On 24/01/2012 12:50 AM, Jim Henderson wrote:
> On Tue, 24 Jan 2012 00:10:36 +0000, Stephen wrote:
>
>> On 23/01/2012 9:39 PM, Patrick Elliott wrote:
>>> Fox News
>>
>> ??? :-P
>
> Some over here refer to them as "Faux News" - because a fair bit of the
> opinion side is "manufactured rage".
>

I saw a bit of it last year in NM. I did not go back to that hotel.

-- 
Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

>> Fame is a relative thing.
>
> Are you really willing to compare the fame of a pretty obscure band to
> the fame of a website that serves every kind of content to pretty much
> everyone in the net?

No, I'm pointing out that they do *not* serve "everyone in the net".

I'm on the net, I've never heard of it, and even now that I have, I have 
no particular desire to go visit.

Post a reply to this message

>>> You were aware that Hosni Mubarak is no longer in charge in Egypt and
>>> that they had a "small" revolution last year, weren't you?
>>
>> Nope. The politics of remote countries isn't something I generally keep
>> up with. (Heck, the politics of *this* country isn't something I avidly
>> follow...)
>
> So you didn't hear about any of the so-called "Arab Spring" events?

No.

> You do know that the US pulled out of Iraq, yes?

I've heard multiple rounds of "We're pulling out. Oh, wait, we're 
pulling out in 6 month's time. No, we're pulling out next month. Oh, 
actually, make that 2 years. Actually, wait, make it a month. No, hang 
on..." It's news to me that they *actually* did it at last.

> Or were you unaware that the US (and the UK) were at war in Iraq?

Hehehe, is *that* why every FPS made in the last 10 years happens in the 
Middle East with Iraqis as the enemy? :-P

> You know there's a war in Afghanistan too, yes?  And that's still going on?

Wait - Afghanistan and Iraq aren't the same place? o_O

> And that Osama Bin Laden is dead?

Actually, no. I heard Saddam was dead, but I didn't know they ever found 
Osama.

>> And Edgar Froese is arguably the most famous band member ever to be in
>> Tangerine Dream... Have *you* ever heard of him?
>
> Yes, as a matter of fact, I have - because I have a fair collection of
> Tangerine Dream albums here. :)

I knew there was a strictly positive probability that this might happen. 
*facepalm*

>> Fame is a relative thing.
>
> It is relative, but there's been a *lot* of news about illegal downloads
> and torrents in the past 5 years or so.  TPB has figured into a lot of
> that news, because the providers keep blocking access, and they keep
> getting unblocked.
>
> I've found it kinda hard to avoid news about that.  I'm wondering how you
> managed it without even trying.

I've heard a lot of talk about "illegal downloads". I haven't heard 
anybody mention TPB.

It did tickle me when ISPs were talking about various ways to "detect 
and prevent downloading". Uh, you realise that the entire /point/ of 
ISPs is to enable downloading, right? Perhaps you meant prevent 
*illegal* downloading? :-P

(That and the talk of ISPs charging YouTube money because they're "using 
up all the bandwidth". Translation: "our profit model depends on 
customers using only a fraction of the bandwidth that they pay us for, 
and now people are using /all/ of what they rightfully paid for, waaaaa!")

Post a reply to this message

On 23/01/2012 06:13 PM, Warp wrote:
> Invisible<voi### [at] devnull>  wrote:
>> On 23/01/2012 10:29 AM, John VanSickle wrote:
>>> Wait, isn't Pipa some gal who's in the tabloids a lot?
>
>> I wouldn't know; I don't read comic books.
>
>    I don't know if that was just a jab at tabloids, or if you a honestly have
> a confusion of terminology... Either way it's slightly amusing.

Even I'm not quite /that/ dense. ;-)

Seriously though, from what I've seen, your typical tabloid is about as 
factually accurate as your typical comic book. Like comics, they 
sometimes reflect real things which are actually happening in the real 
world... aaaaand then most of the time they contain complete fiction. 
(E.g., MMR causes autism - a claim that to this day has not one shred of 
scientific evidence behind it.)

Post a reply to this message

Le 2012-01-24 04:30, Invisible a écrit :
>>>> You were aware that Hosni Mubarak is no longer in charge in Egypt and
>>>> that they had a "small" revolution last year, weren't you?
>>>
>>> Nope. The politics of remote countries isn't something I generally keep
>>> up with. (Heck, the politics of *this* country isn't something I avidly
>>> follow...)
>>
>> So you didn't hear about any of the so-called "Arab Spring" events?
>
> No.
>

Do you watch tv?
Do you listen to the radio?
Read newspaper?
Walk by a newspaper stand on your way to work?
Talk to people?

I think I facepalmed hard enough to break my nose.

-- 
/*Francois Labreque*/#local a=x+y;#local b=x+a;#local c=a+b;#macro P(F//
/*    flabreque    */L)polygon{5,F,F+z,L+z,L,F pigment{rgb 9}}#end union
/*        @        */{P(0,a)P(a,b)P(b,c)P(2*a,2*b)P(2*b,b+c)P(b+c,<2,3>)
/*   gmail.com     */}camera{orthographic location<6,1.25,-6>look_at a }

Post a reply to this message

>>> So you didn't hear about any of the so-called "Arab Spring" events?
>>
>> No.
>
> Do you watch tv?

No.

> Do you listen to the radio?

No.

> Read newspaper?

No.

> Walk by a newspaper stand on your way to work?

I can't actually remember the last time I *saw* a newspaper stand in 
this country... Usually you have to walk indoors to look at newspapers.

> Talk to people?

Sure, all the time. :-P

> I think I facepalmed hard enough to break my nose.

Good for you.

Post a reply to this message

Le 2012-01-23 05:25, John VanSickle a écrit :
> On 1/19/2012 12:31 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:
>> On Thu, 19 Jan 2012 15:56:30 +0000, Invisible wrote:
>>
>>> If they were planning to make it legal to lock Americans up without
>>> trial, *that* would be seriously disturbing.
>>
>> They already have that. It was part of the most recent defense
>> appropriations bill that was signed into law.
>>
>> Obama issued a 'signing statement' saying that his administration
>> wouldn't use indefinite detention on American citizens, but there's
>> nothing to stop the next administration from doing that.
>
> So the next President could round up the Congressmen who wrote that
> provision, toss them in prison, and tell them that they can go free when
> they repeal it.
>
> I hereby announce my candidacy...
>
> Regards,
> John

Nope.

Article I, section 6.

-- 
/*Francois Labreque*/#local a=x+y;#local b=x+a;#local c=a+b;#macro P(F//
/*    flabreque    */L)polygon{5,F,F+z,L+z,L,F pigment{rgb 9}}#end union
/*        @        */{P(0,a)P(a,b)P(b,c)P(2*a,2*b)P(2*b,b+c)P(b+c,<2,3>)
/*   gmail.com     */}camera{orthographic location<6,1.25,-6>look_at a }

Post a reply to this message

> Francois Labreque<fla### [at] videotronca>  wrote:
>> Le 2012-01-22 02:09, Warp a écrit :
>>>     The day after SOPA was rejected in the US congress, the US government
>>> took down megaupload.com. Coincidence?
>>>
>>>     The prevailing theory is that they were planning on taking it down for
>>> some time (after all, the bureucracy and paperwork involved in this kind
>>> of operation is not something that's done in one day) and were only
>>> waiting for SOPA to pass in order to shut down the site, so that they
>>> would have a justification. It did not pass, so no justification. However,
>>> rather than let all the hard work go to waste, they took the website down
>>> anyways.
>>>
>> Using existing laws, proving that PIPA and SOPA were unnecessary after all.
>
>    And now the US government has the IP addresses if millions of people who
> have uploaded and downloaded illegal material to megaupload.com. What do
> you think they will do with those addresses?
>

Use existing laws to prosecute the offenders, if they decide to do so. 
Further proof that PIPA and SOPA were unnecessary.

-- 
/*Francois Labreque*/#local a=x+y;#local b=x+a;#local c=a+b;#macro P(F//
/*    flabreque    */L)polygon{5,F,F+z,L+z,L,F pigment{rgb 9}}#end union
/*        @        */{P(0,a)P(a,b)P(b,c)P(2*a,2*b)P(2*b,b+c)P(b+c,<2,3>)
/*   gmail.com     */}camera{orthographic location<6,1.25,-6>look_at a }

Post a reply to this message

Invisible <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:
> >>> So you didn't hear about any of the so-called "Arab Spring" events?
> >>
> >> No.
> >
> > Do you watch tv?
>
> No.
>
> > Do you listen to the radio?
>
> No.
>
> > Read newspaper?
>
> No.

curiously, I too pretty much have ditched traditional media.  I still dig news
on the web though...

Post a reply to this message

On Tue, 24 Jan 2012 09:30:17 +0000, Invisible wrote:

>> You do know that the US pulled out of Iraq, yes?
> 
> I've heard multiple rounds of "We're pulling out. Oh, wait, we're
> pulling out in 6 month's time. No, we're pulling out next month. Oh,
> actually, make that 2 years. Actually, wait, make it a month. No, hang
> on..." It's news to me that they *actually* did it at last.

There was an agreed-upon timeline with the Iraqi government for the 
pullout to be completed by December 31, 2011.  They met that timeline.

>> Or were you unaware that the US (and the UK) were at war in Iraq?
> 
> Hehehe, is *that* why every FPS made in the last 10 years happens in the
> Middle East with Iraqis as the enemy? :-P

It seems that that probably doesn't have a lot to do with reality.  There 
were a couple of Star Wars games that came out as well, yet the Empire is 
still a work of fiction.

>> You know there's a war in Afghanistan too, yes?  And that's still going
>> on?
> 
> Wait - Afghanistan and Iraq aren't the same place? o_O

Um, no, they're not.  Are you serious?

>> And that Osama Bin Laden is dead?
> 
> Actually, no. I heard Saddam was dead, but I didn't know they ever found
> Osama.

<facepalm>

>>> Fame is a relative thing.
>>
>> It is relative, but there's been a *lot* of news about illegal
>> downloads and torrents in the past 5 years or so.  TPB has figured into
>> a lot of that news, because the providers keep blocking access, and
>> they keep getting unblocked.
>>
>> I've found it kinda hard to avoid news about that.  I'm wondering how
>> you managed it without even trying.
> 
> I've heard a lot of talk about "illegal downloads". I haven't heard
> anybody mention TPB.

Do you read slashdot?  The Register?

> It did tickle me when ISPs were talking about various ways to "detect
> and prevent downloading". Uh, you realise that the entire /point/ of
> ISPs is to enable downloading, right? Perhaps you meant prevent
> *illegal* downloading? :-P
> 
> (That and the talk of ISPs charging YouTube money because they're "using
> up all the bandwidth". Translation: "our profit model depends on
> customers using only a fraction of the bandwidth that they pay us for,
> and now people are using /all/ of what they rightfully paid for,
> waaaaa!")

Actually, not YouTube, but Netflix; it's streaming has been claimed to 
take more bandwidth than illegal downloads.

Jim

Post a reply to this message