Volpe

They said "they believe, but cannot prove". That is inline with their "Can't know" lines in the past.

Just because the system doesn't allow them to identify sources , is not the same as saying sources are unidentifiable through any means... else the allegations against Bradley Manning would have never occurred.

I would challenge that... Julian Assange has faced a lot more isolation, much larger potential charges... And still lives...

What about custom fonts? They work on windows too...

I agree I'm wrong in the context of history of the civilisation, but correct in terms of "the history of communism, and capitalism".

If you want to include feudalism in there I'm happy to have the discussion on what feudalism is closer to: Communism or Capitalism.

You mean it improved dramatically since the beginning of communism? What's your point?

Seems odd to argue he didn't suffer from depression (despite his fathers words).

Do people who aren't suffering from depression commit suicide? I'd always thought that (attempted) suicide was like the smoking gun for diagnosing depression?

Didn't some canadian kids send a digital camera into space, using a weather balloon?

They didn't seem to have any issues with competitors, exports, imported, radiation hardened CPUs...

My point, while seemingly irrelevant, is: All space companies don't have to be NASA. There a probably a gazillion things people could make markets out of that involve space: I would buy a "kit" that let me send small objects to space, or take photos of stars, or take photos of earth...

My secondary point is: Don't just poo-hoo the space industry, because you can't think of anything in that space. I'm sure the Computer industry was difficult to get into before PCs... but people did it.

> Communism, no matter its form, only leads to slavery and poverty.

I think you are confusing communism with capitalism... The nations that at any point had slavery, were capitalist. Capitalism itself can only exist in "surplus value" scenario, meaning someone/thing is being exploited.

abject poverty, only exists because abject wealth exists. Abject wealth is a result of capitalism.

> Certainly, and importantly, this is totally irrelevant to India.

India is a huge (by population) with a similar start point to china also a huge (by population) country, they have some similarities in their culture, but a large defining difference is their way of government, and there reactions to "The West". It isn't totally irrelevant, and meaningful comparisons can be made, but they must be considered.

> Historically, communist countries have had terrible standards of living; this is extremely well documented

You mean "Historically (Except China)"... That's like excluding the US when talking about Democracy.

> ...but we've got a few more examples of that working out, than we do of communist regimes working out

Actually I think you'll find the poorest nations are mostly democratic (of some form). [1]

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_percentage...

It show's all mine, I use Chrome for everything.

Maybe Firefox downloads aren't included? Maybe it's watching the ~/Downloads folder? Can you confirm either?

The "We should do bad things, else someone else will" defence isn't really valid. It is a false dichotomy, as it assumes an 'either or' circumstance. You can not do bad things, and assist in stopping others from doing so as well.

Just because historically, we've been a bit stupid, doesn't mean we should continue to be.

I think the analogy fits.

So what is the ideology?

Are you perhaps being counter constructive by just attacking me, rather than my argument.

Feels good, but gets us no where.

... Yes it is. If I think these charges probably aren't going to do anything good, and they could kill someone, I might consider not pursuing them (being reasonable)... Easy to say this in hindsight, but it is not unrelated.

I would guess that everyone on this website is privileged as well.

My definition is based on fact, I realise those facts are confronting, but not invalid.

Privileged people who think they aren't just have blinders on.

Or not pursue charges based on politics, and instead focus on the 'good of society'.

Step back a bit.

They charges didn't even need to be pursued. What "good" was ever going to come of it in any possible situation where charges were pursued?

Chomsky does round up a lot of criticisms and put them in one place. I'm not sure what 'ideology' you are referring to, unless you view 'reason' as an 'ideology'. But perhaps I am missing some over arching agenda Chomsky has... ?

They ARE strawmen arguments because they present partially related items as reasons for chomsky being wrong. If Chomsky is cherry picking, then the way to respond is to bring ALL the information to light, and show that Chomsky is misrepresenting it... Not to cherry pick something else...

I don't really understand your "Good vs Ignorance" reference, who are you referring to? and why are they unable to self-examine? which ideology are we talking about?

I think my definition of privilege and yours are at very different levels.

> - Rent a furnished apartment.

You have your own place to sleep at night, with (nice) furniture.

> - Use car sharing services

You have access to cars!?

> - Buy ebooks instead of physical books

> - Use Netflix/Hulu instead of owning a tv

> - Use pdf digital signing software instead of owning a printer/scanner/fax

You have access to high speed internet, and advanced electronic devices, and live in a society that supports them.

Most of the people in the world, don't have these things. It's easy for us to sit in 1st world countries and talk about how we aren't privileged because we didn't go to private school, or we buy cheap ebooks on our iPad... but even these things are out of reach for most of the world... that is what I define as "privilege".

> Your post makes me angry. You are privileged and you have no idea. You're on the goddamn internet. You have the opportunity to make a lot of money if you get your shit together. STFU

Sorry to have upset you like that. I meant the comment as something to reflect on (I myself have thought "How can I be more minimal")...

As a side note:

Australia (in general) doesn't have 'shitty public schools'. If you were to compare its schools on a global scale. You were born into privilege and became more privileged. It is difficult to see it that way (as I'm sure things were never 'easy') but the "bottom" in Australia is much much much, higher than the bottom elsewhere in the world.

I'd just mention, just because you've experienced depression, doesn't give you ultimate insight into how others experience it. There are different kinds, and their interactions with different personalities causes different things.

With that in mind, making broad reaching statements "that suicide is always a selfish act" is just out-right incorrect. You are projecting your own feelings, based on your own experience. No one knows any suicide victim's state of mind, so how can we make statements about that state of mind?

While I agree with your sentiment.

I'd also say we are wrong to condemn young cyber-bullies. There are things in life that create adversity, then there are ways of dealing with adversity. I think conflating the two, makes it difficult to discuss.

That said, clearly the two are related, but it is correlative, not causative.

To add to your qualification:

you are living in the US

AND

you have money.

I don't mean this as a criticism of you, but instead the minimilist movement in general: There is something self-indulgent about middle class, talking about how "cool" it is to throw away stuff, and be minimalistic... It's almost a statement about how privileged you are.

I think if someone is going to criticise Chomsky, they need more than strawman arguments to do so. Of course proper criticism would require proper analysis, and thus probably be a lot longer than a typical Amazon review.

What do you find interesting about this review?

It's also impossible, we have all "done" the same amount in the same amount of time (that's how existence works). We just do different things, some of which society rewards more than others.

> It would be awesome if a magic pill existed

I'm pretty sure that's prozac (and it's relatives). It has it's own set of side effects that you may prefer the depression over, but it essentially is a "magic pill". (Depends of course on the severity of your depression).

Meditation, Cognitive Behavioural Therapy (CBT), Exercise, and Drugs are pretty much the corner stones for treating depression.

Pretty sure Australia has done just that. State owned central ISP (NBN: National Broadband Network).

That's fine if it's a ToDo list app. But if your app integrates with other services applications... it needs those running as well.

The more services/external dependencies you cram into single commands... the more maintenance (of that cramming) is required.

Wait... Are you saying Mao is evil?

Are you summing up all his actions, and written works with one quote from one essay... He wrote when he was young?

And some how it's evil?

> but in 2003 it turned into a global outbreak that infected 8,098

You'd think it was more than that given the media outcry at the time. 8,000 out of ~6.8 billion is a complete nothing... more people probably died in car accidents in the same time period.

So if an italian has a better solution, then DARPA have failed on your point 1. because he can use that against americans (i.e block their spectrum), and DARPA won't know about it.

Citation on your point 2. Where does it say anywhere that Government can only spend it's money on employing Americans?