Slashdot | Call For Halt To Wikipedia Webcomic Deletions
Topic: Miscellaneous
4:27 pm EDT, Oct 31, 2007
"Howard Tayler, the webcomic artist of Schlock Mercenary fame, is calling on people not to donate money during the latest Wikimedia Foundation fund-raiser. This is to protest the 'notability purges' taking place throughout Wikipedia, where articles are being removed en-masse by what many see as overzealous admins.
Apparently people around here aren't the only ones grumbling about deletionism.
What soldiers call the “battle space”... is crowded with actors who do not fit neatly into boxes: Sunni extremists, Al Qaeda terrorists, Shiite militiamen, criminals and armed tribes. This situation is made more complex by the questionable loyalties and Janus-faced role of the Iraqi police and Iraqi Army...
In short, we operate in a bewildering context of determined enemies and questionable allies, one where the balance of forces on the ground remains entirely unclear....
Two of the authors of this essay were KIA on Monday.
Bush Rationale on Libby Stirs Legal Debate - New York Times
Topic: Society
6:54 am EDT, Jul 5, 2007
“The Bush administration... has repeatedly supported a federal sentencing system that is distinctly disrespectful of the very arguments that Bush has put forward in cutting Libby a break,” said Douglas A. Berman, a law professor at Ohio State University who writes the blog Sentencing Law and Policy.
The Libby clemency will be the basis for many legal arguments, said Susan James, an Alabama lawyer... “What you’re going to see is people like me quoting President Bush in every pleading that comes across every federal judge’s desk.”
Similarly, in a case decided two weeks ago by the United States Supreme Court and widely discussed by legal specialists in light of the Libby case, the Justice Department persuaded the court to affirm the 33-month sentence of a defendant whose case closely resembled that against Mr. Libby.
Read the article. The last line in it is, I think, the most important.
Whether the pardon was right or wrong is irrelevent. Whether or not the prosecution was politically motivated is irrelevent. Whether or not Libby is truely guilty is irrelevent. Whats important is that this decision runs against the grain of everything the Republican party claims to stand for.
Here is my selected exerpt, with some content cut and some emphasis added...
How aggressively would you interrogate those being held at Guantanamo Bay for information about where the next attack might be?
SEN. MCCAIN: The use of torture -- we could never gain as much we would gain from that torture as we lose in world opinion. We do not torture people.
When I was in Vietnam, one of the things that sustained us, as we went -- underwent torture ourselves, is the knowledge that if we had our positions reversed and we were the captors, we would not impose that kind of treatment on them.
It's not about the terrorists, it's about us. It's about what kind of country we are. And a fact: The more physical pain you inflict on someone, the more they're going to tell you what they think you want to know.
MR. GIULIANI: In the hypothetical that you gave me, which assumes that we know there's going to be another attack and these people know about it, I would tell the people who had to do the interrogation to use every method they could think of. It shouldn't be torture, but every method they can think of --
MR. HUME: Water-boarding?
MR. GIULIANI: -- and I would -- and I would -- well, I'd say every method they could think of, and I would support them in doing that because I've seen what -- (interrupted by applause) -- I've seen what can happen when you make a mistake about this, and I don't want to see another 3,000 people dead in New York or any place else.
MR. HUME: Governor Romney, I'd like to draw you out on this.
MR. ROMNEY: Now we're going to -- you said the person's going to be in Guantanamo. I'm glad they're at Guantanamo. I don't want them on our soil. I want them on Guantanamo, where they don't get the access to lawyers they get when they're on our soil. I don't want them in our prisons. I want them there.
Some people have said, we ought to close Guantanamo. My view is, we ought to double Guantanamo. We ought to make sure that the terrorists -- (applause) -- and there's no question but that in a setting like that where you have a ticking bomb that the president of the United States -- not the CIA interrogator, the president of the United States -- has to make the call. And enhanced interrogation techniques have to be used -- not torture but enhanced interrogation techniques, yes.
REP. PAUL: I think it's interesting talking about torture here in that it's become enhanced interrogation technique. It sounds like Newspeak.
REP. TANCREDO: Well, let me just say that it's almost unbelievable to listen to this in a way. We're talking about -- we're talking about it in such a theoretical fashion. You say that -- that nuclear devices have gone off in the United States, more are planned, and we're wondering about whether waterboarding would be a -- a bad thing to do? I'm looking for "Jack Bauer" at that time, let me tell you. (Laughter, applause.)
And -- and there is -- there is nothing -- if you are talking about -- I mean, we are the last best hope of Western civilization. And so all of the theories that go behind our activities subsequent to these nuclear attacks going off in the United States, they go out the window because when -- when we go under, Western civilization goes under. So you better take that into account, and you better do every single thing you can as president of the United States to make sure, number one, it doesn't happen -- that's right -- but number two, you better respond in a way that makes them fearful of you because otherwise you guarantee something like this will happen.
Rep. Tancredo, the reason western civilization looks hopefully upon you is the sort of values that Sen. McCain mentioned. If your perspective triumphs, you've already gone under. Its over.
Ok, I'll bite. This "illegal is illegal" talk on the part of the anti-illegal immigration movement, far from being "succinct and to the point," represents 3 basic logical fallacies, its a straw man argument, its an over simplification, and it represents circular reasoning.
1. The Straw Man Argument: "My opponent argues that illegal immigration isn't illegal. Clearly that position is wrong, as evidenced by the fact that illegal immigration is, by definition, illegal. Therefore, my opponent is wrong and my views on the issue are correct."
No one is, in fact, arguing that illegal immigration isn't illegal. Demonstrating this rather obvious point does not collapse the debate, but rather, it avoids the debate. There are some who suggest that some kinds of illegal immigration shouldn't be illegal. As laws are a matter of policy, discussing what they should and should not be is, in fact, the purpose of political dialog in a Democracy.
2. The Over Simplification: All crimes are not equal. Both murder and jay walking are illegal, but they are not similarly serious crimes. Saying that "illegal is illegal" is precisely the same thing as saying that "jay walking is just like murder."
Most of the debate regarding illegal immigration concerns the perception on the right that illegal immigration is a crime like murder, and we should devote huge amounts of resources to stopping it and severly punish those who commit it, and the perception on the left that illegal immigration is a crime like jay walking, which while illegal does not warrant severe punishments or huge investments in policing. The statement that "illegal is illegal" contributes nothing to understanding where in the spectrum between these two positions our policy should lie, other than to argue that the United States should treat all crimes exactly the same way and should hand out exactly the same punishments for all crimes, which is ridiculous on it's face.
3. Circular Reasoning: Many people in the anti-illegal immigration movement start their argument by claiming that they are upset by illegal immigration because it is illegal. A good litmus test is to ask whether they would support creating a legal process for short term immigration by manual laborers. The answer is consistently no. Which means the REAL problem isn't that its illegal, as we get to decide whether or not its illegal (see point one). The real problem is something else, and by focusing on the legality rather than on the something else that actually motivates them, they fail, again, to contribute to the discussion in a useful way.
Now I'll be the first to agree with the general statement that "we have a problem with illegal immigration in this country." There simply should not be 12 million people living here illegally. It does not follow directly from that observation that the right answer is a "crackdown." There ar... [ Read More (0.1k in body) ]
This is what I don't get... I go to CNN the other day and they have a picture of the VT killer pointing a gun at the camera.... On their main page above the fold, pointing a gun at me. And I have to look at that. And that's "journalism." That's "my right to know." But at the same time, in his rant, he says things like fuck, and motherfucker, and I can't see that. I don't get to hear that. The media has protected me from that. And thats supposed to make sense. Its supposed to be natural for the media to want to protect my innocent ears from hearing the word fuck, but it is their obliglation to show me a shocking photograph of a murderer pointing a hand gun at a camera. On their front page.
Do you think normal people are sane?
Here is another thing I don't get. We used to be a free country. It used to be the case that if the President felt that you should be arrested that you would receive a fair trial with assistance of counsel before a jury of your peers. But thats gone. Today, the President can detain you for any reason indefinately, without trial. There is no bill of rights anymore. Its impossible in such circumstances, because checks and balances, which no longer exist, are the keystone of freedom.
But we have an individual who masterminded a plot to blow up an airplane containing 73 innocent people. And he is free, in this country, because, it was in our interests. In my mind, the murder of 73 innocent people is never... moral..... But he is free... In this country, and the tools that exist to detain people without trial are not being used against him. Perhaps the death of those 73 innocent people reduced my tax burden. Perhaps many in this country support this. It doesn't make any sense to me. I don't get it.
Someone on Presidential hopeful John McCain’s staff is going to be in trouble today. They used a well known template to create his Myspace page. The template was designed by Newsvine Founder and CEO Mike Davidson (original template is here). Davidson gave the template code away to anyone who wanted to use it, but asked that he be given credit when it was used, and told users to host their own image files.
McCain’s staff used his template, but didn’t give Davidson credit. Worse, he says, they use images that are on his server, meaning he has to pay for the bandwidth used from page views on McCain’s site.
Davidson decided to play a small prank on the campaign this morning as retribution.
YouTube - Video explains the world's most important 6-sec drum loop
Topic: Arts
6:03 am EST, Feb 15, 2007
This fascinating, brilliant 20-minute video narrates the history of the "Amen Break," a six-second drum sample from the b-side of a chart-topping single from 1969. This sample was used extensively in early hiphop and sample-based music, and became the basis for drum-and-bass and jungle music -- a six-second clip that spawned several entire subcultures. Nate Harrison's 2004 video is a meditation on the ownership of culture, the nature of art and creativity, and the history of a remarkable music clip.
