Wrong. Your karma limits your number of posts per day. The higher your karma, the more you can post (I believe excellent gives unlimited posting). If you have bad karma you're limited to 3 posts per 24 hours, good karma is 20-something posts per 24 hours.
I'm wagering that there's more than that in there. I'm wondering, on the smaller scale, how you would feel if everything you said about your wife in private were to be dropped on her lap. That's one form of damage from these releases.
Well, I disagree with your view on Wikileaks, but it's nice that people on slashdot are finally noticing what those of us who express minority opinions have known for years - when there's a political discussion on slashdot, the minority view will almost always be modded down, in good part because the lower your karma, the fewer posts you can make, and thus it makes it look like one side "wins" the argument because the mod system prevents the opposing view from being able to post comments.
This is why I think they need to devise some sort of accountability system (such as having to post an explanation for WHY you modded as you did) for people with mod points.
I disagree. I think he's a hero because he's standing up for the notion of "government of the people, by the people, and for the people". You can't have a democracy (or a democratic republic, which the US technically is) if the government keeps most of the important information about what the government does a secret.
Agreed. While I don't always approve of the things Anonymous does (such as what they did to Boxxy), you can't deny that they know how to get things done.
Seriously, am I the only who's thought about what we could do if we could get get Anonymous to focus on digging up information on corrupt politicians / cops / other government employees?
Yes, specialization is what drives society forward - but just because you're the best Nuclear Physicist on the planet doesn't mean that you can't also know how to change your oil and windshield wipers or replace a hard drive.
Hell, look back through history and examine the most brilliant scientists and inventors - they all knew about multiple subjects. Why? Because a truly brilliant person wants to know as much as they can about as many things as they can.
Classic Slashtard mentality. You know a lot about computers so you think yourself some intellectual fucking superstar, and belittle those who are doing more important things than swapping out motherboards.
Bullshit. It's not about "having more important things to do" and you can't afford 20 minutes, it's about being too lazy to bother to learn something and instead pay way more than necessary to have someone else do what you could easily do yourself. Even the busiest CEO alive can take 5 minutes (or less) to swap out a hard drive. Those who are dependent upon others for everything eventually end up losing everything.
Exactly. I wrote a blog post saying pretty much the same thing a few months ago. We need to return to what the country was meant to be - a collection of individual States with a Federal government that deals with the interactions between the States. Let people choose the government that they want, don't force it on them.
The Constitution IS "the thoughts of guys born 300 years ago". Good god. That's the whole POINT - that the Constitution established the framework for our liberties and you want to throw them away because "Dude, that's like SO last year". That's a very childish and ignorant attitude to have. The Constitution allows people to choose their own form of government, but it also exists to protect us from the government.
Why should be be protecting anyone in Al-Qaeda? Besides, if he wants to turn traitor, have the guts to do it openly and not be a coward (then again, he's in Al-Qaeda....).
It's one thing to complain about the rule of law being followed, but do you really give a damn about what some guys who were born 300 years ago thought?
Personally, I thought they were damn good ideas, but "sticking to founding ideals" for its own sake personally sounds like a horrible idea to me. The founding fathers were innovative politicans...not prophets.
So you're of the "throw away that pesky Constitution, it keeps me from doing whatever I want to the citizens!" school of government. Those "innovative politicians" foresaw people like you and wrote the Constitution with that in mind to help protect us against you.
I never said that they didn't - but everyone's too busy flaming to think about what I actually said. I merely pointed out that they don't know or care about the hardware and thus pay more (the person I replied to mentioned how Mac users are subsidizing the development of this technology). Just like how people who know nothing about cars end up paying more at a car dealer - those who are knowledgeable will know when they're getting a fair deal or not.
But yes, I'm a "troll" for pointing out that people who don't know much about what they're buying end up paying more money.
It's a serious crime to alert people that the government is lying?
Is it safe to assume then that you support the DHS's new policy of labeling anyone who disapproves of the naked-scope & grope policies of the TSA to be a domestic terrorist?
In particular, the reason I think those who leaked this (not those who published it) should be tried for high treason, is that it undermines the trust that our allies have in us to be able to keep a secret and therefore reduces our ability to attract more allies in regions of conflict in the future.
I have a wacky idea - the government could just be honest and not dick people over - then this wouldn't be an issue because these documents wouldn't exist.
What advantage does it have? It'll load your program / files off your hard drive significantly faster and boot faster (the best SATA is only 6 Gbps). I don't know about you, but I can definitely see people being happier that their system / files load 66.667% faster.
Apple customers will subsidize the adoption of this technology, so I can buy a similar laptop in 6 mos for much cheaper.
Thank you Steven Q Jobs!:)
Quite true, and based on Apple's advertising and my own person experiences with Mac users, they won't even know / care about the new technology. I'm not bashing Mac users here, just pointing out that (with the exception of two people I know who are IT consultants), all the Mac users I know have little understanding about hardware, nor do they care to know about the hardware.
First off, you find raising kids fun. Many don't. Saying "raising kids is lots of fun" is a statement of opinion, not a fact. I'll rely on statistics and assume that you enjoy watching sports - however, many do not. See? Fun is a subjective term and everyone has their own idea of what is fun. You cannot tell people what is fun and what is not, you can only state your opinion about what you find fun.
Secondly, your comment on "sound demographics" sounds an awful lot like "force people to have kids". Why do you think the population MUST keep increasing? Why isn't the current population fine - or perhaps one lower than we currently have? For every person who doesn't want kids, there's some moron having a dozen or two (see the Duggar family). The survival of the human race isn't even remotely in danger, plus it's long been noticed that there's a correlation between an increase in women's education / professional achievement and having fewer (or no) kids. Why? Because they have something that they have to give up that they didn't have to lose back in the days of them being (metaphorically) chained in the kitchen.
Thirdly, "sound economic policy" has jack shit to do with individuals and everything to do with the laws and economic policies that politicians implement. You also seem to believe in the bullshit of a "social contract" in which I'm somehow obligated to do things for you just because they'd benefit you. I'm not, nor are you required to do anything for me. You seem to be very much against free will and very much of the "You'll do what I goddamn tell you!" mentality (which leads me to form an assumption about your political affiliations). Just to see if I'm right, please, tell me - I'll give you my guess afterwards. =)
Fourthly, why do we need more kids? The population of the planet is still increasing rapidly - why should people who could have successful and meaningful lives throw them away on having kids? How many female researchers who don't have kids are contributing to furthering science and improving society? If you want to be a martyr, go for it - however, you don't have any right to tell me that I have to have a lower quality life just so that you can try to achieve a "utopia" where everyone has kids dragging them down.
Lastly, when the hell did I mention religion? Never. I said that you follow what society tells you is the "right" path.
The fact that you refuse to acknowledge that there are ups and downs to kids and that people should view both sides of the argument before deciding is exactly why there are so many people with unwanted kids and so many kids with crappy home lives. Have an honest discussion, not this shit of "You're a horrible person if you don't have kids and you'll burn in hell!"
Go make and raise some kids and let them learn some games. That is a fun, rewarding, and quite complex game. All stages of it.
[Citation Needed]
Seriously, different people have different wants, opinions, and desires. You may find having kids fun - I don't, so I won't have any. I have too many things I want to do (games to play, places to travel to, books to read, etc) to afford the massive time drain that is children (not to mention the annoyance factor, which if you claim kids aren't annoying, you're lying - even the most "Kids are so wonderful!" mother admits that her kids get on her frakking nerves). Also, your claim of "the biggest use for games is learning hot to learn fast" - hardly. That may be a side effect, but the biggest use for games is to have fun. You seem to have fallen into the trap that so many do of thinking that "being an adult == not having fun". When I was a kid my parents followed that and kept pressuring me to be miserable because if you're not hating life, you're obviously immature and not working hard enough. Now I'm an adult, work full time (and then some) and I'm in grad school so I'm incredibly busy - yet I still find time to have fun and enjoy my life.
But again, everyone has different desires. Your goal in life may be to have kids and have what society tells you is a "fulfilling life" - if that works for you, then that's great. My goal in life is to enjoy myself, regardless of if society approves of how I do it. Don't try to tell him what to do in order for him to enjoy his life, because only he knows what will make him happy.
Well they can easily do the same thing if you buy a macro lens attachment for a cell phone camera (I have an Evo and yes, the camera is pretty "meh", but I've seen some amazingly high quality stuff from people using the macro lens attachment on an Evo).
Update on price - I just logged into GOG.com and saw the pre-order information, it's $44.99 (I thought $9.99 seemed insanely low for a new game, but you never know).
I understand pirating games with DRM (why pay a company to screw you over), but since the game is DRM-free, there's no excuse to pirate it. I just bought a few games from GOG.com the other day and seeing as how their most expensive game is $9.99, that eliminates the "but it's expensive.." argument too.
Slashdot Mirror
Wrong. Your karma limits your number of posts per day. The higher your karma, the more you can post (I believe excellent gives unlimited posting). If you have bad karma you're limited to 3 posts per 24 hours, good karma is 20-something posts per 24 hours.
Don't believe me? Ask cowboyneil.
I'm wagering that there's more than that in there. I'm wondering, on the smaller scale, how you would feel if everything you said about your wife in private were to be dropped on her lap. That's one form of damage from these releases.
Perhaps people should try being honest?
Well, I disagree with your view on Wikileaks, but it's nice that people on slashdot are finally noticing what those of us who express minority opinions have known for years - when there's a political discussion on slashdot, the minority view will almost always be modded down, in good part because the lower your karma, the fewer posts you can make, and thus it makes it look like one side "wins" the argument because the mod system prevents the opposing view from being able to post comments.
This is why I think they need to devise some sort of accountability system (such as having to post an explanation for WHY you modded as you did) for people with mod points.
I disagree. I think he's a hero because he's standing up for the notion of "government of the people, by the people, and for the people". You can't have a democracy (or a democratic republic, which the US technically is) if the government keeps most of the important information about what the government does a secret.
Agreed. While I don't always approve of the things Anonymous does (such as what they did to Boxxy), you can't deny that they know how to get things done.
Seriously, am I the only who's thought about what we could do if we could get get Anonymous to focus on digging up information on corrupt politicians / cops / other government employees?
Yes, specialization is what drives society forward - but just because you're the best Nuclear Physicist on the planet doesn't mean that you can't also know how to change your oil and windshield wipers or replace a hard drive.
Hell, look back through history and examine the most brilliant scientists and inventors - they all knew about multiple subjects. Why? Because a truly brilliant person wants to know as much as they can about as many things as they can.
Classic Slashtard mentality. You know a lot about computers so you think yourself some intellectual fucking superstar, and belittle those who are doing more important things than swapping out motherboards.
Bullshit. It's not about "having more important things to do" and you can't afford 20 minutes, it's about being too lazy to bother to learn something and instead pay way more than necessary to have someone else do what you could easily do yourself. Even the busiest CEO alive can take 5 minutes (or less) to swap out a hard drive. Those who are dependent upon others for everything eventually end up losing everything.
Exactly. I wrote a blog post saying pretty much the same thing a few months ago. We need to return to what the country was meant to be - a collection of individual States with a Federal government that deals with the interactions between the States. Let people choose the government that they want, don't force it on them.
The Constitution IS "the thoughts of guys born 300 years ago". Good god. That's the whole POINT - that the Constitution established the framework for our liberties and you want to throw them away because "Dude, that's like SO last year". That's a very childish and ignorant attitude to have. The Constitution allows people to choose their own form of government, but it also exists to protect us from the government.
Go read the Constitution.
Why should be be protecting anyone in Al-Qaeda? Besides, if he wants to turn traitor, have the guts to do it openly and not be a coward (then again, he's in Al-Qaeda....).
Honestly? Probably the same thing US citizens think of Canada - which is to say, we normally don't think about you at all, good or bad.
It's one thing to complain about the rule of law being followed, but do you really give a damn about what some guys who were born 300 years ago thought?
Personally, I thought they were damn good ideas, but "sticking to founding ideals" for its own sake personally sounds like a horrible idea to me. The founding fathers were innovative politicans...not prophets.
So you're of the "throw away that pesky Constitution, it keeps me from doing whatever I want to the citizens!" school of government. Those "innovative politicians" foresaw people like you and wrote the Constitution with that in mind to help protect us against you.
I never said that they didn't - but everyone's too busy flaming to think about what I actually said. I merely pointed out that they don't know or care about the hardware and thus pay more (the person I replied to mentioned how Mac users are subsidizing the development of this technology). Just like how people who know nothing about cars end up paying more at a car dealer - those who are knowledgeable will know when they're getting a fair deal or not.
But yes, I'm a "troll" for pointing out that people who don't know much about what they're buying end up paying more money.
It's a serious crime to alert people that the government is lying?
Is it safe to assume then that you support the DHS's new policy of labeling anyone who disapproves of the naked-scope & grope policies of the TSA to be a domestic terrorist?
In particular, the reason I think those who leaked this (not those who published it) should be tried for high treason, is that it undermines the trust that our allies have in us to be able to keep a secret and therefore reduces our ability to attract more allies in regions of conflict in the future.
I have a wacky idea - the government could just be honest and not dick people over - then this wouldn't be an issue because these documents wouldn't exist.
What advantage does it have? It'll load your program / files off your hard drive significantly faster and boot faster (the best SATA is only 6 Gbps). I don't know about you, but I can definitely see people being happier that their system / files load 66.667% faster.
Apple customers will subsidize the adoption of this technology, so I can buy a similar laptop in 6 mos for much cheaper.
Thank you Steven Q Jobs! :)
Quite true, and based on Apple's advertising and my own person experiences with Mac users, they won't even know / care about the new technology. I'm not bashing Mac users here, just pointing out that (with the exception of two people I know who are IT consultants), all the Mac users I know have little understanding about hardware, nor do they care to know about the hardware.
First off, you find raising kids fun. Many don't. Saying "raising kids is lots of fun" is a statement of opinion, not a fact. I'll rely on statistics and assume that you enjoy watching sports - however, many do not. See? Fun is a subjective term and everyone has their own idea of what is fun. You cannot tell people what is fun and what is not, you can only state your opinion about what you find fun.
Secondly, your comment on "sound demographics" sounds an awful lot like "force people to have kids". Why do you think the population MUST keep increasing? Why isn't the current population fine - or perhaps one lower than we currently have? For every person who doesn't want kids, there's some moron having a dozen or two (see the Duggar family). The survival of the human race isn't even remotely in danger, plus it's long been noticed that there's a correlation between an increase in women's education / professional achievement and having fewer (or no) kids. Why? Because they have something that they have to give up that they didn't have to lose back in the days of them being (metaphorically) chained in the kitchen.
Thirdly, "sound economic policy" has jack shit to do with individuals and everything to do with the laws and economic policies that politicians implement. You also seem to believe in the bullshit of a "social contract" in which I'm somehow obligated to do things for you just because they'd benefit you. I'm not, nor are you required to do anything for me. You seem to be very much against free will and very much of the "You'll do what I goddamn tell you!" mentality (which leads me to form an assumption about your political affiliations). Just to see if I'm right, please, tell me - I'll give you my guess afterwards. =)
Fourthly, why do we need more kids? The population of the planet is still increasing rapidly - why should people who could have successful and meaningful lives throw them away on having kids? How many female researchers who don't have kids are contributing to furthering science and improving society? If you want to be a martyr, go for it - however, you don't have any right to tell me that I have to have a lower quality life just so that you can try to achieve a "utopia" where everyone has kids dragging them down.
Lastly, when the hell did I mention religion? Never. I said that you follow what society tells you is the "right" path.
The fact that you refuse to acknowledge that there are ups and downs to kids and that people should view both sides of the argument before deciding is exactly why there are so many people with unwanted kids and so many kids with crappy home lives. Have an honest discussion, not this shit of "You're a horrible person if you don't have kids and you'll burn in hell!"
There is no "social contract". The whole notion of a "social contract" was invented by people trying to force others to behave in a certain way.
Go make and raise some kids and let them learn some games. That is a fun, rewarding, and quite complex game. All stages of it.
[Citation Needed]
Seriously, different people have different wants, opinions, and desires. You may find having kids fun - I don't, so I won't have any. I have too many things I want to do (games to play, places to travel to, books to read, etc) to afford the massive time drain that is children (not to mention the annoyance factor, which if you claim kids aren't annoying, you're lying - even the most "Kids are so wonderful!" mother admits that her kids get on her frakking nerves). Also, your claim of "the biggest use for games is learning hot to learn fast" - hardly. That may be a side effect, but the biggest use for games is to have fun. You seem to have fallen into the trap that so many do of thinking that "being an adult == not having fun". When I was a kid my parents followed that and kept pressuring me to be miserable because if you're not hating life, you're obviously immature and not working hard enough. Now I'm an adult, work full time (and then some) and I'm in grad school so I'm incredibly busy - yet I still find time to have fun and enjoy my life.
But again, everyone has different desires. Your goal in life may be to have kids and have what society tells you is a "fulfilling life" - if that works for you, then that's great. My goal in life is to enjoy myself, regardless of if society approves of how I do it. Don't try to tell him what to do in order for him to enjoy his life, because only he knows what will make him happy.
Well they can easily do the same thing if you buy a macro lens attachment for a cell phone camera (I have an Evo and yes, the camera is pretty "meh", but I've seen some amazingly high quality stuff from people using the macro lens attachment on an Evo).
Better yet, give them a COUNTERFEIT $20 bill so that they get arrested and they'll end up on the receiving end of an involuntary groping.
Dogs have masters.
Cats have staff.
Which implies that dog owners are smarter than cat owners because they're not servants to an animals that licks it's own ass.
Update on price - I just logged into GOG.com and saw the pre-order information, it's $44.99 (I thought $9.99 seemed insanely low for a new game, but you never know).
I understand pirating games with DRM (why pay a company to screw you over), but since the game is DRM-free, there's no excuse to pirate it. I just bought a few games from GOG.com the other day and seeing as how their most expensive game is $9.99, that eliminates the "but it's expensive.." argument too.
I'm aware - I wasn't commenting on that, I was merely commenting on the person's assertion that you can't consider $4 million self-sustaining.