Slashdot Mirror


Iran Caps Net Access to Keep West Out

davidwr writes "The Guardian reports that Iran has banned high-speed internet access to attempt to curb the west's influence. In addition to seizing satellite dishes and filtering more websites than any country save China, Iran is now capping Internet speeds to 128kbps in order to keep out Western influences." From the article: "The latest step has drawn condemnation from MPs, internet service companies and academics, who say it will hamper Iran's progress. 'Every country in the world is moving towards modernization and a major element of this is high-speed internet access,' said Ramazan-ali Sedeghzadeh, chairman of the parliamentary telecommunications committee. 'The country needs it for development and access to contemporary science.'"

356 comments

  1. Can't stop the signal Mal... by IcyNeko · · Score: 5, Funny

    They can never stop the signal. Even if the signal is going at 128kbps

    1. Re:Can't stop the signal Mal... by Chosen+Reject · · Score: 5, Funny

      If this helps to slow (or even stop) the widespread use misuse of flash, I'm all for it.

      --
      Stop Global Warming!
      Just say no to irreversible processes!
    2. Re:Can't stop the signal Mal... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      gedit!? Nay; nano!

    3. Re:Can't stop the signal Mal... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'll stop the argument right here. ed.

    4. Re:Can't stop the signal Mal... by HTTP+Error+403+403.9 · · Score: 1
      They can never stop the signal. Even if the signal is going at 128kbps
      I am a leaf on the wind - watch how I soar. crash
      --
      I'm not a Troll, it's reverse psychology.
    5. Re:Can't stop the signal Mal... by PhoenixFlare · · Score: 1

      Are Iranians even a significant enough portion of the world's internet users to affect something like that? Feel free to try and prove me wrong, but somehow I doubt it.

    6. Re:Can't stop the signal Mal... by Chosen+Reject · · Score: 1

      Baby steps. You start with baby steps.

      --
      Stop Global Warming!
      Just say no to irreversible processes!
    7. Re:Can't stop the signal Mal... by IcyNeko · · Score: 1

      Hey, all I'm saying is that some people juggle baby geese!

    8. Re:Can't stop the signal Mal... by Andrewkov · · Score: 1
      They can never stop the signal. Even if the signal is going at 128kbps

      How are the even doing this? Smaller internet tubes??

    9. Re:Can't stop the signal Mal... by oh_the_humanity · · Score: 1

      Its probably done with Cueing , and limiting streams from IP's to 128k

      --
      "When they invent bitch slaps that can go through a monitor you better f'ing duck" --deft (253558)
    10. Re:Can't stop the signal Mal... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      They downgraded back to using Trucks of course.

    11. Re:Can't stop the signal Mal... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They aren't using tubes. Just straws.

    12. Re:Can't stop the signal Mal... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Guy killed me, Mal...Killed me with a sword...

    13. Re:Can't stop the signal Mal... by EVil+Lawyer · · Score: 1

      If this helps to slow (or even stop) the widespread use misuse of the Microsoft Zune, I'm all for it.

    14. Re:Can't stop the signal Mal... by operagost · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Clearly the Iranian theocrats are even less technologically informed than Alaskan senators. I would think that information passed using highly-compressible, low bandwidth text would be much more of a subversive threat than bloated "Punch the monkey" flash ads and YouTube videos of sleepy kittens.

      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
    15. Re:Can't stop the signal Mal... by eln · · Score: 1

      Real men use cat.

    16. Re:Can't stop the signal Mal... by Exocrist · · Score: 1

      I thought someone made a post a bit ago about how dumptrucks full of DVDs get higher bandwidth than an OC-48. Trucks would have been an upgrade!

    17. Re:Can't stop the signal Mal... by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      It depends on if you're taking the data across the country, or across an ocean. Besides, it's not true, because those DVDs have to be loaded (blank), written, packaged, loaded, shipped, unloaded, unpackaged, loaded, and read. Unless you have a crapload of drives, anyway.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    18. Re:Can't stop the signal Mal... by redwoodtree · · Score: 1

      Damn straight. If anyone remembers using 300 baud modems , then 1200 then 2400, 128kbs is like gold. So there's no good real-time playback but who cares.

      Hell, that's two ISDN channels, that was the high speed internet of 10 years ago.

  2. Nothing for you to see here. Please move along. by yogikoudou · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    How appropriate.

    1. Re:Nothing for you to see here. Please move along. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hmm no. What Iran is saying is:

      "Something for you to see here. Please move along."

  3. uh oh by Gerad · · Score: 1

    "Nothing for you to see here. Please move along."

    Why do I always get this message when I'm trying to view a story about censorship?

    --
    Be the Ultimate Ninja! Play Billy Vs. SNAKEMAN today!
  4. what an idiot! by cashman73 · · Score: 1, Funny
    Ahmadinejad probably just needs more bandwidth for his stupid blog,. . .

    1. Re:what an idiot! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nah, the bandwith is being used by the Ministry of Information to, uh, "investigate" all that evil Western pr0n circulating on the internets.

    2. Re:what an idiot! by bigkahunafish · · Score: 2, Funny

      oh no! you western infidels have slashdotted my blog running on a 128kbps connection!

      --
      Eat a Chicken, You know you want to.
    3. Re:what an idiot! by El+Torico · · Score: 1

      Here's one for the Mullahs - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yIk-rpVRdZ8.

      --
      In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is usually crucified.
    4. Re:what an idiot! by Duhavid · · Score: 1

      Should be "...you western infidel..."

      --
      emt 377 emt 4
    5. Re:what an idiot! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hmm, could one claim that the blog came from western countries and so therefore by him having a blog he is introducing western ideas to the readers?

    6. Re:what an idiot! by teh_chrizzle · · Score: 1

      i would read his blog, but it looks like it was handwritten by a 3 year old. jesus ahmadinejad, ever heard of the "arial" font?

      --
      sarcasm:
      -noun
      1. harsh or bitter derision or irony.
    7. Re:what an idiot! by dobestpossible · · Score: 1

      An excerpt from his "copyrighted" site. Mucho disrespecto from me to him.
        " President: Martyrs light up path to just world

      Tehran, Oct 10, IRNA

      Martyrs in the cause of Islam and the Islamic Revolution light up the arduous path to realization of justice, said President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on Monday.

      Addressing a gathering of martyrs' children, the president said martyrs were honorable people who gave their lives in obedience to religious order and proved their sincerity to God.

      Martyrs gave their most precious possession -- their lives -- and by doing so set the example for others to revive and edify the culture of martyrdom among nations.

      © Copyright 2006 Presidency of The Islamic Republic of Iran. All Rights Reserved. "

  5. Silly Iranians by suparjerk · · Score: 2, Funny

    Silly Iranians, high-speed Internet is for Westerners!

    But seriously, are they going to ban cars and television, too? We use those a lot in here in the west.

    --
    I caught the Mountain Wumpus! He gave me his treasure chest ($100) to let him go free again.
    1. Re:Silly Iranians by From+A+Far+Away+Land · · Score: 4, Funny

      I think we should beat Iran to the punch, and Ban TV here before it's too late. Join the Teleban too, and save the children.

      It's just a modest proposal to save the world!

    2. Re:Silly Iranians by IcyNeko · · Score: 1

      Well here's the thing though... in the states, the fastest residential broadband we offer is 7Mbps,,, in the Netherlands and Asia, it's easily 15 times as much.

      We still have DIALUP in America.

      How backwards is that?

      But I digress. If Iran really wants their country to be free from western influence, they'll need to create a biosphere around their country that regularily emits high-level EMPs to wipe out any technology they might be developing. ;D

      The age of religious-controlled nations dominating information is coming to a close.

    3. Re:Silly Iranians by From+A+Far+Away+Land · · Score: 1, Interesting

      "The age of religious-controlled nations dominating information is coming to a close."

      *keeping my mouth shut about Bush administration and Fox News...

      Seriously though, it will never be completely out of style, since the method works to keep a population fearful, ignorant, and in line with the incumbent government. It wouldn't matter if it were a Democrat in office, because they'd find some media outlet(s) to suck from their trough of pre-chewed drivel.

    4. Re:Silly Iranians by Silver+Sloth · · Score: 3, Insightful
      The age of religious-controlled nations dominating information is coming to a close.
      I'm not sure how you justify this. The examples from the Middle East where religious control is rising are too numerous to mention and, closer to home, we're seeing the evangelical Christian right have a huge say in the current administration of the US of A.
      --
      init 11 - for when you need that edge.
    5. Re:Silly Iranians by Chosen+Reject · · Score: 1

      The age of religious-controlled nations dominating information is coming to a close.

      The age of chinese-controlled nations dominating information has just begun.

      Note: The number of people claiming we're all going to be speaking Chinese in twenty years or so is getting ridiculous. I guess they haven't realized English IS the international language.

      --
      Stop Global Warming!
      Just say no to irreversible processes!
    6. Re:Silly Iranians by truthsearch · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Actually the administration is merely pandering to the evangelicals. They aren't actually getting much of what they want. This group in office has their own agenda. They just convince the religious to support it.

      The evangelicals actually believe they're getting a lot of support. They have too much faith in the words of their leaders.

    7. Re:Silly Iranians by natophonic · · Score: 1


      Actually the administration is merely pandering to the evangelicals. They aren't actually getting much of what they want.

      I'd wait for a few precedent-setting decisions by Bush's SCOTUS appointees before making that call. We might not have a good idea of how that'll shape up until after 2008.

    8. Re:Silly Iranians by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, eating babies is a modest proposal.

      Yes, i'm going to hell.

    9. Re:Silly Iranians by jandrese · · Score: 1
      Well here's the thing though... in the states, the fastest residential broadband we offer is 7Mbps,,,
      Tell that to the 30mbps/5mbps FiOS line that runs to my home. $55 a month no less. Unless you're talking about upstream bandwidth, in which case you're probably right, I've never heard of any residental access that has more than 5mbps of upstream bandwidth.
      --

      I read the internet for the articles.
    10. Re:Silly Iranians by southpolesammy · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Perhaps if they just banned oil exports, they could then stop that inflow of filthy, moral corrupting American money.

      --
      Rule #1 -- Politics always trumps technology.
    11. Re:Silly Iranians by Dance_Dance_Karnov · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      What of that Veriozon Fiber to the home thing? or the 9Mb I can get. Or the 10 a friend of mine in orlando has? Oh you meant that 7 was the fastest you could get? my mistake.

    12. Re:Silly Iranians by plantman-the-womb-st · · Score: 1

      Sure, I'll help ban TV, but you'll have to pry my SecondLife account out of my cold dead fingers.

      --
      Say bad words about my book, in cold oatmeal, or I shall sue!
    13. Re:Silly Iranians by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ummm. The United States doesn't buy any oil from Iran. Europe and China are primary purchasers from them.

    14. Re:Silly Iranians by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But it's not American US Dollars! US foreign debt in is enormous.
      http://www.epinet.org/content.cfm/webfeatures_snap shots_archive_01152003

      Saudi US Dollars is probably considered less "filthy" or "moral Corrupting".

    15. Re:Silly Iranians by westlake · · Score: 1
      Actually the administration is merely pandering to the evangelicals. They aren't actually getting much of what they want. This group in office has their own agenda. They just convince the religious to support it.

      "A new memoir by David Kuo, former second-in-command of President Bush's Office of Faith-Based Initiatives, has the White House on the defensive with its account of an Administration that mocked Evangelicals in private while using them at election time to bolster its support." Why a Christian in the White House Felt Betrayed

    16. Re:Silly Iranians by From+A+Far+Away+Land · · Score: 1

      OK, you're on the bloglist now. Welcome to the Teleban.

  6. This is a genocide... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...against downloading new headers from a.b.dvd.

    You'll see a stable democracy in Iraq before that task completes.

  7. I wonder what the citizens think about this? by tont0r · · Score: 1

    Is this a move to stop their citizens from being connected to the outside work? Or a move to stop westerns from doing digital attacks? If its the first one, I cant imagine that would make their citizens happy. It's basically a current day book burning. Only in the digital sense. Im also not sure what capping it at 128kbps will do, but whatever.

    1. Re:I wonder what the citizens think about this? by betterunixthanunix · · Score: 3, Informative
      Capping it at 128kbps slows down downloads of music and movies. Why would you want to download these things? To see a movie that your government doesn't want you to buy...

      Of course, the intelligent citizens will know that they can just split the downloads amongst themselves, essentially bandwidth-pooling. Maybe we need to educate the government.

      --
      Palm trees and 8
    2. Re:I wonder what the citizens think about this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's basically a current day book burning

      Not really, capping the speeds is more like they are taking all the books and shrinking the font and making it harder (and thus take longer) to read. Now the censoring of sites, that is closer to book burning.

    3. Re:I wonder what the citizens think about this? by nizo · · Score: 1

      It gives the police time to arrive before your porn is finished downloading?

    4. Re:I wonder what the citizens think about this? by Kelson · · Score: 1
      capping the speeds is more like they are taking all the books and shrinking the font and making it harder (and thus take longer) to read.

      Or limiting bookstores to only be open two hours a day, on weekdays, during typical work hours... and not overlapping the typical lunch hour.

    5. Re:I wonder what the citizens think about this? by in2mind · · Score: 1
      Im also not sure what capping it at 128kbps will do, but whatever.
      It will do nothing.
      People will still download all the things they want,only that it takes a few hours longer.
    6. Re:I wonder what the citizens think about this? by howard_coward · · Score: 1

      The intent behind the rate capping is presumably to stop the loyal citizens from downloading and viewing naughty videos.

    7. Re:I wonder what the citizens think about this? by hotdiggitydawg · · Score: 1
      Capping it at 128kbps slows down downloads of music and movies. Why would you want to download these things? To see a movie that your government doesn't want you to buy...

      Or in other cases... to see a movie that the **AA does want you to buy. Not that I think Iran was thinking about the **AA in the slightest, but here's hoping this is a fad that just doesn't catch on...
    8. Re:I wonder what the citizens think about this? by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      If its the first one, I cant imagine that would make their citizens happy.

      Too bad. If the citizens don't like it, they should stop supporting their government and institute a new one.

    9. Re:I wonder what the citizens think about this? by rynthetyn · · Score: 1

      It's been my prediction for the last year or so that Iran has under 10 years before their government gets overthrown from within. My take is that this action just brought my prediction another step closer. The younger generation, by and large, doesn't like the restrictions, they don't buy into the apocalyptic religious extremism, and if they keep making life more and more uncomfortable for those folks, it's only a matter of time until they get fed up and another student revolt goes down.

      --
      Eagles may soar, but weasles don't get sucked into jet engines...
    10. Re:I wonder what the citizens think about this? by raju1kabir · · Score: 1
      Or limiting bookstores to only be open two hours a day, on weekdays, during typical work hours... and not overlapping the typical lunch hour.

      Hmmm... sounds like Australia, Germany, or Spain.

      --
      "Patriotism is your conviction that this country is superior to all other countries because you were born in it." -- GBS
  8. It shows limits of his power by the+Gray+Mouser · · Score: 0

    that he will only cap the signal and not eliminate public internet access entirely, although that could be coming as well.

    It does make a lot of sense, and is consistant with other recent moves by the government. If you make something inconvenient enough, many people will stop using it. The more people he can keep from accessing information, the stronger his position will be.

    I also found it somewhat ironic that the filtering software Iran uses is American made.

  9. You can take my high speed internet access! by feyhunde · · Score: 1

    But you can not take my porn!

    --
    I'd say more, but my guild is raiding.
  10. Ugh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you're so worried about western influences, why not just cut off everyone's ears and eyes while you're at it? God forbid they see something different than what they're used to, or be exposed to ideals other than those of their government.

    1. Re:Ugh by nickos · · Score: 1
      Unfortunately, it seems that the arabic world (and I would guess Iran too) is culturally very closed minded and creatively stunted:

      "Another, no less grave, result is the dearth of creativity. The report comments sadly on the severe shortage of new writing, and, for instance, the decline in the film industry. Nor are foreign books much translated: in the 1,000 years since the reign of the Caliph Mamoun, say the authors, the Arabs have translated as many books as Spain translates in one year."
    2. Re:Ugh by Ender_Wiggin · · Score: 1

      It swings both ways. How many books have you read that were originally in Arabic or Farsi? Iranian cinema is world-renowned, how many of their movies have you watched?

    3. Re:Ugh by nickos · · Score: 1

      None, but I have read many books that have been translated from other countries - the article I linked is talking about any foreign books (not just English ones). How many books do you think were translated into English last year?

  11. Blocked for everyone but "certain individuals"? by R2.0 · · Score: 0

    After all, can't interfere with the mullah's beating off to Arabic porn.

    Before the slams about being racist: they are men in power. Men in power have always demanded and gotten exception from the rules, especially involving personal matters.

    And all men beat off.

    --
    "As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly." A. Carlson
    1. Re:Blocked for everyone but "certain individuals"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      it doesnt seem like all men do, maybe if the more fundamentalist Muslims did that they wouldn't be soo pissed off 24 hours a day.

    2. Re:Blocked for everyone but "certain individuals"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      actually, iranainans are not arabs they are persians. in fact, they hates arabs (trsut me on this).

      so the mullahs are watching east europian porn as eveybody else.

    3. Re:Blocked for everyone but "certain individuals"? by R2.0 · · Score: 1

      I referred to Arabic porn because:

      1) I know it exists, whereas I'm not sure about Iranian/Persian porn
      2) Intersections of language - one assumes the mullah's know arabic, since they have probably studied the Koran in the original text.
      3) I know the Persians dislike the Arabs - hence the double attraction of watching an Arab man do something immoral, and an Arab woman be "defiled".

      --
      "As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly." A. Carlson
  12. Tell me again why China=Good but Iran=Bad? by FatSean · · Score: 1, Interesting

    These two nations don't seem all that different to me.

    --
    Blar.
    1. Re:Tell me again why China=Good but Iran=Bad? by Tweekster · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It isnt that difficult of a concept. Iran does nothing for us, China is a major trade partner.
      That is why, it is pretty simple.

      --
      The phrase "more better" is acceptable English. suck it grammar Nazis
    2. Re:Tell me again why China=Good but Iran=Bad? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Iran doesn't have nukes (yet!)

    3. Re:Tell me again why China=Good but Iran=Bad? by TnkMkr · · Score: 1

      Easy,
      You don't kick the dog that owns you.

    4. Re:Tell me again why China=Good but Iran=Bad? by bomb_number_20 · · Score: 1

      Because China can kick our asses.

      China will be declared bad as soon as the powers that be think they've figured out a way to pummel them.

      --
      That's ok, Jesus likes me anyway.
    5. Re:Tell me again why China=Good but Iran=Bad? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Probably about 60% of your WoW gold was made in china. That's why we need china. Without China we would have to farm WoW gold ourselves, and that is a job suitable only for chinese sweatshops.

    6. Re:Tell me again why China=Good but Iran=Bad? by fortinbras47 · · Score: 4, Insightful
      • China hasn't threatenned to "wipe Israel off the map."
      • China doesn't refer to the US as the "Great Satan."
      • China doesn't support Hizbullah, a terrorist group which killed 241 Americans in a bombing in Beirut.
      • China didn't ship thousands upon thousands of rockets to terrorist group Hizbullah.
      • China didn't storm the US embassy and hold 66 diplomats and US citizens hostage for over a year.
      • China didn't use terrorists to bomb the Israeli Embassy and the Jewish Cultural Center in Buenos Aires.
      • China doesn't try to actively sabotage the peace process in the Middle East.
      Oh.... but Iran did.

      China has nuclear weapons, but not many people are worried that China would provide a terrorist group with a nuclear weapon. There is great uncertainty over what Iran would do with nuclear weapons and nuclear technology.

      China is far from perfect, but the general direction they are moving is towards a more open society and a market economy.

    7. Re:Tell me again why China=Good but Iran=Bad? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Is that you, Bad Analogy Guy?

    8. Re:Tell me again why China=Good but Iran=Bad? by Citizen+of+Earth · · Score: 1
      Iran does nothing for us, China is a major trade partner.

      Plus, China is less of a state sponsor of radical Islamic terrorists. They also spout less rhetoric about annihilating first-world democracies. And their leaders are 20% less psychopathic.

    9. Re:Tell me again why China=Good but Iran=Bad? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      China hasn't threatenned to "wipe Israel off the map."

      Regarding the whole "wiped off the map"/"Israel has a right to exist" thing: both sides are quilty of being extraordinarily vague. For example, would Israel still "exist" (or be on "the map") if it changed its named to something ethnically neutral (for example, "Mediterrania") and renounced all discrimination?

      If your answer is no and you say that Israel has a right to exist then what you are really saying is that Israel has a right to discriminate. If your answer is yes and you believe that Israel should be wiped off the map then most likely you are advocating genocide.

      Until both sides actually spell out exactly what they mean (and not just accuse each other of meaning various outrageous things), this whole debate is pointless.

      China doesn't support Hizbullah, a terrorist group which killed 241 Americans in a bombing in Beirut.

      Well, they support the North Vietnamese and the North Koreans who killed a whole lot more than 241 Americans.

      China doesn't try to actively sabotage the peace process in the Middle East.

      Oh, everybody wants peace - they just want it on their own terms. Look at Israel: first it bombs the crap out of Lebanon and now it wants peace. Maybe Al qaeda should try that - oh wait, they have. First they knocked down the World Trade Center and then they offered peace (with a few "minor" conditions, of course).

    10. Re:Tell me again why China=Good but Iran=Bad? by vertinox · · Score: 1

      These two nations don't seem all that different to me.

      Given the choice to live in a Secular Fascist nation and a Religious Theocracy... I would choose the Secular Fascist mostly because they tend to be more concerned about keeping power and making themselves wealthy than what I am up to as long as I'm not planning to overthrow them.

      Doesn't mean they might get paranoid one night and haul me away to a gulag because my name happened to match someone on a dissenter list, but I don't have to worry about them enforcing crazy beliefs in whatever god they have to appease at the moment and their desire to save my soul... Even if it includes beating me in public and then hanging me from a crane.

      So yeah... They are both bad, but forcing someone to follow a religion is an extreme is a whole lot worse than making them fall in line with the governments economic policy.

      --
      "I am the king of the Romans, and am superior to rules of grammar!"
      -Sigismund, Holy Roman Emperor (1368-1437)
    11. Re:Tell me again why China=Good but Iran=Bad? by Sir+Homer · · Score: 1

      Then what did he say? Who misquoted him?

    12. Re:Tell me again why China=Good but Iran=Bad? by soft_guy · · Score: 1

      Iran does nothing for us

      You haven't heard of oil?

      --
      Avoid Missing Ball for High Score
    13. Re:Tell me again why China=Good but Iran=Bad? by turgid · · Score: 1

      China is far from perfect, but the general direction they are moving is towards a more open society and a market economy.

      And the USA and UK are far from perfect either, and have market economies, and are moving towards a more Chinese style of government where eccentricity amd anit-estsblishment views can lead to detension without trial in Guantanamo Bay and Belmarsh Prison. Communications are being monitored and "suspects" of crimes are punished rather that people found guilty through Due Process.

      Don't listen to me. I've been using Slackware since 1995, I don't have Windows, I program Linux for a living and the doctor gives me pills.

    14. Re:Tell me again why China=Good but Iran=Bad? by drinkypoo · · Score: 1
      Until both sides actually spell out exactly what they mean (and not just accuse each other of meaning various outrageous things), this whole debate is pointless.

      Are you a lawyer? Only a lawyer could say with a straight face that "should be wiped off the map" can mean anything other than blowing it the fuck up.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    15. Re:Tell me again why China=Good but Iran=Bad? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "China didn't ship thousands upon thousands of rockets to terrorist group Hizbullah."

      Uh, just to let you know we brits intercepted a similar consignment of weapons going from america to the other party in that conflict, after the UN ceasefire had been declared, which ended up getting used against civilian areas. So let's not all wade-in with the iran=bad because... stuff until the "anti-terrorist" countries stop supporting these atrocities?

    16. Re:Tell me again why China=Good but Iran=Bad? by Monsuco · · Score: 1

      Because China is currently not threatening to destroy the world in a Holy War, and China is slowly becoming less restrictive.

    17. Re:Tell me again why China=Good but Iran=Bad? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      of course - you must be judish....

    18. Re:Tell me again why China=Good but Iran=Bad? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are you a lawyer? Only a lawyer could say with a straight face that "should be wiped off the map" can mean anything other than blowing it the fuck up.

      Are you an American? Only an American could have such a poor grasp of geography that they would think it was meaningful to talk about "blowing up" an entire country.

      Maybe you mean "carpet bomb" - although Iran doesn't have an air force capable of that. Or, maybe you mean "detonate a nuclear bomb in the vicinity of Tel Aviv" but, although that would be extremely tragic, it would hardly "wipe Israel off the map".

      As to what Ahmadinejad means, he probably means the following:

      • One single country consisting of the territory currently controlled by Israel (West Bank, Gaza, etc.).
      • The country would be named Palestine.
      • The country would have a government that promoted Islamic religions.
      • The country would grant full citizenship to anyone who could remotely considered to be Palestinian (those in refugee camps, etc.).
      • The country would give Palestinians back the land that had been taken from them (settlements in the West Bank but also individual houses in Jerusalem).
      • The country would possibly deport recent Jewish immigrants.

      Personally, I'm not in favor of ethnic homelands of any description or immigration restriction of any descriptions. I think that everyone should be able to live wherever they want regardless of their ethnicity.

      I don't see that countries have rights but that individuals have rights.

      As to whose side I'm on: neither. Having said that, I think both sides have a point when they object to discrimination by the other side.

    19. Re:Tell me again why China=Good but Iran=Bad? by profplump · · Score: 1

      China, for all its faults, is both stable and predictable (as far as partly-industrialized countries go). Iran isn't much of either.

      Think of it this way: would you rather have a nasty neighbor that made loud noises for 10 minutes every day at 3 AM or one that made loud noise for 5 minutes, about twice a day, but at unpredictable intervals? Sure, they're both making the same amount of noise, and the unpredictable noise might even happen when you're awake or away, but the predictable one is much easier to handle.

      That's not to say there's no hypocrisy here -- part of the reason Iran is less stable than China is because they have limited choice in trading partners and good -- just that there are differences.

    20. Re:Tell me again why China=Good but Iran=Bad? by mjwx · · Score: 0

      They have been trying to move towards this for years.

      Ever since the "new guard" came to power they have been moving away from ultra-repressive actions. Most Americans don't know that reformists in the Chinese government have been moving it towards the democratisation of the lower levels of government for the last 9 years. democratisation of what we (in Australia) call "local government".

      Right now as an Australian, I trust the Chinese with nuclear weapons as much as I trust the Americans with nuclear weapons, I trust that someone in the chain of command is smart enough not to use them.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    21. Re:Tell me again why China=Good but Iran=Bad? by swordgeek · · Score: 1

      As opposed to a country that is threatening to destroy the world in a Holy War, and is slowly becoming more restrictive.

      Sorry, but when did we start talking about the US again?

      --

      "People who do stupid things with hazardous materials often die." -- Jim Davidson on alt.folklore.urban
    22. Re:Tell me again why China=Good but Iran=Bad? by Reservoir+Penguin · · Score: 1
      You wrote
      China didn't ship thousands upon thousands of rockets to terrorist group Hizbullah.
      And it today's news (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6065950.st m)
      Both Hezbollah and Israeli forces fired cluster munitions during the recent conflict in Lebanon, according to the group Human Rights Watch. The Islamist militant movement used far fewer cluster weapons than Israel, HRW says, with only two strikes confirmed. They were the first known deployments of a Chinese-made Type-81 rocket anywhere in the world, the group says.
      So where did these chinnedse made rockets come from? And you forgot how China helped Pakistan develop nuclear weapons, and how they threaten to invade Taiwan, fi it choose to formally declare independance.
      --
      US-UK-Israel: The real Axis of Evil
  13. After all by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    (sarcasm) With too much internet exposure, Iranians might start believing crazy things. You know, stuff like "The Holocaust happened." (end sarcasm)

  14. Priorities by Kelson · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Yes, cripple your country! Better to maintain strict control over a nation in poverty than be in charge of a prosperous one!

    (Interestingly, the same comparison can be made for overprotective parents, who would prefer keeping their children...well, children, rather than prepare them to become adults.)

    1. Re:Priorities by q-the-impaler · · Score: 1

      Yeah, well it worked for East Germany... oops. Bad example.

      --
      Sierra Tango Foxtrot Uniform
    2. Re:Priorities by griffjon · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I respect their desire to reduce the impact of Western cultural hegemony, but the better way to do this is to encourage your own culture to flourish, not to make others illicit. Does no one learn from US's prohibition attempts?

      --
      Returned Peace Corps IT Volunteer
    3. Re:Priorities by Marnhinn · · Score: 1

      It all comes down to power. The ruler(s) in charge probably think that it is easier to crush / prevent / stomp out a revolt / change of venue / dissent that lacks state of the art communication. Looking at it from the top down (the ruler's pov), I'd have to say they're right.

      --
      There is always a frontier where there is an open and willing mind
    4. Re:Priorities by nizo · · Score: 4, Informative
      I don't think Iran is poverty stricken (see below); their education however appears to be pretty stunted (no surprise there). Heck I wouldn't mind being in control of the money from 2.5 million bbl/day of oil.


      Iran:
      Literacy: Definition Field Listing definition: age 15 and over can read and write
      total population: 79.4%
      male: 85.6%
      female: 73% (2003 est.)

      GDP (purchasing power parity):
              Definition Field Listing Rank Order
      $561.6 billion (2005 est.)

      United States:
      Literacy: Definition Field Listing definition: age 15 and over can read and write
      total population: 99%
      male: 99%
      female: 99% (2003 est.)

      GDP (purchasing power parity):
              Definition Field Listing Rank Order
      $12.36 trillion (2005 est.)

    5. Re:Priorities by demigod · · Score: 1

      They should probably be more worried about their roads than their pipes.

      Don't you know, the Internet is not a truck it's a series of tubes.

      Trucks use roads, and tubes do not require either roads or pipes.

      --
      "The last thing I want to do is deal with a bunch of people who want something."
      Major Major
    6. Re:Priorities by mr_death · · Score: 1

      The French tried to "protect" their culture by standing up the Language Police. I don't think it worked, but it gave the Frogs a lot to complain about.

      Heck, the US didn't learn anything from Prohibition -- we still have a Holy War on Some Drugs (alcohol and nicotine are OK), and we have a new Holy War on Online Gambling. It's for the children, of course.

      --
      It's Linux, damnit! Pay no attention to renaming attempts by self-aggrandizing blowhards.
    7. Re:Priorities by TnkMkr · · Score: 1

      Don't you mean it worked for North Korea.... errr ohh wait

    8. Re:Priorities by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't forget the fact that this is probably motivated by the theocratic government. (But Iran is probably more of a mullahcracy.) Religion: oppressing people since the dawn of time.

    9. Re:Priorities by TheModelEskimo · · Score: 1
      Better to maintain strict control over a nation in poverty than be in charge of a prosperous one!
      Actually, as I understand it the government of Iran gave its people the same decision that China did: Live in prosperity to the extent that you work for it, or fight a long, difficult political battle against the entrenched leadership.

      The citizens of both countries (China after Tienanmen Square) took the "let us prosper economically and we will forget about opposing you" route.

      I can't remember where I read this about Iran, but you can watch how it unfolded in China here: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/tankman/

      The interesting thing is, high technology like the internet is meant to bring the world together, so the government finds itself in a difficult position: If you allow use of the internet as an incentive to behave, you have a hard time avoiding its detrimental effect on your leadership. If you disallow the internet, though, it starts to look like you are breaking your side of the agreement.
    10. Re:Priorities by Yold · · Score: 1

      Explain to me how limiting bandwidth to the minority of homes with internet access will stiffle economic growth. This is a reasonable (from their perspective) censorship policy aimed at reducing the global expansion of Western culture. Believe it or not, much of American culture (movies, rap, etc) is downright obscene to the conservative Islamic world, and I am sure the Tehran (ruling party) wishes to avoid the kind of cultural duality present in the United States among Muslims. For example, the 13 year old Muslim boy in NY who memorized the entire Quran (which guaruntees entrance to heaven), and says his favorite music is rap and his favorite passtime is playing GTA: San Andreas.

      Iran has actually made good progress in the past 10 years diversifying its economy, and modernizing its exports. It has moved away from commodities, although about 75% IIRC of its 2000 GDP comes from petro-exports. The size and wealth of the middle class has been steadily growing as well. The biotechnology, pharmacuticals, and construction supplies/equipment producers are all government supervised, and will undoubtedly have adequate access to bandwidth.

    11. Re:Priorities by TheModelEskimo · · Score: 1
      Found the quote about the decision I mentioned:

      I think there is no doubt that the present leadership fears relaxing control, particularly over the media and discussions of events like 1989 and a myriad of others, because it fears that once the discussions begin -- like those demonstrations in 1989 -- they will be very hard to stop. In this they may be right.

      But there is another theory that says if you allowed a modicum of discussion to go in an orderly fashion, it would serve as a pressure-release valve, whereas if you don't have any discussion, at some point the pressure will build up. What the Party has relied on to prevent the pressure from building up is to allow people to exercise all of their ambitions and urges to be able to advance themselves and to have lives on the economic side of the ledger. This was Deng Xiaoping's great moment of genius. After the massacre of 1989, he in effect said we will not stop economic reform; we will in effect halt political reform.

      What he basically said to people was: "Folks, you are in a room. There are two doors. One door says 'Politics'; one door says 'Economics.' You open the economic door, you are on your own. You can go the full distance to basically whatever you want: get wealthy, help your family have a bright future, move forward into a glorious future. If you open the political door, you are going to run right into one obstruction after another, and you are going to run into the state." People logically being practical -- and Chinese are very practical -- opened the economic door. They wouldn't open the political door. It was foolish to do so.

      From http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/tankman/in terviews/schell.html
    12. Re:Priorities by mi · · Score: 1
      I respect their desire to reduce the impact of Western cultural hegemony, but the better way to do this is to encourage your own culture to flourish, not to make others illicit.

      It is not "the better way", it is "the only way"... Western's culture is dominant, because it is better — West's substantial wealth allows a lot more people to be involved in "cultural" pursuits, and our liberties allow them the required freedom to do so.

      On contrast, the best-known writer of Iranian origin is Salman Rushdie — an expatriate with a credible death threat against him from an Iranian mullah.

      When Iranian government pretends to "sponsor art", they sponsor an exhibition mocking the Holocaust tragedy...

      "Western's cultural hegemony" would be a terrific improvement for them. When they become rich and wealthy, their own culture will be able to compete again...

      --
      In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
    13. Re:Priorities by Pharmboy · · Score: 4, Informative

      Pretty selective with your facts. How about these from the CIA World Factbook, where you got your info, comparing Iran and the US.

      GDP per capita
      US $41,800 (2005 est.)
      Iran $8,300 (2005 est.)

      Unemployment rate
      US 5.1% (now less then 5%)
      Iran 11.2%

      Population below the poverty level
      US 12%
      Iran 40%

      Inflation rate
      US 3.2%
      Iran 13.5%

      Many other numbers are not published, as Iran doesn't want them public. Iran sells lots of oil, but the citizens don't see much of the money. Too much is being sent to Siria, Iraq, Afghanistan and other places to support their biggest export, their religious philosophy.

      Make no mistake about it, Iran has more poverty than they want you to know about. Then again, if you live in Iran, what are you going to do, protest? BANG! One less person in poverty.

      --
      Tequila: It's not just for breakfast anymore!
    14. Re:Priorities by TubeSteak · · Score: 1
      I respect their desire to reduce the impact of Western cultural hegemony, but the better way to do this is to encourage your own culture to flourish, not to make others illicit.
      Iran is an Islamic Republic run by religious fundamentalists.
      The nature of their culture is to keep out "Western" influences.

      The Iranian revolution was a direct result of dissatisfaction with the U.S./British imposed Shah.
      Does no one learn from US's prohibition attempts?
      Prohibition was the result of Xtian fundies making noise for decades.

      Alcohol Prohibition only became possible when income taxes were created. The Gov't no longer needed alcohol taxes, so they caved into the fundies and banned alcohol.

      Fast forward to the 1930's & the Great Depression. Income taxes tanked & the Feds repealed Prohibition so that they could regain those alcohol sales taxes.

      With respect to Iran, what exactly is the lesson to be learned?
      /The More You Know...
      --
      [Fuck Beta]
      o0t!
    15. Re:Priorities by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      From the BBC article you linked to:

      Another problem is that most cars in the city are locally-produced Paykans - Iran's equivalent to the 1960s Hillman Hunter. They are old, inefficient and do not use lead-free petrol.

      That explains a lot. One of the effects of lead exposure (from gasoline) is a well-documented drop in intelligence.

    16. Re:Priorities by Gobiner · · Score: 1
      Or how about this quote from the same place?
      Iran's economy is marked by a bloated, inefficient state sector, over reliance on the oil sector, and statist policies that create major distortions throughout. Most economic activity is controlled by the state. Private sector activity is typically small-scale - workshops, farming, and services. President Mahmud AHMADI-NEJAD has continued to follow the market reform plans of former President RAFSANJANI, with limited progress. Relatively high oil prices in recent years have enabled Iran to amass some $40 billion in foreign exchange reserves, but have not eased economic hardships such as high unemployment and inflation. The proportion of the economy devoted to the development of weapons of mass destruction remains a contentious issue with leading Western nations.
      Or look at how the Iranian rial is valued to some other currency?
      rials per US dollar - 8,964 (2005), 8,614 (2004), 8,193.9 (2003), 6,907 (2002), 1,753.6 (2001)
      Many Arab Islamist states have terrible economies, in great part due to their Islamist policies. Women can't work, education favors religious teachings over science/technology, et cetera. With globalization occuring, a country really can't afford to promote the worsening of their workforce. As other countries make real gains, the gap will widen until Iran has essentially nothing.
    17. Re:Priorities by noidentity · · Score: 1

      Funny, I'd say they were copying the West, where we are always looking for more ways to restrict consumers/customers/citizens. Maybe Iran is leading the way for reduced functionality at higher prices!

    18. Re:Priorities by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >Many Arab Islamist states have terrible economies, in great part due to their Islamist policies.
      Iran is persian. They are not Arabs, in fact they hate Arabs (compare to French vs Germans)

      >Women can't work,
      Not in Iran, you must think of some arab country. Some jobs are men-only, but thats like education favors religious teachings over science/technology
      Iran is much better than USA in this regard.

    19. Re:Priorities by cyber-vandal · · Score: 1

      Feudalism had a good run though.

    20. Re:Priorities by Tim+C · · Score: 1

      Western's culture is dominant, because it is better

      Is it dominant? It certainly dominates the English speaking world, but that's not what we're talking about here...

      On contrast, the best-known writer of Iranian origin is Salman Rushdie -- an expatriate with a credible death threat against him from an Iranian mullah.

      I would submit that the latter has a great bearing on the former; I'd certainly not have heard of him if it hadn't been for the fuss about The Satanic Verses. Which, of course, I'd almost certainly not have heard much about anyway if they weren't written in English.

    21. Re:Priorities by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Honestly, I say let'em screw themselves over!

      The further they fall behind, due to their own closed-mindedness, the less competition there is for new advances and achievements. Leave the future to 'those who can handle it'*, not those who are uncertain about the now!

      * - is described as technologically advanced, relatively free-thinking, 1st world countries; US, EU~, Can, Japan, Aus. ...

      /I understand I will probably be modded as a troll

    22. Re:Priorities by mapkinase · · Score: 1

      Wrong. Western culture is based on principle of common denominator because of the primacy of the freedom of expression. That means the most popular data flow is the one that caters to most of the consumers and the largest human quality that unites the consumers are animal - satisfcation of basic animal instincts.

      That is why the internet is overloaded with porn.

      Essentially, Western culture (if you count by megabytes floating around) is essentially junk. The high-brow stuff (mozartrembrandtservantes) consitutes very little portion of it and it is not even worth counting.

      One NEEDS filters if you want to make something instead of low entropy junk soup. All the appeal to intrinsic high values of humans is bs. Without constant nurturing from society of those values, they would cover minute portion of the population.

      Limiting internet to low-bandwidth is definitely an act of desperation, but who cares. Man needs to do what man needs to do.

      --
      I do not believe in karma. "Funny"=-6. Do good and forbid evil. Yours, Oft-Offtopic Flamebaiting Troll.
    23. Re:Priorities by gad_zuki! · · Score: 1

      >I respect their desire to reduce the impact of Western cultural hegemony

      I don't. If a culture decides it wants to wear Nike, be secular, and be net enabled then it should be. The elites on top should not be dictating what "people want."

      >Does no one learn from US's prohibition attempts?

      Err, how can they now?

    24. Re:Priorities by Virgil+Tibbs · · Score: 1

      nope the US hasn't learnt anything from prohibitation the US is the only country i know where you have to be 21 to drink alcohol the US is the only country who claim that many underage(21) die from alcohol related deaths What is different about alcohol in the US compared with the rest of europe? is it a different sort which makes you ill? there are some thing I really dont understand and that is one of them

      --
      www.tdobson.net #### Dare to Dream #### blog.tdobson.net
    25. Re:Priorities by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      The powers that be have been discussing for a while the merits of allowing online gambling, while at the same time they're talking about trying to stop it. Now we just have to wait to find out which lobby spends more money, but I suspect it will be the gambling industry... It's just stupid to not allow U.S. online gambling, because when you don't, the money goes out of the country. Then again, it's just stupid to make marijuana illegal and collect revenue from the people via taxes to fight it, instead of just making it legal, and collecting revenue by taxing it, and that's still the status quo, and has been since the 1930s. They did it then because they were lobbied; it's still illegal, presumably, due to lobbying.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    26. Re:Priorities by drinkypoo · · Score: 0, Flamebait
      It is not "the better way", it is "the only way"... Western's culture is dominant, because it is better -- West's substantial wealth allows a lot more people to be involved in "cultural" pursuits, and our liberties allow them the required freedom to do so.

      Our money is falling against practically every currency in the world right now and our trade imbalance with china coupled with our insanely high deficit (due to an illegal war fought over a lie, in order to keep the oil flowing out of other countries by scaring them shitless, and intended to create huge profits for companies like Halliburton) are going to put us deep into the bottom of the hurt locker real soon now. I'm not sure you can hold up American Western Culture (which is what people really mean when they talk about the evils of western culture) as an example of doing things right.

      Not that Iran is an example of that, either...

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    27. Re:Priorities by drinkypoo · · Score: 1
      Fast forward to the 1930's & the Great Depression. Income taxes tanked & the Feds repealed Prohibition so that they could regain those alcohol sales taxes.

      Actually it was more about organized crime than about taxes. The Mafia (and related syndicates) were making money hand over fist by selling alcohol to people, but just as importantly, they were also gaining public goodwill. All they had to do to make money and thumb their nose at the law was to give the people what they wanted, so the government lost tons of support and the criminals gained it. Repealing prohibition allowed them to go after the newly prosperous criminal organizations without further damaging the support of the public.

      Today, Marijuana is California's #2 cash crop. (I forget what #1 is...) It is not much of a stretch to believe that if marijuana production in California were somehow terminated, it would cause significant damage to our economy as more of it was imported from other countries. Think globally, shop locally.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    28. Re:Priorities by drinkypoo · · Score: 1
      Does no one learn from US's prohibition attempts?
      Err, how can they now?

      Presumably the government won't be taking away its own net access.

      Assuming that this works the same way prohibition does, it will provide money for criminal organizations because they will get into the business of providing internet access. For example, you could get a big fat satellite uplink to some location, then provide wireless access from there. The dish could be covered in with a dome made of white PVC and white sheet plastic, which would have only a minimal effect on the signal. You could use this money to run your operations. This is precisely the reason why Prohibition was repealed here in the US.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    29. Re:Priorities by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Don't worry, if the libertarians have their way, it'll be back.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    30. Re:Priorities by pianophile · · Score: 1

      the best-known writer of Iranian origin is Salman Rushdie

      FYI, Salman Rushdie is not Iranian. He was born in India.

      --

      'Your brain is God.' -- Dr. Timothy Leary
    31. Re:Priorities by Darundal · · Score: 1

      It's less about the people in the homes. If you have read the article, you would have seen the picture of the people at the internet cafe. And guess what? They, the majority, are going to be affected by this. Since they don't have computers at home, they are less likely to really know the difference (AKA, how many people you know who don't know a computer who care about any tech issues vs. how many care about tech issues that do). They probably won't understand whats going on, they will just see that something they could do before takes more time now...

    32. Re:Priorities by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's interesting. I was just glad to see there'll be someplace on earth with worse Internet access than I have on the West Coast of the USA.

      http://images.slashdot.org/hc/13/7adc55c3afbd.jpg

    33. Re:Priorities by WilliamSChips · · Score: 1
      It's Linux, damnit! Pay no attention to renaming attempts by self-aggrandizing blowhards.
      It's "GNU". Linux is a relatively minor part. Pay no attention to renaming attempts by self-aggrandizing blowhards who keep their own name in the software name. Yes, I know all about the name Freax. Even though the dir he was given was called linux he could have still called the package freax if he wanted to.
      --
      Please, for the good of Humanity, vote Obama.
    34. Re:Priorities by db32 · · Score: 1

      Not that I really disagree here, but just to play devil's advocate a bit. In the US here...the "poverty level" or the level of income that you must be below to be consided "poor" is set by people who are frequently in the top end of the owners of the wealth in the US. So our "poverty" is skewed a bit too.

      --
      The only change I can believe in is what I find in my couch cushions.
    35. Re:Priorities by Pharmboy · · Score: 1

      Oh I agree that what is "poverty" is a very vague line, but the main point that Iran has a considerable amount of poverty holds true. Many 'poor' people in the US have a playstation, for example, but terrible access to health care. You very likely have a car but no job. Go figure.

      --
      Tequila: It's not just for breakfast anymore!
    36. Re:Priorities by Pharmboy · · Score: 1

      Women are strongly encouraged to cover themselves, although this isn't required by law (many are currently trying to make it law). Women's literacy rate is considerably lower than men's, 73% vs 85.6%. Female circumcision is also still practiced widely, which is a brutal method to insure women can't enjoy sex by removing the clitoris and often more.

      Yea, Iran is a paradise alright. Move there then write us about it, *IF* you can get access to US internet servers, that is.

      --
      Tequila: It's not just for breakfast anymore!
    37. Re:Priorities by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well if the CIA factbook said it, it must be true!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    38. Re:Priorities by mi · · Score: 3, Insightful
      due to an illegal war

      The only thing, that could make an action between countries "illegal" is a UN Security Council's (or some other recognized international organization's) resolution condemning the action as such. Would you be able to refer me to a resolution condeming our resumption of hostilities against Iraq after 12 years of Iraq's violations of cease fire? Oh, wait, you were simply engaged in flamebaiting, never mind.

      deep into the bottom of the hurt locker real soon now

      Gee, start holding your breath now, then, would you, please? Please, please, please — with a strawberry on top?.. Thank you!

      Not only are you flamebaiting, you are also widely off-topic — whatever is going to happen to our wealth "real soon now", and whatever the reasons for it happening, is irrelevant.

      What matters is that we are rich now, which allows us to spend so much on entertnainment and, consequently, keeps so many different entertainers around and well fed — from Barbara Streissand to Sean Hanity.

      Again, whatever your hate-filled heart predicts for US, we are wealthy now and thus can afford "culture", that spills over much to the annoyance of those, who — unable to speed up themselves — are trying to slow us down.

      --
      In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
    39. Re:Priorities by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Question: How does one get the Security Council to declare a war illicit/illegal if the war is started and maintained by one (or more) members that have veto powers over ANY decisions in said council?

      Answer: You don't.

      Oh, and what other organizations would you deem "recognized international[ly]" ?
      The Haag Court? Well, no worries, USA doesn't recognize it, nor does USA allow it to judge American soldiers.

      I must say that I do not think that attempting to limit the influence of another culture is best done by forbidding it - but I wouldn't say that the most money is automatically equal to the best culture... not if it forces me to watch Survivor or other docusoaps on all channels. :)

      Footnote:
      In real life, I don't watch the telly.

    40. Re:Priorities by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1
      The only thing, that could make an action between countries "illegal" is a UN Security Council's (or some other recognized international organization's) resolution condemning the action as such.
      Not quite. Just like doing something forbidden by the law is illegal in and of itself, whether you get caught or not, so are certain things considered illegal by themselves in international law. In partucular, we have what the Nuremberg Tribunal called "Crimes against Peace":
      1. Planning, preparation, initiation or waging of a war of aggression or a war in violation of international treaties, agreements or assurances;
      2. Participation in a common plan or conspiracy for the accomplishment of any of the acts mentioned under (1).
      Deciding on whether any particular war was or wasn't a war of aggression, is another story.
    41. Re:Priorities by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 1

      whatever your hate-filled heart predicts for US, we are wealthy now

      Lol! It's 2006 man, "Why do you hate America?" is so passe. I suggest sticking to the tried and true, like drinkypoo needs to think of the children, you know the classic personal attacks never go out of style.

      --
      When information is power, privacy is freedom.
    42. Re:Priorities by mi · · Score: 1
      Not quite. Just like doing something forbidden by the law is illegal in and of itself

      "Innocent until proven guilty in the court of law".

      Deciding on whether any particular war was or wasn't a war of aggression, is another story.

      My point exactly...

      --
      In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
    43. Re:Priorities by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1
      "Innocent until proven guilty in the court of law".
      Yet again you missed the point. If you did something illegal (like, say, copying a copyrighted song in Australia), and noone ever found out, what you did was still illegal. Innocent/guilty is a different scale.
    44. Re:Priorities by mi · · Score: 1
      If you did something illegal [...]

      In WHOSE opinion? Yours? Your mama's? Or a random guy's on the street? Or the judge's? Of all these, only one's own and the judge's (or the jury's) opinion matters.

      In America's opinion, our resumption of hostilities against Iraq were the fully logical and legal consequences of Iraq's violations of the earlier cease-fire agreement.

      Whoever wants to claim otherwise, will need to convince some kind of recognized court or another.

      Innocent/guilty is a different scale.

      Sounds like a false dichotomy (legal/illegal vs. innocent/guilty), but I'm unsure, what you mean by "scale".

      --
      In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
    45. Re:Priorities by drinkypoo · · Score: 1
      Not only are you flamebaiting, you are also widely off-topic -- whatever is going to happen to our wealth "real soon now", and whatever the reasons for it happening, is irrelevant.

      Nice. So what you're saying is that the present is the only thing that matters and the future is irrelevant? Are you a nihilist or what?

      What matters is that we are rich now, which allows us to spend so much on entertnainment and, consequently, keeps so many different entertainers around and well fed -- from Barbara Streissand to Sean Hanity.

      That's a good thing? If there were any justice in this world, Barbara Streisand would be on the street begging for leftovers.

      Again, whatever your hate-filled heart predicts for US, we are wealthy now and thus can afford "culture", that spills over much to the annoyance of those, who -- unable to speed up themselves -- are trying to slow us down.

      Hate-filled? Nice rhetoric. But the fact is that what we call "culture" is only a means of distraction. I mean, can you really make the argument that "America's Funniest Home Videos" is an example of culture? I mean, I guess you could make the argument, but only if you meant culture in the same way as yogurt or the stuff between your toes.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    46. Re:Priorities by db32 · · Score: 1

      I think the problem there is that we artifically muck with our numbers and you really can't compare our economies in such a simplistic way. We are VERY much a debt driven society these days. Average debt for the average american is supposed to be somewhere around 10-20k. I can make $5,000 and still manage to live a comfortable lifestyle (at least for a while). Debt dodging is VERY common, and a big part of identity theft as well. Rack up thousands in debt, move away when collectors find you, sure you may never get out of the hole, but someone is always willing to give you a payday loan at 350% interest or some other such nonsense.

      Remember not whipping out your credit card and spending yourself into oblivion is unamerican. Think of it this way, when you open a bank account you MIGHT get lucky and get as high as 3% interest rate (typically only credit unions), but every time you swipe that card you are giving Visa/Mastercard/etc a 12-27% savings account on the bank of you.

      --
      The only change I can believe in is what I find in my couch cushions.
    47. Re:Priorities by Pharmboy · · Score: 1

      Remember not whipping out your credit card and spending yourself into oblivion is unamerican. Think of it this way, when you open a bank account you MIGHT get lucky and get as high as 3% interest rate (typically only credit unions), but every time you swipe that card you are giving Visa/Mastercard/etc a 12-27% savings account on the bank of you.

      I'm not sure about that. It may be very "middle class", but I pay off every credit card each month, and my home will be paid off within a year. Most people I know in the top 5% of income pay off debt quickly, then use it as equity to make more wealth. (self finance their business, etc.) Granted, only 5% of the population are in the top 5% (...) but the lower 30% of the population can't get credit anyway. I could easily put over 100k on credit cards, but I'm not that dumb.

      The lifestyle you suggest is pretty common, but it only guarantees you will be stuck in the middle and in debt, forever. Not everyone buys into that "dream".

      --
      Tequila: It's not just for breakfast anymore!
    48. Re:Priorities by mr_death · · Score: 1

      It's "GNU".

      Linux uses the GNU license, of course. To call it "minor" is incorrect. Before Linus started his work, people grabbed an app here and there (gcc, gdb, emacs etc.) and GNU software languished in relative obscurity; post-kernel, people can grab a collection of software, enabled by the kernel, which produces an entire distribution. This demonstrates that the kernel is the most important piece of the distribution.

      The guys who add the value get to name their work. Had Stallman and company stopped playing with themselves and actually gotten hurd out, they could have called it GNU; since Linus and company did the work, they get the honors, Stallman's whining notwithstanding.

      Hypothetically, would you honor Bosch's claim that you should call a Volkswagen a "Bosch/VW", simply because VW chose to use Bosch engine computer and windshield wipers?

      --
      It's Linux, damnit! Pay no attention to renaming attempts by self-aggrandizing blowhards.
    49. Re:Priorities by db32 · · Score: 1

      Oh absolutely, I pretty much refuse to use credit or loans unless absolutely required. I simply won't take out a loan for a vehicle at all. It is infinetly cheaper to buy some used car for a few grand, drive it as long as you can, and then buy a new one when it dies. The people in that top 5% don't really have any wealth so to speak, they have billions of dollars in IOUs basically. For example, it doesn't make any sense to pay off your home, especially in lawsuit happy land that we are these days, its now a liability. If you take out a huge home equity loan and buy your next property you can start using it to make money, just repeating the process until you have millions in debt but thousands of dollars coming in each month. As far as the lower 30% I think your estimates are a bit high, you would be surprised how easy it is to get credit extended to you.

      --
      The only change I can believe in is what I find in my couch cushions.
  15. Oh well... by SuperStretch · · Score: 0

    I think the Iranian gov just doesn't want its citizens downloading old episodes of 24.

    --
    Help me get a new laptop - http://nocreditcard.yourgiftsfree.com/?id=3012
  16. too bad they can't give it away by OrangeTide · · Score: 1

    I'm sure parts of Africa would like to have extra bandwidth, too bad Iran can't just give the wasted bandwidth to them. They are foolish to squander such a resource, when other parts of the world are desperate for the infrastructure.

    Of course the bandwidth cap will make it difficult to download gigs of porn. Maybe the "influence" they are concerned about is the western porn, Iranians should only look at pornography of Iranian women and not western women.

    --
    “Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
  17. Yet another example of by gwayne · · Score: 1, Funny

    a failing fascist, fundamentalist regime oppressing its people under the guise of protecting their freedom...oh, wait...shit!

    1. Re:Yet another example of by jo42 · · Score: 1

      Holy Constitution Buring Bush, Batman!

      What's next?

    2. Re:Yet another example of by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

      How can you possibly compare a nation that limits online bandwidth in order to limit citizens' freedom to a nation which makes internet gambling illegal in order to protect citizens from themselves? We all know that everyone has an inalienable human right to wank off to free mpegs from the internet, but there is no basic human right to lose money by gambling online, now is there?

  18. OMG He'll be Slashdotted! by davidwr · · Score: 1

    "I for one welcome our new Slashdot-reading-bandwidth-sucking-overlords"

    -Ahmadinejad's webmaster

    --
    Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
    1. Re:OMG He'll be Slashdotted! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For not liking broadband this guy has alot of unnecessary javascript decorations on his site.

      Hate all multimedia, except my multicolored website...

  19. Priorities by evil+agent · · Score: 3, Funny

    They should probably be more worried about their roads than their pipes.

    --
    End transmission.
  20. Other MPs state.... by dahwang · · Score: 1

    WAIT. ISOLATIONISM IS BAD?!

  21. Technical solutions? by infolib · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I'm sure it's possible to combine several 128K lines to get one single hi-speed line.

    Suppose you and 5 or 6 of your neighbours had 128K each. How would you go about it?

    --
    Any sufficiently advanced libertarian utopia is indistinguishable from government.
    1. Re:Technical solutions? by profet · · Score: 1

      I'm sure it's possible to combine several 128K lines to get one single hi-speed line.

      Suppose you and 5 or 6 of your neighbours had 128K each. How would you go about it?

      Well... If the punishment was death by stoning, would you even care if it was possible?

    2. Re:Technical solutions? by tokul · · Score: 1
      Suppose you and 5 or 6 of your neighbours had 128K each. How would you go about it?
      Each connection is still capped to 128K. P2P might use it. video streaming won't work. audio streams are low quality.
    3. Re:Technical solutions? by cashman73 · · Score: 1
      Well... If the punishment was death by stoning, would you even care if it was possible?

      That's not quite as bad as, say, having Comcast for an ISP,... ;-)

    4. Re:Technical solutions? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Google for "ISDN bonding" or "IEEE link aggregation".

    5. Re:Technical solutions? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Suppose you and 5 or 6 of your neighbours had 128K each. How would you go about it?

      Easy my man, just go to Start > Control Panel > Network and enable Internet Connection Sharing.

  22. Let me see if I get this right... by Deluxe_247 · · Score: 1

    The citizens of Iran are ticked off that they are being denied of "Western Culture", which is apparently something they want. Therefore they have been using High Speed internet to download music and videos and whatever else so they can have what they want.

    Ahmah-not-gonna-work-here-anymore (couldn't help myself) decides that in order to stop the influence (re: the education of his people outside of what he allows them) he will just cripple the entire nation's communication abilities.... but all this really accomplishes is it takes longer for the people to obtain the goods they want.. This just goes to show his intelligence (lack). The people using the internet to get around his bans and laws are ALREADY influenced by Western Culture. This is just going to cause more discontent among his citizens.. Really, it's only a matter of time before that country becomes a bloodbath with citizens trying to step up to the Government and Ahmadinejad shutting them down forcefully.

    On a positive note, it's also going to somewhat hamper their technology advanacement, right? Although Im sure his high-and-mighty Government 'is trusted not to abuse the highspeed internet' and therefore will continue to use it, so strike that. (I wonder how long that will go unnoticed by the civilians...)

    --
    Its Deluxe, son. Deluxe!
    1. Re:Let me see if I get this right... by $RANDOMLUSER · · Score: 1

      The Soviets jammed Radio Free Europe for years. Fax machines were illegal in the USSR. Foriegn newspapers were banned.

      --
      No folly is more costly than the folly of intolerant idealism. - Winston Churchill
    2. Re:Let me see if I get this right... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually Iran looks increasingly like late USSR: note, sat. dishes are illegal, but widely tolerated. This internet restriction looks like desperate attempt to hold on by the goverment. I would give Iran no more than 10 years of theocracy. It'll collaps by itself (unless USA will press too much and turn iranians pro goverment and anti-west).

  23. This is Good! by frosty_tsm · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Now their researchers will have a harder time finding instructions to build a nuclear-bomb!

    1. Re:This is Good! by D-Fens · · Score: 1

      No, it means they've just finished the download.

  24. Bad Ping by Wiarumas · · Score: 5, Funny

    Note to self: Avoid Iran Counterstrike servers due to bad pings.

    --
    I will bend like a reed in the wind.
  25. Really scared by Rumagent · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Iran is run by a bunch of wackos... I can live with that. But what really scares me is what happens when the RIAA hears of this - they will go for this shit in an instant.

  26. Iran Is Trying To Improve Tech For the Rest of Us! by Doug+Dante · · Score: 4, Funny

    They will son become world experts in data compression, home construction of undetectable spread spectrum links, ad hoc very long range wireless data connections, and anonymous groupware! Thanks Iran!

    --
    The world will not get better through technology. We must seek to be better people.
  27. Bleah... it's what your mom told you... by eno2001 · · Score: 0, Troll
    'Every country in the world is moving towards modernization and a major element of this is high-speed internet access'

    Yeah, and every country is running at breakneck speed towards the edge of the cliff that leads to the deep abyss too. Think we should all follow them? Didn't think so. NEXT!

    --
    -"...bad old ideas look confusingly fresh when they are packaged as technology" - Jaron Lanier (Digital Maoism on Edge.o
    1. Re:Bleah... it's what your mom told you... by Thexare+Blademoon · · Score: 1

      Am I the only one who fails to see the point of that comment?

    2. Re:Bleah... it's what your mom told you... by tekkguy · · Score: 1
      --
      I want a 120 character signature! Please can I have a 120 character signature? I really really want one! 120 characters!
    3. Re:Bleah... it's what your mom told you... by Thexare+Blademoon · · Score: 1

      No, I don't think that falls under sarcasm. Where in the hell does the "cliff" come from? Seems more "pointless" than "sarcastic"

    4. Re:Bleah... it's what your mom told you... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      huh?

    5. Re:Bleah... it's what your mom told you... by eno2001 · · Score: 1

      No. No. I don't think so. Good to feel that you're not alone. Riiiight???

      --
      -"...bad old ideas look confusingly fresh when they are packaged as technology" - Jaron Lanier (Digital Maoism on Edge.o
  28. Positive by davecarlotub · · Score: 1

    I read an article recently about some major carding group whose servers were located in Iran. They had a quote from the leader boasting about the protection from the US government by locating in Iran. Reducing their traffic will be one positive from this, I suppose.

  29. Bittorrent by Iphtashu+Fitz · · Score: 1

    My bet is that bittorrent becomes increasingly popular in Iran to help distribute the kind of content that this crackdown is meant to discourage. True, it wouldn't necessarially help individual end-users but it'd help with overall distribution.

  30. The only thing they curb... by Yaa+101 · · Score: 1

    The only thing they curb is the influence of the vast population of Iranian youngsters.
    Give it another 10 years and that whole country will be torn apart from internal forces.

    1. Re:The only thing they curb... by Iphtashu+Fitz · · Score: 1

      Haven't people been saying this more or less since the end of the Iran hostage crisis back in the early 80's?

    2. Re:The only thing they curb... by denis-The-menace · · Score: 1

      won't happen.
      Bush will meddle in their affairs and piss off the whole country.
      Iran, Thanks to bush, will suddenly have common cause to unite under.
      And it starts all over again.

      You should rent Syriana (http://imdb.com/title/tt0365737/)
      Then you'll understand.

      --
      Obama's legacy: (N)othing (S)ecure (A)nywhere and (T)error (S)imulation (A)dministration
  31. Iran is not a nation that cares about its citizens by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 4, Informative

    The country is effectively a theocracy. The country does conduct votes and such, but it ultimately doesn't matter as the Ayatollah have the final say on everything. It is a highly oppressive in many ways. For example in the 2004 election the hardliners won a major victory. You might think this was the people's wish, but in fact the simple matter was the Council of Guardians disqualified most reformist candidates, including many incumbents. As for information access, well I'll quote Freedom House:

    "Freedom of expression is limited. The government directly controls all television and radio broadcasting. Satellite dishes are illegal, though widely tolerated, and the authorities have had some success in jamming broadcasts by dissident overseas satellite stations. The Ministry of Culture must approve publication of all books and inspects foreign books prior to domestic distribution. The Press Court has extensive procedural and jurisdictional power in prosecuting journalists, editors, and publishers for such vaguely worded offenses as "insulting Islam" and "damaging the foundations of the Islamic Republic." The authorities frequently issue ad hoc gag orders banning media coverage of specific topics and events. The government systematically censors internet content by forcing internet service providers (ISPs) to block access to a growing list of "immoral sites and political sites that insult the country's political and religious leaders.""

  32. OMG! Teh horror! by Klync · · Score: 2, Funny

    Somebody'd better go and liberate them, quick!

    --

    ----
    Not to be confused with Col.
  33. Why do we trade with them? by FatSean · · Score: 1

    Many of the condemnations thrown against NK and Iran apply also to China. Yet we gladly trade with China, and impose economic snactions on the others.

    --
    Blar.
    1. Re:Why do we trade with them? by Klync · · Score: 0, Troll

      Dude! Many of the condemnations of NK, Iran and China apply to the USA! What country has a larger per-capita incarceration rate? Which of the countries on that list has started an illegal invasion of another country in the past decade? Which countries use napalm, low-grade radioactive weapons, or phosphorous incendiaries?

      --

      ----
      Not to be confused with Col.
    2. Re:Why do we trade with them? by Metasquares · · Score: 1

      I never thought I'd be saying anything positive about China's government, but I would consider it far more restrained, and thus safer as a regional power, than Iran's or North Korea's.

    3. Re:Why do we trade with them? by StalinsNotDead · · Score: 2, Insightful

      What country has a larger per-capita incarceration rate?

      In the US, drug dealers end up incarcerated. In the others, I'm willing to bet drug trafficking has a much steeper penalty.

      --
      Thanks to the internet, we can now all die alone together! -SomeWoman
    4. Re:Why do we trade with them? by Tweekster · · Score: 1

      I thought I made it clear, China has something to offer us.

      Oh and China may be pretty bad, but in comparison to NK, they are not even on the same scale.

      --
      The phrase "more better" is acceptable English. suck it grammar Nazis
    5. Re:Why do we trade with them? by Klync · · Score: 0, Troll

      Err, *some* drug dealers end up incarcerated.... Others end up in charge of the country.

      http://www.serendipity.li/cia/bush-cheney-drugs.ht m
      http://everything2.com/index.pl?node_id=1706934

      --

      ----
      Not to be confused with Col.
    6. Re:Why do we trade with them? by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      China has a lower incarceration rate because they have a dramatically higher per-capita execution rate. Sorry, but I don't see that as much of a trade. China kills so many people they had to build those death vans to run around and execute them, it would have cost too much to build stationary facilities. The US has all but stopped using depleted uranium after the public discovered that it was harming our own soldiers, but if you think China, NK, or Iran wouldn't use DPU if they actually had enough to make it worth it to make weapons out of (we only started using DPU for bullets because we had a lot of DPU to get rid of) then you're on crack. And everyone that can afford it and has large-scale enough military operations uses napalm and WP.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    7. Re:Why do we trade with them? by fandog · · Score: 1

      I agree. Plus China seems more interested in making money than blowing things up ATM. We're happy to make money with less-than-desirable but stable administrations, because people interested in making money don't usually want to screw up their cash flow. OTOH nutcases who keep threatening their neighbors don't make you any money and destabilize their own regions. This is both bad for business and it gets people killed. Therein lies the difference.

    8. Re:Why do we trade with them? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      China has a lower incarceration rate because they have a dramatically higher per-capita execution rate. Sorry, but I don't see that as much of a trade. China kills so many people they had to build those death vans to run around and execute them, it would have cost too much to build stationary facilities.
      Ah, I see. So clearly, it is okay that we incarcerate so many people (making the prison corporate enterprise filthy rich), because other countries do worse. Got it.

      The US has all but stopped using depleted uranium after the public discovered that it was harming our own soldiers, but if you think China, NK, or Iran wouldn't use DPU if they actually had enough to make it worth it to make weapons out of (we only started using DPU for bullets because we had a lot of DPU to get rid of) then you're on crack.
      Oh, well I guess it's okay then. Once we figured out that it was hurting our own, they stopped. See how benign they are?

      And everyone that can afford it and has large-scale enough military operations uses napalm and WP.
      Oh? Everyone's doing it? Okay then. Must be okay.
  34. Beware Fundementalists of all Types by anagama · · Score: 1, Insightful

    It's a problem with religious fundementalists of all types, who fundemntally wish people to remain ignorant and uneducated. In America you see fundementalist attacks on education and freedom. Completely illogical thinking like "gay marriage" violates the rights of religious fanatics. A belief that one's particular religious icon should be installed in court houses. Whatever. America needs to worry about the threat of hard-core religious freaks. And note, the type of religion is irrelevant. All fundementalists are budding terrorists whether christian or muslim.

    --
    What changed under Obama? Nothing Good
    1. Re:Beware Fundementalists of all Types by SupraTT+GOP · · Score: 3, Interesting

      What do you think about fundamentalist naturalists and secularists? They can be quite fanatical, you know.

    2. Re:Beware Fundementalists of all Types by pete.com · · Score: 1

      I think the issue revolves around marriage being tradtionally a religious ceremony. The kooks are people that oppose gay marriage and civil unions or anything that gives an equal footing / benefit. I had a former cop as a boss and he used to say, "Its their mouth, that can carry coal in it for all I care."

    3. Re:Beware Fundementalists of all Types by damienl451 · · Score: 0

      This is one of the most intolerant and stupid posts I have ever seen. It's not the fact that you believe strongly in something that is wrong, but what you believe in. If I believe strongly in loving everyone, how does that make me a budding terrorists. I can give you dozens of examples of christian "religious fanatics" who did nothing but help the poor, feed the hungry,etc. You can be a fundamentalist anything, it's only an adjective, and therefore has no meaning of its own. It's what it modifies that makes the person a threat or not. I'm a religious fanatic by your definiton, but I'm also a college student who nobody would think of calling "uneducated or ignorant". I don't wish people to be stupid, since with greater knowledge also comes a greater understanding of your faith. And I certainly wouldn't want to blow anything up just because people disagree with my views -- how is killing someone beneficial to me or to God ? That will certainly not convert him so, unless I enjoy seeing people be sent to Hell (which I, along with every true Christian, do not), I don't see what could prompt me to do that.

    4. Re:Beware Fundementalists of all Types by Foolicious · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      [negativeKarmarifficSpellingTroll] I recognize that not everyone deems spelling to be of the utmost importance. But when you rip another group for pushing ignorance and preventing education in a post that provides (or perhaps only potentially provides) evidence of your own lack of edumacation, you're giving someone an alley-oop. [/negativeKarmarifficSpellingTroll]

      Anyhoo, you might get more buy-in if your statements painted with less of a broad brush.
      --
      Please don't use "umm" or "err" or "erm".
    5. Re:Beware Fundementalists of all Types by Citizen+of+Earth · · Score: 1

      I'm curious to know what a 'fundamentalist secularist' looks like.

    6. Re:Beware Fundementalists of all Types by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why the devil was this modded flaimbait? It is exacty spot-on, there are relgious nutjobs here in the US, they don't like a plurality of voices when it comes to education (instead preferring a monopoly, eg all knowlege comes from the Book), who insist on nannying others around them (via religious laws). Granted, Pat Robertson isn't advocating that we blow ourselves up in public places, but he isn't exactly a voice of religious toleration either.

    7. Re:Beware Fundementalists of all Types by TrekkieGod · · Score: 1
      You can be a fundamentalist anything, it's only an adjective, and therefore has no meaning of its own. It's what it modifies that makes the person a threat or not. I'm a religious fanatic by your definiton, but I'm also a college student who nobody would think of calling "uneducated or ignorant". I don't wish people to be stupid, since with greater knowledge also comes a greater understanding of your faith.

      I'm not the poster you're replying to, but since I agree with him, and since you labeled yourself a "religious fanatic" by his definition, I got curious and wanted you to clarify what you mean by that. I think the problem may be that you two disagree on the definition of "fanatic," rather than him specifically being intolerant of your beliefs.

      My definition of a "fanatic" is a person that is so set in their beliefs that they refuse to accept the possibility that they are wrong in any particular point. Although that by itself won't necessarily make you dangerous, there are different levels of fanaticism. You say that you would never kill anyone because they disagree with you (and I assume that includes actively disagreeing with you, meaning engaging in activities with which you disagree). That to me already says that you're not a dangerous fanatic. However, it's your lack of conviction to kill for what you believe in that makes you not dangerous, not the fact that your fanaticism is Christian instead of Islamic. After all, there are examples of Christian fanatics that disagree with Abortion on the terms that it is murder, but proceed to murder people themselves in order to stop it. I'm not arguing that's a Christian belief, but I'm arguing that their fanaticism has risen to levels where they cannot see the irony in their actions. They believe so strongly that what others are doing is wrong, that they're willing to do anything to stop it, even if it does violate their beliefs. Fanaticism will allow you to rationalize your behavior. It's not Islam that's out to get us, it's the people who are so fanatical that they don't even stop to consider that what they're doing is wrong.

      You then proceed to say that you do not wish people to be uneducated. If you truly do not oppose education in any form, even when what is being taught disagrees with your personal beliefs, than you are not even a fanatic in my book. You're a religious person, and there's nothing wrong with that. However, you also found it necessary to include the phrase "since with greater knowledge also comes a greater understanding of your faith." It worries me that you would then disagree with anything being taught that does not support your faith. I've checked a few your previous posts to get an idea of what you believe in, and I noticed that you don't believe in evolution, and that's fine, it's your choice to have faith in your beliefs. However, how do you feel about evolution being taught in public schools? To your children? If you have no problem with that, then you're not a "religious fanatic," you're just religious and neither I nor I assume the original poster, has anything against that.

      --

      Warning: Opinions known to be heavily biased.

    8. Re:Beware Fundementalists of all Types by compro01 · · Score: 3, Informative

      I'm curious to know what a 'fundamentalist secularist' looks like.

      completely opposed to religion in any way, shape, or form. one of the basic idea is that belief in any form of religion is a sign of mental illness requiring treatment.

      --
      upon the advice of my lawyer, i have no sig at this time
    9. Re:Beware Fundementalists of all Types by damienl451 · · Score: 0

      Well, I should have made it clearer that, apart from the moral decency 99% of people have, I wouldn't kill somebody because vigilantism is also against my religion (that's why killing abortionists is not the right thing to do -- though having a court of law convict them of murder is all right with me). My unwillingness to kill as you put it is a direct consequence of my beliefs, which supports my claim that it's not the strength of your belief that makes you dangerous, but what those specific beliefs are. I tend to agree with you that maybe our definitions of fanaticism differ slightly, but I still think it would be unfair to claim that because some people label themselves as Christian fundamentalists and proceed to kill doctors we can infer that strong religious convictions are by themselves dangerous. What I disagree with is when you claim that Islam is not out to get us. I'd argue that it is, but that most people who identify themselves as Muslims are not. That is major difference : the ideology is quite bloody, but, fortunately for us, most followers of that religion still have morals and know intuitively that, despite what the Quran says, it's not right to beat your wife, or kill innocent civilians. AS far as education is concerned, I don't care if people learn things that I find objectionable, as long as you don't force it on my kids (not that I have any yet, I'm just projecting myself in the future), and make it as balanced as possible. Which means, among other things, don't have the teachers tell all the kids that homosexuality is all right and just an alternative lifestyle. If they are allowed to do that, they it's not the religiously-neutral public school we should have. Same thing for evolution : if it's taught, I don't have a problem with that as long as the present evidence against it as well as in favor of it. I'm not asking them to say that the Bible is true, I'll take care of that myself, just not to present a distorted picture of reality that favors their belief system of mine.

    10. Re:Beware Fundementalists of all Types by Dr.+Manhattan · · Score: 1
      ...don't have the teachers tell all the kids that homosexuality is all right and just an alternative lifestyle. If they are allowed to do that, they it's not the religiously-neutral public school we should have.

      Teaching the fact that homosexuality exists and is observed in essentially all mammals is not the same thing as teaching that it's "all right". On the other hand, should schools be involved in teaching morals at all? If so, which ones? If not, what do you do about, say, bullying?

      On another note, is there any justification besides a religious one that says homosexuality is anything but "all right"? That's where Orson Scott Card lost me with his little treatise about homosexuality - where he says 'Laws against homosexual behavior should remain on the books'. The whole article has basically been saying that he considers homosexuality bad because his church says so, and if you don't want to follow the church, leave it. So far, I have no problem with that. But then he wants his church's standards to apply even to people not in his church. Um, nope. Not just because the church says so, anyway. If they can offer some kind of evidence that such laws would be a good idea, maybe.

      I'm not aware of any solid evidence that homosexuality per se is bad. About the only thing I can think of is the somewhat higher transmissibility of STDs given typical male-male sexual practices - but the opposite is true of lesbian activities in general.

      Same thing for evolution : if it's taught, I don't have a problem with that as long as the present evidence against it as well as in favor of it.

      "[E]vidence against it"? Such as?

      --
      PHEM - party like it's 1997-2003!
    11. Re:Beware Fundementalists of all Types by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      I'm curious to know what a 'fundamentalist secularist' looks like.

      Like this.

  35. I guess Iran really is in the Axis of Evil! by fortinbras47 · · Score: 2, Funny

    ... not only are they trying to develop nuclear weapons and "wipe Israel off the map," but they're capping bandwidth at 128kbps!

    1. Re:I guess Iran really is in the Axis of Evil! by Citizen+of+Earth · · Score: 1
      they're capping bandwidth at 128kbps!

      This seems to me to be plenty of bandwidth for messages like "totalitarian dictatorships suck!". That's only 32 characters. You could send this out 500 times per second at 128kbps.

    2. Re:I guess Iran really is in the Axis of Evil! by beta21 · · Score: 1

      ... not only are they trying to develop nuclear weapons and "wipe Israel off the map," but they're capping bandwidth at 128kbps!

      I didn't know comcast was in charge of Iran

    3. Re:I guess Iran really is in the Axis of Evil! by Sir+Homer · · Score: 1

      Yes but not enough to download V for Vendetta in any reasonable time. I think they are trying to curb American culture because it may corrupt their religious ideals.

  36. True, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The country needs it for development and access to contemporary science.

    Yes, but the philosophy of contemporary science is a little at odds with religious fundamentalism, so I don't see this being an argument that the leadership in Iran is going to listen to very closely.

  37. And in other news... by thewils · · Score: 1

    The Iranian Government has imposed limits on the road network - no traffic is allowed to go faster than a horse-drawn cart. Er, except for Government vehicles.

    --
    Once I was a four stone apology. Now I am two separate gorillas.
  38. It's funny. Laugh. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    'The country needs it for development and access to contemporary science.'

    I'm sure there will be no caps on downloads from nuclear.secrets.navy.mil or the alt.binaries.weapons.of.mass.desruction newsgroup.

    Just remember Iranian teens are all screaming: 'I want my Al-Jazeera TV.'

    This messages has NOT been brought to you by a Religious-rightwing shill for instilling American paranoia.

  39. Jay Leno quote by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    The president of Iran said today that all the liberals should be kicked out of all universities. I think we found the guy for Ann Coulter.
  40. Good start, now they need to finish... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...the job by keeping Iranians out of the West! Only seems fair.

    1. Re:Good start, now they need to finish... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, no shit. Ever talk to any Iranians online? They do their standard "Amerikkka is evil, Israel is evil, Europe are their lapdogs blah blah" spiel. Nothing wrong with that, everyone is entitled to their opinion. But 90% of them are Iranian EXPATS who are posting this shit while they're living in Europe or Canada and taking advantage of Western welfare programs and the openess of Western society. Fuck them. If the west sucks that much then GO LIVE SOMEWHERE ELSE.

  41. Capping at 128kbps should work great by Chris+Burke · · Score: 1

    Everyone knows that Western Influences require at least 1Mbps.

    A foolproof plan.

    --

    The enemies of Democracy are
  42. And the consequences of this? by joe_cot · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Short answer: Instead of quickly downloading western culture, the average Iranian will now be mildly inconvenienced by a cap on bandwidth speeds.

    Long answer: What makes this restriction really useful to the Iranian government is that it will help curb attempts to get around their filtering. Countries which censor (such as China) have had flourishing peer-to-peer anonymous darknets spring up as a result of technologies such as Tor and Freenet (link to wp article, as the site appears to be down currently). By capping the bandwidth at 128kbps, it's much more difficult to have faster supernodes on such networks, and fewer Iranians will be willing to dedicate bandwidth to running a p2p web server. Between a combination of web censorship, and an added (though not insurmountable) barrier to darknets, this will help Iran rather effectively cut off its citizens from what the government doesn't want them to see.

    The other main consequence is to servers; besides the comical bad ping for Iran counter-strike server which a commenter mentioned earlier, this will affect anyone trying to spread subversive material over their connection; on the other hand, this will cripple anyone trying to serve anything over their connection. I wouldn't be surprised if Iran soon gives exemptions to various research and commercial groups to help stem the latter conquences.

    1. Re:And the consequences of this? by OeLeWaPpErKe · · Score: 1

      And what if the "subversive material" is text ? 128k is seriously more than I had when starting to use p2p.

      And what do you mean by subversive material ? Stuff like telling women not to mutilate the genitals of their daughters ? Subversive !

  43. Re:Priorities Indeed by mpapet · · Score: 1

    Yes, cripple your country! Better to maintain strict control over a nation in poverty than be in charge of a prosperous one!

    1. They are simply attempting to control their citizenry. It's done everywhere in the world. I would argue their solution is more obvious than the more complicated, but no less influential methods used in Western countries like the U.S.

    2. Declaring this is the fast path to poverty is a little too careless. It doesn't mean they can't use computers/networks to run the country more efficiently. I'm not keeping track of trade restrictions to Iran, but I'd be interested to hear if you can sell big-time networking/computing infrastructure technology to Iran these days.

    It's very easy to make these kinds of assertions without reflecting on the controls in our own countries. Consider this an opportunity to objectively examine the way your government controls it's populace through media access control.

    --
    http://www.maxineudall.com/2010/02/should-economists-be-sued-for-malpractice.html
  44. In related news... by PhineusJWhoopee · · Score: 1
    ...in related news, the RIAA and MPAA have both praised the Iranian government, holding it up as a model for other governments to follow.

    Film at 11.

    ed

    1. Re:In related news... by Monsuco · · Score: 1
      Film at 11.
      Remember, Tivoing this film at 11 will get you blown up.
  45. Hurry... by willie3204 · · Score: 0

    Someone blame the US foreign policy on this!!!

  46. What parallels do you see here? by FreakerSFX · · Score: 1


    What a wacked-out way to annoy many of your brightest citizens. You take away Satellite TV, reduce the internet speeds and start the removal of many popular styles of women's clothing - the country is backsliding to their conservatives...

    Next they'll be banning violent video games...

    --
    This sig contains a manual self-destruct. Kindly please put your foot through your monitor in 8 seconds.
  47. Couple of links to get your head chopped off with by gd23ka · · Score: 1

    The US censor doesn't like these sites at all but right now they're still legal
    (even though they're information terrorists, you know).

    I wonder though what the Ayatollah Al Censori makes of these here:

    Unwelcome Guests
    Alex Jones Infowars
    Disinformation gateway
    Alan Watt's site (do watch Reality Check)
    alternate thought, psychodelic substance experimentation
    Learn about Astrotheology
    History _is_ a weapon

    Most of the stuff you can download with a 128kbs connection, okay, so instead of a minute a 20Mb
    mpeg like "Reality Check" you will have to wait half an hour to get it. So what. Most of the
    stuff out there is text anyway and you could even re- or rather de-educate yourself with a
    16Kbps connection.

    Btw... don't visit these sites in internet cafes etc, especially in countries where they have
    execution buses in the parking lot (China) or whip and hang you in public (Iran, I suppose) or in
    countries where somebody peeking at your screen will surreptiously take out his mobile phone to
    call Homeland Security (you know where that happens, don't you).

    Happy self-deprogramming!

  48. ObPython by Rob+T+Firefly · · Score: 1

    A small army of soldiers marches up.

    COMMANDER: Ve are the Judean People's Front, crack suicide squad. Suicide squad... attack!!!

    The soldiers all draw their swords, stab themselves, and fall over.

    COMMANDER: That showed 'em, huh? ......*

    --Life of Brian

  49. Duh! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What did you expect from some third-world shithole ruled by scary religious freaks?

    1. Re:Duh! by EvanTaylor · · Score: 1

      Less than I expect from some first-world shithole ruled by scary religious freaks...

      but not much less.

      --
      Sleep is for the weak.
  50. Interesting point by Mateo_LeFou · · Score: 1

    Maybe instead of banning tag, they should've just forced the kids to play it more slowly?

    --
    My turnips listen for the soft cry of your love
  51. 128k isn't THAT slow... by loimprevisto · · Score: 4, Insightful
    From TFA:
    Parastoo Dokoohaki, a prominent Iranian blogger, said the move was designed to foil the government's opponents. "If you want to announce a gathering in advance, you won't see it mentioned on official websites and newspapers would announce it too late. Therefore, you upload it anonymously and put the information out. Banning high-speed links would limit that facility. Despite having the telecoms facilities, fibre-optic technology and internet infrastructure, the authorities want us to be undeveloped."
    How exactly will capping connection speeds at 128k per second stop someone from uploading 1k worth of text to 'put the information out' about a gathering? It's not like you need flashy banners and embedded movies... if someone wants to attend your protest rally (and you're serious about organizing one), waiting a few seconds instead of half of a second isn't really going to get in the way.
    --
    Much Madness is divinest Sense --
    To a discerning Eye --
    Much Sense -- the starkest Madness
    1. Re:128k isn't THAT slow... by Virgil+Tibbs · · Score: 1

      im suprised that any person ever actually was in poseion of a line faster that 128k as far as i was aware their internet was pretty slow anyway as well as being censored

      --
      www.tdobson.net #### Dare to Dream #### blog.tdobson.net
    2. Re:128k isn't THAT slow... by eclectro · · Score: 1

      It's not like you need flashy banners and embedded movies...

      Unless you need to see pictures of nekkid Americans.

      --
      Take the cheese to sickbay, the doctor should see it as soon as possible - B'Elanna Torres, "Learning Curve"
    3. Re:128k isn't THAT slow... by RexRhino · · Score: 1

      If you are running a website, limiting bandwidth to 128k is restrictive if that 128k of bandwidth has to serve lots and lots of people.

  52. But the US isnt far ahead... by nonskanse · · Score: 0

    Most "Western" countries have speeds upwards of 12 Mbitsps, and the Redmond/Seattle area tops out at 6 for Comcast. And you of course never get the "real speed". And you pay more here.

  53. They NEED it? by derEikopf · · Score: 1
    "'The country needs it for development and access to contemporary science.'"

    What if they don't want development or contemporary science? They cannot live their lives as they please without us pressuring them to be like us? I guess most people are all for individuality until push comes to shove--in the end, individuality is mostly lip service paid by those who are anything but individual.
    1. Re:They NEED it? by singingjim · · Score: 1

      You sir, are an idiot. And you don't have to be a troll to see it. Sheesh, you'd think that in a place like this ignorance would be scarce.

      --
      Terrible karma and aiming lower, which in this environment of one-sided reason, is higher.
    2. Re:They NEED it? by Tim+C · · Score: 1

      They cannot live their lives as they please without us pressuring them to be like us?

      You do realise that that was said by Ramazan-ali Sedeghzadeh, chairman of the parliamentary telecommunications committee? You do realise that he's not only an MP (and so presumably representative of a fair number of people), but also Iranian?

      I'm as against forcing Freedemocracy(tm) and The Western Way on people as the next guy, but fercrisake that was in the summary!

      in the end, individuality is mostly lip service paid by those who are anything but individual

      Indeed; think on that as you ponder why you were so quick to condemn, and so convinced that this was a case of "us" forcing our wishes on "them"...

  54. Best thing EVAR by CompMD · · Score: 1

    As someone who works for an aerospace consulting agency in the United States, I guess this means fewer DoS, website defacement, software stealing, and general hacking attempts from Iran. I got tons of crap from them and banned netblock after netblock from there. With less bandwidth, it will be harder for people like those at the "holy institute" that took out my web server for two days to cause trouble. Additionally, I will now have more time to tend to my other duties.

    1. Re:Best thing EVAR by Virgil+Tibbs · · Score: 1

      what i dont get is why the great firewall of iran servers aren't DDOS'd surely taking out the firewall and cracking the ISP's are the way forward for the people of Iran!

      --
      www.tdobson.net #### Dare to Dream #### blog.tdobson.net
  55. blame bush? by cmoguy · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    i predict a very low number of posts on this story because there is no way to tie this act of stupidity to america or bush, and how they are to blame for conflict in the middle east.

    1. Re:blame bush? by WilliamSChips · · Score: 1

      Had we not messed with them under Reagan and Bush Sr. this wouldn't be happening.

      --
      Please, for the good of Humanity, vote Obama.
  56. Fawlty Towers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    When John Cleese created the character of Basil Fawlty, he basically considered the things that a good hotelier would do, then did the opposite. I wonder if President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has taken a similar approach to running a country.

  57. Re:Couple of links to get your head chopped off wi by singingjim · · Score: 1

    What do silly conspiracy theory web sites have to do with the freedom of the Iranian people? I don't get it.

    --
    Terrible karma and aiming lower, which in this environment of one-sided reason, is higher.
  58. Where does it go? by Kadin2048 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Looking at their total GDP isn't a good measure of poverty, because it doesn't say anything about the distribution of the resulting wealth that's being created. In the case of Iran, I have a feeling it's mostly concentrated in a small number of individuals.

    That said, based on some articles that I've read, life there for the average person isn't too bad in the physical sense; it's not poverty-stricken in the same way that parts of Africa or even South-east Asia are. The government uses oil revenues to heavily subsidize some consumer goods in order to keep the people happy (the price of gas there is ridiculous, I want to say around $0.30 a gallon), but there's very little investment in anything that's going to help them once the oil runs out, like education or scientific research (no, building a bomb-factory nuclear reactor that would have been obsolete in 1975 doesn't count) or communications infrastructure.

    The government's plan seems to be "hold on to as much as we can, for as long as we can, by any means necessary."

    --
    "Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
    1. Re:Where does it go? by Pharmboy · · Score: 1

      What good is cheap gas when you have cronic shortages of natural gas for heating due to a lack of infrastructure? Then it may because they want to sell it to Georgia for political points, even if their citizens do without.

      They are not poor like Somalians, granted, but their government is spending more money to attack US troops via proxy than to feed and heat the homes of their citizens.

      --
      Tequila: It's not just for breakfast anymore!
  59. Breathe by flyingfsck · · Score: 1

    Maybe the Iranian Mullahs should ban breathing, food and water too, since we do all that in the west. That will solve the whole problem permanently, rather quick.

    --
    Excuse me, but please get off my Pennisetum Clandestinum, eh!
  60. Hate to tell you... by Constantine+XVI · · Score: 1

    As much as I would like to see two fascist regimes go at each other's throats, I'm afraid that Iran is mildly outside of the Record Industry Association of AMERICA.

    Then again, when has that stopped them before?

    --
    "I think an etch-a-sketch with an ethernet port would beat IE7 in web standards compliance."
    1. Re:Hate to tell you... by teh_chrizzle · · Score: 1

      i think he means that if the RIAA can "prove" that capping bandwidth reduces "piracy" they will push for it in AMERICA.

      --
      sarcasm:
      -noun
      1. harsh or bitter derision or irony.
  61. Erm, what? by Kadin2048 · · Score: 1
    'Every country in the world is moving towards modernization and a major element of this is high-speed internet access'

    Yeah, and every country is running at breakneck speed towards the edge of the cliff that leads to the deep abyss too. Think we should all follow them? Didn't think so.

    So ... the rest of the world is going to run off of this cliff, leaving glorious countries like Iran, that have opted out of Life In The 21st Century, to claim the world and put it back together?

    Have you been smoking hash with Mahmoud Ahmadinejad again?
    --
    "Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
  62. Re:Silly Iranians... ALWAYS! by patrixmyth · · Score: 5, Funny

    First, they came for the newspapers, and I did nothing
    because the Farsi Side comic was just re-prints now.

    Next, they came for the books, and I looked the other way
    because the Death to America Book of the Month Club
    was only recommending books to burn anyway.

    Then, they came for the Satellite Dishes, and I said nothing
    because I still had a year left on my Infidelphia Cable contract.

    Finally, they came for my Internet Service, and no one was left
    to hear my ululation!

    --
    "Don't you know you're going to shock the monkey?"- Peter Gabriel
  63. Sounds like David Kuo by ackthpt · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Actually the administration is merely pandering to the evangelicals. They aren't actually getting much of what they want. This group in office has their own agenda. They just convince the religious to support it.

    Sounds like someone else watched 60 Minutes over the weekend and listened to David Kuo lamenting the Bush administrations manipulation of the Christian Right, getting the backing they need for a few tokens and runs at legislation which would be unconstitutional anyway (some of the Faith-Based initiatives.)

    The Iranian government represents mostly the conservative rural people, not the more cosmopolitan city dwellers, same way most despotic regimes seize power (get the peasants behind you) and then maintain it through fear and intimidation.

    --

    A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
    1. Re:Sounds like David Kuo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Listen to an interview from this past week (sometime in the last 7 days) on Democracy Now (Amy Goodman) of Scott Ritter (the U.N. weapons inspector in Iraq who spoke up to the media about how Iraq did not have WMD's in the time immediately before the United States invasion) about Iran and how it is constituted politically. You will get a much different story than the major media tale strung in the West. I think you can get recent airings up on iTunes as a Podcast (free). I am on dialup, otherwise I'd verify it and give you a link.

    2. Re:Sounds like David Kuo by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1
      The Iranian government represents mostly the conservative rural people, not the more cosmopolitan city dwellers, same way most despotic regimes seize power (get the peasants behind you) and then maintain it through fear and intimidation.
      There seems to be a subtle contradiction here. So, do they really represent the majority of citizens (which happen to be the peasants), in which case it is a typical example of the democratic "tyranny of the majority", or do they only maintain power through fear and intimidation, in which case it is a dictatorship?
  64. In related news, Ford caps F-150 Top Speed... by muonzoo · · Score: 1
    In related news, Ford Motor Corp. announced today that they are capping the top speed of their popular F-150 series pick-up truck to 30 mph (50 km/h) in order to prevent reduce the likelihood of people using their truck to drive to work.
    Huh!? Someone mail them a book on logic.
  65. Good, That much less competition for us by gelfling · · Score: 1

    Great news. Everytime some bunch of retards wants to stop knowledge it can only work out well for everyone else. I hope they ban literacy soon too. Let them all fucking starve.

    1. Re:Good, That much less competition for us by swordgeek · · Score: 1

      Ah yes. Iran. Nothing but retards there, eh? No intelligence at all, unlike, say, the USA.

      --

      "People who do stupid things with hazardous materials often die." -- Jim Davidson on alt.folklore.urban
  66. Is wanting to preserve your culture so bad? by CaffeineAddict2001 · · Score: 1

    I can't think of any society lasting very long once it starts to adopt the ideology of being "open minded". Can anyone come up with an example where having a diverse and rapidly changing set of ideas and values within a society made them stronger? Once a society reaches this stage it tends to get taken over by another society capable of focusing it's energy towards a common objective.

    1. Re:Is wanting to preserve your culture so bad? by Pfhorrest · · Score: 1

      Can anyone come up with an example where having a diverse and rapidly changing set of ideas and values within a society made them stronger?

      The renaissance?

      Footnote: preserving or promoting your own culture does not require that you ban the influence of all other cultures, unless your "culture" has as an inextricable element of telling other people what they can and cannot do. My advice? Best not to define your culture in such a way. "Culture" in a diversity-respecting sense ought to include only voluntary, self-affecting or consensual matters: food, clothing, art, literature, hobbies, games, ceremonial traditions, etc. When you start to get into telling other people what they can or cannot do, you run into ethical or moral issues, and unless you want to be a moral relativist, there is some objective right answer to questions about such matters, and if your "culture" is inextricably tied to unethical practices, then sorry, your "culture" is doomed.

      --
      -Forrest Cameranesi, Geek of all Trades
      "I am Sam. Sam I am. I do not like trolls, flames, or spam."
    2. Re:Is wanting to preserve your culture so bad? by CaffeineAddict2001 · · Score: 1

      "The renaissance"? The italian renaissance?

      The italian reniassance was a revival of traditional greek and roman values among the social elite. It did not encourage diversity and it was not a time of great social change. Only a small minority of people in the renaissance would have noticed anything different from the middle ages.

    3. Re:Is wanting to preserve your culture so bad? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wanting to preserve? No. Forcing others to act within it? Yes.

      Basically you are saying that people born into a certain culture should be forced to involuntarily stay within that culture?

      Wanting to preserve one's OWN behavioral norms is fine. But why should someone follow a culture's rules (note, this is not the same as laws which prevent a person from carrying out hurtful acts) just because they are born within it? Furthermore, by denying knowledge to people.. you are preserving an (inferior?) culture by preventing someone from learning about its flaws or better ways.

      As for a society that adopted new "foreign" ideas and became stronger: Japan, South Korea, (and hopefully soon: China).

      Notice even the presidents of China and Japan (and Japanese businessmen) even wears a western suit not traditional Chinese or Japanese attire. They also adopted mass manufacturing ideas from US car companies (and improved or added to it).

      Also, you need to have ideas communicated across cultures because no one culture has developed all its technologies independently. Many of the ideas for a lot of today's techs didnt all come from one culture. I could spout off a list but that'd be annoying.

    4. Re:Is wanting to preserve your culture so bad? by Pfhorrest · · Score: 1

      "The renaissance"? The italian renaissance?

      The italian reniassance was a revival of traditional greek and roman values among the social elite. It did not encourage diversity and it was not a time of great social change. Only a small minority of people in the renaissance would have noticed anything different from the middle ages.


      I meant the renaissance in the more general sense, roughly synonymous with the early modern period, the enlightenment, the age of reason, the end of the Dark Ages. When science and reason became popular again, and traditional religious and cultural values were called into question. When notions of personal liberty and freedom of thought started getting a foothold, from which followed many leaps and bounds in science, technology, philosophy, and politics, and subsequently in the average quality of life for people throughout the western world. (I speak of the western world only because that was the scope of this particular revolution, not to privilege westerners over other peoples).

      Yes, some of this did involve harkening back to Greek and Roman ideas of antiquity, but that was hardly the end of it. Many of those ancient ideas promoted notions of freedom (of thought at least, via the appointment of impartial reason as the only authority), and subsequently diversity, as people were no longer so strongly held into conformity. From that freedom flowed a wealth of new ideas that have since revolutionized the world.

      I'm not saying that diversity is inherently good - that is, that if everyone were somehow all the same, voluntarily, that some people should have to be different just for the sake of being different. Only that restricting diversity is bad. I may like to eat the same dish for dinner over and over and over again. That's fine. Maybe everybody I know likes to eat that dish and that dish alone. That's fine too. But to say that everybody *has* to eat only that dish is wrong, and may cause many people to miss out on some great foods they might otherwise be eating, or keep them from creating some great new dishes that others might enjoy even more. To suppress diversity is to suppress all change and thus all progress, and lock your culture forever as what it is now. If you want to be a Luddite yourself that's fine (not you in particular, but the generic "you") - just don't hold everybody else back with you if they think they've found a better way and they want to follow that path.

      I saw a quote in someone's sig here on Slashdot once that I love for situations like this. "Your effort to remain what you are is what limits you."

      --
      -Forrest Cameranesi, Geek of all Trades
      "I am Sam. Sam I am. I do not like trolls, flames, or spam."
  67. We wonder why they wanna fight? by socalguychris · · Score: 1

    Guy In Iran:
    *tries to download our western porn...*
    *Picture loads really slow*
    "Screw this"
    *pulls out the paper with the 900 number*
    *Calls, and hears a voice "sorry but the number u tried to call is in the west, please try again" *
    "Mutters n Curses"
    *Checks mail for playboy and finds mail saying western mail was filtered*
    *Now guy wants go out n shoot someone for some*

    No wonder they wanna go shoot each other.

  68. Western Influence is Bad for Life and Morality by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Western Influence is Bad for Life and Morality. Its good to keep it out unless you want your daughters turning into hooker and whores.

  69. Silly Posters. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "The age of religious-controlled nations dominating information is coming to a close."

    Can I borrow your crystal ball when your through with it? Virtually all nations are influenced by religion, and have been throughout their history. There has never been an atheist nation, although it's not for lack of trying. The thing you need to keep in mind is that Iran will be a religious nation even if they get rid of the present regeime. Also a nation CAN BE closed off from the world. Like North Korea (a non-religious run nation BTW).

    "Well here's the thing though... in the states, the fastest residential broadband we offer is 7Mbps,,, in the Netherlands and Asia, it's easily 15 times as much."

    Yeah! So? The bottleneck is usually not at the last mile.

    "We still have DIALUP in America.

    How backwards is that?"

    How very CONSUMER of you.

  70. Re:aaaaactually learn your history by cryfreedomlove · · Score: 1

    Pekov,

    Do you think the current state of Israel has a right to exist? I do think they have that right.

  71. Re:Iran Is Trying To Improve Tech For the Rest of by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0



    i understand that you are joking, but from what i have heard, they are world leader in small satellite receiver designs.

    no kidding, sat dishes are illegal, so in black market you can find dishes that are shaped like doors, windows, bricks and so on!

    (note, this was not a joke)

  72. I'm iranian by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Hi all.

    First every US based company (virtually %90 of software companies) reject to work with us. Few weeks ago I just lost a $4000 consulting contract just because I'm Iranian (I'm a java programmer and $4000 is a big money here). Commonly I pretend I'm Turkish or other country just to use very basic things in internet like paypal or activating a web hosting. we say half of the web sites are blocked by USA (iee, sun download section, ...), half by mullahs. Now this problem. I don't know what the hell will happen next time.
    Regarding music and movie it's not a big problem as most of contents are either from satellite or cd or dvd. Sometimes I think western music groups will be surprised when they know how many fans they have in Islamic Iran and specially in Tehran (my favorites are dire straits and Shania twain among others). Here most of the people have dishes and I think it's between 70%-80%.
    Maybe you think we are happy with creating nuclear bomb and this government But I can say must of us are sick of these things. We just want to live a little better like any body else and have some kind of freedom, unlike what this government pretend, we have no kind of problem with outer world.
    In Iran young people call the "ali khameneii" (supreme leader) as "ali Galile" because like galile he look at stars (for creating Islamic rules).
    The biggest use of internet in Iran is for chatting with yahoo. Girls looking for boys and boys looking for girls (talking in public can result in prison or forced marriage if government arrests). So this will not affect the biggest use of internet in Iran. If you take a look at asia rooms in yahoo messenger and if you know farsi you will see almost every body is Iranian. Other things like orkut are already blocked. You may wonder but this fool (president) already forced coffeenets (small shops which let you connect to internet in the shop) in specified days don't let boys use internet and the same for girls meaning avoid both boys and girls be at the coffeenet at the same time. Some people wish USA drop a bomb and kill this government and if we die, it's not a big problem.
    It's funny but this kind of governments fear from virtually every thing. Like high speed internet, dishes, and even yahoo messenger.
    Also we are not Arab we are persian, some people hate arabs for what they have done to our country (including me).
    Some times I think life is a little tough with us but maybe it's our predecessors fault.

    1. Re:I'm iranian by IMightB · · Score: 2, Interesting

      yeah, I am friends with a Syrian who recently went back to Syria to visit his family. He told me some interesting things when he got back: He basically said that he was "treated better by both the USA and England combined than by his own country" He also mentioned that he told his close friends and family this when he was in Syria and was being asked why he chose to live in the US rather than Syria. His friends and family are under the impression that the US and England are the great infidels that are trying to destroy Islam, and that this is an idea that is being promoted by the government over there. He evidently could have gotten into a lot of trouble had his comments become known by the Syrian officials.

    2. Re:I'm iranian by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think Iran is a little different. Although government does the same here but Iranian people commonly like western people and specially Americans. These mullahs do their best to isolate the people; maybe North Korea is their model.
      The other different is that in Iran mullahs are the leader of Islam and country, meaning any problem that happens some people see it as a result of Islam, you may know that there is a lot of problems in our country and you rarely can find religious young people.

    3. Re:I'm iranian by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I hope that government over there will pass soon, and you'll get back to where you're not under complete government control.

      I'm sorry to say that I seriously doubt the United States will be able to do anything to help you. There are too many people in this country that want to see things just as they are now, rather than going over there and freeing your people from the dictators you are under. It's very sad that the same people that complain about supposedly lack of freedom in the US don't want see others freed.

      My Iraqi friends are delighted that Saddam is out of power, and mad that terrorists are coming into Iraq just to stir up trouble. They hear the news reports coming out of the United States and constantly ask why so many people hate Iraq so much, and why those people wanted Saddam to stay.

    4. Re:I'm iranian by JohnFluxx · · Score: 1

      It's posts like this that bring me back to slashdot continually. It's really nice to actually have some Iranians have their voice here.

    5. Re:I'm iranian by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Careful there, my friend... When the typical Slashdot leftist hears that kind of talk, their head might just explode from the cognitive dissonance :-) Didn't you know that under the current administration the world supposedly hates the United States and everything it does and represents?

      Nota bene, Slashdotters: not a single Bush-bashing word from our humble Persian friend! Hell, 95% of you probably couldn't resist a jab at President Bush if the article were about the latest Hello Kitty merchandise. And here's our man in Iran shaming the lot of you. Brilliant!

      (Salaam my friend and welcome. Khanoumam Tehrani hast!)

    6. Re:I'm iranian by rhakka · · Score: 1

      and what, exactly, would you propose we do to free them? Move in, unilaterally, and overthrow the government?

      Yeah. That works REALLY WELL, doesn't it? What could possibly go wrong?

    7. Re:I'm iranian by UniAce · · Score: 1

      [i'm an American] One thing that makes America great is our constitutionally protected right to question and criticize our leaders, publicly and vocally. In fact, doing so could even be seen as fulfilling one's civic duty, or being patriotic even! Of course, there is a lot of variation in quality of discourse. Saying "Bush is a chimp-faced jerkwad" every chance you get is not necessarily equivalent on an intellectual level (or on politeness, if that's something you want to consider) to saying, "the current president's policies and actions are grossly immoral and hypocritical, and they're causing widespread and lasting damage across the world, and they are encroaching on our freedoms, etc." But both statements are equally protected. I HATE THE CURRENT ADMINISTRATION OF MY COUNTRY. But I love my country.

    8. Re:I'm iranian by UniAce · · Score: 1

      I shouldn't fail to say that I'm dismayed and angered to read of fellow humans living under such oppression. In Iran or anywhere.

      Beside doing my part to elect US government officials most likely to advance my values, and doing my part to protect and restore the global environment that we all share, I don't know what else I can do to help. But I will continue to try and think of something.

    9. Re:I'm iranian by OeLeWaPpErKe · · Score: 1

      Actually it kinda does. Maybe you should look at examples of where the US did this ... like Japan, South Korea, France, Spain, Italy, Germany, ...

      Give the US a couple of years in Iraq. Lots of people really want to make it work.

    10. Re:I'm iranian by rhakka · · Score: 1

      First, the US was not the only player in most of those cases. In all of them, we were responding to overt aggression and had the backing of others.

      Going it alone can never work, when you are a country that has a poor track record and no credibility in a region.

    11. Re:I'm iranian by dave1192 · · Score: 1

      This short story can be interesting what we have paid for democracy. In tabriz which is a big city in iran everybody agreed at that time which we need democracy, government surround the city and didn't let anybody come and go from city, hoping some of people and their leaders will recreant, My parents say they started eating skin of tree because there was no food but never quit their democracy (and finally king sign the democracy law). But very soon in 2 years king killed the democracy. 30 years ago people thought they can kill the kingdom and start a new democracy and you can see the result now. Now every body including my parents thinks they will never have democracy, No kind of government care about them and there is no value in fighting for freedom. But recently some civil wars started which make government very angry. You may think doing it here is as easy as America. This government killed more than 4000 of people in few days even before starting any civil war. You may think I'm afraid to die but in fact I don't care about it. I'm just looking for a working way. We tested almost any way with no result in more than 100 year. Some people say if USA drop a bomb it will kill us once but this government kill us several times a day. I think other governments (including USA) can't do so much for us and the only way is to find some way ourselves.

    12. Re:I'm iranian by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This short story can be interesting what we have paid for democracy. In tabriz which is a big city in iran everybody agreed at that time which we need democracy, government surround the city and didn't let anybody come and go from city, hoping some of people and their leaders will recreant, My parents say they started eating skin of tree because there was no food but never quit their democracy (and finally king sign the democracy law). But very soon in 2 years king killed the democracy.
      30 years ago people thought they can kill the kingdom and start a new democracy and you can see the result now. Now every body including my parents thinks they will never have democracy, No kind of government care about them and there is no value in fighting for freedom. But recently some civil wars started which make government very angry. You may think doing it here is as easy as America. This government killed more than 4000 of people in few days even before starting any civil war.
      You may think I'm afraid to die but in fact I don't care about it. I'm just looking for a working way. We tested almost any way with no result in more than 100 year. Some people say if USA drop a bomb it will kill us once but this government kill us several times a day.
      I think other governments (including USA) can't do so much for us and the only way is to find some way ourselves.

    13. Re:I'm iranian by Harry+Coin · · Score: 1

      Thank you for posting this. Too many people in both of our countries have difficulty separating the actions and rhetoric of their governments from the true feelings of their people. Sadly, politicians everywhere will continue to use these divisions to their advantage, and the uneducated will always follow. (I live in Alabama in the US, and I think 80% of the people here believe that all Iranians are desert-dwelling nomadic terrorists just itching to nuke the US, ignorance is everywhere) I sincerely hope that the current worldwide madness passes, and that you find the prosperity, safety, and liberty that all mankind aspires to.

      --
      That's pre 7-11 thinking....
    14. Re:I'm iranian by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      some people hate arabs for what they have done to our country (including me).


      Are you referring to the 7th century C.E. where Arab armies ended the Sasanian Empire? Well, the Sasanids were weakened by their continued war with Byzantium, and were ripe for the taking. Also, the Muslim civilization that followed under the Abbasids and others assimilated much of the Persian culture and civilization.

      Do not remain hostage to just one event in history and blame current descendants for what you think is the root of all evil for your country.

      Or are you referring to the war with Iraq in the 80s? This was perpetrated by one man, and backed by the USA to counter the revolution that brought Khomeini in power.

      Either way, "Arabs" is too broad a term, and you should not blame an entire ethnicity/lingusitic group for all your ills.
    15. Re:I'm iranian by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Anyone posting as an anonymous coward is obviously a plant. Beware insidious sedition and propoganda!

  73. As usual... by XSforMe · · Score: 1

    I guess its time for me to step in and end your confusion:

    ed

    --
    My other OS is the MCP!
  74. Re:aaaaactually learn your history by shawngarringer · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Why do you think America should decide that, instead of the people who's land Isreal stole?

  75. It's jeniffer lopez fault by malduarte · · Score: 1

    Just check this google trends analysis
    http://www.google.com/trends?q=jeniffer+lopez
    No comments :-)

  76. VI by BillGod · · Score: 1

    was it / then n to search for the next one.. no wait shift g.. no that brings me to the bottom... ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

    --
    MISSING - Sig file. 2 years old black and white and very funny. If found please email me.
  77. Boo Hoo by VonSkippy · · Score: 1

    Sniff! Eyes mist up and almost but not quite shed a single tear.

    There, I'm over it.

    Who freaking cares - ITS IRAN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE.

    Like the lack of high speed Internet will make the county suck significantly more then it already does.

    1. Re:Boo Hoo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Like the lack of high speed Internet will make the county suck significantly more then it already does.

      Indeed. I have determined that Iranian suckiness (aka sucktitude, aka suckism) is a function of log(stupidity * oppression * fanaticism / rational thought). Being a logarithmic function, once you're way up there in terms of suckiness, increasing stupidity, oppression, or fanaticism by the amount of a capped Internet will result in only marginally increased suckiness.

  78. 128K??? by Quixadhal · · Score: 1

    Don't they realize at that low a speed they'll fall DECADES behind the rest of the world in pr0n downloading!

  79. Re:aaaaactually learn your history by tddoog · · Score: 1

    Name a country who didn't steal their land from someone at some point.

  80. Poor people... by Arathon · · Score: 0, Redundant

    Literally. Can the average Iranian afford high-speed internet access? I doubt this is going to cause a huge uproar in Iran, given that per capita GDP is a little over $8,000. On the other hand, what would an uproar look like in a country like Iran? Probably burning American flags, since any other form of free speech is routinely squelched anyway. File this under: "It's ALREADY worse."

  81. Re:Iran is not a nation that cares about its citiz by soft_guy · · Score: 1

    Iran is a preview of what our society will look like after the MPAA/RIAA get through with us.

    --
    Avoid Missing Ball for High Score
  82. Confirmation by bulled · · Score: 1

    I can't seem to find this story confirmed anywhere, and I certainly wouldn't trust the Guardian to be accurate. Does anyone out there have a confirmation?

  83. Re:aaaaactually learn your history by vinn01 · · Score: 1


    No wars have ever been fought on Antarctica. Antarctica is considered a neutral territory

    Whew! Betcha didn't think anyone could name one.

  84. Re:aaaaactually learn your history by halivar · · Score: 1
    Iranian president didnt say he want to wipe Israel off the map. he said Israel SHOULD be wiped off the map. So much for your point 1

    1. He doesn't want Israel wiped off the map.
    2. He thinks Israel should be wiped off the map.

    ERROR: DOES NOT COMPUTE

    And I ams STILL waiting to see a real proof OSama was involved in or planned 9-11.

    I know a movie you'd probably enjoy.
  85. Three Months From Now... by porkface · · Score: 1

    Iran achieves nirvana.

  86. Re:aaaaactually learn your history by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Antarctica is not a country.

    If you want a country, then you'll have to say Vatican. I'm assuming they didn't take their land by force.

    Then, there is.... well, ..... ..... no one I can think of.

    For an example of countries being created and destroyed see Poland. Huge empire in 1500s, disappeared in 1700s until Napolean got the city state back. Got border shifted west by Soviets after WWII. I guess Germany should be pissed off, eh? Poland too as the east Poland became parts of Latvia,Ukraine,Litva,Estonia,etc...

    Palestinians should kick themselves in the ass and keep on living. Shit happens. And there was no country there before Israel either. AFAIK, it was England's colony, just like half of the world at one point or another.

  87. Re:aaaaactually learn your history by soft_guy · · Score: 1

    The best decision the US ever made was to put the Shah into Iran. We should have done a better job putting a successor to the Shah into Iran. Muslim countries need a strong dictator to keep the lid on things. Bush has proved in Iraq that democracy can't work in a muslim country. We should put Saddam back in charge there.

    --
    Avoid Missing Ball for High Score
  88. Re:aaaaactually learn your history by N3Roaster · · Score: 1

    When did Antarctica become a country? What's the capitol? What sort of government does it have? Either I completely missed something that could be very important (in which case, please do inform me) or you have failed to name a country.

    --
    Remember RFC 873!
  89. This has nothing to do with censorship by ayne · · Score: 2, Informative

    Oh my god! I *can not* believe how such stupid rumors get started and even published in the media!!! Yes the ICT ministry has asked ADSL internet service providers to stop giving high speed (higher than 128kbps) to their users. However, being the totalitarian regime that they are, this one had nothing to do with censorship! The ICT ministry announced that this is a *temporary* limitation which will be removed *within 4 months* and that it has to do with the gradual implementation of the new structure for ISP companies (which are going to be divided into several different categories based on their type of activity and the amount of bandwidth that they are allowed to provide). And forget this post, didn't any of you think how stupid it sounds to *censor* the internet by just reducing the speed to 128kbps which is actually quite a fast connection for a home user in this part of the world (because of high price of internet bandwidth). It just doesn't make sense. source: http://www.iribnews.ir/MainContent.aspx?news_num=6 5777

    1. Re:This has nothing to do with censorship by JohnFluxx · · Score: 1

      " gradual implementation of the new structure for ISP companies (which are going to be divided into several different categories based on their type of activity and the amount of bandwidth that they are allowed to provide)"

      You know, that reads even worse. Maybe I'm reading too much into your statement.

  90. Re:Silly Iranians... ALWAYS! by Virgil+Tibbs · · Score: 0, Redundant

    this is a parody of a quote by Pastor Martin Niemöller http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Niemoeller here is the translated version of his orginal poem. When the Nazis came for the communists, I remained silent; I was not a communist. When they locked up the social democrats, I remained silent; I was not a social democrat. When they came for the trade unionists, I did not speak out; I was not a trade unionist. When they came for the Jews, I did not speak out; I was not a Jew. When they came for me, there was no one left to speak out.

    --
    www.tdobson.net #### Dare to Dream #### blog.tdobson.net
  91. For those who marked this flamebait: by drinkypoo · · Score: 4, Insightful

    President Bush Jr. said on national television that he believes that God works through him. The bulk of our political figures regularly cite God as their motivation for their actions. The republican party, which is currently in control of our government, has been hijacked by the religious fundamentalists. If you don't think that this adds up to the US being a religiously-controlled nation, then I don't think you're thinking hard enough.

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    1. Re:For those who marked this flamebait: by Johnboi+Waltune · · Score: 2, Interesting

      For laughs when listening to a politician speak, try mentally replacing the word "God" with some other deity people have made up.

      "I don't believe atheists should be considered patriots, nor should they be considered citizens. This is one nation under Zeus" - George Bush Sr.

      "I believe that Poseidon has planted in every heart the desire to live in freedom." - George Bush Jr.

      "Freedom and fear, justice and cruelty, have always been at war, and we know that Mithra is not neutral between them." - George Bush Jr.

      "Neither death nor life nor angels nor principalities, nor powers nor things present nor things to come nor height nor depth can separate us from Odin's love." - George Bush Jr.

      --
      "The advanced societies of the future will be driven by competing systems of psychopathology." -JG Ballard
    2. Re:For those who marked this flamebait: by Obyron · · Score: 1

      "...and I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God." -- Every Single United States Congressman (of either house) in History.

      Hillary Clinton gave a speech in which she opened by saying, "This is the day the Lord has made. Let us rejoice and be glad in it."

      I'd keep going, but I've made my point. Congressmen are constitutionally required to swear (or affirm!) an oath in the name of God. All politicians regularly pander themselves to whatever cause they think will get them votes. Even at the most pessimistic of numbers, 80% of the US is Christian. Do the math.

      If you want to look at it another way, I'm sure you're willing to admit that, overall, politicians are two-faced crooks with the moral fiber of your average used bible salesman, and will do whatever it takes to get elected. Now look at the fact that even the most jaded, cynical, sociopathic politicians we have in elected office don't come out and say: "That God thing is so silly. You should vote for Atheists(/Agnostics/Secular Humanists/Scientologists/Subgeniuses) like me!" They feel like doing so would destroy their chances of getting re-elected.

      It's just how the game is played. I have no doubt that Bush believes in God and feels like he's fulfilling God's plan for his life, but I can't help but believe that a lot of his rhetoric is just that, and aimed at getting money and votes from the Bob Jones University crowd. It's the same reason Democrats pretend to care about the environment in between trips in their SUV motorcade, or slush-fund vacations to Europe on those private corporate jets.

      For someone who is so obviously jaded about the government, you sure do seem willing to take the things politicians say at face value.

      --
      --Obyron
    3. Re:For those who marked this flamebait: by deesine · · Score: 1
      And yet for all this religious fundamentalism you've pointed out, how many people are murdered because of their religious affliation or lack of it?

      I guess it's just a cultural difference...

      --
      damaged by dogma
    4. Re:For those who marked this flamebait: by OeLeWaPpErKe · · Score: 1

      Let's summarize your post

      Your point : "... Bush ... God works through him ... US religiously controlled ...."
      Your signature : "... mark of the beast ..."

      You obviously are quite religious. So why complain ?

    5. Re:For those who marked this flamebait: by drinkypoo · · Score: 1
      Your signature : "... mark of the beast ..." You obviously are quite religious. So why complain ?

      My signature: "... war for the beast"

      Your clue: MISSING IN ACTION

      Please leave me alone. "The Beast" is an abstract concept that's been around since before the advent of organized religion. People have been anthropomorphizing it since before such a word existed. Just do me a favor and don't reply to my comments until you learn how to read, thanks.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    6. Re:For those who marked this flamebait: by OeLeWaPpErKe · · Score: 1

      Just look at your new signature. I mean come on. You aren't tolerant of other people's views, don't say that you are. At all.

    7. Re:For those who marked this flamebait: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Somewhere between 44,000, "more or less", and 655,000 Iraqis Muslims, depending on which figures you use.

      Counting all the innocent Muslims killed in the US and around the world since 9/11, well that would be a bit trickier.

      But hey, they hate you for your freedom, ain't that right.

  92. Yeah, that'll work. by atomic_toaster · · Score: 1

    The Guardian reports that Iran has banned high-speed internet access to attempt to curb the west's influence.

    Yeah, that'll work. Dial-up didn't prevent a growing North American obsession with Japanese animation. It admittedly made it as far as pop culture after high-speed access became popular, but devotees were maxing out their dial-up bandwidth and "spreading the word" online almost as soon as the Internet came into existence.

    Actually, making high-speed mandatory might have the effect of making citizens get tired of the West. It's easy to get weighed down with the glut of information and media on the net, and you can get very tired very quickly of page after page of uninformed rants and horrible netspeak. You're also not so choosy nor so covetous of what you've downloaded when it takes 5min vs. 5 hours to finish.

  93. abuse of moderation by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

    This is not a big surprise, but this moderation is just ridiculous. I mean, in a world in which the CIA was repeatedly caught actually importing drugs and selling seized drugs to fund so-called "black" operations, is there really anyone who has a hard time believing that anyone in our current administration, which has been shown to be completely devoid of honesty, is involved with drug trafficking?

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  94. Re:Silly Iranians... ALWAYS! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Uh, yeah. We got it.

  95. Re:aaaaactually learn your history by Explodicle · · Score: 1

    Ever hear of
    ?

  96. Alcohol by Kelson · · Score: 1
    What is different about alcohol in the US compared with the rest of europe?

    In the US, it's forbidden to youth. Which means they're that much more interested in it. And since they have to drink it illicitly, they're more likely to binge drink. Which leads to forming lifelong bad drinking habits, to overdoses, and to doing stupid things that result in injury, death, unwanted pregnancies, STDs, etc. Which leads to more concern that alcohol is dangerous, and an even stronger determination to keep it out of the hands of teens. Which makes them more interested in it...

  97. Nukes by SQLz · · Score: 2, Funny

    Luckily, the PDF "How to Make a Nuke Out of Normal Household Items" is only 96k.

  98. Re:aaaaactually learn your history by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    >Iran had a democratically elected president in the 1950s

    and it has one today. Ahmedinajad was democraticly elected unlike Chineese leadership, but that's not really helpfull as the democratic majority would like Isreal wiped of the map.

  99. Re:aaaaactually learn your history by WilliamSChips · · Score: 1

    No. At least, not in Palestine where the Arabs were living for well over a thousand years, whereas the Israelis' ancestors hadn't lived there for over sixteen hundred years. Israel should have been cut out of Germany.

    --
    Please, for the good of Humanity, vote Obama.
  100. Their high tech US filtering software sucks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Last year I was in Teheran. And indeed they filter a lot of websites. But a quick ssh login to my box at home with a port-forward to my proxy server solved the problem in like 10 seconds.

    Actually their filtering technology is completely bogus and easily fooled.

    1. Re:Their high tech US filtering software sucks by jonwil · · Score: 1

      Better hope someone in the iranian government doesnt read that, next thing you know they will ban SSH as "anti-islamic"

  101. Re:Silly Iranians... ALWAYS! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I salute you Captain Obvious! :)

  102. Definitely Misguided by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The most revolutionary ideas are often the most concise.

    I could deliver my anti-establisment (be it a western or eastern one) message over 1200 bps acoustically coupled modems just as effectively, if not more so.

    In fact, one is better off to open the floodgates and let the torrents (pun intended) of porn and Shakira videos flow.

    Methinks Iran has missed the boat on modern propaganda and information flow control.

    It seems to work quite well here in the west.

    I say this from my 28.8 Kbps connection.

  103. silly iranians by slew · · Score: 1

    A few PR suggestion to roll this new policy out to their citizens...

    Silly iranians, clicks are for infid[el]s...
    Have I.T. OUR way...
    Yo quiero Dial-up Hell!
    Surf city yoU abStAin!
    Aren't you glad you use dial-[up]?
    [downloads] keep going, and going, and going...
    Where you don't want to go today...
    Just DON'T do I.T.
    Shout I.T. out...
    Don't leave home with I.T.
    I.T. is everywhere you want to be, [but can't]...
    The network is the computer [and only YOUR computer]...
    Think outside the box [just don't surf there]
    Let your fingers do the walking, [but not the surfing]...
    A mind is a terrible thing to waste, [surfing the internet]...

  104. Re:aaaaactually learn your history by cryfreedomlove · · Score: 1

    The state of Israel has been in existence for 50 years now. For children who are being born into this world today, what would you have them do? Should they be burdened with the old grudges? Let's bury the hatchet and move on.

  105. Re:aaaaactually learn your history by WilliamSChips · · Score: 1

    Actually, today, I think they should just ignore their parents trying to get them to kill each other. On both sides.

    --
    Please, for the good of Humanity, vote Obama.
  106. Re:aaaaactually learn your history by tcc3 · · Score: 1

    When someone figures out how to make a buck off of "hellish frozen wasteland" then lets see how neutral it is.

  107. Re:aaaaactually learn your history by xigxag · · Score: 2, Informative

    I don't consider myself pro-Israel, but honestly, check your facts*. There have been Jews in the Middle East pretty much continuously since there were Jews, admittedly in small numbers, but they never entirely went away. Western history as typically taught tends to follow the story of European Jewry, not unreasonably, since most Jews today are of course of European ancestry. But that doesn't mean Palestinian, Lebanese, Iranian and African Jews ceased to exist.

    *On this subject, particularly, I don't know if it's even possible to find factual information that is entirely free of political agenda, but this page seems to be fairly free of BS. Can't vouch for the rest of the website, just that particular page.

    --
    There are two kinds of people: 1) those who start arrays with one and 1) those who start them with zero.
  108. Hmm by illuminatedwax · · Score: 1

    You know, this sucks for Iran and all, but if you're China, it must be pretty telling of how controlling your government is when Iran has a more lax Internet policy than you do.

    --
    Did you ever notice that *nix doesn't even cover Linux?
  109. Sacrificial Karma by Meph_the_Balrog · · Score: 1

    i know i know, but someone's going to say it

    Would this not then bring a rise in suicide blogging?

  110. Re:Iran Is Trying To Improve Tech For the Rest of by mochan_s · · Score: 1

    Hehe, brilliant.

    Like BitTorrent and eMule was fast-track developed because of RIAA.

    Soon, possibly because of the RIAA - the world will see good ad-hoc network software where the IP-address doesn't give you away.

  111. Re:Couple of links to get your head chopped off wi by gd23ka · · Score: 1

    Go and watch some more CNN then :-). No, honestly. This is America. Nobody has to use their brain here.

  112. Not as much as jennifer lopez' by SpammersAreScum · · Score: 1

    I thought it might be skewed due to being a common misspelling in that part of the world. But, no, it's even more dramatic with the normal spelling! http://www.google.com/trends?q=jennifer+lopez Oh, and you realize that by pointing this out you may have Heisenburg'd the data...

  113. at the speed of light by Treates2 · · Score: 0

    gas prices.

  114. Theyre network wil lbe toast in 2 years. by Unknown+Poltroon · · Score: 1

    Imagine every net junkie, script kiddie, phone phreak, hacker, cracker ane leet sysadmin, suddenly denied access to evertyhing that mkes the internet interesting. There is nothing left but to tinker with the network itself. If the internet suddenly has no value to them, then there is no reson not to tear it apart for amusement.

    --
    All Troll + "offtopic" mods are meta moderated as "Unfair", because you abused the system.
  115. Re:aaaaactually learn your history by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Fag, learn to write in HTML. Learn to speak English. Learn to spell.

    You're one dumb lump of shit and you should be flushed.

    We're all laughing at you.

  116. Re:Where does it go? (Republican version) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    The government's plan seems to be "hold on to as much as we can, for as long as we can, by any means necessary."

    This sounds like the Republican Party in the runup to the next election...

  117. AKA by zekt · · Score: 1

    Iran, aka West Korea :-p

    --
    In my next incarnation, I hope to come back as a code monkey.
  118. Re:Iran is not a nation that cares about its citiz by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Or Pat Robertson.

  119. We'll soon 'Liberate' them anyway... by bushwhacker2000 · · Score: 1

    Since the US seems to be preparing to attack Iran or at least engage in some type of 'regime change', they'll probably have to rebuild their infrastructure anyhow. Maybe the new 'supreme leader' will allow broadband, that is, if the Iranians aren't all dead or suffering for radiation sickness from our depleted uranium munitions.

    http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/200601009_bush s_nuclear_apocalypse/
    http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/101806Q.shtml
    http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=9814279694 71020612
    http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=06/10/1 6/144204

  120. Destruction At The Speed of Light by jman.org · · Score: 1

    It's really quite simple. Iran (the country, not the people) needs the bandwidth for research.

    How else will they simulate all those nuclear "energy producing devices" they're building?

  121. Closed minds... by madbawa · · Score: 0

    Narrow minded sons of beaches...Such closed minds (if any). What is the so-called 'Western influence'?? Those mullahs force their own women to wear veils and then ogle at other people's wives and daughters at every place imaginable. In a word - hypocrites.

  122. I Hope You Used a Proxy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... or else ....

  123. This is why anonymous posting is important by janzen · · Score: 1
    Thanks for posting that. It's one thing to read about "the Iranians" building nukes, or "the Iranians" aiding Iraqi insurgents; quite another to read a first-hand account of what daily life is like for the unfortunate Iranian people themselves. Hope things improve for you soon, my friend.

    And the next time the rest of us hear anyone criticizing anonymous speech on the Internet -- or, worse, proposing restrictions on it -- please point them at the parent post.

    (Finally, I sure hope the Slashdot servers are secure. Slashdot tech guys, please take this stuff really, really seriously.)

  124. Re:aaaaactually learn your history by Petkov · · Score: 0

    Fine, |I will admit the Jews have the upper hand RIGHT NOW since they are backed by the all mightly US which is cleverly using UN to do their bidding. But Israel is supported monetary and finacially by the USA. Take away US's help and Israel is a gonner. the Grand vision of taking over the Middle East by the USA is NOT going very well, is it? We still have to see how the "new world order" game is played out.

    --
    I got permanently modded -1 because I dared to question Israel on /.
  125. Re:Iran is not a nation that cares about its citiz by boarder8925 · · Score: 1
    The country does conduct votes and such, but it ultimately doesn't matter as the Ayatollah have the final say on everything.
    Sounds a lot like the United States.
  126. Re:aaaaactually learn your history by shawngarringer · · Score: 1

    And how many times has America stepped in to one of those land battles and not totally f'ed things up. Besides times where we went in with assistance, like in WW2.

  127. Re:Iran is not a nation that cares about its citiz by Reservoir+Penguin · · Score: 1

    And how many million black americans were illegally prevented from voting (presumably) democrat in the last presedential elections?

    --
    US-UK-Israel: The real Axis of Evil
  128. Or maybe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Or maybe a Shinyman.

  129. Spain? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You may be mentioning to the Spanish-American War, where the US substituted Spain as the colonial power in Cuba, the Philippines and Puerto Rico. The "democracy" in Cuba was limited and no longer exists. The democracy in Philippines was limited and took several decades to be conceded. Puerto Rico became democratic though.

    Or you may be mentioning how Eisenhower sided with a friend of Hitler and Mussolini.

    1. Re:Spain? by OeLeWaPpErKe · · Score: 1

      Everybody makes mistakes. Big ones and small ones.

      4 things are certain though :
      a) america is in iraq to help the iraqi people
      b) saddam killed hundreds of thousands, if not millions to stay in power, even with the constant attacks, the us does not match him, not even with bogus numbers from the lancet
      c) many iraqi's want your support (ironically a large group among them are palestinians, who are being attacked by saoudi arabia sunni militia (and shi'ite, nobody really knows why, but they do attack the palestinians, perhaps they just don't care who they kill), others are christians, or armenians, and many, many shi'ite and sunni muslims)
      d) the worst option by far is to leave them alone, they will all be killed if america were to do that

      Hopefully one day e) can be added

      e) it's working

      it IS working, it's just taking time

  130. What's different by mr_death · · Score: 1

    We (the US) got the right-wing fundamentalist whackos that fled tolerant Europe. Said whackos exert a disproportiate influence on the US electoral system. Alcohol, gambling, evolution -- all tools of the devil.

    I bartended in Texas as a high school senior; the rules were truly weird, like no cleaning supplies could be behind the bar -- apparently, we might cut a nice single malt scotch with drano, or something. Liquor bottles sold to bars were serialized (!!!?!), and the serial number had to be scratched off after the bottle was finished, on pain of a $10k fine and a shutdown for a week (!!!). In the land of the bible belt, goofy rules (bar rules, blue laws, and so on) were common.

    I'm very glad to be living in Seattle (northwest corner of the continental US) now.

    --
    It's Linux, damnit! Pay no attention to renaming attempts by self-aggrandizing blowhards.
  131. Learn to comprehend english. by BobBoring · · Score: 1

    Um.. Antarctica is a continent.

    country (n) kúntree - 1, The territory occupied by a nation, "he visited several European countries" 2, A politically organized body of people under a single government, "the country's largest manufacturer" 3, The people who live in a nation or country "the whole country worshipped him" 4, An area outside of cities and towns "his poetry celebrated the slower pace of life in the country" 5, A particular geographical region of indefinite boundary (usually serving some special purpose or distinguished by its people or culture or geography)

    Since Antarctica has no permanent or indigenous human population, people, it is not a country.

  132. Heck we don't even have proper 56k dialup ! by F117 · · Score: 1

    As an IT Techi guy living in Iran for the past 6 years here's what we used to have and what we have now: 6 years ago if you wanted access you had to apply to an ISP, with a copy of your "birth certificate" and address, work address, parent's phone number, 2-3 guys addresses and birth certificate serial numbers, a lot of money and a signature that accepted all their stupid terms.
    Internet access was through 2 methods: Hourly or Per Kilobyte. You'd opt for the second method if you only chatted, and chose first if you used the web more.

    After a couple of years things became more sensible. You could buy cards, scratch off and find the password, then call up teh now 56K E1 number and get online. No more filling forms.
    Speeds were 56K theoritical, 45K actual, and actual throughput was something around 28.8 - 33.6 even though the "Bandwidth" was 45K. This fooled a lot of people into forking out more money for "E1" lines.

    After a couple of years (2 years ago) a few major ISP's started advertising for DSL. I live in Tehran, the capital and we have something around 30 telecommunications centers, each covering an area of Tehran. Of 30 or so telecommunications areas, even today, only a handful offer digital lines, (DSL) so internet for your average guy is still through 56K (so it's called) dialup. The telecommunications authority (the main one that controls the 30 or so smaller branches) keeps saying we're going to have digital lines soon, but 2 years on and there are around 5 or 6 areas (mainly in central town where the offices are) that offer DSL. Even then, they offer 128K connection at stupid prices, speeds are capped, sites are banned, and you have download limits of something around 1 GB/month. Some, like Datak (www.datak-telecom.com) offer unlimited downloads and speeds of up to 256K. It actually starts from 64K. So for all of you who think 128K is too little. Hey: less than 1% of internet users have access to DSL ! What is the government talking about ?!!!

    Tehran - Iran

    --
    -573417h F16h73r