Owner status trumps technical experience every time. Trust me, any PHB stupid enough to demand access to areas they know nothing about and then go messing about is going to screw something up. When they realize just how much money it will take to fix their screwups, sooner or later they will realize why it isn't smart to give themselves access to said areas. But if the owner demands the keys to the kingdom he owns, he get them whether or not it is the smart move or not. How long do you think any employee who refuses an order from the owner is going to last? And how do you go about determining who is qualified to make the decision if someone is qualified?
There is a vast difference between a PHB making the wise decision to censor himself, and you making the unwise decision that he is not competent enough to have full control over his own property.
...how is it unwise if he actually is incompetent?
I heard that if you post something bad on Slashdot, CmdrTaco hands over your IP address to Anonymous -- where do you think all the GNAA/Goatse trolls went?
They went to 4chan. True story, he doesn't hand your IP address over so they can DDOS you, he hands your IP address over so they can recruit you. You don't think/b/ would be the cesspool it is without absorbing the goatse trolls, do you?
For the record I do believe homosexuals have the right to get married, but to play Devil's advocate, would you support polygamy?
Yes. Wholeheartedly.
It's the same logic in that the people entering into the contract are consenting adults who happen to have a different way of expressing their love/sexuality.
And it's equally correct in this context. I challenge you to give me one single public-policy argument that isn't based on fanciful speculation and doesn't reduce to "my god says it's wrong" or "I think it's icky" for why polygamy should be illegal.
I also think the timing isn't that bad, the lawyer for the girls appealed to a different prosecutor because they felt that comments from the first prosecutor indicated that they weren't being taken seriously, because they weren't.
Well, to be fair, if I were a prosecutor and some women came to me saying they voluntarily had sex with a man and regretted it later, and seeking to have him charged with some form of sexual assault for taking them up on their desire to have sex with him, I wouldn't take them very seriously either.
It's quite a bit better than marginally, but this announcement could not have had a more ironic timing. And the US dropping a few places on the world press freedom list wouldn't look too great either.
Having traveled to China multiple times and read their newspapers I have to say I completely agree with you. Saying we're only "marginally" better was totally inaccurate but a lot more fun.
But let's be honest: the US is still pretty good when it comes to free press. But they're not topping the list.
WTF were the Pentagon Papers? Were they pentagonal?
Basically, back then they didn't have laser printers that the papers had to fit through, so they had a little bit of freedom to play around with shapes.
And apart from the really right-wing Neocon wingnuts, find me a person today who doesn't think the leak of the Pentagon Papers was ultimately for the best.
I know! Joe Lieberman!...er...you said aside from right-wing Neocon wingnuts...um...at this point that's basically what he's become. So shoot, can't name one.
But the fact that the story only appeared over a thousand years after the lifetime of Archimedes or any possible eyewitness pretty much tells us everything we need to know.
Try barely 700 (Archimedes died 212 BC, first writer to attribute the mirror-based death-ray to him lived 474-558 AD). Your point is sound, though. That's still an awful long time for a literate people to remember something without writing it down.
What a lame duck of a Myth. That Myth wasn't even very exciting the first time they did it...
Yeah, if they wanted to do Archimedes, it would have been way more exciting to test whether discovering fluid displacement is exciting enough to make someone run around town naked.
I think we're putting too much emphasis on the US here. Wikileaks is a threat to anyone in power, don't you think that the other 187 countries in Interpol have secrets to hide?
Actually, I was going to put that very same point in my post as well but didn't want to get too long-winded. I do think there's a reasonable chance the US didn't do anything to get them to jump on him but somebody else did. I mean, Wikileaks has been ruffling feathers in a lot of countries for several years now.
Do you have any evidence at all that these two women accusing Assange are part of a US government conspiracy?
They don't need to be in on the conspiracy for there to be one. Do you really believe, if they had made the exact same charges with the exact same evidence on some Joe schmoe that nobody had heard of, then dismissed the charges, then re-filed them after Joe schmoe left the country, and the charges aren't even rape, do you really believe Interpol would be involved? Even if the women are acting completely in earnest, the rest of the system sure isn't.
Please provide any links to show that the US is somehow involved in this criminal case.
The evidence is all circumstantial. We know the US and many other governments basically want Assange dead, and short of that want him out of commission. Having the public suspicious of him is a bonus. Interpol and the Swedish police have both been handling the case very strangely. Then the timing coincides so well between renewed police action and renewed leaking. When you put it all together, it still doesn't prove anything, but it's too sketchy not to be cause for legitimate skepticism.
It's pretty straightforward, really. There's this "progressive" tendency to try to paint companies as faceless, soulless lifesuckers draining all that is meaningful from existence when in reality, it's just people trying to get things done to make a living.
I like poking holes in the "progressive" attempts at class welfare.
I think it's more a tendency to paint them as faceless, soulless legal entities, some of which sometimes do the bad shit that they actually do in fact do. You can't really deny, say, that Firestone and Ford intentionally let people die because it was cheaper than issuing recalls or that BP ignored warnings that resulted in that ecologically catastrophic oil spill, or that our elections are basically bought and sold these days by large corporations, so instead you accuse progressives of class warfare.
Not all companies are alike, and no progressive I know would try to depict them as though they were; you, on the other hand, seem to think "just people trying to get things done to make a living" is an infallible universal descriptor for companies.
As for the reality of class warfare, progressives have never done anything but fight back against the warmongering class. It's like Warren Buffett says: “There’s class warfare, all right, but it’s my class, the rich class, that’s making war, and we’re winning.”
Women from all the world celebrate that they can now compalin to the interpol if their lovers choose to use no condom with the security that they will chase him with full resources in all the brave new world.
They can even wait to do so until they find out he has another lover and get jealous.
Slashdot Mirror
Owner status trumps technical experience every time. Trust me, any PHB stupid enough to demand access to areas they know nothing about and then go messing about is going to screw something up. When they realize just how much money it will take to fix their screwups, sooner or later they will realize why it isn't smart to give themselves access to said areas. But if the owner demands the keys to the kingdom he owns, he get them whether or not it is the smart move or not. How long do you think any employee who refuses an order from the owner is going to last? And how do you go about determining who is qualified to make the decision if someone is qualified?
You're assuming the PHB is the owner.
There is a vast difference between a PHB making the wise decision to censor himself, and you making the unwise decision that he is not competent enough to have full control over his own property.
...how is it unwise if he actually is incompetent?
* - If he is the moron then why is it that you are working for him?
Because he has money and we need jobs.
No, I'm pretty sure 99% are unemployed college students, with the other 1% having dropped out of college to write DDoS scripts.
In other words, 1% evil, 99% hot gas.
You're forgetting about all the high-school students. Also hot gas, but younger and dumber than the college students.
I heard that if you post something bad on Slashdot, CmdrTaco hands over your IP address to Anonymous -- where do you think all the GNAA/Goatse trolls went?
They went to 4chan. True story, he doesn't hand your IP address over so they can DDOS you, he hands your IP address over so they can recruit you. You don't think /b/ would be the cesspool it is without absorbing the goatse trolls, do you?
then how can you official say no one is in charge?
I can say it by opening my mouth and working my vocal cords. And why are you calling me an official?
By that I assume you mean me? Seeing as I'm one of the many people who actually pay for that news service?
You pay for 4chan? Dude, that ain't right. Somebody told you it's not actually a news site, right?
remember rule 1 and 2! you failed
Since when is Anonymous synonymous with Fight Club?
Also, your choice of words is interesting: "polygamy" vs. "polyandry" or "polyamory". Meaning, the union of one man and multiple women.
I think your terminology is a bit off. Polygyny is the union of one man and multiple women. Polygamy is any marriage arrangement where one person has more than one spouse.
For the record I do believe homosexuals have the right to get married, but to play Devil's advocate, would you support polygamy?
Yes. Wholeheartedly.
It's the same logic in that the people entering into the contract are consenting adults who happen to have a different way of expressing their love/sexuality.
And it's equally correct in this context. I challenge you to give me one single public-policy argument that isn't based on fanciful speculation and doesn't reduce to "my god says it's wrong" or "I think it's icky" for why polygamy should be illegal.
I also think the timing isn't that bad, the lawyer for the girls appealed to a different prosecutor because they felt that comments from the first prosecutor indicated that they weren't being taken seriously, because they weren't.
Well, to be fair, if I were a prosecutor and some women came to me saying they voluntarily had sex with a man and regretted it later, and seeking to have him charged with some form of sexual assault for taking them up on their desire to have sex with him, I wouldn't take them very seriously either.
It's quite a bit better than marginally, but this announcement could not have had a more ironic timing. And the US dropping a few places on the world press freedom list wouldn't look too great either.
Having traveled to China multiple times and read their newspapers I have to say I completely agree with you. Saying we're only "marginally" better was totally inaccurate but a lot more fun.
But let's be honest: the US is still pretty good when it comes to free press. But they're not topping the list.
Fair enough.
WTF were the Pentagon Papers? Were they pentagonal?
Basically, back then they didn't have laser printers that the papers had to fit through, so they had a little bit of freedom to play around with shapes.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't Assange accused of having consexual sex?
Yes. The formal charge is consensual sex contrary to the condom laws of Sweden. Previous charges of non-consensual sex have been dropped.
And apart from the really right-wing Neocon wingnuts, find me a person today who doesn't think the leak of the Pentagon Papers was ultimately for the best.
I know! Joe Lieberman!...er...you said aside from right-wing Neocon wingnuts...um...at this point that's basically what he's become. So shoot, can't name one.
But the fact that the story only appeared over a thousand years after the lifetime of Archimedes or any possible eyewitness pretty much tells us everything we need to know.
Try barely 700 (Archimedes died 212 BC, first writer to attribute the mirror-based death-ray to him lived 474-558 AD). Your point is sound, though. That's still an awful long time for a literate people to remember something without writing it down.
What a lame duck of a Myth. That Myth wasn't even very exciting the first time they did it...
Yeah, if they wanted to do Archimedes, it would have been way more exciting to test whether discovering fluid displacement is exciting enough to make someone run around town naked.
I think we're putting too much emphasis on the US here. Wikileaks is a threat to anyone in power, don't you think that the other 187 countries in Interpol have secrets to hide?
Actually, I was going to put that very same point in my post as well but didn't want to get too long-winded. I do think there's a reasonable chance the US didn't do anything to get them to jump on him but somebody else did. I mean, Wikileaks has been ruffling feathers in a lot of countries for several years now.
...that the US is a marginally better place to hold a Press Freedom Day than Red China.
Do you have any evidence at all that these two women accusing Assange are part of a US government conspiracy?
They don't need to be in on the conspiracy for there to be one. Do you really believe, if they had made the exact same charges with the exact same evidence on some Joe schmoe that nobody had heard of, then dismissed the charges, then re-filed them after Joe schmoe left the country, and the charges aren't even rape, do you really believe Interpol would be involved? Even if the women are acting completely in earnest, the rest of the system sure isn't.
Please provide any links to show that the US is somehow involved in this criminal case.
The evidence is all circumstantial. We know the US and many other governments basically want Assange dead, and short of that want him out of commission. Having the public suspicious of him is a bonus. Interpol and the Swedish police have both been handling the case very strangely. Then the timing coincides so well between renewed police action and renewed leaking. When you put it all together, it still doesn't prove anything, but it's too sketchy not to be cause for legitimate skepticism.
Not just Assange. There are others out there. Be proactive.
Definitely. Better to arrest them all before they leak documents, just in case. Why take chances?
It's pretty straightforward, really. There's this "progressive" tendency to try to paint companies as faceless, soulless lifesuckers draining all that is meaningful from existence when in reality, it's just people trying to get things done to make a living.
I like poking holes in the "progressive" attempts at class welfare.
I think it's more a tendency to paint them as faceless, soulless legal entities, some of which sometimes do the bad shit that they actually do in fact do. You can't really deny, say, that Firestone and Ford intentionally let people die because it was cheaper than issuing recalls or that BP ignored warnings that resulted in that ecologically catastrophic oil spill, or that our elections are basically bought and sold these days by large corporations, so instead you accuse progressives of class warfare.
Not all companies are alike, and no progressive I know would try to depict them as though they were; you, on the other hand, seem to think "just people trying to get things done to make a living" is an infallible universal descriptor for companies.
As for the reality of class warfare, progressives have never done anything but fight back against the warmongering class. It's like Warren Buffett says: “There’s class warfare, all right, but it’s my class, the rich class, that’s making war, and we’re winning.”
Women from all the world celebrate that they can now compalin to the interpol if their lovers choose to use no condom with the security that they will chase him with full resources in all the brave new world.
They can even wait to do so until they find out he has another lover and get jealous.
Since when do Swiss banks or government care about where the money comes from?
Hypocrite assholes.
Since people criticized them for helping Hitler. That sort of connection will make you rethink your policies.
Mind you his threat to do that if he was arrested (I don't think he specified for a particular reason) seemed a bit off.
I could be totally wrong, but I though the threat was only to release the insurance file if Wikileaks were pulled completely offline.