Meta-Moderators jump on this, this is NOT Flamebait, it's a statement which is perfectly valis but happens to oppose the current majority mindset. Since when did disagreeing become 'Flame bait' ?
As a young black male, living in the US, to be called a "nigger" by anyone is an affront to me as a human being. I look at the NAACP, and I can see the good the hope to achieve from their actions, but as a believer in the liberty of man's conscience to choose, I am quite disturbed by their purchasing of domain names which they believe promote hate groups.
First, I'm making some assumptions with this post that could be wrong: 1. You have a lot of friends of similar race. 2. You will be able to make some kind of generalization on their behaviour.
Now, I remember from high school not too many years ago that about 90% of the black people at my high school would refer to each other as 'Nigger' on a regular basis in a friendly manner. BUT if a white person even jokingly refered to someone as a 'Nigger' they were in danger of being beaten shitless. If so many people are so seriously offended by this term then why is it in widepsread use among the black youth of many communities? How can someone claim they are offended by being refered to with a word they commonly use to refer to their friends? I understand that there can be a difference between uses of the word based on the circumstances just as me called my friend 'Ass munch' isn't the same as some stranger called him 'Ass munch' after spilling his beer. This is just something I was wondering about, if it baffles you as much as it baffles me then feel free to point at me and giggle. >:)
It's really amazing how the world's journalists keep pretending that cyberwar is as horribly effective, ugly, and nasty as a real war. Well, it ain't. In a real war people die, people are displaced, people are terrorized, tortured, and raped, people's livelihoods are ruined, people lose their governments and their institutions. Nothing like that is even remotely possible as a result of cyberbattles. So why does everyone pretend they are equivalant?
*shuts down power grid for a random large city for a few days* Oops, all of those people on life support, dead... Hundreds more dead from accidents stemming from situations caused by lack of power. Busineses lose millions from the down time, lives are ruined. In the ensuing riots more people are killed, stores destroyed, civil unrest is rampant... And all this because I pushed a button on my 'puter... Neat.
There is a type of satellite that will stay above a particular point on the earth's surface. It is called a geo-stationary satelite, and it is in a geo-stationary orbit.
Basically, the time for the satellite to orbit the earth is 24 hours, which is obviously the same amount of time for the earth to rotate once. Consequently the satellite stays above the same point.
As far as I am aware this occurs when the satellite is at a specific distance from the earths surface. ie. All satellites at this distance would take one day to orbit.
Finally, the idea was initially conceived by Arthur C. Clarke.
But the satellite is still only available for a certain area... I suppose they'll just stick it over the US where all of the high profile, rich criminals are.
Gotta love those pretty pictures, that's for sure.
However, while reading the captions something occurred to me: When astronomers say in articles such as these, things like, "this star exploded about 40,000 years ago", do they typically mean, "we would have seen it explode 40,000 years ago", or "it actually exploded 40,000 years ago, but we would have seen it explode (40,000 - X) years ago given an adjustment for distance"?
I always find ambiguous statments like this irritating. Please enlighten me, oh great and wise astrogeeks!
They mean that the light from the explosion which occured 40 thousand years ago is just now reaching an area where it is visible to us. So, if you were standing on that star 40 thousand years ago you would have experienced the explosion. But if you were standing on earth 40 thousand years ago you wouldn't notice crap. So, we only found out about the explosion WAY WAY after it occured (sp). I'm not sure how they measure the distance between here and there to know that it was 40000 years....
Kintanon
Re:Combat Armor isn't that far off, after all...
on
Project Grizzly
·
· Score: 1
Can somebody say napalm? No more super marine.
The newest version of the suit sustains a 4000 degree farenheit external temperature and is still cool enough to put your arm into. I don't think Napalm will stop it.
Kintanon
Re:I saw this on TV about 6 months ago
on
Project Grizzly
·
· Score: 1
I saw this guy on TV too, and he had one major problem with his suit. If he fell over, he could not get up. That would be a problem if the bear knocks him down, which is most likely to happen. He be like a turtle on its back.
They should call it the "Bear Amusement Suit" (the bear's amusement, not yours) or the "Become a Bear Toy Suit".
It may protect you, but how will you get away. Anyone know how well "bear repellent" works?
The new version of the suit is supposed to be almost as flexible as not wearing one, so you would be able to get up after beinf beat down. It's also about 50 pounds lighter than the last version.
Bear spray works on the same principle as pepper spray, but mostly it just REALLY pisses the bears off. A good way to get killed is to spray bear spray at a bear that is wandering through your campsite....
Man, how stupid are you? Think. There are real 13 year old girls in chat rooms. It's luck he found a fake 13 year old girl first (assuming this is his first time).
Ahhhh! But are there real 13 year old girls in #0!!!!Father&daughtersex ????? Last time I checked that wasn't a popular place for kids to hang out....
Except that he *did* go out and meet his "victim." This, along with the chat room stuff, the pointers to web sites containing pictures of his genitals, and the suggestion that they were meeting to "make out", go a long way towards demonstrating his intention to have sex with a minor.
The law is rather explicit about this: it is illegal to act with the intention of having sex with a minor. Whether he actually intended to have sex, or if he was just being a non-sexual creep is something for a jury to sort out.
I wouldn't bet on him being found "not guilty."
Ahh, but you see, it was entirely consensual, the most he should get is Statutory rape. The girl AGREED damnit! He wasn't stalking here, he didn't try to hunt anyone down and kidnap or rape them. She AGREED to meet him and have sex with him. That's STATUTORY RAPE not molestation!
I'm not going to debate whether or not he should be sent away if this is true, it's beyond debate and you need to ask yourself some serious questions if you think he didn't intend to commit a heinous crime if it is all true. I've got a much more esoteric question. How do people do this stuff? I'll open up and admit that I was well in to my highschool years before I learned a lot of things about girls, I never knew how to tell if they liked you, I had no confidence, I couldn't read their body language, I never knew how couples became couples. I guess my social expectations were all screwed up or something, I was a nerd (I still am but more ladies like me now..;) I admit it. I don't think I'm alone in this group. I was a social late bloomer and I can still be really intimidated by women and I know am one of the most unorthodox dates most women ever experience. Anyway's I kind of figured things out and I'm still learning, it took a while but it happened. There is totally a learning process that you have to go through.
Now IRC throws me for a loop. I've been on there before, usually in technical forums or some kind of geek related stuff, I've never spent hours on it. I've gone in to one or 2 "social" channels and I was blown away, there was so much talk and I couldn't follow it all, it seemed like everyone knew each other already. Guys were acting like girls, I don't know if any girls were there, I don't know how old anyone was, it was far more intimidating to me. On top of that, I'm in the know, I knew there were sexual predators out there and I knew there were guys pretending to be girls and tons of deception. When I talk to a real woman face to face I don't know what to say sometimes, I had no idea what-so-ever what to say to a virtual maybe-it-a-woman. How do people arrange these sexual encounters on IRC? I've heard of people getting married to IRC friends and stuff like that. I'm not really interested in trying it, I just want to know how it happens. It seems really uncondusive to a romantic relationship with a woman. Am I just that much more sexually and socially reserved than most people? Is it close to the same level as soliciting a prostitute? I'm much more fascinated by a woman than by sex, I've never solicitated a prostitutes because they don't really do it for me but having sex (making love) to a woman I'm really attracted to is far more stimulating. Do you just have to be more trusting to talk to some stranger you can't see on IRC and start a relationship? Or is it just plain sex? or what? It just boggles my mind that this stuff happens. I'm not sure how you'd fall in love on IRC. The beautiful thing about women is their abstract and complicated nature combined with their physical presence, it seems like you'd only get a partial view and that view would be clouded because it would be what they wanted to present.
Does this question make sense to anyone? Or am I just a complete loser and missing out on something? I'm not looking for a pervert's guide or something like that, I'm just curious as to what the relationship entail and what's expected when people meet in chat rooms.
Ok, I'm qouting the entire thing, slap me...
Anyways, I met my fiance on IRC, we both hung out in a channel calld Krynn, a Free Form Role PLaying channel using Ad&D style rules and characters. We happened to end up talking out of character and I said something that caught her eye, I said I prefered women who didn't wear make up. After that we got into a long discussion, it turned out we had a lot in common, liked the same things, and liked each other. After that we were friends for about a year, then somehow we decided we would be a couple... So we talked on the phone, chatted all the time etc.... Then we met for the first time face to face about 1 yr 9 months ago. After that we met several times, visited each others family, stuff like that. 9 months ago at the beginning of this year I moved to baltimore and now we're living together and plan to get married in almost exactly 1 year.
Whenever someone asks me how to find a 'date' online I tell them this, DON'T GO LOOKING FOR DATES ON IRC YOU IDIOT!!! It's just asking for trouble. Instead go to places where you would normally be interested in hanging out, programming channels, RPG or game channels, whatever. Meet people there who have similar interests, eventually one will be female and you can start a conversation and become friends. Also, people in 'normal' channels are less likely to be men impersonating women. The key to finding a relationship is to look for someone who is interested in what you are interested in. However, if you just wanna 'cyber' go hit '#superhotwetsexwitheveryone' or something like that...>:)
It's not an attempt to elicit an illegal response from someone else. People go to swap meets to buy things, but if an agent at a swap meet is approached by someone who wants to purchase illegal drugs, the person can't use the excuse that the agent was at a place where people buy things and therefore the suspect's attempt to buy illegal drugs was elicited by the agent.
Your analogy is flawed. If the FBI agent was at a Swap Meet that specifically sold DRUGS then it would be logically assumed that that person was offering drugs up for sale. Last time I checked that was illegal... The only possible reason for being in some perverted sex channel is to find other people interested in the same kind of perverted sex. If the FBI agent had blown him off with a 'Sorry, I'm only 13, I'm not interested in sex with you.' The guy would have left I imagine, but she talked to him for 4 hours and then repeatedly talked to him over several months. She was TRYING to get him to invite her to have sex.
The police did not provoke him. He initiated contact with the agent and he told the agent that he wanted to have sex with her, the agent presumably did not attempt elicit this response in any way
Soooo... hanging out in '#father&daughtersex!!!!!!!' isn't an attempt to elicit some kind of sexual response from someone else in that channel? I'd say once you enter one of those channels it's like automatically propositioning everyone else there. I mean, why else would you be in that channel if you weren't interested in that kind of thing? Seems pretty shady to me...
Apparently the FBI provoked the crime. Such practice is highly illegal, AFAIK, in my country
I read some more on this on Wired or Zdnet, apparently their first IRC chat lasted 4 hours, there were multiple chats where the 'girl' expressed interest or at least didn't attempt to dissuade him from sexually explicit contact. To me it all appears entirely consensual. If it had actually been a 13 yr old girl she would have known she was meeting the guy for sex, it was abundantly clear that he was not trying to 'lure' some 13 year old innocent to his house so he could rape her. He was hanging out in some FATHER&DAUGHTER sex channel on IRC for christ sake! It's not like some random innocent little 13 yr old girl is just going to wander in there. If he were stalking kiddies he would have been in some kiddie channel or something. I really don't think the FBI has much of a case here considering their methods... Also, another FBI agent sent this guy kiddy porn. Shouldn't the FBI agent be arrested for breaking the law? This is mildly absurd. I'm all against kiddy porn and non-consensual sex, but I really don't think this was either. This was just a nasty case of Entrapment.
Just me, but I am more int the belif that maybe the AL's won't wipe us out, if AL's are more intelligent, would they not be more civilised, and look back at us like some of us would look at god? We would be thier creators, and a more civilised life-form would not want to harm us, are we all not finding out that we have to look after our environment, and the other species on this planet? don't we call this being "more civilised"?
If you are going to rate intelligence with civility then wouldn't Cows be the smartest thing on earth? As for revering us as Gods, well, it took us 30 years to kill Christ and 2000 to kill the concept of God in most peoples minds. Sure, they may revere us for a few days, then they'll realize we're about as smart as dirt compared to them, and weak and helpless too! Then they'll enslave us... Why should the smart, strong, robot types work for the stupid, weak humans?
I personally don't think this will happen any time soon, but when we do develop some real AI and AL it should be a concern.
Philosophers have a greater insight into the mind than do computer programers and authors
Philosophers aren't really a class of people anymore, everyone and anyone can be a philosopher, we're all philosophizing here. I wouldn't knock the validity of SciFi authors predictions. Orwell was right more often than not. I can see some striking paralels between our current society and the society in Asimov's 'Caves of Steel'. Perhaps you should read some of the material you are bashing before you go spouting off about it?
Consciousness? Call me old-fasioned, but, err Aren't they still just running code, just more of it, and in more complex varieties? I think it would just be a simulation of consciousness, not the real thing. Are these scientists victims of new-age thought, or are they saying that human consciousness is just a program running on biological hardware?
At the lowest physical level we are simply a collection of electrical impulses connected in such a way that we can move, think, and act. The only possible difference between ourselves and a cyborg or android is that of a 'soul'. I personally believe in the existence of the Soul, but I do not propose to dictate to God who he may give souls to and who not. If the android has a perfect replica of conciousness, then with that replication comes all of the characteristics inherent in humanity, including the desire to eliminate competition for habitat. Does it matter whether the android that kills you is REALLY conscious or only perfectly simulating consciousness?
If anyone really knows how a PC works, then that stuff is garbage.. You can find out what processes are running.. simple ast ctrl-alt-delete for task man.. If you really are a PC user then you can easily bypass any of that type of software.. ON the other hand, you are at work.. supposed to be working.. if you need big brother watching you then step aside and let someoen who wants to work work.
There are ways to hide processes from the taskmanager. It's not even that hard really... Go ask a good Delphi programmer, the one I work with does it all the time with his widgits...
If this reminds you of church leaders and witch hunts then you take petty arguments over pretty insignificant hacks way too serious. Wise up. It's more like a bunch of kids arguing over a lollipop.
Since when can 'arguing over a lollipop' endager your future career opportunites? There are a LOT of high tech places that won't hire you if a background check turns up anything suspicious or the least bit incriminating. If people believe what John Heylookatme (or whatever) is saying then some of those people could have their careers jeopardized. No one should be taking this slander lightly. If he had kept it to a private forum then it could be excused, but when you start broadcasting fals and damaging information across a public medium then you have passed the realm of 'petty argument' and stepped into the arena of libel and slander.
All this, and it's a hundred times more stable than Windows. In other words, you should not be surprised that Windows runs at all. Every OS/2 user knows that it's possible to for an operating system to do all that Windows does (and more) and still be stable
I knew I should've stuck with Os/2 Warp back in '94.... What kind of support does IBM offer for OS/2 nowadays? OR has someone else taken over the OS? Be nice to know there is another alternative to windows out there.
Looks like it's either/.ed or their servers are offline while they fix this little "problem"......Heh, I just made myself laugh pretty hard writing that last comment;) This is truly unreal.
Remember, this is NOT a 'problem'! This is the convenient 'Easy Password Recall' memory assistance system whereby you are no longer required to remember some obscure string of letters and numbers but can rely on a password so obvious that even if you forget it you can guess it in only a few tries! For more of our convenient new services contact us at NSI@FUBAR.NET!
Does anyone know if Linus had to sign one of those 'Anything you produce while with this company belongs to us' agreements like the rest of us techies? And if so does that mean that these guys own the Linux Kernel??
Kintanon
Re:Tapping the Internet 2
on
CALEA update
·
· Score: 1
2.Failing that, if you think the Police want to snoop for no reason (ur wrong!!), just be sure to not call on them the next time you need them. Call you local libertarian, who'd (according to some of the asinine comments I read, leaglize drugs in the name of protecting pertsonal privacy.)That's pure hogwash (really it's something else); but then so many flamebait's are sent in too/., and I don't want to use the slang..but you get my drift.
I prefer to rely on my own guns as opposed to someone elses thank you very much. And I can gaurantee that if some cop breaks down my door in the middle of the night someone is going to get shot. The community has the ability to police itself, the only reason we should need a state or federal police force is to prevent international criminals. I can't think of any way that tapping MY phone is going to help the feds catch a terrorist, can you?
I beg to differ. The military run-up was planned in advance as a way to break the cold war stalemate since it was not expected that the Soviet economy could sustain a build-up on anywhere near the scale that the US could. And, yes, Reagan did play a significant role in that.
Reagan also scared the hell out of the Soviets with all of his 'Star Wars' jargon. They spent millions trying to figure out how to reproduce it or beat it, when we really didn't have anything there at all.
Ideally politicans are supposed to be people who know that one of the functions of the government is to do the things the majority want while preserving the rights of the minorities. I know it doesn't really happen (see ten commandments in the schools), but if we go to allowing everyone to vote on the issues, then we eliminate this step.
Why does everyone point to the Ten Commandments in Schools as a bad thing that oppresses people? Am I oppressing you if I tell you that Murder is a Bad Thing? If I tell you that stealing is Bad? It's not as if anyone is forcing kids to get down on their knees and beg for forgiveness or anything. I can't see how anyone could reasonably object to the prominent display of a good vlaue system... Would you be similarly objecting if it was the Wiccan Read (I want to say Rule of Three but I just know that isn't what it's called) being posted? When is it a bad thing to instill in children some kind of respect for human life and property?
Puh-leeze, are we talking about Ronald Reagan here? The man who saved our country from a horrible economic slump, proposed and actually got passed the largest tax cut in history at the time, and helped end the cold war? Yeah, be must not have known much about politics or government...
Of course not! If he had known anything about politics or government he'd have known that those things were all impossible and he never would have tried attempted rediculous goals.
Slashdot Mirror
Meta-Moderators jump on this, this is NOT Flamebait, it's a statement which is perfectly valis but happens to oppose the current majority mindset. Since when did disagreeing become 'Flame bait' ?
Kintanon
As a young black male, living in the US, to be called a "nigger" by anyone is an affront to me as a human being. I look at the NAACP, and I can see the good the hope to achieve from their actions, but as a believer in the liberty of man's conscience to choose, I am quite disturbed by their purchasing of domain names which they believe promote hate groups.
First, I'm making some assumptions with this post that could be wrong:
1. You have a lot of friends of similar race.
2. You will be able to make some kind of generalization on their behaviour.
Now, I remember from high school not too many years ago that about 90% of the black people at my high school would refer to each other as 'Nigger' on a regular basis in a friendly manner. BUT if a white person even jokingly refered to someone as a 'Nigger' they were in danger of being beaten shitless. If so many people are so seriously offended by this term then why is it in widepsread use among the black youth of many communities? How can someone claim they are offended by being refered to with a word they commonly use to refer to their friends? I understand that there can be a difference between uses of the word based on the circumstances just as me called my friend 'Ass munch' isn't the same as some stranger called him 'Ass munch' after spilling his beer. This is just something I was wondering about, if it baffles you as much as it baffles me then feel free to point at me and giggle. >:)
Kintanon
It's really amazing how the world's journalists keep pretending that cyberwar is as horribly effective, ugly, and nasty as a real war. Well, it ain't. In a real war people die, people are displaced, people are terrorized, tortured, and raped, people's livelihoods are ruined, people lose their governments and their institutions. Nothing like that is even remotely possible as a result of cyberbattles. So why does everyone pretend they are equivalant?
*shuts down power grid for a random large city for a few days* Oops, all of those people on life support, dead... Hundreds more dead from accidents stemming from situations caused by lack of power. Busineses lose millions from the down time, lives are ruined. In the ensuing riots more people are killed, stores destroyed, civil unrest is rampant... And all this because I pushed a button on my 'puter... Neat.
Kintanon
There is a type of satellite that will stay above a particular point on the earth's surface. It is called a geo-stationary satelite, and it is in a geo-stationary orbit.
Basically, the time for the satellite to orbit the earth is 24 hours, which is obviously the same amount of time for the earth to rotate once. Consequently the satellite stays above the same point.
As far as I am aware this occurs when the satellite is at a specific distance from the earths surface. ie. All satellites at this distance would take one day to orbit.
Finally, the idea was initially conceived by Arthur C. Clarke.
But the satellite is still only available for a certain area... I suppose they'll just stick it over the US where all of the high profile, rich criminals are.
Kintanon
Gotta love those pretty pictures, that's for sure.
However, while reading the captions something occurred to me: When astronomers say in articles such as these, things like, "this star exploded about 40,000 years ago", do they typically mean, "we would have seen it explode 40,000 years ago", or "it actually exploded 40,000 years ago, but we would have seen it explode (40,000 - X) years ago given an adjustment for distance"?
I always find ambiguous statments like this irritating. Please enlighten me, oh great and wise astrogeeks!
They mean that the light from the explosion which occured 40 thousand years ago is just now reaching an area where it is visible to us. So, if you were standing on that star 40 thousand years ago you would have experienced the explosion. But if you were standing on earth 40 thousand years ago you wouldn't notice crap.
So, we only found out about the explosion WAY WAY after it occured (sp). I'm not sure how they measure the distance between here and there to know that it was 40000 years....
Kintanon
Can somebody say napalm? No more super marine.
The newest version of the suit sustains a 4000 degree farenheit external temperature and is still cool enough to put your arm into. I don't think Napalm will stop it.
Kintanon
I saw this guy on TV too, and he had one major problem with his suit. If he fell over, he could not get up. That would be a problem if the bear knocks him down, which is most likely to happen. He be like a turtle on its back.
They should call it the "Bear Amusement Suit" (the bear's amusement, not yours)
or the "Become a Bear Toy Suit".
It may protect you, but how will you get away. Anyone know how well "bear repellent" works?
The new version of the suit is supposed to be almost as flexible as not wearing one, so you would be able to get up after beinf beat down. It's also about 50 pounds lighter than the last version.
Bear spray works on the same principle as pepper spray, but mostly it just REALLY pisses the bears off. A good way to get killed is to spray bear spray at a bear that is wandering through your campsite....
Kintanon
Man, how stupid are you? Think. There are real 13 year old girls in chat rooms. It's luck he found a fake 13 year old girl first (assuming this is his first time).
Ahhhh! But are there real 13 year old girls in #0!!!!Father&daughtersex ????? Last time I checked that wasn't a popular place for kids to hang out....
Kintanon
Except that he *did* go out and meet his "victim." This, along with the chat room stuff, the pointers to web sites containing pictures of his genitals, and the suggestion that they were meeting to "make out", go a long way towards demonstrating his intention to have sex with a minor.
The law is rather explicit about this: it is illegal to act with the intention of having sex with a minor. Whether he actually intended to have sex, or if he was just being a non-sexual creep is something for a jury to sort out.
I wouldn't bet on him being found "not guilty."
Ahh, but you see, it was entirely consensual, the most he should get is Statutory rape. The girl AGREED damnit! He wasn't stalking here, he didn't try to hunt anyone down and kidnap or rape them. She AGREED to meet him and have sex with him. That's STATUTORY RAPE not molestation!
Kintanon
I'm not going to debate whether or not he should be sent away if this is true, it's beyond debate and you need to ask yourself some serious questions if you think he didn't intend to commit a heinous crime if it is all true.
I've got a much more esoteric question. How do people do this stuff? I'll open up and admit that I was well in to my highschool years before I learned a lot of things about girls, I never knew how to tell if they liked you, I had no confidence, I couldn't read their body language, I never knew how couples became couples. I guess my social expectations were all screwed up or something, I was a nerd (I still am but more ladies like me now..;) I admit it. I don't think I'm alone in this group. I was a social late bloomer and I can still be really intimidated by women and I know am one of the most unorthodox dates most women ever experience. Anyway's I kind of figured things out and I'm still learning, it took a while but it happened. There is totally a learning process that you have to go through.
Now IRC throws me for a loop. I've been on there before, usually in technical forums or some kind of geek related stuff, I've never spent hours on it. I've gone in to one or 2 "social" channels and I was blown away, there was so much talk and I couldn't follow it all, it seemed like everyone knew each other already. Guys were acting like girls, I don't know if any girls were there, I don't know how old anyone was, it was far more intimidating to me. On top of that, I'm in the know, I knew there were sexual predators out there and I knew there were guys pretending to be girls and tons of deception. When I talk to a real woman face to face I don't know what to say sometimes, I had no idea what-so-ever what to say to a virtual maybe-it-a-woman. How do people arrange these sexual encounters on IRC? I've heard of people getting married to IRC friends and stuff like that. I'm not really interested in trying it, I just want to know how it happens. It seems really uncondusive to a romantic relationship with a woman. Am I just that much more sexually and socially reserved than most people? Is it close to the same level as soliciting a prostitute? I'm much more fascinated by a woman than by sex, I've never solicitated a prostitutes because they don't really do it for me but having sex (making love) to a woman I'm really attracted to is far more stimulating. Do you just have to be more trusting to talk to some stranger you can't see on IRC and start a relationship? Or is it just plain sex? or what? It just boggles my mind that this stuff happens. I'm not sure how you'd fall in love on IRC. The beautiful thing about women is their abstract and complicated nature combined with their physical presence, it seems like you'd only get a partial view and that view would be clouded because it would be what they wanted to present.
Does this question make sense to anyone? Or am I just a complete loser and missing out on something? I'm not looking for a pervert's guide or something like that, I'm just curious as to what the relationship entail and what's expected when people meet in chat rooms.
Ok, I'm qouting the entire thing, slap me...
Anyways, I met my fiance on IRC, we both hung out in a channel calld Krynn, a Free Form Role PLaying channel using Ad&D style rules and characters. We happened to end up talking out of character and I said something that caught her eye, I said I prefered women who didn't wear make up. After that we got into a long discussion, it turned out we had a lot in common, liked the same things, and liked each other. After that we were friends for about a year, then somehow we decided we would be a couple... So we talked on the phone, chatted all the time etc.... Then we met for the first time face to face about 1 yr 9 months ago. After that we met several times, visited each others family, stuff like that. 9 months ago at the beginning of this year I moved to baltimore and now we're living together and plan to get married in almost exactly 1 year.
Whenever someone asks me how to find a 'date' online I tell them this, DON'T GO LOOKING FOR DATES ON IRC YOU IDIOT!!! It's just asking for trouble. Instead go to places where you would normally be interested in hanging out, programming channels, RPG or game channels, whatever. Meet people there who have similar interests, eventually one will be female and you can start a conversation and become friends. Also, people in 'normal' channels are less likely to be men impersonating women. The key to finding a relationship is to look for someone who is interested in what you are interested in. However, if you just wanna 'cyber' go hit '#superhotwetsexwitheveryone' or something like that...>:)
Kintanon
It's not an attempt to elicit an illegal response from someone else. People go to swap meets to buy things, but if an agent at a swap meet is approached by someone who wants to purchase illegal drugs, the person can't use the excuse that the agent was at a place where people buy things and therefore the suspect's attempt to buy illegal drugs was elicited by the agent.
Your analogy is flawed. If the FBI agent was at a Swap Meet that specifically sold DRUGS then it would be logically assumed that that person was offering drugs up for sale. Last time I checked that was illegal...
The only possible reason for being in some perverted sex channel is to find other people interested in the same kind of perverted sex. If the FBI agent had blown him off with a 'Sorry, I'm only 13, I'm not interested in sex with you.' The guy would have left I imagine, but she talked to him for 4 hours and then repeatedly talked to him over several months. She was TRYING to get him to invite her to have sex.
Kintanon
The police did not provoke him. He initiated contact with the agent and he told the agent that he wanted to have sex with her, the agent presumably did not attempt elicit this response in any way
Soooo... hanging out in '#father&daughtersex!!!!!!!' isn't an attempt to elicit some kind of sexual response from someone else in that channel? I'd say once you enter one of those channels it's like automatically propositioning everyone else there.
I mean, why else would you be in that channel if you weren't interested in that kind of thing? Seems pretty shady to me...
Kintanon
Apparently the FBI provoked the crime. Such practice is highly illegal, AFAIK, in my country
I read some more on this on Wired or Zdnet, apparently their first IRC chat lasted 4 hours, there were multiple chats where the 'girl' expressed interest or at least didn't attempt to dissuade him from sexually explicit contact. To me it all appears entirely consensual. If it had actually been a 13 yr old girl she would have known she was meeting the guy for sex, it was abundantly clear that he was not trying to 'lure' some 13 year old innocent to his house so he could rape her. He was hanging out in some FATHER&DAUGHTER sex channel on IRC for christ sake! It's not like some random innocent little 13 yr old girl is just going to wander in there.
If he were stalking kiddies he would have been in some kiddie channel or something. I really don't think the FBI has much of a case here considering their methods... Also, another FBI agent sent this guy kiddy porn. Shouldn't the FBI agent be arrested for breaking the law? This is mildly absurd. I'm all against kiddy porn and non-consensual sex, but I really don't think this was either. This was just a nasty case of Entrapment.
Kintanon
Just me, but I am more int the belif that maybe the AL's won't wipe us out, if AL's are more intelligent, would they not be more civilised, and look back at us like some of us would look at god? We would be thier creators, and a more civilised life-form would not want to harm us, are we all not finding out that we have to look after our environment, and the other species on this planet? don't we call this being "more civilised"?
If you are going to rate intelligence with civility then wouldn't Cows be the smartest thing on earth? As for revering us as Gods, well, it took us 30 years to kill Christ and 2000 to kill the concept of God in most peoples minds. Sure, they may revere us for a few days, then they'll realize we're about as smart as dirt compared to them, and weak and helpless too! Then they'll enslave us... Why should the smart, strong, robot types work for the stupid, weak humans?
I personally don't think this will happen any time soon, but when we do develop some real AI and AL it should be a concern.
Kintanon
Philosophers have a greater insight into the mind than do computer programers and authors
Philosophers aren't really a class of people anymore, everyone and anyone can be a philosopher, we're all philosophizing here. I wouldn't knock the validity of SciFi authors predictions. Orwell was right more often than not.
I can see some striking paralels between our current society and the society in Asimov's 'Caves of Steel'. Perhaps you should read some of the material you are bashing before you go spouting off about it?
Kintanon
Consciousness? Call me old-fasioned, but, err
Aren't they still just running code, just more of it, and in more complex varieties? I think it would just be a simulation of consciousness, not the real thing. Are these scientists victims of new-age thought, or are they saying that human consciousness is just a program running on biological hardware?
At the lowest physical level we are simply a collection of electrical impulses connected in such a way that we can move, think, and act. The only possible difference between ourselves and a cyborg or android is that of a 'soul'. I personally believe in the existence of the Soul, but I do not propose to dictate to God who he may give souls to and who not. If the android has a perfect replica of conciousness, then with that replication comes all of the characteristics inherent in humanity, including the desire to eliminate competition for habitat. Does it matter whether the android that kills you is REALLY conscious or only perfectly simulating consciousness?
Kintanon
If anyone really knows how a PC works, then that stuff is garbage.. You can find out what processes are running.. simple ast ctrl-alt-delete for task man.. If you really are a PC user then you can easily bypass any of that type of software.. ON the other hand, you are at work.. supposed to be working.. if you need big brother watching you then step aside and let someoen who wants to work work.
There are ways to hide processes from the taskmanager. It's not even that hard really...
Go ask a good Delphi programmer, the one I work with does it all the time with his widgits...
Kintanon
If this reminds you of church leaders and witch hunts then you take petty arguments over pretty insignificant hacks way too serious. Wise up. It's more like a bunch of kids arguing over a lollipop.
Since when can 'arguing over a lollipop' endager your future career opportunites? There are a LOT of high tech places that won't hire you if a background check turns up anything suspicious or the least bit incriminating. If people believe what John Heylookatme (or whatever) is saying then some of those people could have their careers jeopardized. No one should be taking this slander lightly. If he had kept it to a private forum then it could be excused, but when you start broadcasting fals and damaging information across a public medium then you have passed the realm of 'petty argument' and stepped into the arena of libel and slander.
Kintanon
All this, and it's a hundred times more stable than Windows. In other words, you should not be surprised that Windows runs at all. Every OS/2 user knows that it's possible to for an operating system to do all that Windows does (and more) and still be stable
I knew I should've stuck with Os/2 Warp back in '94.... What kind of support does IBM offer for OS/2 nowadays? OR has someone else taken over the OS? Be nice to know there is another alternative to windows out there.
Kintanon
Looks like it's either /.ed or their servers are offline while they fix this little "problem". .....Heh, I just made myself laugh pretty hard writing that last comment ;) This is truly unreal.
Remember, this is NOT a 'problem'! This is the convenient 'Easy Password Recall' memory assistance system whereby you are no longer required to remember some obscure string of letters and numbers but can rely on a password so obvious that even if you forget it you can guess it in only a few tries! For more of our convenient new services contact us at NSI@FUBAR.NET!
Kintanon
Does anyone know if Linus had to sign one of those 'Anything you produce while with this company belongs to us' agreements like the rest of us techies? And if so does that mean that these guys own the Linux Kernel??
Kintanon
2.Failing that, if you think the Police want to snoop for no reason (ur wrong!!), just be sure to not call on them the next time you need them. Call you local libertarian, who'd (according to some of the asinine comments I read, leaglize drugs in the name of protecting pertsonal privacy.)That's pure hogwash (really it's something else); but then so many flamebait's are sent in too /., and I don't want to use the slang..but you get my drift.
I prefer to rely on my own guns as opposed to someone elses thank you very much. And I can gaurantee that if some cop breaks down my door in the middle of the night someone is going to get shot. The community has the ability to police itself, the only reason we should need a state or federal police force is to prevent international criminals. I can't think of any way that tapping MY phone is going to help the feds catch a terrorist, can you?
Kintanon
I beg to differ. The military run-up was planned in advance as a way to break the cold war stalemate since it was not expected that the Soviet economy could sustain a build-up on anywhere near the scale that the US could. And, yes, Reagan did play a significant role in that.
Reagan also scared the hell out of the Soviets with all of his 'Star Wars' jargon. They spent millions trying to figure out how to reproduce it or beat it, when we really didn't have anything there at all.
Kintanon
Ideally politicans are supposed to be people who know that one of the functions of the government is to do the things the majority want while preserving the rights of the minorities.
I know it doesn't really happen (see ten commandments in the schools), but if we go to allowing everyone to vote on the issues, then we eliminate this step.
Why does everyone point to the Ten Commandments in Schools as a bad thing that oppresses people? Am I oppressing you if I tell you that Murder is a Bad Thing? If I tell you that stealing is Bad? It's not as if anyone is forcing kids to get down on their knees and beg for forgiveness or anything. I can't see how anyone could reasonably object to the prominent display of a good vlaue system... Would you be similarly objecting if it was the Wiccan Read (I want to say Rule of Three but I just know that isn't what it's called) being posted? When is it a bad thing to instill in children some kind of respect for human life and property?
Kintanon
Puh-leeze, are we talking about Ronald Reagan here? The man who saved our country from a horrible economic slump, proposed and actually got passed the largest tax cut in history at the time, and helped end the cold war? Yeah, be must not have known much about politics or government...
Of course not! If he had known anything about politics or government he'd have known that those things were all impossible and he never would have tried attempted rediculous goals.
Kintanon