No, they weren't very precise. And there were still occasional carpet-bombing runs. And yes, civilians were still killed as collateral damage. But there was no intent to go out and simply slaughter civilians.
All you're doing with your slanted arguments is proving just how little you actually know/understand.
If we wanted to be "the most effective killing machine"?
We wouldn't be dropping high explosives. We'd be dropping nukes. Not chucking salvoes from the Arleigh Burke. We SURE as hell wouldn't be putting boots on the ground!
Again, the military objective is to limit use of force to military targets and avoid civilian casualties/targets.
Why would anyone want to hire someone with anger issues that can't refute a small point? Did you or did you not directly or indirectly end the lives of people that did not commit a crime? If so, you are a sanctioned murderer. Swearing and ranting does not change facts.
Did I or did I not directly or indirectly end lives?
Nope.
I was a medic. And I was lucky enough to have never killed anyone. Or even wounded anyone.
And killing armed and actively hostile enemy combatants in a war IS NOT murder! If you don't understand the difference, you don't know what you're talking about.
This is why Americans are despised worldwide, and why veterans aren't actually welcomed back into the american civilian life.
But hey you have parades and all sorts of propaganda to make them seem valued to the public.
Sorry, but when I was a soldier, if someone was trying to kill me, it was my job to stop them from doing so. Unfortunately, in times of war, the final tool for doing this is the Patton Solution (Make the other dumb bastard die for HIS country).
If that makes people abroad, or at home, hate me and my fellow soldiers, that's THEIR problem. If they're so damn opposed to war, they needed to work harder to keep us from becoming embroiled in one. But it's always easier to bitch about how bad the country/world is. Actually FIXING the world is MUCH more difficult. Made more-so by intolerant blowhards who think that a choice of career in the military means someone is automatically a psychopath.
And then there's mental defectives such as yourself who can't determine the difference between simple frustration and homicidal rage and automatically assume the latter due to the fact that I've had training with pistols, rifles, grenades, squad weaponry and anti-armor weaponry. People who are so oblivious they can't even comprehend simple things, such as my personal choice NOT to own weapons now that I'm a civilian.
1: Nobody can tell you to "kill people". It's not a legal order and you're REQUIRED to disobey it if someone tries to issue it. Maybe if you knew what you were talking about.
2: Do soldiers put themselves in a position where it may be required? Yes. Does that make them a murderer? No. No more than a police officer. No more than a federal marshal. Again, the primary job of a soldier isn't to kill people.
3: In other words, you'll complain, but you won't try to make the world a better place. Sorry, you're a fucking leech then. And your opinion has exactly ZERO value. Go cry about how evil and unfair the world is to someone who cares.
What? Nobody gives a shit about your opinion? Tough.
You're a fan of non-standards-compliant software that breaks compatibility, creeps features all over the place, and compromises system integrity, stability and reliability by introducing a massive SPOF?
Good for you! Me? I like software that works RIGHT.
so government accessories to murder aka accomplices.
As former military, can I just please have you BLOW ME you ignorant little leech on the ass of my country?
People who go into the military with the idea that they want to meet interesting people AND KILL them usually get weeded out in basic training/boot camp. If not, they get weeded out in AIT (occupational training). People like that simply aren't stable enough to get through training in the modern army.
Nobody else really goes into the military with the notion that they want to go out and kill people.
The military's a place to serve one's country, get some occupational training, and rack up money for college. Maybe even find a lifetime career.
There are over 1.4 million people on Active Duty with another million in Ready Reserve (includes National Guard).
The vast MAJORITY of those troops are in military occupational specialties (MOS) that are NOT front-line combat (infantry).
Nobody wants to have to be out there killing people. That usually means that pretty much every other option for negotiation (other than outright appeasement, and Vichy showed us how well THAT went over), has pretty much FAILED. And, even then, the objective of warfare by modern doctrine is NOT about body count. It's about removing the tools and resources necessary to successfully wage warfare against us.
Does that mean we, eventually, wind up killing people?
Yep!
But better them than us.
If YOU, in particular, don't happen to like it, TOUGH FUCKING SHIT. Find some way to serve this country that minimizes the future need for armed conflict and deployment of soldiers into combat that doesn't involve bending and spreading for a bunch of delusional fanatics. I can GUARANTEE you that the very FIRST people stepping up to thank you for your contributions will be the people you've just put out of a job.
He was fucked the moment law enforcement decided that he was a bad guy.
Keep in mind that the law enfarcement deciding that someone is a bad guy doesn't imply that he isn't a bad guy.
Once law enforcement labels you a "bad guy" nowadays, the difference between being mislabeled and actually BEING a bad guy is pretty much academic. They're going to do their absolute best (and worst) to fuck your life up as much as possible.
No. A reactionary conservative wouldn't be against net neutrality because tiered service would be a BIG change in how the internet operates. Reactionaries HATE changes like that.
A financial conservative would hate the change because a changeover to tiered service is an excuse to steal more money from their pockets.
I could go on, but you're locked into the foolish "conservative = idiot" mindset.
Just because someone's conservative doesn't mean they're either a luddite or an imbecile.
Thank you Mr. Holder. I *have* thought of the children. They have exactly NOTHING to do with my desire not to have my devices and data compromised. Either by tech-savvy criminals, terrorists or a government panopticon run amok.
Ammendment IV
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
You were hired to do a job. DO YOUR JOB. DO IT THE RIGHT WAY! Stop whining that everything isn't handed to you on a silver plate. I (and many like me) refuse to abrogate our rights just to make your life easier. I (and many like me) refuse to be pre-criminalized just to make your life easier. I (and many like me) refuse to be treated like criminals or monsters simply because you play demagogue when we don't make your life easier. If you can't do your job without violating the law and people's rights, please quit and allow someone COMPETENT to take up your position. There's nothing shameful about acknowledging your own limitations.
What makes you think that? Is the USA military so inefficient that it can't deter attacks without spending several times more than its rivals?
I can answer that for you. But I don't think you'll like that.
Basically, all that spending on "toys" provides a technological advantage.
This means that we can accomplish, through superior technology, things that USED to cost (large numbers of) human lives. And the correlation is QUITE direct.
In general, the US public *HATES* going to or being at war. Now throw a million casualties at it.
There's also the fact that other countries ARE spending to further their military technology. And WWII demonstrated that superior technology CAN make a difference. The proof of WWII, though, is that superior logistics can trump technology (and the willingness to sacrifice lives).
Being only "marginally" superior nowadays is a good way to get lots and lots of people killed in combat operations. On BOTH sides. Being in possession of vast technological superiority actually cuts down on casualties on both sides (though primarily your own).
The saleswonks argument basically breaks down to "they don't know how to sell "open" therefore it is "bad" for business".
These are bugs we're talking about. Not necessarily "security exploits".
Like "Under Windows 8, 32-Bit running Citrix, the "Foo" button turns green instead of orange"
Or: On dev build XYZ, going to the Tools menu auto-crashes the application.
If the salewonks can't spin "We care about bugs, we hide nothing, and we take bugs VERY seriously."?
Then what the fuck are they getting paid for?
Basically, this person needs to talk to the person making the ACTUAL business decisions. Outline his reasoning.
If the person making the ACTUAL decisions for this company decides to lock it down. Do it.
Make it part of a dev portal.
Now, actual SECURITY issues, *THAT* is probably something you don't want left out in public ("an e-mail crafted just *SO* will corrupt the ERP's mail module and crash the system"). That's something that would probably be better off in a dev portal or limited to vendors, devs and customers.
Slashdot Mirror
"The USA intentionally bombed France during WWII"
And what were the targets? Were they AIMING for hospitals? Were they TRYING to hit schools?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strategic_bombing_during_World_War_II#Bombing_in_France
Precision bombing. Not carpet bombing.
No, they weren't very precise. And there were still occasional carpet-bombing runs. And yes, civilians were still killed as collateral damage. But there was no intent to go out and simply slaughter civilians.
All you're doing with your slanted arguments is proving just how little you actually know/understand.
So "murder" is whatever the hell you feel like defining as murder?
Uh. No. That don't fly.
If we wanted to be "the most effective killing machine"?
We wouldn't be dropping high explosives.
We'd be dropping nukes.
Not chucking salvoes from the Arleigh Burke.
We SURE as hell wouldn't be putting boots on the ground!
Again, the military objective is to limit use of force to military targets and avoid civilian casualties/targets.
Why would anyone want to hire someone with anger issues that can't refute a small point? Did you or did you not directly or indirectly end the lives of people that did not commit a crime? If so, you are a sanctioned murderer. Swearing and ranting does not change facts.
Did I or did I not directly or indirectly end lives?
Nope.
I was a medic. And I was lucky enough to have never killed anyone. Or even wounded anyone.
And killing armed and actively hostile enemy combatants in a war IS NOT murder! If you don't understand the difference, you don't know what you're talking about.
But better them than us.
This is why Americans are despised worldwide, and why veterans aren't actually welcomed back into the american civilian life.
But hey you have parades and all sorts of propaganda to make them seem valued to the public.
Sorry, but when I was a soldier, if someone was trying to kill me, it was my job to stop them from doing so. Unfortunately, in times of war, the final tool for doing this is the Patton Solution (Make the other dumb bastard die for HIS country).
If that makes people abroad, or at home, hate me and my fellow soldiers, that's THEIR problem. If they're so damn opposed to war, they needed to work harder to keep us from becoming embroiled in one. But it's always easier to bitch about how bad the country/world is. Actually FIXING the world is MUCH more difficult. Made more-so by intolerant blowhards who think that a choice of career in the military means someone is automatically a psychopath.
And then there's mental defectives such as yourself who can't determine the difference between simple frustration and homicidal rage and automatically assume the latter due to the fact that I've had training with pistols, rifles, grenades, squad weaponry and anti-armor weaponry. People who are so oblivious they can't even comprehend simple things, such as my personal choice NOT to own weapons now that I'm a civilian.
You're thinking "rank", which is Private, Private First Class, Corporal, Sergeant (all enlisted) Lieutenant, Major, Colonel (all commissioned)).
An MOS is your actual occupational specialty.
Here's a list of MOS'es.
http://www.usarec.army.mil/hq/warrant/WOgeninfo_enlmos.shtml
Things like medic, truck driver, engineer, mechanic, pilot, etc, etc.
1: Nobody can tell you to "kill people". It's not a legal order and you're REQUIRED to disobey it if someone tries to issue it. Maybe if you knew what you were talking about.
2: Do soldiers put themselves in a position where it may be required? Yes. Does that make them a murderer? No. No more than a police officer. No more than a federal marshal. Again, the primary job of a soldier isn't to kill people.
3: In other words, you'll complain, but you won't try to make the world a better place. Sorry, you're a fucking leech then. And your opinion has exactly ZERO value. Go cry about how evil and unfair the world is to someone who cares.
What? Nobody gives a shit about your opinion? Tough.
Why would they want it? It's setting itself up as a single point of failure and breaks POSIX compliance.
That's like asking "Why doesn't FreeBSD just use the Windows bootloader?"
Really?
You're a fan of non-standards-compliant software that breaks compatibility, creeps features all over the place, and compromises system integrity, stability and reliability by introducing a massive SPOF?
Good for you! Me? I like software that works RIGHT.
so government accessories to murder aka accomplices.
As former military, can I just please have you BLOW ME you ignorant little leech on the ass of my country?
People who go into the military with the idea that they want to meet interesting people AND KILL them usually get weeded out in basic training/boot camp. If not, they get weeded out in AIT (occupational training). People like that simply aren't stable enough to get through training in the modern army.
Nobody else really goes into the military with the notion that they want to go out and kill people.
The military's a place to serve one's country, get some occupational training, and rack up money for college. Maybe even find a lifetime career.
There are over 1.4 million people on Active Duty with another million in Ready Reserve (includes National Guard).
The vast MAJORITY of those troops are in military occupational specialties (MOS) that are NOT front-line combat (infantry).
Nobody wants to have to be out there killing people. That usually means that pretty much every other option for negotiation (other than outright appeasement, and Vichy showed us how well THAT went over), has pretty much FAILED. And, even then, the objective of warfare by modern doctrine is NOT about body count. It's about removing the tools and resources necessary to successfully wage warfare against us.
Does that mean we, eventually, wind up killing people?
Yep!
But better them than us.
If YOU, in particular, don't happen to like it, TOUGH FUCKING SHIT. Find some way to serve this country that minimizes the future need for armed conflict and deployment of soldiers into combat that doesn't involve bending and spreading for a bunch of delusional fanatics. I can GUARANTEE you that the very FIRST people stepping up to thank you for your contributions will be the people you've just put out of a job.
There's no real way to measure "creativity".
As such, college entrance boards have to have data points that actually CAN be measured.
Grades.
Types of classes taken.
Extracurricular activities.
General personal presentation.
etc
etc
Since when has The Constitution ACTUALLY stopped runaway law enforcement from fucking someone over?
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=police+falsified+evidence
He was fucked the moment law enforcement decided that he was a bad guy.
Keep in mind that the law enfarcement deciding that someone is a bad guy doesn't imply that he isn't a bad guy.
Once law enforcement labels you a "bad guy" nowadays, the difference between being mislabeled and actually BEING a bad guy is pretty much academic. They're going to do their absolute best (and worst) to fuck your life up as much as possible.
You are confusing someone who calls themselves a conservative with someone who actually is a conservative.
Nobody cares about the pedantic definitions. No one follows them.
Except the people tossing labels at them...
No. A reactionary conservative wouldn't be against net neutrality because tiered service would be a BIG change in how the internet operates. Reactionaries HATE changes like that.
A financial conservative would hate the change because a changeover to tiered service is an excuse to steal more money from their pockets.
I could go on, but you're locked into the foolish "conservative = idiot" mindset.
Just because someone's conservative doesn't mean they're either a luddite or an imbecile.
Nonono. Group of luddite imbeciles opposes net neutrality.
Honestly. At this point, there's pretty much NOBODY involved with the entire debacle (on ANY side) whose hands are clean.
What we need now are EVERYONE to climb off if this nasty, smelly toilet and hit FLUSH.
Thank you Mr. Holder. I *have* thought of the children.
They have exactly NOTHING to do with my desire not to have my devices and data compromised. Either by tech-savvy criminals, terrorists or a government panopticon run amok.
Ammendment IV
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
You were hired to do a job. DO YOUR JOB. DO IT THE RIGHT WAY! Stop whining that everything isn't handed to you on a silver plate.
I (and many like me) refuse to abrogate our rights just to make your life easier.
I (and many like me) refuse to be pre-criminalized just to make your life easier.
I (and many like me) refuse to be treated like criminals or monsters simply because you play demagogue when we don't make your life easier.
If you can't do your job without violating the law and people's rights, please quit and allow someone COMPETENT to take up your position. There's nothing shameful about acknowledging your own limitations.
He's against Anarchy in the UK, then?
Right! now
ha ha ha ha ha...
I am an antichrist
I am an anarchist
Don't know what I want
But I know how to get it
I wanna destroy passerby
'Cause I wanna be Anarchy
No dogsbody
Anarchy for the UK
It's coming sometime and maybe
I give a wrong time stop at traffic line
Your future dream is a sharpie's scheme
'Cause I wanna be Anarchy
In the city
How many ways to get what you want
I use the best
I use the rest
I use the N.M.E
I use Anarchy
'Cause I wanna be Anarchy
It's the only way to be
Is this the M.P.L.A or
Is this the U.D.A or
Is this the I.R.A
I thought it was the UK
Or just another country
Another council tenancy
I wanna be Anarchy
And I wanna be Anarchy
(Oh what a name)
And I wanna be anarchist
I get pissed, destroy!
What makes you think that? Is the USA military so inefficient that it can't deter attacks without spending several times more than its rivals?
I can answer that for you. But I don't think you'll like that.
Basically, all that spending on "toys" provides a technological advantage.
This means that we can accomplish, through superior technology, things that USED to cost (large numbers of) human lives. And the correlation is QUITE direct.
In general, the US public *HATES* going to or being at war. Now throw a million casualties at it.
There's also the fact that other countries ARE spending to further their military technology. And WWII demonstrated that superior technology CAN make a difference. The proof of WWII, though, is that superior logistics can trump technology (and the willingness to sacrifice lives).
Being only "marginally" superior nowadays is a good way to get lots and lots of people killed in combat operations. On BOTH sides. Being in possession of vast technological superiority actually cuts down on casualties on both sides (though primarily your own).
Sometimes I like to think about what sort of country we could be if we didn't spend quite so much on our war toys :/
Not sure, but you'd be speaking either German or Russian.
And this assumes you're white, straight and a LOYAL PARTY MEMBER.
Otherwise, you're probably dead or chopping rocks in Siberia.
My guess is we are fucked.
No. Being "fucked" implied some modicum of informed consent.
The proper term is "ass-raped without even the courtesy of a reach-around".
No. The SALESWONKS are pushing this.
Not the people paid to make decisions.
The saleswonks argument basically breaks down to "they don't know how to sell "open" therefore it is "bad" for business".
These are bugs we're talking about.
Not necessarily "security exploits".
Like "Under Windows 8, 32-Bit running Citrix, the "Foo" button turns green instead of orange"
Or: On dev build XYZ, going to the Tools menu auto-crashes the application.
If the salewonks can't spin "We care about bugs, we hide nothing, and we take bugs VERY seriously."?
Then what the fuck are they getting paid for?
Basically, this person needs to talk to the person making the ACTUAL business decisions. Outline his reasoning.
If the person making the ACTUAL decisions for this company decides to lock it down. Do it.
Make it part of a dev portal.
Now, actual SECURITY issues, *THAT* is probably something you don't want left out in public ("an e-mail crafted just *SO* will corrupt the ERP's mail module and crash the system").
That's something that would probably be better off in a dev portal or limited to vendors, devs and customers.
That's great until they win a federal case.
All Tesla needs is a good, solid win at the federal level and this shit goes away.
Slowly, but it WILL go away.