1) While there may be some Mullahs in caves halfway around the world, it has also been shown beyond doubt that there are people living among us that DO wish to cause us harm. (No, I'm not going to do the legwork for you on that one, feel free to Google it.) So the concern for the safety of ordinary Americans from Islamofascists is quite real, and trying to minimize it by painting it as a far-away issue is , I think, intellectually dishonest.
HOWEVER
2) I DO NOT think that the REALID is the way to fix it. As many conservatives will remind you, ALL of the 9/11 hijackers had valid and legal identification, including state driver's licenses. So simply adding another layer of bureaucracy is no way to protect us from crazy people that want to kill us. I (along with many, many conservatives) see this like the libertarians do, as just another rights-grab by a bloated Federal Government.
I've never seen a liberal "go out of their way to excuse the most heinous behavior of Muslims"
You must be new here.;)
How about reading some of the responses to my posts. (Krog's post just a few up would be a good start. Moral Equivocation between two disparate and dissimilar groups is one form of stifling honest debate about the failings of one group. In this case, equivocating Christians with Muslims to discredit honest and factual criticism of Islam.)
Have you EVER been to DailyKOS? The hate and vitriol directed at Christians (and Jews) there is nothing short of HORRIFYING. To see the naked, burning HATE some people have for Christians with NO real reason is, frankly, vile and disgusting. And let's not get into the Antisemitism RAMPANT on that site. I feel dirty just mentioning it. Of course, Muslims there get a completely free ride, and are, in fact CELEBRATED, even when they are involved in horrific acts of terrorism.
One might also point out, that Christianity reformed itself away from the corruptions of the Dark Ages quite some time ago. Indeed, Modern Christianity has been at the forefront of many of our most celebrated movements. These include the fight against Slavery (started by churches) and the Women's Suffrage in America (Started by Christian Women).
Meanwhile, Islam is still stuck in the 7th century, still talking about past glories, and still ignoring the horrifying state of it's own affairs. I'm sorry, but a "Religion of Peace" does NOT generate the Taliban, Al Quaeda, and the MILLIONS of other splinter terrorist groups that Islam has. These groups are indicative of a fundamental flaw in this religion, or a corruption of the original intent so massive and deep that it may not be reversible.
I do hope for Islam that it may yet return to the glory days of Sufism. Outspoken Muslim women like Hirsi Anan and other outspoken Muslims do give me hope. However when they are under threat from fatwas issued by supposedly "moderate" Muslim leaders, that hope is seriously shaken.
When that happens, they become a very real threat.
Threat? To whom? Talk about disconnected from reality. These are CHRISTIANS we are talking about. the "Turn the other Cheek" people. the "Treat others like you want to be treated" people. How the HELL are these people dangerous? What, because some of them choose to exercise their right to vote by voting for initiatives they like (like getting to choose the school you send your child to.) Ooo! How dangerous!
And they aren't Nanny Staters. Ok, some of them are, those ones mostly vote Democrat (in the US). But the majority aren't. The majority don't want the nanny state, because a Socialistic Big Government (AKA: Nanny State) interferes with their lives, by trying to tell them how to live, and how to raise their children.
Oh, and don't try and bring Jack Thompson into this. He's NOT a Christian, he's just an opportunistic loony trying to make a name for himself and a buck by stirring up trouble for video game companies. I don't know ANY Christians who take him seriously. I do know of some who once did, but when he showed himself as a fruitcake, they dropped him like a hot potato. Besides, how in the heck does a nobody like Jack Thompson get classified as DANGEROUS? Annoying, yes. Comical, absolutely. But DANGEROUS? No. Not buying it. That's just hyperbole.
Let's also keep in mind that Christians are citizens too. They have just as much right as anyone else to get together and vote as a bloc on issues that concern them, or to "Lobby the Government for Redress" Just like anyone else. Being loud doesn't make someone dangerous. Not that Christians are exactly "loud" anyway. The only thing most Congress-critters really hear is Money, and Christians aren't exactly known for obscene wealth. Unlike the Hollywood Leftists, or the George Soroses of the world.
There isn't anything wrong with disagreeing with them on the issues, but to characterize them as somehow DANGEROUS because of the way they believe smacks of religious bigotry.
Christianity is losing adherents. Other religions are gaining them.
Unfortunately, this is true.
Equally unfortunately, the primary religion gaining adherents is Islam. Which is several orders of magnitude more dangerous to Womens Rights Issues than Christianity ever dreamed of being in the darkest days of the Dark Ages.
Railing against modern Christianity as some sort of progress-destroying bogeyman is like putting "Danger! Killer Dog!" signs up around a toothless,three legged Chihuahua. Not only doesn't it make sense, it makes you look like a fool.
In the meantime, many Islamic countries still practice Slavery, and Women are little better than cattle.
Meanwhile, in Iran.....
Buran: Damnit! You hidebound, dogmatic, bigoted sexists!
Mohammad: BACK IN THE BAG, BITCH! *Punches Buran in the face and stuffs her into a Burkha*
Buran: (muffled) Ow! You hit me, you sexist pig!
Mohammad: That's it! *CHOP!* (Buran's head rolls down the street)
But hey. Those CHRISTIANS, they're the REAL danger! Fight the power Buran! You keep after those Eeeevil Christians!
It's not Christians you should fear AT ALL. The overwhelming majority of them just want to live their lives in peace and quiet, and raise their families as they see fit, without a bunch of nanny-state lefties sticking their noses in. A small minority want to get in your face about their beliefs and/or try to make insignificant changes in public policy. At the most, that vanishingly small minority is slightly annoying, but certainly not a threat of any sort. (Keep in mind, these ARE the "Turn the other cheek" people. Not exactly dangerous types.)
It never ceases to amaze me that Liberals can have so much hate towards Christians, and yet go out of their way to excuse the most heinous behavior of Muslims. Not only doesn't it make any sense, it's not terribly logical or consistent either.
So let's all just back off from the Christian hate and the passive-aggressive Christian bashing.
(Yeah, yeah, I know, this is/. But that doesn't mean we can't be civil.)
Except that this is Ubuntu we are talking about. The Ubuntu forums are VERY newbie friendly, and very tightly moderated to eliminate forum trolls.
Of course, if you had spent any time AT ALL on the Ubuntu forums, you would know that. The only people who generally don't get help are those that go in with a snotty, arrogant attitude. Although even they are OFFERED help, but their own attitude usually gets in the way of them being able to absorb it. I have myself been a Linux newbie, and have even recently, well out of my newbie stage, gotten stuck on an oddball issue now and again, and have always been able to find friendly and useful help on the Ubuntu forums.
Honestly, that is what drew me to Ubuntu. While it is a very useful distro, I found the greatest draw was the near complete LACK of the classic Linux community snobbery that so often pervades web forums and IRC channels. Ubuntu users, particularly the more experienced ones, seem to be just generally nicer people.
Of course, I have seen their moderators in action, and have seen flame posts vanish within moments of being posted. So I'm sure that a crack moderator staff has at least something to do with that. However, even THAT redounds well to Ubuntu. It shows that the community and Canonical understand that good PR is very often a key to success. And that the web forums are the Ubuntu community's public face. So they work hard to keep it looking good and working smoothly by stamping out any trolls and "cult of personality" types.
Ok, I'll get off the fanboy soapbox for now. I guess I'm just saying that your point really has no merit, as it doesn't jibe with the reality of the Ubuntu forums that I have experienced on a regular basis.
Yes, because creating a PR-oriented (and quite well made) video game is EXACTLY the same as teaching your children to make REAL suicide bombs and that murdering innocent Jews is the right thing to do. EXACTLY the same. Hooray for Moral Equivalence!
Buddy, that wasn't even a GOOD strawman argument, let alone an effective one.
countering fundamentalist Islam with fundamentalist Christianity
Huh. Last time I checked, we were countering Fundamentalist Islam with Freedom and Prosperity, not Fundamentalist Christianity. but hey, what do I know. I mean, it's not like the Muslim peoples of Iraq are so happy about their newfound freedom of religion that they would ask Iraqi Christian Ex-pats to come back to Iraq. It's not as though those same moderate Iraqi Muslims would say, help repair a cross on a church with Iraqi Christians to show solidarity with them. I mean, it's not as though a new day of religious freedom is dawning across Iraq. Yeah, it must be us Eeevil "Fundie Christian American Opressors(tm)" that are MAKING them do nice things like that. Yeah.... that's the ticket...
Geez. Taking your tinfoil-hatted strawman BS somewhere else. The rest of us like living in reality.
The fact is, small children are REGULARLY used by AQ, Taliban, Hamas and Hezbollah to carry out terror attacks. Why? Because people don't naturally connect children with danger. Thus, the scumbags in terrorist organizations brainwash kids into doing their dirty work.
Those bombs are obviously fake, but who's to say that this kid won't be strapping on REAL ones next?
This is the culture of the terrorists. Death, Destruction, and Murder. And it has been like this for WAY longer than the US has been involved in the middle east, so please, no intellectually dishonest attempts to blame this on the US or the west. These people have done this to themselves.
It's a sad, sick world when a child grows up with a hateful dream of blowing themselves to bits while murdering innocents. These people need to answer for what they are doing to their children, and their so-called religious and political leaders need to pay the deadly price for bringing such evil into the world.
All you Liberals out there need to stop excusing their evil and open your eyes.
I love how Liberals always mention the SECOND half of the second amendment, but always seem to miss the FIRST half of it, "The Right to Keep and Bear Arms". I suspect they do it to avoid an uncomfortable truth...
That the right to keep and bear arms is always one of the FIRST things taken away by totalitarians.
Usually this is done in the guise of; "Why would you need a weapon like that unless you want the break the law?" or; "Weapons like that are dangerous. For the safety of all citizens, only law enforcement and the military should have them."
Sound familiar?
Not to invoke Godwin's law (or goofy/. memes), but in the old Soviet Union, Communist China, and yes, even old Nazi Germany, the right to keep and bear arms was the very first right done away with.
Why?
Because it's much easier to control your populace when they have no means to fight back with.
Before I begin, a disclaimer: I am a Conservative. I regularly read conservative news and blog sources, such as Newbusters, Hot Air, TownHall.com, Little Green Footballs, and the Jawa Report. I am also an avid gamer. I currently am playing mostly EVE-Online, and a bit of TA Spring. I have been gaming since before the days of Sierra's Hero Quest, and I still have an original, functional Atari game system.
So now that I've set your expectations and prejudices, I shall continue...
Honestly, I think of this as the O'Reilly effect.
One of the things I have noticed, is that ever since O'Reilly became an ascendant star on Fox News, the tone of the channel has changed a bit in regards to all things Internet. This is especially evident when Bill-O himself is on, even when he talks with fellow conservatives about the issue. Here is a link to him talking with Mary Katherine Ham about whether the Internet is a good or bad thing: http://hotair.com/archives/2008/01/23/video-mary-katharine-ham-talks-smoking-crack-with-oreilly/
As you can see, O'Reilly is as clueless as ever when it comes to all things Internet. Honestly, he makes Internet-Savvy Conservatives look bad. At least when it comes to technology, he comes off as a boorish old geezer. Honestly, I'm not sure how much of it is an act, and how much is him just being completely out of touch.
MKH, on the other hand, clearly "gets it". Of course, she's my generation (Gen-X) so it's not surprising that she would have a better grasp of this. Also, if you read through the comments at Hot Air, you can see that many of the other conservatives there think like I do, and just shake their heads with a mix of disgust and sadness at O'Reilly.
I think that his influence has been seeping into the rest of Fox News for some time. While obviously the PHB's there think that controversy like this makes for good ratings (and it does), it also serves to make the whole network look out of touch to younger viewers. I think it's a short-term gain, long-term loss kind of strategy. I guess time will tell if I'm right or not.
Either way, both myself, and many other conservatives think that the whole Mass Effect "controversy" is a compete non-starter, and entirely fabricated. As others here have said, it's a rated "M" game. The industry has marked it appropriately, and it's up to parents to make use of the tools given to them and make a judgment about whether or not to buy this game.
This is part and parcel of the conservative concept of Freedom. YOU get to control what you and your children are exposed to. It's not the Government's job to decide that. As far as the original article that spawned the controversy, I've read it, and it's utter hogwash. The writer is just a tool looking for some cheap publicity. Ignore him.
IE: 3 NIC's, and 2 VM's in one box. One running as his server through an "internal network only" NIC, and the other as a virtual router appliance running through an "external network only" NIC, a firewalled connection to an "Internal" NIC and a Virtual network connection to the server V-Machine.
I've been planning on doing this myself to reduce my power consumption levels. I just need to get the hot swappable RAID 5 setup going so I can have full redundancy (currently running on multiple non-redundant RAID 0 arrays) and I'm ready to roll.
I can't believe that the myth of "free" ad-backed games is still out there. It seems there are plenty of people who would be ok with having ads "If the game is price-reduced or free".
However, I think we, as gamers need to take a hard look at the reality of the situation and realize that there is no way on earth that any self-respecting game company is going to allow a revenue stream to pass them by. Yes, there will be ads in the games, but you will still pay full-price. Don't believe me?
Case in point, SOE's "Planetside":
SOE introduced ads into that game on special billboards that were posted around the game world inside buildings. Usually right near spawn-points so that every time you respawned, you saw the ads. They were inside every building, in multiple places. You could not miss them.
SOE's explanation was that the ads were a "Pilot program to find ways to offset the subscription costs so that subscriptions can be made cheaper." So, did the price for the game sub go down? NO. Did the price for the game sub go up? YES. So not only do the players have to pay MORE for the sub than they used to, but now they pay for the "privilege" of viewing ads!
Keep in mind that many of the ads were ANIMATED, WITH SOUND! Incredibly distracting, particularly for an MMOFPS. Even after a massive protest by the community and loss of a big chunk of the playerbase, SOE kept the ads in(although they did restrict the animated ads to only the "sanctuaries" where there was no PVP).
While SOE does get a well-deserved rap for being one of the worst gaming companies out there, I see them, not as an anomaly, but as the bellwether of the gaming world. What SOE has done, other companies will do. This is what EA is trying now, just in a less in-your-face manner. They are taking the "Incremental" approach, like the "frog in boiling water" analogy. They know if they slam us with ads in every game, gamers will revolt. but if they slowly introduce us to the concept of ads in games, ANY game, They believe that we will become desensitized to it. Then before you know it you will be seeing billboards with animated ads in every game. Then it will be too late.
The time to stand up against this is now. Don't buy games with ads, and don't play supposed "free" games that are ad-supported. Make game ads and non-starter and a money loser, and we will be able to keep our ad-free experience. But if you let the in-game-ad camel's nose under the tent, don't complain when your end up stepping in Camel Dung down the line.
Jesus of Nazareth was not illiterate. According to passages in the Bible, and many Theologians and Historians, it is highly likely that he was not only literate, but bilingual;
He would have had to be able read the Torah in it's classical Hebrew. This was taught in all Jewish communities at the time, as all males had to be able to read from the Torah. There is also a passage in the Bible that describes Jesus standing and reading from the Torah in his local Synagogue, so we do have a written account of his Literacy.
In addition, there are several passages that describe Jesus preaching in public areas to large groups of mixed Jews and non-Jews. The common language of the day was Aramaic, and it is this language that Jesus likely spoke on an everyday basis. Again, there is written account of this, in addition to the very high likely-hood of this as per historians and other scholars.
Jesus was also not a "peasant". Keep in mind that Joseph, (Jesus' "father") was a Carpenter and, as per the culture and traditions of the time, Jesus would have learned this trade before beginning His ministry. Carpenters and other skilled tradesmen were the Middle Class of the day as they had a highly valued and difficult to learn skill. So Jesus was Middle Class, not poor.
So basically EVERYTHING in your statement is completely wrong.
Umm.. it's "Grounded". Not "Earthed" ya dweebs. What, did you think you were being clever or something? "Earthed" isn't even technically correct, like Sun vs Sol. It's just plain wrong, and doesn't even SOUND smart. Geez.
You people actually run consumer-level commercial wireless routers?
Apparently I'm the only one here that runs a Smoothwall router and a separate wireless bridge connected to a DMZ'ed network. Wired connections on the normal network, wireless on the DMZ. Soon I'll be upgrading to include a wireless card in my smoothie, and it will run everything. What self-respecting geek actually uses consumer-end garbage and doesn't DIY a proper router/firewall?
The article specifically references the issue of the prosecutors demanding the key.
Correct.
The article also implies that while the defendant was attempting to use his 5th Amendment right against self incrimination to stop having to give the key, they expected the judge to force him to give it since he already gave it willingly to the border patrol agent.
That is the trick. If you have something encrypted, simply refuse to give them the key, or play dumb.... BPAgent: What is this 10GB file on your hard drive with the gibberish name?
You: What file? I don't know what you mean officer.
BPAgent: THIS one! (points at screen)
You: Gosh officer, I have no idea what that is. Oh no! Do you think I have a Virus?
BPAgent: (grumbling) I wouldn't know Sir. Never mind, here is your laptop back, have a nice day.
You: Why thank you officer! (walks away whistling)
While they might be able to arrest you for "Interfering in a Police investigation" You can then successfully plead the 5th, and the prosecution will likely have to drop the case. Being unwilling to do something to incriminate yourself is NOT a crime anywhere in the United States, Nor is not knowing what something on your hard drive is. Heck, if ignorance of the contents of PC hard drives was a crime, 99% of the population would have to be locked up!
And "Revolutionized online play"? Ummm.. PC games have had in-game and out of game unified matchmaking services for YEARS before the FIRST xbox came around, let alone the 360. Consoles are just playing catch-up to what pc's have had for almost a decade now. Yeah, reeeeal revolutionary...:\
May I humbly and politely suggest you remove your lips from Mr. Gates' hind quarters and reconsider your opinion in this matter.
But most everything prior to the last 30 years is well enshrined in paper. I would say being able to quickly build civilization back to a 1980's level would be pretty darn good. Heck, even back to a 1950's level would be more than acceptable. Yes, we wouldn't have computers as we now know them, but we would re-develop them rather quickly.
There are also several efforts to preserve knowledge in a non-perishable format by several Libraries around the world. I remember reading about some of them, possibly on Slashdot. I would provide a link but I'm just too damn lazy today, however I'm sure that Google will serve you well should you choose to look it up.
I personally think that while we would lose large portions of our society, we would eventually be able to build back up to our current state, perhaps within 100 years. Which is pretty impressive, as far as civilizations go.
Slashdot Mirror
OK, two things:
1) While there may be some Mullahs in caves halfway around the world, it has also been shown beyond doubt that there are people living among us that DO wish to cause us harm. (No, I'm not going to do the legwork for you on that one, feel free to Google it.) So the concern for the safety of ordinary Americans from Islamofascists is quite real, and trying to minimize it by painting it as a far-away issue is , I think, intellectually dishonest.
HOWEVER
2) I DO NOT think that the REALID is the way to fix it. As many conservatives will remind you, ALL of the 9/11 hijackers had valid and legal identification, including state driver's licenses. So simply adding another layer of bureaucracy is no way to protect us from crazy people that want to kill us. I (along with many, many conservatives) see this like the libertarians do, as just another rights-grab by a bloated Federal Government.
What the heck does a noodle and cheese dish have to do with a band from the 70's and 80's? (other than the "cheese")
Oh, Wait...
Nevermind.
You must be new here.
How about reading some of the responses to my posts. (Krog's post just a few up would be a good start. Moral Equivocation between two disparate and dissimilar groups is one form of stifling honest debate about the failings of one group. In this case, equivocating Christians with Muslims to discredit honest and factual criticism of Islam.)
Have you EVER been to DailyKOS? The hate and vitriol directed at Christians (and Jews) there is nothing short of HORRIFYING. To see the naked, burning HATE some people have for Christians with NO real reason is, frankly, vile and disgusting. And let's not get into the Antisemitism RAMPANT on that site. I feel dirty just mentioning it. Of course, Muslims there get a completely free ride, and are, in fact CELEBRATED, even when they are involved in horrific acts of terrorism.
So please don't feign ignorance, it's unbecoming.
Well said lgw.
One might also point out, that Christianity reformed itself away from the corruptions of the Dark Ages quite some time ago. Indeed, Modern Christianity has been at the forefront of many of our most celebrated movements. These include the fight against Slavery (started by churches) and the Women's Suffrage in America (Started by Christian Women).
Meanwhile, Islam is still stuck in the 7th century, still talking about past glories, and still ignoring the horrifying state of it's own affairs. I'm sorry, but a "Religion of Peace" does NOT generate the Taliban, Al Quaeda, and the MILLIONS of other splinter terrorist groups that Islam has. These groups are indicative of a fundamental flaw in this religion, or a corruption of the original intent so massive and deep that it may not be reversible.
I do hope for Islam that it may yet return to the glory days of Sufism. Outspoken Muslim women like Hirsi Anan and other outspoken Muslims do give me hope. However when they are under threat from fatwas issued by supposedly "moderate" Muslim leaders, that hope is seriously shaken.
Threat? To whom? Talk about disconnected from reality. These are CHRISTIANS we are talking about. the "Turn the other Cheek" people. the "Treat others like you want to be treated" people. How the HELL are these people dangerous? What, because some of them choose to exercise their right to vote by voting for initiatives they like (like getting to choose the school you send your child to.) Ooo! How dangerous!
And they aren't Nanny Staters. Ok, some of them are, those ones mostly vote Democrat (in the US). But the majority aren't. The majority don't want the nanny state, because a Socialistic Big Government (AKA: Nanny State) interferes with their lives, by trying to tell them how to live, and how to raise their children.
Oh, and don't try and bring Jack Thompson into this. He's NOT a Christian, he's just an opportunistic loony trying to make a name for himself and a buck by stirring up trouble for video game companies. I don't know ANY Christians who take him seriously. I do know of some who once did, but when he showed himself as a fruitcake, they dropped him like a hot potato. Besides, how in the heck does a nobody like Jack Thompson get classified as DANGEROUS? Annoying, yes. Comical, absolutely. But DANGEROUS? No. Not buying it. That's just hyperbole.
Let's also keep in mind that Christians are citizens too. They have just as much right as anyone else to get together and vote as a bloc on issues that concern them, or to "Lobby the Government for Redress" Just like anyone else. Being loud doesn't make someone dangerous. Not that Christians are exactly "loud" anyway. The only thing most Congress-critters really hear is Money, and Christians aren't exactly known for obscene wealth. Unlike the Hollywood Leftists, or the George Soroses of the world.
There isn't anything wrong with disagreeing with them on the issues, but to characterize them as somehow DANGEROUS because of the way they believe smacks of religious bigotry.
Unfortunately, this is true.
Equally unfortunately, the primary religion gaining adherents is Islam. Which is several orders of magnitude more dangerous to Womens Rights Issues than Christianity ever dreamed of being in the darkest days of the Dark Ages.
Railing against modern Christianity as some sort of progress-destroying bogeyman is like putting "Danger! Killer Dog!" signs up around a toothless,three legged Chihuahua. Not only doesn't it make sense, it makes you look like a fool.
In the meantime, many Islamic countries still practice Slavery, and Women are little better than cattle.
Meanwhile, in Iran.....
Buran: Damnit! You hidebound, dogmatic, bigoted sexists!
Mohammad: BACK IN THE BAG, BITCH! *Punches Buran in the face and stuffs her into a Burkha*
Buran: (muffled) Ow! You hit me, you sexist pig!
Mohammad: That's it! *CHOP!* (Buran's head rolls down the street)
But hey. Those CHRISTIANS, they're the REAL danger! Fight the power Buran! You keep after those Eeeevil Christians!
*rolleyes*
Ummm no.
/. But that doesn't mean we can't be civil.)
It's not Christians you should fear AT ALL. The overwhelming majority of them just want to live their lives in peace and quiet, and raise their families as they see fit, without a bunch of nanny-state lefties sticking their noses in. A small minority want to get in your face about their beliefs and/or try to make insignificant changes in public policy. At the most, that vanishingly small minority is slightly annoying, but certainly not a threat of any sort. (Keep in mind, these ARE the "Turn the other cheek" people. Not exactly dangerous types.)
It never ceases to amaze me that Liberals can have so much hate towards Christians, and yet go out of their way to excuse the most heinous behavior of Muslims. Not only doesn't it make any sense, it's not terribly logical or consistent either.
So let's all just back off from the Christian hate and the passive-aggressive Christian bashing.
(Yeah, yeah, I know, this is
I resent that implication. I happen to be a 32 bit nerd.
Except that this is Ubuntu we are talking about. The Ubuntu forums are VERY newbie friendly, and very tightly moderated to eliminate forum trolls.
Of course, if you had spent any time AT ALL on the Ubuntu forums, you would know that. The only people who generally don't get help are those that go in with a snotty, arrogant attitude. Although even they are OFFERED help, but their own attitude usually gets in the way of them being able to absorb it. I have myself been a Linux newbie, and have even recently, well out of my newbie stage, gotten stuck on an oddball issue now and again, and have always been able to find friendly and useful help on the Ubuntu forums.
Honestly, that is what drew me to Ubuntu. While it is a very useful distro, I found the greatest draw was the near complete LACK of the classic Linux community snobbery that so often pervades web forums and IRC channels. Ubuntu users, particularly the more experienced ones, seem to be just generally nicer people.
Of course, I have seen their moderators in action, and have seen flame posts vanish within moments of being posted. So I'm sure that a crack moderator staff has at least something to do with that. However, even THAT redounds well to Ubuntu. It shows that the community and Canonical understand that good PR is very often a key to success. And that the web forums are the Ubuntu community's public face. So they work hard to keep it looking good and working smoothly by stamping out any trolls and "cult of personality" types.
Ok, I'll get off the fanboy soapbox for now. I guess I'm just saying that your point really has no merit, as it doesn't jibe with the reality of the Ubuntu forums that I have experienced on a regular basis.
Aaaaaand it's already slashdotted.
Wow. That was fast.
Yes, because creating a PR-oriented (and quite well made) video game is EXACTLY the same as teaching your children to make REAL suicide bombs and that murdering innocent Jews is the right thing to do. EXACTLY the same. Hooray for Moral Equivalence!
Buddy, that wasn't even a GOOD strawman argument, let alone an effective one.
Huh. Last time I checked, we were countering Fundamentalist Islam with Freedom and Prosperity, not Fundamentalist Christianity. but hey, what do I know. I mean, it's not like the Muslim peoples of Iraq are so happy about their newfound freedom of religion that they would ask Iraqi Christian Ex-pats to come back to Iraq. It's not as though those same moderate Iraqi Muslims would say, help repair a cross on a church with Iraqi Christians to show solidarity with them. I mean, it's not as though a new day of religious freedom is dawning across Iraq. Yeah, it must be us Eeevil "Fundie Christian American Opressors(tm)" that are MAKING them do nice things like that. Yeah.... that's the ticket...
Geez. Taking your tinfoil-hatted strawman BS somewhere else. The rest of us like living in reality.
No, when fascism comes to this country, it will be wearing a smile.
Or where certain peoples didn't teach their kids that murder and death are good things to aspire to:
http://sweetness-light.com/archive/palestinian-kids-mama-killed-five-jews-shes-in-paradise
The fact is, small children are REGULARLY used by AQ, Taliban, Hamas and Hezbollah to carry out terror attacks. Why? Because people don't naturally connect children with danger. Thus, the scumbags in terrorist organizations brainwash kids into doing their dirty work.
Wanna see a suicide bomber in-training? Here: http://knighthospitilar.files.wordpress.com/2007/04/suicide_bomber_1_.jpg
Those bombs are obviously fake, but who's to say that this kid won't be strapping on REAL ones next?
This is the culture of the terrorists. Death, Destruction, and Murder. And it has been like this for WAY longer than the US has been involved in the middle east, so please, no intellectually dishonest attempts to blame this on the US or the west. These people have done this to themselves.
Don't believe me? Then watch the videos for yourself: http://www.pmw.org.il/tv%20part1.html
It's a sad, sick world when a child grows up with a hateful dream of blowing themselves to bits while murdering innocents. These people need to answer for what they are doing to their children, and their so-called religious and political leaders need to pay the deadly price for bringing such evil into the world.
All you Liberals out there need to stop excusing their evil and open your eyes.
I love how Liberals always mention the SECOND half of the second amendment, but always seem to miss the FIRST half of it, "The Right to Keep and Bear Arms". I suspect they do it to avoid an uncomfortable truth...
/. memes), but in the old Soviet Union, Communist China, and yes, even old Nazi Germany, the right to keep and bear arms was the very first right done away with.
That the right to keep and bear arms is always one of the FIRST things taken away by totalitarians.
Usually this is done in the guise of; "Why would you need a weapon like that unless you want the break the law?" or; "Weapons like that are dangerous. For the safety of all citizens, only law enforcement and the military should have them."
Sound familiar?
Not to invoke Godwin's law (or goofy
Why?
Because it's much easier to control your populace when they have no means to fight back with.
It may sound trite, but it is true.
Before I begin, a disclaimer: I am a Conservative. I regularly read conservative news and blog sources, such as Newbusters, Hot Air, TownHall.com, Little Green Footballs, and the Jawa Report. I am also an avid gamer. I currently am playing mostly EVE-Online, and a bit of TA Spring. I have been gaming since before the days of Sierra's Hero Quest, and I still have an original, functional Atari game system.
So now that I've set your expectations and prejudices, I shall continue...
Honestly, I think of this as the O'Reilly effect.
One of the things I have noticed, is that ever since O'Reilly became an ascendant star on Fox News, the tone of the channel has changed a bit in regards to all things Internet. This is especially evident when Bill-O himself is on, even when he talks with fellow conservatives about the issue. Here is a link to him talking with Mary Katherine Ham about whether the Internet is a good or bad thing: http://hotair.com/archives/2008/01/23/video-mary-katharine-ham-talks-smoking-crack-with-oreilly/
As you can see, O'Reilly is as clueless as ever when it comes to all things Internet. Honestly, he makes Internet-Savvy Conservatives look bad. At least when it comes to technology, he comes off as a boorish old geezer. Honestly, I'm not sure how much of it is an act, and how much is him just being completely out of touch.
MKH, on the other hand, clearly "gets it". Of course, she's my generation (Gen-X) so it's not surprising that she would have a better grasp of this. Also, if you read through the comments at Hot Air, you can see that many of the other conservatives there think like I do, and just shake their heads with a mix of disgust and sadness at O'Reilly.
I think that his influence has been seeping into the rest of Fox News for some time. While obviously the PHB's there think that controversy like this makes for good ratings (and it does), it also serves to make the whole network look out of touch to younger viewers. I think it's a short-term gain, long-term loss kind of strategy. I guess time will tell if I'm right or not.
Either way, both myself, and many other conservatives think that the whole Mass Effect "controversy" is a compete non-starter, and entirely fabricated. As others here have said, it's a rated "M" game. The industry has marked it appropriately, and it's up to parents to make use of the tools given to them and make a judgment about whether or not to buy this game.
This is part and parcel of the conservative concept of Freedom. YOU get to control what you and your children are exposed to. It's not the Government's job to decide that. As far as the original article that spawned the controversy, I've read it, and it's utter hogwash. The writer is just a tool looking for some cheap publicity. Ignore him.
Maybe he's using Virtualization?
IE: 3 NIC's, and 2 VM's in one box. One running as his server through an "internal network only" NIC, and the other as a virtual router appliance running through an "external network only" NIC, a firewalled connection to an "Internal" NIC and a Virtual network connection to the server V-Machine.
I've been planning on doing this myself to reduce my power consumption levels. I just need to get the hot swappable RAID 5 setup going so I can have full redundancy (currently running on multiple non-redundant RAID 0 arrays) and I'm ready to roll.
I can't believe that the myth of "free" ad-backed games is still out there. It seems there are plenty of people who would be ok with having ads "If the game is price-reduced or free".
However, I think we, as gamers need to take a hard look at the reality of the situation and realize that there is no way on earth that any self-respecting game company is going to allow a revenue stream to pass them by. Yes, there will be ads in the games, but you will still pay full-price. Don't believe me?
Case in point, SOE's "Planetside":
SOE introduced ads into that game on special billboards that were posted around the game world inside buildings. Usually right near spawn-points so that every time you respawned, you saw the ads. They were inside every building, in multiple places. You could not miss them.
SOE's explanation was that the ads were a "Pilot program to find ways to offset the subscription costs so that subscriptions can be made cheaper." So, did the price for the game sub go down? NO. Did the price for the game sub go up? YES. So not only do the players have to pay MORE for the sub than they used to, but now they pay for the "privilege" of viewing ads!
Keep in mind that many of the ads were ANIMATED, WITH SOUND! Incredibly distracting, particularly for an MMOFPS. Even after a massive protest by the community and loss of a big chunk of the playerbase, SOE kept the ads in(although they did restrict the animated ads to only the "sanctuaries" where there was no PVP).
While SOE does get a well-deserved rap for being one of the worst gaming companies out there, I see them, not as an anomaly, but as the bellwether of the gaming world. What SOE has done, other companies will do. This is what EA is trying now, just in a less in-your-face manner. They are taking the "Incremental" approach, like the "frog in boiling water" analogy. They know if they slam us with ads in every game, gamers will revolt. but if they slowly introduce us to the concept of ads in games, ANY game, They believe that we will become desensitized to it. Then before you know it you will be seeing billboards with animated ads in every game. Then it will be too late.
The time to stand up against this is now. Don't buy games with ads, and don't play supposed "free" games that are ad-supported. Make game ads and non-starter and a money loser, and we will be able to keep our ad-free experience. But if you let the in-game-ad camel's nose under the tent, don't complain when your end up stepping in Camel Dung down the line.
For some reason, head-chopping, gore and Apple reminds me of this comic.
Not sure why....
Stupid Trolls.
Jesus of Nazareth was not illiterate. According to passages in the Bible, and many Theologians and Historians, it is highly likely that he was not only literate, but bilingual;
He would have had to be able read the Torah in it's classical Hebrew. This was taught in all Jewish communities at the time, as all males had to be able to read from the Torah. There is also a passage in the Bible that describes Jesus standing and reading from the Torah in his local Synagogue, so we do have a written account of his Literacy.
In addition, there are several passages that describe Jesus preaching in public areas to large groups of mixed Jews and non-Jews. The common language of the day was Aramaic, and it is this language that Jesus likely spoke on an everyday basis. Again, there is written account of this, in addition to the very high likely-hood of this as per historians and other scholars.
Jesus was also not a "peasant". Keep in mind that Joseph, (Jesus' "father") was a Carpenter and, as per the culture and traditions of the time, Jesus would have learned this trade before beginning His ministry. Carpenters and other skilled tradesmen were the Middle Class of the day as they had a highly valued and difficult to learn skill. So Jesus was Middle Class, not poor.
So basically EVERYTHING in your statement is completely wrong.
Care to try again?
WTF?
Umm.. it's "Grounded". Not "Earthed" ya dweebs. What, did you think you were being clever or something? "Earthed" isn't even technically correct, like Sun vs Sol. It's just plain wrong, and doesn't even SOUND smart. Geez.
Wait...
;)
You people actually run consumer-level commercial wireless routers?
Apparently I'm the only one here that runs a Smoothwall router and a separate wireless bridge connected to a DMZ'ed network. Wired connections on the normal network, wireless on the DMZ. Soon I'll be upgrading to include a wireless card in my smoothie, and it will run everything. What self-respecting geek actually uses consumer-end garbage and doesn't DIY a proper router/firewall?
I AM on Slashdot, right?
Correct.
The article also implies that while the defendant was attempting to use his 5th Amendment right against self incrimination to stop having to give the key, they expected the judge to force him to give it since he already gave it willingly to the border patrol agent.
That is the trick. If you have something encrypted, simply refuse to give them the key, or play dumb....
BPAgent: What is this 10GB file on your hard drive with the gibberish name?
You: What file? I don't know what you mean officer.
BPAgent: THIS one! (points at screen)
You: Gosh officer, I have no idea what that is. Oh no! Do you think I have a Virus?
BPAgent: (grumbling) I wouldn't know Sir. Never mind, here is your laptop back, have a nice day.
You: Why thank you officer! (walks away whistling)
While they might be able to arrest you for "Interfering in a Police investigation" You can then successfully plead the 5th, and the prosecution will likely have to drop the case. Being unwilling to do something to incriminate yourself is NOT a crime anywhere in the United States, Nor is not knowing what something on your hard drive is. Heck, if ignorance of the contents of PC hard drives was a crime, 99% of the population would have to be locked up!
????
I'm afraid I'm going to have to disagree with you quite strongly there.
First of all, on the "marvel of design" part, Let me just list a few issues with that:
- Red Ring of Death: http://support.microsoft.com/kb/907534
- Overheating issues: http://www.next-gen.biz/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1712&Itemid=2
- Scratched Disks: http://www.llamma.com/xbox360/news/Xbox-360-Game-Disc-Scratched.htm
Feel free to read through the Wikipedia article for yourself for more info (yeah, I know it's Wikipedia, but this is one of the better articles): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xbox_360_technical_problems
So, yeah, not so much a technical marvel.
And "Revolutionized online play"? Ummm.. PC games have had in-game and out of game unified matchmaking services for YEARS before the FIRST xbox came around, let alone the 360. Consoles are just playing catch-up to what pc's have had for almost a decade now. Yeah, reeeeal revolutionary...
May I humbly and politely suggest you remove your lips from Mr. Gates' hind quarters and reconsider your opinion in this matter.
True,
But most everything prior to the last 30 years is well enshrined in paper. I would say being able to quickly build civilization back to a 1980's level would be pretty darn good. Heck, even back to a 1950's level would be more than acceptable. Yes, we wouldn't have computers as we now know them, but we would re-develop them rather quickly.
There are also several efforts to preserve knowledge in a non-perishable format by several Libraries around the world. I remember reading about some of them, possibly on Slashdot. I would provide a link but I'm just too damn lazy today, however I'm sure that Google will serve you well should you choose to look it up.
I personally think that while we would lose large portions of our society, we would eventually be able to build back up to our current state, perhaps within 100 years. Which is pretty impressive, as far as civilizations go.
Ok, so if he's Bart Simpson, I guess that would make you Principal Skinner, the guy that still lives at home with his mother?