Sigh.. The entire government in the middle east was destroyed and disbanded at the end of WWI. Of course WWI was not about imperialism but even Thomas Jefferson had to bitch slap them because of the detestable things they were doing.
When WWI ended, something needed to be done with the lands. Most of it worked out somewhat well. Of course things change over time. Here is more on it.
It really isn't and wasn't about imperialism. It was about ending the status quo and getting aid in WWI.
HA.. This will be easy then. We kicked the UK's ass in the war of 1812.. Well, after we ended it but didn't get the word out to all the troops.
In case anyone is wondering, I'm talking about the battle of New Orleans in which an overwhelming British force was defaced and humiliated by a handful of regulars and some volunteer dirt farmers from the south. Communications were slow back then and it took some time before everyone actually knew the war ended.
The parent mentioned a religious attack on the internet and facetiously said I wonder how that will turn out.
The only relation intended here is the fact that one already happened, failed, and was forgotten by most people. The detailed was just explaining how the religious attack was set. It wasn't expected to be connected to Iranians or Islam.
Quite right. The problem though is that the entire premise was wrong before even needing to get to this level of analysis.
Interestingly, I posted that as an example of an "attack" on the internet that fizzled and failed and people seem to be spell bound about the details instead of there being an attack on the internet that failed. I guess the premise is interesting which is why it somewhat caught on until calmer heads pointed out the screw up.
did not see a single photo that was dated to the start of any recent conflict on any news channel. Selling photos from three weeks ago (pretty damn recent by almost any standard) would not help here.
They all had them and displayed them on air in their coverage of the war in Iraq and Afghanistan when it they started.
Even if they did get them, it's not like any news organization has people on hand who are skilled in telling Russian military hardware apart from Ukrainian military hardware in satellite photos (hint: you can't, unless you get lucky or can account for all of one side's hardware).
Yawn.. You bore me with this insipid tripe about how you cannot believe anyone other than governments have access to satellite imagery or could procure it. It is there in the private sector, they can get it, even you can purchase it. News organizations pay huge sums of cash to so called consultants who can distinguish between the two. But even if they all were broke and couldn't pay anyone, they could still show the images.
But now that you are so dead set on claiming they couldn't, and if they somehow could, they wouldn't know what they were looking at, I'm even more curious to why they haven't tried. Is the OPs point valid? Is it all propaganda?
You mean those same commercial companies with multi-million dollar assets that sold sat photos to all the 24 hour news channels at the start of the last two wars? I guess you have a point if we ingore that. But it is not like there isn't a revenue stream already in place.
And not finding a plan does absollutely nothing towards whether or not other sat pics could or should exist. Do you somehow think those commercial photos were fake or something?
First, i think Russia does have troops in the Ukriane.
But there are commercial entities in both Europe and the US who have satalites capable of taking photos with astounding resolutions. Google is one that comes to mind. Back in the 90s, ms had a site called terraserve or something like that which had sat photos of such resolution that you could read markings on stopped semi trailers. Of course that didn't last long before the US government limited the resolutions allowed to be released- which they just recently relaxed.
So i think it is a legitimate question. Where are all the sat photos of this incursion? We had tons of them when that plane disapeared. They were commercial photos and we were asked to look for potential wreckage from the plane.
And your point is what? Naming an argument does not mean it isn't proper to use it. Besides, it is not actually a no true scotsman argument. But what you would have otherwise? A few fringe idiots all the sudden represent every single other person of a group when there is absolutely no basis for it?
BTW, why it is not a no true scotsman argument is because he is not saying those people are not Christians, he is saying not all Christians are the same. A big bit of difference there.
The entire WWW=666 was incorrect but due to someone's misconceptions, was used as a basis to war against the internet. Pointing out that 666 should be 616 is like arguing the bank robber crew socks instead of tube socks when he robbed the bank. It does nothing to the fact the bank was robbed. Likewise, debating whether it was 666 or 616 does nothing for the fact that someone thought 666 was the number and that WWW represented it and attempted to attack the internet as evil. It's like saying the thought of WWW=666 is otherwise valid when it clearly is not.
You might as well be saying the blue moon isn't blue for what it is worth. I mean the entire premise of the post was about misconceptions as the basis for a war against the internet.
You see, letters in the hebrew language are also numbers. There is no W so V is used in it's place or in other words, V and W are interchangeable. It so happens that V is also 6 so when you type www, you are typing 666. That's right, every time to go on the World Wide Web, you are paying homage to the beast.
That was the early rallying cry to why the internet was evil and should be removed. Of course some people who actually knew better checked up on those facts and it turns out a little different.
They can't comprehend the requirement of reasonable limitation on personal freedom as the underlying theme of constitutional government
WTF are you talking about? The constitution places no limits on freedom of the people. In fact, the US constitution is specifically a contract allowing government to do certain things. They are automatically barred from others but the bill of rights was put in place to ensure some key elements never took hold. Government seems to be wanting to forget that now but it is the entire premise of the federalist papers and the anti-federalist papers which discussed this very fact in detail and persuaded unwilling states to join in.
They see the world in terms of a polemical struggles of good and evil, black and white, us versus them.
I would say that when you believe what you just wrote above this, you would not understand why people who have a clue reject your assumptions as an attack on principle. The biggest amount of bullshit about all this is if your way is really better, you can amend the constitution and make it legitimate instead of crying about how inferior everyone who disagrees with you are because they don't magically see or understand something that goes completely contrary to the US constitution and the history surrounding it.
That's why they can't abide political comprise and seek to destroy anything they equate with their misguided definition of socialism as the arch enemy of democracy.
No one should ever compromise the integrity of the US constitution. Amend the damn thing if you think it needs changed.
Except the troll in question didn't take exception to being invaded, he took exception to an explanation that voided fault on anything but abuses of automated systems for the blocking of messages.
And yes, that would make them a troll when he has no evidence or presented no evidence otherwise.
I'm with ya. Except I don't think anyone should be collecting all this data unless it is with a warrant else none of it should ever be able to be used against you.
But if you do start something like that, and there are plenty of sites out there that could make it easier to do than you probably realize, just make sure you are not in violation of some law in your home state so they don't take your free speech and jack a boot on your neck in some john Wayne syndrome fit of a superiority complex.
Their life time will be shorter and there are a list of other ailments associated with smoking but smokers and cancer is not a 100% given. On the other hand, of certain cancers, a high number of people with them are smokers, are thought to have it because of smokers, and of the deaths associated with them, smokers seem to be extremely high compared to non-smokers.
What you are describing is the same thing as a LPR (license plate recognition) setup which is the same thing as the cops use sans the ability to check warrants and crap. Repossession companies have been using this for years, there are even nation wide networks of hits like this that can be searched in case a repo has moved to another state.
Some states are at odds with civilians doing this and made it illegal. Some states make only sharing the information to anyone but employees and law enforcement illegal. Some states that made it illegal are fighting court battles over it right now. What you described would be covered depending on what state and the laws if any about it.
Smoking pot destroys quite a bit of the supposed good stuff in it. Its really a poor delivery system outside of getting high.
As far as causing cancer, it is a surprisingly low number of smokers who get cancer from smoking. I know it is presented as if you even look at a cigarette, you will get cancer and die, but less than 10% of life long smokers will get cancer. But of people who have cancer, something like 87% of the lung cancer deaths are from smoking and about 30% of all cancer deaths are from smoking. Further, smoking increases your risks of cancer about 23 times that of non smokers so there is a strong tie in with cancer. This is how the tobacco companies were able to refute connections to smoking and cancer for so long and probably why they weren't just shut down completely after losing court battle after court battle.
Now when comparing smoking pot with tobacco, you have to understand that the combustion process changes a lot of the chemicals within the substances, creates new ones by reactions, and it is thought that these changes may modify your risks of cancers and other diseases. Similarly, fire fighters seem to have higher risks of cancers and it is thought because of exposure to smoke and supposedly safe chemicals for fire retardants when burned.
I just wouldn't trust anyone who says it is safe to smoke pot. Maybe it might be less dangerous, but that would mean it would still be dangerous.
Some states have banned the use of LPR devices outside of law enforcement and others have banned the sale of information outside of within the company who collected it and established affiliates.
Repossession companies have used this tech going on almost a decade now. Some states don't bother with regulating it, some areas the repo companies self regulate and only sell to Law enforcement or other repo companies. Some states outright forbid it outside of law enforcement. It's a moving target and the laws on it change all the time. In some states, the laws are being challenged by the ACLU and other entities in court.
But beware. Even with their claims of legality being the exact ones you might use, remember how many other people were arrested, had their electronic devices taken and in some cases destroyed for little more than recording cops in public areas. Hell, one guy spent a weekend in jail and had to pay out the nose for a defense because his home security system records the cops.
The actual videos themselves may contain enough information to track vehicles over a period of time
You don't even need the videos. LPR tech is used by repo companies all the time (where it isn't outlawed now) and with a short history of hits on a specific license plate, you can specifically identify the habits of a person and realistically track them to a location in which the car can be repossessed while they are not in it.
But here is why the EFF and such want the information. They want to show how possible this is so the public knows it is more than a camera which notifies the cops when a license plate of a stolen car drives by them. That every single license plate the system recognizes goes into a storage computer along with the date, time, GPS location and likely other information.
Depending on how long this data is kept, they can reconstruct a lot of things about you, like when you were parked in that abortion clinic/AIDS treatment center parking lot for 4 hours that one Friday (when your car broke down and you pushed it off the road but it won't have that info with it). They look and reliably detect your work schedule, when you visit the grocery stores, and a lot of other things. All without you ever doing anything wrong.
Slashdot Mirror
Sigh.. The entire government in the middle east was destroyed and disbanded at the end of WWI. Of course WWI was not about imperialism but even Thomas Jefferson had to bitch slap them because of the detestable things they were doing.
When WWI ended, something needed to be done with the lands. Most of it worked out somewhat well. Of course things change over time. Here is more on it.
It really isn't and wasn't about imperialism. It was about ending the status quo and getting aid in WWI.
HA.. This will be easy then. We kicked the UK's ass in the war of 1812.. Well, after we ended it but didn't get the word out to all the troops.
In case anyone is wondering, I'm talking about the battle of New Orleans in which an overwhelming British force was defaced and humiliated by a handful of regulars and some volunteer dirt farmers from the south. Communications were slow back then and it took some time before everyone actually knew the war ended.
The parent mentioned a religious attack on the internet and facetiously said I wonder how that will turn out.
The only relation intended here is the fact that one already happened, failed, and was forgotten by most people. The detailed was just explaining how the religious attack was set. It wasn't expected to be connected to Iranians or Islam.
Quite right. The problem though is that the entire premise was wrong before even needing to get to this level of analysis.
Interestingly, I posted that as an example of an "attack" on the internet that fizzled and failed and people seem to be spell bound about the details instead of there being an attack on the internet that failed. I guess the premise is interesting which is why it somewhat caught on until calmer heads pointed out the screw up.
So eill the passengers who caught a ride with them and likely anyone who's phone is malfunctioning.
As long as it isn't me or whatever.
You mean other than the fact people will think Kim "Dot Com" was the father or something right?
They all had them and displayed them on air in their coverage of the war in Iraq and Afghanistan when it they started.
Yawn.. You bore me with this insipid tripe about how you cannot believe anyone other than governments have access to satellite imagery or could procure it. It is there in the private sector, they can get it, even you can purchase it. News organizations pay huge sums of cash to so called consultants who can distinguish between the two. But even if they all were broke and couldn't pay anyone, they could still show the images.
But now that you are so dead set on claiming they couldn't, and if they somehow could, they wouldn't know what they were looking at, I'm even more curious to why they haven't tried. Is the OPs point valid? Is it all propaganda?
Hmm.. "Prefix".. I'm not sure that word means what you think it means. At least the two examples you gave do not fit.
My understanding was that yelp was paying people to post negetive reviews until they got their advertising contract.
However, it appears the court (EFF) didn't understand that and thought all the reviewers were regular people and not agents of yelp.
This might not be over.
You mean those same commercial companies with multi-million dollar assets that sold sat photos to all the 24 hour news channels at the start of the last two wars? I guess you have a point if we ingore that. But it is not like there isn't a revenue stream already in place.
And not finding a plan does absollutely nothing towards whether or not other sat pics could or should exist. Do you somehow think those commercial photos were fake or something?
First, i think Russia does have troops in the Ukriane.
But there are commercial entities in both Europe and the US who have satalites capable of taking photos with astounding resolutions. Google is one that comes to mind. Back in the 90s, ms had a site called terraserve or something like that which had sat photos of such resolution that you could read markings on stopped semi trailers. Of course that didn't last long before the US government limited the resolutions allowed to be released- which they just recently relaxed.
So i think it is a legitimate question. Where are all the sat photos of this incursion? We had tons of them when that plane disapeared. They were commercial photos and we were asked to look for potential wreckage from the plane.
No one said they were worried about it. The entire www=666 isn't even connected to Muslims.
The parent said
Then I said about as well as it worked out last time then presented the last time I knew of a religious war against the internet.
I swear... This isn't all that difficult. Are people really that obtuse?
And your point is what? Naming an argument does not mean it isn't proper to use it. Besides, it is not actually a no true scotsman argument. But what you would have otherwise? A few fringe idiots all the sudden represent every single other person of a group when there is absolutely no basis for it?
BTW, why it is not a no true scotsman argument is because he is not saying those people are not Christians, he is saying not all Christians are the same. A big bit of difference there.
Does it really need spelled out?
The entire WWW=666 was incorrect but due to someone's misconceptions, was used as a basis to war against the internet. Pointing out that 666 should be 616 is like arguing the bank robber crew socks instead of tube socks when he robbed the bank. It does nothing to the fact the bank was robbed. Likewise, debating whether it was 666 or 616 does nothing for the fact that someone thought 666 was the number and that WWW represented it and attempted to attack the internet as evil. It's like saying the thought of WWW=666 is otherwise valid when it clearly is not.
And WWW is not 666 either.
You might as well be saying the blue moon isn't blue for what it is worth. I mean the entire premise of the post was about misconceptions as the basis for a war against the internet.
About as well as it did the last time..
You see, letters in the hebrew language are also numbers. There is no W so V is used in it's place or in other words, V and W are interchangeable. It so happens that V is also 6 so when you type www, you are typing 666. That's right, every time to go on the World Wide Web, you are paying homage to the beast.
That was the early rallying cry to why the internet was evil and should be removed. Of course some people who actually knew better checked up on those facts and it turns out a little different.
WTF are you talking about? The constitution places no limits on freedom of the people. In fact, the US constitution is specifically a contract allowing government to do certain things. They are automatically barred from others but the bill of rights was put in place to ensure some key elements never took hold. Government seems to be wanting to forget that now but it is the entire premise of the federalist papers and the anti-federalist papers which discussed this very fact in detail and persuaded unwilling states to join in.
I would say that when you believe what you just wrote above this, you would not understand why people who have a clue reject your assumptions as an attack on principle. The biggest amount of bullshit about all this is if your way is really better, you can amend the constitution and make it legitimate instead of crying about how inferior everyone who disagrees with you are because they don't magically see or understand something that goes completely contrary to the US constitution and the history surrounding it.
No one should ever compromise the integrity of the US constitution. Amend the damn thing if you think it needs changed.
Except the troll in question didn't take exception to being invaded, he took exception to an explanation that voided fault on anything but abuses of automated systems for the blocking of messages.
And yes, that would make them a troll when he has no evidence or presented no evidence otherwise.
I'm with ya. Except I don't think anyone should be collecting all this data unless it is with a warrant else none of it should ever be able to be used against you.
But if you do start something like that, and there are plenty of sites out there that could make it easier to do than you probably realize, just make sure you are not in violation of some law in your home state so they don't take your free speech and jack a boot on your neck in some john Wayne syndrome fit of a superiority complex.
Citation for what? Fewer than 10% of life long smokers will get cancer in their life time. That is not even counting those who started and stopped at some point in their life.
Their life time will be shorter and there are a list of other ailments associated with smoking but smokers and cancer is not a 100% given. On the other hand, of certain cancers, a high number of people with them are smokers, are thought to have it because of smokers, and of the deaths associated with them, smokers seem to be extremely high compared to non-smokers.
And you do not think the fact that relatively low numbers of people who smoke ever get cancer doesn't play a part in making that possible?
What you are describing is the same thing as a LPR (license plate recognition) setup which is the same thing as the cops use sans the ability to check warrants and crap. Repossession companies have been using this for years, there are even nation wide networks of hits like this that can be searched in case a repo has moved to another state.
Some states are at odds with civilians doing this and made it illegal. Some states make only sharing the information to anyone but employees and law enforcement illegal. Some states that made it illegal are fighting court battles over it right now. What you described would be covered depending on what state and the laws if any about it.
Smoking pot destroys quite a bit of the supposed good stuff in it. Its really a poor delivery system outside of getting high.
As far as causing cancer, it is a surprisingly low number of smokers who get cancer from smoking. I know it is presented as if you even look at a cigarette, you will get cancer and die, but less than 10% of life long smokers will get cancer. But of people who have cancer, something like 87% of the lung cancer deaths are from smoking and about 30% of all cancer deaths are from smoking. Further, smoking increases your risks of cancer about 23 times that of non smokers so there is a strong tie in with cancer. This is how the tobacco companies were able to refute connections to smoking and cancer for so long and probably why they weren't just shut down completely after losing court battle after court battle.
Now when comparing smoking pot with tobacco, you have to understand that the combustion process changes a lot of the chemicals within the substances, creates new ones by reactions, and it is thought that these changes may modify your risks of cancers and other diseases. Similarly, fire fighters seem to have higher risks of cancers and it is thought because of exposure to smoke and supposedly safe chemicals for fire retardants when burned.
I just wouldn't trust anyone who says it is safe to smoke pot. Maybe it might be less dangerous, but that would mean it would still be dangerous.
Some states have banned the use of LPR devices outside of law enforcement and others have banned the sale of information outside of within the company who collected it and established affiliates.
Repossession companies have used this tech going on almost a decade now. Some states don't bother with regulating it, some areas the repo companies self regulate and only sell to Law enforcement or other repo companies. Some states outright forbid it outside of law enforcement. It's a moving target and the laws on it change all the time. In some states, the laws are being challenged by the ACLU and other entities in court.
But beware. Even with their claims of legality being the exact ones you might use, remember how many other people were arrested, had their electronic devices taken and in some cases destroyed for little more than recording cops in public areas. Hell, one guy spent a weekend in jail and had to pay out the nose for a defense because his home security system records the cops.
You don't even need the videos. LPR tech is used by repo companies all the time (where it isn't outlawed now) and with a short history of hits on a specific license plate, you can specifically identify the habits of a person and realistically track them to a location in which the car can be repossessed while they are not in it.
But here is why the EFF and such want the information. They want to show how possible this is so the public knows it is more than a camera which notifies the cops when a license plate of a stolen car drives by them. That every single license plate the system recognizes goes into a storage computer along with the date, time, GPS location and likely other information.
Depending on how long this data is kept, they can reconstruct a lot of things about you, like when you were parked in that abortion clinic/AIDS treatment center parking lot for 4 hours that one Friday (when your car broke down and you pushed it off the road but it won't have that info with it). They look and reliably detect your work schedule, when you visit the grocery stores, and a lot of other things. All without you ever doing anything wrong.