The point is that the article summary is wrong, and tries to state that private jets all get scanned. No, they do not. If you would prefer to sit there in your wrongness, being wrong, do so. But by calling someone correcting wrongness a douche, you are simply taking the side of wrong, which is a lame position to take. And explains why you are posting as an Anonymous Coward - you don't want to lose karma by being moderated for, you know, being wrong.
I flew out of BWI. Baltimore Washington International. Huge airpot. No scans. Private tarmac. Simply put, you're wrong. Also, it's now been revealed that this entire incident is a hoax. So eat your words doubly:)
I just flew on a private jet, and they didn't scan shit of mine. In fact, they even talked about how people had smoked weed on their jets before. So I call bullshit -- something's wrong in the summary.
Yea, I understand the situation, but this is a new age. The people who hide only make those who don't stick out like sore thumbs more. If everyone lived in the open, there would be far too many targets to be eliminated. Those who continue to hide behind their own personal iron curtains only propagate the conformity. The internet didn't exist during the barbarism of our past; the paradigm is quite different now. Think of all the groups who have been willing to stand up and be counted, and are now, ever so slowly, gaining their rights. Gay marriage being the current one. 1000s of years of discrimination wiped out within a few decades of a global communication infrastructure being created. You think these gays would have gotten their rights had they refused to acknowledge their own existence by hiding behind a shroud of privacy?
So yeah, I get the points everyone is making. I just find them to be of an outdated mindset. They are basing opinions by looking towards the past instead of the future. Jennicam had it right.
A: Not everyone is a walking vagina frightened of someone getting our info. Not everyone needs to hide in the shadows with a tinfoil hat because, OH NO, somebody might have INFORMATION on us. Not everyone is naive to think this is something they can actually control, anyway.
i stopped reading your comment after "1". He asked "What has Iran done to us", and you said "Jailed and tortured its own population". Uh, Iran isn't "us". So you failed to answer his question at all. 1 is not something Iran did to us. I stopped reading after that.
And states had taxes before 1913, as did kings, as did everybody. In the absence of rule you simply have "taxes" in the form of bandits taking your money and giving you nothing for it. Accept complexity.
I have a hard time, in my gut, accepting that our brains have evolved anything specific to 2-dimensional image processing whatsoever. It might just be our training over our life, in which case, we are simply suffering because we are human relics, soon to be obsolete and replaced by our children that grew up with 3-D movies and have no problems with it.
People had a lot of problem with color when it came out too. Complaints included "realer for the sake of being real", "too real", "gimmicky"...
Military leaks are not a new thing. As much as it tickles our geek fancy that it's TEH INTERNETZ doing it this time, it's not a new thing. WikiLeaks hasn't truly changed the game, it's just better than what we had before.
I agree with your tone and what you have to say, more or less, but you are trying to lump civilian casualties in with operational details such as troop movement strategies. 1 is not 2, even for large values of 1:)
You seem to be as one-dimensional in your thinking as the people that started this war. And then you put words in my mouth -- a hilarious attack strategy also usually only used by idiot conversations. You're a funny man. It's quite easy to google what ClintJCL (me) thinks about the war:
You shouldn't make accusations against people (me) when those people can easily prove your accusations wrong. It just makes you look like a silly ideologue. Not everything is black and white.
No, times do not change with respect to military strategies. If you know how your enemy thinks and acts, you can predict his enemy and work against him. Don't be so stupid in your thinking.
Also: You must have missed the part where I said I was pro-leak.
Some people just want to live in the black and white world of false dichotomies. I suppose with computer people who like 0s and 1s maybe this is fun because it lets you classify people like bits.
I guess if someone (not necessarily me) wanted to argue with that point, they might argue that the civilians who want to avoid the war could use this info to know what areas to avoid and save their asses, and thus it could end up saving lives. Of course, the civilians probably don't have computers to access to wikileaks, so that point is probably moot due to the practicality of the situation.
Well, aren't these movements over half a year old? I mean, do they often sit around in the same place for half a year in secrecy? I'm just wondering; not actually trying to make a point.
They are not zombies that mindlessly and randomly kill (I'm imagining something out of Robotron 2012). If you cannot understand your enemy, you will never be able to defeat them.
Slashdot Mirror
The point is that the article summary is wrong, and tries to state that private jets all get scanned. No, they do not. If you would prefer to sit there in your wrongness, being wrong, do so. But by calling someone correcting wrongness a douche, you are simply taking the side of wrong, which is a lame position to take. And explains why you are posting as an Anonymous Coward - you don't want to lose karma by being moderated for, you know, being wrong.
I flew out of BWI. Baltimore Washington International. Huge airpot. No scans. Private tarmac. Simply put, you're wrong. Also, it's now been revealed that this entire incident is a hoax. So eat your words doubly :)
I just flew on a private jet, and they didn't scan shit of mine. In fact, they even talked about how people had smoked weed on their jets before. So I call bullshit -- something's wrong in the summary.
So yeah, I get the points everyone is making. I just find them to be of an outdated mindset. They are basing opinions by looking towards the past instead of the future. Jennicam had it right.
Your examples aren't very compelling to me. How hard is it to not post nude photos or use geotags? -Clint, living publicly on the internet for 15 yrs
A: Not everyone is a walking vagina frightened of someone getting our info. Not everyone needs to hide in the shadows with a tinfoil hat because, OH NO, somebody might have INFORMATION on us. Not everyone is naive to think this is something they can actually control, anyway.
If I own an office, I should be able to whip my workers.
i stopped reading your comment after "1". He asked "What has Iran done to us", and you said "Jailed and tortured its own population". Uh, Iran isn't "us". So you failed to answer his question at all. 1 is not something Iran did to us. I stopped reading after that.
And states had taxes before 1913, as did kings, as did everybody. In the absence of rule you simply have "taxes" in the form of bandits taking your money and giving you nothing for it. Accept complexity.
People had a lot of problem with color when it came out too. Complaints included "realer for the sake of being real", "too real", "gimmicky"...
Yes. Seeing things in three dimensions does nothing to improve realism. Realty looks 2 dimensional. (Are you a cyclops?)
Although I, too, look silly when I type "conversations" when I mean to type "conservatives". Oy vey.
Don't read my comment - read this guy's grandchild-comment to mine: http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1752470&cid=33232074 - He says it better than I ever could.
I agree with your tone and what you have to say, more or less, but you are trying to lump civilian casualties in with operational details such as troop movement strategies. 1 is not 2, even for large values of 1 :)
http://delicious.com/clintjcl/warinafghanistan - The collection of links about the war, all of which are also integrated into my blog [but easier to read them on delicious].
You shouldn't make accusations against people (me) when those people can easily prove your accusations wrong. It just makes you look like a silly ideologue. Not everything is black and white.
Thank you, Sir, for stating my feelings better than I could have.
Also: You must have missed the part where I said I was pro-leak.
He's right. I'm pro-leak, but it's true. Go read some Sun Tzu or something.
Some people just want to live in the black and white world of false dichotomies. I suppose with computer people who like 0s and 1s maybe this is fun because it lets you classify people like bits.
Only 3 states are.
I guess if someone (not necessarily me) wanted to argue with that point, they might argue that the civilians who want to avoid the war could use this info to know what areas to avoid and save their asses, and thus it could end up saving lives. Of course, the civilians probably don't have computers to access to wikileaks, so that point is probably moot due to the practicality of the situation.
So I tend to agree with you, let's say 85%.
It's not exactly random, though. But yes, you understand it more than the previous poster.
Well, aren't these movements over half a year old? I mean, do they often sit around in the same place for half a year in secrecy? I'm just wondering; not actually trying to make a point.
They are not zombies that mindlessly and randomly kill (I'm imagining something out of Robotron 2012). If you cannot understand your enemy, you will never be able to defeat them.
Well, you see, The Taliban kills when they have "reason" to - and they just gave them more reasons. (I'm pro-leak.)