Weekend tech reading: Profiles of Sid Meier and Jimmy Wales

Matthew DeCarlo

Posts: 5,271   +103
Before Sid Meier was Sid Meier -- the iconic video game designer whose name is stamped on classic titles like Pirates! and Civilization -- he was just another computer hacker. In the early 80s, the then-20-something programmer had a job...

[newwindow="https://www.techspot.com/news/53083-weekend-tech-reading-profiles-of-sid-meier-and-jimmy-wales.html"]Read more[/newwindow]
 

cliffordcooley

Posts: 12,688   +6,051
Senator Dianne Feinstein, head of the Senate Intelligence Committee, said, “I don’t think this man is a whistle-blower… he could have stayed and faced the music. I don’t think running is a noble thought.”

<snip>

But where are Snowden’s defenders? As of Monday, the editorial pages of the Times and the Washington Post, the two most influential papers in the country, hadn’t even addressed the Obama Administration’s decision to charge Snowden with two counts of violating the Espionage Act and one count of theft.

If convicted on all three counts, the former N.S.A. contract-systems administrator could face thirty years in jail.
Right standing and waiting for a 30 year sentence is the noble thing to do after speaking the truth. No wait if he had of stood his ground, he wouldn't have had the chance to speak his mind. It was releasing truth about how our government has been violating everyones privacy that started it all.

Espionage Act of 1917
It originally prohibited any attempt to interfere with military operations, to support U.S. enemies during wartime, to promote insubordination in the military, or to interfere with military recruitment. In 1919, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously ruled in Schenck v. United States that the act did not violate the freedom of speech of those convicted under its provisions.
  • I didn't realize we were at a state of war.
  • The release of documents were not supporting an enemy during a time of war.
  • I was under the impression this was a civil issue.
  • To silence Snowden is violating his freedom of speech.
 
G

Guest

Eh? Of course the USA is at a state of war. Sure it's not like WW2 or Vietnam, but legally the US is absolutely in a state of war, and has been since 2001.

I'm not advocating anything here in regards to Snowden, by the way, I just though that was a rather odd thing to say given the obvious facts to the contrary.
 

cliffordcooley

Posts: 12,688   +6,051
Eh? Of course the USA is at a state of war. Sure it's not like WW2 or Vietnam, but legally the US is absolutely in a state of war, and has been since 2001.
No we are not in a state of war, we are in a state of harassing others. There is a difference! War will come when others get fed up with our constant harassment. I'm tired of our government painting a red flag on my back, without my consent. And then they have the audacity to say we are fighting in retaliation, when we are finally attacked.
 
G

Guest

Well, you're talking emotionally, not legally. I'd probably be inclined to agree with your analysis, but that doesn't change the fact that in legal terms the USA is in a state of war and therefore your point on that is void.

On an unrelated note but concerning the roundup of articles, Jimbo Wales really does sound like one of the most sleazy, unsavoury, and generally unpleasant people around,
 

cliffordcooley

Posts: 12,688   +6,051
Well, you're talking emotionally, not legally. I'd probably be inclined to agree with your analysis, but that doesn't change the fact that in legal terms the USA is in a state of war and therefore your point on that is void.
War
War is an organised and often prolonged armed conflict that is carried out by states and/or non-state actors. It is characterized by extreme violence, social disruption, and economic destruction. War should be understood as an actual, intentional and widespread armed conflict between political communities, and therefore is defined as a form of political violence or intervention. The set of techniques used by a group to carry out war is known as warfare. An absence of war is usually called peace.
With our current administration, we are as close to peace as we ever will be. Since you see my point as void, when will you say we are not in a state of war?
 

KG363

Posts: 526   +15
Well, you're talking emotionally, not legally. I'd probably be inclined to agree with your analysis, but that doesn't change the fact that in legal terms the USA is in a state of war and therefore your point on that is void.

On an unrelated note but concerning the roundup of articles, Jimbo Wales really does sound like one of the most sleazy, unsavoury, and generally unpleasant people around,

Congress hasn't formally declared war since WWII.
 

psycros

Posts: 3,384   +3,855
Congress hasn't formally declared war since WWII.

And that's the problem. Weakness is never respected, esp. not by the fundamentalist throwbacks in the Middle East. If the US was simply attacking terrorists wherever and whenever we could then I'd say we were on the right track. But we're also *aiding* them in the few counties whose regimes were NOT actively engaged in terrorist actions (at least against America). What exactly is Obama's endgame here?? If the enemy is Islamo-facism then why did this administration work so hard to overthrow Mubarak, who kept the Muslim Brotherhood in check? They've been undermining every Middle Eastern government that's not a theocracy. My personal theory is that the mooncalves in the White House think they can reshape the whole region into a peaceful Islamic superstate..a "middle eastern union", if you will. Or maybe they just want as much war as possible to boost the profits from oil and weapons. God only knows what these lunatics we keep electing are up to. The only safe bet is that it won't be good for anyone but them.
 

KG363

Posts: 526   +15
Have you ever wondered why they attack? It's not because they "hate our freedoms", it's because of our aggression. We have boots on their holy sites and we send drone strikes to villages killing hundreds of women and children. Further, you're much more likely to be accidentally killed by the police than in a terrorist attack.