Would you *really* keep it to yourself if you thought you found evidence of extraterrestrial life? Assume that you see yourself as logical and rational, instead of crazy as this guy seems.
This guy is more intelligent than most of the other replies have given him credit. If every ounce of military information were publicly available, we would not be able to have covert or clandestine military operations. Our enemies would know every move we make. Obviously, the "Collateral Murder" video wasn't some tactical plan, but my point is this: Someone, somewhere, has to make the decision about what should and should not be given out to the world. As the OP pointed out, anyone who decides to release that information must be prepared to suffer the consequences, good or bad. If Manning thought he could just get away with releasing the video and go on with his life, he was wrong.
Section 3. Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court. The Congress shall have power to declare the Punishment of Treason, but no Attainder of Treason shall work Corruption of Blood, or Forfeiture except during the Life of the Person attainted.
Constitution > Webster
I don't think this guy is just "spouting shit." I think he's a bot. A damn good one. I'd say he passed the Turing test based on your response, but not based on mine. I think the flaw is a general lack of structure.
Honestly, I think this may be fake. That article doesn't cite any source, just that "Blizzard announced..." It would be nice if they said that it was at another press tour like the announcement of the map editor and trial of the single player campaign. Also, there's nothing up yet on the official forums, which is where they post follow-ups to announcements like these.
Even common knowledge has to be cited on Wikipedia. Believe me, the many updates I've tried to make, mostly in Latin language/literature articles, have all been revoked despite being in every Latin textbook ever written. But I do believe you that the rule exists, I just wanted to see a source. Oddly enough, I think I never had a McMillan or McGraw textbook for my English classes.
6 Years of Latin, finishing my first year of Greek. That wikipedia article doesn't directly cite a source for the rule that you can use the apostrophe for a plural when just an s "may leave things ambiguous or inelegant." The closest source cited is Purdue's OWL guide, but that one does not cite this rule. My other point still stands, however. Using it in this case is only going to further the rampant misuse of the apostrophe. Justifying it is justifying the blatantly wrong uses, such as adding it to words that have a regular plural.
My languages had a genitive before your language's grandparents were born (Classical Greek and Latin). I certainly understand the use of the apostrophe for any form of possessive, but to use that in a plural is completely wrong! Even if there were some obscure reason it could potentially be right, it has not happened on the internet as a result of some mass grammatical Renaissance. It's people being lazy. If you're so educated, why in the world would you further the agenda of laziness and ignorance?
You're a grammar Nazi who doesn't know not to use an apostrophe as a plural? It's "Xboxes". How hard is that? At worst, just use "xboxs". It's more correct than using an apostrophe, which is *never* to be used for pluralization.
I think you have a few things mistaken. For one, psychological disorders resulting from combat tend to be over rather than under diagnosed. PTSD, for example. They get plenty of care before coming back into civilian life, except for some women having issues getting the proper care (article somewhere around here).
The legitimacy has been decided by the fact that no one cares anymore. We want it over. If you think he committed some kind of crime, go to the courts, not the forums.
They seem to play up the soldiers admittedly unprofessional humor about the shooting. While it is atrocious, it is also one of the things that is required of a soldier. To be able to follow an order to attack, a soldier has to be able to think it isn't bad. Psychological issues arise if they don't. It's one of those things I just consider better that I don't see.
iPhone apps make more money because they all have advertisements perilously close to buttons you push to play the game, causing you to bring up the App store. At which point you say, "Screw this, I'll pay $3 to get the ad-free version." Developers, this is a shitty tactic and I won't put up with it any more.
You're really building yourself up to be this honorable but persecuted person, but you're really not. You've created an excessive moral code that is outside social norms just like someone who could never tell the truth. The inability to function well in society is just as morally wrong as telling small lies. While I thank you for not dumping chemicals down the drain, there is certainly a better way to respond than "No, I won't do it." Perhaps, "This is not SOP. We're going to do it the right way." And then getting something done. When all you do is hold up the system, you ARE the problem.
As someone about to donate a kidney this summer, I really hope they work on this research more. Donor matching is incredibly difficult, and the risk of rejection poses issues not only with the health of the recipient (though that's obviously the major issue), but also with the psychological health of the donor. A failed donation can make you feel like crap.
Slashdot Mirror
When did astrophysicists start peer-reviewing biology-related articles authoritatively?
Would you *really* keep it to yourself if you thought you found evidence of extraterrestrial life? Assume that you see yourself as logical and rational, instead of crazy as this guy seems.
Comment: OMG I knew she was guilty. You go for putting that ***** behind bars!
Do all cars really meet the requirements of the Clean Air Act? I can name a few that I'm pretty sure killed trees as they drove by.
I'm not sure it was a matter of providers who did and did not agree. I doubt the researchers were able to find all of the C&C servers.
This guy is more intelligent than most of the other replies have given him credit. If every ounce of military information were publicly available, we would not be able to have covert or clandestine military operations. Our enemies would know every move we make. Obviously, the "Collateral Murder" video wasn't some tactical plan, but my point is this: Someone, somewhere, has to make the decision about what should and should not be given out to the world. As the OP pointed out, anyone who decides to release that information must be prepared to suffer the consequences, good or bad. If Manning thought he could just get away with releasing the video and go on with his life, he was wrong.
Section 3. Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court. The Congress shall have power to declare the Punishment of Treason, but no Attainder of Treason shall work Corruption of Blood, or Forfeiture except during the Life of the Person attainted. Constitution > Webster
I wonder what the billboards for the local strip clubs will smell like.
I don't think this guy is just "spouting shit." I think he's a bot. A damn good one. I'd say he passed the Turing test based on your response, but not based on mine. I think the flaw is a general lack of structure.
Read the title of his post. He uses RFID keys.
Honestly, I think this may be fake. That article doesn't cite any source, just that "Blizzard announced..." It would be nice if they said that it was at another press tour like the announcement of the map editor and trial of the single player campaign. Also, there's nothing up yet on the official forums, which is where they post follow-ups to announcements like these.
Even common knowledge has to be cited on Wikipedia. Believe me, the many updates I've tried to make, mostly in Latin language/literature articles, have all been revoked despite being in every Latin textbook ever written. But I do believe you that the rule exists, I just wanted to see a source. Oddly enough, I think I never had a McMillan or McGraw textbook for my English classes.
6 Years of Latin, finishing my first year of Greek. That wikipedia article doesn't directly cite a source for the rule that you can use the apostrophe for a plural when just an s "may leave things ambiguous or inelegant." The closest source cited is Purdue's OWL guide, but that one does not cite this rule. My other point still stands, however. Using it in this case is only going to further the rampant misuse of the apostrophe. Justifying it is justifying the blatantly wrong uses, such as adding it to words that have a regular plural.
My languages had a genitive before your language's grandparents were born (Classical Greek and Latin). I certainly understand the use of the apostrophe for any form of possessive, but to use that in a plural is completely wrong! Even if there were some obscure reason it could potentially be right, it has not happened on the internet as a result of some mass grammatical Renaissance. It's people being lazy. If you're so educated, why in the world would you further the agenda of laziness and ignorance?
You're a grammar Nazi who doesn't know not to use an apostrophe as a plural? It's "Xboxes". How hard is that? At worst, just use "xboxs". It's more correct than using an apostrophe, which is *never* to be used for pluralization.
I think you have a few things mistaken. For one, psychological disorders resulting from combat tend to be over rather than under diagnosed. PTSD, for example. They get plenty of care before coming back into civilian life, except for some women having issues getting the proper care (article somewhere around here).
The legitimacy has been decided by the fact that no one cares anymore. We want it over. If you think he committed some kind of crime, go to the courts, not the forums.
You're just a troll. Your sig and your statements both attest to that fact. Face it, Bush-bashing is over. Any issues are now Obama's to handle.
They seem to play up the soldiers admittedly unprofessional humor about the shooting. While it is atrocious, it is also one of the things that is required of a soldier. To be able to follow an order to attack, a soldier has to be able to think it isn't bad. Psychological issues arise if they don't. It's one of those things I just consider better that I don't see.
Something tells me that at the very heart of this entire matter is someone's porn stash hidden on a city computer. Probably the mayor's.
Men like these are all that stand between us and the terrorists who would destroy our internet-based communications.
iPhone apps make more money because they all have advertisements perilously close to buttons you push to play the game, causing you to bring up the App store. At which point you say, "Screw this, I'll pay $3 to get the ad-free version." Developers, this is a shitty tactic and I won't put up with it any more.
Some idiot with a computer and a cable modem.
You're really building yourself up to be this honorable but persecuted person, but you're really not. You've created an excessive moral code that is outside social norms just like someone who could never tell the truth. The inability to function well in society is just as morally wrong as telling small lies. While I thank you for not dumping chemicals down the drain, there is certainly a better way to respond than "No, I won't do it." Perhaps, "This is not SOP. We're going to do it the right way." And then getting something done. When all you do is hold up the system, you ARE the problem.
As someone about to donate a kidney this summer, I really hope they work on this research more. Donor matching is incredibly difficult, and the risk of rejection poses issues not only with the health of the recipient (though that's obviously the major issue), but also with the psychological health of the donor. A failed donation can make you feel like crap.