Reading about the Mandate now. You probably have a lot of fair points. But I find it interesting that when the Brits initially set up the post-Ottoman government, even then the Arabs were doing their best to screw over the immigrants.
Samuel tried to establish self-governing institutions in Palestine, as required by the mandate, but was frustrated by the refusal of the Arab leadership to co-operate with any institution which included Jewish participation.
I won't argue that they should have welcomed them with open arms and put them in charge or anything but a little effort to get along before the endless cycle of killing starts would be nice instead of "we refuse to work with anyone who's a Jew."
Then they try to make a legislature:
The 1922 Palestine Order in Council[14] established a Legislative Council, which was to consist of 23 members; 12 elected, 10 appointed and the High Commissioner.[15] Of the 12 elected members, eight were to be Muslim Arabs, two Christian Arabs and two Jews.[16] Arabs protested against the distribution of the seats, arguing that as they constituted 88% of the population, having only 43% of the seats was unfair.[16] Elections were held in February and March 1923, but due to an Arab boycott, the results were annulled and a 12-member Advisory Council was established.
They give Arabs 11 of the 12 elected positions and they still pitch a fit. Presumably the Arabs expected the Brits to appoint 10 Jews for the latter part of the council...which may have been accurate, I suppose. But saying "we only get 43% of the seats" seems blatantly misleading unless somebody can actually show that all 10 of those appointed were Jewish.
In 1930, Sheikh Izz ad-Din al-Qassam arrived in Palestine from Syria and organised and established the Black Hand, an anti-Zionist and anti-British militant organisation. He recruited and arranged military training for peasants and by 1935 he had enlisted between 200 and 800 men. The cells were equipped with bombs and firearms, which they used to kill Zionist settlers in the area, as well as engaging in a campaign of vandalism of the settlers-planted trees and British constructed rail-lines.[18] In November 1935, two of his men engaged in a firefight with a Palestine police patrol hunting fruit thieves and a policeman was killed. Following the incident, British police launched a manhunt and surrounded al-Qassam in a cave near Ya'bad. In the ensuing battle, al-Qassam was killed.[18]
Oh, and the first mention of armed violence is some Arab guy bringing the ruckus. Although I strongly suspect that this is because we're talking Wikipedia so the pro-Israeli crowd is probably on the scene.
The death of al-Qassam in 1936 generated widespread outrage in the Arab community. Huge crowds accompanied Qassam's body to his grave in Haifa. A few months later, in April 1936, the Arab national general strike broke out. The strike lasted until October 1936, instigated by the Arab Higher Committee, headed by Amin al-Husseini. During the summer of that year, thousands of Jewish-farmed acres and orchards were destroyed, Jewish civilians were attacked and killed, and some Jewish communities, such as those in Beisan and Acre, fled to safer areas.(Gilbert 1998, p. 80) The violence abated for about a year while the British sent the Peel Commission to investigate.(Khalidi 2006, pp. 87–90)
So this al-Qassam guy is out there murderin' it up and when they catch him, the Arabs promptly revolt and start burning whatever Jewish land they can get at. Naturally.
Following the Arab rejection of the Peel Commission recommendation, the revolt resumed in autumn of 1937. Over the next 18 months, the British lost control of Nablus and Hebron. British forces, supported by 6,000 armed Jewish auxiliary police,[20] suppressed the widespread riots with overwhelming force. The British officer Charles Orde Wingate (who supporte
It wouldn't provide much in the way of plausible deniability, but please tell me about how easy it is for them to mount it without the keys. There definitely wasn't a federal case with some guy from South America where the FBI admitted after a year that they couldn't crack his encryption.
enumerate the mount points to see what was in it.
Not quite sure what you mean by this...as a dynamic file, it's only going to have one "mount point," and while encrypted at rest it's more or less (less) indistinguishable from entropy except for the headers.
Personally, trusting the closed-source Dropbox desktop client to do your encryption for you and not ever transmit your keys back to the mothership for the inevitable NSA demands is more trust than I'm willing to give. And you remember the hullabaloo where it turned out that their desktop client auth was horribly, horribly insecure?
Then they aren't actually "offering strong encryption." They're just offering an endpoint for the user to hook into? How is that different from what they're already doing?
No, Multics was the predecessor of Unix. The guys who worked on Multics had the philosophy of "do the exact opposite of Multics where possible" when they worked on Unix. Look it up.
Then after awhile everybody started branching mainline Unix and while they were fighting about restandardizing them all together, Microsoft came in and ate their lunch.
For the kneejerks among us who will undoubtedly not understand the subtlety I was trying to convey there, the saying can be interpreted to apply to both the Israelis and the Palestinians alike.
The Mandate ends and the Israelis get invaded... so they take up arms to defend themselves... and after doing so successfully they go on the offensive and capture more territory... then the Palestinians take up arms to resist and try to get their territory back... so they keep sending suicide bombers and launching rockets over the border... so the Israelis retaliate with helicopter airstrikes...
And it depends where you are online. I'm a member of an online RPG called Kingdom of Loathing with a pretty active chat system.
The moderators are *very* active. Say what you will about heavy-handedness, but recent events have proven that if you start throwing around anything with a flavor of misogyny to it in open chat, you will be banned with much prejudice. May be partially related to our uncharacteristically high female playerbase but the game creators are all guys.
Any theories why that is? I'm trying to imagine why there would be such a big skew towards people actually wanting to *kill* women in this context. It doesn't help them achieve any of their stereotypical oriented-around-women objectives.
My armchair philosophy stab in the dark would be inferiority complex. Rage if you want, but I'll admit I have one sometimes.
For awhile there, every time I read a summary I assumed that the editor/submitter was lying to me somehow and just had to figure out which part was the lie. And it was pretty accurate.
So then you go read the comments until you find the one guy who ACTUALLY knows what's going on when it turns out even the writers of TFA, while not lying per se, are usually purposely misrepresenting the issue. I have to give Slashdot credit for that, as I know I'm not going to get accurate news about copyright law, DRM, government end-runs etc. anywhere else.
I'm more over at Soylent these days, but I think the first part has gotten a bit better here since then.
I didn't object to that statement for being nonfactual so much as coming off as very sloppy research and implying a general carelessness for the topic that I'm sure all those involved would find incredibly offensive. The rest of your points sound pretty reasonable so I'll assume you probably didn't mean it that way.
There's obviously more than enough blame to go around, unfortunately.
There are still groups whose sworn goal is the total destruction of Israel and yet people complain about Israel stealing houses. I guess it's all in the eye of the beholder.
You conveniently ignored the part where I said I really doubt Israel's goal is genocide.
Slashdot Mirror
Reading about the Mandate now. You probably have a lot of fair points. But I find it interesting that when the Brits initially set up the post-Ottoman government, even then the Arabs were doing their best to screw over the immigrants.
Samuel tried to establish self-governing institutions in Palestine, as required by the mandate, but was frustrated by the refusal of the Arab leadership to co-operate with any institution which included Jewish participation.
I won't argue that they should have welcomed them with open arms and put them in charge or anything but a little effort to get along before the endless cycle of killing starts would be nice instead of "we refuse to work with anyone who's a Jew."
Then they try to make a legislature:
The 1922 Palestine Order in Council[14] established a Legislative Council, which was to consist of 23 members; 12 elected, 10 appointed and the High Commissioner.[15] Of the 12 elected members, eight were to be Muslim Arabs, two Christian Arabs and two Jews.[16] Arabs protested against the distribution of the seats, arguing that as they constituted 88% of the population, having only 43% of the seats was unfair.[16] Elections were held in February and March 1923, but due to an Arab boycott, the results were annulled and a 12-member Advisory Council was established.
They give Arabs 11 of the 12 elected positions and they still pitch a fit. Presumably the Arabs expected the Brits to appoint 10 Jews for the latter part of the council...which may have been accurate, I suppose. But saying "we only get 43% of the seats" seems blatantly misleading unless somebody can actually show that all 10 of those appointed were Jewish.
In 1930, Sheikh Izz ad-Din al-Qassam arrived in Palestine from Syria and organised and established the Black Hand, an anti-Zionist and anti-British militant organisation. He recruited and arranged military training for peasants and by 1935 he had enlisted between 200 and 800 men. The cells were equipped with bombs and firearms, which they used to kill Zionist settlers in the area, as well as engaging in a campaign of vandalism of the settlers-planted trees and British constructed rail-lines.[18] In November 1935, two of his men engaged in a firefight with a Palestine police patrol hunting fruit thieves and a policeman was killed. Following the incident, British police launched a manhunt and surrounded al-Qassam in a cave near Ya'bad. In the ensuing battle, al-Qassam was killed.[18]
Oh, and the first mention of armed violence is some Arab guy bringing the ruckus. Although I strongly suspect that this is because we're talking Wikipedia so the pro-Israeli crowd is probably on the scene.
The death of al-Qassam in 1936 generated widespread outrage in the Arab community. Huge crowds accompanied Qassam's body to his grave in Haifa. A few months later, in April 1936, the Arab national general strike broke out. The strike lasted until October 1936, instigated by the Arab Higher Committee, headed by Amin al-Husseini. During the summer of that year, thousands of Jewish-farmed acres and orchards were destroyed, Jewish civilians were attacked and killed, and some Jewish communities, such as those in Beisan and Acre, fled to safer areas.(Gilbert 1998, p. 80) The violence abated for about a year while the British sent the Peel Commission to investigate.(Khalidi 2006, pp. 87–90)
So this al-Qassam guy is out there murderin' it up and when they catch him, the Arabs promptly revolt and start burning whatever Jewish land they can get at. Naturally.
Following the Arab rejection of the Peel Commission recommendation, the revolt resumed in autumn of 1937. Over the next 18 months, the British lost control of Nablus and Hebron. British forces, supported by 6,000 armed Jewish auxiliary police,[20] suppressed the widespread riots with overwhelming force. The British officer Charles Orde Wingate (who supporte
It wouldn't provide much in the way of plausible deniability, but please tell me about how easy it is for them to mount it without the keys. There definitely wasn't a federal case with some guy from South America where the FBI admitted after a year that they couldn't crack his encryption.
enumerate the mount points to see what was in it.
Not quite sure what you mean by this...as a dynamic file, it's only going to have one "mount point," and while encrypted at rest it's more or less (less) indistinguishable from entropy except for the headers.
Personally, trusting the closed-source Dropbox desktop client to do your encryption for you and not ever transmit your keys back to the mothership for the inevitable NSA demands is more trust than I'm willing to give. And you remember the hullabaloo where it turned out that their desktop client auth was horribly, horribly insecure?
Just make a dynamic TrueCrypt volume.
Then they aren't actually "offering strong encryption." They're just offering an endpoint for the user to hook into? How is that different from what they're already doing?
1. Dropbox implements server-side encryption.
2. NSA/TLA drops by.
3. Dropbox gives them your keys.
4. No profit.
You are utterly failing to understand the issue. Have you been living under a rock for the last several years?
If by "worst response of all time" you're referring to your comment, yes :)
The mouse didn't work on a small screen so they put the touchscreen on my 52" TV?!?!
You need to buy the Finglonger peripheral, yeesh.
Isn't hipsterism about rejecting commonly-accepted conventions? E.g. the desktop interface we've been successfully using for the last 25 years?
Bash is less flexible (uses strings instead of objects),
Why would you want to use a scripting language for OOP? Use an "actual" language. For scripting uses, use a scripting language.
I get that you want to harp on about how great linux is..but if *ix supporters fail to be objective in their assessments of these things
How about a more direct comparison--bash vs. batch scripting. They were both around 20 years ago.
*Multics.
And this was before they had to slap an "OS" postfix on everything for some reason. "PCLinuxOS" -- seriously?! So massively redundant.
No, Multics was the predecessor of Unix. The guys who worked on Multics had the philosophy of "do the exact opposite of Multics where possible" when they worked on Unix. Look it up.
Then after awhile everybody started branching mainline Unix and while they were fighting about restandardizing them all together, Microsoft came in and ate their lunch.
Microsoft: Metro
Linux: Unity
I don't like it either but it's already been done to some extent (tablet-interface-ifying the desktop).
Cf. sig
For the kneejerks among us who will undoubtedly not understand the subtlety I was trying to convey there, the saying can be interpreted to apply to both the Israelis and the Palestinians alike.
The Mandate ends and the Israelis get invaded...
so they take up arms to defend themselves...
and after doing so successfully they go on the offensive and capture more territory...
then the Palestinians take up arms to resist and try to get their territory back...
so they keep sending suicide bombers and launching rockets over the border...
so the Israelis retaliate with helicopter airstrikes...
And on and on and on.
And it depends where you are online. I'm a member of an online RPG called Kingdom of Loathing with a pretty active chat system.
The moderators are *very* active. Say what you will about heavy-handedness, but recent events have proven that if you start throwing around anything with a flavor of misogyny to it in open chat, you will be banned with much prejudice. May be partially related to our uncharacteristically high female playerbase but the game creators are all guys.
Well damn, I sure wish somebody had pointed that out sooner than halfway down the page of 600 comments.
The pragmatic argument is, do any such laws protecting J Random Group protect the group better than they cause other problems.
Not to belittle the social issues we face, but people complaining about the Internet being a horrible place trigger my "no duh" reflex.
"Doctor, it hurts when I go on 4chan"
Any theories why that is? I'm trying to imagine why there would be such a big skew towards people actually wanting to *kill* women in this context. It doesn't help them achieve any of their stereotypical oriented-around-women objectives.
My armchair philosophy stab in the dark would be inferiority complex. Rage if you want, but I'll admit I have one sometimes.
For awhile there, every time I read a summary I assumed that the editor/submitter was lying to me somehow and just had to figure out which part was the lie. And it was pretty accurate.
So then you go read the comments until you find the one guy who ACTUALLY knows what's going on when it turns out even the writers of TFA, while not lying per se, are usually purposely misrepresenting the issue. I have to give Slashdot credit for that, as I know I'm not going to get accurate news about copyright law, DRM, government end-runs etc. anywhere else.
I'm more over at Soylent these days, but I think the first part has gotten a bit better here since then.
Are you seriously holding up other countries where minorities are actively oppressed as a positive example?
Isn't "straight cis" redundant? At least for Slashdot's general target demographic, U.S. readers.
(cue people screaming about how the general Slashdot readership somehow isn't American and I should DIAF)
Sounds like you're a member of the wrong gaming communities
Then said Jesus unto him, Put up again thy sword into his place: for all they that take the sword shall perish with the sword. -Matthew 26:52
I didn't object to that statement for being nonfactual so much as coming off as very sloppy research and implying a general carelessness for the topic that I'm sure all those involved would find incredibly offensive. The rest of your points sound pretty reasonable so I'll assume you probably didn't mean it that way.
There's obviously more than enough blame to go around, unfortunately.
There are still groups whose sworn goal is the total destruction of Israel and yet people complain about Israel stealing houses. I guess it's all in the eye of the beholder.
You conveniently ignored the part where I said I really doubt Israel's goal is genocide.