Why was parent modded funny? You mean you guys don't do that already..?
Re:That's a Little Extreme
on
iPods at War
·
· Score: 2, Funny
Some trust fund prosecutor, got off-message at Yale, thinks he's gonna run this up the flagpole, make a name for himself, maybe get elected some two-bit, congressman from nowhere, with the result that Russia or China can suddenly start having, at our expense, all the advantages we enjoy here. No, I tell you. No, sir. Corruption charges! Corruption? Corruption is government intrusion into market efficiencies in the form of regulations. That's Milton Friedman. He got a goddamn Nobel Prize. We have laws against it precisely so we can get away with it. Corruption is our protection. Corruption keeps us safe and warm. Corruption is why you and I are prancing around in here instead of fighting over scraps of meat out in the streets. Corruption is why we win.
Syriana is one of the few good movies made recently. And I think it made your point precisely.
Hitler had the economic might of one of the strongest nation's on the planet at the time, entirely behind his leadership. The Germans possessed training and equipment on par with anything else in the world at the time, and his propaganda machine had them ready for war.
At this point in time, there are only two countries that have the capability to present a credible threat to the United States: Russia, and China (plus a few more slightly lesser threats if we throw in France and England's strategic nuclear forces). At least in the Cold War the Russians could actually make good on the threats, and truly kill us all in half an hour. The utter annihilation of the human race was the danger we faced.
And now? Our governments are trying to get us worked up over the threat that a handful of religious kooks in another hemisphere, without any real powerbase whatsoever pose? Either they're idiots, or they're much smarter than those watching Fox News, and the potential consequences of assuming the former are far worse than we would like to imagine.
The problem with this is that it's the equivilant of telling your soldiers before the battle: "Don't worry, the enemy soldiers suck so badly they can't hit anything, you'll be fine! You don't need body armor. Or training in operating as a unit. Or communications gear. Or support fire. You'll be just fine without all of those, because the enemy sucks so badly!"
And then you wake up one day, and the enemy knows how to fight, but you've lost the ability. In a sense, that's where parts of our own military are headed right now. Gambling that your opponents will always be dumbass peasants from Elbonia is a losing plan in the long run.
E3 represented everything that was wrong about the games industry. The hype. The focus on graphics. The sexualisation. The sequelisation. The CG sell. The marketers.
Wait, I thought you said it represented the bad things?
So? That gives you, at best, a matter of hours (and quite possibly even less time) before they piece together what happened, and dozens of SLBMs come raining down upon whatever continent your hostile nation happened to be a former resident of.
Problem: there is a very small but nonzero risk of a future hijacking attempt on a domestic airliner, a la 9/11.
Correct solution: Improve existing cockpit doors, allow licensed pilots to fly armed. Nothing more is necessary based upon the severity of the threat.
Government response: Create entire agencies devoted to providing the illusion of improved security, while wasting billions of dollars on programs that have an infinitesimally small chance of preventing a major terrorist attack. Divert these funds from critical programs such as education, or by incurring debt. Gain political points by appearing to be solving a problem. Get re-elected, and continue the process in some other venue. Thus passes the glory of America.
Unless we changed the political atmosphere somewhat, and managed to get approval to launch an Orion directly from the surface. It isn't physically impossible, just politically.
They are often charming at first, but their only motivation is their own desires. They can be fantastic at acting, pretending to be sorry, but see society as nothing more than a game to win, at any cost.
So wait, are we talking about the criminals or the politicians?
Some days I think I'd rather trust the criminals with the government...not that there's much difference anymore.
We can only hope that this will mean a relaxing of social standards, insofar that as it becomes increasingly common and easy to find someone stupid someone posted on a forum ten years ago, the consequences attendant to that statement will decrease. Most everyone says things in real life to their friends that could be misinterpreted to mean other things, or taken seriously when said in jest. Such trivial statements have historically been the realm of private conversation, and effectively invisible to society. The internet changed that. Now we must hope that our responses will change accordingly.
Can someone tell me what those random dark patches on the underside of the shuttle are? Is that deliberate coloration, or are those missing tiles? Or something else entirely?
All we need are some giant mutated worms (courtesy of an Indian-Pakistani nuclear war) and a few more years of global warming, and we can have our very own Arrakis!
Is the right to life a fundamental human right (not even talking abortion)? So what precisely is your point? If a society decides life isn't a fundamental right, and decides to start randomly executing people, what's your response to that? You're just saying that the UN has a different set of guidelines, but the important question is whether you feel there are inherent human rights.
Shoot them with a pellet gun (as long as you're legal to do it in your area). Screw humane methods, they're freaking poisonous toads, not cute little puppies.
Slashdot Mirror
Why was parent modded funny? You mean you guys don't do that already..?
Some trust fund prosecutor, got off-message at Yale, thinks he's gonna run this up the flagpole, make a name for himself, maybe get elected some two-bit, congressman from nowhere, with the result that Russia or China can suddenly start having, at our expense, all the advantages we enjoy here. No, I tell you. No, sir. Corruption charges! Corruption? Corruption is government intrusion into market efficiencies in the form of regulations. That's Milton Friedman. He got a goddamn Nobel Prize. We have laws against it precisely so we can get away with it. Corruption is our protection. Corruption keeps us safe and warm. Corruption is why you and I are prancing around in here instead of fighting over scraps of meat out in the streets. Corruption is why we win.
Syriana is one of the few good movies made recently. And I think it made your point precisely.
Hitler had the economic might of one of the strongest nation's on the planet at the time, entirely behind his leadership. The Germans possessed training and equipment on par with anything else in the world at the time, and his propaganda machine had them ready for war.
At this point in time, there are only two countries that have the capability to present a credible threat to the United States: Russia, and China (plus a few more slightly lesser threats if we throw in France and England's strategic nuclear forces). At least in the Cold War the Russians could actually make good on the threats, and truly kill us all in half an hour. The utter annihilation of the human race was the danger we faced.
And now? Our governments are trying to get us worked up over the threat that a handful of religious kooks in another hemisphere, without any real powerbase whatsoever pose? Either they're idiots, or they're much smarter than those watching Fox News, and the potential consequences of assuming the former are far worse than we would like to imagine.
The problem with this is that it's the equivilant of telling your soldiers before the battle: "Don't worry, the enemy soldiers suck so badly they can't hit anything, you'll be fine! You don't need body armor. Or training in operating as a unit. Or communications gear. Or support fire. You'll be just fine without all of those, because the enemy sucks so badly!"
And then you wake up one day, and the enemy knows how to fight, but you've lost the ability. In a sense, that's where parts of our own military are headed right now. Gambling that your opponents will always be dumbass peasants from Elbonia is a losing plan in the long run.
Where do you think the heavier elements came from in the first place?
If your voting machine isn't secure, the state government will buy even more of them
Fixed that for you.
E3 represented everything that was wrong about the games industry. The hype. The focus on graphics. The sexualisation. The sequelisation. The CG sell. The marketers.
Wait, I thought you said it represented the bad things?
So? That gives you, at best, a matter of hours (and quite possibly even less time) before they piece together what happened, and dozens of SLBMs come raining down upon whatever continent your hostile nation happened to be a former resident of.
Problem: there is a very small but nonzero risk of a future hijacking attempt on a domestic airliner, a la 9/11.
Correct solution: Improve existing cockpit doors, allow licensed pilots to fly armed. Nothing more is necessary based upon the severity of the threat.
Government response: Create entire agencies devoted to providing the illusion of improved security, while wasting billions of dollars on programs that have an infinitesimally small chance of preventing a major terrorist attack. Divert these funds from critical programs such as education, or by incurring debt. Gain political points by appearing to be solving a problem. Get re-elected, and continue the process in some other venue. Thus passes the glory of America.
Unless we changed the political atmosphere somewhat, and managed to get approval to launch an Orion directly from the surface. It isn't physically impossible, just politically.
They are often charming at first, but their only motivation is their own desires. They can be fantastic at acting, pretending to be sorry, but see society as nothing more than a game to win, at any cost.
So wait, are we talking about the criminals or the politicians?
Some days I think I'd rather trust the criminals with the government...not that there's much difference anymore.
Substitute "busts" for "gold" and "rich American kids" with "oppressive government" as the customer, and you've got it.
We can only hope that this will mean a relaxing of social standards, insofar that as it becomes increasingly common and easy to find someone stupid someone posted on a forum ten years ago, the consequences attendant to that statement will decrease. Most everyone says things in real life to their friends that could be misinterpreted to mean other things, or taken seriously when said in jest. Such trivial statements have historically been the realm of private conversation, and effectively invisible to society. The internet changed that. Now we must hope that our responses will change accordingly.
Why the hell can't this joke come to an end?
Can someone tell me what those random dark patches on the underside of the shuttle are? Is that deliberate coloration, or are those missing tiles? Or something else entirely?
All we need are some giant mutated worms (courtesy of an Indian-Pakistani nuclear war) and a few more years of global warming, and we can have our very own Arrakis!
While funny, how on earth was that considered insightful?
All of that is nice, but how do you get that message out there? Arguably the only real way to do it is with TV/radio/print advertisements.
Guess who owns those TV/radio stations, and newspapers?
Let's face it, there's no real economic way to defeat them.
Didn't like the XD-series, eh?
This is the equivalent of bringing a knife to a gunfight.
No, this is the equivilant of bringing a plastic spork to a gunfight: also known as suicide by stupidity.
Is the right to life a fundamental human right (not even talking abortion)? So what precisely is your point? If a society decides life isn't a fundamental right, and decides to start randomly executing people, what's your response to that? You're just saying that the UN has a different set of guidelines, but the important question is whether you feel there are inherent human rights.
I'd say it's closer to a strange form of corporate socialism. Welfare for the megacorps.
JOKE! It's a JOKE! Jeez, doesn't anyone understand sarcasm these days?
Shoot them with a pellet gun (as long as you're legal to do it in your area). Screw humane methods, they're freaking poisonous toads, not cute little puppies.
It's called the politician, and it's the soldier's only known natural predator, other than other soldiers.