.

      --

      --
      make install -not war

    9. Re:class vs. race by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

      People are competitive. If they can get you to back away based on insults, they'll keep doing it. So stand up for yourself, and reply to those comments with engagement. Not only will you feel better than if you suffer in silence (even with a superior attitude), but you might get another person to behave better, and even change their mind and their comments. Maybe not in a flamewar, but often later on. That kind of influence is important. Self respect is contagious.

      --

      --
      make install -not war

    10. Re:class vs. race by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

      My track of this thread looks like a discussion of "geeks aren't racist" -> "geeks don't like foreigners who take our jobs" -> (my post) "economic competition is classism, not racism" -> "people should attack corporations, not other people" (echoing my post). This subthread, which I started with "class vs. race" is about appropriate expressions of feelings about foreign competitors, and ways to channel those feelings to change things for the better, in order to feel better. Or it's about something else, in someone else's post ;).

      --

      --
      make install -not war

    11. Re:class vs. race by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

      It's appropriate for you to resent your government when your job is offshored, while it subsidizes the corporation with your tax dollars. Because it's appropriate for you to do something about your government, which will make you feel better for trying (and even better when succeeding). Governments don't have much role in competing with the greeneyed among us. They do have a role in competing with foreign economies.

      --

      --
      make install -not war

    12. Re:class vs. race by Hooya · · Score: 1
      it's not economics. it's xenophobia.

      actually, use whatever term you want to use but eventually it breaks down to "us" vs. "them". typically, survival in the biological sense is based on this. economics has become engrained into human survival (over the long run). therefore, what you call ecomonics is actually our basic biological instincts kicking up. it's an issue of "us" vs. "them". when there's enough of "them" the rest are "us". when that "them" goes away (no longer competitive), then the "us" breaks down into another "us" and "them" using a new defining boundry of what is "us" vs "them" . if another group comes into the picture that barrier breaks down and the "us" and the "them" combine to now make up the new "us" since now, there a whole new "them" to worry about.

      do you know how many US companies have part of their operation in germany? no. because it's "us". therefore it doesn't matter. india/H1 is "them" because if it were "us" then there wouldn't be a "them". if india/H1 issue were to go away, i'm sure you'd find plenty of "them"s to wage your "corporate greed" campaign against. you don't see them right now because you have a more distinctive "them" to worry about.

      unless you're the last person on earth, you'll always have a "them". even your brother would be a "them" if compitition/survival were between you and your brother.

      even if you were the last person on earth, you'll still have the "them" martians to worry about.

      the "them" are out to get you. whoever the "them" are today.

      cheers.

    13. Re:class vs. race by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

      Economic competition between geographical regions is not an "all or nothing" proposition. Especially between large, complex places like the US and India (or any other countries), in the interconnected 21st Century. Calling the actual competition between countries' residents "xenophobia" is a smokescreen, an attempt to stifle debate over the actual economics.

      Here's an example that doesn't require anyone "foreign" or even different, except they are "other": New York and New Jersey manufacturing economies. Since the 1960s, NY has passed laws which protect us from pollution. NJ has not protected their people. So manufacturing polluters have moved to NJ, taking the jobs with them. Meanwhile, the corporations were incubated in NY's business climate, with NY's educated, active workers building their foundations. Those years were invested by NY, but people in NY's governments let the corporations off the hook when the investments started to bear fruit in job growth. New Jersey's people benefited from New Yorkers' investments. The corporate leaders benefited throughout, and the New York politicians helped them along. This pattern is a model for globalization, but it has nothing to do with bigotry or other connotations of "xenophobia". It's economic competition.

      --

      --
      make install -not war

    14. Re:class vs. race by Hooya · · Score: 1

      that was my point exactly. use of the word "xenophobia" was meant to illustrate the fact that we tend to draw arbitrary lines to define the "us" and the "them". it might be "race" if the "them" we target is indeed comprised of a different race than the "us". if race doesn't divide but political boundries does then enter the word "xenophobia". if you look deeper, it's not the country per say. it's the "us vs. them". we just look for words that concisely define where the "us" ends and where the "them" begins. my main point being that if todays "them" were to disappear a new definition of "them" would come up to split the what used to be "us" into a new "us" and "them". if a new and more imminent "them" were to enter into the picture, the current "us" and "them" would combine to form a new "us" because there is now a whole new "them". eg. US, the soviets, and germany in WWII.

      but there'll always be a "them" down to your brother..

      anyhow.. i'm not good at writing what i'm thinking..

    15. Re:class vs. race by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

      I agree with your point of view, if you believe that people oversimplify and divide groups into "us" and "them", then set "us" against "them", to win victories that don't necessarily serve all of "us" (or even justify excluding all of "them"). But are you denying that there are actual, meaningful associations that distinguish different groups, which compete to defend interests? Actual "zero sum games", in which a finite resource must be taken from one group by another, in order for the taker to benefit from the resource? To be specific, do you disagree with one country's workers protecting their jobs, preventing their country's corporations from buying labor from another country, when the two countries' economies are separate enough that the resulting growth favors only the foreign country?

      --

      --
      make install -not war

    16. Re:class vs. race by Hooya · · Score: 1
      well, this is kinda cool, the "conversation" that's happenning..

      To be specific, do you disagree with one country's workers protecting their jobs, preventing their country's corporations from buying labor from another country, when the two countries' economies are separate enough that the resulting growth favors only the foreign country?

      before i say anything, i'd like to clarify that i'm not pro-outsourcing. in fact, i'm not pro-big-biz at all. for example, i haven't bought a CD in the last 6 years as a personal 'up yours'. and no i don't download from various napster-isms either.

      that aside, when the steel industry outsourced did we *really* lose jobs? sure we lost jobs in the steel industry but that gave way to countless other jobs because people were freed up from the iron industry.

      i look at it like this..

      industrial revolution came, steel workers were needed, as the steel/iron industry was commoditized, the original 'innovators' no longer needed to be involved. the jobs went overseas but the people (in the sense of the population. not the individual people) who lost steel/iron jobs then started 'innovating' something else. in this case you could say it was telecom. then telecom was more or less commoditized. that went overseas. then came 'infomation tech.' that too is starting to be commoditized. that too will go overseas. and the people currently in info-tech will move on to 'innovate' something else..

      no denying that there are period of droughts in the in-between phases but as i see it there have been at least three major outsourcing in the US history. if people indeed lost jobs because of it, the US should have about at least 50% unemployment rate by now.

      i'm not exactly thrilled that my bargaining power in the market is waay less than what it used to be. and i'm sure i'll be headed back to college for a degree in something else. but that's how the US has been at the forefront of innovation. delegating the old tech to others. :(

      nothing wrong with people defending their way of life tho. none at all. but like i just said, i don't think the outsourcing only works for the people at the other end. we're just readying a move to working on the next big thing..

    17. Re:class vs. race by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      So what exactly do they contribute in return? If they're not paying any taxes, and don't have any employees in the state paying taxes, what the hell are they contributing?

      How is it irrelevant if the company is paying taxes when the only way to keep a state running is through tax revenue?

  64. Of course Pico sucks; it's closed software! by RLiegh · · Score: 1

    Nano is the true editor for people who want to use an editor to edit files, as opposed to using one as a religious cause

    1. Re:Of course Pico sucks; it's closed software! by Peaker · · Score: 1

      Sure, to edit files slowwwwwly :)

      Or use Emacs to get much more work done from every keypress than anything else in the world :)

    2. Re:Of course Pico sucks; it's closed software! by Oopsz · · Score: 1

      Testify!

    3. Re:Of course Pico sucks; it's closed software! by Curtman · · Score: 1

      What on earth is slow about nano? It's about 100k, and its dependencies are ncurses, and libc. You're saying emacs is faster than nano?

    4. Re:Of course Pico sucks; it's closed software! by cryptochrome · · Score: 1

      Femto shall destroy all other editors and make the open source world its own.

      --

      ---If you can't trust a nerd, who can you trust?

    5. Re:Of course Pico sucks; it's closed software! by jrockway · · Score: 1

      Slow in the sense that it doesn't do anything for you like syntax highlighting or M-x replace-string.

      --
      My other car is first.
  65. i Norge by h4rm0ny · · Score: 2, Insightful

    There are probably people in Norway who believe things that would disgust you as well as me

    Ja! Not imprisoning kids for fifteen years for cracking some silly protection system, having politicians who take home a reasonable salary and have no commercial interests and many other cultural idiosyncracies that may seem odd to a US citizen. ;)

    But seriously,intelligence depends on a willingness to think for oneself. It should be no surprise that it is these people who are least constrained by the arbitary beliefs of their culture.

    Smart people have more in common with smart people wherever they are from than with the stupid people next door.

    --

    Aide-toi, le Ciel t'aidera - Jeanne D'Arc.
  66. Not a correct gauge by Joe+the+Lesser · · Score: 3, Funny

    less Geek -> Geek -> more Geek
    Emacs Vi Emacs

    Vi is for pussies. ;)

    --
    "I only speak the truth"
    Karma: null(Mostly affected by an unassigned variable)
  67. Being a geek precludes from being fundamentalist ? by GreenEggsAndHam · · Score: 1

    'nuff said

  68. It has to be said. by KnightStalker · · Score: 2, Funny

    Fetch.... THE COMFY CHAIR!!!!!

    Nobody expects the Saudi Inquisition!

    --
    * And remember, it's spelled N-e-t-s-c-a-p-e, but it's pronounced "Mozilla."
  69. Is that not the fundemental problem? by SerpentMage · · Score: 1

    Do women want to be treated like princesses? Or do women want to be treated like equals?

    I think women want to be treated equal. Because when a women is treated like a princess she is treated as a delicate thing that is not entirely capable of thinking herself and has someone to do everything for her...

    Ok I am dissecting your words, but think hard. Is treating a women like a princess the same as an equal?

    --

    "You can't make a race horse of a pig"
    "No," said Samuel, "but you can make very fast pig"
    1. Re:Is that not the fundemental problem? by XO · · Score: 1

      How many women do you know in the U.S. that actually want to be treated as an equal?

      They say it, but most of them don't seem to understand what that means, especially when it comes to relationships. :D

      Most of the women here are showered with money, and gifts, and nice things, and the Arabic men (especially the older ones, the ones that have moved to this area from an Arabic nation, etc) treat them with a LOT of respect.

      --
      "Champagne for my real friends - and real pain for my sham friends!" http://ericblade.postalboard.com/
  70. Joe by shuz · · Score: 1

    Yes, joe is the correct answer.
    I love my wordstar key bindings.

    --
    There is or can be built a machine that can simulate any physical object. -Church-Turing principle
  71. Who said anything about animals? by The+Tyro · · Score: 3, Insightful

    (generally, $120,000 and up, plus signing bonus.)

    Actually, it was more than that.

    Perhaps this is difficult for you to understand, but Americans are extremely fond of speaking their minds... both in private, and public. In America, if I wanted to walk around in front of a catholic church with a blood-drenched picture of the pope, accusing him of horrible crimes, I could do it (not that I would, but you get the idea). In Saudi Arabia, that could get you beheaded.

    I would not want to force my wife to wear something she didn't agree with, particularly something that is required by a religion we don't practice, that ostensibly puts her in a subservient position. I consider women to be my equal in virtually everything, excepting perhaps physical size and strength. I have a problem with subjecting my wife to possible humiliation, interrogation, and virtual imprisonment just to make a few bucks.

    Judging by the reaction of muslims when their women are prohibited from wearing veils in schools and drivers license photographs, it's obvious you can appreciate my point. You don't like being forced, and neither do I.

    As for being courteous and polite, that goes both ways... you could expect my politeness to end, with extreme prejudice, the moment some muttawa religious policeman tried to strike my wife with his stick because he could see skin above her ankles in public. All cultural differences aside, if you strike a man's wife in front of him, you'd better be prepared for the consequences, whether you're Saudi or American.

    Call me an ugly american if you want, but I have a problem with asking my wife to live in an environment like that, even for a year or two... I simply have too much respect for her.

    Some things are more important than money.

    --
    Even if a man chops off your hand with a sword, you still have two nice, sharp bones to stick in his eyes.
    1. Re:Who said anything about animals? by myowntrueself · · Score: 1

      I think that America (and much of the west) just has better and more effective techniques for the long term manipulation of their societies.

      --
      In the free world the media isn't government run; the government is media run.
    2. Re:Who said anything about animals? by foonf · · Score: 1

      In America, if I wanted to walk around in front of a catholic church with a blood-drenched picture of the pope, accusing him of horrible crimes, I could do it (not that I would, but you get the idea). In Saudi Arabia, that could get you beheaded.

      Actually I think the Saudi government downright encourages criticism of the Catholic church...

      (yes, I know what you were really trying to say)

      --

      "(Man) tries to live his own life as if he were telling a story. But you have to choose: live or tell." --Sartre
    3. Re:Who said anything about animals? by gears5665 · · Score: 1

      so...um...don't bring your wife.

      I'd enjoy the 2 year vacation and she'd still get to spend your money.

      Everyone wins.

  72. Not all countries in the middle east are the same by Bombula · · Score: 5, Informative
    Bear in mind that there are vast differences between the different countries of the Gulf. The national identities of their societies go back millennia. I live in Oman, which a very progressive and pro-western country.

    First to dispel some misconceptions: The women on the roads here think it is just as crazy that their counterparts in Saudi can't drive. Alcohol is available at hotels, restaurants, and in liquor stores. There is essentially no dress code for visitors, and we see plenty of tank tops and belly-button rings. Women don't wear veils or always black, because that's not part of Islam - that's a recent part of Saudi culture. Plenty of women wear jeans and t-shirts. Birth control pills are available at subsidized rates and are encouraged. And of course there are all of the modern ammenities you'd expect: water, power, cheap gas, shopping malls, movie theaters, Starbucks and McDonalds and satellite TV, just like everywhere else.

    Second, there are a number of ways in which life here compares favorably to life back home (I'm American): in day to day living, things are less oppressive here. When you get pulled over by the cops, you get immediately get out of your car and shake hands with the cop and exchange pleasantries. You would get shot doing this where I lived in LA. Speaking of getting shot, there are no guns here. Well, there are rifles of course, but murder is exceedinly rare. In fact, the last one was some Texan woman who murdered her oil-worker husband with the aid of her son. There is virtually no crime to speak of at all. No metal detectors in schools, no looking over your shoulder in dark alleys, no worries or concerns about getting carjacked or mugged or harassed in any way. I rarely lock my car, never lock my house. Punishment for crimes is indeed swift, certain and severe, but a trial by jury is guaranteed - kind of like small-town USA. Medical care? Free. For everyone, foreign or Omani.

    Freedom? There sure seems to be. All citizens vote for parliament members. There are female doctors, professors, ministers - you're free to choose to do whatever you want with your life. Freedom of religion too. A couple of my jewish friends have been out to visit and loved this place. You're much more free here to go where you like, camp where you like, eat and drink and smoke where you like. Cops in Arizona (well, rangers), in the middle of nowhere, busted me for trespassing and not camping at a designated campsite. And here I was used to rolling up any old place, pitching a tent, making a fire, cooking up some pork sausages I picked up from the local supermarket, surfing and fishing wherever I chose.

    Next to my folks' house in California people had a 'vote no on prop 22' sign on their front lawn (the bill that would have allowed gay marriage, which was voted down). Racial hate crimes and general tension are vastly greater in the states than here - Oman is historically a melting pot because of all its sea-faring trade. Oh, and unlike in here, I needed a license to catch a fish and a permit for wherever I wanted to go fishing back in California.

    The point of all this is that things are never black and white, and these countries out here are almost nothing like what the evening news and our elected officials would have us believe.

    --
    A-Bomb
  73. Re:People are pretty much the same around the worl by EulerX07 · · Score: 1

    I'll be sure to mention it on my way to talk to the attack helicopter pilot who shot these missiles or maybe those, or the sharpshooter in this bullseye.

    Point is, it's two sides killing the other side. Using suicide bombing is not more horrible than using high-tech weapons and vehicles. It's just harder to have those handy when you're not receiving BILLIONS every year to buy to toys to murder your adversaries.

    I haven't checked the tally yet, but last time I checked, Israel had a confortable lead in kills. They'll probably make the playoffs.

  74. Re:People are pretty much the same around the worl by JohnnyCannuk · · Score: 1

    Touching words. I applaud you. As you can see by some of your responses, saying nice things can be quite difficult, especially on slashdot.

    I hope some people read this and it can change them for the better. If more people took you veiw point, we would live in a better world indeed.

    Good to see this at +5. I'm not the only one that thinks this is worthy of reading.

    --
    Never by hatred has hatred been appeased, only by kindness - the Buddha
  75. SCO the infidels by ehiris · · Score: 1

    SCO and Darl McBride are finally making the list of infidels.

  76. Compassion is not fashionable right now by mabu · · Score: 1

    It is a shame that many people spend so much of their lives being distracted that their ability to "feel" has been stunted. And most people equate feeling with reacting, which aren't the same. Reacting is a form of agression, whereas feeling is a part of the process of understanding. Unfortunately for us, the latter isn't something that can be accomplished with the push of a button or the plunking down of a credit card.

    Slashdot is definitely more of a community driven by people who have a desire to understand moreso than a desire to react, but even those of us who are aware of these dynamics are still subject to the ongoing influence that wants to dictate black-and-white "solutions" to complex problems. But, as many of us soon realize, we can't apply the same logical problem-solving skills to cultural and sociological issues that we do on inanimate equipment.

    It's interesting to witness how we've not only become a materialistically-disposable society, but also a psychological one as well.

  77. Don't bet on it by The+Tyro · · Score: 1

    You'd be amazed what goes on behind closed doors in that country, and what is tolerated at various foreign enclaves or compounds.

    People are people, no matter where you go... they often have the same yearnings, and yes, that includes vices... take my word for it, the Saudis are NO exception, you just have to know where to go.

    --
    Even if a man chops off your hand with a sword, you still have two nice, sharp bones to stick in his eyes.
    1. Re:Don't bet on it by Spoing · · Score: 1
      1. You'd be amazed what goes on behind closed doors in that country, and what is tolerated at various foreign enclaves or compounds.

        People are people, no matter where you go... they often have the same yearnings, and yes, that includes vices... take my word for it, the Saudis are NO exception, you just have to know where to go.

      That I don't doubt! Erm...so I guess I wouldn't be amazed.

      Informally, I've noticed that communities in the US that have a high ratio of bars or strip clubs also have a high ratio of churches. Care to guess which one follows the other?

      People can only deny so long before the 'sin' shows up somewhere.

      The only thing 'sinful' or just plain wrong is usually a lack of moderation shrouded in the odd notion that abstainance in anything is a good idea. If you have to abstain, you relly don't want to, and eventually you won't!

      Anthropology rule: If there is a law or edict against something, you can be certian that that thing is occuring. After all, there are laws against besatiality though there are none against eating excrement.

      --
      A firewall can not protect you from yourself. Turn off what you do not need. Do not use the firewall to do your work.
  78. Space institute by astrashe · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I guess I'll be blowing some karma on this one.

    The last thing I want to see is an Islamic country with a large fundamentalist population picking up expertise in missle technology.

    The fight against nuclear proliferation is being lost, but at least we (Americans, I guess I should say) have some protection from the difficulties associated with targeting long range missles.

    Saudi Arabia is an ally, and I don't want to run them down. But they're an ally that doesn't have a lot of ability to control its technology and funds. Pakistan is in the same category. These countries are allies, but there are people with high positions in the militaries and intelligence services of both countries that are very hostile to the US.

    The standard geek way of looking at space technology is either naive or deliberately ignores some basic facts. It's military technology.

    The space race with Russia was not undertaken to beam cool pictures of guys walking on the moon to the folks at home. It was because we felt we had to be better at building ICBMs and cruise missles than the Russians.

    Our skill with satellites gives us intelligence and the ability to coordinate our forces on the ground, and to target our weapons much more precisely.

    That's what this stuff is really for. Bush knows it, the Saudis know it, the Pakistanis know it, the Russians know it, and the EU knows it.

    The HST is amazingly cool. The mars rover is incredible. They do spend some money on pure science. I'm glad they do.

    But if you look at space technology purely as geeky goodness, and not as (at the very least) dual-use military technology, then you aren't looking at the space program in a realistic way.

    And for the record, under Saudi law RobLimo could have been decapitated for pulling up that porn while he was on Saudi soil. The government looks the other way when Westerners do stuff like that, but it is the law.

    The fact that he pulled up the porn under those circumstances, to check the filter, makes me wonder about how well he understands the people he was covering.

    1. Re:Space institute by danharan · · Score: 1

      The last thing I want to see is an Islamic country with a large fundamentalist population picking up expertise in missle technology.

      I might as well kiss my karma goodbye too...

      First off, your president, with help of our prime minister in Canada is throwing dirt on the coffin for the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty, arguably a cornerstone of arms control. You might think that at the end of the day only violence works, but in the meantime diplomacy is certainly a lot cheaper.

      Secondly, if I were an enemy of the US, I sure as hell would not be attacking you guys with missiles. I'd use something like planes, and go hide somewhere. Or maybe a dirty bomb with all the "depleted" uranium your generals forgot to secure in Iraq, or any of the radio-active materials littering the ex-USSR. Heck, if I wanted to piss off Saudis at the same time, a couple people in a dinghy could probably cut off one of the main ports- say goodbye to Saudi oil, hello oil shock.

      You guys have a fair bit to worry about, but you're worrying about the things that are least likely to happen. And as someone who lives downwind from some of your major centers, I would really like it if you started worrying about real threats :)

      --
      Information: "I want to be anthropomorphized"
    2. Re:Space institute by bedouin · · Score: 1

      And for the record, under Saudi law RobLimo could have been decapitated for pulling up that porn while he was on Saudi soil. The government looks the other way when Westerners do stuff like that, but it is the law.

      Prove it. Cite a source saying under Saudi law looking at a blocked website results in decapitation. You can't? Thought so.

      The rest of your comment is largely bullshit as well.

    3. Re:Space institute by astrashe · · Score: 1

      It's not blocked websites, it's porn.

      Tell it to the guys who got blown up for selling booze in the British compound.

    4. Re:Space institute by astrashe · · Score: 1

      I can't find a direct link (yet -- still looking), but this is from Amnesty International:

      http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGMDE23007 20 03?open&of=ENG-SAU

      BACKGROUND INFORMATION
      Saudi Arabia applies the death penalty for a wide range of offences which, in
      addition to violent crimes, include some with no lethal consequences, such as
      sorcery, certain sexual offences, drug-related offences and apostasy
      (converting from Islam to another religion). Sentencing occurs after trials
      which fall short of internationally agreed standards - trials are held behind
      closed doors and defendants do not have the right to formal representation by a
      lawyer. In many cases defendants and their families are not informed of the
      progress of legal proceedings against them. Defendants may also be convicted
      solely on the basis of confessions obtained under duress, torture or deception.
      At least 40 people have been executed since the beginning of 2003.

    5. Re:Space institute by astrashe · · Score: 1

      I think I was wrong -- they won't behead you for pulling up porn. They will probably just toss you in jail and torture you for that.

      They will behead you for being gay:

      http://www.sodomylaws.org/world/saudi_arabia/sau di news17.htm

    6. Re:Space institute by astrashe · · Score: 1

      This is a good article, from Amnesty International:

      http://www.amnestyusa.org/countries/saudi_arabia /c ampaign2000/report/death_penalty.html

      Some quotes:

      Saudi Arabia has one of the highest rates of executions in the world in both absolute numbers and per capita. Contrary to the UN's call for a progressive reduction in the number of capital crimes, Saudi Arabia has expanded the scope of the death penalty to cover a wide range of offences, including offences without lethal consequences such as apostasy, drug dealing, sodomy and "witchcraft". The scores of people who are executed every year, many for non-violent crimes, are put to death after summary trials that offer them no opportunity to defend themselves and almost no protection against miscarriages of justice.

      [...]

      Execution is by public beheading for men and, according to reports, by firing squad or beheading for women, sometimes in public

      [...]

      Married people convicted of adultery may be executed by stoning to death. In what are deemed by the authorities as very serious criminal cases involving violence, the person executed may be crucified afterwards. Such cases include one reported in 1990, where the decapitated body of a man executed for murder and other crimes was crucified.

      [...]

      Amnesty International recorded 1,160 executions in Saudi Arabia between 1980 and December 1999, but the real number may well be much higher. The main reasons why so many people are executed is the wide scope of the death penalty, the vague laws that are used to impose it, and the defective criminal justice system which allows courts to impose such sentences with few procedural safeguards.

      --

      I would strongly urge any Westerner who has any interest in the Middle East to check out http://www.memri.org, which offers translations, from Arabic into English, of Middle Eastern media.

  79. The US *Does* have to many religious zelots by autopr0n · · Score: 1

    Fortunetly they have been kept in check by our constitution, and the fact that we live in a democrazy where the majority are not religious zelots. They cant impose their will willy-nilly as they can in Saudi Arabia.

    --
    autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
    1. Re:The US *Does* have to many religious zelots by sydlexic · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Fortunetly they have been kept in check by our constitution

      Until now.

  80. Re:People are pretty much the same around the worl by arasinen · · Score: 1

    I haven't checked the tally yet, but last time I checked, Israel had a confortable lead in kills. They'll probably make the playoffs.

    "How come we play war and not peace?"

    Substitute nation X and nation Y for USA and USSR.

    --
    [ Antti Rasinen ]
  81. Perl or Python? by axxackall · · Score: 1
    Saudi is a place of camels. That means Perl. I don't like Perl for its over-obfuscated syntax abd semantics oriented mostly for pipes.

    I do like Python. I heard there are lots of pythons in Australia. Perhaps I should move there. Besides, I don't have to change a style of my clothes there.

    --

    Less is more !
  82. Re:extremely fond of speaking their minds by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Uh, fighting in a workplace is a good way to get yourself fired, regardless of what started the fight. No one owes you a job, and the best way to stay employed is to do your job instead of getting into heated conversations about politics.

  83. What the FUCK? by admbws · · Score: 1
    Saudi Arabia fits in perfectly among "Islam fundamentalists", the attack on Irak seems more and more like a way for the US to move military bases and get independent oil reserves not controlled by the saudi's. If the war hadn't been such a failure the US could really consider Saudi Arabia as one of the many many nations to make their next enemy by advocating some freedom and democracy.

    Do you realise that Saudi Arabia is one of the US's closest allies in the region? Yup, the United States is one of the strongest supporters of these "Islam fundamentalists". Presumably "freedom and democracy" doesn't mean a lot there.

    Invade Saudi Arabia? Hahaha! Yeah, right. Do you realise that Saudi Arabia is a strong candidate for being the most powerful nation in the Middle East? They're no push-over, I can tell you. Not to mention their hold on the oil.
  84. Re:People are pretty much the same around the worl by guanxi · · Score: 1

    Nice theory. Tell that to the "Mother" of two who blew herself up at the Erez crossing point last week. She killed 4 Israelis and left about 6000 Palistianians out of work for the near future

    You're right. We haven't met complete success yet, so we should quit.

    On the same logic, let's stop trying to reduce poverty, murder, rape, slavery, cancer, AIDS. Why invade Iraq? Why not? Who cares? Obviously, we're failures anyway.

  85. Headline belongs in The Onion by guanxi · · Score: 1

    it seems slashdot won't post this unless i type something here

  86. An explaination. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    I'm white and I don't find Chris Rock racist. I find him incredibly funny and think he has some touchingly bitter (and intelligent) comments on society. He makes fun of what he sees as stupid. Race is often used to drive the point home or construct a joke. But race is not his target, stupidity and intollerence are (except when occasionally poking gentle fun).

    The quote in the parent comment was in regards to a white person's view of Colin Powell. He picked up on a news article that included the revelation that Powell "speaks so well". He pointed out that was retarded and then he made fun of what those people would expect a black president to sound like based on their comments:

    "Ima be pres-o-dent"

    In the same routine, goes on to point out that such stereotypes aren't uniquely held by white people - nor that they aren't without cause. His own definition of the term "nigger" describes the black minority who are destructive, have bad priorities, refuse to grow up and who keep setting back society. He made fun of it by pointing out that not knowing anything seems to be thought of as cool by some:

    "Shit.. I don't know man. What you wanna know that shit for? I don't need no learnin'. I don't need no readin'. But lemme axe you this.. lemme axe you this.. can you kick *my* ass?"

    He's entirely correct about these priorities being absurd and self-destructive in many youths - both black and white. Nobody's going to help society if all they worry about is beating each other up.

  87. It's nice to see that you are all so openminded... by Arab · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I dont even want to comment on how many camel jokes i read in that list of posts, I'm not offended but to be quite frank you are playing up to a stereotype of ignorance.

    Saudi geeks are much like any other geeks, religion is not a factor in being a geek, culture is not a factor in being a geek, just a love of what you do and in the case of computer geeks it's computers.

    Having lived in saudi for the first 18 years of my life before going away to university I'd say that saudi geeks are the same as they are anywhere. if anythign the "restrictive" society leads more people to be introversive and there are more people that spend far too much time in front of computer screens, there are also a surprising number of women that go on to do degrees in computing, which one can assume is and extension of their geekiness.

    I've seen geeks around the world and they are the same, we dont ride camels to work, or flying carpets, we don't have hot and cold running oil.

    In the city I live in there are entire shopping malls dedicated to selling computer parts, every where you go you are hassled by people who are trying to sell you pirated software. computers are an enourtmous thing here, because there is nothing else to do. some people use their computers to play games, some people use them to mess around with photos, some use them to hack about with code, some just spend hours surfing the net and talking to people that they normally wouldn't be able to talk to in person due to the restrictions of the society (mainly the opposite sex, regardless of which sex they are, there is little intermingling for most people but some are more liberated.)

    anyway it's nice to see that everyone is so openminded and such and that being at the frontiers of counter culture you aren't swayed by stereo types...

  88. Who are we to judge anyone? by bit_bang_boom · · Score: 1

    I lived in Saudi Arabia from birth to the age of 12. I lived in a very international community. I lived with Americans, Brits, Indians, and many fellow-Asians. So I'm sure that I have a much better idea of Saudi culture than most of you ignorantly judging a whole population of people from the acts of the radical few. Although I cannot say that Saudi culture is as good as, much less any better, than western "civilized" culture, we always have to remember that when looking at another culture, we should leave our own and look at it from an unbiased POV. From how you have gone to discriminate Arabs (directly or inderctly) in your posts and most probably in many other things from the past, it is hard to imagine no one complaining about it. You had it coming. Although the writer of the article has obviously meant no harm or disrespect, it is obvious that he has written this in a Western context. This is obviously not an unbiased account. It's almost as if an Arab visits Texas and writes an article about how "novel" it is to see grown men in cowboy outfits. We are correct in saying that this anonymous reader is somewhat out of line accusing Mr. Miller unprofessional reporting, but we shouldn't forget the context from which he did. Another thing, the American freedom that everyone keeps referring to in contrast to that of the strangle-hold of Muslim law, is not all it's cracked up to be. Freedom is not the chance to do anything we want to do. Freedom is the chance to do what we should do. Now, in this context, do we free people really exercise "freedom"?

    1. Re:Who are we to judge anyone? by bit_bang_boom · · Score: 1

      I forgot to mention that this is mainly in response to the first article - the one about the white robes.

    2. Re:Who are we to judge anyone? by BadmanX · · Score: 1

      "Freedom is not the chance to do anything we want to do. Freedom is the chance to do what we should do. Now, in this context, do we free people really exercise 'freedom'?"

      I've heard this point of view from many Muslims before - that freedom is bad because it means people will be free to sin, and that the freedom we value so highly is merely a smokescreen for our debauchery.

      But who has the right to decide what I should do? Who has the right to dictate to me? People are going to disagree. "Right" is going to be different for everyone. Attempting to force a single set of extremely strict rules on everyone simply leads to totalitarianism - fascism disguised as religion. And that's exactly what Saudi Arabia and most of the surrounding Muslim states are.

      If you want a view of how people live in Saudi Arabia, read this:

      http://www.lawrencewright.com/art-saudi.html

      This article makes it clear that the people in Saudi Arabia still commit all these "sinful" acts - they drink, smoke, have sex outside of marriage, listen to music, etc - but because of the incredibly stringent laws of Islam, they must do it all in secret, and they must deny to the outside world who they really are.

      Such a system can only breed pathology. True freedom is the better way. It should be up to each individual to choose what is right (within reason, of course - your right to swing your fist ends at my nose, yada yada yada) and it should be up to each person to choose whether or not to do that right.

    3. Re:Who are we to judge anyone? by bit_bang_boom · · Score: 1

      But again, I am saying outside of any context of any religion. "It should be up to each individual to choose what is right (within reason, of course - your right to swing your fist ends at my nose, yada yada yada)" Your "true freedom" is more of an "absolute freedom" where you are free to do anything - even if that anything is detrimental to others. I, for one, believe that there is an absolute good, no matter what religion you have faith in. It is "bad" to kill anyone from any context of any religion or belief. I doubt that you are in a country where killing others is a "good". Even you yourself suggest that that choice should be within limits, within reason. But from what you said, what is "within reason"? I could go deeper into the philosophy of this but I'll stop here.

  89. My god by FredFnord · · Score: 1

    > On the other hand, have you ever read slashdot? Look at all the anti-Indian hysteria in any thread about H1-B or off
    > shoring. It's the same unthinking "us vs. them, they're taking our jobs" attitude that all racism is borne out of.
    > Maybe they won't take the final step to true racism (i.e. anyone of Indian decent == bad), but it's just as bad (any
    > Indian == bad job stealer).

    What a hideous argument! I don't like having my job exported to India, and therefore I'm a racist? Maybe in some bizarro conservative-world, but not here.

    I think that people outside of Sweden should have the same opportunities as those in Sweden. I don't think that the Swedes should be dragged down to the level of the third world.

    (I used to say this about the United States, where I live. Since real wage growth for 90% of the people in the US appears to be a thing of the past (and in fact real wages for 90% of the population are going down, it's just that the top 10% are going up fast enough to make the numbers come out positive), and since the United States's numbers on things like poverty, infant mortality, literacy, health care, and public assistance are rapidly devolving toward those of some of the more advanced third world countries, I'd now prefer the US's standard of living were brought UP to that of, say, Sweden.)

    So clearly I'm a racist, and hate Indians, because I don't think that I want to lose my job to someone who is willing to work for 1/5 my paycheck -- whether they are American or Indian.

    Uh huh.

    It is, however, a novel argument. I'd say that the American right wing should start using it, except that anything they say about racism tends to boomerang back on them (think about a certain senator's mixed-race bastard child, for example). They're probably better off just denying that it's a problem in any way.

    --
    Sign #11 of Slashdot overdose: You see the phrase 'moderate Republican' and you wonder if that would be a +1 or a -1.
    1. Re:My god by spyfrog · · Score: 1

      I don't understand why you brought Sweden into this but let me give you some perspective of our current economy:
      * We have a huge unemployment. Especially in computer related jobs.
      * We are EUs third poorest country
      * We are some of the worst paid europeans
      * We have the highest taxes in the world
      * Our health care is going down the drain
      * Our polticians fucks us over and goes to EU and make wages that we will never get

      We also see our work exported overseas each day. I belive that US standard of living already exceeds ours. Lets all wish for a better economy.

  90. Re:Medical benefits of circumcision by ericspinder · · Score: 1
    Jerk!

    Slashdot, home of the irrational insesitive comment!

    This AC troll doesn't "feel" for anyone. and "yes" little boys do run around flashing his willy to other kids in gym class, etc. Believe it or not kids (anywhere) can be quite cruel to anyone who is unusual.

    Believe it or not, not every thing that has a religous origin is foolhardy or nieve. Jewish dietary law is a perfect example (I am not Jewish, so please don't flame me). From what I understand one of the primary considerations is the separation of meat from vegitables. Many health departments now recomend just that to prevent the spread of ecoli (and other pathogines). Another is having inspections of slaughter houses.

    Anyway, if any religions need some first borns for sacrificing they'll be sure to come see you.
    Again, for emphasis Jerk, maybe religions like that are common wherever the hell you are from, but I am not aware of any. I am not a "huge fan" of organized religion, due to the hate and fear which spews from the mouths of many "religious leaders", but you "sir" are perfect proof that one doesn't need religion to be unable to carry out a intellegent discussion.

    In short fuck you and the horse you rode in on.

    --
    The grass is only greener, if you don't take care of your own lawn.
  91. Looks like by e_pluribus_funk · · Score: 1

    you got fired for stupidity.

    There's a big difference for getting fired for getting in an argument and starting a fight at work, than getting imprisoned for walking outside without something covering your head.

    But obviously, you are too stupid to realize that. So why not move to Saudi Arabia and see how they tolerate your criticism over there?

  92. Meh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    As long as I can see Christian fundamentalist get air time on Larry King to explain how the Jews should be helped to regain their entire scripture promised lands, and by extension cleanse it from its present occupants, I dont think you should be throwing stones.

    We all have our nutters.

  93. RTF5A?? by tommck · · Score: 1
    Dude... this is Slashdot! It's hard enough to get people to RTFA when there is only one! FIVE ARTICLES? That's never going to happen!

    --
    ---- It puts the lotion on its skin or else it gets the hose again. It does this whenever it's told.
  94. Re:Different under the robes? by XO · · Score: 1

    i imagine the head is a lot more sensitive than the foreskin.. and trust me, after having had friction burn/chafing there a couple of times, i always remember to wear underwear with jeans now, no matter how loose they are. don't have that problem with slacks/dress pants.. and i hate hate HATE underwear.

    --
    "Champagne for my real friends - and real pain for my sham friends!" http://ericblade.postalboard.com/
  95. MOD PARENT UP by e_pluribus_funk · · Score: 1

    Very insightful jgalun.

  96. The forgotten "Saudis". by judicar · · Score: 1, Interesting

    If you go downtown in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia you'll be suprised to see more Koreans, Bangladeshis, and Indians, who've been imported for menial labor, than native Saudis. I would be more interested in knowing what sort of geek community these people had than a bunch of rich boy Saudis.

  97. Re:People are pretty much the same around the worl by samantha · · Score: 1

    Tell it to the Israelis that have oppressed and terrorized the Palestenian people for over half a century! The point being that cherry picking an incident here or there to claim that some people are not people to support horrid actions or attitudes to said non-people is a mug's game leading to nothing but pain.

  98. I'm going to be generous... by FredFnord · · Score: 1

    ...and assume that what this gentleman (?) was talking about was a *verbal* fight and not an actual fisticuffs fight.

    If so, then it is an interesting point. Should one be fired for forcefully expressing one's opinions? REALLY?

    I've been in that situation before: I joined a company as a contract employee (after being out of work for over a year) a little less than a year ago. I was only there for a little under three weeks.

    Just before the war in Iraq started, in response to someone's assertion that the rest of the world would back us no matter what they said now, I said that America was currently the most globally feared nation since Nazi Germany. Which, if you listen to non-US sources of news, sure sounds like it was true, is true, and is pretty much going to stay true for the forseeable future.

    One of my coworkers took issue with this, telling me (rather loudly) that if I thought that America was just as bad as Nazi Germany, maybe I should move to Iraq so I could get killed when the US bombed 'those fuckers' back to the stone age, or words to that effect. I told him to stop twisting my words, perhaps more loudly than I should have but not as loudly as he did. Then I got up and left the table.

    Two days later I had my walking papers. My boss mentioned an 'inability to get along with other workers' as a primary reason. He didn't come out and cite the incident in question, but my team lead did, off the record, saying, "I don't think you should be fired for this but maybe you should watch your mouth at your next job." And then some mumble about everybody having to pull together in wartime and that criticizing the government was pretty unpatriotic. Which is to say, he thought that I was an evil bastard too, he just didn't think that was a firing offense.

    Did I mention that this was a publicly traded company? So, really, firing me because of my ideology is ultimately bad for the company, and therefore bad for the shareholders, who of course have no say in this sort of thing. But, in this state (an 'employment at will' state), it is mostly sort of largely legal. Good? Bad? Discuss.

    Now, if the above gentleman is talking about a knock-down drag-out fisticuffs fight, then frankly, I'd be the first to show him the door. Although, to be fair, whether the other person started it, and whether both were fired or just one, does play a role in the question as well.

    -fred

    --
    Sign #11 of Slashdot overdose: You see the phrase 'moderate Republican' and you wonder if that would be a +1 or a -1.
  99. It doesn't take many.... by Sara+Chan · · Score: 1
    You're right that it doesn't take many nutbag assholes to ruin things for everyone. A survey of Nazi party members (not the general population) in pre-war Germany found that only 5% wanted to get rid of Jews. Now consider what those few did.

    So yeah, the views of the populace are interesting. So what.

  100. (Oops) by FredFnord · · Score: 1

    Of course, since I was a contractor, firing ME in particular was wholly legal in any state, unless your particular contract stipulates otherwise.

    But I meant that last bit more generally, since it's hardly just contractors that this is happening to.

    -fred

    --
    Sign #11 of Slashdot overdose: You see the phrase 'moderate Republican' and you wonder if that would be a +1 or a -1.
  101. Did you hear on Public Radio.... by bondjamesbond · · Score: 1, Informative

    The piece they covered about that girls school that was on fire in Saudi Arabia? The local "religious police" would not let them out because they didn't have the garment that covers their faces, and many girls (as in CHILDREN) BURNED TO DEATH. No, the Saudi's are nothing like us. I'm sure SOME people in that region are just swell, but many are just sub-human.

  102. Maybe by geekoid · · Score: 1

    'everybody else' should take care of the 'nutbag assholes'?

    oh wait, caus they are not in the minority, the 'nutbag assholes' are in the majority.

    Of course, I consider anyone who will sit quitely while chilren burn, women are beaten, a nutbag asshole.

    --
    The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  103. Re:Not all countries in the middle east are the sa by alan_dershowitz · · Score: 1
    Freedom? There sure seems to be.

    So, I decided to check out some human rights websites.

    Provided the information is up to date, Oman has no privately owned broadcast media. Criticizing the Sultan is specifically prohbited by law. All publication is censored by a government office.

    Oman has an official religion, which is Islam. While freedom to practice your religion is allowed, other religions besides Islam are barred from proselytizing.

    The government must approve public events. Public gatherings require government approval. NGOs must be governmentally approved. Police do not require search warrants. The right to unionize and strike is specifically prohibited by law. The sultan can overturn parliament.

    You've mentioned you don't have gun rights in Oman. I couldn't find reference to whether there is gay marriage in Oman, but I'm betting there isn't. Personally I'm not impressed that you don't need a fishing license in Oman, and I wonder if discussing gay marriage is even allowed there.

    From what I've read, Oman does seem pretty progressive compared to many other arab countries, but theres all kinds of things that Americans would find completely and totally antithetical to our definition of freedom. so, I suppose in day to day living Oman might be nicer than the USA--providing you are the type of person who day to day doesn't criticise the leader of your government, or participate in any non-government approved organizations, or have a union job. How many americans don't do those things?

    http://www.nationbynation.com/Oman/Human.html
    http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGMDE2000120 02?open&of=ENG-OMN
    http://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/hrrpt/2001/nea/8286 .htm
    http://www.saudihr.org/en/oman.htm

  104. Re:I wonder if they avoid the Pentium M? by bhtooefr · · Score: 1

    Although Pentium M laptop prices are taking a nosedive (my next laptop will be either a Pentium M or an Athlon 64 - yes, I know, both ends of the spectrum, but the A64 I'm looking at is only $1550), my guess is that most laptops sold there would be Celerons, as energy use isn't as much of a concern (they've got oil), but price is. Also, did you read that Saudi geeks work with Israelis, as both Hebrew and Arabic are right-to-left languages, and development for one greatly benefits the other?

  105. Author needs lesson in cultural relativity by bedouin · · Score: 1, Informative

    75% of the content in these articles were comparison and contrast between Saudi culture and the author's American culture; 25% of it consisted of actual information about technology in Saudi Arabia.

    As a Muslim, if I were to write an article about Linux adaptation in say -- France, do you think I'm going to use 50% of the text to explain women there do not cover their heads, many drink alcohol and eat pork, and none of them pray five times daily? No, because I'm not looking to create a cultural competition; I simply don't care since, although I may have certain cultural beliefs and even prejudices, it's irrelevant to the actual topic.

    Saudi Arabia is the home of Islam's two holiest places; it is the home of Islam itself. Coupled with that is Arabian culture that is much more rich than that of Arabized nations in the North (such as Egypt, Syria, Lebanon etc.) Part of 'freedom' is realizing that people may hold values that are in stark opposition to your own; ones that may even seem 'incorrect,' however NOT being a member of that culture you have no room to judge that. The fact is that the vast majority of Saudis approve of their government, and this is coming from someone who has spent most of my adult years amongst Saudis, and plan to spend the rest of my life there.

    The author did not really write a journalistic piece, and that's probably not surprising since he is a self-proclaimed geek. The following links should fill the voids these articles left out. There are some very impressive open source projects going on in Saudi Arabia, including the first Arabic Linux Live-CD (based on Knoppix I believe, as well as many other projects, including Arabic localizations of Mozilla. Feel free to visit the Saudi Linux User group while you're at it. For Arabic Mac users like myself, they may find this site informative.

    1. Re:Author needs lesson in cultural relativity by quax · · Score: 1

      With all due respect most Western countries do indeed believe human rights to be universal. As such it is noteworthy to a large portion of the /. audience that Saudi Arabia seems not to subscribe to these values as documented by the obvious restrictions of freedom that women enjoy in your country of choice.

      What I never understood is how this particular aspect of your culture came about, given that the prophet himself seemed to have highly valued and supported independently thinking women i.e. his daughter Fatima.

  106. Spam vs Spam by Stonent1 · · Score: 1

    Funny, Spam (as all pork products) is illegal in S-A, but not Spam the e-mail? I wonder if the irony is completely lost on them considering they probably have no idea of what Hormel Spam is?

  107. There are no geeks in KSA by haxor.dk · · Score: 1

    Or the rest of the Moslem world for that matter.

    The educational standard is dismal in these coutries, and the youngsters in the middle east want to go to the western world to study and live.

    They home countries suck and they know it.

    1. Re:There are no geeks in KSA by haxor.dk · · Score: 1

      PS - i forgot to mention the widespread censorship of the internet and free information in islamic countries. FFS, if there even is internet!

      I mean, you cant be a geek if you don't have access to porn online! (duh)

  108. Internet access in Saudia Arabia? by harmonica · · Score: 1

    I've recently started looking at log files of my website. I have hits from close to 100 countries so far, many small poor ones among them, but not a single hit from Saudia Arabia. Is Internet access not common there? From the article it seems that only porn is not available, and my site has a more technical nature.

  109. fundamentalist populations by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The last thing I want to see is an Islamic country with a large fundamentalist population picking up expertise in missle technology.

    I'm not that crazy about powerful fundamentalist groups in any country having control over sophisticated weaponry - the United States included.

  110. Re:People are pretty much the same around the worl by arasinen · · Score: 1

    If hundreds of thousands of years of evolution in geographicly isolated populations lead to clearly visable diffrence in then fenotype. Then, praytell, why are is it impossibe for geneticly inherited diffrences in behevioral paterns to exist. It doesn't imply that groups of people are inherently iferior (eg.: caucasians people are antisocial or mongolodis despotic), just that diffrent sets of traits where benefical in diffrent enviroments.

    Homo sapiens learned to speak about 50 thousand years ago, so that's the upper estimate on how much time we've had to evolve into different species. That hasn't happened, though, since we still can procreate with any other race.

    Cosmetic evolution is rather commonplace with both humans and animals. Since appearance is/was the main reason for selecting a mate, it has felt considerable evolutionary pressure. Naturally this leads to rather fast superficial changes.

    Behavioral patterns have, however, been practically the same for millenia. People were hunter-gatherers for tens of thousands of years. Their way of life was rather universal around the world and there was no great pressure to evolve distinct behavioral patterns. Assuming agriculture and society would have changed that we still have at most only 12 millenia to evolve. (It feels slightly far fetched, though.)

    It is possible that there are fundamental genetic differences that would for example cause certain people to be eg. very blood thirsty. But so far I have not seen it. Culture and upbringing seem to dominate that field quite completely. The more I meet people from other countries and continents, the more I believe that there are no built-in differences. The more I hear stories of joke-telling Tanzanians from my friends, the more convinced I become.

    I repeat my previous suggestions: Get to know those people. Read books. Look beneath the surface. For example, in his Annals Tacitus quite well shows how the Romans were very much like you and me. I especially remember a short segment about a fallen apartment building; the constructor had used substandard material to make more profit.

    You are completely right. I have no genetic or medical or sosiological proof. All I have are my empirical observations and those of long gone historians, and naturally my gut-feeling. I tend to trust them, though.

    --
    [ Antti Rasinen ]
  111. Name the country that was not built... by MuParadigm · · Score: 1

    Um, Iceland?

    Seriously, though, that's because it's the only place in the world that didn't have a human population until 1200 years ago, and it was too remote and barren for anyone to care about invading it once it was settled.

    There are other places where the aboriginal population controls the government, Madagascar comes to mind, as do perhaps Thailand, Cambodia, and Papua New Guinea, but even those have had their own share of civil wars, and colonization.

    Europe, of course, doesn't count because there was an aboriginal population that existed before the Indo-European invasion, of which the Basques are the only remnant.

    Russia stills retains a large portion of its aboriginal populations, much as the Americas contain remnants of the Native American cultures, New Zealand, the Maoris, Australia, the Aborigines, etc.

    The Japanese were probably a Korean tribe that overran the original Ainu occupants, the Sino-Tibetans overran a large number of Australasian groups to conquer China, the Koreans themselves probably started as a Mongol tribe that overran that overran tribes on the Korean peninsula that may have been related to the Kamchatkan tribes of far Northwestern Russia, or even tribes that were related to the Na-Dene culture of America.

    Anyway, my point is that you're mostly right, but there are *some* exceptions.

    If you're really interested in following up on the history of human migrations, and conquests over one another, you may want to check out both Luca Cavalli-Sforza's The History and Geography of Human Genes and Jared Diamond's Guns, Germs, and Steel.

    1. Re:Name the country that was not built... by haystor · · Score: 1

      I almost wrote "except Iceland".

      I'm currently studying Icelandic. Anyone know of a good site that might list/review some utilities for Icelandic?

      --
      t
  112. The real question by cookiepus · · Score: 1

    The real question that some people have been trying to approach here but missed isn't whether Saudis love Linux and get excited about new video cards. It's no surprise they do. The real question, when it comes to accepting them, is how they feel about us. Are they excited that we (not me personally) love Linux? Or are we still heathen satans who should be destroyed?

    If they happen to share their neighbors attitudes toward the west, I really don't care how geeky they are.

  113. Depends on Saudi Immigration quotas for Greeks by MCRocker · · Score: 2, Funny

    Many countries place quotas on immigrants from various other countries. So, whether Greeks who emigratate to Saudi Arabia can get to a level that they can form a robust community... oh, wait. GEEKS.

    --
    Signatures are a waste of bandwi (buffering...)
  114. Anything like Lebanese style coffee? by chadjg · · Score: 1

    I tried some of the Lebanese stuff once. It'll definitely put some hair on your ass!

    The table service was nice, but in general, I didn't care for the coffee. The spices they put in it wasn't to my taste, but you definitely knew you were drinking coffee. It's worth trying, if only for exploration's sake.

    Miscellaneous links:

    Hey, If we're gonna be wired, we might as well do it right

    --
    Why do I have this? I don't smoke.
    1. Re:Anything like Lebanese style coffee? by LittleVito · · Score: 1

      Lebanese Coffee is the same as Arab Coffee.

      It's also the same as Turkish Coffee, Greek Coffee, and Bedouin Coffee, but don't tell anyone, they all think it's their's.

  115. Re:People are pretty much the same around the worl by ThesQuid · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Yes, people are the same, but culture is what differentiates them.
    That said, my first hand observations show that the culture of a society directly influences the psychology of a people. And the psychology of a people, for lack of a better term, is who they "are".
    Here's a really long in-depth article by a man who spent some time in the kingdom mentoring some newspaper reporters. Some very interesting views.

  116. Re:Just like other geeks by nostriluu · · Score: 1

    Woops, I'm moderated a "troll" for speaking my mind. Welcome to geek-ville, where automated karma will be used to keep everyone in line. Remind you of any bad science fiction films?

  117. I'm glad they didn't send YOU to report... by alizard · · Score: 1
    He could have looked for hactivists in Saudi Arabia to see what tools they were using and how they were furthering the cause of freedom. He could have spoken to dissidents, but he didin't. It's easy to stay at a comfy hotel and write from the sidelines. It's easier to be an expectator paying lipservice to free softaware than to stand up for what free softare actually represents.


    In summary, being technically superior without being morally committed to the cause of freedom is a very hollow undertaking.

    WHAT THE FUCK KIND OF IDIOT WOULD POST THE KIND OF INFO YOU ARE ASKING FOR FROM INSIDE SAUDI ARABIA?

    The kind of dickhead that gets all his contacts busted and gives the secret police a field day. Even if he doesn't reveal names in the article, do you think that the Saudi Arabian secret police would hesitate to take him into a back room to beat the info out of him? Ever heard of what Bruce Schneier calls "rubber hose cryptography"?

    Would YOU happen to be that kind of dickhead?

    The whole point behind hacktivism and anonymous networks is to make sure an oppressive government does NOT find out who and where you are, not to make the kind of STAND FOR PRINCIPLES that gets you and all your friends face time with the secret police. Of course, given current political trends, perhaps Americans will get to make choices like this for real.

    Perhaps when Roblimo returns, he'll tell us the kind of info you're asking for. I regard his judgement as trustworthy as what, whom, when, and from where to tell this. Yours is another matter.

    1. Re:I'm glad they didn't send YOU to report... by LibrePensador · · Score: 1

      As someone who worked in Guatemala, where thousands of peasants were routinely killed during the early 1990s, I take great offense when someone assumes that I do not know what it is to face danger. I was part of a team of researchers who worked there for two years. By interviewing thousands of peasants, we were able to show a pattern in the killings, thereby proving that these were not random crimes but part of a broader and coordinated campaign.

      Of course, you go out of your way to protect yourself and your sources from the government. For one, if you plan to do this, you don't announce it. You are there as a tourist, researcher if you will. But once you decide to write about it, you call oppression by its name. And you know that there are certain risks involved in doing so.

      Had Roblimo wanted to do that, the publication of those articles could have waited. Rather, he wrote the kind of bland article that basically said, "Things are not good. People will tell you so privately. There is a lot of free speech in private". Well, isn't that revealing and isn't that a funny view what free speech is really about!

      The point of hacktivism is to collect enough facts that if you are a citizen of a democratic government and have some leverage, your government can actually act by imposing sanctions. With a bit of luck and if the crimes are so horrendous and systematic that they constitute a crime against humanity, you may even get a brave judge to act on your information. Of course, Saudi Arabia enjoys a very special relationship with the US as evinced from the unwillingness of the current administration to look into the Saudi connection to 9/11, but given enough info Congress may eventually act.

      In summary, hacktivism is very much about facing oppressing governments with facts. You do so in ways that protect your sources. But you do it.

      If you plan to do this, you have set up beforehand a remote server(s) where you upload your encrypted files/info every hour/night. If you do not have the guts to face the military/secret police, then you should not be involved in this type of inquiry. But it occurs to me that once you have a golden opportunity to expose a vicious dictatorship, it is a reporter's job to do it.

      Ps: Your name-calling is a little preposterous and childish.

      --
      Pragmatism as an ideology is not particularly pragmatic in the long term. Keep it in mind when you dismiss Free Software
  118. Yes they do. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    Here's an article from a newspaper editor who went to Saudi Arabia to train reporters for a year:

    http://www.lawrencewright.com/art-saudi.html

    He has a number of surprising insights into the repressive and mysogynistic Saudi society. If not all Saudi's are sexist, then a very large majority of them. And contrary to expectations, the younger generation are even worse because they grew-up in an even worse society than their parents.

    Here's an excerpt:

    The self-effacement of an entire sex, and, in consequence, of sexuality itself, was the most unnerving feature of Saudi life. I could go through an entire day without seeing any women, except perhaps some beggars sitting on the curb outside a prince's house. Almost all public space, from the outdoor terrace at the Italian restaurant to the sidewalk tables at Starbucks, belonged to men. The restaurants had separate entrances for "families" and "bachelors," and I could hear women scurrying past, hidden by screens, as they went upstairs or to a rear room. The only places I was sure to see women were at the mall and the grocery store, and even there they seemed spookily out of place. Many of them wore black gloves, and their faces were covered entirely--not even a pair of plummy, heavy-lidded Arabian eyes apparent. Sometimes I couldn't tell what direction they were facing. It felt to me as if the women had died, and only their shades remained...

    Abdullah al-Shehri, a professor of linguistics at King Abdul Aziz University, explained during a long conversation in a Starbucks. "There is a religious term, khalwah, which means a man and a woman who are unrelated and are behind a closed door," Abdullah said. "There is another term, ikhtilat. This is an invented term. It's heard only in Saudi Arabia, and is never mentioned in any religious text. It means 'mixing of more than two men and women.' There is a confusion between these two terms in the Saudi mind. The Prophet said whenever a man and a woman are in khalwah Satan will join them. But ikhtilat is part of the Saudi tribal culture. Before I was born, in the thirties and forties men and women used to celebrate weddings together. Now bride and groom have separate wedding celebrations."

    "Traditions say that eating alone with your female relatives is shameful," Raid Qusti, a journalist, wrote earlier this year in a daring column for the Arab News. "Where in our religion does it say that sitting with your own family is forbidden?" Qusti complained that many Saudi men thought it was taboo to utter a woman's name in public. "Ask any Saudi male in the street what the names of his wife or daughters are, and you will either have embarrassed him or insulted him. Islamic? Not in any way." There are some parts of the country where a woman never unveils--her husband and children see her face only when she dies. "Women will always be the core issue that will hinder any social progress in Saudi Arabia," Qusti wrote. "We limit their roles in public, ban them from public participation in decision making, we doubt them and confine them because we think they are the source of all seduction and evil in the world. And then we say proudly: 'We are Muslims.'" ...A middle-aged Saudi told me, "I am worried about the next generation. They don't see any real women at all. You don't see each other's wives, daughters, sisters. Everything is masculine. And yet they are bombarded by images. They can easily see porn. They live in the imagination of sex all the time. We don't grow naturally, to be loved, not to be loved--we don't undergo these changes. Two-thirds of the marriages here are basically loveless. Many men cheat--there's a lot going on underground." ...The absence of socialization between men and women struck me as a potent factor in terrorist fantasies. The hijackers who killed themselves on September 11th were propelled in part by the notion of being rewarded in the afterlife with the company of virgins. Such abstractions don't seem quite so strange in a country whe

  119. Plus one million. by waxmop · · Score: 1

    Your girlfriend is brilliant.

  120. Re:not even in lugs by Ender_Wiggin · · Score: 1

    There is nothing in Islam that says women can't use computers. Islam is quite the opposite, women are strongly encouraged to read.

    Muslims shouldn't say Merry Christmas to Christians, becaue Muslims don't celebrate Christmas. It's the equivalent for the rest, they shouldn't wish Hindus happy Diwali day either.

  121. Re:r0y4l rul3r5 bl0 by Ender_Wiggin · · Score: 1

    Funny, people on /. said that Iraq had no ties to 9/11 or Al Qaeda. They kept pointing how the Saudi Arabian royalty seemed involved.

    It would generate a different response if the US went in to Saudi Arabia. Bad idea to invade, good idea to work nonviolently for change.

  122. NO, we're not like you... by Oxide · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Our skin is usually darker and our hair is usually black.

    Seriously now, what is there to be different from? I'm an arabian who has been running linux since 1997, own a collection of star trek and star wars DVDs, build my own computer, read slashdot regulary, own a Palm T|T, hate MS, love open source, fascinated by space and science research, got my BS degree from a respectible american school, and on top of that does not agree with what happened in Sep/11.

    Why is being an arabian muslim makes me any different than any geek anywhere else in the world?

  123. Amen. by moogla · · Score: 1

    ::sipping freshly brewed coffee::

    --
    Black holes are where the Matrix raised SIGFPE
  124. Re: on styrofoam and truths by King_TJ · · Score: 1

    Actually, despite all the Rush Limbaugh bashing that goes on - I think the guy has generally done a remarkably good job of backing up his commentary and statements/conclusions with relevant sound bytes and news clips!

    One of the reason people first got hooked on his TV show was the ability he then had to actually air video clips of people in politics making statements (and the facial expressions they had while doing so).

    Is he right ALL the time? Obviously not! Who is? But regarding your specific statement about styrofoam being biodegradable - at best, I'd say the jury's still out on that. I believe it was just a year ago or so, I read an article in Popular Science talking about concerns an art museum had about plastic furniture in their collection from the 1950's and 60's. Some of it was actually breaking down at the molecular level and basically turning into a puddle of goo! This was a real shocker, as it was previously assumed plastic would pretty much last forever. Some chemists started analyzing it and they're now starting to believe plastic may have a certain "shelf life" before it begins breaking down on its own.

  125. The same as us? Yeah right... by FrenchyinCT · · Score: 1

    So Robin thinks it's really not so different for Saudi Linux geeks as Western ones? I'm glad he had such a nice time with everyone, it's probably because he's a man. I'll bet *I* wouldn't have been allowed access to the Saudi nerds; it's probably against the law and would have garnered us all a public flogging.

  126. Religious nuts by FrenchyinCT · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Yeah, we have our religious zealots and so do the Saudis, but there's one really BIG difference. *Our* religious zealots blow up abortion clinics and shoot doctors one by one; *their* religious zealots hijack planes and fly them into buildings. There's not a huge amount of difference between the two flavors of zealotry, but *our* zealots live in a country where they're not allowed to get away with nearly as much violence. Saudi society has embraced Wahabbism, the particularly violent flavor of Islam, and they make Operation Rescue look like a bunch of hippie pacifists.

  127. Not a Gene? by bstadil · · Score: 1
    It's not a gene

    Firsts, Thanks for reminding me about Heavens Gate, I had a great laugh at the time and it is perfectly OK. If that is what they want to do, why would I care. The Jonestown is a little sad since innocent children was involved. As for the misguided adults I couldn't care less. The Sweatshop fire is real sad.

    Now to the Not a Gene assertion. That is not so clear cut. People with frontal lobe epilepsy which is most likely hereditary changes personality and starts to express a deep religiosity even if none initially. It gets more and more intense as the disease progresses.

    It is one of the key symptoms. Even for people that only get seizures very rarely.

    I will refrain from commenting on what this mean in a moral sense, but a blanket statement like Not in a gene is probably incorrect.

    --
    Help fight continental drift.
  128. Re:People are pretty much the same around the worl by pardonne · · Score: 1

    Fine post. Glad I was reading slashdot tonight.

    Pardonne

  129. "assholes on both sides" by rs79 · · Score: 1

    Amen, brother.

    Oops, didn't mean to use an Arabic word. My bad.

    --
    Need Mercedes parts ?
  130. Arrested for illegal attire by rs79 · · Score: 1

    It's true if you are a woman and don't wear the headgear you can be arrested in Saudi Arabia.

    Their culture demands it.

    Now, American culture also demands a dress code. What happens if a woman walks around topless? Golly, she's arrested.

    Each culture has it's own norms. Willingly violate it and you're in trouble, whether you're in Saudi or the United States. Why is this so difficult to understand?

    --
    Need Mercedes parts ?
    1. Re:Arrested for illegal attire by lewko · · Score: 1
      I somehow doubt topless-woman will find herself beaten, raped and executed by state sanction though, so am unsure if I accept your comparison.

      Even if I accept your point, it's all well and good, BUT, when such a culture tries to forcibly impose itself on another... That's a problem.

      Look up some articles on Militant Islam.

      --
      Do you or your partner snore? - Visit www.snoring.com.au
    2. Re:Arrested for illegal attire by mandolin · · Score: 1
      Now, American culture also demands a dress code. What happens if a woman walks around topless? Golly, she's arrested.

      Being topless is legal in Austin, TX (although.. the neighbors might scowl at you). We even have Hippy Hollow which is clothing-optional, if that floats your boat.

  131. Re:Arabs hate Jews? You bet your @ss! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    I've lived in the Middle East for six years. I was born and taught to not believe in any form of racism. Today, I have a significant loathing of the Middle East and Arabs in particular. This wasn't 'rubbed off' on me by other Americans but from simple observation of the things they did.

    I watched our US embassy burn when attached by hundreds of protesters screaming "Death to America!" (Murt al-Amrika), had to drive my car over the letters "USA" painted in the streets (they feel its a slam to drive over the flag or name of a country), watched them spraypaint my children's school with the same messages and attack westerners in the streets that 'looked' American.

    They are so pinned down by their dictators that any excuse to blow off steam turns into a lynching party.

    As far as geeks are concerned, it was the UK that brought in the brains to establish the internet there-- not arabs. When it was fully up and running, they fired the foreigners and sent them back. Our internet service was shit for months until they brought back some europeans to unscrew it.

    You can't have a true geek who is more concerned with the death of Israel (the only middle eastern country that actually produces anything other than oil) and opressing women.

  132. bad comparison by The+Tyro · · Score: 1

    it all depends on where you are in the United States.

    For instance, in the state of Ohio, it is perfectly legal for a woman to walk around in public topless... been that way for a few years. That comes straight from that state's supreme court.

    It came as a result of some granola-type college students who were sunbathing topless and were arrested. They fought it all the way to the state supreme court, and argued (successfully) that if a man has the right to walk around shirtless in public, so does a woman.

    The students in question were from this university and were sunbathing at this state park in southwestern Ohio. I have often wondered how the in-chamber discussion went amongst the predominately male supreme court when they were considering that decision...

    --
    Even if a man chops off your hand with a sword, you still have two nice, sharp bones to stick in his eyes.
  133. See How Well, Indeed by Vagary · · Score: 1

    Maybe you should be blaming your legislators that gave the companies tax breaks without getting the quid pro quo in writing? The only thing the companies are obliged to do is make profit for their shareholders (most of whom are still American), and the people who proposed and implemented the tax breaks knew that.

    And why do you guys seem to think that these companies would have such a hard time if their HQ was offshore? I don't see Americans having any qualms about buying foreign cars, electronics, food, and energy -- why would software or IT services be any different?

  134. Culture and Language != Race by Vagary · · Score: 1

    Culture is not race, culture is a real difference, it's acceptable to criticise culture -- otherwise we should let the Arabs do whatever they want with their women. Cultural differences certainly lead to civil engineering differences, why can't they also effect code?

    Language is not race, language is a real difference, it's acceptable to criticise pronounciation -- otherwise we should let school kids speak English however they want. Pronounciation may not be as big a language barrier as syntax or semantics, but it's still some kind of barrier.

  135. Good question... by Da+VinMan · · Score: 1

    I, for one, apologize for the arrogance displayed by those in this country. They read far too little, assume far too much, and believe what they're told far too often. Comes with being somewhat isolated geographically I guess.

    --
    Please mod this post only if you think others should/n't read this. I have enough ego^H^H^Hkarma. Thanks!
  136. American? by jotaeleemeese · · Score: 1

    OK, then they should sell only to Americans as well.

    You want it that way then shut down the outside world and let us know when you want back from the dark ages.

    There are examples of that, like China that just when it was in the brink of becoming the most powerful sea faring country in world retracted to their borders and became a feudalist society.

    To a great extent, China is still trying to recover from such monumental historical short-sightedness.

    It would be ironic that China would re-claim a place in history that was almost theirs after the US commiting exactly the same mistake.

    But alas, that will not happen, but that only means people like you can't have it both ways.

    --
    IANAL but write like a drunk one.
  137. And tell us Batman, what do you want to do? by jotaeleemeese · · Score: 1

    Tax more the US companies that take work off-shore? Then they may grant you your wise wish and move elsewhere, thus losing any jobs left and stopping contributing any revenue to the US tax chest.

    In any case many of those companies are multinationals, they choose the US as their head quarters, but there is no rule anywhere that they shoudl do do, there are countless companies based elsewhere that ar successful.

    --
    IANAL but write like a drunk one.
  138. You sir... by jotaeleemeese · · Score: 1

    .... don't deserve the adjective of human.

    Filth suits you perfectly and in spite of that I don't wish you are ever exterminated in any lunatic war of civilizations.

    You are condemned to your own hate, that is punishment enough.

    --
    IANAL but write like a drunk one.
  139. Religious police... by jotaeleemeese · · Score: 1

    ... just for your information exists also in Malaysia, which is not even fully Islamic (big percenteage of the population of Chinese and Indian origin).

    I had the indignity to be requested my passport in restaurants in ocassions during Rammadan to ensure I was not a local violating the law of the land.

    --
    IANAL but write like a drunk one.
  140. Bullshit. by jotaeleemeese · · Score: 1

    I lived several years in a mainly muslim country, my Muslim friends did not drink alcohol, I did. We had fun all the same.

    The sad thing is how people in Western societies are so conditioned to believe that without alcohol you can't have fun.

    --
    IANAL but write like a drunk one.
  141. I am sorry, but bullshit. by jotaeleemeese · · Score: 1

    The barbarities and savagery that occurs in many Muslims countries, but specially in Saudia Arabia do not leave space to the relativism you are trying to play here. Where the holly prophet Muhhamed, peace uppon him, calls for understanding and compassion, the clerics in Saudia Arabai and many other places institue a regime of fanatical terror in which a text like the one I write will land you in jail or worst.

    I may not be part of the Muslim culture, but the way people are executed, women are treated (including virutal abuse of uncountable young girls sold in marriage as what amounts of virtual slavery) and in general people's freedoms are disrespected (you claim Saudi Arabs support their goverment, well, they are wise, because the people that do otherwise are on exile or dead) does not leave any space to cultural relativism in which we, non Muslims, are missing the point somehow.

    Great to know there are people in Saudi Arabia that at least in regards to technology are at the cutting edge, but frankly that is small fry compared with the almost unsurmountable backwardeness of Saudia Arabia and many other Muslim countries.

    This backwardness is refelcted in the economy, the arts, culture and political influence. GPB in most muslim countries has been falling for the last decades, educaton is in shambles (save a few places like Malaysia and perhaps Indonesia, unsuprisingly some of the less fanatical Muslim countries), bar a few writers like Nahib Mafuzz or cinematographers (often banned in their own counries of origin) the Muslim world offers little today to the continuum of world culture, this as a result of strict censorship that is common place all around the Muslim world (perhaps the only Muslim country with free press is Turkey, and that is big if).

    I am sorry for the Muslim world, it could have so much to teach us and offer us, there are few things so peaceful as the call to prayer when the sun rises or sets, the friendship and human warmth is always forthcomming, unfortunatley they live in a different planet of which I don't want any part and that will self destruct unless Muslims wake up and listen to the message of their prophets.

    --
    IANAL but write like a drunk one.
  142. Impressions of Jeddah by JWhitlock · · Score: 1
    I was recently in Saudia Arabia (Nov 2003), in the city of Jeddah. Jeddah is the considered "the Gateway to Mecca", and the city's administrators have spent quite a bit of money making it very attractive. For instance, most major intersections are roundabouts, and every roundabout has a little park or a sculpture in the center. Islam prohibits showing images of the human form (billboards either don't show people or pixelate the faces), so the scupltures are always abstract art, and Jeddah might have one of the largest public collections of large-scale abstract sculpture in the world. However, it seems that just about every block also has a empty lot filled with construction trash or a building under construction. The impression while driving is one alternating between amazement and depression.

    Jeddah is a little more inviting than Ridyah. Our driver was never stopped at a checkpoint, unless we were entering the job site or the compound. Restraunts and shops all closed for prayer, which meant more planning for meals than normal. Westerners were free to smoke, eat, and drink (no alcohol, of course) during daylight in Ramadan, as long as it was done within the compound walls or behind a closed, locked door. The restrictions only bothered me when I was hungry (invariably just as prayer was starting), but some of my coworkers had a hard time not wearing shorts in public (the rumor is that only prostitutes wear shorts).

    Yes, there were prostitutes, alcohol, gambling, etc. etc., but it was all behind closed doors. The local "alcohol mafia" appears to be run by the Brits, and some people make millions. Others ferment their own in bathtubs. All illegal, but in Jeddah they have stopped random raids for the time. Just don't go driving with any in the trunk...

    We only had a dial-up connection to the internet - management never came through on the promised DSL line. I knew that Gentoo Linux required a network connection, but I never realized how much it absolutely requires broadband until it took 3 days to download the Open Office source code. BTW, it's not worth compiling Open Office from source, especially when you are averaging a MB an hour.

    Bookstores don't generally sell books - just office supplies. The one "real" bookstore I found sold some computer books, but mostly for web design (Flash, etc.). There was one Linux book. It seems to me that the cache servers / firewalls make it especially hard for Linux users - hard to download ISOs, and hard to browse forums and usenet postings. I can see where LUGs would be much more important - one guy can get the DSL line to get the ISOs, and the rest can help each other translate documentation and debug problems. It seems piracy is widespread as well, with many of the compilation CDs and DVDs that come out of Asia. That seems to hurt Linux as well - if you can get Windows XP for $15, why mess around with Linux?

    You need a visa to visit Saudia Arabia, and the visas are given for work (with a company sponsering you), for pilgramage (I think you still need a citizen to sponsor), or for travel (but only for tour groups in buses). If you have a chance to go, it's worth the experience.

  143. This should be modded insightful by archangel77 · · Score: 1

    Don't know why the parent posted as AC, but I fully agree with him.

    You can't impose a "superior" culture on another without provoking hatred and rejection of that very culture - creating the opposite effect of what you intended.

  144. Re:Medical benefits of circumcision by FuzzyBad-Mofo · · Score: 1

    It is never done for hygine, but mearly to elimate sexual pleasure.

    Actually, the reasons for male circumcision are very similar. Did you know that the typical American circumcision removes up to 80% of the skin from the penis, containing unnumerable nerve endings? That the glans is a mucus membrane (like the tongue), and constant exposure results in drying and eventual loss of sensation? I won't go on, it's not my intent to make you feel guilty. But you should know the truth.

    Please read up at NOCIRC and NORM and learn what the American medical profession wants to keep quiet.

  145. Re:Roots of Poverty by SimCash · · Score: 1
    I ran across a neat quote that said that while the West treated religion as "tea room conversation", in the rest of the world religion was a contact sport. Of course, I immediately think of things in the "bible belt" and know that we are not immune here in the USNA.

    I did have an interesting discussion with a Pakistani who works with me after he point-blank asked me what religion I was. I explained to him that such a question was considered improper in the West, at least based on my 30 years in the workplace.

    On the other hand, I am about ready to found "Atheists in support of the Ayatollah Bush" as a signal of my mixed feelings about having a Prez who is doing the right things for the wrong reasons (at least in the arena of military and defense, which is where 20 years of my expertise lies as I once held the job title, "Chief Scientist, Strategic Air Command, Intelligence (HQ SAC/INTC)", which let me play in lots of interesting analyses).

    Back to the point at hand, we may have some zealots, but many are like the Amish, quiet, polite and not particularly dangerous.

  146. Re:Open your eyes. Look up to the skies and see... by infochuck · · Score: 1

    will make us a better, truer, purer race of people

    That statement worries me--sounds a bit too nazi-ish. i enjoy diversity, i enjoy the fact that not everyone sees things from the same side of the fence.

    Uhh... yeah. I can't believe you left out the fact that he referred to "most Saudis as dirty Sand Niggers" (though he used the abbrv "SN" - not something, IMO, that lessens the blow.

    All this coming from a dirty faggot who cares about nothing but carnal pleasure.

    Please note: that last statement was made entirely toungue-in-cheek - here's a guy who claims to be bisexual - a group that is frequently discriminated against - and claims to be educated, yet he labels most of an entire country with a racial slur. Scha-weet.

    Oh, yeah, a note on bi/hetro/homo: (my view only, of course) - I have nothing against either hetro or homsexuals - I think they are both driven by incontrollable brain chemistry that causes a physical attraction to certain things. There is nothing anybody can do about what sex they are attracted to, and I hence embrace them all as my brethren. Bisexuals are a WHOLE other cookie. I view them as simply people of loose character, who lust relentlessly after the pleasures of the flesh, and will take whatever they can get - any hole, any time, any where - man, woman, child, or beast. Yeah that's right. I said it. They're chicken-fuckers and pedophiles. Probably fuck their own mothers and fathers. They'd probably say, "I see beauty everywhere, in all of god's creatures", and I say, "Yeah. As long as you can fuck it or it can fuck you."

    Just goes to show that, as that Matt Damon guy's character in "Good Bill Hunting" said, just because yer stupid enough to not know what books to read and gullible enough to pay somebody $40K a year to tell you which ones doesn't make you educated.