"I don't need to spin it â" ISIS and Al Qaeda do it themselves. Few of the Muslims are actually fighting, yes, but they are funded by the much larger group of people."
Yes, just like the IRA were funded by Catholics in America, just like leftist guerillas in South America are supported by local farmers and so on and so forth. What is your point still? It's not like there's a higher level of funding amongst muslims for this sort of thing than any other group. You might want to think that or pretend there is to satisfy your apparent hatred for this group of people but the problem there is your hatred, not the group of people in question.
"I know about it quite well â" enough to understand, that nothing in the doctrine of either flavor of Christianity compels its followers into doing the things IRA has done."
That depends who you ask. Many members of the IRA would disagree, just as many members of ISIS would disagree with many muslims on it being a religion of police. It doesn't really matter what the books say only the actions of the people, and there's no more Islamic fundamentalists than there are extremists of many other groups.
"Yes, Christianity too has been used to justify all sorts of atrocities, but one had to pervert the doctrine to make it usable to that end. Islam, unfortunately, does not need any such creative interpretations. It is quite explicit."
Yeah, because it's not like the Bible has anything like that is it? -
âoeSlaves, submit yourselves to your masters with all respect, not only to the good and gentle but also to the cruel.â (1 Peter 2:18)
âoeWives, submit to your husbands as to the Lord.â (Ephesians 5:22)
âoeI do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent.â (1 Timothy 2:12)
âoeThis is what the Lord Almighty says... âNow go and strike Amalek and devote to destruction all that they have. Do not spare them, but kill both man and woman, child and infant, ox and sheep, camel and donkey.â(TM)â (1 Samuel 15:3)
The problem is you've fallen hook line and sinker to classic far right spiel just as Russian's have currently with Putin and just as Germans did with Hitler. You create an enemy, which can be easy when there are plenty of that group that give reason for themselves to be hated, and then you focus wholly on that enemy and claim them to be the source of all the world's ills. You ignore the hypocrisy of the fact that other groups are just as guilty and that the problem isn't the group, but bad individuals. Congratulations on being small-minded enough for fall for this type of thing, you're the perfect example of the "useful idiot". You don't have to be though, whether you continue to be is your choice, you sound proud of it, but you really shouldn't be- there's no pride in ignorance.
As for your final note well guess what? Turns out that the Bible similarly denies women freedom of speech if you're to adhere to the examples quoted above which is clearly a breach of the 1st amendment. Again, is that too inconvenient for you?
I get it, you're scarred from years of fighting and turmoil, you want someone to blame, and it's easier for you to take it out on a whole group than get your head round the fact that evil people exist everywhere in every group and every walk of life. They'll always find an excuse, but rather than realise it's an excuse you've simply fallen for their nonsense. You think they're the fools, but they're the ones peddling the excuse- you're the one gullible enough to buy it.
I don't know, maybe you're religious yourself, and this creates the irony that you've decided your religion is more flawless and more right and that they must be wrong. Personally? It's all nonsense, I grew out of fairy tales when I was about 8, which makes it easy for me to step back and see that they're all just stories, often used as excuses to do bad things. Judging by your focus on the constitution I guess you're American and I can see there
Right but now you're changing the scenario to try and avoid the fact you were clearly wrong. We're not talking about a consensual relationship, we're talking about a request for sexual favours in return for him doing his job - teaching.
And, well, "deported to Islam"? what the fuck does that even mean? Islam isn't a place, it's a religion. You can't deport someone to a religion. This is just comical, I know Slashdot jokes about basement dwellers but your apparent complete lack of grasp of societal boundaries coupled with your massive ignorance of geography and beliefs is surely evidence that you can only be a basement dweller. Does your mum even know you're on the internet?
I should stop now, it's pretty clear you're like 10 years old so maybe when you grow up you'll look back at your post and realise how hilariously stupid you were as a kid.
Yes I'm sure all those students will be greatly upset that they don't have to fuck their professor to be able to learn.
I'm sure they'll also be greatly upset that creeps like you don't get to insist they fuck you if they want anything from you.
Do you give your doctor a blowjob if he asks for one when you go for your flu vaccine? should he really stay in the job if he asks that of you? Is your understanding of ethics and norms so fundamentally broken that you're really that creepy? Or are you just one of those people who can't back down even though they're wrong? It's one or the other, I really just still can't tell which and I'm not sure if that's more or less disturbing than you just out and out admitting you're a creep that prefers to support sexual predators over normal people.
"Once again, nothing in Christian scripture compels Christians to fight other faiths. On contrast, Koran does so compel its followers. That's the fundamental asymmetry.."
It doesn't matter. There are about 1.3 billion muslims in the world and the fraction causing problems in practice is minimal however you try and spin it.
Groups like the LRA and many other African Christian groups, Mexican cartels justifying their actions using Christianity and so on and so forth could make ISIS look tame with the amount of people they've killed and the manner in which they've killed them. ISIS beheads a single Westerner and it's headline news, a Mexican drug cartel beheads 40 people and you've really got to fucking dig to find any news on it.
"IRA's fight was purely secular â" nothing in Catholicism insists nor mandates the sort of things they've done."
How old are you 10? Were you even around when the troubles in Ireland were at their worst? I just don't understand how else someone can be this fucking ignorant. You're so utterly oblivious to what the Irish troubles were really about that you think the IRA's fight is secular? You really don't know about the whole Catholics vs. Protestants thing? How can you even begin to join a discussion like this when you're so profoundly lacking a clue on it?
"Muslims, once again, must fight other religions â" in order to remain good Muslims. Because Koran â" which they believe to be the word of God verbatim â" says so."
The Bible says an awful lot of things that aren't particularly nice either, but guess what? most Muslims like most Christians have learnt that some of what these texts say are plain fucking stupid and opt not to pursue them. This is why we're finally starting to see women bishops in the UK as but one example - because it turns out that although the bible preaches misogyny it's not actually cool in this day and age. We hear about Islamic fundamentalism more in the West because it's currently the biggest threat, 30 years ago in the UK though it was the IRA, a wholly Christian conflict.
You can try and justify this how you want but you'd still be wrong. South and Central Africa is ravaged by Christian fighting but the focus is wholly on the Middle East/North Africa because the West has largely given up on the West of Africa and the middle east is where we're primarily trying to interfere nowadays.
It seems that there are violent thugs from every walk of life and the proportion seems similar whatever they purport their cause to be. Whether it's leftist guerillas in South America, Mexican drug cartels in Central America, Far right fascists in Northern and Eastern Europe, Russian Orthodox imperialists in Russia and surrounding states, Christian fundamentalists in Europe and Africa, Islamic fundamentalists in the middle east, Buddhist fundamentalists in Burma, or whatever else- bad people find reasons to kill, pretending that one group of bad people is somehow worse than another is stupid. There's not even really a metric by which the worst of the worst, ISIS or Al Qaeda can compare to the Mexican drug cartels in terms of amount of kills and level of violence - groups like La Familia and Knights Templar cartels claim religion as being key parts of their foundations just as ISIS do, so you cannot simply claim one is secular whilst the other is not.
What about individual acts of terrorism in the West? Well in recent years Anders Breivik killed more kids in the name of Christianity in Norway than the Ottawa shootings, the current Sydney situation, the London 7/7 bombings, and a few French anti-semitic incidents combined. 9/11? small fry. Want to know what real horror sounds like? Try the Srebrenica massacre of 1995 where Russian backed Serbian Orthodox fighters thought it would be fun to kill roughly 10,000 muslims in a single massacre often using things such as hammers to beat them to death so as not to waste bullets and then dumping them all in mass graves.
So you can say things like "the IRA is secular" or w
I think you should probably take a tissue and whipe those tears from your eyes. Honestly, it's not the end of the world that you're wrong.
Or maybe you're just upset that you think sexual harassment is okay and are upset that no one's willing to back you on that.
Being an idiot on Slashdot is fine, you're more than welcome to keep being that. Being a sexual predator? that's not okay, don't expect anyone to come and tell you it is so that you can satisfy that blatant perversion of yours. Don't get upset when someone tells you to stop trying to justify sexual harassment as okay. It's not.
The power is very clearly in her fear of failure if she doesn't get the help she needs from him.
Stop making a fool of yourself, you were wrong on this one and you just need to accept that you have a really creepy view of acceptable and unacceptable behaviour.
On the contrary, the legal definition of harassment contains explicit clauses about applying pressure to trying and obtain sexual favours. If this person was worried about failing the class and felt their only option was to ask for help and this guy told them the only way they were getting his help is through sexual favours then this is very clearly within the bounds of harassment.
I think you have a very narrow view of what harassment actually is, because your description only covers a small portion of what is legally defined as harassment.
If you can't even stop pretending that "Anklagad" and "Ã¥talad" are these weird mystical Swedish concepts when in fact they simply map directly to the accused (Aklagad) and charged (Ã¥talad), then what's the point even trying to debate the rest of your points directly? You'll only read what you want to read, twist what does suit how you want to twist. It's all pointless.
There's a certain irony that you feel that by digging back 2 years you've managed to find five whole posts on the topic of Assange by me, and think that I'm therefore a vehement defender of Assange whilst failing to realise that you've largely confirmed my point, my point was simply that I hadn't bothered to respond to your recent posts until now, and in searching as desperately as you have you seem to have confirmed that given that you've not found a single post in 2014, and barely a handful going all the way back to what, 2011? You say I bother "every bloody time", yet apparently I haven't bothered this year at all.
Now let's compare and contrast this to your posting record on the situation, well it turns out that in the last 6 months alone we can find what, the best part of 100 posts from you on the subject? Have you hit 20 yet on this one single story? I imagine you're close by now.
So just step back and consider this, whose posting record on the topic is probably relatively normal? Whose is rather disturbingly obsessive and abnormal? When you've answered this for yourself, tell me, am I an Assange fanboy? Or are you so obsessively filled with hate for him that anyone that doesn't agree with you is simply in your mind an Assange fanboy? Would an Assange fanboy not even bother to post on a topic about him for a year? to not bother defending him in the face of your many tens, possibly over a hundred posts? Now extrapolate this with your comment, you claim I'm one of the most extreme Assange fanboys on this site, and if the most extreme Assange fanboys on this site are therefore, by logical extension, posting an order of magnitude less than those posting to attack Assange, then which side is most extreme really?
So you see Rei, this is the problem. You're so caught up in your distortions that you have nothing in your mind but distortions. You think a handful of posts across a few years is evidence of fanboyism, yet you think the best part of a hundred posts in less than a year is perfectly healthy. Have I posted more frequently in the past going back even more years? possibly, but if I did it probably wasn't really healthy either.
Whilst I think the case is all a little odd, and the odds don't seem in the prosecution's favour given the way they're misbehaving, as the Swedish courts agree, I'm still perfectly open to the possibility that he will eventually stand trial and be found guilty, not be extradited on to the US, and be out of jail after probably a relatively short sentence. I'm happy with the idea that if I'm wrong, that a few posts I made on the subject were misguided. What about you? are you open to the idea that he may well be innocent? if the case is dropped would you be willing to accept a lack of guilt or would you simply say he cheated his way out of it with political games? if it goes to trial and he's not found guilty, will you not feel a little silly that you spent many hours making hundreds of posts attacking him? or will it just be a miscarriage of justice to you?
You'll have to excuse the grossly misleading headline and summary, I just noticed it's posted by Rei.
Rei turns up on Slashdot every time an Assange story turns up. She's mentioned before that she was a victim of assault, and so has basically decided to make it her life long internet crusade to ensure that any man accused of rape is determined to be guilty, and fuck the law and all that.
She likes to sound intelligent by throwing in random Swedish words like the Swedish version of "the accused" as if it somehow makes her sound more intelligent, but honestly it just comes across as plain weird, I really to this day cannot understand why you'd write out a paragraph in English and just throw in a few otherwise directly translatable words in Swedish other than to try and pretend you have more of a clue than you actually do.
But don't take my word for it. She's already spreading her bile in this discussion already:
"Rape fugitive"? yeah sure Rei, that doesn't sound like a loaded description of someone who has neither been found guilty of rape, nor even been charged for rape, but merely wanted for questioning. Oh let me guess, the tired old "but Sweden can't charge someone without doing it on their soil!". Bollocks. Completely false. Sweden can do this and have done this. They haven't done it because they're not far enough along in their investigation yet. Sweden isn't far along enough in it's investigation yet because it refuses to question Assange anywhere other than on it's soil even though it can and has done this for many other suspects in the past. All of this is mentioned black and white in places like this, by journalists that have actually done their homework, unlike propagandist man-haters like Rei:
In fact, Sweden's own courts recently criticised Assange's prosecutors for not being willing to move the case forward by simply questioning him in the UK or via video link:
"The Court of Appeal notes, however, that the investigation into the suspected crimes has come to a halt and considers that the failure of the prosecutors to examine alternative avenues is not in line with their obligation â" in the interests of everyone concerned â" to move the preliminary investigation forward."
Honestly I've not bothered before, but it's getting tiresome seeing the same old biased hatred filled trash coming from her. It's become impossible to have a rational discussion on Slashdot about the whole Assange thing with her bile and random nonsensical insertion of an arbitrary selection of Swedish words. Yes it sucks what happened to you Rei, but that doesn't mean that we should just throw all semblance of justice and reason out the window just for you.
It's basically become Rei's own personal bitch the fuck out of Assange space. Go away Rei, Slashdot isn't yours, you don't get to unilaterally set the fucking agenda and shame on the editors for allowing it in this case.
Of course we, the UK tax payers, stuck in the middle are footing the bill for this Swedish prosecution caused farce that people like Rei are so quick to defend because of their own personal issues:
Rapists should be hung, drawn, and quartered, and the widespread failure by authorities globally to deal with sexual assault and obtain convictions in cases where they should is a major problem. Conviction rates seem to be from a statistical standpoint unrealistically low, and it needs to change. But when a prosecution can't even be bothered to determine that someone is one and actively avoids doing so then it doesn't instil confidence that they gen
Oh I see, so you're confusing Russian regulars with Chechen guerillas? If you can't even tell the difference between the two sides it's no wonder you're more than a little confused about it all. I'll give you a hint, the Russian regulars of Chechen descent aren't the same as the vast amount of Chechens that want independence.
Is there anything in your world of paranoia that isn't an absolute conspiracy theory? I mean, are you one of those guys who think 9/11 was done by the Jews, and NASA never actually made it the moon?
I have to wonder if people as batshit insane as you are have any grasp of how crazy you actually sound?
What you click a link or type in a URL you're requesting that specific URL. If that URL then has links to external content such as externally hosted ads that your browser is then tricked into loading the user has done nothing to request that content - their browser has been told to request this content that goes outside what the user themselves requested from the initial link. The browser cannot know whether this content is essential to the actual content the user requested by physically following a link or not so it has to blindly send the request.
So installing ad blocking software that only loads what the user explicitly requested is a perfectly fair move if those external sites aren't willing to ask permission to use your bandwidth.
You're conflating browser requests, with user requests. What the browser is told to ask for isn't necessarily what the user expected or asked for.
These cretins aren't getting in, they're just DDOSing. The other folks got in, but they weren't cretins and clearly knew what the fuck they were doing.
Which doesn't excuse Sony's apparent poor security, but you should be technically competent enough to know that a DDOS isn't the same as an intrusion and there's far less you can do about a DDOS than an intrusion.
Sucks to be you then, I mean, 1 night of not being able to use a service doesn't seem to be an adequate reason to live in the dark ages of not being able to access media archives far larger than you'll ever afford or be able to store at home and offline.
Sure and Russia doesn't spot the double standards of annexing Crimea saying it's what the people whilst hanging on to Chechnya which isn't what the people want. You can spot double standards everywhere, but quite how you jump to this absurd conclusion that it's about picking on Russia but that Russia and the West are all in it together I don't know. Do you take way too many drugs or something?
"Why in all that's holy would I load up a multi-megabyte behemoth instead of using a text editor for editing code?"
Because with modern auto-complete you can churn out code an order of magnitude faster?
You never have to look up API documentation again because it gets put there in front of, you only have to press a few keys out of tens to get the code into your code file that you want, and you can see related code like definitions and references without having to go searching manually for it.
Put simply, most IDEs offer at their core intelligent text editors, tools that can do everything your text editor can but with an understanding of the code that allows you to jump between parts of it and understand how sections interact without any effort.
The real question is why wouldn't I want to spend 5 seconds loading a multi-megabyte IDE when you can write, understand, maintain, and debug code 10x faster in it?
"But then again, I've never seen any debuggers other than IDEs for Java."
Maybe this is the problem if all you've encountered are things like Eclipse, which are genuinely slow, clunky, and painful to use to the extent you've already typed your code manually before the autocomplete dropdown has even woken up. There are terrible IDEs just like there is terrible software of all types, but don't judge them all by the poorest examples.
Try using something like Visual Studio and you'll soon understand.
Why single out Android users? If you hadn't noticed that's the entire web now and just about every device manufacturer and most software manufacturers going.
What, you thought Slashdot was being provided to you out of the goodness of Dice's heart?
But regardless of the actual processor, isn't it still fundamentally the case that technology back then was pushing to faster, hotter and less stable compared to modern technology which has taken a step back and focussed much more on efficiency and stability?
The cultural difference between processor design then and now was still present whatever you used no? When billions have been spent on making processors more efficient, run cooler, and more stable it would seem that anything produced back then couldn't match the processors of now given the amount that's been spent researching the exact things a system like this would require- efficiency and stability. This would seem to be even more the case with the advances in mobile processors since 2007 that have become more efficient than ever.
I just get the feeling they're trotting out the same old argument because they're used to trotting it out rather than because it's actually still a valid argument. I can't see how it can be, those billions on efficiency and stability research haven't just been poured down the drain, we've seen marked improvements.
It's not but that's what Lizard Squad are counting on. Lizard Squad are just a bunch of DDOS script kiddies and nothing more. They're trying to look cooler than they are by piggy backing off the success of the actual hack on Sony the other day by pretending they're somehow continuing Sony's "security woes". They're not. They're just doing what anyone with enough dollars to hire a botnet for a few hours could do.
It's still the hack from the other day that should be in the news as that was a big deal carried out by people with actual skill. This? this is just a bunch of clueless kids attention whoring.
To be fair this latest attack was just a DDOS, only so much you can do about that.
Lizard Squad aren't real hackers like whoever carried out the first attack. Lizard Squad are just a bunch of DDOS kiddies without any real actual skills.
You're right all the same of course, but there's only so much Sony can do about the DDOS attacks- they've just been timed to conflate it with Sony's genuine security breaches, Lizard Squad are basically trying to look cool by leeching off the success of whoever did the real hack even though they don't have anything like the talent to do a similar thing themselves.
Should just cut North Korea off the internet anyway, not like ordinary people there can access it so it would only harm the ruling elite. Preventing Fat Kim from watching lolcatz videos on YouTube would probably be a far more effective sanction than anything else anyway.
Even in the UK growing up before the world wide web was a thing you'd just wander on down to the closest building site where the builders often left porn mags lying around or go round to the kids house whose dad creepily collected page 3 girl pictures to find it.
It's always been a nonsense and always will be, kids will find porn whatever you do. You can't legislate natural curiosity away.
It's not even applied to all ISPs. I don't have any of this and haven't had to ever opt in or out of anything.
So sure you can go to one of the big 5 nanny state friendly ISPs and pay nothing for over-contended shit broadband with useless support when it goes wrong, or you can just go to one of the other 200 ISPs where none of this is even an issue.
Slashdot Mirror
"I don't need to spin it â" ISIS and Al Qaeda do it themselves. Few of the Muslims are actually fighting, yes, but they are funded by the much larger group of people."
Yes, just like the IRA were funded by Catholics in America, just like leftist guerillas in South America are supported by local farmers and so on and so forth. What is your point still? It's not like there's a higher level of funding amongst muslims for this sort of thing than any other group. You might want to think that or pretend there is to satisfy your apparent hatred for this group of people but the problem there is your hatred, not the group of people in question.
"I know about it quite well â" enough to understand, that nothing in the doctrine of either flavor of Christianity compels its followers into doing the things IRA has done."
That depends who you ask. Many members of the IRA would disagree, just as many members of ISIS would disagree with many muslims on it being a religion of police. It doesn't really matter what the books say only the actions of the people, and there's no more Islamic fundamentalists than there are extremists of many other groups.
"Yes, Christianity too has been used to justify all sorts of atrocities, but one had to pervert the doctrine to make it usable to that end. Islam, unfortunately, does not need any such creative interpretations. It is quite explicit."
Yeah, because it's not like the Bible has anything like that is it? -
âoeSlaves, submit yourselves to your masters with all respect, not only to the good and gentle but also to the cruel.â (1 Peter 2:18)
âoeWives, submit to your husbands as to the Lord.â (Ephesians 5:22)
âoeI do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent.â (1 Timothy 2:12)
âoeThis is what the Lord Almighty says... âNow go and strike Amalek and devote to destruction all that they have. Do not spare them, but kill both man and woman, child and infant, ox and sheep, camel and donkey.â(TM)â (1 Samuel 15:3)
The problem is you've fallen hook line and sinker to classic far right spiel just as Russian's have currently with Putin and just as Germans did with Hitler. You create an enemy, which can be easy when there are plenty of that group that give reason for themselves to be hated, and then you focus wholly on that enemy and claim them to be the source of all the world's ills. You ignore the hypocrisy of the fact that other groups are just as guilty and that the problem isn't the group, but bad individuals. Congratulations on being small-minded enough for fall for this type of thing, you're the perfect example of the "useful idiot". You don't have to be though, whether you continue to be is your choice, you sound proud of it, but you really shouldn't be- there's no pride in ignorance.
As for your final note well guess what? Turns out that the Bible similarly denies women freedom of speech if you're to adhere to the examples quoted above which is clearly a breach of the 1st amendment. Again, is that too inconvenient for you?
I get it, you're scarred from years of fighting and turmoil, you want someone to blame, and it's easier for you to take it out on a whole group than get your head round the fact that evil people exist everywhere in every group and every walk of life. They'll always find an excuse, but rather than realise it's an excuse you've simply fallen for their nonsense. You think they're the fools, but they're the ones peddling the excuse- you're the one gullible enough to buy it.
I don't know, maybe you're religious yourself, and this creates the irony that you've decided your religion is more flawless and more right and that they must be wrong. Personally? It's all nonsense, I grew out of fairy tales when I was about 8, which makes it easy for me to step back and see that they're all just stories, often used as excuses to do bad things. Judging by your focus on the constitution I guess you're American and I can see there
Right but now you're changing the scenario to try and avoid the fact you were clearly wrong. We're not talking about a consensual relationship, we're talking about a request for sexual favours in return for him doing his job - teaching.
And, well, "deported to Islam"? what the fuck does that even mean? Islam isn't a place, it's a religion. You can't deport someone to a religion. This is just comical, I know Slashdot jokes about basement dwellers but your apparent complete lack of grasp of societal boundaries coupled with your massive ignorance of geography and beliefs is surely evidence that you can only be a basement dweller. Does your mum even know you're on the internet?
I should stop now, it's pretty clear you're like 10 years old so maybe when you grow up you'll look back at your post and realise how hilariously stupid you were as a kid.
Yes I'm sure all those students will be greatly upset that they don't have to fuck their professor to be able to learn.
I'm sure they'll also be greatly upset that creeps like you don't get to insist they fuck you if they want anything from you.
Do you give your doctor a blowjob if he asks for one when you go for your flu vaccine? should he really stay in the job if he asks that of you? Is your understanding of ethics and norms so fundamentally broken that you're really that creepy? Or are you just one of those people who can't back down even though they're wrong? It's one or the other, I really just still can't tell which and I'm not sure if that's more or less disturbing than you just out and out admitting you're a creep that prefers to support sexual predators over normal people.
"Once again, nothing in Christian scripture compels Christians to fight other faiths. On contrast, Koran does so compel its followers. That's the fundamental asymmetry.."
It doesn't matter. There are about 1.3 billion muslims in the world and the fraction causing problems in practice is minimal however you try and spin it.
Groups like the LRA and many other African Christian groups, Mexican cartels justifying their actions using Christianity and so on and so forth could make ISIS look tame with the amount of people they've killed and the manner in which they've killed them. ISIS beheads a single Westerner and it's headline news, a Mexican drug cartel beheads 40 people and you've really got to fucking dig to find any news on it.
"IRA's fight was purely secular â" nothing in Catholicism insists nor mandates the sort of things they've done."
How old are you 10? Were you even around when the troubles in Ireland were at their worst? I just don't understand how else someone can be this fucking ignorant. You're so utterly oblivious to what the Irish troubles were really about that you think the IRA's fight is secular? You really don't know about the whole Catholics vs. Protestants thing? How can you even begin to join a discussion like this when you're so profoundly lacking a clue on it?
"Muslims, once again, must fight other religions â" in order to remain good Muslims. Because Koran â" which they believe to be the word of God verbatim â" says so."
The Bible says an awful lot of things that aren't particularly nice either, but guess what? most Muslims like most Christians have learnt that some of what these texts say are plain fucking stupid and opt not to pursue them. This is why we're finally starting to see women bishops in the UK as but one example - because it turns out that although the bible preaches misogyny it's not actually cool in this day and age. We hear about Islamic fundamentalism more in the West because it's currently the biggest threat, 30 years ago in the UK though it was the IRA, a wholly Christian conflict.
You can try and justify this how you want but you'd still be wrong. South and Central Africa is ravaged by Christian fighting but the focus is wholly on the Middle East/North Africa because the West has largely given up on the West of Africa and the middle east is where we're primarily trying to interfere nowadays.
It seems that there are violent thugs from every walk of life and the proportion seems similar whatever they purport their cause to be. Whether it's leftist guerillas in South America, Mexican drug cartels in Central America, Far right fascists in Northern and Eastern Europe, Russian Orthodox imperialists in Russia and surrounding states, Christian fundamentalists in Europe and Africa, Islamic fundamentalists in the middle east, Buddhist fundamentalists in Burma, or whatever else- bad people find reasons to kill, pretending that one group of bad people is somehow worse than another is stupid. There's not even really a metric by which the worst of the worst, ISIS or Al Qaeda can compare to the Mexican drug cartels in terms of amount of kills and level of violence - groups like La Familia and Knights Templar cartels claim religion as being key parts of their foundations just as ISIS do, so you cannot simply claim one is secular whilst the other is not.
What about individual acts of terrorism in the West? Well in recent years Anders Breivik killed more kids in the name of Christianity in Norway than the Ottawa shootings, the current Sydney situation, the London 7/7 bombings, and a few French anti-semitic incidents combined. 9/11? small fry. Want to know what real horror sounds like? Try the Srebrenica massacre of 1995 where Russian backed Serbian Orthodox fighters thought it would be fun to kill roughly 10,000 muslims in a single massacre often using things such as hammers to beat them to death so as not to waste bullets and then dumping them all in mass graves.
So you can say things like "the IRA is secular" or w
I think you should probably take a tissue and whipe those tears from your eyes. Honestly, it's not the end of the world that you're wrong.
Or maybe you're just upset that you think sexual harassment is okay and are upset that no one's willing to back you on that.
Being an idiot on Slashdot is fine, you're more than welcome to keep being that. Being a sexual predator? that's not okay, don't expect anyone to come and tell you it is so that you can satisfy that blatant perversion of yours. Don't get upset when someone tells you to stop trying to justify sexual harassment as okay. It's not.
The power is very clearly in her fear of failure if she doesn't get the help she needs from him.
Stop making a fool of yourself, you were wrong on this one and you just need to accept that you have a really creepy view of acceptable and unacceptable behaviour.
On the contrary, the legal definition of harassment contains explicit clauses about applying pressure to trying and obtain sexual favours. If this person was worried about failing the class and felt their only option was to ask for help and this guy told them the only way they were getting his help is through sexual favours then this is very clearly within the bounds of harassment.
I think you have a very narrow view of what harassment actually is, because your description only covers a small portion of what is legally defined as harassment.
If you can't even stop pretending that "Anklagad" and "Ã¥talad" are these weird mystical Swedish concepts when in fact they simply map directly to the accused (Aklagad) and charged (Ã¥talad), then what's the point even trying to debate the rest of your points directly? You'll only read what you want to read, twist what does suit how you want to twist. It's all pointless.
There's a certain irony that you feel that by digging back 2 years you've managed to find five whole posts on the topic of Assange by me, and think that I'm therefore a vehement defender of Assange whilst failing to realise that you've largely confirmed my point, my point was simply that I hadn't bothered to respond to your recent posts until now, and in searching as desperately as you have you seem to have confirmed that given that you've not found a single post in 2014, and barely a handful going all the way back to what, 2011? You say I bother "every bloody time", yet apparently I haven't bothered this year at all.
Now let's compare and contrast this to your posting record on the situation, well it turns out that in the last 6 months alone we can find what, the best part of 100 posts from you on the subject? Have you hit 20 yet on this one single story? I imagine you're close by now.
So just step back and consider this, whose posting record on the topic is probably relatively normal? Whose is rather disturbingly obsessive and abnormal? When you've answered this for yourself, tell me, am I an Assange fanboy? Or are you so obsessively filled with hate for him that anyone that doesn't agree with you is simply in your mind an Assange fanboy? Would an Assange fanboy not even bother to post on a topic about him for a year? to not bother defending him in the face of your many tens, possibly over a hundred posts? Now extrapolate this with your comment, you claim I'm one of the most extreme Assange fanboys on this site, and if the most extreme Assange fanboys on this site are therefore, by logical extension, posting an order of magnitude less than those posting to attack Assange, then which side is most extreme really?
So you see Rei, this is the problem. You're so caught up in your distortions that you have nothing in your mind but distortions. You think a handful of posts across a few years is evidence of fanboyism, yet you think the best part of a hundred posts in less than a year is perfectly healthy. Have I posted more frequently in the past going back even more years? possibly, but if I did it probably wasn't really healthy either.
Whilst I think the case is all a little odd, and the odds don't seem in the prosecution's favour given the way they're misbehaving, as the Swedish courts agree, I'm still perfectly open to the possibility that he will eventually stand trial and be found guilty, not be extradited on to the US, and be out of jail after probably a relatively short sentence. I'm happy with the idea that if I'm wrong, that a few posts I made on the subject were misguided. What about you? are you open to the idea that he may well be innocent? if the case is dropped would you be willing to accept a lack of guilt or would you simply say he cheated his way out of it with political games? if it goes to trial and he's not found guilty, will you not feel a little silly that you spent many hours making hundreds of posts attacking him? or will it just be a miscarriage of justice to you?
You only think it's not harassment because you personally apparently have a strange lack of boundaries.
Just because you'd be comfortable with someone asking you to prostitute yourself to them doesn't mean someone else will feel the same.
Yes that's right, you finally figured it out, well done.
You'll have to excuse the grossly misleading headline and summary, I just noticed it's posted by Rei.
Rei turns up on Slashdot every time an Assange story turns up. She's mentioned before that she was a victim of assault, and so has basically decided to make it her life long internet crusade to ensure that any man accused of rape is determined to be guilty, and fuck the law and all that.
She likes to sound intelligent by throwing in random Swedish words like the Swedish version of "the accused" as if it somehow makes her sound more intelligent, but honestly it just comes across as plain weird, I really to this day cannot understand why you'd write out a paragraph in English and just throw in a few otherwise directly translatable words in Swedish other than to try and pretend you have more of a clue than you actually do.
But don't take my word for it. She's already spreading her bile in this discussion already:
http://news.slashdot.org/comme...
"Rape fugitive"? yeah sure Rei, that doesn't sound like a loaded description of someone who has neither been found guilty of rape, nor even been charged for rape, but merely wanted for questioning. Oh let me guess, the tired old "but Sweden can't charge someone without doing it on their soil!". Bollocks. Completely false. Sweden can do this and have done this. They haven't done it because they're not far enough along in their investigation yet. Sweden isn't far along enough in it's investigation yet because it refuses to question Assange anywhere other than on it's soil even though it can and has done this for many other suspects in the past. All of this is mentioned black and white in places like this, by journalists that have actually done their homework, unlike propagandist man-haters like Rei:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/worl...
In fact, Sweden's own courts recently criticised Assange's prosecutors for not being willing to move the case forward by simply questioning him in the UK or via video link:
http://www.svea.se/Om-Svea-hov...
To quote:
"The Court of Appeal notes, however, that the investigation into the suspected crimes has come to a halt and considers that the failure of the prosecutors to examine alternative avenues is not in line with their obligation â" in the interests of everyone concerned â" to move the preliminary investigation forward."
Honestly I've not bothered before, but it's getting tiresome seeing the same old biased hatred filled trash coming from her. It's become impossible to have a rational discussion on Slashdot about the whole Assange thing with her bile and random nonsensical insertion of an arbitrary selection of Swedish words. Yes it sucks what happened to you Rei, but that doesn't mean that we should just throw all semblance of justice and reason out the window just for you.
It's basically become Rei's own personal bitch the fuck out of Assange space. Go away Rei, Slashdot isn't yours, you don't get to unilaterally set the fucking agenda and shame on the editors for allowing it in this case.
Of course we, the UK tax payers, stuck in the middle are footing the bill for this Swedish prosecution caused farce that people like Rei are so quick to defend because of their own personal issues:
https://govwaste.co.uk/
Rapists should be hung, drawn, and quartered, and the widespread failure by authorities globally to deal with sexual assault and obtain convictions in cases where they should is a major problem. Conviction rates seem to be from a statistical standpoint unrealistically low, and it needs to change. But when a prosecution can't even be bothered to determine that someone is one and actively avoids doing so then it doesn't instil confidence that they gen
Oh I see, so you're confusing Russian regulars with Chechen guerillas? If you can't even tell the difference between the two sides it's no wonder you're more than a little confused about it all. I'll give you a hint, the Russian regulars of Chechen descent aren't the same as the vast amount of Chechens that want independence.
Is there anything in your world of paranoia that isn't an absolute conspiracy theory? I mean, are you one of those guys who think 9/11 was done by the Jews, and NASA never actually made it the moon?
I have to wonder if people as batshit insane as you are have any grasp of how crazy you actually sound?
No, that's not correct.
What you click a link or type in a URL you're requesting that specific URL. If that URL then has links to external content such as externally hosted ads that your browser is then tricked into loading the user has done nothing to request that content - their browser has been told to request this content that goes outside what the user themselves requested from the initial link. The browser cannot know whether this content is essential to the actual content the user requested by physically following a link or not so it has to blindly send the request.
So installing ad blocking software that only loads what the user explicitly requested is a perfectly fair move if those external sites aren't willing to ask permission to use your bandwidth.
You're conflating browser requests, with user requests. What the browser is told to ask for isn't necessarily what the user expected or asked for.
These cretins aren't getting in, they're just DDOSing. The other folks got in, but they weren't cretins and clearly knew what the fuck they were doing.
Which doesn't excuse Sony's apparent poor security, but you should be technically competent enough to know that a DDOS isn't the same as an intrusion and there's far less you can do about a DDOS than an intrusion.
Sucks to be you then, I mean, 1 night of not being able to use a service doesn't seem to be an adequate reason to live in the dark ages of not being able to access media archives far larger than you'll ever afford or be able to store at home and offline.
Sure and Russia doesn't spot the double standards of annexing Crimea saying it's what the people whilst hanging on to Chechnya which isn't what the people want. You can spot double standards everywhere, but quite how you jump to this absurd conclusion that it's about picking on Russia but that Russia and the West are all in it together I don't know. Do you take way too many drugs or something?
"Why in all that's holy would I load up a multi-megabyte behemoth instead of using a text editor for editing code?"
Because with modern auto-complete you can churn out code an order of magnitude faster?
You never have to look up API documentation again because it gets put there in front of, you only have to press a few keys out of tens to get the code into your code file that you want, and you can see related code like definitions and references without having to go searching manually for it.
Put simply, most IDEs offer at their core intelligent text editors, tools that can do everything your text editor can but with an understanding of the code that allows you to jump between parts of it and understand how sections interact without any effort.
The real question is why wouldn't I want to spend 5 seconds loading a multi-megabyte IDE when you can write, understand, maintain, and debug code 10x faster in it?
"But then again, I've never seen any debuggers other than IDEs for Java."
Maybe this is the problem if all you've encountered are things like Eclipse, which are genuinely slow, clunky, and painful to use to the extent you've already typed your code manually before the autocomplete dropdown has even woken up. There are terrible IDEs just like there is terrible software of all types, but don't judge them all by the poorest examples.
Try using something like Visual Studio and you'll soon understand.
Why single out Android users? If you hadn't noticed that's the entire web now and just about every device manufacturer and most software manufacturers going.
What, you thought Slashdot was being provided to you out of the goodness of Dice's heart?
But regardless of the actual processor, isn't it still fundamentally the case that technology back then was pushing to faster, hotter and less stable compared to modern technology which has taken a step back and focussed much more on efficiency and stability?
The cultural difference between processor design then and now was still present whatever you used no? When billions have been spent on making processors more efficient, run cooler, and more stable it would seem that anything produced back then couldn't match the processors of now given the amount that's been spent researching the exact things a system like this would require- efficiency and stability. This would seem to be even more the case with the advances in mobile processors since 2007 that have become more efficient than ever.
I just get the feeling they're trotting out the same old argument because they're used to trotting it out rather than because it's actually still a valid argument. I can't see how it can be, those billions on efficiency and stability research haven't just been poured down the drain, we've seen marked improvements.
It's not but that's what Lizard Squad are counting on. Lizard Squad are just a bunch of DDOS script kiddies and nothing more. They're trying to look cooler than they are by piggy backing off the success of the actual hack on Sony the other day by pretending they're somehow continuing Sony's "security woes". They're not. They're just doing what anyone with enough dollars to hire a botnet for a few hours could do.
It's still the hack from the other day that should be in the news as that was a big deal carried out by people with actual skill. This? this is just a bunch of clueless kids attention whoring.
To be fair this latest attack was just a DDOS, only so much you can do about that.
Lizard Squad aren't real hackers like whoever carried out the first attack. Lizard Squad are just a bunch of DDOS kiddies without any real actual skills.
You're right all the same of course, but there's only so much Sony can do about the DDOS attacks- they've just been timed to conflate it with Sony's genuine security breaches, Lizard Squad are basically trying to look cool by leeching off the success of whoever did the real hack even though they don't have anything like the talent to do a similar thing themselves.
Should just cut North Korea off the internet anyway, not like ordinary people there can access it so it would only harm the ruling elite. Preventing Fat Kim from watching lolcatz videos on YouTube would probably be a far more effective sanction than anything else anyway.
Even in the UK growing up before the world wide web was a thing you'd just wander on down to the closest building site where the builders often left porn mags lying around or go round to the kids house whose dad creepily collected page 3 girl pictures to find it.
It's always been a nonsense and always will be, kids will find porn whatever you do. You can't legislate natural curiosity away.
It's not even applied to all ISPs. I don't have any of this and haven't had to ever opt in or out of anything.
So sure you can go to one of the big 5 nanny state friendly ISPs and pay nothing for over-contended shit broadband with useless support when it goes wrong, or you can just go to one of the other 200 ISPs where none of this is even an issue.