after I picked myself up off the floor and composed myself a bit, I still laughed to myself at how fast the BTC bubble burst
that said, I learned alot by studying & discussing how BTC worked & what it's benefits/drawbacks were...I wish I had found my BTC wallet info!
i bought exactly 1 BTC back in late 2009 IIRC but I was so busy with grad school it got lost in the shuffle
any idea that BTC could replace currency or be an investment vehicle were/are silly but its still noteworthy as a sort of 'prank' that got taken very seriously!
I'd like to see a link to a multivitamin that claims to cure cancer.
Let's see it....and btw suppliments can have statements not approved by the FDA so that's not a factor
You won't find any because it's patently ridiculous and no companies claim what TFA says they claim. It's part of the researchers begging the question by over-representing Multivitamin makers claims.
No company claims that...or implies it hard either...it's silly and hurts sales
right...those are the things I **dont** need a source for, because anyone who's been bored at breakfast has read the back of the cereal box
I agree that those examples of enrichment are common knowledge, but that's far from what GP was claiming...he's talking like this crap is like a multivitamin itself
Also, we need to see a study of the effectiveness of ***vitamin enriched food*** done next to the TFA study if we are going to have any meaningful conversation.
Bottom line, multivitamins are a good idea unless you keep track of your vitamin intake and eat organically AND exercise once a day like the CDC recommends.
We haven't discussed athletes taking suppliments, or even a 9-5 person who does intense training or amature sports...those activities deplete certain vitamins much faster.
You're out of your mind if you think just because Fruit Loops says "enriched with Vitamin X" then you've got your proper intake.
almost always have images and plugins are disabled.
this is what I mean, when you disable all the interactive stuff, styling, flash, etc etc you can see what a page really looks like from a system design perspective
it's no coincedence that the best web pages also work the best at low bandwidth
Note that the studies do not say multivitamins are worthless
exactly
in TFA summary "chronic disease" jumped out at me...that's a pretty high bar for ***anything known to medical science*** to hit, and no one ever really claimed that multivitamins would just flat prevent cancer.
it seems like TFA wants to beg the question...but we can't let the researchers off the hook either...they *chose* the language and 3 categories
(1) Preventing chronic disease, including heart disease and cancer, (2) preventing cognitive decline in seniors, and (3) high-dose pills to prevent subsequent events after a confirmed heart attack.
by which to analyze the factors. That is research design and it, obviously, affects every part of your result. IMHO they look like amateurs for not including those who take multivitamins expecting a small performance boost (like athletes or fitness junkies) or to make up for a poor diet.
after reading this over and seeing a few other comments i'm definitely stickign with my vitamins
at first read this seems counter to everything I've experienced..."highly fortified....for almost a hundred years"???
i know some products advertise that they have vitamins & some regulation took place, but those regulations were always fought by the industry as "government intervention that costs consumers"
also, i'm more skeptical of a Pepsi that says it has vitimin C that will help me than I am of a multivitamin
Of course it's modded +5 Insightful....but I'll bite....
This is news because at the extremes of any system's performance you can more easily see the faults of the system.
Anyone who does internet work of any kind should try to do their daily browsing or w/e you do on a 56K modem at least once.
When you see, even just browsing the mainstream 'internet-y' sites like yahoo.com, facebook.com, nytimes.com and compare to slashdot or others...sometimes system design solutions **just click** because you see it in a different context
TFA is like a pro football player doing cross training. It's relevant to us professionally and personally too if you have nostalgia for the early days of the internet.
Once a person is thinking naturally and skeptically, there is no reasonable way to arrive anywhere except atheism (until maybe in the future if we get evidence).
see this is where we differ...I guess just to put a bookend on things I'll elaborate
I think your notion, that:
'natural & skeptical thinking' will always arrive at atheism & any other conclusion is 'unreasonable'
Maybe you're right, but it's not formally provable...to get philosophical it is not formally provable because of the 'social construction' of reality via language limits human certainty to things that are communicatable and somhow formally repeatable. This is discussed alot in 2nd Order Cybernetics
I know I'm just repeating my last argument only substituting 'formally provable' with 'science' but I wanted you to see that my perspective is constant.
Any statement about the supernatural is opinion, not science or logic.
It's when you cross that border, into asserting ***CERTAINTY*** where you have none that causes me to raise objections.
As I said before I support you being an atheist, condescending to whomever you see fit, but to our greater discussion it's all about crossing that line of certainty.
Here's the link directly to the 'naturalism' that is attributed to Dawkins, etc. The counter-arguments by people like Popper and especially Alvin Plantinga's critique are honestly equally as odious as Dawkins to me. Seriously Plantiga's notions of an 'evolutionary argument against naturalism' take just as many scandalous liberties with the concept of 'science' as Dawkins and I hate it.
On the disambiguation page it's listed as Methodological Naturalism.
Seriously, do you see why Dawkins sticks out among Rush Limbaugh types to me? Not saying you have to agree or not be condescending but maybe your everyday life would go smoother (and all of us too) if we don't go down that road.
I'm totally fine with you being condescending to anyone for any reason...knock yourself out...let's just keep from using science where it doesn't belong
Are you complaining about the definition of the word "Naturalism" [wikipedia.org]? What do you think it means? Let me paraphrase it: "A philosophical stance where all supernatural phenomena are false."
ha!
thnx for posting that, and you could've slammed me b/c I honestly didn't know Naturalism had become a "thing" in the whole disgusting "evoution/creation" god debate...I mean if you saw the same wiki I did the Naturalism (philosophy) really only became a thing in the last 30 years. That's fine but just sayin...
I had already read it, after I posted my comment of course...
As you might guess I think it's kind of bullshit, but so are alot of the arguments against it...I don't like any of it b/c to me it's just rhetoric.
Rhetoric is fine for a picnic on a Sunday afternoon or around the watercooler but its the how Dawkins tries to claim that **science** has proven **scientifically** that anyone who isn't a 'naturalist' aka atheist is Deluuusional
for fucks sake!
I want to keep real actual science separate from all of this...I used to do research and it's hard enough to navigate either office politics or university politics and keep your project focused on science and not marketing horseshit...
then this all gets into the conversation...I hate it
are you saying that the government during the Pentagon Papers was somehow ***LESS INTERESTED IN COVERING ITS ASS***???
wtf are you talking about? minimizing the influence of the Pentagon Papers? You're just doing debate geometry now...you're just spitballing counter-arguments no matter how valid or realistic.
the CIA during that time **killed presidents** and **presidential candidates** among other things...you're saying that the military industrial complex didn't give a shit about the Pentagon Papers
and BTW, the guy who released the Pentagon Papers, and several other examples, are living normal lives right now
even if your dumb assertions were true it still wouldn't prove my point wrong
BITCH, I **wish** I was doing that level of technical consulting! Let's do this...***email me the fucking RFP*** I actually bid for a computer architecture contracting job for Booz/Allen in Indianapolis.
If the NSA employed me I could save them Billions...plus I could've smelled Snowden coming. I knew many guys like him in college. He may be borderline autistic...that's what I think is happening here...
Asperbergers/autistic spectrum behavior with "government spying". With good reason of course, it's mind-blowing how much a person could invade your privacy digitally.
I am not defending the NSA or the Patriot Act but I want my government to be able to use all technical means if they have a warrant with actual probable cause or some accountable national security reason
again, I am not defending the NSA...I'm criticizing everyone...and YES I'd love
just about everyone posting on this forum thread has lost trust in the US government, and ultimately, in each other.
yeah, I mean, if you filter out the bots and log-in users double posting as AC's...you're still right
but the end of the quotation above has the answer to the string of questions you posed after it...
see, you're right that our civilization is like a plane headed for a mountain...but the answer is *interpersonal*
human to human we can restore trust in each other...if you think about it, young people, the 'sext' generation, have already shown that they have adapted their morals *interpersonally* to accomidate a bad choice on snapchat...it's the older generation that keeps the 'ruin' of civiliation via loss of trust alive
geeks and nerds and techies of all stripes will fall right in line when/if they encounter a positive environment that they respect
but that's far from a given...but thanks for your comment! kinda proves me right;)
I'm so glad you linked to Thomas Andrews Drake's wikipedia, b/c I read this:
On June 9, 2011, all 10 original charges against him were dropped. Drake rejected several deals because he refused to "plea bargain with the truth". He eventually pled to one misdemeanor count for exceeding authorized use of a computer;[10] Jesselyn Radack of the Government Accountability Project, who helped represent him, called it an act of "civil disobedience."[11]
And of course, he tried to be a whistle blower during the **BUSH ADMINISTRATION**
By all appearances, the Obama Justice Department let this guy go.
Contrary to your intention, your Thomas Andrews Drake point actually casts Snowden and Greenwald in a bad light, it shows what happens when a ***REAL HERO*** tries to do the right thing.
Drake was doing what he did not for himself, but for his country, Snowden was a dupe who got manipulated by criminals.
Nothing I read in TFA excuses the government for the PATRIOT ACT...
That's where this all started, the Patriot Act.
Snowden was a dupe. He was manipulated and now has ruined his life. His actions were like a fruit tree with alot of leaves....
Where many leaves of language are around fruit of meaning below will not be found.
The leaves/language suck the energy and life from the fruit/meaning of the information.
America ***needed*** a privacy wake-up call, but Snowden, Greenwald, and the NSA people, and yes even Obama are *all* to blame for this fucking fiasco.
I think Snowden is a **fucking idiot** but I don't wish hurt on him at all! I am concerned for him...I hope he can get his head out of his ass and eventually come home.
The National Security Agency has been secretly collecting the phone call records of tens of millions of Americans, using data provided by AT&T, Verizon and BellSouth, people with direct knowledge of the arrangement told USA TODAY.
idk about 'assassination' but he deserves this...and so do WE the PEOPLE. We deserve to know the truth and not some pre-packaged "hero" narrative that is paper thin.
Snowden was a pampered man, full of privilege, high off his own intellectualism & criminals USED HIM to spy on and embarass the US.
That's the truth. The fact that so many/.'ers see themselves in Snowden is a major problem. An autistic-like focus on "government spying" will get your ass in Russian jail.
First, the 1st Amendment is the world's standard for the free press. Nowhere is it codified more surely.
our laws say that a journalist cannot be forced to give up a source...the journalist can be called to testify, and if they choose not to, they *can* be incarcerated without trial but only for a period of time.
If they can wait it out, the law says until the detention is no longer coercive...that means **if they stick to their guns they will be released**
It usually is a matter of a few months but can be up to a year.
If a journalist does that, especially with something like the Snowden leaks, ****THEY GET RICH OFF A BOOK DEAL**** and can write their professional ticket.
When I was in college learning this stuff we all *wanted* to be the guy who goes to prison to protect the source...it's a badge of honor!!!!
Fucking Glenn Grenwald wouldn't know the first thing about journalism, professionalism, honor, or ***PROTECTING HIS SOURCE***
It works. Look at Deep Throat and the Pentagon papers. It proves the whole Snowden narrative to be a sham.
Damnit! and damn you for not knowing this!
This used to be common knowledge to any High School graduate.
hey thanks that was indeed a very informative and interesting article
about the figures, indeed you quote them correctly, but we're talking past each other...the figure for the one launch/mission may be under a Billion but the budget for the whole of their moon missiions is surely above $Billion but that's not the point.
about the ground radar...and China in general, I just don't take what a Totalitarian country bursting at the seams w/ pollution and population desperate for having "Good Face" on the world stage seriously. Their press is **fully** a propaganda arm for their government (which is only true of Fox News here)...imagine that...all the national news in a country is like Fox News.
god bless their endeavor...I don't begrudge their work, my negativity comes from the fact that I don't like bandwagon jumping or fake excitement over Public Relations and Propaganda of a Totalitarian regime
thnx CauseBy! seriously thank you for not being completely full of shit this time around
Aurthur C. Clarke (and Tolkein in LOTR) compared magic to technology.
It was a big deal. Lord of the Rings is often discussed in this manner relating to the use of magic as an anology for technology; one example, many say that Sauron's evil represents the Industrial Revolution and magic is technology...just an example.
That's LOTR.
You say this but you just fucking dead wrong:
Magical means the same as supernatural not opinion
By any way humans use language to communicate meaning, this is an overly broad, untrue statement. It is true *sometimes* in the context, but Aurthur C. Clark, who I quoted above
magic is indistinguishable from technology
He and JRR Tolkein are not just some random bullshit writers.
The fact that they, and many others inspired by them and of their own accord see **other** valid and useful analogies to the concept of 'magic' does prove your stupid fuckign statement wrong.
I really wish you'd just drop the whole need to say shit like that in this discussion...
Here's why...I think you're being honest here, and could fully agree to disagree if you just stayed with these statements:
so that means anyone who believes in anything 'supernatural' is childish
Well, not that they 'are' childish, but in our opinion they hold a childish belief, yes.
and
its condescending bullshit
It's condescending but it's not bullshit. It's true and we consider truth more important than protecting the feelings of people who are offended by the truth. But we are in the minority; most people consider it more important to avoid condescending to people.
Damnit if you could just stay there, we could agree. And while you're at it stop repeating that stupid re-definition of "naturalism"...you're free to call your thing w/e you want but that name is taken!
Ditch the bullshit and just be an honest, contrarian, totally atheist asshole and this conversation can be over & we can be cool.
I appreciate your take on this...the last thing I want to do is read/.'ers debate gun control, so thnx.
So, about Columbine...
Anyone remember the "1 Bleeding to Death" sign? The teacher who bled to death...
TFA summary mentions a "revolutionary" change in police, to actually go try to do policework in an emergency instead of sitting around outside, but I just don't remember Columbine that way at all.
I watched it on TV like many of you, and I remember seeing the sign, and seeing the cops sitting there doing nothing...Why?
I think the police were staying out of the Columbine building on orders...I honestly don't believe that honest cops would just sit for hours knowing people were dying.
I'm not trying to start a discussion about **why** they didn't go in at Columbine, just saying that overall, this narrative of "what happened at Columbine" and any interpretations of how it affected the country are serverly off-kilter
He wanted to get out of the U.S. reach, and by doing that, he was revealing his identity anyway
because of false assumptions, mistakes, delusion, and manipulation! HE MADE A HUGE MISTAKE...
he could have released the info, done the 'right thing' and REMAINED ANONYMOUS...he could have even kept his job probably...the guy who released the Pentagon Papers (which were at this level of scandal) during Vietnam had a 30 year career in the FBI after
Snowden screwed up, because his worldview is flawed just like many other techie-types & the cognitive dissonance is off the charts...you can see it going back over our exchange and other's responses
you tacitly admit that but you won't say it plainly but I'm not out to get some conversational catharsis...i don't care
what I care about is understanding **what is actually happening** which very few people seem to understand
the USA Today article from my GP and other questions I've raised completely undercuts the Snowden narrative
its time techies stop projecting their Asperberger's-Inspired devotion to government spying on Snowden and start seeing that Snowden is a dupe, and so are they
Slashdot Mirror
after I picked myself up off the floor and composed myself a bit, I still laughed to myself at how fast the BTC bubble burst
that said, I learned alot by studying & discussing how BTC worked & what it's benefits/drawbacks were...I wish I had found my BTC wallet info!
i bought exactly 1 BTC back in late 2009 IIRC but I was so busy with grad school it got lost in the shuffle
any idea that BTC could replace currency or be an investment vehicle were/are silly but its still noteworthy as a sort of 'prank' that got taken very seriously!
I'd like to see a link to a multivitamin that claims to cure cancer.
Let's see it....and btw suppliments can have statements not approved by the FDA so that's not a factor
You won't find any because it's patently ridiculous and no companies claim what TFA says they claim. It's part of the researchers begging the question by over-representing Multivitamin makers claims.
No company claims that...or implies it hard either...it's silly and hurts sales
right...those are the things I **dont** need a source for, because anyone who's been bored at breakfast has read the back of the cereal box
I agree that those examples of enrichment are common knowledge, but that's far from what GP was claiming...he's talking like this crap is like a multivitamin itself
Also, we need to see a study of the effectiveness of ***vitamin enriched food*** done next to the TFA study if we are going to have any meaningful conversation.
Bottom line, multivitamins are a good idea unless you keep track of your vitamin intake and eat organically AND exercise once a day like the CDC recommends.
We haven't discussed athletes taking suppliments, or even a 9-5 person who does intense training or amature sports...those activities deplete certain vitamins much faster.
You're out of your mind if you think just because Fruit Loops says "enriched with Vitamin X" then you've got your proper intake.
this is what I mean, when you disable all the interactive stuff, styling, flash, etc etc you can see what a page really looks like from a system design perspective
it's no coincedence that the best web pages also work the best at low bandwidth
Now I see why someone would want to fund this research...it increases revenue for Big Pharma.
exactly
in TFA summary "chronic disease" jumped out at me...that's a pretty high bar for ***anything known to medical science*** to hit, and no one ever really claimed that multivitamins would just flat prevent cancer.
it seems like TFA wants to beg the question...but we can't let the researchers off the hook either...they *chose* the language and 3 categories
by which to analyze the factors. That is research design and it, obviously, affects every part of your result. IMHO they look like amateurs for not including those who take multivitamins expecting a small performance boost (like athletes or fitness junkies) or to make up for a poor diet.
after reading this over and seeing a few other comments i'm definitely stickign with my vitamins
at first read this seems counter to everything I've experienced..."highly fortified....for almost a hundred years"???
i know some products advertise that they have vitamins & some regulation took place, but those regulations were always fought by the industry as "government intervention that costs consumers"
also, i'm more skeptical of a Pepsi that says it has vitimin C that will help me than I am of a multivitamin
AC first poster says,
Of course it's modded +5 Insightful....but I'll bite....
This is news because at the extremes of any system's performance you can more easily see the faults of the system.
Anyone who does internet work of any kind should try to do their daily browsing or w/e you do on a 56K modem at least once.
When you see, even just browsing the mainstream 'internet-y' sites like yahoo.com, facebook.com, nytimes.com and compare to slashdot or others...sometimes system design solutions **just click** because you see it in a different context
TFA is like a pro football player doing cross training. It's relevant to us professionally and personally too if you have nostalgia for the early days of the internet.
well this has been fun! thnx man
see this is where we differ...I guess just to put a bookend on things I'll elaborate
I think your notion, that:
'natural & skeptical thinking' will always arrive at atheism & any other conclusion is 'unreasonable'
is an opinion not provable formally (such as by syllogism or other language based logic)
Maybe you're right, but it's not formally provable...to get philosophical it is not formally provable because of the 'social construction' of reality via language limits human certainty to things that are communicatable and somhow formally repeatable. This is discussed alot in 2nd Order Cybernetics
I know I'm just repeating my last argument only substituting 'formally provable' with 'science' but I wanted you to see that my perspective is constant.
Any statement about the supernatural is opinion, not science or logic.
It's when you cross that border, into asserting ***CERTAINTY*** where you have none that causes me to raise objections.
As I said before I support you being an atheist, condescending to whomever you see fit, but to our greater discussion it's all about crossing that line of certainty.
Here's the link directly to the 'naturalism' that is attributed to Dawkins, etc. The counter-arguments by people like Popper and especially Alvin Plantinga's critique are honestly equally as odious as Dawkins to me. Seriously Plantiga's notions of an 'evolutionary argument against naturalism' take just as many scandalous liberties with the concept of 'science' as Dawkins and I hate it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naturalism_(philosophy)
On the disambiguation page it's listed as Methodological Naturalism.
Seriously, do you see why Dawkins sticks out among Rush Limbaugh types to me? Not saying you have to agree or not be condescending but maybe your everyday life would go smoother (and all of us too) if we don't go down that road.
I'm totally fine with you being condescending to anyone for any reason...knock yourself out...let's just keep from using science where it doesn't belong
ha!
thnx for posting that, and you could've slammed me b/c I honestly didn't know Naturalism had become a "thing" in the whole disgusting "evoution/creation" god debate...I mean if you saw the same wiki I did the Naturalism (philosophy) really only became a thing in the last 30 years. That's fine but just sayin...
I had already read it, after I posted my comment of course...
As you might guess I think it's kind of bullshit, but so are alot of the arguments against it...I don't like any of it b/c to me it's just rhetoric.
Rhetoric is fine for a picnic on a Sunday afternoon or around the watercooler but its the how Dawkins tries to claim that **science** has proven **scientifically** that anyone who isn't a 'naturalist' aka atheist is Deluuusional
for fucks sake!
I want to keep real actual science separate from all of this...I used to do research and it's hard enough to navigate either office politics or university politics and keep your project focused on science and not marketing horseshit...
then this all gets into the conversation...I hate it
sorry...
text should read: "I'd love to get a contract working for the NSA"
are you saying that the government during the Pentagon Papers was somehow ***LESS INTERESTED IN COVERING ITS ASS***???
wtf are you talking about? minimizing the influence of the Pentagon Papers? You're just doing debate geometry now...you're just spitballing counter-arguments no matter how valid or realistic.
the CIA during that time **killed presidents** and **presidential candidates** among other things...you're saying that the military industrial complex didn't give a shit about the Pentagon Papers
and BTW, the guy who released the Pentagon Papers, and several other examples, are living normal lives right now
even if your dumb assertions were true it still wouldn't prove my point wrong
BITCH, I **wish** I was doing that level of technical consulting! Let's do this...***email me the fucking RFP*** I actually bid for a computer architecture contracting job for Booz/Allen in Indianapolis.
If the NSA employed me I could save them Billions...plus I could've smelled Snowden coming. I knew many guys like him in college. He may be borderline autistic...that's what I think is happening here...
Asperbergers/autistic spectrum behavior with "government spying". With good reason of course, it's mind-blowing how much a person could invade your privacy digitally.
I am not defending the NSA or the Patriot Act but I want my government to be able to use all technical means if they have a warrant with actual probable cause or some accountable national security reason
again, I am not defending the NSA...I'm criticizing everyone...and YES I'd love
yeah, I mean, if you filter out the bots and log-in users double posting as AC's...you're still right
but the end of the quotation above has the answer to the string of questions you posed after it...
see, you're right that our civilization is like a plane headed for a mountain...but the answer is *interpersonal*
human to human we can restore trust in each other...if you think about it, young people, the 'sext' generation, have already shown that they have adapted their morals *interpersonally* to accomidate a bad choice on snapchat...it's the older generation that keeps the 'ruin' of civiliation via loss of trust alive
geeks and nerds and techies of all stripes will fall right in line when/if they encounter a positive environment that they respect
but that's far from a given...but thanks for your comment! kinda proves me right ;)
I'm so glad you linked to Thomas Andrews Drake's wikipedia, b/c I read this:
And of course, he tried to be a whistle blower during the **BUSH ADMINISTRATION**
By all appearances, the Obama Justice Department let this guy go.
Contrary to your intention, your Thomas Andrews Drake point actually casts Snowden and Greenwald in a bad light, it shows what happens when a ***REAL HERO*** tries to do the right thing.
Drake was doing what he did not for himself, but for his country, Snowden was a dupe who got manipulated by criminals.
Nothing I read in TFA excuses the government for the PATRIOT ACT...
That's where this all started, the Patriot Act.
Snowden was a dupe. He was manipulated and now has ruined his life. His actions were like a fruit tree with alot of leaves....
Where many leaves of language are around fruit of meaning below will not be found.
The leaves/language suck the energy and life from the fruit/meaning of the information.
America ***needed*** a privacy wake-up call, but Snowden, Greenwald, and the NSA people, and yes even Obama are *all* to blame for this fucking fiasco.
I think Snowden is a **fucking idiot** but I don't wish hurt on him at all! I am concerned for him...I hope he can get his head out of his ass and eventually come home.
sorry, here's the 2006 link:
http://yahoo.usatoday.com/news/washington/2006-05-10-nsa_x.htm
From TFA:
The National Security Agency has been secretly collecting the phone call records of tens of millions of Americans, using data provided by AT&T, Verizon and BellSouth, people with direct knowledge of the arrangement told USA TODAY.
idk about 'assassination' but he deserves this...and so do WE the PEOPLE. We deserve to know the truth and not some pre-packaged "hero" narrative that is paper thin.
Snowden was a pampered man, full of privilege, high off his own intellectualism & criminals USED HIM to spy on and embarass the US.
That's the truth. The fact that so many /.'ers see themselves in Snowden is a major problem. An autistic-like focus on "government spying" will get your ass in Russian jail.
Snowden ruined his life to tell us stuff we'd known since ***2006***
anywhere...period.
First, the 1st Amendment is the world's standard for the free press. Nowhere is it codified more surely.
our laws say that a journalist cannot be forced to give up a source...the journalist can be called to testify, and if they choose not to, they *can* be incarcerated without trial but only for a period of time.
If they can wait it out, the law says until the detention is no longer coercive...that means **if they stick to their guns they will be released**
It usually is a matter of a few months but can be up to a year.
If a journalist does that, especially with something like the Snowden leaks, ****THEY GET RICH OFF A BOOK DEAL**** and can write their professional ticket.
When I was in college learning this stuff we all *wanted* to be the guy who goes to prison to protect the source...it's a badge of honor!!!!
Fucking Glenn Grenwald wouldn't know the first thing about journalism, professionalism, honor, or ***PROTECTING HIS SOURCE***
It works. Look at Deep Throat and the Pentagon papers. It proves the whole Snowden narrative to be a sham.
Damnit! and damn you for not knowing this!
This used to be common knowledge to any High School graduate.
hey thanks that was indeed a very informative and interesting article
about the figures, indeed you quote them correctly, but we're talking past each other...the figure for the one launch/mission may be under a Billion but the budget for the whole of their moon missiions is surely above $Billion but that's not the point.
about the ground radar...and China in general, I just don't take what a Totalitarian country bursting at the seams w/ pollution and population desperate for having "Good Face" on the world stage seriously. Their press is **fully** a propaganda arm for their government (which is only true of Fox News here)...imagine that...all the national news in a country is like Fox News.
god bless their endeavor...I don't begrudge their work, my negativity comes from the fact that I don't like bandwagon jumping or fake excitement over Public Relations and Propaganda of a Totalitarian regime
Gah!
thnx CauseBy! seriously thank you for not being completely full of shit this time around
Aurthur C. Clarke (and Tolkein in LOTR) compared magic to technology.
It was a big deal. Lord of the Rings is often discussed in this manner relating to the use of magic as an anology for technology; one example, many say that Sauron's evil represents the Industrial Revolution and magic is technology...just an example.
That's LOTR.
You say this but you just fucking dead wrong:
By any way humans use language to communicate meaning, this is an overly broad, untrue statement. It is true *sometimes* in the context, but Aurthur C. Clark, who I quoted above
He and JRR Tolkein are not just some random bullshit writers.
The fact that they, and many others inspired by them and of their own accord see **other** valid and useful analogies to the concept of 'magic' does prove your stupid fuckign statement wrong.
I really wish you'd just drop the whole need to say shit like that in this discussion...
Here's why...I think you're being honest here, and could fully agree to disagree if you just stayed with these statements:
and
Damnit if you could just stay there, we could agree. And while you're at it stop repeating that stupid re-definition of "naturalism"...you're free to call your thing w/e you want but that name is taken!
Ditch the bullshit and just be an honest, contrarian, totally atheist asshole and this conversation can be over & we can be cool.
I gotta see a source on your figures...bigger the claim = bigger the evidence
I appreciate your take on this...the last thing I want to do is read /.'ers debate gun control, so thnx.
So, about Columbine...
Anyone remember the "1 Bleeding to Death" sign? The teacher who bled to death...
TFA summary mentions a "revolutionary" change in police, to actually go try to do policework in an emergency instead of sitting around outside, but I just don't remember Columbine that way at all.
I watched it on TV like many of you, and I remember seeing the sign, and seeing the cops sitting there doing nothing...Why?
I think the police were staying out of the Columbine building on orders...I honestly don't believe that honest cops would just sit for hours knowing people were dying.
I'm not trying to start a discussion about **why** they didn't go in at Columbine, just saying that overall, this narrative of "what happened at Columbine" and any interpretations of how it affected the country are serverly off-kilter
because of false assumptions, mistakes, delusion, and manipulation! HE MADE A HUGE MISTAKE...
he could have released the info, done the 'right thing' and REMAINED ANONYMOUS...he could have even kept his job probably...the guy who released the Pentagon Papers (which were at this level of scandal) during Vietnam had a 30 year career in the FBI after
Snowden screwed up, because his worldview is flawed just like many other techie-types & the cognitive dissonance is off the charts...you can see it going back over our exchange and other's responses
you tacitly admit that but you won't say it plainly but I'm not out to get some conversational catharsis...i don't care
what I care about is understanding **what is actually happening** which very few people seem to understand
the USA Today article from my GP and other questions I've raised completely undercuts the Snowden narrative
its time techies stop projecting their Asperberger's-Inspired devotion to government spying on Snowden and start seeing that Snowden is a dupe, and so are they