axiom: A idea is weak if it
1) Applies well to a specialized and often overly simplified set of circomstance.
2) Does not continue to apply well to a more universal consideration.
Proof:Moral relativism is a weak and wrong idea Good is the set of all actions that enhance other peoples lives.
Evil is the set of all actions that detracts or degrades other peoples lives.
Assume that for the sake of contradiction that Morality is relative, where it is okay to do evil in certain circumstances becuase it is required to degrade peoples lives who do evil to limit their ability to do evil.
This satisfies condition 1 of a weak idea since it shows validity in a subset of circumstance.
This is a contradiction since by definition limiting their ability to do evil enhances other peoples lives by not allowing them to degrade it and therefore is good. This satisfies condition 2 of the weak idea axiom, and shows it to be a wrong idea.[]
You might want to re-read your post. I can't judge your intentions but I think you hit it on the head more than you may have wanted to.
However, the goal previously refered to as.Net is a truely distributed computing environment that you plug into rather than contain on your computer. On that note you could say that UNIX had that idea many years before.
(Or World Domination, and Hammurabi has prior art to that.)
Yeah, horns are usually associated with leaders. Sometimes wings are considered "directions to move" or for a beast or country the direction it conquers. Did Persia under Sargon move west, south and north?
One could suppose the one he goat was Rome or Greece, since in many ways they were the same country. Alexander the Great defeated Sargon and his empire, and was a "single horn" or leader. From what I understand he conquered regions but never really occupied them, hence he never "touched the ground".
But then I'm not sure which four governments game from the fall of Alexanders Empire, (four horns growing when the first was broken) but the one horn that grew out of that was even until the kingdom of God or coming of Christ.
Anyway, I'd still have to review this longer before I put my name to it but thats my take.
There you go again, did you see it that time when you set up another straw man? Yes I can come up with my own opinion, that is obvious. You rather seem upset that I don't just blindly accept yours
You also seem to continue using personal slander rather than looking at the facts that we've presented to you.
1) US has stepped up aid to Iraq
2) Saddam can't feed his nation even when he is historicaly on the agriculterally richest country in the middle east. He can't feed them with the millions of dollars and tons of food and medical supplies he is doled each year.
3) The Oil for Medical supplies trade agreement is blocked by entities outside the US.
This is a fourth and fifth generation thread from when we first pointed them out. You still haven't made a comment on them.
I do reserve a smattering of contempt for anyone who attempts to justify or deny these murders.
Keep setting up straw men then. To date it is still your only tactic to imagine that the people you are arguing with are simply less informed or blinded. (Well you did attempt to misrepresent the opinion of another entity, but thats really kind of the same thing.)
I'm annoyed with trolls that get spanked in one thread but continue the same thing in another thread. As if the redundancy will finnaly make them right.
I thought you were actually going to produce an event, not countries.
Want to try again? The difference is that an event has a location and a time, etc. But nice try, when you don't have any evidence its good to do some obtuse hand waving.
Honestly the way people try to look like they have information, but when you bring them to it they have nothing and they know it.
Ha! Every troll knows that when he is exposed to accuse the exposer of "Simply disagreeing with him."
No, you are considered a troll becuase you assumed the people who didn't agree with you are "beer chugging" rednecks. Your a troll becuase you just keep re-iterating one link that doesn't even point its finger at the UN or US.
"UNICEF, as a member of the UN family, recognizes that economic sanctions are an instrument intended by the international community to promote peace and security". No genocide, no mal-intent is even suggested by UNICEF. However your misconstruing their comment as such indicates as the poster mentions "[you] really [don't] care about the plight in Iraq - [You] just use it as a stage to bash Americans and Euorpeans".
You are a troll becuase you never respond to the links we provided that provide much more depth and information about the topic. Like that since UNICEF has made that plea for help, the US has appropriated *more* money and supplies to be taken to Iraq.
The quotes we provide mention Saddam has been recieving millions if not billions of dollars that aren't being used to help his own people. It also has a link to how other nations are blocking the "oil for medical supplies" put across by the U.S.
These are cool, intellectual arguments, why have you chosen to ignore them and continue slandering? If you don't mean to be a troll, then you might want to find more effective ways to bring your message to the world. Or just continue to look for people who want to believe what your spewing enough to not do any independant research.
Nationalization is often necessary to help a country survive,
And ensure the survival of presidents elected on a little more than a third of the population? Anyway I don't know that that was the case, nor did I accuse him of that. However, how much arm twisting was there when only 36% wanted him in office in the first place? Maybe as the article says it was supported instead of "instigated by" the U.S.
that is no way to unlegitimate an elected Prime Minister.
No the way to unlegitimate a minority elected leader is to point out Clinton as an example.
The quote people like to mention from Kissenger seems to have been directed at the mishandling of the elections by the people who would have won, if they didn't run three different competing tickets, btw. It didn'g look like it was directed at the civilians.
So what is the state of Chile today? Are they democracy or not? Did the country survive when the property was returned to the owners?
As an aside, Chile is a hard row to hoe to show the America toppled its southern neighbors democracies. I'd have chosen Guatemala as an example.
And reason and logic based on shaky foundations (i.e. not knowing the global impact of US sanctions) is worthless.
I do know the impact and its dispicable. I also know that Saddam can't feed his nation even when he's doled tons of food and money, and has one of the richest agricultural regions in the mid-east helps me understand.
So once again you simply got the wrong guy.
I've found it effective to mention to all your friends about Stegonography. When I tell them that its practicaly undetectible, and probably the method of choice and that encryption helps us from each other (read passing credit card #'s) they understand.
People aren't dumb, but they need to understand what encryption is and does. Otherwise they'll be wary of every attempt to modulate their bitstream! (j/k)
But seriously, people think encryption is like WWII enigma and such where all that is needed is a key or a crack and we'll know everything the enemy is doing. That is simply not true. And the problem with Congresses simplistic view of the whole thing is that it fits so neatly with the public perception.
"Time and time again"? Please name all these Latin American countries and governments that 1) were freely elected, and 2) were overthrown by the US, and 3) the US installed a "military dictator".
If we did it "time and time again", I'm sure you won't have any trouble naming several. 5? 10?
Bill Moyer in "The Secret Government" 1988 would say Guatemala in the 60's was a CIA excersize in such tactics. A more indepth look may find that Bill Moyer's take a little too contravant. Not innacurate, but he definately loaded the dice.
Before one says Panama they should look here. There were definate topplings of democratic regimes, but just have a look for yourself, some of those regimes were supported by the US rather than the rebels who toppled them.
A look at Nicaragua is here, "The rise of Democracy in South America" is here
Someone already mentioned Chile, but he was not a popular president (elected on only 36%, which is even lower than Clinton) although fairly elected. Also, he siezed many US and other nations holdings and "redistributed" them.
I'm not really wanting to give a site for all the countries. Just a little overview of some of the most contraversial. I'm also not saying they are the instances you are looking for, just heading off misinformed trolls.
Why are you bringing up this dead thread? Why do you try to paint me with such a "red-necked" brush? How about the truth, like I am a west-coast libertatian, and has never drunken an alchoholic drink and doesn't own a TV. Do you usually set up straw men when you can't face the reason and logic put across by someone?
Why have you not heard about / heard evidence for these US atrocities? Because the mainstream media are complicit, and you obviously haven't read many of the alternative radical left media like Z Magazine or SCHNews. See e.g.
I have to agree with another poster on this site. Sometimes we accuse the government of concealing the truth, when we should also consider that sometimes lamestream media actually cannot support its accusations so it searches for sympathetic ears that are itching to hear anything sounding credible to back up their claims.
Also, remember that the U.S. (and Israel for that matter) at least try to point out how thier attacks are military in nature, and for the most part can back them up to anyone interested in the justified use of the term "reasonable doubt." How can this then even compare to organizations that have blatantly called for attacks on civilian targets?
One can't say that in case 'A' there is loss of civilian life and in case 'B' there is loss of civilian life therefore they are equal. If they are not equal then they are not even justified in calling for an 'Eye' for an 'Eye'.
Oh and about Indonesia it was a horrible event. But aren't we supposed to be talking about US and its lapdogs attacking civilians, not a passive acceptance ofthe actions of another government in civil war?
You failed to mention that they were toppled when they either stopped the elections, or remained in power by military force inspite of the election results.
Even then they were toppled after many other crimes.
Okay, I've asked this many times, I'll ask it again.
..[was] an inevitable response to the targetting of civilian populations by the USA and her lap dogs
When has this happened?
Bombing of a hospital in Africa has been already debunked, since the very article that mentioned the link with the terrorists to the US said they *were* supported by the US and are now henchmen of Bin Laden.
Another was confused and said that Clinton's airstrikes bombed a hospital, when it really was a pharmaceutical plant that also has ties to Bin Laden (heck the lawyer for the plant is the same lawyer for the Saudi banker accused of imbezling funds for Bin Laden.)
I'm dying to hear when or where these attacks are. Just think of this like the Amazing Randy when he debunks phsycic surgury. Just show me one case where it really happened, that all!
I can understand not wanting your name on something. After all it is the much impostered "Bruce Perens_" name. But...
My primary goal here is that folks in the community don't get hurt in dealing with them.
...is something that is unwarranted by the evidence thus far presented, and shows a lack of faith in the GPL they are putting their code under (IMHO). So their VC's didn't support some company after reviewing the buisness plan? Having worked with many startups I'm sure that is not uncommon.
You are very right. One of my favorite features is that it doesn't use a "file-system" per-say. I assure you that although I'm not active on the mailing list, I've been monitoring it since 1997.
My comment comes from Jonathan Shapiro's comment about his own OS sometime about when it was GPL'ed. In short he mentioned that hardware had a lot of catching up to do with his OS.
I believe it came in response to a thread on how to deal with the "capabilities" (I'm assuming you know how they use that term) of modems and other peripherals. I remember the quote going something like "It will take years for hardware to see a need and implement it."
As another note, if you look at the v2.0 logs you will notice a long essay on why he is finnaly implementing a malloc. Essentially becuase of, [...drumroll...] braindead hardware design.
This guy designing the language and the chip is interesting to me.
Its mentioned in the technical manual for the Enterprise 1701-D that the software was designed long before the hardware. This seems unnatural considering the ease with which you can change software compared to hardware but there are advantages.
EROS for example is a OS that is struggling to apply some really cool ideas becuase there is not enough hardware support for its permission paradigm. Alternatively, it took MS over 10 years to implement all the hardware features built in to the 486 for OS's to use (not just the 32bit bus).
3d libraries are being written in hardware code now, after the attempt to do it in software couldn't handle the massively parallel nature and speed requirements. Now there are crypto cards that simularly add hardware designed functions to prop up where software is slow.
So what I wonder is, is it really so unfeasable or unreasonable to design the software first and then the hardware?
You know, it wasn't until the late 1800's that the sence of objective journalism was tried. Before then you could say everything was more open an honest about their bias, and one then had many viewpoints to choose from.
In any case, I read through those thanks for the link. Amnesty International is a good hearted organization, and one that has a very open and honest agenda. A few things I noticed from reading it:
Israel according to them has killed more people, but not targeted civilians (information outposts, shelling camps in refugee camps, etc..). They call it disregard for human life.
Palestine has killed fewer people, but done almost exclusive targeting of civilians (pizza restraunts, drive by's, wedding receptions...)
Amnesty Int. seeks justice in all of these events, including the attack on America.
All in all pretty fair and even handed, thanks for the link.
Slashdot Mirror
axiom: A idea is weak if it
1) Applies well to a specialized and often overly simplified set of circomstance.
2) Does not continue to apply well to a more universal consideration.
Proof: Moral relativism is a weak and wrong idea
Good is the set of all actions that enhance other peoples lives.
Evil is the set of all actions that detracts or degrades other peoples lives.
Assume that for the sake of contradiction that Morality is relative, where it is okay to do evil in certain circumstances becuase it is required to degrade peoples lives who do evil to limit their ability to do evil.
This satisfies condition 1 of a weak idea since it shows validity in a subset of circumstance.
This is a contradiction since by definition limiting their ability to do evil enhances other peoples lives by not allowing them to degrade it and therefore is good. This satisfies condition 2 of the weak idea axiom, and shows it to be a wrong idea.[]
note: this is a first draft.
hmm, I was thinking more of the crazy collages.
How about DaDa quake?
Or Parc before that.
.Net is a truely distributed computing environment that you plug into rather than contain on your computer. On that note you could say that UNIX had that idea many years before.
You might want to re-read your post. I can't judge your intentions but I think you hit it on the head more than you may have wanted to.
However, the goal previously refered to as
(Or World Domination, and Hammurabi has prior art to that.)
Maybe its not catching up, but moving to the same goal. Just something to think about.
Well, how is this better than Rock Linux?
Rock's package management system is source based, and updates, etc...
And as for elitism, I spoke with the creater on the phone a few years ago when he was starting it, and he's a really jolly bloke.
Yeah, horns are usually associated with leaders. Sometimes wings are considered "directions to move" or for a beast or country the direction it conquers. Did Persia under Sargon move west, south and north?
One could suppose the one he goat was Rome or Greece, since in many ways they were the same country. Alexander the Great defeated Sargon and his empire, and was a "single horn" or leader. From what I understand he conquered regions but never really occupied them, hence he never "touched the ground".
But then I'm not sure which four governments game from the fall of Alexanders Empire, (four horns growing when the first was broken) but the one horn that grew out of that was even until the kingdom of God or coming of Christ.
Anyway, I'd still have to review this longer before I put my name to it but thats my take.
Haven't you ever formed an opinion of your own?
There you go again, did you see it that time when you set up another straw man? Yes I can come up with my own opinion, that is obvious. You rather seem upset that I don't just blindly accept yours
You also seem to continue using personal slander rather than looking at the facts that we've presented to you.
1) US has stepped up aid to Iraq
2) Saddam can't feed his nation even when he is historicaly on the agriculterally richest country in the middle east. He can't feed them with the millions of dollars and tons of food and medical supplies he is doled each year.
3) The Oil for Medical supplies trade agreement is blocked by entities outside the US.
This is a fourth and fifth generation thread from when we first pointed them out. You still haven't made a comment on them.
I do reserve a smattering of contempt for anyone who attempts to justify or deny these murders.
Keep setting up straw men then. To date it is still your only tactic to imagine that the people you are arguing with are simply less informed or blinded. (Well you did attempt to misrepresent the opinion of another entity, but thats really kind of the same thing.)
Heh, I read it and it is well put.
I'm annoyed with trolls that get spanked in one thread but continue the same thing in another thread. As if the redundancy will finnaly make them right.
you sooo funny
I thought you were actually going to produce an event, not countries.
Want to try again? The difference is that an event has a location and a time, etc. But nice try, when you don't have any evidence its good to do some obtuse hand waving.
Honestly the way people try to look like they have information, but when you bring them to it they have nothing and they know it.
Ha! Every troll knows that when he is exposed to accuse the exposer of "Simply disagreeing with him."
No, you are considered a troll becuase you assumed the people who didn't agree with you are "beer chugging" rednecks. Your a troll becuase you just keep re-iterating one link that doesn't even point its finger at the UN or US.
"UNICEF, as a member of the UN family, recognizes that economic sanctions are an instrument intended by the international community to promote peace and security". No genocide, no mal-intent is even suggested by UNICEF. However your misconstruing their comment as such indicates as the poster mentions "[you] really [don't] care about the plight in Iraq - [You] just use it as a stage to bash Americans and Euorpeans".
You are a troll becuase you never respond to the links we provided that provide much more depth and information about the topic. Like that since UNICEF has made that plea for help, the US has appropriated *more* money and supplies to be taken to Iraq.
The quotes we provide mention Saddam has been recieving millions if not billions of dollars that aren't being used to help his own people. It also has a link to how other nations are blocking the "oil for medical supplies" put across by the U.S.
These are cool, intellectual arguments, why have you chosen to ignore them and continue slandering? If you don't mean to be a troll, then you might want to find more effective ways to bring your message to the world. Or just continue to look for people who want to believe what your spewing enough to not do any independant research.
Nationalization is often necessary to help a country survive,
And ensure the survival of presidents elected on a little more than a third of the population? Anyway I don't know that that was the case, nor did I accuse him of that. However, how much arm twisting was there when only 36% wanted him in office in the first place? Maybe as the article says it was supported instead of "instigated by" the U.S.
that is no way to unlegitimate an elected Prime Minister.
No the way to unlegitimate a minority elected leader is to point out Clinton as an example.
The quote people like to mention from Kissenger seems to have been directed at the mishandling of the elections by the people who would have won, if they didn't run three different competing tickets, btw. It didn'g look like it was directed at the civilians.
So what is the state of Chile today? Are they democracy or not? Did the country survive when the property was returned to the owners?
As an aside, Chile is a hard row to hoe to show the America toppled its southern neighbors democracies. I'd have chosen Guatemala as an example.
And reason and logic based on shaky foundations (i.e. not knowing the global impact of US sanctions) is worthless.
I do know the impact and its dispicable. I also know that Saddam can't feed his nation even when he's doled tons of food and money, and has one of the richest agricultural regions in the mid-east helps me understand.
So once again you simply got the wrong guy.
I've found it effective to mention to all your friends about Stegonography. When I tell them that its practicaly undetectible, and probably the method of choice and that encryption helps us from each other (read passing credit card #'s) they understand.
People aren't dumb, but they need to understand what encryption is and does. Otherwise they'll be wary of every attempt to modulate their bitstream! (j/k)
But seriously, people think encryption is like WWII enigma and such where all that is needed is a key or a crack and we'll know everything the enemy is doing. That is simply not true. And the problem with Congresses simplistic view of the whole thing is that it fits so neatly with the public perception.
"Time and time again"? Please name all these Latin American countries and governments that 1) were freely elected, and 2) were overthrown by the US, and 3) the US installed a "military dictator".
If we did it "time and time again", I'm sure you won't have any trouble naming several. 5? 10?
Bill Moyer in "The Secret Government" 1988 would say Guatemala in the 60's was a CIA excersize in such tactics. A more indepth look may find that Bill Moyer's take a little too contravant. Not innacurate, but he definately loaded the dice.
Before one says Panama they should look here. There were definate topplings of democratic regimes, but just have a look for yourself, some of those regimes were supported by the US rather than the rebels who toppled them.
A look at Nicaragua is here, "The rise of Democracy in South America" is here
Someone already mentioned Chile, but he was not a popular president (elected on only 36%, which is even lower than Clinton) although fairly elected. Also, he siezed many US and other nations holdings and "redistributed" them.
I'm not really wanting to give a site for all the countries. Just a little overview of some of the most contraversial. I'm also not saying they are the instances you are looking for, just heading off misinformed trolls.
Why are you bringing up this dead thread? Why do you try to paint me with such a "red-necked" brush? How about the truth, like I am a west-coast libertatian, and has never drunken an alchoholic drink and doesn't own a TV. Do you usually set up straw men when you can't face the reason and logic put across by someone?
The last thread ended here.
Why have you not heard about / heard evidence for these US atrocities? Because the mainstream media are complicit, and you obviously haven't read many of the alternative radical left media like Z Magazine or SCHNews. See e.g.
I have to agree with another poster on this site. Sometimes we accuse the government of concealing the truth, when we should also consider that sometimes lamestream media actually cannot support its accusations so it searches for sympathetic ears that are itching to hear anything sounding credible to back up their claims.
Also, remember that the U.S. (and Israel for that matter) at least try to point out how thier attacks are military in nature, and for the most part can back them up to anyone interested in the justified use of the term "reasonable doubt." How can this then even compare to organizations that have blatantly called for attacks on civilian targets?
One can't say that in case 'A' there is loss of civilian life and in case 'B' there is loss of civilian life therefore they are equal. If they are not equal then they are not even justified in calling for an 'Eye' for an 'Eye'.
Oh and about Indonesia it was a horrible event. But aren't we supposed to be talking about US and its lapdogs attacking civilians, not a passive acceptance ofthe actions of another government in civil war?
Here is a good link on that. Essentially his government siezed control of many US owned mines, and he was elected on only 36% of the vote.
You failed to mention that they were toppled when they either stopped the elections, or remained in power by military force inspite of the election results.
Even then they were toppled after many other crimes.
Okay, I've asked this many times, I'll ask it again.
..[was] an inevitable response to the targetting of civilian populations by the USA and her lap dogs
When has this happened?
Bombing of a hospital in Africa has been already debunked, since the very article that mentioned the link with the terrorists to the US said they *were* supported by the US and are now henchmen of Bin Laden.
Another was confused and said that Clinton's airstrikes bombed a hospital, when it really was a pharmaceutical plant that also has ties to Bin Laden (heck the lawyer for the plant is the same lawyer for the Saudi banker accused of imbezling funds for Bin Laden.)
I'm dying to hear when or where these attacks are. Just think of this like the Amazing Randy when he debunks phsycic surgury. Just show me one case where it really happened, that all!
I can understand not wanting your name on something. After all it is the much impostered "Bruce Perens_" name. But...
My primary goal here is that folks in the community don't get hurt in dealing with them.
...is something that is unwarranted by the evidence thus far presented, and shows a lack of faith in the GPL they are putting their code under (IMHO). So their VC's didn't support some company after reviewing the buisness plan? Having worked with many startups I'm sure that is not uncommon.
You are very right. One of my favorite features is that it doesn't use a "file-system" per-say. I assure you that although I'm not active on the mailing list, I've been monitoring it since 1997.
My comment comes from Jonathan Shapiro's comment about his own OS sometime about when it was GPL'ed. In short he mentioned that hardware had a lot of catching up to do with his OS.
I believe it came in response to a thread on how to deal with the "capabilities" (I'm assuming you know how they use that term) of modems and other peripherals. I remember the quote going something like "It will take years for hardware to see a need and implement it."
As another note, if you look at the v2.0 logs you will notice a long essay on why he is finnaly implementing a malloc. Essentially becuase of, [...drumroll...] braindead hardware design.
This guy designing the language and the chip is interesting to me.
Its mentioned in the technical manual for the Enterprise 1701-D that the software was designed long before the hardware. This seems unnatural considering the ease with which you can change software compared to hardware but there are advantages.
EROS for example is a OS that is struggling to apply some really cool ideas becuase there is not enough hardware support for its permission paradigm. Alternatively, it took MS over 10 years to implement all the hardware features built in to the 486 for OS's to use (not just the 32bit bus).
3d libraries are being written in hardware code now, after the attempt to do it in software couldn't handle the massively parallel nature and speed requirements. Now there are crypto cards that simularly add hardware designed functions to prop up where software is slow.
So what I wonder is, is it really so unfeasable or unreasonable to design the software first and then the hardware?
You know, it wasn't until the late 1800's that the sence of objective journalism was tried. Before then you could say everything was more open an honest about their bias, and one then had many viewpoints to choose from.
In any case, I read through those thanks for the link. Amnesty International is a good hearted organization, and one that has a very open and honest agenda. A few things I noticed from reading it:
Israel according to them has killed more people, but not targeted civilians (information outposts, shelling camps in refugee camps, etc..). They call it disregard for human life.
Palestine has killed fewer people, but done almost exclusive targeting of civilians (pizza restraunts, drive by's, wedding receptions...)
Amnesty Int. seeks justice in all of these events, including the attack on America.
All in all pretty fair and even handed, thanks for the link.
You have me there, Clinton was an embarassment of a president.
However I'm not finding reference to Clinton bombing a hospital, however I did find this about the Arab militia known as Murahaleen bombing a hospital and as was pointed out in another thread, although they were once supported by the CIA, but now shown to be an arm of Bin Laden terrorism.I think the closest to credible your claim is the Shifa pharmacutical plant in Sudan that was bombed by Clinton.