That soldier may have committed a crime, but he is a hero for it. Had he "obeyed the law" he would have been no better than everyone else in history who justified their actions, or lack of actions, with the classic "I was just following orders".
Show me the Swedish law that forbids releasing information to the general public that is only classified in other countries.
So you're saying it's OK for Sweden to publish classified US government information
Why the fuck not? US laws don't apply in Sweden, believe it or not [European Country] is not a state in the US. It's hardly even like Sweden (or Wikileaks...) even leaked this shit. It was a US soldier.
Oh, and don't make the mistake of thinking that we can only complain about one thing at a time. Trust me, the free software community in general has a pretty impressive capacity for complaining, there is more than enough to go around.;)
1) Microsoft convinces the free software community to embrace.NET with promises not to use it's patents against Novell, and assurances that C# is a standarized (and thus safe) language. 2) Microsoft extends.NET in such a way that Mono cannot follow suit, either for technical or legal reasons. 3) Extinguish.
Alternatively to step 2, other theories state that Microsoft will use submarine patents to nail Mono once adoption of Mono is high enough to hurt the community.
Regardless, with no official Linux implementation of.NET by Microsoft, I can't bring myself to give half a shit about it. If Microsoft was sincere about.NET being a replacement for Java they'd implement it themselves on more than one platform, like Sun did...
I understand that but in this context it doesn't make any more sense. Why should these devices be any more prone to being hacked than any other PC? Hell, just the fact that idiot home users won't be using them for web-surfing would make me suspect the exact opposite would be true.
In all seriousness though, I'm not sure there is exactly a word for that. "like a tabloid but with things that actually happened" might be the best way to say it unfortunately. There are definitely similar papers here, and they'd probably be usually referred to as tabloids, but to describe something that is previously unknown as "a tabloid" would get the wrong idea across.
If the hardware is genuinely free, then what in the world is there to "root"? That concept only makes sense with nonsense like Apple/Google telephones.
Different words act differently. In this case "it" seems to get an "s" sound for the same reason "cat" gets an "s" sound. Leaving out the "'" just because it is a pronoun is dumb.
There are exceptions to every rule in English, the fact of the matter is there are not really any rules, only guidelines.
How do you pluralize "dish"? "dishes". How do you pluralize "fish"? "fishes" or "fish"? The language is full of arbitrary exceptions. The general rule of thumb seems to be "if it sounds ignorant, it is wrong", but in this case both words are pronounced exactly the same. Unlike your straw-man examples, both versions are spoken exactly the same.
Provide me with a reason it should be considered wrong. Circular logic does not impress me.
You were joking, but I honestly use that, and refuse to believe that it is incorrect. I don't see any reason why I can't use a saxon genitive with pronouns.
I stepped on the cat's tail
I stepped on it's tail
See? Logical. And screw contractions, why should they take precedence?
I fully understand you weren't trying to be serious. I'm explaining why people thought you were being serious...
I'm giving the the benefit of the doubt here and assuming you didn't actually think "Doesn't support the indefinite holding of suspects without charge in internment camps." is a joke as well.
I hear Obama's old car before he became president and had the secret service drive him everywhere had a MAN SIZED TRUNK! Oh the horror.
Seriously though, mixing silly criticisms like that in with serious criticisms like "he started a fucking war" and "he opened gitmo" just make it look like you are being serious about that one as well. You don't help your cause by making yourself look like a nut.
If you then proceed to open that bag of shit, and smear it all over yourself and embrace the fecal stench? Yes, I think I can blame you for stinking. Did you even read the post you just responded to?
While he is undoubtedly better than the Cheney/Bush administration,
he is continuing the exact same types of policies in regards to 'national security' so that it legitimizes the horrendous evils that the previous administration engaged in rather than marking them out as significant abberations in the United States moral code
You are very close to coming upon the truth. Allow yourself to make that mental leap.
Right, that is why nobody cared when John Lennon died for example. He wasn't a US citizen so nobody in America cared, and nobody in the rest of the world cared because that's just an American thing. Poor guy.
Seriously. I removed the Apple section from my mainpage for a reason slashdot. Don't sneak this shit in under other sections, keep it where I can quarantine it.
It's really not a false premise though. The Pentagon was prevented with the opportunity to either minimalism civilian damage, or maintain the "moral high ground" and do nothing. Nothing they could do would prevent the release so refusing to help was for all intents and purposes refusing to act at all.
I realize the reality of your philosophical view, and that of WikiLeaks/Assange, brings you down to the level of those you chastise: that you, too, believe that to kill and be killed is al-right so long as the cause is the politically correct cause.
In any case, you assume far too much. I've long moved passed petty shit like arguing the morality of wars, the US military's conduct, foreign policy, etc. For what it is worth though, I used to consider myself rather right wing, and have never harboured any ill will towards the military. I don't really care if the military was "right" or "wrong" in how it acted.
The purpose of my comment was not to actually criticise the Pentagon for their [lack of] action, but rather to criticise the person I was responding to for laying blame on Assange while defending the Pentagon. As you state, either side appears quite willing to sacrifice innocent lives for their cause.
This entire incident interests me from a freedom of speech standpoint. I really couldn't care less about the topic of these papers, however what I am seeing is people who do care about the content waging a smear campaign against Assange in an attempt to silence him. Leaving out key details (such as the Pentagon had the opportunity to censor the documents but chose not to) is not something that is done by accident.
Man up and admit that you would gladly sacrifice a few lives for your ideals to dominate
I would never hesitate in admitting to that....and for the record, even though Assange's death toll will never come close to rivalling the Pentagon's, I would still support him if it did. His cause is that important in my eyes.
Slashdot Mirror
That soldier may have committed a crime, but he is a hero for it. Had he "obeyed the law" he would have been no better than everyone else in history who justified their actions, or lack of actions, with the classic "I was just following orders".
Show me the Swedish law that forbids releasing information to the general public that is only classified in other countries.
Why the fuck not? US laws don't apply in Sweden, believe it or not [European Country] is not a state in the US. It's hardly even like Sweden (or Wikileaks...) even leaked this shit. It was a US soldier.
The cat is out of the bag, suck it the hell up.
I made it pretty clear I wasn't speaking for everybody.
Hint: I never said complaining was a bad thing. In fact, far from it...
Tell you what. Ask the founder of MADD whether she thinks MADD is overstepping their original mission or not.
Do it. I dare you to learn.
Oh, and don't make the mistake of thinking that we can only complain about one thing at a time. Trust me, the free software community in general has a pretty impressive capacity for complaining, there is more than enough to go around. ;)
Variations on Embrace, Extend, Extinguish.
1) Microsoft convinces the free software community to embrace .NET with promises not to use it's patents against Novell, and assurances that C# is a standarized (and thus safe) language. .NET in such a way that Mono cannot follow suit, either for technical or legal reasons.
2) Microsoft extends
3) Extinguish.
Alternatively to step 2, other theories state that Microsoft will use submarine patents to nail Mono once adoption of Mono is high enough to hurt the community.
Regardless, with no official Linux implementation of .NET by Microsoft, I can't bring myself to give half a shit about it. If Microsoft was sincere about .NET being a replacement for Java they'd implement it themselves on more than one platform, like Sun did...
I understand that but in this context it doesn't make any more sense. Why should these devices be any more prone to being hacked than any other PC? Hell, just the fact that idiot home users won't be using them for web-surfing would make me suspect the exact opposite would be true.
Fox News ;)
In all seriousness though, I'm not sure there is exactly a word for that. "like a tabloid but with things that actually happened" might be the best way to say it unfortunately. There are definitely similar papers here, and they'd probably be usually referred to as tabloids, but to describe something that is previously unknown as "a tabloid" would get the wrong idea across.
If the hardware is genuinely free, then what in the world is there to "root"? That concept only makes sense with nonsense like Apple/Google telephones.
Dammit, I wish we had Sex-Storms here in the states.
101025
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disputes_in_English_grammar
Get off your high horse.
I dropped the dish.
I dropped the dishes.
I dropped the fish.
I dropped the fish.
Different words act differently. In this case "it" seems to get an "s" sound for the same reason "cat" gets an "s" sound. Leaving out the "'" just because it is a pronoun is dumb.
Oh, I get it: "it is wrong because it is wrong."
Brilliant.
There are exceptions to every rule in English, the fact of the matter is there are not really any rules, only guidelines.
How do you pluralize "dish"? "dishes". How do you pluralize "fish"? "fishes" or "fish"? The language is full of arbitrary exceptions. The general rule of thumb seems to be "if it sounds ignorant, it is wrong", but in this case both words are pronounced exactly the same. Unlike your straw-man examples, both versions are spoken exactly the same.
Provide me with a reason it should be considered wrong. Circular logic does not impress me.
They preform the same role in that sentence, as far as I am concerned there isn't a reason they can't use the same convention to indicate possession.
You were joking, but I honestly use that, and refuse to believe that it is incorrect. I don't see any reason why I can't use a saxon genitive with pronouns.
See? Logical. And screw contractions, why should they take precedence?
I fully understand you weren't trying to be serious. I'm explaining why people thought you were being serious...
I'm giving the the benefit of the doubt here and assuming you didn't actually think "Doesn't support the indefinite holding of suspects without charge in internment camps." is a joke as well.
I hear Obama's old car before he became president and had the secret service drive him everywhere had a MAN SIZED TRUNK! Oh the horror.
Seriously though, mixing silly criticisms like that in with serious criticisms like "he started a fucking war" and "he opened gitmo" just make it look like you are being serious about that one as well. You don't help your cause by making yourself look like a nut.
If you then proceed to open that bag of shit, and smear it all over yourself and embrace the fecal stench? Yes, I think I can blame you for stinking. Did you even read the post you just responded to?
You are very close to coming upon the truth. Allow yourself to make that mental leap.
"green card" != "citizenship". Lennon would have been eligible for citizenship in '81.
Right, that is why nobody cared when John Lennon died for example. He wasn't a US citizen so nobody in America cared, and nobody in the rest of the world cared because that's just an American thing. Poor guy.
Seriously. I removed the Apple section from my mainpage for a reason slashdot. Don't sneak this shit in under other sections, keep it where I can quarantine it.
Free speech is not something you only support when it is easy or convenient to do so.
It's really not a false premise though. The Pentagon was prevented with the opportunity to either minimalism civilian damage, or maintain the "moral high ground" and do nothing. Nothing they could do would prevent the release so refusing to help was for all intents and purposes refusing to act at all.
In any case, you assume far too much. I've long moved passed petty shit like arguing the morality of wars, the US military's conduct, foreign policy, etc. For what it is worth though, I used to consider myself rather right wing, and have never harboured any ill will towards the military. I don't really care if the military was "right" or "wrong" in how it acted.
The purpose of my comment was not to actually criticise the Pentagon for their [lack of] action, but rather to criticise the person I was responding to for laying blame on Assange while defending the Pentagon. As you state, either side appears quite willing to sacrifice innocent lives for their cause.
This entire incident interests me from a freedom of speech standpoint. I really couldn't care less about the topic of these papers, however what I am seeing is people who do care about the content waging a smear campaign against Assange in an attempt to silence him. Leaving out key details (such as the Pentagon had the opportunity to censor the documents but chose not to) is not something that is done by accident.
I would never hesitate in admitting to that. ...and for the record, even though Assange's death toll will never come close to rivalling the Pentagon's, I would still support him if it did. His cause is that important in my eyes.