In Afghanistan, women were beaten and sometimes executed for showing even their naked ankles in public. Here is a website created by Afghan women where they describe the restrictions placed on them by the Taliban. So, probably those women were psychologically harmed by their fundamentalist abusers.
It is up to you to prove that naked breasts are detrimental to our society if you are going to advocate that women be restricted from baring their breasts in public. I submit that you oppose women baring their chests in public because you are uptight about a woman's body. If you disagree, then tell me how it's bad for a woman's breasts to be displayed.
You're referencing something you're calling the "Clinton Gun Ban of 1994." Were guns banned? No. But you've worked in a concerted effort with the folks at that website to exaggerate the Assault Rifle Ban to sound like a ban on guns in general. And in fact, the legislation Clinton got the Republican-dominated House to pass was a restriction on the sale of certain newly-manufactured or imported guns that look like military weapons. Functionally, this law didn't limit people's access to military-styled weapons.
It's understood amonst themselves. They don't need to talk about it.
I strongly recommend that you actually talk to one of these liberals of which you seem to assume a lot about. If it's understood amonst [SIC] themselves, then why is it that liberals talk about other issues that should be understood amonst [SIC] themselves? Like gay rights? Or recycling? Or protecting our forests, wetlands and other animal habitats? Seriously, I hang out with a lot of wacko liberals and consider myself one, and we're never talking about banning guns. In fact several of my friends own guns. One guy even shot a nazi skinhead with a 22-caliber rifle.
Talking to people who seem different from yourself can help you understand that they aren't all that different. It can also help you be less afraid of those same people.
Talk to a liberal someday. You'll probably find that this hype about gun control is a fiction created by the NRA for their own job security. Getting rid of guns is so low on the liberal agenda, that radical liberals don't even waste their breath on it. The NRA claims that the democrats are going to take our guns away in order to get more money from paranoid gun-owners. This paper tiger tactic has been working great for them.
With all due respect, in your culture, a bare breast may seem especially sexual. In other cultures there is no stigma attached to a woman's breast being revealed in public. In Austin, Texas, where I live, women are free to walk around topless if they so choose. ANYWHERE. In fundamentalist religious cultures,such as the Taliban-ruled Afghanistan, women were forced to cover their skin from head to toe. In Austin, Texas, our children seem to be growing up just fine. Sometimes they see breasts naked in public. Not unlike when they are walking around the house and their mothers are changing clothes. Kids across America see breasts on the internet anytime they wish. As a result of our nation's children seeing a naked breast on the Superbowl Halftime Show, were they harmed? What damage was done? If you choose to respond to this question, please cite as many scientific studies as possible that indicate children who view naked breasts are likely to have been psychologically harmed.
Thanks for clarifying your original post. I had interpreted it to mean that you don't think voting in Texas is important. Clearly you recognize that's not the case.
I also agree that I'd like to see more a more liberal bend to the Democratic party. I'd like to see a national discussion of decriminalizing victimless drug crimes (possession, manufacturing, distribution), for instance.
Unfortunately, there are so many disenfranchised voters like yourself who aren't showing up to vote, it's not politically viable for the Democratic party to reach out to us. They have to craft their appeal to the people who are actually voting, and largely that's the old folks and the SUV moms you mentioned -- the middle-of-the-roaders. Think about this- if I run for city council as a radical anarchist, will I win? No. Because other anarchists don't believe the candidates share their agenda. So it presents a chicken-and-the-egg problem. And that's what the national Democratic party faces.
What you are doing, voting for the Green Party it sounds like, does send a valuable message. It tells the Democratic party operatives that there is a valid liberal voting block and that they can woo those voters by adopting a more liberal platform. So I encourage you to go out to the polls on November 2nd and drag all your like-minded Texan friends with you.
As a Texan, I hear a lot of people voicing the same sentiment that you have above. I strongly disagree that Democratic votes in Texas are unimportant.
The Republican party generates tens of millions of dollars in campaign contributions in Texas. Because the GOP assumes a win in Texas, it is free to spend all those funds in the battleground states at the national, state, and county race levels. That's why you don't see a bunch of campaign commercials on TV in Texas. By rolling over and letting the GOP have Texas, you are making it difficult for Democratic candidates to win in the local races as well as making it difficult for them to win in the battleground states.
Your vote in Texas also serves to backfire the recent redistricting on the GOP. Austin, for example, now is split into three different districts. We have 50,000 newly-registered voters in Travis County. If the Democratic voters show up in force in Travis County, then these three districts could all go with Democratic Congressional wins.
While we're on the topic of the GOP agenda for Texas, you might want to review the 2004 Texas GOP Party Platform. Here are some interesting objectives:
We call for the abolition of the U. S. Department of Education and the prohibition of the transfer of any of its functions to any other federal agency.
The Party supports the termination of bilingual education programs to allow individuals to more quickly assimilate into and succeed in American society.
The Party supports the immediate adoption of American English as the official language of Texas and of the United States of America. While encouraging fluency in additional languages by all citizens, no governmental entity shall require any agency, contractor, business, or individual to publish public documents in a language other than English.
In terms of the emphasis on English in the last two items, note that none of the people on the platform draft committee have hispanic names.
I fully agree with WebLion. Wolfenstein: Enemy Territory is an awesome game. And it's free as in beer, but much of the source code has been opened up, so there are a lot of mods being developed. There were MANY disappointed attendees at QuakeCon who wanted official QuakeCon ET competitions.
I remember a lot of people complaining that the iMac was USB-only. The thing is, Apple sold millions of those computers. Suddenly, there was a market demand for USB peripherals. Now nobody is making parallel printers. If it wasn't for Apple pushing firewire, who knows how long it would have been before vendors would have been building it (IEEE 1394) into their video cameras and motherboards. Carrot and the stick, my friend. The carrot was a bunch of consumers who no longer had serial connections on the computers. The peripheral makers wanted to eat that carrot very badly. And this pushed technology in the marketplace forward.
So yeah, I can't use my old laserwriter IInt on my new G4 Powerbook. I'm not too disappointed, though. It's a 300dpi laser printer. Now I can get 1400dpi inkjet printers for under $100.
A couple of easy steps if you have a linux server.
1. Download and install brag. It's available with RPMs for easy installation.
2. Add this cron entry: brag -s news-server -g alt.binaries.howard-stern -a '*CF*'
3. For convenience's sake, add this as a cleanup cron entry: mv/root/.brag/news-server/alt.binaries.howard_stern/ finished/*.mp3/home/user/stern (customize that last path for your own installation)
4. Oh, and this other cleanup cron entry- rm -rf/root/.brag/news-server/alt.binaries.howard_stern/ unfinished/*
Schedule those around 3:30 your time, and have the latter entries run a couple hours later. You should be good to go with Stern each day on your iPod without commercials.
and I have a machine that used to be an iMac running a web server but I'm done with Apple.
If you purchased an iMac, you did that at least a couple years after Jobs renigged on the contracts with PowerComputing, Umax, Motorola, et. al. How long after the clones disappeared did it take you to get mad at Jobs? As for the 'resultant changes to the hardware' Jobs and Company as only improved Apple hardware. Your Performa 6400 was a competitive box for several years, but doesn't hold a candle to a G5 Powermac in any comparison. I know. I used to do tech support as an Apple employee.
I'd also encourage you to shut down the iMac and just let the Performa 6400 function as both a 'linux server' and your 'web server'. No need for two computers to be jacking up your electric bill. And you can run the 6400 headless.
Well, as a pseudo engineer, I can help shave the weight of the cable from this equation. Use several balloons. No cable. Send your camera-carrying balloon aloft on a not very windy day. When it has taken the photos you desire and is still within a reasonable distance, use a BB gun to shoot one of the balloons. It should return slowly back to earth without the need for a heavy cord or string.
Make no mistake. Engadget is a commercial enterprise (WEBLOGS, INC. NETWORK) masquerading as a blog site. It's under contract by Motorola to promote the Sidekick product. Pure advertorial.
I suspect that they are paying Slashdot for placement of these 'stories'. Check out the Engadget editor admitting to submitting a story without disclosing his connection to Engadget. Mr. Blue VT is right on the money. In the example posted above, the editor's account, r-blo, had been created, then submitted two stories, both of which were accepted for publication while no posting or other activity had been recorded in its history.
If my assertions are false, then Phillip Torrone can say that he's not an employee of WIN and that money hasn't changed hands between WIN and Slashdot and Motorola and WIN for story placement.
Oh, yeah. Thanks, MrBlue VT for linking to the ONLY story I've submitted to slashdot that's been accepted. Coincidentally, it is the first mention of kite arial photography on this site.
If Lucas has updated the original films for timeliness, he'd have the Rebel Alliance blow up the death star and all of its inhabitants, then afterwards find out that in fact there were no weapons of mass distruction on board. Additionally, Luke would revisit Tantooine and find that his Aunt and Uncle as well as the Jawas were actually all killed by some irate sand people, with no connection to the Empire.
Performer Guy has a UID of 5 digits. Astroturfing accounts are usually newer. It's not like he's posting as an anonymous coward.
not anarchists, just dipshits
on
Steel Bolt Hacking
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
Those are true dipshits. Not anarchists. Anarchists shouldn't be jealous of other peoples' material possessions. If they are, then they are increasing the scope of those who oppress them.
Great. Destroy someones' bicycle. Encourage them to drive a car. Way to go "anarchists." You really have fucked the system now!
Porsche cars not easy to steal
on
Steel Bolt Hacking
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
In terms of hotwiring or other methods of driving away with a stolen car, Porsches are impossible to steal. They've got factory-installed burglar alarms that are engaged every time you lock the doors. The engine will not start until the alarm is properly disengaged. Someone MIGHT be able to spoof the electronic radio signal that disables the alarm. But then you've got a special key with a computer chip that the car checks before starting the engine. In the end, the best way to steal a porsche is with a flatbed truck. Then chop it and sell it for parts. A used 1997 twin turbo sells for $100k +, so most people keep those vehicles under close watch. I dunno. Thought I'd chime in after laughing at Nick Cage in Gone in 60 Seconds driving away in stolen porches. Ridiculous.
They are tragic, but very low considering what has been accomplished.
You might consider this to be a low death toll. I do not. The lion's share of casualties have been suffered by Americans in this conflict, second only to Iraqis. Had we really invaded as part of a UN coalition as the US participated in the Kosovo war, the numbers would be more evenly distributed. I am also outraged that most of these casualties have occurred after George Bush announced an end to 'major combat operations in Iraq' with the 'mission accomplished' banner in the background. A capable war president would know better than to call a premature end to a war.
I'm certain that theirs isn't any more slack than the other networks.
I disagree. If you are so certain the other networks are as biased as Fox News, then I challenge you to watch the movie OutFoxed and then scrutinize the other networks. But you won't. You'll prefer to sit with your pre-formed opinion without exploring other perspectives on the topic.
I checked out information on the Youssef-McVeigh connection. Sounds plausible. I'd support the Bush administration investigating this connection. We've still got Terry Nichols alive (and his brother), so they've got people to work with. It would certainly be the strongest connection of Iraq supporting terrorism against Americans. To date, there has been no evidence documented that connects Iraq to terrorism against Americans.
You mention Carville and Begala. Those are commentators. They don't conduct interviews or report news. They discuss politics. In the Fox News case I cited, this is a reporter. Reporters are tasked with asking hard questions of the people they interview. They may not have connections to the stories they report or else that is considered a conflict of interest.
Already the Fox News effect is demonstrated in your blurring of commentary and reporting. Fox News features a guy named Colmes who loves to finish his segments with "Only X days before we get to re-elect George Bush." The defense of this is that guy is a 'commentator' not a reporter.
Greta van Sustern, by the way, is employed by Fox News. If you are correct about her Husband campaigning for Kerry, which I could not find anything about in a Google search, then this would be another example of Fox News' slack ethics.
I agree. Fox News is filling airtime with irrelevant stuff like the Lacy Peterson murder trial in order to avoid talking about issues that might reflect poorly on the Bush administration. Whoops! 1000 soldiers now killed in Iraq. How many US troops were killed during the previous administration? Oh, how about less than 10% of that number died in Kosovo and Somalia combined. Fox News would prefer to downplay the significance of this milestone and instead distract viewers with irrelevant courtroom drama.
Damn. It seems like a day doesn't go by without Slashdot linking to some engadget article. Yesterday the Engadget Senior Editor admitted that he's been submitting Articles on Slashdot without a disclaimer saying 'hey, I'm from Engadget. Here's my story over at my site.' Interestingly, he never posts with his slashdot account, but keeps getting his self-hyping article submissions accepted.
Now here's this article posted on Slashdot referencing a child-site of Endadget called joystiq. Engadget and Joystiq are part of the "Weblogs, Inc. Network"
I tried to check the submitter's slashdot account. Doesn't exist. Why would Timothy use this nickname (oldskoolar) to attribute the submission when it doesn't exist? Now slashdot is not only running promo articles for engadget sites, it's pretending that they're submitted by users who don't exist.
I'd bet that the folks at WIN are paying slashdot to run these promos to drive traffic to their pseudo-blog sites.
You know, there are a lot of misinformed individuals around the world that say all kinds of slanderous things about America and Americans. I think all of us can usually turn the other cheek, etc. with the knowledge that these people haven't met real Americans, or just don't know all the facts. With the advent of Fox News, I have to be embarrassed for our country when these foreigners criticize the American media as being propaganda.
For so many years, we were able to point fingers at Russia with its state-run Pravda and contrast our freedom to their oppression. More recently we all got a laugh from the Iraqi information minister holding press conferences telling obvious lies, etc. But I must wonder, how does it look for our media (Fox News) to employ Oliver North to cover the war in Iraq? This guy was a military officer convicted of obstructing Congress and now he's working as a journalist? Everytime I see him on tv, I cringe knowing that to people around the world he represents America as well as that goof Iraq information minister did.
I have no idea who you are referring to when you say the other networks have reporters working for the Kerry campaign. In OutFoxed, they show footage of Fox News political reporter, Carl Cameron, interviewing Bush during the 2004 campaign. Before the interview, he preps Bush by telling him what questions he's going to ask him. Then he kisses his ass with all this stuff about how his wife is working on Bush's campaign, etc. No ethical news operation would allow such a drastic conflict of interest to exist. Please back up your assertion about the other networks' reporters working for the Kerry campaign.
As to the alleged smear on McCain, obviously it's not that big of a deal, since McCain spoke on Bush's behalf at the RNC.
Within John McCain, you are witnessing an amazing amount of swallowing of pride to fulfill an agenda. John McCain has a plan. Right now he's the least divisive politician in the GOP. If they had him running instead of W, they'd have a compelling ticket that would be hard for Kerry / Edwards to beat. But the GOP can't switch horses and maintain face. So they have to stick with Bush / Cheney.
McCain is playing his party-faithful role because of three possible outcomes working in his favor:
1. Bush loses in 2004. McCain will be the go-to man in 2008 for the GOP. His party-faithful performance at the RNC would have won back the neo-cons. It would also help restore the conservatives who voted Kerry (or didn't vote) in 2004 because they were upset over Bush / Cheney running the country into a $400 billion deficit.
2. Bush wins in 2004. Can't run again in 2008. Cheney is too frail to run. McCain again becomes the go-to guy for reasons posted in point #1.
3. Last minute desperation for Bush ticket. Cheney withdraws from race complaining of heart issues lingering from his quadruple heart bypass. McCain put on ticket as replacement. They win, then McCain runs in 2008.
In any event, I would bet that after the 2004 election is over, McCain will not be buddies with Bush. All that dirty stuff the Bush campaign did in 2000 with the push polling telling voters McCain fathered an illegitimate black child is unforgivable.
Hey Ryan, the story here isn't my paranoia, it's your lack of full disclosure. For starters, you're hyping up your website with posts using a pseudonym that you do not use on said website. The slashdot community typically frowns on such disingenuous self-promotions. Had you instead been open and said, "Hey slashdotters, here's an article I wrote on my website about XYZ" then it certainly wouldn't have come across as some sort of deception.
...what Engadget is: a subscription free news source.
Is your site really a news source or a distributor of press releases? I know that sounds like a flame, but I don't mean it that way. I think your site is probably a lot of fun to produce. At the same time, when a site's content is so product-heavy, I get suspicious about the possibility of paid placement, etc. Especially when you gush about a product like this-- "Know that new T-Mobile Sidekick II that Paris Hilton and Derek Jeter have been totin' around town?" The only reason Paris Hilton would have any tech gadget is if she's paid to endorse it. By commenting on Paris Hilton owning a Sidekick II, you've taken on the role of a mouthpiece for the Danger PR department. Does your community really care what consumer products Paris Hilton owns? Actually, it would have been a hundred times more interesting had your contacts at Danger's PR department arranged for you to interview Paris about what she does with her Sidekick rather than the CEO.
If you want to call Engadget a news source, you need to brush up on your journalism ethics. Real journalists don't accept gifts or freebies of any kind from people / companies they might write about. For example, Roger Ebert pays to see the movies he reviews. Quality journalists don't present advertisements as news. Does Engadget qualify?
Please check the Society of Professional Journalist's website on the issue:
Distinguish news from advertising and shun hybrids that blur the lines between the two.
Deny favored treatment to advertisers and special interests and resist their pressure to influence news coverage.
Be wary of sources offering information for favors or money; avoid bidding for news.
I think the problem is that atari joysticks were 4-switch systems while the PS2 and other modern consoles use 8-switches in their direction controller.
Slashdot Mirror
In Afghanistan, women were beaten and sometimes executed for showing even their naked ankles in public. Here is a website created by Afghan women where they describe the restrictions placed on them by the Taliban. So, probably those women were psychologically harmed by their fundamentalist abusers.
It is up to you to prove that naked breasts are detrimental to our society if you are going to advocate that women be restricted from baring their breasts in public. I submit that you oppose women baring their chests in public because you are uptight about a woman's body. If you disagree, then tell me how it's bad for a woman's breasts to be displayed.
You're referencing something you're calling the "Clinton Gun Ban of 1994." Were guns banned? No. But you've worked in a concerted effort with the folks at that website to exaggerate the Assault Rifle Ban to sound like a ban on guns in general. And in fact, the legislation Clinton got the Republican-dominated House to pass was a restriction on the sale of certain newly-manufactured or imported guns that look like military weapons. Functionally, this law didn't limit people's access to military-styled weapons.
It's understood amonst themselves. They don't need to talk about it.
I strongly recommend that you actually talk to one of these liberals of which you seem to assume a lot about. If it's understood amonst [SIC] themselves, then why is it that liberals talk about other issues that should be understood amonst [SIC] themselves? Like gay rights? Or recycling? Or protecting our forests, wetlands and other animal habitats? Seriously, I hang out with a lot of wacko liberals and consider myself one, and we're never talking about banning guns. In fact several of my friends own guns. One guy even shot a nazi skinhead with a 22-caliber rifle.
Talking to people who seem different from yourself can help you understand that they aren't all that different. It can also help you be less afraid of those same people.
Talk to a liberal someday. You'll probably find that this hype about gun control is a fiction created by the NRA for their own job security. Getting rid of guns is so low on the liberal agenda, that radical liberals don't even waste their breath on it. The NRA claims that the democrats are going to take our guns away in order to get more money from paranoid gun-owners. This paper tiger tactic has been working great for them.
With all due respect, in your culture, a bare breast may seem especially sexual. In other cultures there is no stigma attached to a woman's breast being revealed in public. In Austin, Texas, where I live, women are free to walk around topless if they so choose. ANYWHERE. In fundamentalist religious cultures,such as the Taliban-ruled Afghanistan, women were forced to cover their skin from head to toe. In Austin, Texas, our children seem to be growing up just fine. Sometimes they see breasts naked in public. Not unlike when they are walking around the house and their mothers are changing clothes. Kids across America see breasts on the internet anytime they wish. As a result of our nation's children seeing a naked breast on the Superbowl Halftime Show, were they harmed? What damage was done? If you choose to respond to this question, please cite as many scientific studies as possible that indicate children who view naked breasts are likely to have been psychologically harmed.
Thanks for clarifying your original post. I had interpreted it to mean that you don't think voting in Texas is important. Clearly you recognize that's not the case.
I also agree that I'd like to see more a more liberal bend to the Democratic party. I'd like to see a national discussion of decriminalizing victimless drug crimes (possession, manufacturing, distribution), for instance.
Unfortunately, there are so many disenfranchised voters like yourself who aren't showing up to vote, it's not politically viable for the Democratic party to reach out to us. They have to craft their appeal to the people who are actually voting, and largely that's the old folks and the SUV moms you mentioned -- the middle-of-the-roaders. Think about this- if I run for city council as a radical anarchist, will I win? No. Because other anarchists don't believe the candidates share their agenda. So it presents a chicken-and-the-egg problem. And that's what the national Democratic party faces.
What you are doing, voting for the Green Party it sounds like, does send a valuable message. It tells the Democratic party operatives that there is a valid liberal voting block and that they can woo those voters by adopting a more liberal platform. So I encourage you to go out to the polls on November 2nd and drag all your like-minded Texan friends with you.
As a Texan, I hear a lot of people voicing the same sentiment that you have above. I strongly disagree that Democratic votes in Texas are unimportant.
The Republican party generates tens of millions of dollars in campaign contributions in Texas. Because the GOP assumes a win in Texas, it is free to spend all those funds in the battleground states at the national, state, and county race levels. That's why you don't see a bunch of campaign commercials on TV in Texas. By rolling over and letting the GOP have Texas, you are making it difficult for Democratic candidates to win in the local races as well as making it difficult for them to win in the battleground states.
Your vote in Texas also serves to backfire the recent redistricting on the GOP. Austin, for example, now is split into three different districts. We have 50,000 newly-registered voters in Travis County. If the Democratic voters show up in force in Travis County, then these three districts could all go with Democratic Congressional wins.
While we're on the topic of the GOP agenda for Texas, you might want to review the 2004 Texas GOP Party Platform. Here are some interesting objectives:
In terms of the emphasis on English in the last two items, note that none of the people on the platform draft committee have hispanic names.
I fully agree with WebLion. Wolfenstein: Enemy Territory is an awesome game. And it's free as in beer, but much of the source code has been opened up, so there are a lot of mods being developed. There were MANY disappointed attendees at QuakeCon who wanted official QuakeCon ET competitions.
None of my peripherals would work with a new Mac.
I remember a lot of people complaining that the iMac was USB-only. The thing is, Apple sold millions of those computers. Suddenly, there was a market demand for USB peripherals. Now nobody is making parallel printers. If it wasn't for Apple pushing firewire, who knows how long it would have been before vendors would have been building it (IEEE 1394) into their video cameras and motherboards. Carrot and the stick, my friend. The carrot was a bunch of consumers who no longer had serial connections on the computers. The peripheral makers wanted to eat that carrot very badly. And this pushed technology in the marketplace forward.
So yeah, I can't use my old laserwriter IInt on my new G4 Powerbook. I'm not too disappointed, though. It's a 300dpi laser printer. Now I can get 1400dpi inkjet printers for under $100.
Glad you resurrected that dead iMac!!!
A couple of easy steps if you have a linux server.
1. Download and install brag. It's available with RPMs for easy installation.
2. Add this cron entry: brag -s news-server -g alt.binaries.howard-stern -a '*CF*'
3. For convenience's sake, add this as a cleanup cron entry: mv
4. Oh, and this other cleanup cron entry- rm -rf
Schedule those around 3:30 your time, and have the latter entries run a couple hours later. You should be good to go with Stern each day on your iPod without commercials.
and I have a machine that used to be an iMac running a web server but I'm done with Apple.
If you purchased an iMac, you did that at least a couple years after Jobs renigged on the contracts with PowerComputing, Umax, Motorola, et. al. How long after the clones disappeared did it take you to get mad at Jobs? As for the 'resultant changes to the hardware' Jobs and Company as only improved Apple hardware. Your Performa 6400 was a competitive box for several years, but doesn't hold a candle to a G5 Powermac in any comparison. I know. I used to do tech support as an Apple employee.
I'd also encourage you to shut down the iMac and just let the Performa 6400 function as both a 'linux server' and your 'web server'. No need for two computers to be jacking up your electric bill. And you can run the 6400 headless.
Well, as a pseudo engineer, I can help shave the weight of the cable from this equation. Use several balloons. No cable. Send your camera-carrying balloon aloft on a not very windy day. When it has taken the photos you desire and is still within a reasonable distance, use a BB gun to shoot one of the balloons. It should return slowly back to earth without the need for a heavy cord or string.
Make no mistake. Engadget is a commercial enterprise (WEBLOGS, INC. NETWORK) masquerading as a blog site. It's under contract by Motorola to promote the Sidekick product. Pure advertorial.
I suspect that they are paying Slashdot for placement of these 'stories'. Check out the Engadget editor admitting to submitting a story without disclosing his connection to Engadget. Mr. Blue VT is right on the money. In the example posted above, the editor's account, r-blo, had been created, then submitted two stories, both of which were accepted for publication while no posting or other activity had been recorded in its history.
If my assertions are false, then Phillip Torrone can say that he's not an employee of WIN and that money hasn't changed hands between WIN and Slashdot and Motorola and WIN for story placement.
Oh, yeah. Thanks, MrBlue VT for linking to the ONLY story I've submitted to slashdot that's been accepted. Coincidentally, it is the first mention of kite arial photography on this site.
If Lucas has updated the original films for timeliness, he'd have the Rebel Alliance blow up the death star and all of its inhabitants, then afterwards find out that in fact there were no weapons of mass distruction on board. Additionally, Luke would revisit Tantooine and find that his Aunt and Uncle as well as the Jawas were actually all killed by some irate sand people, with no connection to the Empire.
Performer Guy has a UID of 5 digits. Astroturfing accounts are usually newer. It's not like he's posting as an anonymous coward.
Those are true dipshits. Not anarchists. Anarchists shouldn't be jealous of other peoples' material possessions. If they are, then they are increasing the scope of those who oppress them.
Great. Destroy someones' bicycle. Encourage them to drive a car. Way to go "anarchists." You really have fucked the system now!
In terms of hotwiring or other methods of driving away with a stolen car, Porsches are impossible to steal. They've got factory-installed burglar alarms that are engaged every time you lock the doors. The engine will not start until the alarm is properly disengaged. Someone MIGHT be able to spoof the electronic radio signal that disables the alarm. But then you've got a special key with a computer chip that the car checks before starting the engine. In the end, the best way to steal a porsche is with a flatbed truck. Then chop it and sell it for parts. A used 1997 twin turbo sells for $100k +, so most people keep those vehicles under close watch. I dunno. Thought I'd chime in after laughing at Nick Cage in Gone in 60 Seconds driving away in stolen porches. Ridiculous.
They are tragic, but very low considering what has been accomplished.
You might consider this to be a low death toll. I do not. The lion's share of casualties have been suffered by Americans in this conflict, second only to Iraqis. Had we really invaded as part of a UN coalition as the US participated in the Kosovo war, the numbers would be more evenly distributed. I am also outraged that most of these casualties have occurred after George Bush announced an end to 'major combat operations in Iraq' with the 'mission accomplished' banner in the background. A capable war president would know better than to call a premature end to a war.
I'm certain that theirs isn't any more slack than the other networks.
I disagree. If you are so certain the other networks are as biased as Fox News, then I challenge you to watch the movie OutFoxed and then scrutinize the other networks. But you won't. You'll prefer to sit with your pre-formed opinion without exploring other perspectives on the topic.
I checked out information on the Youssef-McVeigh connection. Sounds plausible. I'd support the Bush administration investigating this connection. We've still got Terry Nichols alive (and his brother), so they've got people to work with. It would certainly be the strongest connection of Iraq supporting terrorism against Americans. To date, there has been no evidence documented that connects Iraq to terrorism against Americans.
You mention Carville and Begala. Those are commentators. They don't conduct interviews or report news. They discuss politics. In the Fox News case I cited, this is a reporter. Reporters are tasked with asking hard questions of the people they interview. They may not have connections to the stories they report or else that is considered a conflict of interest.
Already the Fox News effect is demonstrated in your blurring of commentary and reporting. Fox News features a guy named Colmes who loves to finish his segments with "Only X days before we get to re-elect George Bush." The defense of this is that guy is a 'commentator' not a reporter.
Greta van Sustern, by the way, is employed by Fox News. If you are correct about her Husband campaigning for Kerry, which I could not find anything about in a Google search, then this would be another example of Fox News' slack ethics.
I agree. Fox News is filling airtime with irrelevant stuff like the Lacy Peterson murder trial in order to avoid talking about issues that might reflect poorly on the Bush administration. Whoops! 1000 soldiers now killed in Iraq. How many US troops were killed during the previous administration? Oh, how about less than 10% of that number died in Kosovo and Somalia combined. Fox News would prefer to downplay the significance of this milestone and instead distract viewers with irrelevant courtroom drama.
Damn. It seems like a day doesn't go by without Slashdot linking to some engadget article. Yesterday the Engadget Senior Editor admitted that he's been submitting Articles on Slashdot without a disclaimer saying 'hey, I'm from Engadget. Here's my story over at my site.' Interestingly, he never posts with his slashdot account, but keeps getting his self-hyping article submissions accepted.
Now here's this article posted on Slashdot referencing a child-site of Endadget called joystiq. Engadget and Joystiq are part of the "Weblogs, Inc. Network"
I tried to check the submitter's slashdot account. Doesn't exist. Why would Timothy use this nickname (oldskoolar) to attribute the submission when it doesn't exist? Now slashdot is not only running promo articles for engadget sites, it's pretending that they're submitted by users who don't exist.
I'd bet that the folks at WIN are paying slashdot to run these promos to drive traffic to their pseudo-blog sites.
You know, there are a lot of misinformed individuals around the world that say all kinds of slanderous things about America and Americans. I think all of us can usually turn the other cheek, etc. with the knowledge that these people haven't met real Americans, or just don't know all the facts. With the advent of Fox News, I have to be embarrassed for our country when these foreigners criticize the American media as being propaganda.
For so many years, we were able to point fingers at Russia with its state-run Pravda and contrast our freedom to their oppression. More recently we all got a laugh from the Iraqi information minister holding press conferences telling obvious lies, etc. But I must wonder, how does it look for our media (Fox News) to employ Oliver North to cover the war in Iraq? This guy was a military officer convicted of obstructing Congress and now he's working as a journalist? Everytime I see him on tv, I cringe knowing that to people around the world he represents America as well as that goof Iraq information minister did.
What's wrong with FoxNews?
I have no idea who you are referring to when you say the other networks have reporters working for the Kerry campaign. In OutFoxed, they show footage of Fox News political reporter, Carl Cameron, interviewing Bush during the 2004 campaign. Before the interview, he preps Bush by telling him what questions he's going to ask him. Then he kisses his ass with all this stuff about how his wife is working on Bush's campaign, etc. No ethical news operation would allow such a drastic conflict of interest to exist. Please back up your assertion about the other networks' reporters working for the Kerry campaign.
As to the alleged smear on McCain, obviously it's not that big of a deal, since McCain spoke on Bush's behalf at the RNC.
Within John McCain, you are witnessing an amazing amount of swallowing of pride to fulfill an agenda. John McCain has a plan. Right now he's the least divisive politician in the GOP. If they had him running instead of W, they'd have a compelling ticket that would be hard for Kerry / Edwards to beat. But the GOP can't switch horses and maintain face. So they have to stick with Bush / Cheney.
McCain is playing his party-faithful role because of three possible outcomes working in his favor:
1. Bush loses in 2004. McCain will be the go-to man in 2008 for the GOP. His party-faithful performance at the RNC would have won back the neo-cons. It would also help restore the conservatives who voted Kerry (or didn't vote) in 2004 because they were upset over Bush / Cheney running the country into a $400 billion deficit.
2. Bush wins in 2004. Can't run again in 2008. Cheney is too frail to run. McCain again becomes the go-to guy for reasons posted in point #1.
3. Last minute desperation for Bush ticket. Cheney withdraws from race complaining of heart issues lingering from his quadruple heart bypass. McCain put on ticket as replacement. They win, then McCain runs in 2008.
In any event, I would bet that after the 2004 election is over, McCain will not be buddies with Bush. All that dirty stuff the Bush campaign did in 2000 with the push polling telling voters McCain fathered an illegitimate black child is unforgivable.
if you're going to talk shit, don't post AC.
Hey Ryan, the story here isn't my paranoia, it's your lack of full disclosure. For starters, you're hyping up your website with posts using a pseudonym that you do not use on said website. The slashdot community typically frowns on such disingenuous self-promotions. Had you instead been open and said, "Hey slashdotters, here's an article I wrote on my website about XYZ" then it certainly wouldn't have come across as some sort of deception.
Is your site really a news source or a distributor of press releases? I know that sounds like a flame, but I don't mean it that way. I think your site is probably a lot of fun to produce. At the same time, when a site's content is so product-heavy, I get suspicious about the possibility of paid placement, etc. Especially when you gush about a product like this-- "Know that new T-Mobile Sidekick II that Paris Hilton and Derek Jeter have been totin' around town?" The only reason Paris Hilton would have any tech gadget is if she's paid to endorse it. By commenting on Paris Hilton owning a Sidekick II, you've taken on the role of a mouthpiece for the Danger PR department. Does your community really care what consumer products Paris Hilton owns? Actually, it would have been a hundred times more interesting had your contacts at Danger's PR department arranged for you to interview Paris about what she does with her Sidekick rather than the CEO.
If you want to call Engadget a news source, you need to brush up on your journalism ethics. Real journalists don't accept gifts or freebies of any kind from people / companies they might write about. For example, Roger Ebert pays to see the movies he reviews. Quality journalists don't present advertisements as news. Does Engadget qualify?
Please check the Society of Professional Journalist's website on the issue:
Distinguish news from advertising and shun hybrids that blur the lines between the two.
Deny favored treatment to advertisers and special interests and resist their pressure to influence news coverage.
Be wary of sources offering information for favors or money; avoid bidding for news.
I think the problem is that atari joysticks were 4-switch systems while the PS2 and other modern consoles use 8-switches in their direction controller.