Absolutely! If I had mod points, you'd be getting them. Zonk is the lowest brand of troll.
This is the problem with Slashdot (as opposed to Kuro5hin or Digg): the whole community has to put up with the biases of the editors rather than allowing the community to decide ITSELF what is newsworthy.
Zonk hates Sony and because he's an editor he gets to troll us with his shoddy, unreasoned rants. It's really crap. Slashdot used to be a lot better than this, and I think it needs to evolve to allow user selected submissions to the front page, and not continue to abuse editorial rights as if it were a soapbox. You want a Soapbox - make an op-ed blog.
The relevent questions are as follows:
Is this control property of the US government?
As far as 'control' is concerned, the US government has already demonstrated that it will exercise control over ICANN ('XXX' domain)
If not, what right does the US government have to sieze this private asset?
(1) Governments (and the UN) regulate Telcos for exactly the same reason - they're strategic assets
(2) The US and the UN don't need anyone to "sieze" the root servers - they just need to set up different root servers.
(3) The root servers are not a "private asset", ICANN was set up BY THE US GOVERNMENT SOLELY FOR THE PURPOSES OF MANAGING THE ROOT SERVERS - they do not own them.
If not, what right does the UN or any nation have to demand that the US sieze this asset?
They can push all they fucking like, they don't dominate the UN therefore they won't dominate any UN decision. How fucking hard is that for you to grasp?
They may WANT to dominate the Internet, but 1/180th of the UN is still sweet fuck all. Check out that "Democracy" idea and how that works again.
(1) The US government *does* exert control over ICANN (refer the 'XXX' domain fiasco)
(2) Even if ICANN is a mythical company *with no government oversight* (it's not, no company in the world is) then the UN would still have exactly the same beef, but with ICANN directly rather than the US in particular.
FWIW, I used to work with a Brit who thought the wages looked crap in NZ when doing a currency conversion but when in NZ thought that the purchasing power of the NZ$ in NZ was better than the exchange rate would have suggested. Having worked in the UK previously, I think he might be right. But anyway, YMMV.
Personally, I'd use OSX if I could get it without buying into Apple's hardware monopoly. Why swap M$'s O/S monopoly for Apple's hardware monopoly?
The OEM support issue is bullshit - linux manages it pretty well without major corporate support. There's no reason why Apple couldn't support a standard set of PC equipment and allow the FOSS community to build drivers for anything else.
*YES* it's an old word - but with a *DIFFERENT* meaning. It is supposed to mean - 'to make something into actual currency' (think stamping gold to make coins). NOT 'to make financial gain from'. FFS!
Warhammer has two variants - the Wargame and the Roleplaying game. Not only are these different kinds of games, the settings are quite different - the Wargame is very 'high fantasy' and flashy whereas the RPG is 'low fantasy', gritty and plays on its dark sense of humour.
My question is twofold: which style of game are you going for and which setting are you choosing from the competing source options?
I was amazed with what they'd done with "First Blood", which was a fairly straightforward anti-war novel, and Hollywood turned it into an glorification of war. Go figure.
"
Perhaps if you'd had you land stolen, if you'd been rounded up in ghettos and marginalised, had all your resources controlled by an enemy that appears to want you wiped off the face of the earth then perhaps you might understand why the Palestinians feel they have reason to fight.
You might also understand why the Jews want to fight, since your description of the Palestinians applies just as aptly, if not more so, to the Jews."...which makes it even more revolting that they want to visit the same inhuman treatment onto others that they suffered. The Palestinians didn't murder the Jews - the Nazis did. So how does that justify Israeli treatment of the Palestinians?
The fact is that Israel displaced Palestine, not the other way around. You can't use Jewish suffering to justify that - unless you support the idea that one who is abused is morally permitted to abuse others. You may stomach that, but my moral compass doesn't swing that way.
YOU are the one making up lies to villify and dehumanise the Palestinian people and you have the gall to claim that I don't like you because you oppose antisemitism?
For fuck's sake, you are completely and utterly mental. There is NO link to your paranoid response and what I was talking about. You're a loon.
Hollywood, the US games industry and unfortunately, even your head of state, have been using the "raghead==evil" formula for years now and suddenly when the positions are reversed, you feel agrieved? Give me a break. You do EXACTLY the same things. Utter hypocracy.
"> As I recall, that conflict came to an end through negotiation and diplomacy.
And negotiation and diplomacy became possible when state sponshorship of the terrorists ended. Negotiation became possible when both sides were actually able to engage in diplomacy, when anyone on the IRA side who suggested out loud that compromise might be a good idea didn't get a quick death.
I suspect that if we leaned REAL hard (as in cut the crap or we allow Israel to bomb your sorry asses from the 7th century all the way back to the stone age) on Syria, Iran, Saudia Arabia, etc. to cut off Hamas and Fatah cold, they too would soon come to the bargaining table in good faith and that a lasting peace would suddenly become possible where none can currently be imagined. Same for Lebanon. Same for Iraq."
Yeah. Right. The West's history of bombing the hatred out of the middle east has worked *REALLY* well up until now. Are you really so blind that you fail to realise that what you propose as a radical new plan is pretty much a continuation of the approach Israel has been taking with their neighbours for decades now? To NO avail.
Terrorism is not a country. You cannot wage war on it - it doesn't have a captial, a state, a flag, a uniform. Terrorism is borne out of hatred and fear and desperation. You cannot bomb the hatred out of people, you just create new martyrs you complete and utter idiot.
And for your fucking information, the IRA did not compromise because of an ending of "state sponshorship of the terrorists". For a start, most of their funding came from the US in the first place, but secondly and to the point - the IRA came to compromise because Ireland started doing very well economically. When your stomachs are full, there's work for those who want it and your people are busy engaging with the rest of the world, your will to fight goes. You can't bomb the hatred out of people, but you can very easily dispell hatred and fear by engaging with your "enemy" and treating them like human beings (which you clearly have forgotten that they are)
Slashdot Mirror
Absolutely! If I had mod points, you'd be getting them. Zonk is the lowest brand of troll.
This is the problem with Slashdot (as opposed to Kuro5hin or Digg): the whole community has to put up with the biases of the editors rather than allowing the community to decide ITSELF what is newsworthy.
Zonk hates Sony and because he's an editor he gets to troll us with his shoddy, unreasoned rants. It's really crap. Slashdot used to be a lot better than this, and I think it needs to evolve to allow user selected submissions to the front page, and not continue to abuse editorial rights as if it were a soapbox. You want a Soapbox - make an op-ed blog.
Because Zonk is a Sony-hating zealot.
As far as 'control' is concerned, the US government has already demonstrated that it will exercise control over ICANN ('XXX' domain)
If not, what right does the US government have to sieze this private asset?
(1) Governments (and the UN) regulate Telcos for exactly the same reason - they're strategic assets
(2) The US and the UN don't need anyone to "sieze" the root servers - they just need to set up different root servers.
(3) The root servers are not a "private asset", ICANN was set up BY THE US GOVERNMENT SOLELY FOR THE PURPOSES OF MANAGING THE ROOT SERVERS - they do not own them.
If not, what right does the UN or any nation have to demand that the US sieze this asset?
Already answered (3 above)
All your points are falacious.
Yeah, cause Democracy was getting old anyway.
Good one.
They can push all they fucking like, they don't dominate the UN therefore they won't dominate any UN decision. How fucking hard is that for you to grasp?
They may WANT to dominate the Internet, but 1/180th of the UN is still sweet fuck all. Check out that "Democracy" idea and how that works again.
Look up the term "strawman"
Also, look up the membership of the UN. It's "the entire world" not "China, Iran and Attila the Hun". Might I add "you fucking moron"
Oh what a load of reactionary bullshit. The UN is NOT FUCKING DOMINATED BY CHINA AND MIDDLE-EASTERN GOVERNMENTS.
Contrary to this fucked up idea you red-necks have, the US is not the only place in the world that cares about democracy and freedom of speech.
(1) The US government *does* exert control over ICANN (refer the 'XXX' domain fiasco)
(2) Even if ICANN is a mythical company *with no government oversight* (it's not, no company in the world is) then the UN would still have exactly the same beef, but with ICANN directly rather than the US in particular.
"Apres moi, les deluge"
Fucking moron. Sun have OS'd more software than anyone else I can think of.
OpenOffice,
OpenSolaris,
NFS,
Netbeans,
GlassFish
etc etc
Sun also contributes to Gnome, X.org, PostGreSQL, Mozilla and many other projects.
Get a fucking clue and stop spreading the same old FUD.
The Destiny Church are hardly even a significant minority.
FWIW, I used to work with a Brit who thought the wages looked crap in NZ when doing a currency conversion but when in NZ thought that the purchasing power of the NZ$ in NZ was better than the exchange rate would have suggested. Having worked in the UK previously, I think he might be right. But anyway, YMMV.
That's rubbish. Our government compares well to others (transparancy, lack of corruption).
And Shania Twain *was* allowed to build her house, it was only an issue of how it effected the landscape that was debated.
Personally, I'd use OSX if I could get it without buying into Apple's hardware monopoly. Why swap M$'s O/S monopoly for Apple's hardware monopoly?
The OEM support issue is bullshit - linux manages it pretty well without major corporate support. There's no reason why Apple couldn't support a standard set of PC equipment and allow the FOSS community to build drivers for anything else.
Yes, you are correct - the PHB usage of 'monetize' is quite wrong.
*YES* it's an old word - but with a *DIFFERENT* meaning. It is supposed to mean - 'to make something into actual currency' (think stamping gold to make coins). NOT 'to make financial gain from'.
FFS!
You do realise that there has been a WH RPG for a very long time and this isn't just made up now to make a online computer game?
Warhammer has two variants - the Wargame and the Roleplaying game. Not only are these different kinds of games, the settings are quite different - the Wargame is very 'high fantasy' and flashy whereas the RPG is 'low fantasy', gritty and plays on its dark sense of humour.
My question is twofold: which style of game are you going for and which setting are you choosing from the competing source options?
You are a moron. Goodbye.
"I have not made up one single "lie" to dehumanize the Palestinians"
You attributed denial of the holocaust to Palestinians which is a lie.
Not sure if I ever did see that one.
I was amazed with what they'd done with "First Blood", which was a fairly straightforward anti-war novel, and Hollywood turned it into an glorification of war. Go figure.
"
...which makes it even more revolting that they want to visit the same inhuman treatment onto others that they suffered. The Palestinians didn't murder the Jews - the Nazis did. So how does that justify Israeli treatment of the Palestinians?
Perhaps if you'd had you land stolen, if you'd been rounded up in ghettos and marginalised, had all your resources controlled by an enemy that appears to want you wiped off the face of the earth then perhaps you might understand why the Palestinians feel they have reason to fight.
You might also understand why the Jews want to fight, since your description of the Palestinians applies just as aptly, if not more so, to the Jews."
The fact is that Israel displaced Palestine, not the other way around. You can't use Jewish suffering to justify that - unless you support the idea that one who is abused is morally permitted to abuse others. You may stomach that, but my moral compass doesn't swing that way.
YOU are the one making up lies to villify and dehumanise the Palestinian people and you have the gall to claim that I don't like you because you oppose antisemitism?
For fuck's sake, you are completely and utterly mental. There is NO link to your paranoid response and what I was talking about. You're a loon.
Hollywood, the US games industry and unfortunately, even your head of state, have been using the "raghead==evil" formula for years now and suddenly when the positions are reversed, you feel agrieved? Give me a break. You do EXACTLY the same things. Utter hypocracy.
"> As I recall, that conflict came to an end through negotiation and diplomacy.
And negotiation and diplomacy became possible when state sponshorship of the terrorists ended. Negotiation became possible when both sides were actually able to engage in diplomacy, when anyone on the IRA side who suggested out loud that compromise might be a good idea didn't get a quick death.
I suspect that if we leaned REAL hard (as in cut the crap or we allow Israel to bomb your sorry asses from the 7th century all the way back to the stone age) on Syria, Iran, Saudia Arabia, etc. to cut off Hamas and Fatah cold, they too would soon come to the bargaining table in good faith and that a lasting peace would suddenly become possible where none can currently be imagined. Same for Lebanon. Same for Iraq."
Yeah. Right. The West's history of bombing the hatred out of the middle east has worked *REALLY* well up until now. Are you really so blind that you fail to realise that what you propose as a radical new plan is pretty much a continuation of the approach Israel has been taking with their neighbours for decades now? To NO avail.
Terrorism is not a country. You cannot wage war on it - it doesn't have a captial, a state, a flag, a uniform. Terrorism is borne out of hatred and fear and desperation. You cannot bomb the hatred out of people, you just create new martyrs you complete and utter idiot.
And for your fucking information, the IRA did not compromise because of an ending of "state sponshorship of the terrorists". For a start, most of their funding came from the US in the first place, but secondly and to the point - the IRA came to compromise because Ireland started doing very well economically. When your stomachs are full, there's work for those who want it and your people are busy engaging with the rest of the world, your will to fight goes. You can't bomb the hatred out of people, but you can very easily dispell hatred and fear by engaging with your "enemy" and treating them like human beings (which you clearly have forgotten that they are)