Personally if saving the human race meant walking across the street I wouldn't do it, but since I appear to be along for the ride I'm trying to make the best of it. I've never understood people like you who look around at all the meanness and suffering that people cause each other and say, "yeah, this is good!" I'm not sure all the advances make up for the sociopathy.
But it's just disappointing that a guy that has enough brains to earn $1M that way didn't have enough to just vanish and live quietly in another country before the police came looking.
That's because people that pull that kind of stuff are narcissistic and sociopathic. They think they'll never get caught because they're "too clever." It has nothing to do with brains and everything to do with pathology. The people who think like you do are the kind of people who wouldn't do it in the first place.
You might want to take a look at the latest Wired magazine, page 42: The Worst Stupid Engineering Mistakes. At least 6 out of the ten appear to have been perpetrated by the private sector including McDonnell Douglas' DC-10 in the 1970s. Wired blurb states that nearly 1000 people around the world lost their lives "while the kinks were being ironed out. Blown out cargo doors, shredded hydraulic lines and engines dropped mid-flight were just a few of the" problems.
That seems way worse to me than losing a satellite or a probe.
Catbeller, you are one of my favorite posters as you give a ready voice to my own cynicism. However, I don't think we're the Soviet Union at its worst. Yet. Idealogically we may be heading that direction, but we still only have a king, not a Stalin.
They sure are. 9/11 was the wake up call. The problem is I was awakened to the Bush corporation. Seeing them in action I've never felt more depressed about human nature than I do today.
Just the other day, there was a Slashdot thread where people were seriously discussing violently overthrowing the American government; I guess Slashdot can be banned now as well, and all those people can go strait to jail.
I didn't see that discussion. It's probably not as you described, but discussing the violent overthrow of the government is not the same as inciting.
And no, I didn't outlaw verbal support for socialism, communism or even capitalism (which is the most violent of all). I merely stated that actually inciting violence may not be protected.
No. In other words speech should be free until it incites violence against others. Perhaps that is a difficult concept to grasp as so many here have failed to understand that. Would you defend my right to try to convince people that you should be dragged into the street and shot?
It sounds like you're lobbying for the right to yell "fire!" in a crowded movie house. Do you think that if the hate speech propagated by the radio personalities in Rwanda had been halted there would still have been a massacre of 800,000 people?
Even here in the U.S. where we have pretty liberal laws regarding free speech it is still recognized that you are not allowed to incite people to violence. That inciting to violence is what AI opposes.
Could you explain/elaborate on that? Are you talking about Amnesty International? Amnesty International is all about the abolition of torture and the promotion of human rights. AI has no ability or desire to deny distribution of medicine to anyone. AI has always maintained a politics neutral standpoint with regard to torture.
Goals of Amnesty (from the wikipedia entry):
Free all Prisoners of Conscience (a "POC" is a person imprisoned for the peaceful exercise of their beliefs, which differs somewhat from the typical use of the term political prisoner).
Ensure fair and prompt trials.
Abolish all forms of torture and ill-treatment of prisoners, including the use of the death penalty.
End state-sanctioned terrorism, killings, and disappearances.
Assist political asylum-seekers.
End all forms of violence against women
Co-operate with organizations that seek to put an end to human rights abuses.
Raise awareness about human rights abuses around the world.
Should really clean house before going abroad.
Not really sure what you mean by this. Did you miss the "international" in Amnesty International?
Really. Like what happened to the Media Lab's Government Information Awareness project? Does anyone but me remember that? It opened to a little bit of fanfare when the US government was busy trying to put together Total Information Awareness. One year later--or less--it quietly shut down. I sent a couple of letters to the grad student and the professor behind it but no answers.
I own a Ibook now, but I'll NEVER EVER BUY ANOTHER APPLE PRODUCT EVER AGAIN.
No itunes. No ipod. No Imac, powermac or any such nonsesense. Never again.
Nobody reading your post actually believes you own an iBook. This isn't even a good troll. Yes, this action by Apple is irritating and stupid, but saying it is tantamount to subverting the first amendment and the constitution is hyperbole to say the least. There is some real subverting going on against the constitution these days and I suggest you place your ranting efforts against those.
Problem is, now everyone is loosing something they love: their freedom and their privacy
After watching what the American public will put up with I am no longer convinced that all people love their freedom and privacy. There was not nearly the outrage over domestic spying that I thought there should be. And the fact that our government can grab anyone off the street and declare that person to be an enemy combatant without due process is not so alarming to the general public either. So where is this love of freedom and privacy?
OK, let's all take the pledge:
1. I promise not to slam people who have done interesting work just to self-aggrandize.
2. Even if I disagree with the article I will not behave like a petulant 4th grader.
3. In pointing out errors, omissions or other faults I will not call anyone an idiot but will rather offer constructive criticism.
4. I will count to ten before posting anything
I expect there will be additions to this list, but it would really be nice if they were civil. A fella can dream....
It's an interesting idea, but not quite on for a few reasons. Most editors are using Avid systems, which was formerly Windows only software so there are probably many, many editing systems out there that are not Apple.
Also, editors are not responsible for what gets shot, only how it gets put together. So if all they're given is footage with Macs in it they don't have much choice.
Possibly one of the biggest reasons that Apple products seems to appear so often, especially in low budget movies and still photo shoots, is simply because that's what art directors and photographers tend to own and so they use them as props.
Slashdot Mirror
Personally if saving the human race meant walking across the street I wouldn't do it, but since I appear to be along for the ride I'm trying to make the best of it. I've never understood people like you who look around at all the meanness and suffering that people cause each other and say, "yeah, this is good!" I'm not sure all the advances make up for the sociopathy.
Your post was idiotic. I'm sure you don't mind me saying that.
Apparently your username/password is longer than 20 characters.
That's because people that pull that kind of stuff are narcissistic and sociopathic. They think they'll never get caught because they're "too clever." It has nothing to do with brains and everything to do with pathology. The people who think like you do are the kind of people who wouldn't do it in the first place.
How do you think dictators get to be dictators in the first place? Business is not just business.
Yep. It's going to be a very dicey proposition for Google now, trying to make ends meet with only 4.7 billion users.
Sure we can! But in 2008 we're hoping to get back to being serious.
I think perhaps it's more apt to describe the waiter as serving everyone Thunderbird but some of us are going to dump it out and demand a good Merlot.
That seems way worse to me than losing a satellite or a probe.
Catbeller, you are one of my favorite posters as you give a ready voice to my own cynicism. However, I don't think we're the Soviet Union at its worst. Yet. Idealogically we may be heading that direction, but we still only have a king, not a Stalin.
Obviously this idea sucks.
It's always refreshing to see someone who blatantly admits that money is much more important than human rights, free speech and privacy.
They sure are. 9/11 was the wake up call. The problem is I was awakened to the Bush corporation. Seeing them in action I've never felt more depressed about human nature than I do today.
Thank you for clarifying my post. That is indeed what I intended but somehow the meaning was missed.
I didn't see that discussion. It's probably not as you described, but discussing the violent overthrow of the government is not the same as inciting.
And no, I didn't outlaw verbal support for socialism, communism or even capitalism (which is the most violent of all). I merely stated that actually inciting violence may not be protected.
No. In other words speech should be free until it incites violence against others. Perhaps that is a difficult concept to grasp as so many here have failed to understand that. Would you defend my right to try to convince people that you should be dragged into the street and shot?
Even here in the U.S. where we have pretty liberal laws regarding free speech it is still recognized that you are not allowed to incite people to violence. That inciting to violence is what AI opposes.
Goals of Amnesty (from the wikipedia entry):
Should really clean house before going abroad.
Not really sure what you mean by this. Did you miss the "international" in Amnesty International?
It's an even surer sign that greed is the prime motivator for a good percentage of the population.
Really. Like what happened to the Media Lab's Government Information Awareness project? Does anyone but me remember that? It opened to a little bit of fanfare when the US government was busy trying to put together Total Information Awareness. One year later--or less--it quietly shut down. I sent a couple of letters to the grad student and the professor behind it but no answers.
Nobody reading your post actually believes you own an iBook. This isn't even a good troll. Yes, this action by Apple is irritating and stupid, but saying it is tantamount to subverting the first amendment and the constitution is hyperbole to say the least. There is some real subverting going on against the constitution these days and I suggest you place your ranting efforts against those.
After watching what the American public will put up with I am no longer convinced that all people love their freedom and privacy. There was not nearly the outrage over domestic spying that I thought there should be. And the fact that our government can grab anyone off the street and declare that person to be an enemy combatant without due process is not so alarming to the general public either. So where is this love of freedom and privacy?
1. I promise not to slam people who have done interesting work just to self-aggrandize.
2. Even if I disagree with the article I will not behave like a petulant 4th grader.
3. In pointing out errors, omissions or other faults I will not call anyone an idiot but will rather offer constructive criticism.
4. I will count to ten before posting anything
I expect there will be additions to this list, but it would really be nice if they were civil. A fella can dream....
It's a good point. But it's also good to remember that science usually follows science fiction so perhaps it's not quite as ridiculous as it seems.
Also, editors are not responsible for what gets shot, only how it gets put together. So if all they're given is footage with Macs in it they don't have much choice.
Possibly one of the biggest reasons that Apple products seems to appear so often, especially in low budget movies and still photo shoots, is simply because that's what art directors and photographers tend to own and so they use them as props.