Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:Radicalization (Score 1) 868

by santax (#47561159) Attached to: Gaza's Only Power Plant Knocked Offline
Actually, we haven't seen the slightest proof of Hamas doing that. We do however know that Israel does precisely that. Not only do they force their teenagers to take up arms in the army and frontlines, they also force them to kill babies. But sometimes they just do it for real like here: And there is lot more of those videos where there is zero evidence of Hamas doing this, except from the word of professional liar (ak, spokesperson) for the IDF. Keep thinking critical people. Hamas might do this, but there is zero proof. Israel does do it and there is proof enough. Most of their IDF are teens who are forced to take service. Talk about human shields.

Comment: Army funded (Score 1) 130

by santax (#47346651) Attached to: In 2012, Facebook Altered Content To Tweak Readers' Emotions
The research is (partly at least) army funded. That does explain why every academic ethic rule is ignored. Cornell has co-authored this research, so they can know. Check the last couples of lines to see for yourself. That part makes this even more disturbing. The media should include this 'small' detail.

Comment: Way to long to read. (Score 4, Insightful) 222

by santax (#47182213) Attached to: The Sci-Fi Myth of Killer Machines
I tried, honestly, but it's all bullshit. Assumptions. Without caring for reality. We now have robots that can decide to kill. Do we really want those? See what happened when you had drones shoot missiles at people? A lot of weddings got bombed. That is what happens when you take emotion out by relinking b&w video to an 'operator ' that pulls the trigger. Now imagine to take emotion out completely, because that is the direction we are heading. Especially, but not alone, the US. And the all other nations will have to follow. And as of now these systems exist and are being used in the field, as tests. Robots that decide who gets shot. Great fucking idea. Not.

Comment: Re:Linux soon? (Score 1) 202

by santax (#47165769) Attached to: Netflix Ditches Silverlight For HTML5 On Macs
It's the combination of that and the simple fact that when I have allready paid you, I am not going to pirate it. I just bought the right to see it. I gave you money for it, while I could have just downloaded it instead. The combination of first letting me pay, do extra stuff I wouldn't need to do for a torrent etc etc. They got me to pay for a lesser experience. The reason I am still paying is because I find the price very reasonable for what they offer (I do use hola though to also access US-version and UK-version). So why bother with it. I am already a paying customer. Yet netflix really does use your browsers useragent to determine if you can get the stream. I mean, that is not really a security, it's easily spoofed. All in all, these decisions don't compute for me.

Comment: Re:Linux soon? (Score 1) 202

by santax (#47165193) Attached to: Netflix Ditches Silverlight For HTML5 On Macs
The install isn't that interesting, it's what it does that is interesting and that part will not that differ on ubuntu. Wether you apt-get on debian based systems or use pacman or yaourt on arch based systems. It's the fact that I am technical able to simply watch netflix in html5, but they won't let us. So now we need multilib support for netflix. I agree, it works, but it still is a hack and a pretty dirty one. (no offence to the coders of pipelight btw, they did an excellent job nonetheless.)

"And do you think (fop that I am) that I could be the Scarlet Pumpernickel?" -- Looney Tunes, The Scarlet Pumpernickel (1950, Chuck Jones)