You are right about everything except one. The older generations do know things, actually they know better. Look at Noam Chomsky, the Nobel-winning mathematician.
No matter how rationally and how objectively he put forth his arguments, the mainstream media successfully portrayed him as a conspiracy theorist.
Heck, the mainstream media even marooned (figuratively) Albert Einstein because his political views were socialist. He was also one of the first to understand media's role in imperialism. But when the latter's success in science grew beyond certain level, media just couldn't contain him anymore. So they came up with the "a genius working in dungeons of science without any time to think about politics" image for him, thus shaking off any need to publicize his political views.
Then there was Howard Zinn, who passed away recently.
These days, the media reich has coined the term "alternative history" to refer to the publications of Zinn, Chomsky and such. It has successfully brought the intended negative connotation to these people's work.
The internet is also a great danger to the world. It allows the propaganda-partners of big corporations (especially oil companies and arms companies) to convince people about the existence of WMDs, etc.
Stay silent. By letting people know that US bombed a Chinese embassy, you're dealing against forces that are more powerful than you'll ever understand. Unless you want to get FBI to spy on you, stay silent.
So far, there's no proof. All we have are presuppositions and rhetorical claims. Hey, I'm not saying Chinese people didn't do it. But still people are so prejudiced that I'll get modded into oblivion.
you are too prejudiced. Evidence? Click the link given in the summary. In the CNN article that comes up, go to the paragraph that starts with "And surveillance infrastructure can be...". Hover your mouse over the link labeled with the word "helped". Your browser's status bar will tell you that it links to yet another article about China's surveillance. You won't open an article that supposedly talks about such an "obvious" thing. But only when you click that link, you will know that it doesn't exist. Apparently, the CNN propagandist is an expert who is aware that you won't click the link. But that is not the issue here. The fact that nobody complained about this, either in the CNN site or here on Slashdot, tells volumes about how prejudiced the public is and how badly the propagandists are exploiting it.
but I really don't like this idea that they are somehow as bad as the Taliban in their regard for human life.
Actually, the US government's worse. The Taliban are just fighting the troops that invaded their country. The US government, OTOH, are a corporatocracy whose foreign policy is dictated entirely by the interests of powerful corporations, especially the oil companies and the arms manufacturers. War is a profitable business for arms manufacturers, which is why new ruses for war are constantly being invented. Have a look at this - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arms_industry#World.27s_largest_arms_exporters
I would like to know what the U.S. contingency plan is for war with China. Look at almost any product in the U.S. today, and it is from China. If we declare war with them, do we suddenly have no more imported goods? This is not a scenario that I like to ponder.
Simple. You'll buy products from American corporations. Double benefit: on one hand, you rescue American companies out of the economic depression and on the other hand, you make Chinese companies lose.
I'm sure the "attack" will be successful enough to give credibility to all the recent hacking-related stories. And the "response" will be successful enough to justify future funding for "Cyber Control Force", "Strategic CyberWar command", etc.
I understand your point about piracy. Pirates are committing a crime by not paying for the software they use. GPL violators, OTOH, are making money without writing code and without giving anything in return. They neither negotiate development sponsorships like RedHat nor pay royalties nor give credit. Which is a more serious crime?
GPL is the reason why we have Linux and several other free software. Many people voluntarily contribute to GPL'd projects without receiving anything in return. So GPL violation is not just a legal issue but a moral issue as well. I think it's fair enough to point out a GPL violation whenever there's a chance.
I pity the independent singer songwriter or now author who is blamed as part of the economic ecosystem of this mess. They may have a stigma attached to them they cannot shake and cannot grow beyond.
Why would/should independent artists be blamed? The blame lies totally with those who signed up as members of RIAA.
Slashdot Mirror
to comment (4 or 5 months ago) that IDG news is a biased, paid up, propagandist, political mouthpiece. I was modded as a troll, back then.
You just suspect it. I'm pretty sure the latest accusation by Google is just a drama that is part of the Google-Feds relationship.
You are right about everything except one. The older generations do know things, actually they know better. Look at Noam Chomsky, the Nobel-winning mathematician.
http://www.chomsky.info/
http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Chomsky/Noam_Chomsky.html
No matter how rationally and how objectively he put forth his arguments, the mainstream media successfully portrayed him as a conspiracy theorist.
Heck, the mainstream media even marooned (figuratively) Albert Einstein because his political views were socialist. He was also one of the first to understand media's role in imperialism. But when the latter's success in science grew beyond certain level, media just couldn't contain him anymore. So they came up with the "a genius working in dungeons of science without any time to think about politics" image for him, thus shaking off any need to publicize his political views.
Then there was Howard Zinn, who passed away recently.
These days, the media reich has coined the term "alternative history" to refer to the publications of Zinn, Chomsky and such. It has successfully brought the intended negative connotation to these people's work.
The internet is also a great danger to the world. It allows the propaganda-partners of big corporations (especially oil companies and arms companies) to convince people about the existence of WMDs, etc.
The fact that your post has been modded as insightful instead of funny, should tell you something.
Stay silent. By letting people know that US bombed a Chinese embassy, you're dealing against forces that are more powerful than you'll ever understand. Unless you want to get FBI to spy on you, stay silent.
... state-sanctioned attacks ...
So far, there's no proof. All we have are presuppositions and rhetorical claims. Hey, I'm not saying Chinese people didn't do it. But still people are so prejudiced that I'll get modded into oblivion.
The public is so prejudiced and so uncritical that even a million "Come on guys"s won't matter.
this one too.
The summary uses the phrase "we already knew". Who knew? and how did they know?
you are too prejudiced. Evidence? Click the link given in the summary. In the CNN article that comes up, go to the paragraph that starts with "And surveillance infrastructure can be ...". Hover your mouse over the link labeled with the word "helped". Your browser's status bar will tell you that it links to yet another article about China's surveillance. You won't open an article that supposedly talks about such an "obvious" thing. But only when you click that link, you will know that it doesn't exist. Apparently, the CNN propagandist is an expert who is aware that you won't click the link. But that is not the issue here. The fact that nobody complained about this, either in the CNN site or here on Slashdot, tells volumes about how prejudiced the public is and how badly the propagandists are exploiting it.
Presuppositions. Or unstated assumptions.
I prefer to read as superficially as possible to pick up basic facts, and use logic and reason to _imagine_ the rest. Saves a lot of time and trouble.
In addition to logic and reason, we'll also need an unprejudiced mind.
but I really don't like this idea that they are somehow as bad as the Taliban in their regard for human life.
Actually, the US government's worse. The Taliban are just fighting the troops that invaded their country. The US government, OTOH, are a corporatocracy whose foreign policy is dictated entirely by the interests of powerful corporations, especially the oil companies and the arms manufacturers. War is a profitable business for arms manufacturers, which is why new ruses for war are constantly being invented. Have a look at this - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arms_industry#World.27s_largest_arms_exporters
I would like to know what the U.S. contingency plan is for war with China. Look at almost any product in the U.S. today, and it is from China. If we declare war with them, do we suddenly have no more imported goods? This is not a scenario that I like to ponder.
Simple. You'll buy products from American corporations. Double benefit: on one hand, you rescue American companies out of the economic depression and on the other hand, you make Chinese companies lose.
The title of a China-related news has the adverb "reportedly". What's the world coming to?
Your link says "they prepared the module's new observation deck for its first opening". Yesterday, preparations only. Today, opened.
At least, they should openly specify the reasons why they chose Google.
Love to. How about Global Hacker War?
No, Linus is the reason why we have Linux. It could've been any other license.
Then it would have died a quick death. See the answer to second question in this Linus Torvalds interview.
I'm sure the "attack" will be successful enough to give credibility to all the recent hacking-related stories. And the "response" will be successful enough to justify future funding for "Cyber Control Force", "Strategic CyberWar command", etc.
I understand your point about piracy. Pirates are committing a crime by not paying for the software they use. GPL violators, OTOH, are making money without writing code and without giving anything in return. They neither negotiate development sponsorships like RedHat nor pay royalties nor give credit. Which is a more serious crime?
GPL is the reason why we have Linux and several other free software. Many people voluntarily contribute to GPL'd projects without receiving anything in return. So GPL violation is not just a legal issue but a moral issue as well. I think it's fair enough to point out a GPL violation whenever there's a chance.
That's the most probable explanation. However if RIAA loses, then the media coverage will bring all the more confidence/boldness to people.
I pity the independent singer songwriter or now author who is blamed as part of the economic ecosystem of this mess. They may have a stigma attached to them they cannot shake and cannot grow beyond.
Why would/should independent artists be blamed? The blame lies totally with those who signed up as members of RIAA.