I would be interested to learn why you think you "know" that Bin Laden was a "leader" and that he "approved" attrocities. It is only G.W.'s propaganda that would give you that impression and if you think about some of the other facts that he produced like Saddam's WMD you would realise that his "truth" is doubtful. If you research further you will find lots of reason to doubt the story of Bin Laden. Why was he such a welcome guest in the US? etc. etc. I do not think you "know" anything, you just believe the propaganda like good follower. If he had been brought to trial we may have found out some facts. That is why they killed him.
"Fair enough... but then why do you still go to war? Why did you come and fight in Iraq with us then? That war was pointless."
Because your boss bribed our boss and made him very rich. The British people went out onto the streets of London in what must have been one of the biggest demonstrations ever (over 1,000,000) because unlike the US, most British actually follow events and could realise beforehand that there were no weapons of mass destruction.
It is a classic example of why democracy is as BS as the rest.
Yes, because that made it murder. If they were not ready to give him a trial they should not have gone after him. You accept that he is the evil nemesis only because the people that made billions from a war, told you he was. Without that fair trial, he was an innocent man and shooting him was murder. He was unarmed when they entered his bedroom, there was no need or reason to shoot him. They should have given him a fair trial so that the world could see the man to be who they claim he was. Now it all looks like a lie.
Have you heard of a place called Guantanamo that is filled with people that are not US citizens, have never been to the US or committed crimes in the US and most were just defending their country against an invasion, as I hope you would if your country was invaded.
If he got on a plane, the whole situation would change before the plane landed and he would be arrested. Saying that we have not done the paperwork yet does not mean that it would not be done before he arrived.
Nah, they will do a Assange on him but with 10 year girls making the accusations this time and no one will ever be able to discuss what he said again. People will just talk about the accusation instead of the issue. If you look at the accusations they are so stupid but it whitewashed the whole Wikileaks issue. Same with Strauss Khan...
Not in anyway similar. If you take the keys to their trucks you are stealing but if you stop work there is no theft involved. If you want me to talk to you then that is work and I no longer work for you. You should have implemented a better system when I was employed for you. To take this into the real world, what would have happened if he had been killed in a traffic accident? The same procedure that would go into place in such an event should also work during a dismissal. If you do not have such a procedure do not blame the guy that you just sacked as that would make as much sense as blaming a dead guy. It is your fault.
They may be entitled to the passwords but for me to tell them the passwords or to listen them asking for them is work and I no longer work for them. They should have implemented a policy at the time (during my employment) whereby such things were recorded.
Having read your proposal I notice that you wish to introduce a new form of virtual racism. Those that use technology will have a voice and those that do not will become the new 'untouchables'. I realise that you yourself are obviously in the white group and that is a good reason to want this new social structure but I happen to know, love and even be related to some of those in the black group and for those I stand up and oppose you.
"an old relative died at home after extended illness."
This does not tell us about bitcoins but about preparing for the inevitable. We should all prepare for our death as we will all die. My oldest son knows how to access my money and how to deal with my demise. You need someone you trust in life and your old relative obviously lacked that. I give a copy of all my keys etc. to my son and I know that the trust is 2 way in that I have access to his. If I had a stock of bitcoins he would have a copy of the keys. When he asks for money I tell him to get it from the account himself... My online banking is set up with a direct link to his account. I know that not everyone can trust someone else and that in that way I am lucky. I think that it is sad that many people do not have someone.
I have been using Skype for several years and as most of my business is done online I spend about 10 hours a day on Skype. I have seen the quality of service decline since it was first discussed that M$ were going to buy it. The guys that ran it before obviously lost interest the moment that the deal was discussed. Microsoft took over and it continued to suffer and I was shocked to hear that they were dropping MSN as they really did seem to be running down Skype.
I know the alternatives and many colleagues will say "lets move to Oovoo as it always works better" , some still use Yahoo messenger as it is better in low bandwidth countries (if you are going to the Philippines, get a Yahoo account) or some other provider like QQ (China). I try to encourage my hard core colleagues to use RetroShare as it is more secure (only 4 do) BUT the reality is that more than 95% of the people that I work with, who are all computer literate, want to stay with Skype because it is what they know and are happy with.
I cannot explain why because I hate Skype, it is rubbish. Its main feature is that it is easy to install. If you want to video chat with more than one colleague Oovoo will do that for free, if you want security you must use RetroShare.... but for talking to your granny, I suppose you have to use Skype because it is the only one that she will get running on her PC. Non geeks will never master RetroShare but as you are a geek, I really recommend you try it.
"Infosys had set aside $35 million to settle the case and cover legal costs. "
Meaning that they expect to discount the $35m by at least the cost of the legal expenses. So the people have to carry that burden... Surely it is time that such negotiations go 2 ways. i.e. "You want to argue the penalty, OK $45m..."
Why shouldn't they? It is a logical progression and just because you do not want to gamble online does not mean that there is not a market for it. They have a right to fill that market. As for allowing the people to download, why not? It is also a logical progression into a market that for some strange reason the people that should be running it have chosen to run down. I cannot understand why more countries do not allow their people more freedom. You talk about greed but you are selective in where you see it. Things that should have quite reasonably have gone out of copyright have, through lobbies in the US government, been kept copyright and you see that as OK and see anyone that sees differently as bad... You are narrow minded. It is only through US corruption that the concept of "piracy" has been created. That corruption should end.
Yeah, I know you will start with all the claptrap about poor starving artists but they are not the ones that benefit from the twisted market that the new guilds have created. Just like the guilds of the middle ages, the concept of "intellectual property" will fail.
Lovely quote for someone defending the idea of US help. The US sold supplies to both sides until Germany declared war on the US and even after that the US continued to supply Germany through 3rd parties. Britain on the other hand did not charge for the help that it gave to its allies. The US, as always, saw the war as a way to get rich. That is very different from the picture painted by people like GW who spoke about the US (he said 'America' but Canada did offer genuine help) saving Europe. Without the US, the Germans had still lost. The US servicemen did do a lot and to them we are grateful but the politicians who steal credit for things that they do not deserve are scum.
Mandella really was a terrorist. He was arrested while in the possession of 48,000 Soviet-made anti-personnel mines, 210,000 hand-grenades and loads of other explosives. He was blowing shit up and was about to blow up the railway station. He was sent to prison and frequently offered release if he would renounce terrorism. He consistently refused. His wife of the time used to like to tie children to street lamps and put car tyres around their necks which she then filled with petrol and set the poor child alight.
He had a change of heart and became a man of peace. Would Bin Laden have been so readily forgiven?
Where are you from that had the US kick out the Germans? I am European so I remember that the British and the Russians did far more and that the Americans turned up late as usual with the beer and pizza. If you had actually spoken to people who fought you would have heard them tell you the the yanks were a liability as they were green. They ran from the fight and did not defend their allies. The main thing that they were good at was taking credit for what everyone else had done. They were a minority at Normandy but they took the majority of the credit as usual.
Telling the truth about the US is seen as trolling by the plebs:) you should know that in order to keep good kharma you have to wave the flag and advocate Linux:)
Slashdot Mirror
Do you think that Vietnam should have released American captives after that war?
I would be interested to learn why you think you "know" that Bin Laden was a "leader" and that he "approved" attrocities. It is only G.W.'s propaganda that would give you that impression and if you think about some of the other facts that he produced like Saddam's WMD you would realise that his "truth" is doubtful. If you research further you will find lots of reason to doubt the story of Bin Laden. Why was he such a welcome guest in the US? etc. etc. I do not think you "know" anything, you just believe the propaganda like good follower. If he had been brought to trial we may have found out some facts. That is why they killed him.
http://youtu.be/FfISZaCHJ_4
"Fair enough... but then why do you still go to war? Why did you come and fight in Iraq with us then? That war was pointless."
Because your boss bribed our boss and made him very rich. The British people went out onto the streets of London in what must have been one of the biggest demonstrations ever (over 1,000,000) because unlike the US, most British actually follow events and could realise beforehand that there were no weapons of mass destruction.
It is a classic example of why democracy is as BS as the rest.
Is there another kind of politician?
"Would you say that was unjustified?"
Yes, because that made it murder. If they were not ready to give him a trial they should not have gone after him. You accept that he is the evil nemesis only because the people that made billions from a war, told you he was. Without that fair trial, he was an innocent man and shooting him was murder. He was unarmed when they entered his bedroom, there was no need or reason to shoot him. They should have given him a fair trial so that the world could see the man to be who they claim he was. Now it all looks like a lie.
Have you heard of a place called Guantanamo that is filled with people that are not US citizens, have never been to the US or committed crimes in the US and most were just defending their country against an invasion, as I hope you would if your country was invaded.
If he got on a plane, the whole situation would change before the plane landed and he would be arrested. Saying that we have not done the paperwork yet does not mean that it would not be done before he arrived.
...and the tooth fairy has not forgotten that shilling she owes you and she will bring it round soon and leave it under your pillow.
If you want something, then stop sitting on your arse screaming, and go and get it. No one is going to run around for your lazy arse.
Nah, they will do a Assange on him but with 10 year girls making the accusations this time and no one will ever be able to discuss what he said again. People will just talk about the accusation instead of the issue. If you look at the accusations they are so stupid but it whitewashed the whole Wikileaks issue. Same with Strauss Khan...
Not in anyway similar. If you take the keys to their trucks you are stealing but if you stop work there is no theft involved. If you want me to talk to you then that is work and I no longer work for you. You should have implemented a better system when I was employed for you. To take this into the real world, what would have happened if he had been killed in a traffic accident? The same procedure that would go into place in such an event should also work during a dismissal. If you do not have such a procedure do not blame the guy that you just sacked as that would make as much sense as blaming a dead guy. It is your fault.
They may be entitled to the passwords but for me to tell them the passwords or to listen them asking for them is work and I no longer work for them. They should have implemented a policy at the time (during my employment) whereby such things were recorded.
Having read your proposal I notice that you wish to introduce a new form of virtual racism. Those that use technology will have a voice and those that do not will become the new 'untouchables'. I realise that you yourself are obviously in the white group and that is a good reason to want this new social structure but I happen to know, love and even be related to some of those in the black group and for those I stand up and oppose you.
"an old relative died at home after extended illness."
This does not tell us about bitcoins but about preparing for the inevitable. We should all prepare for our death as we will all die. My oldest son knows how to access my money and how to deal with my demise. You need someone you trust in life and your old relative obviously lacked that. I give a copy of all my keys etc. to my son and I know that the trust is 2 way in that I have access to his. If I had a stock of bitcoins he would have a copy of the keys. When he asks for money I tell him to get it from the account himself... My online banking is set up with a direct link to his account. I know that not everyone can trust someone else and that in that way I am lucky. I think that it is sad that many people do not have someone.
I have been using Skype for several years and as most of my business is done online I spend about 10 hours a day on Skype. I have seen the quality of service decline since it was first discussed that M$ were going to buy it. The guys that ran it before obviously lost interest the moment that the deal was discussed. Microsoft took over and it continued to suffer and I was shocked to hear that they were dropping MSN as they really did seem to be running down Skype.
I know the alternatives and many colleagues will say "lets move to Oovoo as it always works better" , some still use Yahoo messenger as it is better in low bandwidth countries (if you are going to the Philippines, get a Yahoo account) or some other provider like QQ (China). I try to encourage my hard core colleagues to use RetroShare as it is more secure (only 4 do) BUT the reality is that more than 95% of the people that I work with, who are all computer literate, want to stay with Skype because it is what they know and are happy with.
I cannot explain why because I hate Skype, it is rubbish. Its main feature is that it is easy to install. If you want to video chat with more than one colleague Oovoo will do that for free, if you want security you must use RetroShare.... but for talking to your granny, I suppose you have to use Skype because it is the only one that she will get running on her PC. Non geeks will never master RetroShare but as you are a geek, I really recommend you try it.
"Infosys had set aside $35 million to settle the case and cover legal costs. "
Meaning that they expect to discount the $35m by at least the cost of the legal expenses. So the people have to carry that burden... Surely it is time that such negotiations go 2 ways. i.e. "You want to argue the penalty, OK $45m..."
But if he is literally Hitler, then he is dead and still writing on /., and no one noticed...
The Queen of Denmark walks to the shops to buy flowers most days and if you ask her security gut why, he says "Why not?"
Why shouldn't they? It is a logical progression and just because you do not want to gamble online does not mean that there is not a market for it. They have a right to fill that market. As for allowing the people to download, why not? It is also a logical progression into a market that for some strange reason the people that should be running it have chosen to run down. I cannot understand why more countries do not allow their people more freedom. You talk about greed but you are selective in where you see it. Things that should have quite reasonably have gone out of copyright have, through lobbies in the US government, been kept copyright and you see that as OK and see anyone that sees differently as bad... You are narrow minded. It is only through US corruption that the concept of "piracy" has been created. That corruption should end.
Yeah, I know you will start with all the claptrap about poor starving artists but they are not the ones that benefit from the twisted market that the new guilds have created. Just like the guilds of the middle ages, the concept of "intellectual property" will fail.
You need special glasses to fire a 3D gun and only people wearing those glasses can get shot by one.
'Once a liar, always a liar'.
Lovely quote for someone defending the idea of US help. The US sold supplies to both sides until Germany declared war on the US and even after that the US continued to supply Germany through 3rd parties. Britain on the other hand did not charge for the help that it gave to its allies. The US, as always, saw the war as a way to get rich. That is very different from the picture painted by people like GW who spoke about the US (he said 'America' but Canada did offer genuine help) saving Europe. Without the US, the Germans had still lost. The US servicemen did do a lot and to them we are grateful but the politicians who steal credit for things that they do not deserve are scum.
Mandella really was a terrorist. He was arrested while in the possession of 48,000 Soviet-made anti-personnel mines, 210,000 hand-grenades and loads of other explosives. He was blowing shit up and was about to blow up the railway station. He was sent to prison and frequently offered release if he would renounce terrorism. He consistently refused. His wife of the time used to like to tie children to street lamps and put car tyres around their necks which she then filled with petrol and set the poor child alight.
He had a change of heart and became a man of peace. Would Bin Laden have been so readily forgiven?
Where are you from that had the US kick out the Germans? I am European so I remember that the British and the Russians did far more and that the Americans turned up late as usual with the beer and pizza. If you had actually spoken to people who fought you would have heard them tell you the the yanks were a liability as they were green. They ran from the fight and did not defend their allies. The main thing that they were good at was taking credit for what everyone else had done. They were a minority at Normandy but they took the majority of the credit as usual.
Telling the truth about the US is seen as trolling by the plebs :) you should know that in order to keep good kharma you have to wave the flag and advocate Linux :)