Which I think you will agree is not the same as "bitching" about it, primarily because many people in the community would bitch if it turned water into gold, simply because it is an MS product.
"Waiting for the final release and then saying "this feature sucks"
Is useless. If you plan to participate in the beta process, give useful criticism. Claiming something sucks does this how?
THAT I beleive was the poster's point. There is a tremendous amount of "bitching" which is functionally different from "constructive criticism"
This was to be expected.
Whenever someone denounces one religion, some know nothing moron automatically assumes that it is an endorsement of anothe religion. In case you are wondering, YOU are that know nothing moron.
Now, SHOW ME WHERE I SAID CHRISTIANITY IS BETTER.
Do it. Show me.
You won't be able to, because I am intelligent enough to understand that ALL religions are flawed, and I have said so.
You on the other hand are clearly NOT bright enough to uderstand that by denouncing Islam, I am NOT supporting Christianity. If I could snap my fingers and do away with both, I would.
"You can shut the fuck up now."
You should have taken my advice, you would have avoided sounded ignorant. At least in this post.
While your points are valid, you chose the wrong CONTEXT.
There is NO right to know you are being investigated. I don't know why you think there is, but since you do, it colors the rest of your comment.
As in "this guy has no idea what the fuck he is talking about so I'll dismiss him as ignorant" colored.
"so i'm not sure what venue you expect a complaint to be heard in"
Well, where did you hear about these things? Do you have any idea how idiotic you sound claiming the abuses are covered up, then posting a link to an open website where you can read about them?
I honestly believe you people INTENTIONALLY ignore reason in order to rant about percieved abuses.
"So you're defending the assumption that the state's desire to keep secrets trumps an individual's right to a fair trial."
So you're trotting out an inaccurate representation of what I said ij order to make your point. Congratulations, you have succumbed to the Straw Man fallacy. It's ok, smarter people than you do it.
And to answer your attempt at a question, NO MORON I NEVER SAID STATE SECRETS TRUMP INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS.
My point, which you intentionally missed in order to do your idiotic straw man thing, is that THE SAFETY OF AN OPERATIVE SHOULD BE CONSIDERED.
Care to explain why the rights of an accused terrorist are somehow more important than the safety of an operative? Is your position that the operative is expendable as long as it's in the pursuit of an individual's civil rights? Funny how one life appears to be so much more important to you than another.
Next time you decide to comment on my post, READ IT, then ask someone smarter than you to compose a response, because you sound like a jackass.
When you point to ANYTHING of substance in my life that is changed by the PATRIOT act, I'll take comments like this seriously.
But the truth is, you're a chicken-little.
And save your idiotic "if it happens to them it could happen to you" garbage because all that demonstrates is your utter lack of knowledge of logical fallacies.
I assume you know the nazis weren't tried by the US. Not sure what they have to do with this at all, apart from the easy shock value of bringing them up.
"If they are truly terrorists then I'm sure they have enough to try them without compromising national security."
Ok, scenario 1. "Terrorist" goes on trial, operative is called to testify (which you cannot do anonymously) operative, which was previously VERY useful is now USELESS. Assuming they have enough evidence without the operative is just that, an assumption. I would say with near certainty you're wrong, because traditional methods of evidence gathering are ineffective.
THINK please. It helps you avoid sounding ignorant when you talk.
I love that you got modded insightful, despite the fact that you have no fucking idea what you are talking about.
If you bothered to actually learn about it ( you haven't, so don't lie we can tell from you post) you would realize enemy combatant status and has nothing to do with the PATRIOT act.
But god forbid you actually INFORM yourself.
How do morons like you get modded insightful?
Oh, right by other morons. If you agree with parent, and find yourself cursing me, you are one of those morons.
One possibility is that trying him will endanger operatives.
If he gets a trial and talks about who helped pinch him, they're useless and quite possibly dead.
Now, I'm not sure, but aren't the morons who are barking about divulging a (former) CIA operative's info the same morons barking about this padilla idiot?
Why yes they are, trapped in an incredible web of their own hypocrisy.
"Or do you care if a citizen gets a fair trial anyomre? If they can throw him in without a trial, they can do the same to you"
And how do you come to this conclusion? I mean it sounds great, but apart from the logical fallacy you've succumbed to, what do you have to support your position.
Chicken littles everywhere, thinking they're insightful because their echo-chamber blog friends tell them so.
We don't listen to you because you are a talker, interested in sounding like you have some "inside" knowledge, that somehow came from your superior insight.
But you don't. What you do have is a flair for dramatically overstating a position, spouting rhetoric, and essentially wasting time with your gasbag antics.
Stop LYING about what's happening (and by that I mean INTENTIONALLY exaggerating for effect) because it makes you look silly.
You know, I wish they had a mod "-1 missed the point"
They provided a music service. There is no reason that must include RIAA artists because
1. RIAA won't fuck with them. What stake can they claim if their artists aren't represented (spare me the moronic RIAA conspiracies). If they REALLY wanted a music service for students, they could partner with a real one, and probably get a deal.
2. They never wanted it used anyway. The purpose of this partnership is to insulate the schools when RIAA comes for the real file sharers.
The very things you claim will kill this are the reasons it was chosen in the first place.
Slashdot Mirror
This is ridiculous. How does having money make a company more innovative? Funding r&d doesn't guarantee anything useful.
Biased much?
"discussion within the community helps too"
Which I think you will agree is not the same as "bitching" about it, primarily because many people in the community would bitch if it turned water into gold, simply because it is an MS product.
"Waiting for the final release and then saying "this feature sucks"
Is useless. If you plan to participate in the beta process, give useful criticism. Claiming something sucks does this how?
THAT I beleive was the poster's point. There is a tremendous amount of "bitching" which is functionally different from "constructive criticism"
This was to be expected. Whenever someone denounces one religion, some know nothing moron automatically assumes that it is an endorsement of anothe religion. In case you are wondering, YOU are that know nothing moron. Now, SHOW ME WHERE I SAID CHRISTIANITY IS BETTER. Do it. Show me. You won't be able to, because I am intelligent enough to understand that ALL religions are flawed, and I have said so. You on the other hand are clearly NOT bright enough to uderstand that by denouncing Islam, I am NOT supporting Christianity. If I could snap my fingers and do away with both, I would. "You can shut the fuck up now." You should have taken my advice, you would have avoided sounded ignorant. At least in this post.
"I guess the question is, if its okay for agovernment official to out an agent,"
I never said it was, so fuck you. It's not ok in either case.
If you want to have a reasonable discussion, STOP MISREPRESENTING WHAT I SAY.
"You can't have it both ways, either."
I never tried, so to reiterate, FUCK YOU.
The slippery slope fallacy. Your ignorance of it outlines why you think the way you do.
Look it up, you'll be just a tad smarter, and you'll have me to thank.
"You think that we should all accept the government's assertions about this man without seeing any evidence to back it up whatsoever"
And that's the Straw Man. Smarter still.
"Now, what is to keep them from doing the same to anyone if they can do it to him?"
Ah, slippery slope redux.
You should have titled your post "LOGICAL FALLACIES 101"
While your points are valid, you chose the wrong CONTEXT.
There is NO right to know you are being investigated. I don't know why you think there is, but since you do, it colors the rest of your comment.
As in "this guy has no idea what the fuck he is talking about so I'll dismiss him as ignorant" colored.
"so i'm not sure what venue you expect a complaint to be heard in"
Well, where did you hear about these things? Do you have any idea how idiotic you sound claiming the abuses are covered up, then posting a link to an open website where you can read about them?
I honestly believe you people INTENTIONALLY ignore reason in order to rant about percieved abuses.
"So you're defending the assumption that the state's desire to keep secrets trumps an individual's right to a fair trial."
So you're trotting out an inaccurate representation of what I said ij order to make your point. Congratulations, you have succumbed to the Straw Man fallacy. It's ok, smarter people than you do it.
And to answer your attempt at a question, NO MORON I NEVER SAID STATE SECRETS TRUMP INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS.
My point, which you intentionally missed in order to do your idiotic straw man thing, is that THE SAFETY OF AN OPERATIVE SHOULD BE CONSIDERED.
Care to explain why the rights of an accused terrorist are somehow more important than the safety of an operative? Is your position that the operative is expendable as long as it's in the pursuit of an individual's civil rights? Funny how one life appears to be so much more important to you than another.
Next time you decide to comment on my post, READ IT, then ask someone smarter than you to compose a response, because you sound like a jackass.
"You play the game of excusing the behavior of one party by comparing it to the behavior of the other, as if two wrongs somehow make a right."
This is a lie.
I NEVER excused anyone's behavior, and if you can find ONE example of when I did, I'll eat my shoes.
But you won't, so fuck you.
BOTH sides suffer from a lack of accountability. I stated that very clearly, yet you trot out falsehood in an attempt to discredit what I've said.
Does the idea that government accountability is lacking not strike you as a reasonable, rational idea?
Oh I get it, I didn't slam Bush, so I must be an apologist. Fuck you again.
"The only people you are going to impress with those kind of arguments are small minded, bigoted idiots"
Which explains why I'm posting on slashdot.
Sorry man, but you're a liar, and I hate liars like you.
When you point to ANYTHING of substance in my life that is changed by the PATRIOT act, I'll take comments like this seriously.
But the truth is, you're a chicken-little.
And save your idiotic "if it happens to them it could happen to you" garbage because all that demonstrates is your utter lack of knowledge of logical fallacies.
"Um...I don't know where you get your definitions from...but killing over 100 people sounds like an act of war to me."
Well now I know never to take any of your posts seriously.
I assume you know the nazis weren't tried by the US. Not sure what they have to do with this at all, apart from the easy shock value of bringing them up.
"If they are truly terrorists then I'm sure they have enough to try them without compromising national security."
Ok, scenario 1. "Terrorist" goes on trial, operative is called to testify (which you cannot do anonymously) operative, which was previously VERY useful is now USELESS. Assuming they have enough evidence without the operative is just that, an assumption. I would say with near certainty you're wrong, because traditional methods of evidence gathering are ineffective.
THINK please. It helps you avoid sounding ignorant when you talk.
"Perhaps I'm misunderstanding you, but you seem to be saying that it's okay to hold "enemy combatants" without proof."
Yes
"If that's the case, what is the process for determining who is an "enemy combatant?"
Ok, so I would ask you, why would you feel the need to comment when you admit YOU HAVE NO IDEA WHAT THE FUCK YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT.
Don't you think you should have researched the subject before formulating an opinion, or is this indicative of how you come to decisions generally?
FINALLY!
Someone who adresses the REAL point.
If you want to be concerned about something, be concerned that there is no way to hold anyone accountable in these situations.
And despite what you people think, the situation has been that way for decades.
It's not PATRIOT, it's certainly not neo-cons, it's the total lack of accountablity in government that you should be ranting about.
And both sides suffer from it, so save your childish rhetoric, it serves no purpose and only makes things worse.
I love that you got modded insightful, despite the fact that you have no fucking idea what you are talking about.
If you bothered to actually learn about it ( you haven't, so don't lie we can tell from you post) you would realize enemy combatant status and has nothing to do with the PATRIOT act.
But god forbid you actually INFORM yourself.
How do morons like you get modded insightful?
Oh, right by other morons. If you agree with parent, and find yourself cursing me, you are one of those morons.
One possibility is that trying him will endanger operatives.
If he gets a trial and talks about who helped pinch him, they're useless and quite possibly dead.
Now, I'm not sure, but aren't the morons who are barking about divulging a (former) CIA operative's info the same morons barking about this padilla idiot?
Why yes they are, trapped in an incredible web of their own hypocrisy.
What makes you competent to judge that? What do you REALLY know about what's going on?
I hate you arrogant know it all fuckers who think that you're qualified to comment on everything under the sun.
You're a NOBODY who knows essentially NOTHING about what is going on, and you think that you have insight.
The only possible reason for that is incredible arrogance.
"Or do you care if a citizen gets a fair trial anyomre? If they can throw him in without a trial, they can do the same to you"
And how do you come to this conclusion? I mean it sounds great, but apart from the logical fallacy you've succumbed to, what do you have to support your position.
Chicken littles everywhere, thinking they're insightful because their echo-chamber blog friends tell them so.
"Is this guy any less likely to be a terrorist than the first one?"
Yes.
"Or are you generalizing the Muslim faith as a bunch of hate mongering terrorists. So much for tolerance."
KORAN commands to kill infidels:
Allah is an enemy to unbelievers. - Sura 2:98
On unbelievers is the curse of Allah. - Sura 2:161
Slay them wherever ye find them and drive them out of the places whence they drove you out, for persecution is worse than slaughter. - 2:191
I'M not generalizing anything, simply stating what is outlined in their (hehe) holy text.
You can shut the fuck up now.
Ok, I'm going to let you in on a secret.
We don't listen to you because you are a talker, interested in sounding like you have some "inside" knowledge, that somehow came from your superior insight.
But you don't. What you do have is a flair for dramatically overstating a position, spouting rhetoric, and essentially wasting time with your gasbag antics.
Stop LYING about what's happening (and by that I mean INTENTIONALLY exaggerating for effect) because it makes you look silly.
By listening to the people it is happening to.
Or do you think they'll disappear, never to be heard from again?
So, what essential liberty did I give up?
Oh, right this is what passes for interesting, trot out the same ridiculous (mis)quote and pretend it's intelligent commentary.
to say about this, because I would prefer not to wade through 500 posts about how my freedom is disappearing.
Wait, I'm on slashdot, never mind.
This isn't a "death star subwoofer" any more than a traditional speaker box is an "empire state building" subwoofer.
It's a spherical enclosure, with some (very) minor additions. A reasonable facsimile of the Death Star? Not even close.
When will you star wars nerds stop falling all over yourselves about this stuff?
You know, I wish they had a mod "-1 missed the point"
They provided a music service. There is no reason that must include RIAA artists because
1. RIAA won't fuck with them. What stake can they claim if their artists aren't represented (spare me the moronic RIAA conspiracies). If they REALLY wanted a music service for students, they could partner with a real one, and probably get a deal.
2. They never wanted it used anyway. The purpose of this partnership is to insulate the schools when RIAA comes for the real file sharers.
The very things you claim will kill this are the reasons it was chosen in the first place.
Yeah, but do they have any good music?