"What terrorists?": Iraq? What's-his-name Bin Laden? The United States has done quite a bit to piss other countries off, and thus a reletively large percentage of the population of the world would love to see us hurt. Remeber those terrorist bases in the middle east that we were bombing?
"You are a moron": Because I have different opinions? I don't think you are a moron.
OK, several people are saying things that I'd like to contest, so here we go:
"Liberty vs Security": I would not trade liberty for security. Echelon is not limiting my liberty in any way.
"Unreasonable search and seizure": It is not unreasonable when someone is threatening to kill people. If you ran around a public place saying that you were going to kill the president, you would be arrested.
"Against the law": That's why they don't moniter e-mails within the US.
"Echelon isn't helping": Then why are they paying for it?
"Abuse": Yep. That's true. They could abuse this system. I will agree with this point... I guess the argument then is, "Are they abusing it?" I haven't seen any evidence so far, but this is a very valid point.
"You are a troll": No, I am trying to have an intelligent discussion here. I believe one thing, you believe another. So be it.
I will probably continue posting replies as more people reply to me. -------------
I don't understand why so many people are upset about Echelon. I don't know about everybody else, but I don't write about assasinating the president in my e-mails, and thus they don't get read by Echelon. Furthermore, IMHO, not being bombed by terrorists is a bit more important than maintaining my personal privacy.
The entertainment industry is mostly to blame. Shows like the X-Files (don't get me wrong, I love that show) and similar movies have taught us that the CIA, FBI, and especially the NSA are all out to get us. However, as my.sig suggests, the NSA is in fact working for the good of the people of the United States. That is why they are called the National Security Agency. The idea that they are trying to harm us is downright silly. The concept of government conspiracies is pure myth, perhaps rooted in the fact that there are inevidably a few somewhat corrupt people in the government that have done a few inconsequential things, like having oral sex with interns.
Getting back to Echelon, so what? It is a computer that collects international electronic communications that include phrases like "bomb the Whitehouse." If you are talking about bombing the Whitehouse in your e-mails, frankly, I want the government to take a closer look at what you are doing. And if you don't want Echelon to look at your e-mail, don't talk about bombing the Whitehouse. Efforts like "Jam Echelon Day" have done nothing but help terrorists get a chance to get by our security. I think that we should instead all do our part to avoid writing e-mail that might get picked up by Echelon to lighten their work load and let them take care of the important stuff.
It's 10 o'clock. Several Russian suitcase-sized nuclear warheads are missing. Do you know where your priorities are? -------------
The United States is in fact working closely with the Russian government to create this new technology. It is true that the Russians are upset, but we have agreed not to deploy the defense systems unless the same technology is deployed in Russia simotaneously. The idea is that many countries other than the United States and Russia are gaining ICBM technology, and those countries are not bound by the treaty. Thus, we want to make sure that we are defended against them.
For those who don't understand the treaty: The only way we were able to prevent a nuclear holocaust during the cold war was through MAD (Mutually Assured Distruction), meaning that neither side would launch because they knew that they would have been destroyed themselves. If one side had built a nuclear defense system that completely defended them against nuclear attack, MAD would have been no more, and nothing would have stopped that side from destroying their opponents. Fortunately, the leaders of both countries realized this and created the treaty before anything bad happenned. -------------
In my opinion, TNG was the best TV series I've ever seen. No, I'm not a trekkie. I don't own a single piece of Star Trek merchandise, and I haven't seen an episode of Voyager since last season. But I understand it. Note that when I say "Star Trek" here, I am mainly refering to The Next Generation (and also Voyager and DS9), as I am not very familiar with the original series.
Star Trek is not about science or technology. Those are just a medium for the real stuff that goes on. Star Trek is about the characters and moral issues. To enjoy the show, you have to watch it consistantly. You have to know the characters. Half (if not more) of the content of the show is just about the characters and how they are growing. Most people wouldn't understand why it is hillarious when Data says "oh shit!" It is, of course, because doing so contrasts so much with his normal character. (he says "oh shit!" shortly after first installing his new emotion chip) When you really get in to it, you find that Star Trek has better character development than almost every other series on TV today.
The other important issue in Star Trek is the moral issues presented. One of the most interesting episodes of Voyager that I have seen involved a debate over whether or not it is right to use medical or other scientific data aquired through immoral means. Although I did not agree with the decision made by the Captain, I found myself talking about that episode for hours afterwards.
If shows like this don't interest you, that doesn't make me think any less of you. Everyone has their own tastes. But lots of people come at Star Trek from the wrong direction, and then they think it sucks. Star Wars fans, in particular, can't seem to comprehend the idea of sci-fi without constant fight scenes and explosions. So, I guess what I want to say is, no, just because you don't get it doesn't mean it sucks.
-------------
Well, a guy I know says...
on
Which BSD?
·
· Score: 2
I know this guy. He's the type of person who likes to make himself seem much smarter than he really is. He will write twice as much as he needs to on assignments (I'm in college), and he will say things in class with a very thoughtful voice, and no depth of thought.
So, one day I was talking with a friend about BSD, and how I wanted to try it out. This person I know just happenned to be sitting nearby and jumped in. He said that FreeBSD was the most secure and that OpenBSD was the most compatible. I asked him to elaborate on this compatibility thing, and he said "Well... I think... OpenBSD can run C++ programs." Instantly I lost all respect for him. I inquired further, and he said "yes, it can run Microsoft C++ programs, and the other BSD's can't."
Moral of the story: If you don't know, shut up already!:) (not refering to anyone who has posted here)
I seem to recall learning in physics last year that completely surrounding an object with some form of conductor will shield it from electromagnetic fields, as well as prevent internal fields from getting out. So if you just plaster your room with tin foil, you should be safe. Just remember to let in some air once in awhile.
Also note that a typical computer is almost completely surrounded by a conductor: the case. Of course, if you are like me, and you have a K7 and a TNT2 in your case, and you find you have to leave the cover off and have an external fan blowing on the damn thing to keep the heat down, then you have a problem. In my situation... well, I couldn't care less if the government looked at what I'm doing. I'm an open source programmer!:) -------------
A computer-vs-computer distributed match could be interesting, but only if the computers are running different software (an AI programming contest?). But what would really be cool would be to run a distributed chess game vs. Gary Kasperov. Show the world that lots of little computers can do alot more than one big Deep Blue. -------------
First I thought forum2000 was real. Then I decided that it was too good to be real. I decided that only "the cube" was AI controlled, and the others were some team making up witty responses. After reading some more, I decided that no individual or team could be that witty that consistantly. Humans burn out after so many questions. A machine, however, can keep chugging along indefinately (until it crashes)! -------------
The major RAM producers in Taiwan recovered to full production capacity in 11 days after the last quake, and, until today at least, they were on schedule to "meet the demand" and even set record sales. See article. So, you have nothing to worry about. On the other had, those of us who worry about human life have >2,274 people (from the last quake alone) to think about.
Here's my (only semi-serious) theory: Our univers is just the graph of a four-dimentional equation on God's TI-89 calculator, which He is doing for His CSci class on simulated universes. While we preceive time as moving forward, to Him it is just one of the four dimentions of the graph. He hits clear and graphs the function again with slightly different input. He decides to make gravity repulsive rather than attractive. He finds that this creates a universe devoid of life. "Doh! I'm gonna fail this exam," he thinks. -Kenton Varda
> (I knew speaking Spanish would come in handy some day) Of course, you could have clicked on the "in English" button at the top of the page.:) -Kenton Varda
If I remember correctly from my Spanish class, "Que pasa?" basically means "What's up?". Both phrases are used millions of times a day by millions of people throughout the world, 99.9% of which have never heard of www.whatshappenin.com. Furthermore, the phrase was in use long before that site existed. Since when can we trademark basic phrases that everyone uses all the time and then sue others for using them? And if this is really allowed, why did the trademark on "Open Source" fail? -Kenton Varda
It is true that alot of effort goes into making a game, but for many people, that effort is fun. As long as it is fun, there will be people that will do it for free. IMHO, the free mods made for current commercial games are often more fun to play than the original games. Some of these mods use very little of the original game data. The only thing that is holding them back from being completely free is the fact that the game engine itself is not free. So, all we need is a good 3D game engine, which the Open Source community should be able to handle. -Kenton Varda
You once said that you wanted Q3A running on every platform that had hardware 3D accelleration support. BeOS is such a platform. Any plans? (then I could actually do something with my batmobile) -Kenton Varda
What is your opinion on the viability of commercial open source games or game engines? Is it possible that some day id software will create an open source game engine? Or would you consider building off of an open source game egine rather than starting from scratch when the Quake codebase is deemed obscelete? (not to suggest that my project would be worthy of such a thing.:) -Kenton Varda
Oh great, now we're gonna have another holy war to keep track of.
On one side, there will be the people who prefer to pronounce Itanium with a long a (like in "pay"), and on the other those who prefer a short a (like in "mad"). Of course, the guy who invented the name won't be able to help, as he will prefer pronouncing the a as "ah", which everyone else will refuse to do because it sounds silly.
Slashdot Mirror
-------------
I will probably continue posting replies as more people reply to me.
-------------
I don't understand why so many people are upset about Echelon. I don't know about everybody else, but I don't write about assasinating the president in my e-mails, and thus they don't get read by Echelon. Furthermore, IMHO, not being bombed by terrorists is a bit more important than maintaining my personal privacy.
The entertainment industry is mostly to blame. Shows like the X-Files (don't get me wrong, I love that show) and similar movies have taught us that the CIA, FBI, and especially the NSA are all out to get us. However, as my .sig suggests, the NSA is in fact working for the good of the people of the United States. That is why they are called the National Security Agency. The idea that they are trying to harm us is downright silly. The concept of government conspiracies is pure myth, perhaps rooted in the fact that there are inevidably a few somewhat corrupt people in the government that have done a few inconsequential things, like having oral sex with interns.
Getting back to Echelon, so what? It is a computer that collects international electronic communications that include phrases like "bomb the Whitehouse." If you are talking about bombing the Whitehouse in your e-mails, frankly, I want the government to take a closer look at what you are doing. And if you don't want Echelon to look at your e-mail, don't talk about bombing the Whitehouse. Efforts like "Jam Echelon Day" have done nothing but help terrorists get a chance to get by our security. I think that we should instead all do our part to avoid writing e-mail that might get picked up by Echelon to lighten their work load and let them take care of the important stuff.
It's 10 o'clock. Several Russian suitcase-sized nuclear warheads are missing. Do you know where your priorities are?
-------------
But they do give credit to the original page designers provided you look in the right place. (hint: secret messages)
quick link
-------------
The United States is in fact working closely with the Russian government to create this new technology. It is true that the Russians are upset, but we have agreed not to deploy the defense systems unless the same technology is deployed in Russia simotaneously. The idea is that many countries other than the United States and Russia are gaining ICBM technology, and those countries are not bound by the treaty. Thus, we want to make sure that we are defended against them.
For those who don't understand the treaty: The only way we were able to prevent a nuclear holocaust during the cold war was through MAD (Mutually Assured Distruction), meaning that neither side would launch because they knew that they would have been destroyed themselves. If one side had built a nuclear defense system that completely defended them against nuclear attack, MAD would have been no more, and nothing would have stopped that side from destroying their opponents. Fortunately, the leaders of both countries realized this and created the treaty before anything bad happenned.
-------------
Actually, the translator is in the communicator, not implanted in people.
-------------
In my opinion, TNG was the best TV series I've ever seen. No, I'm not a trekkie. I don't own a single piece of Star Trek merchandise, and I haven't seen an episode of Voyager since last season. But I understand it. Note that when I say "Star Trek" here, I am mainly refering to The Next Generation (and also Voyager and DS9), as I am not very familiar with the original series.
Star Trek is not about science or technology. Those are just a medium for the real stuff that goes on. Star Trek is about the characters and moral issues. To enjoy the show, you have to watch it consistantly. You have to know the characters. Half (if not more) of the content of the show is just about the characters and how they are growing. Most people wouldn't understand why it is hillarious when Data says "oh shit!" It is, of course, because doing so contrasts so much with his normal character. (he says "oh shit!" shortly after first installing his new emotion chip) When you really get in to it, you find that Star Trek has better character development than almost every other series on TV today.
The other important issue in Star Trek is the moral issues presented. One of the most interesting episodes of Voyager that I have seen involved a debate over whether or not it is right to use medical or other scientific data aquired through immoral means. Although I did not agree with the decision made by the Captain, I found myself talking about that episode for hours afterwards.
If shows like this don't interest you, that doesn't make me think any less of you. Everyone has their own tastes. But lots of people come at Star Trek from the wrong direction, and then they think it sucks. Star Wars fans, in particular, can't seem to comprehend the idea of sci-fi without constant fight scenes and explosions. So, I guess what I want to say is, no, just because you don't get it doesn't mean it sucks.
-------------
I know this guy. He's the type of person who likes to make himself seem much smarter than he really is. He will write twice as much as he needs to on assignments (I'm in college), and he will say things in class with a very thoughtful voice, and no depth of thought.
:) (not refering to anyone who has posted here)
So, one day I was talking with a friend about BSD, and how I wanted to try it out. This person I know just happenned to be sitting nearby and jumped in. He said that FreeBSD was the most secure and that OpenBSD was the most compatible. I asked him to elaborate on this compatibility thing, and he said "Well... I think... OpenBSD can run C++ programs." Instantly I lost all respect for him. I inquired further, and he said "yes, it can run Microsoft C++ programs, and the other BSD's can't."
Moral of the story: If you don't know, shut up already!
-------------
I seem to recall learning in physics last year that completely surrounding an object with some form of conductor will shield it from electromagnetic fields, as well as prevent internal fields from getting out. So if you just plaster your room with tin foil, you should be safe. Just remember to let in some air once in awhile.
:)
Also note that a typical computer is almost completely surrounded by a conductor: the case. Of course, if you are like me, and you have a K7 and a TNT2 in your case, and you find you have to leave the cover off and have an external fan blowing on the damn thing to keep the heat down, then you have a problem. In my situation... well, I couldn't care less if the government looked at what I'm doing. I'm an open source programmer!
-------------
A computer-vs-computer distributed match could be interesting, but only if the computers are running different software (an AI programming contest?). But what would really be cool would be to run a distributed chess game vs. Gary Kasperov. Show the world that lots of little computers can do alot more than one big Deep Blue.
-------------
First I thought forum2000 was real. Then I decided that it was too good to be real. I decided that only "the cube" was AI controlled, and the others were some team making up witty responses. After reading some more, I decided that no individual or team could be that witty that consistantly. Humans burn out after so many questions. A machine, however, can keep chugging along indefinately (until it crashes)!
-------------
The major RAM producers in Taiwan recovered to full production capacity in 11 days after the last quake, and, until today at least, they were on schedule to "meet the demand" and even set record sales. See article . So, you have nothing to worry about. On the other had, those of us who worry about human life have >2,274 people (from the last quake alone) to think about.
-------------
Here's my (only semi-serious) theory:
Our univers is just the graph of a four-dimentional equation on God's TI-89 calculator, which He is doing for His CSci class on simulated universes. While we preceive time as moving forward, to Him it is just one of the four dimentions of the graph.
He hits clear and graphs the function again with slightly different input. He decides to make gravity repulsive rather than attractive. He finds that this creates a universe devoid of life. "Doh! I'm gonna fail this exam," he thinks.
-Kenton Varda
> (I knew speaking Spanish would come in handy some day) Of course, you could have clicked on the "in English" button at the top of the page. :)
-Kenton Varda
If I remember correctly from my Spanish class, "Que pasa?" basically means "What's up?". Both phrases are used millions of times a day by millions of people throughout the world, 99.9% of which have never heard of www.whatshappenin.com. Furthermore, the phrase was in use long before that site existed. Since when can we trademark basic phrases that everyone uses all the time and then sue others for using them? And if this is really allowed, why did the trademark on "Open Source" fail?
-Kenton Varda
It is true that alot of effort goes into making a game, but for many people, that effort is fun. As long as it is fun, there will be people that will do it for free. IMHO, the free mods made for current commercial games are often more fun to play than the original games. Some of these mods use very little of the original game data. The only thing that is holding them back from being completely free is the fact that the game engine itself is not free. So, all we need is a good 3D game engine, which the Open Source community should be able to handle.
-Kenton Varda
You once said that you wanted Q3A running on every platform that had hardware 3D accelleration support. BeOS is such a platform. Any plans? (then I could actually do something with my batmobile)
-Kenton Varda
What is your opinion on the viability of commercial open source games or game engines? Is it possible that some day id software will create an open source game engine? Or would you consider building off of an open source game egine rather than starting from scratch when the Quake codebase is deemed obscelete? (not to suggest that my project would be worthy of such a thing. :)
-Kenton Varda
Oh great, now we're gonna have another holy war to keep track of.
On one side, there will be the people who prefer to pronounce Itanium with a long a (like in "pay"), and on the other those who prefer a short a (like in "mad").
Of course, the guy who invented the name won't be able to help, as he will prefer pronouncing the a as "ah", which everyone else will refuse to do because it sounds silly.
-Kenton Varda