It may have been 'professional' behavior, but it wasn't all ETHICAL behavior, even by wartime standards. Had the documented abuses been punished with prejudice, that would have been something worthy of pride. We have the same ethical problems right here at home with our police forces and district attorneys, which for instance will arrest and jail and prosecute bystanders for LEGAL videotaping of questionable police behavior in public. Oh, they're 'professional', all right... they're just not always ethical.
That is the ENTIRE point of this Wikileaks document release.
Why in hell is this classified as 'Troll'? Didn't the Germans keep exceptional records during World War II, for instance? How about the Japanese? How about the United States during the Vietnam War... was its campaign with agent orange meticulously planned, implemented, and documented? I'm betting all the above is true.
"Professionalism" has NOTHING to do with social ethics; they are not synonymous, and that was precisely the point of the parent post by moortak. Professionalism merely implies a certain degree of diligence and attention to detail.
This summary borders on incoherent. I would have expected better, from what little I thought I knew of Eldavojohn. There are incomplete sentences and byzantine arrangements of word and phrase that effectively make no sense. It's possible with effort to discern what each sentence intends to convey, but why is that effort necessary? Where was the proofreading?
I don't think I'd be exaggerating to say that this was the worst summary I can ever recall reading at Slashdot, and I have read many thousands.
Greed and ambition aren't binary mental switches; there is a spectrum of ambition and greed. It's that least-ethical extreme of the Bell Curve on that spectrum that we need to lock up.
I don't want to complain! It's NOT fun. It's tiring, depressing, and is only a precursor to something constructive. Unfortunately, like other forms of de-struction, sometimes it is necessary before the best con-struction can proceed.
You've oversimplified its actual implementation. The process would not be PURELY random. Jury selection isn't purely random; only the initial step is random. See my comment even further down.
Also, there are other factors beside mere material wealth that identify excessive ambition and can give certain people unfair advantages: fame/celebrity, supreme ability to manipulate others, etc. Again, claiming that mere finance reform would solve the problem and result in ethical leaders is a gross oversimplification and attacks a symptom rather than the root problem... kinda like we run around trying to solve species extinction, global warming, and pollution instead of dealing with the 800-pound gorilla: human overpopulation. If more ethical leaders are what is desired - we we SAY that is what we want - then the root problem of excessive ambition is what needs to be solved. Monetary greed is merely ONE expression of excessive ambition.
Exactly, but with clarification: random chance would be the first or second step of the process, selecting a "pool" of candidates as for juries, to be followed by steps that would narrow the choices based on objective qualifications, and then perhaps finally an electoral run-off vote between the final two. But yeah, the idea is valid, and you're not the first to propose it!
I began proposing such a system in all sincerity myself about 10 years ago. Later I saw an article in the national Mensa bulletin that proposed essentially the same idea. It has validity because of this equation:
those with the greatest ambition == those with the least ethics
Random chance in the process, at least as a first or second step, actually has better odds of producing ethical leaders than any of the electoral systems in use for the last two thousand years. Those electoral systems have actually favored those who most desire power and control of others; what a surprise, huh?
I've sarcastically referred to him as a Messiah myself, as an exaggeration of how some others obviously perceived him, but I'm anything but a right-winger. I was making fun of this habit of investing too much expectation in people who, honestly, are in it as much for themselves and their own Inner Circle as they are for any of the rest of us, regardless which Party's flag they happen to be waving. Our criteria for choosing leaders is just FUBAR and has been for millennia.
I wonder how these snailfish would fare if exposed to the 'vacuum' of space? Would they fare better than the near instant death of terrestrial creatures? It seems to me that any creature that lives at pressures of 10K PSI must not have an internal pressure differential at all. Gills are certainly a better adaptation for both immense pressures and vacuums than lungs.
Yeah, but who will be able to "rent" the use of this thing once installed? Only the government, or anyone with enough cash to make them salivate? If the latter, then one can imagine a scenario where some private investigator with a wealthy client buys the use of the thing for some period hoping to catch his target saying something naughty.
So I guess your local terrorist cells won't be having their strategy meetings under the cover of all that stadium noise any more. Of course it also means that Randy Dandy might wanna think twice before sitting in the stands with his best bud and confessing that he's been cheating on his wife.
Slashdot Mirror
This is THE most intelligent response to this complaint that I've ever read. Mod this post up to +6, please.
When I saw the title I thought it was a book review of a new O'Reilly release of that name.
What is this, another article submission by a shill for the SSD manufacturers? Here we go again:
1. submit dodgy article to Slashdot
2. sow seeds of doubt
3. profit!
It may have been 'professional' behavior, but it wasn't all ETHICAL behavior, even by wartime standards. Had the documented abuses been punished with prejudice, that would have been something worthy of pride. We have the same ethical problems right here at home with our police forces and district attorneys, which for instance will arrest and jail and prosecute bystanders for LEGAL videotaping of questionable police behavior in public. Oh, they're 'professional', all right... they're just not always ethical.
That is the ENTIRE point of this Wikileaks document release.
Why in hell is this classified as 'Troll'? Didn't the Germans keep exceptional records during World War II, for instance? How about the Japanese? How about the United States during the Vietnam War... was its campaign with agent orange meticulously planned, implemented, and documented? I'm betting all the above is true.
"Professionalism" has NOTHING to do with social ethics; they are not synonymous, and that was precisely the point of the parent post by moortak. Professionalism merely implies a certain degree of diligence and attention to detail.
This summary borders on incoherent. I would have expected better, from what little I thought I knew of Eldavojohn. There are incomplete sentences and byzantine arrangements of word and phrase that effectively make no sense. It's possible with effort to discern what each sentence intends to convey, but why is that effort necessary? Where was the proofreading?
I don't think I'd be exaggerating to say that this was the worst summary I can ever recall reading at Slashdot, and I have read many thousands.
Greed and ambition aren't binary mental switches; there is a spectrum of ambition and greed. It's that least-ethical extreme of the Bell Curve on that spectrum that we need to lock up.
I don't want to complain! It's NOT fun. It's tiring, depressing, and is only a precursor to something constructive. Unfortunately, like other forms of de-struction, sometimes it is necessary before the best con-struction can proceed.
You've oversimplified its actual implementation. The process would not be PURELY random. Jury selection isn't purely random; only the initial step is random. See my comment even further down.
Also, there are other factors beside mere material wealth that identify excessive ambition and can give certain people unfair advantages: fame/celebrity, supreme ability to manipulate others, etc. Again, claiming that mere finance reform would solve the problem and result in ethical leaders is a gross oversimplification and attacks a symptom rather than the root problem... kinda like we run around trying to solve species extinction, global warming, and pollution instead of dealing with the 800-pound gorilla: human overpopulation. If more ethical leaders are what is desired - we we SAY that is what we want - then the root problem of excessive ambition is what needs to be solved. Monetary greed is merely ONE expression of excessive ambition.
Already did a bit elsewhere.
Read below.
No, he doesn't. He just seems to understand the dynamics of human psychology a bit better.
Exactly, but with clarification: random chance would be the first or second step of the process, selecting a "pool" of candidates as for juries, to be followed by steps that would narrow the choices based on objective qualifications, and then perhaps finally an electoral run-off vote between the final two. But yeah, the idea is valid, and you're not the first to propose it!
I began proposing such a system in all sincerity myself about 10 years ago. Later I saw an article in the national Mensa bulletin that proposed essentially the same idea. It has validity because of this equation:
those with the greatest ambition == those with the least ethics
Random chance in the process, at least as a first or second step, actually has better odds of producing ethical leaders than any of the electoral systems in use for the last two thousand years. Those electoral systems have actually favored those who most desire power and control of others; what a surprise, huh?
I've sarcastically referred to him as a Messiah myself, as an exaggeration of how some others obviously perceived him, but I'm anything but a right-winger. I was making fun of this habit of investing too much expectation in people who, honestly, are in it as much for themselves and their own Inner Circle as they are for any of the rest of us, regardless which Party's flag they happen to be waving. Our criteria for choosing leaders is just FUBAR and has been for millennia.
Political asbestos maneuverings are indeed serpentine, aren't they?
I didn't realize that was the case. There's a lot I don't know about biology.
I wonder how these snailfish would fare if exposed to the 'vacuum' of space? Would they fare better than the near instant death of terrestrial creatures? It seems to me that any creature that lives at pressures of 10K PSI must not have an internal pressure differential at all. Gills are certainly a better adaptation for both immense pressures and vacuums than lungs.
... because when I saw TF title I wondered why the hell Melanie Chertoff would even have an opinion on the subject.
He'll be listening to Def Jam on his iPod with custom Stratos earbuds on the way down.
No, it's having forgotten to activate and reverse polarity of the deflector dish during re-entry that will kill you.
Yeah, but who will be able to "rent" the use of this thing once installed? Only the government, or anyone with enough cash to make them salivate? If the latter, then one can imagine a scenario where some private investigator with a wealthy client buys the use of the thing for some period hoping to catch his target saying something naughty.
So I guess your local terrorist cells won't be having their strategy meetings under the cover of all that stadium noise any more. Of course it also means that Randy Dandy might wanna think twice before sitting in the stands with his best bud and confessing that he's been cheating on his wife.
BTW, TA is still being played online through several services and is still being actively modded.
If you miss some of them, maybe do something about it so you're not missing them?
Master of Orion I and II for just USD$6
The complete Total Annihilation suite, also for USD$6
Well, whatcha waiting for?
The model 9 was reviewed by ARSTechnica way back in January. It looks virtually the same to me.