This is the Christian equivalent of Embrace, Extend and Extinguish
That doesn't make sense on any level. How does one extend science with vendor lock in and get everyone to switch to it before they kill it off? Are you telling me the Big Bang theory (first put forward by a catholic priest) is a clever extension of science to lead us down the wrong path before they somehow destroy all scientific knowledge completely? You can't throw that phrase around just because you hate the person/group embracing whatever idea you also like and are thus faced with having to live in a world where your enemy isn't quite as ubiquitously evil as you'd prefer them to be. Can't let that happen or next thing you'll be self reflecting on whether the stereotypes you hold true are correct and you should be hating them at all!
Why do you think that older people who have a good grasp of history say that this (Homeland/Security/Terrorism theater) can only lead to Interment camps and execution squads?
Because they have a less firm grasp of the slippery slope fallacy?
Wow, you're giddy about fellow human beings dying because they have different culture and beliefs than you. Is this really the "enlightened" and "evolved" alternative to religion you wish to present?
You can get most college football from ESPN on an Xbox. I only use cable for the NFL. no idea about motorcycle racing but if it's on ESPN 3 you can get that via the xbox app.
Funny that the people railing against things like this are so quick to call upon TEH CONSTITOOSHUNZ for debating power and feel-goodiness, but are more than willing to quickly point out how little power it has when someone thinks to actually look it up.
There's no contradiction in saying the Constitution which is the supreme law of the land has a lot of power while at the same time correctly pointing out that the pre-amble of the Constitution has little to no bearing on established law and neither grants nor limits federal power or individual rights. From Wikipedia:
The Preamble serves solely as an introduction, and does not assign powers to the federal government,[1] nor does it provide specific limitations on government action. Due to the Preamble's limited nature, no court has ever used it as a decisive factor in case adjudication,[2] except as regards frivolous litigation.[3]
You might as well be mad that they consider the Articles of the Constitution important but for some reason refuse to recognize moral obligations cited in Sesame Street Episodes
Scary question: at what level of certainty do they let the guy piloting the UAV push hellfire missile button based on this platform's "identification" of an enemy?
I think the idea of this is "higher then currently employed". For example, an analyst tracking a target that walks under a bridge and out the other side might be confident enough to give the go-ahead but assisted by a software bio-metrics package the analyst can be warned that based on height calculations the guy that just came out on the other side of the bridge isn't the target being tracked unless he just grew 3 inches.
I love how the summary says they store your religious and political views like they aren't boxes literally labeled religious and political view that your purposely decided to fill out and display publicly on your profile info page. My God, they're probably even storing your facebook NAME and profile PICTURE somewhere on their SCARE SERVERS!!!!
what part of 'remote control from half a mile away' does supervision deter?
The part where you have to break the seals on the machine, take it completely apart, hook up circuitry to it, close it back up, and re-seal the now broken tamper-proof tape, let the election run, break back in, break the seals on the machine again, pull your electronics back out of the machine to eliminate evidence and then reseal the machine and fix the tamper-proof seals again.
Are you saying ordinary Americans are trying to break encryption on NSA smart phones in order to intercept their communiques? Neither my post nor GP's mention ordinary Americans btw.
Technology hasn't really been competitive with people in the past though.
Really? How many acres of corn/wheat can you harvest by hand in a day? How many pieces of furniture can you hand-carve and assemble? How many tons of coal can you mine? Hell, how many miles can you move 500 pounds of X? Technology has been competitive with people since someone figured out pointy sticks stab better.
First of all, in order to take classified data out of a secure area, you have to seal it in an approved manner -- triple wrap it, stow it in a lockable opaque container, sign for it, and basically chain it to your body until it reaches its next secure location. That's been the rule in the DoD for over 50 years
You know for Secret level stuff you can simply mail it right? As in regular post office right next to your post card to Aunt Jenny.
I don't think there's anything inherently contradictory about wanting to keep the enemy's knowledge of you to a minimum while maximizing your knowledge of the enemy. Both stem from the idea that knowledge/information is power, and in the information battle, just like the physical battle, you're not interested in a level playing field.
What are you rambling on about? You can 100% guarantee that a phone given to you by the NSA capable of accessing classified information is going to be heavily and regularly monitored by the government without court orders required. There would be 0% expectation of privacy with such a phone.
Does a being incapable of making anything but the perfect choice really have free will? Sounds more like a software program that only makes the choices you programmed it to.
It may be a sense of entitlement but that doesn't mean it's incorrect. For example, if I paid a moving company to pack and ship my furniture I'd feel entitled to having people show up who can say, lift a couch and carry it outside. If all their workers showed up were geniuses at how to pack things efficiently but had thrown out backs and thus couldn't do one of the main things I hired them for I'd be rather upset about not receiving what I felt I was entitled to in return for my payment rendered.
Now it sounds to me, that the state is doing the correct thing, and instead of simply firing people unable to communicate giving them free speech therapy instead. I'm sure your teacher that had a stroke would have been happy to have the state give him free speech therapy, I know my grandfather would have appreciated someone else picking up that check after his stroke. It would be no different then the moving company paying for physical therapy for one of their works who had a back injury. So why all the uproar?
I am pretty sure that when used by the state in Arizona, this amounted to selective cultural bias and harassment. That would be constant with the other developments in that benighted corner of the US.
Yea, we must closely watch this terrible group of people defined by imaginary borders because we all know they are the absolute worst at judging other groups of people defined by imaginary borders. I don't understand why they can't be more enlightened like us.
If this is true this is HUGE. If my time watching TNG is to be believed, you can literally solve ANY problem by hitting it with an inverse tachyon beam.
Without government to defend them and maintain order, the rich would quickly become very poor
Ah yes, just like ye olden days, where the rich nobles cried out for strict national governance to better protect them from the peasants because without a stronger government to protect them what was a rich man with resources, arms, and mercenaries to do?!
Microsoft had not yet publicly disclosed their sub-optimal lighting "feature" for the camera. In all seriousness though your pointing out a single question on the policy (the most severe one) and saying he didn't violate anything because he didn't violate that one. Personally, I'd want to fire any employee who decided they thought they could unilaterally do PR for un-released joint-company products and publicly rate the product as a low B (8/10) and described features as sub-optimal.
How would any of us feel if our company's PR managers decided to come down and unilaterally make amateur and bug riddled commits to our projects code repositories and then release it? You'd probably want them fired too.
Can we stop calling things "open" which are actually proprietary?
I agree! I mean just the other day I passed a breakfast diner that had the GALL to be claiming they were open with a red and blue ELECTRIC NEON SIGN right there in the window!! This term has just become meaningless and shameful pandering, I mean how the fuck do you open source a steak and eggs breakfast anyways?!
When did not wanting to raise taxes become radical extremism on par with being a member of the Taliban? If you're upset about the divisive political atmosphere in Washington DC you should check your own rhetoric and ask if it's helping. Pro Tip: Calling people terrorists generally doesn't pave the path toward amiable compromise.
If you are already wealthy and retired, and aren't earning more money, why do you believe the federal government has a right to continue to tax money they already taxed once when you first earned it?
Slashdot Mirror
This is the Christian equivalent of Embrace, Extend and Extinguish
That doesn't make sense on any level. How does one extend science with vendor lock in and get everyone to switch to it before they kill it off? Are you telling me the Big Bang theory (first put forward by a catholic priest) is a clever extension of science to lead us down the wrong path before they somehow destroy all scientific knowledge completely? You can't throw that phrase around just because you hate the person/group embracing whatever idea you also like and are thus faced with having to live in a world where your enemy isn't quite as ubiquitously evil as you'd prefer them to be. Can't let that happen or next thing you'll be self reflecting on whether the stereotypes you hold true are correct and you should be hating them at all!
Why do you think that older people who have a good grasp of history say that this (Homeland/Security/Terrorism theater) can only lead to Interment camps and execution squads?
Because they have a less firm grasp of the slippery slope fallacy?
Wow, you're giddy about fellow human beings dying because they have different culture and beliefs than you. Is this really the "enlightened" and "evolved" alternative to religion you wish to present?
You can get most college football from ESPN on an Xbox. I only use cable for the NFL. no idea about motorcycle racing but if it's on ESPN 3 you can get that via the xbox app.
This is a line of thinking that would declare bullets to be useless in modern combat because they could be defeated by a scrap of metal.
Funny that the people railing against things like this are so quick to call upon TEH CONSTITOOSHUNZ for debating power and feel-goodiness, but are more than willing to quickly point out how little power it has when someone thinks to actually look it up.
There's no contradiction in saying the Constitution which is the supreme law of the land has a lot of power while at the same time correctly pointing out that the pre-amble of the Constitution has little to no bearing on established law and neither grants nor limits federal power or individual rights. From Wikipedia:
The Preamble serves solely as an introduction, and does not assign powers to the federal government,[1] nor does it provide specific limitations on government action. Due to the Preamble's limited nature, no court has ever used it as a decisive factor in case adjudication,[2] except as regards frivolous litigation.[3]
You might as well be mad that they consider the Articles of the Constitution important but for some reason refuse to recognize moral obligations cited in Sesame Street Episodes
Scary question: at what level of certainty do they let the guy piloting the UAV push hellfire missile button based on this platform's "identification" of an enemy?
I think the idea of this is "higher then currently employed". For example, an analyst tracking a target that walks under a bridge and out the other side might be confident enough to give the go-ahead but assisted by a software bio-metrics package the analyst can be warned that based on height calculations the guy that just came out on the other side of the bridge isn't the target being tracked unless he just grew 3 inches.
I love how the summary says they store your religious and political views like they aren't boxes literally labeled religious and political view that your purposely decided to fill out and display publicly on your profile info page. My God, they're probably even storing your facebook NAME and profile PICTURE somewhere on their SCARE SERVERS!!!!
Agreed, hence proper and trained supervision being necessary to deter it.
what part of 'remote control from half a mile away' does supervision deter?
The part where you have to break the seals on the machine, take it completely apart, hook up circuitry to it, close it back up, and re-seal the now broken tamper-proof tape, let the election run, break back in, break the seals on the machine again, pull your electronics back out of the machine to eliminate evidence and then reseal the machine and fix the tamper-proof seals again.
Are you saying ordinary Americans are trying to break encryption on NSA smart phones in order to intercept their communiques? Neither my post nor GP's mention ordinary Americans btw.
Technology hasn't really been competitive with people in the past though.
Really? How many acres of corn/wheat can you harvest by hand in a day? How many pieces of furniture can you hand-carve and assemble? How many tons of coal can you mine? Hell, how many miles can you move 500 pounds of X? Technology has been competitive with people since someone figured out pointy sticks stab better.
First of all, in order to take classified data out of a secure area, you have to seal it in an approved manner -- triple wrap it, stow it in a lockable opaque container, sign for it, and basically chain it to your body until it reaches its next secure location. That's been the rule in the DoD for over 50 years
You know for Secret level stuff you can simply mail it right? As in regular post office right next to your post card to Aunt Jenny.
I don't think there's anything inherently contradictory about wanting to keep the enemy's knowledge of you to a minimum while maximizing your knowledge of the enemy. Both stem from the idea that knowledge/information is power, and in the information battle, just like the physical battle, you're not interested in a level playing field.
What are you rambling on about? You can 100% guarantee that a phone given to you by the NSA capable of accessing classified information is going to be heavily and regularly monitored by the government without court orders required. There would be 0% expectation of privacy with such a phone.
Does a being incapable of making anything but the perfect choice really have free will? Sounds more like a software program that only makes the choices you programmed it to.
It may be a sense of entitlement but that doesn't mean it's incorrect. For example, if I paid a moving company to pack and ship my furniture I'd feel entitled to having people show up who can say, lift a couch and carry it outside. If all their workers showed up were geniuses at how to pack things efficiently but had thrown out backs and thus couldn't do one of the main things I hired them for I'd be rather upset about not receiving what I felt I was entitled to in return for my payment rendered.
Now it sounds to me, that the state is doing the correct thing, and instead of simply firing people unable to communicate giving them free speech therapy instead. I'm sure your teacher that had a stroke would have been happy to have the state give him free speech therapy, I know my grandfather would have appreciated someone else picking up that check after his stroke. It would be no different then the moving company paying for physical therapy for one of their works who had a back injury. So why all the uproar?
What makes him being "Vulcan" biologically impossible instead of highly unlikely?
I am pretty sure that when used by the state in Arizona, this amounted to selective cultural bias and harassment. That would be constant with the other developments in that benighted corner of the US.
Yea, we must closely watch this terrible group of people defined by imaginary borders because we all know they are the absolute worst at judging other groups of people defined by imaginary borders. I don't understand why they can't be more enlightened like us.
If neutrinos are tachyons
If this is true this is HUGE. If my time watching TNG is to be believed, you can literally solve ANY problem by hitting it with an inverse tachyon beam.
Without government to defend them and maintain order, the rich would quickly become very poor
Ah yes, just like ye olden days, where the rich nobles cried out for strict national governance to better protect them from the peasants because without a stronger government to protect them what was a rich man with resources, arms, and mercenaries to do?!
Microsoft had not yet publicly disclosed their sub-optimal lighting "feature" for the camera. In all seriousness though your pointing out a single question on the policy (the most severe one) and saying he didn't violate anything because he didn't violate that one. Personally, I'd want to fire any employee who decided they thought they could unilaterally do PR for un-released joint-company products and publicly rate the product as a low B (8/10) and described features as sub-optimal.
How would any of us feel if our company's PR managers decided to come down and unilaterally make amateur and bug riddled commits to our projects code repositories and then release it? You'd probably want them fired too.
Can we stop calling things "open" which are actually proprietary?
I agree! I mean just the other day I passed a breakfast diner that had the GALL to be claiming they were open with a red and blue ELECTRIC NEON SIGN right there in the window!! This term has just become meaningless and shameful pandering, I mean how the fuck do you open source a steak and eggs breakfast anyways?!
When did not wanting to raise taxes become radical extremism on par with being a member of the Taliban? If you're upset about the divisive political atmosphere in Washington DC you should check your own rhetoric and ask if it's helping. Pro Tip: Calling people terrorists generally doesn't pave the path toward amiable compromise.
If you are already wealthy and retired, and aren't earning more money, why do you believe the federal government has a right to continue to tax money they already taxed once when you first earned it?