You also failed to specify which of his examples of libertarianism are really anarchistic. I assume you meant those about personal liberty. Those are indeed liberal and anarchistic, not libertarian. I still think you should be more specific in your critique. One could get the impression that you meant to say libertarians are anarchists, (which is obviously nonsense.)
That libertarian countries don't have a functioning government is his point; how is that anti-liberty?
Lastly, when you say corporations are "nothing more than collectives," do you mean they are something less than collectives? Indeed they are rarely run collectively, but that fact was at the base of his critizism, why would he need to admit it?
And, yes, it's true that it can be proven that no fair voting system can exist,
I'm sorry, and forgive my ignorance, but to the best of my knowledge it has only been proven at one time that no fair system did exist, not that it is impossible for a fair system to exist. In particular, I have not seen proof yet that least opposition election (where voters get a list of candidates and cross out who they do not want, and the candidate that has been crossed out the least times wins) is unfair, which is not to say that is isn't, but that I don't know.
Is it really the case that no fair voting system can exist?
The US is monitoring all major financial transactions in the EU. They also copy every telefax transmitted via an international relay carrier. There is evidence that US companies knew exactly what EU companies would offer on public contract bids by the US government before the offers were officially made public. I think that is a fine example of a country conducting industrial espionage.
It apppears to me that rather than preying on their followers, those that lead prey on those that get out of the way with the help of those that follow them.
And this is why Anonymous will never affect the Church of Scientology in any way whatsoever: Because they lack a hierarchical organization and just passively sit around discussing without causing losses to the Church or otherwise perturbating the status quo.
Twitter just lacks the possibility to create strong social ties that motivate people to form flashmobs.
If you pause, whatever google instant is suggesting that you search for becomes part of your browser history.
I would consider that a feature. Poison everyone's cache with potentially offensive words, make it harder to identify those who dare seek what man was not meant to know.
Slashdot Mirror
from this generation onward, kids will grow up totally assuming they are being tapped, bugged and wire-sniffed.
Not assuming. Knowing.
we really didn't have that feeling decades ago (I'm old enough to know).
Ignorance is bliss.
Most people prefer to continue to not believe it.
His was not a slippery slope argument. Yours is.
You also failed to specify which of his examples of libertarianism are really anarchistic.
I assume you meant those about personal liberty. Those are indeed liberal and anarchistic, not libertarian. I still think you should be more specific in your critique. One could get the impression that you meant to say libertarians are anarchists, (which is obviously nonsense.)
That libertarian countries don't have a functioning government is his point; how is that anti-liberty?
Lastly, when you say corporations are "nothing more than collectives," do you mean they are something less than collectives? Indeed they are rarely run collectively, but that fact was at the base of his critizism, why would he need to admit it?
Could this mean that ReactOS is getting attention again?
why isn't your page dynamically generated server-side
It also says on the same page that it is 100% dynamically generated. I assume that means server-side.
Still, I can't take a page seriously that explicitly says: Please do something stupid.
I think Wolf is afraid that NASA would be helping the Chinese.
When actually, Bolden wants help for NASA from the Chinese.
And, yes, it's true that it can be proven that no fair voting system can exist,
I'm sorry, and forgive my ignorance, but to the best of my knowledge it has only been proven at one time that no fair system did exist, not that it is impossible for a fair system to exist. In particular, I have not seen proof yet that least opposition election (where voters get a list of candidates and cross out who they do not want, and the candidate that has been crossed out the least times wins) is unfair, which is not to say that is isn't, but that I don't know.
Is it really the case that no fair voting system can exist?
The US is monitoring all major financial transactions in the EU.
They also copy every telefax transmitted via an international relay carrier.
There is evidence that US companies knew exactly what EU companies would offer on public contract bids by the US government before the offers were officially made public.
I think that is a fine example of a country conducting industrial espionage.
If religion didn't exist, people would blame their bad behavior on something else. Video games, or rock and roll music perhaps...
Did you notice how only religious people blame things like these?
Terrorism is what the Directorat uses to keep the people in line after the French revolution.
Perhaps this is a uninvolved state that just wants the US and Israel actively engaged and distracted by dealing with Iran.
Tinfoil hat territory.
I looked at Zuckerman's page on Facebook to see if he liked the movie, but he hasn't posted anything yet.
Maybe because you misspelled his name.
(Or was that the joke?)
I wonder if theres anything to be gained by spoofing your mac address as one from another location, possibly to circumvent some geolocked content?
Unlikely. Such things are usually geolocated via IP address, not MAC.
You could maybe spoof your IP address, or use an appropriate proxy.
"Anything that makes it easier for our enemies to find targets is madness."
Perhaps they should consider banning the ADS-B transmitters, then?
Perhaps they should stop building targets.
When there are not targets, their enemies won't be able to find any, and they win.
It apppears to me that rather than preying on their followers, those that lead prey on those that get out of the way with the help of those that follow them.
And this is why Anonymous will never affect the Church of Scientology in any way whatsoever:
Because they lack a hierarchical organization and just passively sit around discussing without causing losses to the Church or otherwise perturbating the status quo.
Twitter just lacks the possibility to create strong social ties that motivate people to form flashmobs.
If you pause, whatever google instant is suggesting that you search for becomes part of your browser history.
I would consider that a feature. Poison everyone's cache with potentially offensive words, make it harder to identify those who dare seek what man was not meant to know.
No, the military has little use for self-centered cunts, because there is sound reason for the authority structure.
I wouldn't consider giving someone the ability to force others to die with impunity for their personal benefit sound reason.