"Anonymous" is a bunch of forum trolls on 4chan.org, where they made an entire board dedicated to forum trolls, and has been gaining popularity since the "lolcats," "rickrolls," and various other weird memes they made up to annoy people started getting more popular.
They're only called "Anonymous" because it's the default username of the board, and none of them post their identities because they tend to do and say horribly offensive things all the time. They started out invading other boards and calling into internet radio shows and such, and made up this concept of themselves as a collective force or organization as a joke. Apparently, it's catching on, and people are taking the damn thing seriously.
Sure this whole anti-Scientology thing looks pretty impressive, but it reminds me a lot of the time they ran white-supremacist Hal Turner's internet radio show into the ground by racking up huge bandwidth charges, flooding his show with fake calls, and protesting on his lawn. It sounds pretty noble and all, until you look into it and talk to some of the people that frequent/b/, and find out that the apparent reason all this started was that he was badmouthing pedophiles, whom forum goers pretend to admire.
Seriously, these guys are the trolls that normal trolls are afraid of. They're a bunch of bored 15-year-olds in the Lord of the Flies of internet BBSes. On the whole, they're the most incredibly racist, sexist, puerile, disgusting, mean-spirited and anti-social group of people you're going to find online these days, and the main reason they do "good" things is for attention and to make a name for themselves as the alpha-assholes on the scene today, taking on all comers.
That said, the place is hilarious and I probably visit the site far more often than is healthy or perhaps legal.
Have you played Bioshock? It's a commentary on Objectivism and the fault of pride, a whole city of people ruled by visionaries who felled the society with their hubris, leaving the normal folk who came in hopes of a better life either dead or insane, pleading to God to forgive their sins. You can also shoot lightning from your hands and set people on fire by snapping your fingers, and you get to kill evil mutants and killer robots with grenade launchers, electric shotgun rounds and napalm flamethrowers. Seriously, it's an impressive game.
In first and second edition, paladins were the strongest class by far. If you got a Holy Avenger you were the ultimate munchkin in the game. They weakened them considerably in third edition, I'm thinking mostly to counter the original popularity. Tieflings were pretty badass in 2nd edition too. They completely changed their abilities for 3rd ed. And they're just not right without the Tony DiTerlizzi art.
Millionaire is one thing, but I don't understand the problem with the pastor making a living as one. Is he supposed to be the local plumber that just happens to know a lot about religion, or something?
Also, I know a lot of churches with secretaries. If more than a couple hundred people go, there is likely to be a lot of office work required.
I think you either misread the previous post, or that was the most vicious agreement I've ever read. It looks to me that the grandparent's opinion is that no matter how rare the animal, most people are going to save people because we're, well, people.
Getting married and having a baby is procreation (do I need to explain how that is useful?). Remember, most of the people you're talking to here are teenagers or cynical outcasts, so I think you're going to need some charts.
The candle that burns brightest is the first to go out, as they say. So grind until you're level 70! Partake in the most epic quests there are! Fight many PvP battles! Leave a mark upon the gaming world that will last for at least three months after you die of starvation in front of your PC! Truly, that is a life lived.
That was the theory, at least in the 80s. There was an executive at Apple, French guy, can't remember his name, who steadfastly refused to allow the prices to drop on Macs at all. His belief was that it was a better product and thus deserved to be more expensive. One wonders what the computer industry would look like right now if they'd swallowed their pride and priced their systems competitively way back when.
Well, for one thing, if AT&T did a MITM attack against my VPN and it turned out that instead of warez and copyrighted music, I was, say, transferring customer financial information to a data warehouse, AT&T would be in a proverbial shit-ton of trouble, especially once word got out that they did something like that. I'd like to see every large corporation in the US simultaneously sue AT&T for industrial espionage.
Many people do believe this to be true. This is specially true when it's a child. When you fuck up a kid's head like that, odds are larger then usual they're just going to continue the cycle and have a horrible life in the process.
While I still can't decide which side I'm on, I can understand why some people may think death is better then rape, torture, imprisonment, and a whole bunch of other things.
I know several people who were raped as children (none of whom were in any way involved with this "child porn" the government loves to scare people with) and I have to say in every occasion, they are doing well enough. Yes, it was a terribly traumatic experience, and some of them never recovered, but they can live their lives despite this and have more or less the same chance to find happiness as anyone else. Personally, I'm very glad they're still alive as several of them are good friends of mine.
Rape is an awful experience but it is recoverable, and one of the major steps for victims to move on is to realize this. It's a good thing that our culture considers rape to be so horrific, considering the cultures I've seen that don't, but it's unfair to think that people who have been raped, even so young, are "damaged goods."
I completely disagree. The eighties put out some of the best vapid, brainless music that the world will ever see. The vapid, brainless music of today is crap in comparison. None of it will stand the test of time like "The Safety Dance", "Walk Like an Egyptian", "You Spin Me Round (Like A Record)", "Oh Yeah (The Ferris Bueller Theme)" or "Tainted Love." That stuff is incredibly classic.
This is a problem, and it's simple and obvious if you look at it. Previously, you shared items, and your friends who knew the page could follow along. Now, you share items, and everyone who chat with or email you have that list right in front of them. Sure, your boss or mother in law could have previously searched around a while and probably found your shared list, but that violates social boundaries on their part, and you have reason to take issue with them for tracking your personal information online.
Now, if they use Reader, they have a list right in front of them of all your interests, just like you have a list in front of you of theirs. If you're into BDSM, new earth creationism, or even (god help me) square dance, it takes a click for them to find out. If that was the original intent of the service, then it's your own damn fault, but beforehand Google put some effort into making it non-obvious to find your page if you didn't know where to look. You didn't have full security, but at least you had the "Why the hell were you tracking down all my personal information at 2am last night, you weirdo?" defense if they went that far.
At first, I figured that Google entering into the social networking market was going to be a big move in their favor, and that they'd blow away the competition, but something like this makes me think that the "social" part is probably beyond their reach. I guess that's what you get when all their technology is designed by 20-somethings that live under their desks at the Googleplex.
(An aside, I live within walking distance from Google, and when you go to the Safeway on Shoreline you can actually pick out all the Google-types. Skinny young guys traveling in twos or threes, talking slightly quietly and huddled together. The fact that more often than not they're wearing Google t-shirts helps.)
So what's the "..." file in the group say? I can't read it, but it looks like it's Shift_JIS. Not sure if it's part of the deal or if someone just uploaded it though.
There's still installation and subscription rates. Sure, there are free-to-air stations out there, but it's unlikely that you're going to find that many from your area. Though I guess they could "borrow" satellite like a lot of people seem to be doing these days.
The type of person that can spend $500 on a television set and doesn't have cable/satellite is probably not a big TV watcher.
And I just want to point out that if Congress has to subsidize receivers to force this change along, it's probably not a good idea in the first place. And let me also point out that F*@& Congress for spending tax money on paying for unnecessary digital upgrades. Next they'll be buying everyone blue ray and HD-DVD players to fund the HD war. It's frustratingly ridiculous.
There are people that can't afford cable TV still. Are they the type of person to keep up on tech news? I think it's unlikely. And it is a problem because there are still a significant amount of people that watch broadcast TV. It's probably the only way the local channels are staying in business at this point. I have a feeling this forced switchover is going to be the death of a lot of broadcast stations.
Well, that's an important point, but that's not what they're arguing about. The issue is with people who are repairing your computer using it as an excuse to go through your stuff. I used to work at a optical drive company, and on occasion needed to test drives against specific discs for unusual errors or BIOS issues. In some cases customers gave me copies of their home movies that were failing to play or causing problems. Watching someone's personal memories on disc at work is a strange thrill, and honestly made me kind of uncomfortable sometimes. If they were just testing the burn process, they would obviously have test files they could use. They just got off on looking into videos that weren't meant for them.
Child porn is disturbing, but I get suspicious any time an article brings it up, because it's almost always being used as an excuse to do something that is otherwise morally unacceptable on the government's or other establishment's part. Invasion of privacy, search and seizure, wiretapping, etc, there are always justifications brought up in the form of "this one time it caught a guy with child porn!" I can't believe that child porn is so rampant that it justifies the laws that are passed with child porn as an excuse. If it truly is, then the only law I could see as effective at that point is castration.
As with most things that are the result of a disruptive technology, the laws take time to adjust - but nevertheless they will. This in no way excuses your willful violation of existing laws
Actually, in a general sense, it does. Were everyone to respect these new laws, there would be no need to adjust them. If the law doesn't cause disruption, it would stand as it is. Sure, people could complain, but if everyone griped and went along with it, debate would eventually lose momentum. It would also be extremely difficult to bring the issue to court, because one has to have violated a law to be able to challenge it, I believe.
It's an interesting balance, since individuals who violate a law they disagree with are considered to be criminals and punishment is just, but large groups of individuals that openly violate laws would be seen as a social movement or protest that leads to the repealing or rewriting of the law. I guess how we judge people based on the two extremes depends on the eventual outcome of the law process.
Slashdot Mirror
"Anonymous" is a bunch of forum trolls on 4chan.org, where they made an entire board dedicated to forum trolls, and has been gaining popularity since the "lolcats," "rickrolls," and various other weird memes they made up to annoy people started getting more popular.
/b/, and find out that the apparent reason all this started was that he was badmouthing pedophiles, whom forum goers pretend to admire.
They're only called "Anonymous" because it's the default username of the board, and none of them post their identities because they tend to do and say horribly offensive things all the time. They started out invading other boards and calling into internet radio shows and such, and made up this concept of themselves as a collective force or organization as a joke. Apparently, it's catching on, and people are taking the damn thing seriously.
Sure this whole anti-Scientology thing looks pretty impressive, but it reminds me a lot of the time they ran white-supremacist Hal Turner's internet radio show into the ground by racking up huge bandwidth charges, flooding his show with fake calls, and protesting on his lawn. It sounds pretty noble and all, until you look into it and talk to some of the people that frequent
Seriously, these guys are the trolls that normal trolls are afraid of. They're a bunch of bored 15-year-olds in the Lord of the Flies of internet BBSes. On the whole, they're the most incredibly racist, sexist, puerile, disgusting, mean-spirited and anti-social group of people you're going to find online these days, and the main reason they do "good" things is for attention and to make a name for themselves as the alpha-assholes on the scene today, taking on all comers.
That said, the place is hilarious and I probably visit the site far more often than is healthy or perhaps legal.
That's when he "accidentally" banged her head against the doorframe. Sounds like the start of a beautiful marriage.
Have you played Bioshock? It's a commentary on Objectivism and the fault of pride, a whole city of people ruled by visionaries who felled the society with their hubris, leaving the normal folk who came in hopes of a better life either dead or insane, pleading to God to forgive their sins. You can also shoot lightning from your hands and set people on fire by snapping your fingers, and you get to kill evil mutants and killer robots with grenade launchers, electric shotgun rounds and napalm flamethrowers. Seriously, it's an impressive game.
In first and second edition, paladins were the strongest class by far. If you got a Holy Avenger you were the ultimate munchkin in the game. They weakened them considerably in third edition, I'm thinking mostly to counter the original popularity. Tieflings were pretty badass in 2nd edition too. They completely changed their abilities for 3rd ed. And they're just not right without the Tony DiTerlizzi art.
Millionaire is one thing, but I don't understand the problem with the pastor making a living as one. Is he supposed to be the local plumber that just happens to know a lot about religion, or something?
Also, I know a lot of churches with secretaries. If more than a couple hundred people go, there is likely to be a lot of office work required.
Car jack.
I think you either misread the previous post, or that was the most vicious agreement I've ever read. It looks to me that the grandparent's opinion is that no matter how rare the animal, most people are going to save people because we're, well, people.
The candle that burns brightest is the first to go out, as they say. So grind until you're level 70! Partake in the most epic quests there are! Fight many PvP battles! Leave a mark upon the gaming world that will last for at least three months after you die of starvation in front of your PC! Truly, that is a life lived.
I'd love to see your kid find this post 15 years from now. Assuming he lives that long/hasn't been taken by CPS, of course.
That was the theory, at least in the 80s. There was an executive at Apple, French guy, can't remember his name, who steadfastly refused to allow the prices to drop on Macs at all. His belief was that it was a better product and thus deserved to be more expensive. One wonders what the computer industry would look like right now if they'd swallowed their pride and priced their systems competitively way back when.
Well, for one thing, if AT&T did a MITM attack against my VPN and it turned out that instead of warez and copyrighted music, I was, say, transferring customer financial information to a data warehouse, AT&T would be in a proverbial shit-ton of trouble, especially once word got out that they did something like that. I'd like to see every large corporation in the US simultaneously sue AT&T for industrial espionage.
While I still can't decide which side I'm on, I can understand why some people may think death is better then rape, torture, imprisonment, and a whole bunch of other things.
I know several people who were raped as children (none of whom were in any way involved with this "child porn" the government loves to scare people with) and I have to say in every occasion, they are doing well enough. Yes, it was a terribly traumatic experience, and some of them never recovered, but they can live their lives despite this and have more or less the same chance to find happiness as anyone else. Personally, I'm very glad they're still alive as several of them are good friends of mine.
Rape is an awful experience but it is recoverable, and one of the major steps for victims to move on is to realize this. It's a good thing that our culture considers rape to be so horrific, considering the cultures I've seen that don't, but it's unfair to think that people who have been raped, even so young, are "damaged goods."
I completely disagree. The eighties put out some of the best vapid, brainless music that the world will ever see. The vapid, brainless music of today is crap in comparison. None of it will stand the test of time like "The Safety Dance", "Walk Like an Egyptian", "You Spin Me Round (Like A Record)", "Oh Yeah (The Ferris Bueller Theme)" or "Tainted Love." That stuff is incredibly classic.
You misspelled Beavis, dumbass.
heheheh, yeah, heheheh.
This is a problem, and it's simple and obvious if you look at it. Previously, you shared items, and your friends who knew the page could follow along. Now, you share items, and everyone who chat with or email you have that list right in front of them. Sure, your boss or mother in law could have previously searched around a while and probably found your shared list, but that violates social boundaries on their part, and you have reason to take issue with them for tracking your personal information online.
Now, if they use Reader, they have a list right in front of them of all your interests, just like you have a list in front of you of theirs. If you're into BDSM, new earth creationism, or even (god help me) square dance, it takes a click for them to find out. If that was the original intent of the service, then it's your own damn fault, but beforehand Google put some effort into making it non-obvious to find your page if you didn't know where to look. You didn't have full security, but at least you had the "Why the hell were you tracking down all my personal information at 2am last night, you weirdo?" defense if they went that far.
At first, I figured that Google entering into the social networking market was going to be a big move in their favor, and that they'd blow away the competition, but something like this makes me think that the "social" part is probably beyond their reach. I guess that's what you get when all their technology is designed by 20-somethings that live under their desks at the Googleplex.
(An aside, I live within walking distance from Google, and when you go to the Safeway on Shoreline you can actually pick out all the Google-types. Skinny young guys traveling in twos or threes, talking slightly quietly and huddled together. The fact that more often than not they're wearing Google t-shirts helps.)
So what's the "..." file in the group say? I can't read it, but it looks like it's Shift_JIS. Not sure if it's part of the deal or if someone just uploaded it though.
There's still installation and subscription rates. Sure, there are free-to-air stations out there, but it's unlikely that you're going to find that many from your area. Though I guess they could "borrow" satellite like a lot of people seem to be doing these days.
They listened to the radio, since the government didn't black out all the radio stations to make sure everyone bought a TV.
The type of person that can spend $500 on a television set and doesn't have cable/satellite is probably not a big TV watcher.
And I just want to point out that if Congress has to subsidize receivers to force this change along, it's probably not a good idea in the first place. And let me also point out that F*@& Congress for spending tax money on paying for unnecessary digital upgrades. Next they'll be buying everyone blue ray and HD-DVD players to fund the HD war. It's frustratingly ridiculous.
There are people that can't afford cable TV still. Are they the type of person to keep up on tech news? I think it's unlikely. And it is a problem because there are still a significant amount of people that watch broadcast TV. It's probably the only way the local channels are staying in business at this point. I have a feeling this forced switchover is going to be the death of a lot of broadcast stations.
Well, that's an important point, but that's not what they're arguing about. The issue is with people who are repairing your computer using it as an excuse to go through your stuff. I used to work at a optical drive company, and on occasion needed to test drives against specific discs for unusual errors or BIOS issues. In some cases customers gave me copies of their home movies that were failing to play or causing problems. Watching someone's personal memories on disc at work is a strange thrill, and honestly made me kind of uncomfortable sometimes. If they were just testing the burn process, they would obviously have test files they could use. They just got off on looking into videos that weren't meant for them.
Child porn is disturbing, but I get suspicious any time an article brings it up, because it's almost always being used as an excuse to do something that is otherwise morally unacceptable on the government's or other establishment's part. Invasion of privacy, search and seizure, wiretapping, etc, there are always justifications brought up in the form of "this one time it caught a guy with child porn!" I can't believe that child porn is so rampant that it justifies the laws that are passed with child porn as an excuse. If it truly is, then the only law I could see as effective at that point is castration.
Who says you can't do both? You just have to find a heavy enough medal.
Actually, in a general sense, it does. Were everyone to respect these new laws, there would be no need to adjust them. If the law doesn't cause disruption, it would stand as it is. Sure, people could complain, but if everyone griped and went along with it, debate would eventually lose momentum. It would also be extremely difficult to bring the issue to court, because one has to have violated a law to be able to challenge it, I believe.
It's an interesting balance, since individuals who violate a law they disagree with are considered to be criminals and punishment is just, but large groups of individuals that openly violate laws would be seen as a social movement or protest that leads to the repealing or rewriting of the law. I guess how we judge people based on the two extremes depends on the eventual outcome of the law process.