The way the announcement phrased it, you'd think the journalists dug out this information on their own, rather than having it dumped in their laps.
This is particularly true in the case of The Washington Post. IIRC, Snowden provided all the raw info, Greenwald at The Guardian did all the journalistic legwork. And The Washington Post was just brought in at the last minutes and handed everything in finished form just to lend some U.S. credibility to the story. The Post's entire contribution was to basically say "Yeah, okay thanks, we'll publish it too." It's like giving a Pulitzer to a paper who just picked up the AP story and published it unaltered.
Perhaps the solution is how to make cars that collect, rather than emit, all their pollution, or to make cars that merely emit substantially less, or to make electric or hydrogen-powered cars that don't emit anything (moving the emissions, perhaps), to reduce the amount of travel we do (e.g. telecommuting), or perhaps something entirely different which none of us can even envision (FYI, my prognostication is that it'll bit of each of the above, but I'm probably wrong).
Or someone invents practical teleportation out of nowhere and renders the whole issue completely moot. And people look back and say "I can't believe we put so much effort into that issue and it didn't even fucking matter in the end." Kind of like the "Free Silver" issue. At the turn of the 20th century, everyone thought it would be one of the defining issues of the 20th century. In the end, it didn't amount to jack shit.
I love Comcast. Comcast is awesome. And I don't just say that because they're my only real broadband internet option now, and the only real option now for several cities around me now in fact. I say it because they're great! Doubleplus good they are!
I like the elevator analogy. The fact is that even when prognostications get something right--they inevitably get the context, implications, and effects all wrong. That's because they get one invention or innovation right, but every invention and innovation has to be understood in the context of the million other inventions, innovations, and social changes that surround it.
So one person guesses in the mid-19th century that we will have horseless carriages in the future--but also thinks they'll run on steam engines and cause great depletion of our wood and coal supplies. Another person forsees the internal combustion engine, but thinks its only practical use will be in industry. Another person forsees high-grade steel, but thinks it will be used just for girders. Another person forsees an interstate highway system, but thinks it will be used for giant horse-drawn land trains. No one person truly predicts the automobile and its actual effects and implications. No one person puts it all together.
That's why all these reports that come out predicting the future (beyond the obvious) always crack me up. Such arrogance. About the only prediction guaranteed to be accurate is that the future will be far different than any of us can possibly imagine.
I'm sure some poor piece of shit who grew up with meth-head parents in a trailer park in Appalachia is really grateful for all his white privilege. "Live like a white king, I do!!" I can hear him saying.
According to modern rules, it's impossible to discriminate against a white male, since we all grew up in such wealth a privilege and all. So when a black student from an affluent background goes up against a poor white student from a trailer park, obviously we need to give a hand up to the disadvantaged black student.
I, for one, have no illusions about the nobility of Castro or the Venezuelan govt. (or Iran or North Korea, for that matter). But I also am not a fool who think that hundreds of thousands of CIA and NSA employees just sit around all day staring at walls. The CIA has a long, well-established, and VERY shameful history in Cuba (even engaging in open terrorism there).
So you can be sure that pretty much any effort to that undermines the Castro government there is AT LEAST being supported and/or funded by the CIA. Even if this started as a homegrown movement, you can bet that it took about 2 seconds for CIA agents to descend on it with briefcases full of cash and offers of assistance. The U.S. government has a serious hate-on for Castro, and dream of the day they can replace him with a U.S. puppet government. This is just another in a very long line of ploys to further than end.
I want to know what's so bizarre about "Cuban officials accusing the U.S. government of bizarre plots over the years, such as trying to kill Fidel Castro with exploding cigars." I think the CIA's many, many efforts to assasinate Castro over the years have been well-documented. An exploding cigar would be no less bizarre than many of the attempts we already know about.
Are we still pretending that donating money to prevent American citizens from marrying the person they love is just a "political belief"?
Considering that it's still a contentious legal issue in most of the U.S. and is largely split along party lines, yes that's exactly what it is. That may change in the future, but, for right now, it's very much a political issue. And the people on the right think they they're every bit as morally justified in this as those on the left. And I personally don't want to see people losing their jobs over this very fucking politicized holy war, be they a Prop-8 supporter in CA or a gay rights supporter in TX.
So it's okay to fire someone for being conservative and supporting conservative causes, but not for being liberal and supporting liberal causes? Okay, got it.
We're sorry your husband died as the result of our bad accelerator ma'am. But, as consolation, we can offer you the chance to relive his last drive in Gran Turismo if you like...
Slashdot Mirror
dead horses and vehicular entanglement
BAND NAME! Called it!
The way the announcement phrased it, you'd think the journalists dug out this information on their own, rather than having it dumped in their laps.
This is particularly true in the case of The Washington Post. IIRC, Snowden provided all the raw info, Greenwald at The Guardian did all the journalistic legwork. And The Washington Post was just brought in at the last minutes and handed everything in finished form just to lend some U.S. credibility to the story. The Post's entire contribution was to basically say "Yeah, okay thanks, we'll publish it too." It's like giving a Pulitzer to a paper who just picked up the AP story and published it unaltered.
Perhaps the solution is how to make cars that collect, rather than emit, all their pollution, or to make cars that merely emit substantially less, or to make electric or hydrogen-powered cars that don't emit anything (moving the emissions, perhaps), to reduce the amount of travel we do (e.g. telecommuting), or perhaps something entirely different which none of us can even envision (FYI, my prognostication is that it'll bit of each of the above, but I'm probably wrong).
Or someone invents practical teleportation out of nowhere and renders the whole issue completely moot. And people look back and say "I can't believe we put so much effort into that issue and it didn't even fucking matter in the end." Kind of like the "Free Silver" issue. At the turn of the 20th century, everyone thought it would be one of the defining issues of the 20th century. In the end, it didn't amount to jack shit.
it seems like it's really good news for the people who stream Netflix on Comcast.
Soon that will be about 50% of the entire United States. You go with Concast or you go without broadband.
I love Comcast. Comcast is awesome. And I don't just say that because they're my only real broadband internet option now, and the only real option now for several cities around me now in fact. I say it because they're great! Doubleplus good they are!
It's always funny when two puppet governments fight over who is the less puppetty.
It was a war over Federal vs. State control
Yeah, control of slavery.
They bomb the tourists at Pearl Harbor?
We always try to write the present on both the future and the past. It's human nature.
Yeah, and Clapper and the NSA leadership probably aren't going to get prison time either. But they still deserve it.
I like the elevator analogy. The fact is that even when prognostications get something right--they inevitably get the context, implications, and effects all wrong. That's because they get one invention or innovation right, but every invention and innovation has to be understood in the context of the million other inventions, innovations, and social changes that surround it.
So one person guesses in the mid-19th century that we will have horseless carriages in the future--but also thinks they'll run on steam engines and cause great depletion of our wood and coal supplies. Another person forsees the internal combustion engine, but thinks its only practical use will be in industry. Another person forsees high-grade steel, but thinks it will be used just for girders. Another person forsees an interstate highway system, but thinks it will be used for giant horse-drawn land trains. No one person truly predicts the automobile and its actual effects and implications. No one person puts it all together.
That's why all these reports that come out predicting the future (beyond the obvious) always crack me up. Such arrogance. About the only prediction guaranteed to be accurate is that the future will be far different than any of us can possibly imagine.
Snowden deserves a Nobel prize too. And Clapper and the other NSA leaders deserve prison time.
Can't let one of the other VC's get the drop on me!
Dreamers risked their lives to build the first airplane, risked their career on the first microcomputers
Dreamers also risked their lives on a million other products that failed. But Business Week never writes stories about them.
I like your way of thinking. Would it be possible for me to buy your company for several billion dollars?
I'm sure some poor piece of shit who grew up with meth-head parents in a trailer park in Appalachia is really grateful for all his white privilege. "Live like a white king, I do!!" I can hear him saying.
Income is only worthless if you're time.
If man is still alive.
According to modern rules, it's impossible to discriminate against a white male, since we all grew up in such wealth a privilege and all. So when a black student from an affluent background goes up against a poor white student from a trailer park, obviously we need to give a hand up to the disadvantaged black student.
I, for one, have no illusions about the nobility of Castro or the Venezuelan govt. (or Iran or North Korea, for that matter). But I also am not a fool who think that hundreds of thousands of CIA and NSA employees just sit around all day staring at walls. The CIA has a long, well-established, and VERY shameful history in Cuba (even engaging in open terrorism there).
So you can be sure that pretty much any effort to that undermines the Castro government there is AT LEAST being supported and/or funded by the CIA. Even if this started as a homegrown movement, you can bet that it took about 2 seconds for CIA agents to descend on it with briefcases full of cash and offers of assistance. The U.S. government has a serious hate-on for Castro, and dream of the day they can replace him with a U.S. puppet government. This is just another in a very long line of ploys to further than end.
I want to know what's so bizarre about "Cuban officials accusing the U.S. government of bizarre plots over the years, such as trying to kill Fidel Castro with exploding cigars." I think the CIA's many, many efforts to assasinate Castro over the years have been well-documented. An exploding cigar would be no less bizarre than many of the attempts we already know about.
The MtGox guys better get on a plane and head for their secret island.
Are we still pretending that donating money to prevent American citizens from marrying the person they love is just a "political belief"?
Considering that it's still a contentious legal issue in most of the U.S. and is largely split along party lines, yes that's exactly what it is. That may change in the future, but, for right now, it's very much a political issue. And the people on the right think they they're every bit as morally justified in this as those on the left. And I personally don't want to see people losing their jobs over this very fucking politicized holy war, be they a Prop-8 supporter in CA or a gay rights supporter in TX.
So it's okay to fire someone for being conservative and supporting conservative causes, but not for being liberal and supporting liberal causes? Okay, got it.
We're sorry your husband died as the result of our bad accelerator ma'am. But, as consolation, we can offer you the chance to relive his last drive in Gran Turismo if you like...