Slashdot Mirror

Ann Coulter is an opinion-writer, not a news-source — just as Camille Paglia, whom I quoted earlier without any objections from you.

Obvious excuse is obvious. I'm asking what justification is there (aside from Right-wing paranoia of some vast takeover conspiracy) that we should flat out dissolve the DoE. You? You're bringing opinions to the table. For me, or anyone, to object to an opinion makes about as much sense as objecting to someone saying, "I don't like electronica music." My objection is that you have yet to answer my question, and I'm annoyed this isn't already clear as fucking day to you. Surprised? No. Just annoyed.

I didn't ask you for news citations,

Cheap dismissal technique for any citations you find inconvenient.

...and I didn't dispute the fact, that America's Public Schools education is declining —

LOLWUT? Wait, so you agree the educational system is going down the tubes, but somehow you require citations regarding misbehavior of States in handling their business, who just happen to, oh yeah, set state guidelines for education, direct funds to cities & local districts, and control the aforementioned to make sure children are properly educated... Take your grandstanding to make yourself look smart and fuck off. You can double that prescription while you're at it, considering all the details I've posted so far, and that all you can offer is "You Lie! I disagree! My opinion that I copied from Mann Coulter has more validity than reality!" As far as that Camille Paglia quote, it sounds a little like an out of context, snipped from a long, unrelated editorial, so again, that's just another red-herring.

...in fact, this was my whole point against rewarding failure at the Department of Education,

What reward? What the hell are you talking about? In case the concept has not sunk into your dense skull, THE FEDERAL DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION CONTROLS GIVING MONEY TO STATES, MONEY THE GOVERNMENT ALREADY HAS. THEY ARE NOT A PRIVATE AND SEPARATE GROUP FROM THE REST OF THE GOVERNMENT. What crack have you been smoking?
What a smart person you are.

which we didn't even have until 1979, and the education was better before then.

How is this relevant? In regards to the Southern social standards that said segregation and discrimination were "A-Okay!" prior to the Federal Government stepping in and saying something had to change? Or maybe this is in regards to literacy rates? I'm not here to give undue credit to the DoE, but it looks an awful lot like a broad social movement swept the nation to improve literacy and education across the board, formalized with the creation of the DoE. How do formal rules that say you can't arbitrarily give some people the short end of the stick regarding educational opportunities equal a "failure?" Explain.

What I asked you, was citations of the States not learning from each other's mistakes...

Once again, fuck off. I've already posted a number of links, some evidencing, among other things, that we are on average slipping in terms of skills. Simple knowledge of mathematical averaging tells you that either at one end, all districts are doing rather mediocre to poo, or on the other end some are doing very well, while the majority of others are crapping things up. This isn't a fucking College thesis, I'm not about to go chasing a billion citations around for your benefit, and the fucking issue IS FOR YOU TO ANSWER MY FUCKING QUESTION. Quit stalling.

Is it your contention, that only peo

Waaaah! Waaah! Big bad guhv'nmint iz takin' our monieezzz! Dey shoodn't taxez mine, just the lib'rals dat i h8tez!

fix'd

And your true colors shine through. /bullshit or GTFO.

Waaaah! Waaah! Big bad guhv'nmint iz takin' our monieezzz! Dey shoodn't taxez mine, just the lib'rals dat i h8tez!

fix'd

And your true colors shine through. /bullshit or GTFO.

Waaaah! Waaah! Big bad guhv'nmint iz takin' our monieezzz! Dey shoodn't taxez mine, just the lib'rals dat i h8tez!

fix'd

And your true colors shine through. /bullshit or GTFO.

Waaaah! Waaah! Big bad guhv'nmint iz takin' our monieezzz! Dey shoodn't taxez mine, just the lib'rals dat i h8tez!

fix'd

And your true colors shine through. /bullshit or GTFO.

There is a significant portion of furries that are an overflowing font of drama. These mainly fall into two groups: the batshit insane, and the ones who take everything Too Fucking Seriously. The first one consists of the fursuiters, the people who serious believe they are an animal trapped in a human body or some shit like that, and so on. The second consists of the people who indignantly say "it's not a fetish, it's a lifestyle!", the people who scream "fursection!" and start namedropping Hitler and Nazis like it's the early 40s all over again, the people who simply can't handle someone calling them a pervert and feels they absolutely must correct their flawed way of thinking at once, the people who turn every little fucking slight against their furriness into their own personal one-man war, and so on.

It shouldn't be too hard to see why furries thus draw so much loathing and mockery, even when you might think that, say, guro fans ought to be objectively disliked more.

Because, as we all know, flight has nothing to do with lift and drag, amirite?

What I really don't get is why you continue to try to apply the dynamics of a plane to something that is obviously not one. This is essentially a solar powered glider. 'Nuff said.

He didn't hire a small army, he was part of a small army.
http://encyclopediadramatica.com/Chanology - NSFW
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chanology

And your proposal is exactly the argument I just tore down.

Please read the following slowly and carefully:
If a state education board is already mishandling the funds they currently receive, how will it help to give them even more money, but now WITHOUT ANY strings attached?
I have yet to see an answer to that question.

I just realized the most alarming part. You said "redisctribute all the funds back to the states." Technically, you're not even talking about it going to education, or any requirement that it be used as such. Just give it to the state. Dump it in a slush fund? Or maybe see that it gets earmarked by toot-sweet. Because, as we know, such funding has never been misused. Never ever, Amirite?

And your proposal is exactly the argument I just tore down.

Please read the following slowly and carefully:
If a state education board is already mishandling the funds they currently receive, how will it help to give them even more money, but now WITHOUT ANY strings attached?
I have yet to see an answer to that question.

I just realized the most alarming part. You said "redisctribute all the funds back to the states." Technically, you're not even talking about it going to education, or any requirement that it be used as such. Just give it to the state. Dump it in a slush fund? Or maybe see that it gets earmarked by toot-sweet. Because, as we know, such funding has never been misused. Never ever, Amirite?

And your proposal is exactly the argument I just tore down.

Please read the following slowly and carefully:
If a state education board is already mishandling the funds they currently receive, how will it help to give them even more money, but now WITHOUT ANY strings attached?
I have yet to see an answer to that question.

I just realized the most alarming part. You said "redisctribute all the funds back to the states." Technically, you're not even talking about it going to education, or any requirement that it be used as such. Just give it to the state. Dump it in a slush fund? Or maybe see that it gets earmarked by toot-sweet. Because, as we know, such funding has never been misused. Never ever, Amirite?

If/when a State's department screws up, only that State is affected, and the others learn, how not to do things. When the Federal department screws up, we are all affected and — having little to compare with — may not even know, how much better (or worse) the things could be.

Well, wouldn't that just be peaches and cream...if it were true. I'd love it if all our varying governmental institutions, from the local to the state level, took to heart the lessons taught by the failures of others. But let's be honest; how many can you say to yourself have actually followed this path? So far few, if any, local state education boards have implemented this "learn from others' mistakes" ideology, which, yes, would be a great benefit for them to endorse. We have yet, however, to see governmental institutions do so on any sort of broad scale. The current state of most of our schools, and so many other parts of our decaying infrastructure, makes that painfully self-evident.
As far as that last bit about how much better or worse things could be, I can only say this: I don't need to wait until a bullet is burrowing through my ribcage or my cranium to know I don't want to get shot, or predict what will happen if the trigger is pulled. You still fail to justify disbanding an entire federal department on the "basis of we don't know what will happen." You're wrong. Again. We do.
In the words of George Santayana, "Those who cannot learn from history are doomed to repeat it."

More importantly, most of the modern "national" Departments violate the Constitution — if not in letter, then in spirit — by usurping the powers not explicitly enumerated as Federal by the document. Lip-service to that is still paid by Congress — the Federal attempts to regulate the maximum speed nationally, for example, are hidden behind "federal highway money": States don't have to set certain speed limits, but will not get federal funds, unless they cap the speeds...

LOLWUT? Been indulging in some "recreational substances" there, chief? State governments are more than free to NOT TAKE Federal money. No one forces the cash down states' throats. But guess what? If you want to feed at the Federal trough, you play by their rules. Same thing any responsible parent tells their snotty teenager: "As long as you're living under my roof..." I do believe the proper term for claiming rights to taxpayer money without strings is called...*ahem*... Entitlement.

Peace is the absence of opposition to Socialism.

Oops.

I don't understand the modern Left's obsession with the all-knowing and benevolent Central government. What happened to "stick it to the man", etc? I'm not alone in my puzzlement, BTW:

... somehow liberals have drifted into a strange servility toward big government, which they revere as a godlike foster father-mother who can dispense all bounty and magically heal all ills.

That's only part of the picture. Definitely, a good number do believe that Uncle Sam will do everything including providing a nice clean and soft wipe for their backside, followed by just the right amount of baby powder during their diaper change. Some of them are in the Republican Party, too. Remember all the tax cuts and bailouts for big business since 2000?

In the end, I'm just sick and tired of bullshit arguments being pushed as

If/when a State's department screws up, only that State is affected, and the others learn, how not to do things. When the Federal department screws up, we are all affected and — having little to compare with — may not even know, how much better (or worse) the things could be.

Well, wouldn't that just be peaches and cream...if it were true. I'd love it if all our varying governmental institutions, from the local to the state level, took to heart the lessons taught by the failures of others. But let's be honest; how many can you say to yourself have actually followed this path? So far few, if any, local state education boards have implemented this "learn from others' mistakes" ideology, which, yes, would be a great benefit for them to endorse. We have yet, however, to see governmental institutions do so on any sort of broad scale. The current state of most of our schools, and so many other parts of our decaying infrastructure, makes that painfully self-evident.
As far as that last bit about how much better or worse things could be, I can only say this: I don't need to wait until a bullet is burrowing through my ribcage or my cranium to know I don't want to get shot, or predict what will happen if the trigger is pulled. You still fail to justify disbanding an entire federal department on the "basis of we don't know what will happen." You're wrong. Again. We do.
In the words of George Santayana, "Those who cannot learn from history are doomed to repeat it."

More importantly, most of the modern "national" Departments violate the Constitution — if not in letter, then in spirit — by usurping the powers not explicitly enumerated as Federal by the document. Lip-service to that is still paid by Congress — the Federal attempts to regulate the maximum speed nationally, for example, are hidden behind "federal highway money": States don't have to set certain speed limits, but will not get federal funds, unless they cap the speeds...

LOLWUT? Been indulging in some "recreational substances" there, chief? State governments are more than free to NOT TAKE Federal money. No one forces the cash down states' throats. But guess what? If you want to feed at the Federal trough, you play by their rules. Same thing any responsible parent tells their snotty teenager: "As long as you're living under my roof..." I do believe the proper term for claiming rights to taxpayer money without strings is called...*ahem*... Entitlement.

Peace is the absence of opposition to Socialism.

Oops.

I don't understand the modern Left's obsession with the all-knowing and benevolent Central government. What happened to "stick it to the man", etc? I'm not alone in my puzzlement, BTW:

... somehow liberals have drifted into a strange servility toward big government, which they revere as a godlike foster father-mother who can dispense all bounty and magically heal all ills.

That's only part of the picture. Definitely, a good number do believe that Uncle Sam will do everything including providing a nice clean and soft wipe for their backside, followed by just the right amount of baby powder during their diaper change. Some of them are in the Republican Party, too. Remember all the tax cuts and bailouts for big business since 2000?

In the end, I'm just sick and tired of bullshit arguments being pushed as

I think a micro black hole ate your verb ;)

Intentional, actually: http://encyclopediadramatica.com/I_accidentally_X

For great justice!

Wikipedia should ban people for being murderers like Something Awful does

http://encyclopediadramatica.com/Andrew_Allred#Public_Reactions

Also I just permabanned this guy because he murdered two people: http://forums.somethingawful.com/member.php?s=&action=getinfo&userid=84611

Now the question I have here is that, in the rules, it doesn't explicitly state you will be permabanned or punished in any way if you murder people. Does this make the user terms of conditions unclear?

...this could be the theological equivalent of executing a proof, thinking you've got it right, only to wind up dividing by zero. Oops. Let's just review those first equations again...
On the other hand, though, they could easily explain it away by saying only humans have souls, and therefore aliens are really just demons/not living or some other gibberish like that. It wouldn't be the first time religion has dehumanized/demonized (meh, really don't have any better terms than those right now) individuals, groups (social, religious and ethnic populations), and ideas, simply because they conflicted with the Church doctrine.

As long as whatever they decide doesn't include a Xenu figure, they'll leave the illustrious status of "Most despicable 'religion' in the world," to those who deserve it.

If you want to know about Drama, check Dramatica, not Wikipedia.
(NSFW) http://encyclopediadramatica.com/Violet_Blue

But she's just looking out for her kid, right? She should be able to take the necessary steps, amirite?

But she's just looking out for her kid, right? She should be able to take the necessary steps, amirite?

http://encyclopediadramatica.com/SFW_Porn is an example of SFW porn.

... and why does the first link in the summary go to very very NSFW porn?

Explain what SFW porn is, please.

Here you go.

Well, TV's have already hit the 1080p pinnacle, Blu-Ray won the format wars, and the whole HD-media-over-wireless... Yeah, well, I've yet to hear about it panning out in a cost-effective form while retaining decent quality along with the tech being over a year or two old now, so I guess the media covering home theater needs something to tout as the Next Big Thing (TM). Until viable high-quality, consumer holographic displays show up along with a viable need/demand in the mainstream market, this is the most interesting thing I've seen in regards to 3d type stuff. And even that is old by internet standards.

To be honest, I've not watched any "new" 3d movies. I've heard that it looks really nice, but then you also need to wear the glasses--srsly, I already wear specs. Hate them, don't want another pair. As far as in home theaters, do you need a special tv that can display it? Or does the movie have to be specially formatted for 3d? Either way, it sounds like paying at least a small (per movie) to large (for a special tv) amount extra over the non-3d version. Until I watch such a film and find myself in need of a fresh pair of pants and my ambulatory extremity undergarments expelled from my personage via sheer amazement, I remain skeptical.

Virus is replacing a static image, not a video.
Image should be replaced with a duckroll.

No proper villains these days.

All it really means is that the creator messed up.

...but there's a big whole in that argument, which, I'm sure, MS doesn't like being mentioned. IMHO, one of the biggest holes in security is the clueless user. We all know 'em. "Oooh, pretty cursors, and they're free," "I'll just email my username & password to someone so they can login to my account for *miscellaneous-reason*, and yes, that's over unencrypted email" "I just store all my info in My Documents," (including textfiles with usernames/passwords, personal info including credit card/bank account info, etc), "Bah! I can't view this crazy website properly! I'll just turn off the firewall/anti-malware program," "Oh, nifty IE toolbar! Sure I've never heard of this website/company/group/whatever providing it, but it looks pretty cool so I'll install it," "Internet cache? What's that? Defrag? Virus Scan? Fooey!" "Huh. I don't know who this person that emailed me is, or why they're emailing me about (insert tragic/horrific/frightening/miraculous/ridiculous or whatever urban legend/trope/myth/etc here), but I think I'll pass this email on like it says to. After all, if I don't send to at least 10 people in the next 5 minutes, then (insert promise of disaster/catastrophe or great happiness/wealth here, conditional on them forwarding spam)" "I made my password, 'Password'! Isn't it clever? No one will think it'll be that!" And so on, and so forth. Or how about the cluess admin that leaves a username or password of "admin" on a server or other network profile? "1-2-3-4-5? That's amazing! I've got the same combination on my luggage."

If they're drawing conclusions like this already, I can't help but wonder if they plan on hiding behind this when they roll out some new, more restrictive anti-piracy scheme. I'm not advocating piracy by any means, but MS seems to spend more time and money conniving how to get everybody to fork over a hefty chunk of cash for the "latest and greatest" version of their OS or software, rather than trying to fix bugs still in the last version. That, and trying to brainwash people into believing they're the only legitimate option. I hope they realize, if they think the Win7 release buys them enough good will to start monkeying around, that it only goes so far, which isn't far at all after infecting the World with Vista.

Oh I'm so tired of this tired old mantra.

Ok...name one fully proprietary standard or protocol that is absolutely critical to, in the broad sense, the functioning of the internet at large... I'm waiting.

If everyone relied so much on standards, why do all the major browsers support .innerHTML, which is not part of W3C ? Because Microsoft did it first (right or wrong, it works, and is a lot cleaner than all that messing with DOM nodes)...

That's one of maybe a handful of things they may have gotten sorta right, depending, of course, on the viewpoint of whichever web developer you'd ask...see here. Ajax is DOM based, lots of sites use Ajax. Including /. That tells me DOM isn't the widely spurned standard you portray. Further, we can see here that IE, in fact, also supports it. Even further, when reading here, under 'Nonstandard Features', the article notes...

Internet Explorer has introduced a number of extensions to JScript which have been adopted by other browsers. These include the innerHTML property, which returns the HTML string within an element; the XMLHttpRequest object, which allows the sending of HTTP request and receiving of HTTP response; and the designMode attribute of the contentDocument object, which enables rich text editing of HTML documents. Some of these functionalities were not possible until the introduction of the W3C DOM methods.

'Nuff said.

and the competition had to make a choice between :-

1) Aceepting that standards are out-of-date before they are ever finalised (because anything decided by a committee of 1000's is doomed to failure)

Lolwut? Aceepting? How is that done? When & how did the W3 standards become "out of date"? What's the qualifier, oh, great all-knowing master of teh vast intarwebs? Oh, also, here's a tip. I'm going to go out on a limb and assume you're an IE user based off your enthusiastic support for Bill & Steve, or at least their browser. If there's no spell-checker in IE, there's always wordpad. [WINKEY]+R, type "Wordpad", hit Enter. Voilà! That way you won't seem quite as idiotic & incoherent when you post. Unfortunately, the content of your post is just something for which I can't render proper assistance. But I do wish you and your IQ the best of luck. You'll need it.

or

2) Risk having the world saying "Firefox / Safari / Opera sucks because the DHTML don't work like is does in IE".

Yes, everyone is saying those browsers suck, in the form of using them more while abandoning IE... This should be obvious, amirite?

So what it really boils down to is a case of the other browsers playing a game of "you should follow standards like we do, unless MS or someone else do something better, in which we'll ignore the principles we were founded on and simply follow the leader instead".

LOL, disproven.

Or perhaps would you have all browser development forbidden until the HTML5 spec is finalized when ? 2025 ?

I guess you're an expert on these things, yes? I think listening to someone who can't even spell-check would be a good idea.

Oh I'm so tired of this tired old mantra.

Ok...name one fully proprietary standard or protocol that is absolutely critical to, in the broad sense, the functioning of the internet at large... I'm waiting.

If everyone relied so much on standards, why do all the major browsers support .innerHTML, which is not part of W3C ? Because Microsoft did it first (right or wrong, it works, and is a lot cleaner than all that messing with DOM nodes)...

That's one of maybe a handful of things they may have gotten sorta right, depending, of course, on the viewpoint of whichever web developer you'd ask...see here. Ajax is DOM based, lots of sites use Ajax. Including /. That tells me DOM isn't the widely spurned standard you portray. Further, we can see here that IE, in fact, also supports it. Even further, when reading here, under 'Nonstandard Features', the article notes...

Internet Explorer has introduced a number of extensions to JScript which have been adopted by other browsers. These include the innerHTML property, which returns the HTML string within an element; the XMLHttpRequest object, which allows the sending of HTTP request and receiving of HTTP response; and the designMode attribute of the contentDocument object, which enables rich text editing of HTML documents. Some of these functionalities were not possible until the introduction of the W3C DOM methods.

'Nuff said.

and the competition had to make a choice between :-

1) Aceepting that standards are out-of-date before they are ever finalised (because anything decided by a committee of 1000's is doomed to failure)

Lolwut? Aceepting? How is that done? When & how did the W3 standards become "out of date"? What's the qualifier, oh, great all-knowing master of teh vast intarwebs? Oh, also, here's a tip. I'm going to go out on a limb and assume you're an IE user based off your enthusiastic support for Bill & Steve, or at least their browser. If there's no spell-checker in IE, there's always wordpad. [WINKEY]+R, type "Wordpad", hit Enter. Voilà! That way you won't seem quite as idiotic & incoherent when you post. Unfortunately, the content of your post is just something for which I can't render proper assistance. But I do wish you and your IQ the best of luck. You'll need it.

or

2) Risk having the world saying "Firefox / Safari / Opera sucks because the DHTML don't work like is does in IE".

Yes, everyone is saying those browsers suck, in the form of using them more while abandoning IE... This should be obvious, amirite?

So what it really boils down to is a case of the other browsers playing a game of "you should follow standards like we do, unless MS or someone else do something better, in which we'll ignore the principles we were founded on and simply follow the leader instead".

LOL, disproven.

Or perhaps would you have all browser development forbidden until the HTML5 spec is finalized when ? 2025 ?

I guess you're an expert on these things, yes? I think listening to someone who can't even spell-check would be a good idea.

Oh I'm so tired of this tired old mantra.

Ok...name one fully proprietary standard or protocol that is absolutely critical to, in the broad sense, the functioning of the internet at large... I'm waiting.

If everyone relied so much on standards, why do all the major browsers support .innerHTML, which is not part of W3C ? Because Microsoft did it first (right or wrong, it works, and is a lot cleaner than all that messing with DOM nodes)...

That's one of maybe a handful of things they may have gotten sorta right, depending, of course, on the viewpoint of whichever web developer you'd ask...see here. Ajax is DOM based, lots of sites use Ajax. Including /. That tells me DOM isn't the widely spurned standard you portray. Further, we can see here that IE, in fact, also supports it. Even further, when reading here, under 'Nonstandard Features', the article notes...

Internet Explorer has introduced a number of extensions to JScript which have been adopted by other browsers. These include the innerHTML property, which returns the HTML string within an element; the XMLHttpRequest object, which allows the sending of HTTP request and receiving of HTTP response; and the designMode attribute of the contentDocument object, which enables rich text editing of HTML documents. Some of these functionalities were not possible until the introduction of the W3C DOM methods.

'Nuff said.

and the competition had to make a choice between :-

1) Aceepting that standards are out-of-date before they are ever finalised (because anything decided by a committee of 1000's is doomed to failure)

Lolwut? Aceepting? How is that done? When & how did the W3 standards become "out of date"? What's the qualifier, oh, great all-knowing master of teh vast intarwebs? Oh, also, here's a tip. I'm going to go out on a limb and assume you're an IE user based off your enthusiastic support for Bill & Steve, or at least their browser. If there's no spell-checker in IE, there's always wordpad. [WINKEY]+R, type "Wordpad", hit Enter. Voilà! That way you won't seem quite as idiotic & incoherent when you post. Unfortunately, the content of your post is just something for which I can't render proper assistance. But I do wish you and your IQ the best of luck. You'll need it.

or

2) Risk having the world saying "Firefox / Safari / Opera sucks because the DHTML don't work like is does in IE".

Yes, everyone is saying those browsers suck, in the form of using them more while abandoning IE... This should be obvious, amirite?

So what it really boils down to is a case of the other browsers playing a game of "you should follow standards like we do, unless MS or someone else do something better, in which we'll ignore the principles we were founded on and simply follow the leader instead".

LOL, disproven.

Or perhaps would you have all browser development forbidden until the HTML5 spec is finalized when ? 2025 ?

I guess you're an expert on these things, yes? I think listening to someone who can't even spell-check would be a good idea.

• The My Documents folder is a special folder that, by default, is located on the C:\ drive
• That most software, Explorer.exe itself included, by default, will recurse subdirectories
• Most of the things discussed here can be changed, like what folders you are sharing, and even where My Docs points can be changed too...like to a different drive
• If you have anything above retard level intelligence, you'd know to keep sensitive material anywhere but a default, commonly trolled, and (lacking proper security) easily exploitable folder like My Docs...
• ...Like, say, in an encrypted, password-protected archive on a flash drive you never let out of your sight? Or better yet, said archive on a fully encrypted portable hard drive that you make sure not to leave plugged in...
• Best solution, don't run your p2p on the same system as for super secret government work; you could maybe try running the p2p under a restricted linux virtual machine? At bare minimum, create a separate special user account specifically for either accessing the sensitive files, or else a restricted one for p2p activities

...then I'm inclined to think they're speaking as security experts, seeing as to how they've most certainly passed their advanced computer science classes. This isn't Soviet Russia, I'll skip the propaganda, thank you very much.

• The My Documents folder is a special folder that, by default, is located on the C:\ drive
• That most software, Explorer.exe itself included, by default, will recurse subdirectories
• Most of the things discussed here can be changed, like what folders you are sharing, and even where My Docs points can be changed too...like to a different drive
• If you have anything above retard level intelligence, you'd know to keep sensitive material anywhere but a default, commonly trolled, and (lacking proper security) easily exploitable folder like My Docs...
• ...Like, say, in an encrypted, password-protected archive on a flash drive you never let out of your sight? Or better yet, said archive on a fully encrypted portable hard drive that you make sure not to leave plugged in...
• Best solution, don't run your p2p on the same system as for super secret government work; you could maybe try running the p2p under a restricted linux virtual machine? At bare minimum, create a separate special user account specifically for either accessing the sensitive files, or else a restricted one for p2p activities

...then I'm inclined to think they're speaking as security experts, seeing as to how they've most certainly passed their advanced computer science classes. This isn't Soviet Russia, I'll skip the propaganda, thank you very much.

• The My Documents folder is a special folder that, by default, is located on the C:\ drive
• That most software, Explorer.exe itself included, by default, will recurse subdirectories
• Most of the things discussed here can be changed, like what folders you are sharing, and even where My Docs points can be changed too...like to a different drive
• If you have anything above retard level intelligence, you'd know to keep sensitive material anywhere but a default, commonly trolled, and (lacking proper security) easily exploitable folder like My Docs...
• ...Like, say, in an encrypted, password-protected archive on a flash drive you never let out of your sight? Or better yet, said archive on a fully encrypted portable hard drive that you make sure not to leave plugged in...
• Best solution, don't run your p2p on the same system as for super secret government work; you could maybe try running the p2p under a restricted linux virtual machine? At bare minimum, create a separate special user account specifically for either accessing the sensitive files, or else a restricted one for p2p activities

...then I'm inclined to think they're speaking as security experts, seeing as to how they've most certainly passed their advanced computer science classes. This isn't Soviet Russia, I'll skip the propaganda, thank you very much.

• The My Documents folder is a special folder that, by default, is located on the C:\ drive
• That most software, Explorer.exe itself included, by default, will recurse subdirectories
• Most of the things discussed here can be changed, like what folders you are sharing, and even where My Docs points can be changed too...like to a different drive
• If you have anything above retard level intelligence, you'd know to keep sensitive material anywhere but a default, commonly trolled, and (lacking proper security) easily exploitable folder like My Docs...
• ...Like, say, in an encrypted, password-protected archive on a flash drive you never let out of your sight? Or better yet, said archive on a fully encrypted portable hard drive that you make sure not to leave plugged in...
• Best solution, don't run your p2p on the same system as for super secret government work; you could maybe try running the p2p under a restricted linux virtual machine? At bare minimum, create a separate special user account specifically for either accessing the sensitive files, or else a restricted one for p2p activities

...then I'm inclined to think they're speaking as security experts, seeing as to how they've most certainly passed their advanced computer science classes. This isn't Soviet Russia, I'll skip the propaganda, thank you very much.

• The My Documents folder is a special folder that, by default, is located on the C:\ drive
• That most software, Explorer.exe itself included, by default, will recurse subdirectories
• Most of the things discussed here can be changed, like what folders you are sharing, and even where My Docs points can be changed too...like to a different drive
• If you have anything above retard level intelligence, you'd know to keep sensitive material anywhere but a default, commonly trolled, and (lacking proper security) easily exploitable folder like My Docs...
• ...Like, say, in an encrypted, password-protected archive on a flash drive you never let out of your sight? Or better yet, said archive on a fully encrypted portable hard drive that you make sure not to leave plugged in...
• Best solution, don't run your p2p on the same system as for super secret government work; you could maybe try running the p2p under a restricted linux virtual machine? At bare minimum, create a separate special user account specifically for either accessing the sensitive files, or else a restricted one for p2p activities

...then I'm inclined to think they're speaking as security experts, seeing as to how they've most certainly passed their advanced computer science classes. This isn't Soviet Russia, I'll skip the propaganda, thank you very much.

• The My Documents folder is a special folder that, by default, is located on the C:\ drive
• That most software, Explorer.exe itself included, by default, will recurse subdirectories
• Most of the things discussed here can be changed, like what folders you are sharing, and even where My Docs points can be changed too...like to a different drive
• If you have anything above retard level intelligence, you'd know to keep sensitive material anywhere but a default, commonly trolled, and (lacking proper security) easily exploitable folder like My Docs...
• ...Like, say, in an encrypted, password-protected archive on a flash drive you never let out of your sight? Or better yet, said archive on a fully encrypted portable hard drive that you make sure not to leave plugged in...
• Best solution, don't run your p2p on the same system as for super secret government work; you could maybe try running the p2p under a restricted linux virtual machine? At bare minimum, create a separate special user account specifically for either accessing the sensitive files, or else a restricted one for p2p activities

...then I'm inclined to think they're speaking as security experts, seeing as to how they've most certainly passed their advanced computer science classes. This isn't Soviet Russia, I'll skip the propaganda, thank you very much.

• The My Documents folder is a special folder that, by default, is located on the C:\ drive
• That most software, Explorer.exe itself included, by default, will recurse subdirectories
• Most of the things discussed here can be changed, like what folders you are sharing, and even where My Docs points can be changed too...like to a different drive
• If you have anything above retard level intelligence, you'd know to keep sensitive material anywhere but a default, commonly trolled, and (lacking proper security) easily exploitable folder like My Docs...
• ...Like, say, in an encrypted, password-protected archive on a flash drive you never let out of your sight? Or better yet, said archive on a fully encrypted portable hard drive that you make sure not to leave plugged in...
• Best solution, don't run your p2p on the same system as for super secret government work; you could maybe try running the p2p under a restricted linux virtual machine? At bare minimum, create a separate special user account specifically for either accessing the sensitive files, or else a restricted one for p2p activities

...then I'm inclined to think they're speaking as security experts, seeing as to how they've most certainly passed their advanced computer science classes. This isn't Soviet Russia, I'll skip the propaganda, thank you very much.

Or if you're enough of a geek, rock out with your cock out and play with windows 7.

FTFY... /. isn't GameFAGs, you know.

You have thought about robbing a bank more than once, have you? ^^

Locke's rights-based ethics [...]

You don't mean that Locke, do you?

Actually, not a bad way to poison a bot's intelligence. Its been done before, with hilarious results (well, if you like 4chan-style humor), with a chatbot called Bucket. It was designed to pick up the basics of the English language and conversation techniques from random internet users.

Then 4chan found it.

http://encyclopediadramatica.com/Bucket has the full story, along with quotes and screenshots.

That is like a Japanese Fetish.
Otaku even have Maid cafés
I am sure they wouldn't mind a few a feminine male geeks too.
Gotta watch out for those Traps (NSFW prolly)

Ugh, someone get the Troll repellent. They're apparently out in droves today.

Because, obviously, if an authority like Anonymous Coward has never heard of it, it must not exist. A very smart person who probably knows a lot about this sort of thing.

Because, obviously, if an authority like Anonymous Coward has never heard of it, it must not exist. A very smart person who probably knows a lot about this sort of thing.

Because, obviously, if an authority like Anonymous Coward has never heard of it, it must not exist. A very smart person who probably knows a lot about this sort of thing.

Because, obviously, if an authority like Anonymous Coward has never heard of it, it must not exist. A very smart person who probably knows a lot about this sort of thing.

Because, obviously, if an authority like Anonymous Coward has never heard of it, it must not exist. A very smart person who probably knows a lot about this sort of thing.

Because, obviously, if an authority like Anonymous Coward has never heard of it, it must not exist. A very smart person who probably knows a lot about this sort of thing.

Of course, others like their computing without advertisements and are willing to pay money for that.

...

...Wut?

Cool story, bro

Jesus Christ, I was expecting an article on Admiral Ackbar! NSFW, man, NSFW!

As any good /b/tard knows, when in doubt it's always a trap