Heh, you're welcome to believe the "gummint" is hot on the trail of OBL, but as I said such an assertion is simply unfalsifiable. You can take it on "gut instinct" or "tactics logic" or something like that if you want, but I tend to try and operate under a more academic version of logic myself though.
That said though, if we can agree to disagree on that, then I guess we don't really have any issue here. I suppose you're welcome to hold whatever belief you want regarding pursuit of Osama, even if it does contradict with public statements by the military and such (after all, they could just be engaging in disinformation, even though there's no proof of that). I think I'll avoid harboring a conspiracy theory on this particular topic, though, as god knows I tend to harbor them (not always wholeheartedly, but still somewhat) regarding plenty of other things.
So, no hard feelings then, and I doubt I'll ever be down in the southeast but I certainly wouldn't mind drinking with you, heh. Alcohol can overcome all ideological differences, I have found.
I suggest providing actual sources and reasoning for your views, rather than just "could be's" and other conspiracy theory views. Technically, your assertion is unfalsifiable: that is, it is impossible to prove wrong and as such is unscientific and can't really be logically discussed (much like assertions regarding the existence of God, or conspiracy theories regarding all sorts of things). So yeah, I'd suggest shaping up on that. My initial response to you praised your logic, but it seems like I may have been mistaken.
You should actually read the link I'm referring to. It shows that Osama *has* been forgotten by the military and government. And if you look at the media you'll see he's largely been forgotten by the public as well.
Read the link. A US General actually said that "Saddam was out of the picture". The press has forgotten *and* the US govt has forgotten (or perhaps more accurately, given up).
Your logic is good but there are a few facts you're missing. Namely, we have been looking for Saddam pretty ardently for awhile, but we have essentially given up regarding Osama, deciding that he's "out of the picture".
http://www.proles.net/archives/000385.html
As such, the correct statement (with proper tenses) is: "Have we been able to find Bin Laden? Nope, we've given up."
As Bob Graham says, he's become "Osama Bin Forgotten". Too bad Osama is a much more significant issue than Saddam, since we know he has multiple times masterminded attacks on the U.S., and could potentially still be doing so (while Saddam was likely doing little to nothing).
Seriously, anybody who's been to any of the 12:01am showings for movies like LotR or Star Wars knows what I'm talking about. You'll get hordes of people dressed up like Gandalf (albeit some morbidly obese variant of him) trying to hit you with a broom handle that they insist on calling a quarterstaff.
On a side note, what sort of self-respecting/.er would be wary of spoilers regarding LotR?
The first one was closest (although cutting Tom Bombadil annoyed me), but the second one really took quite the shortcut by developing Aragorn's character by having him fall off a cliff and have a flashback sequence. Taking scenes out is one thing, but fabricating new ones to cheaply develop characters ia something else.
In any case, even if you are a "movie snob", just read the damn books if you want to get the real, full experience. Don't get me wrong, Peter Jackson has done a hell of a job and the LOTR movies are truly some of the best book-based movies I've ever seen. But still, the key element is book-based. I hold to a general rule of not watching a movie based on a book without reading the book first, as while the movie can still be entertaining it simply isn't the same medium and as such just can't capture the same experience as the book.
And in any case, Tolkien's writing, while sometimes overly grandiose (really it's largely his fault that all modern fantasy writers write that way), is pretty easy to digest, and the books aren't that long. So just slog through them, you'll probably get through it pretty quick even if you are more of a movie person.
"Their memory device combines this polymer, which is inexpensive and easy to produce, with very thin-film, silicon-based electronics."
Alright, the polymer is inexpensive and easy to produce. How about the "thin-film, silicon-based electronics"? That seems to be being glossed over here...
This is really just a sensible evolution, a transition to a newer way of making a polished product. Drawing by hand will still be around as an intermediate step for design and planning (storyboards and such).
Correlation and causation anyone? Maybe tall people tend to be more self-confident and that causes them to generally earn more, but a short person who has the same self-confidence as a tall person will earn the same amount?
How many of the people being sued by the RIAA actually use Gnutella? I would bet few to none. The vast majority are getting nabbed for Kazaa and other more popular, less geeky p2p clients.
"I do solemnly swear to support, uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States of America against all enemies, foreign and domestic, to obey the lawful orders and directives of those appointed before and above me, and that I enter into this office without any mental reservation whatsoever, so help me GOD."
I find it a tad ironic then that such an oath is in and of itself unconstitutional.
That aside, that may be their oath, but in practical purposes it is not the FBI that is taking apart our rights: the politicians are doing that. That's all I was pointing out.
And as others have pointed out, we can't expect each FBI officer to be an expert of constitutional law: they just enforce the laws that are passed, it is up to the courts to decide whether or not the laws are constitutional.
"Good to see that our First Amendment rights are being upheld by the FBI."
Technically the FBI doesn't "uphold" our rights. They should *respect* them, but right now the reason our rights are on this slippery slope is because of the politicians we have in office (and to a lesser degree the judges we have in the courts, although that results from the former). Dare I suggest we try and find some new folks to put in office?
There's a Penny Arcade for every situation. God (or lack thereof) knows I'm not going to try a mod where chances are decent I'm just going to break my GBA. The mod gets point for geekness, but is definitely on the impractical side.
Part of it is a tongue in cheek joke. Another part of it is the ego that comes with being a self-proclaimed "expert" at something. And one last part is actually legitimate: while in this mud-specific scenario I'd agree with you, there are certainly examples out there where the "better" software just obfuscates the functionality and makes it worse. I wouldn't say many mud clients have hit that point (I'd be tempted to argue that it would be a good description of Everquest, though), but it certainly has happened in other software domains (the first thing that comes to my mind is office applications, what with the damn paperclip and the automatic reformatting of everything and so forth).
What makes more sense to me (and what they do at the university I attend) is to not fine those who get viruses, but rather to require that they have all service packs installed and a virus scanner (they can download one for free from ITS if necessary) before they can access the internet, and then if they still manage to get a virus just cut off their internet access until they're clean again. Makes sense to me, at least.
While I agree that looking at a little screen can cause eye strain, reading an actual physical book can cause eye strain too. I seem to remember anecdotes in history class about how Lincoln (an avid reader) suffered eye troubles because he read so much. What's more, he didn't have so many handy lights at night to help him read. Palm Pilots and the like at least typically come with backlights (or frontlights or whatever).
Slashdot Mirror
Heh, you're welcome to believe the "gummint" is hot on the trail of OBL, but as I said such an assertion is simply unfalsifiable. You can take it on "gut instinct" or "tactics logic" or something like that if you want, but I tend to try and operate under a more academic version of logic myself though.
That said though, if we can agree to disagree on that, then I guess we don't really have any issue here. I suppose you're welcome to hold whatever belief you want regarding pursuit of Osama, even if it does contradict with public statements by the military and such (after all, they could just be engaging in disinformation, even though there's no proof of that). I think I'll avoid harboring a conspiracy theory on this particular topic, though, as god knows I tend to harbor them (not always wholeheartedly, but still somewhat) regarding plenty of other things.
So, no hard feelings then, and I doubt I'll ever be down in the southeast but I certainly wouldn't mind drinking with you, heh. Alcohol can overcome all ideological differences, I have found.
Mmhmm, so you really think there's a conspiracy at work here? That's a pretty unlikely theory, I'm afraid, especially considering we're talking about actually bringing troops home from Afghanistan.
I suggest providing actual sources and reasoning for your views, rather than just "could be's" and other conspiracy theory views. Technically, your assertion is unfalsifiable: that is, it is impossible to prove wrong and as such is unscientific and can't really be logically discussed (much like assertions regarding the existence of God, or conspiracy theories regarding all sorts of things). So yeah, I'd suggest shaping up on that. My initial response to you praised your logic, but it seems like I may have been mistaken.
You should actually read the link I'm referring to. It shows that Osama *has* been forgotten by the military and government. And if you look at the media you'll see he's largely been forgotten by the public as well.
Read the link. A US General actually said that "Saddam was out of the picture". The press has forgotten *and* the US govt has forgotten (or perhaps more accurately, given up).
Your logic is good but there are a few facts you're missing. Namely, we have been looking for Saddam pretty ardently for awhile, but we have essentially given up regarding Osama, deciding that he's "out of the picture".
http://www.proles.net/archives/000385.html
As such, the correct statement (with proper tenses) is: "Have we been able to find Bin Laden? Nope, we've given up."
As Bob Graham says, he's become "Osama Bin Forgotten". Too bad Osama is a much more significant issue than Saddam, since we know he has multiple times masterminded attacks on the U.S., and could potentially still be doing so (while Saddam was likely doing little to nothing).
Seriously, anybody who's been to any of the 12:01am showings for movies like LotR or Star Wars knows what I'm talking about. You'll get hordes of people dressed up like Gandalf (albeit some morbidly obese variant of him) trying to hit you with a broom handle that they insist on calling a quarterstaff.
On a side note, what sort of self-respecting /.er would be wary of spoilers regarding LotR?
Damn, apparently extrans mode didn't work. Here's a functioning link. Stupid me and not previewing. It's still funny, though.
As long as >nobody does any of these things</a> the movie should be an enjoyable experience. I particularly am amused by #7 for some reason...
7. When Aragorn is crowned king, stand up and at the top of your lungs sing, "And I did it.... MY way...!"
I think we slashdotted the entire government of the Netherlands.
The first one was closest (although cutting Tom Bombadil annoyed me), but the second one really took quite the shortcut by developing Aragorn's character by having him fall off a cliff and have a flashback sequence. Taking scenes out is one thing, but fabricating new ones to cheaply develop characters ia something else.
In any case, even if you are a "movie snob", just read the damn books if you want to get the real, full experience. Don't get me wrong, Peter Jackson has done a hell of a job and the LOTR movies are truly some of the best book-based movies I've ever seen. But still, the key element is book-based. I hold to a general rule of not watching a movie based on a book without reading the book first, as while the movie can still be entertaining it simply isn't the same medium and as such just can't capture the same experience as the book.
And in any case, Tolkien's writing, while sometimes overly grandiose (really it's largely his fault that all modern fantasy writers write that way), is pretty easy to digest, and the books aren't that long. So just slog through them, you'll probably get through it pretty quick even if you are more of a movie person.
"Their memory device combines this polymer, which is inexpensive and easy to produce, with very thin-film, silicon-based electronics."
Alright, the polymer is inexpensive and easy to produce. How about the "thin-film, silicon-based electronics"? That seems to be being glossed over here...
This is really just a sensible evolution, a transition to a newer way of making a polished product. Drawing by hand will still be around as an intermediate step for design and planning (storyboards and such).
Correlation and causation anyone? Maybe tall people tend to be more self-confident and that causes them to generally earn more, but a short person who has the same self-confidence as a tall person will earn the same amount?
How many of the people being sued by the RIAA actually use Gnutella? I would bet few to none. The vast majority are getting nabbed for Kazaa and other more popular, less geeky p2p clients.
Pshah, Linux geeks may not have real babes but they do have Photoshop and/or the GIMP.
"I do solemnly swear to support, uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States of America against all enemies, foreign and domestic, to obey the lawful orders and directives of those appointed before and above me, and that I enter into this office without any mental reservation whatsoever, so help me GOD."
I find it a tad ironic then that such an oath is in and of itself unconstitutional.
That aside, that may be their oath, but in practical purposes it is not the FBI that is taking apart our rights: the politicians are doing that. That's all I was pointing out.
And as others have pointed out, we can't expect each FBI officer to be an expert of constitutional law: they just enforce the laws that are passed, it is up to the courts to decide whether or not the laws are constitutional.
"Good to see that our First Amendment rights are being upheld by the FBI."
Technically the FBI doesn't "uphold" our rights. They should *respect* them, but right now the reason our rights are on this slippery slope is because of the politicians we have in office (and to a lesser degree the judges we have in the courts, although that results from the former). Dare I suggest we try and find some new folks to put in office?
There's a Penny Arcade for every situation. God (or lack thereof) knows I'm not going to try a mod where chances are decent I'm just going to break my GBA. The mod gets point for geekness, but is definitely on the impractical side.
"The site is still up for now, but how long will it last?"
And to *help* the site you submitted it to Slashdot? I don't buy it. You're one of them, aren't you!
Part of it is a tongue in cheek joke. Another part of it is the ego that comes with being a self-proclaimed "expert" at something. And one last part is actually legitimate: while in this mud-specific scenario I'd agree with you, there are certainly examples out there where the "better" software just obfuscates the functionality and makes it worse. I wouldn't say many mud clients have hit that point (I'd be tempted to argue that it would be a good description of Everquest, though), but it certainly has happened in other software domains (the first thing that comes to my mind is office applications, what with the damn paperclip and the automatic reformatting of everything and so forth).
What makes more sense to me (and what they do at the university I attend) is to not fine those who get viruses, but rather to require that they have all service packs installed and a virus scanner (they can download one for free from ITS if necessary) before they can access the internet, and then if they still manage to get a virus just cut off their internet access until they're clean again. Makes sense to me, at least.
While I agree that looking at a little screen can cause eye strain, reading an actual physical book can cause eye strain too. I seem to remember anecdotes in history class about how Lincoln (an avid reader) suffered eye troubles because he read so much. What's more, he didn't have so many handy lights at night to help him read. Palm Pilots and the like at least typically come with backlights (or frontlights or whatever).
"And I'm being sued for not being funny."
Your current moderated status seems to disagree, henceforth I am suing you for misadvertising your comment. I'll see you in court!
No, you obviously haven't, so for your benefit: