Slashdot Mirror


Thirty Meter Telescope Likely Never Gets Built ... In Hawaii

An anonymous reader writes: After years of its backers of doing everything the state of Hawaii demanded in order to get permission to build the Thirty Meter Telescope, a state judge today ordered that the whole process should start over again. Since this order was instigated by the protesters, and that it appears the government favors those protesters, it appears that there is no chance TMT will ever get approval to build in Hawaii. We've been following the back and forth, back and forth story of this telescope for a while.

277 comments

  1. And for what? by amightywind · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Hippie burnouts. Luddite native simpletons. There are already 4 observatories near the sacred summit of Mauna Kea. What harm would one more do? Whose state is it anyway?

    --
    an ill wind that blows no good
    1. Re:And for what? by fustakrakich · · Score: 1

      Do you mind if I put this antenna up on yonder peak?
      That's our Sacred Mountain.
      This is our Sacred Antenna! It's shaped like a cross!

      --
      “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
    2. Re:And for what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Excuse me. It was us Limeys what stole it, if you don't mind.

    3. Re:And for what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      "Kingdom" - Oh, you mean that brief moment when one tribe subjugated all the other tribes on the islands. The island was of extreme tactical and logistical importance to many factions. It was either going to become a part of the US, the UK, or Japan. Frankly, they got the best of the alternatives to self-rule.

      Yes, how terrible of the white man to move in and stake a claim -- as opposed to the "Kingdom" which slaughtered various tribes to make it "theirs."

      It's stupid to claim the mountain as "theirs" simply because their ancestors owned it. I may as well go back to Ireland and claim an area where my former clan ruled if that were the deciding factor in who gets to control land today. "But it's mine! My ancestors lived here and ruled this area! Let me determine what gets built in Ireland!" Lots of Irish here in the USA. I bet Ireland doesn't give a crap what we want for our homeland we were forced to leave due to famine or oppression.... or our ancestors, rather.

      Shut up. Move on. Every Hawaiian today is a citizen of the USA & most of the natives of native ancestry don't even recognize the group blocking the observatory as their leaders. Have you even ever been to Hawaii?!?!? B/c I have! My family visits often, and some family are looking into moving there permanently. Most natives are chill & don't give a damn about the "holy mountain." This is a bunch of self-absorbed, self-aggrandized rebels that want to secede from Hawaii and just love stirring up trouble wherever they can so they get headlines -- b/c they crave attention to their dying special interest group.

    4. Re:And for what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hawaiian people is a misnomer. The "native people" there now weren't even the original native people, they took it over from them by conquest.

    5. Re:And for what? by BinBoy · · Score: 1

      What harm would one more do? Have you ever seen the Fire God when he's angry? You don't want to.

    6. Re:And for what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Defending monarchy and "nations" defined by ancestry and skin color as legitimate owners of land. You must be a real progressive.

    7. Re:And for what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Got the best deal ? Hardly the UK honoured its treaties with the local kings if they toed the official line,

    8. Re:And for what? by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      Perhaps the people building it should have not sued the "owners" of the mountain so many times for the 4 that are there now and instead have asked more nicely, or sued more effectively previously for better permissions for future structures.

    9. Re:And for what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > My family visits often, and some family are looking into moving there permanently. Most natives are chill

      Please don't move here. You've mistaken the locals not calling you out for your bigotry with agreement. You are right, locals are chill .. too chill to make huhu correcting you. They just tell you what you want to hear and think "stupid haole" to themselves.

    10. Re:And for what? by DanielRavenNest · · Score: 5, Informative

      > "The planned construction site is on land considered sacred by some Native Hawaiians."

      What the *modern* natives fail to mention is that the *pre-western* natives used the top of the mountain as a rock quarry. It wasn't sacred at all. Turns out that lava erupted during an ice age, when there were glaciers on top, hardened rapidly, preventing crystal growth. Crystals fracture more easily, so the lack made for excellent stone tools, which the natives used before westerners brought metal tools.

      The top of the mountain wasn't habitable for the same reason it makes an excellent telescope site - very little rain. The altitude also means it's cold, and it is high enough to induce altitude sickness if you are acclimated to sea level. So the natives didn't live up there, but rather set up mining camps to extract the rock, then took them back down. There is literally tons of archaeological evidence all over the Mauna Kea Science Reserve, the area on top of the mountain that the University of Hawaii controls. The astronomers are careful about not putting a telescope in archeology areas. There's rock debris, partial tools, shelters, etc. up there.

      If it was originally an industrial site, I see no reason not to use it now for a scientific site. It's not like they are knocking down the Parthenon to build a telescope.

    11. Re:And for what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, this is the natives being stupid. Fuck their god

    12. Re:And for what? by rtb61 · · Score: 1

      If you are reaching for the stars, then god dam it reach for the stars, build the fucker on the moon and build the base around it to support it. Stop with these stupid half arsed set ups pretending you are doing something. I want a big arsed telescope on there on the moon where it belongs. Want more build some out in the asteroid belt as well, time to stop dicking about with token efforts at space exploration, time to get serious. Whose is the cheap luddite who is afraid to leave the surface of the earth and make real, serious investments into the future of humanity as a galactic species and not just a bunch of mud monkeys as entertainment of the rest of the galaxy. Stop fucking dreaming small, start to dream big and work to making it come true.

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    13. Re:And for what? by KGIII · · Score: 1

      I've brought up my heritage before and I've got some white, some black African, and I'm mostly Micmac. You're right. Well, in some regards.

      The Micmac and the white man got along pretty well, actually. We adapted, traded, communicated. and did okay - eventually. It was pretty rough going for a while. The black, that's crazy talk! Nope. My family fought on the side of the Brits during the Revolutionary War. They'd promised to free all blacks willing to fight for them. They almost got into a second battle because the newly formed States didn't really want to let us go. So, they ran a gauntlet with a couple of loads of former slaves and brought us to Haiti. That wasn't going to work for we were freed men. So, they picked us all up again and hauled us to Nova Scotia and encouraged us and the natives to interbreed. (Really.) We did. Thus, I have some black in me.

      As near as I can tell, no treaties with the Micmac people were violated by the Crown themselves. It took a while to get certain rights, however. This is also why I sometimes have brought up that I'm Canadian by grace of Heritage and why I have dual citizenship. I can not trace my black side back further than being on the ship for the gauntlet running. We can go back quite a ways on the Amerindian side.

      If you're from New England, the white part of me is of the Prescott family with all that entails. I'm sure it was quite a story among certain parts of the family. Ah well, fuck 'em. I've met some of 'em and I can't say we're close.

      But, strangely enough, you're correct - from my perspective. The UK did, indeed, follow their treaties with my people and in both of those case - even risking life and limb because the King's word had been given and they had the paperwork to prove that they'd been told that they'd get freedom in return for service. There's a small bit about it in one of the Ken Burn's documentaries, at least I think it was from him.

      However, hmm... Given where Hawaii is and the way the UK has dumped all of her colonies, really... I can't imagine what it would look like today if the US hadn't taken Hawaii. I imagine, if nothing else, the US would have ended up with a portion the territory, by Lend/Lease, during WWII and Hawaii might be a sovereign nation by now or in about 2040. Which might sound good but I doubt Hawaii would do all that well on their own - without the bonus of having the US military and diplomatic power. So, I expect Hawaii would have ended up a territory, at least, and probably a full-fledged State eventually. I do not see Japan having kept Hawaii. I do not see that at all. I have no idea where the OP was going with that one.

      Ah well... So, in my anecdote of one, you appear to be correct. I'm not entirely sure I agree with a broader statement but I suspect that'd be because "toed the line" is a bit subjective and "local kings" is oddly specific.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    14. Re:And for what? by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      The white ones? They started it.

    15. Re:And for what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm sure it is a state of luddite native simpletons. They elected their government which refused the building permit. This is democracy, so go build it elsewhere.

    16. Re:And for what? by Coisiche · · Score: 1

      and the way the UK has dumped all of her colonies

      The UK didn't really have much say in it; they all chose to leave and there was often war or conflict involved.

    17. Re:And for what? by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Thanks for saying this, this is what I have said in basically every discussion on this subject so far. Why are we building bigger scopes on the planet when they belong on the far side of the moon, isolated from our light and radio noise? Yeah, it's a big project. Compared to going to Mars, landing the elements of a radio telescope array on the moon seems trivial... like a solved problem, really.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    18. Re:And for what? by Hotawa+Hawk-eye · · Score: 1

      I'm sure that when or if we colonize the moon we will have "big arsed" telescopes on the moon. But to develop the lunar infrastructure to the point where constructing a radio telescope there will take decades (at least) and hauling enough material up there to set up a colony is going to be a monumental task, much less hauling enough extra to build a telescope. So, to tide us over for the (rough guess) 30-40 years until we can build a lunar colony and lunar industry to the point where a lunar telescope is feasible, scientists want to build one on this mountain.

    19. Re:And for what? by wyHunter · · Score: 1

      The hippies have destroyed the entire country, not just Hawaii. Or maybe I should say the Baby Boomers - but I repeat myself.

    20. Re:And for what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't assume the way you are treated as a tourist is the same way you'll be treated as a resident, Hawaiians can be very bigoted

    21. Re:And for what? by oh_my_080980980 · · Score: 1

      Obviously not yours.

    22. Re:And for what? by oh_my_080980980 · · Score: 1

      Yeah they're definitely the cause of that methane leak in California...oh wait...

    23. Re:And for what? by idontgno · · Score: 1

      What harm would one more do? Have you ever seen the Fire God when he's angry? You don't want to.

      "Snow Goddess".

      So, yeah, in addition to being superstitious luddites, they're apparently SJWs and Frozen fans.

      --
      Welcome to the Panopticon. Used to be a prison, now it's your home.
    24. Re:And for what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or Russia.

      Hawaii was so close to signing up with them that the scale of the diplomatic fuck-up they pulled was amazing.

    25. Re:And for what? by Talderas · · Score: 1

      A radio telescope is simple. There's plenty of plans for doing that which do not require manufacturing facilities on the moon. This telescope is not radio which is a completely different beast. The telescope and its direct instruments themselves are 1,430 tons meaning it would take 31 launches of Saturn V rockets just to get all that equipment there. That hasn't touched the facility, power generation, or additional factors necessary to keep the mirrors clean from moon dust. It also doesn't touch the surveying and foundation considerations that are crucial and significant to a observatory that aren't present in other constructions.

      Maybe they could scale down the requirements of total mass needed or maybe you could address that mass problem by somehow establishing manufacturing facilities on the moon. After all, one of the best plans for mirror based telescopes is to use about carbon nano tubes and some sort of epoxy combined with moon dust in a tray spun at high speed. Calling an optical telescope on the moon a "solved problem" is a severe understatement.

      --
      "Lack of speed can be overcome. In the worst case by patience." --Znork
    26. Re:And for what? by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Actually, I think they should start with an optical/radio telescope array, I'm sure you know more than I do about techniques for combining multiple small image sensors' output. But they should also put a large optical telescope there, and I think that it's within our technical abilities.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    27. Re: And for what? by Cinnamon+Beige · · Score: 1

      Pele is, in multiple senses, a hot woman by all reports. While I don't have my usual Native Hawaiian source to check with, what I've been told suggests they're rather more offended by renaming land, though I can't tell you where we're starting on the offense scale.

      If you think of land as people, it makes sense, but brings up the question of how do we know the sacred mountain isn't an astronomy fan? Especially given that the observatories already there are fine, it may just be that everybody needs to be polite and let the mountain's personification have a turn with the telescope, with any luck we won't end up having to work out how to list geography as an author...

    28. Re:And for what? by dl_sledding · · Score: 1

      Funny how you use A/C rather than a real login to throw the race card around... Just sayin'. Shows just how cowardly you truly are, and how little weight or faith anyone should put on your statements.

      If you're going to support the natives (and act as if you are one), then grow a pair and put yourself out there. Make a real stand, not behind the curtain of cowardice.

    29. Re:And for what? by Talderas · · Score: 1

      Look at the VLT for an example of an array of telescopes. It's an array of four telescopes with 8.2m mirrors. Each telescope has a 0.05 arcsecond resolution while the array of four can get 0.001 arcseconds. For comparison Hubble has a 2.4m mirror with a resolution of 0.1 arcsecond but that's kind of deceptive. The VLT and the TMT are both optical telescopes and will have better resolutions than Hubble. You may ask, wasn't the point of Hubble to get a better telescope without having to deal with interference from the atmosphere? Yep, that's it's purpose and it still is one of the best telescopes but it was designed and launched in a day where ground based technology couldn't match up to it. Ground based technology HAS caught up to it but we're still dealing with the problems of telescopes away from earth.

      Most of our space endeavors are limited by launch payload and terrestrial production. There's no effective means out there for large scale space manufacturing and our best effort has been a LEO space station that has been under construction since 1998 and has a total current mass of 300,862 kg (give or take) which is 332 tons. It would take seven Saturn V launches to get the structure of the ISS to the moon. Compare that to the 31 launches it would take to get the TMT's instruments to the moon.

      If you want to do anything complex outside of earth's atmosphere there needs to be a huge jump in either payload capacities or space-based manufacturing to enable such projects.

      --
      "Lack of speed can be overcome. In the worst case by patience." --Znork
    30. Re:And for what? by therealbev · · Score: 1

      We let them live. Is there a really GOOD reason that civil governments must recognize superstitions?

    31. Re:And for what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Polynesian. then? Didn't they get there in those reed boats that Thor Heyerdahl weaved? Who were the original owners.. BTW? Japanese?

    32. Re:And for what? by IonOtter · · Score: 1

      "Funny how you use A/C rather than a real login to throw the race card around.."

      Auwe?!

      Like beef? Like scrap? Keep talkin' stink, ufa, get one false crack!

      No kama'aina fo you heah, haole. Try come holoholo, bring da kala, den hele on. Got NO aloha spirit.

      (An I no da kine anonymouse holowale up deah, I stay my own kine kama'aina.)

      --
      [End Of Line]
    33. Re:And for what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This country is slowly being run by morons, fools, idiots, and buffoons, that will stop at nothing to see advancement and scientific progress come to a standstill for the sheer sake of their insipid NewAge/Junk Science beliefs. Yes, I'm talking about leftist enviro-kook nutcases, because that's who they are and we are worse off for it.

    34. Re:And for what? by rtb61 · · Score: 1

      So it can be done. That is all that counts, so why waste money on a 'temporary' make do solution, when there is something much more worthwhile to achieve. A galactic observatory for scanning to a depth never before achievable and across a broad range of space. A truly effective early warning of impact system, a great planetary observation base and the likely ability to see planets in nearby star systems. It is feasible right now, it just requires the will. Perhaps a little less focus on killing each other in wars and a bit more focus on space will take use much further.

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    35. Re:And for what? by rtb61 · · Score: 1

      It would be stunning. Observe a huge chunk of the galaxy and even be able to see planets around other stars. A entire complex of radars and telescopes, awesome stuff. Close to the horizon though, so that earth and solar observations could still be made and streamed live. A planetary effort.

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
  2. Re:Unhelpful Whining by Aighearach · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Yeah, it seems pretty obvious to me as an American from a different State that this just means some judge doesn't like the telescope. Judges are not generally considered representative of the rest of government. ;)

    Actually that idea is what we call "batshit crazy."

  3. Re:Unhelpful Whining by Jiro · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "Historically marginalized people are now getting their legitimate say in the process" translates to "they want to be paid a bribe, at which point the construction will stop being blasphemous". It's a shakedown.

    We have no business as a society stopping building on the basis of blasphemy anyway.

  4. Why does the summary state by Rei · · Score: 5, Interesting

    ... that it likely never gets built, when the article says that officials have said that they'll continue the process? You're basically just changing actual reporting into an opinion piece, and presenting said opinion as if it's in the reporting.

    --
    It's times like this I wish I had a friend named 'The Professor'.
    1. Re:Why does the summary state by Brett+Buck · · Score: 1

      You're new here, right? Two clear tip-offs

      1) you RTFA
      2) are surprised that the summary misrepresents the article in order to make a different point

        Please note this for future reference
       

    2. Re:Why does the summary state by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 1

      ... that it likely never gets built, when the article says that officials have said that they'll continue the process? You're basically just changing actual reporting into an opinion piece, and presenting said opinion as if it's in the reporting.

      The anonymous submitter was likely one of the current presidential candidates.

      --
      #DeleteChrome
    3. Re:Why does the summary state by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, if there was any truth on the internet the background color of Slashdot would be piss yellow.

    4. Re: Why does the summary state by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The involved believe that the ant-science activists would delay it indefinitely. However, given that they're being aid to continue science, they will keep trying.

    5. Re: Why does the summary state by Hognoxious · · Score: 5, Funny

      The involved believe that the ant-science activists would delay it indefinitely.

      Unless there's such a thing as Formicologists, Entomologists is the word you're looking for.

      Though why they'd be bothered with telescopes is a bit of a puzzle. Perhaps they're worried that they could be used to fry their subjects.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    6. Re: Why does the summary state by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This root word gets around...
      Formication- 1; The sensation of having Ants crawling on the skin, when in fact, there are no Ants. 2; A sexual act involving twelve legs, but only two bodies, said to be extraordinarily difficult to perform.

      Formicosis- Difficulty in breathing due to inhaling too many Ants. (Yes, really...)

      Formica- A Trade Name for a kind of floor covering, and is actually a Pun. "For Mica", but Mica was very rarely used as a floor covering; it is in fact derived from the Formaldehyde created in the binding resin, which has its precursor in Formic Acid, which was first obtained by crushing... Ants. You may not want to know about Carmine... too bad. "Carmine" is a food coloring largely derived from crushed beetles, and the word itself comes from Ancient Persian, meaning "bug".

      Captcha- amusedly

    7. Re:Why does the summary state by Talderas · · Score: 1

      User ID 811,747 calls user ID 128,717 "new".

      --
      "Lack of speed can be overcome. In the worst case by patience." --Znork
  5. It's Sacred. by edibobb · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I consider Mauna Kea sacred ground that should be used only for telescopic exploration of the heavens. How can these heretics deny me my constitutional right of freedom of religion? Thomas Jefferson had a telescope, and it was obviously his intent when he wrote the First Amendment that people should be free to practice telescopy in sacred places such as Mauna Kea.

    1. Re:It's Sacred. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I consider the entire Earth sacred.

      I launch formicologists at the judges...and get all construction halted.

      Now, let's talk donations.

  6. This is why we can't have nice things by Brett+Buck · · Score: 2

    A tiny pressure group can stop virtually any big project, by filing court action after court action, delaying it until everyone gets tired of it and gives up. If they hadn't succeeded this time, they would have found some endangered flea, argued indefinitely until they won or lost, and lose, try again with a newly-invented religious icon.

    It happens time and again. For example, the NFL (with regard to the Washington Redskins) is on record for saying "if one person objects, we will take action". Whether you think the word is offensive is beside the point. This sort of thinking allows the loudest complainers to exert veto power over virtually anything. So we get absolutely nowhere.

    1. Re:This is why we can't have nice things by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How are the Redskins an example, they are not changing their name and the NFL doesn't want them to.

    2. Re:This is why we can't have nice things by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 4, Interesting

      "A tiny pressure group can stop virtually any big project, by filing court action after court action,"

      The real opposition to TMT came from the Deep Greens, who tried the same tactic in the Nineties to stop telescope construction in Arizona. Republicans (astronomy is a major "industry" in AZ) beat them back by the skin of their teeth, but the Green victory in Hawaii means that the US is through as a location for any major project of this kind, barring some major political reformation.

      It's an election year, so write your candidate. It can't hurt.

    3. Re:This is why we can't have nice things by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not quite any project. If it were a private firm extracting oil, mining coal or making a death ray, I'm pretty sure that they would have just laughed off the protesters and that would have been the end of it.

    4. Re:This is why we can't have nice things by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It this project was something that killed the fauna deforested the are and contaminate the water table while making a huge profit for a big corporation known to expend large sums on lobbing, that tiny pressure group would have 0 chance

    5. Re: This is why we can't have nice things by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 1

      That's why private property is a good idea. If the natives owned the property (the last monarch's corruption makes it worth a separate argument) , they'd probably want the rent. Or at least the builders would have known ahead of time that building the telescope was not worth their time. If the scientists owned the property then it would have just been built already. The idea of "public property" is what leads to these sorts of conflicts; low - IQ politicians are a far worse way to decide issues then rationally-enforced market discipline.

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
    6. Re:This is why we can't have nice things by ooloorie · · Score: 1
      You'd be wrong. The reason you don't hear about private companies having such fights with activists is because most of them are too risk averse to even engage in them. That is, given the choice of investing your money where you may run into issues with activists and somewhere else where you don't, companies are going to invest where they are no activists. The only time it's worth for businesses to actually fight for such a project is if it's really big and if it has massive support from politicians.

      That's why Native American communities are so poor and have so little industry or businesses investing in them: there is too much legal uncertainty, and Hawaii risks the same fate if it keeps going down this road. The more Hawaii pushes for "native Hawaiian rights", the less inclined people will be to invest their money there as well.

    7. Re:This is why we can't have nice things by djent · · Score: 1

      This sounds like something General Custer would have said while having some "Indian problems".

    8. Re:This is why we can't have nice things by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For example, the NFL (with regard to the Washington Redskins) is on record for saying "if one person objects, we will take action".

      Actually, the record says “I think what we have to do though is we have to listen,” Goodell said. “If one person is offended, we have to listen.” so you are in error there. Or perhaps you have some actual source to go with your alleged record?

      Then again, that should be obvious from the fact that the name of the team has not changed.

      But let me ask you this, why shouldn't people have a say, why shouldn't they object, and why shouldn't they fight for what they want, with the tools available to them, when they are in fact, genuinely offended?

      Or do you just not care, you have a highway to pave, and to hell with anybody who gets in your way?

      What is your real attitude, behind your own sanctimony?

    9. Re: This is why we can't have nice things by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 1

      "That's why private property is a good idea. If the natives owned the property (the last monarch's corruption makes it worth a separate argument) , they'd probably want the rent."

      That would be true if the real opposition were just the natives, but the Greens will stall projects on private land just as surely as on public land. In a case like this, they are just using the natives as a weapon.

      How long has it been since we could build a nuclear plant, even on land the utility owns outright?

    10. Re: This is why we can't have nice things by hackertourist · · Score: 1

      You still need planning permission to build on private property.

    11. Re:This is why we can't have nice things by srw · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Sadly, you're both wrong. Keystone XL is private, is all about resource extraction (well, transportation of extracted resources) and is being eternally delayed in much the same way. In Canada, we have two more proposed pipelines that are experiencing the same opposition. ("Northern Gateway" and "Energy East")

    12. Re: This is why we can't have nice things by fustakrakich · · Score: 2

      rationally-enforced market discipline.

      Oh, that's funny. *sorry* On what planet are you going to find that?! The market is everything but rational, and is why economic 'science' is no better than phrenology.

      --
      “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
    13. Re:This is why we can't have nice things by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Those pipelines have not been pushed through because the economic viability (ie. providing a huge ROI) has evaporated. Piping oil from Canada to the US gulf was put into question when the shale oil production increased in ND. Now with oil prices tanking there is no profit in building the US pipeline and even the proposed alternative pipelines in Canada have become less viable due to the downward spiral of oil prices. As the OP stated most companies are risk adverse and will only engage in fights if the profitability out weighs the costs of dealing with protesters. A giant telescope in Hawaii is hardly a profitable venture so any protesters have a better chance of killing the project.

    14. Re: This is why we can't have nice things by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      In a city, sure. Rural land, not so much. Though it's changing as counties belly up to the bar.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    15. Re:This is why we can't have nice things by Noah+Haders · · Score: 1

      > Or do you just not care, you have a highway to pave, and to hell with anybody who gets in your way?

      All the planning charts and demolition orders have been on display at your local galactic planning department for years.

    16. Re: This is why we can't have nice things by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Astronomy is just not regressive enough for the Greens. If it is a wind or solar farm though, they are perfectly willing to destroy vast expanses of delicate ecosystems for resource intensive and unreliable systems. Dense and reliable nuclear energy with a minimal environmental footprint? Hell no; prosperity for all doesn't fit with their fantasy of de-populating the planet and living as in antiquity. It is a flawed romantic ideal, ignorant of the reality that it was never environmentally friendly to start with. Most "Greens" are really just Luddites, standing in the way of technologies that intensify production and ultimately will allow us to minimize impact on the natural world.

    17. Re:This is why we can't have nice things by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Environmentalists have fought the deepening of harbors by 5 feet to accommodate "Superpanamax" ships, for longer than the original canal (remember that horror story of human effort?) took to build.

      The empire that keeps the trade routes open prospers. Those that turn to lording over its own people falters.

    18. Re:This is why we can't have nice things by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      why shouldn't they fight for what they want, with the tools available to them, when they are in fact, genuinely offended?

      Why do you support ISIL and other terrorist groups?

    19. Re:This is why we can't have nice things by ADRA · · Score: 1

      If they were called the Washington Negro's would we be having this discussion? No, they would've been pressured into changing their name decades ago. The point being that the "redskin's" are a marginalized group that nobody seems to give a fuck about it which is the issue.

      --
      Bye!
    20. Re: This is why we can't have nice things by SvnLyrBrto · · Score: 1

      There are plenty of ways that NIMBYs (Though I guess that's a misnomer in this case. The top of a bloody volcano is hardly anyone's "backyard".) can throw a monkey wrench into plans to build on private property as well. So no, privatizing everything is really not a solution to the problem at hand.

      --
      Imagine all the people...
    21. Re:This is why we can't have nice things by ooloorie · · Score: 1

      Keystone XL is private

      Which part of The only time it's worth for businesses to actually fight for such a project is if it's really big and if it has massive support from politicians. did you not understand?

    22. Re:This is why we can't have nice things by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Please elaborate. I mostly identify as a Green and opposing a telescope is completely anathema to me.

    23. Re:This is why we can't have nice things by srw · · Score: 1

      The "has massive support from politicians" part. I guess I figured, if that half of your two-part criteria was true, it wouldn't have so much trouble getting approval.

    24. Re:This is why we can't have nice things by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 1

      I posted the Deep Green manifesto above.

    25. Re:This is why we can't have nice things by KGIII · · Score: 1

      I'm Amerindian. I'm so Amerindian that I have both US and Canadian citizenship and am a full member of the Micmac tribe.

      Gotta tell ya, I don't give a shit about the Redskin's name. Not even a wee bit. No, not even the Braves (I think?) and their tomahawk chop thing bothers me or anyone that I know who is also Native American. Usually, the only people I see bitching about the name are white people. I've been told (by white people) that this is important and that I have to give a shit. I guess I'm glad that someone's sticking up for what they think I feel? Thanks, I guess?

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    26. Re:This is why we can't have nice things by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This just shows the wisdom of the Daleks. They do not leave any enemies alive to repopulate and file court cases years later. They EXTERMINATE.

      Perhaps it's time to #ThinkLikeaDalek.

    27. Re: This is why we can't have nice things by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Rural areas are often still subject to zoning. Want to build something different? You need to obtain a conditional use permit, or risk having to tear down anything that does not comply with the existing zone restrictions.

    28. Re: This is why we can't have nice things by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      In a city, sure. Rural land, not so much. Though it's changing as counties belly up to the bar.

      Anywhere in Lake County, CA, it costs more in permits to build a single-bedroom dwelling than it does to buy the materials. There is some $30k in mandatory fees and permits involved. Lake County is rural by any definition. Welcome to America...

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    29. Re:This is why we can't have nice things by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Quiet you! I will be offended for you.

    30. Re:This is why we can't have nice things by KGIII · · Score: 1

      Thanks! I appreciate the effort. Don't forget to wave the sign vigorously while you're protesting. Err... Do I like owe you a couple of dollars or am I supposed to tip? I can probably get you into the high-stakes bingo game if it's a tit-for-tat type of thing.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    31. Re:This is why we can't have nice things by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You might have a different opinion if they were trying to build a big, ugly pipeline in your own backyard.

      Of course landowners are going to say no.

      The issue is that they want the US government to forceably take land from private US citizens and give it to a Canadian company for no real benefit except that it might help the shareholders of that company.

  7. Republicans always stand against science. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Stand against science.

    1. Re: Republicans always stand against science. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The republicans tried to waste $1,400,000,000 on this project. It is good that someone with some sense is putting an end to it.

    2. Re: Republicans always stand against science. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And the republicans started construction before getting proper permits. They literally have thrown money away.

    3. Re: Republicans always stand against science. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow. At $50 per month per infant, that would pay for 28 million infant months of food. They are literally starving babies to fund this.

    4. Re: Republicans always stand against science. by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 2

      A little of the money is from Stanford and UC, but most of the $1.4G comes from a consortium of foreign countries. Choose one that has a good site, and build it there.

    5. Re: Republicans always stand against science. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So you don't care that children are starving in other countries. How very Republican of you.

    6. Re: Republicans always stand against science. by Noah+Haders · · Score: 1

      > At $50 per month per infant,

      I say, stick with the boob, it's free!

    7. Re: Republicans always stand against science. by Skewray · · Score: 1

      A little of the money is from Stanford and UC, but most of the $1.4G comes from a consortium of foreign countries. Choose one that has a good site, and build it there.

      Small correction - that's Caltech and UC.

    8. Re: Republicans always stand against science. by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      Um, how many really tall mountains in the northern hemisphere do you think there are among those countries? Ignore any in the US because it'll probably have this same problem.

    9. Re: Republicans always stand against science. by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 1

      No, there are not many good sites for an instrument this size. The only other alternatives besides San Pedro Mártir would be Gran Canaria (Canary Islands) or the Tibetan Plateau.

    10. Re: Republicans always stand against science. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Great Mother was the last of her kind from an era long forgotten.
        Her voice was a thunderstorm.
      Her hair was a rain forest.
      Her arms were wonderous flowing rivers.
      And her breasts defied the laws of energy conservatation.

  8. Establishment clause by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The argument against the TMT is that it would be built on sacred ground, essentially for religious reasons. Isn't that an establishment of religion and, therefore, in violation of the first amendment?

    1. Re:Establishment clause by ClickOnThis · · Score: 1

      The argument against the TMT is that it would be built on sacred ground, essentially for religious reasons. Isn't that an establishment of religion and, therefore, in violation of the first amendment?

      No. This is not, in the words of the First Amendment, about passing a law that prescribes a particular religion or impedes the free exercise thereof. This is a dispute about the usage of land. Scientist want to use it to build a telescope. A group of native Hawaiians object on the grounds that the land has historic and spiritual significance. IMHO, both sides have standing, and I hope they work something out that preserves both of their interests.

      --
      If it weren't for deadlines, nothing would be late.
    2. Re:Establishment clause by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, those aren't the words of the First Amendment. The actual words are: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..."

      As I understand it, Mauna Kea is public land. Telescopes have already been built on its summit. Prohibiting an otherwise legal activity on public land because of religious grounds is respecting an establishment of religion.

      It's like allowing the Ten Commandments to be displayed at a state capitol but not a Satanic statue. You're respecting an establishment of religion. It would be different if, say, there were reasons to want to excavate the site for archaeological reasons, or something like that. But because it's based purely on that someone's religion considers the land sacred, it's respecting an establishment of religion. The government isn't allowed to respect an establishment of religion. They can only tolerate it. Ordering a telescope to not be built goes beyond tolerating an establishment of religion.

    3. Re:Establishment clause by ooloorie · · Score: 1

      A group of native Hawaiians object on the grounds that the land has historic and spiritual significance. IMHO, both sides have standing, and I hope they work something out that preserves both of their interests.

      There are two possibilities. Either these lands are public or they are private (or could be sold to a private group). If I build a telescope on my private land, you have no right to interfere with that even if it offends your religious beliefs. If the lands are public, then trying to maintain them in a way that caters to the religious feelings of any group amounts to an establishment of religion; that's unacceptable as well.

      And, of course, "native Hawaiian" is an ill-defined and corrupt concept to begin with, so "native Hawaiians" ought not to have any legal standing as a group at all. That isn't just a question of justice; if you let people retroactively interfere with property and ownership rights based on their membership in some racial group, you create so much risk and uncertainty that you scare away investments and business. Any sane businessman and investor is going to ask: if we build a new power plant or factory or dock or shopping center, how much risk do we face that some "native Hawaiian group" is going to claim that we are treading on their sacred ground and kill the project halfway through, or demand pay-offs?

    4. Re:Establishment clause by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      If I build a telescope on my private land, you have no right to interfere with that even if it offends your religious beliefs.

      My neighbors objected to my building an unshielded reactor on my private property. This is why America is going to hell. No respect for private property.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    5. Re:Establishment clause by Maxo-Texas · · Score: 1

      Wow... what religion prohibits building unshielded reactors?

      --
      She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
    6. Re:Establishment clause by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      Wow... what religion prohibits building unshielded reactors?

      The church of Christ, nonScientist?

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    7. Re:Establishment clause by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 3, Informative

      A group of native Hawaiians object on the grounds that the land has historic and spiritual significance. IMHO, both sides have standing, and I hope they work something out that preserves both of their interests.

      There are two possibilities. Either these lands are public or they are private (or could be sold to a private group). If I build a telescope on my private land, you have no right to interfere with that even if it offends your religious beliefs. If the lands are public, then trying to maintain them in a way that caters to the religious feelings of any group amounts to an establishment of religion; that's unacceptable as well.

      And, of course, "native Hawaiian" is an ill-defined and corrupt concept to begin with, so "native Hawaiians" ought not to have any legal standing as a group at all. That isn't just a question of justice; if you let people retroactively interfere with property and ownership rights based on their membership in some racial group, you create so much risk and uncertainty that you scare away investments and business. Any sane businessman and investor is going to ask: if we build a new power plant or factory or dock or shopping center, how much risk do we face that some "native Hawaiian group" is going to claim that we are treading on their sacred ground and kill the project halfway through, or demand pay-offs?

      That isn't just a question of justice; if you let people retroactively interfere with property and ownership rights based on their membership in some racial group, you create so much risk and uncertainty that you scare away investments and business. Any sane businessman and investor is going to ask: if we build a new power plant or factory or dock or shopping center, how much risk do we face that some "native Hawaiian group" is going to claim that we are treading on their sacred ground and kill the project halfway through, or demand pay-offs?

      Especially since the Mauna Kea Telescope is just a proxy fight. This group of Hawaiians at core do not want white people on "their" islands at all. The native Hawaiians refer to anyone not of their race as Haole https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... , although it is mostly used as a racial epithet against Europeans.

      From the article:

      In 1944, Hawaiian scholar Charles Kenn wrote, "In the primary and esoteric meaning, haole indicates a race that has no relation to one's own; an outsider, one who does not conform to the mores of the group; one that is void of the life element because of inattention to natural laws which make for the goodness in man. In its secondary meaning, haole ... implies a thief, a robber, one not to be trusted.

      In likewise manner, in Hawaiian schools, on the last day of school, they have "Kill Haole day", where natives are supposed to harass and attack the white students. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

      The Southern Poverty Law Center has this to say about the incredibly racist Hawaiians:

      https://www.splcenter.org/figh...

      So sorry Hawaiians, I consider you to be just as racist as the southern preacher in the 1859's preaching how the bible condones owning black people, as racist as any group of KKK members, who lynch and burn crosses on lawns. As racist as any southern state you care to name.

      And do not even attempt to hand me the idea that since some white people have been racist, that its okay with you being racist, because you are then condoning their racism. You are 100 percent as big a collection of racist scum as they were.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    8. Re:Establishment clause by currently_awake · · Score: 1

      I can see why the natives would be upset, having been invaded and subjugated by the US army and their land taken. Not sure how that affects building telescopes though.

    9. Re:Establishment clause by ooloorie · · Score: 1

      So sorry Hawaiians, I consider you to be just as racist

      Well, before you get all pushed out of shape, you might start telling us who you define as "Hawaiian". How many "drops of blood" should a "Hawaiian" have according to Ol Olsoc to be legally considered a member of the "Hawaiian race"?

      As I said, personally, I don't consider Hawaiians anything at all, since I don't believe there is such a thing as a "Hawaiian".

      What there is is "native Hawaiian groups", which seem pretty similar to something like the Thule Society.

    10. Re:Establishment clause by ooloorie · · Score: 1

      I suppose it's not surprising that someone who believes in scientific racism (as you obviously do) also would think that a religious symbol on your neighbor's property is the equivalent of an unshielded nuclear reactor.

    11. Re:Establishment clause by DanielRavenNest · · Score: 1

      > A group of native Hawaiians object on the grounds that the land has historic and spiritual significance.

      It doesn't. The top of Mauna Kea was used by the natives as a *rock quarry* for stone tools. There is literally tons of archeological evidence of that:

      http://www.mauna-a-wakea.info/...

      https://photos1.blogger.com/bl...

    12. Re:Establishment clause by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      I can see why the natives would be upset, having been invaded and subjugated by the US army and their land taken.

      Not sure how that affects building telescopes though.

      Yes, wrong is wrong. The thing is that they aren't exactly innocent or pure. Their religion is a caste system, their religion practices human sacrifice, segregates men and women and as far as I can tell, the Tahiti takeover (Disputed) or Maori merely shows whatever they are, they aren't the first, so they have no permanent claim.

      Some researchers think they may even had pre-Columbian American contact due to the presence of the sweet potato in Hawaii.

      Lest we think only white 'murricans are evil, the Hawaiians (whichever were the presumed original ones) introduced the Pacific rat to the islands, which precipitated an early extinction event.

      Here's an interesting link https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

      I have great sympathy for a lot of the people that we Americans may have run roughshod over. The "native" Hawaiians simply aren't one of them.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    13. Re:Establishment clause by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      As I said, personally, I don't consider Hawaiians anything at all, since I don't believe there is such a thing as a "Hawaiian".

      What there is is "native Hawaiian groups", which seem pretty similar to something like the Thule Society.

      Yes, you are right. There is a lot of ambiguity over the original Hawaiians, Polynesians, Tahitian, and Maori and even possible pre-Columbian Americas influence. As well as the dates of occupation. Some have even noted some sort of "little people" living there, although that is disputed.

      So Ol Olsoc doesn't think a pure Hawaiian exists at all - and that's just another knock against these folks. I pretty much dispute their claim over the islands any more than anyone else's.

      I also dispute that some deity lives in that mountain, and find the original lease agreement is valid. Any claim they have - especially to the mountaintop is as valid as Dominionist dogma. They are part of the US now, and if they want to rebel, they'll need to take up arms and declare war on us.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    14. Re:Establishment clause by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      I suppose it's not surprising that someone who believes in scientific racism (as you obviously do) also would think that a religious symbol on your neighbor's property is the equivalent of an unshielded nuclear reactor.

      I am sort of surprised that you took a comment noting that property rights are not 100 percent on the side of the property owner, and gyrating that to scientific racism. Especially, what the hell is scientific racism anyhow?

      If I wanted to place a 300 foot cross on my property in my neighborhood, I wouldn't be allowed. If I wanted to pan for gold, I wouldn't be allowed.

      What the hell are we arguing about anyhow? We seem to be more or less on the same page, except my attempt at humor upset you. Hint, I don't even think the most rabid property rights advocate would want to put an unshielded nuc reactor on his property. My training tells me that he wouldn't own the property much longer. They're kinda nasty thingies if you don't keep them in their jars.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    15. Re:Establishment clause by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Lol.

      No, it went like this.

      The islands were "discovered" by the UK.

      One chief got a lot of guns from the UK and "unified" (genocide basically) the islands.

      The islands became profitable because of whales and agriculture.

      American businessmen staged a coup-- with a lot of support of the current Queen.

      To paraphrase a book on a similar subject, "The real problem with the Indians is they're just as lazy and stupid and greedy as the rest of us."

    16. Re:Establishment clause by ooloorie · · Score: 1

      f I wanted to place a 300 foot cross on my property in my neighborhood, I wouldn't be allowed. If I wanted to pan for gold, I wouldn't be allowed.

      Generally, you can do both of those things on private property. You are restricted from doing them if you bought your property without mineral rights or if you bought property where there are CC&Rs or zoning restrictions.

      Especially, what the hell is scientific racism anyhow?

      Scientific racism is the use of scientific and pseudo-scientific techniques and hypotheses to support or justify the belief in racism, racial inferiority, racialism, racial superiority, or alternatively the practice of classifying individuals of different phenotypes into discrete races (Wikipedia). Scientific racism is what caused separate-but-equal, eugenics, forced sterilization, and widespread labor discrimination against blacks. It was widely preached by progressives, and still is to this day. No, 20th century racism did not originate with "southern preachers in the 1859" and only has indirectly to do with slavery at all.

      What the hell are we arguing about anyhow? We seem to be more or less on the same page, except my attempt at humor upset you.

      I frankly can't tell whether you're trying to be sarcastic or humorous. What I can tell is that you don't know anything about the history of racism or discrimination in the US.

    17. Re:Establishment clause by KGIII · · Score: 1

      LOL! You're a scientific racist! That's precious. They're new, you should probably break 'em in right. I was tempted to write 'em a novella on your behalf but I'm just too lazy and you can stand up for yourself.

      That is, that's too cute. You scientific racist, you!

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    18. Re:Establishment clause by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As long as you can guarantee gamma rays stay on your side of the fence and don't melt a hole to the water you can go ahead and build your reactor.

    19. Re:Establishment clause by findoutmoretoday · · Score: 1

      If you have seen images of animist society (Japan for example) you would know that work-tools and religion can be related. And 2000 years from now the telescopes will probably be seen as religious buildings. Scientists are often like religious casts more concerned by status and building temples than science itself.

    20. Re:Establishment clause by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      f I wanted to place a 300 foot cross on my property in my neighborhood, I wouldn't be allowed. If I wanted to pan for gold, I wouldn't be allowed.

      Generally, you can do both of those things on private property. You are restricted from doing them if you bought your property without mineral rights or if you bought property where there are CC&Rs or zoning restrictions.

      Actually, you're only half right. You're right about the panning for gold, but absolutely not about the cross. Any structure that large will surely fall afoul of some kind of restriction. You will at minimum require a permit. You can't just go off half-cocked and do it. There will be meetings, and your community will decide if you can build something that big. If someone complains there will be more meetings.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    21. Re:Establishment clause by ooloorie · · Score: 1

      You can't just go off half-cocked and do it. There will be meetings, and your community will decide if you can build something that big.

      No, sorry, that's not true. "Your community" has no input into whether you build 300 ft structures on your 1000 ac of private property out in unincorporated land. The only thing you have to do is to file an FAA notice, but even that isn't a "permit". In addition. objections to any structure on someone else's property traditionally can only be justified on utilitarian grounds, i.e. that they cause someone else demonstrable harm or risk in some way.

      In any case, this b.s. about height and mineral rights is special pleading and straw men; what we were discussing is whether there is any basis for religious objections to what other people do on their property. The idea that "my feelings are hurt" or "it offends my religious feelings" should give you the right to interfere in the liberty of others is incompatible with American values and American legal tradition. It's even worse when those ideas are combined with racist ideas and those newly created rights are only available to members of select races ("native Hawaiians", "native Americans").

      And the primary reason for objecting to such racist legal ideas is that they end up hurting the very people they are claimed to help, not that anybody else is hurt by it. It makes little practical difference to anybody else what kind of shithole activists for "native Hawaiians" turn Hawaii into, but this sort of nonsense hurts many innocent people who call that place their home regardless of their "race". This is nothing other than segregation warmed over.

    22. Re:Establishment clause by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If the lands are public, then trying to maintain them in a way that caters to the religious feelings of any group amounts to an establishment of religion; that's unacceptable as well.

      Or to put it another way; If Christians wanted to put up the 10 commandments on public lands, like the state capitol, other religious groups would fight to get their religious symbol put up, like satanists with Baphomet.

      The argument was the same in Oklahoma with satanists and the 10 commandments; If the government gives special treatment to a religion, it amounts to establishing or sanctioning that religion.

    23. Re:Establishment clause by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      No, sorry, that's not true. "Your community" has no input into whether you build 300 ft structures on your 1000 ac of private property out in unincorporated land.

      HAW HAW HAW

      Tell you what. Go forth and give it a shot, and see how it goes — make sure to defend it to the bitter end. You won't have to get back to us to let us know how it went, because you'll be on the news.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    24. Re:Establishment clause by ooloorie · · Score: 1

      HAW HAW HAW Tell you what. Go forth and give it a shot, and see how it goes — make sure to defend it to the bitter end. You won't have to get back to us to let us know how it went, because you'll be on the news.

      Tell you what: before you keep demonstrating your ignorance, I suggest you actually spend a little time in rural America.

      In any case, as I was saying, whether there are height limits is irrelevant to the question of whether your neighbors should be able to prevent you from building something on your private property solely based on their religious feelings.

      If you believe anybody ought to have that right, you are opposed to a modern liberal society.

    25. Re:Establishment clause by ooloorie · · Score: 1

      I should say that the no-hassles limit is 200 ft. Above 200 ft, you need to interact with the FAA, but that is a notification requirement, not actually an approval process.

    26. Re:Establishment clause by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      No, sorry, that's not true. "Your community" has no input into whether you build 300 ft structures on your 1000 ac of private property out in unincorporated land.

      HAW HAW HAW

      Tell you what. Go forth and give it a shot, and see how it goes — make sure to defend it to the bitter end. You won't have to get back to us to let us know how it went, because you'll be on the news.

      I think ooloorie is just here to disagree with others, and I'm certain he'll defend whatever the hell he is talking about to the bitter end.

      Maybe he lives in Houston Texas, Where you might find a 1950 mobile home next to a skyscraper, but I have a number of restrictions I have to deal with. Less restrictions than many places, I can put up a radio tower, but it can't be so tall it will fall on my neighbor's house. I can't park an unregistered vehicle on the street. I can't allow my grass to grow taller than 6 inches without cutting it.

      And I can't keep chickens - although they are working on allowing that.

      And his scientific racism bullshit still has me scratching my head. Kinda like that uncle who comes to family functions and wants to argue with everyone even when they agree.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    27. Re:Establishment clause by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      LOL! You're a scientific racist! That's precious. They're new, you should probably break 'em in right. I was tempted to write 'em a novella on your behalf but I'm just too lazy and you can stand up for yourself.

      That is, that's too cute. You scientific racist, you!

      My gast has been flabbered! But stand by, I shall reply to the lad. I'm now dealing with the urge to be unkind, but.... Ah, to heck with it...

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    28. Re:Establishment clause by KGIII · · Score: 1

      I dunno what it is but "scientific racist" is now associated with you in my mind and vice versa. 'Snot my fault, blame them - you evil scientific racist!

      I read a few more of their comments, how could I not notice their name after that? I have decided that they were drunk. I hope so. Heh... Ol' Olsec the Scientific Racist. Chances are, ten years from now, someone will use that term of phrase and I'll recollect this very thread. That may not have been their intent but it's how it's gonna be. I'll refresh later and see if you've said anything that made 'em cry or if they double-down on the accusation. That's rich, it really is.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    29. Re:Establishment clause by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      Scientific racism is the use of scientific and pseudo-scientific techniques and hypotheses to support or justify the belief in racism, racial inferiority, racialism, racial superiority, or alternatively the practice of classifying individuals of different phenotypes into discrete races (Wikipedia). Scientific racism is what caused separate-but-equal, eugenics, forced sterilization, and widespread labor discrimination against blacks. It was widely preached by progressives, and still is to this day.

      And I have a lovely bunch of coconuts! Have you perhaps been indulging in the more potent forms of Kava to extrapolate that from my postings?

      Even from my other posts on this subject, I've noted that even the southern poverty law center, considers the so called native Hawaiians a racist group. https://www.splcenter.org/figh...

      And they are just that. I don't say they are racist because of some DNA heritage, but because they have left adequate proof of their racism. From "Kill Hao

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    30. Re:Establishment clause by KGIII · · Score: 1

      I think I can add to this...

      I live in one of those "unincorporated" areas. In fact, I not only mention it often - I've publicly given directions to my home. It's very much in an unincorporated township with no municipality of its own.

      No, I still had to file for an apply for all the various permits to build. No, I can't just construct a tower (but I own a disassembled one). No, I'm not exempt from the various regulations and that's probably for the best.

      I'm pretty sure that oloorie is just an idiot.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    31. Re:Establishment clause by ooloorie · · Score: 1

      And I have a lovely bunch of coconuts! Have you perhaps been indulging in the more potent forms of Kava to extrapolate that from my postings? Even from my other posts on this subject, I've noted that even the southern poverty law center, considers the so called native Hawaiians a racist group.

      I read your posting as sarcasm, based on the fact that the link you provide for "Kill Haole Day" basically says that it doesn't exist, and your over-the-top comparison that "Hawaiians [...] as racist as any group of KKK members".

      If you say that wasn't intended as sarcasm, I'll take your word for it.

    32. Re:Establishment clause by houghi · · Score: 1

      If I build a telescope on my private land, you have no right to interfere with that

      Not sure if that is true where you live. Where I live you would need a building permit. There can be several reasons why it would be denied. Depending on where you live, it could be because it does not fit in. That means it does not look enough like the rest of the buildings.Or the neigbours do not like the design.
      Another reason can be that you are not allowed to build there, even though other buildings are already present. This because it is destines to be farming land or whatever. Just because you own something does not mean you can do as you wish.
      There are even places where you MUST build within X time. This can change from village to village, let alone country to country, so it might or light not be the case here.

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    33. Re:Establishment clause by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not sure if that is true where you live. Where I live you would need a building permit.

      Those are specific, additional restrictions you accepted when moving into that particular community, not something that applies to "private land" in general. Obviously, if you buy land encumbered by additional restrictions, you are bound by them.

  9. Victory by frovingslosh · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Another victory of religion and superstition and the self interests of a few people who have appointed themselves as religious leaders over science and reason and public interest.

    --
    I'm an American. I love this country and the freedoms that we used to have.
    1. Re:Victory by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think the Hubble Space Telescope is the greatest thing to happen to mankind since fish grew feet, and as far as religion goes, I'm a yuuuuuuge fan of the FSM.

      But this isn't about stopping science like fetal tissue research, this is about a piece of land. Most people so far are giving what amount to Manifest Destiny arguments.

      And we know how well MD works out for the locals.

      Maybe they want the land to stay their land, nothing wrong with that, and maybe they want a bribe. If they do want a bribe, what's wrong with that?

      I'd suggest any indigenous person wanting a bribe from the US Government isn't so much taking advantage of the situation so much as they're just students of history and are tired of getting the shaft.

    2. Re:Victory by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There was a time when we would have built it anyway, and if they'd made too much of a fuss they would have been rounded up and shot "in the public interest."

      A middle ground would be nice.

    3. Re:Victory by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Horseshit. This isn't about "religion". This is about grievance mongering and hating on "white" people and their "white" government. Pretending this is about "religion" is a cop-out. Stop lying to yourself.

    4. Re:Victory by reboot246 · · Score: 1

      Bingo! You hit the nail on the head! You said what all the others were afraid to say.

    5. Re:Victory by ooloorie · · Score: 1

      I'd suggest any indigenous person wanting a bribe from the US Government isn't so much taking advantage of the situation so much as they're just students of history and are tired of getting the shaft.

      "Getting the shaft"? The per capita GDP of Hawaii is slightly above US average at almost $50000. That's ten times that of other Pacific Islanders. In addition, Hawaiians have free access to labor markets across the US, receive US passports, and receive a massive net influx of federal money. Hawaiians should thank their lucky stars that they are part of the US. However, if they want to leave the US, they are free to campaign for it. Of course, individuals are always free to vote with their feet and give up their US citizenship.

    6. Re:Victory by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Religion? This is straight up racism is what it is. The fact that you can see it means that you spend too much time with some atheist dick up your ass.

      Anyone who can claim to not be a white male in the US has an ace in the hole the second a white male wants something that they don't.

      If religion had so much power that a handful of practitioners of an otherwise dead religion could stop Big Science do you really think we'd have legal abortion and gay marriage in the US? The age of religion having that much sway over the public is pretty much over. Aside from a couple of loose canons that get a bit of press anytime they open their mouths there really isn't much to religion anymore.

    7. Re:Victory by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I vote for: 'Build it anyway...rounded up and tazed until they shit themselves.'

    8. Re:Victory by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      Another victory of religion and superstition

      Hawaiians spontaneously gave up their religion in 1819, before the arrival of western missionaries. It seems a lot of them really didn't like the kapu system.
      There are still superstitions in Hawaii but mainly revolving around ghosts.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    9. Re:Victory by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just because he said it doesn't make it true.

      Let me demonstrate - you are a brilliant and insightful person.

    10. Re:Victory by h33t+l4x0r · · Score: 1

      It's not really accurate to call kapu a religion, or to call objection to the telescope superstition. It's more like sentimentality. If they were building the telescope in Bethlehem I think some people here would change their tune.

    11. Re:Victory by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      It's not really accurate to call kapu a religion

      It was more than just giving up Kapu. They destroyed the temples, the wooden statues, and abandoned the gods. What exactly would you call that?

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    12. Re:Victory by h33t+l4x0r · · Score: 1

      They were really only paying lip service to those gods. Imagine if the US president ordered everyone to stop believing in Jesus. And then imagine that they did!

      So the Hawaiians were clearly never as religious white people. They had some weird hangups though - women couldn't eat bananas? That's weird.

      If you want to see some real religious and superstitious primitives, turn on the GOP debate some time.

  10. Re:Unhelpful Whining by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    No, you need to grow up. If this was a fight over some land with significance to Christians you'd like be all "fuck them."

    Those of us with a fairer eye on the question of religion don't play the denomination game. Fuck these savages. Stop your PC bullshit and grow a set. The idea that people identify themselves with something that they had no hand in from their ancestors is simply bullshit.

  11. The score at half time. by TechyImmigrant · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Science: 0
    superstition: 1
    greed: 4.

    --
    I should use this sig to advertise my book ISBN-13 : 978-1501515132.
    1. Re:The score at half time. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Those are some awesome land tile properties. Perhaps my civilization could build a mine there?

    2. Re:The score at half time. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      law: 1
      blatant flaunting of the law: -0.5

      Everyone seems to be fantastically missing the point that this was decided in a court of law duly recognized by the state of Hawaii and the United States Government. The TMT Corporation broke the rules and tried to evade existing regulations when they started *actually constructing* the telescope before they ever had regulatory review. They could have been trying to build a brewery, or an outhouse - it's not about a telescope, it's about the law. As this was a violation of state law, and the subsequent process used to try to paste over this was also a violation of state law, construction was halted and now the illegally granted retroactive permit will be revoked.

      The telescope may still get built, and the opposition group is not as a rule opposed to this - what they are opposed to is the way this was done (on top of similar acts in the past where the natives failed to have proper representation, so they didn't push back within our legal framework, and now there are already more telescopes than there should be on the mountain).

    3. Re:The score at half time. by TechyImmigrant · · Score: 1

      and now there are already more telescopes than there should be on the mountain).

      What is the telescope capacity rating of a mountain? How is it determined?

      --
      I should use this sig to advertise my book ISBN-13 : 978-1501515132.
  12. Re:Unhelpful Whining by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 2

    "If the telescope doesn't get built it will be because the people who want to build it aren't willing to make the compromises that are required as part of a democratic process."

    Hawaii doesn't want astronomy, and it is not the job of astronomers to convince them otherwise. Even if they were to start the 7-14 year permitting process over again, it wouldn't change the opposition. Start construction right away at an alternate site.

    Sierra San Pedro Mártir in Baja California is a site on the original list for the TMT, but all of the other sites other than Maunakea were in Chile, which is now the location for its southern hemisphere sibling. The TMT needs another northern hemisphere site. Given the current social situation in Mexico, can the safety of construction and operation be assured? If not, I have suggested that qualified site on the Tibetan Plateau, even though it was not on the TMT's original list because that list was composed before China became a partner in TMT. China is one place where the project will be insulated from its real opponents, the Greens.

  13. Sounds familar by hawguy · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Sounds a lot like what happened to the company that tried to run ferry service between the islands, the government supported the company and helped them start up, 2 years (and several lawsuits) later a judge shut them down because whatever law was passed by the government was against Hawaii's constitution.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

    In December 2008, environmental groups and the company returned to court for an appeal of the previous ruling. On March 16, 2009 the Hawaii Supreme Court ruled that allowing the Superferry to operate prior to completion of the environmental study was unconstitutional.[37] The company immediately suspended service and laid off its 236 employees.

    Hundreds of jobs and hundreds of millions of dollars of investment lost.... and probably hundreds of millions of future investments lost because investors won't invest in infrastructure when they have no assurance that when the government says "we need this, do it", that they really mean it.

    I actually had tickets to ride the boat, but the company had already shut down before my trip.

    1. Re:Sounds familar by phantomfive · · Score: 1
      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    2. Re:Sounds familar by PolygamousRanchKid+ · · Score: 1

      I seriously that Hawaii would be able to find any investors. Even if the State Legislature approves, the Native Hawaiians will hit it with yet more lawsuits, and the courts will shut it down. After the TMT fiasco, potential investors will decide that it isn't worth the risk.

      Anyway Hawaii already has tradition Native Hawaiian inter-island ferry services . . . they are called outrigger canoes. That would give the Native Hawaiian groups enough ammunition to claim that the new services were trying to use modern "white" naval technology to drive the outriggers out of business.

      Maybe Über could step in, and offer a service where you could book rides on people's private boats . . . ?

      As to the TMT, maybe the groups involved could dig up a Native Hawaiian astronomer who could negotiate between the two sides . . . ?

      --
      Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
    3. Re:Sounds familar by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > the government supported the company and helped them start up,

      You have a funny way of spelling "corruption." That ferry company used their connections and influence to get themselves illegally exempted from doing environmental impact reports. When the supreme court undid that bullshit the ferry company leaned on their connections to get a law passed essentially doing the same thing. So the supreme court called bullshit on that too.

      The lesson you should have taken away from those events is don't be corrupt. But I guess corruption is just fine when its for something you like, right? Seems to be the general consensus on the telescope too because nothing must stand in the way of progress!!!!

    4. Re:Sounds familar by guises · · Score: 1

      Really, even without the corruption angle there'd be nothing to get up in arms about here. Maybe Hawaii does need a ferry service, but that doesn't necessarily mean that setting up a ferry service is a good idea. That's the whole point behind requiring environmental studies.

    5. Re:Sounds familar by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sounds a lot like what happened to the company that tried to run ferry service between the islands, the government supported the company and helped them start up, 2 years (and several lawsuits) later a judge shut them down because whatever law was passed by the government was against Hawaii's constitution.

      Because it *was* unconstitutional! Why is operating under the requirements of existing laws such a pain? The state government acted completely illegally at the time - *and KNEW IT* - in order to fast track something that should have been reviewed.

      Much like the telescope, the ferry *could* have been built (and the TMT might still), if the proper process had been followed. However, because special interests decided that their project was somehow "better" than environmental review, they got the legislature to bypass it and allow them to operate without it - unsurprisingly completely unconstitutional. What is the point of having environmental protections in the first place if we can just ignore review whenever we want?

    6. Re:Sounds familar by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Anyway Hawaii already has tradition Native Hawaiian inter-island ferry services . . . they are called outrigger canoes. That would give the Native Hawaiian groups enough ammunition to claim that the new services were trying to use modern "white" naval technology to drive the outriggers out of business.

      I love posts like yours because they are so revealing. Either you think that's true because you are an idiot or you think its a funny joke because you are an ignorant prick. Either way we didn't learn anything about Hawaii but we did learn something about you.

      BTW we have a phrase for people like you - "haole, that's why" as in why is he such a dick? Haole, that's why.

  14. Re:Unhelpful Whining by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    If the telescope doesn't get built it will be because the people who want to build it aren't willing to make the compromises that are required as part of a democratic process. Don't get sour grapes over the fact that a historically marginalized people are now getting their legitimate say in the process.

    Giving people special political rights based on their race isn't part of "the democratic process", it is racist.

    And none of the activists that are protesting this were "historically marginalized" because they weren't historically alive. The only thing they have in common with people who were "historically marginalized" is their appearance.

    The fact that they've been shut out for decades is the tragedy.

    No, what is a tragedy is that the same racists that gave us eugenics, separate-but-equal, and segregation are up to their old tricks again. And by "the same racists", I mean progressives and Democrats.

  15. Fuck you, protesters by argStyopa · · Score: 0

    Seriously:

    - fuck you and your ridiculous stone age religious sympathies. (BTW I'd say the same thing to Christians if they prevented building a telescope on a Chilean mountain because "Jesus' spirit lives here")
    - fuck you and your revisionist history; if Hawaii was still its own country, you'd have your own 1%ers that would instead own that land, the normal people STILL wouldn't be allowed there, and the astronomers could build their telescope there simply by paying someone a hefty bribe with probably 10% the complications
    - fuck you generally.

    --
    -Styopa
    1. Re:Fuck you, protesters by chipschap · · Score: 5, Interesting

      if Hawaii was still its own country, you'd have your own 1%ers

      That was certainly the historical case, and going back into pre-Western-contact days, the ruling class (ali`i) were so elite that if a commoner even looked at them the commoner was subject to death.

      Having said that, though, the situation, like everything here in Hawai`i, is complex. Certainly bad things happened back in 1893; it's hard to study the history and think otherwise. But that was a long time ago. What's right? I don't really have the right to be the judge of that.

      However, most of the protesters overlook the fact that their ancestors were astronomers and skilled in things like celestial navigation. The ancestors might very well have supported something like the TMT. The ali`i seemed to believe in progress (a little known fact is that Honolulu was, in the days of the Kingdom, an early and enthusiastic adopter of the telephone, under the direction of King David Kalakaua).

      Last spring I happened to be on the University of Hawai`i Manoa campus (the main campus, in Honolulu). There was a large group of TMT protesters spread along Dole Street. Granted, they were all very polite and behaved very well, which is a credit to their movement. But was it their movement? I stopped and listened to some of them talking; a number of them were speaking `olelo Hawai`i (the Hawaiian language). Very cool. But they really didn't know what was going on. I overheard them saying that they (at least many of them) were taking part because their UH Hawaiian Studies instructors told them they had to be there.

    2. Re:Fuck you, protesters by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 4, Interesting

      "That was certainly the historical case, and going back into pre-Western-contact days, the ruling class (ali`i) were so elite that if a commoner even looked at them the commoner was subject to death."

      And in particular, only the ali'i were permitted to go above the treeline on Maunakea. The kãnaka, or commoners, would be clubbed to death for venturing up to where the telescopes are now.

      Yippee! Macrons work now. Thanks for the encoding fix, new owners!

    3. Re:Fuck you, protesters by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So sad that the astronomers tradition is being destroyed to protect a more palatable tradition, ludditism. If I was native I would be mad as hell at the dumbing down of my tradition. Aloha

    4. Re:Fuck you, protesters by chipschap · · Score: 1

      Yippee! Macrons work now. Thanks for the encoding fix, new owners!

      Now if only there would be a way to render the `okina correctly, in a way that would display reliably on most browsers!

  16. Headline tense by wonkey_monkey · · Score: 0

    Thirty Meter Telescope Likely Never Gets Built ... In Hawaii

    Yeesh, what tense is that?

    --
    systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
  17. Religion is crap and all....but.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If these guys wanted to build their telescope over Stone Henge in England. For whatever scientific reason. I would object very violently.

    Call me a pagan.

    On another tack, physicists and cosmologists have, in recent times, determined that the "universe" is way to big. And getting bigger at an accelerating rate. We are never getting off this planet to any other hospitable place. We, humans, are done.

    Finding out more details of this inevitable end does not justify trampling on what we have here.

       

    1. Re:Religion is crap and all....but.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why would you object to a stellar observatory on or near Stone Henge? There's one there already, though it's not in very good condition.

    2. Re:Religion is crap and all....but.... by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 1

      "Why would you object to a stellar observatory on or near Stone Henge? "

      Yes I would, because it rains a lot there and the sky is hazy that close to sea level. One passable viewing night every ten years and my detectors would keep rusting out.

    3. Re:Religion is crap and all....but.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      the artillery range would be a bit of a hindrance as well I expect

  18. The difference between abstraction and reality by RightwingNutjob · · Score: 2

    In the abstract, intellectual sense, you can be all for the rights of "marginalized peoples" and against the "the man".

    But when you naively put theory into practice, you start to get some less-than-happy outcomes and get mugged by reality and start to get a visceral understanding of some facts, like

    1. Turns out that the marginalized peoples are marginalized not because they're innocent noble pacifists more in tune with nature, but because they're superstitious anti-science savages who worship sacred rocks and can't be reasoned with.
    2. The Man actually has a millenia-long tradition of scientific inquiry and exploration, which is how you get to have a roof over your head, food on the table, indoor plumbing, electric lights, and a lifespan longer than 30.
    3. Fighting for Justice (TM) is all well and good. But when we're sitting pretty in the civilized world, there really isn't much real injustice to fight against. So like a child raised in a sterile environment only to develop allergies to everything, a society taught to attack "injustice" will turn its energies against itself, and superstition and paganism can trump science.
    4. Freedom of religion is all well and good, but we in the west tend to have more personal and private religions, where my faith doesn't place any demands on your lifestyle. The savages, on the other hand, tend to have communal 'religions' with sacrifices to pagan idols in the extreme case, and elaborate restrictions on the freedom of their inherents in the most charitable interpretation. One is compatible with capital-f Freedom, one is not. Our culture is about freedom, theirs isn't. You can't compromise between the two.

    1. Re:The difference between abstraction and reality by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      with sacrifices to pagan idols in the extreme case

      Every other asshole on this site is sacrificing lucre on the altar of Jobs or Goog'El.

    2. Re:The difference between abstraction and reality by PPH · · Score: 2

      where my faith doesn't place any demands on your lifestyle.

      Yeah, right. Try telling that to Evangelicals. Go back hundreds of years and try telling that to the inquisitor. You are never going to win an argument with "My religion is good and benign. Yours is evil and superstitious." They're all nuts. As long as they keep to themselves, mutter strange words and wear funny hats, we'll let it slide.

      --
      Have gnu, will travel.
    3. Re:The difference between abstraction and reality by RightwingNutjob · · Score: 1

      That's my point. Ours tend to be the types that can keep to themselves. Theirs are the kind that can't.

    4. Re:The difference between abstraction and reality by drinkypoo · · Score: 3, Interesting

      That's my point. Ours tend to be the types that can keep to themselves. Theirs are the kind that can't.

      What? No. There is no kind of religious type that can keep to itself once it gets the power to start forcing other people to live like them. There are some kinds of religious, though, whose beliefs inherently prevent them from amassing such power. You're not going to see the Amish forcing anyone to live like them any time soon because their religion forbids them taking up arms. They don't have the means, and their lifestyle forbids them acquiring them, so it's not going to happen.

      The only thing that stops any particular Christian sect from going bad (they all have the same book more or less, so they all can justify any kind of bad behavior if they cross their eyes just right when they read it) is other competing sects, and the fact that their numbers are all dwindling. The only religion growing right now is Islam, and IMO that's only because they have a large captive audience to which they can sell their story. Depressed people are easy targets for religion. Bring up quality of life in the places they're making inroads and you'll see them falter rapidly. Nobody happy needs religion.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  19. Re: Unhelpful Whining by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How fortunate we are to have those brave Republicans sticking up for women, Muslims, immigrants, and other minorities! /s

  20. This was actually the result of a proxy fight. by tlambert · · Score: 4, Interesting

    This was actually the result of a proxy fight.

    It was a proxy for the ke ea Hawai‘i movement, which is a movement that is demanding some form of sovereignty for Hawaii. they have been around forever, and they make themselves a pain in the ass wherever they can in order to attempt to draw media attention to their cause.

    Their favorite hobby horses are self-determination and self-governance, for Hawaii as an independent nation, or for people of native Hawaiian ancestry to obtain "tribal sovereignty" similar to the relationship with Native Americans, for Native Hawaiians.

    They generally don't care about "sacred spots" unless caring about them publicly will get major headlines.

    Alphabetically, the organizations involved include: ALOHA, Hawaiian Kingdom, Hawaiian Kingdom Government, Ka Lhui, Ka Pkaukau, Mauna Kea Anaina Hou, Nation of Hawai'i, Nou Ke Akua Ke Aupuni O Hawaii, Poka Laenui, and Protect Kahoolawe Ohana (PKO).

    Frankly, I'm surprised there is not a "Bring Queen Lili'uokalani Back From The Dead Society". They are unhappy with the 1893 U.S. Marine invasion that got rid of the hereditary monarchy, and they are unhappy with the U.S. annexation of 1898.

    1. Re:This was actually the result of a proxy fight. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh, so they want to build tax free casinos on their tribal land. Now it all makes sense.

    2. Re:This was actually the result of a proxy fight. by tlambert · · Score: 1

      Oh, so they want to build tax free casinos on their tribal land. Now it all makes sense.

      More like Texas secessionists.

    3. Re:This was actually the result of a proxy fight. by PolygamousRanchKid+ · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Their favorite hobby horses are self-determination and self-governance, for Hawaii as an independent nation, or for people of native Hawaiian ancestry to obtain "tribal sovereignty" similar to the relationship with Native Americans, for Native Hawaiians.

      Well, there's the solution right there . . . give the Native Hawaiians the right to build gambling casinos, in exchange for the right to build a telescope.

      --
      Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
    4. Re:This was actually the result of a proxy fight. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What, they want to keep slavery?

      Remember the A'la'mo!!!

    5. Re:This was actually the result of a proxy fight. by PPH · · Score: 1

      Native Hawaiians

      None left. The Polynesians wiped them out hundreds of years ago.

      --
      Have gnu, will travel.
    6. Re:This was actually the result of a proxy fight. by aberglas · · Score: 1

      Ate them, actually.

    7. Re: This was actually the result of a proxy fight. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Given how much money we waste on Hawaii, it would be great if we could get rid of them as a state. Unfortunately, that's pretty much impossible because the majority of Hawaiians don't want it.

    8. Re:This was actually the result of a proxy fight. by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Ate them, actually.

      Then in a way, they are still with us...

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  21. eminent domain for nice [public] things by harvey+the+nerd · · Score: 1

    We know who vigorously supports eminent domain for public projects...

    1. Re:eminent domain for nice [public] things by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 2

      Actually his controversy is about using eminent domain for private development, which is not at issue here. The TMT site was on a 52-acre 'telescope reservation' that has existed by contract since 1960, and where a number of other instruments are already located.

    2. Re:eminent domain for nice [public] things by DanielRavenNest · · Score: 1

      Eminent domain isn't relevant in this case. The land already belongs to the State of Hawaii, under their Department of Land and Natural Resources. Basically the entire upper half of the Big Island by altitude is a nature reserve. The very top of Mauna Kea is a science reserve managed by the University of Hawaii (another state institution). It includes archaeological sites where natives used it as a *rock quarry* for stone tools, and the area where the telescopes are set up.

      Nobody has ever lived up there, because there is not enough rainfall to support farming, and it gets quite cold at 14,000 ft. So there was nobody to kick out. Once westerners brought metal tools, they replaced the stone tools, so even the native quarry shut down.

    3. Re:eminent domain for nice [public] things by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, but unsurprisingly most /. users can't be bothered to actually understand the conflict here. That contract *does not allow* for the TMT to be built, nor did it allow for some earlier telescopes to be built, but the University of Hawaii has been exploiting loopholes and/or just getting the legislature to modify their contract without both parties having to agree, and then subleasing the land to other entities that build telescopes, which was *never* part of the original framework.

  22. Re:Unhelpful Whining by rubycodez · · Score: 1

    Wrong, Hawaii as a whole might well want astonomy, but a flawed process and flawed judge gave some outcast weirdos a megaphone. Disgusting how the ignorant can hold back human progress.

  23. Re:Unhelpful Whining by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Totalitarian leftist shakedowns

    Said the person who lives in neither a totalitarian nor a leftist state. And has experience of neither of them.

  24. Re:Unhelpful Whining by He+Who+Has+No+Name · · Score: 2

    "Eppur si muove": now a microaggression.

  25. Re:Unhelpful Whining by Kohath · · Score: 1

    Said the person who lives in neither a totalitarian nor a leftist state. And has experience of neither of them.

    And would like to keep it that way. But that requires more people to start saying no to totalitarian-minded leftists.

  26. Re: Unhelpful Whining by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No. The parties switched so everything the Democrats did wrong before about 1970 is the fault of the Republicans.

  27. Re:Unhelpful Whining by Noah+Haders · · Score: 4, Interesting

    > Fuck these savages.

    I don't see why /. is losing their minds over this. It's just a straight up NIMBY issue. The people who live there don't want it, and obviously nobody has successfully explained why they should care. I don't even know if anybody has even tried. I certainly haven't seen an explanation here about why the TMT is so important, and why we must have it so bad that we should override the wishes of the local residents.

    I don't know why everybody here needs to play up the pacific islander aspect, poking fun at their hokey religion and ancient weapons.

  28. Re:Unhelpful Whining by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 1

    Since this controversy started, I've been following the state news closely, and I from what I can see the response to the native oppositions is...lukewarm indifference. I see a few positive comments in newspaper story response threads, sandwiched between huge blocks of misspelled but fervent screeds from the religious opposition. Where are the business organizations like Rotary and Chamber of Commerce? Where are the counterprotests? Where are the academics at UH and other schools?

    I get the impression that the natives have been weaponized by ethnic studies programs that nobody ever bothered auditing for historical accuracy.

  29. Re: Unhelpful Whining by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That's why the Christians have invaded Israel to free Bethlehem from the Palestinians, except, of course, that they haven't.

  30. Soon we will be by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The retarded states of America.
    As other will do the science we do not.

  31. The pecking order of science by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This shows how low the pecking order of science in society really is.
    Mala tempora.

  32. Ex-Hawaii resident here by mccotter · · Score: 1

    I have mixed feelings on this after spending 10 years on several Hawaiian islands. Hawaiians have a deep reverence and connection to the land which is one thing they ABSOLUTELY get right. I'm not sure where the sweet spot is w/r/t progress / preserving the land, but categorically reducing the Hawaiians through name calling is not fair, and quite naive in my book, when you haven't lived there to fully grok where many of them are coming from.

    1. Re:Ex-Hawaii resident here by RightwingNutjob · · Score: 1

      We don't need to grok anything other than the fact that they tanked a big scientific instrument for no reason other than their aboriginal superstitions and less-than-veiled disdain for anything haole. And that's bullshit, regardless of where they're coming from, which is to say that their position is not defensible in any sane argument.

    2. Re:Ex-Hawaii resident here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      which is to say that their position is not defensible in any sane argument.

      I disagree.
      Let's have a sane argument and see, shall we? That means you need to drop your all-hominem approach.

    3. Re:Ex-Hawaii resident here by RightwingNutjob · · Score: 1

      OK. What's your sane argument? What can you possibly pull out of the aether to justify the tactics being used to halt the construction of the telescope? And I will remind you that sane arguments must be constructed from the framework of laws-on-the-books, past precedents, and actual logic, not emotion, not imagined grievances, and not political statements.

  33. Re: Unhelpful Whining by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's amazing the number of people that lie and claim they don't know that. You usually hear them saying incorrect things like Lincoln was a Republican.

  34. Re:Unhelpful Whining by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    > We have no business as a society stopping building on the basis of blasphemy anyway.

    You call it "blasphemy" while anyone who actually understands the situation calls it culture.

    Seems like slashdot just loses it shit when it comes to religion. Its like you guys are so fanatically devoted to your principles that you can't even see what's in front of you. Sound familiar?

    Even sadder -- this is the result of a democratic process. This is why we have government. Your arguments are just gussied up fascism.

  35. Re:Unhelpful Whining by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It is amazing how blind you are to your own biases.

    You know what is totalitarian? The way the construction permits were issued in the first place. Pure kowtowing to special interest groups at the expense of the weak. Now the weak are a tiny bit stronger due to the actual rule of law rather than just lip service to the rule of law and you thin-skinned whiners totally lose your shit.

    Society is for everybody, not just the rich and powerful.

  36. Re:Unhelpful Whining by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    NO fucking way you live in hawaii. You personify all the worst stereotypes that hawaiians hold about whites -- Authoritarian, entitled, dismissive and supremely confident in your ignorance.

  37. Re:Unhelpful Whining by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    > The only thing they have in common with people who were "historically marginalized" is their appearance.

    Whenever racists talk about race you get bullshit like that.

    Ever heard of generational wealth? These people had theirs stolen because of their race. Recognizing that injustice isn't racist, it is anti-racist.

  38. Re:Unhelpful Whining by guruevi · · Score: 1

    There's historically marginalized people everywhere, if you go back far enough in time everyone was and everyone has. Those "natives" oppressed other natives at some point (unless you believe in that wholesome native tribe - Comanches, Tibetans, Hawaiians - they weren't very nice to their neighbors) so do those ancestors get to claim the land? If you do keep giving people what is 'rightfully' theirs by going back further and further, then you get into situations like Africa where tribal wars and slavery have been marginalizing the country for centuries, long before a white man ever put a flag in the ground.

    To give people like American "Indians", Hawaiians a pittance because someone feels bad about their ancestors' actions is marginalizing them even further. To say they were 'wholesome', peaceful or somehow better than anyone else is racist, it's taking away their humanity, there was good and evil as well in their history, to ignore it is just hiding their rich history of wars, peace, settlement, nomadic life, trade and treaties.

    Is it "their" land (as in they own it currently and it was in the process of being taken by the government)? No? If they want it back, they should conquer it and deal with the consequences of trying to stake claim to another nation's property.

    --
    Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
  39. Re:Unhelpful Whining by russotto · · Score: 1

    If nothing else, the bribes should be more affordable in Mexico. They'll need their own paramilitary force to discourage going back on the graft, however.

  40. Re:Unhelpful Whining by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    but they went through all the hoops, and now you've decided the hoops were not small enough, so they must do it again.

    As you say, society is for everyone, not just special interest groups that have a historical edge to them.

  41. Re:Unhelpful Whining by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yeah, it seems pretty obvious to me as an American from a different State that this just means some judge doesn't like the telescope.

    DId I read that right? You literally said that you don't know anything about the local politics and that makes you confident that the judge vacated his previous ruling allowing construction because he "doesn't like the telescope?" So he hated the telescope last year when he made the original ruling too? How does that work?

    Are you trying to do a caricature of viciously ignorant self-righteous slashdotters who have an autistic level understanding of social issues? Because you are done a fucking awesome job of it!

  42. Re:Unhelpful Whining by Kohath · · Score: 1

    It's leftist science types versus leftist racial justice warriors in a dispute mediated by a leftist government in Hawaii. Whichever side loses might want to rethink their allegiance and start supporting laws and due process and legal procedure rather than arrogantly stomping on people in the usual leftist way.

  43. Re:Unhelpful Whining by rubycodez · · Score: 2

    are you funny! "native Hawaiins" are only ten percent of the population. a minority should not be given control over what the majority wants.

  44. Re:Unhelpful Whining by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 3, Informative

    I'm in Arizona, where the real organizers of this protest tried the same tactics during the Nineties, when the telescope construction was on our Mt. Graham, with somewhat less success. You might want to read their manifesto:
    http://dgrnewsservice.org/2015...

  45. Re:Unhelpful Whining by PolygamousRanchKid+ · · Score: 1

    Where are the academics at UH and other schools?

    They are keeping low lest they come into the sites of the Native Hawaiian groups. UH has some brilliant researchers who do work on marine life and volcanoes. They want to pursue their own research. If they dare to put their fingers into the TMT hornet's nest, they will be hit with lawsuits try to block marine life research, because the marine life has religious meaning ("that fish has the spirit of my great-grandmother in it!"), and lawsuits against volcano research ("that's where my great-grandparents used to toss their virgin daughters into!"

    Serious scientific researchers just want to do research. They do not want to deal with protests and lawsuits, that would just distract them from their work.

    --
    Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
  46. Anti-science is willing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Anti-science is winning, or hasn't anyone noticed.

  47. You didn't learn the lesson of the movie Avatar by Kohath · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The lesson was this:

    Sure we're all supposed to share resources and we all support Bernie Sanders taking from people and giving to others. But if there's a native group involved, then they have an absolute right to completely control any resource, for any reason. Even if the resource is infinitely valuable, and not sharing it will result in poverty and starvation for billions of people. The natives can't even be asked to talk about sharing it; their rights are supreme because they have the righteous skin color.

    I consider Mauna Kea sacred ground that should be used only for telescopic exploration of the heavens. How can these heretics deny me my constitutional right of freedom of religion?

    It doesn't matter. You don't have the righteous skin color, nor the righteous cultural origins. So, as far as the left is considered, you can fuck off.

    1. Re:You didn't learn the lesson of the movie Avatar by Grishnakh · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Oh please. It's the left that wants to build the telescope. When was the last time you heard about right-wingers giving a shit about astronomy or basic science unless there's profit involved? There's no profit in astronomy.

      As someone above stated, this is a fight between the pro-science left and the SJW wacky-left. And unfortunately it looks like the wacky-left is winning.

    2. Re:You didn't learn the lesson of the movie Avatar by Kohath · · Score: 1

      As someone above stated...

      Probably me.

      ...this is a fight between the pro-science left and the SJW wacky-left. And unfortunately it looks like the wacky-left is winning.

      Yeah. The astronomers thought they were elite, ruling class leftists in good standing. Now they're finding out they're just another group of wrong-race, wrong-culture little people getting bent over like the rest of America.

    3. Re:You didn't learn the lesson of the movie Avatar by clovis · · Score: 1

      What I got from Avatar is that we should have kept some smallpox handy.

  48. What else did you expect from Slashdot? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Angry anti-religious zealots abound here and have since the beginning.

  49. TPP to the rescue by currently_awake · · Score: 1

    The new TPP treaty lets foreign corporations override local laws, if money is at stake. I'm sure we can find some excuse to make a claim, and get the telescope built.

  50. Easter Island Anyone? by JimSadler · · Score: 1

    It seems like easter Island would be a great spot as there is no light pollution to worry about and all that land with nobody on it for any size telescope.

    1. Re:Easter Island Anyone? by Ken+McE · · Score: 1

      Easter island has a nice 17,000 foot mountain, but the commute to get there would be hell. Someplace up in the Andes might be a reasonable compromise.

    2. Re:Easter Island Anyone? by DanielRavenNest · · Score: 1

      Easter Island gets 1,147 mm of rain a year, Mauna Kea Observatory gets 187. It's a better site for lots of other reasons (altitude, stability of the air, etc.)

    3. Re:Easter Island Anyone? by amightywind · · Score: 0

      The highest point on Easter Island is a few hundred meters. Most of the rest of the world's great telescopes are at altitude in the Atacama of Chile. Mauna Kea is about as good as it gets in the US.

      --
      an ill wind that blows no good
  51. Re:Unhelpful Whining by RightwingNutjob · · Score: 1

    Rich and powerful my ass. That's the go-to label for anyone that's doing something other than worshipping at the alter of Social Justice. A mom-and-pop operation can find itself labeled "rich and powerful" if they fail to fill their one job opening with people of the favored skin color and the favored Historical Injustice(TM) weighing on their souls to this very day.

  52. Very very odd by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It seems odd to me that people are protesting against something being built somewhere, where they never actually go. I've never been to Hawaii, and some might argue that I have no voice in the argument, having never gone there and visited myself. But I could grab hold of that argument and ask "how many protesters have visited the site of the telescope?" How many would even know if a telescope were built there or not. Could you actually even see it from where you live? Do you have a special set of snow tracks that you want preserved (I've seen pictures of where they want to build the telescope, its covered by snow all year and very cold). So the argument then is: who is actually being harmed, except the idea that someone thought that a place was pristine and they didn't want anyone setting foot on it or something, but its all philosophical. Perhaps a compromise, like "don't step foot on my pristine beach or swim in my pristine water and I won't build on your pristine mountain. If you break the deal, so do I" Its not even that any protester will be out-of-pocket or suffering illness or lose in any way their ability to go about their day-to-day lives. Its all just "the idea of the thing". And in that regard, its all bat crap crazy. Its not even a real thing, its just an idea of a thing. Its virtual.

  53. Re:Unhelpful Whining by DanielRavenNest · · Score: 3, Informative

    > We have no business as a society stopping building on the basis of blasphemy anyway.

    Except the top of Mauna Kea was never a holy site. It was a rock quarry, there is evidence all over the top of the mountain. Before Westerners brought metal tools, the natives used stone ones, and the lava that erupted up there during an ice age cooled quickly, making it chip-resistant. So they set up mining camps and dug up the mountain top. They didn't live up there, not enough rainfall to grow things. That's also the reason it is a good telescope site. So the natives commuted from lower altitudes, dug up stone tools, and went back down. Not exactly a religious pilgrimage.

  54. Re:Unhelpful Whining by whodunit · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I've never seen it explained how a telescope (of which several are already up there) could possibly be a "NIMBY" issue, considering that it has exactly zero possible negative consequences for the locals. It's jot nuclear waste, it's not noisy - shit, it doesn't even block anyone's view. To say nothing of their "hokey religions and ancient weapons" being exactly what they, themselves cite in opposition: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wik...

    Since you were fortunate enough to be under a rock for the last few decades, you've missed the rapid proliferation of "identity politics." The basic idea is to assert that you are a member of a sexual, social, religious or ethnic minority, so that you may characterize any criticism directed at you as inherently bigoted, racist, et cetera. It is a variant of "moral fiat high ground" argument style - the idea being to avoid debates one cannot win by making it impossible for anyone to speak against you.

    You have probably seen articles/comments on /. about "gamergate;" this was simply a lot of 20-somethings with no prior interest in politics getting a crash-course in identity politics when they found a "game dev" trying to hype a very poor game on its merits as femenist-affiming art, or something. These same 20-somethings were also astounded to discover that journalists are neither honest nor principled (fancy that,) and they all got very excited. That entire fracas is a case study in how widespread exploiting identity politics has become - and how commercialized. You can reasonably expect to drum up undeserved hype (and sales) for a poor product if you cast it as pro-whatever; by writers seeking to establish their moral righteousness, or just seeking to head off accusations of bigotry or intolerance (i.e. character assasination.)

    In this case, identity politics is stopping Science, which /. is fond of. Therefore many cnsider it a big deal. You may disagree with the above assesments (and you'd be a fool not to do your own research on all this and just trust my word, anyway,) but it is a description of the issue as I (and many others) percieve it.

  55. Re:Unhelpful Whining by Noah+Haders · · Score: 0

    oh, I'm quite aware of identity politics. I see it all the time on fox news, hannity, and breitbart. "War on Christmas?" "Religious freedom"? "Feminazis"? It's all playing to hurt an indignation of white poor uneducated americans who feel left behind and carry a big grudge.

    I'm familiar with gamergate as well. a reactionary neckbeard riot against people who were trying to challenge and expand what gaming meant, and who played games. "who let a girl into our basement?".

    as for the negative consequences, maybe they didn't want a large industrial installation on top of what the local community feels is a natural resource? combine this with 14 years of construction, more traffic, anybody would protest it. it shure wouldn't get built in vermont, i'll tell you that much.

    so maybe you should check your identity privilege before getting all butthurt about this.

  56. Sad posters ... by yusing · · Score: 1

    Sad but not unexpected to see posters slathering on ad hominem attacks rather than addressing the issues. The subtext of most of the messages here today is unmistakable: the nerve of these savages.

    I majored in science at university. I read most of the technical books I was supposed to read. I quit religion as soon as I could get away from it. I can clearly see the progress for humanity fostered by reason, empiricism, and applied technology. But.

    When I look at what has been done to this world in the previous century-and-a-half, I accept my share of responsibility for what we've done to this incredible, and only, spaceship we have. Here in the US, from the genocides to the atom-bomb to the water in Flint, it's a cornucopia of disasters. We all know the list. And yet, when someone suggests that we step away from the course we've taken, and seriously consider engaging with some traditional notions of sane, caring, thoughtful stewardship, some of us choose to stomp our feet and demand that the Luddites be pushed aside, that their ideas are laughable, that their "feelings" are just manipulation.

    Gentlemen (I assert that most of you are), your exhibition of foot-stomping here today reminds me of Sagan attacking Velikovsky. Not of his apology for attempting to crush another POV without regard for its merits.

    --

    "You must try to forget all you have learned. You must begin to dream." -- Sherwood Anderson

  57. Re:Unhelpful Whining by whodunit · · Score: 3, Interesting

    It's all playing to hurt an indignation of white poor uneducated americans who feel left behind and carry a big grudge.

    There's actually a name for it: "privileged panic." It refers specifically to people who honestly have no clue why the disenfranchised are angry, or that they even ARE disenfranchised. All they know is, they're suddenly under attack for things they've done all their lives and never thought twice about, much less been criticized for. The hue and cry is what happens when you shift a paradigm without a clutch. And as you say, it is playing to the panic - Fox news et al has a very simple model of journalism; i.e. the Jerry Springer one. They take one conservative, one liberal, and then lock them in a cage and give them knives - because clash sells. This is not the way with, say, MSNBC - or even Huffington Post compared to Breitbart.com. They are not seeking to push policy issues - or personal advancement - based on their religion being special. They're circling the wagons and barking at anything that comes close. Abuse of identity politics makes things hard for people looking for real change. You can't impose social change from the top town, no matter how hard you try - Reconstruction in general and Jim Crow in particular, for instance. You have to win hearts and minds. You have to communicate. And that's very difficult to do when the panicking privileged have become accustomed to seeing these issues wielded like just another political club.

     

    I'm familiar with gamergate as well. a reactionary neckbeard riot

    I'm a "gamergate" supporter, and a gamer. I also have a bachelor's degree from a four year university. Video games are now a 93 billion dollar global industry with development teams and budgets that rival Hollywood blockbuster movies in their scope, cost and sophistication - and are marketed much the same way. Long gone are the days when computer games were limited to two markets; kids (on consoles) and computer geeks (who were the only people really using personal computers back in the day.) "Gamer" has retained this stigmatic association well into the modern era, and the fact you feel no shame in using it to attack those you disagree with puts the lie to your earlier sneering at the " white poor uneducated americans." You feel no shame or hesitation in attacking their ethnicity, educational opportunities, socioeconomic status or even their intellect (rather ableist of you, chum,) because white males are fair game by dint of being born "privileged." This is, indeed, the beating heart of identity politics. You seek to elevate your voice above reproach - and discredit mine beyond consideration - by holding legitimacy to be intrinsic to socioeconomic status. Naturally, those that disagree with you are categorized as "reactionary neckbeards rioting," and thus, intrinsically, are stripped of legitimacy.

    I am telling you all this so you will understand that not all of us "reactionary neckbeards" are stupid, nor are we uneducated. We have voices, and we vote. Think about that.

     

    maybe they didn't want a large industrial installation on top of what the local community feels is a natural resource?

    It most certainly is a natural resource - it's a really good place to build telescopes. I would understand completely if the locals were upset over 14 years of construction work going to offshore contractors rather than the locals, or something similar - or if they were lobbying for a rental tax, so the local population with a significant cultural claim to the land was receiving at least as much use of that public land as the astronomers from timbuktu were. Unfortunately, that's not how it has been characterized or argued.

  58. hand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Political correctness was invented by the communists to defeat capitalism and democracy without a war they couldn't win. Until you're willing to fight them facing this reality, they will win.

  59. Re: Unhelpful Whining by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well I was already irritated by these people, then you link to that Luddite moron and I wasted a good 10 minutes getting even more angry.

    Thanks.

  60. Proxy fight: Parent Is Correct by cmholm · · Score: 1

    13 year Hawaii resident, lacking mod points, so chiming in to say that tlambert hit the nail on the head. The sovereignty and similar aligned organizations have little political power, other than what they can exercise in the state courts.

    I used to argue with sovereignty advocates (via Maui News letters to editor) that if they wanted to make some real headway, they should consider forming a party and contesting elective office like the various Puerto Rican independentistas, rather than expending all of their energies in front of judges.

    But, those at the pointy end of the Hawaii movements seem to labor under the delusion that a tribunal in The Hague or D.C. can and will separate Hawaii from the remainder of the Union by the stroke of a pen, so back to court we go...

    --
    Luke, help me take this mask off ... Just for once, let me butterfly kiss you with my own eyes.
  61. The Fix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Build the damn telescope, but instead of a typical telescope looking building to house it, carve it into the shape of a giant Tiki Fire God head who shoots flames from his nose when the scope isn't actually in use.

    Watch how fast that thing gets built.

    1. Re:The Fix by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 1

      In a way, you're onto something. Why not add a casino to the observatory complex visitor center halfway up the mountain, with all revenue going to the natives?

  62. Everyone who blocked the contruction by execthis · · Score: 0

    For every person who blocked the construction of the telescope: Then to not be total disgusting fucking hypocrites:

    When you have a serious injury and are in need of medical support, please do you partake of the services of a trauma center and the beneficial modern technology which made it possible.

    When your loved ones are suffering and dying from some fatal disease, do you partake of advanced medications which could potentially cure them or extend their lives.

    Do not drive a fucking car, use a computer, take an airplane, or utilize any other aspect of modern technology.

    Because otherwise you are disgusting, full-of-shit hypocrites who deserve to rot.

  63. Re:Unhelpful Whining by Noah+Haders · · Score: 1

    OK, thanks for this insightful reply. I had never heard the term privelaged panic. I also appreciate you adding links for more information. tell me more about your perspective on gamergate? I think my understanding is pretty spot on. based on my understanding, the whole thing started when some women were making videogames that were outside of the mainstream and blurred the lines of what a game was. Other women were making cultural commentary videos about videogame history. I never saw any attacks on gamers or direct threats to people's identity. There was an unsubstantiated attack of an inappropriate relationship that led to favorable video game media coverage, but oddly this attack was not on the journalist who supposedly did an unethical thing.

    where am I wrong?

  64. Re:Unhelpful Whining by Noah+Haders · · Score: 1

    I shoudl add that I'm a gamer tool. Currently working my way through just cause 3. looking forward to uncharted.

  65. Re:Unhelpful Whining by KGIII · · Score: 1

    Heh... I've kind of been following this. Just pay the damned bribe. Really. How much do they want? They are taking something of value. Pay for it. Yeah, it sucks but strip all the batshit out of it and just be pragmatic. Promise to not step on the toads, ruin the flowers, let 'em do whatever they seem inclined to say they do up there, and buy 'em off. Just strip the crazy aspects out and understand that they're gonna say it's important to them no matter what you do. Give 'em the money and make 'em go away - but make sure they sign first.

    --
    "So long and thanks for all the fish."
  66. Re:Unhelpful Whining by KGIII · · Score: 1

    Are they saying it *was* a holy site or that it *is* a holy site? I'd read that they (unless being quoted elsewhere) were using the word "sacred" in the present tense. I've read a few articles on this and I've read them from a few sources. As near as I'm able to tell, they were only claiming that it is now, currently, considered sacred because of it's historical significance. That's a whole other argument than saying it was holy in the past.

    I don't know if you'll decide that carries any more or less weight but I believe that's how it was phrased. Given the archaeological evidence of past use, it could be sacred to them now as a tie to their past? Buggered if I know if it really is, by all outward appearances, it looks like a classic shakedown. But, that might give it some more legitimacy and it's quite a bit different than the accusation you're and a few others are using. Dunno if that's significant but it's worth mentioning.

    --
    "So long and thanks for all the fish."
  67. Re: Unhelpful Whining by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Funny how the SJWs are so aggressive about marginalizing Appalachian Americans.

  68. Re:Unhelpful Whining by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Haha, these lazy assed racists are just looking for a payout.

    There are already 4 telescopes up there.

    Their Hawaiian pride can suck the skin off a donkey dick for all I care, If they are so concerned about ancient tradition, they shouldn't be there either only the priests.
    They pretend like they'd all be able to access the site.

    The hokey religion gets brought up because they use it and their "Hawaiian Culture" as a basis for being racist against all "Haoles" (whites) and "half breeds". THey use it to get what they want but almost none of them really practice that shite.

    I lived there for a bit, most Hawaiians (Natives) are pretty nice to your face because they want your money jobs etc. but there is a strong undercurrent of well the thing about "fucking god dammed dirty Haoles is X", It's really weird if you live thee for a while. It's mostly in the poorer areas like the big island and especially in the rural areas.

    As with all things, there is a spectrum. Some Hawaiians are the nicest people you'd ever meet. Some aren't racist at all. But some are real racist buttholes that just want free money and want to sit around and do drugs.

  69. Re:Unhelpful Whining by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Actually, the planned site is nowhere near anybody's backyard, either literally or figuratively, which is why that site was chosen to begin with.

  70. Best comment ever by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    in a decade of reading slashdot.

  71. Your conclusion is wrong. by flip-flop · · Score: 3, Informative

    Astronomer here, I live and work on the Big Island. You are completely wrong to assume this means the end of TMT in Hawaii, it was pretty much what was expected to happen after the state supreme court vacated the permit last December. While the new permitting process is going to take more time (months or years, nobody knows for sure), TMT seem to be taking their time deciding on their next step and are still hoping to continue as planned. I have heard nothing that would suggest otherwise. Please understand a big project like that doesn't just up and leave after having so much invested. Supporters of the TMT here (of which there are plenty) are still hoping a new, watertight permit will come out of all this. Frankly, we're more shocked by the recent news about another batch of anti-TMT protesters being acquitted because they claimed to have "prevented a greater harm from occurring". But then again, this is Hawaii, and that's how things work here.

    1. Re:Your conclusion is wrong. by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 1

      I feel for you, most certainly, but at some point you have to face the truth. The football players have flushed your chess pieces and stuffed you in your locker, yet you still hope that if you just stick it out you will (a) magically become one of the popular kids or (b) wait a year and hope that Principal Trump will see fit to take your side.

      It's time to boldly transfer to a more nerd-friendly place. Before joining the TMT, China was developing its own similar design and was scouting its own locations on the Tibetan Plateau above 5000m.

    2. Re:Your conclusion is wrong. by flip-flop · · Score: 1

      The football players have flushed your chess pieces and stuffed you in your locker, yet you still hope that if you just stick it out you will (a) magically become one of the popular kids or (b) wait a year and hope that Principal Trump will see fit to take your side.

      Funny, but totally wrong. And I very much doubt you're going to find many Trump supporters in the astronomy community...

      Before joining the TMT, China was developing its own similar design and was scouting its own locations on the Tibetan Plateau above 5000m.

      Oh, they still are. But that site is pretty remote, and higher altitude doesn't automatically mean better seeing.

  72. Re: Unhelpful Whining by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That's why the Christians have invaded Israel to free Bethlehem from the Palestinians, except, of course, that they haven't.

    uh, wtf are you talking about? and when?

  73. Re:Unhelpful Whining by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

    as for the negative consequences, maybe they didn't want a large industrial installation on top of what the local community feels is a natural resource?

    No. No, that is not at all possible. That is not possible because there is already a large industrial installation on top of what the local community used to use as a natural resource, also known as a rock quarry. The local community doesn't use the site at all now; it's actually set aside specifically for building telescopes.

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  74. Catholic Church by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Since there seems to be a lot of criticism of religion here, I'd like to take a moment to mention that the Catholic Church has an observatory in the Vatican. So much for superstition winning out.

    The problem isn't religion or science. The problem is a group of people who dislike another group of people and will pervert the justice system to get what the want. In this case, they're hiding behind religion. You see the same thing with Black Live Matter. They're using race relations (bad race relations) to get back at whitey. Both depend heavily on guilt to get their way. Neither is sincere about their stated objectives. Our justice system has devolved into ab "ends justifies the means" system where anyone takes a noble cause and perverts it to fit their agenda. Pretty sad.

  75. Two edged sword by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    These green's used a lack of due process to pause the project today.
        But I think they have no respect for the privilege, and so will ultimately loose.

    Due process is there so that everybody's ideas can be heard and considered and then a decision rendered.

    As the telescope folks learned, it is not to be ignored without dotting every 'i' and crossing every 't'.
    What the greens need to learn is that it is not there as a vehicle for a never-ending stream of objections.
    All sides need a chance to present their cases and let the facts and law drive the conclusion.
    This should at least include these greens, the rest of the native population, and the scientists (Maybe history, ecology, and astronomy).
    Once this is done these folks should not be able to come back to the due process well.

    From where things are today, it should be relatively easy to backup to where things went wrong and proceed.
    Most of the leg work has presumably been done.

    Democracy it there to partly to prevent the majority from overrunning a minority.
    But the reverse should be true as well.

  76. Re:Unhelpful Whining by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Aw, come on - if we can't enjoy poking fun at weapons that are no match for a good blaster, what's next?

  77. Re:Unhelpful Whining by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Not any orig poster and posting AC for obvious reasons:

    You're "wrong" - in my opinion - of even responding to anyone who claims to be a 'gamegate' supporter, period. The subject of this thread says it all.

    It's kind of like the theory behind Wargames the movie. BOTH sides have endless amounts of irrefutable while at the same time totally debunked "evidence" that they'll endlessly spin in order to suck up time/resources/etc just to bring any attention to the current speaker's pet cause. It's kind of like a demented black hole.

    Anyways... that's 60 more seconds than I've previously said that I'd ever spend speaking of that subject again... no replys welcome, or will be checked for. :)

  78. Re:Unhelpful Whining by Coren22 · · Score: 1

    If you didn't see any attacks on gamers, you are willingly blinding yourself to the issue.

    https://www.reddit.com/r/Kotak...
    http://imgur.com/gallery/FzbfI...
    http://www.reaxxion.com/10765/...
    http://sjwar.blogspot.com/2014...

    It appears that this tumblr collects information about people being harassed for supporting gamergate.
    http://gamergateharassment.tum...

    And here is a site that explains what happened from the gamergate perspective. Since your post above is so wildly accusatory, it might be good for you to read it as it goes into quite a bit of detail about the ethics issues being brought up, and how it was the gaming journalists themselves that were talking about it being a harassment campaign when they didn't want to defend themselves for the clear ethics violations being brought up.
    http://www.breitbart.com/big-h...

    --
    APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
  79. Re: Unhelpful Whining by Coren22 · · Score: 1

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

    In 1860, Lincoln secured the Republican Party presidential nomination as a moderate from a swing state.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

    He was the first president from the Republican Party.

    What is incorrect about Lincoln being a Republican?

    --
    APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
  80. lack of money, influence by DriveDog · · Score: 1

    Those who install telescopes out of view of inhabited areas generally don't throw large sums of money at politicians. Those who build cell towers near inhabitants generally do, if needed, and generally get their way. Those who wish to strip coal from the tops of mountains generally do as well, and generally get their way. See a pattern?

  81. Re:Unhelpful Whining by budgenator · · Score: 1

    The impression I've been getting is the group opposing the telescope are more interested in being oppositional/defiant, and are using the sacred site angle to facilitate that.

    --
    Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
  82. Re:Unhelpful Whining by KGIII · · Score: 1

    That does seem to be true. I've followed this with some keen interest and people keep pointing to the group in Arizona (anti-science) as being behind it but, from what I've read, I don't actually know if they're behind it so much as they're useful idiots and allowed to participate/help because the more noise the more notice.

    --
    "So long and thanks for all the fish."
  83. Hope in the Long Game by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Just because the process for permitting the TMT goes back to court doesn't mean it won't get built. Hale started the process of building the 200 in. telescope at Mt. Palomar in the mid 1920's; it didn't see first light until 1949 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hale_Telescope). The building of a space-based telescope - what became the Hubble - also started decades earlier.

    Yes, the USA abandons some projects (i.s., the SSC, or "Desertron" / https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superconducting_Super_Collider), so it is still possible the TMT won't be built at all. But I would prefer to believe that eventually common sense will win out - that building on a site with existing telescopes with lots of associated existing infrastructure etc. would be better than picking a net new site somewhere else.

    While those that took all this to court won this round, this kind of project ALWAYS takes a while; now it may just take longer.

    JAAC

    PS - And remember / the SSC site is still "available". Eventually a replacement for the LHC will be needed. If building the CERN device was successful in part because of the benefit of using existing tunnels, etc. then perhaps the tunnels in Texas can generate the same kind of benefits in about 10 years or so.

  84. Re:Unhelpful Whining by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The only thing they have in common with people who were "historically marginalized" is their appearance.

    Like chinks, but fatter and uglier?

  85. Re:Unhelpful Whining by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The generational wealth of the Hawaiian people was living in thatched huts, stone tools, writing in hieroglyphs, surfing, fishing, and tribal wars with neighboring tribesall of that is pretty much still do-able; there's lots of homeless people living under bushes, tagging walls with Graffiti, Street Gang wars and dumpster diving for food in Hawaii.

  86. Re:Unhelpful Whining by Noah+Haders · · Score: 1

    1) breitbart is a notorious troll right wing 'news' site. It is the Donald trump of news aggregators.

    2) the article makes no sense. It says it's the media fault because a total 'blackout' of coverage led to interest and rage. Maybe they didn't think it was a story worth covering?

    3) your justification doesn't explain all the Anita sarkeesian nonsense, which was clearly about a girl getting in the boys club.

    I didn't look at the rest of the links, but undoubtedly there was all sorts of nastiness going around on all sides once the issue was raging. My point was that the original ignition and first blows were all done on the neck beard side.

  87. Re:Unhelpful Whining by Coren22 · · Score: 1

    1) breitbart is a notorious troll right wing 'news' site. It is the Donald trump of news aggregators.

    If you discount news sites because they have differing opinions to yours, you are intentionally blinding yourself to half the story. And no, they are not a troll site, they just aren't coopted by the left wing media hug machine.

    2) the article makes no sense. It says it's the media fault because a total 'blackout' of coverage led to interest and rage. Maybe they didn't think it was a story worth covering?

    No, the story says that it was the media organizations making it all about Zoe Quinn, the Gamergate issue was with the journalist, not Quinn, it was never about Quinn or her crappy game, it was about the journalist starting a relationship with her, and not disclosing the conflict of interest.

    3) your justification doesn't explain all the Anita sarkeesian nonsense, which was clearly about a girl getting in the boys club.

    You mean the same person who felt that doxxing was perfectly acceptable to use against people who disagreed with her? The same person who was caught red handed being the person making the threats against herself, and lying about being forced from her house? Also, the same person that says she felt her life was threatened, but yet still hasn't filed a police report because she knows the police will find she threatened herself?

    --
    APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
  88. Coren22's "APKolypse" #1/2 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "You are terrified someone will steal your software if you publish the source code." - by Coren22 (1625475)

    WTF? A respected other in security & competent coder has OK'd it as clean/safe!

    I don't give it away to everyone W/ GOOD REASON (Google's mistake w/ CHROME = prime example) -> http://it.slashdot.org/story/1...

    ---

    "You have yet to address the issue of name resolution performance of anything not found in your hosts file. This is a serious issue when the hosts file is so large" - by Coren22 (1625475)

    By placing users FAVORITE SITES where they spend 95++% of their time online @ TOP of hosts files cached in RAM gets them to sites FASTER & MORE RELIABLY than a more-than-potentially REDIRECT POISONED DNS SERVER (99.999% of ISP DNS aren't patched vs. the kaminsky flaw, stupid).

    ---

    "DNS outperforms your hosts file solution several fold" - by Coren22 (1625475)

    No it doesn't (see using hardcoded favorites above) - & DNS outperforms hosts in GOING DOWN (does a lot) OR poisoning users via redirect poisonings (DNS amp attacks is another).

    ---

    "so why not just run your own DNS server? Oh, resources eh?" - by Coren22 (1625475)

    More resource consumption + moving parts complexity + POWER USE doesn't = a GOOD solution vs. hosts by using redirect poisoning/DNS amp attack exploitable DNS w/ only a few systems @ home.

    ---

    "But you have no problem running 100k copies of the hosts file in a domain" - by Coren22 (1625475)

    It works easily migrated by central admins via scripts or chronjobs/scheduled tasks with less moving parts complexity, room for exploit & breakdown, OR power usage.

    ---

    "You have yet to submit to a code review from anyone but your friend. No, I don't trust that he has thoroughly assessed your software." - by Coren22 (1625475)

    I have to a seasoned security pro AND competent coder himself (unlike you).

    ---

    "you are stealing other people's work in your code" - by Coren22 (1625475)

    I don't "steal" (you project YOU DO)!

    APK

    P.S.=> You FAIL, MENIAL.. apk

  89. Coren22's "APKolypse" #2/2... apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "the secretary at MalwareBytes took a look at his source code and said it looked all good to them" - by Coren22 (1625475) on Wednesday November 18, 2015

    My code went thru verification by Mr. Steven Burn of Malwarebytes' hpHosts

    hpHosts Site Admin Mr. Steven Burn quoted:

    "I've been asked to further clarify so for the record yes I've seen the code, and yes, it is safe."

    FROM http://forum.hosts-file.net/vi...

    (On my latest 9.0++ code engine above & from past versions -> http://slashdot.org/comments.p... )

    A competent coder & BEST security researcher I know of FROM THE BEST ANTIMALWARE THERE IS http://www.av-test.org/en/news...

    NOT a secretary!

    I don't give away work to be stolen OR misused like GOOGLE CHROME http://it.slashdot.org/story/1...

    ---

    "won't demonstrate security of his product be exposing the source" - by Coren22 (1625475) on Wednesday November 18, 2015

    Bullshit: 62 reputable sources + /. users say different:

    Safe by 57 antivirus programs in 64-bit model https://www.virustotal.com/en/...

    +

    the 32-bit model https://www.virustotal.com/en/...

    &

    Per VirScan (installer too)-> http://f.virscan.org/APKHostsF...

    MalwareBytes' hpHosts Admin (MalwareBytes employee) hosts & recommends it -> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl... & MalwareBytes = BEST antivirus per this VERY recent testing of them all http://www.av-test.org/en/news...

    APK

    P.S.=> Eat your words, scumbag:

    Tell us about AD + DNS too while you're @ it & how you said I said not to run DNS when I use it myself & said to NOT use external to network DNS with AD http://slashdot.org/comments.p...

    OR

    About how my program NEEDS admin privelege to update too (& it doesn't http://slashdot.org/comments.p... )

    LOL... fool - 'eat your words' on ALL those accounts chump!

    ... apk

  90. Coren22's "APKolypse" #1/2... apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "You are terrified someone will steal your software if you publish the source code." - by Coren22 (1625475)

    WTF? A respected other in security & competent coder has OK'd it as clean/safe!

    I don't give it away to everyone W/ GOOD REASON (Google's mistake w/ CHROME = prime example) -> http://it.slashdot.org/story/1...

    ---

    "You have yet to address the issue of name resolution performance of anything not found in your hosts file. This is a serious issue when the hosts file is so large" - by Coren22 (1625475)

    By placing users FAVORITE SITES where they spend 95++% of their time online @ TOP of hosts files cached in RAM gets them to sites FASTER & MORE RELIABLY than a more-than-potentially REDIRECT POISONED DNS SERVER (99.999% of ISP DNS aren't patched vs. the kaminsky flaw, stupid).

    ---

    "DNS outperforms your hosts file solution several fold" - by Coren22 (1625475)

    No it doesn't (see using hardcoded favorites above) - & DNS outperforms hosts in GOING DOWN (does a lot) OR poisoning users via redirect poisonings (DNS amp attacks is another).

    ---

    "so why not just run your own DNS server? Oh, resources eh?" - by Coren22 (1625475)

    More resource consumption + moving parts complexity + POWER USE doesn't = a GOOD solution vs. hosts by using redirect poisoning/DNS amp attack exploitable DNS w/ only a few systems @ home.

    ---

    "But you have no problem running 100k copies of the hosts file in a domain" - by Coren22 (1625475)

    It works easily migrated by central admins via scripts or chronjobs/scheduled tasks with less moving parts complexity, room for exploit & breakdown, OR power usage.

    ---

    "You have yet to submit to a code review from anyone but your friend. No, I don't trust that he has thoroughly assessed your software." - by Coren22 (1625475)

    I have to a seasoned security pro AND competent coder himself (unlike you).

    ---

    "you are stealing other people's work in your code" - by Coren22 (1625475)

    I don't "steal" (you project YOU DO)!

    APK

    P.S.=> You FAIL, MENIAL.. apk

  91. Coren22's "APKolypse" #2/2 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "the secretary at MalwareBytes took a look at his source code and said it looked all good to them" - by Coren22 (1625475) on Wednesday November 18, 2015

    My code went thru verification by Mr. Steven Burn of Malwarebytes' hpHosts

    hpHosts Site Admin Mr. Steven Burn quoted:

    "I've been asked to further clarify so for the record yes I've seen the code, and yes, it is safe."

    FROM http://forum.hosts-file.net/vi...

    (On my latest 9.0++ code engine above & from past versions -> http://slashdot.org/comments.p... )

    A competent coder & BEST security researcher I know of FROM THE BEST ANTIMALWARE THERE IS http://www.av-test.org/en/news...

    NOT a secretary!

    I don't give away work to be stolen OR misused like GOOGLE CHROME http://it.slashdot.org/story/1...

    ---

    "won't demonstrate security of his product be exposing the source" - by Coren22 (1625475) on Wednesday November 18, 2015

    Bullshit: 62 reputable sources + /. users say different:

    Safe by 57 antivirus programs in 64-bit model https://www.virustotal.com/en/...

    +

    the 32-bit model https://www.virustotal.com/en/...

    &

    Per VirScan (installer too)-> http://f.virscan.org/APKHostsF...

    MalwareBytes' hpHosts Admin (MalwareBytes employee) hosts & recommends it -> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl... & MalwareBytes = BEST antivirus per this VERY recent testing of them all http://www.av-test.org/en/news...

    APK

    P.S.=> Eat your words, scumbag:

    Tell us about AD + DNS too while you're @ it & how you said I said not to run DNS when I use it myself & said to NOT use external to network DNS with AD http://slashdot.org/comments.p...

    OR

    About how my program NEEDS admin privelege to update too (& it doesn't http://slashdot.org/comments.p... )

    LOL... fool - 'eat your words' on ALL those accounts chump!

    ... apk

  92. It is still the most likely site. by Voice+of+satan · · Score: 1

    The European EELT will cover the southern hemisphere. So it is logical the TMT people want to build their instrument in the northern one.

    Except there are no that many sites. You need a calm and clean laminar atmosphere and a high altitude. Sites facing an ocean to the west are good because it is where the dominant winds come from. No hills or mountains there to create turbulences.

    South California is in Mexico, a moderately stable country plagued by banditry and mafias. Some people have suggested Morocco for European scopes but the country isn't very secure either. The Tibetan plateau is behind mountains which generate turbulences. The Canary Islands are nice, but not as nice as Hawaii in term of altitude and dryness of air.

  93. Re:Unhelpful Whining by whodunit · · Score: 1

    The only important thing to know is that "Gamergate" ceased to be about "games" very, very quickly. Some indie game developer (who happened to be female) received a glowing review of her game from a game journalist. Said journalist was accused of being her boyfriend and demonstrating favoritism. Even if it was true (and it was likely not,) it was just another tempest in a teapot - games journalists have been fired for giving bad reviews to games whom their publication were currently running expensive advertisements for, so the low standards of game journalism were hardly news to anyone. Gamers accused reviewers of being biased, reviewers accused them of being sexist basement-dwellers, the Earth revolved around the sun, etc. It would've ended there, but for what the journalists did next.

    About a day after the #Gamergate hashtag was created, several game journalism media outlets published almost the same article - all of them consistent in tone, topic and message. The message was "Gamers Are Dead." The Gamergate wiki has a fairly comprehensive list of said articles, the archive links are dead, but googling the article names brings them up on their own site. The Gamasutra article is fairly typical, so I'll quote from it briefly:

    ‘Games culture’ is a petri dish of people who know so little about how human social interaction and professional life works that they can concoct online ‘wars’ about social justice or ‘game journalism ethics,’ straight-faced, and cause genuine human consequences. Because of video games.

    Subtle, they were not. These articles basically said two things: gamers (especially the ones criticizing the journalists) were all angry white males (and this implicitly without legitimacy) and it was high time they all just fucked off and died. And they were published by multiple media outlets all around the same time. This isn't news to anyone who follows politics, of course - but for the 20-something video-game playing college students who'd never showed great interest in politics, it was a very rude shock, and a crash-course introduction to identity politics as used in the modern age. This event is what put GamerGate on the map, because it drew in a huge groundswell of support. Overnight it had went from sniping over a mostly-forgettable spat to a full-on cultural war.

    Note that this isn't acknowledged by the "anti-gamergate" crowd - they still portray "gamergate" (insofar as it can be identified as a unified entity, which isn't much,) as a bunch of angry white misogynistic males who're just screaming because girls with cooties got into their clubhouse. That, alone, is a testament to the power of identity politics. By portraying her game as some sort of feminist critique, that original developer was able to decry any criticism as sexism - and in so doing, immediately tapped a much, much, much more powerful bloc of people; pundits and writers who've been involved in real politics for decades. And they wasted no time in bringing the brunt of it to bear on their opponents in a coordinated campaign to demolish their legitimacy - character assassination by the city block, you might say. This is the heart of complaints about "Social Justice Warriors"- their critics consider them people who exploit the legitimacy of worthy causes to destroy the legitimacy of anyone who opposes their views, on almost any topic.

    "Gamergate" isn't clean or innocent, of course. I'm familiar with the communities from which it spawned; mostly occupied by young college students with too much time on their hands. They follow the "game industry" like others follow Hollywood gossip or the internal politics of major-league sports; i.e. as a hobby. Combine this over-investment with the air of young folk who believe they've

  94. Re:Unhelpful Whining by Noah+Haders · · Score: 1

    Some indie game developer (who happened to be female) received a glowing review of her game from a game journalist. Said journalist was accused of being her boyfriend and demonstrating favoritism.

    this is an important statement for two reason. First, it's notable that if the event were true, then the person who committed the ethics violation was Nathan Grayson, the writer for kotaku. Yet Zoe Quinn caught all the rage and hate. If #gg was all about ethics in journalism, why was Zoe demonized? This says to me that the movement is not in fact about ethics.

    Second notable thing: your statement is false on its face. Nathan Grayson never reviewed Depression Quest. See this kotaku statement. If this is incorrect, please provide the link to the review. So the entire rage against Zoe and the entire genesis of #gamergate is based on a false premise. A good question, how could so many people get so upset about an issue that can be demonstrably proven false with a simple Internet search? This confirms to me that the whole thing is invalid and about hate for uppity women.

    Your thoughts on this?

  95. Re:Unhelpful Whining by whodunit · · Score: 1

    Your thoughts on this?

    My thoughts? Personally, I think the whole "Zoe Quinn" scandal was bullshit as well. Considering how much of the "evidence" came from her ex-boyfriend calling her an evil manipulative bitch (no ulterior motives there, no sir,) it just cannot be taken seriously. The most damning thing, in my opinion, is that it wouldn't be big news even if it was true. It wouldn't hold a candle to much more serious ethics problems that have been documented beyond a shadow of a doubt (like the writer fired for giving a bad review to a game who's publisher paid for expensive ads on their news site; see link in prior post.) A few writers getting doe eyes from an indie dev cannot compare to instituitonal editorial corruption. And none of it matters because it wasn't true.

    "Gamergate" only became noteworthy after the remarkably shady way several gake journalism publications responded to it - but I think you raise a good point. Was the initial furor that needled thr journalists into that response born of petty sexism? As one familiar with that community, my take on it is thus: yes, but not as much as you might think.

    What made the "zoe quinn conspiracy" so attractive to the bored 20-something hobbyists was that her game was more of a "disabilities awareness" interactive fiction than a game. Thus it smacked strongly of "SJW." "Social Justice Warrior," among my generation in general and among the 4chan community in particular has a more narrow connotation than most think. It refers specifically to self-righteous youth/young adults whom engage in constant mutual outrage/agreement with one another on social media for the purpose of moral self-aggrandizement. (Currently this trend is most visible and famous on tumblr.) Games promoting "social justice" themes - especially if they have little actual gameplay - are generally seen as the video game equivilent of "Emmy Bait"; movies that pander shamelessly to this or that sancified cause in order to win awards that enhance the director's reputation as Righteous. In this case the "Emmys" were the many glowing reviews the game recieved, which irked an audience already rightly distrustful.

    But for all that, its hard to explain the vehemence with which the tempest was stirred in that teapot without at least some sexism. Yes, a great deal of it owes to bored 20-somethings treating rather minor matters with the gravity real adults save for national politics. They sit around and bitch about game publishers like you or I might bitch about major leauge teams. But anyone trying to tell you that young 20-something males on the internet is a demographic devoid of sexism is lying their ass off. 4chan and such is no exception. The angry lneckbeard sexists you sneered at? Oh yes, my friend - these petty little trolls exist.

    And before the "Gamers are Dead" articles, that's exactly what the whole thing was - petty. A rather small number of clowns "sticking it to the biased media Man" who was backing up some "tumblr-tier hack." And many of them went about it with the same air of righteous crusaders as the "tumblrinas" they so despise. Kids sniping at kids sniping at writers so corrupt even journalists (with their own remarkably low reputation) won't deign to call real journalists.

    But when it went big, it went BIG - and that's because sexism (and identity politics) are things that have been batted around by REAL adults in REAL politics for decades. And when THEY came in, "shit got real." You don't hear much about Zoe Quinn anymore, but you always hear about Anita Sarkeesian's latest tweet - because she's a femenist pundit/blogger that grown adults pay attention to. Her counterpart is Milo Yiannopoulos, the right wing pundit for Huffpo's dark mirror, breitbart.com. His original blog posts were remarkably candid: "Listen, I don't know shit about video games, but I think you're being left out in the cold."

    The effects were felt very fast on 4chan. 4chan is a big damned site, and given th

  96. Re:Unhelpful Whining by Noah+Haders · · Score: 1

    what a fascinating post! you definitely know the subject very well and were clearly in on the ground floor. You're absolutely right, ethics in journalism is paramount, whether we're talking about AAA videogames or war in iraq. we rely on the free press to tell us what the world is like. This is why journalism is a "noble profession", and the history and ethics of that profession are what make it different than just being a blogger.

    and I think you also make a good point that whatever organic movement was quickly co-opted by people who piled on just to make noise, on both sides, because they are professional agitators. And once this happened, the whole thing turned into a shizz show.

    The only remaining question mark is you. If you feel passionately that game journalism has an ethics problem, why are you trying to make this point through the #gamergate platform? You must understand that many (I would say most?) people who would otherwise be open to your message just reject it out of hand because of all the baggage.

    Surely there must be a more effective platform from which you can advocate for change.