Nope, you won it. Yours is infinitely less well-constructed.
But carry on battling privacy for the sake of billionaires, without any argumentation at all. I suspect you are not a lobbyist, but just a mere complete and total idiot.
And Google is in your slashdot, modding your and mine comment to oblivion (you troll!), while minifying/laughing away/ridiculing any concerns and placing insightful comments about how all is well.
Spammers gather email addresses from the open internet. According to your argument it is ok to spam millions of email addresses. Also, I could stand across the street and watch you leave the house and take notes. The government could also do this, watching thousands of civilians in a gigantic operation. According to your simple pro-google argumenation, this is ok. Why is it exactly you are defending an ad broker that needs more profit every year selling your private data to the highest bidder, and which works with an army of lobbyists to make sure your rights are not defended? Are you a lobbyist?
Google, as a for-profit corporation, acts in the best interests of its owners - its share holders. The rest is PR and marketing, i.e. they tell you what you want to hear. For some reason people seem to realize this kind of audience targeting when its not them being targeted, i.e. a conservative presidents using Christians to get elected - not to serve their interests but just as an election vehicle, but when it's Obama using an election vehicle for the left ("change", "yes we can") or Google says it does no evil (yet it censored Tank Man for market and opportunity) they suddenly are blind and deaf. Fan boys. They are half of the problem, not just the corporations and their politicians. Become more critical. It's ok. You are not payed to protect Google against the evils of people who are critical of companies making money out of their privacy, unless you're on of their sock puppets always popping up in these topics.
Yes, excellent argument, Sir, and so elaborate too. It is a good thing you shine your wisdom on us. Forget all I said. Carry on then, go kill some more civilians and cover it up. In the name of Normality.
What are the new international rights for Americans?
Now let's suppose a group of Canadian terrorists bombs a building a China. You couldn't complain if the Chinese consequently invaded the USA because you are harboring Canadians. The Chinese could march up to Washington, catch Bush, Obama and friends from pits in the ground, and execute them after a fake trial. While hunting the terrorists, they could kill innocent civilians with a ratio 5:1. These events, they could hide them actively from the media and from being ever discovered, because it is the patriotic thing to do and to protect the Chinese freedom fighters. If your family was killed at a checkpoint, you could witness people on Chinese internet forums discussing that it is irresponsible to have information about this incident released, that this would be anti-Chinese and evidence of a strong bias and sensationalism of the person of organisation releasing that secret info. There will be much torture, and those who expose it will be branded traitors, while the torturers walk. Many Americans and Canadians will be shipped to a remote prison. The new Chinese ruler who will keep everything the same will get the Nobel Peace Price.
You put a spin on all this crap that just isn't quite right. You work the sensationalism angle pretty hard. I like what you do, I just don't like your angle on things. And, guess what? I can say all that and don't provide the actual evidence of such. Was that an Argumentum ad hominem smoothem? What was the spin? What was the sensationalist part? If you can't provide this, you are the only one spinning.
It is not about what it adds to the movie, or not. It is about what it adds to the marketing process. Avatar was a mediocre movie if you take away the 3D and hype surrounding the movie. It was a very well played marketing event, where the masses just felt they had to see this movie. The 3D movies after that did not play this game as well. Jackson, of course, has proved he knows exactly how to play it. So this movie will be a big event, that everybody has to watch, and they will discuss the 3D, whether it is good or bad, and it won't matter, like Avatar, because those people discussing it already payed for the movie. Personally, I'm gutted Guillermo isn't going to make it, but "just" Jackson. The LOTR was excellent, but had its failings, mostly with the characters and story telling. It was a series of rollercoaster events with no depth. Jackson's weak points are Guillermo's strong points. Since the Hobbit is a smaller movie (in the sense of less rollercoasting) it would have been perfect for Guillermo, and at least very interesting considering the movies he had made in the past. I hope the Hobbit turns out well, but frankly I expect a 3D King Kong/Avatar type of movie with little depth, which, of course, will make huge amounts of money nevertheless. The 3D of course suggests Jackson will still not be concentrating on depth. I'll be happy if he manages to avoid jumping the shark. He came close sometimes in LOTR, with Legolas surfing the enormous CGI elephants, and an CGI army of the undead flooding a battle field.
Well, at least he is a guy with his own opinion, unlike some folks here who seem to be parroting a certain source with all kinds of information and opinion about Assange produced after the leak, a certain source which incidentally is the US government and which is of course complete objective and independent. Or was it you, who researched Mr. Assange? If not, you are a parrot.
Excellent. You start trying to make me look bad because you lack an argument, reverse the argument, and continue with another ad hominem. Meh.
Here's mine:
Your excellent argument was to call an extremely experienced web developer an inexperienced child.
So you are a complete idiot with no class whatsoever and you sound like a baby. I wish you good luck as a target for the publishing business for idiots. (These lame "books" are only written because lame idiots buy them, little boy, a well-known industry "secret")
I never get this. Organisation publishes a standard or programming language or whatever. Someone reads all the specs. Writes a book about it. Other people buy this book.
Well we're back to the starting point again. You don't have an argument and are calling people names instead. Next, you are going to deny it, etc. etc.
In the meantime, the point stays valid: your "warriors" are cowards fighting a wrong war for money.
"Please point out the personal attacks I've leveled at you?"
Pro tip: No, I won't, "ignorant twat" who came up with the Firebombing of Dresden.
But nice try trying to reverse it. Let's get back to the issues you are once trying to duck. I bet you're morally corrupted because a family member is in Afghanistan. Hey guess what, he's guilty too. He wasn't drafted, but signed up, for the money. So far you have reacted like a 16 year old boy who is talking right what is wrong with foam around his mouth. You are a cynical little toad aren't you. Protecting those who kill civilians, because they are cowards. You can't get more cynical than that.
Wow more lies and deceit and personal attacks. While denying it at the same time (although it's for anyone to see). You won't stop that, will you? You are a piece of work. Apparently you are not capable to discuss things in an intellectual way.
I wonder, when you were a little kid, did you always dream of doing the pitch dark hearted propaganda of a fascist regime? You must be so proud. I bet if you keep repeating your constructs in convenient walls of text, you might even start to believe in them yourself.
In the meantime your American "heroes" are killing civilians in their oil wars (that's what they are) for no other reason than that they are pitiful cowards of the worst kind. You, boy, go excuse the bombing of another wedding or something. Me, I wish some country tries to bring freedom and democracy to the US and suspects the torturing war criminal George Bush is near your position, and then bombs the hell out of your entire family, only to realize later it was a bad tip.
Thank you for your morality lessons. What would we have done without them? We would just not be paying taxes as we wouldn't have thought of all that. Thank you again.
However, the morality of the tax avoidance was not the issue here.
The issue here was the goverment was using a stolen list. The bad morality of the tax avoidance is a given. Let's say it wasn't a list, but the goverment got the details by torture. That would clearly cross a line. Back to the list. What crosses the line?
We were discussing the USA. You are trying to redirect to the Taliban. This after your first attempt at ad hominem, and comparing carpet bombing to taking out individual targets.
You have a dark hearth, and are not prepared to face the reality of the fascism of America's wars, excusing them cheaply instead. Way to go, boy. Obviously a country to be proud of. I predict the USA will fall much quicker than England did once, and much more deserved. Hope you have a lot of fun in the process. People like you deserve that. People like me won't save your ass.
Slashdot Mirror
Personally I don't get this charging thing. It will be slow and inefficient.
Why can't I just swap batteries at the "gas" station? Problem solved.
You have problems understanding an argument. I recommend brain amputation, it can only get better.
Nope, you won it. Yours is infinitely less well-constructed.
But carry on battling privacy for the sake of billionaires, without any argumentation at all. I suspect you are not a lobbyist, but just a mere complete and total idiot.
And Google is in your slashdot, modding your and mine comment to oblivion (you troll!), while minifying/laughing away/ridiculing any concerns and placing insightful comments about how all is well.
Spammers gather email addresses from the open internet. According to your argument it is ok to spam millions of email addresses. Also, I could stand across the street and watch you leave the house and take notes. The government could also do this, watching thousands of civilians in a gigantic operation. According to your simple pro-google argumenation, this is ok. Why is it exactly you are defending an ad broker that needs more profit every year selling your private data to the highest bidder, and which works with an army of lobbyists to make sure your rights are not defended? Are you a lobbyist?
Google, as a for-profit corporation, acts in the best interests of its owners - its share holders. The rest is PR and marketing, i.e. they tell you what you want to hear. For some reason people seem to realize this kind of audience targeting when its not them being targeted, i.e. a conservative presidents using Christians to get elected - not to serve their interests but just as an election vehicle, but when it's Obama using an election vehicle for the left ("change", "yes we can") or Google says it does no evil (yet it censored Tank Man for market and opportunity) they suddenly are blind and deaf. Fan boys. They are half of the problem, not just the corporations and their politicians. Become more critical. It's ok. You are not payed to protect Google against the evils of people who are critical of companies making money out of their privacy, unless you're on of their sock puppets always popping up in these topics.
Yes, excellent argument, Sir, and so elaborate too. It is a good thing you shine your wisdom on us. Forget all I said. Carry on then, go kill some more civilians and cover it up. In the name of Normality.
What are the new international rights for Americans?
Now let's suppose a group of Canadian terrorists bombs a building a China. You couldn't complain if the Chinese consequently invaded the USA because you are harboring Canadians. The Chinese could march up to Washington, catch Bush, Obama and friends from pits in the ground, and execute them after a fake trial. While hunting the terrorists, they could kill innocent civilians with a ratio 5:1. These events, they could hide them actively from the media and from being ever discovered, because it is the patriotic thing to do and to protect the Chinese freedom fighters. If your family was killed at a checkpoint, you could witness people on Chinese internet forums discussing that it is irresponsible to have information about this incident released, that this would be anti-Chinese and evidence of a strong bias and sensationalism of the person of organisation releasing that secret info. There will be much torture, and those who expose it will be branded traitors, while the torturers walk. Many Americans and Canadians will be shipped to a remote prison. The new Chinese ruler who will keep everything the same will get the Nobel Peace Price.
You put a spin on all this crap that just isn't quite right. You work the sensationalism angle pretty hard. I like what you do, I just don't like your angle on things. And, guess what? I can say all that and don't provide the actual evidence of such. Was that an Argumentum ad hominem smoothem? What was the spin? What was the sensationalist part? If you can't provide this, you are the only one spinning.
They know within a few months into a project when they are going to deliver.
Was this prior or after Windows Vista?
Let's not be shy.. Like half of the commenters here: http://yro.slashdot.org/story/10/10/14/2220209/Wikileaks-Donations-Account-Shut-Down
If you are in there accusing wikileaks of killing people, you have now been officially documented as an idiot and an easy target of propaganda.
It is not about what it adds to the movie, or not. It is about what it adds to the marketing process. Avatar was a mediocre movie if you take away the 3D and hype surrounding the movie. It was a very well played marketing event, where the masses just felt they had to see this movie. The 3D movies after that did not play this game as well. Jackson, of course, has proved he knows exactly how to play it. So this movie will be a big event, that everybody has to watch, and they will discuss the 3D, whether it is good or bad, and it won't matter, like Avatar, because those people discussing it already payed for the movie. Personally, I'm gutted Guillermo isn't going to make it, but "just" Jackson. The LOTR was excellent, but had its failings, mostly with the characters and story telling. It was a series of rollercoaster events with no depth. Jackson's weak points are Guillermo's strong points. Since the Hobbit is a smaller movie (in the sense of less rollercoasting) it would have been perfect for Guillermo, and at least very interesting considering the movies he had made in the past. I hope the Hobbit turns out well, but frankly I expect a 3D King Kong/Avatar type of movie with little depth, which, of course, will make huge amounts of money nevertheless. The 3D of course suggests Jackson will still not be concentrating on depth. I'll be happy if he manages to avoid jumping the shark. He came close sometimes in LOTR, with Legolas surfing the enormous CGI elephants, and an CGI army of the undead flooding a battle field.
Well, at least he is a guy with his own opinion, unlike some folks here who seem to be parroting a certain source with all kinds of information and opinion about Assange produced after the leak, a certain source which incidentally is the US government and which is of course complete objective and independent. Or was it you, who researched Mr. Assange? If not, you are a parrot.
Excellent. You start trying to make me look bad because you lack an argument, reverse the argument, and continue with another ad hominem. Meh. Here's mine: Your excellent argument was to call an extremely experienced web developer an inexperienced child. So you are a complete idiot with no class whatsoever and you sound like a baby. I wish you good luck as a target for the publishing business for idiots. (These lame "books" are only written because lame idiots buy them, little boy, a well-known industry "secret")
Meh, argumentum ad hominem. In other words: game over.
If you need someone to hold your hand to learn HTML, you are in the wrong business.
I never get this. Organisation publishes a standard or programming language or whatever. Someone reads all the specs. Writes a book about it. Other people buy this book.
Why not go to w3c.org and read the specs?
The best way to prepare for the video game industry is to work as a slave rower on a Roman warship.
Hey, did you know why I kept you going? It was a test to see if you're a sociopath. They want to have the last word.
Well we're back to the starting point again. You don't have an argument and are calling people names instead. Next, you are going to deny it, etc. etc. In the meantime, the point stays valid: your "warriors" are cowards fighting a wrong war for money.
I pointed out a lot of facts, which you again did not answer and ducked instead, while calling me a troll. I call you a fascist duck.
"Please point out the personal attacks I've leveled at you?"
Pro tip: No, I won't, "ignorant twat" who came up with the Firebombing of Dresden.
But nice try trying to reverse it. Let's get back to the issues you are once trying to duck. I bet you're morally corrupted because a family member is in Afghanistan. Hey guess what, he's guilty too. He wasn't drafted, but signed up, for the money. So far you have reacted like a 16 year old boy who is talking right what is wrong with foam around his mouth. You are a cynical little toad aren't you. Protecting those who kill civilians, because they are cowards. You can't get more cynical than that.
Wow more lies and deceit and personal attacks. While denying it at the same time (although it's for anyone to see). You won't stop that, will you? You are a piece of work. Apparently you are not capable to discuss things in an intellectual way.
I wonder, when you were a little kid, did you always dream of doing the pitch dark hearted propaganda of a fascist regime? You must be so proud. I bet if you keep repeating your constructs in convenient walls of text, you might even start to believe in them yourself.
In the meantime your American "heroes" are killing civilians in their oil wars (that's what they are) for no other reason than that they are pitiful cowards of the worst kind. You, boy, go excuse the bombing of another wedding or something. Me, I wish some country tries to bring freedom and democracy to the US and suspects the torturing war criminal George Bush is near your position, and then bombs the hell out of your entire family, only to realize later it was a bad tip.
Thank you for your morality lessons. What would we have done without them? We would just not be paying taxes as we wouldn't have thought of all that. Thank you again.
However, the morality of the tax avoidance was not the issue here.
The issue here was the goverment was using a stolen list. The bad morality of the tax avoidance is a given. Let's say it wasn't a list, but the goverment got the details by torture. That would clearly cross a line. Back to the list. What crosses the line?
Where is your condemnation for the Taliban
We were discussing the USA. You are trying to redirect to the Taliban. This after your first attempt at ad hominem, and comparing carpet bombing to taking out individual targets.
You have a dark hearth, and are not prepared to face the reality of the fascism of America's wars, excusing them cheaply instead. Way to go, boy. Obviously a country to be proud of. I predict the USA will fall much quicker than England did once, and much more deserved. Hope you have a lot of fun in the process. People like you deserve that. People like me won't save your ass.