Sorry your post is a regurgitated mess of truth tidbits you were fed by some idiot.
There is an evident conflict between any ideology of inerrant revelation and one of skeptical investigation, you just choose not to see it.
The only way out is by the usual method of weaseling out by smudging the word religion until it doesn't resemble any actual religion in the world.
Here I'm talking about real world examples of scientifically proved wrong opinions held by large numbers of members from a major religion and you are trying to downplay it as "some cleric somewhere disagreed with something a scientist said".
When you choose to subtract yourself from the real world it's easy to say there isn't a conflict between your incredibly bizarre definitions of science and religion that no ordinary person could guess.
Except it is not really just "assholes" we are also talking about old ladies that none the less vote against the rights of gay people to live together and teach their grandsons that God created every animal separated and that evolution is a lie made by the devil, supported by Satanists.
What are you suggesting we do? Shall we punch the grannies or let them do as they please unopposed?
The alternative is an education campaign, winning mind share among kids by illustrating holes in their claims and the key evidence, as well as debating and debunking people in power who push religion pacifically.
Religion has been deliberately opposing science since the first doctors were burned as witches. Want a list? Off the top of my head:
* Evolution. * Abiogenesis. * Archeology * Paleontology. * Cosmology. * Just biological materialism, as most religious people are still stuck in with vitalism. * Plate tectonics and generally geology. * Radiometry and thus. * Medicine, germ theory as opposed to curses by witches. * Psychiatry as opposed to spiritual possessions. * Meteorology, as opposed to divine punishment. * SETI, yes most religious people I know deny life outside of Earth on religious grounds only.
To say that there are no conflicts between science and religion is a barefaced lie.
Relidiots have to be buried in evidence to shake them, their next step? Denialism! All those scientists are lying! It's a conspiracy!
So you have to hammer evidence into their faces to break the wall, do they change their ways? No!
When a relidiot can't fight the truth anymore, rather than admitting their religion is bunk and that they shouldn't make real-world assertions based on fantasies they claim to have misinterpreted, mistranslated or mistaken as literal what really was a "metaphor".
And then proceed to state that all the rest of their superstitious beliefs are *still* true.
The fact that a minority of scientist keep their religion in secret doesn't prove that religion is compatible with science, it only proves that religious beliefs can survive even among scientists as long as they are kept sheltered from critical thought.
1.- Propose ambitious project for ultra high speed for everybody! 2.- Rise public funds over promises of open unregulated connection for the nation 3.- ??? 4.- Profit!
Wait are you suggesting that the purpose of this is to catch drug dealers that go through cell phones like Doritos? Wanna bet the chances such criminals are going to use phones registered under their real identities?
And no they can't get information when I call another prepaid phone, that they cannot get the names of every single individual out there drives them crazy.
My theory, telcos wanted to sell this information to the likes of Google, Yahoo and Miscrosoft (and facebook and Pizza Hut etc...). They didn't want the negative backslash, so they asked the Government to ask them for their users name, transference of Guilt. The Government saw this as a chance to implement the kind of inter-federal surveillance that would make the founding fathers spin in their graves. Profit!
Why do I need to care about activities? Why are my aplication not showing up in the tray? Why my desktop icons have windows around them? What's with modern KDE getting in the way of my applications?
Insightful? This is -1 Troll, you are insulting all of Slashdot, History and Reality.
* Slashdot: because you are calling them a bunch of unobjective Apple haters. * History: because Slashdot has a history of praising Apple whenever it gets something right, in fact most people on Slashdot liked the iPhone until the Tarkin Grip became so obvious. * Reality: because at this point, suggesting that Slashdot is a single unified hive mind should automatically mod you down.
I was wondering when someone was going to come up with this moronic analogy again.
In real life, everything you say out loud is public, yet you don't expect your conversation with your friends in a restaurant to be recorded by a search engine listening behind the walls. If some one with a TV camera walked into the restaurant and started filming you up close you and your friends would stop talking or at least change the subject while the camera is over you.
While the conversation is carried on public there is still an expectation of privacy because you know no one is spying on you and that is exactly what changed here. Now we --and I mean people, not just slashdoters-- need to be aware that there is a company with the resources to send cars around recording personal-yet-public communications.
But, for the time being, I wouldn't blame people for not knowing they were being spied upon, for almost everybody outside of the WW2 generation in Nazi Germany and the Cold War generation in the USSR, being randomly spied upon is a new thing.
And yes this a spying of sort, just recording audio off the air isn't really spying, but separating the voices, tagging them to specific names, along with geolocation, and other traceable information, then logging it forever is just spying waiting to happen.
They'll find out when the gun sites you visit tell facebook, remember the bacon fiasco? One must be careful it doesn't happen again, mainly by complaining about it.
Of course! I never meant that it is always illegal, it's only when the consequences are negative that it matters,
It is not illegal for instance to see your face when you come to my establishment. But it is illegal if I then follow you to your home, that's stalking, Google basically stalked the civilized world.
Yes other companies have done this, I'm also mad at them.
No, the problem isn't so much the unencrypted networks but the abuse of them, it's like saying it's OK to hack your computer because you use an insecure OS.
Yes, "one or two frames of network traffic" is far from "every detail about [me]", I'm talking about everything else Google gets from you, from your searches to your social network and your email and chat conversations.
No, Google *is* really watching you everywhere. Just not all the time. It's not that I want it to sound scary, it's just that it breaks people's expectations of privacy.
You can have a bad romance, school fight, a stalker and a reputation for throwing wild parties, but you can always drive away from your problems. Move to a small town, or move within a big city and live in peace knowing that your psychotic isn't going to find you.
But you can't run away from Google (except in an ONN article) Google is effectively omnipresent.
That in itself is not illegal, but it is disruptive, we are not used to omnipresent beings, what you see here is one omnipresent being (the public) dealing with a newcomer.
Just one of these stupid posts should be allowed per Google-SSID article. All the other ones are redundant.
Ok, why is this stupid? Because the entire world has grown up to understand the idea that there is a difference between doing something and doing something a lot.
There is a difference between peeking in a magazine and reading it at the store. There is a difference between listening to music and listening to music at 100dbls in a party. There is a difference between walking around naked in your house and doing so in your glass house. There is a difference between selling your old computer in your garage and turning your garage into a used hardware store. There is a difference between selling your 2 tickets to a concert you won't attend and selling your 100 tickets to the same concert. In fact the whole RIAA has successfully sold (or rather bought) the idea that it is not the same to share a movie with your friend than sharing it with your other hundred thousand friends.
And yet you are unable to understand that there is a difference between broadcasting SSID and MAC addresses to let your equipment interoperate inside your home and volunteering them to a global geolocating database of the entire Internet!
And yet you are unable to understand that there is a difference to let your neighbors see your face and having an omnipresent and omniscient entity mapping and logging every detail about you!
These people didn't opt-in into this, they never even knew about it, and if they knew, they would have opted out.
Google is abusing both people's thrust in their neighborhood --who could have known that Google is watching you everywhere?-- and their ignorance. Is it ok to take something from someone just because they didn't knew they had it?
Google basically played "easier to ask forgiveness than ask permission". Are you really so incapable to realize the difference between an individual and a corporation?
No seriously, how many people came here just to post that same silly "if you are broadcasting your data..." argument?
Slashdot should always allow you to moderate someone redundant (with heavy metamoderation) or allow people to mod themselves redundant, maybe a system to offer another poster all your child posts if you realize you are just repeating the same things.
--
Aaaaaaany way, I don't think the government should have access to such info precisely for the same reason I don't want Google to have it and in fact, part of my complain against Google's data mining is that it enables governments to outsource fascism.
My policy is that, anything you don't want your government to do, or you don't want them to do without a warrant, you don't want a corporation to do freely either.
The "broadcasting your data..." is silly for reasons I won't get into in this post.
Ubuntu won't install some poorly tested alpha quality file system until the next LTS and viceversa, a filesystem can't make it into ubuntu unless its buggy enough to get into the LTS a week after feature freeze.
I liked Halo games even tough I'm not a serious FPS player and maybe it's *because* I'm not a serious FPS player.
But a fratboy? I'm insulted, and confused.
As you seem to have a strong opinion here please instruct me, what is a real FPS, and what makes Halo a fratboy FPS?
Also, would you say Halo is a bad choice for me considering that:
* I never played another FPS since Golden Eye. * I'm more into co-op than deathmatch. * I only play about 7 hours a week. * I don't care about playing with anonymous strangers over the net. * I like long levels rather than small arenas. * I don't like cheap, unfair games that spawn/reveal monsters behind you like Quake II loved to do. I gave Quake II a try 3 levels or so and hated this aspect of the game. It made me hate the whole FPS genre until I tried Halo.
My Facebook profile contains nothing that I wouldn't want my mom, boss, pastor, or future employer to see.
Or so you think, but consider this:
EFF's Panopticlick Demo Uses browser headers to identify you even with cookies. Now imagine some site, maybe a spammer or phisher honeypot site, or just a asshole gaming site that got the idea that it needed to track everything about you and got compromised one day.
Of course facebook must surely be tracking that too and it will want to correlate it with has many websites as posible, those websites will be wanting the same and I'm sure they'll find some agreement.
Add to that that you only need one of your friends to fill the wrong quiz for all of your data to be spilled in "public".
Congratulations, now someone has made a link to both, your employer and that 4chan photo of you bragging about writing a virus when you were just a 10yo script kiddie.
Did you had a career change in mind?
Of course I don't think there is much I've done that could be use against me nor I have any big enemies, today. But I may get an enemy in the future and... what were the Cardinal's words again...?
I've already said that I'm in the market for something like this. I want to share some things with my close friends, links videos and status updates like twitter, without the feeling that I'm being psychologically profiled by a government of another country.
I don't have to make my friends *switch* from facebook, Half of my friends don't even like facebook because they are like me, I suspect that would be the case for many users of such a service.
The other half of my friends who use facebook can still use it.
I'm talking of about 4-6 friends, I have a small circle of friends, the rest are acquaintances (including family members) and my acquaintances already know I hate facebook.
About the only problem with this is that facebook will surely make an app "Give facebook your PrivateLife password and get a cute picture of a puppy representing your personality"
If one of my two friends who do use facebook fall for that then again I'd be exposed, but the risk is lower as my friends are not that dumb.
Slashdot Mirror
Sorry your post is a regurgitated mess of truth tidbits you were fed by some idiot.
There is an evident conflict between any ideology of inerrant revelation and one of skeptical investigation, you just choose not to see it.
The only way out is by the usual method of weaseling out by smudging the word religion until it doesn't resemble any actual religion in the world.
Here I'm talking about real world examples of scientifically proved wrong opinions held by large numbers of members from a major religion and you are trying to downplay it as "some cleric somewhere disagreed with something a scientist said".
When you choose to subtract yourself from the real world it's easy to say there isn't a conflict between your incredibly bizarre definitions of science and religion that no ordinary person could guess.
My guess? You are an idiot.
Except it is not really just "assholes" we are also talking about old ladies that none the less vote against the rights of gay people to live together and teach their grandsons that God created every animal separated and that evolution is a lie made by the devil, supported by Satanists.
What are you suggesting we do? Shall we punch the grannies or let them do as they please unopposed?
The alternative is an education campaign, winning mind share among kids by illustrating holes in their claims and the key evidence, as well as debating and debunking people in power who push religion pacifically.
Drivel. Lies.
Religion has been deliberately opposing science since the first doctors were burned as witches.
Want a list? Off the top of my head:
* Evolution.
* Abiogenesis.
* Archeology
* Paleontology.
* Cosmology.
* Just biological materialism, as most religious people are still stuck in with vitalism.
* Plate tectonics and generally geology.
* Radiometry and thus.
* Medicine, germ theory as opposed to curses by witches.
* Psychiatry as opposed to spiritual possessions.
* Meteorology, as opposed to divine punishment.
* SETI, yes most religious people I know deny life outside of Earth on religious grounds only.
To say that there are no conflicts between science and religion is a barefaced lie.
Relidiots have to be buried in evidence to shake them, their next step? Denialism! All those scientists are lying! It's a conspiracy!
So you have to hammer evidence into their faces to break the wall, do they change their ways? No!
When a relidiot can't fight the truth anymore, rather than admitting their religion is bunk and that they shouldn't make real-world assertions based on fantasies they claim to have misinterpreted, mistranslated or mistaken as literal what really was a "metaphor".
And then proceed to state that all the rest of their superstitious beliefs are *still* true.
The fact that a minority of scientist keep their religion in secret doesn't prove that religion is compatible with science, it only proves that religious beliefs can survive even among scientists as long as they are kept sheltered from critical thought.
Just like Snoopy and the Road Runner.
1.- Propose ambitious project for ultra high speed for everybody!
2.- Rise public funds over promises of open unregulated connection for the nation
3.- ???
4.- Profit!
For 1000pts, guess what is step 3?
Wait are you suggesting that the purpose of this is to catch drug dealers that go through cell phones like Doritos? Wanna bet the chances such criminals are going to use phones registered under their real identities?
And no they can't get information when I call another prepaid phone, that they cannot get the names of every single individual out there drives them crazy.
My theory, telcos wanted to sell this information to the likes of Google, Yahoo and Miscrosoft (and facebook and Pizza Hut etc...).
They didn't want the negative backslash, so they asked the Government to ask them for their users name, transference of Guilt.
The Government saw this as a chance to implement the kind of inter-federal surveillance that would make the founding fathers spin in their graves.
Profit!
They're even shutting down prepaids unless they register, this, from the government that leaked the electoral records to organized crime.
Why do I need to care about activities? Why are my aplication not showing up in the tray? Why my desktop icons have windows around them? What's with modern KDE getting in the way of my applications?
Insightful? This is -1 Troll, you are insulting all of Slashdot, History and Reality.
* Slashdot: because you are calling them a bunch of unobjective Apple haters.
* History: because Slashdot has a history of praising Apple whenever it gets something right, in fact most people on Slashdot liked the iPhone until the Tarkin Grip became so obvious.
* Reality: because at this point, suggesting that Slashdot is a single unified hive mind should automatically mod you down.
Sir you have reinstated my faith in humanity, I'm really appalled of the egoist, survivalist attitude of many posters as of late.
Scandalous schmegegges! What is this tosh poppycock you talk about!?
I was wondering when someone was going to come up with this moronic analogy again.
In real life, everything you say out loud is public, yet you don't expect your conversation with your friends in a restaurant to be recorded by a search engine listening behind the walls. If some one with a TV camera walked into the restaurant and started filming you up close you and your friends would stop talking or at least change the subject while the camera is over you.
While the conversation is carried on public there is still an expectation of privacy because you know no one is spying on you and that is exactly what changed here. Now we --and I mean people, not just slashdoters-- need to be aware that there is a company with the resources to send cars around recording personal-yet-public communications.
But, for the time being, I wouldn't blame people for not knowing they were being spied upon, for almost everybody outside of the WW2 generation in Nazi Germany and the Cold War generation in the USSR, being randomly spied upon is a new thing.
And yes this a spying of sort, just recording audio off the air isn't really spying, but separating the voices, tagging them to specific names, along with geolocation, and other traceable information, then logging it forever is just spying waiting to happen.
They'll find out when the gun sites you visit tell facebook, remember the bacon fiasco? One must be careful it doesn't happen again, mainly by complaining about it.
Of course! I never meant that it is always illegal, it's only when the consequences are negative that it matters,
It is not illegal for instance to see your face when you come to my establishment. But it is illegal if I then follow you to your home, that's stalking, Google basically stalked the civilized world.
Yes other companies have done this, I'm also mad at them.
No, the problem isn't so much the unencrypted networks but the abuse of them, it's like saying it's OK to hack your computer because you use an insecure OS.
Yes, "one or two frames of network traffic" is far from "every detail about [me]", I'm talking about everything else Google gets from you, from your searches to your social network and your email and chat conversations.
No, Google *is* really watching you everywhere. Just not all the time. It's not that I want it to sound scary, it's just that it breaks people's expectations of privacy.
You can have a bad romance, school fight, a stalker and a reputation for throwing wild parties, but you can always drive away from your problems. Move to a small town, or move within a big city and live in peace knowing that your psychotic isn't going to find you.
But you can't run away from Google (except in an ONN article) Google is effectively omnipresent.
That in itself is not illegal, but it is disruptive, we are not used to omnipresent beings, what you see here is one omnipresent being (the public) dealing with a newcomer.
Just one of these stupid posts should be allowed per Google-SSID article. All the other ones are redundant.
Ok, why is this stupid? Because the entire world has grown up to understand the idea that there is a difference between doing something and doing something a lot.
There is a difference between peeking in a magazine and reading it at the store.
There is a difference between listening to music and listening to music at 100dbls in a party.
There is a difference between walking around naked in your house and doing so in your glass house.
There is a difference between selling your old computer in your garage and turning your garage into a used hardware store.
There is a difference between selling your 2 tickets to a concert you won't attend and selling your 100 tickets to the same concert.
In fact the whole RIAA has successfully sold (or rather bought) the idea that it is not the same to share a movie with your friend than sharing it with your other hundred thousand friends.
And yet you are unable to understand that there is a difference between broadcasting SSID and MAC addresses to let your equipment interoperate inside your home and volunteering them to a global geolocating database of the entire Internet!
And yet you are unable to understand that there is a difference to let your neighbors see your face and having an omnipresent and omniscient entity mapping and logging every detail about you!
These people didn't opt-in into this, they never even knew about it, and if they knew, they would have opted out.
Google is abusing both people's thrust in their neighborhood --who could have known that Google is watching you everywhere?-- and their ignorance. Is it ok to take something from someone just because they didn't knew they had it?
Google basically played "easier to ask forgiveness than ask permission". Are you really so incapable to realize the difference between an individual and a corporation?
wow I managed to incorrectly use both it's and its simultaneously.
Also replace that "make take most" with "make/take the most"
The speed of your computer and connection shouldn't give you an advantage.
Why not? I mean, Capitalism grew out of feudalism where people retained their lands and means of productions.
It is called "capital", money that makes money, he who has the most money will make take most money out of everyone else.
It is not only allowed by capitalism, its it's very end.
Basically anything beside Microsoft
And Apple they are in bed with MS about this.
He's playing PCB Lunatic, I'd trust him with the Internet.
No seriously, how many people came here just to post that same silly "if you are broadcasting your data..." argument?
Slashdot should always allow you to moderate someone redundant (with heavy metamoderation) or allow people to mod themselves redundant, maybe a system to offer another poster all your child posts if you realize you are just repeating the same things.
--
Aaaaaaany way, I don't think the government should have access to such info precisely for the same reason I don't want Google to have it and in fact, part of my complain against Google's data mining is that it enables governments to outsource fascism.
My policy is that, anything you don't want your government to do, or you don't want them to do without a warrant, you don't want a corporation to do freely either.
The "broadcasting your data..." is silly for reasons I won't get into in this post.
Ubuntu won't install some poorly tested alpha quality file system until the next LTS and viceversa, a filesystem can't make it into ubuntu unless its buggy enough to get into the LTS a week after feature freeze.
I liked Halo games even tough I'm not a serious FPS player and maybe it's *because* I'm not a serious FPS player.
But a fratboy? I'm insulted, and confused.
As you seem to have a strong opinion here please instruct me, what is a real FPS, and what makes Halo a fratboy FPS?
Also, would you say Halo is a bad choice for me considering that:
* I never played another FPS since Golden Eye.
* I'm more into co-op than deathmatch.
* I only play about 7 hours a week.
* I don't care about playing with anonymous strangers over the net.
* I like long levels rather than small arenas.
* I don't like cheap, unfair games that spawn/reveal monsters behind you like Quake II loved to do. I gave Quake II a try 3 levels or so and hated this aspect of the game. It made me hate the whole FPS genre until I tried Halo.
Thanks.
My Facebook profile contains nothing that I wouldn't want my mom, boss, pastor, or future employer to see.
Or so you think, but consider this:
EFF's Panopticlick Demo Uses browser headers to identify you even with cookies. Now imagine some site, maybe a spammer or phisher honeypot site, or just a asshole gaming site that got the idea that it needed to track everything about you and got compromised one day.
Of course facebook must surely be tracking that too and it will want to correlate it with has many websites as posible, those websites will be wanting the same and I'm sure they'll find some agreement.
Add to that that you only need one of your friends to fill the wrong quiz for all of your data to be spilled in "public".
Congratulations, now someone has made a link to both, your employer and that 4chan photo of you bragging about writing a virus when you were just a 10yo script kiddie.
Did you had a career change in mind?
Of course I don't think there is much I've done that could be use against me nor I have any big enemies, today. But I may get an enemy in the future and... what were the Cardinal's words again...?
No need for everybody to join.
I've already said that I'm in the market for something like this. I want to share some things with my close friends, links videos and status updates like twitter, without the feeling that I'm being psychologically profiled by a government of another country.
I don't have to make my friends *switch* from facebook, Half of my friends don't even like facebook because they are like me, I suspect that would be the case for many users of such a service.
The other half of my friends who use facebook can still use it.
I'm talking of about 4-6 friends, I have a small circle of friends, the rest are acquaintances (including family members) and my acquaintances already know I hate facebook.
About the only problem with this is that facebook will surely make an app "Give facebook your PrivateLife password and get a cute picture of a puppy representing your personality"
If one of my two friends who do use facebook fall for that then again I'd be exposed, but the risk is lower as my friends are not that dumb.