But isn't that exactly the point - that the USA should not be stealing credit card numbers from visiting dignitaries in the first place? And this release of information will help prevent this sort of immoral thing from happening in the future.
You are looking at this wrong... Is it wise to let your enemy have any advantage if you end up in a war? Stealing the credit card numbers is just part of the information required to totally decimate your enemy. Not that we are at war with many of the credit cards that were requested, but having the option available at a later date is prudent planning. Is it immoral? What if the person in question is using his credit to purchase weapons to be used against us? One can play the what if game forever, but the idea here is to be fully prepared to dominate your opponent. As long as the State department doesn't collect information on US citizens, I have no problem with the practice.
It's one thing to post documents on-line that Governments would rather keep secret. It's another to do like Wikileaks did and edit video to fit their personal views. If these sites would just post and not add their opinion; credibility would improve.
When the Libertarians win, that will be amended to slave.
Your statement makes absolutely no sense. To a Libertarian, a consumer is nothing more than someone who buys his goods or services. If you don't want that particular brand of goods or service, then don't buy it. How does that make one a slave? Its as bad as those who claim that the Republicans are fascist, or the Liberals are Communist.
So you see no moral or ethical problems with replacing their homegrown tyranny with your own tyranny? In Iraq, first it was an outright military dictatorship, now it's a puppet government that can do whathever it wants as long as what they want to do does not inconvinience US business interests.
Bringing in business interests, US or other, is exactly what Iraq needs. This will do more good than any other thing we could possibly come up with now. I know that people like to bash the "evil capitalist", but it's the entrepreneurs that make the world a better place for all.
WikiLeaks may think they are trying to expose corruption, but so far, I haven't seen the corruption they think exists.
Certainly this is an arguable point, as shown by the many replies you received to this comment. However, I'd like to point out something else - If we were to shut down WikiLeaks now (for failing to expose corruption?) then what do we do when we find corruption and there's no WikiLeaks to post it to?
How about reporting it to the FBI. There is this thing called the whistle-blower protection act of 1989 that allows those who see wrongdoing to report it. Not to the news media, but to the appropriate authorities. Had Pfc Manning taking what he thought was wrongdoing by the government to the FBI, he wouldn't be in the pile of Sh!t he is in now. The FBI have the clearance to sort through the documentation and pick out any evidence to be used without releasing documentation that could jeopardize ongoing diplomatic relations. They do a pretty good job at prosecuting corrupt individuals if they have the evidence to back it up. So, no, we don't need Wikileaks to exist for exposing corruption.
We do blame Mugabe for being an evil tyrant. However, had Wikileaks not posted that info Mugabe wouldn't have been able to use it to commit more evil. It goes back to that whole journalistic integrity thing. If your actions cause somebody to be unlawfully imprisoned, then perhaps your actions need closer scrutiny.
Because you cannot bring about Democracy by force.
Forgive me if I am wrong, but didn't the USA bring about democracy by force? Removing a tyrant from power and replacing that power with democracy will always require force.
However, I will agree with your assessment that if a 'decent Western power' does the perforation of holes, they do in fact invalidate the adjective "decent".
I suspect that you meant to say "Because you cannot force a country into democracy by waging war on their tyrant of a leader." Although, gauging by the current situation in Iraq, even that is a questionable statement. Time will tell.
That a business does what it thinks is good for its bottom line? On one hand we have an organization that is trying to bring down civilization as we know it and on the other, we have capitalism as usual. Think I will side with Amazon's decision on this one. WikiLeaks may think they are trying to expose corruption, but so far, I haven't seen the corruption they think exists.
Actually, I do consider this in the idle category... Or at least in the non-news category. There is plenty of music available for kindergarten kids to sing that isn't copyrighted. Ok, so they can't sing the latest song by a current artist. Oh-Well. A good teacher will not rely on what is current or popular and still be able to provide an outstanding education.
It only matters whether the survey is true. You have not presented any evidence that the survey is wrong in any way.
There is more to it than whether the survey it true... If the questions asked are biased for a particular outcome, then one can't call it poisoning the well, since the well is already poisoned.
An example from the Article... Though the CBO concluded that the health reform law would reduce the budget deficit, 53% of voters thought most economists have concluded that health reform will increase the deficit. Most people who watch FNC believe that the part of the Health Reform Law that requires everybody to purchase insurance, or face a penalty, will eventually end up in the Supreme Court and be shot down 5-4. If this happens, then the funding the CBO counted on to pay for the HRL will be gone. Thus increasing the deficit if the rest of the bill doesn't get paid for in some other way.
Or maybe this... The poll also found significant differences depending how people voted. Those who voted Republican were more likely than those who voted Democratic to believe that: most scientists do not agree that climate change is occurring (62% to 26%) To which I have to ask, what was the actual question in the pole? 'Most' scientist do not study climate or more accurately Anthropomorphic Climate Change. 'Most' scientist study in fields with no relationship to AWG and therefore couldn't give a professional opinion on the subject.
If you ask me, the poll itself is misleading... probably just as much as Fox News can be. But then, sheep will follow there shepherds on both sides.
The Oil Companies regularly pay more than that to bury the technology. Or the inventor...
eh... When the oil companies run out of oil, they can then sell us energy from all the patents they hold. We get to continue using energy and they get to continue making obscene amounts of cash. Sort of a win/win situation... at least until we run out of arable land to produce fuel with. We are all doomed in the end anyway.
Nice strawman argument in the video... "The erosion of the middle class"
It always amazes me how people fixate on the disparity of the distribution of wealth. Let me say this a distinctly as I can... SO WHAT! It shouldn't matter that so-in-so makes $10 billion and I only make $30,000. Ask yourself this, what is your standard of living? Could it improve? If so, then take responsibility and improve it. Stop worrying about the Jones and start worrying about your own situation. Do you find yourself in a career path that doesn't lead to promotion? Change it. Can't find a job in your chosen profession? Change it. Take responsibility for your own life and stop worrying about others.
Every time I make this argument, I always get a response to the effect of: We should help those who need a leg up... I say BAH! There are plenty of resources to help those in need already. Giving handouts (redistribution of wealth?) does nothing more than encourage the poor to stay poor.
Give a man a fish and he will eat for a day. Teach a man to fish and he will eat for a lifetime - Lao Tzu
Somebody with high security clearence thought these documents were suitable for release. I would rather wikileaks released them as they were leaked rather than making their own subjective judgement on all 1.6GB of text data.
To make a minor correction to your post: Somebody with high security clearance, who did not have release authority, took it upon himself to release classified documents to the world. Whether or not WikiLeaks should have used their subjective judgement on the data will be a point of contention for many years.
What really gets me, is that to reduce light pollution in urban areas, they use special fixtures that direct the light down instead of up at the night sky. If you have a glowing tree, it will radiate in all directions... kinda defeats the purpose. However, having RTFA, it gets worse... they are currently using a special wavelength of LED to shine on the tree to get it to glow a reddish tint. It is a neat parlor trick, nothing more.
I am pretty sure most countries in the developed world do not allow discrimination on the basis of weight.
I can't speak for other countries, but here in the USA, there is nothing illegal about discrimination on the basis of weight. The US military does, as do Fire rescue, etc... Do you really want a 300 lbs. fireman climbing up the ladder to pull you from a burning multi-story building? Or how about an airline stewardess who is so large they can't fit down the aisle way. Model agencies are probably the best known example of weight discrimination. Heck, my company pays its employees a bonus if they work out. Weight discrimination happens so much, that this really is a non-story.
Except that eventually she's going to have to pay her attorneys...
The lawyers know that bankruptcy will be the next step in her financial future. In fact, I would bet that the only thing she ends up paying after all is said and done is a lawyer fee. As somebody mentioned before, the only thing the MAFIAA is interested in is the precedent. They could care less about getting any actual money from her.
Bull shit ( I am all for a strong nuclear force etc) but basically Russia had the USA hoodwinked into thinking they were 10* stronger than they actually were. The whole shit with russia was more or less just propagated to further the whole red scare.
Seeing how liberals tend to marry liberals and conservatives tend to marry conservatives; I could see how it might affect the gene pool. Does this mean that the next war between the two sides will be considered a race war?
Slashdot Mirror
But isn't that exactly the point - that the USA should not be stealing credit card numbers from visiting dignitaries in the first place? And this release of information will help prevent this sort of immoral thing from happening in the future.
You are looking at this wrong... Is it wise to let your enemy have any advantage if you end up in a war? Stealing the credit card numbers is just part of the information required to totally decimate your enemy. Not that we are at war with many of the credit cards that were requested, but having the option available at a later date is prudent planning. Is it immoral? What if the person in question is using his credit to purchase weapons to be used against us? One can play the what if game forever, but the idea here is to be fully prepared to dominate your opponent. As long as the State department doesn't collect information on US citizens, I have no problem with the practice.
What happens when I launder the bills in my pocket?
Either he's right, and Google is also actively trying to discredit him, or he's an idiot.
Sadly, all of the above is true.
He is politically on the right... Google is actively trying to discredit him... he is an idiot.
It's one thing to post documents on-line that Governments would rather keep secret. It's another to do like Wikileaks did and edit video to fit their personal views. If these sites would just post and not add their opinion; credibility would improve.
When the Libertarians win, that will be amended to slave.
Your statement makes absolutely no sense. To a Libertarian, a consumer is nothing more than someone who buys his goods or services. If you don't want that particular brand of goods or service, then don't buy it. How does that make one a slave? Its as bad as those who claim that the Republicans are fascist, or the Liberals are Communist.
Maybe I shouldn't feed the trolls.
So you see no moral or ethical problems with replacing their homegrown tyranny with your own tyranny? In Iraq, first it was an outright military dictatorship, now it's a puppet government that can do whathever it wants as long as what they want to do does not inconvinience US business interests.
Bringing in business interests, US or other, is exactly what Iraq needs. This will do more good than any other thing we could possibly come up with now. I know that people like to bash the "evil capitalist", but it's the entrepreneurs that make the world a better place for all.
I will give up my keyboard once the neural implant technology becomes available.
WikiLeaks may think they are trying to expose corruption, but so far, I haven't seen the corruption they think exists.
Certainly this is an arguable point, as shown by the many replies you received to this comment. However, I'd like to point out something else - If we were to shut down WikiLeaks now (for failing to expose corruption?) then what do we do when we find corruption and there's no WikiLeaks to post it to?
How about reporting it to the FBI. There is this thing called the whistle-blower protection act of 1989 that allows those who see wrongdoing to report it. Not to the news media, but to the appropriate authorities. Had Pfc Manning taking what he thought was wrongdoing by the government to the FBI, he wouldn't be in the pile of Sh!t he is in now. The FBI have the clearance to sort through the documentation and pick out any evidence to be used without releasing documentation that could jeopardize ongoing diplomatic relations. They do a pretty good job at prosecuting corrupt individuals if they have the evidence to back it up. So, no, we don't need Wikileaks to exist for exposing corruption.
We do blame Mugabe for being an evil tyrant. However, had Wikileaks not posted that info Mugabe wouldn't have been able to use it to commit more evil. It goes back to that whole journalistic integrity thing. If your actions cause somebody to be unlawfully imprisoned, then perhaps your actions need closer scrutiny.
"
Because you cannot bring about Democracy by force.
Forgive me if I am wrong, but didn't the USA bring about democracy by force? Removing a tyrant from power and replacing that power with democracy will always require force.
However, I will agree with your assessment that if a 'decent Western power' does the perforation of holes, they do in fact invalidate the adjective "decent".
I suspect that you meant to say "Because you cannot force a country into democracy by waging war on their tyrant of a leader." Although, gauging by the current situation in Iraq, even that is a questionable statement. Time will tell.
That a business does what it thinks is good for its bottom line? On one hand we have an organization that is trying to bring down civilization as we know it and on the other, we have capitalism as usual. Think I will side with Amazon's decision on this one. WikiLeaks may think they are trying to expose corruption, but so far, I haven't seen the corruption they think exists.
Actually, I do consider this in the idle category... Or at least in the non-news category. There is plenty of music available for kindergarten kids to sing that isn't copyrighted. Ok, so they can't sing the latest song by a current artist. Oh-Well. A good teacher will not rely on what is current or popular and still be able to provide an outstanding education.
It only matters whether the survey is true. You have not presented any evidence that the survey is wrong in any way.
There is more to it than whether the survey it true... If the questions asked are biased for a particular outcome, then one can't call it poisoning the well, since the well is already poisoned.
An example from the Article... Though the CBO concluded that the health reform law would reduce the budget deficit, 53% of voters thought most economists have concluded that health reform will increase the deficit.
Most people who watch FNC believe that the part of the Health Reform Law that requires everybody to purchase insurance, or face a penalty, will eventually end up in the Supreme Court and be shot down 5-4. If this happens, then the funding the CBO counted on to pay for the HRL will be gone. Thus increasing the deficit if the rest of the bill doesn't get paid for in some other way.
Or maybe this... The poll also found significant differences depending how people voted. Those who voted Republican were more likely than those who voted Democratic to believe that: most scientists do not agree that climate change is occurring (62% to 26%)
To which I have to ask, what was the actual question in the pole? 'Most' scientist do not study climate or more accurately Anthropomorphic Climate Change. 'Most' scientist study in fields with no relationship to AWG and therefore couldn't give a professional opinion on the subject.
If you ask me, the poll itself is misleading... probably just as much as Fox News can be. But then, sheep will follow there shepherds on both sides.
The Oil Companies regularly pay more than that to bury the technology. Or the inventor ...
eh... When the oil companies run out of oil, they can then sell us energy from all the patents they hold. We get to continue using energy and they get to continue making obscene amounts of cash. Sort of a win/win situation... at least until we run out of arable land to produce fuel with. We are all doomed in the end anyway.
As opposed to all the grants that are given to anybody who attaches 'Effects of Global Warming on...' to there research title?
"pre existing image of the background" this makes it an epic fail, but cute project.
I'l be impressed if it generates the background without ANY reference images or reference data.
Except for the fact that he moves the camera, thus changing the POV. Whatever he is doing to achieve this effect is live.
Nice strawman argument in the video... "The erosion of the middle class"
It always amazes me how people fixate on the disparity of the distribution of wealth. Let me say this a distinctly as I can... SO WHAT! It shouldn't matter that so-in-so makes $10 billion and I only make $30,000. Ask yourself this, what is your standard of living? Could it improve? If so, then take responsibility and improve it. Stop worrying about the Jones and start worrying about your own situation. Do you find yourself in a career path that doesn't lead to promotion? Change it. Can't find a job in your chosen profession? Change it. Take responsibility for your own life and stop worrying about others.
Every time I make this argument, I always get a response to the effect of: We should help those who need a leg up... I say BAH! There are plenty of resources to help those in need already. Giving handouts (redistribution of wealth?) does nothing more than encourage the poor to stay poor.
Give a man a fish and he will eat for a day. Teach a man to fish and he will eat for a lifetime - Lao Tzu
Nice that amazon have shown their colours... I shall no longer trade with them. Vote with your wallet, it's the only way they'll learn.
Never been one to do much business with amazon before, guess I will have to, as you put it "Vote with your wallet", and start shopping with them.
Somebody with high security clearence thought these documents were suitable for release. I would rather wikileaks released them as they were leaked rather than making their own subjective judgement on all 1.6GB of text data.
To make a minor correction to your post: Somebody with high security clearance, who did not have release authority, took it upon himself to release classified documents to the world. Whether or not WikiLeaks should have used their subjective judgement on the data will be a point of contention for many years.
What really gets me, is that to reduce light pollution in urban areas, they use special fixtures that direct the light down instead of up at the night sky. If you have a glowing tree, it will radiate in all directions... kinda defeats the purpose. However, having RTFA, it gets worse... they are currently using a special wavelength of LED to shine on the tree to get it to glow a reddish tint. It is a neat parlor trick, nothing more.
I am pretty sure most countries in the developed world do not allow discrimination on the basis of weight.
I can't speak for other countries, but here in the USA, there is nothing illegal about discrimination on the basis of weight. The US military does, as do Fire rescue, etc... Do you really want a 300 lbs. fireman climbing up the ladder to pull you from a burning multi-story building? Or how about an airline stewardess who is so large they can't fit down the aisle way. Model agencies are probably the best known example of weight discrimination. Heck, my company pays its employees a bonus if they work out. Weight discrimination happens so much, that this really is a non-story.
Except that eventually she's going to have to pay her attorneys...
The lawyers know that bankruptcy will be the next step in her financial future. In fact, I would bet that the only thing she ends up paying after all is said and done is a lawyer fee. As somebody mentioned before, the only thing the MAFIAA is interested in is the precedent. They could care less about getting any actual money from her.
Wooosh!
Bull shit ( I am all for a strong nuclear force etc) but basically Russia had the USA hoodwinked into thinking they were 10* stronger than they actually were. The whole shit with russia was more or less just propagated to further the whole red scare.
*Facepalm*
Bravo for making an example of the GP's point.
Seeing how liberals tend to marry liberals and conservatives tend to marry conservatives; I could see how it might affect the gene pool. Does this mean that the next war between the two sides will be considered a race war?