Dubstepforum.com

alien pimp wrote:there are only 2 possibilites: they knew/they were lying about it. what's your pick?

if they knew, everyone should've known about it

All they knew was that human populations almost certainly endure pandemics every few years.

There isn't a year goes by when most people don't have a day off sick. There isn't a year without a flu. During my lifetime there have been annual flu epidemics, there have been meningitis outbreaks, the AIDS virus has spread, we've worried about SARS, Bird Flu, Swine Flu... all sorts.

You're making "assume" = "know". That's not good logic.

You can assume that a pandemic will occur within the next X years without knowing what and when exactly it'll be.

the acid never lies wrote:This 'discussion' really could be a lot better

So this porn....

that's why i try to get magma out of it, and you didn't contribute anything either today, without your posts this thread would've look much better in my eyes. empty would've look better...

alien pimp wrote:empty would've look better...

We agree.

magma wrote:

alien pimp wrote:empty would've look better...

We agree.

no, it just looks like that because you're the kind of person that sees assumption in a 100% prediction.
now you will follow every fucking post of mine, addressed to you or not, and talk around it things that have no connection just to flood my threads?

let's make a deal: i never post in your threads, you never post in mine, ok?

alien pimp wrote:

magma wrote:

alien pimp wrote:empty would've look better...

We agree.

no, it just looks like that because you're the kind of person that sees assumption in a 100% prediction.

The title of the slide you posted is "IBM Plan Assumptions". I posted the definition of an assumption. How is that a 100% prediction?

alien pimp wrote:

magma wrote:

alien pimp wrote:empty would've look better...

We agree.

no, it just looks like that because you're the kind of person that sees assumption in a 100% prediction.

Yes, I see "assumptions" in a document marked "assumptions". Where did you see the word "100% prediction" in that slide?

let's make a deal: i never post in your threads, you never post in mine, ok?

I don't really see how that helps anything. I think I'll probably just carry on acting how I always act.

I fucking love these AP vs Magma threads. Where's the popcorn emote when you need it...

alien pimp wrote:without your posts this thread would've look much better in my eyes. empty would've look better...

Personally I think nearly every thread or post you make is covered in some kind of self-opinionated and conspiracy obsessed higher knowledge (read: bullshit). Thats just my opinion of course so I wouldnt expect you to agree...if it was your opinion however you would be offended If I didnt accept it as the truth and would try undermine or talk down to me until I had no option but to agree with you just to shut you up...

That is all...

collige wrote:

alien pimp wrote:

magma wrote:

alien pimp wrote:empty would've look better...

We agree.

no, it just looks like that because you're the kind of person that sees assumption in a 100% prediction.

The title of the slide you posted is "IBM Plan Assumptions". I posted the definition of an assumption. How is that a 100% prediction?

because when IBM says "it's 100% chances for something to happen in a clearly determined short period of time in future" in internal documents, called plan assumptions or not, and then it happens you know why they assumed that: they knew and they were taking action.
as it's been said, companies like that have pandemic reaction plans, governments have, have you seen anything like that before?
the only argument can be: "this is normal, nothing awkward" and that can be substantiated with similar plans made at random dates, referring to periods when the pandemics didn't happen and it all remained a "just in case something happens" plan

faust.dtc wrote:

alien pimp wrote:without your posts this thread would've look much better in my eyes. empty would've look better...

Personally I think nearly every thread or post you make is covered in some kind of self-opinionated and conspiracy obsessed higher knowledge (read: bullshit). Thats just my opinion of course so I wouldnt expect you to agree...if it was your opinion however you would be offended If I didnt accept it as the truth and would try undermine or talk down to me until I had no option but to agree with you just to shut you up...

That is all...

personally i've stated many times: opinions are like untested medicine that you allowed to take
i respect the right to have/express opinions, but i rarely express opinions myself or am interested in any, i prefer facts

alien pimp wrote:

collige wrote:

alien pimp wrote:

magma wrote:

alien pimp wrote:empty would've look better...

We agree.

no, it just looks like that because you're the kind of person that sees assumption in a 100% prediction.

The title of the slide you posted is "IBM Plan Assumptions". I posted the definition of an assumption. How is that a 100% prediction?

because when IBM says "it's 100% chances for something to happen in a clearly determined short period of time in future" in internal documents, called plan assumptions or not, and then it happens you know why they assumed that: they knew and they were taking action.
as it's been said, companies like that have pandemic reaction plans, governments have, have you seen anything like that before?

I can believe that. However, a pandemic like the one described on the slide hasn't happened yet.

Anyway, 2006-7 was around the time everyone was freaking out about bird flu, so its very possible that this document came out of that.

collige wrote:

alien pimp wrote: because when IBM says "it's 100% chances for something to happen in a clearly determined short period of time in future" in internal documents, called plan assumptions or not, and then it happens you know why they assumed that: they knew and they were taking action.
as it's been said, companies like that have pandemic reaction plans, governments have, have you seen anything like that before?

I can believe that. However, a pandemic like the one described on the slide hasn't happened yet.

Anyway, 2006-7 was around the time everyone was freaking out about bird flu, so its very possible that this document came out of that.

bird flu shit started just next year, that's what i'm saying
and you don't see the word pandemic too early in documents even in 2007 i guess
yeah, not saying it's bull's eye, but close enough, wouldn't you want to be that much well informed about pandemics and shit (and i stick to the first sentence in the document only)?
again: how often do you see such a thing? this is the real question here, maybe it happens and i don't know, but if you want to successfully argue, this is the only winning method.

alien pimp wrote: and you don't see the word pandemic too early in documents even in 2007 i guess

SARS was a possible pandemic in 2002/2003.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Severe_acu ... y_syndrome

The world went bananas, South Park even did an episode about it in April 2003:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Man's_Greed

But no, nobody was worried about pandemics until your documents start in 2007...

had my timings messed a bit but not like that:
sars was eradicated in 2004 or 2005, dead subject afterwards, until it resurrected a bit in 2007 when i think some vaccine discussions came up and they also started to discuss a bit more again about "what do we do next time it happens?". don't remember what precisely was the fuzz, had some other worries at the time.


it might have something to do with this: http://jama.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/ex ... /853-c?ct= ?

the document is from 2006, as i said, bring anything like it from that time, even from 2007, and subject's dead, bam, case closed!

alien pimp wrote:the document is from 2006, as i said, bring anything like it from that time, even from 2007, and subject's dead, bam, case closed!

Your point was nobody talked about pandemics before this document. SARS shows otherwise. Any time after SARS, documents like this simply aren't suspicious.

They weren't even suspicious before SARS... humans get sick and often, they get sick in massive numbers.

We had several major flu pandemics during the 20th Century:

In 1918 "Spanish Flu" took out over 50 million people.
In 1937 the Manchester Flu narrowly avoided becoming a pandemic.
In 1958 "Asian Flu" took out between 1 and 4 million people.
In 1968 "Hong Kong Flu" took out around a million people.

All of these, apart from Manchester, were classed as "pandemic" at the time.

That doesn't even include healthscares about CJD, Swine Flu, Bird Flu, SARS, AIDS, super-modified Streptococcal Pharyngitis (remember when sore throats were going to eat us all from within... was all the rage when I was a teenager) or MRSA.

Humans get sick. Companies and governments (whose requests, you'll notice, IBM say they'll respond to positively) need to be prepared whether it's 2007 or 1918 - we simply can't allow a repeat of the Spanish Flu.

Shock horror - a large multinational company has contingency plans for continuing to operate should a pandemic occur.

When I worked for my last employer, Bird Flu was all the rage. As such, every single employee was given instructions on what do to. Contact numbers were collected and 'drills' were run to make sure that automatic notification systems were working. Plans were drawn up so that even if a large percentage of the work force was unable to come to work, the business could still function and wouldn't go into financial ruin. There was a risk that such a pandemic could occur, and as such, preparations were made as if the pandemic was going to happen. All the preparatory work and systems cost a great deal of money. The business wasn't looking to profit from a pandemic, it was looking to be able to run as a profitable business while a pandemic occured. There's quite a difference.

Like when you buy insurance, you don't know that you're going to crash/flood your house/break everything, but you acknowledge that there is a risk of it occuring, and therefore make preparations for that eventuality.


Alien Pimp - To try and look for anything sinister in these kind of plans is pathetic, and the way that you have dealt with people making sound, logical arguments against what you've said is juvenile. If you so fervently believe in what you say then you should be able to maintain a debate without retreating into name calling or stupidity.

magma wrote:

alien pimp wrote:the document is from 2006, as i said, bring anything like it from that time, even from 2007, and subject's dead, bam, case closed!

Your point was nobody talked about pandemics before this document.

oh, thanks for letting me know, i thought my point was no one relevant had predictions of such accuracy like IBM, why exactly them and why not publicly?

alien pimp wrote:

magma wrote:

alien pimp wrote:the document is from 2006, as i said, bring anything like it from that time, even from 2007, and subject's dead, bam, case closed!

Your point was nobody talked about pandemics before this document.

oh, thanks for letting me know, i thought my point was no one relevant had predictions of such accuracy like IBM, why exactly them and why not publicly?

Their predictions haven't had any accuracy yet... last time I checked, IBM weren't in danger of dropping to 30% of their workforce. It's obvious that an "assumption" isn't a 100% prediction.... it's an insurance policy that they're very likely to have to cash in at some point.

It's internal because why would IBM want the world to know their corporate strategies? The fact that they say on that slide that they will cooperate with government wishes, shows that they're not sitting alone in a corner planning for the end of humanity. If government plans conflict with theirs, they go with the government one. Sounds very similar to the plans that were circulated here last year and earlier this year. I got provided with hand sanitiser, as did every employee... all big companies have these plans.

Seriously, the world isn't as scary as you want it to be.

magma wrote:

alien pimp wrote:the document is from 2006, as i said, bring anything like it from that time, even from 2007, and subject's dead, bam, case closed!

Your point was nobody talked about pandemics before this document. SARS shows otherwise. Any time after SARS, documents like this simply aren't suspicious.

They weren't even suspicious before SARS... humans get sick and often, they get sick in massive numbers.

We had several major flu pandemics during the 20th Century:

In 1918 "Spanish Flu" took out over 50 million people.
In 1937 the Manchester Flu narrowly avoided becoming a pandemic.
In 1958 "Asian Flu" took out between 1 and 4 million people.
In 1968 "Hong Kong Flu" took out around a million people.

All of these, apart from Manchester, were classed as "pandemic" at the time.

That doesn't even include healthscares about CJD, Swine Flu, Bird Flu, SARS, AIDS, super-modified Streptococcal Pharyngitis (remember when sore throats were going to eat us all from within... was all the rage when I was a teenager) or MRSA.

Humans get sick. Companies and governments (whose requests, you'll notice, IBM say they'll respond to positively) need to be prepared whether it's 2007 or 1918 - we simply can't allow a repeat of the Spanish Flu.

and the whole post is besides the point again, you don't understand simple sentences, it's not about that, can you provide other documents where the forthcoming epidemics were so accurately predicted with 100% if it's nothing unusual? can you understand at least that bolded sentence?

alien pimp wrote:can you provide other documents where the forthcoming epidemics were so accurately predicted with 100% if it's nothing unusual? can you understand at least that bolded sentence?

Because I don't have access to other companies internal networks and because I don't want to lose my job for posting corporate documents online - no, I can't.

What I can show you is that human populations being worried and planning for pandemics is nothing new - it's something we've been worried about since before the days of the Bubonic Plague. Frankly, this is enough to show that there is nothing sinister about anything you posted.

I'm really not trying to insult you, but when your only reply to my sensible points are to insult me (because you have no logical argument other than a picture of a slide from a company you know nothing about preparing for an illness you also know nothing about) then it becomes rather difficult.

Are you really this desperate for the world to be exciting? Why don't you write comics instead of trying to post about the real world? You could create a brilliant little dystopian comic strip with all these ideas in your head and the great music you make.

Please don't get so offended when people don't agree with your opinion. You've got to stop being such a sensitive flower if you want to talk about stuff like this on the internet.