That's why the "nickled and dimed" are important. It happened. Nobody complained. Nobody disobeyed orders, forced the issue. Folks who needed the ability to protect themselves, who were leaving town, removing their property from danger, and the chance to have that property stolen and used against others, had it taken. They did the responsible thing, and the government took away their firearms. The fact is, when ordered, they acted without raising a fuss.
We have a "real emergency" now. The War on Terror. Keeps me awake at night (sarcasm there).
And look at the rights we have thrown away with it. That is the point. Military personnel are listening to Americans conversations and transcribing them even when unrelated to terrorism, the FBI can raid your home, and never tell you, you can be served with papers that you are not allowed to talk about publicly that order you to do unconstitutional things. The only difference between the amendments we are allowing to be violated and the 2nd is the amount of breath people waste on it.
The second is being whittled away. And if you think that when the time comes, the military, police, FBI, boy scouts, or your neighbors are going to defend it against the powers that be - then you need to a step back from your personal rose colored allegiances and see the truth of what is already happening.
Argue that such-and-such a semi-auto weapon is too dangerous for the public, and should be banned, and all you are left with is a growing list of illegal items for the public... Actually, strike "public," replace it with the word powerless.
That would be contradictory to what they themselves said.
This specific group, I won't comment all, just the folks I know, they did not believe guns are bad, just civilians were not involved enough to be a responsible party.
Of course, like I said above just now, this faded back into normal 2nd amendment support after time out of the military.
Please in no way think that I am maligning the military, I actually feel that we should have more, maybe even mandatory, military or civil service (not quite "Service Guarantees Citizenship" style, but maybe)
But, when ordered to take guns from the populace, the National Guard has already proved their willingness to do so without question.
I saw this attitude of "Civilians aren't competent" when at a party at my cousins home on the airbase, all enlisted men drinking beer and talking. Most were pro-second amendment, but there was a strong underlying theme of "but mainly for us with service under our belts". I can't comment on most of their pre-military opinions, I didn't know them then.
This is a bad beginning. And nobody specifically said this was a pointed, direct statement or training program, but it was agreed to be a thematic undertone of the Civilians being unable to handle this responsibility any more.
Of course, I must admit, after a year or so out of the military, this attitude shifted back to a die hard pro 2nd amendment stance again. So, maybe it is just a "My Team is the best" type attitude combined with frustration over the way some people view the military and the current campaigns.
Have you experienced the training that a person gets these days. My cousin, a "Take my guns when you pry them from my cold dead hands" bumper sticker type, joined up. A year later, he came back for a brief visit, and he has completely fallen into the "Civilians should not have more than small bolt action hunting rifles" thing. I have seen this with all three freinds/family that have joined.
There is a trained contempt for the civilian population, we are not smart enough, caring enough, or involved enough to really understand. They, and their commanders, understand.
It is the same attitude you see in police officers. Civilians are second class cattle to be herded.
If you really think that in 10-20 years those troops, or police, or whatever we have will not shoot when ordered, then you are in for a big surprise. Though, most likely, by that time, we will have "nickled and dimed" our rights away, and those still defending them will be seen as fringe crazies, so shooting will be "justified".
I find it funny that both sides of the political spectrum make the same accusations about each other.
Being really into party politics in America is like being a Chicago Baseball fan.
(For those unfamiliar with Chicago Baseball, the city has both a American & National league team, I think that by law you have to like one and despise the other, there is no reason to any discussion about who is better, just devotion to one and revilement of the other)
I know this is off topic, but it is a personal pet peeve. Just for the sake of accuracy, Persians (Iranians preferred name) Teach Evolution heavily. The purely religious institutions don't, but they also don't teach against it. Except the "hillbillies" of the country, a very small percentage of the population. Basically, the areas comparable to the back woods of Arkansas with no electricity.
They think that Evolution is fact.
In fact, I cannot tell you how many times the evolution debate in this country has made a Persians ask me about it, assuming I, being American, must be creationist. When they find out I am not, they ask me why Americans are so stupid. My Wife (A Beautiful Persian woman) laughs and makes fun of my Uncle, a fundamentalist Christian. Though they are careful to try to avoid me hearing so as to not give offense, they actually make fun of the US over these things. This came up as a topic of conversation each and every time I was over there. They actually wanted to know if it was true, or just more propaganda from their government to make us look bad.
This idea that Iran is backwards, just because their president is divisive and they are on some "Axis of Evil" list created primarily for political "Us vs. Them" games is really frustrating. Remember, they have a ruling class that uses the uneducated violent minority to enforce its lust for power. But it is a minority, less than 10%. We have a larger ultra-religious group of zealots in this country. Their president makes those crazy statements because it appeals to the minority powerbase, and it gets attention on a world stage.
I have never met a Persian who did not believe that the holocaust happened and was terrible. Oh, they don't like Isreal's POLITICS, but they have no problem with jews. They equally don't like Palestinian Politics. (though are less likely to like Palestinians)
Iran is actually quite "western". Our allies (Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Etc...) in the middle east are actually much closer to the stereotypes that are applied to Iran. Iran was fighting the Taliban before most Americans even know Afghanistan continued to exist after the russian left. They were demonstrating and providing support for Afghan women before we knew there was a problem. A woman with out a college degree in Iran is looked at with disdain, "why didn't she go to college and make herself better and educated?" The same applies to men by the way.
I was just as interested as you. And I think you got the dramatic nature of the results correct. The Survey seems to be testing reaction to the interviewer rather then the content. I would love to see this done for real though, to test the results of the content rather than the influences.
Title: Response to Bill of Rights Paraphrases as Influenced by the Hip or Straight Attire of the Opinion Solicitor
Abstract:A sample of 375 white middle class residents of suburban Sacramento was randomly distributed among 3 experimental conditions of exposure to paraphrases of the Bill of Rights. The paraphrases were in the form of letters to the "Subcommittee on Crime and Disorder" of the California State Senate. A far greater proportion of subjects would endorse a "negative", somewhat authoritarian version of the Bill of Rights than would sign either a "real" paraphrase of the original text or a rather equivocal "wishy-washy" bill. A minority of those shown the "real" bill would sign it. Solicitors dressed as "straights" were more likely to elicit signatures from subjects than were "hips". The latter effect was observable, however, only for subjects in the negative and to a lesser extent the wishy-washy bill conditions. When the "real" bill was presented the attire of the solicitor made no difference. While an alternative interpretation was viable, the results were explained in terms of reactance (Brehm, 1966) and Rokeach's (Rokeach & Mezei, 1966) hypothesis that liking is mediated by inferred congruity of beliefs.
A geek who is married. I will agree with this. I got lucky, My wife was having a hard time in her life when I met her, she was out of place and in a foreign country. I stepped in as the "nice" guy I had always been told by women and books that I should be. Months went by, and suddenly one night I had this terrible day, I was stressed out, and ready to kill someone. She came by for help with an english paper.
I without thinking, already on edge, suddenly kissed her. Suddenly, I stopped being the nice guy, and turned into the guy who unexpectedly kissed her and grabbed her rear end.
Over time, I found out that polite, tame, and watered down was not what she wanted, and she claims no girl wants that. It makes them feel that they are with a weak man that will not protect or provide in rough times.
I learned that they want a manly man. I don't mean the jock. They want a man who cares, loves, and is kind to them. But is strong, powerful, and "manly".
The jocks give them the part that makes them get attracted. But they lack the decency of a good character and temperament that provides a life long mate. We can do the second part, but many of us do not have the instinctual understanding of how to act dominate. And that dominance shows a safe place to raise children, have a home that is protected. Or we have become afraid that we will be seen as a brute.
But being strong does not mean being brutish. This applies in many situations when interacting with women. Have a heart, but let it be strong and conquer. This applies to many situations, in conversation, relationship, and the bedroom.
They come to you to cry because you are a man, but a if you never act like it, the signal of sexual attraction will never come through the static.
You must combine that jock "take what I want" and "I don't need you" composure and actions, and then after you have them on the hook, let them see that you will be a caring, loving protector.
About a year after 9-11, I was talking on my phone with my wife. Now, to really understand this story, you have to know that my wife is from Iran, her father was a former General or the Air Force there, and she knows multiple folks who had fairly high positions at one time in the government. And she calls home all the time. We spend 50-60 hours a month connected to Iran via phone.
So I'm sitting in a bookstore, and she calls. Right in the middle of the call there is a strange squeaking noise, reminiscent of digital audio "static" noises, sort of a cross between a cd skip and a modem. Sudden it ends, and we are no longer on the phone alone. Somehow our conversation was crossed with another cell phone conversation.
The strange part is this. The other folks now joined to our conversation were also from Iran. They were speaking Persian.
After about 30 seconds or mass confusion, the call went dead. For about 5 minutes my wife's phone and mine refused to connect out to make a call. Full signal, no access. When we finally got back in contact with each other, she told me that the other people on the line were trying to meet at a restaurant on the other side of Dallas. One had just landed at DFW from Frankfurt, on his way home from Iran. She understood them, I don't know the language.
Now, what are the chances of 4 mobile phones, separated by 20 miles a piece, suddenly crossing conversations at the servers, and being the same fairly limited ethnic/nationality group that just happens to be on the "Axis of Evil" list?
I tell this story to my freinds under the title "My conversation with the NSA" Since then it is a running joke for my freinds to randomly yell "bomb", "assassinate", "Jihad" and "Mohamed" while talking to me on the phone.
The problem lies in the fact that information given without a warrant by a third party is perfectly legal. If I, as a federal agent, request information, the company or individual can give that information freely of their own volition. As long as I do not threaten, nothing "underhanded" has happened. And that info can be used in court or any other way I wish. It is only when a individual or entity declines to provide the requested information that a warrant is needed.
Many big corps and individuals feel that they must give the information based on pressure to seem patriotic or just to better serve the bottom line. They give this information perfectly willingly. What is needed to stop this is laws with harsh penalties. The problem is that too many folks are view privacy issues as some sort of philosophical, ideological, or conceptual debate. How then can you determine when privacy is violated if there is no substantial definition.
The data that companies have on a person is not owned by that person, it is owned by the company. And that is the essence of the problem. What we need is laws that allow the individual to retain that information as their personal property, not the company. The individual may choose to allow that the use of that property by the company for purposes of conducting business with that company, but outside of the normal and reasonable activity of commerce, that property cannot be used with out the individual giving up his various rights (ie property rights of ownership and use, the right to remain silent, etc.)
You can refuse the police access to your dwelling because it is your property, unless they have a warrant. If you rent, then you have less rights, because the owner can decide to allow the police inside. But without a warrant, they cannot enter the building that you hold the title to without permission. If we had laws in place that forced companies to hold your information and personal data without having to relinquish ownership to that company, then this would not be an issue. This would allow the problem to once again be a constitutional issue of "illegal search and seizure".
Mind you, this is just a simplistic way I have defined the idea, but I think you should be able to see the advantageous (and disadvantageous) to such a law. As it stands, unless the administration open threatened the companies, nothing illegal has taken place.
I tend to agree. My desire to jump on the couch and play a game is still there, but once I sit down and start playing it's too easy to be distracted. The responsibilities of life come crashing in.
Like the other day, I picked up Final Fantasy Crystal Chronicles. My brother came over and we sat down to play. It was a weeknight, so time was not unlimited. About halfway through the first area my wife informs me that we are out of bread, cheese, milk, etc... She asks if I can go to the store and do some quick shopping. Since she is studying for a second degree, and has a test coming up, my game play is less important then her studying.
There goes an hour of time for the game.
This is what it is always like. Real life interferes with the game. My desire to play is hindered by my need to be a good husband, a good employee, a good brother, etc... On the rare occasions that you find time to play for extended periods of time, you find yourself trying to remember where you were at, you spend half the time working out what was going on last, or re-mastering the controls, or getting the feel of the interface because you've only played 3 or 4 hours in the last month.
It's just life. Especially with a new marriage and a new career, time is spent in other ways.
I want a game to be engrossing and captivating. If a game is worth its price, it had better do just this. If it is to short, then I feel cheated, like going out to a nice romantic dinner with my fiance`, spending hours talking and enjoying each other, then getting a hug in the resturant parking lot and going home. It leaves you wanting more.
(Of course, the romantic dinner is better then any game)
Take the recent Zelda. I really enjoyed the game, it was excellent. But the core story was too short. It left my feeling disappointed. I wanted to continue living in that world, but I couldn't. Like a author, you find one good book and you keep going back for more over the next month. Like when I first read Heinlein, I read everything I could find in a month, and missed Lazurus Long when I was done.
Of course, there is the flip side. Games that are long and bothersome. These I just don't finish. I throw them aside. This happens because either the game is just bad or they try to hard to pack in to much unnessaray junk.
If a game is good, I'll play it and love it. If it is good and short, I 'll play it and feel disappointed that I spent my money for it full price. If a game is bad then I should have done a little more research before buying it.
But don't tell me that they need to be shorter. That's bull. They just need to be better. But, I do play primarily RPG's, and expanse and grandiose is good for those.
I have to agree with all of the comments, but especially with number 4. When my group of freinds found out that Data dies, we just all decided to skip the movie. I don't really like the "going out to the movies" experiance anyway. I'd prefer to stay at home and watch it in my living room on a big screen TV with surround sound and the works. Much more relaxing and enjoyable. So Why would I go to a movie that's going to kill off one of my favorite characters and put up with all the rest of the frustration.
Of course, I can almost always come up with some excuse to wait for the DVD, resulting in going to the movie theater only about 5-6 times a year. And most of those are my girlfreind's doing, not mine. It is so much nicer at home.
An interesting fact about the "+" standard is that it is incompatable with the current dual AMD boards (MP and MPX chipset). This is a problem that I found out from selling a computer configured with both a ASUS a7m266-d and a DVD+R+RW. When the problem showed up we tryed changing motherboards, then brand of motherboard, and finally brands of DVD+ drive.
HP and Sony both blame AMD. AMD says that the problem lies in a data protocol required for the dual chips that the "+" standard interfers with.
The "-" is fully compatable and works perfect. So my vote goes to the "-" standard because of compatablity and I don't trust Sony and HP. (especially since we saw a bunch of issues with packet writing and the Sony CDRW drive)
I decided to buy it even though I know I will buy the Special Edition. Since my girl freind has never seen it, (we weren't dating when it was in theaters) I figured I would rent it at least once, probaly twice, and since I always forget to bring the back on time, it would wind up costing me close to that anyway. When the other version comes out I'll just give this one to my baby sister.
And $15 dollars seems like a reasonable price, instead of the normal 25, which doesn't. Something the movie industry should realize. In fact almost every DVD I own was purchased for that price or less. $20+ is too much for entertainment and few movies justify that type of expenditure.
As an owner of an Xbox and a PS2 i have to say this: The XBox has a much more solid base at the Hardware level. I would love to see more games with deep and rich game play. That's the current problem, the games that are out (30 something games total) most are prety linear, that includes the PS2 ports. If they can levarage the hardware side to convince developers to make games that are more then eye candy, it'll work for them.
Though, one thing I think they failed on was removing the ability to use CDR's in the box. I know they did it for copyright protection, but if they had they could let developers and individuals make mods for Halo and its kind. Only having a few levels can get pretty dull. Slashdot recently mentioned this in an article about Half-Life/Counterstrike, and I agree with the article claiming mods push business (no time to find article for link, late for work)
The Xbox has potential, I'd love to see it make waves, but they need to get some CREATIVE developers on the boat first.
I sell and configure custom computers almost everyday, and one thing I will take issue with is the articles opinion of Abit and support.
Abit performs well, they are reliable, and they come with nice features... As I heard a tech at my company told a customer once, "if you get a bad one, forget about getting your problem fixed."
We as a company refuse to stock them any longer. Having a pile of 4 dozen motherboards with issues that we can't RMA'd or get credit for made that decision easy. Even the istributers we buy from dropped them. I haven't confirmed this, but I've been told this last week by two customer's that Fry's won't carry them any longer for the same reason.
I tell customers this everytime they want to special order a Abit motherboard, "I can order it in, but it is purchased 'as is.' We wlll not accept it in return, refund, or exchange. All warranty issues must be dealt with by you directly with Abit. Payment is needed at time of order." It's the only way to protect the company and most people ask why we have that policy, I explain, they buy Asus or go elsewhere.
Basically, Abit rocks, except when you get that 1 out of 200 bad board. My opinion, buy Asus, their RMA and support is the best I've ever seen, and they perform realiably.
I Work in a independent OEM computer store that sells custom boxes and the word on the street for a long time is this: Micron has been intentionally selling below cost to kill off its smaller competitors. The market had become to competitive and beyond the control of the larger industry leading companies. They no longer could control pricing and the profit margins were not to their liking, so Micron responded by starting a price war to force smaller manufacturers out of the business. Prices will go back up when they can contrlol the market again and make extremely high profits.
The price war is just a power play to regain control of a market that was priced to high for the consumer but good for the bank book.
What I or you pay is not the issue... It's ATT claiming they are doing me a favor when they are not.
I quote "Lightning fast download speeds" when by comparison they are not. This is not the service I signed up for. I spent quite a bit of time in research and talking to reps on the phone because we needed specific service and speeds. @home provided that.
Now ATT is acting like the @Home service wasn't worth the money. But from a customer's point of view it was worth even more. It all comes down to profits, which everything does in business. It's merely a case of extreme profits versus lower profits... still profit though. When having to have your cake and eat it to becomes "and I'll eat everyone else's" is when i have an issue with business. If the customer is prioritized as high as you profit margin, that's when everyone is happy.
ATT is getting a customer base from a company that provided superior service and expecting everyone to accept it. It's their way or the highway... only because they want BIG WHOPPING margins, when a small hit to the profit would still be profit.
And still on top of that, we're willing to pay gladly, so profits don't have to even take a hit. Offer me a premium service, then cap those that don't need it or want to pay. People by expensive foreign cars when a cheaper car would do... why not the same here?
Well, Dallas was a big market for them, lots of new users and lots of infrastructure by the local companies put in place. I commonly ran at 13 to 20 Mbs, and that's why we went with @home. With 3 roomates all doing work from home (and playing online shooters) the bandwidth was well used.
The 1.5 cap is hard and fast here. And it has ALOT of people very upset (I work at a independent computer store and talk to people and it's the topic of the week)
Basically, almost eveyone I've talked to would be willing to pay 20 dollars or more a month if they could just get their bandwidth back... I wonder if ATT considered that? Or maybe offering a premium service? Hopefully they will in the near future because this cut has really affected our usage.
ATT has their customers capped because their system can't handle the bandwidth. A cap that has been forced on customers who for the most part would have paid more to be without. (at least the 30 or so I've talked to, myself included)
If the network was worth so little, why were my downloads 20 or 30 times faster then they are now? I feel like I've been paying to drive a corvette, and now I'm still paying for that corvette but somebody welded the gear shift into 1st gear. ATT is basically leaving their customers with much lower service and acting like they're doing us a favor....
The problem with switching thier customers (being a switched customer myself) is that the service is not comparable. My 2 roomates and I went with @home for the down speed. ATT caps the down speed at 1.5 Mbs. Not bad, until you have 5 desktops and a laptop connected up all competeing for the bandwidth. Also two Xbox's running over the network at the same time as online Tribes (or other game) eats that capped bandwidth up.
Also the service is DCHP not Static. And all manner of servers are blocked (I know you can't run servers, we just have mail delivered from forwarded addresses, puts it in our hands and lets us archuve it in our own way).
If this is what ATT considers a comparable service, maybe that's why @Home was so popular. This costs the same, but is not the same.
The really funny thing is, I would be willing to pay more for the service I WAS recieving (more upload needed though). And I woiuld still be willing to pay more. Broadband needs an option to buy a premium service such as I had. Normal DSL speeds are nice for surfing... I've tryed to call ATT to ask about the availablity of packages, but they keep transfering me to a special line for @Home migration with 1+ hour wait times. DSL is nice speed, but more is needed for real power use....
Slashdot Mirror
That's why the "nickled and dimed" are important. It happened. Nobody complained. Nobody disobeyed orders, forced the issue. Folks who needed the ability to protect themselves, who were leaving town, removing their property from danger, and the chance to have that property stolen and used against others, had it taken. They did the responsible thing, and the government took away their firearms. The fact is, when ordered, they acted without raising a fuss.
We have a "real emergency" now. The War on Terror. Keeps me awake at night (sarcasm there).
And look at the rights we have thrown away with it. That is the point. Military personnel are listening to Americans conversations and transcribing them even when unrelated to terrorism, the FBI can raid your home, and never tell you, you can be served with papers that you are not allowed to talk about publicly that order you to do unconstitutional things. The only difference between the amendments we are allowing to be violated and the 2nd is the amount of breath people waste on it.
The second is being whittled away. And if you think that when the time comes, the military, police, FBI, boy scouts, or your neighbors are going to defend it against the powers that be - then you need to a step back from your personal rose colored allegiances and see the truth of what is already happening.
Argue that such-and-such a semi-auto weapon is too dangerous for the public, and should be banned, and all you are left with is a growing list of illegal items for the public... Actually, strike "public," replace it with the word powerless.
That would be contradictory to what they themselves said.
This specific group, I won't comment all, just the folks I know, they did not believe guns are bad, just civilians were not involved enough to be a responsible party.
Of course, like I said above just now, this faded back into normal 2nd amendment support after time out of the military.
Please in no way think that I am maligning the military, I actually feel that we should have more, maybe even mandatory, military or civil service (not quite "Service Guarantees Citizenship" style, but maybe)
But, when ordered to take guns from the populace, the National Guard has already proved their willingness to do so without question.
A quick reference = http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-taU9d26wT4
I saw this attitude of "Civilians aren't competent" when at a party at my cousins home on the airbase, all enlisted men drinking beer and talking. Most were pro-second amendment, but there was a strong underlying theme of "but mainly for us with service under our belts". I can't comment on most of their pre-military opinions, I didn't know them then.
This is a bad beginning. And nobody specifically said this was a pointed, direct statement or training program, but it was agreed to be a thematic undertone of the Civilians being unable to handle this responsibility any more.
Of course, I must admit, after a year or so out of the military, this attitude shifted back to a die hard pro 2nd amendment stance again. So, maybe it is just a "My Team is the best" type attitude combined with frustration over the way some people view the military and the current campaigns.
Have you experienced the training that a person gets these days. My cousin, a "Take my guns when you pry them from my cold dead hands" bumper sticker type, joined up. A year later, he came back for a brief visit, and he has completely fallen into the "Civilians should not have more than small bolt action hunting rifles" thing. I have seen this with all three freinds/family that have joined.
There is a trained contempt for the civilian population, we are not smart enough, caring enough, or involved enough to really understand. They, and their commanders, understand.
It is the same attitude you see in police officers. Civilians are second class cattle to be herded.
If you really think that in 10-20 years those troops, or police, or whatever we have will not shoot when ordered, then you are in for a big surprise. Though, most likely, by that time, we will have "nickled and dimed" our rights away, and those still defending them will be seen as fringe crazies, so shooting will be "justified".
I find it funny that both sides of the political spectrum make the same accusations about each other.
Being really into party politics in America is like being a Chicago Baseball fan.
(For those unfamiliar with Chicago Baseball, the city has both a American & National league team, I think that by law you have to like one and despise the other, there is no reason to any discussion about who is better, just devotion to one and revilement of the other)
I know this is off topic, but it is a personal pet peeve. Just for the sake of accuracy, Persians (Iranians preferred name) Teach Evolution heavily. The purely religious institutions don't, but they also don't teach against it. Except the "hillbillies" of the country, a very small percentage of the population. Basically, the areas comparable to the back woods of Arkansas with no electricity.
They think that Evolution is fact.
In fact, I cannot tell you how many times the evolution debate in this country has made a Persians ask me about it, assuming I, being American, must be creationist. When they find out I am not, they ask me why Americans are so stupid. My Wife (A Beautiful Persian woman) laughs and makes fun of my Uncle, a fundamentalist Christian. Though they are careful to try to avoid me hearing so as to not give offense, they actually make fun of the US over these things. This came up as a topic of conversation each and every time I was over there. They actually wanted to know if it was true, or just more propaganda from their government to make us look bad.
This idea that Iran is backwards, just because their president is divisive and they are on some "Axis of Evil" list created primarily for political "Us vs. Them" games is really frustrating. Remember, they have a ruling class that uses the uneducated violent minority to enforce its lust for power. But it is a minority, less than 10%. We have a larger ultra-religious group of zealots in this country. Their president makes those crazy statements because it appeals to the minority powerbase, and it gets attention on a world stage.
I have never met a Persian who did not believe that the holocaust happened and was terrible. Oh, they don't like Isreal's POLITICS, but they have no problem with jews. They equally don't like Palestinian Politics. (though are less likely to like Palestinians)
Iran is actually quite "western". Our allies (Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Etc...) in the middle east are actually much closer to the stereotypes that are applied to Iran. Iran was fighting the Taliban before most Americans even know Afghanistan continued to exist after the russian left. They were demonstrating and providing support for Afghan women before we knew there was a problem. A woman with out a college degree in Iran is looked at with disdain, "why didn't she go to college and make herself better and educated?" The same applies to men by the way.
I was just as interested as you. And I think you got the dramatic nature of the results correct. The Survey seems to be testing reaction to the interviewer rather then the content. I would love to see this done for real though, to test the results of the content rather than the influences.
Title: Response to Bill of Rights Paraphrases as Influenced by the Hip or Straight Attire of the Opinion Solicitor
Abstract:A sample of 375 white middle class residents of suburban Sacramento was randomly distributed among 3 experimental conditions of exposure to paraphrases of the Bill of Rights. The paraphrases were in the form of letters to the "Subcommittee on Crime and Disorder" of the California State Senate. A far greater proportion of subjects would endorse a "negative", somewhat authoritarian version of the Bill of Rights than would sign either a "real" paraphrase of the original text or a rather equivocal "wishy-washy" bill. A minority of those shown the "real" bill would sign it. Solicitors dressed as "straights" were more likely to elicit signatures from subjects than were "hips". The latter effect was observable, however, only for subjects in the negative and to a lesser extent the wishy-washy bill conditions. When the "real" bill was presented the attire of the solicitor made no difference. While an alternative interpretation was viable, the results were explained in terms of reactance (Brehm, 1966) and Rokeach's (Rokeach & Mezei, 1966) hypothesis that liking is mediated by inferred congruity of beliefs.
http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/119681993/abstract?CRETRY=1&SRETRY=0
The Culture books are actually some of the best Sci-fi written today.
A geek who is married. I will agree with this. I got lucky, My wife was having a hard time in her life when I met her, she was out of place and in a foreign country. I stepped in as the "nice" guy I had always been told by women and books that I should be. Months went by, and suddenly one night I had this terrible day, I was stressed out, and ready to kill someone. She came by for help with an english paper.
I without thinking, already on edge, suddenly kissed her. Suddenly, I stopped being the nice guy, and turned into the guy who unexpectedly kissed her and grabbed her rear end.
Over time, I found out that polite, tame, and watered down was not what she wanted, and she claims no girl wants that. It makes them feel that they are with a weak man that will not protect or provide in rough times.
I learned that they want a manly man. I don't mean the jock. They want a man who cares, loves, and is kind to them. But is strong, powerful, and "manly".
The jocks give them the part that makes them get attracted. But they lack the decency of a good character and temperament that provides a life long mate. We can do the second part, but many of us do not have the instinctual understanding of how to act dominate. And that dominance shows a safe place to raise children, have a home that is protected. Or we have become afraid that we will be seen as a brute.
But being strong does not mean being brutish. This applies in many situations when interacting with women. Have a heart, but let it be strong and conquer. This applies to many situations, in conversation, relationship, and the bedroom.
They come to you to cry because you are a man, but a if you never act like it, the signal of sexual attraction will never come through the static.
You must combine that jock "take what I want" and "I don't need you" composure and actions, and then after you have them on the hook, let them see that you will be a caring, loving protector.
About a year after 9-11, I was talking on my phone with my wife. Now, to really understand this story, you have to know that my wife is from Iran, her father was a former General or the Air Force there, and she knows multiple folks who had fairly high positions at one time in the government. And she calls home all the time. We spend 50-60 hours a month connected to Iran via phone.
So I'm sitting in a bookstore, and she calls. Right in the middle of the call there is a strange squeaking noise, reminiscent of digital audio "static" noises, sort of a cross between a cd skip and a modem. Sudden it ends, and we are no longer on the phone alone. Somehow our conversation was crossed with another cell phone conversation.
The strange part is this. The other folks now joined to our conversation were also from Iran. They were speaking Persian.
After about 30 seconds or mass confusion, the call went dead. For about 5 minutes my wife's phone and mine refused to connect out to make a call. Full signal, no access. When we finally got back in contact with each other, she told me that the other people on the line were trying to meet at a restaurant on the other side of Dallas. One had just landed at DFW from Frankfurt, on his way home from Iran. She understood them, I don't know the language.
Now, what are the chances of 4 mobile phones, separated by 20 miles a piece, suddenly crossing conversations at the servers, and being the same fairly limited ethnic/nationality group that just happens to be on the "Axis of Evil" list?
I tell this story to my freinds under the title "My conversation with the NSA" Since then it is a running joke for my freinds to randomly yell "bomb", "assassinate", "Jihad" and "Mohamed" while talking to me on the phone.
The problem lies in the fact that information given without a warrant by a third party is perfectly legal. If I, as a federal agent, request information, the company or individual can give that information freely of their own volition. As long as I do not threaten, nothing "underhanded" has happened. And that info can be used in court or any other way I wish. It is only when a individual or entity declines to provide the requested information that a warrant is needed.
Many big corps and individuals feel that they must give the information based on pressure to seem patriotic or just to better serve the bottom line. They give this information perfectly willingly. What is needed to stop this is laws with harsh penalties. The problem is that too many folks are view privacy issues as some sort of philosophical, ideological, or conceptual debate. How then can you determine when privacy is violated if there is no substantial definition.
The data that companies have on a person is not owned by that person, it is owned by the company. And that is the essence of the problem. What we need is laws that allow the individual to retain that information as their personal property, not the company. The individual may choose to allow that the use of that property by the company for purposes of conducting business with that company, but outside of the normal and reasonable activity of commerce, that property cannot be used with out the individual giving up his various rights (ie property rights of ownership and use, the right to remain silent, etc.)
You can refuse the police access to your dwelling because it is your property, unless they have a warrant. If you rent, then you have less rights, because the owner can decide to allow the police inside. But without a warrant, they cannot enter the building that you hold the title to without permission. If we had laws in place that forced companies to hold your information and personal data without having to relinquish ownership to that company, then this would not be an issue. This would allow the problem to once again be a constitutional issue of "illegal search and seizure".
Mind you, this is just a simplistic way I have defined the idea, but I think you should be able to see the advantageous (and disadvantageous) to such a law. As it stands, unless the administration open threatened the companies, nothing illegal has taken place.
I tend to agree. My desire to jump on the couch and play a game is still there, but once I sit down and start playing it's too easy to be distracted. The responsibilities of life come crashing in.
Like the other day, I picked up Final Fantasy Crystal Chronicles. My brother came over and we sat down to play. It was a weeknight, so time was not unlimited. About halfway through the first area my wife informs me that we are out of bread, cheese, milk, etc... She asks if I can go to the store and do some quick shopping. Since she is studying for a second degree, and has a test coming up, my game play is less important then her studying.
There goes an hour of time for the game.
This is what it is always like. Real life interferes with the game. My desire to play is hindered by my need to be a good husband, a good employee, a good brother, etc... On the rare occasions that you find time to play for extended periods of time, you find yourself trying to remember where you were at, you spend half the time working out what was going on last, or re-mastering the controls, or getting the feel of the interface because you've only played 3 or 4 hours in the last month.
It's just life. Especially with a new marriage and a new career, time is spent in other ways.
I want a game to be engrossing and captivating. If a game is worth its price, it had better do just this. If it is to short, then I feel cheated, like going out to a nice romantic dinner with my fiance`, spending hours talking and enjoying each other, then getting a hug in the resturant parking lot and going home. It leaves you wanting more.
(Of course, the romantic dinner is better then any game)
Take the recent Zelda. I really enjoyed the game, it was excellent. But the core story was too short. It left my feeling disappointed. I wanted to continue living in that world, but I couldn't. Like a author, you find one good book and you keep going back for more over the next month. Like when I first read Heinlein, I read everything I could find in a month, and missed Lazurus Long when I was done.
Of course, there is the flip side. Games that are long and bothersome. These I just don't finish. I throw them aside. This happens because either the game is just bad or they try to hard to pack in to much unnessaray junk.
If a game is good, I'll play it and love it. If it is good and short, I 'll play it and feel disappointed that I spent my money for it full price. If a game is bad then I should have done a little more research before buying it.
But don't tell me that they need to be shorter. That's bull. They just need to be better. But, I do play primarily RPG's, and expanse and grandiose is good for those.
I have to agree with all of the comments, but especially with number 4. When my group of freinds found out that Data dies, we just all decided to skip the movie. I don't really like the "going out to the movies" experiance anyway. I'd prefer to stay at home and watch it in my living room on a big screen TV with surround sound and the works. Much more relaxing and enjoyable. So Why would I go to a movie that's going to kill off one of my favorite characters and put up with all the rest of the frustration.
Of course, I can almost always come up with some excuse to wait for the DVD, resulting in going to the movie theater only about 5-6 times a year. And most of those are my girlfreind's doing, not mine. It is so much nicer at home.
An interesting fact about the "+" standard is that it is incompatable with the current dual AMD boards (MP and MPX chipset). This is a problem that I found out from selling a computer configured with both a ASUS a7m266-d and a DVD+R+RW. When the problem showed up we tryed changing motherboards, then brand of motherboard, and finally brands of DVD+ drive.
HP and Sony both blame AMD. AMD says that the problem lies in a data protocol required for the dual chips that the "+" standard interfers with.
The "-" is fully compatable and works perfect. So my vote goes to the "-" standard because of compatablity and I don't trust Sony and HP. (especially since we saw a bunch of issues with packet writing and the Sony CDRW drive)
I decided to buy it even though I know I will buy the Special Edition. Since my girl freind has never seen it, (we weren't dating when it was in theaters) I figured I would rent it at least once, probaly twice, and since I always forget to bring the back on time, it would wind up costing me close to that anyway. When the other version comes out I'll just give this one to my baby sister.
And $15 dollars seems like a reasonable price, instead of the normal 25, which doesn't. Something the movie industry should realize. In fact almost every DVD I own was purchased for that price or less. $20+ is too much for entertainment and few movies justify that type of expenditure.
As an owner of an Xbox and a PS2 i have to say this: The XBox has a much more solid base at the Hardware level. I would love to see more games with deep and rich game play. That's the current problem, the games that are out (30 something games total) most are prety linear, that includes the PS2 ports. If they can levarage the hardware side to convince developers to make games that are more then eye candy, it'll work for them.
Though, one thing I think they failed on was removing the ability to use CDR's in the box. I know they did it for copyright protection, but if they had they could let developers and individuals make mods for Halo and its kind. Only having a few levels can get pretty dull. Slashdot recently mentioned this in an article about Half-Life/Counterstrike, and I agree with the article claiming mods push business (no time to find article for link, late for work)
The Xbox has potential, I'd love to see it make waves, but they need to get some CREATIVE developers on the boat first.
I sell and configure custom computers almost everyday, and one thing I will take issue with is the articles opinion of Abit and support.
Abit performs well, they are reliable, and they come with nice features... As I heard a tech at my company told a customer once, "if you get a bad one, forget about getting your problem fixed."
We as a company refuse to stock them any longer. Having a pile of 4 dozen motherboards with issues that we can't RMA'd or get credit for made that decision easy. Even the istributers we buy from dropped them. I haven't confirmed this, but I've been told this last week by two customer's that Fry's won't carry them any longer for the same reason.
I tell customers this everytime they want to special order a Abit motherboard, "I can order it in, but it is purchased 'as is.' We wlll not accept it in return, refund, or exchange. All warranty issues must be dealt with by you directly with Abit. Payment is needed at time of order." It's the only way to protect the company and most people ask why we have that policy, I explain, they buy Asus or go elsewhere.
Basically, Abit rocks, except when you get that 1 out of 200 bad board. My opinion, buy Asus, their RMA and support is the best I've ever seen, and they perform realiably.
I Work in a independent OEM computer store that sells custom boxes and the word on the street for a long time is this: Micron has been intentionally selling below cost to kill off its smaller competitors. The market had become to competitive and beyond the control of the larger industry leading companies. They no longer could control pricing and the profit margins were not to their liking, so Micron responded by starting a price war to force smaller manufacturers out of the business. Prices will go back up when they can contrlol the market again and make extremely high profits.
The price war is just a power play to regain control of a market that was priced to high for the consumer but good for the bank book.
What I or you pay is not the issue... It's ATT claiming they are doing me a favor when they are not.
I quote "Lightning fast download speeds" when by comparison they are not. This is not the service I signed up for. I spent quite a bit of time in research and talking to reps on the phone because we needed specific service and speeds. @home provided that.
Now ATT is acting like the @Home service wasn't worth the money. But from a customer's point of view it was worth even more. It all comes down to profits, which everything does in business. It's merely a case of extreme profits versus lower profits... still profit though. When having to have your cake and eat it to becomes "and I'll eat everyone else's" is when i have an issue with business. If the customer is prioritized as high as you profit margin, that's when everyone is happy.
ATT is getting a customer base from a company that provided superior service and expecting everyone to accept it. It's their way or the highway... only because they want BIG WHOPPING margins, when a small hit to the profit would still be profit.
And still on top of that, we're willing to pay gladly, so profits don't have to even take a hit. Offer me a premium service, then cap those that don't need it or want to pay. People by expensive foreign cars when a cheaper car would do... why not the same here?
Well, Dallas was a big market for them, lots of new users and lots of infrastructure by the local companies put in place. I commonly ran at 13 to 20 Mbs, and that's why we went with @home. With 3 roomates all doing work from home (and playing online shooters) the bandwidth was well used.
The 1.5 cap is hard and fast here. And it has ALOT of people very upset (I work at a independent computer store and talk to people and it's the topic of the week)
Basically, almost eveyone I've talked to would be willing to pay 20 dollars or more a month if they could just get their bandwidth back... I wonder if ATT considered that? Or maybe offering a premium service? Hopefully they will in the near future because this cut has really affected our usage.
Except you forget one thing...
ATT has their customers capped because their system can't handle the bandwidth. A cap that has been forced on customers who for the most part would have paid more to be without. (at least the 30 or so I've talked to, myself included)
If the network was worth so little, why were my downloads 20 or 30 times faster then they are now? I feel like I've been paying to drive a corvette, and now I'm still paying for that corvette but somebody welded the gear shift into 1st gear. ATT is basically leaving their customers with much lower service and acting like they're doing us a favor....
The problem with switching thier customers (being a switched customer myself) is that the service is not comparable. My 2 roomates and I went with @home for the down speed. ATT caps the down speed at 1.5 Mbs. Not bad, until you have 5 desktops and a laptop connected up all competeing for the bandwidth. Also two Xbox's running over the network at the same time as online Tribes (or other game) eats that capped bandwidth up.
Also the service is DCHP not Static. And all manner of servers are blocked (I know you can't run servers, we just have mail delivered from forwarded addresses, puts it in our hands and lets us archuve it in our own way).
If this is what ATT considers a comparable service, maybe that's why @Home was so popular. This costs the same, but is not the same.
The really funny thing is, I would be willing to pay more for the service I WAS recieving (more upload needed though). And I woiuld still be willing to pay more. Broadband needs an option to buy a premium service such as I had. Normal DSL speeds are nice for surfing... I've tryed to call ATT to ask about the availablity of packages, but they keep transfering me to a special line for @Home migration with 1+ hour wait times. DSL is nice speed, but more is needed for real power use....
This works great for me -
www.smoothwall.org
And when I had some problems with setup they were extremely helpful on irc.