Well, that seems like a lot less than the 20,000 to 100,000 barrels of oil figures that I've been reading on CNN, in the LA Times, and so on. Then again, I don't know how many of these plumes there are...but unless there are 15 - 95 of them....
Except for all the people who will continue to use these products because they didn't hear.
So, we're supposed to craft a society to pander to those who are unwilling or incapable of doing their own research? Yeah, that should work out well....
I do, I just felt like playing the role of the pissed off crotchety old man, rather than the snarky but optimistic slashdotter. Don't worry, tomorrow I'll be playing the role of McBeth so all my posts will be in Elizabethan. =D
If phrases like, "CMOS Settings," and, "IDE Controller," aren't descriptive enough for you, or they seem complicated and semi-unintelligible then you have no business dicking around with the low-level settings of your motherboard.
So far as I can tell, it just means that now the BIOS is going to consist of a complicated, semi-unintelligible set of menus (and/or icons) and point and click options rather than a simple tree of text-based menus with descriptive names. Don't worry though, by fixing something that isn't broken, things will get better.
You know, I was developing sore wrists from typing at a keyboard all day when I started my first job. I bought a wrist brace to help manage my ergnomics, but that got pretty old fast. You know what I figured out? You can work out your wrist, strengthen it, and this will help nullify some of the wrist/tendon issues from excessive keyboard or gaming work. I started doing pull-ups (knuckles turned outwards, away from the body) which really help to strengthen the forearm and the wrist. I also started using some of those squeeze torsion spring things to increase my grip. Since I started actually building the muscle and using the tendons and ligaments in my forearms and wrists and hands, all of the old pain and wear from over-using a keyboard went away. I'll bet hardcore gamers could benefit from similar exercises...
Plus you get the added benefit of having forearms like Popeye, and that just looks damn tough.
I wonder if the study focused on whether or not both groups display high levels of testosterone and high levels of competitiveness. I always figured that the constant tea-bagging and shit-talking in Halo and such were just virtual depictions of the same male-centric dominance instinct that athletes display by making fouls, being unnecessarily belligerent, or just being douchebags in general. I know both groups often (though not always) display an attitude of elitism towards those that are not part of the, 'club.' I know that competitive sports are so popular because they, essentially, allow for the enactment of modern alpha-male style dominance displays. I wonder if the same can be said of gamers. I can't count how many times I've heard a Halo player blow his verbal load on Xbox live talking about how good he is and why he is so much better. There has to be a link in those attributes too. I wonder if further studies are going to look into that or not.
That said, I think football and soccer would be funnier if the scoring team tea-bagged their rivals every time they made a point.
Hmmmm, a story combining the ever-inflammatory idea of censorship with the, 'greatest environmental disaster of our time,' delivered right to our internet front-door here on slashdot. I have my money on more than 400 comments in the first 4 hours.
While I don't disagree with any point of yours particularly, I would like to mention that trust is something that should be earned. I don't automatically assume that any random stranger is somebody I can trust. I don't trust, immediately, a person as soon as I shake their hand. As I get to know somebody new, and as I watch them interact with myself and others, I can formulate an opinion about them in one way or another. Through such observation of their actions, I can determine whether or not that person can be trusted by myself.
So far, such scrutiny has been a very useful tool in preventing myself from getting completely boned (that's not to say that I haven't been boned before, but it does help). So, my standing theory regarding trust is that, if you want my trust, you have to earn it by demonstrating yourself to be a respectable person.
I hold my government officials and police officers to the same standard. If they want my trust, they damn well better earn it. If a police officer that stops me for a traffic violation wants me to respect and trust him, he needs to demonstrate to me, at least to some extent, that he is not a total douchebag. If he is not capable of doing this, I will mark his name and badge number down and file that information away for my own purposes if the issue of my trust in him is ever raised again (such as, perhaps, in court or in a future interaction). That's not to say that I will be belligerent, merely that I do expect those in a position of authority to demonstrate their right to be their. They have to earn that position. They have to earn that badge. They have to earn that authority.
That said, yes, at some point we do have to trust some part of our government. That does not mean we have to trust the individuals working in that part of the government. That does not mean those individuals are exempt from the constant effort of earning said trust. Asking to not be video taped is a good way to lose credibility in my view. It just serves my opinion that the police, along with many other government employees, truly cannot be trusted. Does this mean that I think our government should fall or that our society is a house of cards? No. It simply means that my trust does not lie, implicitly, in the individuals that make up our government. Rather, my trust lies in a set of ideals that are used to check the government and the respective employees of the government (checks and balances, the right to vote, jury duty, and so on...you know, all that stuff in the constitution).
So yes, we do have to start trusting in our government somewhere. However, that trust does not have to be given blindly on faith, nor does it have to lay in the individuals holding power in the government. Rather, our trust should, in my opinion, be placed in the ideals that were meant to establish a government which is governed by the people. Legislation that prevents the documentation (even if it is biased documentation) of public interactions with figures of authority is not going to earn my trust (nor, I suspect, the trust of many other citizens). Acting in a respectful manner, and allowing yourself to be video taped (open yourself, knowingly, to public scrutiny) is a very powerful way to gain my trust. The courts, juries, and police officers are welcome to choose and support whichever of those two options they want. Suffice it to say, however, that one option will result in my trusting the police more, and one option will result in my trusting the police less. That is one of the many consequences that legislators need to understand when considering this kind of legislation.
Right now, there aren't going to be a lot of people that have heard of this kind of legislation. Of those that have heard it, the typical response will be, "Well it's not my state."
So, as vigilant citizens of America, I consider this to be a call to arms, metaphorically speaking. Rather than go pick up our guns and join in ranks of various bat-shit insane militia parties, how's about we all go buy cameras instead? For a couple hundred bucks, we can all get easily operated, simple, sturdy video cameras that we can start carrying with us. While some of us may not have that kind of money, I would wager that quite a few 'dotters do. So, as citizens of this society, I would suggest that, if you can swing it, you do some research, cough up $300 bucks, and buy yourself a nice, simple, mobile video camera. To get you started on the research end, look into hero cameras and flip cameras. I am sure there are better models out there, but I don't know of them yet.
Anyways, once you have your nice, new, shiny video camera, carry it with you in your car or on your bike everywhere you go. If you end up having some interaction with a police officer, simply place the camera discreetly on your dash board or in an empty seat or some such thing and turn it on. Video tape every interaction that you have with any police officer over every issue, no matter how trivial the matter seems. If this is done often enough, by enough citizens, the videos captured will start percolating onto the internet. The cops that do end up abusing their power on camera will be revealed in large quantities. More and more citizens, both intelligent and unintelligent, will begin to understand the problems caused by making it illegal to tape figures in a position of authority. There will be a public outcry and we will see laws like this repealed.
So, I say that now, we citizens of all 50 United States must take a stand and peacefully disobey such ridiculous notions that police officers cannot be video taped in public. If we all start doing this, even in states where it is still legal to video tape officers, this kind of legislation will come to the spotlight and the public will scream. This sort of vigilance and action is our duty, in my humble opinion.
Well let's see here, between caffeine addiction, high consumption of high-fructose corn syrup, consumption of alcohol, constant exposure to various forms of EM waves, the thinning of the ozone layer allowing more UV rays to pass through the atmosphere, and a lack of proper amounts of sleep, I (and most folks in my generation) will probably end up dying at a young age from some combination of diabetes, cancer, withdrawal symptoms, and physical stress according to the media.
I'll be damned if it won't be one helluva delicious, intense, fun, and, most importantly, caffeinated ride though.
Certainly not true. ITAR is export controlled only.
Which, if you take the time to read the ITAR documentation, you would know also includes any and all spacecraft systems. I used to help on a small, local satellite project at the university where I went to school. We designed and built 10 cm x 10 cm x 10 cm cubesats that were primarily constructed from commercial off the shelf components. Even our cubesat systems were subject to ITAR control and all of our projects, developed entirely for civilian, educational purposes, were inspected by national security officials regularly to ensure we met ITAR compliance. I guarantee you that Falcon 9, and all of SpaceX's systems are also ITAR restricted and, probably, even more heavily scrutinized. Furthermore, SpaceX does all of its development in-house which is precisely why they have managed to keep their production costs so low. They don't rely on subcontractors (and thus, outsourcing). So your original point is moot. ITAR applies to every space system developed within American borders. Circumventing such heavy restrictions costs millions of dollars in legal wrangling and an indescribably painful court battle (that will probably earn you a lot of enemies in the government).
In short, you, sir, are a terribly misinformed fool.
If ever a post detailed, through anecdote, precisely what has gone wrong with American society, this is it. The story of your brother, the unhealthy, 'fuck everyone else,' attitude that such incidents instill in our populace, and the requirement of a damn judge to dismiss your brother's charge are all a screaming testament to the lack of respect that folk these days have for themselves and one another. It's a sad day, indeed, when you cannot be a good neighbor without facing a criminal charge.
Well that's why I always figured that you have to take Wikileaks, like all information on the internet, with a healthy dose of skepticism. Don't get me wrong, wikileaks is a great resource and tool for a vigilant populace. However, like any other tool, it can be misused and abused. Who is to say that everything on wikileaks is legit? Who is to say that everything posted to wikileaks was actually leaked from somewhere? Who is to say that the things posted don't have some ulterior motive?
I remember my dad once told me, when I was younger, that you should listen to everybody but trust nobody. That seemed like a bit of a rough cliche at the time, and still does to some extent. However, it is a good guiding piece of advice when approaching any part of the internet, wikileaks included. Read what they post. Check out the documents. But consume them with the knowledge that they are being posted to a watchdog site that does not list its sources. That's all you can take them as, one more source of interesting information that may be part of the signal and may be part of the noise.
I mean, it's not like we believe everything else we read on the internet right? Or do you consider all Slashdot comments (even highly moderated ones) to be accurate, infallible sources of information?
Americans are now attacking their culture and religion
Just to clarify, we Americans have a habit of attacking our own culture and religion too. What, have you not heard of South Park, Family Guy, The Daily Show, and The Colbert Report? Frankly, we Americans attack culture and religion, and everything else, in a vocal, satirical manner because it is an integral part of our culture to question any and all source of authority, whether they be natural, supernatural, artificial, or of some other nature. So please don't go around victimizing those poor Pakistanis and Arabs as if they are on the receiving end of a biased stick.
Furthermore, who is to say that it was just us blasted Americans doing the cultural attack? Are you sure that all of the members of the Facebook group were American? Or is it possible that it isn't an American phenomenon, but a human phenomenon, to challenge other groups of people (tribes) and deride them in an attempt to gain dominance (alpha male complex)?
...but not broadcast on US TV because our good Christian values does not allow us to see what we are doing over there or something.
Or, right, because all American culture is based on Christian values. We never learned anything from the Native Americans that taught us how to survive on this continent, or form the scores of Asian immigrants that have migrated here over the past couple centuries, or from the atheists and pagans and wiccans and so on that have all integrated into our society. Yup, we are, by and large, just parrots for Christian values here in America. Nevermind the fact that some of our most popular TV shows depict Jesus Christ in some of the most absurd, ridiculous scenes ever. Nevermind the fact that many of our philosophers and scientists have openly denounced Christianity and declared it to be lacking. Nevermind the fact that, even to this day, we throw up a fuss as soon as a school board even discusses teaching anything related to Creationism. Yeah, we're just a society based on Christian values alright. Or, is it more likely, that there are various sets of values at work in American society that come into conflict with each other at every opportunity and that, in some mediums, Christian values prevail of non-Christian values and vise versa?
In summation, how's that anti-American bias working out for you?
Oh, and one more thing, regarding the various covert military and political practices in which our government has partaken, you would do well to remember that, often, the American society is not aware of such operations being conducted and, once we learn of said operations, we often protest vehemently. We aren't perfect. No American (save some extremely retarded fringe groups) would claim otherwise. However, we are doing the best we can to help manage a fucked up, chaotic, insane world. If you compare our track record to most of our predecessors, we really aren't that terrible. So please, quietly go fuck yourself, or at least do us the favor of establishing and implementing a better system before completely lambasting American society. Criticism that is not accompanied by appropriate reform suggestions is completely useless, asshole.
So, every product that claims to be 'green' is equally green for you?
Yep, that's analogous to what the parent post claimed. Let's see, your interpretation:
Anyone who claims they are open must be open source.
What the parent actually said:
People who are so pedantic as to nitpick about arbitrary details that define openness are a burden. If the source is open for use, then it's open source. It really is that simple.
You didn't take many classes in proper paraphrasing in high school now did you? Sheesh.
All late-afternoon bitterness, aside, your other point about the help of various organizations to verify claims of openness being a benefit to us all still stands.
it's always attached to a stingy, bitter, painful taste
I have no idea whether or not you are a supertaster, but I can tell you that if this is true, you've either only tried crap beers (possible), or your taste buds are plenty fracked (read unique and recognizably different from mine). A well brewed beer should not sting going down, just like a well-aged whiskey, a fine wine, and quality vodka (no really, good liquor doesn't have to burn).
Well, if it's particularly effective, I would willingly eat that corn every day to reduce my risk of an unintended pregnancy before I was ready for such a responsibility. Not all strange effects are bad you know.;)
[Queue jokes about Slashdot being the most effective form of birth-control.]
Huh, I don't know what kind of beers you've tried (you claim to have tried a lot, but I am suspect) but I really disagree on the theory that beer actually tastes like crap and we just drink it to get a *high.* Now, I will make this clear, this is personal preference/opinion, so I don't have any scientific evidence to back anything up but here's been my experience.
The first time I tasted a beer I drank a Budweiser at a friends house. Honestly, I didn't see the appeal to the drink (and most people can understand why I am sure). I mean, the flavors were smooth enough that I wouldn't describe it as stingy or anything like that, but it just tasted like liquefied bread and my response was something in terms of, "WTF is all the fuss about?"
However, a couple years later, one of my friends came back from Belgium and brought home some darker beers. I hadn't been drinking a lot at this point (actually, I only drank once since the Budweiser), so there was no acquired taste thing going on here. When I drank that beer, for the first time, I almost cried it tasted so good. There was a tart sweetness to it that was very difficult to find in any other food. The smoky flavor that is heavy in a lot of American dark beers was very mellow. The bitter nip to it (and it wasn't much more than a nip) stimulated a slight tingle on the tongue. Most noticeable of all, was how smooth it was going down the throat. I want to emphasize that last point. A good beer does not sting going down, it warms the throat just like a good whiskey does. It leaves you sitting there, feeling more complete for having drank it.
The thing that I appreciate about a good beer (yes I am an elitist) the most is the incredible variety of flavor experiences that can be found in a single drink. Very few consumables have the ability to stimulate so many different receptors as beer. This, in my opinion, is what makes it taste incredible. It doesn't just taste sweet, or salty, or whatever, it tastes complex, and I like that. More importantly, I think that's what makes a taste truly unique and worth appreciating. I'm not a wino, but for what it's worth, my wine drinking friends say the same thing about wine.
Now, you compare the taste of beer to the taste of a milkshake and say that a milkshake is what can be called, universally, good. I would agree that a milkshake is pleasing for the sweet receptors. However, it leaves all your other receptors lacking. To make a music analogy, I consider milkshakes to be the equivalent of fun, energetic modern pop music like Katy Perry. It's fun to listen to. It fills you with a good hype for a short time. It's very nice, but somewhat lacking in terms of depth and power. Now a good beer, on the other hand, is like a magnificent symphony or orchestra piece. It fills your very spirit with so many sounds tied together in such wonderful ways that it makes you think. You can listen to a good symphony, and your mind's eye will develop an entire cinematic to go along with the music, rife with character, feeling, plot, color and on and on. Now, is the powerful symphony better, or the fun pop music? Well that's a judgment more than anything, but I don't think either sounds better. I think they both sound great in their own ways.
Similarly, is the super sweet, awesome classic milkshake or the complex fulfilling beer better tasting? Well, neither. They both taste magnificent in their own ways. So you can reiterate your point all you want that beer tastes like shit, but I really think you have missed out on some world class beers or something. Beer provides one of the most complex, amazing symphonies of flavor that I've ever had the delight of partaking in.
In response to public criticisms abour Japanese whaling practices, Japanese officials had the following to say:
"A fuck-a-you whales!!!!!! And a fuck-a-you dolphiiiiiiiins!!!!!"
No further comment was necessary, but a young man that prides himself on his vocal abilities in the popular Rock Band video game exclaimed matter-of-factually:
"I don't give a crap about whales so go and hug a tree."
Slashdot Mirror
Well, that seems like a lot less than the 20,000 to 100,000 barrels of oil figures that I've been reading on CNN, in the LA Times, and so on. Then again, I don't know how many of these plumes there are...but unless there are 15 - 95 of them....
Except for all the people who will continue to use these products because they didn't hear.
So, we're supposed to craft a society to pander to those who are unwilling or incapable of doing their own research? Yeah, that should work out well....
For those of you that don't want to dig through the links in the summary blog, here is a more in-depth discussion of the papers.
The most efficient way to ensure arbitrary prosecution under the law is to keep the laws subjective in nature:
Phrases like, "unity...national honor...and interests...." provide nice means to ensuring your enemies are at your mercy.
Criticize Chinese society all you like, but you have to give it props for being crafty and efficient with persecution!
I do, I just felt like playing the role of the pissed off crotchety old man, rather than the snarky but optimistic slashdotter. Don't worry, tomorrow I'll be playing the role of McBeth so all my posts will be in Elizabethan. =D
If phrases like, "CMOS Settings," and, "IDE Controller," aren't descriptive enough for you, or they seem complicated and semi-unintelligible then you have no business dicking around with the low-level settings of your motherboard.
What am I missing here?
So far as I can tell, it just means that now the BIOS is going to consist of a complicated, semi-unintelligible set of menus (and/or icons) and point and click options rather than a simple tree of text-based menus with descriptive names. Don't worry though, by fixing something that isn't broken, things will get better.
You know, I was developing sore wrists from typing at a keyboard all day when I started my first job. I bought a wrist brace to help manage my ergnomics, but that got pretty old fast. You know what I figured out? You can work out your wrist, strengthen it, and this will help nullify some of the wrist/tendon issues from excessive keyboard or gaming work. I started doing pull-ups (knuckles turned outwards, away from the body) which really help to strengthen the forearm and the wrist. I also started using some of those squeeze torsion spring things to increase my grip. Since I started actually building the muscle and using the tendons and ligaments in my forearms and wrists and hands, all of the old pain and wear from over-using a keyboard went away. I'll bet hardcore gamers could benefit from similar exercises...
Plus you get the added benefit of having forearms like Popeye, and that just looks damn tough.
I wonder if the study focused on whether or not both groups display high levels of testosterone and high levels of competitiveness. I always figured that the constant tea-bagging and shit-talking in Halo and such were just virtual depictions of the same male-centric dominance instinct that athletes display by making fouls, being unnecessarily belligerent, or just being douchebags in general. I know both groups often (though not always) display an attitude of elitism towards those that are not part of the, 'club.' I know that competitive sports are so popular because they, essentially, allow for the enactment of modern alpha-male style dominance displays. I wonder if the same can be said of gamers. I can't count how many times I've heard a Halo player blow his verbal load on Xbox live talking about how good he is and why he is so much better. There has to be a link in those attributes too. I wonder if further studies are going to look into that or not.
That said, I think football and soccer would be funnier if the scoring team tea-bagged their rivals every time they made a point.
Hmmmm, a story combining the ever-inflammatory idea of censorship with the, 'greatest environmental disaster of our time,' delivered right to our internet front-door here on slashdot. I have my money on more than 400 comments in the first 4 hours.
/popcorn
This should be fun. =)
While I don't disagree with any point of yours particularly, I would like to mention that trust is something that should be earned. I don't automatically assume that any random stranger is somebody I can trust. I don't trust, immediately, a person as soon as I shake their hand. As I get to know somebody new, and as I watch them interact with myself and others, I can formulate an opinion about them in one way or another. Through such observation of their actions, I can determine whether or not that person can be trusted by myself.
So far, such scrutiny has been a very useful tool in preventing myself from getting completely boned (that's not to say that I haven't been boned before, but it does help). So, my standing theory regarding trust is that, if you want my trust, you have to earn it by demonstrating yourself to be a respectable person.
I hold my government officials and police officers to the same standard. If they want my trust, they damn well better earn it. If a police officer that stops me for a traffic violation wants me to respect and trust him, he needs to demonstrate to me, at least to some extent, that he is not a total douchebag. If he is not capable of doing this, I will mark his name and badge number down and file that information away for my own purposes if the issue of my trust in him is ever raised again (such as, perhaps, in court or in a future interaction). That's not to say that I will be belligerent, merely that I do expect those in a position of authority to demonstrate their right to be their. They have to earn that position. They have to earn that badge. They have to earn that authority.
That said, yes, at some point we do have to trust some part of our government. That does not mean we have to trust the individuals working in that part of the government. That does not mean those individuals are exempt from the constant effort of earning said trust. Asking to not be video taped is a good way to lose credibility in my view. It just serves my opinion that the police, along with many other government employees, truly cannot be trusted. Does this mean that I think our government should fall or that our society is a house of cards? No. It simply means that my trust does not lie, implicitly, in the individuals that make up our government. Rather, my trust lies in a set of ideals that are used to check the government and the respective employees of the government (checks and balances, the right to vote, jury duty, and so on...you know, all that stuff in the constitution).
So yes, we do have to start trusting in our government somewhere. However, that trust does not have to be given blindly on faith, nor does it have to lay in the individuals holding power in the government. Rather, our trust should, in my opinion, be placed in the ideals that were meant to establish a government which is governed by the people. Legislation that prevents the documentation (even if it is biased documentation) of public interactions with figures of authority is not going to earn my trust (nor, I suspect, the trust of many other citizens). Acting in a respectful manner, and allowing yourself to be video taped (open yourself, knowingly, to public scrutiny) is a very powerful way to gain my trust. The courts, juries, and police officers are welcome to choose and support whichever of those two options they want. Suffice it to say, however, that one option will result in my trusting the police more, and one option will result in my trusting the police less. That is one of the many consequences that legislators need to understand when considering this kind of legislation.
Right now, there aren't going to be a lot of people that have heard of this kind of legislation. Of those that have heard it, the typical response will be, "Well it's not my state."
So, as vigilant citizens of America, I consider this to be a call to arms, metaphorically speaking. Rather than go pick up our guns and join in ranks of various bat-shit insane militia parties, how's about we all go buy cameras instead? For a couple hundred bucks, we can all get easily operated, simple, sturdy video cameras that we can start carrying with us. While some of us may not have that kind of money, I would wager that quite a few 'dotters do. So, as citizens of this society, I would suggest that, if you can swing it, you do some research, cough up $300 bucks, and buy yourself a nice, simple, mobile video camera. To get you started on the research end, look into hero cameras and flip cameras. I am sure there are better models out there, but I don't know of them yet.
Anyways, once you have your nice, new, shiny video camera, carry it with you in your car or on your bike everywhere you go. If you end up having some interaction with a police officer, simply place the camera discreetly on your dash board or in an empty seat or some such thing and turn it on. Video tape every interaction that you have with any police officer over every issue, no matter how trivial the matter seems. If this is done often enough, by enough citizens, the videos captured will start percolating onto the internet. The cops that do end up abusing their power on camera will be revealed in large quantities. More and more citizens, both intelligent and unintelligent, will begin to understand the problems caused by making it illegal to tape figures in a position of authority. There will be a public outcry and we will see laws like this repealed.
So, I say that now, we citizens of all 50 United States must take a stand and peacefully disobey such ridiculous notions that police officers cannot be video taped in public. If we all start doing this, even in states where it is still legal to video tape officers, this kind of legislation will come to the spotlight and the public will scream. This sort of vigilance and action is our duty, in my humble opinion.
I hope you're kidding. GP wrote about "a small group [that] hold the answers". The Fed hardly qualifies.
I hope you grow a sense of ironic humor. Otherwise you are going to live a long and painful life.
Well let's see here, between caffeine addiction, high consumption of high-fructose corn syrup, consumption of alcohol, constant exposure to various forms of EM waves, the thinning of the ozone layer allowing more UV rays to pass through the atmosphere, and a lack of proper amounts of sleep, I (and most folks in my generation) will probably end up dying at a young age from some combination of diabetes, cancer, withdrawal symptoms, and physical stress according to the media.
I'll be damned if it won't be one helluva delicious, intense, fun, and, most importantly, caffeinated ride though.
Certainly not true. ITAR is export controlled only.
Which, if you take the time to read the ITAR documentation, you would know also includes any and all spacecraft systems. I used to help on a small, local satellite project at the university where I went to school. We designed and built 10 cm x 10 cm x 10 cm cubesats that were primarily constructed from commercial off the shelf components. Even our cubesat systems were subject to ITAR control and all of our projects, developed entirely for civilian, educational purposes, were inspected by national security officials regularly to ensure we met ITAR compliance. I guarantee you that Falcon 9, and all of SpaceX's systems are also ITAR restricted and, probably, even more heavily scrutinized. Furthermore, SpaceX does all of its development in-house which is precisely why they have managed to keep their production costs so low. They don't rely on subcontractors (and thus, outsourcing). So your original point is moot. ITAR applies to every space system developed within American borders. Circumventing such heavy restrictions costs millions of dollars in legal wrangling and an indescribably painful court battle (that will probably earn you a lot of enemies in the government).
In short, you, sir, are a terribly misinformed fool.
If ever a post detailed, through anecdote, precisely what has gone wrong with American society, this is it. The story of your brother, the unhealthy, 'fuck everyone else,' attitude that such incidents instill in our populace, and the requirement of a damn judge to dismiss your brother's charge are all a screaming testament to the lack of respect that folk these days have for themselves and one another. It's a sad day, indeed, when you cannot be a good neighbor without facing a criminal charge.
Well that's why I always figured that you have to take Wikileaks, like all information on the internet, with a healthy dose of skepticism. Don't get me wrong, wikileaks is a great resource and tool for a vigilant populace. However, like any other tool, it can be misused and abused. Who is to say that everything on wikileaks is legit? Who is to say that everything posted to wikileaks was actually leaked from somewhere? Who is to say that the things posted don't have some ulterior motive?
I remember my dad once told me, when I was younger, that you should listen to everybody but trust nobody. That seemed like a bit of a rough cliche at the time, and still does to some extent. However, it is a good guiding piece of advice when approaching any part of the internet, wikileaks included. Read what they post. Check out the documents. But consume them with the knowledge that they are being posted to a watchdog site that does not list its sources. That's all you can take them as, one more source of interesting information that may be part of the signal and may be part of the noise.
I mean, it's not like we believe everything else we read on the internet right? Or do you consider all Slashdot comments (even highly moderated ones) to be accurate, infallible sources of information?
Americans are now attacking their culture and religion
Just to clarify, we Americans have a habit of attacking our own culture and religion too. What, have you not heard of South Park, Family Guy, The Daily Show, and The Colbert Report? Frankly, we Americans attack culture and religion, and everything else, in a vocal, satirical manner because it is an integral part of our culture to question any and all source of authority, whether they be natural, supernatural, artificial, or of some other nature. So please don't go around victimizing those poor Pakistanis and Arabs as if they are on the receiving end of a biased stick.
Furthermore, who is to say that it was just us blasted Americans doing the cultural attack? Are you sure that all of the members of the Facebook group were American? Or is it possible that it isn't an American phenomenon, but a human phenomenon, to challenge other groups of people (tribes) and deride them in an attempt to gain dominance (alpha male complex)?
...but not broadcast on US TV because our good Christian values does not allow us to see what we are doing over there or something.
Or, right, because all American culture is based on Christian values. We never learned anything from the Native Americans that taught us how to survive on this continent, or form the scores of Asian immigrants that have migrated here over the past couple centuries, or from the atheists and pagans and wiccans and so on that have all integrated into our society. Yup, we are, by and large, just parrots for Christian values here in America. Nevermind the fact that some of our most popular TV shows depict Jesus Christ in some of the most absurd, ridiculous scenes ever. Nevermind the fact that many of our philosophers and scientists have openly denounced Christianity and declared it to be lacking. Nevermind the fact that, even to this day, we throw up a fuss as soon as a school board even discusses teaching anything related to Creationism. Yeah, we're just a society based on Christian values alright. Or, is it more likely, that there are various sets of values at work in American society that come into conflict with each other at every opportunity and that, in some mediums, Christian values prevail of non-Christian values and vise versa?
In summation, how's that anti-American bias working out for you?
Oh, and one more thing, regarding the various covert military and political practices in which our government has partaken, you would do well to remember that, often, the American society is not aware of such operations being conducted and, once we learn of said operations, we often protest vehemently. We aren't perfect. No American (save some extremely retarded fringe groups) would claim otherwise. However, we are doing the best we can to help manage a fucked up, chaotic, insane world. If you compare our track record to most of our predecessors, we really aren't that terrible. So please, quietly go fuck yourself, or at least do us the favor of establishing and implementing a better system before completely lambasting American society. Criticism that is not accompanied by appropriate reform suggestions is completely useless, asshole.
Read the book.
So, every product that claims to be 'green' is equally green for you?
Yep, that's analogous to what the parent post claimed. Let's see, your interpretation:
Anyone who claims they are open must be open source.
What the parent actually said:
People who are so pedantic as to nitpick about arbitrary details that define openness are a burden. If the source is open for use, then it's open source. It really is that simple.
You didn't take many classes in proper paraphrasing in high school now did you? Sheesh.
All late-afternoon bitterness, aside, your other point about the help of various organizations to verify claims of openness being a benefit to us all still stands.
it's always attached to a stingy, bitter, painful taste
I have no idea whether or not you are a supertaster, but I can tell you that if this is true, you've either only tried crap beers (possible), or your taste buds are plenty fracked (read unique and recognizably different from mine). A well brewed beer should not sting going down, just like a well-aged whiskey, a fine wine, and quality vodka (no really, good liquor doesn't have to burn).
Well, if it's particularly effective, I would willingly eat that corn every day to reduce my risk of an unintended pregnancy before I was ready for such a responsibility. Not all strange effects are bad you know. ;)
[Queue jokes about Slashdot being the most effective form of birth-control.]
Huh, I don't know what kind of beers you've tried (you claim to have tried a lot, but I am suspect) but I really disagree on the theory that beer actually tastes like crap and we just drink it to get a *high.* Now, I will make this clear, this is personal preference/opinion, so I don't have any scientific evidence to back anything up but here's been my experience.
The first time I tasted a beer I drank a Budweiser at a friends house. Honestly, I didn't see the appeal to the drink (and most people can understand why I am sure). I mean, the flavors were smooth enough that I wouldn't describe it as stingy or anything like that, but it just tasted like liquefied bread and my response was something in terms of, "WTF is all the fuss about?"
However, a couple years later, one of my friends came back from Belgium and brought home some darker beers. I hadn't been drinking a lot at this point (actually, I only drank once since the Budweiser), so there was no acquired taste thing going on here. When I drank that beer, for the first time, I almost cried it tasted so good. There was a tart sweetness to it that was very difficult to find in any other food. The smoky flavor that is heavy in a lot of American dark beers was very mellow. The bitter nip to it (and it wasn't much more than a nip) stimulated a slight tingle on the tongue. Most noticeable of all, was how smooth it was going down the throat. I want to emphasize that last point. A good beer does not sting going down, it warms the throat just like a good whiskey does. It leaves you sitting there, feeling more complete for having drank it.
The thing that I appreciate about a good beer (yes I am an elitist) the most is the incredible variety of flavor experiences that can be found in a single drink. Very few consumables have the ability to stimulate so many different receptors as beer. This, in my opinion, is what makes it taste incredible. It doesn't just taste sweet, or salty, or whatever, it tastes complex, and I like that. More importantly, I think that's what makes a taste truly unique and worth appreciating. I'm not a wino, but for what it's worth, my wine drinking friends say the same thing about wine.
Now, you compare the taste of beer to the taste of a milkshake and say that a milkshake is what can be called, universally, good. I would agree that a milkshake is pleasing for the sweet receptors. However, it leaves all your other receptors lacking. To make a music analogy, I consider milkshakes to be the equivalent of fun, energetic modern pop music like Katy Perry. It's fun to listen to. It fills you with a good hype for a short time. It's very nice, but somewhat lacking in terms of depth and power. Now a good beer, on the other hand, is like a magnificent symphony or orchestra piece. It fills your very spirit with so many sounds tied together in such wonderful ways that it makes you think. You can listen to a good symphony, and your mind's eye will develop an entire cinematic to go along with the music, rife with character, feeling, plot, color and on and on. Now, is the powerful symphony better, or the fun pop music? Well that's a judgment more than anything, but I don't think either sounds better. I think they both sound great in their own ways.
Similarly, is the super sweet, awesome classic milkshake or the complex fulfilling beer better tasting? Well, neither. They both taste magnificent in their own ways. So you can reiterate your point all you want that beer tastes like shit, but I really think you have missed out on some world class beers or something. Beer provides one of the most complex, amazing symphonies of flavor that I've ever had the delight of partaking in.
Suicide Machines have an album called, "Steal This CD."
It's an odd thing when, 'stealing,' becomes the common sense way to access culture.
In response to public criticisms abour Japanese whaling practices, Japanese officials had the following to say:
"A fuck-a-you whales!!!!!! And a fuck-a-you dolphiiiiiiiins!!!!!"
No further comment was necessary, but a young man that prides himself on his vocal abilities in the popular Rock Band video game exclaimed matter-of-factually:
"I don't give a crap about whales so go and hug a tree."