Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[nenjin]

I don't know if Akylon and others already raeg'd on this, but here it is again. (Say what you will about Gamespy, Objection! is fucking awesome.)

It's like industry heads craft copyright legislation on the assumption that it's unpassable in the form they want it. Maybe that's good negotiating. On the other hand if they're "friends" in the Senate manage to ride it through past the 4 people that are paying attention, well, goodbye Internet, hello Corpanet. The restrictions are mind-boggling, as are the implications. More than 10 views of copyrighted material in 180 days, and if the host site (not even you) makes at least $2,500 in profit by whatever means? You could get sued if you upload a cellphone video of a party to a social networking site, because a copyrighted song is playing in the background and the site happened to sell ads.

There's like, no chance of this passing the legislature I think, and even less chance of surviving only one of a dozen free speech challenges. Still, the balls on these guys. Raeg.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

Fair Use covers commentary, so that would override the bill even if it did pass. I think. I'm not a lawyer, but I'm pretty sure it would work out like that.

That said, I already sent my representative a plea to vote against S.978 when it comes up, so hopefully I at least made him think about it.

[Aklyon]

Yep, thats been called stupid/talked about in a variety of places by now.

[nenjin]

My bad. Then have this instead.

I like that the part no one talks about is the Christian belief in Armageddon. Because that's really the briefing we want to give our missile control operators when we talk to them about the ethics of nuclear weapons. The scariest part? That program is only 20 years old.

[Nadaka]

My bad. Then have this instead.

I like that the part no one talks about is the Christian belief in Armageddon. Because that's really the briefing we want to give our missile control operators when we talk to them about the ethics of nuclear weapons. The scariest part? That program is only 20 years old.

It gets way scarier than that.

[Dsarker]

My bad. Then have this instead.

I like that the part no one talks about is the Christian belief in Armageddon. Because that's really the briefing we want to give our missile control operators when we talk to them about the ethics of nuclear weapons. The scariest part? That program is only 20 years old.

It gets way scarier than that.

Okay. Don't get me wrong, I think that what appears is that they're just cherry picking the bible for reasons to go to war, but how is the scariest part that the program is only 20 years old? Surely it would be scarier if it was older than that?

I do have to admit, though, I'd have gone with Aquinas' just war theory.

[Nadaka]

The scarier part is that for most of that period, the activation code for every nuclear weapon in the USAF was set to 0 because they didn't trust the civilian government to be willing to pull the trigger when the time came.

[nenjin]

Okay. Don't get me wrong, I think that what appears is that they're just cherry picking the bible for reasons to go to war, but how is the scariest part that the program is only 20 years old? Surely it would be scarier if it was older than that?

As a relic of the Cold War thinking, I would accept that some department of the Air Force, that hasn't seen the light of day since the 50s, would still be doing this.

But it means that sometime in the 90s, someone in the military thought we needed more religious justifications for shooting our missiles. I find that concept far more terrifying. When the realistic threat of nuclear obliteration is enough to cool people's trigger fingers...well....just tell someone that Jesus would approve of pulling the trigger. It's basically a reversal of the lessons we learned from the Cold War.

[Dsarker]

Okay. Don't get me wrong, I think that what appears is that they're just cherry picking the bible for reasons to go to war, but how is the scariest part that the program is only 20 years old? Surely it would be scarier if it was older than that?

As a relic of the Cold War thinking, I would accept that some department of the Air Force, that hasn't seen the light of day since the 50s, would still be doing this.

But it means that sometime in the 90s, someone in the military thought we needed more religious justifications for shooting our missiles. I find that concept far more terrifying. When the realistic threat of nuclear obliteration is enough to cool people's trigger fingers...well....just tell someone that Jesus would approve of pulling the trigger. It's basically a reversal of the lessons we learned from the Cold War.

From what I understand, the article is saying that twenty years ago, the program started as an ethics thing. At this point in time, it is religiously fundamentalist war mongering. Wasn't clear that it was that at the start.

[Vector]

You know, at this point I don't even understand the strict creationists who think God created everything in 7 days, or why there's any controversy to be taught.  The earth was created by a certain number of physical rules out in the universe, and then a bunch of stuff slowly started emerging.

Why can't we take God = physical laws of the universe, which have been pretty nice to us, and leave it at that?

[nenjin]

Why can't we take God = physical laws of the universe, which have been pretty nice to us, and leave it at that?

Because the physical laws of the universe don't care about human behavior, we're microscopic compared to them and that's a problem for those who want to control human behavior. No one wants to worship a god who ostensibly doesn't care about us. The Christian belief about our place in creation makes us the center of god's attention, and so God cares deeply about everything we believe and everything we do and say. A study of science shows us the truth is the exact opposite.

[inteuniso]

I prefer the God created the beginnings of the universe, then left it at that. Much like someone observing an experiment running it's course.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

You know, at this point I don't even understand the strict creationists who think God created everything in 7 days, or why there's any controversy to be taught.  The earth was created by a certain number of physical rules out in the universe, and then a bunch of stuff slowly started emerging.

Why can't we take God = physical laws of the universe, which have been pretty nice to us, and leave it at that?

Because that isn't what they think, or how they think about it. These fundamentalists literally think that 6000 years ago, their god, who to them is a real person who knows everything and can do anything, made Earth and the rest of the universe out of nothing in a week. They want the laws of whatever country they live in to reflect everything The Bible says, literally. That is their agenda, and they will not accept anything less.

[Vector]

Meh!

I am so confused.  See, I actually could see myself going "Oh, Randomness, please don't fuck me over too hard this time" and having that be The Thing.  But maybe other people wouldn't like that.

I sort of thought it was all about gratitude for having an existence to explore in the first place, and how cool it is to have time and space and things like that.  But ... I guess I'll just have to enjoy my "religion" by myself >_> <_<

I prefer the God created the beginnings of the universe, then left it at that. Much like someone observing an experiment running it's course.

EXACTLY

Because that isn't what they think, or how they think about it. These fundamentalists literally think that 6000 years ago, their god, who to them is a real person, made Earth and the rest of the universe out of nothing in a week. They want the laws of whatever country they live in to reflect everything The Bible says, literally. That is their agenda, and they will not accept anything less.

But... but...

St. Augustine -> Fundamental writing of the Catholic Church -> Still referenced today by the Pope when settling matters of doctrine -> Totally kills all of that dead with the resounding hammer of a long piece of paper pinned to a sanctified door

. . . BUT COME ON YOU GUYS

[Duke 2.0]

 People have diferent things they can accept. Some people can accept the idea of a God and the rules of physics working as one and others cant. It does seem that the unified thinking is becoming more popular nowadays. So long as nobody is forced to accept another persons belief system everything is fine.