Looks like we gotta kill 2k more to get even. Its like we all forgot that 11 years ago they gave us the biggest fuck you ever. I say burn em all
The people that flew the planes into the buildings are already dead. Before they attacked you they made the decision that they would be willing to die if it meant striking back at their perceived oppressor, the US.
While the US is killing random targets they are creating more and more potential terrorists who will go to greater and greater extremes to get revenge.
If the US stops killing people today it will have less terrorists to deal with in the next 30 or so years.
there have been multiple instances of the US bombing weddings in Afghanistan.
Generally due to retarded people firing automatic weapons into the air.
Guns aren't toys, and if you act like they are you fucking well deserve to be shot.
But these people are not shot, they are blown to bits along with everyone else within about 100 meters. That's a grossly excessive response to some loonies firing guns at empty airspace. Besides, not all the weddings that got bombed were due to loonies firing guns in the air.
Weddings are a big deal in these cultures. China doesn't bomb you whenever you hold a BBQ for friends and family do they?
From now on, if you want to start a war on a developed country, you should do it on a Tuesday. That's the day the soldiers are down for their Windows Updates.
Imagine what something like stuxnet could do to soldiers with brain implants.
what will happen when military tech hits the civilian world?
It does already, and as long as it keeps doing it in Muslim countries I'm all for it.
And if you run out of resources before you kill everyone else? US military spending is unsustainable and pushing the national debt to insane levels. High tech comes at a high cost and brain implants are not going to change that.
It's not so much "ways of killing people" as it is "ways of making sure no one else can wantonly kill or subjugate you".
And maybe grabbing all the oil and installing a puppet government while you are at it. Face it, it's "ways of killing people" to justify military spending the can't be paid for while more important things get no funding whatsoever.
The idea was that, at some point and after enough mods, you become distanced from your own humanness and humanity itself; at what point do you become a cyborg and no longer human?
A single functional implant makes you a cyborg as long as that implant has some synthetic electrical component.
Now, 10 cops for a missing cell phone... you could call that obnoxious -- at the very least!
It's use of company ( i.e.police ) resources for personal reasons. It's simple theft and the police can get away with it because they are above the law.
Don't forget the corruption too! 10 police look for one stolen kids iphone while how many other more serious crimes got ignored?
Whoever ordered these 10 cops to go waste time the state is paying for should be disciplined for corruption. Using company resources for personal reasons is at best corruption and at worst theft.
He would never have got involved in facebook in the first place. It's not an understandable investment, it's not a safe investment, it's strongly overvalued and although google+ was a failure the next thing might not be.
I suspect the great majority of people who brought facebook shares really should not be buying shares at all. They are the wreckless investors who lose all their money in the long term.
I run Linux and OpenBSD and software with GPL, BSD, or other free licences for all my personal stuff. I have everything I need and more for free.
On the other hand at work we often get people asking us to save a few hundred by buying Windows student edition or wanting to install software on multiple machines when we have licensed it for only one. I won't do it, we either pay for the correct license or we don't use it. It's one thing for a home user to rip off some software but companies never should.
How would they run out of money? The government of China has and can force its banks to give loans that essentially never have to be repaid to these vendors.
Why would they? What would the Chinese government gain by flooding the solar panels market with things that cost more than they sell for?
But only because they were already artificially low, with China selling those things below cost just to gain market dominance.
I've heard that said a few times but it seems nuts that China would sell these things at a loss, if that's really the case they will run out of money and be forced to stop fairly soon.
Do you have a citation for the claim that China is selling solar at a loss?
Read the OP. It's clear that we're using the word "terrorist" to refer to Muslim extremists. Stop watering down the meaning of terms. If you're going to change "terrorist" to mean "anyone who makes me scared", you might as well scrap the word all together. We have plenty of good terms to describe authoritarian governments already.
I was using the dictionary definition which has nothing to do with Muslims at all. It refers to anyone or any group who causes terror or frightens others. The UK government is clearly doing this by arming and militarizing the police. Using the term 'terrorist' to refer to Muslim extermists and ignoring every other cause of terror or loss of freedom is missing the big picture. Muslims didn't turn the UK into a police state, the UK police did and the UK government let them. When the IRA were blowing up buildings every few months or so the UK never resorted to police state tactics and it never militarized the police.
From dictionary.com: terrorist
[ter-er-ist] Show IPA noun 1. a person, usually a member of a group, who uses or advocates terrorism. 2. a person who terrorizes or frightens others. 3. (formerly) a member of a political group in Russia aiming at the demoralization of the government by terror. 4. an agent or partisan of the revolutionary tribunal during the Reign of Terror in France. adjective 5. of, pertaining to, or characteristic of terrorism or terrorists: terrorist tactics.
terrorism
[ter-uh-riz-uhm] Show IPA noun 1. the use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, especially for political purposes. 2. the state of fear and submission produced by terrorism or terrorization. 3. a terroristic method of governing or of resisting a government. Origin: 1785–95; terror + -ism
How in the world does that count as a "win" for terrorists? The terrorists aren't winning anything. We haven't left their countries alone or changed our "evil ways" and adopted Sharia Law. Only Western authoritarians are winning.
A crowd dispersal weapon has absolutely nothing to do with stopping a terrorist. Why would you even think that?
If you define terrorists to mean people who cause terror and define terror as the emotion of strong fear then yes, the terrorists have won and they are the western governments. I think you are using terrorist to mean muslems, people from the middle east, or something like that.
A crown dispersal weapon doesn't stop terrorists, it prevents crowd of people openly opposing terrorists.
And of course if people are planning to protest in the street, they'll take ear-plugs, which will take most of the pain and disorientation away. This will only be really effective against non-protestors.
The take home message is that peaceful protesters anywhere in London will be subjected to experimental torture devices. Also anyone who happens to be near protesters.
The more I read about preparations, the less I want to attend. Sounds like it will be a lot more pleasant to watch at home.
The more I hear about the insane security measures and the use of the military for policing the more I want to go sit on a beach in Asia until it all goes away.
I mean the choice is cheap seafood, sunlight, friendly people or mind blowingly expensive food, bad weather, hostile people, heavily armed army types performing crowd control. The army is trained and equipped to work in war zones and effectively kill people, they are not trained to perform police work.
ordinary people can see the games in FTA HD on like 24 channels so they can sit at home and not pay for tickets.
Everyone from the UK has paid for the games and they were very expensive too.
The ticket that are for sale are way out of the price range of normal honest working people yet the ticket prices don't even nearly cover the cost of the thing, taxpayers got soaked for the rest. The whole thing is an insane waste of money and turning London into North Korea for some misguided idea of 'security' is doubly insane.
UK law only allows you to defend yourself if you can prove your innocence later.
No. In all UK law you are innocent until proven guilty. The onus is not on you to prove that your self defence was reasonable, but on the prosecution to show that it was not.
It's just semantics. The prosecution has a statement from a guy saying you attacked him, he has clearly been beaten, you have his blood on your clothes and some minor bruising. For all practical purposes you have to prove your innocence. If you don't have witnesses you are going to find that hard.
Don't ever get the impression the UK police care about anyone, the way they see it the victims did something to deserve it.
The UK police don't prosecute, judge nor sentence people.
They don't prosecute. They do judge in some sense of the word and certainly sentence some people to punishment from being tasered, to a beating, to sometimes death. It's highly unlikely they will get punished when they step outside the letter of the law.
The thing is if you really have to defend yourself then you have a right that transcends national laws to do so, criminal justice system be dammed.
You're welcome to your opinion. But it is only your opinion. It's not a right in any real sense.
It's a law of nature, not of old men who sit in cosy chairs and pass judgement on the rest of humanity. You are entitled to preserve your own life and the lives of your loved ones.
The Dutch Nanny State happened to be the one that for a large part co-provided all the infrastructure most telco's use. And then it just had to be privatized for no other reason other then trying to force a failing market system.
You obviously don't know what you're talking about.
The Government used to own the post office and telecoms. They privatized them as the company KPN. I've dealt with KPN and they are a bunch of customer hating assholes who love forcing their insane internal policies on customers. They started with a government department mentality because they were exactly that, a government department. Change comes slow in the Netherlands but it does come. With the forced separation of infrastructure other companies started providing phone and data services and the situation has greatly improved.
The free market system saved Dutch telecoms. It's not failing, it's providing more and higher quality service than a self-serviing government department ever could.
And no - I'm not an American who loves free markets. I'm an end user who happened to have the misfortune of dealing with KPN.
Slashdot Mirror
Looks like we gotta kill 2k more to get even. Its like we all forgot that 11 years ago they gave us the biggest fuck you ever. I say burn em all
The people that flew the planes into the buildings are already dead. Before they attacked you they made the decision that they would be willing to die if it meant striking back at their perceived oppressor, the US.
While the US is killing random targets they are creating more and more potential terrorists who will go to greater and greater extremes to get revenge.
If the US stops killing people today it will have less terrorists to deal with in the next 30 or so years.
Generally due to retarded people firing automatic weapons into the air.
Guns aren't toys, and if you act like they are you fucking well deserve to be shot.
But these people are not shot, they are blown to bits along with everyone else within about 100 meters. That's a grossly excessive response to some loonies firing guns at empty airspace. Besides, not all the weddings that got bombed were due to loonies firing guns in the air.
Weddings are a big deal in these cultures. China doesn't bomb you whenever you hold a BBQ for friends and family do they?
From now on, if you want to start a war on a developed country, you should do it on a Tuesday. That's the day the soldiers are down for their Windows Updates.
Imagine what something like stuxnet could do to soldiers with brain implants.
what will happen when military tech hits the civilian world?
It does already, and as long as it keeps doing it in Muslim countries I'm all for it.
And if you run out of resources before you kill everyone else? US military spending is unsustainable and pushing the national debt to insane levels. High tech comes at a high cost and brain implants are not going to change that.
It's not so much "ways of killing people" as it is "ways of making sure no one else can wantonly kill or subjugate you".
And maybe grabbing all the oil and installing a puppet government while you are at it. Face it, it's "ways of killing people" to justify military spending the can't be paid for while more important things get no funding whatsoever.
The idea was that, at some point and after enough mods, you become distanced from your own humanness and humanity itself; at what point do you become a cyborg and no longer human?
A single functional implant makes you a cyborg as long as that implant has some synthetic electrical component.
Now, 10 cops for a missing cell phone... you could call that obnoxious -- at the very least!
It's use of company ( i.e.police ) resources for personal reasons. It's simple theft and the police can get away with it because they are above the law.
Really? I use Find My iPad to find my iPad in my _house_. "Ah, the kids left it behind the couch."
Have you considered that maybe you are smarter than 10 cops?
That takes a spectacular level of incompetence.
Don't forget the corruption too! 10 police look for one stolen kids iphone while how many other more serious crimes got ignored?
Whoever ordered these 10 cops to go waste time the state is paying for should be disciplined for corruption. Using company resources for personal reasons is at best corruption and at worst theft.
I think that this day was a very bad day for our freedoms and privacy.
Everything to do with facebook is bad for our freedoms and privacy. The whole point of it is to take information entered by dumb people and index it.
It's the perfect CIA ( or whoever ) data collection tool.
What would Warren Buffet do?
He would never have got involved in facebook in the first place. It's not an understandable investment, it's not a safe investment, it's strongly overvalued and although google+ was a failure the next thing might not be.
I suspect the great majority of people who brought facebook shares really should not be buying shares at all. They are the wreckless investors who lose all their money in the long term.
I run Linux and OpenBSD and software with GPL, BSD, or other free licences for all my personal stuff. I have everything I need and more for free.
On the other hand at work we often get people asking us to save a few hundred by buying Windows student edition or wanting to install software on multiple machines when we have licensed it for only one. I won't do it, we either pay for the correct license or we don't use it. It's one thing for a home user to rip off some software but companies never should.
How would they run out of money? The government of China has and can force its banks to give loans that essentially never have to be repaid to these vendors.
Why would they? What would the Chinese government gain by flooding the solar panels market with things that cost more than they sell for?
But only because they were already artificially low, with China selling those things below cost just to gain market dominance.
I've heard that said a few times but it seems nuts that China would sell these things at a loss, if that's really the case they will run out of money and be forced to stop fairly soon.
Do you have a citation for the claim that China is selling solar at a loss?
This is good news. The world doesn't need a more effective Microsoft.
However a poster above makes a good point about Stephen Elop of Nokia deserving this title.
at a cost of roughly $1 trillion
So a fraction of what we spend on the military finding new ways to blow things up or on wall street bailing out incompetent bankers, then?
We definitely have our priorities don't we?
Exactly. Humanity needs this, it's a no brainer.
Now will humanity actually try and build it or will humanity argue over nonsense instead?
Read the OP. It's clear that we're using the word "terrorist" to refer to Muslim extremists. Stop watering down the meaning of terms. If you're going to change "terrorist" to mean "anyone who makes me scared", you might as well scrap the word all together. We have plenty of good terms to describe authoritarian governments already.
I was using the dictionary definition which has nothing to do with Muslims at all. It refers to anyone or any group who causes terror or frightens others. The UK government is clearly doing this by arming and militarizing the police. Using the term 'terrorist' to refer to Muslim extermists and ignoring every other cause of terror or loss of freedom is missing the big picture. Muslims didn't turn the UK into a police state, the UK police did and the UK government let them. When the IRA were blowing up buildings every few months or so the UK never resorted to police state tactics and it never militarized the police.
From dictionary.com:
terrorist
[ter-er-ist] Show IPA
noun
1. a person, usually a member of a group, who uses or advocates terrorism.
2. a person who terrorizes or frightens others.
3. (formerly) a member of a political group in Russia aiming at the demoralization of the government by terror.
4. an agent or partisan of the revolutionary tribunal during the Reign of Terror in France.
adjective
5. of, pertaining to, or characteristic of terrorism or terrorists: terrorist tactics.
terrorism
[ter-uh-riz-uhm] Show IPA
noun
1. the use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, especially for political purposes.
2. the state of fear and submission produced by terrorism or terrorization.
3. a terroristic method of governing or of resisting a government.
Origin:
1785–95; terror + -ism
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LwRvWpsiM2w
How in the world does that count as a "win" for terrorists? The terrorists aren't winning anything. We haven't left their countries alone or changed our "evil ways" and adopted Sharia Law. Only Western authoritarians are winning.
A crowd dispersal weapon has absolutely nothing to do with stopping a terrorist. Why would you even think that?
If you define terrorists to mean people who cause terror and define terror as the emotion of strong fear then yes, the terrorists have won and they are the western governments. I think you are using terrorist to mean muslems, people from the middle east, or something like that.
A crown dispersal weapon doesn't stop terrorists, it prevents crowd of people openly opposing terrorists.
And of course if people are planning to protest in the street, they'll take ear-plugs, which will take most of the pain and disorientation away. This will only be really effective against non-protestors.
The take home message is that peaceful protesters anywhere in London will be subjected to experimental torture devices. Also anyone who happens to be near protesters.
The more I read about preparations, the less I want to attend.
Sounds like it will be a lot more pleasant to watch at home.
The more I hear about the insane security measures and the use of the military for policing the more I want to go sit on a beach in Asia until it all goes away.
I mean the choice is cheap seafood, sunlight, friendly people or mind blowingly expensive food, bad weather, hostile people, heavily armed army types performing crowd control. The army is trained and equipped to work in war zones and effectively kill people, they are not trained to perform police work.
ordinary people can see the games in FTA HD on like 24 channels so they can sit at home and not pay for tickets.
Everyone from the UK has paid for the games and they were very expensive too.
The ticket that are for sale are way out of the price range of normal honest working people yet the ticket prices don't even nearly cover the cost of the thing, taxpayers got soaked for the rest. The whole thing is an insane waste of money and turning London into North Korea for some misguided idea of 'security' is doubly insane.
UK law only allows you to defend yourself if you can prove your innocence later.
No. In all UK law you are innocent until proven guilty. The onus is not on you to prove that your self defence was reasonable, but on the prosecution to show that it was not.
It's just semantics. The prosecution has a statement from a guy saying you attacked him, he has clearly been beaten, you have his blood on your clothes and some minor bruising. For all practical purposes you have to prove your innocence. If you don't have witnesses you are going to find that hard.
Don't ever get the impression the UK police care about anyone, the way they see it the victims did something to deserve it.
The UK police don't prosecute, judge nor sentence people.
They don't prosecute. They do judge in some sense of the word and certainly sentence some people to punishment from being tasered, to a beating, to sometimes death. It's highly unlikely they will get punished when they step outside the letter of the law.
The thing is if you really have to defend yourself then you have a right that transcends national laws to do so, criminal justice system be dammed.
You're welcome to your opinion. But it is only your opinion. It's not a right in any real sense.
It's a law of nature, not of old men who sit in cosy chairs and pass judgement on the rest of humanity. You are entitled to preserve your own life and the lives of your loved ones.
And by "our politicians" you mean?
Good question. "our politicians" doesn't really make sense in any country I've seen unless you actually work inside a political party.
They are always "their politicians" working for their own personal gain.
The Nanny State? Parroting a-holes use that word.
The Dutch Nanny State happened to be the one that for a large part co-provided all the infrastructure most telco's use. And then it just had to be privatized for no other reason other then trying to force a failing market system.
You obviously don't know what you're talking about.
The Government used to own the post office and telecoms. They privatized them as the company KPN. I've dealt with KPN and they are a bunch of customer hating assholes who love forcing their insane internal policies on customers. They started with a government department mentality because they were exactly that, a government department. Change comes slow in the Netherlands but it does come. With the forced separation of infrastructure other companies started providing phone and data services and the situation has greatly improved.
The free market system saved Dutch telecoms. It's not failing, it's providing more and higher quality service than a self-serviing government department ever could.
And no - I'm not an American who loves free markets. I'm an end user who happened to have the misfortune of dealing with KPN.