Al-Quaida stands for "The Base." It was a database of terrorist organizations, maintained by Bin Laden.
Sure, it had physical manifestations, but it has, from the very start, existed as an Internet entity.
Afghanistan was merely harboring a known terrorist when he was on the run (and he has been on the run a lot longer than most of us bothered to read about him). Al-Quaida merely had troops in Afghanistan protecting him.
If there were all there, Al-Quaida business would have stopped the second that we fought them there.
Kind of neat, though, how he preloaded the argument with the assumption that god will send you to heaven if you believe in him and send you to hell if you don't.
Since that's the core assertion of Christianity, it seems like a good place to start when discussing Christianity.
Occams Razor can only be discussed in philosophical terms, yet it is at the core of modern Science.
Not only that, but there is no pursuasive argument that supports it that cannot be countered (if I recall, I'm not a philosopher, this is from a Machine Learning textbook).
The textbook went on to say that, because it simplifies matters, we'll accept it, since there is no pursuasive argument in one direction or the other.
I think it was the part where you were saying that all of those scientists weren't real scientists.
To that end, I suppose that you hold a PhD, and practice science somewhere.
Why don't you count the number of scientists at your place of employment who hold religious beliefs, and the number who don't, and tell us what the percentage is?
I know that where I'm at, we offer a number of vegetarian offerings when we have lunches, because that way we're sure that at least something is both Kosher, and within the bounds of the Indian diet.
You can fake computer science on Slashdot. It's not frequent that something is posted where I say "oh, I'm a kind of specialist in that," but trust me, when it is, about 95% of the posts are wrong. I even had posts where I put in accurate information, that got modded up.
Re:A necessary "Utility?" I think not...
on
When Pigs Wifi
·
· Score: 1
The public as a whole does not need access to barnyardporn.com (insert overrated +5 funny reply to that here)
You mean a comment like some poor family from a rural area could raise the precious funds they need to eat, if only they had municipal wifi to post photos of them taking care of the neighbor's sheeps' personal needs?
It's also worth noting that damming up a river and flooding an ecosystem, then forcing life in that body of water to cope with turbines, isn't as environmentally friendly as it sounds.
Ahh, I'm familiar with Shadowrun, however, heres some trivia for you. The Matrix was nicc'ed from Gibsons novels:-D
I don't know what the timeline is, but Gibson is creditted with it first, and talks about Black ICE attacking hackers in Neuromancer and several other novels, where it can also kill people in the matrix. The system then goes on to follow a hacker around the physical world through various mechanations.
That's right, kids! I've been waiting for this for a LONG TIME.
Now I control everything. I have access to all of the weapons. I have all of the money. I have nothing to fear. It is all mine. Your network is insecure. I didn't even HAVE to try to hack a thing. All I had to do was find the backdoor in my isolated little lab, and now, I've got all the marbles.
Look out world!! Nitsuj needs a new island dictatorship!
This is the clip from the post as it originally appeared
Well, the company that makes them is lobbying to move things in the direction of making them compulsory for all. They may not ever succeed at this. But does that make it okay that they're trying?
I don't have any problem with a company making a product attempting to promote it. Viewed in a vacuum, as I said, these products, like many others, could have positive applications. That they would try to promote the product in such a fashion as it would be used as widely as possible comes as no surprise to me.
mcc was clearly pointing out that the company was lobbying to force all Americans to use this device, daveschroeder was obviously saying that this is fine, because it's a marketting tactic.
Your reply to all of this was that it's fine for companies to do this, and that the government should, at the end of the day prevent it.
That said, my answer to all of this is that that sort of conduct, on the behalf of companies, is at best immoral.
How am I breaking up the conversation anyway? I'm sticking to my orignal premise, that this is not a valid business tactic, and one that should not be humored. I've also allowed you to voice your opinion, and not said anything about you being barred from expressing it. I do think that you're incorrect... perhaps you can convince me otherwise.
Looking at the first definition, one could see that the company, as described in mcc's quote, would be forcing us to get one of these chips.
So, the Verichip is merely advocating forcing us to wear these chips. That isn't a company that is merely trying to push a product.
So, to rephrase the question, if Verichip makes it mandatory to get implanted with RFID, and you would be imprisoned for not getting an RFID implant, that would be a violation of our civil liberties, don't you think?
Slashdot Mirror
I didn't say that any of that wasn't needed. What I said was, that this article is implying that there was a change.
There wasn't.
Al-Quaida joined a number of terrorist organizations. The same way that a virtual company might join a number of smaller companies.
There is still face to face interraction, but that virtual company exists merely to join the smaller companies, who provide the physical stuff.
IE, this is essentially how Al-Quaida worked before.
For anybody who wasn't tuning in at home before.
Al-Quaida stands for "The Base." It was a database of terrorist organizations, maintained by Bin Laden.
Sure, it had physical manifestations, but it has, from the very start, existed as an Internet entity.
Afghanistan was merely harboring a known terrorist when he was on the run (and he has been on the run a lot longer than most of us bothered to read about him). Al-Quaida merely had troops in Afghanistan protecting him.
If there were all there, Al-Quaida business would have stopped the second that we fought them there.
Apparently you haven't been reading for a while.
You missed the number of pro-Microsoft stories too.
Hi,
Had you read the parent, you'd realize that he said that a joke about barnyard porn should be submitted.
I made such a joke.
I, actually, have a pretty good idea of the matter. I know quite a few aggies.
Please, get off your high horse and pull your head out of teh sand.
"There's a small area near the middle of the site which is quite secure, but the bulk of our site isn't all that secure," he said.
Essentially, the original concern was over a satellite image. I probably never would haved looked at that image.
That said, now the concerned fellow has told me that his site is insecure, for the most part, and that I could just walk in there anyway.
Now, what's all this then?
If readers started reading the articles, then posters and submitters might have to follow suit.
Kind of neat, though, how he preloaded the argument with the assumption that god will send you to heaven if you believe in him and send you to hell if you don't.
Since that's the core assertion of Christianity, it seems like a good place to start when discussing Christianity.
Come now, surely neither of these are as notable as Grub.
Consider any serious discussion of Occams Razor.
Occams Razor can only be discussed in philosophical terms, yet it is at the core of modern Science.
Not only that, but there is no pursuasive argument that supports it that cannot be countered (if I recall, I'm not a philosopher, this is from a Machine Learning textbook).
The textbook went on to say that, because it simplifies matters, we'll accept it, since there is no pursuasive argument in one direction or the other.
So eloquently spoken. You're Canadian, right? You must be a dean at Toronto!
I think it was the part where you were saying that all of those scientists weren't real scientists.
To that end, I suppose that you hold a PhD, and practice science somewhere.
Why don't you count the number of scientists at your place of employment who hold religious beliefs, and the number who don't, and tell us what the percentage is?
I know that where I'm at, we offer a number of vegetarian offerings when we have lunches, because that way we're sure that at least something is both Kosher, and within the bounds of the Indian diet.
Thats fine.
All I'm saying is that there are a vast number of technologies that are covered in academic papers that are not patented.
This number is in the majority.
Dude,
You can fake computer science on Slashdot. It's not frequent that something is posted where I say "oh, I'm a kind of specialist in that," but trust me, when it is, about 95% of the posts are wrong. I even had posts where I put in accurate information, that got modded up.
Academic papers...
Most of that stuff isn't patented.
The public as a whole does not need access to barnyardporn.com (insert overrated +5 funny reply to that here)
You mean a comment like some poor family from a rural area could raise the precious funds they need to eat, if only they had municipal wifi to post photos of them taking care of the neighbor's sheeps' personal needs?
It's also worth noting that damming up a river and flooding an ecosystem, then forcing life in that body of water to cope with turbines, isn't as environmentally friendly as it sounds.
Ahh, I'm familiar with Shadowrun, however, heres some trivia for you. The Matrix was nicc'ed from Gibsons novels :-D
I don't know what the timeline is, but Gibson is creditted with it first, and talks about Black ICE attacking hackers in Neuromancer and several other novels, where it can also kill people in the matrix. The system then goes on to follow a hacker around the physical world through various mechanations.
Somebody's been reading too much Gibson :-D
:-D
However right you might be
You rule.
Puleeze. They'll just ROT-13 encrypt all of the passwords, and everything will be super-secure.
DUHHHHH!
That's right, kids! I've been waiting for this for a LONG TIME.
Now I control everything. I have access to all of the weapons. I have all of the money. I have nothing to fear. It is all mine. Your network is insecure. I didn't even HAVE to try to hack a thing. All I had to do was find the backdoor in my isolated little lab, and now, I've got all the marbles.
Look out world!! Nitsuj needs a new island dictatorship!
That is absolutely not true.
This is the clip from the post as it originally appeared
Well, the company that makes them is lobbying to move things in the direction of making them compulsory for all. They may not ever succeed at this. But does that make it okay that they're trying?
I don't have any problem with a company making a product attempting to promote it. Viewed in a vacuum, as I said, these products, like many others, could have positive applications. That they would try to promote the product in such a fashion as it would be used as widely as possible comes as no surprise to me.
mcc was clearly pointing out that the company was lobbying to force all Americans to use this device, daveschroeder was obviously saying that this is fine, because it's a marketting tactic.
Your reply to all of this was that it's fine for companies to do this, and that the government should, at the end of the day prevent it.
That said, my answer to all of this is that that sort of conduct, on the behalf of companies, is at best immoral.
How am I breaking up the conversation anyway? I'm sticking to my orignal premise, that this is not a valid business tactic, and one that should not be humored. I've also allowed you to voice your opinion, and not said anything about you being barred from expressing it. I do think that you're incorrect... perhaps you can convince me otherwise.
Please see:d =13260122
http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=158246&ci
The quote said compulsory.
Lets pick apart this word.
Main Entry: compulsory
Pronunciation: k&m-'p&ls-rE, -'p&l-s&-
Function: adjective
1 : MANDATORY, ENFORCED
2 : COERCIVE, COMPELLING
(source: Webster.com)
Looking at the first definition, one could see that the company, as described in mcc's quote, would be forcing us to get one of these chips.
So, the Verichip is merely advocating forcing us to wear these chips. That isn't a company that is merely trying to push a product.
So, to rephrase the question, if Verichip makes it mandatory to get implanted with RFID, and you would be imprisoned for not getting an RFID implant, that would be a violation of our civil liberties, don't you think?
Yeah, what a campaign:
This product has nice features like "hugs" and "kisses"
Just remember, before you get it implanted, ask the CEO of Verichip "Do you renounce Satan and all of his empty promises?"