You say he is one of your co-workers. Okay, fine. But where is he from? Is he from South Carolina or Saudi Arabia? From what you've written one would assume he's an American Joe Blow, in which case his landlord's paranoia is pretty far fetched. If he's an arab on the other hand then that paranoia just got a whole lot more reasonable.
If he is an arab from some other middle-eastern ethnic group, then he can thank his cousins back home for his predicament and thank Allah that he didn't get deported.
If he's a native american (and no, I don't mean an American Indian) then he has every right to be angry. Lets just pray his landlord hasn't polluted the gene pool by reproducing.
I think if I were him I would have:
1) Gotten a lawyer
2) Littered the apartment with promo from the ACLU to piss off the gestapo
3) Made the gestapo work for its donuts. The more time they spend on me, the less time they have to cause problems for others.
4) Filmed or taped every single thing that happened, or at least as much as I could. Especially if this is a state that doesn't require both parties to agree to audio and video taping.
5) Posted the video files to the internet
But then again I'm someone for whom resentment of authority isn't just a pastime, its a religion. I can understand why some people would be good little Germans. Just remember that if you don't stand up for yourself in the face of bullshit like this, no one else is going to. You may not win the confronation, but forcing the enemy to expend some of its limited resources in fighting you is a victory in and of itself.
Why was the US attacked on September 11th instead of say, Italy, Belgium or Germany? The reasons are simple.
First of all, we matter when it comes to what goes on in the world. Europe is stuck in this fantasy of their own continued relevance much the same way that many in Britian didn't understand that their empire was gone after WW-II. Europe believes in limp-wristed diplomacy because they live in an artificial bubble created by US military power. the same could be said of much of the first world. If anyone went after Japan the US seventh fleet would give them an "edjumacation." If anyone picked on Canada we'd probably bomb them into the stone age because some of us remember that Canada was right there with us on D-day. The same goes for Australia for that matter. So many citizens of first world nations forget that the reason they haven't had to worry about being invaded and conquered by a foreign aggressor, like say the Soviet Union, is because the US has been there to back them up. This lapse in memory and judgement has persisted for so long that some have even fallen prey to the fantasy that military power isn't relevant anymore. History has a name for such people, it calls them victims.
The second reason why we were attacked is that we back Israel. From what I understand Israel is hated in Europe, which may be more a case of anti-semitism than anything else, it is hard to say. In any case the islamic terrorists are smart enough to know that Europe doesn't like Israel much more than they do.
Third, and this is most important, the islamic terrorists were not afraid of us. Why? Because for 8 years the Clinton administration didn't do a damned thing about them. Terrorists, led by an Iraqi intelligence officer, attempted to topple the world trade center in '93. What did we do? We pretended it was a criminal justice issue. Our embassy was bombed and what did we do? Nothing really. The Cole had a big hole blown into it and what did we do? Wringed our hands and pretended that we were working with Yemen to find the people responsible. In short we did the very thing I found fault with Archer's character for, we showed weakness. The surest way to encourage an aggressor is to show weakness. I remember after the 9/11 attacks there were all these dizzy idiots asking why the terrorists hated us so much. The truth is that while it doesn't matter, the reason they hate us because we represent everything they are not and will likely never be. Trying to win the love of a people who resent us is both futile and foolish. First because it won't work, and second because it doesn't matter if they like us or not. The only thing that matters is whether they fear us or not. Fear is a more constant emotion than love. Love waxes and wanes with mood and the seaons. Fear, especially if it is reinforced periodically by reminding them of why they should fear us, is a wonderfully effective tool for peace. Had the islamic world been scared shitless of us we never would have been attacked. It was Clinton's foreign policy failures that led to 9/11, not anything we "neo-con USian cowboys" did.
My gripe with this show is that it seems to be little more than a vehicle for leftist propaganda. It only makes a half-hearted attempt at being subtle in this regard. I was greatly concerned the first time I saw captain Archer whine at the Klingons. Playing the pussy diplomat may be consistent with modern euro-centric left-wing political ideology, but it just doesn't work in the real world, unless of course you're trying to get someone to attack you. The episode about AIDS, disguised as a vulcan mind disease, was particularly insulting. I don't know about you, but I've been fully aware of the AIDS epidemic for about 20 years now. I really don't need a TV show to preach to me about it.
What Enterprise needs to do is hire some of the writers from Farscape and wrest control away from the ideologues who think the show is there so they can propagandize.
You can either live in a nation where freedom to speak one's mind is protected, or you can live in a country where you will be protected from anyting and everything that you might ever find insulting.
What you can't do is have both because the two are mutually exclusive.
Living in the former means that you're going to see and hear things that you disagree with and a few things that truly disturb you for one reason or another. Living in the latter means that anyone who wishes to censor something will merely strike a "I'm offended!" pose and pretend that they have been injured by the information or point of view they wish to see suppressed.
Guess which situation our current culture more closely resembles?
I don't know about you, but I'd much rather live in a free society than a politically correct one.
By the way, most people don't equate a 48 year old programmer with the status of "grandmother" regardless of whether she does in fact have grandchildren. The term "grandmother" as used in the context you take exception to, refers to your sterotypical, elderly, retired, little-red-riding-hood type, not a middle aged professional who isn't even old enough to join the AARP.
When I read the title to this article, my immediate assumption was that "social engineering" referred to the misguided attempts by "progressives" to re-work society into a socialist utopia.
"Social Engineering in the Workplace" could easily be an article about the problems created by such policies as affirmative action, or the reactionary knee-jerk responses to charges of sexual harassment or discrimination that are so common nowadays.
I guess this is what happens when you're someone whose interests include fields which use the same terms to mean very different things.
This sounds like the kind of crap that went on back in the 60's and 70's that eventually led to the creation of the FOIA in the first place.
As much as I dislike Kerry and the modern Democratic party, if this is the kind of crap we can expect from the Republicans, I can't see how I can vote for them in good conscience. Expect me to vote for a 3rd party candidate in November. What is the world coming to when a brain-dead jesus-freak holy roller and a neo-bolshevik nimrod communist are our choices for who is going to lead this country?
What I found especially disturbing is the fact that they thought his hair was somehow significant. The level of ignorance that displays is really sickening. This isn't the summer of love, lots of guys have long hair and it's no more a political statement than the color of someone's shoes. I used to have hair down to my ass, and I'm a southern boy and a card carrying member of the NRA, hardly an "activist" who is going to blow up something. Well...nothing bigger than a coke bottle anyway.
In a way I almost wish I'd been the one they were picking on just so I'd have the opportunity to tell them to kiss my ass.
Am I the only one who feels we have more to fear from the abusive power of unchecked law enforcement than we ever will from terrorism?
I'd much prefer to limit my concern to those criminals who DON'T have the power of the state backing them up. It's stuff like this that makes me write checks to the NRA and pray it's enough to make a difference. There are times when I'm tempted to send money to the ACLU as well. Its the leftist propaganda that seems to be their driving philosophy that stops me, but if Ashcroft's goons aren't told to sit down and shut up I might just not care anymore and send them money anyway!
This is part of an emerging strategy that a friend of mine explained to me. In the past Microsoft has competed in the marketplace. In the future they will compete in the courthouse. Would-be competitors will be sued before their products gain enough of a following to be a threat. Microsoft's lawyers will tromp around beating their chests and making threats intended to intimidate others much the same way that the "church" of $cientology's lawywers persecute those who speak out about the cult's abuses and fundamentally evil nature. Microsoft is pursuing these fraudulent and frivilous patents because it costs money to defend against patent suits. Microsoft will not really care whether they win or lose the court case because the purpose of the suits and the threats of being sued is to intimidate their competitors and force them to tie up resources they cannot afford in their legal defense. This is exactly what CLABS did to Aureal a few years ago, filed phony patent suits and used the courts to bankrupt the company.
This really worries me because if blatant fraud and deceit become accepted business practices that are allowed to succeed, what does that say about the state of our civilization?
I'm opposed to the per-tv "License Fee" charged by the British government on philosphical grounds.
Extracting a tax for simply owning a television set creates a captive audience and the quality of the programming suffers as a result. For every Monty Python's Flying Circus there are countless shows that wouldn't make it past the pilot phase here in the states. If the quality of programming on BBC-america is any indication, brits are being robbed.
I'm curious about something, and maybe some of you british slashdotters can answer some questions for me. What else is there on the air other than the BBC? How many channels do brits generally have to choose from? Is cable TV common, and if so what kind of channels are there on it? Do you get HBO? ESPN? I was told when I was a little kid that the BBC was the ONLY channel available over there. I find that hard to believe. Imagine if the only channel americans had to watch was PBS.
I've always wondered what kinds of drugs most of the current anti-war crowd is on. I've become convinced that they are simply far left anti-conservatives and would bitch about anything that Bush or any other conservative leader did regardless of the outcome. Luckily they are a minority. A very obnoxious and vocal minority, but a minority just the same. Most Americans seem to be driven more by pragmatism than any sort of ideology. This is a wonderful thing since most ideologies are, to a greater or leser degree, fantasies adhered to by people who can't deal with reality. This goes for the right wing as well as the left.
Control what people know about and you control what they believe. This is the fundamental purpose of censorship, to control what people think. Information control is people control. When you can control what people know and believe controlling what they DO is trivial. This is why there were not constant wide-spread violent revolts in places like the USSR where most of the population believed the leftist lies they were spoon-fed every day. The few who didn't were easy to detect and for them the gulag awaited.
Here in the west, particularly in America, there is a concept known as freedom of speech. We hold the right to speak one's mind as a fundamental freedom that exists independently of whether the government protects or even acknowledges it. What most people don't realize is the fact that it implies and is dependent upon an even more basic right, and that is the freedom to make up one's mind. The freedom to think for oneself. The freedom to choose what one believes is the foundation upon which all liberty rests. After all, what use is the ability to express your thoughts and ideas when those are being determined by someone else?
Censorship is an attack upon freedom itself. The idea that by fighting it you are somehow imposing your views upon someone else is one of the most despicable lies I've ever heard, and one of the most perfect examples of the pot calling the kettle black.
It is censorship itself that seeks to impose beliefs upon people. Those who fight it work to ensure the freedom of others to make up their own minds and decide for themselves what they are going to believe.
Any culture that depends upon protection from outside influences and ideas in order to survive is a culture that is doomed to perish, and should. The reason is because the degree to which a culture must be so protected is the degree to which it is based upon lies.
A culture is a set of defining values, beliefs, and ideals held in common by a group of people. A culture is therefore valuable and beneficial to the degree to which it reflects objective truth and contributes to the well-being of those who are a part of it. Those who believe that cultures are somehow inherently precious or valuable are missing the point. The very purpose of human culture is to ensure the survival of the individuals who belong to it. Culture exists to bring individuals together and unify them as a people for the added benefit of all who are a part of it. If a culture does not do this, or does not do this as well as another culture that is competing with, then it should and will either adapt or perish. There is nothing tragic about this. The exposure to and subsequent adoption of new ideas that are more closely aligned with reality, and therefore improve the lives of everyone so exposed, is nothing to cry about.
I fully support this group's efforts to fight censorship. I don't think they go far enough however. Graeme Bunton seems to think that Saudi Arabia censoring the internet in order to preserve its islamic culture is a valid endeavor. I don't. Ideas should stand or fall based upon their own merit. Cultures, being made up of ideas and beliefs, should be held accountable to the same standard. As I said before, if a culture has to be protected from outside influences in order to survive, then it is a culture that is to that degree based upon lies. As someone who seeks to know and live with the truth, I see no reason to protect lies no matter who it is that believes them or why.
I don't give a damn what the government buys with the money they steal, the point is that they don't have any right to it in the first place.
Misapplication of the law for the purpose of generating revenue is nothing short of extortion. This law was not passed for the purpose they are trying to use it for. It is therefore an abuse of power which it is the duty of every citizen of the state of Florida to resist.
"All wars, every one, can be prevented by a people who truly value peace and life. If you can't see a way, then you aren't looking hard enough."
Thank you Neville Chamberlain.
When are the left going to understand that human evil is a real and tangible thing and not simply the result of someone having a bad day? There are people in this world who cannot be reached, not by reason, nor by love. Their motivations are beyond the understanding of anyone who is sane. Good will and kindness are nothing more to them than an opportunity to exploit and betray. The only things that get through to them are brute force and the fear it creates. When people such as this come to power, war is often the only means of putting a stop to them.
As far as our ability to prevent a war goes, I think you should understand that unless you're a party to the creation of a war, namely the aggressor, then you're not in a position to prevent the war. Wars are avoided when the bad guy sits down and shuts up. Even if you, as a third party, are somehow in a position to prevent a war, the question then becomes at what cost? There are worse outcomes than war, far worse. One of them is to lay down, not fight, and end up in as bad or worse a position as you would have if you'd fought and lost.
Conflict is an unavoidable fact of human existence. There is no escaping it and you ignore it at your own peril. There is a long tradition associated with people who avoided war at all costs, namely death at the hands of those who did not avoid war. history calls them victims, when it even remembers their names at all.
Some of us in a place called the real world. You're more than welcome to join us. This world isn't as pretty and fanciful as the world you imagine where there are noble solutions to every problem. Here there are some problems that aren't easy to fix, or even possible in many cases. Some problems require that you get your hands dirty, sometimes with the blood of your fellow man. Yes, there is much that is wrong with this world, but it does have the crucial advantage of being the only world that truly exists.
You're in a foreign country, where the people don't speak your language, and you're late for a meeting with some murderous thugs you've been tasked with removing from the gene pool.
What do you do?
You pull out your night-vision goggles, target a nearby heap of rubble that used to be one of Saddam's "palaces." The goggles lock onto the complex geometric shapes and this information is automatically transmitted to a massive cluster of Cray's in New Jersey on loan from the NSA. Using state of the art satellite x-ray photography and next-generation neural-net AI (NGNNAI), your precise location is calculated and relayed back to you, all at the price of only 3 million dollars an hour. What, you didn't think it was the energizer bunny keeping all those Cray's up an running did you?
Why would anyone want to use Java for something like this? That's like buying a Ferarri and trying to race it after disconnecting half the spark plugs.
I am not a fan of Java. I don't have any problems with the language itself. What I have a problem with is the fact that it is crippled by the lack of native compilers. And by that I mean comprehensive compilers that work. Something like gcj that won't compile everything that Sun's "compilers" will just doesn't count.
Interpreting bytecode for the purpose of cross platform capability is all fine and good. There are times when this is very beneficial. But not having the ability to target your programs for a particular platform is insane because it kills any chance at implementing an efficient solution for anything. It is the primary reason why I don't use Java for anything. I'm not going to use a language depends upon a virtual machine that eats 20+ megs of ram just to run hello world...slowly. And that is PER INSTANCE mind you. Shared libraries that eat up tons of ram are one thing, but having multiple programs whose memory footprint is such that they might as well have been statically linked is quite another.
Then of course there is the speed issue. The lack of native compilers is what doomed IBM and Corel's attempts to create Java-base office suites. They could write the code, but running it was another matter altogether. I suspect that the projects at both companies were thought up by suits who bought into Sun's marketing. No one but a suit would believe that you could create something as complex and resource hungry as an office suite using an interpreted language.
Java and especially.NET, are examples of what I call Gate's law. Gate's law is the counterpoint to Moore's law. Moore's law states that speed of new computer hardware at a given price point will double every 16 to 24 months. Gate's law states that the efficiency of new computer software will be cut in half every 16 to 24 months. This is why we have to have desktop systems with enough raw power to simulate nuclear explosions just to run Word and Excel at a decent clip. To be sure there is going to be some loss of efficiency due to newer programming strategies that attempt to maximize code maintainability and speed of development, but I seriously doubt that these factors alone are enough to account for the way that most current software packages waste system resources. The only sort of software that still operates at a respectable level of efficiency is computer games. The fact that games are the most perfect example of Gates' law in action would be ironic if it were not for the quantum leaps that have been made in game design over the past quarter century. We've gone from PC-Man to the Lawnmower Man in just under 25 years. Packages like Word should not rightfully require computers with VR-capable speed and memory just to run. Unfortunately they do.
I'm sure I'm going to get flamed for this post, but then if I cared whether people bitched at me I'd just keep my mouth shut wouldn't I?
Java advocates are perfect examples of the old adage that if the only tool you have is a hammer then every problem looks like a nail. Java has its uses and its place. The problem is that far too many people want to use it for things that it is not well-suited for. If we can get good optimizing native compilers for the language then most of the problems with Java will disappear and I'll have nothing but good things to say about it. Till then I'll stick to C and C++ thank you very much.
I lived there for a few years back in the late 80's. I lived in a condominium complex called Lifestyles. It was on center street. It's still there according to the arial photos that Mapquest used to provide, although I can't seem to find a website for it online. I suspect the name has changed just like so many other things. The town has a new library that looks pretty impressive in the pictures. When I was living there I used to buy paperback books for 10 cents a piece at the Herndon Fortnightly. I still have a lot of them. Some of them were true classics too, like Stranger in a Strange land, Revolt in 2100, Ender's Game, etc. I got so "bad" about buying Sci-Fi and fantasy books there that I started thinking about money in terms of how many withdrawn paperbacks I could buy with it. Dimes became my unit of currency.
I went to both Herndon Intermediate (now called Herndon Middle School) and Herndon High school before my family moved back to Tennessee, which I've always believed was a mistake. The Nashville area is OK, but its nothing compared northern Virginia.
I've been living in Phoenix, AZ for the past 12 years. Phoenix is this huge city in the middle of a desert wasteland. There are no real trees and only two seasons, Hot and Hiroshima.
Every so often I'll hear about Herndon or Reston in the news and I've tried to keep up on the goings on there, which is pretty easy thanks to the internet.
Does anyone actually KNOW why Herndon has a 25 mph speed limit? I could understand a short-lived city council administration passing the ordinance, and getting kicked out of office come next election. What I can't understand is why it is still in effect. Unless of course it makes the town so much money that they don't dare overturn it. Maybe that is what paid for that nice new library huh?
Can you believe that someone mod'ed my original response down to TROLL? I suspect it had nothing to do with my post and everything to do with my sig. Unless of course the Herndon Slashdot Mafia didn't like me bad mouthing their town.
Oh well, if jackasses want to waste their mod points on me then that's fine. All it means is that they won't have them the next time they want to stifle a more prominent post because its contrary to their political idiotology.
I don't think that John Kerry, or any Democrat for that matter, is the answer.
While this latest round of BS from Ashcroft has made it entirely clear that Bush is WORSE than Kerry, that doesn't mean that Kerry, merely as the lesser of two evils, deserves anyone's vote.
The political left is evil because it is dominated by communists. The political right is evil because it is dominated by religious zealots. Dennis Miller described this situation best when he said "Hey, we're just looking to vote for the guy who is going to screw us the least!" That is, unfortunately, becoming more and more difficult to do. I'd love to find a candidate that was driven by common sense instead of ideology. It is a tragedy of epic proportions that our political process as a whole isn't driven by common sense. Imagine a world where you didn't have to continuously choose between Hitler and Stalin every time you voted, where you could find a candidate you could actually have some faith in. Someone who, while imperfect, was basically honest and decent. The problem is that politics have become so vicious that honest and decent people never even get involved. Or if they do they are quickly disillusioned and driven out.
Unless Bush does something to reign in Ashcroft, and preferably asks for his resignation, then there is no way I'm going to vote for him. Even so I'm sure has hell not going to hand hand this country over to a bunch of aging 60's radicals who believe that the America is the enemy. Instead I'm going to vote for whatever candidate the libertarian party fields. I know that this candidate won't win of course, but that is not the point. An election is where we try to create a more ideal government. It is not a horse race where you try to vote for whoever you think is going to win. At the very least by voting for a libertarian candidate I'll know that I won't be responsible for the next administration's stupidity.
I really do think that someone should write a book comparing the left and the right in this country and explains how, as Simon and Garfunkel once sang "Laugh about it, shout about it, when you've got to choose, any way you look at it you lose."
As far as I'm concerned John Ashcroft is waging war on the American people. I don't see anything difference between him using the power of the state to attack pornography, and other regimes using the power of the state to attack political dissidents. Porn is harmless. I don't particularly like it myself, at least not the crude garbage that accounts for 95% of it. But even though I don't like it doesn't mean I don't appreciate its value as a tool for creating a healthier society. Porn serves a very important purpose, and that is to make sex and sexuality something that is seen as ordinary and commonplace. When talking about sex is as uneventful as talking about the weather then society will be a lot better off. As it stands right now there are still an awful lot of neurotic people out there. Talk about sex and they get all twittery. Some even become angry or embarassed. Why? Because they've been conned into thinking of sex as something bad, or something to worry about. That is not just stupid, its sick. For many people like that there just isn't anything that can be done, except wait for them to die that is. Luckily people aren't born that way. Instead they are psychologically conditioned to have those thoughts and feelings. This conditioning is little more than mass brainwashing. Its end result is a person who has fixed ideas and emotional responses that don't change, even if he or she has experiences that would warrant that they change. They are impaired from thinking, impaired from forming their own conclusions, and impaired from changing their minds when the facts dictate that they should. They feel bad and anxious about sex because they were made to feel that way about it. This brainwashing depends upon lies. And not just lies, but lies told within an environment where the truth is hidden and questions and curiosity are strongly discouraged. This is what has commonly been called sexual repression and it is a form of mental and emotional torture. Porn undermines it, and if for no other reason than that it is a positive influence. Not because porn shows sex accurately or truly, but because it prevents sex from being made into a secret shame. I hate to say this because I'll sound Alec Baldwin, but if Ashcroft's crap is allowed to fly, I do belive I may leave the country.
This country is going to shit in a hurry in general . The american people are stuck between neo-bolshevik nimrods on the left, and puritanical pinheads on the right. How are we supposed to elect a wise and prudent government when this what we have to build it with?
Ashcroft has, in one fell swoop, angered and incensed me more than just about any of the crap I've seen come from the left over the past decade. You have to go all the way back to the 60's to find something that the left has done to top this nonsense.
Any SOB who will put a man like Ashcroft in power and give him free reign to persecute the American people sure as hell isn't going to get my vote.
I'm at a loss for words. I think my beer money's going to be going to the EFF and the ACLU this year.
Slashdot Mirror
You say he is one of your co-workers. Okay, fine. But where is he from? Is he from South Carolina or Saudi Arabia? From what you've written one would assume he's an American Joe Blow, in which case his landlord's paranoia is pretty far fetched. If he's an arab on the other hand then that paranoia just got a whole lot more reasonable.
If he is an arab from some other middle-eastern ethnic group, then he can thank his cousins back home for his predicament and thank Allah that he didn't get deported.
If he's a native american (and no, I don't mean an American Indian) then he has every right to be angry. Lets just pray his landlord hasn't polluted the gene pool by reproducing.
I think if I were him I would have:
1) Gotten a lawyer
2) Littered the apartment with promo from the ACLU to piss off the gestapo
3) Made the gestapo work for its donuts. The more time they spend on me, the less time they have to cause problems for others.
4) Filmed or taped every single thing that happened, or at least as much as I could. Especially if this is a state that doesn't require both parties to agree to audio and video taping.
5) Posted the video files to the internet
But then again I'm someone for whom resentment of authority isn't just a pastime, its a religion. I can understand why some people would be good little Germans. Just remember that if you don't stand up for yourself in the face of bullshit like this, no one else is going to. You may not win the confronation, but forcing the enemy to expend some of its limited resources in fighting you is a victory in and of itself.
Gary Coleman is an evil leprechaun.
Jared from the Subway commercials is still fat, but no one can see it because of the mind control implants.
Dogs speak english but no one can understand them because they talk too fast.
Jerry Garcia was elected president in 1972, but the CIA altered the results so that Nixon would win.
Nazi's went to the moon in 1944 in a flying saucer designed by Werner Von Braun.
Aliens that look like giant bird men are living in the appalacian mountains. Bigfoot is living in Cleveland.
Cell phone radio towers are actually defensive SDI weapons that shoot microwave beams at incoming ICBMS, frying their on-board computers.
The bilderberg group controls the governments of the world through manipulation of international finances.
All computers have a chip in them that lets the government see what you are doing. The scroll lock key can be used to de-activate it.
Glenn Close is really a man.
Why was the US attacked on September 11th instead of say, Italy, Belgium or Germany? The reasons are simple.
First of all, we matter when it comes to what goes on in the world. Europe is stuck in this fantasy of their own continued relevance much the same way that many in Britian didn't understand that their empire was gone after WW-II. Europe believes in limp-wristed diplomacy because they live in an artificial bubble created by US military power. the same could be said of much of the first world. If anyone went after Japan the US seventh fleet would give them an "edjumacation." If anyone picked on Canada we'd probably bomb them into the stone age because some of us remember that Canada was right there with us on D-day. The same goes for Australia for that matter. So many citizens of first world nations forget that the reason they haven't had to worry about being invaded and conquered by a foreign aggressor, like say the Soviet Union, is because the US has been there to back them up. This lapse in memory and judgement has persisted for so long that some have even fallen prey to the fantasy that military power isn't relevant anymore. History has a name for such people, it calls them victims.
The second reason why we were attacked is that we back Israel. From what I understand Israel is hated in Europe, which may be more a case of anti-semitism than anything else, it is hard to say. In any case the islamic terrorists are smart enough to know that Europe doesn't like Israel much more than they do.
Third, and this is most important, the islamic terrorists were not afraid of us. Why? Because for 8 years the Clinton administration didn't do a damned thing about them. Terrorists, led by an Iraqi intelligence officer, attempted to topple the world trade center in '93. What did we do? We pretended it was a criminal justice issue. Our embassy was bombed and what did we do? Nothing really. The Cole had a big hole blown into it and what did we do? Wringed our hands and pretended that we were working with Yemen to find the people responsible. In short we did the very thing I found fault with Archer's character for, we showed weakness. The surest way to encourage an aggressor is to show weakness. I remember after the 9/11 attacks there were all these dizzy idiots asking why the terrorists hated us so much. The truth is that while it doesn't matter, the reason they hate us because we represent everything they are not and will likely never be. Trying to win the love of a people who resent us is both futile and foolish. First because it won't work, and second because it doesn't matter if they like us or not. The only thing that matters is whether they fear us or not. Fear is a more constant emotion than love. Love waxes and wanes with mood and the seaons. Fear, especially if it is reinforced periodically by reminding them of why they should fear us, is a wonderfully effective tool for peace. Had the islamic world been scared shitless of us we never would have been attacked. It was Clinton's foreign policy failures that led to 9/11, not anything we "neo-con USian cowboys" did.
Lee
My gripe with this show is that it seems to be little more than a vehicle for leftist propaganda. It only makes a half-hearted attempt at being subtle in this regard. I was greatly concerned the first time I saw captain Archer whine at the Klingons. Playing the pussy diplomat may be consistent with modern euro-centric left-wing political ideology, but it just doesn't work in the real world, unless of course you're trying to get someone to attack you. The episode about AIDS, disguised as a vulcan mind disease, was particularly insulting. I don't know about you, but I've been fully aware of the AIDS epidemic for about 20 years now. I really don't need a TV show to preach to me about it.
What Enterprise needs to do is hire some of the writers from Farscape and wrest control away from the ideologues who think the show is there so they can propagandize.
You can either live in a nation where freedom to speak one's mind is protected, or you can live in a country where you will be protected from anyting and everything that you might ever find insulting.
What you can't do is have both because the two are mutually exclusive.
Living in the former means that you're going to see and hear things that you disagree with and a few things that truly disturb you for one reason or another. Living in the latter means that anyone who wishes to censor something will merely strike a "I'm offended!" pose and pretend that they have been injured by the information or point of view they wish to see suppressed.
Guess which situation our current culture more closely resembles?
I don't know about you, but I'd much rather live in a free society than a politically correct one.
By the way, most people don't equate a 48 year old programmer with the status of "grandmother" regardless of whether she does in fact have grandchildren. The term "grandmother" as used in the context you take exception to, refers to your sterotypical, elderly, retired, little-red-riding-hood type, not a middle aged professional who isn't even old enough to join the AARP.
Lee
When I read the title to this article, my immediate assumption was that "social engineering" referred to the misguided attempts by "progressives" to re-work society into a socialist utopia.
"Social Engineering in the Workplace" could easily be an article about the problems created by such policies as affirmative action, or the reactionary knee-jerk responses to charges of sexual harassment or discrimination that are so common nowadays.
I guess this is what happens when you're someone whose interests include fields which use the same terms to mean very different things.
Lee
This sounds like the kind of crap that went on back in the 60's and 70's that eventually led to the creation of the FOIA in the first place.
As much as I dislike Kerry and the modern Democratic party, if this is the kind of crap we can expect from the Republicans, I can't see how I can vote for them in good conscience. Expect me to vote for a 3rd party candidate in November. What is the world coming to when a brain-dead jesus-freak holy roller and a neo-bolshevik nimrod communist are our choices for who is going to lead this country?
What I found especially disturbing is the fact that they thought his hair was somehow significant. The level of ignorance that displays is really sickening. This isn't the summer of love, lots of guys have long hair and it's no more a political statement than the color of someone's shoes. I used to have hair down to my ass, and I'm a southern boy and a card carrying member of the NRA, hardly an "activist" who is going to blow up something. Well...nothing bigger than a coke bottle anyway.
In a way I almost wish I'd been the one they were picking on just so I'd have the opportunity to tell them to kiss my ass.
Am I the only one who feels we have more to fear from the abusive power of unchecked law enforcement than we ever will from terrorism?
I'd much prefer to limit my concern to those criminals who DON'T have the power of the state backing them up. It's stuff like this that makes me write checks to the NRA and pray it's enough to make a difference. There are times when I'm tempted to send money to the ACLU as well. Its the leftist propaganda that seems to be their driving philosophy that stops me, but if Ashcroft's goons aren't told to sit down and shut up I might just not care anymore and send them money anyway!
Lee
This is part of an emerging strategy that a friend of mine explained to me. In the past Microsoft has competed in the marketplace. In the future they will compete in the courthouse. Would-be competitors will be sued before their products gain enough of a following to be a threat. Microsoft's lawyers will tromp around beating their chests and making threats intended to intimidate others much the same way that the "church" of $cientology's lawywers persecute those who speak out about the cult's abuses and fundamentally evil nature. Microsoft is pursuing these fraudulent and frivilous patents because it costs money to defend against patent suits. Microsoft will not really care whether they win or lose the court case because the purpose of the suits and the threats of being sued is to intimidate their competitors and force them to tie up resources they cannot afford in their legal defense. This is exactly what CLABS did to Aureal a few years ago, filed phony patent suits and used the courts to bankrupt the company.
This really worries me because if blatant fraud and deceit become accepted business practices that are allowed to succeed, what does that say about the state of our civilization?
Lee
I'm opposed to the per-tv "License Fee" charged by the British government on philosphical grounds.
Extracting a tax for simply owning a television set creates a captive audience and the quality of the programming suffers as a result. For every Monty Python's Flying Circus there are countless shows that wouldn't make it past the pilot phase here in the states. If the quality of programming on BBC-america is any indication, brits are being robbed.
I'm curious about something, and maybe some of you british slashdotters can answer some questions for me. What else is there on the air other than the BBC? How many channels do brits generally have to choose from? Is cable TV common, and if so what kind of channels are there on it? Do you get HBO? ESPN? I was told when I was a little kid that the BBC was the ONLY channel available over there. I find that hard to believe. Imagine if the only channel americans had to watch was PBS.
Lee
What a maroon!
I've always wondered what kinds of drugs most of the current anti-war crowd is on. I've become convinced that they are simply far left anti-conservatives and would bitch about anything that Bush or any other conservative leader did regardless of the outcome. Luckily they are a minority. A very obnoxious and vocal minority, but a minority just the same. Most Americans seem to be driven more by pragmatism than any sort of ideology. This is a wonderful thing since most ideologies are, to a greater or leser degree, fantasies adhered to by people who can't deal with reality. This goes for the right wing as well as the left.
Lee
Control what people know about and you control what they believe. This is the fundamental purpose of censorship, to control what people think. Information control is people control. When you can control what people know and believe controlling what they DO is trivial. This is why there were not constant wide-spread violent revolts in places like the USSR where most of the population believed the leftist lies they were spoon-fed every day. The few who didn't were easy to detect and for them the gulag awaited.
Here in the west, particularly in America, there is a concept known as freedom of speech. We hold the right to speak one's mind as a fundamental freedom that exists independently of whether the government protects or even acknowledges it. What most people don't realize is the fact that it implies and is dependent upon an even more basic right, and that is the freedom to make up one's mind. The freedom to think for oneself. The freedom to choose what one believes is the foundation upon which all liberty rests. After all, what use is the ability to express your thoughts and ideas when those are being determined by someone else?
Censorship is an attack upon freedom itself. The idea that by fighting it you are somehow imposing your views upon someone else is one of the most despicable lies I've ever heard, and one of the most perfect examples of the pot calling the kettle black.
It is censorship itself that seeks to impose beliefs upon people. Those who fight it work to ensure the freedom of others to make up their own minds and decide for themselves what they are going to believe.
Any culture that depends upon protection from outside influences and ideas in order to survive is a culture that is doomed to perish, and should. The reason is because the degree to which a culture must be so protected is the degree to which it is based upon lies.
A culture is a set of defining values, beliefs, and ideals held in common by a group of people. A culture is therefore valuable and beneficial to the degree to which it reflects objective truth and contributes to the well-being of those who are a part of it. Those who believe that cultures are somehow inherently precious or valuable are missing the point. The very purpose of human culture is to ensure the survival of the individuals who belong to it. Culture exists to bring individuals together and unify them as a people for the added benefit of all who are a part of it. If a culture does not do this, or does not do this as well as another culture that is competing with, then it should and will either adapt or perish. There is nothing tragic about this. The exposure to and subsequent adoption of new ideas that are more closely aligned with reality, and therefore improve the lives of everyone so exposed, is nothing to cry about.
I fully support this group's efforts to fight censorship. I don't think they go far enough however. Graeme Bunton seems to think that Saudi Arabia censoring the internet in order to preserve its islamic culture is a valid endeavor. I don't. Ideas should stand or fall based upon their own merit. Cultures, being made up of ideas and beliefs, should be held accountable to the same standard. As I said before, if a culture has to be protected from outside influences in order to survive, then it is a culture that is to that degree based upon lies. As someone who seeks to know and live with the truth, I see no reason to protect lies no matter who it is that believes them or why.
Lee
I don't give a damn what the government buys with the money they steal, the point is that they don't have any right to it in the first place.
Misapplication of the law for the purpose of generating revenue is nothing short of extortion. This law was not passed for the purpose they are trying to use it for. It is therefore an abuse of power which it is the duty of every citizen of the state of Florida to resist.
Lee
"All wars, every one, can be prevented by a people who truly value peace and life. If you can't see a way, then you aren't looking hard enough."
Thank you Neville Chamberlain.
When are the left going to understand that human evil is a real and tangible thing and not simply the result of someone having a bad day? There are people in this world who cannot be reached, not by reason, nor by love. Their motivations are beyond the understanding of anyone who is sane. Good will and kindness are nothing more to them than an opportunity to exploit and betray. The only things that get through to them are brute force and the fear it creates. When people such as this come to power, war is often the only means of putting a stop to them.
As far as our ability to prevent a war goes, I think you should understand that unless you're a party to the creation of a war, namely the aggressor, then you're not in a position to prevent the war. Wars are avoided when the bad guy sits down and shuts up. Even if you, as a third party, are somehow in a position to prevent a war, the question then becomes at what cost? There are worse outcomes than war, far worse. One of them is to lay down, not fight, and end up in as bad or worse a position as you would have if you'd fought and lost.
Conflict is an unavoidable fact of human existence. There is no escaping it and you ignore it at your own peril. There is a long tradition associated with people who avoided war at all costs, namely death at the hands of those who did not avoid war. history calls them victims, when it even remembers their names at all.
Some of us in a place called the real world. You're more than welcome to join us. This world isn't as pretty and fanciful as the world you imagine where there are noble solutions to every problem. Here there are some problems that aren't easy to fix, or even possible in many cases. Some problems require that you get your hands dirty, sometimes with the blood of your fellow man. Yes, there is much that is wrong with this world, but it does have the crucial advantage of being the only world that truly exists.
Lee
You're in a foreign country, where the people don't speak your language, and you're late for a meeting with some murderous thugs you've been tasked with removing from the gene pool.
What do you do?
You pull out your night-vision goggles, target a nearby heap of rubble that used to be one of Saddam's "palaces." The goggles lock onto the complex geometric shapes and this information is automatically transmitted to a massive cluster of Cray's in New Jersey on loan from the NSA. Using state of the art satellite x-ray photography and next-generation neural-net AI (NGNNAI), your precise location is calculated and relayed back to you, all at the price of only 3 million dollars an hour. What, you didn't think it was the energizer bunny keeping all those Cray's up an running did you?
Lee
Why would anyone want to use Java for something like this? That's like buying a Ferarri and trying to race it after disconnecting half the spark plugs.
.NET, are examples of what I call Gate's law. Gate's law is the counterpoint to Moore's law. Moore's law states that speed of new computer hardware at a given price point will double every 16 to 24 months. Gate's law states that the efficiency of new computer software will be cut in half every 16 to 24 months. This is why we have to have desktop systems with enough raw power to simulate nuclear explosions just to run Word and Excel at a decent clip. To be sure there is going to be some loss of efficiency due to newer programming strategies that attempt to maximize code maintainability and speed of development, but I seriously doubt that these factors alone are enough to account for the way that most current software packages waste system resources. The only sort of software that still operates at a respectable level of efficiency is computer games. The fact that games are the most perfect example of Gates' law in action would be ironic if it were not for the quantum leaps that have been made in game design over the past quarter century. We've gone from PC-Man to the Lawnmower Man in just under 25 years. Packages like Word should not rightfully require computers with VR-capable speed and memory just to run. Unfortunately they do.
I am not a fan of Java. I don't have any problems with the language itself. What I have a problem with is the fact that it is crippled by the lack of native compilers. And by that I mean comprehensive compilers that work. Something like gcj that won't compile everything that Sun's "compilers" will just doesn't count.
Interpreting bytecode for the purpose of cross platform capability is all fine and good. There are times when this is very beneficial. But not having the ability to target your programs for a particular platform is insane because it kills any chance at implementing an efficient solution for anything. It is the primary reason why I don't use Java for anything. I'm not going to use a language depends upon a virtual machine that eats 20+ megs of ram just to run hello world...slowly. And that is PER INSTANCE mind you. Shared libraries that eat up tons of ram are one thing, but having multiple programs whose memory footprint is such that they might as well have been statically linked is quite another.
Then of course there is the speed issue. The lack of native compilers is what doomed IBM and Corel's attempts to create Java-base office suites. They could write the code, but running it was another matter altogether. I suspect that the projects at both companies were thought up by suits who bought into Sun's marketing. No one but a suit would believe that you could create something as complex and resource hungry as an office suite using an interpreted language.
Java and especially
I'm sure I'm going to get flamed for this post, but then if I cared whether people bitched at me I'd just keep my mouth shut wouldn't I?
Java advocates are perfect examples of the old adage that if the only tool you have is a hammer then every problem looks like a nail. Java has its uses and its place. The problem is that far too many people want to use it for things that it is not well-suited for. If we can get good optimizing native compilers for the language then most of the problems with Java will disappear and I'll have nothing but good things to say about it. Till then I'll stick to C and C++ thank you very much.
Lee
Maybe this will help out some of the people who make amateur porn and just can't seem to hold the camera still. Just don't let John Ashcroft find out.
Am I the only one who think's he's the real-life version of John Lithgow's character in Footloose?
Lee
I heard about that and I live in Phoenix now!
One thing I will say about Arizona, the harsh conditions tend to keep out the losers who would dream up such a scheme.
Lee
I lived there for a few years back in the late 80's. I lived in a condominium complex called Lifestyles. It was on center street. It's still there according to the arial photos that Mapquest used to provide, although I can't seem to find a website for it online. I suspect the name has changed just like so many other things. The town has a new library that looks pretty impressive in the pictures. When I was living there I used to buy paperback books for 10 cents a piece at the Herndon Fortnightly. I still have a lot of them. Some of them were true classics too, like Stranger in a Strange land, Revolt in 2100, Ender's Game, etc. I got so "bad" about buying Sci-Fi and fantasy books there that I started thinking about money in terms of how many withdrawn paperbacks I could buy with it. Dimes became my unit of currency.
I went to both Herndon Intermediate (now called Herndon Middle School) and Herndon High school before my family moved back to Tennessee, which I've always believed was a mistake. The Nashville area is OK, but its nothing compared northern Virginia.
I've been living in Phoenix, AZ for the past 12 years. Phoenix is this huge city in the middle of a desert wasteland. There are no real trees and only two seasons, Hot and Hiroshima.
Every so often I'll hear about Herndon or Reston in the news and I've tried to keep up on the goings on there, which is pretty easy thanks to the internet.
Does anyone actually KNOW why Herndon has a 25 mph speed limit? I could understand a short-lived city council administration passing the ordinance, and getting kicked out of office come next election. What I can't understand is why it is still in effect. Unless of course it makes the town so much money that they don't dare overturn it. Maybe that is what paid for that nice new library huh?
Can you believe that someone mod'ed my original response down to TROLL? I suspect it had nothing to do with my post and everything to do with my sig. Unless of course the Herndon Slashdot Mafia didn't like me bad mouthing their town.
Oh well, if jackasses want to waste their mod points on me then that's fine. All it means is that they won't have them the next time they want to stifle a more prominent post because its contrary to their political idiotology.
Lee
You weren't living in Herndon, VA were you?
The speed limit there for the ENTIRE TOWN is 25mph. Cops would actually give people on bikes speeding tickets.
I have not idea how such an ordinance got passed, but last time I checked it was still in effect.
Lee
I don't think that John Kerry, or any Democrat for that matter, is the answer.
While this latest round of BS from Ashcroft has made it entirely clear that Bush is WORSE than Kerry, that doesn't mean that Kerry, merely as the lesser of two evils, deserves anyone's vote.
The political left is evil because it is dominated by communists. The political right is evil because it is dominated by religious zealots. Dennis Miller described this situation best when he said "Hey, we're just looking to vote for the guy who is going to screw us the least!" That is, unfortunately, becoming more and more difficult to do. I'd love to find a candidate that was driven by common sense instead of ideology. It is a tragedy of epic proportions that our political process as a whole isn't driven by common sense. Imagine a world where you didn't have to continuously choose between Hitler and Stalin every time you voted, where you could find a candidate you could actually have some faith in. Someone who, while imperfect, was basically honest and decent. The problem is that politics have become so vicious that honest and decent people never even get involved. Or if they do they are quickly disillusioned and driven out.
Unless Bush does something to reign in Ashcroft, and preferably asks for his resignation, then there is no way I'm going to vote for him. Even so I'm sure has hell not going to hand hand this country over to a bunch of aging 60's radicals who believe that the America is the enemy. Instead I'm going to vote for whatever candidate the libertarian party fields. I know that this candidate won't win of course, but that is not the point. An election is where we try to create a more ideal government. It is not a horse race where you try to vote for whoever you think is going to win. At the very least by voting for a libertarian candidate I'll know that I won't be responsible for the next administration's stupidity.
I really do think that someone should write a book comparing the left and the right in this country and explains how, as Simon and Garfunkel once sang "Laugh about it, shout about it, when you've got to choose, any way you look at it you lose."
Lee
http://www.ccel.org/g/gibbon/decline/home.html
The Roman republic and empire took a lot longer than 200 years to collapse, but collapse it did.
Redhat dropped pine because of ongoing security issues, not because they are GPL zealots (which they are not).
Lee
As far as I'm concerned John Ashcroft is waging war on the American people. I don't see anything difference between him using the power of the state to attack pornography, and other regimes using the power of the state to attack political dissidents. Porn is harmless. I don't particularly like it myself, at least not the crude garbage that accounts for 95% of it. But even though I don't like it doesn't mean I don't appreciate its value as a tool for creating a healthier society. Porn serves a very important purpose, and that is to make sex and sexuality something that is seen as ordinary and commonplace. When talking about sex is as uneventful as talking about the weather then society will be a lot better off. As it stands right now there are still an awful lot of neurotic people out there. Talk about sex and they get all twittery. Some even become angry or embarassed. Why? Because they've been conned into thinking of sex as something bad, or something to worry about. That is not just stupid, its sick. For many people like that there just isn't anything that can be done, except wait for them to die that is. Luckily people aren't born that way. Instead they are psychologically conditioned to have those thoughts and feelings. This conditioning is little more than mass brainwashing. Its end result is a person who has fixed ideas and emotional responses that don't change, even if he or she has experiences that would warrant that they change. They are impaired from thinking, impaired from forming their own conclusions, and impaired from changing their minds when the facts dictate that they should. They feel bad and anxious about sex because they were made to feel that way about it. This brainwashing depends upon lies. And not just lies, but lies told within an environment where the truth is hidden and questions and curiosity are strongly discouraged. This is what has commonly been called sexual repression and it is a form of mental and emotional torture. Porn undermines it, and if for no other reason than that it is a positive influence. Not because porn shows sex accurately or truly, but because it prevents sex from being made into a secret shame. I hate to say this because I'll sound Alec Baldwin, but if Ashcroft's crap is allowed to fly, I do belive I may leave the country.
This country is going to shit in a hurry in general . The american people are stuck between neo-bolshevik nimrods on the left, and puritanical pinheads on the right. How are we supposed to elect a wise and prudent government when this what we have to build it with?
Ashcroft has, in one fell swoop, angered and incensed me more than just about any of the crap I've seen come from the left over the past decade. You have to go all the way back to the 60's to find something that the left has done to top this nonsense.
Any SOB who will put a man like Ashcroft in power and give him free reign to persecute the American people sure as hell isn't going to get my vote.
I'm at a loss for words. I think my beer money's going to be going to the EFF and the ACLU this year.
Lee
Sounds like an episode of Jerry Springer to me.
The death penalty is nothing but an abortion...applied retroactively.