And which one is right? We get the same problem with TV. The interenet allows us to spread our opinions and "the news" and an incredible rate. But it is still up to the viewer to determine what is reality and what is BS.
Sure it allows Mr. Smith to converse with Mr. (whateverthecommonlastnameisinthemiddleeast). But that doesn't mean either of them are who they say they are, or that what they have to say has any importance. I am a scientist so I can't speak for everyone, but if Joe Schmo says something about the nature of the universe it immediately gets put on the back burner. Why would I listen to someone who has no background in the thing they are taking about. Realities can be warped, and perceptions can be deluded. Human beings are flawed. Just because I can talk to someone from the other side of the world who is living through something doesn't mean I should trust their opinion or their interpretation.
Interesting to read this, and then look a couple inches below and see the headline "UK Authorities Threaten to Storm Ecuadorian Embassy to Arrest Julian Assange". Not sure why you think declaring him an enemy of the state means that we should consider the UK an enemy. But hey, have fun in your conspiracy bubble.
This is my first post on slashdot since I felt compelled to respond.
I am surprised that this is the only post so far that is critical of both the US military and Wikileaks. Everyone seems to think that Assange could do no wrong, and that Wikileaks is a saint for revealing unto us the corruption of the government.
I for one, am more skeptical. While I will agree with most comments about our government and its over reaching and almost tyrannical military and political prowess. There are some things that I don't want posted. I understand the importance of secrecy and of believing one thing but doing another. For instance, a know a good friend of mine is against homosexuality (rare where I am from), but he still votes for equal rights. If you leak his personal emails you might see his bigotry, but didn't the new batman teach us anything? It's not what you say, but what you do that defines you. And thus I think wikileaks has done wrong in some cases. Should he be an enemy of the state? No. But he shouldn't be considered some saint either. Some information should be kept classified and/or personal. In this day and age surely people can understand the importance of privacy.
Slashdot Mirror
Of course they do. They are basically all just two peas from the same pod.
And which one is right? We get the same problem with TV. The interenet allows us to spread our opinions and "the news" and an incredible rate. But it is still up to the viewer to determine what is reality and what is BS. Sure it allows Mr. Smith to converse with Mr. (whateverthecommonlastnameisinthemiddleeast). But that doesn't mean either of them are who they say they are, or that what they have to say has any importance. I am a scientist so I can't speak for everyone, but if Joe Schmo says something about the nature of the universe it immediately gets put on the back burner. Why would I listen to someone who has no background in the thing they are taking about. Realities can be warped, and perceptions can be deluded. Human beings are flawed. Just because I can talk to someone from the other side of the world who is living through something doesn't mean I should trust their opinion or their interpretation.
Ah right, because the other choice for president, Mr. McCain would have been totally different.
Interesting to read this, and then look a couple inches below and see the headline "UK Authorities Threaten to Storm Ecuadorian Embassy to Arrest Julian Assange". Not sure why you think declaring him an enemy of the state means that we should consider the UK an enemy. But hey, have fun in your conspiracy bubble.
This is my first post on slashdot since I felt compelled to respond. I am surprised that this is the only post so far that is critical of both the US military and Wikileaks. Everyone seems to think that Assange could do no wrong, and that Wikileaks is a saint for revealing unto us the corruption of the government. I for one, am more skeptical. While I will agree with most comments about our government and its over reaching and almost tyrannical military and political prowess. There are some things that I don't want posted. I understand the importance of secrecy and of believing one thing but doing another. For instance, a know a good friend of mine is against homosexuality (rare where I am from), but he still votes for equal rights. If you leak his personal emails you might see his bigotry, but didn't the new batman teach us anything? It's not what you say, but what you do that defines you. And thus I think wikileaks has done wrong in some cases. Should he be an enemy of the state? No. But he shouldn't be considered some saint either. Some information should be kept classified and/or personal. In this day and age surely people can understand the importance of privacy.