Let me be the first to say "uh oh", not because I think it's a bad thing (I don't, I think it's an amazing discovery) but because right now some fuckface ad exec is rubbing his sweaty little hands together wondering how he can implement this to sell more fucking widgets.
And his counterparts in the government are doing the same thing, albeit with different aims in mind.
Atheism is also a dogma and can produce just as much violence.
Oh, and you were making sense right up until that point.:(
No, atheism is not a "dogma", any more than "not collecting stamps" is a "hobby". Or being "bald" is a "hair color"
Atheism simply means you don't believe in a god or gods. And that's ALL it means, there is no other data you can draw from the fact that person "A" is an atheist.
It's like saying that person "A" likes popcorn, there is no other conclusion you can draw from that other than the fact that they like popcorn. You can't guess at their age, race, political leaning, preferred clothing, geographic location, etc etc etc.
And it's the same way with atheism- it's a single specific data point, and that's all it is.
We surely do. And in a number of cases, we should've gone and detained these suspects, instead of just shooting them
Yes, but the fact is that quite a few of those people who were killed were completely innocent and had nothing to do with any terrorism. They literally had no connection whatsoever. Many of them just had the bad luck to be nearby a drone strike or had had their phone number mistakenly "identified" as belonging a target (i.e. a typo in transcribing the phone number).
Which was and remains true about processes, that do not involve drones. You aren't contradicting slasher999 at all.
Which was why I said "Yes and no" at the start of my reply. Some of what he says is correct, some of it isn't that clear cut. Civilian casualties being a prime example, unfortunately.
Yes they save American lives (most of the time).
Reducing costs? That depends on what costs you're tallying. Do you have any idea what a fully-staffed drone program costs? It ain't cheap.
This "sensor fest" circle jerk goes all the way back to Vietnam (PRACTICE NINE and IGLOO WHITE, for example) and neither of those worked worth a shit. Things have gotten better, but stop believing that now everything is a surgical pinpoint strike with no collateral damage...it's simply not true, not by wide margin.
We mistakenly kill a *lot* of people who simply had the bad luck to have the wrong phone number or were mistaken for someone else or had the misfortune to be in the wrong place at the wrong time.:(
Actually, Pol Pot, Stalin, and Mao did what they did because they were athiests.
Errr, no. And as someone who has studied Pol Pot a bit (due to family connections with some of his victims) it's clear that his atheism was not a significant motivating force in his rampage. And it's clear that neither Stalin nor Mao did anything due to their lack of belief, while o the other hand Hitler embraced the Catholic church and they embraced him back. Does "Gott Mitt Un" ring a bell?
It's hard to murder millions of people just because you don't believe in something.
For example, there are lots of people who don't believe in leprechauns, why aren't they out there committing atrocities? Why don't we label the "aleprechanists" and worry day and night about what they might do? Because it would be silly, that's why.
The fact is that lack of belief in something is rarely a motivator to do anything, let alone commit horrific atrocities.
Your average atheist isn't going to be motivated to kill people in the name of his/her magical sky-daddy or the promise of an afterlife. Most of us atheists realize that we only get one life to live, and so we try to make the most of it here and now. Yeah, some of us are assholes, but most of us just want to live our lives in peace and not be persecuted in the name of any of the 100,000+ religions that are all vying for dominance, often at the point of a sword or a thumb on a detonator.
Show me an example or two of atheists who've committed atrocities in the name of atheism (if you can), and I'll show you a hundred that have done it in the name of religion.
Seriously, show me some examples of people who have said "I'm killing people specifically because I don't believe in god!". Statistically there are probably some, but I can't think of any offhand.
Why is it that Leftists are always out front and center defending Islam?
I'm quite "left leaning" or liberal and I certainly don't defend Islam or any other religion. Almost ALL of them would (and have) engaged in this kind of behavior if left to their own devices.
It's not "THIS" religion or "THAT" religion, it's ALL religion, with a couple of extremely minor exceptions.
The fact is that virtually ALL of the "leftist" people I know decry this stuff and none of them defend any of it, period.
I think it's too easy to say that this kind of violence is simply the consequence of religious fanaticism. It's not the religion that produces the violence,
Errr, well, actually it is often the religion that produces the violence. Without the religion they'd have nothing to fight to the death over and nothing to motivate them or delude them into such action.
You don't see groups of disaffected model railroaders or snowboarders committing mass murder because their hobby or pursuit doesn't require them to kill others in order to be the dominant group.
-
it's the extreme violence that these people have lived under that produces traumatized, unstable minds that are prone to becoming fanatic via whatever dominant fervor surrounds them.
Yes, it's this too, but without the shared delusion of religion and a supposed afterlife, no one would be so keen to machine gun groups of complete strangers, would they?
Let's all just be honest and admit that religion often serves as the vehicle to induce people to do horrific things, things that they otherwise would never dream of doing.
One shouldn't spend one's time talking about how terrible religious fanaticism is when atheistic fanaticism has killed 100x as many people this century alone.
Ah I see you're one of the comparison shoppers of bad things. As a general rule, no matter what someone has done, someone else has done something worse. By your "logic" one should only talk about the single worst thing ever and nothing else.
Exactly. But logic and reason will bounce off CrimsonAvenger like water off a duck's back.
Pol Pot, Stalin, and Mao were all atheists. Suck on it.
The difference is that Pol Pot, Stalin, and Mao didn't do the things they did because they were atheists, whereas religious fanatics do horrific things precisely because they're religious fanatics. Sorry to burst your simple little thought-bubble.
You're a fool if you believe that. Drones save American lives, reduce costs, and civilian casualties are no higher than any other type of targeted strike.
Yes and no.
Read the book Kill Chain to see why this often isn't the case. Sometimes all this high tech drone and sensor stuff works, but sadly an awful lot of the time it fails miserably. There are multiple layers of failure-prone processes, any one of which can produce truly disastrous results.:(
It's awful what hate and fanaticism drive people to do.
Bingo. Fanaticism of any kind is usually detrimental, but religious fanatics seem especially violent and destructive.
So it's another fabulous win for religious fanatics everywhere; the ones who did this will scream about how great their god is, and the ones on the other side(s) will scream about how awful those other religions are.
While those of us who don't follow or practice any religion look on in horror at what fanatical religious beliefs produce.:(
And now let's watch all the religious apologists mod me down to oblivion. To those people, if it makes you feel better then go right ahead.
Like many thumb drives, BIOS, etc, there is no write protect to prevent unauthorised alteration of the configuration.
100% true. I worked for a barcode company for quite a few years and there was never any write-protect switch or password needed to alter the device config. We simply had a book of barcodes that we scanned to set the device up however we wanted.
And now looking back on it, it seems we were all astoundingly naive not to realize that someone somewhere would take advantage of that. Of course at the time there wasn't anything terribly interesting you could get away with by fiddling with the config, but that's no longer true.
If nothing else one could do some very malicious things by mucking about with the configuration, in some cases possibly leading to injury and/or death. (For example, altering a printed "Max Pressure Allowed" label to read "500lbs" instead of "20lbs" or a hospital label printer to output "Recommended Dosage: 500mg" instead of "Recommended Dosage: 30mg".)
"Apple has a history of buying companies for various reasons other the products"
1) No editing or proofreading needed here. God forbid we have coherent, readable sentences in the summary.
2) Sometimes Apple buys things simply to shut them down or eliminate them, similar to the way that Amazon recently stopped carrying competitors to its streaming video service. Can't compete? Worried about eroding market share? No problem- just buy your enemy and dismantle the business.
It takes a special kind of person to see celebrating greater diversity as celebrating the decline of another group.
I honestly don't think that's what riles them up, I think it's that we see these stories once or twice a week, every singe week, and some people just get tired of it.
I'm all for women in tech, I think it's a good thing, but I admit sometimes I also get tired of the frequency at which these stories appear. (And I speak as a guy in a tech field who works in a building that's about 75% women-populated, so this whole "women are in tech!" is not exactly a revelation from on high.)
Women aren't some weird life form that scientists have just discovered, and we all know that more and more are getting into tech-related fields. That's fine. There's no need to report on it as if this is some amazing new event, unprecedented in history. If anything it just serves to differentiate their involvement and make it seem unusual.
Yes, there are some guys that feel threatened by it, but I think it's the frequency of these stories that annoys people, not so much the content.
Slashdot Mirror
Let me be the first to say "uh oh", not because I think it's a bad thing (I don't, I think it's an amazing discovery) but because right now some fuckface ad exec is rubbing his sweaty little hands together wondering how he can implement this to sell more fucking widgets.
And his counterparts in the government are doing the same thing, albeit with different aims in mind.
I'm not a Freeciv player or enthusiast, but the work you all have produced is some pretty cool stuff. It's really quite impressive (to me, at least).
Congrats, and here's to another 20 years of development!
Read the book Kill Chain
The nice thing about books is there isn't really a peer review process.
Right, but that doesn't mean that what's in a book isn't true.
Kill Chain seems fairly well substantiated and draws from some credible sources, which you're free to ignore or discount as you like.
Well, Hitler said on more than a few occasions that he was "doing god's work", so if he wasn't a theist he was certainly pretending to be a theist.
Atheism is also a dogma and can produce just as much violence.
Oh, and you were making sense right up until that point. :(
No, atheism is not a "dogma", any more than "not collecting stamps" is a "hobby". Or being "bald" is a "hair color"
Atheism simply means you don't believe in a god or gods. And that's ALL it means, there is no other data you can draw from the fact that person "A" is an atheist.
It's like saying that person "A" likes popcorn, there is no other conclusion you can draw from that other than the fact that they like popcorn. You can't guess at their age, race, political leaning, preferred clothing, geographic location, etc etc etc.
And it's the same way with atheism- it's a single specific data point, and that's all it is.
We mistakenly kill a *lot* of people
We surely do. And in a number of cases, we should've gone and detained these suspects, instead of just shooting them
Yes, but the fact is that quite a few of those people who were killed were completely innocent and had nothing to do with any terrorism. They literally had no connection whatsoever. Many of them just had the bad luck to be nearby a drone strike or had had their phone number mistakenly "identified" as belonging a target (i.e. a typo in transcribing the phone number).
Which was and remains true about processes, that do not involve drones. You aren't contradicting slasher999 at all.
Which was why I said "Yes and no" at the start of my reply. Some of what he says is correct, some of it isn't that clear cut. Civilian casualties being a prime example, unfortunately.
Yes they save American lives (most of the time).
Reducing costs? That depends on what costs you're tallying. Do you have any idea what a fully-staffed drone program costs? It ain't cheap.
This "sensor fest" circle jerk goes all the way back to Vietnam (PRACTICE NINE and IGLOO WHITE, for example) and neither of those worked worth a shit. Things have gotten better, but stop believing that now everything is a surgical pinpoint strike with no collateral damage...it's simply not true, not by wide margin.
We mistakenly kill a *lot* of people who simply had the bad luck to have the wrong phone number or were mistaken for someone else or had the misfortune to be in the wrong place at the wrong time. :(
Actually, Pol Pot, Stalin, and Mao did what they did because they were athiests.
Errr, no. And as someone who has studied Pol Pot a bit (due to family connections with some of his victims) it's clear that his atheism was not a significant motivating force in his rampage. And it's clear that neither Stalin nor Mao did anything due to their lack of belief, while o the other hand Hitler embraced the Catholic church and they embraced him back. Does "Gott Mitt Un" ring a bell?
It's hard to murder millions of people just because you don't believe in something.
For example, there are lots of people who don't believe in leprechauns, why aren't they out there committing atrocities? Why don't we label the "aleprechanists" and worry day and night about what they might do? Because it would be silly, that's why.
The fact is that lack of belief in something is rarely a motivator to do anything, let alone commit horrific atrocities.
Your average atheist isn't going to be motivated to kill people in the name of his/her magical sky-daddy or the promise of an afterlife. Most of us atheists realize that we only get one life to live, and so we try to make the most of it here and now. Yeah, some of us are assholes, but most of us just want to live our lives in peace and not be persecuted in the name of any of the 100,000+ religions that are all vying for dominance, often at the point of a sword or a thumb on a detonator.
Show me an example or two of atheists who've committed atrocities in the name of atheism (if you can), and I'll show you a hundred that have done it in the name of religion.
Seriously, show me some examples of people who have said "I'm killing people specifically because I don't believe in god!". Statistically there are probably some, but I can't think of any offhand.
it's hopelessness. ISIS is just a bunch of men with no jobs, no wives, no future and no hope for a future.
Yes, this is definitely part of it, but that hopelessness provides an easy "in" for being sold on the promise of an afterlife.
Lets be honest- without religion as a motivator, most of these people would never be driven to commit any kind of atrocities.
Why is it that Leftists are always out front and center defending Islam?
I'm quite "left leaning" or liberal and I certainly don't defend Islam or any other religion. Almost ALL of them would (and have) engaged in this kind of behavior if left to their own devices.
It's not "THIS" religion or "THAT" religion, it's ALL religion, with a couple of extremely minor exceptions.
The fact is that virtually ALL of the "leftist" people I know decry this stuff and none of them defend any of it, period.
I think it's too easy to say that this kind of violence is simply the consequence of religious fanaticism. It's not the religion that produces the violence,
Errr, well, actually it is often the religion that produces the violence. Without the religion they'd have nothing to fight to the death over and nothing to motivate them or delude them into such action.
You don't see groups of disaffected model railroaders or snowboarders committing mass murder because their hobby or pursuit doesn't require them to kill others in order to be the dominant group.
-
it's the extreme violence that these people have lived under that produces traumatized, unstable minds that are prone to becoming fanatic via whatever dominant fervor surrounds them.
Yes, it's this too, but without the shared delusion of religion and a supposed afterlife, no one would be so keen to machine gun groups of complete strangers, would they?
Let's all just be honest and admit that religion often serves as the vehicle to induce people to do horrific things, things that they otherwise would never dream of doing.
One shouldn't spend one's time talking about how terrible religious fanaticism is when atheistic fanaticism has killed 100x as many people this century alone.
Ah I see you're one of the comparison shoppers of bad things. As a general rule, no matter what someone has done, someone else has done something worse. By your "logic" one should only talk about the single worst thing ever and nothing else.
Exactly. But logic and reason will bounce off CrimsonAvenger like water off a duck's back.
Pol Pot, Stalin, and Mao were all atheists. Suck on it.
The difference is that Pol Pot, Stalin, and Mao didn't do the things they did because they were atheists, whereas religious fanatics do horrific things precisely because they're religious fanatics. Sorry to burst your simple little thought-bubble.
You're a fool if you believe that. Drones save American lives, reduce costs, and civilian casualties are no higher than any other type of targeted strike.
Yes and no.
Read the book Kill Chain to see why this often isn't the case. Sometimes all this high tech drone and sensor stuff works, but sadly an awful lot of the time it fails miserably. There are multiple layers of failure-prone processes, any one of which can produce truly disastrous results. :(
It's pretty obvious the world would be far better off without religion.
^^^ THIS.
Someday people will look back on the shared delusion of religion and wonder what the fuck was wrong with everyone.
It's like a mind virus or brain disease that most people simply accept. WTF??
The amazing part is that most people don't consider it as a disease to be eradicated.
So yes, it appears these hateful acts are quite likely to continue.
Exactly, this is what these people do. This is what they live (and die) for.
They won't stop. Even if they "won" they wouldn't stop, they'd just find something else to fight against.
It's awful what hate and fanaticism drive people to do.
Bingo. Fanaticism of any kind is usually detrimental, but religious fanatics seem especially violent and destructive.
So it's another fabulous win for religious fanatics everywhere; the ones who did this will scream about how great their god is, and the ones on the other side(s) will scream about how awful those other religions are.
While those of us who don't follow or practice any religion look on in horror at what fanatical religious beliefs produce. :(
And now let's watch all the religious apologists mod me down to oblivion. To those people, if it makes you feel better then go right ahead.
for god's sake fuck off.
Why would god need you to tell me to fuck off? Couldn't He tell me Himself, or failing that couldn't He just make me fuck off?
Are you God's official mouthpiece on Earth, or is the pope out sick today and you're just covering for him?
Like many thumb drives, BIOS, etc, there is no write protect to prevent unauthorised alteration of the configuration.
100% true. I worked for a barcode company for quite a few years and there was never any write-protect switch or password needed to alter the device config. We simply had a book of barcodes that we scanned to set the device up however we wanted.
And now looking back on it, it seems we were all astoundingly naive not to realize that someone somewhere would take advantage of that. Of course at the time there wasn't anything terribly interesting you could get away with by fiddling with the config, but that's no longer true.
If nothing else one could do some very malicious things by mucking about with the configuration, in some cases possibly leading to injury and/or death. (For example, altering a printed "Max Pressure Allowed" label to read "500lbs" instead of "20lbs" or a hospital label printer to output "Recommended Dosage: 500mg" instead of "Recommended Dosage: 30mg".)
"Apple has a history of buying companies for various reasons other the products"
1) No editing or proofreading needed here. God forbid we have coherent, readable sentences in the summary.
2) Sometimes Apple buys things simply to shut them down or eliminate them, similar to the way that Amazon recently stopped carrying competitors to its streaming video service. Can't compete? Worried about eroding market share? No problem- just buy your enemy and dismantle the business.
They hadn't even evolved when you were my age. So STFU, you toothless pant-pisser.
Thanks for the suggestion, but I'll comment where and when I want. :)
BTW, you seem a bit tightly wound. Maybe you should stop taking this stuff so personally and dial it back a bit, if only for your own sake.
Equality is about equal opportunity. Somehow it has been bastardized into expecting equal outcomes.
Bingo. A lot of people confuse those two things, with predictable results.
It takes a special kind of person to see celebrating greater diversity as celebrating the decline of another group.
I honestly don't think that's what riles them up, I think it's that we see these stories once or twice a week, every singe week, and some people just get tired of it.
I'm all for women in tech, I think it's a good thing, but I admit sometimes I also get tired of the frequency at which these stories appear. (And I speak as a guy in a tech field who works in a building that's about 75% women-populated, so this whole "women are in tech!" is not exactly a revelation from on high.)
Women aren't some weird life form that scientists have just discovered, and we all know that more and more are getting into tech-related fields. That's fine. There's no need to report on it as if this is some amazing new event, unprecedented in history. If anything it just serves to differentiate their involvement and make it seem unusual.
Yes, there are some guys that feel threatened by it, but I think it's the frequency of these stories that annoys people, not so much the content.
Just my 2 cents.
Stupid fucking cunts, the pair of you.
No, like most trolls, you have it all wrong, boobs come in pairs, but the only cunt here is you.
I'm not surprised at your lack of familiarity, you've probably never actually seen or touched a real one, have you?
Well, I can probably make a reasonable guess at your age and gender.
Maybe, but I self-identify as a 16-year old girl with big boobs who is a poly-demi-platonic trans-otherkin.