After reading some more, I realized that private individuals/corporations can not directly violate the Constitution, since the Constitution mostly deals with the powers the gov has over individuals.
Ah, but hell, they still need to be punished for making my work desktop crash 3 times a day (on average). Can't I at least get to spank Bill Gates each time it crashes?
Actually, this is the best idea I've heard, even better than mine. This way you can support a candidate that backs your positions, but you have no "leverage" later.
"Excuse me Senator, I want X because I gave you $2 billion."
"Prove it"
"Ah, well, I did, really!"
"Spank me, bitch"
(I would love to see a Senator say that last line to some huge contibutor!!!!!)
I would try to put it that the HQ of the top controlling power of any organization would be considered the locality of that business. This would extend to MTV being owned by Viacom, ABC being owned by Disney, etc. Only the very top company would be able to contribute. As for free speech, you still have it, but would not be able to influence people who really should not have influence on you, say a senator in Arizona (unless you live there!). For federal elections, go crazy, but having California buy some guy from the southeast is pretty weird, in my opinion.
Re:Difference between Soviet and US attacks
on
Robots Go To War
·
· Score: 1
Vietnam was run as a politcal war-
"No, you can't bomb that village because it will hurt my image" and such shit. Plus, we had no will for that war.
If we had a good reason to take Vietnam today, it wouldn't be to hard. Jungles don't usually contain the seats of power. For some stupid reason we thought forests and rice pattys were important to take.
Re:Difference between Soviet and US attacks
on
Robots Go To War
·
· Score: 1
They gotta come out sometime, and even if it's at night, the UAVs got infrared.
Well thank you, Mr. Wisdom! If you want to work through this shit that happened, it ain't gonna happen here. Try BadAssMofo (http:www.bamf.com/forum) for some good discussion of recent events. Oddly enough, they are really hashing this shit out really well, with lots of different opinions, points of view, and philosophies. There are even folks there that are being supportive. If you go there, look out for verve, that's me in that forum. May be it'll help to go and rant as much as you want (some have), talk about your feelings (many have), and just flip out and bust loose (some have, but don't be surprised if your post gets deleted).
There are other, more "official" sites that can be used for grieving and talking, a bunch of which can be reached through the red cross web site.
Slashdot just isn't the right place to grieve. It is techy, it is geeky, it is scientific. These attributes don't leave much room for emotion outside of the tech world. I am sure these people care, but there are other outlets for what you are expressing.
I watched this once it popped up on Ain't It Cool News (aintitcool.com) yesterday. Imagine CGI but with Legos. It looked more fluid than the old stop-motion clay-based creatures, yet I could see no obvious wires or such. It seemed very fluid, and yes, it was freaky due to the level of (I hate to say it) professionalism.
Next thing you know, we'll have Connectix emulating Matrix, GI Joe re-creating the Gulf War, and Lincon Logs re-enacting the chopping of the cherry tree!
Difference between Soviet and US attacks
on
Robots Go To War
·
· Score: 1
The UAVs could well prove the difference between success and failure. The Soviets had little info before they went into the country, where as we (if we go in) will have much info due to these UAVs. Go ahead, shoot them down, their cost is trivial compared to a spy plane. We can loft 100 of them into the air, and track all military movements, even at night. We don't need a massive ground troop invasion, just track their movements and drop in deltas, seals, hell even rangers into the area around their bunkers.
I don't back eliminating polictical donations, because I believe that people should be able to back those whom they like.
What I do think, though, is that only individuals and corporations that reside in that congressional/senate district can give money to those politicians. That way Hollywood, for example, could only influence 2 senators, and a small number of congressmen. The real beauty is that one super-rich person/company can only influence 3 congressfolk. So Hollywood gets 3 in their pocket, while Rush Limbaugh can get his oppositely viewed 3.
The whole scheme needs refinement, but I think that it would be a step in the right direction.
You destroy your own points- the lines of communications we have today are just convienences. Airline lines are an imposement of inconvience upon your freedom. You can still get on an airplane and go anywhere in the world you want. You can still call anyone you want. You can still view all the porn you want. What freedoms are you giving up? None. You are giving up conviences, not freedoms. It is only because we live in such a great country and such a great time that you confuse your rights with convience.
Even more poignant- look at the what our grandparents willingly gave up, willingly did, and willingly gave to those who were putting their asses on the line.
Probably no one here will be asked to put their lives at risk, including these dipshit reporters and writers. Must be nice to be in a country where you can sit in your comfy chair while bashing the country while our kids our in a fox hole somewhere.
There is a severe reality disconnect here- no one born after Vietnam or Korea has any idea what the hell a country at war is like. We have grown soft and cushy, and how dare we suspend our TV! Dear God, Friends episode 296020233 was suspended!
I hope you get my point. The silly shit we dealed with in the '90s is gone, we have real shit to deal with.
When the Congress gave the President the right to use all military force against those who have attacked us. No they didn't use the word "war", but what difference did it make. Also, the dozens of politicians that have said "we are at war" should have given you a clue.
I have seen this several times already- we are going to lose everything we hold dear. Bullshit. We will not lose our rights provided in the Constitution. Email is a convienience. You can still snail mail someone something and not have it touched. You can still go start loudly shouting your beliefs in a park somewhere. The Constitution does not cover freedom of easy communication. This is where most people lose it (and I will be flamed forever for this)- phone calls and emails are not a basic right, they are conviences.
And the whole thing about being charged with treason, give me a break. Treason is the one crime which is defined by the Constitution- basically aiding an enemy in a time of war. Spies don't get that charge.
This is a major over-reaction, people will not stand for a modern day McCarthyism (sp?).
I played some, which look great but don't really have the "grab me" factor that games like, oh, maybe Robotron did. Or Phoenix, Asteroids, Dragon's Lair.
I probably missed a few good ones, but it sees that today's trend is towards eye-candy effects.
I don't know, I'm not an expert, nor do I even consider myself a gamer.
I remember playing the first Wolfenstein, and the second, and it was you against an entire castle, much less the bratwurst monopoly! Once you make it multiplayer, just change the name. Of course, they are probably trying to cash in on the name. Oh well, it will probably feature amazing graphics with ok gameplay, like most games have been the past 5 years or so.
Re:Pray Or Meditate Or Whatever For President Bush
on
Handling the Loads
·
· Score: 1
At what point did all of the people responding to this parent comment decide that Bush was going to nuke whoever? Because somebody infers from some emotional comments that this is equivalent to a full-out nuclear strike, and suddenly Bush is running a jihad?
This is the problem I'm seeing on the 'net now- lots of people guessing about basic assumptions and then running with them to absurdity. Does anyone really think that we would use a nuke, or that even the US command structure would allow one to be deployed? Oh, and we have quite the jihad running right now, considering all the people we have mowed down. You all know damn well that the US will never knowingly and willingly go after civilian targets. Yes, they may get by accident, but the military would never target civilians.
Unfortunately, even in this fucked up time, people need to run around with their bullshit ideas and stupid theories, when mostly they have no idea what they are talking about. I must have missed the part where all these people got their doctorates in statesmenship and military theory. At least I got the military part down, and I admit I'm not a statesmen.
Re:What can be done? Nothing.
on
More On Tragedy
·
· Score: 1
What utter shit.
America is not a superpower because others don't fear death? No, we have not fought back like we should have.
The answer to terrorism- find out who did it and who harbored them, and then destroy both. Not a missle into a factory, carpet bomb the whole area.
"Oh, you bombed our embassy? Say goodbye to your entire country."
There's your answer when it comes to terrorism- reply with more terror than a bomber can imagine.
This is the biggest pile of shit I have ever heard. Pushing Catholicism? We pushed for a "silent moment", and got nowhere. What, atheism is against a silent moment? Do you have to speak every second to be an atheist, buddist, jew, etc? But no, a silent moment was equated to catholicism, and therefore shot down as being to religious! Yep, it is now too religious to shut up for 2 seconds! And a total lack of any beliefs (ie atheism) is now a religion? Give me a break- I believe that a lack of long hair is now a fashion?
The NewsForge article gives 2 reasons why the media isn't covering these outrages now:
1) That these people are "fringe players"
2) Most media is composed of big conglomerates.
If the first is true, it's bad but about par for the media. I've never thought they were the smartest bunch, especially when it comes to tech stuff.
But if the reporters are beholden to "Big Media", just wait till a reporter accidentally reports on an article like the ones mentioned. Can you imagine the mess if AOL/TW charges one of it's own reporters with violating the DMCA, and after the fact realizes that the reporter is one of its own? What is it going to do then? Recant, or go full bore to make an example? Will be interresting to see if other reporters toe the line or go after their bosses? Perhaps take the law to the courts?
Slashdot Mirror
After reading some more, I realized that private individuals/corporations can not directly violate the Constitution, since the Constitution mostly deals with the powers the gov has over individuals.
Ah, but hell, they still need to be punished for making my work desktop crash 3 times a day (on average). Can't I at least get to spank Bill Gates each time it crashes?
Actually, this is the best idea I've heard, even better than mine. This way you can support a candidate that backs your positions, but you have no "leverage" later.
"Excuse me Senator, I want X because I gave you $2 billion."
"Prove it"
"Ah, well, I did, really!"
"Spank me, bitch"
(I would love to see a Senator say that last line to some huge contibutor!!!!!)
I would try to put it that the HQ of the top controlling power of any organization would be considered the locality of that business. This would extend to MTV being owned by Viacom, ABC being owned by Disney, etc. Only the very top company would be able to contribute. As for free speech, you still have it, but would not be able to influence people who really should not have influence on you, say a senator in Arizona (unless you live there!). For federal elections, go crazy, but having California buy some guy from the southeast is pretty weird, in my opinion.
Vietnam was run as a politcal war-
"No, you can't bomb that village because it will hurt my image" and such shit. Plus, we had no will for that war.
If we had a good reason to take Vietnam today, it wouldn't be to hard. Jungles don't usually contain the seats of power. For some stupid reason we thought forests and rice pattys were important to take.
They gotta come out sometime, and even if it's at night, the UAVs got infrared.
Well thank you, Mr. Wisdom! If you want to work through this shit that happened, it ain't gonna happen here. Try BadAssMofo (http:www.bamf.com/forum) for some good discussion of recent events. Oddly enough, they are really hashing this shit out really well, with lots of different opinions, points of view, and philosophies. There are even folks there that are being supportive. If you go there, look out for verve, that's me in that forum. May be it'll help to go and rant as much as you want (some have), talk about your feelings (many have), and just flip out and bust loose (some have, but don't be surprised if your post gets deleted).
There are other, more "official" sites that can be used for grieving and talking, a bunch of which can be reached through the red cross web site.
Slashdot just isn't the right place to grieve. It is techy, it is geeky, it is scientific. These attributes don't leave much room for emotion outside of the tech world. I am sure these people care, but there are other outlets for what you are expressing.
I hope you come out of this ok.
Bryan
I watched this once it popped up on Ain't It Cool News (aintitcool.com) yesterday. Imagine CGI but with Legos. It looked more fluid than the old stop-motion clay-based creatures, yet I could see no obvious wires or such. It seemed very fluid, and yes, it was freaky due to the level of (I hate to say it) professionalism.
Next thing you know, we'll have Connectix emulating Matrix, GI Joe re-creating the Gulf War, and Lincon Logs re-enacting the chopping of the cherry tree!
The UAVs could well prove the difference between success and failure. The Soviets had little info before they went into the country, where as we (if we go in) will have much info due to these UAVs. Go ahead, shoot them down, their cost is trivial compared to a spy plane. We can loft 100 of them into the air, and track all military movements, even at night. We don't need a massive ground troop invasion, just track their movements and drop in deltas, seals, hell even rangers into the area around their bunkers.
Game over.
I don't back eliminating polictical donations, because I believe that people should be able to back those whom they like.
What I do think, though, is that only individuals and corporations that reside in that congressional/senate district can give money to those politicians. That way Hollywood, for example, could only influence 2 senators, and a small number of congressmen. The real beauty is that one super-rich person/company can only influence 3 congressfolk. So Hollywood gets 3 in their pocket, while Rush Limbaugh can get his oppositely viewed 3.
The whole scheme needs refinement, but I think that it would be a step in the right direction.
If this means what it sounds like, doesn't that impinge on the 1st Amendment, and thereby become unconstitutional?
Microsoft- not only are we a monopoly, we're unconstitutional!
:)
Well, it may ease your mind a bit that the encryption and info assurance work we do for the army is all done in linux.
You destroy your own points- the lines of communications we have today are just convienences. Airline lines are an imposement of inconvience upon your freedom. You can still get on an airplane and go anywhere in the world you want. You can still call anyone you want. You can still view all the porn you want. What freedoms are you giving up? None. You are giving up conviences, not freedoms. It is only because we live in such a great country and such a great time that you confuse your rights with convience.
Even more poignant- look at the what our grandparents willingly gave up, willingly did, and willingly gave to those who were putting their asses on the line.
Probably no one here will be asked to put their lives at risk, including these dipshit reporters and writers. Must be nice to be in a country where you can sit in your comfy chair while bashing the country while our kids our in a fox hole somewhere.
There is a severe reality disconnect here- no one born after Vietnam or Korea has any idea what the hell a country at war is like. We have grown soft and cushy, and how dare we suspend our TV! Dear God, Friends episode 296020233 was suspended!
I hope you get my point. The silly shit we dealed with in the '90s is gone, we have real shit to deal with.
When the Congress gave the President the right to use all military force against those who have attacked us. No they didn't use the word "war", but what difference did it make. Also, the dozens of politicians that have said "we are at war" should have given you a clue.
Well said. We can always get back our rights. They're not like taxes.
I have seen this several times already- we are going to lose everything we hold dear. Bullshit. We will not lose our rights provided in the Constitution. Email is a convienience. You can still snail mail someone something and not have it touched. You can still go start loudly shouting your beliefs in a park somewhere. The Constitution does not cover freedom of easy communication. This is where most people lose it (and I will be flamed forever for this)- phone calls and emails are not a basic right, they are conviences.
And the whole thing about being charged with treason, give me a break. Treason is the one crime which is defined by the Constitution- basically aiding an enemy in a time of war. Spies don't get that charge.
This is a major over-reaction, people will not stand for a modern day McCarthyism (sp?).
I played some, which look great but don't really have the "grab me" factor that games like, oh, maybe Robotron did. Or Phoenix, Asteroids, Dragon's Lair.
I probably missed a few good ones, but it sees that today's trend is towards eye-candy effects.
I don't know, I'm not an expert, nor do I even consider myself a gamer.
I remember playing the first Wolfenstein, and the second, and it was you against an entire castle, much less the bratwurst monopoly! Once you make it multiplayer, just change the name. Of course, they are probably trying to cash in on the name. Oh well, it will probably feature amazing graphics with ok gameplay, like most games have been the past 5 years or so.
At what point did all of the people responding to this parent comment decide that Bush was going to nuke whoever? Because somebody infers from some emotional comments that this is equivalent to a full-out nuclear strike, and suddenly Bush is running a jihad?
This is the problem I'm seeing on the 'net now- lots of people guessing about basic assumptions and then running with them to absurdity. Does anyone really think that we would use a nuke, or that even the US command structure would allow one to be deployed? Oh, and we have quite the jihad running right now, considering all the people we have mowed down. You all know damn well that the US will never knowingly and willingly go after civilian targets. Yes, they may get by accident, but the military would never target civilians.
Unfortunately, even in this fucked up time, people need to run around with their bullshit ideas and stupid theories, when mostly they have no idea what they are talking about. I must have missed the part where all these people got their doctorates in statesmenship and military theory. At least I got the military part down, and I admit I'm not a statesmen.
For anyone in the Eatontown, NJ area who wants to donate items, my company (Booz-Allen) is delivering donated items daily.
Items needed:
Food (wrapped, with no need to be cooked)
Power bars
Work gloves
Peanut butter
Sandwiches (dry and wrapped)
Anyone who wants to drop off items can do so at our Industrial Way East site. My user page has my real email address for more info.
It's over a million now...
What utter shit.
America is not a superpower because others don't fear death? No, we have not fought back like we should have.
The answer to terrorism- find out who did it and who harbored them, and then destroy both. Not a missle into a factory, carpet bomb the whole area.
"Oh, you bombed our embassy? Say goodbye to your entire country."
There's your answer when it comes to terrorism- reply with more terror than a bomber can imagine.
Go build something with wood. In other news, this has to be the dumbest article that ever got posted on /.
This is the biggest pile of shit I have ever heard. Pushing Catholicism? We pushed for a "silent moment", and got nowhere. What, atheism is against a silent moment? Do you have to speak every second to be an atheist, buddist, jew, etc? But no, a silent moment was equated to catholicism, and therefore shot down as being to religious! Yep, it is now too religious to shut up for 2 seconds! And a total lack of any beliefs (ie atheism) is now a religion? Give me a break- I believe that a lack of long hair is now a fashion?
The NewsForge article gives 2 reasons why the media isn't covering these outrages now:
1) That these people are "fringe players"
2) Most media is composed of big conglomerates.
If the first is true, it's bad but about par for the media. I've never thought they were the smartest bunch, especially when it comes to tech stuff.
But if the reporters are beholden to "Big Media", just wait till a reporter accidentally reports on an article like the ones mentioned. Can you imagine the mess if AOL/TW charges one of it's own reporters with violating the DMCA, and after the fact realizes that the reporter is one of its own? What is it going to do then? Recant, or go full bore to make an example? Will be interresting to see if other reporters toe the line or go after their bosses? Perhaps take the law to the courts?