So your position is that you can model the global climate with a high school science project more accurately than can all the climatologists in the world. Perhaps while you're at it you'd like to use the water-in-pipes model for electricity to disprove quantum mechanics?
No, damn it. False equivalency. One side lies about it for political gain, the other is desperately trying to get the public to understand that it is a scientifically accepted truth that must be dealt with.
Tell me, in what way would flooding in NYC and global famine not affect our security?
I find it very difficult to believe that a die shrink would improve battery life by that much. Given the amount of energy used by the screen and the radios, you could probably remove the CPU entirely and not see a 30% power reduction.
Either they fixed some other issues, or else the power savings are being exaggerated. Did the old processor have an extremely high sleep current, perhaps?
I know you're joking, but a lot of other people aren't and I can't respond to all of them. McAfee (the person) hasn't had anything to do with McAfee (the malware company) for nearly twenty years. He does pharmaceutical research now, and has nearly blown through his entire fortune in the process. Perhaps that's why he could no longer afford to pay the protection money...er, I mean, make the "political donations".
They give themselves excessive compensation. Remember, the company is controlled by a board made up of the CEO's buddies, and the CEO likewise sits on the boards of their companies. They all vote to rob the shareholders, and the shareholders can't do shit about it. Heck, its only thanks to Obama that we even get to have a non-binding vote on compensation. Prior to that we couldn't even complain as they robbed us. And it's not like we can take our money elsewhere, because every big company does it, and if you don't invest somewhere, you'll never be able to retire.
Seriously, if you ever want to feel utterly helpless and abused, try to vote your shares.
What a coincidence! Personally, I don't really care or have a strong opinion about whether or not Elvin is alive, but I think he has been chilling with Kurt Cobain in upstate New York for years now. It makes more sense than the alternatives, in my opinion.
Are you conspiracy theorists for real? How can anyone be that stupid without choking to death on their own tongue?
It's not like OBL's biggest worries were the contents of his USB sticks should hostile individuals be present in his home.
That depends on whether his chief concern was his own life or that of his associates. If he really gave two shits about his fellow terrorists, he would have encrypted the data to protect them in the event of his discovery. OBL: selfish, stupid, or both. No surprises there.
No worries, the visible light spectrum is already being regulated. If you don't believe me, feel free to set up a 1500 watt spotlight pointing towards oncoming traffic on your street tonight. Let us know how it turns out.
Without the original innovation, what is there to imitate?
Someone else's innovation, of course.
Company A has an innovation. Company B imitates it, allowing Company B to catch up, since imitating is easier than innovating. Company B starts making further innovations on the original design, "standing on the shoulders of giants" and all that. Company A, desperate, turns to litigation to hold Company B down. That eventually fails, and Company A disintegrates, leaving Company B as the market leader and innovator...but here comes Company C.
That argument only works if you presume the people the FBI is catching are truly terrorists, in which case you're conceding the very point at the heart of the discussion.
Well, he got modded up, so there's your answer. Truth is dead, buried, and pissed on. What matters now is who can come up with the most blood-boiling lies. Cpu6502, or more accurately, whoever he's parroting, is a tremendously talented liar, and that counts for a hell of a lot more than knowledge these days.
At most, the Milgram experiment suggests that ~2/3 of people are corruptible. And a key part of the test was that respected authority figures were giving the orders. It likely doesn't work quite as well when the person giving the orders is someone perceived to be a criminal. Not to mention the difference between administering shocks and murder.
People give in in an interrogation because they feel (often correctly) that they can't get out of the situation until they give in.
So tell me, was the suspect in this case locked in a room with the FBI agents as they pressured him to join in their terrorist plot? No? Then it's not even remotely comparable. The guy should have called the cops, or submitted an anonymous tip, or at the very least stopped talking to the people he thought were soon-to-be mass murderers.
1) He traveled overland from Budapest to Germany. That's like a seven hour drive. Would you just leave a flash drive chafing in your nether regions all that time?
2) You know I wasn't agreeing. You intentionally split my statement. Man, you must have rocked at debate club with logic skills like that.
3) Nice line drawing fallacy. Let me make this simple for you. If I toss a coin, and it comes up heads four times in a row, that's chance. If I toss a coin and it comes up heads forty times in a row, I can be quite confident that it's not a fair coin.
4) No, if the odds are sufficiently remote, it doesn't need anything else to meet the "reasonable doubt" criterion. You can always concoct some remote set of circumstances that would get someone off the hook. "I didn't kill him, it was my long lost twin brother!" That's what the "reasonable" part of "reasonable doubt" is for.
5) You expected me to Google for a real number on "what percentage of security is theater"? Really? Really? Okay, you go Google it for me. Go get me the real number I should have posted.
6) Pointing out that you used a strawman fallacy isn't an ad hominim (sic). Ad hominem isn't Latin for "thing I disagree with".
He wasn't in Pakistan, nor coming from there, when he was found with the porn. Read the fine article before spouting off like you know what you're talking about.
As for your dismissals of his travel to Pakistan and his traveling companion, I suggest you look up Bayesian inference. Some coincidences happen. But as evidence piles up, it becomes less and less likely to all be one big coincidence. The odds of this guy having two video files, both containing hidden terrorist documents, hidden in his underwear, shortly after a trip to Pakistan, while rebelling with a suspected terrorist are remote to say the least.
And BTW, of course my "90%" of security is theater stat was made up on the spot. I never tried to pass it off as a real number. Nor did I say anything that even remotely suggested we try to find the IPs of people sharing these files. Pro tip: if you need to invent straw men to argue against, don't even bother posting.
So it just so happens that two videos on this guy's drive both contained Al Qaeda files? And he was smuggling them in his underpants because... he thinks porn is illegal? And it's just a coincidence that he was recently in Pakistan? And another coincidence that he was traveling with a man suspected of setting up the German branch of the Taliban?
Come on, I know that 90% of anti-terrorism security is just theatre, and so we're conditioned to dismiss any successes it claims, but be rational.
And anyway, there's an easy way to check -- go on the various torrent sites and download all the distinct copies of "Kick Ass" and "Sexy Tanja" you can find. Are any of them exact matches for the files this guy was transporting? If no, he's guilty. If yes, we gain valuable information on how Al Qaeda is communicating, and some lucky federal agent gets the job to download porn all day.
If they negotiated the amount they would be paid based on the residuals, then they're entitled to them. How would you feel if your employer paid part of your compensation in stock options and then simply decided years later to take them back against your will? Would you honestly just figure "oh well, I drew a salary, that's all I deserve"? I doubt it.
A better statement of the law (which I came up with myself before hearing of Betteridge) is that if a headline asks a question, the correct answer is the obvious one. They're insinuating its the non-obvious one to get more viewers, but if it really were the non-obvious one, they'd be announcing it as fact.
Doesn't fit on a bumper stick quite as nicely, but it works better in practice.
Seven Democrats, and nine Republicans. Who do you think is in charge?
Now, time for your civics lesson. Go to the department webpage, scroll down to the Strategic Forces subcommittee markup, watch the little five minute video, and read the attached file (search for the word "laser").
What you'll find is that the truth is a lot more banal than what gets printed in the papers. They're requesting an extra $30 million to keep to project in stasis while they look into whether or not it should really be shut down. The whole thing is a couple paragraphs out of over 200 pages. The Democrats had some concerns with the proposal, but those don't get announced yet -- instead, they're submitted in writing sometime in the next week.
This is small potatoes. Really small potatoes. If we reach the point where they're seriously considering funding this, then complain and point fingers. For now, its a handful of people asking a slightly larger group to ask an even larger group to spend 0.004% of the military's budget on looking into whether or not this project is worth preserving.
Even leaving aside Obama's veto threat, the bill was voted against by 75% of the Democrats in the House. If it gets a similar percentage in the Senate, they can filibuster it without any GOP crossovers.
Your fatalism isn't doing anyone any good. Actually, that's not true, I'm sure the Republicans love it. When was the last time you called your congresscritters?
You're describing a race to the bottom. It ends in the death of the first world lifestyle. Fuck that. We should charge corporations what we think is reasonable, and if they don't like it, then strip their executives of citizenship and kick them out. If Ballmer had to choose between living in Somalia or helping pay for the civilization he enjoys living in, I suspect he'd suddenly come to a very different conclusion about what level of taxes is acceptable.
So what is it that the Washington state government is doing that it shouldn't be? Or the federal government, if you're not a Washingtonian? What would you cut to balance the budget, while still allowing the government to do the things you say it should?
Our problem isn't an overspending one. We did just fine in decades past spending more as a percentage of GDP than we do now. The truth is that the Republicans like to spout lies about how wasteful government is as an excuse to eviscerate it, and then pass the savings on to their wealthy donors.
Slashdot Mirror
So your position is that you can model the global climate with a high school science project more accurately than can all the climatologists in the world. Perhaps while you're at it you'd like to use the water-in-pipes model for electricity to disprove quantum mechanics?
No, damn it. False equivalency. One side lies about it for political gain, the other is desperately trying to get the public to understand that it is a scientifically accepted truth that must be dealt with.
Tell me, in what way would flooding in NYC and global famine not affect our security?
You not only read the article, but made it all the way to page four? I salute you, sir.
I find it very difficult to believe that a die shrink would improve battery life by that much. Given the amount of energy used by the screen and the radios, you could probably remove the CPU entirely and not see a 30% power reduction.
Either they fixed some other issues, or else the power savings are being exaggerated. Did the old processor have an extremely high sleep current, perhaps?
*psst* You might wanna check a map.
I know you're joking, but a lot of other people aren't and I can't respond to all of them. McAfee (the person) hasn't had anything to do with McAfee (the malware company) for nearly twenty years. He does pharmaceutical research now, and has nearly blown through his entire fortune in the process. Perhaps that's why he could no longer afford to pay the protection money ...er, I mean, make the "political donations".
They give themselves excessive compensation. Remember, the company is controlled by a board made up of the CEO's buddies, and the CEO likewise sits on the boards of their companies. They all vote to rob the shareholders, and the shareholders can't do shit about it. Heck, its only thanks to Obama that we even get to have a non-binding vote on compensation. Prior to that we couldn't even complain as they robbed us. And it's not like we can take our money elsewhere, because every big company does it, and if you don't invest somewhere, you'll never be able to retire.
Seriously, if you ever want to feel utterly helpless and abused, try to vote your shares.
What a coincidence! Personally, I don't really care or have a strong opinion about whether or not Elvin is alive, but I think he has been chilling with Kurt Cobain in upstate New York for years now. It makes more sense than the alternatives, in my opinion.
Are you conspiracy theorists for real? How can anyone be that stupid without choking to death on their own tongue?
It's not like OBL's biggest worries were the contents of his USB sticks should hostile individuals be present in his home.
That depends on whether his chief concern was his own life or that of his associates. If he really gave two shits about his fellow terrorists, he would have encrypted the data to protect them in the event of his discovery. OBL: selfish, stupid, or both. No surprises there.
No worries, the visible light spectrum is already being regulated. If you don't believe me, feel free to set up a 1500 watt spotlight pointing towards oncoming traffic on your street tonight. Let us know how it turns out.
Without the original innovation, what is there to imitate?
Someone else's innovation, of course.
Company A has an innovation. ...but here comes Company C.
Company B imitates it, allowing Company B to catch up, since imitating is easier than innovating.
Company B starts making further innovations on the original design, "standing on the shoulders of giants" and all that.
Company A, desperate, turns to litigation to hold Company B down.
That eventually fails, and Company A disintegrates, leaving Company B as the market leader and innovator
Well, looks like you didn't need to wait long! This time the shill is "TehTech". You'd think they would be more creative with the nicks.
That argument only works if you presume the people the FBI is catching are truly terrorists, in which case you're conceding the very point at the heart of the discussion.
Well, he got modded up, so there's your answer. Truth is dead, buried, and pissed on. What matters now is who can come up with the most blood-boiling lies. Cpu6502, or more accurately, whoever he's parroting, is a tremendously talented liar, and that counts for a hell of a lot more than knowledge these days.
At most, the Milgram experiment suggests that ~2/3 of people are corruptible. And a key part of the test was that respected authority figures were giving the orders. It likely doesn't work quite as well when the person giving the orders is someone perceived to be a criminal. Not to mention the difference between administering shocks and murder.
People give in in an interrogation because they feel (often correctly) that they can't get out of the situation until they give in.
So tell me, was the suspect in this case locked in a room with the FBI agents as they pressured him to join in their terrorist plot? No? Then it's not even remotely comparable. The guy should have called the cops, or submitted an anonymous tip, or at the very least stopped talking to the people he thought were soon-to-be mass murderers.
1) He traveled overland from Budapest to Germany. That's like a seven hour drive. Would you just leave a flash drive chafing in your nether regions all that time?
2) You know I wasn't agreeing. You intentionally split my statement. Man, you must have rocked at debate club with logic skills like that.
3) Nice line drawing fallacy. Let me make this simple for you. If I toss a coin, and it comes up heads four times in a row, that's chance. If I toss a coin and it comes up heads forty times in a row, I can be quite confident that it's not a fair coin.
4) No, if the odds are sufficiently remote, it doesn't need anything else to meet the "reasonable doubt" criterion. You can always concoct some remote set of circumstances that would get someone off the hook. "I didn't kill him, it was my long lost twin brother!" That's what the "reasonable" part of "reasonable doubt" is for.
5) You expected me to Google for a real number on "what percentage of security is theater"? Really? Really? Okay, you go Google it for me. Go get me the real number I should have posted.
6) Pointing out that you used a strawman fallacy isn't an ad hominim (sic). Ad hominem isn't Latin for "thing I disagree with".
He wasn't in Pakistan, nor coming from there, when he was found with the porn. Read the fine article before spouting off like you know what you're talking about.
As for your dismissals of his travel to Pakistan and his traveling companion, I suggest you look up Bayesian inference. Some coincidences happen. But as evidence piles up, it becomes less and less likely to all be one big coincidence. The odds of this guy having two video files, both containing hidden terrorist documents, hidden in his underwear, shortly after a trip to Pakistan, while rebelling with a suspected terrorist are remote to say the least.
And BTW, of course my "90%" of security is theater stat was made up on the spot. I never tried to pass it off as a real number. Nor did I say anything that even remotely suggested we try to find the IPs of people sharing these files. Pro tip: if you need to invent straw men to argue against, don't even bother posting.
So it just so happens that two videos on this guy's drive both contained Al Qaeda files? And he was smuggling them in his underpants because... he thinks porn is illegal? And it's just a coincidence that he was recently in Pakistan? And another coincidence that he was traveling with a man suspected of setting up the German branch of the Taliban?
Come on, I know that 90% of anti-terrorism security is just theatre, and so we're conditioned to dismiss any successes it claims, but be rational.
And anyway, there's an easy way to check -- go on the various torrent sites and download all the distinct copies of "Kick Ass" and "Sexy Tanja" you can find. Are any of them exact matches for the files this guy was transporting? If no, he's guilty. If yes, we gain valuable information on how Al Qaeda is communicating, and some lucky federal agent gets the job to download porn all day.
If they negotiated the amount they would be paid based on the residuals, then they're entitled to them. How would you feel if your employer paid part of your compensation in stock options and then simply decided years later to take them back against your will? Would you honestly just figure "oh well, I drew a salary, that's all I deserve"? I doubt it.
A better statement of the law (which I came up with myself before hearing of Betteridge) is that if a headline asks a question, the correct answer is the obvious one. They're insinuating its the non-obvious one to get more viewers, but if it really were the non-obvious one, they'd be announcing it as fact.
Doesn't fit on a bumper stick quite as nicely, but it works better in practice.
Seven Democrats, and nine Republicans. Who do you think is in charge?
Now, time for your civics lesson. Go to the department webpage, scroll down to the Strategic Forces subcommittee markup, watch the little five minute video, and read the attached file (search for the word "laser").
What you'll find is that the truth is a lot more banal than what gets printed in the papers. They're requesting an extra $30 million to keep to project in stasis while they look into whether or not it should really be shut down. The whole thing is a couple paragraphs out of over 200 pages. The Democrats had some concerns with the proposal, but those don't get announced yet -- instead, they're submitted in writing sometime in the next week.
This is small potatoes. Really small potatoes. If we reach the point where they're seriously considering funding this, then complain and point fingers. For now, its a handful of people asking a slightly larger group to ask an even larger group to spend 0.004% of the military's budget on looking into whether or not this project is worth preserving.
Even leaving aside Obama's veto threat, the bill was voted against by 75% of the Democrats in the House. If it gets a similar percentage in the Senate, they can filibuster it without any GOP crossovers.
Your fatalism isn't doing anyone any good. Actually, that's not true, I'm sure the Republicans love it. When was the last time you called your congresscritters?
You're describing a race to the bottom. It ends in the death of the first world lifestyle. Fuck that. We should charge corporations what we think is reasonable, and if they don't like it, then strip their executives of citizenship and kick them out. If Ballmer had to choose between living in Somalia or helping pay for the civilization he enjoys living in, I suspect he'd suddenly come to a very different conclusion about what level of taxes is acceptable.
So what is it that the Washington state government is doing that it shouldn't be? Or the federal government, if you're not a Washingtonian? What would you cut to balance the budget, while still allowing the government to do the things you say it should?
Our problem isn't an overspending one. We did just fine in decades past spending more as a percentage of GDP than we do now. The truth is that the Republicans like to spout lies about how wasteful government is as an excuse to eviscerate it, and then pass the savings on to their wealthy donors.