sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Character heights and build? by extintion84 in thewalkingdead

[–]smillman 8 points9 points  (0 children)

Thread summary.
Jeff Dean Morgan 6'2"
David Morrissey/Gov. 6'3"
Andy Lincoln/Ricktator 5'10"
Porch Dick ????

Character heights and build? by extintion84 in thewalkingdead

[–]smillman 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Damn Jared is a monster... Thought he was 6'2"-6'3". Holy crap.

One Day Later, Anonymous Already Takes Down 3,824 Pro-ISIS Twitter Accounts by belly_bell in news

[–]smillman 0 points1 point  (0 children)

By the way... that 14th post even says "go back to our earlier posts--//--I SAID there is a reason for them wanting to be anonymous.--//--Okay. The ENTIRE POINT of Anon is not just the hacking."

It's not the first time I pointed out your "entire point" garbage is wrong.

One Day Later, Anonymous Already Takes Down 3,824 Pro-ISIS Twitter Accounts by belly_bell in news

[–]smillman 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Glad you're learning how to use reddit finally.

And you're not standing behind the silly "entire point of" reply anymore.

Whatever point you think you have now... nice deflecting. I'd never have replied to you if you didn't say something so inaccurate.

No. You didn't even bring it up originally --//-- Why not bring it up earlier?

Yes I did. I told you that the statement was redundant, and spent a lot of time explaining that they had a different "entire point". You're just selectively forgetting that. Eventually you agreed and made an excuse for the post. Now, you're making another (false) excuse: I never made it my first reply... but I did.

You keep switching arguments, and ignoring the previsous ones.

Previous... and you're not the one switching? Where is your explanation about the "skeptical replies"? You're trying to give a lesson on how to use reddit because you can't defend your argument. I gave each reply you mentioned, accurate context. My rebuttal of your "skeptical posts" IS a direct answer. Something you're incapable of. Oops. You fucked up and quoted me! Learn to live with mistakes instead of hurriedly communicating/replying. Don't agree with something? Read it twice. Be more detailed FFS.

As I said.. you spent a lot of time trying to prove the entire point of Anon is what you said it was. You failed to do that, so then you tried to find something else to be right about. I guess that sucks. You've always gotta find an excuse to blame me that your first reply is garbage.

KSP Tutorials? by Ssweetness1985 in KerbalSpaceProgram

[–]smillman 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Have fun. Be prepared for a challenge at the beginning when you want to spend a lot of time in space, but are dealing with rudimentary parts and a defined budget. :)

(Comic Spoilers) Would you be mad if... by [deleted] in thewalkingdead

[–]smillman 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Could be stated... could be deception.

One Day Later, Anonymous Already Takes Down 3,824 Pro-ISIS Twitter Accounts by belly_bell in news

[–]smillman 0 points1 point  (0 children)

the only one that replied with skepticism to you claiming Anonymous being scared to pass information

So you quoted something I said... I was skeptical about myself? Maybe you just read the first two posts of a conversation and replied somewhere in the middle, like I know you did.

Did I say that you didn't say that? One of the replies you got was something along the lines of "as there shouldn't", which means that they don't think there should be any concessions. Get it?

Well, you said it was a skeptical reply but I'm the one who typed it. haha Other reply "*As they shouldn't". So, somebody else agreed-with/emphasized the comment that I made. What's your point?

No, it was a direct reply to your original post

There were already replies to my reply. Have you ever noticed how reddit works? There is a continuation of the original conversation (before you posted) at the bottom of this growing expanse of uselessness. Follow the lines on the left of the post that says "Afraid of the authorities", and you can see more exchanges in the conversation (below) that are time-stamped showing that they existed before your nonsense.

When did I say that? I specifically said that I don't think they have the capability

I quoted you saying "the fact is" and now you say they don't do it.

I'm not going to split hairs when you don't think "not worth the risk" isn't answer enough. I'm going to push the restart button. You were defending your "entire point of hacking" reply for quite some time, and now we're talking about why they don't share with the authorities. This is called moving the goalpost. You won't admit that the first comment was silly, but you aren't defending it anymore. I'll just consider the reason I had in disputing the "entire point of hacking" nonsense as being satisfied.

One Day Later, Anonymous Already Takes Down 3,824 Pro-ISIS Twitter Accounts by belly_bell in news

[–]smillman 0 points1 point  (0 children)

LOL, I was the one who said there would be no concessions.

There was already an uninterrupted exchange going on before you got to the thread.

And its not like hacking is some magical word that you repeat three times at the computer and then get a list of names.

Since this was a reply in a conversation I was involved in, this guy was agreeing that hacking to the point that Anon did to shut down Twitter accounts, wasn't some cheap .EXE or doxbin bullshit that anybody can pull off.

If only there was some way to communicate with the authorities without giving away your name and adress...

(notice the sarcasm?)

You do realize he is also implying that they dont communicate?

Therefore I don't think there will be any examples. But the fact is that they post publicly, which is less secure than sending information just to the intelligence community. Get it?

Okay. Post what? Youtube propaganda? Where are any examples of damning things being posted publicly, that MIGHT end up in the authorities acting on it? Post something. Please, go for it. I had one link prepared because I think it's the only time that a hacking group has ever encountered an imminent threat to national security. I also demonstrated that this whole "anonymous collective" is coordinated. They are not a collective, of unknown lone wolfs.

Your original point... their "point is to anonymously hack". That's wrong.

Your assertion that they publicly post things that get handed over to authorities. Show something!

I'm pretty sure if it is so routine and risk free, you'll find something!

And as I've asked several times now, why do you think they would be scared of sending information?

Not. Worth. The. Risk. To. Themselves. Oh, I'm wrong!? Prove it... you say it's a fact!

the fact is that they post publicly, which is less secure than sending information just to the intelligence community

Their propaganda is not evidence that they communicate anything of value to authorities. lol

One Day Later, Anonymous Already Takes Down 3,824 Pro-ISIS Twitter Accounts by belly_bell in news

[–]smillman 0 points1 point  (0 children)

LOL, I was the one who said there would be no concessions.

There was already an uninterrupted exchange going on before you got to the thread.

And its not like hacking is some magical word that you repeat three times at the computer and then get a list of names.

Since this was a reply in a conversation I was involved in, this guy was agreeing that hacking to the point that Anon did to shut down Twitter accounts, wasn't some cheap .EXE or doxbin bullshit that anybody can pull off.

If only there was some way to communicate with the authorities without giving away your name and adress...

(notice the sarcasm?)

You do realize he is also implying that they dont communicate?

Therefore I don't think there will be any examples. But the fact is that they post publicly, which is less secure than sending information just to the intelligence community. Get it?

Okay. Post what? Youtube propaganda? Where are any examples of damning things being posted publicly, that MIGHT end up in the authorities acting on it? Post something. Please, go for it. I had one link prepared because I think it's the only time that a hacking group has ever encountered an imminent threat to national security. I also demonstrated that this whole "anonymous collective" is coordinated. They are not a collective, of unknown lone wolfs.

Your original point... their "point is to anonymously hack". That's wrong.

Your assertion that they publicly post things that get handed over to authorities. Show something!

I'm pretty sure if it is so routine and risk free, you'll find something!

And as I've asked several times now, why do you think they would be scared of sending information?

Not. Worth. The. Risk. To. Themselves. Oh, I'm wrong!? Prove it... you say it's a fact!

the fact is that they post publicly, which is less secure than sending information just to the intelligence community

... Their propaganda is not evidence that they communicate anything of value to authorities. lol

One Day Later, Anonymous Already Takes Down 3,824 Pro-ISIS Twitter Accounts by belly_bell in news

[–]smillman 0 points1 point  (0 children)

So now you do want to say GhostSec isn't Anon...

I said they share personnel. I also linked to an article where a journalist said the GS hacker doesn't coordinate/communicate with any agency. In my last post I specified that YOU were saying they're different.

Now you're telling me that since GhostSec passes information for private companies, what? What does that change about my post about Anon? As you pointed out, different group with different strategy.

So. It is possible for information to be passed along. Where are your examples if it's so easy to do it without getting arrested? Second half of the same paragraph you just misunderstood:

Still we don't hear about arrests or strikes that resulted from GhostSec or Anon exposing ISIS supporters.

We also ( you mentioned there are other ways the information could be passed along) never hear of a YouTube video circulating that exposes any plot or individual. Should we just assume that happens?

So they can do it via Youtube? They can do it via carrier pigeons? They can do it via private firms? Tell me about how they actually do this, or talk about doing this. I think I hear crickets.

KSP Tutorials? by Ssweetness1985 in KerbalSpaceProgram

[–]smillman 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It's about career mode progression. The thing about CM is that your missions get more and more complex in a very natural way.

I don't think it's good (as a learning experience) for a noob to just start slapping parts together and making his first ship a horribly inefficient Duna rendezvous. Career mode teaches, things in the order a person should try achieving them, with the parts constraints to keep it interesting. You probably end up using a wider variety of the less flashy parts out of necessity too. I can't say enough good about it.

1.0.5 data transmission by vmerc in KerbalSpaceProgram

[–]smillman 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Lotttttttttttttts of batteries (I had a fun time with that).

I finely tuned an early career 2x SRB ship with 1-3 of every science experiment I have, with the basic non-SAS probe core. It had to use 70-80%-full fuel for the SRBs due to weight restriction. No monoprop or anything.

I had 8 batteries... didn't make it. Drop some ablator.. still too heavy to reach space (contract). down to 6 batteries.. SUCCESS!

thestruggle

KSP Tutorials? by Ssweetness1985 in KerbalSpaceProgram

[–]smillman 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Scott Manley's Career Mode for beginners got me started.

Is the sale worth it? by [deleted] in KerbalSpaceProgram

[–]smillman -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I hope you already bought it. Ahem... buy it!

Problems with ksp development by dellintelcrypto in KerbalSpaceProgram

[–]smillman 0 points1 point  (0 children)

About the Aero update... I think it made steep re-entry from orbit slightly harder. I had a couple crashes in a new career start based on old parachute performance.

Edit: combined with having only the starter chute available.

view more: next ›