PDA

View Full Version : Rumor Wrapup - New iBooks?


arn
Apr 29, 2002, 10:55 PM
Once new releases come, we can backtrack to find out where the best information came from... in this case PowerPage (http://www.powerpage.org) provided some of the most accurate details regarding the upcoming TiBook updates...

However... one tipster named Hiro had reported (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2002/04/20020417212858.shtml) to Macrumors.com on the new iMac and Powerbook back on April 15th.

Here is the entirety of his submission from that time:

...new products announced soon will be iBooks with speed bumps of roughly 100Mhz; new Powerbooks with a new graphics subsystem tthat supports ADC out; and finally a new iMac with a G4 processor and 17" CRT that should retail for around $1000.

2 of 3 correct... which means we should probably expect minor iBook bumps in the near future.

TyleRomeo
Apr 29, 2002, 11:39 PM
id love to see faster iBooks coming out in before July so that MWNY can be just focused on kick ass G4s

Xapplimatic
Apr 30, 2002, 02:01 AM
I'm guessing that Apple held off on implementing the iBook bump because they are closer to a final plan for iBook on bluetooth implementation and will release them the second it's read -OR- they decided that they would go ahead and move iBooks up to low-end G4s right at the next PowerBook revision (which by Apple patterns would put PowerBooks up to 933 or 1000 MHz by August unless there is a radical departure like a sudden release of a G5 low power chip--not likely).

Beej
Apr 30, 2002, 04:47 AM
Well if the iBook is rev'ed at MWNY (which seems likely) and the PowerMac is rev'ed at MWNY (which everyone is expecting) that would mean Apple has revapmed it's whole Mac line in the space of a couple of months.

Not a bad effort! I hope we will see more frequent updates... it will do Apple the world of good.

Geert
Apr 30, 2002, 06:32 AM
Well if the iBook is rev'ed at MWNY (which seems likely) and the PowerMac is rev'ed at MWNY (which everyone is expecting) that would mean Apple has revapmed it's whole Mac line in the space of a couple of months.

Not a bad effort! I hope we will see more frequent updates... it will do Apple the world of good.

Great indeed!!!
That is what Steve promised us some time ago (2001), great new products, ...

And it's not over yet, I guess we'll be seeing some great new Pro line in the the short term future.

teabgs
Apr 30, 2002, 07:21 AM
Originally posted by Geert

And it's not over yet, I guess we'll be seeing some great new Pro line in the the short term future.

Lets hope so! I've been holding out since MWSF02 for a new tower, cause that dual 1GHZ is definately (IMO)a teaser. Apple NEEDS the very new and great pro line or all this great stuff that has happened in 2002 will start to fizzle out. I sure hope Motorola doesnt screw up and they realease something great and ship immediatley.

Spock
Apr 30, 2002, 08:09 AM
Hey I said Apple would start making Airport standard and everybody told me that was very unlikley. The new TiBook has Airport Cards installed in the Middle and high end line.

Rocketman
Apr 30, 2002, 08:22 AM
Originally posted by arn
Once new releases come, we can backtrack to find out where the best information came from... in this case PowerPage (http://www.powerpage.org) provided some of the most accurate details regarding the upcoming TiBook updates...

However... one tipster named Hiro had reported (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2002/04/20020417212858.shtml) to Macrumors.com on the new iMac and Powerbook back on April 15th.

Here is the entirety of his submission from that time:

...new products announced soon will be iBooks with speed bumps of roughly 100Mhz; new Powerbooks with a new graphics subsystem tthat supports ADC out; and finally a new iMac with a G4 processor and 17" CRT that should retail for around $1000.

2 of 3 correct... which means we should probably expect minor iBook bumps in the near future.

I find this type of post to be among the most valuble on this site. Verification of trusted sources that can be relied upon in the future to give better than average intelligence. Kudos.

The eMac is essentially the mac+ of Y2K. Sweet indeed.

As a Ti-400 owner I can say buyers who get past the >3000 price of the new Ti's will have a great primary computer.

Rocketman

Mr. Anderson
Apr 30, 2002, 08:26 AM
Originally posted by arn

However... one tipster named Hiro had reported (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2002/04/20020417212858.shtml) to Macrumors.com on the new iMac and Powerbook back on April 15th.

2 of 3 correct... which means we should probably expect minor iBook bumps in the near future.

I look forward to seeing if this becomes 3 out of 3 soon. Its really good to know that not everyone is blowing smoke here on MacRumors.

Now if we just had a good G5 rumor.....

ThomasB
Apr 30, 2002, 08:51 AM
What if apple soon releases an eBook?

ibjoshua
Apr 30, 2002, 09:16 AM
Originally posted by ThomasB
What if apple soon releases an eBook?

i think the ibook fits that bill already
they're cheaper than the new imacs


hey, looks like i just made 'member'

mcrain
Apr 30, 2002, 09:23 AM
You know, while boxing up dishes I ran across a Motorola press release from earlier this year in which they predicted very good things for the second half of 2002. The analysts thought the predictions of a profitable 2nd half couldn't be correct, but if Steve is telling us that good things are coming, MWNY sounds like it could be big, and Moto is predicting a profitable second half (not just overall, but specifically in its semiconductor business), then maybe something bigger than a faster G4 is imminent. Maybe. Hopefully.

iH8Quark
Apr 30, 2002, 10:56 AM
Originally posted by mcrain
You know, while boxing up dishes I ran across a Motorola press release from earlier this year in which they predicted very good things for the second half of 2002...Moto is predicting a profitable second half (not just overall, but specifically in its semiconductor business)

Link????

I'm with dukestreet. SHOW ME THE G5! :D ;) :(

mcrain
Apr 30, 2002, 11:04 AM
Originally posted by iH8Quark


Link????

I'm with dukestreet. SHOW ME THE G5! :D ;) :(

I'll see what I can find, but like I said, the original is all crumpled up and around a dish right now.

cryptochrome
Apr 30, 2002, 11:35 AM
The trouble with the eBook is that it's (relatively) expensive and non-mobile. The G4 power is way more than schools need most of the time. I forsee it being as a higher end computer lab computer for doing the fancy and computationally-intensive multimedia stuff like digital photography, video, and layout. This could be complemented by a more day-to-day useful eBook which is:

*very portable - thin and light, but with reasonable screen space and very good screen quality (because it will be used a lot).
*A touchscreen, so that it requires no keyboard, although one can be wirelessly networked via bluetooth.
*very cheap - no more than $700, and sold in bulk
*very durable with long battery life
*sufficiently powerful to handle essential productivity apps, eTextbooks (as PDFs), basic image editing and drawing, and digital video playback. 10gb of local storage on a mini-drive should be sufficient.
*wirelessly networked, very secure. Hacking should be impossible, and theft should be made undesirable and trackable if possible. Vandalism must be prevented somehow. Student use is limited, er guided.
*Directly controlable by the teacher via a special education edition of Desktop Manager. Can be centrally commandeered to display particular materials, and for giving tests (which can be instantly graded, recorded, and analyzed and remotely observed).
*Handles many basic classroom tasks automatically. Datebook actively reminds students of assignments (and other stuff from the syllabus), which they complete on the eBook, which also records how and when they work, which allows teachers to observe and teach good study habits and avoid plagarism. Students/Parents have access to their (extensive) records. Higher-ups (principals and even district supervisors and above) also have access to full records and analysis, and can remotely observe use.
*Is built with a digital library of resources available on-disk or over the wireless network, including dictionaries, encyclopedias, eTextbooks, self-guided study materials, and so forth. Includes productivity apps like calculators and datebooks. Built in spelling, pronunciation, grammar, and typing (and maybe penmanship?) programs analyze ability and actively instruct as necessary.

Sort of an uber-PDA with teacher control. Naturally, a lot of the software would need to be developed and a lot of digital library resources would have to be integrated. But for a truly useful educational computer, this is essential. Otherwise it's just an expensive toy.

ftaok
Apr 30, 2002, 11:45 AM
Originally posted by cryptochrome
The trouble with the eBook is that it's (relatively) expensive and non-mobile. The G4 power is way more than schools need most of the time. I forsee it being as a higher end computer lab computer for doing the fancy and computationally-intensive multimedia stuff like digital photography, video, and layout. This could be complemented by a more day-to-day useful eBook which is:

*very portable - thin and light, but with reasonable screen space and very good screen quality (because it will be used a lot).
*A touchscreen, so that it requires no keyboard, although one can be wirelessly networked via bluetooth.
*very cheap - no more than $700, and sold in bulk
*very durable with long battery life
*sufficiently powerful to handle essential productivity apps, eTextbooks (as PDFs), basic image editing and drawing, and digital video playback. 10gb of local storage on a mini-drive should be sufficient.
*wirelessly networked, very secure. Hacking should be impossible, and theft should be made undesirable and trackable if possible. Vandalism must be prevented somehow. Student use is limited, er guided.
*Directly controlable by the teacher via a special education edition of Desktop Manager. Can be centrally commandeered to display particular materials, and for giving tests (which can be instantly graded, recorded, and analyzed and remotely observed).
*Handles many basic classroom tasks automatically. Datebook actively reminds students of assignments (and other stuff from the syllabus), which they complete on the eBook, which also records how and when they work, which allows teachers to observe and teach good study habits and avoid plagarism. Students/Parents have access to their (extensive) records. Higher-ups (principals and even district supervisors and above) also have access to full records and analysis, and can remotely observe use.
*Is built with a digital library of resources available on-disk or over the wireless network, including dictionaries, encyclopedias, eTextbooks, self-guided study materials, and so forth. Includes productivity apps like calculators and datebooks. Built in spelling, pronunciation, grammar, and typing (and maybe penmanship?) programs analyze ability and actively instruct as necessary.

Sort of an uber-PDA with teacher control. Naturally, a lot of the software would need to be developed and a lot of digital library resources would have to be integrated. But for a truly useful educational computer, this is essential. Otherwise it's just an expensive toy. Sounds a little too BIG BROTHERish for my tastes. Also sounds extremely expensive, no where near the $700 price target. At least not right now. Maybe in 2 years or so.

SPG
Apr 30, 2002, 11:49 AM
It's really nice to see that some of the info coming in is from people who know, not just "I like Macs and this is what I want and so Apple will definitely make this..."
Any word on the G5? 'cause I really want one and so Apple should definitely make one. quick. and fast.

Thanks Hiro, and Arn. Keep it up and you'll have to call this MacInfo.com.

cryptochrome
Apr 30, 2002, 12:34 PM
Originally posted by ftaok
Sounds a little too BIG BROTHERish for my tastes. Also sounds extremely expensive, no where near the $700 price target. At least not right now. Maybe in 2 years or so.

This isn't a personal computer, it's an educational device. It's no more Big Brother-ish than being legally obliged to go somplace every day where you do what you're told and the people in charge monitor your every move and actively trying to mold the way you think. In other words, it would be Big Brotherish if it weren't kids, but this is an essential part of learning and earning those rights and responsibilities of adults.

The key to it being cheap (and that is essential) is twofold - strip it down to the bare (and consistent) essentials, and manufacture in bulk. The eBook I'm suggesting would be little more than a touchscreen, a battery, a 10gb hard drive, a low-end all-in-one processor and graphics unit (and 3D is unnecessary), a firewire/power port, a usb port (maybe), a headphone jack, and an airport/bluetooth subsystem with antenna. The most expensive parts would be the touchscreen (which will be used a lot and has to be easy to look at for long periods), battery, and drive, and those could be brought down in price (particularly with new technology). A computer useless for anything but school-mediated education to deter theft, in a polycarbonate case designed to be water-resistant, marking-resistant, and not easily opened.

The software would be OS X w/o classic, with an optimized/stripped down Quartz subsystem, and involving a replacement for the Finder with a more tailored interface (the desktop would be too screen hungry and difficult to work with - automatic workspace organization would be good) and well-integrated apps. It should also be able to be installed on any superior computer, namely iBooks, eMacs, and iMacs. Apple would need to negotiate to purchase the rights to and port the digital library resources.

Like game consoles, the specs may be far less than what you could do, but very consistent and doing everything you need, allowing bulk manufacture for a relatively low price. And aside from perhaps quartz (the current incarnation) and mpeg4 (could be standardized with hardware decoders), these devices would require less power than a console. Ideally, with the amount of money saved on paper, books, and paperwork they should cut down on operational expenses, and free educators to do more important things. They should be meant to last and produced for many years, with warranty, upgrade, and repair programs to back it up. Later models of the device should be built with being cheaper and more useful rather than more powerful, and backwards compatibility should be assured.

robotrenegade
Apr 30, 2002, 01:30 PM
They seem cool. But, I rather wait for a new tower. I also think later they will take the place of the old imac. I'm wondering if they are going to make istereo for the ipod. It would be a stereo that you just drop the ipob into. Hiro keep up with great updates.

Xapplimatic
Apr 30, 2002, 02:04 PM
I can't help but remember a blurb about IBM PPC chips and an Alti-Vec contender called SIMD they are developing. Does anyone remember this or know anything about it?

peteMG
Apr 30, 2002, 02:09 PM
Originally posted by mcrain
You know, while boxing up dishes I ran across a Motorola press release from earlier this year in which they predicted very good things for the second half of 2002.
You find Motorola press releases in your kitchen shelves? Sounds like their marketing department needs some training ;)

mcrain
Apr 30, 2002, 03:24 PM
Originally posted by peteMG

You find Motorola press releases in your kitchen shelves? Sounds like their marketing department needs some training ;)

No, no, no... I was boxing dishes to move, and to protect them, I wrap them in newspapers. I had a pile of Wall Street Journals, and one of the sheets had an article on Motorola's optimistic profit forecasts for the second half of 2002 in its semi-conductor business. I of course can't find the original article (it's in a box), and I can't find a link to it.

Oh well, c'est la vie.

RecTechMin
Apr 30, 2002, 03:45 PM
cryptochrome,
you're insane. kid's have rights too. way too often overlooked, might i add. parents have been ****ing over the younger generation since the dawn of time -- it's no wonder everybody's so screwed up. what you're saying is kid's don't have the right to think for themselves, the right to privacy, the right to choose. hell, if your Big Brother Mentality was actually enstated my guess is 1) these kid's would grow up to be complete morons 2) there would be a lot more Columbine-like attacks 3) it would create a world i would want no part of. after reading your post, it made me want to vomit. peace!

gotohamish
Apr 30, 2002, 03:48 PM
hey, remember the "no new cpus" statement a while back?

well, apple release new products like the 10GB iPod and the eMac, using EXISTING tech, whilst (hopefully) catching it's breath with Motorola, allowing a MWNY02 release of 1 - 1.4 Ghtz Towers, shipping immediately.

now, as they ship immediately, the supplies are coming in for the late/autumn/early winter collection of towers, with a ready suppy of 1.4 - 1.8 Ghtz whoppers.

Then the G5, but as we know, that's another story!!!

H

hvfsl
Apr 30, 2002, 04:03 PM
You Americans already live in a big brother state and you are all stupid. So monitoring on eBooks will not make any difference

eric_n_dfw
Apr 30, 2002, 05:20 PM
Originally posted by Xapplimatic
I can't help but remember a blurb about IBM PPC chips and an Alti-Vec contender called SIMD they are developing. Does anyone remember this or know anything about it?

You do know than SIMD just stands for "Single Instruction / Multiple Data" stream. That is what AltiVec, MMX and 3DNow are; different implementations of vector processors. (They take multiple peices of data and apply a single instruction to all of the peices in one clock cycle)

buffsldr
Apr 30, 2002, 11:06 PM
Originally posted by Spock
Hey I said Apple would start making Airport standard and everybody told me that was very unlikley. The new TiBook has Airport Cards installed in the Middle and high end line.


Nice job, Spock. You sure proved the naysayers wrong. Way to go.

(Nobody tell Spock Apple was offering the Airport Card in the middle and high end line before 4/29)

buffsldr
Apr 30, 2002, 11:10 PM
Originally posted by peteMG

You find Motorola press releases in your kitchen shelves? Sounds like their marketing department needs some training ;)

Pete.... this just may be the single funniest thing I have read in weeks. Verrrry nice.

cryptochrome
May 1, 2002, 10:30 AM
Originally posted by RecTechMin
cryptochrome,
you're insane. kid's have rights too. way too often overlooked, might i add. parents have been ****ing over the younger generation since the dawn of time -- it's no wonder everybody's so screwed up. what you're saying is kid's don't have the right to think for themselves, the right to privacy, the right to choose. hell, if your Big Brother Mentality was actually enstated my guess is 1) these kid's would grow up to be complete morons 2) there would be a lot more Columbine-like attacks 3) it would create a world i would want no part of. after reading your post, it made me want to vomit. peace!

Kids don't have as many rights as adults do, and never have in any culture (except maybe since the 60s), because people are born utterly ignorant and selfish. There's nothing wrong with that - if you're a baby. But expecting them to grow up to be good, well-educated people without plenty of guidance, help, and yes, control, is just plain stupid. All you get are ignorant, selfish people. Frequently spoiled too, since people who subscribe to that theory often think the way to raise a child is by giving them stuff. That's how we ended up with those muderous gamer brats in Columbine. Excuse me for pointing out the excruciatingly obvious, however unpleasant that truth may be to teenagers and other self-absorbed irresponsible people.

Giving schoolkids an expensive full-fledged computer like an iBook (which I doubt even the school has any solid plans for besides word processing and maybe a little presentation, and has little educational software bundled) will not make better students - it's just an invitation to waste taxpayer money on a machine for kids to play games, download porn, and have shallow conversations in chat rooms. Which you'll find is already a problem in Henrico County, Virginia. If the parents want to try that route on their own nickel and time, fine, but the schools shouldn't be. They should be getting devices that aid education alone and allow them to go above and beyond conventional teaching methods, which is what I was trying to suggest. Hopefully now that the internet hype bubble has burst they'll come to their senses.

jelloshotsrule
May 1, 2002, 11:59 AM
Originally posted by hvfsl
You Americans already live in a big brother state and you are all stupid. So monitoring on eBooks will not make any difference

that was tough.

not sure where you're from but the UK has a lot of big brother type surveillance cameras last i checked... share with us where you're from our superior friend

mcrain
May 1, 2002, 01:59 PM
Originally posted by cryptochrome
They should be getting devices that aid education alone and allow them to go above and beyond conventional teaching methods, which is what I was trying to suggest.

Removed... (Wow, did I say that?)

SPG
May 1, 2002, 02:45 PM
re: educational tablet idea. Single purpose devices work well for Fedex and UPS drivers to track packages, but I prefer to believe that education should be a more open and investigative process...not just brain programming.
Recite the multiplication tables!
Repeat the rules of grammar!
Focus on the blackboard until the bell rings!

NWBadger
May 1, 2002, 03:51 PM
Originally posted by mcrain
You know, while boxing up dishes I ran across a Motorola press release from earlier this year in which they predicted very good things for the second half of 2002. The analysts thought the predictions of a profitable 2nd half couldn't be correct, but if Steve is telling us that good things are coming, MWNY sounds like it could be big, and Moto is predicting a profitable second half (not just overall, but specifically in its semiconductor business), then maybe something bigger than a faster G4 is imminent. Maybe. Hopefully.

Hope you're right, McRain. But remember: Moto's semiconductor biz is focused primarily on chips for things other than Macs. So the fact that they expect an upturn in business might just reflect optimism about, for instance, the embedded devices chip market, or Moto's telecommunications chip market.

voicegy
May 1, 2002, 04:08 PM
Originally posted by cryptochrome

Giving schoolkids an expensive full-fledged computer like an iBook (which I doubt even the school has any solid plans for besides word processing and maybe a little presentation, and has little educational software bundled) will not make better students - it's just an invitation to waste taxpayer money on a machine for kids to play games, download porn, and have shallow conversations in chat rooms. Which you'll find is already a problem in Henrico County, Virginia. If the parents want to try that route on their own nickel and time, fine, but the schools shouldn't be. They should be getting devices that aid education alone and allow them to go above and beyond conventional teaching methods, which is what I was trying to suggest. Hopefully now that the internet hype bubble has burst they'll come to their senses.

As you all know, I'm an educational technologist and a great backer of Apple and technology in the classroom. Cryptochrome's statement is the verbalization of, because of my position, what I've had to be too politically correct to say out loud. I agree, Crypto...and in a few years, we may just see such devices.

mcrain
May 1, 2002, 04:41 PM
Originally posted by NWBadger


Hope you're right, McRain. But remember: Moto's semiconductor biz is focused primarily on chips for things other than Macs. So the fact that they expect an upturn in business might just reflect optimism about, for instance, the embedded devices chip market, or Moto's telecommunications chip market.

Try MCrain if you're going to capatilize. I just go with mcrain. McRain sounds like something McDonalds would sell out in Seattle.

I have heard some grumblings on here about a potential IBM chip that wouldn't need Altivec, but barring that, I think we have to really hope Moto has been burning some latenight oil.

RecTechMin
May 1, 2002, 05:17 PM
i do not believe in a school system that controls the minds of children. it will create people that are all the same -- mindless, thoughtless idiots. the other problem is WHAT do you teach them and who gets to choose? you? i hope not. you're talking about 1984, about nazi germany. i never said the public schools should get every kid ibooks. though if they did, their money would be better spent than on theology programs or whatever the conservatives are trying to push these days. you're saying that my ideology (which believes that children are human beings with rights to freedom of thought and speech and privacy) would create selfish people? what world do you live in? everybody's already selfish! maybe if people listened to their children, there wouldn't be as many ****ed up relationships, disfunctional families, etc.
and on a side note, to the dude who said something about america being 1984's big brother -- i don't think so. more like a brave new world.

Rower_CPU
May 1, 2002, 06:17 PM
Originally posted by voicegy
As you all know, I'm an educational technologist and a great backer of Apple and technology in the classroom. Cryptochrome's statement is the verbalization of, because of my position, what I've had to be too politically correct to say out loud. I agree, Crypto...and in a few years, we may just see such devices.

I didn't know you were an EdTecher. I'm in the grad program at SDSU. :D

So what's your story? Where did you go to school, and what are you doing now?

voicegy
May 1, 2002, 07:22 PM
Originally posted by Rower_CPU


I didn't know you were an EdTecher. I'm in the grad program at SDSU. :D

So what's your story? Where did you go to school, and what are you doing now?

I think there was a thread not too long ago where all of us posted where we were from, and I was surprised to see, what, 3 or 4 of us in San Diego!

OK, heck with it. I'm a Network Systems/Media Support Tech with the Educational Technology dept. of San Diego City Schools.

For any more information, you'll have to e-mail me...no one wants to hear boring, off-topic personal story tripe on a public thread.;)

Say "hi" to Bernie Dodge for us...love his WebQuests. :p

buffsldr
May 1, 2002, 10:58 PM
Originally posted by hvfsl
You Americans already live in a big brother state and you are all stupid. So monitoring on eBooks will not make any difference

Yessssss! Finally. Someone else realizes what is going on in this country. Right on hvfsl. Tell these americans what is going on. I am so concerned about Big Brother.

hvfsl, did they put a microchip in your brain too? I hear them talking every day. "Buy more Macs, Buy more Macs...." and on and on it goes.

Thanks, hvsfl, it feels good to know I am not alone.

groovebuster
May 2, 2002, 04:05 AM
i do not believe in a school system that controls the minds of children. it will create people that are all the same -- mindless, thoughtless idiots.

Like always you have to find the middle-way. A society can only work, if the individuals accept their own borders and the rights of other individuals, plus a sense for issues concerning the country and the world as a whole. So the question is not how to mind-control the kids, it is how we teach them to become more succesful to deal with the problems of a modern society/world than we do...

the other problem is WHAT do you teach them and who gets to choose? you? i hope not. you're talking about 1984, about nazi germany.

What does nazi Germany has to do with it? Since I am german myself it is always interesting how "important" nazi Germany seems to be for americans. Is it really? My wife is canadian and I know what kids are teached about nazi Germany in North America and it is more than biased. It wasn't just the fault of the Germans, that a dictator like Hitler was able to get to power in Germany. It was also the fault of the neighboors and the USA. Yes, the USA... but like always the real background of historical events is interpreted in a b/w manner so that only the other side is bad. Unfortunately in history classes they stop talking about Germany with the end of WWII. So kids have that picture of bad german guys in their heads, still praising Hitler as their leader.
The US have so many black spots in their own history, but to teach kids about those would mean to question some things about your own country. Germans learned their lesson, and it is annoying to be called a Nazi by some moron teenagers in North America, when they can't even show you Germany on a world map. Not to mention the fact, that racism and related issues are (still) a lot bigger subject in the US.

So the only goal can be to teach kids tolerance, to be open minded towards other nations and their history and to fight for the human rights. But that doesn't work when the message is always "our country is the best anyway, we can't tell you why, but it just is!" ... and when the problems in the own country are just "ignored".

i never said the public schools should get every kid ibooks. though if they did, their money would be better spent than on theology programs or whatever the conservatives are trying to push these days. you're saying that my ideology (which believes that children are human beings with rights to freedom of thought and speech and privacy) would create selfish people? what world do you live in? everybody's already selfish! maybe if people listened to their children, there wouldn't be as many ****ed up relationships, disfunctional families, etc.

Maybe you should define freedom of thought and speech. Though I totally agree on the privacy part. But your view of the innocent children that should be a role model for adults... I couldn't disagree more. It is right that children often copy the adults with their behaviour, but kids are both... innocent and extremely violent towards other children in some cases. Remember the days in school and how outsiders were treated? This is not something they copy from the adults, since they normally don't have any relation to the complex social environment adults are living in, it is coming from themselves, having that stone-age program running in their brains to be accepted member in a group and to find their place in the group hierarchy. And at that point it is the responsibility of the parents and the school to teach them tolerance towards minorities and the weak Is that mind-control? The only thing the parents/society do is to sometimes give the target (e.g. racistic comments about other nationalities or exaggerated nationalism), what is bad enough already.

My personal opinion is, that before a lot of money is spent for expensive computer technology (no matter in which country) the kids should be teached more tolerance and resepct. Of course not easy in a capitalistic system that is based on maximized profit by screwing other people, but capitalism as we know it won't work for long anyway anymore.

Children of course should have the freedom of thought and speech, as long as it is not violating the rights of other people. If my daughter would call me an a**-hole just because she feels like it, I don't think it would be mind-control to make her understand that this is not an appropriate way to talk to her dad (or to any other person). Same thing for decisions she is making. Children younger than 15 are unable to think abstract and to properly estimate the consequences of their doing, not to mention how easily their are influenced. And that is the reason why adults have "more rights" than them. Not to rule them, but to prevent them from wrong decisions.

and on a side note, to the dude who said something about america being 1984's big brother -- i don't think so. more like a brave new world.

I think the comparison to 1984 isn't that far fetched...

Peace.

groovebuster

eric_n_dfw
May 2, 2002, 07:23 AM
I agreed with most everything groovbuster had to say, but have to comment on this:
Originally posted by groovebuster
My personal opinion is, that before a lot of money is spent for expensive computer technology (no matter in which country) the kids should be teached more tolerance and resepct. Of course not easy in a capitalistic system that is based on maximized profit by screwing other people, but capitalism as we know it won't work for long anyway anymore.

I would not presume to know your background or how much you know about America, but your stereotypical, leftist comment about capitalism is as wrong as the idiots here who think all Germans are racist Naziís.
The capitalistic system, as practiced by law-abiding people, is not about screwing other people at all. Profits are only attainable by providing the marketplace with products and services at prices that marketplace will support. If you can do that and come out ahead of what it cost you to make/provide that product or service, you profit. If you can't, you either stop selling it or find a better way to make it.
If your screw over your customer or employee, they will leave - probably telling others about it - and you will loose. If what you did was illegal, you will be sued. (Now if you want to talk about our courts, I'm with you - they can really screw things up sometimes, but, more often than not, they work)
You're statement about capitalism not working for much longer is rather silly too. Why? What will be replacing it, communism? We all see how well that worked in the USSR and is working in China.
As long as our government sticks to enforcing the laws on the books and stops trying to meddle with law-abiding companies, capitalism will be strong and kicking here for quite a long time. (Notice, I said law-abiding, when companies are found to have done illegal things, like MSFT, the courts SHOULD bring the hammer down.)

As a side note, in case you are a socialist, I heard a quote a while back that wraps it all up, "Socialistic programs, while attractive, are by their very nature, mandatory. Those who chose not to participate must be coerced. That's why they build walls around socialist countries to keep people in to enjoy the benefits." An example was the Clinton health care plan that actually said if youíre child was dieing and you didnít want to take them to the government specified health care facility. If you took them to a doctor and they, outside of the system, provided medical services; both of you would have broken the law and could be fined thousands of dollars. Thatís coercion and has no place in a free market.

groovebuster
May 2, 2002, 08:51 AM
I agreed with most everything groovbuster had to say, but have to comment on this:

I would not presume to know your background or how much you know about America, but your stereotypical, leftist comment about capitalism is as wrong as the idiots here who think all Germans are racist Naziís.

Interesting how you are firing back, based on a comment I made that didn't use any stereotypes at all. Just to critizise the capitalism makes me a leftist idiot?? Thank you very much! Then you are just ignorant! As I told before I have a canadian wife and I am regularly in North America because her family lives there... Why you question my competence to have an opinion about it anyway? Neither the US are the only capitalistic country in the world, nor Germany is socialstic... So it seems that I know a lot more about your country than you do about mine... ;) But there seems to be a tendency (that is my personal experience) that north americans think they are superior and have to explain to the dumb people from the rest of the world how things work.
Not all of them of course, but quite a lot still.

Even you maybe didn't mean it like that, it sounded like: "I would not presume if you are stupid or not, even though I think you are ..." Just to start your reply like that wasn't very respectful. But somehow I doubt that you'll get the point.

The capitalistic system, as practiced by law-abiding people, is not about screwing other people at all.

It's not? I am living in a capitalistic country myself (as you probably know... at least I hope you do) and you don't need to explain the mechanisms of capitalism to me. And I am also having a good life, since I am working in the IT industry, but that doesn't mean I totally ignore that our life-style in the western world is only possible on the back of dozens of poor countries who provide us with the resources we need... You know, there is a world outside of the western world.

Profits are only attainable by providing the marketplace with products and services at prices that marketplace will support. If you can do that and come out ahead of what it cost you to make/provide that product or service, you profit. If you can't, you either stop selling it or find a better way to make it.

So far the theory. Actually I don't feel like having an ideological discussion in this forum.

If your screw over your customer or employee, they will leave - probably telling others about it - and you will loose.

Of course you don't screw your customers, but I think most customers don't care at all, how their item was produced or manufactured, they just want maximum value for minimum prize. Otherwise noone would buy coffee anymore or people would ask if the kids in India knitting their carpet work under acceptable conditions and get a good salary. But people don't, right? If they got what they wanted they dont care anymore. And when there's a lot more workforce on the market than open jobs, people won't go because they are happy being able to provide their families with food and housing. Especially when we are talking about other countries that are not as rich as North America or Western Europe. Open your eyes and tell me again, that I am a leftist ignorant...

If what you did was illegal, you will be sued. (Now if you want to talk about our courts, I'm with you - they can really screw things up sometimes, but, more often than not, they work)

Laws in a country are made by people who live in that country. Why would they change the law in a way that gives them disadvantages regarding to drain out the poor countries, or even the lower class in the own country? It is hard to give away priveliges just by yourself without any pressure, because the human nature is egoistic... How would capitalism work if not? I want to maximise my profit, within the borders other people give me... if they don't have a choice and have to accept the conditions I dictate them... too bad for them, right?

You're statement about capitalism not working for much longer is rather silly too. Why? What will be replacing it, communism? We all see how well that worked in the USSR and is working in China.

I just said that capitalism as we know it won't work for long anymore! You should read more carefully what other people are writing. OK? Fact is, that our economical system has to change radically, if we want to face the challenges of the 21st century. I never said, that communism is an alternative, since it would never work anyway. And just to inform you, the political systems in the USSR and China were/are not communism, even they called themselves that. When I write chocolate on a piece of *****, you would believe it right away?

As long as our government sticks to enforcing the laws on the books and stops trying to meddle with law-abiding companies, capitalism will be strong and kicking here for quite a long time. (Notice, I said law-abiding, when companies are found to have done illegal things, like MSFT, the courts SHOULD bring the hammer down.)

And who is defining what is illegal? The laws are always a mirror of the society they were made in. For example: You had slavery in your country before the civil war. The law was allowing it. Does that mean it wasn't a crime, just because the law didn't forbid it? So you see, the law is almost always a very subjective matter. And especially in the case of M$... I don't see any punishemnt so far and it is clear for years now that they broke the law... Justice for money! That how it works in "our" world. ;)

As a side note, in case you are a socialist,

Are you one of those paranoid US citizens who think that every person that is critizising the capitalistic system is a socialist??? *l* That's kinda funny!

I heard a quote a while back that wraps it all up, "Socialistic programs, while attractive, are by their very nature, mandatory. Those who chose not to participate must be coerced. That's why they build walls around socialist countries to keep people in to enjoy the benefits."

So let me tell you as a non-socialist... The capitalism is doing the same. How do you get a chance not to participate in that system? Just tell me! Being a farmer and providing yourself with everything you need? Almost impossible. At first you need money to buy a farm. And any good you need you have to purchase from somewhere else you have to pay with money, so you have to trade. From that moment on you are part of the system again. And what about the country, that is forcing you to participate, because you have to pay taxes and you are forced to follow laws and those laws also make you automatically part of the system?

An example was the Clinton health care plan that actually said if youíre child was dieing and you didnít want to take them to the government specified health care facility. If you took them to a doctor and they, outside of the system, provided medical services; both of you would have broken the law and could be fined thousands of dollars. Thatís coercion and has no place in a free market.

Maybe because the family health care costs a lot of money....? tax money! The people with money they need to keep wheels spinning, because without them in the end only cases would go to those facilities who are covered by social welfare anyway. But that would mean no cash flow to keep the quality up. A society also needs solidarity at least to a certain point. And that also means that the rich people pay part of the costs for those facilities through their health insurances. To just talk about the free market when it comes down to health of children is a little bit cynical, don't you think? Maybe you are lucky that you raised in a rich and wealthy family, but maybe some day even YOU will be happy, when other people help you without any condition and don't start to talk about the free market instead. Never say never!

groovebuster

sparkleytone
May 2, 2002, 09:07 AM
although there are many bad examples of amoral things done in the name of money, our economy in the US is not as "capitalistic" as you are blowing it up to be. American capatalism you will find is not true capitalism and hasn't been since the early 1900s.

first of all, you are defining capitalism with a negative connotation, so you already have a strike against you there. that would be like me talking about socialism or communism with language that clearly vilifies the principles before I can even make a clear stand.

People everywhere need to realize that words like "capitalism" or "communism" are only labels that loosely define a set of ideas and principles for society and economy. There is nothing wrong with people having different ideas and beliefs. The problems arise when those people develop the arrogance that their beliefs are somehow more important and would better serve the people.


If you think your ideas are so much better, than take them to the people and tell them what you want to change. You'll see whether or not they think you are right.

Finally, while having an "Enemy of the People" is generally a good thing for a society, Ibsen also did a great job in writing that the person does not need to be pious with their beliefs. Indeed, this would hurt their respective cause.

groovebuster
May 2, 2002, 09:50 AM
although there are many bad examples of amoral things done in the name of money, our economy in the US is not as "capitalistic" as you are blowing it up to be. American capatalism you will find is not true capitalism and hasn't been since the early 1900s.

You are also interpreting stuff into my postings that I didn't say. First of all I wasn't talking about US capitalism in particular, I was talking about capitalism in general. Therefore I didn't say that US capiltalism is "pure capitalism", you put words in my mouth. I really wonder why you folks always start right away to feel offended, if someone is just thinking loud and is questioning things that are going on in our world. This is not a thread against the US and you don't need to go on a crusade. Just be a little open-minded to other opinions.

first of all, you are defining capitalism with a negative connotation, so you already have a strike against you there.

Critizising the system you are living is not allowed? Interesting... How can a system make progress, when you don't keep working on it?

that would be like me talking about socialism or communism with language that clearly vilifies the principles before I can even make a clear stand.

Then please do me the favour and show me the part where I talk about capitalism "with language that clearly vilifies the principles before I can even make a clear stand". Thanks in advance!

The more you should read eric_n_dfw's statement about communism. He was doing exactly what you were telling in your example...

People everywhere need to realize that words like "capitalism" or "communism" are only labels that loosely define a set of ideas and principles for society and economy. There is nothing wrong with people having different ideas and beliefs. The problems arise when those people develop the arrogance that their beliefs are somehow more important and would better serve the people.

I totally agree, but why do you tell me that? I never thought that my beliefs are more important, but to think that they maybe would better serve the people is totally OK, or not? That's what everybody thinks with a different opinion than another person, otherwise it wouldn't be his/her opinion.

Anyhow I guess we agree I hope that capitalism in the western world works in a "certain way" with minor differences between the industrialized countries. The word capitalism isn't as empty as you want to tell us.

If you think your ideas are so much better, than take them to the people and tell them what you want to change. You'll see whether or not they think you are right.

Why so agressive? Did I say anything how my ideas are in particular? So far I just said that I think that some things have to change on the mid-term and that already makes some people attacking me. They don't even ask me what those things are. Isn't that a little bit strange? I guess the only reason is, they are scared that someone could take away the priveleges from them. Therefore they block any constructive discussion right from the start.

If something is wrong or right is not always a question of a majority that likes the new ideas or not. As I said before, the human being is selfish. Why it should give away privileges, if it doesn't have an advantage on first sight? That's how human nature is, also I am like that (and it scares me sometimes). Be true to yourself, the starving people in Africa don't affect your daily life in any way. When you see some pictures of it once in a while on TV you feel sorry for a few minutes and that's it. You probably would never agree to lower your life standard just to help them out of the mysery, because you don't see any direct benefit from doing so. In other words... you (and me) don't give a ***** how many people die daily because of starvation, because you don't see them, it is too abstract for the normal human mind to really care. But is it justified by that?

I hope you get the point...

But if you forget your privileges for a second and you try to be objective about the future of the world, you have to agree that we can't go on like we do at the moment...

Finally, while having an "Enemy of the People" is generally a good thing for a society, Ibsen also did a great job in writing that the person does not need to be pious with their beliefs.

Could you please explain who you mean with "Enemy of the People"?

groovebuster

Rower_CPU
May 2, 2002, 12:14 PM
My turn to take a stab a this. :D

I'm pretty sure that the "Enemy of the People" comment was referring back to Hitler. During WWII the US propaganda painted Hitler in the worst light possible to rile up the people and get more support for the war effort. Germany did likewise, of course. Propaganda is as big a part of wars as the battles themselves; unfortunately it has the side-effect of hanging around for years as "truth" in the collective conscious of the society.

For many people it is difficult to separate the actions of a leader from the morals of the country he is supposed to represent. Therefore, they see Hitler's actions as a reflection of the depravity of Germany during WWII. Just like people see Clinton's actions as a reflection of the moral bankrupcy of American's.

The original comment was not intended to be derogatory of Germany today, but rather, illustrative of a system of mind-control and propaganda resulting in the brainwashing of a people. You seem to have taken it personally when that was not its intent. Now who's getting defensive?

America has its fair share of flaws, but since 9/11 it has become something of a taboo to badmouth the country now that there is a newfound sense of patriotism. Forgive us if we overreact, we've been through a lot this year.

groovebuster
May 2, 2002, 01:59 PM
My turn to take a stab a this. :D

Go ahead... ;) :D

I'm pretty sure that the "Enemy of the People" comment was referring back to Hitler. During WWII the US propaganda painted Hitler in the worst light possible to rile up the people and get more support for the war effort. Germany did likewise, of course. Propaganda is as big a part of wars as the battles themselves; unfortunately it has the side-effect of hanging around for years as "truth" in the collective conscious of the society.

And now the propaganda machine is doing the same with bin Laden. Of course he is a bad guy, but so far the international community is still waiting for the evidence, that he is behind all that mess ...

For many people it is difficult to separate the actions of a leader from the morals of the country he is supposed to represent. Therefore, they see Hitler's actions as a reflection of the depravity of Germany during WWII. Just like people see Clinton's actions as a reflection of the moral bankrupcy of American's.

I don't have a problem with that... as long as the people don't forget about the problems in their own country (in any country). The propaganda is used also for that even in first place. Hitler made the jews responsible for everything that was going wrong in Germany back then and it worked to unite the country in a way that he could get into power, not questioning the morals behind it. I just hope that the US americans don't do the same in their fight against terrorism... But if I would start to ask, if the massive anti-americanism in the islamic world isn't also caused by the totally ignorant foreign policy of the US during the last decades I probably will be deheaded by some people... so I better don't! ;)

George W. can make decisions now that the public won't be suspicous about anymore as long as it has the label "fight against terrorism". That's how it started here in Germany back then. Fellows in the US, I really hope you don't fall for this that easily... just don't choose the easy way all the time.

The original comment was not intended to be derogatory of Germany today, but rather, illustrative of a system of mind-control and propaganda resulting in the brainwashing of a people. You seem to have taken it personally when that was not its intent. Now who's getting defensive?

Defensive? No. It just gets on my nerves... there are enough examples in US history or other totalitary systems even nowadays (like China or North Korea) people could use, but no... it HAS to be Germany. Especially US americans have a preference in using Germany. Maybe you could explain to me why... ? :confused:

As I said before, it's really getting on my nerves. How would you feel if people in other countries would refer always to the history of the US regarding the theft of the country from the native population while you are present. And then afterwards hearing always: "Oh, don't take it personal, it was just an example!"

America has its fair share of flaws, but since 9/11 it has become something of a taboo to badmouth the country now that there is a newfound sense of patriotism. Forgive us if we overreact, we've been through a lot this year.

Every country has it's flaws and 9/11 was a bad day for the USA, so I understand a little bit overreacting, don't worry. But patriotism turns into something very dangerous, when people stop questioning things and just let their instincts decide what to do while they are blinded by the propaganda (and before I get bashed again, it is like that in every country). The result is often even more violence and the deaths of innocent people, not to mention that this behaviour can isolate the country very quickly. Actually I am a little bit worried at the moment...

And I think we should close this subject now... it doesn't have anything to do with Macs! ;)

groovebuster

P.S.: I want my G5!!!!

mcrain
May 2, 2002, 02:14 PM
Originally posted by groovebuster
Defensive? No. It just gets on my nerves... there are enough examples in US history or other totalitary systems even nowadays (like China or North Korea) people could use, but no... it HAS to be Germany. Especially US americans have a preference in using Germany. Maybe you could explain to me why... ? :confused:

As I said before, it's really getting on my nerves. How would you feel if people in other countries would refer always to the history of the US regarding the theft of the country from the native population while you are present. And then afterwards hearing always: "Oh, don't take it personal, it was just an example!"

P.S.: I want my G5!!!!

I can't resist jumping in on one issue. Why do American's use Germany as an example? Well, we've had two major wars with Germany involving two generations which were my generation's parents and grandparents. In addition, China's system, although probably totalitarian or whatever, is pretty foreign to most of us. In fact, most of us don't know very much about either China or North Korea. Finally, China and North Korea are 'called' communist rather than what they really are.

The best, most identifiable example of a totalitarian or dictatorship type government that did bad things is Germany. Sure there are others, but if I used the terrible things that happened in micronesia (zoolander!) as an example, most people just wouldn't get it.

Oh, as for using the US as an example of thievery from a native people, that's fine with me. It probably is the best case example. There are others (australia, india, etc...), however, the atrocities here are unforgiveable.

Why is it that if you point your finger at our past we accept that there were dark days in our past, while you seem to be awfully touchy about the dark days in Germany's past?

I don't hold Germans today responsible for anyting except making nice Mercedes, BMW's, etc... and having an awfully nice country. So, you have a nice country now that has a checkered past. So what? Big deal. I'm sure you don't mean to suggest that we 'forget' what happened? In fact, it would be silly for us to do so, especially as you stated, we are in a situation now in many ways similar to Germany pre 1939.

Oh, one other thing. If you want to use something bad that the US did as an example to prevent similar bad things from occuring in another country, I think you will find that most American's are all for that. (E.G. In the US, they did bad things to the Native Americans, therefore the settlors in micronesia shouldn't do the same thing to the native micronesians)

Don't get me wrong, I really don't have an opinion on any of this stuff, but, my job is to argue stuff I don't have a personal interest in, so I just couldn't resist asking a few questions.

eric_n_dfw
May 2, 2002, 02:28 PM
Okay, so I opened the can of worms a bit farther here. :eek:

I did not mean to call you, groovbuster, an idiot. The idiot comment was for American racists who think all German's are Nazi's. After re-reading my post, I can see, however, it sounded like I might have inferred it upon you. My apologies.

I got off on a tangent, and probably did use the general terms "capitalism" and "communism" (and "socialism" for that matter) incorrectly.

In a nutshell, I am a free-market believer who wants as little government intervention in the market place as possible.

groovebuster
May 3, 2002, 01:59 AM
Actually I didn't want to discuss that stuff in here anymore, but your post needs to be answered! ;)

I can't resist jumping in on one issue. Why do American's use Germany as an example? Well, we've had two major wars with Germany involving two generations which were my generation's parents and grandparents.

Well, the war is one thing, the example for a tolitarian country another, don't you think?

In addition, China's system, although probably totalitarian or whatever, is pretty foreign to most of us. In fact, most of us don't know very much about either China or North Korea. Finally, China and North Korea are 'called' communist rather than what they really are.

That is not really convincing as an excuse. Especially since China is one of the last totalitarian countries and the foreign policy of the US is seeing China as a possible enemy, people should be well informed...

The best, most identifiable example of a totalitarian or dictatorship type government that did bad things is Germany. Sure there are others, but if I used the terrible things that happened in micronesia (zoolander!) as an example, most people just wouldn't get it.

And why is that? This is more an educational problem, don't you think?

Oh, as for using the US as an example of thievery from a native people, that's fine with me. It probably is the best case example. There are others (australia, india, etc...), however, the atrocities here are unforgiveable.

Easy to say something like that when you have never been in a similar situation. Or are you confronted with it almot every time you talk to people from other countries?

Why is it that if you point your finger at our past we accept that there were dark days in our past, while you seem to be awfully touchy about the dark days in Germany's past?

I think you don't get something that I already explained. I don't have a problem to deal with the fact, that Germany has a dark chapter in it's history. Maybe you are one of those educated exceptions. But very often people talk about nazi Germany and don't know ***** about Germany at all. Not about the time back then, even less about the time after WWII. The take Germany as an example (quite often in a wrong context) and don't even know exactly what they are talking about.

My point was, that there is a tendency to use "others" as bad examples, even you could use examples from your own country instead.

I don't hold Germans today responsible for anyting except making nice Mercedes, BMW's, etc... and having an awfully nice country. So, you have a nice country now that has a checkered past. So what? Big deal. I'm sure you don't mean to suggest that we 'forget' what happened? In fact, it would be silly for us to do so, especially as you stated, we are in a situation now in many ways similar to Germany pre 1939.

It was never my intention that I want people to forget bad things in human history.

And as I said before, you seem to be at least one of the few people that know more about Germany.

Oh, one other thing. If you want to use something bad that the US did as an example to prevent similar bad things from occuring in another country, I think you will find that most American's are all for that. (E.G. In the US, they did bad things to the Native Americans, therefore the settlors in micronesia shouldn't do the same thing to the native micronesians)

I hope you know, that you are not the average US american with an opinion like that... at least not from my experience and I met a lot of you guys already. But maybe it's just bad coincedence.

Don't get me wrong, I really don't have an opinion on any of this stuff, but, my job is to argue stuff I don't have a personal interest in, so I just couldn't resist asking a few questions.

That's totally OK! ;)

groovebuster

mcrain
May 3, 2002, 08:49 AM
Originally posted by groovebuster
That is not really convincing as an excuse. Especially since China is one of the last totalitarian countries and the foreign policy of the US is seeing China as a possible enemy, people should be well informed...

And why is that? This is more an educational problem, don't you think?


Hey Groovebuster, interesting conversation that would be a blast to either argue, debate or just continue, however, it's way way off topic on these boards.

There is however one thing that I have to point out. You, as a non-us person, have a unique perspective that we can't really ignore. The US's educational system could be a whole lot better at a whole lot of things. I can say with a lot of confidence that I obtained a very good education in my time, but it could have been a lot better. Unfortunately, as you pointed out, a lot of us in the good 'ol US of A don't have a very solid understanding of other countries and the problems they face.

Oh well, thank goodness we have a cowboy for president, he'll solve everything those evil empire bad countries been doin'. (*rolls eyes*)

SPG
May 3, 2002, 04:57 PM
I spent a year of high school in Germany and can say comfortably that the system there is a little better, not a utopian system by any means, but at least it treats it's students as more than participants in a glorified day care system.
All these attrocities that the world has witnessed in the past century are mind boggling. Elites promoting their agendas over the will of the people for dubious reasons at best. I truly do fear for what's next, that "axis of evil" comment by the "president" has set back reforms in Iran by a decade. I fear that now the comment will become a self fulfilling prophecy that will land us in a whole new heap of trouble.

Rower_CPU
May 3, 2002, 06:40 PM
How about the recent school shooting in Germany?

Guess the US doesn't have the monopoly on those anymore. :rolleyes:

SPG
May 3, 2002, 07:02 PM
Originally posted by Rower_CPU
How about the recent school shooting in Germany?

Guess the US doesn't have the monopoly on those anymore. :rolleyes:
now that was uncalled for.

Rower_CPU
May 3, 2002, 07:05 PM
Originally posted by SPG
now that was uncalled for.

All I'm saying is that the violence normally associated with American society is by no means prevalent only in America, as some would have you believe.

I think it's sad, but it's definitely true.

SPG
May 3, 2002, 07:11 PM
Yeah, but you should have said that instead. What you did say is akin to saying "nyah nyah!" a week after 9/11.

Rower_CPU
May 3, 2002, 07:20 PM
Originally posted by SPG
Yeah, but you should have said that instead. What you did say is akin to saying "nyah nyah!" a week after 9/11.

Hardly. If anyone takes it that way, I apologize.

voicegy
May 3, 2002, 11:13 PM
Originally posted by SPG
Yeah, but you should have said that instead. What you did say is akin to saying "nyah nyah!" a week after 9/11.

Naw, I didn't take Rower_CPU's statement as "nyah-nyah" at all. I understood its context right away.

I dunno if I should add anything to this, but from what I see, America attempts to teach its children in ways that have never been done before. It's amazing that it happens at all. And I think the reason that it's far from perfect, but somehow still seems to semi-work, is simple:

Japan teaches Japanese people.
China teaches Chinese people.
(add a few other countries with indigenous people here)

America attempts to teach Americans. They're from all over the dang place. Like I said, it's amazing it works as much as it does. And, damnit, I'm pretty dang proud of those teachers that bust their butts every day in front of a sea of faces from all over the world in their classrooms.

jelloshotsrule
May 4, 2002, 12:05 AM
i love european folks. my dad was in the army and so my parents have some friends in germany who have kids who are closer to my age and so me and my brothers have become friends with them. and my oldest brother married a dutch girl... but anyways, i like it because it keeps me straight with my american ego.

basically, i think that america (and canada- aka america jr) are somewhat isolated (geographically) industrial western countries. whereas all of europe is so tight, that it's tougher for them to forget that there are other countries out there... so it's good to have some international friends to keep me/us in check. too bad it's so much money to visit each other..

as per american historical education. it's definitely biased. i've always wondered what people in the UK (or anywhere besides US, but especially england) would learn regarding the whole american revolution thing.

i mean, clearly they're not gonna put ben franklin and thomas jefferson on a pedestal. i also wonder how they portray columbus and other early travelers to america. i guess that since columbus wasn't "american", they wouldn't necessarily portray him any differently in other places, but i think it's sad that we have a national holiday for this guy. but i guess that's just me.

ps. i want to move to the netherlands and ride my bike to work in a little town. but alas, i have too many roots here.... ha

jelloshotsrule
May 4, 2002, 12:08 AM
Originally posted by voicegy
America attempts to teach Americans. They're from all over the dang place. Like I said, it's amazing it works as much as it does. And, damnit, I'm pretty dang proud of those teachers that bust their butts every day in front of a sea of faces from all over the world in their classrooms.

i agree. it's those occasional teachers that often have me thinking "man i'd love to be a teacher and show kids how to use all this great technology for some really neat stuff"... combining the love of computers and graphics and stuff, with the feeling of helping/teaching people would be great.

eirik
May 4, 2002, 12:27 AM
Originally posted by SPG
I truly do fear for what's next, that "axis of evil" comment by the "president" has set back reforms in Iran by a decade. I fear that now the comment will become a self fulfilling prophecy that will land us in a whole new heap of trouble.

Give me a f-u-c-k-i-n-g break!!!

The news coverage on Iran's reaction was pitiful.

The opposition groups and people not under threat of losing their job or enrollment in school loved it. All those demonstrations were organized by the clerics, which run the so-called 'moderate' government. All government employees and students were REQUIRED to PARTICIPATE in those demonstrations. The cleric dominated Iranian government is renowned for putting on choreographs demonstrations at the drop of a hat.

Actual Iranian experts (source: Fox News, "Special Report", http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,51724,00.html ) report that America is more popular amongst its average citizens than those of all of the other middle east countries. Although, we're so hated in the other countries, I wouldn't rush off to Iran to buy silk Persian rugs.

Iranian opposition groups are drawing upon the President's characterization as a rallying point, solidifying their opposition. Its noted in their publications and radio broadcasts (from outside of Iran itself). BTW, the cleric-dominated government is tearing down satellite dishes because Iranian people are watching non-government controlled news reports from abroad.

When reading or listening to news about Iran, one really must check one's sources. I've never seen such flawed reporting on any foreign policy subject as that of sentiments among average Iranian citizens about America.

With all that's going on in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, and Israel/Palestine, the media is hard pressed to allocate significant resources for indepth reporting on Iran.

Eirik

sparkleytone
May 4, 2002, 12:30 AM
sorry i didn't clarify before now about my post. its been a little hectic on these forums lately.

my reference of an "Enemy of the People" is not to any person in history, especially not Hitler. It was a play written by Henrik Ibsen. I'm surprised no one got this, but it doesnt really matter now. Read it, its good. My usage of the term "enemy" you'll see is not negative.

on the education issue, I believe that the resources are there in the US system of education, we are just behind in motivating the students. education isn't really about how good teachers are or how advanced the classes are, its really about what the student does with what is available to him/her. Students do not learn unless they take an interest. memorization is the devil.

on the American Presidency. yes we may have a cowboy for Pres. and he may not have even won the election, but thank GOD he is president in these times and NOT Gore. i don't even want to begin the nightmare of speculation as to what his response to 9/11 would have been. He is part of the very definition of the weak foreign policy Democrat. We all saw how Clinton, a veritable genius, could make himself look incompetent in int'l affairs. His understudy for the first presidency of a new century?? no no no no no!

if you credit Clinton for a strong economy, I will come and shoot you myself.

Rower_CPU
May 4, 2002, 12:40 AM
Originally posted by sparkleytone
on the American Presidency. yes we may have a cowboy for Pres. and he may not have even won the election, but thank GOD he is president in these times and NOT Gore. i don't even want to begin the nightmare of speculation as to what his response to 9/11 would have been. He is part of the very definition of the weak foreign policy Democrat. We all saw how Clinton, a veritable genius, could make himself look incompetent in int'l affairs. His understudy for the first presidency of a new century?? no no no no no!

if you credit Clinton for a strong economy, I will come and shoot you myself.

My dear lord, save us all from people like this!

Were you asleep all of last year? Dubya was the laughingstock of the entire international community! A "weak foreign policy Democrat" is better than a NO foreign policy Republican. Please provide an example of how Clinton made himself look incompetent in international affairs...really!

And yes, Clinton is responsible for the strong economy, but the downtrend did start during his Presidency. Are you blaming him for the dot com bomb?

Come get me!

eirik
May 4, 2002, 12:46 AM
Originally posted by sparkleytone


if you credit Clinton for a strong economy, I will come and shoot you myself.

While I agree with the rest of what Sparkleytone said, it is however subjective. But as for the point about the economy, which is LESS subjective, it pains me to hear Clinton credited for the economy. Its utter nonsense!!! For those that do, do they credit him for the recession last year and the employment recession that continues? How did Clinton stimulate the economy? A tax increase? Sorry, not a stimulant. He cut the deficit, which caused rates to drop? Sorry, the economy cut the deficit. However, the tax increase did come at the perfect time for a tax increase, when the economy is so superheated that the IRS can ride the wave. Gingridge and those other extreme right wing partisans were full of crap when they predicted a recession would follow the tax increase. But, we'll never know how much more the economy would have grown had the tax increase not been enacted. We might have avoided this recession if deficit reduction was achieved through cutting waste and fundamentally reforming, not eliminating or hacking, entitlement programs.

Well, here I am participating in another one of these damn tangents that I personally don't care to see in the Macrumors forum. I must really need to get laid!!!

Eirik

jelloshotsrule
May 4, 2002, 12:52 AM
Originally posted by Rower_CPU
Were you asleep all of last year? Dubya was the laughingstock of the entire international community! A "weak foreign policy Democrat" is better than a NO foreign policy Republican. Please provide an example of how Clinton made himself look incompetent in international affairs...really!


i've said it before and i'll say it again...

go nader!

Rower_CPU
May 4, 2002, 01:23 AM
Originally posted by eirik
While I agree with the rest of what Sparkleytone said, it is however subjective. But as for the point about the economy, which is LESS subjective, it pains me to hear Clinton credited for the economy. Its utter nonsense!!! For those that do, do they credit him for the recession last year and the employment recession that continues? How did Clinton stimulate the economy? A tax increase? Sorry, not a stimulant. He cut the deficit, which caused rates to drop? Sorry, the economy cut the deficit. However, the tax increase did come at the perfect time for a tax increase, when the economy is so superheated that the IRS can ride the wave. Gingridge and those other extreme right wing partisans were full of crap when they predicted a recession would follow the tax increase. But, we'll never know how much more the economy would have grown had the tax increase not been enacted. We might have avoided this recession if deficit reduction was achieved through cutting waste and fundamentally reforming, not eliminating or hacking, entitlement programs.

Well, here I am participating in another one of these damn tangents that I personally don't care to see in the Macrumors forum. I must really need to get laid!!!

Eirik

Two words: consumer confidence

Tax hikes are meaningless if the people spending are confident in the economy.

How's that tax cut doing for you? What, you put it away in savings because you're scared about your economic stability? How is that supposed to stimulate the economy?

eirik
May 4, 2002, 02:36 AM
Originally posted by Rower_CPU


Two words: consumer confidence

Tax hikes are meaningless if the people spending are confident in the economy.

How's that tax cut doing for you? What, you put it away in savings because you're scared about your economic stability? How is that supposed to stimulate the economy?

Consumer confidence: not a bad point. Despite decades of macroeconomics, most of which I personally consider weak, aggregate psychology is important. However, it is a speculative phenomenon. It can dampen macroeconomic non-equilibrium effects. But it can also severely worsen an economy as well. Can we thank Clinton for consumer confidence? Nonsense! The consumer confidence was manifest from a strong, booming economy and the speculative bubble of the dot com wave. Clinton did an excellent job of portraying himself as creating/stimulating economic growth. While that in itself can mean that confidence in him therefore can mean more confidence in the economy, it still boils down to no contribution by Clinton. Perception is unstable and often wrong, particularly in macroeconomics.

A little discussed key to economic growth is equilibrium. The economy is a web of interdependent suppliers and buyers. Excess inventory is the difference between suppliers and buyers. Consumer confidence is very destablizing. A sudden change in either direction increases inventory, promotes non-equilibrium.

Investment generated and sustained growth is much more stable and effective because consumption dollars thrown into the economy are diffuse and dilluted in the way in which they ultimately flow into job creation and retention. A consumption dollar doesn't consider ROI, which implicitly accounts for risk BTW. A consumption dollar tends to go after subsistance and luxuries, contributing less to job creation infrastructure than informed, focused investment. A tax increase reduces the amount of capital that targets high ROI, which means more jobs and stronger economy.

The tax cut, I presume you're referring to the $300/single and $??? for married...., was more of a consumption stimulation. It was consumption stimulation because it was a small payout. It did little to encourage investment. Our economy was/is troubled by non-equilibrium: excess inventory, dot com bust, and btw, increased energy prices. Had we created tax breaks for corporations to write off inventory, etc., provided it would have been large enough of course, that would have done more to help. Don't get me wrong, the pay-out tax cut did help the economy. However, the vast bulk of the tax cut passed last year hadn't taken effect in 2001.

As for money in bank, savings is good for the economy because banks use it for investment. Banks look for ROI, so they generally invest it wisely, which generally creates more jobs than increased low-end consumption spending. Increased potato chip sales doesn't help the semiconduct industry much does it?

Blame Clinton for the dot com bust? Well, that would be a bit much. But, he did contribute, as did the Congress. Had the numerous SEC/accounting reforms been passed, that Clinton and many members of Congress opposed, investors would have had considerably more insight into actual earnings. Those reforms would likely have prevented the Enron crash, for example, though that was something like a run on the bank. Those reforms still haven't been passed! The so-called 'efficient market' is self-correcting, although as Enron illustrates, it can also 'over-correct'.

I must be tired because I only now realized that we've achieved orbit around one of the classic partisan arguments (tax policy), which is a waste of time because partisans seek arguments to justify their positions, not to seek truth to formulate their positions.

I entered this fray because I'd like to hear someone make a credible case as to what Clinton did to deliver the economic growth that we enjoyed. So far, all I've read here so far is: consumer confidence. Well, that's hogwash. He really didn't create that either. The fact that he didn't create consumer fear through absurd behavior does not a consumer confidence builder make!

Did Clinton substantially reduce/simplify regulatory costs on businesses to reduce economic entropy? No. Did he simplify the tax code in anyway, again to reduce economic entropy? No.

Let me help you a bit. He allowed more illegal aliens to cross the border, this was good for the economy. Many low-paying jobs were filled rather than jobs being exported or capacity not being filled. But sorry, he did this out of politics, not economics.

He allowed for greater expansion of work visas, which did help the high-tech sector. But, he was hardly a champion for this cause; he went along with it.

He pushed for increases in education spending. That will help our economy. But, it does take many years for that stimulant to act. Unfortunately, with all of the money that he helped through into education, he did so without meaningful reform, such as results-oriented incentives that Bush and Kennedy just passed last year. America was already spending more on education per capita than nearly every country in the world. But with such a large percentage of this not directly going to educating the students, well, there you are.

You see, I very much appreciate the insight posts on Apple and technology in general. Many of them are high quality. But, what we've seen on this subject praising Clinton, well...

Eirik

mcrain
May 4, 2002, 08:52 AM
All I can say is that I love arguments like these. As much as I'd enjoy giving you my opinion on why I believe Clinton was one of the better presidents in recent history, I'll refrain.

What I will however do is make one comment.

To all you conservative nutjobs who are bashing Clinton and saying he isn't responsible for this, or he isn't responsible for that...

Now you can shut the hell up about Reagan's presidency (that he slept through). Greatest president? Or even one of the greatest presidents? No way. He wasn't responsible for the fall of the USSR. He wasn't responsible for any of the stuff all the conservatives love to say he did (at least legally, considering he was mentally incompetent).

Oh wait, did that touch a nerve? What, you say he did do great things and was responsible for the stuff that happened in his presidency? It wasn't really the Democrat before him that made things happen and Reagan just cashed in on it?

Really?

Then stop trying to berate Clinton. You and the ultra right wing conservatives already have done enough damage to the credibility of the President of the United States when millions upon millions of dollars were spend for no reason other than they didn't like the fact the W's daddy got beat in the election.

I hate to say it, but the damage to the US by the Treason committed by that wacky FBI or CIA guy doesn't come close to the damage caused by the Republicans during Clinton's presidency.

Whether I like Bush Jr., or vote republican now is irrelevant. The point is that for 8 years the conservatives in this country had a personal vendetta against the President of the United States. They made this country look ridiculous in the world's eyes.

eirik
May 4, 2002, 10:00 AM
I tend to agree that the Republican right was reckless during the Clinton administration. They were too damn partisan.

As for Reagan and the economy, I wouldn't say that he delivered the growth single handedly. However, he did stimulate the economy with his huge tax cut, regulatory simplification, aggressive energy (cheap gasolline) tactics (wouldn't go so far as to call it a strategy though) and huge defense spending. Neither one nor all of the above 'created' or 'delivered' the economic boom. But, they are fairly specific examples of things that he did to stimulate the economy. Thus far in this, and frankly everywhere else that I've read/listened, I haven't heard/seen credible, specific examples of how Clinton stimulated the economy.

Reagan didn't create the Soviet economy, which was ultimately responsible for its fall. However, he was the right man for the time. He pressed them hard with his defense build-up; tough arms negotiating; and moral clarity (something some folk call simplistic foreign policy). If Reagan had not done these three things, the Soviet Union might not have collapsed; it might just have kept lingering along. I wouldn't go so far as to say that it would have reformed its economy. That sort of thing would have required someone like Stalin to ruthlessly change things. But don't take my word for this alone, read some transcripts from Gorbachov. You'll find my sentences above pretty accurate paraphrases.

The partisan behavior in DC did indeed and continues to do great harm to the US. The two parties are little better than the Israelis and Palestineans, with respect to their intransigence.

I had hoped Bush Jr would be more effective in bashing 'football politics'. But he's too prudent; won't do the sort of bold things necessary to break it.

Eirik

Rower_CPU
May 4, 2002, 01:19 PM
Trickle down economics. What a joke!
Just another case of Republicans helping the rich get richer and the poor get f*cked over...

jelloshotsrule
May 4, 2002, 01:36 PM
the two parties are essentially the same.

they have very few differences and most of those are only talk anyways.

they are both owned by big corporations, so they're not trying to make anything better first and foremost, but rather trying to make people happy and ensure money for re-election campaigns.

if we had a good, true democracy we might be able to have people who don't have access to millions and billions of dollars to have a chance to make a dent in the way the country is run. oh well... nader 2004 i guess..

Rower_CPU
May 4, 2002, 01:46 PM
Originally posted by jelloshotsrule
the two parties are essentially the same.

they have very few differences and most of those are only talk anyways.

they are both owned by big corporations, so they're not trying to make anything better first and foremost, but rather trying to make people happy and ensure money for re-election campaigns.

if we had a good, true democracy we might be able to have people who don't have access to millions and billions of dollars to have a chance to make a dent in the way the country is run. oh well... nader 2004 i guess..

Yeah, I'm getting pretty frustrated with the whole D vs R situation...but damn, the 3rd party guys just seem so...silly!

Which reminds me of a Monty Python sketch...;)

jelloshotsrule
May 4, 2002, 02:01 PM
Originally posted by Rower_CPU
Yeah, I'm getting pretty frustrated with the whole D vs R situation...but damn, the 3rd party guys just seem so...silly!

Which reminds me of a Monty Python sketch...;)

how are they silly in your eyes?

i mean yeah, pat buchanan, folks like that...

but i think nader is great. he is not the best speaker in that he's not exactly active and entertaining but oh well. i'd rather have his policies than someone else's ability to speak in front of people...

the guy's just brilliant. and people get much much more fired up over him than over the other people. too bad he doesn't get the exposure he deserves in our "democracy"

Rower_CPU
May 4, 2002, 02:15 PM
Originally posted by jelloshotsrule
how are they silly in your eyes?

i mean yeah, pat buchanan, folks like that...

but i think nader is great. he is not the best speaker in that he's not exactly active and entertaining but oh well. i'd rather have his policies than someone else's ability to speak in front of people...

the guy's just brilliant. and people get much much more fired up over him than over the other people. too bad he doesn't get the exposure he deserves in our "democracy"

Exactly. Since they aren't given as much coverage/respect by the press, they are seen as fringe parties. Mildly interesting, but not important.

I would LOVE to see these guys get more awareness out there. Nader almost got enough votes to win some funding for his party...then again, he robbed Gore of what turned out to be crucial votes...:p

buffsldr
May 4, 2002, 03:33 PM
You got it all wrong. In Nader's own words, he said he was not sad he stole votes from Gore, he was sad Gore stole votes from him. Rock on, Ralphie.

eirik
May 4, 2002, 04:27 PM
I don't like labels but Nader strikes me as too socialist-like. I'm thankful that he is a critical thinking advocate bashing corruption. But as for a policy maker, no, he struck me as too extreme and impractical.

There's a sad reality, while we can legislate equal rights, we cannot legislate equal results. While we cannot let corporations run rampant, we cannot regulate away bad behavior without radically complicating business practices, hence the cost of doing business, hence job creation.

Trick-down economics, what a useful rhetorical tool that seems to rally the like-minded together with their predispositions and obstinance. You know, given that the Clinton fans haven't listed any credible, tangible actions that Clinton did that can be construed as significantly contributing to the economic growth that we enjoyed, how ironic that the cause of the growth might actually be something like trickle-down economics. It is an intentionally misleading and polarizing characterization.

One thing about Nader that I greatly admire, I believe he truly is an honest person. Unfortunately, I had the impression that he would devastate our economy if he were elected. To be fair, I cannot remember his specific policy positions anymore; I just remember that they seemed awfully impractical.

Eirik

jelloshotsrule
May 4, 2002, 05:15 PM
what pissed me off about the whole nader thing, was not him. but it was some of his people..

my example:

michael moore (filmmaker/writer) was a big green party/nader supporter... bush then won the election. moore showed up here at nyu to talk and he acted pissed off, as though he was sorry that he'd supported nader and how nader's votes stole from gore. but nader's entire platform and most of his supporters talked about how bush and gore are the same. and that there's no difference b/w the reps and dems. and that's why they needed someone like nader, and some change.

so these hypocritical people piss me off.

funny thing is, my parents are republicans basically, and i actually would've voted for bush if not nader, but not gore... however, it was a no brainer for me. nader was my choice

to me he represented the ideas that would most change the country for the better in the long run. but now we'll never know...

you gotta admit, it'd be INTERESTING to see how nader would've dealt with foreign countries (the war too) as well as congress and such. such a radical thinker in a position to truly change things. i'm very curious how it'd have worked out.

eirik
May 4, 2002, 05:34 PM
Yes, say what you will about Nader, but a term or two of him would be interesting.

blakespot
May 16, 2002, 08:16 AM
Originally posted by teabgs


Lets hope so! I've been holding out since MWSF02 for a new tower, cause that dual 1GHZ is definately (IMO)a teaser.
A teaser?



blakespot

SPG
May 18, 2002, 01:40 PM
Originally posted by jelloshotsrule
what pissed me off about the whole nader thing, was not him. but it was some of his people..

my example:

michael moore (filmmaker/writer) was a big green party/nader supporter... bush then won the election. moore showed up here at nyu to talk and he acted pissed off, as though he was sorry that he'd supported nader and how nader's votes stole from gore. but nader's entire platform and most of his supporters talked about how bush and gore are the same. and that there's no difference b/w the reps and dems. and that's why they needed someone like nader, and some change.

so these hypocritical people piss me off.


I've seen Michael Moore in person, read his book, seen him on TV, and even talked to him briefly about this in person and so I wonder if you were actually paying attention while he was speaking.
He admits that in the last few weeks of the campaign he told people in states with very tight races like Florida's that they should decide which is more important, the lesser of two evils (voting for Gore), or making a statement by supporting Nader. Michael Moore himself voted for Nader since his state, New York, was not a close race.
I'm not sure that you can equate pragmatism with hypocracy.

SPG
May 18, 2002, 02:06 PM
Originally posted by eirik


Give me a f-u-c-k-i-n-g break!!!

The news coverage on Iran's reaction was pitiful.

The opposition groups and people not under threat of losing their job or enrollment in school loved it. All those demonstrations were organized by the clerics, which run the so-called 'moderate' government. All government employees and students were REQUIRED to PARTICIPATE in those demonstrations. The cleric dominated Iranian government is renowned for putting on choreographs demonstrations at the drop of a hat.

Actual Iranian experts (source: Fox News, "Special Report", http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,51724,00.html ) report that America is more popular amongst its average citizens than those of all of the other middle east countries. Although, we're so hated in the other countries, I wouldn't rush off to Iran to buy silk Persian rugs.

Iranian opposition groups are drawing upon the President's characterization as a rallying point, solidifying their opposition. Its noted in their publications and radio broadcasts (from outside of Iran itself). BTW, the cleric-dominated government is tearing down satellite dishes because Iranian people are watching non-government controlled news reports from abroad.

When reading or listening to news about Iran, one really must check one's sources. I've never seen such flawed reporting on any foreign policy subject as that of sentiments among average Iranian citizens about America.


Eirik

You base your response on a single brief interview by one memeber of the American Enterprise Institute, a group that although claims to be non partisan, actually aligns itsefl idealogically farther to the right of the republican party in many people's view. You then quote and link to Fox News an unabashedly conservative and fervently partisan media company.
Although the average Iranian may have nothing against the average American, they do not love our government and it's policies, they love our culture, technology, and standard of living.
When it comes to politics, the Ayatollahs still hold the upper hand in Iran. The moderates in the government are in a difficult position and have to walk a tightrope to get reforms passed without upsetting the religious leaders. By describing their country as evil, Bush has made their work that much more difficult to do. A rallying point? Ludicrous. Pershaps a radical reformer would be able to use that statement, but in Iran the radical opposition does not last long in the open and depends on the moderates to inch progress forward. When a group is under attack it will circle the wagons and ask around to see who is with them and who is against them. The reformers will be hard pressed to continue any activity that would seem to be against the religious government under this kind of pressure, thus setting back the reform movement.

mr.w
May 18, 2002, 05:04 PM
unfortunately (like apple) Nader only controls a small % of the market share in america. It'll take a miracle for Nader to become president, and apple will most likely never be able to compete with wintel ... oh well, the'll both still be around in the comming years.

teabgs
May 19, 2002, 10:57 AM
Originally posted by blakespot

A teaser?



blakespot

I just felt like apple had something much better in store but moto couldnt deliver. If there had been something other then just the ol' Mhz boost I would have bought it. I just was expecting more and I think what I had wanted is coming out with MWNY. I feel like it was released to hold us over until the better ones are ready.

Spock
May 21, 2002, 09:21 AM
Yea lets all interlace obsinities with our post's and show how ignerint we are. Sometimes I wonder if you are just little 14 year olds that look at porn on their Mac Plus and walk around Wal-Mart saying the F-word trying to look cool. I'm not looking for haters but I know little kids that love looking at post's and they are picking up words from Macrumors and making parents want to block it from them SO please Stop.

groovebuster
May 22, 2002, 04:49 PM
Since we are all the time off-topic, I just feel like telling you an interesting observation today...

As you know George W. Bush arrived today in my home-town, good old Berlin. I am living in the district of Spandau, which is at the western border of the city and my appartment happens to be right beside the entry lane of the airport Berlin-Tegel, which gives me a really good look onto the planes that are on final approach to the airport without being unbearable loud.

The Air Force One with the President was supposed to arrive around 8:30 p.m. At least that's what the media said in advance. So I was curious about watching the Air Force One approaching the airport and maybe taking some pictures... It's not often that you can see the Air Force One from that close in action and with the President of the USA on board... probably the closest I'll ever get to an American President.... ;) (300 meters)

So now the interetsing part starts. Around 7:30 p.m., I was just arriving home and was locking my car on the street, I heard a plane approaching that sounded different than the usal two engine planes that land in Tegel. I was curious and tried as fast as possible to see the plane coming in. But for a while I only could hear it, it was strange.

And then I saw it .... the Air Force One. It was so low, I thought it would touch the trees any second. And I heard a lot of 747s approaching in my life, but this one was pretty quit. Looked as if they tried to steal into the city without being noticed a lot.

I was disappointed... I wanted to take pictures and now they made the arrival time a hoax...

But the story is not over. Right after that I switched the TV on at home to hear about the arrival of Bush... but they still said that he would arrive still! "Uhuh!", I thought... there is something strange going on. Then they told the official arrival time of Bush on TV and that it would be 8:15 p.m. So now I was curious again and waited at the window of my living-room (with a perfect view on the entry lane) to see if really a plane would arrive.

And exactly at 8:15 there was a plane, that looked like the... Air Force One again! This time doing a normal approach.

So there are two Air Force Ones ... or shall I say Air Force One and Air Force Two? ;) Did anybody know that before? They use two identical planes to play hide and seek with potential attackers. And I am pretty sure that Bush was in the first one, because I noticed that for about 30 minutes before the first plane landed there was no other plane approaching the airport. Very unusual for that time of the day. Second hint is that the plane came in exremely low (they have pretty good pilots actually!). Third evidence is, that they didn't show any pictures from the airport and the arrival of Bush. At the time the second plane arrived he probably was all safe already in his hotel. The only picture they showed was how they put the gangway... kinda cheap...

Sorry for bothering you with that story, but I found it interesting to watch that game, even I don't get what it should really prevent??? I mean, if some terrorist are kind of professionel, they can't be fooled by easy tricks like that. Especially since it only works exactly only one time before everybody knows.

Anyway... greetings from Berlin.

groovebuster

SPG
May 22, 2002, 05:25 PM
Doh! Now that you told everyone you just wasted $125,000,000 of our US Taxpayer dollars!
No I don't think that would fool too many pros, but it gives them a 50% success rate at best, and it might still fool the lone nut case.

groovebuster
May 23, 2002, 01:00 AM
Originally posted by SPG
Doh! Now that you told everyone you just wasted $125,000,000 of our US Taxpayer dollars!
No I don't think that would fool too many pros, but it gives them a 50% success rate at best, and it might still fool the lone nut case.

Very funny! But maybe I should tell you, that an average 747 costs about $200,000,000. A "little" difference! Not to mention the costs to run and maintain the puppy. I don't think that any person on this friggin' planet is worth to be spend that much money on just for little security games like this with almost no effect. Also not the president of the US, he is replacable like anybody else (especially since it is Bush ;)).

So if they shoot down a 747 every time the president is travellig the world, this becomes pretty expensive on the long run. And the chance of survival overall is getting also lower every time by half. Besides that I would really like to know, what a "lone nut case" could do anyway??? It's not that you can buy anti-aircraft-missiles here at every corner for a few Euros! That would be probably a lot easier where you live.

For me that is pure paranoia.

Whatever... I just found the observation interesting. Should have known that someone like you is making an arrogant comment about it right away.

And of course you knew before that they use two identical planes! ;) You are one of those who know everything! :D

groovebuster

SPG
May 23, 2002, 12:28 PM
Arrogant? Know it all? Them's is fightin' words my friend.
And you can't buy an anti aircraft missile for a few euros here on the corner, they only take good old american greenbacks like any self respecting arms dealer would!

And for the record, I think the other 747 is probably carrying other support staff and gear, so not a total waste.

groovebuster
May 24, 2002, 01:24 AM
Originally posted by SPG
Arrogant? Know it all? Them's is fightin' words my friend.
And you can't buy an anti aircraft missile for a few euros here on the corner, they only take good old american greenbacks like any self respecting arms dealer would!

And for the record, I think the other 747 is probably carrying other support staff and gear, so not a total waste.

Yup! Arrogant! ... reread your first post and try to put yourself into my position reading a reaction like that (that tax payer dollars thingy). If your first reaction is to make the other one looking ridiculous...

I was just wondering about my observation, that's all. I found out meanwhile that there are really two Air Force One officially since 1990. Never thought of it before, because for me the Air Force One was always ONE particular plane (like it's name is inducing).

And there are some things (btw, I was often in North America and the USA) that are just fact. You can buy guns and weapons on every corner (unlike here). And if you know the right people, you also get stuff under the table that is way beyond the normal shot-gun.
But it's funny that you try to provoke with another stupid arrogant comment. What is the relation between US$ and selfrespect? And how can someone have self-respect who is dealing with guns and arms anyway?

Unfortunately you are that kind of ignorant US American being responsible, that the USA is losing more and more support and respect in the world. Probably you think : "Who cares"? But one day you will my friend! Mark my words!

To the rest of the people: Sorry for bothering you. Since it is not possible to post something here as a non-US-American without getting stupid comments by american morons, I won't participate anymore in discussions here. Herr, schmeiŖ Hirn vom Himmel. Und davon besonders viel auf den nordamerikanischen Kontinent!

groovebuster

Rower_CPU
May 24, 2002, 02:17 AM
I think you're overreacting there just a bit, Herr groovebuster.

SPG likes to joke around, and I guess you didn't get the joke. It's pretty thin-skinned of you to say that you're never coming back. :rolleyes:

No-one accused you of saying anything un-American.

What you must realize that the excess of our government no longer impresses/shocks us. We're used to hearing stories of $500 hammers and $1000 toilet seats. An extra Air Force One or two doesn't surprise us.

I think the observation you made is interesting. Now just try to keep your sense of humor. Okay?:)

SPG
May 24, 2002, 12:27 PM
Forget to turn on the sarcasm indicator and look what happens!

buffsldr
May 25, 2002, 12:28 AM
Auf wiedersehn, groove buster. Sorry your stay wasnt more pleasant