Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:Not all objections have just causes (Score 1) 446

This validates all extremism (B) by claiming that it must have had a valid complaint (A).

Not that it must but that it does. That doesn't validate anything, it addresses reality rather than ignoring it.

What violent extremist movement exists today that does not have a public, democratic, social, economic or otherwise legitimate way of addressing its concerns?

Given al Qaeda's foundation in wahabism, centered in the Arabian peninsula and expanding into south-central Asia and northern Africa, the dearth of democratic institutions is pretty relevant. For that matter, the fact that no targets of US foreign policy have any input into the policy underscores that. This is still not to justify the extremism, but rather to point out that other forms of input are lacking, broken, or compromised.

That said, I'll reiterate that the concerns are worth addressing on their own merits and that it's a positive side-effect that it would undermine the support climate for the violent extremist reactions.

Comment Re:Encourage good behavior (Score 1) 446

The point is that extremism is not a necessary consequence of their complaint. There are other ways.

It's not a necessary consequence, but the complaint is a necessary precursor! Violent extremism, as a phenomenon, requires a sea in which to swim.

I would rather encourage good behavior than give credence to bad behavior, because by acknowledging legitimacy to bad behavior, you encourage more of it.

It's not giving credence to bad behavior. It's addressing real problems that already need to be addressed. As a positive side-effect, it provides much less of a foundation for those violent extremists to rally people.

Comment Re:We don't force them to become extremists. (Score 1) 446

1. Not everyone becomes an extremist, because there are other ways of expressing discontent or changing policy.

But the violent extremists are the problem in the context of the discussion, and the context of your comment which I responded to. All of your options were for "the terrorists", not for people taking other directions with their discontent. And those people, I think we'd agree, are not who we want to stifle.

2. You assume they have no choice in the matter, and that our acts manipulate them directly.

How do you figure? I assume they exist, and that we want to solve the problem rather than not.

This seems to be the type of permissiveness that rewards bad behavior and ignores good. If you're worried about bad things happening in politics, find the people who are doing good and get them into power.

Insofar as I agree that that kind of meddling is even appropriate, it's worth noting that those people who represent our interests commonly complain that the conditions that inspire people to become and support violent extremists are a serious detriment to their efforts.

By encouraging us to see the choice to become an extremist as normal, you are encouraging the devolution of politics into more conflict and terrorism.

I'm encouraging no such thing. I'm pointing out that people don't become violent for no reason, and that it's worth addressing those reasons to undermine the choice to become violent. Let's never mind that only one option on your list is not violent and extreme and you dismiss it out of hand.

Comment Re:Need to make a comparison, not absolute judgmen (Score 5, Insightful) 446

4. Determine the conditions that inspire people to become—or, more importantly, support—violent extremists who threaten us and our values, and mitigate or eliminate those conditions.

Most people have the good sense to support that option, especially in recognizing that those conditions themselves fundamentally threaten our values as well, if it's presented as an option. It's so far from the dominant discourse that we end up facing the false choice you've presented.

Comment Re:Seriously? (Score 1) 377

Technology pricing usually declines over the top of the curve of that technology's widespread usefulness, it's not unique to Apple's supply chain. Apple is usually pretty aggressive about using high-end components in its high-end models, then aggressive about pushing them downmarket in a generation or two (displays are a great example here; see the iPod touch gaining the same screen as the iPhone). They can only do this by taking advantage of declining cost as economies of scale improve and cutting edge features progress. The retail price rarely declines, but neither do margins increase substantially; instead, they regularly cycle through new/improved parts to justify the same prices and margins. And again, it's not so unique, it's fairly common for consumer products. The only reason it's not as common in the computer industry is that the OEM model favors low-margin-high-volume strategies over other kinds of differentiation.

Comment Re:Bull (Score 1) 349

this meme that the rich just want to steal from the poor only works on the stupid

"Poor" and "rich" are not finite states. The wealth divide has been increasing at a pretty incredible clip. That doesn't happen spontaneously, it's a consequence of policy... set by the rich and powerful.

Comment Re:Fucking Retarded (Score 1) 418

Let me paraphrase, as an analogy, what you've given me.

"The Bible explains everything you need to know about sexual morality."

What does it explain? Can you give me a reason to consider the Bible a sexual morality reference? There's oodles of books out there competing for my attention. What is the content I'm supposed to be motivated to go look at? Do you have an outline or even a few quotes?

Incidentally, I've continued to reply because I'm genuinely interested in the subject. Why are you so determined not to sell me on this, and so condescendingly at that? I've given you many opportunities.

Comment Re:Fucking Retarded (Score 1) 418

Why would I buy a book without any substantive comment on what I might expect to find in it? Is it really so involved that you can't provide a short synopsis that would help me understand your point? I think I'm being pretty generous by inviting you twice now to state what you want me to take away from your comment.

Slashdot Top Deals

Two percent of zero is almost nothing.