Libya Warns Against Use of Facebook

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Libya Warns Against Use of Facebook

Posted by CmdrTaco on Thursday February 17, 2011 @05:22AM from the don't-do-that dept.

An anonymous reader writes "Many Libyan Internet activists have declared their support for the pro-democracy movements and revolutions in the Middle East. After seeing the power of the people succeed in Tunisia and Egypt, they created groups on Facebook to call for political and economic reforms in Libya. Libya's dictator, Muammar Gaddafi, has responded by warning against the use of Facebook."

112 of 146 comments (clear)

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

There are many reasons to beware of Facebook. by Kenja · 2011-02-17 05:24 · Score: 4, Insightful

But this isn't one of them.

--

"Have you ever thought about just turning off the TV, sitting down with your kids, and hitting them?"
1. Re:There are many reasons to beware of Facebook. by Anonymous Coward · 2011-02-17 05:27 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  The printing press was not good for authoritarians. Neither is online collaboration.
2. Re:There are many reasons to beware of Facebook. by FuckingNickName · 2011-02-17 05:30 · Score: 2, Interesting
  
  All governments reflect the will of the majority, except in the very short term. No dictator could stand without popular support. This horrible truth makes "Western Democracy" a polite facade for the same experience everyone's endured since one guy first discovered he could win friends and influence people.
3. Re:There are many reasons to beware of Facebook. by swanzilla · 2011-02-17 05:34 · Score: 1
  
  Avoiding Lybian prison is a fairly valid reason.
  
  --
  0 = 1 + e^(Alt something)
4. Re:There are many reasons to beware of Facebook. by tysonedwards · 2011-02-17 05:34 · Score: 2
  
  As much as I personally object to the implementation of Facebook and how the masses seem to regard it as the be-all, end-all source for communicating, playing games and generally dicking around, I completely agree that the dissemination of information is generally for the greater good.
  
  Enabling people to openly speak their minds and to enable reform to happen within their governments when they object to the way that things are being run has been shown to create dialogs to enable peaceful change to happen.
  
  When such opinions and discussions are forced to be kept in secret, the only action that can be taken is out of anger and violence, and as the mighty Yoda once said: "Fear leads to anger. Anger leads to hate. Hate leads to suffering."
  
  --
  Thirty four characters live here.
5. Re:There are many reasons to beware of Facebook. by ElectricTurtle · 2011-02-17 05:37 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  I think you wildly conflate "support" with "acquiescence". A dictator can maintain power so long as the majority would rather not act against him. They don't have to like, let alone act positively toward, that administration.
  
  --
  I support the Slashcott and will not be reading or commenting from 2/10/14 to 2/17/14. Beta is steaming pile of dog shit
6. Re:There are many reasons to beware of Facebook. by ColdWetDog · 2011-02-17 05:42 · Score: 1
  
  An amusing sidelight to this is that SonicWall is blocking anything with the term 'Facebook' in it. I was going to look at yesterday's Facebook thread here on Slashdot when I had a few, um, spare moments. I got this nice banner saying that the system was keeping me safe and clean and free from Internet Evil. Apparently it's just parsing the links looking for nasty words.
  
  Nothing to see here, move along.....
  
  --
  Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
7. Re:There are many reasons to beware of Facebook. by gad_zuki! · 2011-02-17 05:54 · Score: 2
  
  Your administrator has set your Sonicwall router to do that explicitly. Sonicwall as a corporation isn't blocking Facebook for all the world, your IT guy is. Take it up with him. Maybe your boss thinks you're dicking around too much on the internet.
8. Re:There are many reasons to beware of Facebook. by shadowknot · 2011-02-17 06:00 · Score: 1
  
  Unrelated to the topic but I had a similar moment with eBay yesterday. While listing my Schecter Blackhawk for sale I thought I'd include the usual blurb about no Western Union and all that stuff. Turns out the page you submit the auction through parses looking for such keywords and won't allow you to start tour auction until you remove all references to such verboten services and lacks the logic to differentiate between saying "I won't accept this" and "I will scam you with this". So my auction now says I won't take payment from "Eastern Guild" or similar services!
9. Re:There are many reasons to beware of Facebook. by Nadaka · 2011-02-17 06:17 · Score: 2
  
  Or his secret police are too effective.
10. Re:There are many reasons to beware of Facebook. by phantomfive · 2011-02-17 06:19 · Score: 1
  
  I've noticed, at least in latin america, the dictator needs actual support of around 20%-30% of the population, and, as you say, acquiescence of 60% of the rest or so. You need to have someone to do your bidding, after all. For example, in Nicaragua, president and wannabe dictator Ortega seems to have strong support of around 30% of the population, but the rest would prefer a different president. But the army and a lot of the youth really like him, think he'll bring change or something, and keep voting him in. And most of the rest acquiesce.
  
  Iran is an interesting situation, right on the edge. The ruling class has strong direct support of a big minority of the population (the Basij and the military), but it also has a large chunk of the population, probably significantly larger chunk, who is not willing to acquiesce anymore. For that reason it's an unstable country. The interesting part there is that the ruling class has all the weapons.....if each side had an equal armament, the revolution likely would have been over by now.
  
  --
  "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
11. Re:There are many reasons to beware of Facebook. by Locke2005 · 2011-02-17 06:31 · Score: 1
  
  Agreed. Wasn't the printing press one of the factors that led to the Protestant Reformation?
  
  --
  I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
12. Re:There are many reasons to beware of Facebook. by FuckingNickName · 2011-02-17 06:31 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  Unfortunately so. Just as today, capitalism is the will of the majority (sell what enough people want), and poverty is the method of purging the undesirables - whether by keeping them wage slaves or simply letting them die off through lack of good security and healthcare. It's not that there are alternatives - the outcome is inevitable, whatever label you put on your political or economic system.
13. Re:There are many reasons to beware of Facebook. by Locke2005 · 2011-02-17 06:32 · Score: 1
  
  Only because his secret police is using the latest technology from the US... and we wonder why people don't like us.
  
  --
  I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
14. Re:There are many reasons to beware of Facebook. by spun · 2011-02-17 06:33 · Score: 1
  
  So you are saying, if a country has a dictator, that country deserves to have a dictator? Can you explain what factors make a populace acquiesce to a dictator, and what make them revolt? That would be more helpful than stopping your analysis at "They support it or are too apathetic to revolt."
  
  --
  - None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
15. Re:There are many reasons to beware of Facebook. by FuckingNickName · 2011-02-17 07:01 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  No, I'm not saying anyone "deserves" a dictator - I'm saying that the existence of a dictator/regime implies popular support for the dictator/regime. This doesn't mean the whole country supports the dictator; it may even be that the majority would prefer something different if it were presented to them but lack the imagination to think it up themselves (this is why propaganda is such an effective tool, both from within and without).
16. Re:There are many reasons to beware of Facebook. by Loosifur · 2011-02-17 07:11 · Score: 2
  
  If you're talking about the Libyan army, last I checked the Russians made T-72's and T90's. Also, we don't exactly have a warm and fuzzy relationship with Libya. Bahrain has some US hardware, but the M60 Patton and the M113 APC aren't exactly the cutting edge of armor; they both came out in the 60s. And if you think Bahraini protesters should hate the US on the basis of military hardware, might I suggest that they also hate the British, French, Swiss, Swedish, and Germans for the same.
  I'm not sure, but I think the tanks that the Egyptian army did not turn on protesters are a combo of American and old Soviet tanks.
  Secret police, being secret, don't advertise whatever tech you think they might be using, but I'm going to go out on a limb and say that the CIA did not provide any help to Libya in that regard, either, seeing as this is the country led by a dictator whose house we bombed in the 80s for general naughtiness, among other notable diplomatic fun-facts.
  Although "people don't like us" is a deliciously vague phrase, I'm going to translate that as, "the US is unpopular in the Middle East". Then I would say that we're actually not as unpopular as you might think, or as we might seem at times. Also, the Middle East encompasses a large enough area and diverse enough population that it is probably a gross oversimplification to assign one opinion to all people in the entire region. Then you have the problem of how to accurately measure opinions of populations who might not have the freedom to speak openly, in countries led by hostile regimes, and who may or may not be truly random selections (i.e. not government plants). Finally, it seems that most people in the Middle East are quite capable of separating a distaste for American foreign policy from a dislike for the United States as a country or Americans as people.
  
  --
  This unbiased moderation brought to you by the Porcine Aviation Group!
17. Re:There are many reasons to beware of Facebook. by Darkness404 · 2011-02-17 07:26 · Score: 1
  
  Um, no, (pure) capitalism isn't the will of the majority. If capitalism was the will of the majority, there would be only one provider for everything. One car, one restaurant, etc. Rather, capitalism shows that it is possible to get a profit while not being in the majority. For example, in any medium sized town there are multiple places to eat and most of the time none of them have a majority but yet all of them are successful. If capitalism was the will of the majority, if less than 50% plus one was eating at that restaurant, it would close but yet that doesn't happen. While it is true that you need -some- people to go to your business or else it will go bankrupt, the idea that it is the "will of the majority" is laughable.
  
  --
  Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
18. Re:There are many reasons to beware of Facebook. by FuckingNickName · 2011-02-17 07:32 · Score: 2
  
  You're describing the beginning of the process. The end result in any market is a few dominant players, often cooperating, to satisfy the vast majority. It is possible for a few irrelevant small businesses to struggle along temporarily ("successful" is rose-tinting it), all vigorously defending the system because each dreams to become a big player.
19. Re:There are many reasons to beware of Facebook. by Darkness404 · 2011-02-17 08:00 · Score: 1
  
  Yes, a few dominant players but there are still others out there and will always continue to have others out there serving niches that aren't met by the large players. If there is a need, there will be a company to fulfill that need, no matter how small. Whenever there is a niche that needs to be filled, one of two things will happen, either a new business will start up to fulfill that niche or an existing business will, its not going to go unfulfilled for long. Name me a product that no company has stepped in to fulfill a need.
  
  --
  Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
20. Re:There are many reasons to beware of Facebook. by Chris+Mattern · 2011-02-17 08:18 · Score: 1
  
  All governments reflect the will of the majority, except in the very short term.
  True, of course. But the will of the majority can be bent, by propaganda. It can be coerced, by intimidation. A dictator cannot rule without the consent of the great majority of his people. That doesn't mean he's limited to nice means in getting it.
21. Re:There are many reasons to beware of Facebook. by dgatwood · 2011-02-17 08:19 · Score: 1
  
  Name me a product that no company has stepped in to fulfill a need.
  Booger pickers.
  
  --
  Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.
22. Re:There are many reasons to beware of Facebook. by Cinder6 · 2011-02-17 08:19 · Score: 1
  
  So you're only successful if you're a big, multinational corporation? There are plenty of businesses that don't struggle to survive and aren't huge. There are also plenty of huge businesses that are struggling.
  
  --
  If you can't convince them, convict them.
23. Re:There are many reasons to beware of Facebook. by spun · 2011-02-17 08:20 · Score: 2
  
  "Popular support" usually implies a majority, I guess that was what threw me. But it appears you are saying that a dictator requires a certain amount of popular support, and a certain amount of apathy or lack of imagination. That I can agree with. I believe the real reason for this recent slew of revolts is the recent string of crop failures driving up food prices. Poorer people who are apathetic when bread is 50 cents a loaf can suddenly become very motivated when the price tops two dollars.
  
  --
  - None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
24. Re:There are many reasons to beware of Facebook. by FuckingNickName · 2011-02-17 08:22 · Score: 1
  
  So you're only successful if you're a big, multinational corporation?
  Relative to the big, multinational corporation, yes.
  
  There are also plenty of huge businesses that are struggling.
  Because they're either no longer popular or they've fucked up their management. Popularity is necessary for success (gov or com) but not sufficient.
25. Re:There are many reasons to beware of Facebook. by Chris+Mattern · 2011-02-17 08:25 · Score: 1
  
  The end result in any market is a few dominant players
  Wrong.
26. Re:There are many reasons to beware of Facebook. by Tranzistors · 2011-02-17 08:34 · Score: 1
  
  I think what you are trying to say is "dictator implies some people support him". Like, if there is support from police and army, then what else do you need?
  Even if 90% know that anything is better than this, but revolting means swift death, what do you expect? Maybe you believe in "liberty or death", but for lots of others it is more like "live to fight another day".
27. Re:There are many reasons to beware of Facebook. by operagost · 2011-02-17 09:09 · Score: 1
  
  Dale Carnegie?
  
  --
  
  Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
28. Re:There are many reasons to beware of Facebook. by FuckingNickName · 2011-02-17 09:09 · Score: 1
  
  "computing industry" is not a single market.
29. Re:There are many reasons to beware of Facebook. by FuckingNickName · 2011-02-17 11:12 · Score: 2
  
  You're not very good at this. "Computer hardware" is such a vague, overarching term that it's embarrassing you propose a market for "computer hardware". You need to do it like this:
  Market for general purpose CPU: Intel, ARM, (AMD).
  Market for desktop operating systems: Microsoft, Apple.
  Market for search engines: Google, Yahoo, Microsoft.
  Market for smart mobile phone operating systems (much newer market - this still varies quite a bit): Google, Apple, Nokia, Blackberry.
  If you think even half a dozen competitors in a world of almost 7 billion people is impressive, you're missing the point entirely.
30. Re:There are many reasons to beware of Facebook. by Erikderzweite · 2011-02-17 11:29 · Score: 1
  
  I strongly disagree, having been lived in a dictatorship myself. A dictator may have the majority of votes on election, but to call it the will of majority would be a gross overstatement.
  Any dictator creates an artificial environment where no strong opponent may ever become strong enough to oppose him. The govenment usually consists of weak officials chosen by their absolute loyalty instead of their abilities and skills. Any opposition leader who is becoming too strong in the eye of a dictator will be oppressed, put in jail, forced to leave the country and above all discreditated almost non-stop via the state controlled media with no opportunity to answer even the most insolent lie. The police deals fairly brutally with any forms of protests which are downplayed by the monopolistic state-owned media as well.
  The Internet is a bit of a game-changer, but as most dictatorship are doing pretty bad economically with government officials that are selected by loyalty and inevitable rampant corruption, only a minority could afford it.
  Sure, with obligatory pre-election pensions and salaries rise, with excessive propaganda prior to the election, no real alternative due to the above-mentioned reasons and other tricks a dictator *may* get above 50% of the votes, but such election is by no means fair, don't you agree?
  But, as we've seen lately, most dictators just falsify the election to about 80-90% to claim the unanimous support of the people. Both in Tunisia and Egypt the number of people who *actively* went to the streets has easily surpassed the alleged number of people who officially voted against the president. And how many of unhappy were simply afraid? Fear is dictators weapon of choice, after all. Not everyone who is against the dictatorship is willing to risk his job, freedom and even life. So 3-5 Mio. of protesters in Egypt is a sign that there were very few people in the country who have *approved* the regime. The diminutive pro-president demonstrations consisting of mostly police agents kind of prove my point.
31. Re:There are many reasons to beware of Facebook. by allusionist · 2011-02-17 11:30 · Score: 1
  
  secret police.....of supporters.
  File it under "support is too great".
32. Re:There are many reasons to beware of Facebook. by budgenator · 2011-02-17 13:04 · Score: 1
  
  I'm not sure, but I think the tanks that the Egyptian army did not turn on protesters are a combo of American and old Soviet tanks.
  That's the way I understand it, if memory serves me correctly, in the late 70s or 80s USATACOM was busy installing US M60A1 turrets on Soviet built T72 tank hulls for the Egyptians, so some would even be hybrids of the two.
  
  --
  Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
33. Re:There are many reasons to beware of Facebook. by severoon · 2011-02-17 13:46 · Score: 1
  
  I don't think preventing people from accessing Facebook will do any good. The Libyan govt needs to keep people away from Twitter, email, etc. What they really need to do is just shut off the Internet completely...that would get them where they want to be.
  What? Why's everyone looking at me? Why wouldn't that work???
  
  --
  but have you considered the following argument: shut up.
34. Re:There are many reasons to beware of Facebook. by shutdown+-p+now · 2011-02-17 14:10 · Score: 1
  
  All governments reflect the will of the majority
  True to an extent, but the thing about will of the people is that it's easily manipulated if you control their access to information. In particular, if a dictator can fully control such in his country, he can ensure continued (and genuine) support of the majority. Then there's brainwashing through the education system, and so on. See also: cult of personality.
  And that is the reason why Western democracies are fundamentally different. True, someone still controls the channels, but so long as 1) those are different entities with different agendas often hostile to each other, and 2) it's not (only) the guys in charge, you have the actual will of the majority rather than imposed one.
35. Re:There are many reasons to beware of Facebook. by Thing+1 · 2011-02-17 14:35 · Score: 1
  
  Exactly. I've been wondering when the USA will start dancing in the streets.
  
  --
  I feel fantastic, and I'm still alive.
36. Re:There are many reasons to beware of Facebook. by Meski · 2011-02-17 16:26 · Score: 1
  
  That's assuming that you think an effective (and scary) secret police relies on technology.
37. Re:There are many reasons to beware of Facebook. by WorBlux · 2011-02-17 22:47 · Score: 1
  
  "From all these indignities, such as the very beasts of the field would not endure, you can deliver yourselves if you try, not by taking action, but merely by willing to be free. Resolve to serve no more, and you are at once freed. I do not ask that you place hands upon the tyrant to topple him over, but simply that you support him no longer; then you will behold him, like a great Colossus whose pedestal has been pulled away, fall of his own weight and break in pieces."
  Discourse on Voluntary Servitude The Discours sur la servitude volontaire of ÉTIENNE DE LA BOÉTIE,
38. Re:There are many reasons to beware of Facebook. by buchner.johannes · 2011-02-18 05:29 · Score: 1
  
  Does anyone know what Gaddafi actually said?
  
  --
  NB: The message above might reflect my opinion right now, but not necessarily tomorrow or next year.
Here we go again by Lyrata · 2011-02-17 05:26 · Score: 5, Funny

Help, help, I'm being repressed!

--
50,000 characters used to live here.
1. Re:Here we go again by Anonymous Coward · 2011-02-17 05:26 · Score: 4, Funny
  
  LIKE!
2. Re:Here we go again by ArhcAngel · 2011-02-17 06:15 · Score: 1
  
  POKE!
  
  --
  "A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it." - K
3. Re:Here we go again by Lyrata · 2011-02-17 06:22 · Score: 1
  
  Be the first of your friends to "Like" this on Facebook!
  
  --
  50,000 characters used to live here.
4. Re:Here we go again by Apothem · 2011-02-17 06:38 · Score: 1
  
  Bloody peasant!!
5. Re:Here we go again by operagost · 2011-02-17 09:12 · Score: 1
  
  The REVOLUCION!!! VIVA LA CHE! application wants permission to do the following:
  [Post to your wall]
  [Read your personal information]
  [Empty your bank account]
  [Ruin your credit rating]
  [Turn you in to the authorities]
  
  --
  
  Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
Then Warn Against the Internet! by BoRegardless · 2011-02-17 05:29 · Score: 4, Interesting

The "old guard" has no clue. Stiffling communication today will not work much longer.
The free information exchange makes people want to be free.
1. Re:Then Warn Against the Internet! by Anonymous Coward · 2011-02-17 05:42 · Score: 1
  
  Free information exchange? Yes, because EVERYONE wants to know you're playing farmville, taking a crap and poke you!!
  People forget that facebook is just a website, geesh... Unfurl the flags, log-in on facebook!!
2. Re:Then Warn Against the Internet! by LWATCDR · 2011-02-17 05:58 · Score: 4, Interesting
  
  I wouldn't bet on that. You sure do not hear about any protests in North Korea.
  I fear that the dictators of the world have learned well from this. If you are going to be a dictator be a brutal ruthless dictator. Watch the news and will see that now when protesters show up tanks will too and not a show of force but as brutal force.
  It is easy to talk about an uncrushable human spirit when you do not have a tank crushing your, your wife's, and or you children's bodies. Yep the old guard has learned well. No half measures anymore. If you are going to rule then rule with a brutal iron fist. Welcome to the world of unintended consequences. The results of the Internet revolution may be getting ride of the just moderately bad dictators but creating more really brutal ones.
  BTW just to be clear I REALLY HOPE I TURN OUT TO BE WRONG.
  
  --
  See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
3. Re:Then Warn Against the Internet! by Turn-X+Alphonse · 2011-02-17 05:58 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  People don't want to be free, they want the illusion of freedom while being kept safe, The Internet isn't making people want freedom, it's showing them behind the curtain and the corruption there.
  
  --
  I like muppets.
4. Re:Then Warn Against the Internet! by Damek · 2011-02-17 06:21 · Score: 1
  
  Stiffling communication today will not work much longer.
  I don't see why it can't, though. The internet doesn't exist in a vacuum any more than printing presses did. SOMEONE is doing the work to keep it going in places that need it. Should they stop, it stops.
  P2P cellphone/mifi networks can help, but they're still just electronic tools. Adequate state power can oppress anything, just not, perhaps, forever. (Likewise, adequate vigilance can liberate people at any time - just not, perhaps, forever.)
5. Re:Then Warn Against the Internet! by phantomfive · 2011-02-17 06:24 · Score: 1
  
  North Korea doesn't have any computers.
  
  The problem is, as a dictator, you have two choices: you can either give them computers and allow them to have communication, or you can stifle them like North Korea, and end up impoverished. Keeping citizens ignorant is not a plan for economic growth. North Korea still manages to get by, but how long before the people get tired of starving to death?
  
  --
  "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
6. Re:Then Warn Against the Internet! by ArhcAngel · 2011-02-17 06:24 · Score: 2
  
  Or there are more people who support the dictator than oppose him. There are quite a few North Koreans (and Chinese) who believe the propaganda of their government and fully support them.
  
  --
  "A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it." - K
7. Re:Then Warn Against the Internet! by Locke2005 · 2011-02-17 06:30 · Score: 1
  
  What percentage of the population of North Korea owns a cell phone, let alone and internet-connected computer? You do have a valid point though -- when you don't know where your next meal is coming from, you generally don't have a lot of energy to put into public protests.
  
  --
  I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
8. Re:Then Warn Against the Internet! by just_another_sean · 2011-02-17 07:01 · Score: 1
  
  when you don't know where your next meal is coming from, you generally don't have a lot of energy to put into public protests.
  Seems to me that's a perfect time to start thinking about public protest. Rising food costs and unemployment were major factors sparking the unrest in Egypt, Jordan, Tunisia, etc.
  
  --
  Creationist Textbook Stickers Declared Unconstitutional by CowboyNeal
9. Re:Then Warn Against the Internet! by tompaulco · 2011-02-17 07:01 · Score: 1
  
  Stop anthropomorphizing people!
  Yeah, they hate when you do that.
  
  --
  If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
10. Re:Then Warn Against the Internet! by Locke2005 · 2011-02-17 07:46 · Score: 2
  
  Historically, revolutions don't happen when people are completely oppressed. They happen when oppression is partially lifted, giving the populace the resources they need to revolt. The protesters in Egypt are well educated and well versed in modern technology, not exactly the starving poor. Historically, the very poor by themselves never lead revolts. People are easier to control when they have no freedom at all, they become harder to control when you give them a little freedom.
  
  --
  I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
11. Re:Then Warn Against the Internet! by Asic+Eng · 2011-02-17 08:04 · Score: 1
  
  That's not as easy as it may sound. You need to be evil to be a brutal ruthless dictator, but that's not enough - you also need to be able to convince others that they are better off following you (even if the majority of the population is not). If the basis of your system is an ideology, then you can't easily make changes which go counter that ideology. You also need to arrange yourself with other power structures within your realm - it's rare that you have all the power to begin with.
  If you look at Burma for example - they need to respect Buddhism to an extent, and will not easily move against monks, except as a very last resort. To go against deeply ingrained beliefs you need an ideology to counter it - like communism for example. That ties your hands on other matters though - e.g. now you need to at least make a convincing show of following communist beliefs.
12. Re:Then Warn Against the Internet! by LWATCDR · 2011-02-17 08:19 · Score: 2
  
  That is just it. To have a real revolution you must have some hope of victory and frankly living to see it. People in the west and even slightly free nations really do not get it.
  If you see masses of people being killed you will not join them. Look at the very limited resistance in European nations durring WWII. The movies really over blow the size of the resistance. The French resistance was actually pretty minnor until liberation was near at hand. AKA they thought they had chance to live to see victory. The Warsaw uprising was when Russian troops where near btw that was a shameful thing the USSR did letting them die.
  The nation that did the best at resisting was Norway. The reason that did so well. Hitler gave them the most freedom and thought that they would actually fall in line because they where Nordic. BTW I am not saying this to take anything away from the Norwegian resistance. On the contrary they pretty much invited a brutal occupation because they took a moral stand. IMHO Norway was the unsung hero of WWII.
  But all this brave talk on Slashdot means nothing. Most of us are really clueless to how good we have it and how free and safe we really are. When push comes to shove almost no one here would stand in front of tank that just ran over another protester. It goes counter to the basic will to live.
  
  --
  See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
13. Re:Then Warn Against the Internet! by rahvin112 · 2011-02-17 08:21 · Score: 1
  
  There are exceptions but for the most part you are wrong. Dictators don't like people pointing out they are being naughty and killing people. Amnesty International would have absolutely no power or authority if it wasn't for that fact. They work to shame repressive regimes by publicizing the crimes in the free world. Such publicity causes diplomatic and other problems such as travel bans. And that's the kicker, even though they rule whatever backwater place, they take their vacations in Europe and even if they don't leave very often their family and kids do.
  Some of the Dictators like Ghadafi might get more aggressive but the majority are going to have issues doing it because it will crimp their own lifestyles and impact their families.
14. Re:Then Warn Against the Internet! by LWATCDR · 2011-02-17 09:14 · Score: 1
  
  "Some of the Dictators like Ghadafi might get more aggressive but the majority are going to have issues doing it because it will crimp their own lifestyles and impact their families."
  More than getting kicked out of power?
  As I said some will get over thrown but some will become far more brutal.
  I fear that a lot more will become far more brutal.
  http://english.aljazeera.net/news/middleeast/2011/02/201121714223324820.html
  for example
  
  --
  See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
15. Re:Then Warn Against the Internet! by BitZtream · 2011-02-17 09:17 · Score: 1
  
  Apparently, neither does the new gaurd.
  Facebook played little role in what happened, for some retarded reason, the same reason as the Google guy, it gets publicized like it brought down the evil Egyption dictator.
  The reality of it is, it was the people who actually got off their asses and made their feeling known that changed Eygpt. Not Facebook, not some Google talking head who happens to live there.
  Facebook doesn't even deserve an honorable mention. More people showed up because of telephone calls from friend than anything Facebook did, its retarded to attribute it to having an effect.
  
  --
  Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
16. Re:Then Warn Against the Internet! by MaDeR · 2011-02-17 09:30 · Score: 1
  
  USA already is afraid of Internet, too.
  
  --
  What modern Obelix would say today? Of course, "Those crazy Americans!".
17. Re:Then Warn Against the Internet! by future+assassin · 2011-02-17 10:26 · Score: 1
  
  http://www.google.ca/search?hl=en&tbs=nws:1&&sa=X&ei=QqBdTdy2L4-asAO00NnLCA&ved=0CCEQBSgA&q=Protests+in+Bahrain+killed+as+they+slept&spell=1
  
  --
  by TheSpoom (715771) Uncaring Linux user here. I have nothing to add to this but please continue. *munches popcorn*
18. Re:Then Warn Against the Internet! by Nick_13ro · 2011-02-17 10:58 · Score: 1
  
  That is just it. To have a real revolution you must have some hope of victory and frankly living to see it. People in the west and even slightly free nations really do not get it. If you see masses of people being killed you will not join them. Look at the very limited resistance in European nations durring WWII. The movies really over blow the size of the resistance. The French resistance was actually pretty minnor until liberation was near at hand. AKA they thought they had chance to live to see victory. The Warsaw uprising was when Russian troops where near btw that was a shameful thing the USSR did letting them die. The nation that did the best at resisting was Norway. The reason that did so well. Hitler gave them the most freedom and thought that they would actually fall in line because they where Nordic. BTW I am not saying this to take anything away from the Norwegian resistance. On the contrary they pretty much invited a brutal occupation because they took a moral stand. IMHO Norway was the unsung hero of WWII. But all this brave talk on Slashdot means nothing. Most of us are really clueless to how good we have it and how free and safe we really are. When push comes to shove almost no one here would stand in front of tank that just ran over another protester. It goes counter to the basic will to live.
  All true. But on the other hand if you're seriously oppressing a people if you want it to work you must either make sure there are very significant differences between the people in your army and the people they must run over with their tanks or else make sure the oppressed are kept on such a tight leash they never have a chance to assemble en masse in your capital. The mob itself almost certainly won't be enough to overthrow the government but it may very well provide cover for traitors and plots(who then of course declare their coup to be a "popular revolution"). And most of those tinpot dictators accusing CIA involvement in movements against them are probably not lying. A democratic government is easiest to control: just fund a bunch of killers/rapists/child molesters to power and then bribe and blackmail them into doing your bidding.
19. Re:Then Warn Against the Internet! by Erikderzweite · 2011-02-17 11:55 · Score: 1
  
  So you neglect the fierce resistance of partisans and underground in Belarus which have lost almost a *third* of its population during the war (unlike Holocaust that tragedy remains relatively unknown) and praise Norway which faired pretty well under German rule with most population going on with their daily lives (you can't really compare several thousands Norwegian causalities with a few millions dead Belarusian people)?
  It did not help Germans that they have slaughtered entire villages in Belarus and Ukraine, the resistance got stronger instead which lead to even more slaughtering. I've been talking to many old people who have survive that time, many of them have joined the partisans *because* they've seen German troops slaughtering Jews wherever they could find any (and there were many Jewish settlements and communities in Belarus back then).
  German did two wars back then -- the "civilized" one in Western and Nothern Europe and the total war against Soviet Union, where millions of captured soldiers have died in German concentration camps (another forgotten tragedy, no one really cared about conventions, they were "commies" after all) and many more civilians.
  As for Warsaw uprising -- I tend to believe Churchill when he said that the uprising was started prematurely and with no coordination with the Red Army. The famous Polish pride, I guess.
20. Re:Then Warn Against the Internet! by TheDugong · 2011-02-17 13:40 · Score: 1
  
  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Come_and_See
  Haunted me for weeks afterwards.
21. Re:Then Warn Against the Internet! by shutdown+-p+now · 2011-02-17 14:07 · Score: 1
  
  North Korea still manages to get by, but how long before the people get tired of starving to death?
  Practically indefinitely, so long as you can keep them thinking that this is normal state of affairs (i.e. explain that people are starving even worse under capitalist yoke on the other side of the border etc). Which is precisely why you keep all communication channels down for the population at large.
22. Re:Then Warn Against the Internet! by shutdown+-p+now · 2011-02-17 14:17 · Score: 1
  
  As for Warsaw uprising -- I tend to believe Churchill when he said that the uprising was started prematurely and with no coordination with the Red Army.
  This is true (the military leaders of the uprising have remarked, before it began, that they had no hope for success without Soviet intervention), though not for the lack of trying - it's just that Poles were turned down whenever they suggested it. The point however was that by the time it began, Soviet Army had no real reasons not to intervene, other than political (Polish forces in the city were largely aligned with anti-Soviet government-in-exile). So while they didn't have any formal obligation to do so, there was an expectation for them to do it on both rational and moral grounds.
23. Re:Then Warn Against the Internet! by Erikderzweite · 2011-02-17 23:44 · Score: 1
  
  I don't think so, after the "Bagration" offensive operation the communication lines of the Red Army were overstretched, it needed time to regroup in order to be able to continue the push on the Germans. The vanguard could not force crossing the Vistula on its own. Besides, the Germans have started counter-attacks trying to make use of that situation.
  As for the Poles that were allegedly turned down -- just two days before the uprising began a polish representative met with Stavka officers but failed to mention what was about to start.
  You have to read the correspondence between Churchill and Stalin, it confirms as well that the Stavka has not been even informed about the uprising, only when the Poles got in serious trouble Churchill began to persistently ask Stalin to intervene.
  The intrigues of British government and Polish exile government in London combined with an overestimation of their own strength have lead to this venture. The uprisers were heroes who were gambled by British and their own excile leaders for questionable political gains. It is just too easy to blame the bad Soviets in order to cover own actions.
24. Re:Then Warn Against the Internet! by satuon · 2011-02-23 01:48 · Score: 1
  
  This doesn't work any more. North Koreans often go across the border to China to trade/work/get help from relatives who live in China, so news slowly trikles into North Korea, mostly in the form of rumours.
Dictator wars by Anonymous Coward · 2011-02-17 05:32 · Score: 1

Well if Gaddafi thinks i will take care of his farmville while he cleans this mess up he has another thing coming!
Obligatory by Even+on+Slashdot+FOE · 2011-02-17 05:34 · Score: 1

Now Gaddafi and Streisand are in the same club. I hope they get along.
1. Re:Obligatory by snspdaarf · 2011-02-17 05:55 · Score: 1
  
  "Do you come here often? Wait a minute... I've got it! You're an Italian! What? You're Jewish? Love your nails. You must be a Libra!..."
  
  --
  Why, without your clothes, you're naked, Miss Dudley!
2. Re:Obligatory by Locke2005 · 2011-02-17 06:27 · Score: 1
  
  Oh, Muammar has a long history of getting along just famously with Jews!
  
  --
  I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
Avoid Prison & more by FriendlyLurker · 2011-02-17 05:57 · Score: 1

Forget prison, they are just shooting them - videos and update blog: http://wlcentral.org/node/1312
1. Re:Avoid Prison & more by Threni · 2011-02-17 07:26 · Score: 1
  
  They're shooting Facebook users? Perhaps it's worth highlighting the dangers of Twitter and Yahoo in Libya too? That's worth considering.
there goes Lybia - don't they learn a thing...? by pyalot · 2011-02-17 06:02 · Score: 2

I mean, it's not like, duh, obvious or something? Left and right dictatorships are sucumbing to public protest, riot and facebook. And they *all* did the very same thing first, restrict the ways in which citizens can organize themselves, which in turn angried the citizens even more, and the whole thing totally spirals out of control. Dear would-be dictator of some soon to come fledgling and hopeful dictatorship. If you let it get as far as that you have to forbid people from using facebook, you're doing it wrong.

--
Experiments and other stuff
1. Re:there goes Lybia - don't they learn a thing...? by phantomfive · 2011-02-17 06:33 · Score: 1
  
  The dictators did learn things: some learned that they need to be more pro-active in responding to their people, like this fascinating interview with Assad in Syria, he says directly what he learned:
  
  "Syria is stable. Why?" Mr. Assad said. "Because [the dictator has to] be very closely linked to the beliefs of the people. This is the core issue. When there is divergenceyou will have this vacuum that creates disturbances."
  He's probably right.
  
  The lesson other dictators learned, like Kadafi in Libya, is to be proactive in countering the revolution. Organize counter-protests (Iran is trying that tactic too, we'll see if it works). Use violence when necessary. Arrest key people. The Egyptians didn't use violence, the lesson other dictators learned is to use more violence.
  
  --
  "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
2. Re:there goes Lybia - don't they learn a thing...? by Nick_13ro · 2011-02-17 06:43 · Score: 1
  
  I mean, it's not like, duh, obvious or something? Left and right dictatorships are sucumbing to public protest, riot and facebook. And they *all* did the very same thing first, restrict the ways in which citizens can organize themselves, which in turn angried the citizens even more, and the whole thing totally spirals out of control. Dear would-be dictator of some soon to come fledgling and hopeful dictatorship. If you let it get as far as that you have to forbid people from using facebook, you're doing it wrong.
  I'm afraid the reality is not as you paint it. In the real world absolutely nobody starts a revolution for the sake of "freedom", "democracy" or any such nonsense. When they do it's because they've been made dirt poor and struggling to get food on the table. The "freedom" and "democracy" shit is just a rationalization after the fact that flatters their ego after they've been humiliated (and so leaving themselves open to be even more humiliated by democratic governments that flatter their ego while they steal their bread). If you want proof just look at the "revolutions" in Venezuela and Iran- the demonstrations there are organized by well fed middle class spoiled brats that think they should run the place instead of the existing governments. With such a base they're got 0% chance of success while everybody else supports the government or simply doesn't give a shit.
3. Re:there goes Lybia - don't they learn a thing...? by BitZtream · 2011-02-17 09:24 · Score: 1
  
  The Egyptians didn't use violence, the lesson other dictators learned is to use more violence.
  Probably because the Egyptians weren't nearly as bad off as the others.
  Perhaps the fact that the leader realized he wasn't going to last, and backed of rather than making it a blood bath.
  I realize I don't know jack shit about the guy or what he's done to them, but it would appear to me that he wasn't trying all that hard (in an evil way) to stop what happened. We've certainly seen FAR FAR worse done to people in the last 10 years for the exact same reasons.
  One could also argue that the fact that the people protested in a (mostly) sane way might have something to do with the lack of bloodshed as well.
  Its the difference between a sit in and a riot. Look at blacks in america. Sitins, non-violent protesting worked. Riots just got their own sections of towns burned to the ground by their own people. If you want peace you rarely get it by using violence. Rarely, not always, sometimes war and fighting is all you can do, but thats the last resort, not the first ... at least for anyone who actually values the lives of others rather than just claiming they do in order to push their own agenda.
  
  --
  Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
4. Re:there goes Lybia - don't they learn a thing...? by phantomfive · 2011-02-17 14:37 · Score: 1
  
  I realize I don't know jack shit about the guy or what he's done to them, but it would appear to me that he wasn't trying all that hard (in an evil way) to stop what happened
  Indeed, it may be some consolation, that if the US chooses allies who are dictators, at least we choose the ones who aren't too evil.
  
  --
  "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
5. Re:there goes Lybia - don't they learn a thing...? by Funky+Weasel · 2011-02-17 21:52 · Score: 1
  
  "Let them eat Minecraft!"
Re:just how many ways DOES he spell his name? by Nidi62 · 2011-02-17 06:03 · Score: 1

I believe it's actually spelled qaf dhal alif fa ya.

--
The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
Re:Gaddafi, Khadafy, Qadhafi, Qathafi, Gadaafi by TaoPhoenix · 2011-02-17 06:04 · Score: 1

We need the legendary remixer of Ballmer's Developers to do a sequel.
Gaddafi, Khadafy, Qadhafi, Qathafi, Gadaafi, Qadhdhafi!
Come on!!

--
My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
The Will Of The People by mattwrock · 2011-02-17 06:11 · Score: 1

It goes to show that enough people want something, they will get it. This works for good and evil purposes. The people who question middle east democracy will lose either a lot of money or influence. It makes me wonder if people in the US would have the will to ask for their freedoms back. The Patriot act, and the TSA are a few of the major examples of how we are moving away from the rule of law (as of the Constitution) and the will of the people. There are many reasons for fragmentation, but I don't believe you could enough people on the same page to scare the government. It's easy to complain here and other web sites about the situation, it is quite another to stand up for what you believe in when a gun is pointed at your head.

--
"Ones and zeros were everywhere. I even think I saw a two!" - Bender
Stupid question by Locke2005 · 2011-02-17 06:23 · Score: 1

Would using proxies help avoid the attention of Libyan secret police?

--
I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
1. Re:Stupid question by Locke2005 · 2011-02-17 06:39 · Score: 1
  
  Shouldn't the fact that your session is encrypted also attract the attention of the authorities? How do we do SSH tunneling from a smart phone?
  
  --
  I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
2. Re:Stupid question by BitZtream · 2011-02-17 09:26 · Score: 1
  
  Right, because thats totally different than using SSH over your standard connection. Theres no way they can tap the tower and see your SSHing or anything!
  
  --
  Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
Re:just how many ways DOES he spell his name? by Locke2005 · 2011-02-17 06:25 · Score: 3, Informative

I believe HE spells it in Arabic script. All of your examples are attempts to phonetically spell it with Latin characters.

--
I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
First Tweeted by @Muammar? by JustinFreid · 2011-02-17 06:29 · Score: 1

How did they get the message out?

--
Hey, how's it going?
great minds by meeotch · 2011-02-17 06:39 · Score: 1

I gotta say, with the exception of this (and of course all things fashion-related), Gaddafi and I don't agree on much.
1. Re:great minds by phantomfive · 2011-02-17 17:13 · Score: 1
  
  It's ok, most of us don't have good fashion sense either. :)
  
  --
  "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
Re:just how many ways DOES he spell his name? by Bobakitoo · 2011-02-17 07:01 · Score: 1

There is.
The nonviolent approach wont work on Libya or Iran by Timmy+D+Programmer · 2011-02-17 07:16 · Score: 1

Iran and Libya don't care what the world thinks, and don't care about body counts.

--

(If at first you don't succeed, do it different next time!)
Alright you Libyan geeks, time to diversify by HeckRuler · 2011-02-17 07:32 · Score: 1

For all you hip Libyan geeks out there (and I think you qualify if you're reading slashdot comments), listen up:
It's time to diversify. Facebook is quick and easy to set up groups and organize. Woo. But as the article points out, it's also an easy target. But the Internet is bigger then that. Make your own page, conscript a forum somewhere, run a chat server, or a BBS for that matter. Tell people about it. Link to it. Replicate posts from one system to another. Use the full force of the Internet. There's no reason to stay within the walled garden of facebook, and there are plenty of reasons to spread out.

And if the Libyan government turns their ire to the Internet on the whole? A lot more people will rise up with you. It's a pretty good rule of thumb that when a government tries to shut down the Internet, it's time to shut down the Government.
1. Re:Alright you Libyan geeks, time to diversify by Asic+Eng · 2011-02-17 08:18 · Score: 1
  
  Yeah, but if you want to organize thousands, or tens of thousands of people, then your board will get noticed. The "tell people about it" means the security forces will know about it, too. It might actually be beneficial to use a platform like facebook - not just because it's a good way to connect like minded people, but also because it's popular among the people the regime relies on. It's harder for them to to block it, because they'd be pissing off their supporters, too.
Wikilieaks by Anonymous Coward · 2011-02-17 07:41 · Score: 1

How is this different from our government saying people should not look at the Wikileaks site?
1. Re:Wikilieaks by gox · 2011-02-17 21:16 · Score: 1
  
  Relativistically, not different at all. One can object to porn for the same reasons you object to "child" porn. Freedom vs. Dignity. Nation vs. Individual. Humanity vs. Nature. Nature vs. God. There are no bad analogies in this context.
  We are complex little organisms formed on a rock to maximize entropy. We humans can do it more efficiently (in a shorter timescale) thanks to our intellectual capacity having the ability to give rise to culture.
  We will fight to the death for our norms, be it genes or moral values, and the side that contributes the most to the maximization of entropy in the whole universe will win in the "long" run. At the context and scale of the topic at hand, that side seems to be the biggest producer of technology and industrial output in our human world. That might not last for long, and for instance going green might be a better way to go, so that we can endure more to create more entropy. And maybe Kaddafi is right, who knows? His ideals might win in a longer run. Norms are arbitrary from an absolutist standpoint, and there is no way to objectively know the solution other than to fight it out. We ARE the calculator here. We are here for this very principle, otherwise even abiogenesis wouldn't happen.
  However, for the timescale this topic operates, my money is on technology and production. You in the West are leading it and it's highly unlikely for Kaddafi and the likes to hold ground anymore. We in the middle keep the score and will follow whoever wins. "Helping them out" is a good way to accelerate the process.
  Wikileaks? Maybe that is the line that shouldn't be crossed. Is freedom the key? Who knows? But yes, all absolutists are hypocritical in this game. I'm all for freedom, with my Freenet node and Bitcoin miner, but still, I'm burdened by the knowledge that I like freedom because it's been more efficient in recent history and won out. It's not a priori or anything...
Thirds rule by elrous0 · 2011-02-17 07:42 · Score: 2

There used to be a "rule of thirds" advocated by some historians of the French Revolution. For a revolution to happen, you needed at least 1/3 of the population to actively support it, no more than 1/3 actively opposed, and around 1/3 to be neutral (less if you had more than 1/3 supporting).

--
SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
1. Re:Thirds rule by FuckingNickName · 2011-02-17 07:49 · Score: 1
  
  Indeed. The tipping point is when the number of revolutionaries reaches the number of reactionaries, although you need enough manpower in the first place to effect change (whence the suggested limit of 1/3 neutral). This observations is anathema to the US, which has spent the last 65 years thinking people "need freeing".
2. Re:Thirds rule by mrbcs · 2011-02-17 09:55 · Score: 1
  
  I heard this explained this way: If you want to change anything, 1/3 are ahead of you and are helping to change others minds, 1/3 will never change and the last third are watching to see which side to support.
  It was interesting at the conference. The speaker began by telling us that for the good of the seminar, we all had to switch seats. Nobody wanted to.
  
  --
  I'm not anti-social, I'm anti-idiot.
3. Re:Thirds rule by Billly+Gates · 2011-02-17 16:53 · Score: 1
  
  The American revolution actually started this.
  1/3 of Americans opposed it surprisingly. That is not taught in our elementary school history books but many people including Benjamin Franklin's own son violently opposed it and even led British attacks on many rebel cities. Franklin Township New Jersey is named after the loyalist as many thought Thomas Pain and Thomas Jefferson were nuts!
  '
  1/3 supported independence from England. The rest of the 1/3 looked at both sides and supported either way.
  I wonder if this is why the US constitution has the 2/3 majority on constitutional amendments and presidential vetos? Maybe the founding American forefathers knew this number as well from experience.
  
  --
  http://saveie6.com/
copy cat by sheridan3003 · 2011-02-17 07:50 · Score: 1

Copying the approach taken by others in blocking the internet is a good idea.
Look how well it worked for the leadership in Tunisia and Egypt.

--
http://www.linkedin.com/in/dougneedham
Quote? by Cigarra · 2011-02-17 07:50 · Score: 1

Been to TFA, then to its source, and I couldn't find the exact quote of Gaddafi's words.

Do we really need to comment on unfounded rumors?

--
I don't have a sig.
False Report by jklovanc · 2011-02-17 08:29 · Score: 1

It is interesting that the article has no quote where Gaddafi makes this statement. I believe it is being made up by the press to encourage the use of Facebook. I think even Gaddafi knows that the best way to get someone to do something is to tell them they shouldn't.
Re:The nonviolent approach wont work on Libya or I by BitZtream · 2011-02-17 09:27 · Score: 1

DING!
We have a winner.
Couldn't have said it better myself, and I tried.

--
Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
Re:just how many ways DOES he spell his name? by masterzora · 2011-02-17 10:19 · Score: 1

Clever, except that I can name at least four different methods of romaji, each of which have their own deep flaws and a lot of areas where they simply don't agree. This is how we got "Japan" out of "Nippon", after all.
Even if you do select a particular romaji method, you're still without a way to properly translate moras, pitch, and some of the subtly different sounds (like the "r" people so love to make fun of). Which brings us to the GPs point: there is no way to directly translate Japanese, but we have agreed on a handful of systems that we consider "good enough".

--
Remember, open source is free as in speech, not free as in bear.
Meanwhile...Glenn Beck by P.+Legba · 2011-02-17 10:22 · Score: 1

...warns about the use of The Google.
Brothers in arms.
Re:just how many ways DOES he spell his name? by Bobakitoo · 2011-02-17 14:38 · Score: 1

Japanese is spoken in a dozen of dialects, they also use four different writing system.
I am not suprise there is multiple romaji method, it only match the diversity and complexity of the Japanese language. The fact that there is many romanji method do not invalidate the sytem. Native japanese writing system, wich also come from china and maybe korea, faild in the exact same way. This is why they got so many writing system.
You and the anonymous coward are both worng. Considering there is so many version of "japanese", there is a direct way to converting "some" Japanese to roman letter.
Re:just how many ways DOES he spell his name? by masterzora · 2011-02-17 15:26 · Score: 1

You and the anonymous coward are both worng. Considering there is so many version of "japanese", there is a direct way to converting "some" Japanese to roman letter.
Okay, perhaps we are lacking some mutual clarity in what we consider a direct romanisation. If you simply want a mapping from Japanese onto roman characters, then Nippon-shiki will grant that. However, I consider this lacking because, if you follow its pronunciation you will be mispronouncing a lot of things in any dialect I've heard. This is how we run into the Nippon->Japan problem. Hepburn, which would probably be my romaji of choice if I wanted to present to an primarily-English-speaking audience, is actually a pretty good transliteration of pronunciation, but otherwise it's pretty much impossible, and it doesn't really do much of a mapping. This is the dichotomy that I call problematic to declaring a "direct translation": you can have good mapping or good transliteration, but not both. In this manner, there is no direct mapping, but we have agreed on a handful of romaji, chiefly Nippon-shiki and Hepburn, and called them "good enough". But even note here we come up with multiple ways to write the same thing. Now, Arabic script has its romanisations, too, each with their own issues. We've agreed on more than a handful of these, however, and everybody seems to have chosen different ones, hence all of the different ways listed above of writing just one name.

--
Remember, open source is free as in speech, not free as in bear.
sucks when they have a good idea by Nyder · 2011-02-17 17:54 · Score: 1

for a wrong situation.

--
Be seeing you...
What pro-democracy movement? by petman · 2011-02-17 21:57 · Score: 1

I followed the Egyptian uprising from day one, and at the beginning it was not at all about democracy. The Egyptian people would have been happy to replace Mubarak with another authoritarian, albeit benevolent, dictator. The pro-democracy people came in later and essentially hijacked the revolution when it became clear that Mubarak was on the way out.

--
Dropbox drops it like it's hot.