this is the new thread for pointless political arguements about the war. enjoy.
-Louie
Printable View
this is the new thread for pointless political arguements about the war. enjoy.
-Louie
Quote:
Originally posted by OberonBob
This is a little off topic, but is there any hope of a new NbeGone client anytime soon, perhaps incorperating some of the recent speed improvment changes that sobsieve has?
Also, can someone point me to a copy of NBeGone for Solaris, as I don't have a copy, and I cannot access Phil's website anymore? I could provide my email if that is needed.
Thanks.
Quote:
Originally posted by Moo_the_cow
:|ot|:
quote:
_________________________________________
I cannot access Phil's website anymore
_________________________________________
You're not alone, because I can't either.
Honestly, I don't think that Americans, Brits, or Australians, who are part of the mathematical community, should be punished because of one man's exaggerated opinions about political events. This is an excellent example of how prejudice exist even today, despite his comment on his web site that
"not all Americans are pro-war...etc" Well guess what- he also
says "let me know, and I'll unblock you". The problem with this is that nowhere on his website does he provide a e-mail, except the one on the bottom, which he says is for complainers.
I tried to e-mail him once through that e-mail, and I never got a
response (probably because he thinks i'm complaining even before he reads it, but in that e-mail, I didn't complain).
Yeah, I know that you can do whatever you what with your websites, but I do NOT think that what he's currently doing is anything close to ethical.
Moo :swear:
P.S. Why should I be talking about this? The war is already over!
Quote:
Originally posted by Mystwalker
Strangely, even I can't access that site. And Germany isn't known for supporting that war, is it?:eek:
Quote:
Originally posted by OberonBob
ok, I got my program. I used a public proxy in Canada to access the page. :) I downloaded all the versions, so if anyone needs a copy, let me know.
;)
Quote:
Originally posted by philmoore
:|ot|:
Quote:
Yeah, I know that you can do whatever you what with your websites, but I do NOT think that what he's currently doing is anything close to ethical.
_________________________________________________
This seems to me an odd sense of ethics. Someone who has written a program that he once made available for download and free use by anyone currently chooses to not make this program available to people from certain countries because of his view on the war. This is unethical? You sound like you believe he is under some sort of obligation to provide his program to you. Have you tried corresponding to this person via private mail through this forum?
Is it ethical to compel disarmament though U.N. weapons inspections and then, on fabricated charges of alleged non-compliance with inspectors, to invade that country, kill thousands of civilians, tens of thousands of military, (most of whom were once civilians and got drafted) and inflict terror on the population of Iraq just to get rid of another dictator who is no longer useful to us? We Americans talk big on exporting democracy to the rest of the world, but our actual record in the Arab world (and elsewhere) is truly horrifying. The war is over, you say. Until the next war, Syria or Iran or Cuba or North Korea, it really depends on us and our reaction to the fear being spread by those currently in power in Washington. I for one hope that Phil keeps his "No War in Iraq" website up a little longer and encourages us to contemplate that we, the citizens of the U.S., Great Britain, Australia, but also Spain, Netherlands, Italy, Turkey, Denmark, and others listed at:
http://fatphil.org/errors/403.html
as well as all other countries of the world, have a responsibility to demand that our governments act ethically.
Is this really the way to deal with the world's problems?
:machgun: :sniper:
I really hope that the human species proves in the long run that it can do better than this.
Quote:
Originally posted by Moo_the_cow
I'll make some statements to clear up the possible confusion in my previous message.
First, I have no intention of offending anyone, and i am sorry if I did.
2nd- I neither support or am against the war (which is over)
3rd- What I meant by "I don't think that what he's doing is anything close to ethical" is that, in my opinion, it is unfair for Phil to make his sieve clients unavailable to people in certain countries because of his view on the war. I say this because those people (assuming that they're ordinary civilians) have no or very minimal control over the decisions made by their government.
In other words, everyone should not be prohibited from driving cars if one person uses a car as a murder weapon.
4th- Over 80% of Brits and Austrailians are against the war, so I don't see why they should be punished.
5th - I do not believe that he is under any sort of obligation to make his programs available to me or the general public, but it would be more beneficial to the mathematical community if he did.
6th- It just doesn't make sence for Phil to prohibit some people from viewing his website because of his views on the war. The war (as i've repeatedly said) is already over, so why should he do that? The longer he does this, the more it sounds like "sorry you can't visit my web site because i don't like the fact that the Egyptians enslaved the Hebrews in 1500 B.C."
Quote:
Originally posted by tom ehlert
Please explain the difference between a (BAD) dictator and (GOOD) democrazy, and what's going to be changed in Iraq,now; (except that the control over the oil resources changed)
tom
Quote:
Originally posted by Xrillo
I don't see the connection between politics and the sieve client. If you guys want to discuss politics do it somewhere else please.
Am I the only one who finds that picture about comparing arguing on the net to running in the Special Olympics rather offensive?
No you are not alone.
Lars
It is a disgrace, posting such a picture (with the accompagnied comments).
Ola
The picture alone is cute, but with the comments it's out of line.
No, it would still be offensive alone. Any time you say such things about people it is bad.
With comments I also meant the ones written in the picture. But if the picture were displayed alone, it would just be life-affirming ...
Yes, Louie can make all the fun he wants over people discussing politics, but please leave retarded people out of it!
A couple of points about Moo's post - Bush said just three days ago that the war is definitely NOT over. Sure, he claimed an end to major armed conflict, that was good PR, but the killing continues, and as long as the U.S. government does not want to be bound by its responsibilities as an occupying force under the Geneva Conventions, it will insist that the war is not over.
Second, I agree with Moo that it is not right to punish people for actions taken by their government when these people have little or no control over that government. This raises two questions: If Iraqis had little or no control over their government, was it right to kill thousands of them because of actions taken by their government? And second, how much control do we in this country (U.S.) have over our own government? If little or none, why is that, when our constitution supposedly makes the government answerable to the people?
Phil M. (who doesn't think that dialogue and critical thinking is ever pointless!)
Well I assumed that when Bush said that the major armed conflict is over, he meant that the war was over.
I was rather surprised that there was still killing going on.
The main reason that i am not opposed to the war (but neither support it) is that it appears that the U.S. military made every effort to spare the lives of innocent civilians.
BTW, I do find the words on the Special olympics poster rather offensive (but the picture is not)
what, they made every effort to spare the lives of innocent civilians. OK, I'm sure fighting in a war is difficult, but theyQuote:
Originally posted by Moo_the_cow
The main reason that i am not opposed to the war (but neither support it) is that it appears that the U.S. military made every effort to spare the lives of innocent civilians.
-used depleted uranium, making parts of baghdad radioactive
-used bunker busters (they cause lung cancer because they're also made of depleted uranium)
-used cluster bombs (even after the whole world told them not to)
-aren't going to clear up the cluster bomblets that didn't explode (so if children play with them they will most likely get their arm blown off)
-massacered the republican guard with bombs (OK, they're not exactly innocent, but all the same)
-when they ran out of bomb targets in the shock and awe they weren't careful enough selecting new targets
-cut off the water supply
-switched off the electricity
-didn't turn them on soon enough
-didn't do anything against the hospitals that were being looted, they just guarded the oil ministry (rumsfield wouldn't have done anything against the looting, had their not been an international outcry)
Is it just me that thinks this all sucks, or what?
Being aganist war is fine. I am for the war. What scares me is that people that are aganist the war want the U.S. too be a second rate nation that begs the U.N. to defend us. I want a strong America. To achieve this we had to go out and fight a war aganist Iraq. We are also strong because we protect our neighbors and secure most of the First World from war. We can do this because we also produce the most stuff. Our GDP was like 10,000,000,000,000 dallors. I believe that the US has to show that when attacked we will fight back not just the next month or year, but year after year, untill we are secure. I believe in Freedom for us not them.
jim
It's opinions of the sort that jimmars shows that scares me most. When such a view is legislated systematically, it can only lead to more violence and/or fear.
The stuff going on in the US now is dangerously close to what happened in Germany in the thirties.
And even more to the McCarthy era in the 50's.
Comparing the U.S. to german in the thirities is in error. Germany had a serge of building that culimnited in it's attack on poland. The U.S has had the military power to take over most of the world and since the fall of the Soviet Union, yet since we have the power to take over the world we instead, liberate Kuwait and push the iraqis back into there country in 91, bomb the serbians in 94-95, kill some Somalis and a few other 3rd world peoples in 95, and finally after 10 years will the power to take over the world we act taking down Afganistan and Iraq. We are on the move now, watch out Haiti we coming after you next. We are nothing like the Nazi's of the thrities unless you look at our gun control mesures; they are closely linked to pre-war Germany. You make very poor analigies. As for our fear of communism it should be way more than it is now. I had a class mate tell me that he wants the U.S. to move into a communistic political state. I like my freedom; I'll stay with the Capitalistic Republic we have now.
I am not only talking about US' military power (or Germany's for that sake), but about the decrease in civil rights for the average US citizen. When a company is allowed to staple us citizen's as traitors because they are against a war, then that will most likely just make it even harder for others to make statements against the war. For christ's sake, american students with anti-war opinions use false names, because they are scared of the police!
I just read some comments from the us guys looking for weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. They still haven't found any and doubt that they will. What happened to Powell's irefutable evidence?
I guess lot's of you americans haven't noticed how subjective american press has been lately?
I find it offesive to use such language, i.e. the "R" word, for the developmentally challenged. We all should be "above" such juvenile and tasteless behavior.
Quote:
Originally posted by Jwb52z
Am I the only one who finds that picture about comparing arguing on the net to running in the Special Olympics rather offensive?
I agree with you but Bush does look rather comfortable in a German officers uniform: http://members.cox.net/jammy/OnTheFr...6_archive.html
Quote:
Originally posted by jimmars
Comparing the U.S. to german in the thirities is in error.
The word "retarded" would be ok to use, but people have changed the understanding and connotation of it.
We don't want US to be a second rate nation. But we don't want to behave you like a "only we count"-nation. All "First World nations" love to be directly or indirectly protected by the US.Quote:
Originally posted by jimmars
Being aganist war is fine. I am for the war. What scares me is that people that are aganist the war want the U.S. too be a second rate nation that begs the U.N. to defend us. I want a strong America. To achieve this we had to go out and fight a war aganist Iraq. We are also strong because we protect our neighbors and secure most of the First World from war. We can do this because we also produce the most stuff. Our GDP was like 10,000,000,000,000 dallors. I believe that the US has to show that when attacked we will fight back not just the next month or year, but year after year, untill we are secure. I believe in Freedom for us not them.
jim
The official reason for the war was that the Iraq is dangerous to the US (and the rest of the world, but who cares ;) ), that he has weapons of mass destruction. Did you find any? You didn't trust the US weapon inspectors - but your own inspectors didn't find anything too (the'll leave this week I've read).
So, you say by making war you proof that the US are strong and shouldn't be attacked or it will strike back. I ask you: who doubts that? I don't, european ministers don't, Saddam Hussain doesn't (didn't?), bin Laden doesn't (didn't?). But when has Saddam Hussain attacked the US? Please help me, I don't remember ...
The only reason why you go to war is: to boost your economy (at least the armaments industry), to protect your interests in that region (mainly oil), to distract from internal political problems, to make a president be voted again.
The easiest method to achive this is of course: :machgun: :sniper:
~~~
To clarify things a bit: I don't like Saddam. I don't like bin Laden. But I also don't like the US to behave like a mad & angry Marine that fires at every potential target. Iraq now. What comes next? Syria - it was already mentioned as the next target. Iran? North Korea?
But it is not politically correct any longer to use the "R" word! Developmentally/intellectually challenged is the term that is now recommended to use and those individuals who "are" "mentally retarded" , and they should be treated with dignity and respect!
The Arc (Association For Retarded Children) of the United States, the "nation's leading national organization on mental retardation," according to its Internet site, stressed the importance of preserving the dignity of those with lower intelligence quotients.
Disability is a natural part of the human experience, which does not diminish the right of individuals with mental retardation to enjoy the opportunity to live independently, make choices, contribute to society, and experience full integration and inclusion to the extent possible, in the economic, political, social, cultural and educational mainstreams of society
The intellectually challenged have these same rights, and I am quite sure that the poster boy pictured in jjjjL's doctored-up poster, who evidentally has downs syndrome, may not understand the wording but would be able to "feel their meaning".
Maybe jjjjL intended to use the "R" word for its "shock value" but again, it's use is inappropriate in a setting such as this forum. Remember: we members here may possess high IQ's but not all of the individuals who may access this page at a later date may equal ours.
It is best just to not denigrate anybody in this forum based on class, color, ethnicity, gender, religion, or their IQ.
Quote:
Originally posted by Jwb52z
The word "retarded" would be ok to use, but people have changed the understanding and connotation of it.
Just a few questions in regard to the post of Jimmars:
quote:
What scares me is that people that are aganist the war want the U.S. too be a second rate nation that begs the U.N. to defend us.
Where does this idea come from? I don't know anyone who is against the war who believes this.
another quote:
I want a strong America. To achieve this we had to go out and fight a war aganist Iraq.
If I hear you correctly, you seem to be saying that not fighting a war against Iraq would have caused the U.S. to become weak. I really wish I could understand the logic behind your statement, because I don't see how the nation which is responsible for over 40% of the world's military spending could be realistically threatened by a country which had been largely disarmed since 1991 and funded its own military at a level of roughly 1/10000-th that of the U.S.
And finally:
I believe in Freedom for us not them.
If you believe this, you might as well throw the Declaration of Independence out the window, since it declares that "Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness" are the inalienable rights, not just of Americans, but of all humans everywhere. (OK, it says "men" rather than "humans", but the idea is still there.)
Phil
"Colored People" was once a term of dignity and respect (NAACP was founded in this era). But people used it in a derogatory way, and "Negro" became the term of dignity and respect. But people used it in a derogatory way, and "black" became the term of dignity and respect. But people used it in a derogatory way, and "African-American" became the term of dignity and respect. I don't expect that term to last much longer.Quote:
Originally posted by Jammy
But it is not politically correct any longer to use the "R" word! Developmentally/intellectually challenged is the term that is now recommended to use and those individuals who "are" "mentally retarded" , and they should be treated with dignity and respect!
There was a time, roughly comparable to "Colored People," when "idiot" and "imbecile" were descriptive but repectful. "Mentally retarded" became the term of dignity and respect when idiot and imbecile became derogatory. Now the wheel has turned again.
It's a silly game to keep changing the words - the people that speak derogatorily will always switch to the new term.
I am fully aware of the correct terminology to use when describing a person of color. I am writing my thesis on Segregation in San Diego city schools, and have had touse the "currently" PC terms, i.e. Black Americans, Hispanic, Asian (realky a catch-all term) and Pacific islanders. I know that ethnic groups within the last two terms often want to be identified further, but in the fileds of Education and History it has to be the terms currently used in the California State Board of Education's guidelines.
It is at times most "tricky" to paraphrase another scholars writings from the 1940s, 1950s, or 1960s and I have to replace their terminology with that that is PC and not lose the intended meaning.
As regards one's mentality, "retarded" is being used in a derogatory manner where "mentally" retarded is describing one's mental abilities. In 1910, at the annual meeting of the AASFM (American Association for the Study of the Feeble-Minded, nothing less!) in Illinois, Henry H. Goddard proposed definitions for a system for classifying individuals with mental retardation. Goddard used the terms moron, imbecile, and idiot for categories of increasing impairment. This nomenclature was the standard of the field for decades. And there actually is a difference between the words idiot, imbecile and moron. An idiot is someone w/IQ below 25, an imbecile between 26-50,and a moron between 51 to about 75.
Anyways . . .any noun can be used both in a positive and negative manner, its connotation being inferred by the reader himself. But the negative use and or implied use of a noun in a negative or comoarative manner which is negative is always improper usage no matter what area of the country one lives in.
It is true that there are many regional differences amongst the members here at this forum, but still, using a public domain image and inserting your own words or phrases can most ofeten lead to misinterpretation and/or unintended consequences.
Again I must reiterate that I am quite sure that jjjjL did not mean to make fun of the individual in the poster nor menatlly challenged individuals in general, but 1) the image has NOTHING to do with either political arguments nor the war, and most of all, 2) the picture is just distasteful.
A rule of thumb for any posts:
Acceptable: Subject to change and continuing debate
Unacceptable: Dehumanizing/Offensive
Jammy
p.s. The term Colored People was in vogue during the 1930s to 1940s. The terms idiot, imbecile, and moran were in vogue from the 1910 until the 1950s.
Quote:
Originally posted by wblipp
"Colored People" was once a term of dignity and respect (NAACP was founded in this era). But people used it in a derogatory way, and "Negro" became the term of dignity and respect. But people used it in a derogatory way, and "black" became the term of dignity and respect. But people used it in a derogatory way, and "African-American" became the term of dignity and respect. I don't expect that term to last much longer.
There was a time, roughly comparable to "Colored People," when "idiot" and "imbecile" were descriptive but repectful. "Mentally retarded" became the term of dignity and respect when idiot and imbecile became derogatory. Now the wheel has turned again.
Jammy, I think you may have had a tiny overreaction to what I said.
Sorry . . .I meant no offense. I am sitting here writing on my thesis and I guess that I just went overboard, I did not over-react.
Jammy
Quote:
Originally posted by Jwb52z
Jammy, I think you may have had a tiny overreaction to what I said.
I recently decided to join SoB and chose to put my computer's efforts into sieving. As I was looking through the information available on the site, I decided to see what Phil Carmody's sieving program was about. However, I couldn't, thanks to Phil's offensive and prejudice decision to ban everyone from countries whose government supported the war in Iraq. Nevermind that none of the individuals trying to access his page had anything to do with their government's position.
I'm not disputing his right to do this. Obviously he can do whatever he wants with his website. However, there are things that you have a legal right to do, but are still unethical. So, I would be very interested to know exactly what Phil Carmody's involvement with this project is. Is he a main contributor, or did he just write some sieving program which happens to be able to be used for the project? If he is actively involved in the running, development, and maintainance of this project, then I'm afraid I'll have to devote my computer's time to some project where they'll be appreciated. If this isn't the case, then I'll happily continue with it. I would suggest however, considering that the vast majority of contributions come from people he apparently hates, that some kind of note to this effect be placed with the link to Phil's site on the sieve page of SoB, or that it simply be removed. I was going to write to him personally, but couldn't find his email anywhere on the error page I got from his site. Also, mysteriously his is the only name on the "about us" page without an email address listed or linked. I wonder why?
Finally, Phil, if you're reading this, nothing personal, but :moon:
PCCO
Just tried the site to see if I were blocked since I am from Denmark, and I was. I agree that it should be removed from the SOB site.
I have been pondering about this threat, but came to no publicworthy conclusions whatsoever about Phil Charmody decision.
But what I know is this: It is a true disgrace Phil Charmody gets treated now so badly, let alone insulted by the ones who first admired him. I find this pretty hypocritical. Instead of thanking him for what he has done for this project sofar and trying to understand his decision, people feel the need in throwing mud.
Thank You,
OLA
Hey . . .I live in San Diego, CA, USA and I too cannot access the website:
Quote:
403 - No War In Iraq
You don't have permission to access this server. However, Iraqis are still dying because of American aggression - ask yourself, which is the more important issue?
In order to prevent any more overly-sheltered 12-year-olds throwing up on viewing this page, there's no more picture of an Iraqi 11-year-old with a head-sized hole blown out of her skull by the US military, and instead this message of tranquility and peace:
So what gives?
Jammy
p.s. His link over at the official SOB website also has been removed: ]http://www.seventeenorbust.com/help/about.mhtml
[QUOTE]Originally posted by kfx
Just tried the site to see if I were blocked since I am from Denmark, and I was. I agree that it should be removed from the SOB site. [/QUOTE
Phil is not officially associated with the SB project per se. In fact, his mention on our "About Us" page where we thank him actually had nothing to do with him writing a siever. We were actually thanking him for his effort in pre-sieving the lower ranges of some of the k-values back when the most efficient siever was NewPGen.
Phil does not speak for SB so he's welcome to do as he pleases. I haven't had any conversations with him since he blocked his site. I didn't take the link down since I assumed he'd take the block down when the war ended. I think it's great that he has views he feels passionately about. Does anyone know when he plans to reopen his site again? Phil?
-Louie
Upon rereading my previous post, I realize that the end of it sounds harsher than I intended and I apologize. I was just upset that it appeared that politics was coming so prevently into an international effort like this. I'm glad to hear that this is not an official SoB position and will continue my support.
PCCO
Anyway, does ANYONE know how to contact Phil? It says on his webpage that
"of course, not all Americans are pro-war...etc" and "If you fall into that category (and it sounds like it's most of the world) and you want to see these pages, then please just drop me a mail, ... etc". Apparently, he's spent some time constructing
that prejudiced website, but he has spent no time to provide anyone who's against the war in the US, UK, etc, with an e-mail address to tell him so. The only website
I see is the one at the bottom of the page, which he says is for complainers. I've e-mailed him though that e-mail address more than a month ago to politely ask him
to reconsider his decision, but i haven't got a response yet.
Finally,
quote:
________________________________________________
Does anyone know when he plans to reopen his site again? Phil?
________________________________________________
P.S. Yves Gallot did a similar thing when he suspended the Generalized Fermat
Prime Search because of the war, but he restarted it more than two months ago.
P.P.S.
quote (from my first sentence):
_________________________________________________
Does ANYONE know how to contact Phil?
_________________________________________________
That's strange. Also, his last mail at primenumbers yahoogroup is dated March 17th. Prior to that, he was very active at that group, writing a couple of messages everyday.
PS: Moo, did you send the e-mail to the address at the current page ("fatpuzzles" at "yahoo.co.uk"), or to the previous e-mail he was using ay primenumbers group and at his web page?
I e-mailed him through the address "fatpuzzles at yahoo.co.uk". In case he mistook my e-mail for spam, I e-mailed him again today. I doubt that i'll receive a response, however, because in my opinion he has been quiet and withdrawn lately.
P.S. Has anyone seen him browsing this forum or posting a message within the last 2 months?
Not this forum, but the other day he did post a couple of messages on the mersenne forum:Quote:
P.S. Has anyone seen him browsing this forum or posting a message within the last 2 months?
http://www.mersenneforum.org/viewtopic.php?t=633
I have downloaded the clients and uploaded them again to my webspace. Strangely, I didn't need a proxy now - some weeks ago, the website was denied for me, too. :confused:
So, just go here to download the clients:
http://mystwalker.de/sb/fatphil/orgmathssierpinski.html
He posted a eMail address on his page:
fatphil@asdf.yesthisispissingmeofftoo.org
I guess you have to remove the last but one "word". ;)
Thanks Mystwalker :thumbs:
Phil responded to the email I sent to him two days ago and I found him quite delightful! Quite different than what I have read. A very opinionated individual who stands up for his beliefs and holds them dear to his heart. I admire him for his forthrightness.
A very pleasent email indeed.
Jammy
Quote:
Originally posted by PCCO
Upon rereading my previous post, I realize that the end of it sounds harsher than I intended and I apologize. I was just upset that it appeared that politics was coming so prevently into an international effort like this. I'm glad to hear that this is not an official SoB position and will continue my support.
PCCO
The Arc (Association For Retarded Children) of the United States, the "nation's leading national organization on mental retardation," according to its Internet site, stressed the importance of preserving the dignity of those with lower intelligence quotients.
OK let me write this down: ARC says that "retarded" is a bad word. Got it.
I think you may have missed the point of the original post. Let me explain it to you. See Jammy, even if you manage to convince us that Louie's post was offensive and immoral...are you ready for this? In that scenario, where you, Jammy Jam Jam, win the argument...
YOU are STILL RETARDED.
--dudliohara