Not entirely true, I've seen third party voice recorders for iPod, devices that let you copy digital camera film to the iPod HD, and some nifty tool that lets you use your iPod as a TV remote.
You think that once there are elections everything will 'be better' and the troops will be able to leave? I heard them say that same exact thing would happen once the Iraqi army surrendered, then once Interim Governing Council was appointed, then once the US caught Saddam Hussein, then once "sovereignty" was handed over, then once Fallujah was demolished, etc. Each of these was supposed to be some magical turning point and the beginning of sunshine and rainbows, and instead the situation has deteriorated every single month for the past nearly two years.
I think the election will go forward, but I just don't expect much from it. The resulting government will be of questionable legitimacy due to poor turnout and unequal representation (especially since the Constitution will be drafted by those elected), and the guerrilla war will if anything intensify. Oh, and as for wild goose chase, Bush is apparently setting his sights on Iran, according to this and last week's news.
802.11 wasn't new either, but Apple's Airport base station became very popular. Until XP simplified the interface, I was tearing my hair out trying to support different drivers and programs to allow people to connect.
I agree with the grandparent, this is something my mom could set up.
The non-aqua version which uses the X server works fine... if your objective is to have something that works similar to Linux. It works fine until you actually want to use the wealth of rich, high-quality fonts that comes with OS X. So I guess that makes the NeoOffice/J project ever more important.
The NeoOffice/J team has done a fantastic job of gradually Aquafying OpenOffice without anywhere near the same resources.
Well I didn't want to talk about myself. SP2 broke my computer, had to reformat and reinstall. It also ruined my Virtual PC Windows disk image, thank God I made a backup of that.
News Corp, (parent of Fox) is owned by Rupert Murdoc, and he's fighting tooth and nail to keep control of it. The board adopted a "poison pill" strategy to prevent Malone from seizing control. How did he do that? Are there any ways Ubisoft can do the same?
Hey, Apple fought the recording companies in order to make the iTunes DRM looser. Now you can burn a playlist 10 times to CD, and play on 5 PCs now (up from only 3). That's better than the competition, which is far stricter.
Windows doesn't rip you off? Of course they do, their updates are far slower in arriving, and I hear all the gripes about how their service packs break the OS. Farther between is a baad thing. Apple's software updates also add plenty of features, go read their feature lists.
Cocaine doesn't grow well, but Opium does in areas like Afghanistan. Without the Taliban preventing it, billions of dollars worth of opium is pouring out from Afghanistan. Iran banned it since long ago. According to Iranian law, anyone who is found to be carrying more than 30 grams of heroin or 5 kilograms of opium could face the death penalty, although in recent years only a small percentage of these sentences have been carried out.
The Iranian people are also against terrorism as well, they had spontaneous demonstrations and candlelight vigils on the streets after 9/11.
I'm not Arab. I come from America, and I can tell you that the drugs in my country are mostly grown, distributed, and consumed by Christians. So?
Your point makes no sense. Female Genital Mutilation, as I said, is not an Islamic thing, mainstream scholars have spoken out against the practice, and it doesn't matter if the majority of those done in your area are by Muslims. What percentage of that area is Muslim? It hardly matters, since plenty of Christians and Animists and Pagans also do the practice. You can't pin this on Islam. Muslims in other parts of the world aren't doing it. I didn't hear Muslims or scholars protesting that FGM was banned in America.
unfortunately, neither your nor my Iranian friends (3 of them) are an accurate sampling of the Iranian public. I guess neither of us is qualified to speak for them. I wish some Iranians would jump in, I didn't hear slashdot getting blocked.
Muslims are quite civilized by your definition then. Istanbul is a thriving city, so is Islamabad, Jakarta, Baghdad, Cairo, Amman, Dubai, etc. They are large cities with infrastructure and amenities. Their societies are not very different than Western ones. Baghdad, pre-sanctions and war, had possibly the best health care system of all the Arab countries.
Go read some Iraqi bloggers, Salam Pax showed the world how civilized they are, everyone watches TV, takes interest in world events, people even drink alcohol. Riverbend is very down-to-earth and human, she sounds like a neighbor to me. Civilized is a relative term, but I'm sure they fit your definition
Then what's your definition of sanity? Obeying whatever the majority thinks?
Socrates ranked democracy as the second worst form of government, second only to tyranny, because the masses are stupid, easily swayed, easily bribed. Western political philosophy is based on his ideas and rhetoric. For example, the majority of Americans still believe Saddam Hussein had ties to Al Qaeda, despite multiple investigations, American-led, Bush-led, British-led and UN-led. Are you going to go against the majority? Does that make you an elitist, or an oligarch? According to the ideology of a democracy, whatever the majority decides, goes. Constitutions, a relatively recent invention, won't help, the masses will just amend it to their will.
Secular humanism SOMETIMES works, but you have that giant eyesore of an exception (yes, Godwin's law interrupts here), and would Communism's failings count as well?
I'm not saying all theocratic governments are sane. Obviously not. Iran has issues applying greater democratic freedoms to their government, which at the moment gives the clerics an unequal balance of power. The Taliban's government was full of problems as well. A theocracy simply means a state religion. It doesn't exclude democratic ideas within it though. Greece therefore is a theocracy, but I don't hear a lot of criticism of them. Comparing one theocratic government to another is only going to be moral relativism in the end.
I don't think democrats (small 'd') have the authority to claim their system is the best, when it seems morally blind. What about when two democracies engage in war with one another, with the majority of each supporting it?
That's not to say I don't support democracy and democratic reform. Many modern theocrats of today want democracy within their system as well. Go read the Constitution of Iran sometime. Also, look at the original Islamic state, that was a democratic theocracy.
Simple, Colombia doesn't destroy idols, because honestly it's not against their religion. If they were hardcore lutheran or adventist or orthodox jew (whoever is against 'graven images'), then you'd see the idols come down. Islam is firmly anti-idol, it's a part of the religion. There were no buddhists in Afghanistan, so the Taliban felt they were of no importance to their citizens.
However, I don't see Egyptian Muslims trying to destroy the Sphinx or the pyramids, and they had hundreds of years to do so. Plain and simple, the Taliban destroyed the Buddha statues, and Muslim leaders and scholars protested to try and prevent that from happening. I remember Sheikh Qaradawi, a big famous Islamic scholar from TV went to Afghanistan personally to intervene. So you're wrong to say Islam needs lessons on how to be civilized. (How can a religion need to be civilized anyway? You mean the people) You really can't generalize all Muslims that way either.
As for the Rushdie death threats, he also started slandering Iran's government and religion, which prompted them to react. If someone starts openly advocating overthrowing the US, what would homeland security do with them? Let's be honest, if someone started making nasty stuff up about Jesus, peace be upon him, many Christians would be livid, and the person would get death threats. I mean, some Christians kill abortion clinic doctors, who is to say that Islam is somehow less civilized?
The last time I heard a Muslim mention the crusades was so long ago that I can't even remember. Who are you listening to?
You want only one Muslim country? I can name several. Indonesia doesn't seem to have a bad government despite being run by Muslims. Bangladesh doesn't have terrorism problems. Bahrain seems a pretty tame democracy, they have respect for America (of course until we bombed their holy Shiite cities Najaf and Karbala in Iraq, then they got extremely upset but not terrorist). The Maldive Islands, 100% Muslim and I haven't heard a single criticism. Mali, Mauritania, and Morocco seem decent enough. Qatar is an ally to the US, and Oman doesn't seem half bad. Senegal has a friendly Muslim democratic government in Africa. Tunisia is good. Turkey's government is a secular parliament, its secularism is seen as going overboard by many Muslims, but Europe seems to approve.
Maybe the IRA groups aren't really at it because of Christianity issues. So how then can you spin around and say that Al Qaeda REALLY does it for Islam? Bin Laden said he wanted to punish America for Palestine (he sped up the deadline because of it), that sounds Political to me.
No, "Jack and Mary" aren't going to carry out suicide attacks. But neither is your average "Muhammad Akbar." Are you saying those names as if each was a terrorist? First of all, not all terrorists who claim to be Muslim do suicide attacks. The FLN of Algeria didn't, and neither did the PLO. Suicide attacks are recent in that conflict. Second, many different terrorists have carried out suicide attacks; the Japanese Kamikaze, the Marxist Tamil Tigers of Sri Lanka, etc.
FARC is communist, they carry out terrorism in the name of their ideology. Bombings, hijackings, landmines, and guerilla warfare with the death of many many innocents, all justified by their communist agenda. No, its not a jihad, a TRUE Jihad in Islam would never stoop so low. Go read the stories of the sahaba and the hadith from the prophet Muhammad (pbuh) concerning the battles of Badr and Uhud and see what qualifies. Mainstream Islamic scholars around the world including in the West, like Hamza Yusuf and Tariq Ramadan, vocally condemn terrorism, they say it has no place in Islam.
Bin Laden is doing what he does for political reasons. He's stated on numerous occasions that he is against the US for siding against the Palestinians, and he wants the US out of Saudi Arabia. Thats all political, and he gives it a religious overtone. The IRA does the same thing. Would they agree with you if you told them they weren't acting in a Christian manner? Al Qaeda would disagree with me if I told them they weren't acting Islamic, but who cares what they say if most of the rest of the world knows they are wrong.
Iran claims to be an Islamic state, but the Sunnis may not agree with them. The Vatican city claims to be a Christian state, but the Protestants may not agree with them.
How did Iran lead in terrorism? Aside from the hostage affair, I don't know what you're referring to. I didn't see them do acts like the PLO, and I didn't hear about them fighting with anyone other than Iraq.
Who or what would you assume I am trolling against?
What I meant was that Islam doesn't NEED instructions from a civilization on how to "act civilized." Yes, Islam has its own instructions within, so does every religion. Christianity has its commandments that its followers abide by, so does Islam.
The question of separation of Church and state will always depend on which religion. It looks like a hit-or-miss situation. Would anyone care if Tibet had a Buddhist government? Though on the other side of the coin, doesn't the BJP of India want to create a Hindu state? I suppose if the majority of a country democratically decides to create a religious state or enforce religious law, we can't stop them.
I'm not trying to mislead people. I still see my analogy as valid. You can't blame Catholicism for the drug problem and terrorism in Colombia (which the church is against) just as you can't blame Islam for the fighting and terrorism going on. (Iran also bans drugs, since the topic is about them anyway)
I didn't mean that anyone should be killed for insulting a religion. I was just providing background, since the AC decided to take an unprovoked jab. However, we have laws against slander in America, so I wouldn't approve of insulting religions with anything false.
If you were surrounded by Saddam Hussein, the Taliban, nuclear Pakistan, and the US had made failed attempts to send military into your country, and nuclear Israel continuously threatens you, wouldn't YOU want nukes too?
The US tried to screw over Indonesia with its handling of East Timor. However, they are still relatively nice to us. They appear to be a good muslim country, but nobody in America cares.
That makes no sense. The ISPs are doing it likely because they were ordered to by the government. Too bad I can't read Farsi or I'd read some of the news sites.
Slashdot Mirror
I give up, whats the sig?
Not entirely true, I've seen third party voice recorders for iPod, devices that let you copy digital camera film to the iPod HD, and some nifty tool that lets you use your iPod as a TV remote.
You think that once there are elections everything will 'be better' and the troops will be able to leave? I heard them say that same exact thing would happen once the Iraqi army surrendered, then once Interim Governing Council was appointed, then once the US caught Saddam Hussein, then once "sovereignty" was handed over, then once Fallujah was demolished, etc. Each of these was supposed to be some magical turning point and the beginning of sunshine and rainbows, and instead the situation has deteriorated every single month for the past nearly two years.
I think the election will go forward, but I just don't expect much from it. The resulting government will be of questionable legitimacy due to poor turnout and unequal representation (especially since the Constitution will be drafted by those elected), and the guerrilla war will if anything intensify. Oh, and as for wild goose chase, Bush is apparently setting his sights on Iran, according to this and last week's news.
802.11 wasn't new either, but Apple's Airport base station became very popular. Until XP simplified the interface, I was tearing my hair out trying to support different drivers and programs to allow people to connect.
I agree with the grandparent, this is something my mom could set up.
The non-aqua version which uses the X server works fine... if your objective is to have something that works similar to Linux.
It works fine until you actually want to use the wealth of rich, high-quality fonts that comes with OS X. So I guess that makes the NeoOffice/J project ever more important.
The NeoOffice/J team has done a fantastic job of gradually Aquafying OpenOffice without anywhere near the same resources.
Well I didn't want to talk about myself. SP2 broke my computer, had to reformat and reinstall. It also ruined my Virtual PC Windows disk image, thank God I made a backup of that.
News Corp, (parent of Fox) is owned by Rupert Murdoc, and he's fighting tooth and nail to keep control of it. The board adopted a "poison pill" strategy to prevent Malone from seizing control. How did he do that? Are there any ways Ubisoft can do the same?
Hey, Apple fought the recording companies in order to make the iTunes DRM looser. Now you can burn a playlist 10 times to CD, and play on 5 PCs now (up from only 3). That's better than the competition, which is far stricter.
Windows doesn't rip you off? Of course they do, their updates are far slower in arriving, and I hear all the gripes about how their service packs break the OS. Farther between is a baad thing. Apple's software updates also add plenty of features, go read their feature lists.
Can't they just wear sunglasses? How about two-way mirrors or reflective trooper shades?
Cocaine doesn't grow well, but Opium does in areas like Afghanistan. Without the Taliban preventing it, billions of dollars worth of opium is pouring out from Afghanistan. Iran banned it since long ago. According to Iranian law, anyone who is found to be carrying more than 30 grams of heroin or 5 kilograms of opium could face the death penalty, although in recent years only a small percentage of these sentences have been carried out.
The Iranian people are also against terrorism as well, they had spontaneous demonstrations and candlelight vigils on the streets after 9/11.
Your point makes no sense. Female Genital Mutilation, as I said, is not an Islamic thing, mainstream scholars have spoken out against the practice, and it doesn't matter if the majority of those done in your area are by Muslims. What percentage of that area is Muslim? It hardly matters, since plenty of Christians and Animists and Pagans also do the practice. You can't pin this on Islam. Muslims in other parts of the world aren't doing it. I didn't hear Muslims or scholars protesting that FGM was banned in America.
unfortunately, neither your nor my Iranian friends (3 of them) are an accurate sampling of the Iranian public. I guess neither of us is qualified to speak for them. I wish some Iranians would jump in, I didn't hear slashdot getting blocked.
Go read some Iraqi bloggers, Salam Pax showed the world how civilized they are, everyone watches TV, takes interest in world events, people even drink alcohol. Riverbend is very down-to-earth and human, she sounds like a neighbor to me. Civilized is a relative term, but I'm sure they fit your definition
Socrates ranked democracy as the second worst form of government, second only to tyranny, because the masses are stupid, easily swayed, easily bribed. Western political philosophy is based on his ideas and rhetoric. For example, the majority of Americans still believe Saddam Hussein had ties to Al Qaeda, despite multiple investigations, American-led, Bush-led, British-led and UN-led. Are you going to go against the majority? Does that make you an elitist, or an oligarch? According to the ideology of a democracy, whatever the majority decides, goes. Constitutions, a relatively recent invention, won't help, the masses will just amend it to their will.
Secular humanism SOMETIMES works, but you have that giant eyesore of an exception (yes, Godwin's law interrupts here), and would Communism's failings count as well?
I'm not saying all theocratic governments are sane. Obviously not. Iran has issues applying greater democratic freedoms to their government, which at the moment gives the clerics an unequal balance of power. The Taliban's government was full of problems as well. A theocracy simply means a state religion. It doesn't exclude democratic ideas within it though. Greece therefore is a theocracy, but I don't hear a lot of criticism of them. Comparing one theocratic government to another is only going to be moral relativism in the end.
I don't think democrats (small 'd') have the authority to claim their system is the best, when it seems morally blind. What about when two democracies engage in war with one another, with the majority of each supporting it?
That's not to say I don't support democracy and democratic reform. Many modern theocrats of today want democracy within their system as well. Go read the Constitution of Iran sometime. Also, look at the original Islamic state, that was a democratic theocracy.
I was wondering where that turkey came from...
Great quote btw.
Simple, Colombia doesn't destroy idols, because honestly it's not against their religion. If they were hardcore lutheran or adventist or orthodox jew (whoever is against 'graven images'), then you'd see the idols come down. Islam is firmly anti-idol, it's a part of the religion. There were no buddhists in Afghanistan, so the Taliban felt they were of no importance to their citizens.
However, I don't see Egyptian Muslims trying to destroy the Sphinx or the pyramids, and they had hundreds of years to do so. Plain and simple, the Taliban destroyed the Buddha statues, and Muslim leaders and scholars protested to try and prevent that from happening. I remember Sheikh Qaradawi, a big famous Islamic scholar from TV went to Afghanistan personally to intervene. So you're wrong to say Islam needs lessons on how to be civilized. (How can a religion need to be civilized anyway? You mean the people) You really can't generalize all Muslims that way either.
As for the Rushdie death threats, he also started slandering Iran's government and religion, which prompted them to react. If someone starts openly advocating overthrowing the US, what would homeland security do with them? Let's be honest, if someone started making nasty stuff up about Jesus, peace be upon him, many Christians would be livid, and the person would get death threats. I mean, some Christians kill abortion clinic doctors, who is to say that Islam is somehow less civilized?
The last time I heard a Muslim mention the crusades was so long ago that I can't even remember. Who are you listening to?
You want only one Muslim country? I can name several. Indonesia doesn't seem to have a bad government despite being run by Muslims. Bangladesh doesn't have terrorism problems. Bahrain seems a pretty tame democracy, they have respect for America (of course until we bombed their holy Shiite cities Najaf and Karbala in Iraq, then they got extremely upset but not terrorist). The Maldive Islands, 100% Muslim and I haven't heard a single criticism. Mali, Mauritania, and Morocco seem decent enough. Qatar is an ally to the US, and Oman doesn't seem half bad. Senegal has a friendly Muslim democratic government in Africa. Tunisia is good. Turkey's government is a secular parliament, its secularism is seen as going overboard by many Muslims, but Europe seems to approve.
Maybe the IRA groups aren't really at it because of Christianity issues. So how then can you spin around and say that Al Qaeda REALLY does it for Islam? Bin Laden said he wanted to punish America for Palestine (he sped up the deadline because of it), that sounds Political to me.
No, "Jack and Mary" aren't going to carry out suicide attacks. But neither is your average "Muhammad Akbar." Are you saying those names as if each was a terrorist? First of all, not all terrorists who claim to be Muslim do suicide attacks. The FLN of Algeria didn't, and neither did the PLO. Suicide attacks are recent in that conflict. Second, many different terrorists have carried out suicide attacks; the Japanese Kamikaze, the Marxist Tamil Tigers of Sri Lanka, etc.
FARC is communist, they carry out terrorism in the name of their ideology. Bombings, hijackings, landmines, and guerilla warfare with the death of many many innocents, all justified by their communist agenda. No, its not a jihad, a TRUE Jihad in Islam would never stoop so low. Go read the stories of the sahaba and the hadith from the prophet Muhammad (pbuh) concerning the battles of Badr and Uhud and see what qualifies. Mainstream Islamic scholars around the world including in the West, like Hamza Yusuf and Tariq Ramadan, vocally condemn terrorism, they say it has no place in Islam.
Bin Laden is doing what he does for political reasons. He's stated on numerous occasions that he is against the US for siding against the Palestinians, and he wants the US out of Saudi Arabia. Thats all political, and he gives it a religious overtone. The IRA does the same thing. Would they agree with you if you told them they weren't acting in a Christian manner? Al Qaeda would disagree with me if I told them they weren't acting Islamic, but who cares what they say if most of the rest of the world knows they are wrong.
Iran claims to be an Islamic state, but the Sunnis may not agree with them. The Vatican city claims to be a Christian state, but the Protestants may not agree with them.
How did Iran lead in terrorism? Aside from the hostage affair, I don't know what you're referring to. I didn't see them do acts like the PLO, and I didn't hear about them fighting with anyone other than Iraq.
Who or what would you assume I am trolling against?
What I meant was that Islam doesn't NEED instructions from a civilization on how to "act civilized." Yes, Islam has its own instructions within, so does every religion. Christianity has its commandments that its followers abide by, so does Islam.
The question of separation of Church and state will always depend on which religion. It looks like a hit-or-miss situation. Would anyone care if Tibet had a Buddhist government? Though on the other side of the coin, doesn't the BJP of India want to create a Hindu state? I suppose if the majority of a country democratically decides to create a religious state or enforce religious law, we can't stop them.
I'm not trying to mislead people. I still see my analogy as valid. You can't blame Catholicism for the drug problem and terrorism in Colombia (which the church is against) just as you can't blame Islam for the fighting and terrorism going on. (Iran also bans drugs, since the topic is about them anyway)
I didn't mean that anyone should be killed for insulting a religion. I was just providing background, since the AC decided to take an unprovoked jab. However, we have laws against slander in America, so I wouldn't approve of insulting religions with anything false.
If you were surrounded by Saddam Hussein, the Taliban, nuclear Pakistan, and the US had made failed attempts to send military into your country, and nuclear Israel continuously threatens you, wouldn't YOU want nukes too?
The US tried to screw over Indonesia with its handling of East Timor. However, they are still relatively nice to us. They appear to be a good muslim country, but nobody in America cares.
Because in the US, capitalism is THE highest value in the land. Iran ranks religion higher (or at least their interpretation of it).
That makes no sense. The ISPs are doing it likely because they were ordered to by the government. Too bad I can't read Farsi or I'd read some of the news sites.