"It wasn't necessary to refute you. You did it for me. Your post showed all the classic flaws of someone who would hold such a position."
OOH NICE! So, after you've attacked me personally, you are convinced that is sufficient and no refutation of my statements are necessary.
How about instead of pretending my qualities as a human have anything at all to do with the accuracy of my statement, you actually address my fucking statement.
Except, you can't refute it, and you know it, so you pretend attacking me personally is sufficient.
Newsflash sister, the truth of my comment is independent of who said it. Your inability to grasp this is what lead you to such ridiculous conclusions in the first place.
"You don't want to debate, you want to be a jerk"
No little guy, I want to do both.
Sadly, all you want is to pretend that since I'm not nice I can't have a valid opinion. That is what your kind does when they're wrong.
Which is why you continue to do it.
This is where you say "WAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!! Someone should stifle his speech because it hurts my FEEELLINGS!!!!! WAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!"
"Your example is stupid because knowing th names of troops on the ground really wouldn't help "the terrorists" at all."
L-O-C-A-T-I-O-N-S>.
No one said anything about names but you, so make sure you're not running off at the mouth the next time you call someone's post "stupid" or you'll look silly.
"If by working well, you mean it makes the torturer believe that they are getting information, sure."
THAT is what I think. It is true.
"But they're not."
WRONG. Sometimes they are, it is simply impossible to know when.
"They get what the person being tortured thinks they want to hear."
And sometimes they get exactly what they want, but it is untrustworthy.
"Never underestimate the power of kind words."
I would tell you "never pretend that one tool is adequate for every job".
I think you and I are nearly on the same page, just that you think torture never gives good information, while I know that is wrong, but that torture always gives UNRELIABLE information, as one never knows whether it is true, somewhat true, or totally inaccurate.
Please post evidence that supports you. Show where I have denied global climate change.
Save your time you won;t find any.
"You are the liar."
Then post the quote. I'll wait.
By the way, I called you on your lies and your response was "I'm rubber you're glue."
Which is about all that you're capable of.
"About the only resistance to the consensus is manufactured by the polluting industries"
It was a lie the first time you spewed it and it's a lie now, source it or SHUT YOUR FUCKING LYING MOUTH.
I don't want to labor through another of your ignorant rants until your SOURCE YOUR FUCKING STATEMENT.
Or do what an honest man would and admit you can't. But you won't because it's more important to you to run off at the mouth and lie than tell the truth.
And while you're at it, save the "you're a liar, you're a denier" garbage. I fully believe that the climate is changing. SEE THAT? DO YOU FUCKING SEE THAT YOU COWARDLY FUCKING TROLL? THE VERY THING YOU LIED ABOUT IN ATTACKING ME, I SAY I SUPPORT IN PLAIN SIGHT.
So, go ahead an call me a denier you fucking moron, just make sure you're ready to refute THAT FUCKING STATEMENT RIGHT IN FRONT OF YOUR IDIOT FACE, and deal with the fact that there is not one iota of evidence that I have ever believed otherwise.
I like though how in your total failure to refute me, you pretended as though what I said somehow proves anything other than that you have no refutation.
Any chance you could just cry and concede, it'll save me the time of making you do it.
"There's lots of consensus on our guesses about climate and how it's changing."
Too bad consensus isn't data.
"About the only resistance to the consensus is manufactured by the polluting industries, which aren't going to go along just because we know better what's happening."
That's just a lie and you know it. Unfortunately, you're exactly the kind of individual who will lie when it suits you, like now.
"Most people turn to crime because of a lack of access to legal opportunities. "
Shut the fuck up.
Most people turn to crime because they lack the character necessary to do other things. As to "lack of access to legal opportunities" that bullshit doesn't do much for the mother of 2 working 3 shitty jobs, avoiding crime because she knows it's wrong.
And in all my life, no matter the state of the economy, I have found legal, albeit occasionally distasteful, alternatives to crime to support myself.
People CHOOSE crime, because something inside if them makes it ok for them to prey on others. Stop making stupid excuses.
"Because it is not the particular model (of which there are many, like Zenit, Proton, the new Angara) but the concept of cheap, disposable boosters which is important"
Which still doesn't explain why you chose to discuss the Energia instead of one of the other rockets that are actually being used.
"I know how easy it would be to sneak in a back door, and so do many of you."
Well, let's hear it. I have no doubt if your method is viable, there are enough technical experts to say so.
Of course, they will be able to tell if you're full of shit too, which leads me to believe you'll never be heard from again.
So enlighten us AC. Let's hear about how "easy" it would be to sneak a "back door" in. I'm nervous with anticipation.
Of course, after they sneak their "back door" in, they'll have to actually play which means that their decisions will be recorded and any statistical variance noted, like it was in this case.
It took around 200 hands for those involved to smell something fishy.
"if they can gain a 100% edge by cheating, they won't press it to it's maximum, they'll only press it slightly so that they only have a 55% edge, time and compounding will make them rich beyond their wildest dreams, and NO ONE will be the wiser."
And this is the ignorance talking. The detail in records that are available would allow even this level of cheating to be detected, it would just increase the necessary sample size.
You could probably make some money (as some have) but rich beyond your wildest dreams is just wrong.
"None of my friends, teachers or relatives knew about ID either (except my brother, who reads slashdot ocasionally), so I'll extrapolate that to Latin America."
Then perhaps instead of "extrapolating to the rest of Latin America" incorrectly like you did, you should just extrapolate to the people you know (minus your brother).
You know, so your extrapolation won't be completely wrong.
Slashdot Mirror
"It wasn't necessary to refute you. You did it for me. Your post showed all the classic flaws of someone who would hold such a position."
OOH NICE! So, after you've attacked me personally, you are convinced that is sufficient and no refutation of my statements are necessary.
How about instead of pretending my qualities as a human have anything at all to do with the accuracy of my statement, you actually address my fucking statement.
Except, you can't refute it, and you know it, so you pretend attacking me personally is sufficient.
Newsflash sister, the truth of my comment is independent of who said it. Your inability to grasp this is what lead you to such ridiculous conclusions in the first place.
"You don't want to debate, you want to be a jerk"
No little guy, I want to do both.
Sadly, all you want is to pretend that since I'm not nice I can't have a valid opinion. That is what your kind does when they're wrong.
Which is why you continue to do it.
This is where you say "WAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!! Someone should stifle his speech because it hurts my FEEELLINGS!!!!! WAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!"
First, it was a joke that you failed to get.
Second, go back and reread it until you realize WHAT I was asking for a source for. You'll notice that you didn't get that part either.
"If we minded our own business we wouldn't have troops in hot zones to attack."
UN peacekeeping.
Feel free to realize you're wrong now.
"In short, torture basically doesn't work."
And I have explained why you are wrong. And you need to look into what "in short" means, because you're a bit off on that.
You have yet to do anything that proves this other than say so.
If all you're going to do is reap eat yourself and fail to address my post, I see no reason to waste any more time with you.
You'll ignore my reply because you said something incredibly dumb and aren't man enough to own up?
I'll gladly ship you a 5 spot just to watch you eat your fucking words.
"I don't want to labor through another of your ignorant rants until your SOURCE YOUR FUCKING STATEMENT."
Just admit you can't and get it over with.
I like how you completely shut the fuck up once you realized how stupid your post was though, it's very satisfying to shut a troll like you up.
"Your example is stupid because knowing th names of troops on the ground really wouldn't help "the terrorists" at all."
L-O-C-A-T-I-O-N-S>.
No one said anything about names but you, so make sure you're not running off at the mouth the next time you call someone's post "stupid" or you'll look silly.
Like you did in that post.
"If by working well, you mean it makes the torturer believe that they are getting information, sure."
THAT is what I think. It is true.
"But they're not."
WRONG. Sometimes they are, it is simply impossible to know when.
"They get what the person being tortured thinks they want to hear."
And sometimes they get exactly what they want, but it is untrustworthy.
"Never underestimate the power of kind words."
I would tell you "never pretend that one tool is adequate for every job".
I think you and I are nearly on the same page, just that you think torture never gives good information, while I know that is wrong, but that torture always gives UNRELIABLE information, as one never knows whether it is true, somewhat true, or totally inaccurate.
"No, you're a lying Greenhouse denier."
Please post evidence that supports you. Show where I have denied global climate change.
Save your time you won;t find any.
"You are the liar."
Then post the quote. I'll wait.
By the way, I called you on your lies and your response was "I'm rubber you're glue."
Which is about all that you're capable of.
"About the only resistance to the consensus is manufactured by the polluting industries"
It was a lie the first time you spewed it and it's a lie now, source it or SHUT YOUR FUCKING LYING MOUTH.
I don't want to labor through another of your ignorant rants until your SOURCE YOUR FUCKING STATEMENT.
Or do what an honest man would and admit you can't. But you won't because it's more important to you to run off at the mouth and lie than tell the truth.
And while you're at it, save the "you're a liar, you're a denier" garbage. I fully believe that the climate is changing. SEE THAT? DO YOU FUCKING SEE THAT YOU COWARDLY FUCKING TROLL? THE VERY THING YOU LIED ABOUT IN ATTACKING ME, I SAY I SUPPORT IN PLAIN SIGHT.
So, go ahead an call me a denier you fucking moron, just make sure you're ready to refute THAT FUCKING STATEMENT RIGHT IN FRONT OF YOUR IDIOT FACE, and deal with the fact that there is not one iota of evidence that I have ever believed otherwise.
"You probably don't realize that not only does torture not work, it actually gives you incredibly bad information."
You're only half right, it works very well, so much so, that the individual being tortured will say anything. Which leads to the bad information.
"In short: Torture does not work."
In short, you're wrong. Torture, like any other tool, is effective if used in the correct situations.
None of which makes it worth lowering oneself to, by the way.
"There are *no* reasons for classified material at all."
Really? REALLY?
So all those troops on location in hot zones that will get massacred just don't matter anymore?
God, could you be any more wrong...
"You claim something that people generally don't believe"
Source?
"Wow, i can't refute any of that"
FYP
I like though how in your total failure to refute me, you pretended as though what I said somehow proves anything other than that you have no refutation.
Any chance you could just cry and concede, it'll save me the time of making you do it.
"There's lots of consensus on our guesses about climate and how it's changing."
Too bad consensus isn't data.
"About the only resistance to the consensus is manufactured by the polluting industries, which aren't going to go along just because we know better what's happening."
That's just a lie and you know it. Unfortunately, you're exactly the kind of individual who will lie when it suits you, like now.
"Most people turn to crime because of a lack of access to legal opportunities. "
Shut the fuck up.
Most people turn to crime because they lack the character necessary to do other things. As to "lack of access to legal opportunities" that bullshit doesn't do much for the mother of 2 working 3 shitty jobs, avoiding crime because she knows it's wrong.
And in all my life, no matter the state of the economy, I have found legal, albeit occasionally distasteful, alternatives to crime to support myself.
People CHOOSE crime, because something inside if them makes it ok for them to prey on others. Stop making stupid excuses.
"Because it is not the particular model (of which there are many, like Zenit, Proton, the new Angara) but the concept of cheap, disposable boosters which is important"
Which still doesn't explain why you chose to discuss the Energia instead of one of the other rockets that are actually being used.
"And the Shuttle, unlike the Energia payload, is rather unlikely to make it to Mars or Venus."
Well, since the Energia isn't produced anymore, I'd say the likelihood of it making it to Mars is currently pretty low.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energia
"Production of Energia rockets ended with the fall of the Soviet Union and the end of the Buran shuttle project."
Why are you blathering on about the technical qualities of a rocket that was discontinued?
"Unbelievable - "better position to compete"? Are they so incredibly afraid of Sony, then, despite their enormous lead?"
Or maybe it just means that adding a feature will put them in a better position to compete, period.
What you said makes no sense at all.
Sometimes you people post some seriously stupid shit.
Or maybe they could just not take it from us in the first place?
Did you really think your post made any sense and wasn't moronic?
Way to completely miss the point in your rush to protect your sacred calf.
Will you come up with a better justification by then?
"I know how easy it would be to sneak in a back door, and so do many of you."
Well, let's hear it. I have no doubt if your method is viable, there are enough technical experts to say so.
Of course, they will be able to tell if you're full of shit too, which leads me to believe you'll never be heard from again.
So enlighten us AC. Let's hear about how "easy" it would be to sneak a "back door" in. I'm nervous with anticipation.
Of course, after they sneak their "back door" in, they'll have to actually play which means that their decisions will be recorded and any statistical variance noted, like it was in this case.
Please go back to writing "web apps".
It took around 200 hands for those involved to smell something fishy.
"if they can gain a 100% edge by cheating, they won't press it to it's maximum, they'll only press it slightly so that they only have a 55% edge, time and compounding will make them rich beyond their wildest dreams, and NO ONE will be the wiser."
And this is the ignorance talking. The detail in records that are available would allow even this level of cheating to be detected, it would just increase the necessary sample size.
You could probably make some money (as some have) but rich beyond your wildest dreams is just wrong.
They were also playing limit, which is significantly different from no limit.
Limit is almost totally math based, and much easier for a bot to play.
Or perhaps you didn't get it and still don't realize it.
"None of my friends, teachers or relatives knew about ID either (except my brother, who reads slashdot ocasionally), so I'll extrapolate that to Latin America."
Then perhaps instead of "extrapolating to the rest of Latin America" incorrectly like you did, you should just extrapolate to the people you know (minus your brother).
You know, so your extrapolation won't be completely wrong.