antimatty

There should have been more pictures of robots poking dead alleged suicide bombers with a stick.

Now wouldn't that be a hell of a meta-reference.

cde

However, I won't deny that some have made their comments more of a personal attack, but that's not what I'm trying to do. (And, for the record, I believe it better to present a rational argument than just make attacks.) Although Annalee (who can certainly speak for herself) demonstrates considerable writing talent, some of the readers take umbrage with post being about science and containing fiction, rather than being about science fiction. Yes, there is a big difference. I could expound at length, but that's a much larger issue which seems to be a sidebar here.

Generally speaking, if anyone wants to defend Annalee against personal or unreasonable attack, then consider me part of that group. However, someone expressing a calm, rational viewpoint also has my support, even if I don't happen to agree with it.

PantherShade

jessse

i'm trying to remember the last time i saw a newspaper with a content warning on the front page- "for actual news, turn to page 2. warning- bad sh*t happens."

i'm not seeing any ethical debate going on here, i'm seeing a bunch of commenters who disapprove of annalee. there's a difference.

dave the wet sprocket

Lost_Thought

twreckx

twreckx

nutbastard

*pours out 40oz*

nutbastard

You get what you get from blogs. Obviously snark, which comes in high doses on any Gawker site, tends to be personal opionion so I'm unsure as to why some are suddenly taking umbrage at the fact that Annalee's writing includes such, especially when she has taken great pains to ensure that this article had no personal opinion. Yes they are a great alternative to mainstream media, but they are by no means infallible, get over yourself already. I'm rambling now, will stop.

twreckx

You know, an inperfect one, because we are still living in 2008.

This is jus my humble opinion, and the only thing I can do is stop reading your posts.

victor-hvgo borges

guibom

Kevin Kelly

nutbastard

highfloydelity

Furthermore, posting the picture of a human corpse on the front page (even worse than the addition pictures with no warning) demonstrates a lack of empathy as well as negligence of journalistic integrity. :(

(Yeah, I had to come back and post that too. It's been bugging me for a while.)

PantherShade

PantherShade

Zerodamage and PriorMarcus - shit or get off the pot! If this blog is so horrible, leave. If it's not so horrible, quit being drama queens and enjoy the posts you like, and ignore the ones you don't. All of this over the use of "alleged" and "purported?" Somebody needs a hobby or second job.

Munch the BanNail

Congrats, IO9! The blog has gotten big enough to attract some serious trollage. I do hereby alledge that they are douchebags, as well.

As for my two cents' worth: Those are some pretty tame pictures. I commend your neutrality in reporting and your resistance to letting the dialogue get personal, as the trolls have done. And I think "robot" tends to imply autonomy these days, which is why anything with "-bot" in the title but is actually remote controlled drives me crazy.

Annalee and JennaW, y'all rock my socks off. [wiggles toes] See?

FredicvsMaximvs

imagine how IT feels about all this muckery.

nachobel

You not reading all of the comments means you will not understand how awful this article really is and how bad this site will become with someone like Annalee as editor. If anything, just read Annalee's and my comments and you will get the gist of why this article is the worst ever posted on this site.

zerodamage

blogs don't kill brain cells, comment threads kill brain cells. wtf people?

nobody forces me to read any of these posts, i do it by choice. if i don't like the content, i can be a responsible adult and look somewhere else.

i mean, i suppose i could raise a fit and demand the blog change to suit my tastes. (replace the editor! footnotes for all!) there's that option. but 1) i don't work for the fcc, and 2) i'm not a fascist.

it's ironic to me that the fundamental inability of some people to live and let live is camoflaged in such "educated discussion" about images that are a result of some people's fundamental inability to live and let live.

or maybe that's coincidence- i get confused sometimes.

dave the wet sprocket

Churrito

First of all, to everyone complaining about the post (mostly zerodamage) it's not your website, so...what exactly is the problem? Even if it DID have some kind of bias, and AnnaLee went off on a tirade against Israel, that is your business...how? If you don't like it don't read it. I am somewhat confident she has a right to express her opinion if she so feels like it. It's the internet, I'm PRETTY sure you can find a different website to annoy with your exceptionally clever and important responses if this blog just doesn't live up to your super awesome journalistic standards.

etwarrior

Well done. You've earned a bookmark from this reader.

I'd just like to note, too, that zerodamage's comment on the post's bias is completely wrong, if only because no such bias is betrayed in the post.

Which is what makes it so damned good.

willentrekin

I can't be sure if it's because of the internet's veil of anonymity or the innate pomposity of your character which is creating these distasteful posts…

Regardless, please don't unnecessarily and unjustly vilify an individual for trying to tell us a story.

Also, since you feel the need to criticize to no end, why don't you just start your own blog? That would be infinitely more constructive than what you are currently defecating all over this comment board.

On another note, I hope you find some peace. Good day/night to you, sir.

AMBROSE

and war, unfortunately, is pretty damn present as well. well, except for american readers (like myself) who don't ever have to see it if they don't want to even though their country is behind the bulk of it all.

if you don't like seeing "disturbing" images of, then close you damn eyes forever ... or start your own blog where you post nothing but kittens and puppies all day.

OriginalGabriel

The Middle East is a kindergarten full of third-generation working-class zealots, where people wake up in the morning and renew their outrage that the child-killers on the opposing side haven't magically disappeard overnight.

Specific religion is unimportant. All you need to engage either side are the proper keywords. I know this; my mother's one of them. She relocated to the US in the 1950s, but the family remains engaged in the stoopid.

All of them are easily manipulated by leaders who make incendiary public statements, and then call the same accountant about their stock portfolios.

Moeskido

(Oh, wrong choice of words? Sorry.)

In all seriousness Annalee, thanks for posting this.

92BuickLeSabre

simmo

@charliejane: And I'm not sure Wall-E is going to be this entertaining.

aspiringexpatriate

Charlie Jane Anders

joemono

aspiringexpatriate

As for your cherry picking of one line out of the dictionary link that I posted, she also used the word "purported" which is still in the article. She used "Purported" along with "alleged" which have pretty much the same meaning. It is obvious what definition of "alleged" she was using when she used the word (before she tried to hide it by deleting it). She should be replaced as the editor before this site loses all of its credibility.

Purported: [dictionary.reference.com]

zerodamage

zerodamage

Annalee is an alleged blogger. You're an alleged bad commenter. The guy being run over by a robot is an alleged suicide bomber. The fact that all of those allegations are true doesn't stop them from being allegations.

No blogger is going to respond well to someone coming in, accusing her of being anti-Israel, and demanding she change an already accurate article to be more to his taste. It's not possible to word this much more neutrally than Annalee did, but you came and inserted your own bias into it and were extremely insulting. Annalee's refusal to give into your demands doesn't prove any bias on her part; it only indicates that she doesn't feel the article needs to be altered and/or that she thinks you were an ass in the way you went about trying to get it changed.

At this point, I'm done feeding the troll.

Morgan

Iamtehawesome

To clarify, I not only think Annalee is a poor journalist (if you can consider her that) and a poor blogger, she is also ideologically motivated. The Refusal to correct her articles proves that to me. It is as simple as realizing the mistake and fixing it, but instead she uses absurd arguments about the US Justice system to validate her use of the words "alleged" and "purported." You only do that when you are disingenuous and politically/ideologically motivated by the topic at hand. NO WHERE is there any reference to this suicide bomber being an "Alleged Suicide bomber," for the exception of Annalee's own words. Yet she commented that those are the words that Getty images used. Compared to the rest of this site, this article is a huge disappointment. It is sad that a science fiction site is run by someone who doesn't know what it means to be an editor and a journalist. It is more important to her to make her political ideology known by ignoring the facts before and after the fact when it comes to Israel. Seriously, why else anyone use those words when every news article says otherwise. The argument about US Law makes no sense and is an invalid argument; it is a cop-out. She added them because she probably is sympathetic to the Palestinians and not a fan of Israel. I am open to clarification from Annalee. I want to maintain my RSS feed but after this, I am unsure if I can trust anything else from this site when someone like Annalee is the editor of the site.

zerodamage

Lost_Thought

As to whether this belongs in the blog- there's been plenty of stuff in this blog in the past about technology traditionally associated with sci fi being used today, and there hasn't been any complaint before. Clearly the subject matter (robot) does belong in this blog, and it's only the suicide bomber part that is making anyone claim it doesn't.

Morgan

zerodamage

Lost_Thought

I guess it all makes sense, this is after all a science fiction blog.

zerodamage

braak

Here is another article with another image of the robot:[www.washingtonpost.com]
Notice how the caption goes: "An Israeli police explosives robot removes clothing from the body of a suicide bomber at the scene of an attack in the town of Dimona, southern Israel, Monday, Feb. 4, 2008."
Notice how there is no mention of the bomber being "alleged" or "purported." I am starting to think that Annalee added those words herself as she never referenced her source of those images in the first place. HERE is the only place I am seeing anyone use the words "Alleged" and "Purported" when talking about this particular suicide bomber. Even in her own linked source on this post, he is referred to as a "suicide bomber" and not an alleged suicide bomber.

I do not know how I can make it any more clear.

zerodamage

Annalee Newitz

braak

zerodamage

Okay. Okay, you guys win.

Annalee, I'm sorry. I tried to defend you, but clearly my skills are not up to par. You'd better make that correction, or else run the risk that these guys won't comment here anymore.

braak

zerodamage

Let me post these links for you again since you may have missed my comment above. Here is a print article - one of many - of the same suicide bomber you have a picture of above: [www.thesun.co.uk]

Here is the byline of that article, "A SUICIDE bomber lies dead yesterday - shot just as he was about to blow himself up."

Here is a video of the news broadcast stating that he was a suicide bomber looking to detonate himself after the medics/doctors on the scene saw that he was WEARING a suicide belt (you know, those belts that are loaded with explosives that suicide bombers typically blow themselves up with). [www.liveleak.com]

Do not hide behind some nonsense about he not being convicted in a US Court. That is just absurd. The facts are right there in the two links I posted a second time for you Annalee.

zerodamage

@PriorMarcus: How is it not libel?

braak

Marcus117

Marcus117

Otherwise, if the blog didn't fulfill those expectations, you just wouldn't call it part of the blogosphere. Then you'd move on, and have a wonderful time enjoying the blogs that did work the way you wanted them to.

braak

JennaW

It's as simple as this: She is wrong and is refusing to correct it. The guy was a suicide bomber; the only one alleging it at this point is Annalee and by association, io9.com.

zerodamage

I will not engage in libel on this blog. That is all.

Annalee Newitz

Marcus117

Obviously, you guys understand the blogosphere better than I do. What happens to a blog when some of the people don't like the postings on it, but some of them do like it?

braak

This would suggest to anyone with even rudimentary reasoning skills that your description of how the blogosphere works is false.

braak

He called her Anna, shit happens. She should stop dodging the point of his complaints, and other complaints, and answer up to it.

Despite the fact that she writes for a blog, and now The New York Times she should still have some degree of journalistic integrity, or at least some pride in getting her facts right and checking information.

You and her are just dodging the issue that people don't see how this really belongs on a science fiction, but maybe you don't see it, being so far up someones [unspecified] ass.

Marcus117

NefariousNewt

1. Blogger researches topic and posts article
2. People such as myself read the article or posting
3. People such as myself may find errors, we notify the author
4. The author verifies and corrects the initial posting notating the correction
5. Readers of the blog realize the blogger is human and makes errors and is willing to admit that and corrects errors
6. We tell others about the blog (as I have) and the blogs popularity grows

That's it in a nutshell. I am not sure if someone with the limited mental capacity of Jennaw will understand why this is important in the blogosphere but to me it is what makes the blogosphere better than the print and tv news media whether it be about scifi or politics or whatever.

zerodamage

JennaW

braak

JennaW

If the bloggers aren't being credible, then you have to stop thinking that the blogosphere is more credible.

It is not the rest of the world's obligation to fulfill whatever imaginary standard you've set for it.

braak

zerodamage

I have no comment for the commenter calling me names.

zerodamage

Annalee Newitz

@7Zark7 Iz In Ur Internetz:
Snarky enough for ya?

JennaW

halloweenjack

zerodamage

Annalee Newitz

What the fucking fuck...

I dub thee Sir Douchebag... allegedly.

JennaW

@zerodamage: Bloggers are held to a higher standard? I don't know whether you're putting too much faith into bloggers or if professional news journalism has slid that far down in respectability.

aspiringexpatriate

@7Zark7 Iz In Ur Internetz: Aw, hey! We should be allowed to talk about interesting things if we want to.

braak

zerodamage

Snark, and only snark, should be allowed here.

That said, I like how that robot rolls.

7Zark7 Iz In Ur Internetz

simmo

Idolwild

braak

Annalee Newitz

Just because we can do something, does it mean we should? That's a fundamental question high-minded SF asks. I find the post entirely appropriate to the venue.

JennaW

I think it's important for us to see what combat robots are being used for, since they are the future of military engagement (and, increasingly, its present). I also think it's good to send robots to do the dangerous work humans once did, though I don't think the robots will see it that way when they attain human-like intelligence.

But like @NefariousNewt, I'd rather see us using our cool robot technology to create peace rather than to clean up after terrorist attacks. But in the time between the horror of war and the way of peace, I am glad we have smart people working on defense technology and combat robots. This is necessary technology, as horrible as it sounds.

Annalee Newitz

There really is controversy here, just a sad fact of life right now. One could hope we don't have to see too many more images like those.

NefariousNewt

Annalee Newitz

Annalee Newitz

@braak: And yes, but it was funny, no?

aspiringexpatriate

Ed Grabianowski

braak

People have this crazy idea that it's not okay to accuse someone of criminality unless they've actually been convicted, by a court, of a crime. I don't know where it comes from. Mental retardation, probably.

braak

As I knew no specifics until posted just above, I was refraining from discussing this specific instance.

At least zerodamage got the 'bias' on the right side of the spectrum.

And, braak, the implied support of the robot doesn't count when it's remote controlled. Its motivations aren't up for spec, only the interesting utilization of its innate abilities.

[I had to go back and change 'his' to 'its' cause really, who's to say the robot isn't female?]

aspiringexpatriate

Morgan

When is that ok? Self-defense. Not the case here. Also, during military combat against armed combatants. Again, not the case. Therefore, what was done was wrong. Simple. Black. Not white. Not grey. As for name calling? Also simple.

Walk into a market and blow people up? Douchebag.
Walk around your college shooting other students? Douchebag.
Bomb a clinic? Douchebag.
Fire a gun into a crowd as you drive by? Douchebag.

All of them pathetic, worthless, cowardly sacks of shit. There is no. justification. for. murder.

In any case, if you hate the site and the writers so much, don't let the door hit your ass on the way out.

Ed Grabianowski

This article is shoddy and unprofessional. If I see too many more of these politically motivated articles here, I will unsubscribe from the RSS feed and not read this site any further. I can get all the political bias I want from other blogs; I read this blog as well as some others to get away from it. I hope you are reading this Anna because this article has NOTHING to do with sci-fi. Stick to BSG, Terminator, sunspots and other topics that deal with space and sci-fi.

zerodamage

According to the story, a local doctor started to help him thinking he was a victim until he noticed explosives under his jacket and informed a local policeman. The local policeman inspected the man, noticed him moving (it looked as if he was attempting to detonate his package) and shot him until he was dead.

The robot was brought in to make sure the remaining bomb was not live and would not go off.

EracMan

So, why has the definition of terrorism changed since the US was hit by a major terrorist attack? Because it's run by a retarded fucking chimpanzee.

braak

braak

aspiringexpatriate

aspiringexpatriate

I pointed out that if you dropped fifteen Navy Seals in a city and told them to defend it from an invading army, they'd do exactly the same thing.

I am often a stickler for precise definitions of things, and this is exactly why.

braak

braak

JennaW

aspiringexpatriate

JennaW

92BuickLeSabre

That being said, getting all worked up over the word "douchebag" is a RIDICULOUS mountain to die on.

JennaW

aspiringexpatriate

Marcus117

I think part of the problem is exactly when we equate "terrorists" with "freedom fighters," as these are two different things which occasionally overlap--the first represents the use of a particular tactic, the second of an ideology. Sometimes, freedom fighters use terrorism; sometimes they don't. Sometimes, terrorists believe that they are freeing their people, sometimes they have a different goal in mind.

I don't have a problem labeling the tactic of detonating civilians at a shopping mall in order to achieve political gains as universally deplorable.

braak

aspiringexpatriate

And it's not about the idea of io9 and others calling terrorist douche bags fueling the problem that annoys, it's that when you do you manage to make this blog, and yourself, look like a biased idiot. Believing their actions are wrong or even believing that they aren't very well thought out is one thing, but using language and implying that it's the work is retarded fools is another.

When I read this article I got the impression that it was only posted so that a bunch of narrow minded people who believe that one situation should be the road map for another could get their kicks seeing the douche bag terrorist being crushed under the cool robot.

It's not science fiction, it's politics, it's not a worthwhile article, it's senseless baiting. It's cool images that have the loosest connection to the subject matter this site is meant to cover.

I actually believe that this could be a worthwhile blog, standing up to it's peers such as Kotaku and Gizmondo, but until the level of writing and worthwhile (relevant) stories improves it's just going to hang in limbo as something that's passable, but overall easily ignored as mediocre.

Marcus117

But seriously, how you're even going there...? *baffled*

THIS is what makes it complicated. People are too entrenched to just call a stupid situation a stupid situation. If you don't present things *just exactly in the right way to please them,* you're biased and evil.

JennaW

and @Katana_Mind:

Do you two seriously think that a bunch of people calling dead terrorists and those who long to be like the dead terrorists "douchebags" is going to impact any longterm solution to the situation? I suggest you study the Irish situation and how that has recently resolved after not just decades but centuries of intractable us-vs-themishness (outrage fully justified on the Irish side especially; actions absolutely not).

The populace treating the jerks who kept blowing each other up like the douchebags they were did play a part in their change of hearts. The solution doesn't require showing respect to the people too entrenched in the fight to see the bigger picture; it requires bringing them to a sense of how stupid their behavior is. In the long run, if they can't look at the future and realize they are destroying it for their own children by their own actions, nothing will change.

But go ahead and focus on io9 commenters calling terrorists douchebags. I'm sure once that's all stamped out, Palestine will be well on the way to peace.

JennaW

zerodamage

Dereks

@JennaW: And you've just managed to rank yourself in my list of people who don't really understand what they are talking about, but make valiant efforts to appear that they do.
Condoning a persons actions is different to asking for a degree of integrity when we examine said actions, by saying that someone is a douche and suggesting a lack of intelligence you do nothing but hurt the issue at hand.
If they are meant to put down their weapons and talk I hope it's with someone better than yourself, otherwise the bombing will never end.

Marcus117

zerodamage

And while the Situation might not look complex from an outsiders point of view [c'mon guys, all you have to do is to stop fighting, simultaneously] it seldom is to the individual who has experienced it.

@zeppelined:
The world is seldom black/white in my experience. Most often it depends on what side of the fence you're standing on. If there is a fence at all.
Sometimes you're a "terrorist" and sometimes you're a "freedom fighter".
Oh, and thanks for putting words into my mouth.

Katana_Mind

pj898

Ed Grabianowski

I didn't realize the robot ran him over though!

ltwass

Get the hell off your high horse. You know what? Everyone always says these situations are terribly complex when THEY ARE NOT. They are complex because neither side wants to back down and BOTH SIDES ARE WRONG. One side may be wronger than the other, but fuck that.

Do they have valid complaints? Yes. Is blowing up shoppers the way to address them? Fuck. No.

Ireland -- what was the solution? They finally stopped being *douchebags* and started talking.

JennaW

Marcus117

commandocody

NefariousNewt

Marcus117

However farfetched or hard to understand that persons beliefs was, the situation concerning Palestine/Israel is tremendously complex. And name-calling isn't one of the ways we need to go about ending it.

Katana_Mind