71–80 of 187 posts
I wonder if he wrote it to Lyndon B. Johnson asking why he started the war in the first place or perhaps querying how much involvement he had in the Kennedy assassination.
Amazon is building a $600 million datacenter for the CIA. The CIA did all of the bad things listed in Dropbox article as directed by Bush and Condoleezza, and they are still actively trying to cover up torture. I've never heard anyone here not using EC2 over it? The tech scenes pitchfork mobs are wildly inconsistent. I have a feeling this one hit a nerve because Condoleezza Rice is famously hated across the internet…
I don't understand what people are admiring here. This "letter" is nothing more than a meaningless rant by a person whose field of expertise has nothing to do with politics, economy, international relations or terrorism. Donald Knuth is a great computer scientist, but hearing him talking about international politics is like hearing any other random person on the street. Also: "...and that almost blindly supports Isra…
Amazon is building a $600 million datacenter for the CIA. The CIA did all of the bad things listed in Dropbox article as directed by Bush and Condoleezza, and they are still actively trying to cover up torture. I've never heard anyone here not using EC2 over it? The tech scenes pitchfork mobs are wildly inconsistent. I have a feeling this one hit a nerve because Condoleezza Rice is famously hated across the internet…
If you read the link you'll see that Knuth himself only wrote two letters to government officials. Most people do not have time to become full time activists, so a certain degree of inconsistency seems inevitable.
You lost me at almost blindly supports Israel's increasingly unjustifiable occupation . Why is it that people who know so much about one thing feel compelled to open their big mouths about something else they clearly know so little about?
Which part are you objecting about, the implication that the US blindly supports Israel, or the implication that Israel's occupations are unjustifiable?
Criticizing US government officials for their excessive support of Israel is reasonable. Blanketing all of Israel's various incursions into Palestinian territory as "unjustifiable" is bad for the discussion and makes an otherwise-reasonable person look extremist.
Amazon is building a $600 million datacenter for the CIA. The CIA did all of the bad things listed in Dropbox article as directed by Bush and Condoleezza, and they are still actively trying to cover up torture. I've never heard anyone here not using EC2 over it? The tech scenes pitchfork mobs are wildly inconsistent. I have a feeling this one hit a nerve because Condoleezza Rice is famously hated across the internet…
Amazon is building a $600 million datacenter for the CIA. The CIA did all of the bad things listed in Dropbox article as directed by Bush and Condoleezza, and they are still actively trying to cover up torture. I've never heard anyone here not using EC2 over it? The tech scenes pitchfork mobs are wildly inconsistent. I have a feeling this one hit a nerve because Condoleezza Rice is famously hated across the internet…
It's quite simple. Rice and Eich are not directly useful and their dismissal would have no effect on the protestors, so there is almost zero sacrifice. There is no sacrifice necessary on behalf of the protestors. Dropping AWS on the other hand could be difficult and expensive for many, so protesting AWS requires either hypocrisy or sacrifice.
Amazon is building a $600 million datacenter for the CIA. The CIA did all of the bad things listed in Dropbox article as directed by Bush and Condoleezza, and they are still actively trying to cover up torture. I've never heard anyone here not using EC2 over it? The tech scenes pitchfork mobs are wildly inconsistent. I have a feeling this one hit a nerve because Condoleezza Rice is famously hated across the internet…
And your point is what? That demonstrating outrage here is in some way invalid since similar outrage was not demonstrated in every other similar situation? Do I have no moral authority to speak up in this situation if I have not before? Maybe we should boycott Amazon. Not boycotting Dropbox because we didn't do the same for Amazon doesn't get us anywhere.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Wikileaks violated the AWS TOS by publishing classified material in violation of US law.
Feel free to downvote since it doesn't fit the meme that "information wants to be free", but the statement is 100% correct.
http://gigaom.com/2010/12/07/has-wikileaks-actually-done-any...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm pretty sure "inconsistently principled" == "consistently unprincipled".
I think that depends on the reading of "inconsistently principled". If the principles are inconsistent, then I tentatively think your equality holds. If the principles are consistent, and the stridency in application is inconsistent, then I don't think they are equal. With the second reading, a tangential concern is what drives the inconsistency. If it is purely stochastic, then I think the above saying holds ("bette…
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equal_Protection_Clause
There's also a long history in cognitive science on social trust and perceived consistency (anti-hypocrisy).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_dissonance
So that is why people normally vet these issues outsied of the context of SCOTUS, even on social issues. These are valid ideas irespective of people's views on any subject, IMHO.