News Stories

[justinstrife]

My sister died when she was born, and my mom went psycho and divorced my dad soon after. By all rights I am an only child(though I have a half brother i haven't seen in 17 years), and I worry about being able to take care of my father and my step-mother when they reach that age. He is 63 and she is 51 so I'm not too concerned for at least another couple of decades, but there will be a time when it does fall on me. And unfortunately there will be a small horse ranch that I will have to tend to as they get older and unable to take care of it themselves. It's a burden I'd rather not have, but will be carrying out of respect and love for them.

I can completely relate to that article, as I'm not close with my extended family at all(I have no contact at all with my mom's family ever since '96 when my grandfather passed away), and really am only close to my Father(who is a great human being who has just about done everything in life you can do). It would be far easier if I could hurry up and start a family of my own soon so we could keep the family line going.

[FDW]

Originally Posted by TinyRedLeaf

Growing up, one is indeed the loneliest number

Being an only child myself I can sympathize with this guy to an extent, but only to an extent, I had to go through most of my life not even knowing what my father was like while dealing with a paranoid mother with slowly declining mental facilities, then having to deal with the hell of California's foster care system. (which though mentally traumatizing for myself, was probably better than any options I would've had had I lived outside of the U.S.) To this day I haven't forgiven my mother's side of the family for not intervening when they knew my mother wasn't fit to take care of me. (My father's side was a completely different story, I can't really hate for not being able to intervene, rather than refusing outright, like my mother's side did.)

[FateAnomaly]

Numbers don't really mean anything. If you had a useless brother like mine you will be thankful you are the only child. God knows what is going on in that head of his.

[Roger Rambo]

Well it's good to see that Jullian Assange is so concerned over any people he might kill.

Security issues pertaining to how the US organizes info on infomants not being very secure there probably are, but how the fuck does Jullian go about saying he bears no responsibility if anyone gets killed here? Also, like how he reverts to fall back on his official "why we take lots of care to not leak dangerious info that might get anyone killed" in response that's he's done just that, rather than explain why releasing the names and residence of informers isn't dangerious.

[SaintessHeart]

Originally Posted by FateAnomaly

Numbers don't really mean anything. If you had a useless brother like mine you will be thankful you are the only child. God knows what is going on in that head of his.

Almost the same as all of us guys here : girls. You should only start worrying when they are 2D instead of RL3D.

[WordShaker]

Originally Posted by Roger Rambo

Well it's good to see that Jullian Assange is so concerned over any people he might kill.

Security issues pertaining to how the US organizes info on infomants not being very secure there probably are, but how the fuck does Jullian go about saying he bears no responsibility if anyone gets killed here? Also, like how he reverts to fall back on his official "why we take lots of care to not leak dangerious info that might get anyone killed" in response that's he's done just that, rather than explain why releasing the names and residence of informers isn't dangerious.

I can't help but think that it's a case of the pot calling the kettle black. If the Afghan informants were in such dangerous and compromised conditions, I think the initial fault has to fall on the US for putting them there in the first place. While it doesn't mean WikiLeaks and Assange couldn't have been a little more selective of what to publish, I can't help but side with them on this one. Until someone can prove definitively that WikiLeaks caused the deaths of anyone, I don't think baying for blood is an appropriate response. Although, I admit, I'm a little colored by my opposition to the war in Afghanistan.

[Roger Rambo]

Originally Posted by wassupimviet

I can't help but think that it's a case of the pot calling the kettle black. If the Afghan informants were in such dangerous and compromised conditions, I think the initial fault has to fall on the US for putting them there in the first place.

Being an informant in a warzone is always inherintly risky. Though I haven't heard anything to indicate that allot of these guys were put at any kind of immediate risk until wiki leaks released all these documents pertaining to them being informants.

Julian bassically sounds like he's saying that since US security wasn't tight enough to prevent him from leaking the info, that he bears no responsibility on any fallout from the leak.

Originally Posted by wassupimviet

While it doesn't mean WikiLeaks and Assrange couldn't have been a little more selective of what to publish, I can't help but side with them on this one. Until someone can prove definitively that WikiLeaks caused the deaths of anyone, I don't think baying for blood is an appropriate response.

Here's an example of one of individuals that had info revealed about him in one of the documents. He was described as a potential defector. In the document there was the following information.

-His name
-His fathers name
-The name of his village

This is easily sufficient information for that guy to tracked down and killed. Does it mean he'll definitely be killed? No. But the information is specific enough that I consider it rather analogous to blindly dropping bricks from the top of a hundred story building onto a street below. Do you know if it'll killed anyone? No, but it's not exactly a huge logical leap to think there's a very good chance you did.

Do I need to head down to the street level to check for dead people to formulate an opinion about how responsible someone is for dropping bricks of a skyscraper?

Originally Posted by wassupimviet

Although, I admit, I'm a little colored by my opposition to the war in Afghanistan.

Because Julian Assange is opposed to the war it's ok for him to do irresponsible things that get Afghani's killed?

[WordShaker]

Originally Posted by Roger Rambo

Being an informant in a warzone is always inherintly risky. Though I haven't heard anything to indicate that allot of these guys were put at any kind of immediate risk until wiki leaks released all these documents pertaining to them being informants.

Julian bassically sounds like he's saying that since US security wasn't tight enough to prevent him from leaking the info, that he bears no responsibility on any fallout from the leak.

Well, in that first article you linked to, Julian Assange was quoted to have said that the leaked documents were already available to all soldiers and contractors, and that a suspect in the leak was PFC Bradley Manning. I don't think, considering how available it already was, that it's much of a leap to assume that the Taliban and other such groups might have already gotten their hands on it.

Here's an example of one of individuals that had info revealed about him in one of the documents. He was described as a potential defector. In the document there was the following information.

-His name
-His fathers name
-The name of his village

This is easily sufficient information for that guy to tracked down and killed. Does it mean he'll definitely be killed? No. But the information is specific enough that I consider it rather analogous to blindly dropping bricks from the top of a hundred story building onto a street below. Do you know if it'll killed anyone? No, but it's not exactly a huge logical leap to think there's a very good chance you did.

No, but logical leaps aren't the stuff of fact. The documents could lead to someone's death, but, as far as we can tell, they haven't. I'm not saying that this absolves them of responsibility, no. But what I am saying is that the real fault lies on both sides of the table: on WikiLeaks for publishing these documents, and for the international community that made that action necessary.

Do I need to head down to the street level to check for dead people to formulate an opinion about how responsible someone is for dropping bricks of a skyscraper?

Er, well, yes, if you wanted to get him for killing somebody. Otherwise, I think you'd just have to get him for throwing bricks.

Because Julian Assange is opposed to the war it's ok for him to do irresponsible things that get Afghani's killed?

Ah, see, I didn't say that. I said that my own opinion is biased because of my personal opposition to the war in Afghanistan, that's all.

[Roger Rambo]

Originally Posted by wassupimviet

Well, in that first article you linked to, Julian Assange was quoted to have said that the leaked documents were already available to all soldiers and contractors, and that a suspect in the leak was PFC Bradley Manning. I don't think, considering how available it already was, that it's much of a leap to assume that the Taliban and other such groups might have already gotten their hands on it.

Is a thief excused any from stealing something from a safe because the safe was left unlocked? The US military having security lapses that could get people killed are not excuses for wikileaks to exploit them and get people killed.

(Though just out of curiosity, how many Bothans working for Wiki leaks must die before wikileaks bears full responsibility for leaking any info?)

Originally Posted by wassupimviet

No, but logical leaps aren't the stuff of fact. The documents could lead to someone's death, but, as far as we can tell, they haven't.

Dropping a brick off the side of a building onto a crowded street could kill someone. But we're pretty high up, and I don't have the best long distance vision, so as far as I know I didn't kill anyone.

You're doing something VERY wrong if all you can offer in defense of your actions other people qualify as reckless is "we don't think we've killed anyone yet".

Originally Posted by wassupimviet

Er, well, yes, if you wanted to get him for killing somebody. Otherwise, I think you'd just have to get him for throwing bricks.

This individual isn't throwing bricks. He's dropping them. From three hundred meters off the ground. By the time they hit the ground they'll be hitting with more force than most handgun rounds.

Originally Posted by wassupimviet

Ah, see, I didn't say that. I said that my own opinion is biased because of my personal opposition to the war in Afghanistan, that's all.

Fair enough.

Though I don't recall ever coming out and saying how wonderful the US war effort was either.

[Jinto]

@Roger Rambo,

Security by obscurity is always a risky procedure. If this incident makes the US military rethink their security policies, it might be beneficial. Imagine a random US soldier sold the information to the taliban/alquaida instead of publishing it on wikileaks... Now, personally I think thats a weak justification but can accept it as that. Its not weaker than the justification to invade Iraq, its playing dirty in a dirty business - no matter how you look at it, it smells.

[Vexx]

If "US National Security" is already compromised because of corrupt or incompetent decision making, war profiteering, and other crapola.... it makes the Good vs Evil argument on leakage really really murky.


In other news, Pakistan is having its worst floods in 80 years... lots of people displaced.

[Hage-bai]

Originally Posted by Roger Rambo

Well it's good to see that Jullian Assange is so concerned over any people he might kill.

Security issues pertaining to how the US organizes info on infomants not being very secure there probably are, but how the fuck does Jullian go about saying he bears no responsibility if anyone gets killed here? Also, like how he reverts to fall back on his official "why we take lots of care to not leak dangerious info that might get anyone killed" in response that's he's done just that, rather than explain why releasing the names and residence of informers isn't dangerious.

Did you see all those moonbat animals in the comments thread for that article? Hilarious shit. Its party time now. Their messiah has risen!

[Mr. DJ]

Robbers try to rob a gaming store, gamers fight back.

"You can have our money...but you can never take...MY NINTENDO DS!!!"



(wasn't sure whether to post this here or the other news thread)

[SaintessHeart]

Originally Posted by DjTrizz

Robbers try to rob a gaming store, gamers fight back.

"You can have our money...but you can never take...MY NINTENDO DS!!!"



(wasn't sure whether to post this here or the other news thread)

You know, if this happens in Japan on an otaku who is playing Love Plus, things could get uglier.

The robber might even get his house burned down and family murdered.

[TinyRedLeaf]

Will Zynga be the Google of games?

San Francisco (July 24, Sat): Orientation for new employees of Zynga, the fast-growing maker of Facebook games like FarmVille and Mafia Wars, can be a heady affair given the company's outsize ambitions — all of which are embodied in Mr Mark Pincus, Zynga's 44-year-old founder.

In a pep talk this month, Mr Pincus told his company's newcomers that he had set out to build an enduring Internet icon, one that was synonymous with fun. "I thought, it's 2007, and this can't be all that the Internet is meant to be," he said. There has to be more than "a garage sale, a bookstore, a search engine and a portal", he added in a good-natured put-down of the Web giants eBay, Amazon, Google and Yahoo.

And lest there be any doubt which of those giants Zynga aims to match, Mr Pincus said the opportunity to build an online entertainment empire was "like search before Google came along".

So far, he seems on track. The Zynga Game Network, as the company is officially called, is the hottest start-up to emerge from Silicon Valley since Twitter and, before that, Facebook.

Unlike Twitter, which has meager revenue, Zynga is on a path to pocket as much as US$500 million in revenue this year, according to the Inside Network, which tracks Facebook apps. And, while Facebook needed four and a half years to reach 100 million users, Zynga crossed that mark after just two and a half years.

Zynga's empire is made up of cartoonish online games that even Mr Pincus acknowledges are goofy. And, most striking, given its financial success, is the fact that the games are free to everyone. Zynga makes money, by and large, only when a small fraction of its users pay real money for make-believe "virtual" goods that let them move up in the games or to give their friends gifts.

The start-up has been valued at more than US$4.5 billion, putting Mr Pincus, who has retained voting control over the company, on a path to become Silicon Valley's next billionaire. And, not surprisingly, Zynga has caught the attention of people beyond Silicon Valley.

NYT

[thevil1]

I'm posting that gamers fight back vid in the laugh a day topic if no one minds. It's just hilarious.

[Mr. DJ]

I personally have no problems with it I also found it hilarious, hence my confliction between the three different threads lol

[killer3000ad]

Deadly border clash breaks out at Israel-Lebanon border.

Apparently the IDF were carrying out a routine tree cutting operation when a skirmish occured between them and the Lebanese military.

[bladeofdarkness]

Originally Posted by killer3000ad

Deadly border clash breaks out at Israel-Lebanon border.

Apparently the IDF were carrying out a routine tree cutting operation when a skirmish occured between them and the Lebanese military.

the tree in question was on the israeli side of the boarder according to UN peacekeeprs
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/...n6741823.shtml
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-10864861
http://edition.cnn.com/2010/WORLD/me...id=ykzuFnMbP8z

Spoiler for view on the map:

the Lebanese forces open fire for no reason, and the israeli soldier who died was a Lt Col who was standing WELL behind the fence (and was killed by sniper fire).
this was someone's attempt to warm up the entire sector.

its not exactly surprising that this would happen now.
Lebanon is under a LOT of internal pressure at this point, because the investigation into the murder of former PM harir is about to release its findings
the result, is the second worst kept secret in the middle east.
Hezbollah agents were responsible for the murder.

Hezbollah's situation is already very dire after the events of may 7 2008 (where they attacked Beirut, forever shuttering the illusion that they exist solely to fight israel)
and many people in Lebanon have not forgiven them for dragging the whole country into war with Israel in 2006 (a war that devastated much of Lebanon)
and their connections with Iran are already an image problem in and of its own (they are viewed as agents of a foreign non-Arab power)
Hezbollah's image as "Lebanon's protectors" (their Reison D'etre) is already in taters
this Revelation that they were behind the murder of a Lebanese PM could well spell the doom for this group.
and since Hezbollah is not going down without a fight, Lebanon is on the brink of a potential civil war.

Yesterday's incident, was someone's attempt to start a war with Israel in order to try and wag the dog.
nothing helps distract from an internal problem, like an external one.

[FateAnomaly]

And i thought its because they really love trees.