A computer components & hardware forum. HardwareBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » HardwareBanter forum » Processors » Intel
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Intel's agreement with the FTC



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old August 25th 10, 03:13 PM posted to comp.sys.intel,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips
Robert Myers
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 606
Default Intel's agreement with the FTC

On Aug 25, 9:09*am, chrisv wrote:
Robert Myers wrote:
On Aug 20, 10:15*am, chrisv wrote:
Robert Myers wrote:
Good news for fanboys. *For the industry? *For real consumers? *What a
joke.


LOL. *What a "surprise" to see Mr Myers rushing to the defense of his
beloved Intel.


What scummy behavior, on their part.


May I see your God credentials, please? *Or are you totally
unacquainted with scripture?


Weird.


I don't think it's weird at all.

You speak in a peremptory fashion, as if your judgments were obvious,
indisputable, and final. Leaving our readers across the Atlantic
out, we live in a country where some huge fraction of the population
claims to be Christian. Never mind what reality those claims
correspond to, they reflect a publicly-stated allegiance to a set of
values that should have some consonance with judgments that are
obvious, indisputable, and final.

The only real content of your post is moral judgment. According to
the commonly-accepted text, moral judgment is a job to be left to
God. Either

1. You are out of line with publicly-declared allegiances to values,
or

2. You have some credentials that qualify you to judge for God.

Robert.
  #2  
Old August 26th 10, 06:07 AM posted to comp.sys.intel,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips
Yousuf Khan[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,296
Default Intel's agreement with the FTC

On 25/08/2010 10:13 AM, Robert Myers wrote:
On Aug 25, 9:09 am, wrote:
Robert Myers wrote:
On Aug 20, 10:15 am, wrote:
What scummy behavior, on their part.


May I see your God credentials, please? Or are you totally
unacquainted with scripture?


Weird.


I don't think it's weird at all.


So "scummy behaviour" is a judgment only god can make, now? Is it one of
the ten commandments: "Thou shalt not conduct thine behaviour scummily?

You speak in a peremptory fashion, as if your judgments were obvious,
indisputable, and final. Leaving our readers across the Atlantic
out, we live in a country where some huge fraction of the population
claims to be Christian. Never mind what reality those claims
correspond to, they reflect a publicly-stated allegiance to a set of
values that should have some consonance with judgments that are
obvious, indisputable, and final.

The only real content of your post is moral judgment. According to
the commonly-accepted text, moral judgment is a job to be left to
God. Either

1. You are out of line with publicly-declared allegiances to values,
or

2. You have some credentials that qualify you to judge for God.

Robert.


Ha-ha-ha, ROLFMAO. Good one Robert, you'll convince everyone that you're
an old man going senile yet.

Yousuf Khan
  #3  
Old August 26th 10, 03:29 PM posted to comp.sys.intel,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips
Robert Myers
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 606
Default Intel's agreement with the FTC

On Aug 26, 1:07*am, Yousuf Khan wrote:
On 25/08/2010 10:13 AM, Robert Myers wrote:

On Aug 25, 9:09 am, *wrote:
Robert Myers wrote:
On Aug 20, 10:15 am, *wrote:
What scummy behavior, on their part.


May I see your God credentials, please? *Or are you totally
unacquainted with scripture?


Weird.


I don't think it's weird at all.


So "scummy behaviour" is a judgment only god can make, now? Is it one of
the ten commandments: "Thou shalt not conduct thine behaviour scummily?


The eighth commandment, as Lutherans and RC's count, is "Thou shalt
not bear false witness against thy neighbor." If you are going to
accuse someone of something, you'd best have God-like certainty of
your standing to do so.

In any case, the Ten Commandments are only one (albeit important)
summary of some parts of the Law. That it is only God who is fit to
judge can be found throughout scripture.

People like Chris speak as if their own judgments reflected some
obvious conclusion that anyone would draw. Leaving beliefs in the
supernatural entirely aside, Chris demonstrates over and over again
that he does not understand even the stated beliefs of our culture and
thus is an unlikely person to be proposing moral judgments (as
scripture would see it, in the place of God).

The rest of your post is just more of your abusiveness.

Robert.

  #4  
Old August 26th 10, 03:58 PM posted to comp.sys.intel,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips
Robert Redelmeier
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 316
Default Intel's agreement with the FTC

In comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips Robert Myers wrote in total:
On Aug 25, 9:09*am, chrisv wrote:
Robert Myers wrote:
On Aug 20, 10:15*am, chrisv wrote:
Robert Myers wrote:
Good news for fanboys. *For the industry? *For real consumers? *What a
joke.


LOL. *What a "surprise" to see Mr Myers rushing to the defense of his
beloved Intel.


What scummy behavior, on their part.


May I see your God credentials, please? *Or are you totally
unacquainted with scripture?


Weird.


I don't think it's weird at all.

You speak in a peremptory fashion, as if your judgments were obvious,
indisputable, and final. Leaving our readers across the Atlantic
out, we live in a country where some huge fraction of the population
claims to be Christian. Never mind what reality those claims
correspond to, they reflect a publicly-stated allegiance to a set of
values that should have some consonance with judgments that are
obvious, indisputable, and final.

The only real content of your post is moral judgment. According to
the commonly-accepted text, moral judgment is a job to be left to
God. Either

1. You are out of line with publicly-declared allegiances to values,
or

2. You have some credentials that qualify you to judge for God.

Robert.



Wierder and wierder -- defending a non sequitur. Did he hit a nerve?

To recap: chrisv accused you of being an Intel fanboy.
Obviously his personal judgement which others may share.
He also accused the Intel/FTC settlement of being scummy. Ditto.

Nothing outside USENET norms. Deity nowhere claimed or involved.


-- Robert R


  #5  
Old August 26th 10, 04:18 PM posted to comp.sys.intel,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips
Robert Myers
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 606
Default Intel's agreement with the FTC

On Aug 26, 10:58*am, Robert Redelmeier wrote:
In comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips Robert Myers wrote in total:





On Aug 25, 9:09*am, chrisv wrote:
Robert Myers wrote:
On Aug 20, 10:15*am, chrisv wrote:
Robert Myers wrote:
Good news for fanboys. *For the industry? *For real consumers? *What a
joke.


LOL. *What a "surprise" to see Mr Myers rushing to the defense of his
beloved Intel.


What scummy behavior, on their part.


May I see your God credentials, please? *Or are you totally
unacquainted with scripture?


Weird.


I don't think it's weird at all.


You speak in a peremptory fashion, as if your judgments were obvious,
indisputable, and final. * Leaving our readers across the Atlantic
out, we live in a country where some huge fraction of the population
claims to be Christian. *Never mind what reality those claims
correspond to, they reflect a publicly-stated allegiance to a set of
values that should have some consonance with judgments that are
obvious, indisputable, and final.


The only real content of your post is moral judgment. *According to
the commonly-accepted text, moral judgment is a job to be left to
God. * Either


1. You are out of line with publicly-declared allegiances to values,
or


2. You have some credentials that qualify you to judge for God.


Robert.


Wierder and wierder -- defending a non sequitur. *Did he hit a nerve?

To recap: *chrisv accused you of being an Intel fanboy.
Obviously his personal judgement which others may share.
He also accused the Intel/FTC settlement of being scummy. *Ditto.

Nothing outside USENET norms. *Deity nowhere claimed or involved.


The are Usenet norms? Would that include all of alt.*? I guess
pretty much anything goes.

We are off, here, into moral proclamations, a favorite pastime of
many, including you.

If you are going to make moral announcements as if you had the
standing to do so, then it stands to reason that you should exhibit
some knowledge of and consonance with the beliefs of the culture in
which you made your announcements.

No matter what you or I may personally believe, our culture at least
nominally subscribes to a set of values that proscribes, among other
things, placing oneself in the seat of judgment which, in the standard
formulation, is reserved to God. It matters not in the slightest
whether you have included any religious material in your announcement
or what you actually believe. If you presume to be a moral arbiter,
you have to establish your moral standing to *be* a moral arbiter.

You can disagree, vehemently, if you wish, with assumed cultural
norms, but you can't at the same time make your announcements as if
they would be manifestly acceptable to everyone.

Robert.

  #6  
Old August 27th 10, 02:51 AM posted to comp.sys.intel,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips
Yousuf Khan[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,296
Default Intel's agreement with the FTC

On 26/08/2010 10:29 AM, Robert Myers wrote:
On Aug 26, 1:07 am, Yousuf wrote:
So "scummy behaviour" is a judgment only god can make, now? Is it one of
the ten commandments: "Thou shalt not conduct thine behaviour scummily?


The eighth commandment, as Lutherans and RC's count, is "Thou shalt
not bear false witness against thy neighbor." If you are going to
accuse someone of something, you'd best have God-like certainty of
your standing to do so.


Ah, I see, so even scripture isn't above your spin-doctoring? That
commandment is quite obviously about committing perjury, and you've
turned it into "only god can know what went on"? Sorry god will never
take the witness stand, but trials are somehow still conducted and
verdicts rendered.

People like Chris speak as if their own judgments reflected some
obvious conclusion that anyone would draw. Leaving beliefs in the
supernatural entirely aside, Chris demonstrates over and over again
that he does not understand even the stated beliefs of our culture and
thus is an unlikely person to be proposing moral judgments (as
scripture would see it, in the place of God).


Get over it, Intel was found guilty by literally every authority who has
judged them so far. Not even god can disagree with that.


Yousuf Khan
  #7  
Old August 27th 10, 02:06 PM posted to comp.sys.intel,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips
Robert Myers
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 606
Default Intel's agreement with the FTC

On Aug 26, 9:51*pm, Yousuf Khan wrote:
On 26/08/2010 10:29 AM, Robert Myers wrote:

On Aug 26, 1:07 am, Yousuf *wrote:
So "scummy behaviour" is a judgment only god can make, now? Is it one of
the ten commandments: "Thou shalt not conduct thine behaviour scummily?


The eighth commandment, as Lutherans and RC's count, is "Thou shalt
not bear false witness against thy neighbor." *If you are going to
accuse someone of something, you'd best have God-like certainty of
your standing to do so.


Ah, I see, so even scripture isn't above your spin-doctoring? That
commandment is quite obviously about committing perjury, and you've
turned it into "only god can know what went on"? Sorry god will never
take the witness stand, but trials are somehow still conducted and
verdicts rendered.


E-mail me privately, and I will show you the catechism. It isn't
about only God can know what went on. It's about defaming others
falsely, something you do regularly.

People like Chris speak as if their own judgments reflected some
obvious conclusion that anyone would draw. *Leaving beliefs in the
supernatural entirely aside, Chris demonstrates over and over again
that he does not understand even the stated beliefs of our culture and
thus is an unlikely person to be proposing moral judgments (as
scripture would see it, in the place of God).


Get over it, Intel was found guilty by literally every authority who has
judged them so far. Not even god can disagree with that.


You don't understand how consent decrees work and you never will.
You're hopeless. Signing a consent agreement almost never involves an
admission of guilt. A "finding" of guilt requires a criminal
proceeding and a verdict. What you are engaged in here is corporate
defamation, a tort, for which you could be sued.

Robert.
  #8  
Old August 28th 10, 03:40 PM posted to comp.sys.intel,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips
Yousuf Khan
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 914
Default Intel's agreement with the FTC

On 8/27/2010 9:06 AM, Robert Myers wrote:
On Aug 26, 9:51 pm, Yousuf wrote:
On 26/08/2010 10:29 AM, Robert Myers wrote:

On Aug 26, 1:07 am, Yousuf wrote:
So "scummy behaviour" is a judgment only god can make, now? Is it one of
the ten commandments: "Thou shalt not conduct thine behaviour scummily?


The eighth commandment, as Lutherans and RC's count, is "Thou shalt
not bear false witness against thy neighbor." If you are going to
accuse someone of something, you'd best have God-like certainty of
your standing to do so.


Ah, I see, so even scripture isn't above your spin-doctoring? That
commandment is quite obviously about committing perjury, and you've
turned it into "only god can know what went on"? Sorry god will never
take the witness stand, but trials are somehow still conducted and
verdicts rendered.


E-mail me privately, and I will show you the catechism. It isn't
about only God can know what went on. It's about defaming others
falsely, something you do regularly.


Circular logic, I corrected you by saying it's about perjury and you
agree with it, without admitting it. Is that your consent decree?

People like Chris speak as if their own judgments reflected some
obvious conclusion that anyone would draw. Leaving beliefs in the
supernatural entirely aside, Chris demonstrates over and over again
that he does not understand even the stated beliefs of our culture and
thus is an unlikely person to be proposing moral judgments (as
scripture would see it, in the place of God).


Get over it, Intel was found guilty by literally every authority who has
judged them so far. Not even god can disagree with that.


You don't understand how consent decrees work and you never will.
You're hopeless. Signing a consent agreement almost never involves an
admission of guilt. A "finding" of guilt requires a criminal
proceeding and a verdict. What you are engaged in here is corporate
defamation, a tort, for which you could be sued.

Robert.


You mean god is gonna sue me?

Yousuf Khan
  #9  
Old August 29th 10, 02:15 AM posted to comp.sys.intel,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips
Robert Myers
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 606
Default Intel's agreement with the FTC

On Aug 28, 10:40*am, Yousuf Khan wrote:
On 8/27/2010 9:06 AM, Robert Myers wrote:





On Aug 26, 9:51 pm, Yousuf *wrote:
On 26/08/2010 10:29 AM, Robert Myers wrote:


On Aug 26, 1:07 am, Yousuf * *wrote:
So "scummy behaviour" is a judgment only god can make, now? Is it one of
the ten commandments: "Thou shalt not conduct thine behaviour scummily?


The eighth commandment, as Lutherans and RC's count, is "Thou shalt
not bear false witness against thy neighbor." *If you are going to
accuse someone of something, you'd best have God-like certainty of
your standing to do so.


Ah, I see, so even scripture isn't above your spin-doctoring? That
commandment is quite obviously about committing perjury, and you've
turned it into "only god can know what went on"? Sorry god will never
take the witness stand, but trials are somehow still conducted and
verdicts rendered.


E-mail me privately, and I will show you the catechism. *It isn't
about only God can know what went on. *It's about defaming others
falsely, something you do regularly.


Circular logic, I corrected you by saying it's about perjury and you
agree with it, without admitting it. Is that your consent decree?


http://www.vatican.va/archive/catechism/p3s2c2a8.htm

"The eighth commandment forbids misrepresenting the truth in our
relations with others."

Nothing about swearing. Nothing about perjury. We have not
agreed. You have said that Intel was "found guilty." It wasn't.
You have misrepresented the truth regarding Intel.

Luther's Small Catechism goes much further in interpreting the Eighth
Commandment as condemning the kind of behavior you regularly
indulge. I'm sure I could find something similar in the Institutes
of Religion (Calvin), with which I am much less familiar.

None of this has anything to do with circular logic. You set yourself
up as a moral judge, made false statements regarding Intel, and thus
condemned yourself.

You could plausibly argue that scripture and its normative
interpreters are no longer relevant to a discussion of moral
discourse, but that would be your only recourse.

Robert.
  #10  
Old August 31st 10, 04:19 PM posted to comp.sys.intel,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips
Sebastian Kaliszewski[_5_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 22
Default Intel's agreement with the FTC

Robert Myers wrote:
None of this has anything to do with circular logic. You set yourself
up as a moral judge, made false statements regarding Intel, and thus
condemned yourself.


First of all, Intel is not a being.

Second, Mr Myers, may I remind you about 2nd commandnment?


rgds
\SK
--
"Never underestimate the power of human stupidity" -- L. Lang
--
http://www.tajga.org -- (some photos from my travels)
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Intel's agreement with the FTC Yousuf Khan[_2_] General 71 August 31st 10 04:24 PM
Intel's agreement with the FTC Bob Willard Intel 9 August 22nd 10 08:53 PM
Intel to pull x86 cross-licensing agreement with AMD in 60 days Yousuf Khan General 0 March 16th 09 09:11 PM
Vista license agreement is a joke Garrot Homebuilt PC's 47 November 22nd 06 10:18 AM
Vista license agreement is a joke Garrot Nvidia Videocards 0 October 13th 06 08:07 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:30 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 HardwareBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.