Waiting for ...... wikileaks

[PrinceofWands]

It's a pretty good bet that Prince was mind fucked in college, and listened to his professors without question.

It's a pretty good bet that most of you were mind fucked by media and corporate interests, and listened to your inner greed without question.

 

[DucatiMonster696]

Correction:

I'll let you two beat each other, but regarding what's actually been released, this is hardly total disclosure, nor is everything been released.

In fact the only way seriously damaging information against the US is likely to come out is if someone decides to harm Assange.

This guy has nothing on other nations and he should be very careful with what he releases and who it effects besides the US.

 

[iGas]

Very easy to point at the failures. Can you point at the successes too? You can't? Well, too bad; that's the ungrateful part in intelligence work. When you do it well, no one knows. Public only hears about the fuckups. All I'm saying the fact we're now free to read classified state department cables is one of these failures, but I wouldn't rush to judge the intelligence agencies on that alone.

It is correct that we only hear about the screw ups, but some of the fuckup is on such a grandiose scale that cost hundred of thousands of lives, disrupts millions of lives, and costs trillions of dollar.

IMHO whistleblowers are needed because it keeps these so call spook agencies honest, and it also help them patch up vulnerable holes in their system. And, how safe are we from the KGB (FSB)/Mossad/MSS/MOSI/etc... if it classify information is easily obtained by Wikileaks?

 

[shiner]

Actually not true. I took a great class on the nature of invention/innovation in which we explored this very topic. MOST discovery has been happenstance, or humanitarian. Only a VERY small percentage of advancements have been about personal gain. That's why throughout 6000 years of recorded human history there are very VERY few wealthy inventors.

The industrial revolution was driven by greed of the aristocracy.

No, MOST creation is because humans are driven to create...not for gain, but the act itself or to better the human condition. MOST advancements are made by genius individuals with little or no thought of personal remuneration. Yes, we've gotten away from that in the last few decades especially...and I argue that's why things suck so desperately now.

Careful guys....he took a class.

:hmm:

 

[Zebo]

I'll let you two beat each other, but regarding what's actually been released, this is hardly total disclosure, nor is everything been released.

In fact the only way seriously damaging information is likely to come out is if someone decides to harm Assange.

Yeah Mr. Assange would be clever to keep the most sensitive sources and methods under wraps as an insurance policy.

His anti American campaign can continue and he stays alive.

 

[Zebo]

It's a pretty good bet that most of you were mind fucked by media and corporate interests, and listened to your inner greed without question.

Capital allocation and profit today is rarely done by merit alone. Also the right misses that we need an educated workforce to even open businesses like MS and pharma here. But even the lefty lib in Sweden understands capitalism is the way to go for human advancement. It's just a matter of degrees. Total free market w/o even patents to free market with socialistic undertones. Anything else is fail look around.

 

[Amused]

Who said anything about anonymous? What real benefit is having your name on something if you in no way profit from it?

I said that innovation is a basic human drive, and most inventions have been accidents, or created purely for the act of creation or for human betterment. I was told I was wrong.

You are wrong. Ambition isn't driven by money alone. But ambition drives innovation and invention. NOT altruism.

 

[CycloWizard]

Maybe you should actually read a book. The knowledge is freely available, you just have to attempt to view it without bias. There is absolutely no supportable argument to the contrary. Seriously, just do some research on it.

If you don't want to take the time, then just pose it as a question of probability and logic:

what are the odds that the gains of mankind over five-and-a-half thousand years without corporate/capital driven research, which enabled us to reach the social and technological levels we've achieved, are outpaced by a few hundred years of mixed for-profit and continuing not-for-profit achievement?

Or we can play a game if you'd rather. You list an innovation or creation for profit, and I'll respond with three for creativities sake, humanitarian reasons, or happenstance. I bet you $100 I can go longer than you can.

The last time you started this nonsense, you fell off the face of the earth when asked to expound your position. The only way you could win $100 in this bet is if you completely bastardize the definition of innovation. I'll give you a quick quiz to see where we're at: which of the seminal inventions were invented for humanitarian reasons? Printing press? Steam engine? Telegraph? Light bulb?

 

[LegendKiller]

Again, not really. A tribe forms, spends years working together to better their situation, until suddenly some other tribe intrudes. Then there's a short-lived struggle to be allowed to live as they're wont to, after which they go back to cooperative living for decades.

Even during the actual battle MOST hours are spent in cooperative pursuits. It's only the few moments of direct conflict when the competition intervenes.

The more 'modern' we've become the less this has been true. Partly it's a result of population vs resources, but I believe even more so it's about the proliferation of the ideas you endorse. The more greedy people there are trying to take more than their share, the tougher it is for everyone to just live.

Sorry. but most tribes worked in a hierarchy whereby the strongest gained the most wealth and notoriety, whether by strength of arms, battle prowess, innovation, intelligence...etc. The strongest societies were ones who were most successful intellectually and militarily. Intellectualism is a competition unto itself, those who are smarter prove their points and raise to the top.

This is also the main tenant behind Darwinism, the strongest, fittest, smartest, and most adaptable are the ones who have survived to present day. These are all competitions which require constant honing of skills, whether intellectual or physical. These also require motives that are not selfless, but selfish, whether to the person or the tribe/village/city/state/country.

Without working towards making the respective constituents stronger, they would be torn asunder by those who are stronger. There's always somebody stronger unless you gather allies and make your position unassailable.


This is fact, this is life. This is the entire human history.

 

[PrinceofWands]

You are wrong. Ambition isn't driven by money alone. But ambition drives innovation and invention. NOT altruism.

Not supported through the majority of history. Mere existence drives creativity, of which innovation and invention are parts. Beyond that there is ambition, yes, but more often is a genuine desire to better the world. It's only VERY recently where selfish reasons have gained a more prominent part of discovery, and it does it worse, and at greater cost to mankind.

 

[JS80]

ONLY the evil people. Good people just want to live, not rule others.

As to being 'down with out world view', that has so many fallacies I don't even know where to start. What is 'our', what defines it, who determines inclusion, who determines values, etc, etc, etc. It inherently requires EXACTLY what I'm opposed to: egocentrism.

Newsflash: YOU ARE NOT IMPORTANT. YOU ARE NOT MORE 'RIGHT' THAN SOMEONE ELSE.

Feel free to read 'you' as you personally, your country, or anything else you want, it will still be absolutely correct.

Yes we are. Especially more "right" than you.

 

[JS80]

The cause of the Chinese famine wasn't primarily that attempts at cooperative farming led to lower production, it was tyrannical and stupid people trying to radically remake a society along with some unfortunate natural disasters. Of course you could say that the tyranny was part and parcel to communism, but attempts at cooperative production themselves did not cause that famine.

This is not to say that communism is a preferable economic system, as history has pretty clearly shown that not to be the case.

lol nice way of arranging words to be apologetic for mass murder and communism.

 

[Amused]

Not supported through the majority of history. Mere existence drives creativity, of which innovation and invention are parts. Beyond that there is ambition, yes, but more often is a genuine desire to better the world. It's only VERY recently where selfish reasons have gained a more prominent part of discovery, and it does it worse, and at greater cost to mankind.

Good gawd that professor had a LOT of kool-aid, didn't he? And you drank all of it.

When a man invented how to use fire to cook and heat, he did it to better his OWN LOT. Not to better the world. The same goes for the vast majority of inventions and innovations. When a man invented how to use a weapon to kill his food, he did it so HE wouldn't starve.

And I could go on and on and on and on.

Your class has you thinking people are altruistic and Mother Teresa like. He is full of shit. So full of shit in fact, that he had enough to fill you with it too.

Maybe when you grow up you'll see what man really is like. No doubt it will leave you disillusioned and sad. But what else should we expect from the fucking Care Bear pussified generation raised and educated by communist idealist hippy washouts with no grip on reality?

 

[fskimospy]

lol nice way of arranging words to be apologetic for mass murder and communism.

You are either functionally illiterate, or stupid.

EDIT: I forgot, you could be both.

 

[Throckmorton]

So what do those who supported Wikileaks releasing the war documents because they oppose the wars think about releasing the diplomatic documents?

 

[JSt0rm]

So what do those who supported Wikileaks releasing the war documents because they oppose the wars think about releasing the diplomatic documents?

We dont care?

 

[BoberFett]

The hate and fear of wikileaks is pure fucking hilarity. The amount of idiots that argue topics they don't understand was obvious to me, but to see them just quake and rage information to come out is just fucking.......... lol.

The more human beings put in positions of power are held accountable for their actions, the better for the rest of us. How can you complete belligerent fools think that blind faith in government or business is good for you or your children. Quite interesting that many people would rather purposely be ignorant of reality, just to save themselves a short term headache, in order to dig themselves into a hole impossible to climb out of.

Quick! Kill all the Wikileaks founders so our government can save us!!!!!

Agreed. It doesn't surprise me in the least that LegendKiller the two-faced, fork-tongued bastard is 100% behind the government keeping vast secrets, while at the same time rails on about the evils of an unregulated market. WikiLeaks is simply vigilante regulation of unchecked government power and secrecy. I hope something incredibly embarrassing is released. I want to see some heads roll in D.C.

 

[Zebo]

Good gawd that professor had a LOT of kool-aid, didn't he? And you drank all of it.

When a man invented how to use fire to cook and heat, he did it to better his OWN LOT. Not to better the world. The same goes for the vast majority of inventions and innovations. When a man invented how to use a weapon to kill his food, he did it so HE wouldn't starve.

And I could go on and on and on and on.

Your class has you thinking people are altruistic and Mother Teresa like. He is full of shit. So full of shit in fact, that he had enough to fill you with it too.

Maybe when you grow up you'll see what man really is like. No doubt it will leave you disillusioned and sad. But what else should we expect from the fucking Care Bear pussified generation raised and educated by communist idealist hippy washouts with no grip on reality?

I had to laugh. As you know I believe in balance but that shit is funny.

 

[Zebo]

Agreed. It doesn't surprise me in the least that LegendKiller the two-faced, fork-tongued bastard is 100% behind the government keeping vast secrets, while at the same time rails on about the evils of an unregulated market. WikiLeaks is simply vigilante regulation of unchecked government power and secrecy. I hope something incredibly embarrassing is released. I want to see some heads roll in D.C.

That won't happen.

Who rolled for 911's over staying visa?
Who rolled for Nigerian being whisked past detection w/o a passport and on no fly?

You only roll with race, sexism or insulting superiors fuckups.

I don't think LK was saying anything about total security state vast secrets. Just that some should be.

 

[BoberFett]

That won't happen.

Who rolled for 911's over staying visa?
Who rolled for Nigerian being whisked past detection w/o a passport and on no fly?

You only roll with race, sexism or insulting superiors fuckups.

I don't think LK was saying anything about total security state vast secrets. Just that some should be.

I agree some should be. But Washington has proven that they can't be trusted to properly classify things.

 

[nageov3t]

So what do those who supported Wikileaks releasing the war documents because they oppose the wars think about releasing the diplomatic documents?

confidential communications is necessary to conduct diplomacy.

covering up civilian deaths and casualty counts is not necessary to conduct a war.

 

[DucatiMonster696]

I agree some should be. But Washington has proven that they can't be trusted to properly classify things.

Who are you going to trust to negotiate with an opponent that is more then willing to play dirty? If you think other nations are going to buy into the chivalry nonsense when it comes to high stakes diplomacy you are naive.

 

[PrinceofWands]

The last time you started this nonsense, you fell off the face of the earth when asked to expound your position. The only way you could win $100 in this bet is if you completely bastardize the definition of innovation. I'll give you a quick quiz to see where we're at: which of the seminal inventions were invented for humanitarian reasons? Printing press? Steam engine? Telegraph? Light bulb?

Ok, lets examine those:

First, the Printing Press. Let's first remember that presses have actually existed since around 1000 or before in various forms. Gutenbergs 'invention' was moveable metal type to print on cheaper paper with cheaper ink (and even that is in doubt since concurrent development was found in Korea, and other versions well on their way). The REASON he pursued that invention was his oft-lamented irritation that books were only available to the wealthy. Specifically, that the common man couldn't hope to own a bible to enrich his soul as well as his mind. Let's also not forget that he did not significantly profit from his invention, dying in relative anonymity and poverty until later records would bring his story to the world.

The steam engine is even more convoluted. We know that it was nearly accomplished in 1st century Rome, and there are reports of others since, though none were workable or common knowledge. However, they all worked on principles developed LONG before they were perfected. However, to keep the discussion simple we'll talk about the Newcomen engine (based on Papin and Savery). First, we need to understand that Papin was a medical doctor with a random interest in vacuums to improve medical treatment (his work was the precursor to the autoclave), and Savery was a military man who did his experiments on his own time and money (with his stated purpose being to protect miners by improving drainage, and to supply towns with water from remote areas). So the foundations of the steam engine was entirely humanitarian. Then Newcomen (a baptist preacher) came along and put it all together. There is no information about his 'purpose', but given his upbringing around mines and their conditions, and his calling as a baptist preacher, one could easily speculate that there was at least as much humanitarian calling as any other - ESPECIALLY since he made very little from his invention (same as most inventors).

I'm not sure why you link an Edison article to talk about the Telegraph. He was an operator in his youth, but did not invent the theory, nor the application. He offered some improvements (like quadroplex), but seriously, he's not the central figure. You could talk about Morse, who was involved in the commercial application of his refinements, but that would leave out Cooke & Wheatstone, Henry, Sturgeon, etc. Moreover you have to look at why Morse even had an interest. He was on an oceanic trip and realized that the work of Ampere could be utilized to exchange communication and intelligence (scientific and government related specifically). He then worked on it himself until he had it solved. The initial purpose of it was for the government to implement as an infrastructure device. It was only when the government didn't see how it could be implemented in such a way as to cover costs that it was given to private business interests.

The light bulb is another convoluted one, that your link over-simplifies. It wasn't invented by Edison. There were a dozen or more previous working light bulbs. Edison merely built on their genius 70 years later. You can claim that Edison successfully completed the first American commercialization, but NOT that he 'invented' the light bulb.

We're dealing with subjective thresholds here, but I don't see any of those that were INVENTED for commercial reasons...commercial use at least in part, perhaps...but not driven by commerce for commerce.

 

[BoberFett]

Who are you going to trust to negotiate with an opponent that is more then willing to play dirty? If you think other nations are going to buy into the chivalry nonsense when it comes to high stakes diplomacy you are naive.

I don't give a damn what other countries do. I don't live in other countries. I live in the US. When my country is doing underhanded things, I want to know about it.

 

[PrinceofWands]

Good gawd that professor had a LOT of kool-aid, didn't he? And you drank all of it.

When a man invented how to use fire to cook and heat, he did it to better his OWN LOT. Not to better the world. The same goes for the vast majority of inventions and innovations. When a man invented how to use a weapon to kill his food, he did it so HE wouldn't starve.

And I could go on and on and on and on.

Your class has you thinking people are altruistic and Mother Teresa like. He is full of shit. So full of shit in fact, that he had enough to fill you with it too.

Maybe when you grow up you'll see what man really is like. No doubt it will leave you disillusioned and sad. But what else should we expect from the fucking Care Bear pussified generation raised and educated by communist idealist hippy washouts with no grip on reality?

You go on, and keep rationalizing your greed and self-centeredness in an attempt to not have to off yourself out of guilt. It won't change the fact that you're an ignorant, selfish, worthless waste of human flesh.

Medicine isn't usually invented by those suffering from it, nor even those likely to ever do so. Theoretical physics or pure mathematics advances the individual how again? Tesla, Michelangelo, Matzeliger, etc. And I could go on, and on, and on.

The vast majority of inventions are exactly as I've described.