The janitor's function in society is just as important as that of the CEO of Exxon
You have to define "important". A single CEO can be responsible for the gain or loss of thousands of jobs and thus impacts more people than any janitor could. Of course janitors are important, but their duties can be taught in a single shift. A CEO usually needs years of experience in a specific industry to be effective, as well as natural leadership skills (i.e. "gifted").
Are you a security expert? You seem to think you are one. How do you know there is no vast network of terrorists? How do you know they don't routinely contact each other? How do you know the methods by which they transfer money and material?
I am not a security expert. My interest is not about these details. It's about given a threat of the severity of 9/11, what am I willing to do, or to sacrifice, to meet that threat and defeat it?
Counting bodies is one method of determining priorities - a poor one. A murder - a single act that causes a single death - is different than a single act that causes thousands of deaths. And what if that single act could be repeated? Terrorist acts are a legitimate threat - why can't you see that?
You also fail to realize the impact that repeated acts of this nature would have. What if the target were stadiums full of people, national monuments, nuclear power plants? Terrorism is a significant problem, anyone can see this.
Your phrase "wholesale slaughter of our freedoms" is laughable - the "slaughter" simply isn't happening. You don't know history. At no time in history has any nation ever done as LITTLE as the US has done in curtailing individual freedom given an attack with the impact of 9/11.
And the impact of 9/11 WAS staggering - you fail to realize this as well. Perhaps it isn't staggering to you, perhaps you think we deserved it. Maybe you think we should shake it off and get back to being excellent targets.
The article was about the rising popularity of Ask.com, my point was to point out that conservatives are unhappy about a perceived liberal bias at Google (my original post clearly says "perceived"). My point was not to prove or disprove anything, only to point out perceptions about Google that are leading to people using Ask.com. The Fortune article didn't address this as a reason for Ask.com's success. Whether or not allegations of bias are true, it's an entirely valid point.
Most of the points I summarized are from the unbiased article at searchengineguide.com. In fact, I think they are all from that article.
My original post has been unfairly modded to "troll", maybe someone can explain why since my post directly addressed the topic and said nothing inflammatory.
Ask.com gaining conservative searchers
on
Ask.com's Rising Star
·
· Score: -1, Troll
Many conservatives have stopped using Google because of a perceived bias against conservative blogs and news sources. Many have turned to ask.com and dogpile.com (which uses google) as viable alternatives. Here's a right-leaning analysis and a more impartial analysis.
Google has complained of "hate speech" from conservative sites when removing them, but usually the speech is from comments left by users, not the stories themselves. And google continues to news index Jihadist sites from the Middle East, which are rife with anti-semitic hate speech and propaganda, as well as US leftist sites like dailykos.com and democraticunderground.com, which contain the same type of hate speech found on right wing sites, only these sites are from the left.
In addition to this, Google has been accused of refusing to run conservative ads and it's pretty well known that 98% of political contributions from Google employees went to liberal candidates and causes, including over $1 million to Moveon.org.
Many people concerned with human rights (left and right) are appalled by Google's partnership with China's Communist government, which forces google to censor search results.
Vinyl Chloride is one of the only environmental substances known to specifically cause brain cancer. Is it possible there is a source of contaimination in the building? Accidental or deliberate, perhaps? Small amounts of vinyl chloride can dissolve in water, and it is found in tiny amounts in tobacco smoke. These people may have been exposed years ago and are just now showing disease.
Most multi-party systems wind up aligning into majority and minority blocs that act like two-party systems anyway. A schism in the majority bloc often results in the govt failing and new elections being called, which leaves the momentum of bureaucrats in charge, and in many Parlimentary systems, the bureaucrats can issue horrendous regulations without any govt approval at all. I think the two-party system has served the USA quite well (too much power still given to bureaucrats, though).
It has only been very recently (the past 40 years) that pornograpy has enjoyed any constitutional protection at all. People were routinely sent to jail before the 1970's for producing and distributing pornography. It is still quite normal for communities to restrict the manufacture, sale, and distribution of pornography in an entirely legal manner, per the Supreme Court test, although lengthy jail sentences are rare.
Whorley was sent to jail for violating a federal law, he is free to challenge his conviction on 1st Amendment grounds, but it is likely he will lose because he fails the Supreme Court's test for pornagraphic material. From your short description of the material he possesed, I'm guessing it doesn't have 1st Amendment protection.
Calling something "pure expression" because it does not contain images of living persons (or a victim in the case of child porn) isn't legally meaningful. A written description of child rape is just as legitimate a target of legal restriction as an actual picture. The idea that something can't be restricted because there is no victim is also without legal foundation and is libertarian nonsense.
I'm extremely amused by your Gov't bashing as well. Equating a crackdown on child porn with a coming assault on political speech is idiotic and without foundation - we aren't any closer to being packed into boxcars today as we were when Clinton was president, or Eisenhower, or Lincoln. Your real gripe is with the Supreme Court, which in spite of being exceedingly liberal in the past 40 years has allowed modest restriction on porn and somewhat tighter restrictions on child porn.
Guys like Dwight Whorley deserve to be in jail. I'm glad society isn't forced to tolerate his sickness.
proven yourself to be an idiotic moron. you're a lying sack of shit. Asshats like yourself whine like little bitches typical karma whore tactic. only fools or sociopaths could possibly support them keep your moronic 24 hour propaganda lies to yourself.
This is known as "insightful" on Slashdot. Nothing to say or can't be troubled with facts? Insult, attack, defame.
Stop drinking the kool aid and start thinking for yourself. This administration is destroying this country.
The irony of this statement is as delicious as the Kool-aid you yourself are gulping.
I have not heard of the ACLU fighting for the right of Christians to observe private religious practice on or using public property or funds. Can you cite a case? It might go a long way towards making your argument...
Your hyperbole is showing. Cutting through your nonsense would be a waste of time, let me just give you one example - the "worst of the Soviet Union" would be the forced slavery and starvation of tens of millions of your own citizens. Somehow the warrantless surveillence of the international communications of ~35 persons over a 3 year period during a time of war fails to meet the rather high Soviet standard of evil.
Actually the vast majority of Democrats want to support it, just as they did in 2001, but there are three provisions in the current bill they want removed, mostly technical issues like how long you can wait after a sneak-and-peek search before telling the suspect. 99% of the Patriot Act is fine with Democrats, as it generally is with the American people.
Some of the people who contracted Mad Cow disease were vegetarians who got it from using fertilizer that (unknown to them) contained cow offal. There's no question that if a prion gets blasted out of someone's tailpipe, it will wind up in the food chain. The prion that causes Mad Cow is extremely difficult to destroy - it's a protein molecule, not a living organism. Even heat as high as 360C will not break it down, and traditional chemical sterilization doesn't work. I would be extremely worried about using any animals known to carry prion brain wasting disease (cow, deer, humans).
Since criminal defendents are guaranteed a trial by jury, it is "the people" not "the government" that decides capital punishment. The govt merely allows it and throws the switch (which is better than lynching).
Also, health care affects everyone, capital punishment only affects those who get caught...
Re:Looks like they crossed the threshold...
on
Bad Day To Be Sony
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
Spitzer's usual tactic is to threaten corporations with civil or criminal suits, then agree to drop/reduce charges if the corporation will pay large fines/reparations, admit some form of wrongdoing, and/or make some significant public contribution. Guilty or not, most corporations will settle out of court rather than suffer the bad publicity, spend millions on lawyers in court, and possibly be found guilty anyway by a jury that has to weigh enormously complex law vs a big Evil Corporation.
It's very telling that when Spitzer does get someone in court, he usually loses. He is much less interested in correctly prosecuting the law than in generating PR for himself.
If Spitzer were truly interested in making corporations pay, he would refuse to settle the big cases, drag companies into court, and really make them pay (and establish good legal precedent so other corporations would shape up).
So you're advocating that the state should be able to prevent parents from sitting down with their children and choosing as a family what they're going to believe?
That's called fascism.
People can choose to be ignorant and stupid. Parents often pass their ignorance on to their children. It's sad, but it's always been that way, always will be, and the state can't do anything about it.
Unless you're a fascist, anyway. Maoist, Stalinist, whatever...
I think the right-bashing point you're trying to make is that the ID proponents aren't interested in their own families, they're interested in YOURS and are using the state to enforce that quasi-religious view on everyone.
That's fascism too.
But the change in Kansas was through the democratic process.
So if you live in Kansas, maybe you should move!:)
Abuses of power will happen with or without a Patriot Act. If there were no Patriot Act, or 9/11, or fanatical terrorist enemy, there would STILL be abuses by the FBI. What many people are calling abuses are actually mistakes. An agent can make an honest mistake in the performance of a job (just like we all can, right?). This is not an abuse of power, it's just a mistake, and the law provides for remedy for those harmed by improper action. One valid criticism of the Patriot Act is that it makes remedy more difficult. But as this story shows, the information does come to light eventually.
The important thing here is that we offer a fair trial to the accused and punish them harshly if guilty. Accountability is important.
Most people have not mentioned that information about abuses has come to light we hold our government accountable through many means - in this case, the FOIA.
While most slashdotters would love to believe the US = 1933 Germany, it's just not the case.
Sounds just like the US war for Independance. A bunch of non-uniformed rabble using geurilla (sp?) tactics to defend their home.
Unless you count the part about murdering random civilians by sawing their heads off, targeting children and journalists with bombs, and support for a fascist ideology that sees gang rape as an exceptable form of punishment. Other than that, these bastards are as red, white, and blue as my Uncle Sam.
Yeah, but scientists didn't know shit back then. Now they know everything, even how to keep rats with the plague from escaping their ca...oh never mind.
I suspect developing nations would easily agree to a uniform global per-capita energy and fossil fuel budget
They probably wouldn't agree to it if they understood the devestation such a scheme would cause the world economy. The economic and humanitarian aid would end, as would the retail market for the cheaply made goods and crops that so many developing nations depend on...and I'm sure some third-rate Marxist/Fascist would be around to help them make the right decisions after picking up the pieces.
I'm sorry you haven't been paying attention, but we do understand what is happening and why it's happening.
Actually, you don't, or you would simply explain it without being a smarmy know-it-all.
Slashdot Mirror
The janitor's function in society is just as important as that of the CEO of Exxon
You have to define "important". A single CEO can be responsible for the gain or loss of thousands of jobs and thus impacts more people than any janitor could. Of course janitors are important, but their duties can be taught in a single shift. A CEO usually needs years of experience in a specific industry to be effective, as well as natural leadership skills (i.e. "gifted").
Are you a security expert? You seem to think you are one. How do you know there is no vast network of terrorists? How do you know they don't routinely contact each other? How do you know the methods by which they transfer money and material?
I am not a security expert. My interest is not about these details. It's about given a threat of the severity of 9/11, what am I willing to do, or to sacrifice, to meet that threat and defeat it?
Counting bodies is one method of determining priorities - a poor one. A murder - a single act that causes a single death - is different than a single act that causes thousands of deaths. And what if that single act could be repeated? Terrorist acts are a legitimate threat - why can't you see that?
You also fail to realize the impact that repeated acts of this nature would have. What if the target were stadiums full of people, national monuments, nuclear power plants? Terrorism is a significant problem, anyone can see this.
Your phrase "wholesale slaughter of our freedoms" is laughable - the "slaughter" simply isn't happening. You don't know history. At no time in history has any nation ever done as LITTLE as the US has done in curtailing individual freedom given an attack with the impact of 9/11.
And the impact of 9/11 WAS staggering - you fail to realize this as well. Perhaps it isn't staggering to you, perhaps you think we deserved it. Maybe you think we should shake it off and get back to being excellent targets.
The article was about the rising popularity of Ask.com, my point was to point out that conservatives are unhappy about a perceived liberal bias at Google (my original post clearly says "perceived"). My point was not to prove or disprove anything, only to point out perceptions about Google that are leading to people using Ask.com. The Fortune article didn't address this as a reason for Ask.com's success. Whether or not allegations of bias are true, it's an entirely valid point.
Most of the points I summarized are from the unbiased article at searchengineguide.com. In fact, I think they are all from that article.
My original post has been unfairly modded to "troll", maybe someone can explain why since my post directly addressed the topic and said nothing inflammatory.
Many conservatives have stopped using Google because of a perceived bias against conservative blogs and news sources. Many have turned to ask.com and dogpile.com (which uses google) as viable alternatives. Here's a right-leaning analysis and a more impartial analysis.
Google has complained of "hate speech" from conservative sites when removing them, but usually the speech is from comments left by users, not the stories themselves. And google continues to news index Jihadist sites from the Middle East, which are rife with anti-semitic hate speech and propaganda, as well as US leftist sites like dailykos.com and democraticunderground.com, which contain the same type of hate speech found on right wing sites, only these sites are from the left.
In addition to this, Google has been accused of refusing to run conservative ads and it's pretty well known that 98% of political contributions from Google employees went to liberal candidates and causes, including over $1 million to Moveon.org.
Many people concerned with human rights (left and right) are appalled by Google's partnership with China's Communist government, which forces google to censor search results.
Vinyl Chloride is one of the only environmental substances known to specifically cause brain cancer. Is it possible there is a source of contaimination in the building? Accidental or deliberate, perhaps? Small amounts of vinyl chloride can dissolve in water, and it is found in tiny amounts in tobacco smoke. These people may have been exposed years ago and are just now showing disease.
Most multi-party systems wind up aligning into majority and minority blocs that act like two-party systems anyway. A schism in the majority bloc often results in the govt failing and new elections being called, which leaves the momentum of bureaucrats in charge, and in many Parlimentary systems, the bureaucrats can issue horrendous regulations without any govt approval at all. I think the two-party system has served the USA quite well (too much power still given to bureaucrats, though).
It has only been very recently (the past 40 years) that pornograpy has enjoyed any constitutional protection at all. People were routinely sent to jail before the 1970's for producing and distributing pornography. It is still quite normal for communities to restrict the manufacture, sale, and distribution of pornography in an entirely legal manner, per the Supreme Court test, although lengthy jail sentences are rare.
Whorley was sent to jail for violating a federal law, he is free to challenge his conviction on 1st Amendment grounds, but it is likely he will lose because he fails the Supreme Court's test for pornagraphic material. From your short description of the material he possesed, I'm guessing it doesn't have 1st Amendment protection.
Calling something "pure expression" because it does not contain images of living persons (or a victim in the case of child porn) isn't legally meaningful. A written description of child rape is just as legitimate a target of legal restriction as an actual picture. The idea that something can't be restricted because there is no victim is also without legal foundation and is libertarian nonsense.
I'm extremely amused by your Gov't bashing as well. Equating a crackdown on child porn with a coming assault on political speech is idiotic and without foundation - we aren't any closer to being packed into boxcars today as we were when Clinton was president, or Eisenhower, or Lincoln. Your real gripe is with the Supreme Court, which in spite of being exceedingly liberal in the past 40 years has allowed modest restriction on porn and somewhat tighter restrictions on child porn.
Guys like Dwight Whorley deserve to be in jail. I'm glad society isn't forced to tolerate his sickness.
I love sendmail. It's the reason I became an application engineer instead of a sysadmin.
you're a lying sack of shit.
Asshats like yourself
whine like little bitches
typical karma whore tactic.
only fools or sociopaths could possibly support them
keep your moronic 24 hour propaganda lies to yourself.
This is known as "insightful" on Slashdot. Nothing to say or can't be troubled with facts? Insult, attack, defame.
It is not illegal to be attracted to children. It is only illegal to act on it. Provided that he doesn't, he can still be a good man in my book.
Your book sucks.
Stop drinking the kool aid and start thinking for yourself. This administration is destroying this country.
The irony of this statement is as delicious as the Kool-aid you yourself are gulping.
I have not heard of the ACLU fighting for the right of Christians to observe private religious practice on or using public property or funds. Can you cite a case? It might go a long way towards making your argument...
The only motive Slashdotters need for outrage or intellectual dishonesty are 4 letters: B-U-S-H.
Yet I've had all my rights stripped
Sorry, which right was that?
Your hyperbole is showing. Cutting through your nonsense would be a waste of time, let me just give you one example - the "worst of the Soviet Union" would be the forced slavery and starvation of tens of millions of your own citizens. Somehow the warrantless surveillence of the international communications of ~35 persons over a 3 year period during a time of war fails to meet the rather high Soviet standard of evil.
Actually the vast majority of Democrats want to support it, just as they did in 2001, but there are three provisions in the current bill they want removed, mostly technical issues like how long you can wait after a sneak-and-peek search before telling the suspect. 99% of the Patriot Act is fine with Democrats, as it generally is with the American people.
Some of the people who contracted Mad Cow disease were vegetarians who got it from using fertilizer that (unknown to them) contained cow offal. There's no question that if a prion gets blasted out of someone's tailpipe, it will wind up in the food chain. The prion that causes Mad Cow is extremely difficult to destroy - it's a protein molecule, not a living organism. Even heat as high as 360C will not break it down, and traditional chemical sterilization doesn't work. I would be extremely worried about using any animals known to carry prion brain wasting disease (cow, deer, humans).
Horses are probably OK.
Since criminal defendents are guaranteed a trial by jury, it is "the people" not "the government" that decides capital punishment. The govt merely allows it and throws the switch (which is better than lynching).
Also, health care affects everyone, capital punishment only affects those who get caught...
Spitzer's usual tactic is to threaten corporations with civil or criminal suits, then agree to drop/reduce charges if the corporation will pay large fines/reparations, admit some form of wrongdoing, and/or make some significant public contribution. Guilty or not, most corporations will settle out of court rather than suffer the bad publicity, spend millions on lawyers in court, and possibly be found guilty anyway by a jury that has to weigh enormously complex law vs a big Evil Corporation.
It's very telling that when Spitzer does get someone in court, he usually loses. He is much less interested in correctly prosecuting the law than in generating PR for himself.
If Spitzer were truly interested in making corporations pay, he would refuse to settle the big cases, drag companies into court, and really make them pay (and establish good legal precedent so other corporations would shape up).
Unless the Brit bureaucrats aren't worth their salt, they've already performed a cost/benefit analysis of the system.
Like Jessica Alba's ass, it's a moneymaker.
So you're advocating that the state should be able to prevent parents from sitting down with their children and choosing as a family what they're going to believe?
That's called fascism.
People can choose to be ignorant and stupid. Parents often pass their ignorance on to their children. It's sad, but it's always been that way, always will be, and the state can't do anything about it.
Unless you're a fascist, anyway. Maoist, Stalinist, whatever...
I think the right-bashing point you're trying to make is that the ID proponents aren't interested in their own families, they're interested in YOURS and are using the state to enforce that quasi-religious view on everyone.
That's fascism too.
But the change in Kansas was through the democratic process.
So if you live in Kansas, maybe you should move!
Fighting intelligent design vs. allowing a copyright to be used like a sledgehammer?
Slashdotters heads are popping like blisters all over the globe.
Abuses of power will happen with or without a Patriot Act. If there were no Patriot Act, or 9/11, or fanatical terrorist enemy, there would STILL be abuses by the FBI. What many people are calling abuses are actually mistakes. An agent can make an honest mistake in the performance of a job (just like we all can, right?). This is not an abuse of power, it's just a mistake, and the law provides for remedy for those harmed by improper action. One valid criticism of the Patriot Act is that it makes remedy more difficult. But as this story shows, the information does come to light eventually.
The important thing here is that we offer a fair trial to the accused and punish them harshly if guilty. Accountability is important.
Most people have not mentioned that information about abuses has come to light we hold our government accountable through many means - in this case, the FOIA.
While most slashdotters would love to believe the US = 1933 Germany, it's just not the case.
Sounds just like the US war for Independance. A bunch of non-uniformed rabble using geurilla (sp?) tactics to defend their home.
Unless you count the part about murdering random civilians by sawing their heads off, targeting children and journalists with bombs, and support for a fascist ideology that sees gang rape as an exceptable form of punishment. Other than that, these bastards are as red, white, and blue as my Uncle Sam.
Yeah, but scientists didn't know shit back then. Now they know everything, even how to keep rats with the plague from escaping their ca...oh never mind.
I suspect developing nations would easily agree to a uniform global per-capita energy and fossil fuel budget
They probably wouldn't agree to it if they understood the devestation such a scheme would cause the world economy. The economic and humanitarian aid would end, as would the retail market for the cheaply made goods and crops that so many developing nations depend on...and I'm sure some third-rate Marxist/Fascist would be around to help them make the right decisions after picking up the pieces.
I'm sorry you haven't been paying attention, but we do understand what is happening and why it's happening.
Actually, you don't, or you would simply explain it without being a smarmy know-it-all.