Slashdot Mirror


Mysterious Website Actually Social Experiment

MaelstromX writes "For six months a website called eon8 (probably down) has carried a countdown to July 1, along with vague and mysterious codes. In addition, strange code-bearing posts associated with the site were made in various webforums, and the site carried a map of the world marked by spots of "deployment". All of this, along with some apparent recorded visits by US military and intelligence computers, led many people to believe this was an imminent terrorist operation or a massive virus to be unleashed on the web-surfing public. Turns out, it was just an experiment by a 23-year-old guy named Chris from Florida who wanted to see how people would react to an absence of information, and he was disappointed that people expected the worst -- even going to so far as to attempt to hack his webserver and make phone calls to anyone with any perceived tangential connection to the site or its host. A mirror of the site in its current state is available with an explanation added by the site owner after the countdown expired."

349 comments

  1. Just wait by The+Clockwork+Troll · · Score: 5, Funny

    That's all I can say right now ... just wait.

    --

    There are no karma whores, only moderation johns
    1. Re:Just wait by Threni · · Score: 1

      > That's all I can say right now ... just wait.

      Or just ignore it. I mean, really - who cares? "Imminent terrorist operation"? Yeah, of course it is.

    2. Re:Just wait by Spy+der+Mann · · Score: 2, Funny

      That's all I can say right now ... just wait.

      Wait for what? I'm confused now :(

    3. Re:Just wait by enrgeeman · · Score: 2, Funny

      don't worry, when the time comes, he'll edit that post to tell you.

      --
      sent from my slashdot browser.
    4. Re:Just wait by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes... because terrorist attacks would be more successful if we knew when and where they would be attacking!!!

    5. Re:Just wait by maxwell+demon · · Score: 2, Funny
      Wait for what? I'm confused now :(

      In order to maximize your waiting experience, I suggest any of the following options:
      • Godot
      • the hell freezing
      • Duke Nukem Forever

      --
      The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
    6. Re:Just wait by ConceptJunkie · · Score: 2, Funny

      Godot just came back from visiting Hell. He spent a month of Sundays iceskating, skiing, and watching pigs fly by the light of the blue month.

      He wanted to play some games on his spankin' new Windows Vista system, but Duke Nukem Forever hadn't shipped yet.

      --
      You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike.
    7. Re:Just wait by mdecarle · · Score: 1

      The CCC did that, because they didn't want to make human victims ... yet two guys did get killed.

    8. Re:Just wait by WCD_Thor · · Score: 2, Informative

      Wait on the site he calls him self Mike, not Chris, where did Chris come from?!!!!

    9. Re:Just wait by pipingguy · · Score: 1

      Why, are you planning something?

  2. Don't worry! by intnsred · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Don't worry! Chris -- and his family and friends -- are being investigated by homeland security as you read this. :-(

    1. Re:Don't worry! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So why, exactly, is it a bad thing for Homeland Security to investigate something like this?

      Don't let that jerking knee hit you in the chin.

    2. Re:Don't worry! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Perhaps because they ought to be focused on investigating people that they actually have EVIDENCE, INTELLIGENCE or PROBABLE CAUSE that a crime MAY be committed?

      Instead it seems our Gestapo was wasting its time on a foolish web site with nothing more than a counter and absolutely no evidence of a any sort of a threat.

      If the site's claim that gov't agencies were indeed monitoring the site, then Big Brother REALLY IS watching us!

    3. Re:Don't worry! by Frank+T.+Lofaro+Jr. · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Unless he IS Homeland Security.

      knowing how people react to something which could be perceived as a threat is something the government (rightfully) would like to know.

      --
      Just because it CAN be done, doesn't mean it should!
    4. Re:Don't worry! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      How do YOU think THEY get the EVIDENCE and INTELLIGENCE?

      Do you ALSO think that all COPS on the BEAT should be PULLED OFF
      their BIG brother jobs of OBSERVATION and maintaining a presence
      and only INVESTIGATE crimes that HAVE already been committed?

      PS. How is my FLUENCY in your RANDOM capitalization language?

    5. Re:Don't worry! by KDR_11k · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Perhaps because they ought to be focused on investigating people that they actually have EVIDENCE, INTELLIGENCE or PROBABLE CAUSE that a crime MAY be committed?

      Mysterious person spams codes all over the net. Codes could mean anything. Would the DHS take the risk of these codes being communication between hostile agents and possibly ending up with another PR desaster of "why didn't you see that major terrorist attack coming?"? Especially since the DHS seems to have a budget surplus they must get rid of*?

      *=Beaurocratic rules say that if you don't use your entire budget, your budget gets cut. Therefore everyone wastes all left overs before the budget times out. Yes I know that's stupid and inefficient but noone bothers to fix it.

      --
      Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
    6. Re:Don't worry! by theStorminMormon · · Score: 1

      Best. Response. Evar.

      I always feel so conflicted when ACs make good posts. Such a waste.

      -stormin

      --
      The Southern Baptist Convention has creationism. On Slashdot, we have porn.
    7. Re:Don't worry! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > Mysterious person spams codes all over the net.

      Oh come now, how likely is that?

      2317 2317 5546 5546 8931 8931 6643 6643 6569 6569 2388 2388 1547 1547

    8. Re:Don't worry! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Think we know the facts about 9/11? [scholarsfor911truth.org]

      What makes these guys scholars? Sounds more like an Art Bell reunion to me.

    9. Re:Don't worry! by KDR_11k · · Score: 1

      Now get a few friends to do that along with you, post on many different websites and if this conversation had never happened Homeland Security would at least raise an eyebrow.

      --
      Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
    10. Re:Don't worry! by Sage+Gaspar · · Score: 1

      Beaurocratic rules say that if you don't use your entire budget, your budget gets cut. Therefore everyone wastes all left overs before the budget times out. Yes I know that's stupid and inefficient but noone bothers to fix it.

      Not just in national bureaucracies either, hehe. My undergrad school's student senate used to pull the same shit. You'd start off with tiddlywinks in the way of budget, not enough to do much of anything, and you'd blow it on refreshments or some crap for a couple years before they started giving you more money.

      The other fun part was that student-run academic clubs were considered to be ipso facto extensions of the academic major they were closest affiliated with, and those were required to have one-to-one support from the department itself. So if our club wanted to bring a speaker for $500, we needed $250 of that money to come from our already budget-starved, very small academic department.

      On top of that, the finance committee made a policy of shaving a couple hundred off your budget just for shits and giggles so they felt like they were doing something. I found that out after a carefully planned budget that involved bringing in just one speaker for a modest expense got axed, leaving me with a "speaker budget" that could barely fund getting a member of our own faculty to speak. So the policy became overestimating by a couple hundred dollars. And the year you actually get that extra money, guess what, if you have no use for it you still need to spend it all (see above), so yay more pizza parties at the end of the year, hehe.

      I don't know why I just posted all that. I guess it's cathartic even after I'm gone :P

    11. Re:Don't worry! by zcat_NZ · · Score: 1

      2275 8844 3239 4090 4511 2395 5545 8334 0305 2007 7373

      --
      455fe10422ca29c4933f95052b792ab2
    12. Re:Don't worry! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      6548 6c6c 2c6f 5720 726f 646c 0a21

    13. Re:Don't worry! by rjung2k · · Score: 1

      Would the DHS take the risk of these codes being communication between hostile agents and possibly ending up with another PR desaster of "why didn't you see that major terrorist attack coming?"?

      Yeah, especially since we know the Bush Administration would never ignore a clear warning of an imminent terrorist strike, such as a Presidential Daily Brief entitlted "bin Ladin Determined to Strike in US."

      Since all the clear warnings are already taken care of, let's go after the vague ones!

    14. Re:Don't worry! by geekoid · · Score: 1

      not accurate.
      ALthough it depends on many factors, often what is dictate that if you ahve a surplus, you budget MAY be reduced by the amount of the surplus, so you ahve exactly the same amount of money.
      example:

      2007 budget: 1,000,000
      2006 surplus 100,000

      revised 2007 bnudget: surplus + budget - surplus.

      continually getting your budget wrong leads to audits. Often casued by unexpected factors, and/or poor project managment.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  3. just wait... by m874t232 · · Score: 5, Funny

    This means that poorly designed web sites with unclear purposes will now be considered a terrorist threat and lead to indefinite detention of the designer(s).

    Well, I guess that's at least one effect of the anti-terrorist hysteria that I could get behind; all other efforts to force better web design have failed after all.

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

      If only poorly written poetry with teenage angst were also considered a threat; then myspace would vanish off the web

    2. Re:just wait... by identity0 · · Score: 4, Funny

      "If you blog with MySpace, you blog with Osama!"

      "This just in, Hamas has threatened to open up a new MartyrSpace website to help lonely terrorists get laid and launch eye-shredding suicide webdesign attacks on Israel. The Israeli Defence Minister is reported as saying, 'The goggles... they do nothing!'"

    3. Re:just wait... by ultranova · · Score: 1

      This just in, Hamas has threatened to open up a new MartyrSpace website to help lonely terrorists get laid

      Which might make them reconsider their brilliant master plan of killing themselves to take some innocent bystanders with them.

      --

      Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.

    4. Re:just wait... by dorkygeek · · Score: 0, Offtopic
      If you want a safety net: invest.

      Or come over here to Europe, where you have plenty of social safety, don't have to work the crazy hours US employers want to make you believe are required for the company to survive, plus you can get pretty wealthy never the less.

      --
      Windows is like decaf - it tastes like the real thing, but it won't get you through the day.
    5. Re:just wait... by theStorminMormon · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      I'm thrilled that we have a massive nanny-state in Europe where those afraid of personal risk and responsibility can find a peaceful haven.

      -stormin

      --
      The Southern Baptist Convention has creationism. On Slashdot, we have porn.
    6. Re:just wait... by dorkygeek · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Sure, if you prefer to work yourself to death, still not earning enough to make for a decent living, and be afraid of retirement where you don't know if you'll have enough money to sustain, stay where you are. If you, instead, prefer to work reasonable hours, enjoy your life, have rent after retirement, and can be assured that you're going to be supported if your company kicks you out, come over here.

      --
      Windows is like decaf - it tastes like the real thing, but it won't get you through the day.
    7. Re:just wait... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Done both. Decided to stay in the US and pay more in taxes than I used to earn in the UK.

    8. Re:just wait... by theStorminMormon · · Score: 1

      So again: if you think you can fend for yourself - stay in America. If you are afraid to do so - stay in Europe.

      Couple this with the fact that I'm reasonably confident Europe's economy will continue to gradually decelerate under the growing burder of it's older, entitled population (coupled with ever decreasing child-bearing rates) - and I'm doubly happy to be where I am. In a few decades Europe is likely to either be in a semi-permenant recession, in social upheavel as young immigrant populations refuse to should outrageously high tax burdens to support elderly indigenous populations. Or I suppose they could trim some fat.

      I'm confident I can make a better life for myself in America then I could in Europe - no questions. If you feel you're doing better in Europe, I wish you the best. I can't predict the future; that's just my opinion.

      Remember, I was criticizing the illogic of the original sig, not the European system. I'd rather not get into a debate about which is better: the US or Europe. Obviously I feel the US, you feel Europe. In the end only time will tell.

      -stormin

      --
      The Southern Baptist Convention has creationism. On Slashdot, we have porn.
    9. Re:just wait... by dorkygeek · · Score: 1

      Couple this with the fact that I'm reasonably confident Europe's economy will continue to gradually decelerate under the growing burder of it's older, entitled population (coupled with ever decreasing child-bearing rates)

      This was recently shown to be overrated. The ways of measuring demographics was based on bad data, and had to be corrected (one funny example from Germany: children born by unmarried women were not counted. Oops!).

      In a few decades Europe is likely to either be in a semi-permenant recession, in social upheavel as young immigrant populations refuse to should outrageously high tax burdens to support elderly indigenous populations.

      GDP (PPP) per capita is still lead by European countries. Well, and if those young immigrants you're quoting don't like the "high taxes", why would they even come in the first place? Besides, you also have to consider what you're getting for the money: for example, we have free education for everyone, and tuition for university is very low (e.g. about 500 USD per semester, where I live, and you can even be exempt if you don't have enough money).

      Furthermore, I wouldn't be too sure about where the US is heading to. With all those wars you're fighting, you're currently building up some solid financial debt, and somewhen somebody will have to pay it. Also, the US seems to be pouring less and less money into higher education when compared to upcoming economies like China or India. Don't be surprised when the majority of scientific discoveries and innovations suddenly start to come from those countries. And this would mean direct economic impact.

      --
      Windows is like decaf - it tastes like the real thing, but it won't get you through the day.
    10. Re:just wait... by theStorminMormon · · Score: 1

      Well, and if those young immigrants you're quoting don't like the "high taxes", why would they even come in the first place?

      They couldn't cut it in America.

      we have free education for everyone, and tuition for university is very low

      Yeah, but 8 of the 10 best universities are American. Furthermore, there've been several good articles recently on why the European mindset has let to mediocrity in their university system. You get what you pay for in this case.

      Also, the US seems to be pouring less and less money into higher education when compared to upcoming economies like China or India

      The US uni system is more self-supporting than Europes. That's why it's better. Not saying there's nothing nto be worried about. As I already said - only time will tell. The US has plenty of issues of it's own to face.

      But the uni example you gave was perfect. Go to europe and get cheap higher education. Go to the US and get the best higher education in the world. Take your pick.

      -stormin

      --
      The Southern Baptist Convention has creationism. On Slashdot, we have porn.
    11. Re:just wait... by lightning_queen · · Score: 1

      You both have some good points here (even if the discussion is a little offtopic). Though I do have a question for you: Is there really that much different going on in Europe than there is in America (except, perhaps childbearing rates).

      Considering our elderly, which is now becoming the Baby Boomer generation, is putting an increasing strain on our Social Security measures. It wouldn't suprise me if we went into some form of recession in the next decade or two (despite how "up" things are looking now, remember the roaring 20s right before the Depression), we're about due for another one. Not to mention the ever-rising prices of everything, and yet federal minimum wage is still less than $6 an hour. Something's bound to give eventually. Keep in mind too, that if Europe goes into a recession (depending on how much and what parts of Europe and how bad the recession is), it could send America into one as well.

      The fact that we have to work over 40 hours a week to make ends meet and anyone with a well-paying job (especially in the Tech field) has to worry about being outsourced and anyone with a job has the prospect of downsizing or budget cuts constantly looming over their head (whether or not they want to admit to it), should be indicative that something's not quite right.

    12. Re:just wait... by dorkygeek · · Score: 1

      Yeah, but 8 of the 10 best universities are American.

      Ahh, the academic ranking's argument... I guess you are aware of the criticism surrounding its measurement methods (citations count, diversity of fields taught, etc.), no?

      You get what you pay for in this case.

      So how comes, by your reasoning, that the university of Cambridge is ranked as number 2, with low tuition rates of about 5'435 USD per year compared to Harvard's astronomically high rates?

      --
      Windows is like decaf - it tastes like the real thing, but it won't get you through the day.
    13. Re:just wait... by kimvette · · Score: 1

      Hell, even joke IM client avatars made in poor taste are perceived as threats now thanks to the idiotic "zero tolerance" policies.

      Meanwhile, back in the '50s when my dad was in school, they actually brought guns into schools for sanctioned shooting club events.

      Blame today's society on poor parenting, with idiotic lazy parents expecting the government to raise their kids and teach them decent morals (or at minimum ethics) which led to today's paranoia which is so prevalent.

      --
      The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
    14. Re:just wait... by hackwrench · · Score: 1

      Oh, was it an avatar or an icon? They reported it was an icon.

      http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/06/30/21 1211

    15. Re:just wait... by kimvette · · Score: 1

      I'm presuming that the "journalist" doesn't know the difference between a picture in a signature on a messageboard, in an IM window, or an application's icon on the desktop. It's an assumption.

      --
      The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
    16. Re:just wait... by theStorminMormon · · Score: 1

      First off, you make some very good points about the problems with the rising generation of elderly in our own country. We're facing the same type of problem as in Europe, but since we have fewer entitlements we're not as badly off as they are.

      Secondly, you're absolutely right about Europe going into a depression/recession. It would havea negative impacton the world at large. So I'm not eager to have my point "proved" at all. I'm not being sarcastic when I say I'm glad you can choose to live where you want. I hope Europe doesn't fall - but I think it will face some serious economic hardship in the years ahead with associate social turmoil (the French riots were just the tremors before an earthquake).

      There are some issues as well, however. First off, I don't think we should raise min wage. I don't evne think we should have one. Practically no one actually tries to support a family on min wage jobs. Those that do either move up quickly or would benefit from a lack of minimum wage. Why? Because having to pay retired folks and teenagers min wage means there's less wages for those who might actually treat the job as a career. So you're paying Joe from high school the same for working one summer as you're paying the (hypothetical) family-wage earner. That doesn't make sense - and raising min wage makes it worse, not better.

      The tech out-sourcing thing is also way over-rated. 1 - Most companies that outsourced used saved money to reinvest in America: with more jobs. Outsourcing hits a ceiling pretty quickly anyway as the nations where you outsource start to demand wages more inline with their foreign counterparts.

      -stormin

      --
      The Southern Baptist Convention has creationism. On Slashdot, we have porn.
    17. Re:just wait... by theStorminMormon · · Score: 1

      Ahh, the academic ranking's argument... I guess you are aware of the criticism surrounding its measurement methods (citations count, diversity of fields taught, etc.), no?

      There's a reason America is the #1 destination for foreigners looking for an advanced degree. Do you dispute that?

      So how comes, by your reasoning, that the university of Cambridge is ranked as number 2, with low tuition rates of about 5'435 USD per year compared to Harvard's astronomically high rates?

      That's kind of silly. If I say "you get what you pay for" are you actually going to figure out the amount paid in tuition per class day and then say "Monday was SO much better than Wednesday, clearly this is false" or even "that five minutes the professor was late were worthless academically, so this is false".

      It's a general statement and it holds true in general. In general the US system for higher education is better. Not every American university is better than every European university.

      -stormin

      --
      The Southern Baptist Convention has creationism. On Slashdot, we have porn.
    18. Re:just wait... by Reaperducer · · Score: 1

      A friend of mine in Austria gloats about his 12 weeks of annual vacation.

      Until I remind him that that's why the U.S. has been to the moon, and Austria hasn't been a factor in 200 years.

      Hard work has its rewards. The United States was founded by Europeans who realized this and decided it was more rewarding to actually DO something, rather than sit around and talk about doing things.

      --
      -- I'm old enough to have lived through six different meanings of the word "hacker."
    19. Re:just wait... by dorkygeek · · Score: 1

      There's a reason America is the #1 destination for foreigners looking for an advanced degree. Do you dispute that?

      Yes, I do. Could you please state your sources?

      That's kind of silly. If I say "you get what you pay for" are you actually going to figure out the amount paid in tuition per class day and then say "Monday was SO much better than Wednesday, clearly this is false" or even "that five minutes the professor was late were worthless academically, so this is false".

      Huh? Sorry, but how does this relate to my argument? You stated that "you get what you pay for", thereby implying that the higher the tuition, the better the education. I replied with the argument that "if this holds true, how can Cambridge then be on place number two, with distinctly lower rates, right before Stanford, with again, higher tuition"? Your statement does not fit here at all.

      On a sidenote, I've tried to find the rank of your university, but failed. I only found the tuition rates.

      Not every American university is better than every European university.

      Here, I agree, considering all your community colleges where they don't even do research. But stating that American universities simply are better based on the ranking system is silly. Besides, it doesn't say much about the people who studied there, because it is mainly focused on the research parameters (and we all know how bright profs can sometimes fail at teaching).

      Now, allow me to play advocatus diaboli: if it indeed holds true that America would be heaven for foreign researchers, then they would also contribute to your high ranking, but being, well, foreigners, would have received their education apparently from a non-US institution. Therefore, if those people are so good, they must also have come from a good (and foreign) university.

      --
      Windows is like decaf - it tastes like the real thing, but it won't get you through the day.
    20. Re:just wait... by dorkygeek · · Score: 1

      Oh, common, you can't be serious about that, no? Austria is a significantly smaller country, and therefore simply hasn't got the money the US has to pour into a space program! Space programs are very money intensive, as NASA proves. If Austria had wanted to go to the moon they must have stopped, well, I don't know, building streets for decades or whatever, to spare that much of money.

      --
      Windows is like decaf - it tastes like the real thing, but it won't get you through the day.
    21. Re:just wait... by m874t232 · · Score: 1

      I'm thrilled that we have a massive nanny-state in Europe where those afraid of personal risk and responsibility can find a peaceful haven.

      Your knowledge and understanding of European politics is clearly as limited as your knowledge and understanding of US politics.

    22. Re:just wait... by TylerTheGreat · · Score: 1

      Finally, Anglefire and Geocities... your day has come.

    23. Re:just wait... by NoOneInParticular · · Score: 1
      t's a general statement and it holds true in general. In general the US system for higher education is better. Not every American university is better than every European university.

      In my experience this is complete nonsense. The top education in the US is the best of the world, but it goes downhill quickly after that. Some complete unscientific experiences by me and some of my collegues, tells me that, on average, EU universities beat US universities and 'universities' hands down.

    24. Re:just wait... by Reaperducer · · Score: 1

      It's not meant as a specific slap at Austria, but at the EU as a whole. I think he understands my intent, even if I didn't articulate it properly here.

      --
      -- I'm old enough to have lived through six different meanings of the word "hacker."
    25. Re:just wait... by lightning_queen · · Score: 1

      Okay, I'll give you the outsourcing ones, though it's interesting to see some of the other effects of outsourcing (like the requirement to know Mandarin Chinese for various positions at Blizzard).

      I don't quite agree with your point on minimum wage, though. Although it may be beneficial for the most part, for the points you've stated, there are far too many companies that would take advantage of it, and unfortunately, there are people that have to support at least themselves on a minimum wage (or close to minimum wage) job and aren't in a position to find a different job or work two jobs. I think the only reason why many companies don't pay people minimum wage is that it's an insult to do so, so they make themselves look better by keeping hold of the fact that they pay more than minimum wage (even if it's only a quarter or two more). I, personally, enjoy knowing that even if I have to work the worst job I could ever work, I'm going to come home with at least a certain amount of money in each paycheck. Try paying rent, utilities, a car payment, and insurance on a minimum wage job...now try it on a job that pays less because there is no minimum wage. True, we wouldn't have to pay minors or retired people as much (though that'll bring up so many issues from activists about age discrimination it's almost scary), but we'll be supporting the people that are stuck in the middle age groups with those wages because they'll have to be on something like Welfare and be receiving food stamps because every penny they earn goes just to paying the bills because they can't get a second/different job.

      Personally, I find it sickening enough knowing how much some of these execs make and how much they give themselves bonuses and what their employees make without any sort of, or very minimal, bonuses (I'm not saying all companies are like that, but when the President of the company makes $64k/year from renting out an apartment he owns, over and above what he gets from the company he runs while his degreed employees are making less than $10/hr; or the Superintendent of a school district is making $150k/year as he's shutting down schools because there's "insufficient funding to keep them open" or neglecting to allow valuable upgrades to learning materials because of "insufficient funds"; that's just disgusting).

    26. Re:just wait... by mdecarle · · Score: 1

      GDP (PPP) per capita is still lead by European countries.
      Wait, if you look at that list, the first is Luxemburg and the second Norway. Both are countries with low numbers of citizens. Half the European finance and holdings sector is based in Luxemburg because of their low taxes. Why do you think Arcelor is in Luxemburg? Norway is the world's third oil exporter. It is save to say these 2 countries do not represent an average European country. Whether or not they really belong above the USA in the list is at least debateable.

    27. Re:just wait... by jez9999 · · Score: 1

      Wow. You have the gall to say that at a time when the Bush administration is taking funding away from NASA and it's over 30 years since a US person has set foot on another planet or moon?

    28. Re:just wait... by jez9999 · · Score: 1

      But the uni example you gave was perfect. Go to europe and get cheap higher education. Go to the US and get the best higher education in the world. Take your pick.

      But then if you don't get a job after your US education, you're left with $50000+ of debt and go bankrupt. Not everyone is able to get high paying, high flying jobs. If you're OK with that, fine, but I think it's a rather inhumane and primal attitude.

    29. Re:just wait... by theStorminMormon · · Score: 1

      there are people that have to support at least themselves on a minimum wage (or close to minimum wage) job and aren't in a position to find a different job or work two jobs

      What people? Why are they in this position. Thomas Sowell wrote a great column on poverty back in February that you can get from TowhHall.com (which is down for an upgrade, it appears, or I would link you) and his main points included the following.

      The vast majority of people below the poverty line:
      - don't work full time
      - have no high school diploma
      - are not supporting a family

      Despite this fact, some people are below the poverty line and supporting a family. Most of them aren't married, by the way, being unmarried and having kids correlates very highly to being poor. But anyway, the point is that the vast majority of the "working poor" manage to move out of poverty in a relatively short time period.

      What it comes down to is this. If you make them min wage a "living wage" you prety much guarantee that it becomees a "sticky point". A lot of people will be stuck there. If you get rid of it you can then do intelligent welfare (e.g. adult education, temporary free housing for the working poor, etc) that will accelerate the movement of poor people out of poverty.

      There are ALWAYS going to be poor people. If you believe in min wage you are trying to make poverty an OK condition. But no one likes being poor. The alternative is to try and increase the rate at which poor people can stop being poor altogether. Getting rid of the min wage will help that a lot.

      And to your example I just think there's this popular mythos in America that the rich guys are bad guys. The only difference, in my opinion, is the rich guys have more capacity to harm. But they also have more capacity to do good. Contrast your example with the Bill and Melinda Gates fund, or Warren Bufet's donation. And it's not like min wage earners are great saints either. Some company exec can give you the legal shaft, some burger flipper can spit in your soda: their are asholes everywher.

      -stormin

      --
      The Southern Baptist Convention has creationism. On Slashdot, we have porn.
    30. Re:just wait... by theStorminMormon · · Score: 1

      But then if you don't get a job after your US education, you're left with $50000+ of debt and go bankrupt. Not everyone is able to get high paying, high flying jobs. If you're OK with that, fine, but I think it's a rather inhumane and primal attitude.

      Oh please, do you live in the US? Do you have any idea how any debt relief programs there are? If you're not making enough you can extend the "no payment" period practcally to eternity. NOt to mention the fact that there are tons of progrms to repay debt if you take jobs as a teacher or other forms of public service.

      You're acting like you graduate colleg with $50,000 car loan or something. We get 30-year mortgages for our houses and no one bats an eyelash. And yet you get a loan for a fraction of that principle with much, much easier repayment terms and everyones like "AcK! Cruel, harsh, evil world!!!".

      Makes no sense.

      -stormin (current student debt ~ $50,000)

      --
      The Southern Baptist Convention has creationism. On Slashdot, we have porn.
    31. Re:just wait... by lightning_queen · · Score: 1

      For the record, my examples are real people. The company President is my mom's boss, and yes, he does get $64k a year from the Trump Towers apartment he inherited from his step-mother, and his wife is a co-owner of the company. And the people on my mom's level (accountants with at least an Associate's) make between $8 and $10 an hour working full time, and this is a major company with international clients. I'm not saying he's a bad person, because he's not, but I don't agree with the pay scale in the company.

      The school superintendent is one that's notorius in parts of the state of New York for shutting down schools and consolidating them, he became the superintendent of the school district I attended in high school and had the school I went to (K-12, ~250 students, one of the two self-sufficient high schools in the district of 5 high schools, it was also the farthest out, the next school in the district was about 20 miles away) shut down, and was quite shady and borderline illegal about it, spreading lies about the condition of the school and the education received. From what I hear, he tried doing the same thing to one of the other schools, but was met with more opposition this time and was stopped. The people in the district are trying to find a way to get him out of there and nullify his contract which states that if he were to be fired, he'd get 90% of his pay (his pay is somewhere between $120k and $150k).

      I'm not saying that all rich people or execs are bad people (the school I went to and the local library were prime examples of the benefits of The Gates Foundation -- the school got 20-25 new computers, and the library got 3 or 4 new computers [it's a small library and didn't need many]; though I don't really agree with the way Microsoft works, especially when dealing with competition), but power and money does corrupt and people in high positions can fall victim to the effects. And it's not usually the people themselves I don't like, it's the way a company, in general, is run. Most companies are run by the people at the top, the ones who aren't on the floor any more and no longer see what's going on on a daily basis. Yet the execs still think they know what's best for the company. So, when a decision is made that affects the lower levels, especially when the lower levels aren't involved in the decision, the people on the bottom are going "what are they thinking? This doesn't make sense." I don't think all execs are evil...I just think most of them are clueless...

      As far as who is at or below the poverty line, I've been one of them that was at least close. Like I said, my mom (who finished high school, has a college degree, works full time, and supported a family) has a wage of a little less than $9/hr. My step-dad is physically disabled and can't work, so he's on social security (he does have to pay child support and had one of his kids living with him when we met him, he was easily below the poverty line at that time). That gave them roughly $18k/yr to work with for the three of us (after the child support). There were times where we barely had the money for my mom to have enough gas to get to work (which was about 30 miles away as they live in a rural area). After I moved out for college, the first job I was able to get was a Burger King, making $6/hr. I was in a situation where I was in college and had no car (I live about 15 miles away from the school because of the nature of the city), so I couldn't work more than part time, but I had to work because I had a $300 rent payment (off-campus housing) and enjoyed being able to eat (I was a 17-year-old high school graduate, I had to fight the fact that most people look at the age without looking at education status and immediately want a work permit).

      I'm not trying to "cry poor" because I know I'm not the worst off (and technically speaking, we weren't at/below poverty in the arrangement we were in, though if one of his kids had moved in, we would have been), but I know how hard it was trying to make ends meet in situati

    32. Re:just wait... by ultranova · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Well, this became a large thread. Maybe I should consider a career as a political agitator ?-)

      Your sig bugs me. That's probably the point.

      Not at all. The point of my sig is to express my opinion about welfare system and the prevailing Slashdot attitude of it being somehow bad.

      The point of social security is not that it forces me to protect myself - it forces me to protect your lazy ass.

      No, it forces you to protect my unlucky ass. The point of social security is not feeding those too lazy to feed themselves, but those incapable of feeding themselves.

      If I fall and break my leg, I'm going to be unable to work - at least on some jobs - while it heals. If I don't have enough money to feed myself until I'm healthy again, and don't have the qualifications to jobs I could do with a broken leg, I'll starve. And while one might point out that I should have saved money, no matter how much I'll save there will always be something that requires more money to treat than I have.

      That's another point of my sig - to comment the belief that you only need social security if you're lazy. That's simply not true. Be as capable, cautious and hard-working as you can possibly be, and you're still liable to need help. Social security guarantees that you get it. Or, more importantly to me, social security guarantees that I get it.

      Finally, I dislike laws that try to protect people from themselves. That is not only impossible, but also treat people as less than adults - which they may well be, but the lawmaker is not really any different in that regard.

      Just because you want a safety net doesn't mean you should be able to make your neighbor help pay for it.

      See, this is the bad side of living in a society and enjoying its benefits and protections: someone has to pay for them, and sometimes that someone is you. And sometimes someone else is the one to get the benefit.

      Besides, why would my neighbours wallet take priority over my life and security ? And don't start typical libertarian bullshit about his rights being violated, since the only thing that allows him to have any property in the first place is that society restricts other people's ability to take it away. He benefits from having a publicly funded police force and army to enforce contract and property laws, but now he decides that these rights are "natural" and deserve protection but my right to live is somehow not natural and doesn't deserve protection ? That he's entitled to protection of property but I'm not entitled to protection of life ?

      I say that man's not my neighbour, then. And if he refuses to acknowledge any responsibilities towards me, I refuse to acknowledge any towards him - including the responsibility to honor his claims of ownership to his personal property. If you want a world where only the fit survive, fine; but don't expect me to play by your rules - or any other, for that matter - for I'll be fighting for my survival and sure as Hell won't just lie down and die.

      It's all fine and good to say "every man for himself", but also remember it when a hungry mob breaks to your home and hauls you off to be beheaded. And also remember it when you realize that you can't afford treatment for an illness that's killing you, or when you break your leg and can't work, or when a thousand other things make you unable to survive on your own.

      A world without safety nets is one where a single misstep sends you falling to your death, a world where only the strong survive; but no one is strong all the time, and no one is immune to misfortune. It is sheer arrogance to believe that you won't ever need the safety net; even if it's true, it's because of good luck and not any merit of yours. That's the point of my sig: I don't want my life to go to hell, literally or metaphorically, just because I got unlucky, and I value my life far above anyone's property rights or freedom to be a selfish asshole.

      --

      Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.

    33. Re:just wait... by Reaperducer · · Score: 1

      The current funding situation doesn't change the fact that it happened.

      Strangely, not everything that is currently happening in the world, and not everything that ever happened in the world's history involves George W. Bush. It's about time people realized this. Mark you calendar with the number of days until his term expires, and just get on with your lives already.

      --
      -- I'm old enough to have lived through six different meanings of the word "hacker."
    34. Re:just wait... by theStorminMormon · · Score: 1

      First - and before anything else (I'm getting tired of responding to all these posts) - I want to get back to my original point. Your sig is incoherent.

      I want a Social Security safety net. You are free to become a stain on life's floor if you don't.

      This doesn't make sense because if you get a Social Security safety net then how is someone else supposed to be "free to become a stain on life's floor"? If you have social security, then not only do other people in the country have to pay for it, but they darn well get the same safety net. So before we get into social security the main point I made is simply this: your sig doesn't make logical sense.

      Now, moving onto social security, I'm not going to argue with everything that you said because I don't have a problem with all of social security. Social security offers the following benefits:

      - retirement
      - survivor/spouse benefit
      -disability benefit

      The main part of social security is retirement. That's what I think is largely overrated. You guys are acting like I think we should take away disability insurance. I don't think that at all.

      -stormin

      --
      The Southern Baptist Convention has creationism. On Slashdot, we have porn.
    35. Re:just wait... by ultranova · · Score: 1

      This doesn't make sense because if you get a Social Security safety net then how is someone else supposed to be "free to become a stain on life's floor"? If you have social security, then not only do other people in the country have to pay for it, but they darn well get the same safety net. So before we get into social security the main point I made is simply this: your sig doesn't make logical sense.

      You can move to a country without social security, or simply refuse to use it. Sure, you'll still be paying for it in the later case, but then again, you're paying for many things that don't benefit you directly or at all - the security arrangments of your government or president, for example.

      Please also note that my sig is partly in response to the various posts suggesting that their writer is invincible and couldn't ever possibly need social security. I wanted to express my opinion that this attitude is sheer arrogance.

      I suppose I should word myself better. I'll take rewording my sig under consideration, but, unfortunately, one can't make a very detailed political speech in 120 characters :(.

      The main part of social security is retirement. That's what I think is largely overrated. You guys are acting like I think we should take away disability insurance. I don't think that at all.

      As I see it, the proper function of social security is just that - it gives security to people and indirectly helps economy by letting them take risks knowing that failing won't get them kicked to the street.

      As for retirement, it is unfortunately neccessary, since a 70-year old simply can't work, he doesn't have the strength to anymore. And while a 60-year old propably could, at least in some occupations, todays work environment makes it very difficult in reality - you lose flexibility as you get older, and can't cope with stress as well anymore, and consequently switching jobs becomes a near-impossibility.

      As I see it, there's three possibilities:

      1. Do not pay retirement and let people starve to death if they didn't manage to save enough money to last through their ailing years.
      2. Restructure work environment to emphasize long-lasting employment, reducing stress for employees and allowing them to work older, therefore reducing the total retirement payments.
      3. Pay retirements as currently.

      Apart from moral issues, number one will leave into a very nasty society very soon, since once you take a cap off human cruelty there's nothing else holding it back anymore - history shows that all too well. Number two requires restructuring the entire economic culture, and is very unlikely to occur in this time of globalization and cutthroat competition, but would propably lead to the most pleasant world for everyone. And option number three costs a lot.

      Take your pick.

      --

      Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.

    36. Re:just wait... by theStorminMormon · · Score: 1

      What about letting people take care of their OWN retirement? It's not like social security retirement is actually going to be sufficient for most people's desired standard of living anyway. Let people do their own planning in the form of 401Ks, real estate, and other investments.

      Of course phasing it out would be difficult because those paying today are paying for older generations, not themselves, but I'd be happy to continue paying for a decade or so (at least) without expecting any benefits myself if it meant my kids wouldn't have to pay into this program anymore.

      -stormin

      --
      The Southern Baptist Convention has creationism. On Slashdot, we have porn.
  4. And why should we believe him? by FhnuZoag · · Score: 5, Funny

    Oh, just an experiment, he says. But how do we know? HOW DO WE KNOW?!?

    Please, arrest him quickly and torture him so that we may learn the true horror of his plot.

    1. Re:And why should we believe him? by mpcooke3 · · Score: 5, Funny

      If he lived in the UK we'd have already accidentily shot him.

      You americans have such slack security.

    2. Re:And why should we believe him? by tehshen · · Score: 1
      --
      Guy asked me for a quarter for a cup of coffee. So I bit him.
    3. Re:And why should we believe him? by Frosty+Piss · · Score: 1

      "Think of the children".

      --
      If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
    4. Re:And why should we believe him? by Ninjy · · Score: 1

      Secrets! Naughty little secrets! I'll rip the secrets from your flesh! Aaahahaha!!
      *cough*

      Nice day, eh? Yup, nice day...

  5. what the hell? by El+Pollo+Loco · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The most I can tell you is I am a 23 year old web designer from Florida named Mike.

    Where did the summary get the name Chris from?

    1. Re:what the hell? by AngryDill · · Score: 5, Funny

      Where did the summary get the name Chris from?

      It is a mystery, but the answer will be revealed on July 3rd. Keep watching the website slashdot.org.

      That's when the dupe will be posted ;-)

      -a.d-

      --


      I'm Erwin Schrodinger and I approve of this message, and I do not approve of this message!
    2. Re:what the hell? by The+MAZZTer · · Score: 3, Informative

      Probably from this:

      http://www.vitalsecurity.org/uploaded_images/hck edeon3-789284.gif

    3. Re:what the hell? by MaelstromX · · Score: 1

      Oops. That's what I get for doing it off the top of my head :)

    4. Re:what the hell? by Frightening · · Score: 0

      Chris is just one of those names that means "nobody important". Female equivalent is Martha.

      Very subtle stuff, but look at the subject matter.

    5. Re:what the hell? by TubeSteak · · Score: 1

      If you can't wait for the dupe,
      visit http://backslash.slashdot.org/ tomorrow

      --
      [Fuck Beta]
      o0t!
    6. Re:what the hell? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Name's chris, and he's a 26 year old from Australia. ;)

    7. Re:what the hell? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      I'm Erwin Schrodinger and I approve of this message, and I do not approve of this message!
      I'm Werner Heisenberg and I'm not certain what you're trying to say here!
  6. Heh heh by The+MAZZTer · · Score: 1, Funny

    When everyone was going berzerk over the countdown, I was all like "It's going to be something dull, it's got to be, nothing with this much hype can be exciting." And I was right!

    1. Re:Heh heh by xmas2003 · · Score: 3, Funny

      This was right up there with watching grass grow ...

      --
      Hulk SMASH Celiac Disease
    2. Re:Heh heh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Roland just had a counter a few months back. It turned out to be a red colored amp. I wonder if they got investigated?

    3. Re:Heh heh by tyson.cpp · · Score: 0, Redundant

      I survived EON8 and all I got was this crappy t-shirt. :(

    4. Re:Heh heh by Chubby_C · · Score: 2, Informative
      all this hype?

      this is the first of heard of this foolishness

      --
      - My question is: Can Slashdot be Slashdotted? -
    5. Re:Heh heh by TRS80NT · · Score: 2, Funny

      Grass is boring. Corn on the other hand...


      --
      Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet.
    6. Re:Heh heh by Sage+Gaspar · · Score: 1

      Yeah, where was this hyped? It actually sounds sort of interesting to me, but I never heard about it before hehe.

    7. Re:Heh heh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Quick, someone call the police, that link is to young corn stalking. If the stalking continues it will probably be impregnated, followed by swollen ears and when they get to be adults they may turn to alcohol.

    8. Re:Heh heh by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      Best...webcam...ever...

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
  7. Threats by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    From TFA:
    Evil was the number one first impression people had of the site, in spite of the fact that there are no threats on the site. The only thing Eon 8 says is "We don't want you here". Nothing else.
    But whether that's a threat depends on where "here" is. I can see that being interpreted as "in this world" i.e. we don't want you to live. Okay, you'd have to be paranoid to seriously worry about that from an anonymous web site, but I can see how someone would think it's a threat.
    1. Re:Threats by I_Love_Pocky! · · Score: 3, Insightful

      And I can see how you must be such a huge coward, that you would be well served by never leaving your home again. People who live in fear of anything and everything are not healthy.

      Excuse me while I hide from: Terrorists, SARS, the bird flu, west nile virus, mad cows disease, video game violence corrupting the youth, school shootings, anthrax, and gays some how destroying traditional marriage. Oh yeah, and now anonymous website postings that may or may not be threats.

  8. Why is this surprising? by October_30th · · Score: 4, Insightful
    who wanted to see how people would react to an absence of information, and he was disappointed that people expected the worst

    I don't see why that should be a surprise or a disappointment. Is he trying to make a case that people should trust people more? Bollocks. In the absence of valid information during a decision making process it would be foolish not to assume the worst.

    --
    The owls are not what they seem
    1. Re:Why is this surprising? by jgrahn · · Score: 4, Insightful
      In the absence of valid information during a decision making process it would be foolish not to assume the worst.

      No -- it would be foolish to rule out the worst. Assuming the worst is just paranoid. It's the kind of thinking that would have triggered WWIII if it had dominated.

    2. Re:Why is this surprising? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So if I know very little about my neighbors I should make the decision that they are terrorists?

    3. Re:Why is this surprising? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No -- it would be foolish to rule out the worst. Assuming the worst is just paranoid. It's the kind of thinking that would have triggered WWIII if it had dominated.

      Really? What about 9261983?
      Had the worst not been assumed then WWIII might well have occured.

    4. Re:Why is this surprising? by keyne9 · · Score: 1

      Then you would live life in fear.

    5. Re:Why is this surprising? by FourStarGeneral · · Score: 1

      Yeah, apparently this guy forgot the old axiom, "hope for the best, plan for the worst." Still, the whole idea was pretty dumb.

      --
      Resistance... is futile.
    6. Re:Why is this surprising? by Millenniumman · · Score: 1

      If they speak of a deadline to a "deployment" on various places around the world, but they are not forthcoming as to what they are talking about, and they are visited by federal agents, you might have cause to be worried.

      --
      Stupidity is like nuclear power, it can be used for good or evil. And you don't want to get any on you.
    7. Re:Why is this surprising? by John+Newman · · Score: 1
      Really? What about 9261983?
      Had the worst not been assumed then WWIII might well have occured.
      I would think that "assuming the worst" would have meant Petrov assuming that there was an inbound attack, not that there was a computer error. If he had assumed the worst, most of us might be dead.
    8. Re:Why is this surprising? by siriuskase · · Score: 1

      This is exactly why rumor control is so important. When people only have partial information, such as a list of names and a date, it is natural for them to prepare for the worst and hope for the best.

      --
      If you must moderate, please moderate as irrelevent, not something bad, because I'm sure someone will find this interest
    9. Re:Why is this surprising? by Tezkah · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure exactly what you're referring to, but how about this very real incident where a computer glitch would have caused global nuclear war if it weren't for one man making a rational decision?

    10. Re:Why is this surprising? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful
      No -- it would be foolish to rule out the worst. Assuming the worst is just paranoid. It's the kind of thinking that would have triggered WWIII if it had dominated.
      Imagine, if we'd adopted that attitude, a proud country like the US could be running gulags and turning functioning (if repressive) nations into dangerous, extremist enemies.

      Whew! Dodged that bullet!
    11. Re:Why is this surprising? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      >>Bollocks. In the absence of valid information during a decision making process it would be foolish not to assume the worst.

      In that case, I would have killed my girlfriend expecting her to be a hit(wo)man when I heard the sound of her cocking the gun behind the closed door of the bathroom, while actually the sound was her farting underwater in the tub.

      Therer. Bollocks to you too.

    12. Re:Why is this surprising? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What do you think 9261983 means? (Hint: September 26, 1983).

    13. Re:Why is this surprising? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      ... I heard the sound of her cocking the gun behind the closed door of the bathroom, while actually the sound was her farting underwater in the tub.


      Wow. Impressive. That totally redefines tight-assed for me. I would go further but there is no need, use your imagination.
    14. Re:Why is this surprising? by JaWiB · · Score: 1

      "But remember: the fact that you are not paranoid doesn't mean they are not out to get you." -Bruce Schneier and Niels Ferguson, Practical Cryptography

    15. Re:Why is this surprising? by Tezkah · · Score: 1

      Hint: thats not a standard way to show dates. Try 1983-09-26 next time. That way people will know what you're talking about.

    16. Re:Why is this surprising? by Tezkah · · Score: 1

      You are very confused about the Petrov incident. It was a computer glitch. If the worst - nuclear attack from the US - was assumed, there would have been a nuclear war. People should not be making policy decisions because of fear, but should rationally decide them. Just like you didn't shoot yourself when this timer went out.

    17. Re:Why is this surprising? by Xyrus · · Score: 1

      It doesn't surprise me that people assume the worst, given the media blitzkrieg of fear we're bombarded with every single day.

      Remember, most people don't see through the hysteria.

      ~X~

      --
      ~X~
    18. Re:Why is this surprising? by khallow · · Score: 1

      Phone number? Some sort of ID number? I don't know. What does it mean?

    19. Re:Why is this surprising? by Minwee · · Score: 1

      Please don't tease the Americans. It's not his fault he doesn't know any better.

  9. It's amazing... by Rendo · · Score: 0

    How quickly hysteria can travel for unexplained reasons. Remember Y2K? Hysteria. Remember all those times the terror threat was elevated to orange or whatever colour? Hysteria. And now this? People are suckers.

  10. Mysterious Website Or Prank? by aymanh · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Am I the only one who simply ignored the whole thing? I saw the link posted on many forums and blogs, but it looked like some sort of prank or whatever, only in movies you'd see terrorist organizations publicly providing maps of their targets, or countdown timers...

    --
    python>>> q="'";s='q="%c";s=%c%s%c;print s%%(q,q,s,q)';print s%(q,q,s,q)
    1. Re: Mysterious Website Or Prank? by ezzewezza · · Score: 5, Funny

      I did one better than you and had managed to have never even heard of it until today.

    2. Re: Mysterious Website Or Prank? by pikine · · Score: 1

      Am I the only one who simply didn't know anything about this? I never saw links posted to any forums and blogs...

      --
      I once had a signature.
    3. Re: Mysterious Website Or Prank? by Sage+Gaspar · · Score: 1

      I think the more interesting study is in seeing which internet currents this site followed, hehe. They should drop a bunch of seeds of information out there sometime that... somehow... report back?... like those little probes in Twister, and maybe we can get some sort of topological map of the connectedness of internet communities hehe.

    4. Re: Mysterious Website Or Prank? by Justin205 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Same here. If people were so concerned over this, why is this the first we've heard of it on Slashdot? I would have loved the chance to mock them earlier about it.

      Or maybe if people considered this a real threat, it would have been in a newspaper, or perhaps on the evening news on TV.

      --
      "Your effort to remain what you are is what limits you."
    5. Re: Mysterious Website Or Prank? by file+terminator · · Score: 1

      Heard of what?

    6. Re: Mysterious Website Or Prank? by 241comp · · Score: 1

      I've done yet one better. In standard Slashdot fashion, I'm posting this comment without reading the article or the summary... so I STILL haven't heard of it!

    7. Re: Mysterious Website Or Prank? by SamSim · · Score: 1

      Actually I think you'll find terrorist organisations do sometimes provide advance warning. The IRA have done this in London a few times. IIRC they let the police know the approximate location and date (I'm not sure if they generally give enough to find the bomb or not). The reason? So that they can stake a valid claim to being responsible. ANYBODY can claim responsibility AFTER the fact.

    8. Re: Mysterious Website Or Prank? by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      It's now Monday morning and I still haven't heard anything about it.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
  11. list of sites covering this by Paperghost · · Score: 1

    ...for those that can't be bothered looking for them in the summary.

    http://www.argn.com/archive/000428eon8_activate.ph p
    http://www.vitalsecurity.org/2006/07/eon8-summary. html
    http://louisex.dommox.com/eon8/

    theres a few more, but they're mostly over the top speculation of a "world ending" variety.

  12. Subtle Promotion Methods... by Microlith · · Score: 2, Informative

    Which were apparently so subtle I hadn't heard about the site until yesterday, when I saw a link to it on YTMND.COM, and I'm online nearly 24/7. Sometimes you can be too subtle.

    This sort of experiment was probably done slightly better by the xbox team with ilovebees.com just prior to the Halo 2 release.

  13. why did this make the front page? by kz45 · · Score: 1

    I was watching stories being submitted through the digg-spy tool on digg.com and someone (probably tbe owners of this site) was spamming the links to this story over and over for at least a couple of hours. It was getting rejected. It boggles my mind that it would actually make it to the front page of slashdot.

    1. Re:why did this make the front page? by Traiklin · · Score: 1

      because it's an interesting story?

      The ones submitting it to digg weren't paying them?

      the ones in charge of submissions got busted for helping their friends more then actually letting people submit story's?

  14. Fear by Bombula · · Score: 2, Insightful

    People are simply afraid of what they don't know or don't understand. In the absence of information or explanation, it is often wise to assume the worst - indeed, doing so helped our ancestors survive, which is why such behavior is now instinctive.

    --
    A-Bomb
    1. Re:Fear by vertinox · · Score: 1

      People are simply afraid of what they don't know or don't understand. In the absence of information or explanation, it is often wise to assume the worst - indeed, doing so helped our ancestors survive, which is why such behavior is now instinctive.

      Actually, one anthropologist pointed out at one time (can't remember the link), people who died in combat during the pre-1700 eras were more likley to have more children than people who were came back from battle. They thought it might be something to the lines that reckless people have more sex and therefore pass on their genes.

      Secondly, fear will often get you killed in certain situations when bravery or calm thinking will get you through the situation.

      Besides who wants to sit around and fear the uknown of what you have control over. Its like worrying about what happens after you die. Something man cannot understand nor will it make a difference if you sit around and live in fear all day.

      --
      "I am the king of the Romans, and am superior to rules of grammar!"
      -Sigismund, Holy Roman Emperor (1368-1437)
    2. Re:Fear by Anonymous+Brave+Guy · · Score: 1

      In the absence of information or explanation, it is often wise to assume the worst

      Really? It may be wise to allow for the worst, but assuming it is just paranoid if you have no particular reason to do so.

      As the saying goes, we should not fear what we do not understand, we should fear because we do not understand.

      --
      If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
    3. Re:Fear by theStorminMormon · · Score: 1

      Another hilarious sig.

      Imagine the awful power of the suicide knife. Or the suicide rock. Or the suicide stick.

      Terrorism didn't EXIST in a mearningful way until the 20th century, so what's your point?

      -stormin

      --
      The Southern Baptist Convention has creationism. On Slashdot, we have porn.
    4. Re:Fear by Jeremi · · Score: 1
      Terrorism didn't EXIST in a mearningful way until the 20th century, so what's your point?


      Of course it did. Educate yourself before posting any more pointless snide remarks.

      --


      I don't care if it's 90,000 hectares. That lake was not my doing.
    5. Re:Fear by VJ42 · · Score: 1
      Terrorism didn't EXIST in a mearningful way until the 20th century


      Really? The word originates from C16 France for a reason; early terror campaigns can clearly be traced back as far as the C1 againt the Roman Empire: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_terrori sm#Origin
      --
      If I have nothing to hide, you have no reason to search me
    6. Re:Fear by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Terrorism didn't EXIST in a mearningful way until the 20th century, so what's your point?"

      Really?

      History of terrorism. Claims the term was coined in 18th C France, but if we look east there are terrorist methods used way before that.

      Silly boy.

    7. Re:Fear by theStorminMormon · · Score: 1

      Ahahahahahahaha... I knew you were going to be simplistic and point to the Zealots as the first terrorists.

      I reiterate what I said: Terrorism didn't EXIST in a mearningful way until the 20th century, so what's your point?

      Before the capacity for one person (or a very small group of people) to kill many, many people existed (from explosives to chemical weapons to nukes) terrorism was completely different. Of COURSE tyrannical gov'ts were more of a threat than terrorism when the worst terrorists could do is attack you with hand-to-hand weapons. The advent of 20-th century weapons completely changed the equation, so using a pre-20th century comparison of the relative dangers of tryanny and terrorism is nothing but a straw man.

      My point stands as stated.

      -stormin

      --
      The Southern Baptist Convention has creationism. On Slashdot, we have porn.
    8. Re:Fear by theStorminMormon · · Score: 1

      blah blah blah

      See me post to this topic already. I didn't say terrorism did not exist before 20th century, so stop acting like I did. I said it didn't exist in a meaningful way.

      And the reason for that is that the power of terrorists was (to approximate roughly) linearly related to the number of terrorists you had. Because in order to inflict harm they had to each physically carry out the harm with very crude tools. Furthermore, they had to expose themselves to harm, so they could be neutralized more effectively.

      Starting with gun powder (which wasn't cheap enough to be available to terrorists until 20th century) the equation switches. Instead of damage being linear to # of terrorists it's more like exponential. Now a small band of terrorists (say 20) can fairly easily take out several thousand and there's not a damn thing we can do about it.

      You tell me that 20 people flying planes into buldings is the same TYPE of thing as a couple of guys with swords murdering people.

      -stormin

      --
      The Southern Baptist Convention has creationism. On Slashdot, we have porn.
    9. Re:Fear by Anonymous+Brave+Guy · · Score: 1

      Terrorism didn't EXIST in a mearningful way until the 20th century, so what's your point?

      Leaving aside the question of whether your claim is true, would my point be any less valid if I'd written "Since the start of the twentieth century, the greatest threat to life and liberty has been not terrorism, but the power of the state"? I don't think so.

      --
      If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
    10. Re:Fear by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      and this fear instinct is now being exploited by our government through Al-CIAda *cough* I mean Al-Qaeda.

    11. Re:Fear by theStorminMormon · · Score: 1

      No. I would agree with it in that case. And even if I didn't agree with it; at least it wouldn't be patently nonsensical.

      You're assuming that I'm somehow disagreeing with your politics. I probably do, but also probably not as much as you think I do.

      I just really don't like arguments that are utter nonsense regardless of the conclusion.

      -stormin

      --
      The Southern Baptist Convention has creationism. On Slashdot, we have porn.
  15. Rather lame, but somewhat informative... by Xserv · · Score: 1

    It does lend some salt to the idea that "a person is intelligent, clever, but people are stupid, panicky." (Bad MIB reference, I know, but fitting nonetheless.) The "uneducated masses" look at a problem differently than the minority on the skirts of an issue. To the few us that saw this thing in the wild and said, "Mmmm, must be nice to be 14 and stupid again," and let it live at that while not being influenced by the "hysteria effect" of the other people reacting differently would explain that quote. People who normally would have thought it through alone were influenced differently by hearing or seeing this information in a group setting.

    *shrugs* Whatever -- slow news day apparently.

    Xserv

    --
    "I love lamp."
  16. Absence of information? Hardly. by Samrobb · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The problem is, he didn't "see how people would react to an absence of information". He provided some information, and did it in a way that would make most people think immediately of military operations (using obviously encrypted data, terms like "deployment", etc.)

    And he's surprised that people "expected the worst"?

    If he had been serious, he wouldn't have left any (immediately) human readable text on the website. Instead, he prejudiced his own experiement by providing just enough information to prompt certain thoughts. If he had labelled his map "Elvis Sightings" instead of "Deployment Map", he probably would have gotten an entirely different set of reacations.

    --
    "Great men are not always wise: neither do the aged understand judgement." Job 32:9
    1. Re:Absence of information? Hardly. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      No kidding. The whole thing seems designed to produce a result, rather than to measure an outcome.

    2. Re:Absence of information? Hardly. by TheRealMindChild · · Score: 2, Informative

      Like http://zombo.com

      --

      "When life gives you lemons, don't make lemonade. Make life take the lemons back!" -- Cave Johnson
    3. Re:Absence of information? Hardly. by TheSpoom · · Score: 1

      I think he did it for fun, really.

      --
      It's better to vote for what you want and not get it than to vote for what you don't want and get it.
      - E. Debs
    4. Re:Absence of information? Hardly. by krotkruton · · Score: 1

      If he had labelled his map "Elvis Sightings" instead of "Deployment Map", he probably would have gotten an entirely different set of reacations.

      I don't know about that. Given that the right information is displayed or left out, "Elvis Sightings" can be just as *scary* as "Deployment Map".
      If I was a terrorist and wanted to make some attack, I wouldn't give away my plan on some website. If the purpose of the website was to keep other terrorists in the loop, then using something silly like "Elvis Sightings" would help keep attention off of our plans. However, if I just wanted to scare the shit out of people or distract them so that I could attack a day earlier or something, then I would make just this type of website, and the author showed that it would work (sort of). Terrorists use fear as a weapon, and this website shows that their weapons have been successful on a good number of people.

      To me, the site seemed like a cheap advertising ploy: the type of thing you would see for some new video game or movie. It never occurred to me that it was some evil terrorist plot, but then again I don't believe there was a shooter on the grassy knoll, so maybe I'm the foolish one.

    5. Re:Absence of information? Hardly. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "deployment" sounds more like a software engineering term to me.

      But then who cares? It's not like anyone heard of this website anyway. The guy sounds like a plonker.

    6. Re:Absence of information? Hardly. by rolfwind · · Score: 1

      I disagree - deployment is used in a bunch of business speak. You are correct and that there was some information, but it's a more interesting experiment in how people's minds fill the gaps with their own speculation. After all, they didn't have to think the worst, but they decided to anyway. That's the kind of irrational fear filling the world today.

      A paralell (but with even more "information" designed to make a person feel a certain way) to this in the movies would the original "Blair Witch Project." There was no monster ever seen, but that's what most people conclude from the inconclusive, even though it could have been just as easily a kidnapper at the end spooking them.

    7. Re:Absence of information? Hardly. by Zaatxe · · Score: 1

      Better sources of absence of information would be Dvorak's articles or Tom's Hardware's pages...

      --
      So say we all
    8. Re:Absence of information? Hardly. by assassinator42 · · Score: 1

      It made me think of Microsoft, as they seem to like making these kinds of sites. (I Love Bees, etc)

  17. The hacking the Update on the site references.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting
    Was done by members from LL.

    This was what they left behind before "Mike" restored control:

    "Eon8.com gave us a relatively large desire for "more information". It was an interesting social experiment, but the 'reactions of the internet public' cannot be gauged or measured with web statistics. The possibility that this website could have been linked to something much bigger and perhaps more evil was compelling.

    We are not lame noobs, just as you are not a 23 year old named Mike from Florida. Your name is Chris Rossi, and you are a 25 year old from Australia.

    This has been an honorable challenge, and a wonderful project. Signed w00b,Amun,D.C.,and E.D.D."

    Just in case you were curious about it.

    1. Re:The hacking the Update on the site references.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A URL linked from Eon8 itself that includes screenshots of the hack: http://www.vitalsecurity.org/2006/07/eon8-summary. html

    2. Re:The hacking the Update on the site references.. by a10waveracer · · Score: 1

      As a member of LL, I can say that the community there was pretty hyped up about it, wondering what was going to come out of it. The majority knew it was going to be something pointless, but the few (vocal) believers decided to hype it up, and then someone from there hacked it after they got pissed because it was nothing.

  18. People find this compelling ... by meanfriend · · Score: 4, Interesting

    probably for the same reason that they watch Lost. Replace Eon8 with Dharma Initiative, and the similarities are marked.

    It's mysterious, has dead ends and redirections, uses cryptic codenames and strings of alphanumeric characters that hints at something much larger and sinister behind it, complete with a countdown to boot.

    Interesting too, is how people also came up with all sorts of wild theories and found connections that the creators didnt originally intend (like the 8th eon being the end of the world).

    "The purpose of this project was to determine the reactions of the internet public to lack of information."

    Yeah, that seems to describe Lost pretty well too :)

    1. Re:People find this compelling ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ha, I love the use of "they". You've obviously never watched lost. Ever. Oh no.

    2. Re:People find this compelling ... by heinousjay · · Score: 1

      I've never watched a single episode but I knew all that information as well. People do talk, you know, although possibly not to you.

      --
      Slashdot - where whining about luck is the new way to make the world you want.
    3. Re:People find this compelling ... by RealGrouchy · · Score: 1
      Yeah, that seems to describe Lost pretty well too :)


      Lack of entertainment != lack of information.

      - RG>
      --
      Hey pal, this isn't a pleasantforest, so don't waste my time with pleasantries!
    4. Re:People find this compelling ... by SamSim · · Score: 4, Funny
      it's mysterious, has dead ends and redirections, uses cryptic codenames and strings of alphanumeric characters that hints at something much larger and sinister behind it

      ...and I suspect Lost won't have a particularly satisfying conclusion either... :)

    5. Re:People find this compelling ... by Jrabbit05 · · Score: 1

      Those pesky numbers didn't show now did they? That would have totaly given it away if the hashes were of that.

    6. Re:People find this compelling ... by moosesocks · · Score: 1

      Is there any way for it to?

      The writers have dug themselves into a hole, where the only way out will be an extremely unsatisfying ending that will have to either be incredibly anticlimatic, or so spectacular that it's cheezy.

      That said, television is finding new fun ways to keep viewers entralled. Lost and 24 are the first two heavily commercialized (read: mainstream, non-educational) series to capture my attention.

      I'm actually happy that good storytelling and plot cohesiveness has been revived. I'd daresay that even Dickens would be proud.

      --
      -- If you try to fail and succeed, which have you done? - Uli's moose
    7. Re:People find this compelling ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The history of English literature makes a lot more sense when you realize that Dickens was paid by the word.

  19. XCCR.com by ModernGeek · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    What is xccr.com ?

    --
    Sig: I stole this sig.
    1. Re:XCCR.com by Kadin2048 · · Score: 1

      Actually I thought of XCCR -- whatever the heck you want to call it (social experiment? game? random website?) when I read this article ... I had never heard of the site mentioned in TFA, and I think people are pretty stupid to jump to the conclusion of "terrorist!" (although I can't say I'm really surprised). I would like to hear what the story is on xccr.com, though.

      --
      "Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
  20. Chris... by jethro200 · · Score: 1
    From the site:
    Who are you, really?

    The most I can tell you is I am a 23 year old web designer from Florida named Mike.

    From the summary:
    Turns out, it was just an experiment by a 23-year-old guy named Chris from Florida ...

    More misinformation! The plot thickens...

    1. Re:Chris... by ehrichweiss · · Score: 1

      I was about to point that out myself. Funny that nobody has bothered reading it.

      --
      0x09F911029D74E35BD84156C5635688C0
  21. No subject by naoursla · · Score: 5, Funny

    This comment is another social experiment to see how people react to a lack of information.

    1. Re:No subject by MrCopilot · · Score: 2, Interesting

      It led to one more click. Nice Flocks.

      --
      OSGGFG - Open Source Gamers Guide to Free Games
    2. Re:No subject by jrockway · · Score: 2, Funny

      Actually, this whole site is a social experiment to see how people react to a lack of information.

      The results? People just make stuff up to fill in the gaps. :)

      --
      My other car is first.
    3. Re:No subject by Jugalator · · Score: 1

      Hmm.. I bet the parent is using an encryption to turn Arab terrorist plans into plain English.

      Damn, we need to crack that message before this timer runs out! >>> 5:32 <<<

      --
      Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!
    4. Re:No subject by Ant+P. · · Score: 2, Funny

      I thought this whole site was a social experiment to see how people react to redundant repetition of information repetitively.

    5. Re:No subject by morgan_greywolf · · Score: 2, Funny
      This comment is another social experiment to see how people react to a lack of information.


      Oh, yeah, sure... you're just part of it aren't you?? AREN'T YOU??? Tell us! Tell us what you KNOW!!! Or we'll KILL YOU!!!!

      thistextforthelamenessfilter
    6. Re:No subject by npsimons · · Score: 1
      People just make stuff up to fill in the gaps.

      So that's where gods come from!

  22. disappointed people took it the wrong way? by theStorminMormon · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This was a clumsy experiment at best. He's sad people assumed evil and says all that was on the site was the phrase "we don't want you here".

    That means the only info was negative. This is a commonly studied human phenomen called "framing" (or something similar). If you give a person very limited info, then they will use that tidbit of info will drastically influence their perception of the question at hand. If it has said something less ominous I'm sure it could have had a better reception. As it was, however, if you only give 1 factoid and the factoid is negative, and there's a countdown - how do you expect people to react?

    -stormin

    --
    The Southern Baptist Convention has creationism. On Slashdot, we have porn.
    1. Re:disappointed people took it the wrong way? by B3ryllium · · Score: 1

      I wonder - if it had said "i love pie." and had a countdown timer, would people have had the same reaction? :)

    2. Re:disappointed people took it the wrong way? by theStorminMormon · · Score: 1

      Definitely. People would have thought it was a countdown until Google release Google Pie - free pies if you promise to read all the advertisements on the box.

      -stormin

      --
      The Southern Baptist Convention has creationism. On Slashdot, we have porn.
    3. Re:disappointed people took it the wrong way? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      I wonder - if it had said "i love pie." and had a countdown timer, would people have had the same reaction? :)
      I, for one, would have started looking forward to welcoming our Weebl & Bob overlords.
    4. Re:disappointed people took it the wrong way? by Jeremi · · Score: 1
      I wonder - if it had said "i love pie." and had a countdown timer, would people have had the same reaction? :)


      I, for one, would have headed for the hills. I know all about the pie apocalypse


      ps Hi Beryllium ;^)

      --


      I don't care if it's 90,000 hectares. That lake was not my doing.
    5. Re:disappointed people took it the wrong way? by pipingguy · · Score: 1

      This is a commonly studied human phenomen called "framing"

      Why do so many sitcoms have laugh tracks? I'd really like to know why.

    6. Re:disappointed people took it the wrong way? by B3ryllium · · Score: 1

      Hey jeremy! Long time no see! Are you still flexing your muscle?

    7. Re:disappointed people took it the wrong way? by IHateChoosingAName · · Score: 1

      So you'd know not to watch them.
      [laugh]AHAHHAHAAHHAHA[/laugh]

    8. Re:disappointed people took it the wrong way? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "He's sad people assumed evil and says all that was on the site was the phrase "we don't want you here"."

      How about a little logic? Ask yourself why do people put up a websites? What's the point of a website that no one wants you to see, and then displays that to the public? If anyone seriously asks that question, they just may think of it as a hoax and/or meant to cause a panic. It's about as inane as mmorpg players putting, "Why are you looking at me?" in their bios.

    9. Re:disappointed people took it the wrong way? by dcam · · Score: 1

      People don't like to laugh alone. Well, except for mad scientists. Most people watching TV are either alone or with few people.

      --
      meh
  23. Lost of Innocence by Hoolala · · Score: 0

    That's called the lost of innocence. If we have lost our innocence, has the terror won?

    1. Re:Lost of Innocence by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You mean "the loss of innocence". Learn your tenses.

    2. Re:Lost of Innocence by Serapth · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Im going to completely ignore the typical grammar nazi posts I could throw in...

      We havent been innocent for a very long time. The Veitnam war was probrably the end of it, and even before that fear played a hell of a big role in our lives ( you know... the whole Cold War thing ). The only thing that has changed since post World War 2 innocence is a greater lack of conformity, the fear mongering was always there.

      Movies are a classic example, horror movies and thrillers specifically. The themes change from generation to generation, but there was always an underlying current. Godzilla representing the fallout of the nucleur era, countless war movies following vietnam, slasher flicks of the 70s and 80s teaching us our normal fellow man may infact be a psychotic killer. But here is an example much closer to home for me( at my age ). Did you every go trick or treating? Was *the fear* ever put into you that you had to inspect all of your candy, because psychos were putting razorblades and poison in them? Ever hear of a single case of that actually happenning? I mean... an actual case of someone you know? No, it was simply media generated hype.

      Yeah, there are sickos in the world, always have been. Thing is, in our 24/7 media coverage generation we get overloaded with stories of pure evil. I have to imagine an immegrant from a war oppressed region of Africa has to look at America's modern day fears and laugh. When our biggest fears are whatever media/goverment generated terror scheme which never actually seem to happen. After that, our fears seem to revolve around meaningless shit like Grand Theft Auto and its murder simulations. To someone who came from a soceity where death was a daily occurance, our fears much seem pretty damned trivial.

      Notice though, the government isnt doing much to curb those fears? Thats simple, a scared population is an easy to control population. Something the current regime seems to have learned exceedingly well.

    3. Re:Lost of Innocence by idonthack · · Score: 1
      Ever hear of a single case of that actually happenning?
      When I was in third grade, one of my friends got a caramel apple with glass in it.
      --
      Why is it that when you believe something it's an opinion, but when I believe something it's a manifesto?
    4. Re:Lost of Innocence by apflwr3 · · Score: 1

      Im going to completely ignore the typical grammar nazi posts I could throw in...

      If you open with that line you should spell check your comment.

    5. Re:Lost of Innocence by Serapth · · Score: 1

      Yeah... I know. I after all this years still have trouble with how primitive Slashdots commenting system is towards making changes.

      Although, in my defence, my errors were mostly spelling, not grammar.

    6. Re:Lost of Innocence by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      We havent been innocent for a very long time. The Veitnam war was probrably the end of it, and even before that fear played a hell of a big role in our lives ( you know... the whole Cold War thing ). The only thing that has changed since post World War 2 innocence is a greater lack of conformity, the fear mongering was always there.


      I would go quite a bit further back than that. There is this biblical story; something about a tree of knowledge of good and evil?

      The Crusades? The Romans? The Greeks? The Assyrians? The Mongols? ...

      We have not been innocent since we left "the garden". I would venture so far as to say that our evolutionary predecessors engaged in guerrilla warfare and terrorism, they just did not intellectualise it, it was a fact of life.
    7. Re:Lost of Innocence by pipingguy · · Score: 1


      I have to imagine an immegrant from a war oppressed region of Africa has to look at America's modern day fears and laugh

      Maybe those who commit terrorist acts are being spoon-fed the worst of American TV as evidence that the US is an evil culture.

    8. Re:Lost of Innocence by Serapth · · Score: 1

      Have you seen The Simple Life, or Sweet Sixteen? I mean, I live here and still consider both those TV shows proof positive we need to be nuked to dust.

  24. Public countdown? by Bromskloss · · Score: 1

    In my days (well), we didn't announce when the bomb was going to blow. I guess times are different now.

    --
    Swedish plasma phys. PhD student; MSc EE; knows maths, programming, electronics; finance interest; seeks opportunities
    1. Re:Public countdown? by the+grace+of+R'hllor · · Score: 1

      According to the evil overlord list, it's not impossible to employ some sort of timing device. If it absolutely necessary to use one, set it to go off at '117', when the hero is just getting his plan into action.

    2. Re:Public countdown? by npsimons · · Score: 1
      In my days (well), we didn't announce when the bomb was going to blow. I guess times are different now.

      In my day, we didn't have timers! You'd be lucky if you got halfway down the street before debris started raining down on you!

    3. Re:Public countdown? by Bromskloss · · Score: 1
      In my day, we didn't have timers! You'd be lucky if you got halfway down the street before debris started raining down on you!
      Yet in my day, you had to manually set off the explosives on site. So you'd strap them around your belly or something and went down in the blow... I guess some people still do it oldschool. Someone should tell them about the advancements of technology... or mabye not.
      --
      Swedish plasma phys. PhD student; MSc EE; knows maths, programming, electronics; finance interest; seeks opportunities
  25. in shocking news by thelost · · Score: 2, Interesting

    people fear what they don't know. Also, what credentials does this guy have beyond being a web designer. i.e., what gives him the guts to carry out an 'experiment' like that and quantitatively derive results from it from an authoritative sociological standpoint? This is practically a myspace joke.

    --
    Promote Charity on Myspace, Show Your Colours!
    1. Re:in shocking news by vertinox · · Score: 1

      Also, what credentials does this guy have beyond being a web designer. i.e., what gives him the guts to carry out an 'experiment' like that and quantitatively derive results from it from an authoritative sociological standpoint?

      Who need credentials? The guy wanted to make a point and it turned out people just overhyped something that could have just been a live action game going on.

      Seriously, he wasn't granted government or college grants to pull this off.

      Heck anyone could have did it. I think he was trying to say that we as a people are being super paranoid to an extend that we look at non-novel events and take them out of context. Its as much as a social expiriment as Andy Kaufman made a tv show that looked like its vertical sync was messed up so people would get up and try to fix their TV while the show was going on.

      He's basically saying... "Hey guys! You just made a fool of yourself and I didn't help you do this one bit!"

      --
      "I am the king of the Romans, and am superior to rules of grammar!"
      -Sigismund, Holy Roman Emperor (1368-1437)
    2. Re:in shocking news by thelost · · Score: 1

      if this was original, exciting and unexpected then it would be interesting. Also, credentials do matter. I'm not going to go to a tramp about my broken leg as readily as I would a doctor at a hospital. There are certain people who are qualified to talk about certain subjects, moreso than others. This doesn't preclude people from talking about a given thing, but I would trust a sociologists take on this more than a web designers.

      If this *sociological* experiment had been carried out by qualified sociologists (I don't know that this guy isn't by the way, but the page says he is a web designer) then it might be worth giving a fig about, but all it seems to be is a poorly thought out project set up by an idealist, who is then surprised when human nature takes its course.

      --
      Promote Charity on Myspace, Show Your Colours!
    3. Re:in shocking news by geekoid · · Score: 1

      great, his experiment wasn't for you, it was for him.

      He performed an experiment, and produced the results. He did not base a new form of socialogy on it,or use it as an attempt to 'debunk' some socialogy therom.

      and using person emergency situation as an anology for something like this is bad for, and a horrible analogy.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  26. Dissapointed by spykemail · · Score: 2, Funny

    I was expecting eternal happiness, I want my HTTP requests back :(.

  27. eon ate my children by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    For the past four months I have had to endure constant harassment from state, federal, and international agents of law. There is nothing left of my children except a small bag of bones, and my phone line and Internet connection have been cancelled. I do not have access to my lawyer, and for the past three days I have had to subsist on mustard and graham crackers. I am determined to fight this through, even if I have to do it from a public library. The best advice I can give is, don't give up. Fight for your rights. They can take away your freedom, they can take away your entire life, but they can never take away your will. There is always a way.

    1. Re:eon ate my children by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      mustard and graham crackers
      Sounds like some new wave diet to me.
  28. Assume the worst? by venicebeach · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It doesn't seem fair pin "assuming the worst" on the viewers of this website. It seems to me that the information that was provided was, given the current context, quite suggestive of something negative. "Deployment"? Who uses that word? It is has a largely military connotation. A map with locations targeted? I don't think people assumed the worst as much as his website implied the worst. Yes, none of these things is direcctly indictivie of a negative act, but they are all highly associated with negative acts in the collective consciousness at this point in history. If it were a countdown to a "birth" of something people might have had a different reaction...

    1. Re:Assume the worst? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Deployment"? Who uses that word?



      Anyone who's even looked at a datacenter from across the street.

    2. Re:Assume the worst? by Bogtha · · Score: 2

      "Deployment"? Who uses that word?

      Er, all sorts of people. Even web developers and software engineers.

      It's just a word meaning "put something in place and get it ready".

      I don't think people assumed the worst as much as his website implied the worst.

      Well yes, it might have implied the worst, but people were still pretty damn stupid to believe it's for real. I'm pretty sure the next person to nuke the world isn't going to put a nice Flash countdown up on the web.

      I did find the website horrifying. Not because I thought something bad was going to happen, but because it demonstrated just how dumb lots of people can be. If anybody thought this was the precursor to some kind of catastrophe, then they belong in a home being looked after by qualified professionals.

      --
      Bogtha Bogtha Bogtha
    3. Re:Assume the worst? by Tablizer · · Score: 3, Informative

      I've noticed a lot of milaristic terms in software development:

      * Deployment
      * Launch Date
      * Work the front lines (help-desk)
      * Upper eschelons (the suits)
      * Strategic Planning
      * Go up in smoke
      * Application crash
      * Callatoral damage (software A that affects software B)
      * Debri (garbage collection not working right)
      * Fallout (when bleep happens and the blame game starts)
      * (more to come....)

    4. Re:Assume the worst? by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      (Correction, should be "militaristic")

    5. Re:Assume the worst? by Minwee · · Score: 1

      * Upper eschelons (the suits)

      echelons, from a French word meaning a rung on a ladder.

      * Callatoral damage (software A that affects software B)

      collateral, from a Latin phrase meaning "both sides".

      * Debri (garbage collection not working right)

      debris, from a French word meaning something that has broken apart.

      * Fallout (when bleep happens and the blame game starts)

      No, that's when bleep happens, Ron Perlman says something about how war never changes, and then one of the greatest games of all time starts.

    6. Re:Assume the worst? by geekoid · · Score: 1

      "I'm pretty sure the next person to nuke the world isn't going to put a nice Flash countdown up on the web."

      Should I be inclined to violent solution(I am not) I would puit a countdown on the internet.
      Then next time I put a countdown on the internet, people will take me seriously.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  29. Lack of Information by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So, people from all over sign hospital papers, docotor consent forms, pay $30 for a gimmic on tv... without reading any of the fine print.. therefore having a costly lack of information. and, it is ok.. but when it comes to someone posting a page on a website with -lack of information - THEN people freak out and think twice and react like this? Seems a little backwards to me.

  30. We want information. by stigmato · · Score: 1

    Number 6: What do you want?
    Number 2: We want information.
    Number 6: Whose side are you on?
    Number 2: That would be telling. We want information... information... information.
    Number 6: You won't get it.
    Number 2: By hook or by crook, we will.

  31. bloody canada day by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It was a count down to the bloody canada day parade that woke me UP!

  32. Re:Worst? What do you mean by that? by vertinox · · Score: 1

    In the absence of valid information during a decision making process it would be foolish not to assume the worst.

    So we are going to go about our daily lives and assume just because we don't have enough information about a web site that we are all going to die horrible ebola related deaths while a nuclear fire rains down on us while nano-bots turn us to grey goo?

    Its like not getting a call from your wife/girlfriend when you expected one and then assuming she was kidnapped, raped, murdered and thrown into a dumpter and you call 911 for help when all along she just left her cell phone at home by mistake.

    Seriously, I thought this thing was viral marketing or a live action game of some sort... Just because a site throws encyrption looking codes and has maps with dots on it does not make a threat to our existance.

    Remember, when you assume the worst sometimes you make the situation worse by either poor health from all that stress, getting fined by the authorities for harrassing them over non-issues, or pissing off your friends and loved ones who think your are a paranoid person who won't give them any space.

    Until you clear cut evidence that something bad is going to or taking place then that is when you need to act on it. Besides it you act on abscene of information a real enemy would use that against you and force you into doing things because you are paranoid and then striking you when you finally let your guard down.

    Example: Boy who cried wolf.

    --
    "I am the king of the Romans, and am superior to rules of grammar!"
    -Sigismund, Holy Roman Emperor (1368-1437)
  33. WRONG TERM by theStorminMormon · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I reference the wrong term. The right term is "anchoring".

    Anchoring or focalism is a term used in psychology to describe the common human tendency to rely too heavily, or "anchor," on one trait or piece of information when making decisions.

    During normal decision making, individuals anchor, or overly rely, on specific information or a specific value and then adjust to that value to account for other elements of the circumstance. Usually once the anchor is set, there is a bias toward that value.


    This article (and more info) found here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anchoring

    Framing, by contrast, is described here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Framing_(economics)

    In any case, experiments that support "common wisdom" (in this case "fear of the unknown") based on bad logic or poor experiment design are just a pet peeve of mine. This is a perfect example of how not to actually perform an experiment.

    -stormin

    --
    The Southern Baptist Convention has creationism. On Slashdot, we have porn.
    1. Re:WRONG TERM by Reziac · · Score: 1

      "This is a perfect example of how not to actually perform an experiment."

      Or perhaps a very good example of what can happen when an experiment is ill-designed (deliberately or otherwise).

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
  34. Experiment? by JohnWiney · · Score: 1

    Doesn't "experiment" implies stuff like theory, hypotheses, controls - all that "science" stuff that keeps getting in the way of good conspiracies?

  35. Success by duh+P3rf3ss3r · · Score: 1

    "Fq2{fbCG cni9 o3hL ?9Q){"

    --
    Give a man a match: warm him for an instant. Douse him in petrol and set him aflame: warm him for the rest of his life.
    1. Re: Success by duh+P3rf3ss3r · · Score: 1

      "Sqi|$y2}'CZ?5dtp^ F'f#,$M"

      --
      Give a man a match: warm him for an instant. Douse him in petrol and set him aflame: warm him for the rest of his life.
  36. Fabulous! by TimTerrific · · Score: 1

    I think this is the most fabulous stunt ever contrived on the Web!

    It points out once and for all how many paranoid freaks there are running free among us.

    Tim

    "You can't cure stupid!"

  37. Select-All on Home Page by repetty · · Score: 1

    Select everything on the home page and look at the bottom. There's a string of characters, which Slashdot does not allow me to post. Anyone know what this is?

    Also, at the bottom of the page (visible) is this:

    IP: 70.17.160.238 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.8.0.4) Gecko/20060508 Firefox/1.5.0.4

    That's not my IP number and I'm not using Windows, I'm using a Mac. Got the Firefox part right, though.

    This _IS_ mysterious... excessively so.

    --Richard

    1. Re:Select-All on Home Page by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In the original page it's generated when you visit it, in the mirror it's a static page so the ip and the user agent is from who capture it.

      PS: Sorry for my english.

    2. Re:Select-All on Home Page by ookabooka · · Score: 1

      That's not my IP number and I'm not using Windows, I'm using a Mac.

      Have no fear, thats just the information from whoever cached the site to a mirror. Its not the actual site itself. And I assume that string at the bottom was just part of the "code".

      --
      If you are about to mod me down, keep in mind that this post was most likely sarcastic.
    3. Re:Select-All on Home Page by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you go to the live page you will see the correct information. By the way the string at the bottom is
      ES-12 212E59531871015634330815FF445708241914870FB310B852 0E3B481EEF164B481B2587212E5953
      1871015634330815FF2807345696693B8194E62BF33E00F353 32EF6E5E932E94696917B3E6581361
      F22044614360930041B22E537E151EB

    4. Re:Select-All on Home Page by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      OMG, check it out!111

      Quite visible in your post is the string:
      IP: 70.17.160.238 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.8.0.4) Gecko/20060508 Firefox/1.5.0.4

      The ker-azee thing is, that's not my IP or operating system!

      WE'RE ALL GONNA DIEEEEEEEEEEEEE!111elevenshifteins

  38. Adsense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Imagine the ad revenue :) Less is more, right? So my hairdresser keeps telling me :)

  39. Another F*ing Hoax by Nom+du+Keyboard · · Score: 3, Insightful
    Just another Internet hoax. Surprised that there are no references to it on Snopes. Don't know about you, but I am sooo tired of attempts to make me part of yet someone else's social experiments. If you want my participation in your project, pay me for it!

    Btw, I could have told you for free that the unknown always leads people to fear the worst. After you grow up a bit more you'll realize that for yourself.

    --
    "It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
    1. Re:Another F*ing Hoax by bar-agent · · Score: 1

      But if they paid you... that would change the outcome. You'd have sub-conscious influences. You know that you can't study someone who knows they're being studied, right?

      --
      i'd hit it so hard, if you pulled me out you'd be the king of britain [bash.org]
    2. Re:Another F*ing Hoax by Just+Some+Guy · · Score: 3, Funny
      If you want my participation in your project, pay me for it!

      How much are you getting paid to participate in this project?

      --
      Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
    3. Re:Another F*ing Hoax by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You sound bitter that you were stupid enough to think that this website was anything other than a waste of time. At least you're not alone.

    4. Re:Another F*ing Hoax by shish · · Score: 1
      If you want my participation in your project, pay me for it!

      Do you also complaing about not being paid to visit slashdot, since they're making money out of you (ad impressions)?

      --
      I mod down anyone who says "I will be modded down for this", regardless of the rest of their comment
    5. Re:Another F*ing Hoax by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What? Who made you participate in this? You're getting pissed off at this guy for something you did voluntarily?

    6. Re:Another F*ing Hoax by Aranth+Brainfire · · Score: 1

      Bzzt, wrong.

      You can't study someone who knows they're being studied, and what about them is being studied.

      Make them think you're testing something else, and there you go.

      --
      "Quoting yourself is stupid." -Me
    7. Re:Another F*ing Hoax by TubeSteak · · Score: 1
      How much are you getting paid to participate in this project?
      I couldn't say.
      CowboyNeal handles my finances.
      He seems to enjoy how I react to a lack of information.

      Oddly enough, he too uses the phrase "we don't want you here."
      --
      [Fuck Beta]
      o0t!
    8. Re:Another F*ing Hoax by bar-agent · · Score: 1

      That depends on what you are actually trying to study. Remember that article about the eyes posted above the coffee jar? People changed their behavior simply because they were (kinda) being observed. Merely being observed is enough to change behavior, even with no stated test purpose at all.

      --
      i'd hit it so hard, if you pulled me out you'd be the king of britain [bash.org]
  40. Terrorism? My ass... by dorkygeek · · Score: 1

    Over here in Europe the do this stuff all the time, but on T minus zero they don't launch a terrorist attack, but a product. And the shady people behind it are not Osamas, but marketing.

    Looks like the goverments have finally won in making people believe in all this terrorist hysteria, just to roll out more laws to give the folks in power even more power.

    --
    Windows is like decaf - it tastes like the real thing, but it won't get you through the day.
  41. Re:Worst? What do you mean by that? by MMaestro · · Score: 1
    Its like not getting a call from your wife/girlfriend when you expected one and then assuming she was kidnapped, raped, murdered and thrown into a dumpter and you call 911 for help when all along she just left her cell phone at home by mistake.

    Actually its more like your girlfriend calling you, yelling 'Help m-' and then hearing the phone being crushed before the line is cut. Then calling her home phone, her workplace and her friends to learn no one knows where she is or whats shes doing.

    Example: Boy who cried wolf.

    Except in some "versions" of the story the boy is killed and eaten by the wolf... Or in the kiddy versions, the wolf eats the sheep/chickens/whatever the kid is supposed to be protecting.

  42. or references to by plopez · · Score: 1

    ill tempered sea bass with lasers on their heads...

    --
    putting the 'B' in LGBTQ+
  43. This is important... by RexRhino · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Put a countdown on a webpage with half-ass myserious writing with nothing explicitly bad whatsoever, and people are willing to take vigilante action to shut it down?

    Right now it is funny because it was designed in a bad spy movie kind of way. But if you did the same thing, with mysterious Arabic writing and music, a world map with locations, and a countdown, I am certain the results would be as bad (or most likely even worse), and the discussion certainly would not be as light-hearted. It turned out not that bad because it was such an obviously contrived thing that people thought it could be an ad for a movie or video game.

    People, nowadays, have such a paranoid lynch mob mentality, it is getting scary. If it isn't terrorists, it is myspace predators, or crystal meth rampages, or school shooters, or bird flu, or whatever other astronomicly unlikely boogyman. Even people on Slashdot, who love to joke "someone think of the children!!!" are starting to become more and more paranoid within the bounds of their political beliefs (people on the right tend to be paranoid about terrorists and foriegners, where as people on the left tend to be paranoid about sexual preditors and school violence... people tend to discount the other guys paranoid fears, while maintaining that theirs are, of course, rational!).

    Is the government promoting the hysteria in order to gain more power? Or is the government just reacting to the popular hysteria of the people? I don't know, but I wouldn't be suprised if we started hunting witches again (real old-school Communists are just to damn irrelevant for some good ol' fashion Red hunting... but the power of Satan is eternal!). Is there some ergot growing in our wheat supply nowadays that is causing people to lose their minds? Is it all that floride in the water? Cosmic rays? What the hell is going on?

    1. Re:This is important... by Oligonicella · · Score: 1

      Where did you get that "people are willing to take vigilante action to shut it down"? Hacking could have been just to see what was there.

    2. Re:This is important... by Jeremi · · Score: 1
      where as people on the left tend to be paranoid about sexual preditors and school violence


      I think people paranoid about those things are called "parents", and they come from all parts of the political spectrum. Us people on the left tend to be paranoid about the abuse of power by large corporations and the government... with a good deal of justification. After all, if you had walked up to me 10 years ago and told me the American government would openly condone torture, or invade a foreign country for no rational reason, I would have said you were nuts...

      --


      I don't care if it's 90,000 hectares. That lake was not my doing.
    3. Re:This is important... by DigiShaman · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Is there some ergot growing in our wheat supply nowadays that is causing people to lose their minds? Is it all that floride in the water? Cosmic rays? What the hell is going on?

      That's a very good question. Just what the hell is going on? Well, I've been thinking about this social symptom of hysteria for quite some time (years actually) and I think I may have an answer

      I would postulate the problem stems from social stress and the breakup of the plutonic family structure. I mean, sure we have a mother and/or father. What I'm talking about is the social bond with your family and relatives. Seriously, how many of you on Slashdot maintain those close ties to them and/or siblings. Hell, how many of you even have a "best friend" and not just some jokers you hang out with?

      I'm being very serious. The social communal system has fractured big-time in western civilization. Honestly, I'm not sure if and when the pendulum will swing back the other way.

      --
      Life is not for the lazy.
    4. Re:This is important... by Aranth+Brainfire · · Score: 1

      You do realize that people have been saying this, almost exactly, for hundreds of years?

      --
      "Quoting yourself is stupid." -Me
    5. Re:This is important... by Elemenope · · Score: 1

      And, oddly enough, it has become more true with each generation (at least in the most recent few centuries). Divorce rates, never higher. Family size, never smaller. Long distance families, never more common. So, some alarmists misjudged the failure point of the system by an order of magnitude or two; this doesn't mean they were incorrect about the general causal mechanism!

      --
      All the techniques ever used to make men moral have been themselves thoroughly immoral... (Nietzsche)
    6. Re:This is important... by wilec · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The foundation for none of this is new, most of it has been around since people started sharing caves. Most of it has roots in our territorial animal natures. Survival of ones genes meant as it still does providing for and protecting ones self and ones offspring from nature and other people. The same instincts that allowed us to survive to this point are still in effect. The threats are still here, the details have become more complex and in some cases of a slightly different nature or requiring different types of reactions. So much is, as I said initially, the same as always. In the end a lot of it is about the ability to control of ones life.

      I do suspect that the amplitude and frequency of many of these issues is trending dramatically upwards in the last 50 years or so. I think a lot of it is driven by the massive increase in information available today, both in volume and speed of update. In addition the world is in a period where the growth of specialized knowledge and thus new information is growing faster than ever before. There is also the same type of increase in the rate of technological, social and economic change in the world today. These are areas where one can make the statement that today is different the past and it not be anthropic. The rates of change in the general information available, technological, social and economic evolution in the world viewed on a graph with the history of mankind have went from a nearly straight gradually rising line to almost perpendicular in the last century, even more so in the last half. Yet in many ways we are the same instinctive creatures we have been for tens of thousands of years or more. The environment we live in however is changing in ways that make if more and more difficult to control some aspects of our lives and thus our instinctive fears arise. I believe this is the primary cause of the issues you are concerned about.

      I also think a lot if it recently, at least in the USA is getting worse because the politicians and pundits are using the issues at hand in dramatic and divisive ways. This seems to be so whether we are talking about global warming or gay rights. I think that the original intent of many politicians and pundits were to use these issues divisively in an objective methodology for their own gain. However these politicians and pundits are subject to many of the same instinctive pressures as everyone else and I suspect the drum beats from opposing views are tending to drive each other faster and harder in a vicious cycle.

      From what I an see from my own situation and attitude, watching those I know well and my observations of the general population via the news and such I make the following very general observations. Keep in mind that I realized there are many shades of gray in these very general observations.

      Those on the right tend to get upset by things of a sexual nature, this seems to me to be about loss of control of others primarily the opposite sex and children, thus loss of control of their own lives through proxy. Many seem to get upset about what they see as their rightful resources(money) being wasted on what they consider the undeserving(the idle poor). Many of those on the right seem to be especially fearful of things and people alien to the specific cultural background in which they were raised(example:foreigners).

      Those on the left tend to get upset by things of a privacy nature, this seems to me to be about loss of autonomy, of having to conform to others expectations of what is proper, thus loss of control of their own lives directly. Many seem to get upset about what they see as their rightful resources(money) being hoarded by those they see as undeserving(the idle rich). Many of those on the left seem to to be especially fearfully over any type of potential violence(example:guns).

      I could go on but I won't tonight. Like I said before I realized that individuals cannot be classified this cleanly. For instance I consider myself very much a Liberal and I consider the right to bear arms as very

    7. Re:This is important... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      crystal meth is a serious problem that afflicts a proportionally high amount of people in rural areas. in a town of say 500 or 1000, 5 or 10 people using/distributing meth would constitute a rather high number. i don't think its fair to lump dangerous illicit drugs into the same category as the rest of the list.

    8. Re:This is important... by jc42 · · Score: 1

      People, nowadays, have such a paranoid lynch mob mentality, it is getting scary.

      So how's that anything new? Even the slightest investigation shows that we've always had people like that. The only thing special here is that /. mentioned it, so we're discussing it.

      Hereabouts (Boston), we have the documented Salem incident as a reminder. A few teenage kids made up a tall tale, and rather than a serious investigation, you had the authorities rounding up the innocent victims and killing them in public spectacles; the kids themselves were horrified at the whole thing but didn't have the nerve to admit publicly that it was just a prank.

      Of course, this case is exacerbated by what's now a well-known phenomenon: As soon as the word "computer" is uttered, all precedent and history is thrown out the window, and people have to relearn from scratch the lessons they've known for millenia.

      Is the government promoting the hysteria in order to gain more power?

      Well, of course they are. That's one of the oldest tricks in the books. The Bush gang plays it to the hilt. But it's hard to find an administration anywhere that doesn't do this any time they think they can get away with it. For that matter, it's also one of the main techiques of marketers: Remind the marks (aka customers or citizens) of a scary, fuzzily-defined problem, and present your product as a solution.

      As long as people react as they have to this site, we can trust that people who want power will take advantage of the reaction in the obvious way.

      --
      Those who do study history are doomed to stand helplessly by while everyone else repeats it.
    9. Re:This is important... by mjkjedi · · Score: 1
      where as people on the left tend to be paranoid about sexual preditors and school violence
      I think people paranoid about those things are called "parents"
      Meanwhile, I'm paranoid about people on the left, people on the right, and parents...
    10. Re:This is important... by tehcyder · · Score: 1
      if you did the same thing, with mysterious Arabic writing
      then 99% of web users would not be able to read it
      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
  44. Plenty of people have done similar things by istartedi · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The one that Slashdotters might remember is the Transmeta website.

    The of course there is Ginger, which was the Segway, which is just an expensive scooter.

    When I lived in Charlottesville, VA there was a several month campaign of "the connosiers are coming". When they came, it was a "club" where you paid a flat fee and got discounts at local restaurants.

    The pattern with this kind of thing is that it's always anti-climactic. The same thing goes for song count-downs on the radio. Oh. Stairway to Heaven wins again. Even when that doesn't happen, whatever song does win is always a letdown. I think it's just human nature. It always seemed to me that David Letterman's 3 or 4 was funnier than the number 1 on his top ten. Was that on purpose, or is number 1 always a let down? I guess the way to test that would be to have Letterman tape several versions of his top 10, show them to different audiences and ask them if they thought number 1 really belonged. The problem with that is that "delivery" is an important part of comedy, and I suppose that "deliver" is an important part of other information too. In other words, "metadata" is "data" or as an earlier generation used to say, "the medium is the message". In this case, the guy just transmitted nothing but metadata, and I think the results were not too surprising. In the absence of data, people attach the metadata to the context, in this case, our current climate of paranoia and fear provided the context.

    --
    For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
    1. Re:Plenty of people have done similar things by Reziac · · Score: 1

      Something in your post reminded me of this hoary campfire tale:

      The phone rings, and you hear a heavily-accented voice saying, "I am der vinder viper, I'll be there at nine o'clock!" And then it hangs up.

      An hour later, you get the same call, the same voice, the same terse message.

      This goes on all day long, every hour on the hour... by nine o'clock you're a nervous wreck, and then there's a KNOCK AT THE DOOR... ...and the voice announces, "I am der vinder viper. I've come to vipe yer vinders!"

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
    2. Re:Plenty of people have done similar things by mnbjhguyt · · Score: 1

      When I lived in Charlottesville, VA there was a several month campaign of "the connosiers are coming". When they came, it was a "club" where you paid a flat fee and got discounts at local restaurants.

      gabbo! gabbo! GABBO!!

    3. Re:Plenty of people have done similar things by mgblst · · Score: 1

      Was that on purpose, or is number 1 always a let down? I guess the way to test that would be to have Letterman tape several versions of his top 10, show them to different audiences and ask them if they thought number 1 really belonged.
       
      Write that up as a proposal, and you can apply for a $100,000 grant from your uni.
       
      And I can't imagine a song count-down where Human Nature comes out on top.

  45. Experiment? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    HAH! The evil aliens ALWAYS say that!

  46. Something funny by cnerd2025 · · Score: 1

    I'd like to set up something like that, except on the day of "deployment" have a big header reading, "ALL YOUR BASE ARE BELONG TO US". Also, the guy says his name is Mike, not Chris.

  47. count down to canada day by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is just another piece in the vast canadian consipracy (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0285470/)

  48. Psychological Experiment Site by SonicSpike · · Score: 2, Funny

    Here is a site which tests your subconsciousness with regard to hypnotics!

    http://r33b.net/

    All Glory to the Hypnotoad!

    --
    Libertas in infinitum
  49. Troll response by A+nonymous+Coward · · Score: 1, Offtopic

    The problem with the classic libertarian view, as you have expressed it, of taking personal risk, is that the vast majority of the financial risk I take is not personal at all; it is out of my control. I have no control over the investment market, and what little knowledge I can obtain is unreliable at best. In other words, I can't take any personal responsibility for my investments. The so-called free market is controlled by huge conglomerates whose owners are not well known and whose goals, both short term and long term, are invisible to just about everybody else.

    When the US becomes a truly capitalist society with no robber barons and monopolists biasing the risk in their favor and limiting my options to rigged investments, then I will be more than happy to have Social Security disappear. But as long as the fat cats rig the system in their favor, I am just as happy to have them finance the social safety net.

    1. Re:Troll response by theStorminMormon · · Score: 1

      Your concept of investment is too narrow. Investing in your education counts. As does acquisition in goods (e.g. real estate).

      The so-called free market is controlled by huge conglomerates whose owners are not well known and whose goals, both short term and long term, are invisible to just about everybody else.

      This is conspiracy theory nonsense. The free-market is not controlled. What do you even mean by "free market"? The stock markets? Which ones? With or without real estate markets? This is just a nonsensical statement.

      But as long as the fat cats rig the system in their favor

      Show me some evidence that this is true. Even a little bit. Even a tiny smidgen.

      And, finally, keep in mind that EVEN IF YOU DO my MAIN POINT was just the illogical position of the sig. Even if all you say is true it does not follow that one person should have the right to force their neighbors to help get out of if. That is my point. Not Europe vs. the US, not the nature of free-market capitalism vs. the US economy.

      Before we get on tangents at least acknowledge that you're not responding to my actual point, please.

      -stormin

      --
      The Southern Baptist Convention has creationism. On Slashdot, we have porn.
    2. Re:Troll response by dorkygeek · · Score: 1

      Even if all you say is true it does not follow that one person should have the right to force their neighbors to help get out of if.

      You seem to miss the point of social safety. It does not simply force YOU to help others out, the system is mutual. I.e., should you find yourself suddenly down on the ground, you will get help too. That's the beauty of it: you may have to pay for others, but in exchange you can live a calm life yourself, knowing that you will get help as well if you should once need it. Oh, and apart from that, nobody's keeping you from investing in whatever you think will once pay off.

      --
      Windows is like decaf - it tastes like the real thing, but it won't get you through the day.
    3. Re:Troll response by Omestes · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Goodbye mod points...

      This point is missed in the modern tech savvy libertarian geek. They want a system that benefits their immediate greed, their future and everyone else be damned. I really can't think of any other reason than greed that anyone would support such an untenable and intangible ideal.

      Civilization is doomed to be imperfect, and unfair. Social security tries to evens this out a bit. I have a feeling that most people who are against it have never been down and out, or poor, or rendered incapable of work. I have a feeling that they really don't care that 90% of America is two paychecks away from the streets, meaning if they loose their job for two measly weeks their in a world of hurt and debt, of no fault of their own. Sure they could have invested, but this precludes the idea that they had excess capital to begin with. Its hard to invest money when your living paycheck to paycheck, and fighting off the debt of raising a family or paying off a mortgage on a wage that is grossly inadequate for any standard of living.

      Adventures in capitalism is only for the rich. And a hugely vast majority of us aren't wealthy by any means, of no fault of our own. Not all of Americans have good paying tech jobs, but it seems that some people can't escape from their own position to see how other people live, and are far too egotistical to see that helping others is our responsibility, especially since we have the means to do so.

      This is going to get modded to oblivion, isn't it? The anti-slashbot POV.

      --
      A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government. -edward abbey
    4. Re:Troll response by theStorminMormon · · Score: 2, Insightful

      This is going to get modded to oblivion, isn't it? The anti-slashbot POV.

      Get over yourself. There's a strong libertarian streak, but there's also plenty of "america sucks, capitalism is evil" types running around.

      Two points.

      1. My original point was simply this: I don't think you have a right to force someone else to invest in a safety net. Period. I'm well aware that a social security net would benefit both, but if you notice the sig I was replying to stated something to the effect of "if you don't want a net you can splatter on the ground, but I want my social security". Since social security is an everybody-in or everybody-out proposition, the sig in question is just assinine. THAT was my point.

      2. You write: I have a feeling that most people who are against it have never been down and out, or poor, or rendered incapable of work.

      You're wrong, in my case anyway. I have been poor. I'd say 5 kids in a double-wide trailer with barely enough money to keep food on the table day in and day out is poor by American standards. Social security did squat. My mother-in-law recently had to quit her job to continue her 18-year battle with breast cancer. She gets social security. It's such a pathetic amount it's an insult. It does squat for her.

      Studies have shown that increasing the value of food stamps x% can increase poverty by 3 or 4 times as much (in %).

      And finally studies also show that the vast majority of Americans who are poor manage to work themselves out of it. I'm not quoting all my "studies show", and I apologize for that, but I'll at least link you on this one: http://townhall.com/opinion/columns/thomassowell/2 006/02/08/185448.html

      So what's my point? Social security is ineffective and largely unnecessary. It's more impotant to have a vital economy that creates jobs than to have a handout that can't even pay the rent.

      People extend as much effort as they think they have to - no more. The more paternalistic (or nannyish, take your pick) the gov't becomes, the more people will 'need' that support.

      I say let's operate on a minimalist approach to gov't welfare. Private organizastions tend to do a much better job of it anyway. The gov't should be the last resort - not a full-service stop for people who are either genuinely in-need or just lazy or somewhere in between.

      -stormin

      --
      The Southern Baptist Convention has creationism. On Slashdot, we have porn.
    5. Re:Troll response by jdavidb · · Score: 1

      That would be an awesome and cool argument if the fat cats were financing the social safety net instead of you and me.

    6. Re:Troll response by rpdillon · · Score: 1

      Well, as a tech-savvy libertarian, I take exception to your remarks. =)

      For me, it is really a question of what role the government should play in a society. I heartily believe that lots of people, through no fault of their own, will be "down and out" from time to time. The world *is* imperfect. However, I do not believe it is the government's job to remedy this. I believe that charities and non-profits are a much better means to that end, and that they should get standing as such from the government for tax purposes.

      Indeed, if you spend much time at all working in government programs, you too would want to minimize the number of things the government runs, especially things you care about. Government tends to be one of the least efficient means to the ends we seek because they can simply hemorrhage money with no impact to the workers allowing it to happen...government is an inherent money sink, so there are no incentives to be efficient. This wouldn't be such a problem except that the money they are wasting is coming directly out of the pockets of those who need it.

      My opinion in this regard has nothing to do with my lack of empathy for some other social class, rather, it has to do with my desire for a solution that will actually work to help those in trouble get back on their feet in a way that is sustainable. I do disagree that it is the rich people's (or the government's) responsibility to help the disadvantaged (the jury is still out on whether I feel this way because I am egotistical, as you suggest). Your use of the word "responsibility" is disturbing to me, because that does not equal "money" in my mind, but actual real responsibility (time, attention, money, use of my house, etc.). The only people to whom I have real responsibility are my close friends, wife, and family. If you are suggesting that rich people should simply throw money at the problem, I would be disappointed. Indeed, as the homeless blogger mentioned in one of his recent posts, he suggests that you not give money to homeless people, but rather stop what you are doing, get to know them, figure out what they need (even if they don't know what it is), and then provide it to the best of your ability. This kind of effort takes a lot more than money, and from the perspective of how "rich" people are, the distribution of wealth is a lot more uniform among people for this type of wealth than it is with monetary wealth.

      Here in San Diego there is an awesome non-profit that employs the homeless to help other homeless people get back on their feet. It offers them responsibility, pay, and a chance to build a track record of doing good work and being responsible so they can move up and do more challenging work if they desire.

      I am not a strict libertarian, however...I align with libertarians because I object to our culture of "another law will fix this problem!", which tends to simply produce criminals, rather than solving the root problem. We need to incentivize the populous to do the right thing, rather than dis-incentivize them from doing the wrong thing. They may sound like the same thing, but they are worlds apart. But that is a discussion for another time. =)

    7. Re:Troll response by A+nonymous+Coward · · Score: 1

      If you actually believe that there are no monopolists and conglomerates who bias investment risk in their favor, then you are so naive that nothing will open your eyes, and I am not going to try.

      Your argument that I have no right to force you to contribute to my safety net is more of this blinders attitude. You just don't get it. When the fat cats control finances and make it impossible for me to take ONLY my share of the personal risk involved, then I will find some other way to fix things, and that way is the secial net. I am tired of my risk being at their whim, and if the ballot box is the only recourse I have, then so be it.

      When the fat cats stop biasing the risk in their favor, I will stop biasing my votes in my favor. If this offends you, take some responsibility yourself, get out on that campaign trail, educate the fat cats as to the long term harm you see, and get on with life. Stop whining about the little people trying to get back some control of their lives. After all, that is what it is all about. The fat cats have taken control of everybody's lives in order to eliminate risk to them, and that is the abdication of personal responsibility that you ought to be decrying. Picking on the little people for getting back a small bit of control is pathetic.

    8. Re:Troll response by A+nonymous+Coward · · Score: 1

      Really? Then why are the fat cats leading the charge to destroy social security? Altruism?

    9. Re:Troll response by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 1

      You need to name some names, or at least cite some examples. Repeatedly referring to 'the fat cats' makes you sound like you're quoting from some 1930's socialist leaflet. Who are these 'fat cats'? Can you cite a few credible examples?

    10. Re:Troll response by killjoe · · Score: 2, Insightful

      "I say let's operate on a minimalist approach to gov't welfare. Private organizastions tend to do a much better job of it anyway."

      Didn't we have that at one time? Social security is a relatively new invention as are medicare, medicaid, etc. Apparently minimal govt thing wasn't working so well and private enterprise wasn't providing enough so we invented social security.

      We don't like in a vacuum you know. There is a rich history of mankind without social benefits. Not only that but today, right now, there are governments which provide little or no retirement benefits. Why don't we look to see if people are better off in those countries then they are in the US or other countries which provide even more social benefits.

      That's the beauty of internet and modern communications. You can actually look things like this up rather then accept on faith that private enterprise would take care of people or that people who live in countries with no social benefits are richer, happiers, live longer, are better educated, and all around better off.

      No need for faith or zealotry. Just look it up!

      --
      evil is as evil does
    11. Re:Troll response by jez9999 · · Score: 1

      get out on that campaign trail, educate the fat cats as to the long term harm you see

      Hi Mr. Fat Cat, you know, that mouse and cream would really benefit society MUCH more in the long term if you shared them out, you know.

      Face it, the only way to cut down on fatcats is to remove their money and power by FORCE. Then put a system in place that, whilst still capitalist, has a lot more power to prevent people getting uber-wealthy. For the good of society.

      I sound like a socialist, but i'm still right wing by most European standards.

    12. Re:Troll response by jez9999 · · Score: 1

      I believe that charities and non-profits are a much better means to that end, and that they should get standing as such from the government for tax purposes.

      You seem to be forgetting that many charities are very inefficient. People here are quite annoyed at how much was wasted on 'wages' for charity workers when they donated toward the DEC to help with the Indonesian tsunami.

    13. Re:Troll response by jez9999 · · Score: 1

      The Waltons, owners of WAL*MART.

    14. Re:Troll response by identity0 · · Score: 1

      Well thanks a lot, you assholes, for taking my perfectly good joke post and turning it into a insightful discussion! Don't you know that's not what you do on Slashdot?!

      Anyways, as far as the first poster goes, the sig could mean something along the lines of "America - love it or leave it" bumperstickers. You can avoid social security, you just have to leave the country :P

      The argument that you shouldn't force others to spend on gov't programs is not really useful. Sure, you could have opt-in taxation, but since the gov't is supposed to be doing things that are not doable or profitable to private parties, and which benefits society as a whole, that will only give people a way to shirk responsibility.

      A similar argument could be made about public education. You could go to private school, and never have kids, meaning you would never directly benefit from public education. However, the society as a whole benefits, and you do indirectly from the labors of the people educated by the system. Now imagine if there were no public education or vouchers, and only the rich or charity cases could be educated. That would be a terribly uneducated society.

      Your second argument boils down to "America has a shitty social safety net, so let's not have one." America's system does not really reflect the usefulness of a social safety net. I've never heard anyone from western Europe or Canada, or even Australia say, "I wish we had America's level of social security." The fact is that we have terrible coverage of medical and financial hardships. If we wanted to talk about the usefulness of social securty, the question we should be asking is "How come ours isn't as good as Britain or Canada's?"

    15. Re:Troll response by Omestes · · Score: 1

      First, thank you for the civil and rational tone, I've noticed that when I get into this debate I, at times, end up with some silly ad hominem thrown at me, or some odd dogmatic responce, instead an actual thought out answer.

      Government tends to be one of the least efficient means to the ends we seek because they can simply hemorrhage money with no impact to the workers allowing it to happen.

      As it stands, this is absolutely correct, but I think it is more because of a climate of apathy and complacence, than because of an inherent flaw in government welfare. As you state, there is no impact on the administrators who squander tax dollars, and this is true in more than just welfare programs. I think they should be culpable, and I think this is an easier fix than completely revamping the system. Shake things up, eliminate the consiquences of 60 years of the Peter principle.

      The only people to whom I have real responsibility are my close friends, wife, and family.

      On this I completely disagree. I think that we all have a responcibility to the society in which we exist, mostly due to the fact that this society (and thus its members) allowed us to be in the position or means to even allow help. To be shorter, if it wasn't for society allowing you to gain wealth (or free time), you wouldn't have. Second, due to factors (either ignorance, ego, or just apathy) most people of means DON'T help, and wouldn't even if the mitigating factors were eliminated. Look at the civil donations and philanthropic gestures by one of the most heavily wealthy, and libertarian, areas of the US, silicon valley. In modern society there is a general lack of community or humanitarian spirit. Its impossible to disagree that your responsibility is MUCH greater for family (and even friends) than some random welfare mother, but I think there still is a level where it should be obligitory since you can't expect people to do the right thing on their own.

      I could get much more into responsibility. But I will avoid philosophy for a moment. But in short, we do have a degree of ethical responsibility for those less fortunate (of our society or no). And the role, in part, of government is the care of the people, by definition.

      I agree with your last paragraph completely (except of course the libertarian, even quasi-libertarian part). I don't presume to know a solution, when I was younger I did, but it seems the older one gets the more ambiguous things become. I used to even be a social libertarian (I can't stand the uber-capitalism economically), but even the implications of a Lockean/Millsian view of rights break down eventually. But, as you said, that is another story.

      --
      A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government. -edward abbey
    16. Re:Troll response by theStorminMormon · · Score: 2, Interesting

      OK, I fell for that one.

      THe old trick where someone makes a statement (X) and I reply with "Not X" and then get hit with "what, you don't believe Y? you must be retared"!!

      You're a clever one alright.

      You said that conglomerists, monopolists, etc. controlled the market. I said they did not. Now you are claiming that they bias investment risk in their favor. That's the sme thing to you is it? "Contol" and "bias risk"? And I'm naive?

      Stop whining about the little people trying to get back some control of their lives

      I'm "whining" about little people who try to get control of my life, you dolt. You may have this weird pyschological disorder that makes you think a bunch of obese felines are pulling the strings in your life - but I should not have to be legislated into playing a role in your own demented fantasies.

      "The market" is not something that can be controlled. Look at how many "fat cats" lose ther shirt from one year to the next (I'd direct you to sources, but the site hosting the article I want appears to be down). And look how many regular Americans make it from rags to riches (e.g. prety much every single tech company founder). Yes - in this chaos the CEO of a 500 billion dollar compan has exponentially times more power than you do. And if you try to go head to head wih his company you'll end up with your ass in a sling - at best. But the idea that the "fat cats" are somehow united in the cause of oppresion is absurd. They're all doing the best they can for themselves and you are essentially jaded. That's it.

      You want to cut your nose off to spite your face. What you don't understand is that your high standard of living is the DIRECT result of "fat cats". The drive, the passion, and yes sometimes the greed of these empire builders is what has made America thrive.

      It comes to this: any effort to "make things right" for the little man benefits a congolmeration of people who've had a run of bad luck, people who are too stupid to make it big, and people who are too lazy to make it big. This is achieved at the expense of the ones who - for the most part - know how to create wealth for themselves and others. Everybody gets a more equitable slice of the pie but the pie gets smaller. Capitalism leaves things alone. The pie gets A LOT bigger. Enough safety nets are put in place to provide an absolute minimum for those who need the help.

      The fat cats have taken control of everybody's lives in order to eliminate risk to them, and that is the abdication of personal responsibility that you ought to be decrying. Picking on the little people for getting back a small bit of control is pathetic.

      You're just raving at this point. I really wish you could hear yourself. You ARE the crazy-eyed guy on the subway grabbing people's lapels and telling them the end is near. Your argument is nothing but ad hominem. Please, tell me what the hell the word "fat cat" means to you. It's like these people aren't human to you. THey are are alien overlords. And also tell them what on earth you mean by "they have taken control of everybody's lives". Look at Africa man. The warlords, the starvation, the chaos. That's what life looks like with out the fat cats. Look at feudalism or theocracies. That's where we came from. What are these mysterious freedoms that have gone by the way side and when in history did we have them?

      I'll take you as more than a deranged lunatic when you can answer those two questoins.
      1. What is a "fat cat"?
      2. How, precisely, did they gain "control over our lives"

      -stormin

      --
      The Southern Baptist Convention has creationism. On Slashdot, we have porn.
    17. Re:Troll response by theStorminMormon · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Apparently minimal govt thing wasn't working so well and private enterprise wasn't providing enough so we invented social security.

      Yes, it was a time called the Great Depression. The name should indicate it was an emergency, and Social Security was an emergency soluion. Where's the emergency now?

      Why don't we look to see if people are better off in those countries then they are in the US or other countries which provide even more social benefits.

      Because it makes far more sense to look at how American private organizations work. Other nations have other cultures, other infrastructure, other politics, and other economies. So whatdo you think we could really learn from such a comparison?

      -stormin

      --
      The Southern Baptist Convention has creationism. On Slashdot, we have porn.
    18. Re:Troll response by theStorminMormon · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The argument that you shouldn't force others to spend on gov't programs is not really useful.

      But that's not my argument. There's a difference between gov't programs and re-distributing wealh. Gov't programs are like nat'l defense and publich libraries. Social security is about taking money from some people and giving it to others. The useful value of money, from a societal standpoint, is that it encourages people to be productive, etc. This erodes the utility of money to society at large. The incentive to work hard and be productive is diminished, the incentive to be a parasite is increased every time we richen wealth re-distribution benefits. It's bad for America.

      I've never heard anyone from western Europe or Canada, or even Australia say, "I wish we had America's level of social security." The fact is that we have terrible coverage of medical and financial hardships. If we wanted to talk about the usefulness of social securty, the question we should be asking is "How come ours isn't as good as Britain or Canada's?"

      Hahahaha. This is a matter of experience. I think I know a prety good amount about the UKs system because my mother is British and her family still lives there (Ipswich and London). Right now her grandfater is going through what should have been a routine sugery. Thanks to UKs state medicine it's turned into a nightmare. I can't tel you how many times my mother (she's over there right now) has told me "if only the lived in America!"

      The reason America has bad health care has nothing to do with gov't programs. I know what I'm talking about here because my job is an analyst in the insurance industry. First of all, you have to point out that from the standpoint of sophistication America has the absolute best medical care in the world bar none. If you need cutting-edge medical care, you come to the US (yes, yes - IF you can afford it). Also - everyone in America has free access to this care on an emergency basis. E.g. emergency rooms can't turn you away (or refuse to roll out the expensive stuff) if you show up with a bullet in you or something like that.

      Where American medical care falls down is accessibility of non-emergency care. And the main problem here is the rising cost of health care. But what most people dn't realize s that the cost of health care is rising just above inflation on a per-unit/service basis. The reason insurance premiums are going up by double-digit inflation has one cause: utilization.

      1. Starting in the 80s health insurance changed from insurance to subsidization. Insurance is when you pay x dollars and then if something catastrophic happens you get 1000x dollars (or whatever). Insurance does NOT mean you pay $150 a month (or whatever) and then get to have MD visits for $25, or tier 3 drugs for $30 a month. But in the 80s that's whay the designed into insurance - copays and other routine utilization subsidies. Well guess what happened. At $10 a visit (instead of say 100) people went to the MDs more than 10 times as much. Combine this with marketing from big pharma and EVERYBODY is on ritalin, prozac, etc - at subsidized prices. If you pay $150 a month for insurance and get $200 a month in benefits from routine care guess what - the price goes up.

      The final problem is our elderly population. They use health care like you wouldn't believe I'm talking like 12 visits to primary care physician every year on average! They need more care than young folks, they have more time on their hands, and they're living longer and longer.

      This is why Europe's state health care system is a bad, bad bad idea. It takes all the problems American health care has, hides them under high taxes and low payments (the low payments make the problem WORSE) and the result? Rationing at best, total failure at worst. Give it time. Decades, maybe. The system is designed to fail.

      In America, on other hand, we're trying to use the laws of capitalism to make the system get better. When is medicine ca

      --
      The Southern Baptist Convention has creationism. On Slashdot, we have porn.
    19. Re:Troll response by GreyWolf3000 · · Score: 1

      Yeah, but I think the parent was arguing that responsible, hard working citizens don't *need* Social Security.

      I won't argue whether or not that is true. I think we can all agree, though, that those who are willing to invest in their own retirement have room to be a bit irked about having to shoulder the financial burden brought by those who don't make the best choices.

      Not saying that justifies throwing out Social Security, but it is an understandable sentiment.

      --
      Slashdot: Where people pretend to be twice as smart as they really are by behaving like children.
    20. Re:Troll response by killjoe · · Score: 2, Insightful

      "Yes, it was a time called the Great Depression. The name should indicate it was an emergency, and Social Security was an emergency soluion. Where's the emergency now?"

      Why did the great depression occur if private enterprise was so great? Maybe the great depression occured BECAUSE there was a weak govt and private enterpise ruled the day. Every think of that?

      "Other nations have other cultures, other infrastructure, other politics, and other economies. So whatdo you think we could really learn from such a comparison?"

      Political theories should be robust enough to compensate for cultural differences. Any political theory that says "this will only work in america" is useless and should be disregarded. Those are people, they are not animals, they are not aliens. They have the same types of motivations as all other humans do.

      Nice dodge though. At least we narrowed your argument about the supremecy of the private enterprise to just the US.

      --
      evil is as evil does
    21. Re:Troll response by Rich0 · · Score: 1

      Why did the great depression occur if private enterprise was so great? Maybe the great depression occured BECAUSE there was a weak govt and private enterpise ruled the day. Every think of that?

      Well, the problem wasn't so much that private enterprise ruled the day, per se. The problem was that information on the stock market was largely restricted to insiders. Today private enterprise still rules the day, but the SEC is far more powerful (did the SEC even exist in the 20's?).

      The problem is one of extremes. In the early 1900's companies didn't follow standardized accounting practices, and the market was highly manipulated. Today market information is fairly well regulated. As a libertarian I'd say that this is a good thing - laws to prevent fraud are perfectly valid. There might be cases where they can be simplified, but the free market only works right if everybody has the same access to information - otherwise you have big investors robbing corporations to line their own pockets, at the expense of smaller investors.

      There are many cases where government regulation is important, but not to the extreme we have today. On the one hand we don't want the lack of quality that used to be widespread in the manufacture of pharmaceuticals back at the start of the 20th century. On the other hand, today people don't even have the right to purchase drugs without the permission of a doctor - even if the drugs are well made and well-labeled with regard to effects. Likewise, the drug development process is so expensive due to testing requirements that the market is limited to a handful of companies, and they have found that the market is such that investment in marketing is more profitable than investment in R&D (due to the huge cost - a dollar in R&D doesn't get you much more product, but a dollar in market share does get you more market share). If the testing requirements were relaxed while the quality requirements were maintained, the result would be a more open market for new drugs, and vastly diminished costs. On the other hand, far less testing would be done, and doctors would not have as much information regarding the effectiveness of various drug products. However, this might be a good place for the NIH to step in and do comparative studies - the cost will still be high, but one study might be able to cover more drugs and would likely to be more impartial and test for answers to questions that pharma manufacturers might not want to ask.

      Society is capable of functioning with far fewer regs than it has today - and while this might restructure the costs of running society overall it probably will still lower them. Speaking to social security - back before the depression people didn't retire at all unless they were rich - they worked until they died or were disabled. The disabled were relatively few in number, and if they couldn't find a job they were often cared for by churches and neighbors (back then people actually talked to their neighbors - but then again there was no cheap long-distance travel, so who else would you talk to?). Back then the poor were definitely poorer, but there were probably fewer of them. Working poor were a bigger issue - this was back before unions put an end to horrible work conditions. This is one issue I do have with libertarianism - in theory it is nice to think that people should be free to enter into any contract that they wish, but then that would include even slavery or indentured servitude. These systems have always been a major source of abuse.

      The problem with social nets of any kind is abuse - they reward those who do not work. That might include those who are just down on their luck. However, it also includes many who could work, but don't. And the cost to society is huge. On the other hand, such system do tend to make society more "fair" - defined as a more similar level of wealth across society - at the cost of a smaller total wealth for everyone. As long as humans are selfish the poor will be neglected more than the

    22. Re:Troll response by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I just don't know where to start, Stormin, but I'll try...

      The incentive to work hard and be productive is diminished, the incentive to be a parasite is increased every time we richen wealth re-distribution benefits

      So we can incentivise the population not to become ill?

      I think I know a prety good amount about the UKs system because my mother is British and her family still lives there (Ipswich and London).

      I've lived in the UK for 37 years and have been treated by the NHS many times in that period.

      Thanks to UKs state medicine it's turned into a nightmare.

      One anecdote does not an argument make. The NHS is far from perfect, but there are many, many more cases of it treating people just fine, than of it sawing off the wrong leg. Oddly "I got great service from government funded organisation" doesn't make the news.

      I can't tel you how many times my mother (she's over there right now) has told me "if only the lived in America!"

      That may be fine for your family, but the point of the argument is that this would not be true for everyone. As a poor man I'd prefer my chances in the UK, and yes I have been to the States many times.

      The reason America has bad health care has nothing to do with gov't programs. I know what I'm talking about here because my job is an analyst in the insurance industry.

      So America has bad healthcare?

      from the standpoint of sophistication America has the absolute best medical care in the world bar none

      Ah no, America has the best and most sophisticated healthcare (yay! you're number one!), but not everyone gets to sample this goodness, so therefore the system is bad?

      The reason insurance premiums are going up by double-digit inflation has one cause: utilization.

      Well that may be the reason within an insurance-based system. However as you work in the insurance industry you might not see that the insurance industry itself could be bad for a country's healthcare.

      The final problem is our elderly population

      Same is true in the UK, probably across Western Europe as a whole.

      This is why Europe's state health care system is a bad, bad bad idea. It takes all the problems American health care has

      Um, no. No it doesn't. Specifically it is free at the point of delivery. That's *better* than the US system as everyone can get treatment without worrying about the cost.

      and the result? Rationing at best, total failure at worst

      Where is there rationing in the UK healthcare system? What are you basing this allegation on?

      Give it time. Decades, maybe. The system is designed to fail.

      It's certainly under strain from the cost of drugs and the rising elderly population. It's not designed to fail though.

      You could be right, the UK's NHS may die in a few decades, we may see that it is us, not the US, that have been mistaken in our approach to healthcare.

      Who knows? Maybe it'll take a century of universal good quality healthcare with no crippling insurance premiums that is free at the point of delivery for us to realise. How stupid will we feel then?

    23. Re:Troll response by killjoe · · Score: 1

      "Perhaps some form of social security is needed, but the current form just doesn't work for the majority of recipients (or payers)."

      Once again you make outrageous statements based on some sort of religious conviction. What do you mean doesn't work? If the majority of recepients didn't like it they would not fight so hard for it and they would fight to change it. Maybe in your world recepients of social security don't interact with society and are not happy with SS but in my world that's just not true. Everybody I know who is on social security feels like they deserve every bit of what they got because they paid into it while they were young. They supported their elders and now it's your turn to support them.

      "The problem with social nets of any kind is abuse - "

      The problem with anything is abuse. The problem with corporaritism is abuse, the problem with police is abuse, the problem with liberterianism is abuse, the problem with courts is abuse, the problem with the military is abuse, the problem with govt is abuse, the problem with parents is abuse, the problem with schools is abuse, the problem with traffic is abuse, the problem with parking is abuse. Yes you can abuse anything. Just because you can abuse food that doesn't mean you should never eat.

      --
      evil is as evil does
    24. Re:Troll response by Rich0 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Once again you make outrageous statements based on some sort of religious conviction.

      Uh, what would be my prior statement? This is my first comment in this thread.

      What do you mean doesn't work? If the majority of recepients didn't like it they would not fight so hard for it and they would fight to change it. Maybe in your world recepients of social security don't interact with society and are not happy with SS but in my world that's just not true.

      Oh, they're happy alright. They just shouldn't be. In my opinion the purpose of socialism is to act as a safety net for those who are either unlucky for a time, or are disabled in some fashion. Therefore, the ultimate goal of any socialist program should be to try to get people off the program entirely. The best way to do that is to integrate recipients into society with payers - thus allowing them to network for jobs, develop skills, and hopefully appreciate the fact that there is a better way.

      Everybody I know who is on social security feels like they deserve every bit of what they got because they paid into it while they were young. They supported their elders and now it's your turn to support them.

      Now, this is by far the worst possible use for social security - as a retirement plan. If you want to save up for retirement, just do it - you'll save far more privately than with social security. Also - current recipients did NOT support their elders to the degree that they want to be supported - just look at a chart of life expectancies vs time - their elders died much younger than they will. The first generation of recipients didn't support anybody - the last generation of payers won't get supported at all. Yup, it is grossly unfair - but reality nonetheless - all we're doing right now is debating whether the last generation of recipients has already passed, is about to pass, or will pass 10-20 years from now before the system collapses.

      The problem with anything is abuse.

      Agreed - and social programs that have no plan on getting people off of them are inherently abused. Again, I didn't call for a ban on social programs, just a reworking. Social programs should always seek to help enable their recipients to become independant, to whatever degree that this is possible. For some this may never happen, but integration with society should still be pursued. Nobody will resent somebody who is severely mentally handicapped for not paying in more than they take out. Those who are able-bodied/minded, on the other hand, should be encouraged to work.

    25. Re:Troll response by killjoe · · Score: 1

      "Oh, they're happy alright. They just shouldn't be. In my opinion the purpose of socialism is to act as a safety net for those who are either unlucky for a time, or are disabled in some fashion. Therefore, the ultimate goal of any socialist program should be to try to get people off the program entirely. The best way to do that is to integrate recipients into society with payers - thus allowing them to network for jobs, develop skills, and hopefully appreciate the fact that there is a better way."

      Yes, that's a nice opinion. Congratulations on having such a nice opinion. Really, I admire your opinion.

      "Now, this is by far the worst possible use for social security - as a retirement plan. If you want to save up for retirement, just do it - you'll save far more privately than with social security"

      I am tired of arguing this. Look there are places in the world where there is no social security. During most of the history of the US there was no social security. During most of the history of mankind there was no social security.

      Why don't you point to either a place a in the world where there is no social security or some time in history where there was no social security and explain to me how those people were happier, healthier and wealthier then we are. In other words why don't you present some evidence that lack of social services leads to a more prosperous evidence.

      --
      evil is as evil does
    26. Re:Troll response by Rich0 · · Score: 1

      In other words why don't you present some evidence that lack of social services leads to a more prosperous evidence.

      I'm not arguing that a lack of ANY social services leads to a more prosperous society. Even if this were so, there are no nations to look at out there which have first-world economies that lack social services. Perhaps a good contrast would be the US/Europe - where social services exist to varying degrees. Overall, the US is clearly more prosperous despite spending 1000 times as much on its military.

      Comparing the modern US to that of the early 1900s is not possible - besides the creation of social security we've also had tremendous reforms of employment law, securities law, and the general advancement of education, technology, and medicine.

      Yes, that's a nice opinion. Congratulations on having such a nice opinion. Really, I admire your opinion.

      However, it is an opinion that has the potential to create better lives for everybody - including those who are down and out. The opinion that homeless folks are better off with jobs than living on the street might be resented by some homeless people, but it doesn't change the fact that they would be much more comfortable not freezing to death in the winter.

      Social programs are really a matter of liberty. They only work if those with means are compelled by force to provide for those without means. Any use of compulsion should be kept in check - this is why the draft is a bad idea (if a war is worth fighting, then folks will volunteer). This is why the Berlin wall was a bad idea - sure, keeping in prosperous people was better for the communist dream and all that, but it was a horrible affront to personal liberty. In general we need to be careful in our power to tax - it shouldn't be used for social engineering.

      Then again, I suppose my desire to have freedom to spend the money I earn in the manner in which I choose is also just an "opinion"... Guess what - all ideas start as opinions...

    27. Re:Troll response by killjoe · · Score: 1

      "Even if this were so, there are no nations to look at out there which have first-world economies that lack social services."

      Maybe that tells you something.

      "Perhaps a good contrast would be the US/Europe - where social services exist to varying degrees. Overall, the US is clearly more prosperous despite spending 1000 times as much on its military."

      What is your criterea? Surely the US could be even more prosperous if it enslaved half of it's population and made them work for free. Let's see your measurements and decide based on evidence if people are better off in Europe of US.

      "However, it is an opinion that has the potential to create better lives for everybody "

      It's just an opinion. Sorry. I am just not interested in opinions.

      "hen again, I suppose my desire to have freedom to spend the money I earn in the manner in which I choose is also just an "opinion"..."

      Yes, everybody is selfish, everybody wants to take and never give. That's human nature. Human beings have had thousands of years of experimenting with how to live with each other and liberterian option has never worked. In the end we always have to resort to living in societies where we have to overcome some of our selfish desires for the greater good.

      But hell if you know of a society anywhere in the world or any time in the world where people kept all their money and the society actually stayed around for more then a year or two I am all ears. Evidence would be nice.

      --
      evil is as evil does
    28. Re:Troll response by Rich0 · · Score: 1

      It's just an opinion. Sorry. I am just not interested in opinions.

      Well, you sure seem to be on the wrong website then... :)

      What exactly were you looking for here? You certainly don't mind sharing your opinion...

    29. Re:Troll response by killjoe · · Score: 1

      "What exactly were you looking for here? You certainly don't mind sharing your opinion..."

      Simply put I am sick and tired of people sprouting off the same memes over and over again even though there is no evidence for their pet theory whatsoever. Religion is one of these, liberterianism is another.

      Liberterianism doesn't work. It never has, it never will. It's a silly collection of "theories" based on no evidence whatsoever. There is no difference between saying "if the govt stops social security then everybody will be better off" and saying "if I put this crystal on this printer it will heal the circuits and the printer will work". Both are based on complete myths.

      Show me one successful liberterian culture or society in all of human history. SHow me one study that shows that countries with no social programs are better off then countries with. SHow me one study that even correlates the median salary, rates of disease, rates of poverty, rates or crime, life expentecy, infant mortality, or any other measure of citizen happiness with a lack of social services.

      It's fine if that's what you believe, lots of people believe in silly things based completely on faith. I am trying to understand why you have those beliefs? Is there some evidence someplace that I haven't seen yet?

      --
      evil is as evil does
    30. Re:Troll response by Rich0 · · Score: 1

      I think the fundamental issue is one of freedom. Even if it doesn't benefit society as a whole at all, an argument can be made for libertarianism on the basis that it allows for greater freedom - this is in itself a benefit to society.

      Any time you collect taxes you are infringing on the freedom of people to spend their money how they will. Now, to some degree taxes are necessary, and there are things like infrastructure which are natural monopolies where a government is the best form of administration. Likewise, there are externalities like national defence where everybody benefits and therefore everybody should pay.

      Can I prove that people should have the right to spend money how they will? Of course not! I can point to societies that are socialized to the point of communism and the resulting carnage (no incentive to work, brutal use of government force due to the involuntary system of economic control, imprisonment of entire populations to prevent people from fleeing to "less progressive" nations).

      Socialism is just a limited form of communism - and as a result it is subject to many of the same problems, although to a lesser degree. This is why it must be carefully regulated and reigned in - lest it get out of control to a degree that nations can't afford it.

      Last time I checked the concept that people are endowed by their creator with inalienable rights was just an opinion as well. If you want solid proof the only thing you'll find is that the group with the biggest guns gets to write the rules - by this logic it doesn't matter which side is right or best, just which side is more motivated to use force and has it in the greatest quantity.

    31. Re:Troll response by geekoid · · Score: 1

      the system will not collapse.

      Republicans(meaning the party line) have been saying that since it was created, for one reason or another.

      The people who study it, i.e. the experts, say it will need minor adjusting from time to time, but will hold.

      Beasr in mind, it was not, is not, and never has been designed to complety subsidize for all your needs.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    32. Re:Troll response by killjoe · · Score: 1

      "I think the fundamental issue is one of freedom. Even if it doesn't benefit society as a whole at all, an argument can be made for libertarianism on the basis that it allows for greater freedom - this is in itself a benefit to society."

      I call bullshit on both counts. Human beings learned very early on that without claws, scales, wings, thick hide, and horns they had to band together in order to survive. Banding together means giving up some freedoms and learning to live in a community to advance the community as a whole. This is why tribes were formed, this is why cities were formed, this is why countries were formed. It's the only way to organize that is proven to work.

      Your brand of freedom leads to death.

      As for all your claptrap about communism and socialism then I say put your money where mouth is.

      1) Show me a statistical correlation between the any of the criterea I mentioned for happiness (longevity, wealth, infant mortality etc) and the degree of socialism.
      2) Show me at least one liberterian culture anywhere or at any time in history that was able to exist for more then X number of years (let's say 10 to be nice even number).

      Simple really. If your theories are correct then there should be a clear correlation between the amount of socialism in a country and the happiness of those citizens. You should be able to draw a chart and make it obvious to anybody.

      I think I can make a chart that shows that MORE socialism in a country makes for better citizens, healthier babies, greater median income, less poverty, and a more desirable place to live pretty easily. Can you do the same to support your opnion?

      Freedom is a great word, in this context it's meaningless. You don't get to have freedom fromt he laws of phyics, you don't get to have freedom from mathematics, you don't get to have freedom from nature.

      You should stop using the word freedom, the word you are looking for is liberty. Liberty is freedom from the govt.

      --
      evil is as evil does
  50. names? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    RTFA. Chris ermm Mike?

    Whats going on here?

  51. For Crying out loud! by Captain+DaFt · · Score: 1

    I ran across the Eon website in In February, and didn't give it another thought.
    In fact, I'd completely forgotten about it until all the hype yesterday on the web.

    Why? Because the gloating, tease you in advance criminal mastermind type that pulls that BS is found only in cheap comic books and novels.
    It's the type of plot development that's only taken seriously by 12 year old mentalities.

    Geez, if that kind of thing is taken seriously these days, prepare for terror!
    http://www.delta-green.com/
    http://members.shaw.ca/csstrowbridge/Tulzscha/Main Page.htm
    http://www.whatisdeepfried.com/zogg/zogg1.html
    http://www.cantonweb.com/procrastinators/
    and finally:
    http://r33b.net/

    Run for the hills! BOOGA-BOOGA!
    Or, grab some ice cubes, and chill out alrady!

    --
    The U.S. really needs an English to Wisdom dictionary.
    1. Re:For Crying out loud! by pedalman · · Score: 1
      Why? Because the gloating, tease you in advance criminal mastermind type that pulls that BS is found only in cheap comic books and novels. It's the type of plot development that's only taken seriously by 12 year old mentalities.
      Or people who get WAY too involved when they watch "24" in Mom's basement.
      --
      Friends don't let friends line-dance.
  52. From the explanation by Frightening · · Score: 1

    The most I can tell you is I am a 23 year old web designer from Florida named Mike. I can't narrow it down anymore than that. When I say 'we', I really mean 'me'.

    But he never said we. Aha! Tongue slip!

    1. Re:From the explanation by Zaatxe · · Score: 1

      Just a few examples:

      "We were amazed to discover..."
      "We picked Eon 8 because Eon 9 was already taken."
      "We didn't know about..."
      "We didn't know how long..."


      Sorry!

      --
      So say we all
  53. July 1 is Canada Day! by Easy2RememberNick · · Score: 4, Funny

    All Canadians (minus a few militant Quebecers I suppose) were counting down the days to July 1 anyway since it's our nation's birthday! ...insensitive clods!

  54. Deployment? by ImaLamer · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Sure, the first four Google results on "deployment" are military sites, but the fourth is Microsoft talking software deployment. http://www.google.com/search?q=deployment

    Why must you assume the worst? Sounds to me like bad marketing hype. Did you think Ginger (the Segway) was a new thermonuclear weapon? This guy could have been pushing a PC game or a new type of potato chip.

  55. eon8 is for the new bond film by Ayanami+Rei · · Score: 1

    It's some Viral Marketing group associated with MGM. Chris is a paid misinformant who will do anything to keep everyone interested for when the news breaks "for real".
    There used to be links on YTMND and Wikipedia but I can't find them anymore since "Chris" came out; everyone's jumping on the "it was a social experiment" bandwagon. Anyone have old links? There used to be a thread on 4chan, shoulda FUKKEN SAVED it.

    --
    THIS THING CAN TURN ON A DIME, MACROSSZERO STYLE ALSO FUCK BETA, ~NYORON
    1. Re:eon8 is for the new bond film by Zorque · · Score: 0

      Um, have you read what was posted on the site after the time ran out?

    2. Re:eon8 is for the new bond film by Ayanami+Rei · · Score: 1

      Yes. And that it's just misdirection.
      They've still got the media attention. They're being "hacked". Oh boo hoo (right).
      The Casino Royale trailers aren't out yet. I wouldn't be surprised if they show up on eon8 before http://www.apple.com/trailers/ or whatever.

      --
      THIS THING CAN TURN ON A DIME, MACROSSZERO STYLE ALSO FUCK BETA, ~NYORON
  56. Let's see... by LaurieDash · · Score: 1

    Let's see how many whores, who after seeing the amount of traffic this page has got do the exact same thing but with google click ads on the page aswell. I don't think it's going to be quite as widespread as all the milliondollarhomepage immitations though.

  57. Downward Spiral by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

    Anyone who's disappointed to learn that "ignorance makes fear" has hallucinatory expectations.

    The human condition is underwritten by the negative cycle:

    Ignorance -> Fear -> Anger -> Violence -> Destruction -> Nothingness -> Ignorance

    When we learn something outside that cycle, greed has a chance to motivate us to learn, create and obtain. That humans have done so much else outside negative cycle shows how much there is to learn, and how flexible we are.

    --

    --
    make install -not war

  58. And all this time I thought by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    that it was a countdown to the release of Duke Nukem Forever.

  59. Absence of Information by inode_buddha · · Score: 1

    Why didn't he just ask? Is he truly so cynical as to believe that there are no truthful humans within the scale of his test? If so, I *pity* his lame ass. Of course, you need to actually live through such things while making life-changing decisions with large amounts of sodium pentothal to actually grasp this.

    --
    C|N>K
  60. Number 1 is supposed to be a letdown by Draconnery · · Score: 1

    Just to back you up - I once read an interview with one of Letterman's writers, who said exactly what you have suggested about the Top Ten Lists. The best of the 10 is almost always between 2 and 5. IIRC, he talked about the drumroll and the whole hoopla about #1; it would be a waste to save the best laugh for last. Makes sense, there's a whole lot of noise going on after the countdown ends, when they're showing the graphics and everything. You can actually hear the audience laugh after Dave reads #3.

    I have no point to make about the website in question. I am sorta annoyed at this guy's self-importance in deciding to run a social experiment with no method at all. But anyway, you're right, it would've been hard for Chris/Mike to live up to most expectations after a successful interest-raising marketing campaign.

  61. Hahaha by paulmer2003 · · Score: 1

    Its funny that so many people made such a big deal out of this. I was talking to this one guy on IRC who was paranoid about it - he thought it was going to attack him (lol). There was even a #eon8 channel made on EFnet..Around a hour before it went to 0, it got flooded to hell. I dont understand why people got so worked up about it..

  62. A "Social Experiment" Huh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Turns out, it was just an experiment by a 23-year-old guy named Chris from Florida who wanted to see how people would react to an absence of information, and he was disappointed that people expected the worst...

    Yeah, because we all know just how trustworthy people online are, and how they never exagerate things or just post some stupid shit pretending to be scared.

    I have read comments from people of this type, and they were not really being that serious. Does he actually know the communites and posters he is seeing these comments from? How does he not know that some of those being experimented on know it is some "game" and they are being watched, but pretend to go along and are just pulling his leg? As for me looking at the thing in its last hours, it came off to me as some laughly bad & crummy viral marketing campaign, and I am sure I am not the only person to treat it as one.

    I don't doubt some people fell for it or were actually concerned, I also just don't see how he can be "surprised" with the outcome if he was the one giving these puzzle pieces & is responsible for "things get out of hand"(most ARGs seem to keep things under control/on-track). For me it came off as some blah hacker/tech game, but I guess from what was featured(the "mirror" of the current state was no help, so I have no reference point to see where...) some people could see a terrorist connection with the image(which, IMHO, this whole thing would be stupid thing for real terrorist to do, which is why I wrote it off as an ARG).

    1. Re:A "Social Experiment" Huh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why don't you just admit your an idiot for falling for it. The way you try to cover for yourself makes you sounds like their biggest fan.

  63. He works for ABC. This is just a "Lost" promo. by ScentCone · · Score: 1

    Yup, "eon8," "Dharma Initiative," same thing.

    --
    Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
  64. AHHH by abscissa · · Score: 1

    Jesus I am embarassed to find this on the front page of Slashdot. It kept showing up on Digg but... for this to make front page on Slashdot??

  65. Canada Day by Qwavel · · Score: 1

    I thought it was a countdown to Canada Day (July 1st)?

  66. Re:Worst? What do you mean by that? by hazem · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Actually its more like your girlfriend calling you, yelling 'Help m-' and then hearing the phone being crushed before the line is cut. Then calling her home phone, her workplace and her friends to learn no one knows where she is or whats shes doing.

    Something like that practically happened to me. My girlfriend had been living in Paris for a few weeks and on the day she was leaving Paris for another town, I get this phone call. It wakes me up at 4:00AM. It's international, her cellphone, and all I can hear is what sounds like a lot of scuffling and some muffled cries and then the phone goes dead. This was shortly after that girl got kidnapped and killed while on the phone with her boyfriend.

    I tried calling her back on her phone with no luck. No answer. I tried her old apartment.. disconnected. I kept calling. No luck.

    I started going through ideas in my head - what could I do? Call the Paris Police? And tell them what?

    I kept trying to call her cellphone.

    After about 30 minutes, she answers with a perky, "Hello?"

    Turns out her phone was in her purse and the send button got pushed while she was running for the train and she didn't know about it. The cries were a child in the same cabin she was in. That's the story she told me, anyway.

    But, it's a big feeling of helplessness to think someone you care about is in trouble and there's really nothing you can do.

  67. Too funny by iminplaya · · Score: 1

    It reminds of the Simpsons episode where Lisa finds an "angel" buried near a mall that was under construction.

    --
    What?
  68. Unkown codes ? by DrYak · · Score: 1
    Codes could mean anything. Would the DHS take the risk of these codes being communication between hostile agents


    Slashdot posts are full of spelling error. This could be a pure random patern, this could be a complexe steganographic way to store informations to launch terrorist mayhem on the american people. Would the DHS take the risk of these code being communications between hotile agents ?
    They better capture all slashdot subscribers and send them to some out-sourced torture facility for more in-depth investigations about those suspictions.

    and possibly ending up with another PR desaster of "why didn't you see that major terrorist attack coming?"? Especially since the DHS seems to have a budget surplus they must get rid of*?


    Especially since this time, the DHS is getting warning from other intelligence organisation from all over the world telling them that there's a high probability that this spam is comming from terrorists ?
    --
    "Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
  69. This was all BS by EvilBrak89 · · Score: 1

    Everything according to the Web 2.0 generation is a virus. Everything with a map of the world and faux MD5 is terrorism. Everything with a Javascript countdown timer is the apocalypse.

  70. You've been hoodwinked! by dR.fuZZo · · Score: 1

    Mike/Chris wants you to think that this was no big deal. Just a social experiment. Nothing to be concerned about. This is a lie!

    In fact, the 6 month timer was a countdown to when Mike/Chris would release a pirated MP3 of Monty Python's Always Look On the Bright Side of Life. The FBI has been notified.

    --
    -- dR.fuZZo
  71. It doesn't matter by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 1

    The point is this isn't "no information" as he implied, it was a spific amount of limited information, that was likely to produce a result, the one he got. If the site really had no information, it probalby would have been ignored. For years my site contained only one thing on the front page a :P in a large, red, font. Essentially it was just something to have other than the Apache "this guy hasn't configured his site" page. I had no central site it was just a domain for e-mail and for holding pictures and things like that. Unsupprisingly, people paid it no mind. There was no information so they just ignored it. They saw it for what it was.

    However this sit was filled with information, just incomplete information. It was designed to implicate something. That people started assuming there was something behind it is unsupprising.

    It's like if you show people videos of car crashes, but splice audio of really hard car hits and phrase your questions to imply speed such as "What speed do you think the cars were going when they slammed in to each other?" you shouldn't be supprised if people pick up on the implication they were going fast and over estimate speed. Though you never directly said anything, you biased the results trhough imlication.

    Also, with your Segway thing, you'll notice many people were able to correctly riddle out that it was some kind of transportion, hence the Southpark episode.

  72. Our security isn't slack... by Khyber · · Score: 1

    I think our security's god - just the people responsible for maintaining it are growing weary of this "terrorism" bullshit. And I do not mean the higher-ups, I mean the lower-end people, the grunts. They probably are getting slack, not to mention sick of this crap.

    --
    Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
  73. Art of War by Tablizer · · Score: 1

    Paraphrased ancient Chinese philosophy: "Don't waste your efforts on war when it is easier to fuck with the enemy's head."

  74. No subject by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We want your information We will do what we must But not here or in front of people or on the phone

  75. Keep watching... by Pedrito · · Score: 4, Funny

    Keep watching this number: 58

    When it reaches 0, you're in for a big surprise. Just keep watching....

  76. We deploy daily... by C10H14N2 · · Score: 1

    Personnel to the field...
    Servers to production...
    Applications to servers...
    Software Updates...

    A day doesn't go by that someone doesn't "deploy" something.
    Hell, I "deploy" about 75 times per day during testing.

    We're deploying ten new sites around the country next week and yes, we have a map...on a big board...and lots of precious bodily fluids.

    1. Re:We deploy daily... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But do you drink Vodka?

  77. Social Experiment. by zippthorne · · Score: 1

    Oh really. A social experiment. It wasn't just some jackass trying to ruffle a few feathers, but a bona fide experiment complete with research, a hypothesis, control groups, isolating variables, and meaningful results published in a peer-reviewed journal?

    --
    Can you be Even More Awesome?!
    1. Re:Social Experiment. by belg4mit · · Score: 1

      My theory is you're a dumbass, and this reply is the test.
      It's an experiment whether or not it gets published by the APA.

      --
      Were that I say, pancakes?
    2. Re:Social Experiment. by zippthorne · · Score: 1

      It's not an experiment. It's a practical joke with results. The experimentor had no hypothesis, had done no research, and did not make any attempt to even classify the variables involved, let alone control or mitigate them.

      All this guy did was deliberatly antagonize people, then made fun of their responses. Heck, he didn't even address the ethics of deliberately experimenting on people.

      --
      Can you be Even More Awesome?!
  78. Well... by bakunyu · · Score: 1

    I'm a little dissapointed that the article states "led many people to believe this [eon8] was an imminent terrorist operation or a massive virus to be unleashed on the web-surfing public" but forgets to mention that many people out there tought it was an ARG (Alternate Reality Game) or just viral marketing, we are not all paranoid freaks with tin foil hats ;)

  79. Fast Times... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This reminds me of the Vernor Vinge story "Fast Times at Fairmont High."
    Some kids tracking the curious movements of scientists think they've stumbled on the secretive beginnings of a marketing campaign for a new movie. That sort of thing being common in the story's universe.

    On a different note, one can imagine low-budget terrorists using a scheme like this to scare the crap out of people.
    Throw up a page with a countdown and some pictures of prospective targets in, say, New York City. Or pictures taken from prospective detonation/release points.
    Maybe add a second counter denoting how far the weapon is from being delivered before use. Drop a few more pointed hints. Throw in some information about the target or its security that isn't secret but also the average Joe doesn't know.
    Then nothing would happen and only the most paranoid would take these pages seriously afterwards, until the day one counts down and a bomb goes off.

  80. Beaumont-Hamel!! by Chaotic+Spyder · · Score: 1

    Don't froget to exclude the Newfies and their Beaumont-Hamel Memorial.

    --
    Losers whine about their best, Winners go home to fuck the prom queen
  81. Totally downsized... by Xytheril · · Score: 1

    You mean I sat up all night trying to decode those messages for nothing? Man. I was hoping it would open a portal to hell and kill all stupid people at each of point on that map or something like that. I thought the whole "This must be a terrorist attack" angle that I saw on various sites was hilarious, especially since there haven't been any terrorist attacks in this country in almost five years. Can a website which unintentionally invokes fear in the stupid be labelled as a terrorist attack in itself?

  82. I use "deployment" daily in my job. by syukton · · Score: 1

    "How is the server deployment coming?"
    or
    "Did we initiate deployment on the new software upgrades?"

    Deployment has different connotations to different people. To me it means "organized distribution" and is subject-neutral.

    --
    Reinvent the wheel only at either a lower cost, greater effectiveness, or your own personal enrichment and satisfaction.
  83. huh I must live in a hole. or have a life by /dev/trash · · Score: 1

    first I heard of this eon8.

    1. Re:huh I must live in a hole. or have a life by hawfizzle · · Score: 1

      same.

  84. And where's the deedle deedle deedle? by wsanders · · Score: 1

    And everyone knows that on a true Black Ops Website, the text streams out one line at a time at 30 cps, and goes "deedle deedle deedle".

    --
    Give a man a fish and you have fed him for today. Teach a man to fish, and he'll say "WHERE'S MY FISH, YOU IDIOT?"
  85. pshaw! by foreverdisillusioned · · Score: 1

    We "accidentally shot" a guy 41 times for reaching for his wallet. I've yet to see that kind of dedication out of you Brits.

    1. Re:pshaw! by popeguilty · · Score: 2

      We shot at him 41 times and hit him 19 times at a range of about fifteen feet, with Diallou doing nothing but crumple to the ground under the hail of gunfire. 19 out of 41.

      It's that combination of persistance, psychotic violence, and incomprehensible incompetance that really seems to define America.

    2. Re:pshaw! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We shot a man for carrying a table leg. I think we're about even.

  86. Just a social experiment, huh? by Caspian · · Score: 1

    Yeah, let's hear him pull that line on the Department of Homeland Security. ;)

    --
    With spending like this, exactly what are "conservatives" conserving?
    1. Re:Just a social experiment, huh? by Shadyman · · Score: 1

      You mean before or after they send him to Guatanamo Bay?

  87. I know what the countdown was for it was a... by Lomak · · Score: 1

    ...countdown to being Slashdotted.

  88. Now is just the second half of the experiment.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...to see how people, who thought the countdown was a prelude to bad things happening, react. Of course, it appears to be equally predictable:

    "Oh, it was just a social experiment."
    "What a stupid website!"
    "Well that was a poorly performed experiment because..."

    I'm still looking for a "I was wrong" or "I should not have been so paranoid" admission...

  89. My version of this experiment by noidentity · · Score: 1

    "The purpose of this project was to determine the reactions of the internet public to lack of information."

    Here's my mini-version of this experiment:
















  90. Please, Remain Calm. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Please, Remain Calm.

    - this is the worst thing you can say to a person... the person will automatically assume that something is wrong, and will NOT stay calm...heheeh

    test with a friend.. out of the blue come to him an say "please, remain calm". he will freak out.. trust me.. I tested it..

    so, lack of information makes people anxious and nervous...

  91. cowards by fredouil · · Score: 1

    "he was disappointed that people expected the worst" American are totally framed by their administration and medias to be afraid of everything, they are becoming completly coward and ready to kill everyone to fell safe. they surrendered very dangerous

  92. Wikipedia and the CIA probably never visited. by Netsnipe · · Score: 2, Interesting
    "All of this, along with some apparent recorded visits by US military and intelligence computers."
    I can't believe how many people took that and ran with it imagining some grand conspiracy that was never there. Eon8 had a live feed of HTTP referers, so some one probably thought it'd be a great joke to spoof a visit from the CIA and the Pentagon which isn't hard at all considering there's even Firefox extensions that can do it for you.

    And the fun keeps on going now that the Wikipedia article for Eon8 has been nominated TWICE for deletion resulting in much flamage and sock puppetry by the SomethingAwful and YTMND crowd.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_fo r_deletion/Eon8_(2nd_nomination)
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_fo r_deletion/Eon8

    --
    -- "I can't tell the future, I just work there." -- The Doctor
  93. LOL Trolls, but if this is really legit.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ok, I'll bite. Why don't you just admit you'RE a retard, and really don't want to believe that there are those of us who just laughed off the pathetic thing?

    Using your tactics, why don't you admit to being the author of this failed & flawed "Social Experiment," and you want to turn those who didn't fall for it into victims?

  94. Grammar by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    > school shootings, anthrax, and gays some how destroying traditional marriage

    Somehow, I'm not quite sure how school shootings & anthrax destroy traditional marriage?

  95. Re:Worst? What do you mean by that? by mrleinad · · Score: 1

    As a matter of fact, your girlfriend has been abducted and replaced by an android that told you that nothing happened. She is going to kill you as soon as she completes her mission, which is very, very secret...

    --
    Mr. Leinad
  96. Henry Gale by sesshomaru · · Score: 1

    I never entered the numbers, I never pushed the button.

    --
    "MIT betrayed all of its basic principles."
  97. You're pretty funny by A+nonymous+Coward · · Score: 1

    Anyone who claims to not even understand who the fat cats are is pretty starnge, not for believing that, but for thinking others will believe that he believes that.

    Anyone who claims that the fat cats don't have a lot more control over society than the thin ones is incredibly naive. People who have 8-5 jobs simply don't have the control over their lives that the bosses do, and the higher up the food chain, the more control. Trying to blame this on the peons is ridiculous. There will always be more peon jobs than boss jobs, that's just the facts of life. The trick is to prevent the bosses from trampling on the peons, whether directly (union busting) or indirectly (buying congress critters). That's why the current occupant wants to destroy social security and why so many peons have raised such a vote stink that most of those who privately want to destroy social security are keeping their mouths shut.

    It's a hoot how you come up with such naive positions and think anyone will actually believe that you believe them. I like this thread. Keep on keeping on, brother, you are a breath of putrid air to enliven the day, and you too shall disappear in the breeze.

    1. Re:You're pretty funny by theStorminMormon · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Anyone who claims to not even understand who the fat cats are is pretty starnge, not for believing that, but for thinking others will believe that he believes that.

      No, I'm serious. Is Bill Gates a fat cat? Warren Buffet? Steve Jobs? How about my grandfather. He owned his own business and it was worh over a million. Now my uncle owns it, and it's probably 2 or 3 times as valuable. Are they fat cats? What about my boss? He and his two buddies started a company that now makes revenues of about 1.5 million annually. Are they fat cats? It is owners or CEOs or board members? Are self-made men and women excluded? How about inventors who get rich? What about lottery winners? How about those who inherit wealth?

      I know exactly what the idea of a fat cat is. But that's just an idea. I want to know how you would map that idea onto reality. Calling me strange for wanting you to be specific in your rhetoric isn't going to make your arguments sound any less childish.

      Anyone who claims that the fat cats don't have a lot more control over society than the thin ones is incredibly naive.

      You're typing, so you must be literate, but this comment makes me wonder. Go read my post and tell me where I said rich people don't have more power than poor people in the markets. I believe the term I used was that they had "exponentially" more power. Maybe that word was to big for you?

      Anyway - I eagerly await the transformation of your hot-air rhetoric into an actual argument. In the mean time I'd urge you - as a peon - to work on not being a peon instead of becoming a powerful peon. While all these self-declared victims are whining about how poor and mistreated they are, I'm just going to go make shit happen. You could do, if you were more intersted in working for youself instead of trying to get handouts.

      -stormin

      --
      The Southern Baptist Convention has creationism. On Slashdot, we have porn.
  98. Give credit where credit is due by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Slashdot is by far the greatest social experiement of the 20th and 21st century...

  99. Re:Worst? What do you mean by that? by rbarreira · · Score: 1

    And you too, for having revealed the secret now...

    --

    The AACS key is NOT 0xF606EEFD628B1CA427BEA93A9CA9773F
  100. eh? by abstrak_tokatl · · Score: 1

    i never even heard of it.

  101. I wouldn't waste my time by N3wsByt3 · · Score: 1

    I've had these discussions before with these types, and while some are interesting, most are just...well, let's call them blind self-made philosophers, to be kind.

    I never had a satisfactory answer yet, from these ultra-capitalistic libertarians (I consider myself to be a libertarian too, though mostly as civil libertarianism is concerned). My question is, much as yours (it's a quite logical thing, after all): if an economic libertarian model is so great for the majority of the people, like in the USA, why is it doing worse (at least in terms of education, absolute amount and relative % of poor(ness), health and health-care, etc.) then countries that follow a less libertarian model, like those in the EU?

    Some claim this is due to the fact it's not real libertarianism, but rather corporatism, but I think this is a weak argument for two reasons: it's rather a pseudo-argument, because it can always be used. For example, when communism failed, people said; "it's not communism, it's stalinism that has failed". But...the communism of Chroetsov failed too, and that of all others, including Gorbatsov. Chinese communism failed (apart from lipservice) - was that a failure of the "communism of mao"? When cuba will inevitably fail, will if be 'castro's communism' that has failed? Or is this rather a weak excuse for not acknowledging the obvious, namely that it is communism itself that fails, whomever tries it?

    And secondly, even when one would accept the explanation, it still wouldn't explain why a country like the US, who - corporatism or not - still has more libertarian elements in their economy then, say, europe, fares worse then europe in providing 'the best' for the largest amount of people.

    Still others respond with a dodge out, like your poster, by claiming the cultures are so different (yeah, right) that it is unlikely that libertarianism would yield better results for anyone exept americans. This makes no sense whatsoever.

    And thus, this sort of questions remains immer unanswered by those fanatically believing in the anglo-saxon version of ultra-capitalism - usually USA citicens, I may add.

    Most of whome think I'm a socialist, while I'm in fact a liberal, btw ;-).

    --
    --- "To pee or not to pee, that is the question." ---
    1. Re:I wouldn't waste my time by killjoe · · Score: 1

      I think it's obvious by now that the natural outgrowth of liberterianism is tyranny by corporations. We can easily see what the effects of these kinds of policies are in south america, africa and few other places in the world that have yet to adopt more socialist practices. Everything in the country owned by a dozen families or less. We can also see this in history too.

      --
      evil is as evil does