There was a fellow a couple years ago who was sued for writing a sequel to "Catcher in the Rye"
Yea, by fucking J.D. Salinger himself (or did mentioning that little tidbit weaken your argument too much to make it worthy of a mention?)
So sad that this is where you've invested your moral outrage, that one of the century's most noted author's sued because he didn't want some talentless ass hat publishing fan fiction (a.k.a. unoriginal self-indulgent feculence) to muddy his genuine, original and critically acclaimed novel.
Hammer on Disney and the other greedycorps all you want, but when a living author wants to protect his own work/invention/legacy, he has every right to do so and piss on every self-righteous dick (including the comparatively talentless hacks of the world) who tells him otherwise.
Personally, I'd rather not work for a firm where the quality of my work doesn't equate in the least with the pay calculations.
Wow, that was like a triple-negative sentence... absolutely no idea if you are for or against being a slacker and fair pay for laziness... and don't think you didn't break my brain with that... er, in the least.
Of course, given the NSA can dictate terms to the President, Congress and Federal judges, the coup might have already happened. Would you notice if it had? Would you care?
People would notice when the next elections weren't held, or the person winning the vote didn't take office.
The Devil's greatest trick is convincing you he doesn't exist. Now, while I'm loathe to use a religious maxim to point out the error in your thinking, it seemed apt.
If you looked behind the curtain of freedom and democracy you are pointing your finger at, you'd see self-interest groups (corporations, the very rich) applying lobbyists and likely more nefarious means of manipulation/regulation/control on their local/state/federal politicians, those very politicians whose only real motivation is to win the next election, and the media manipulating the population's fear/greed/loneliness to keep them tuned into their 'message' and keep them consuming (to appease their corporate owners and financial sponsors respectively). All backed up by a failed education system and two-parents-working economy that produces nothing but mindless minions who almost universally ignore and accept as required (or forget/abandon their occasional outrage so fast the separation from outright indifference is negligible).
But hey, if you are comfortable with the illusion of freedom and control over your future, more power to you.
Just being a non-US citizen doesn't make a person a foreign power. Spying on the governments of other countries, fine. Spying on the citizens of other countries is just as bad as spying on US citizens.
I have no problem with it.
So just to be clear, Mr. ordinary self-interested citizen of the USA, as long as your criminal Stasi organizations and the douche politicians that enable them are only spying on the ordinary, law-abiding people outside your borders, you're good to go?
I can't help but think you'd be pissing furious if you found out the GCHQ had recorded all of your conversations for the last few years, and would be first to whine about the illegality of it all. And at how hard I'll laugh when it turns out to be true.
To make universal knowledge a reality, it is first necessary to have all books and journals available in torrents and file sharing sites everywhere. When we can all download knowledge as easily as the latest hollywood blockbuster, only *then* can the politicians be convinced to change the laws to agree with what people already expect by that time.
<sarcasm>Yes, because that's exactly what happened with movies and music.</sarcasm>
And what the hell are "unavoidable facts on the ground". Sounds like you're talking dog shit.
There should be profit sharing involved. And key people - like the lead developers and lead creatives - should get a big enough share of that profit to motivate them and entice them to use it on other projects to keep them fresh.
You have made a common but (as Sheldon would say) not forgiveable error in your reasoning. Two, in fact.
First, the "Talent" makes big money because they actually draw people to the movie. Enough to justify their huge salary? Yes. The market wouldn't bear it otherwise. Nobody, esp. studio execs., gives RDJ $25 mil because they dig the goatee. By your logic, grips and best boys should be getting big pay checks too.
There is *no* parallel in gaming, or at best the company itself is the "Talent". Voice actors, capture artists, designers, etc. do not individually draw major numbers of customers to purchase a game. The only people who do (and they are few in number) are creative director-types who do, in fact, earn great pay checks.
As to profit sharing, should these self-same developers take a huge pay cut if the work was a failure? Or, do only the people who a) built their company up from the ground, over years or decades, to reach this point, and/or b) poured all the front-money including salaries into the project, have to suffer if the game fails?
These developers you speak of are absolutely free to quit their secure jobs, go start a company, develop their own games and keep all the profits. They don't, of course, and that's why they don't get to show up with a cup in their hand when their company's 'AAA' hits it big.
If you paying to remove your photo, then chances are you are a hypocrite who as attacked and ridiculed others for that behaviour and well, you deserve what you get.
What an insanely vapid rant, on literally every single point you made.
I've never had a cause to worry about this, but the undertones of patheti-sad rage in your middle-school English rant seem to indicate you have some pretty deep-seated issues, though I cannot fathom how this topic triggered them. How you can so blithely validate extorting people who a) may not have been convicted of anything yet, b) may actually be innocent or even c) if guilty, will be punished within the confines of the accepted legal system, of which public humiliation has not been a meaningful component since the stocks?
These are absurd leech sites serving no purpose other than to earn money, and survive on the backs of the lowest form of smug, self-satisfying losers who get off on having a list of faces who they can finally point to and shout, "see, there are people lower on the totem pole than me!"
You'd think the British people would have noticed by now.
Been living here two years and trust me, they have.
Everybody here want's everything re-privatized. Power, gas, the trains, etc. The lies that the politicians told during the money grab (better cheaper service through competition) have of course not panned out. Competition is a farce, there is monopoly and scarcity of choice everywhere, unabashed price fixing and price increases that far outpace infrastructure costs and inflation (i.e. solely to increase profit), all in the absence of regulation and built on the backs of trillions of dollars of a tax-derived infrastructure.
All I see and hear is whining and whinging, though. No reason for the greed to stop, in absence of any real will to stop them.
the right approach is offering something which doesn't give them a reason to "pirate" it.... example: having your magazine available worldwide without restrictions.... you can't pirate an ebook/magazine
I struggle to imagine how your example could be any more pointless. Like pissing into the wind and congratulating yourself because you remembered to keep your mouth closed.
Especially this -> You can't pirate and ebook/magazine? Is this just some petty terminology hangup, would you prefer the terms steal/infringe/plagiarize/redistribute illegally? The other possibility is that you're suggesting that copywrite doesn't exist, or that it isn't a crime. If so, I imagine you must also cheer when banker's foreclose on junk mortgages (and double-dip by shorting them) and wall streeter's game stocks and profit while Gramma's pension halves in value. After all, they're getting away with being thieving dicks too, gaming the system and smiling because it's so hard to get caught breaking the law... what's the difference?
The fact is, you'll never get through to the poetmatt mentality. If you are distributing digitally there will always be tools too thick to realize the consequences of their petty arrogance, that their actions directly jeopardize the source of the material perhaps irrevocably (especially in niche markets).
If you can't find a way of monetizing the content through secondary channels (professional support, training, high charges for advertising, timely feeds, or perhaps just using digital only as a supplement or enhancement to subscribers) it's possible your business model isn't going to translate to the digital age. I'd suggest polling your clients directly, ask them what they are looking for and maybe you'll find a safe, no-hassle way of delivering it or a new way of operating that fits your current skill sets / resources.
Why does the funnel clamped to the stand move just at the moment of the breakage?
I'm assuming its so that there is a bit more space for the next drop of tar to form, since the one that just fell is going to take some time to incorporate into the bottom mass. Probably didn't have to happen right right away, but it would allow the next drop to begin forming from the earliest possible fixed rest point.
I'm betting that the longish length of the previous one had the monitor worried for years that it would reach the bottom mass without pinching off first.
Supposedly this is to protect the identities of MIT staff who might be harassed — but government policy is to redact such information already.
There is nothing in the article that supports your conclusion. From the article:
In its motion, MIT asked the court to establish a process by which MIT could review and propose redactions to any such documents prior to their release. With this motion MIT does not oppose the release of these documents, but seeks only to redact information that could threaten the safety and privacy of its employees, or that could threaten the security of MIT’s computer network.
So your outrage is what, that MIT isn't proceeding in the good faith that the government would bear the burden of protecting their staff's identities. Yea, that makes sense.
If somebody solicits your attention through forced indignation, its a sure sign you are talking to either a) a zealot or b) a drum beater looking for a pat on the back. Nobody thinks what happened to Aaron was reasonable (other than those fetid US attorneys and prosecutors who build their careers by prosecuting beyond reason or justice), but selling shit as Shinola just tarnishes the overall conversation around it, even if there is a grain of truth in what you are selling.
And you think Apple and Microsoft are any less evil?? How many wind and solar farms are they bankrolling? What kind of phone are YOU using, hypocrite?
I have two words for you -- bribery and extortion. It's how politics work in the US.
To be fair, neither of the companies you cited actually have (had?) the mandate "Do No Evil" plastered next to their names. It's pretty ballsy to come out with that statement and yet then crap like this, especially when they just shrug their shoulders and say "um, yea, dude gives us tax breaks" when you call them on it.
Can't say I disagree about the rest, though. Corporations hijacked American democracy decades ago, everything they do is just smoke and mirrors to hide their unabashed self-interest.
-------
"Life is pain, Highness. Anyone who says differently is selling something."... Man In Black
if they're upset about other people controlling the pricing of their work, then maybe they shouldn't have sold that right off. The barrier to entry for distributing e-books is minuscule - if an author wants to maintain control over the distribution of their work, there is absolutely nothing stopping them these days.
Wow, just no barrier to stupidity on the internet, is there. Do you realize how fantastically low the success rate is for e-books? No distribution, no public awareness, no marketing... other than the seventeen people following you on twitter. I'm not saying publishers go out of their way to push every book (far, far from it) but without a physical presence on the bookshelves you chance of getting noticed or even an ounce of publicity is fantastically low.
Your suggestion is akin to suggesting a farmer open a fruit stand instead of working with wholesalers.
At this point you will likely point out one or two of those exceptions as some sort of straw man argument. Me, I've just worked in and around the industry for decades (on both sides).
Authors control the supply... I'm going to laugh about that one for a while.
then what, nothing in OSS land takes responsibility for itself, its free it (sort of works) if it doesnt fix it your self or fuck off
You sound like the sort of anonymous coward (appropriate) who's part of the "hey, why should I pay for support if the product is free" crowd. If you are using it, chances are you are making money off of it, and off the many devs who have contributed and the *paying* clients who pay for support, fixes and updates.
And where are you? Standing there whining with a cup in your hand, pissed off because nobody gives a shit about your problems. OS doesn't mean free, chuckles. You need something fixing according to your own needs and timeline, man up and give back something to the community. Doesn't even have to be code or cash, drop the dev a line and trade some documenting time or support work on the forums to get your issue dealt with.
So, go ahead and piss into the wind while the rest of us make the most out of OS by treating as part of our business instead of something the world owes us.
Sorry, you are comparing causative and cognitive experiences.
In this context (head on a new body), hungry and horny or arthritic are as environmental as living on a ship, up the side of a mountain or in the middle of the desert. Differences in environment shape your experiences, but your mind is the system that defines how you react to them. So, losing a body is just a magnification of what a person would experience if they lost, say, an arm or leg. Some will excel in their new circumstance, some will wither, some will continue to plod along. That's because there's no change in the conscious self, only the circumstances in which the self now exists.
Your examples are too reductive. Switching bodies isn't going to make you like eggs any better than the last body, or hate birds or want to go fishing. The body, on the other hand, will never get to fishing again if the brain now attached to it doesn't like to.
We hope to provide a view of this to the website owner and yes, push them a little to get their security ducks in a row.
No, you don't. If you did you'd have built your system to make *them* aware first, instead of posting a "don't blame the messenger" shame tool that exposes their vulnerabilities.
The hacking-promotes-security argument is weak sauce, even more so in your case. The vast percentage of people you've exposed (i.e. not anonymous mega-corps, but rather small mom-and-pops set up and left un-managed by unskilled sysadmins, innocuous self-hosting newbies, etc.) will likely never encounter your list, even after it provides scriptkiddies with an easily digestible list of opportunities who wipe their servers and turn them into warez hubs only to be rinse-repeated because they will *never* know any better.
You are merely a new vector for the disease, selling itself as a cure. Where in this is your moment to feel proud?
So publishing a list of vulnerabilities on websites serves the purpose of shaming the website operators into better protecting their users.
So by that logic, I assume you rape every woman you pass on a dark street, mug the elderly who don't go out in groups, and commit every other crime of opportunity to shame people into what *you* consider proper, minimum safe behavior. How brave and noble of you.
I'm so tired of people dressing up shitty behavior under the guise of protecting them when really all they are doing is being selfish, self-satisfying little asshats.
If this guy wasn't such a douche, he'd be emailing the websites a notice letting them know of the vulnerabilities, not making the list available for everybody. This would have been a good example of how decent behavior could have helped protect both visitors and the site owners, instead of what at best will become a life lesson taught through severe litigation and (if we are lucky) state prosecution.
I see a lot of posts in here about banning guns. They are far more controlled where I live (Canada), but rest assured shootings that happen in Canada are always with black-market guns. It's not the people who legally purchase and register firearms doing these things, it's those who obtain them illegally.
You may argue that making guns harder to get, like here, reduces this kind of thing. That may be correct. But no matter what, people can get anything, and they will, if sufficiently demented, do something bad.
What's the answer to that?
'
I call bullshit, FUD-boy. I doubt you could prove even a single one one of your claims.
I too am Canadian, and wouldn't have the foggiest idea how to get a "black market gun", and doubt many of my neighbors would either. Never mind some meek, socially damaged dude who'd probably set warning flags off where-ever he went. Even scum who would *sell* these kinds of guns wouldn't be interested in the couple of hundred bucks the Columbine-looking shit would be offering. And in the end if you did manage to find one, you can sure as hell bet it was made or at least traffic'd through good old America so you've just circled around to the stated problem.
The fact is, the gun is the enabler. There is no way this kid would have killed 2 people let alone 26 if all he'd had to work with was a set of steak knives, and possibly wouldn't have even considered attempting it without the firepower to back his cowardly bullshit move. The same would apply to all the cowards who kill this way. The gun (or knife, for that matter) carrier is the easiest way to identify the sniveling cowards in the crowd. I've never understood the damaged logic some 2-bit self-entitled sack of shit has that convinces him that attacking an unarmed person makes him anything more than a cowardly worm.
The NRA might as well relabel themselves as the Paranoid People's Association of Cowards, sponsored by the Unethical Abusement of Nonsequiter Statistics and Random Bullshit, Inc. We, being Socialist Pinkos, would not qualify for membership.
Being a white males is not a "background", it is a skin color and gender.
Cheers to this. One of my best friends is Indian. We code the same way, solve problems in similar ways, and often borrow code from each other because our methods and approaches are interchangeable even though we've only known each other for a couple of years. When it comes to code we share zero fucking diversity, even though I'm a middle-aged white guy and he's a Sikh styling in his dastar. Conversely I spend hours every week arguing with a stubborn white-male colleague who's methodologies and coding style are completely different than mine. Diversity galore.
Diversity cheerleaders are simply shallow thinkers. They base their opinions on all the bigoted ideas that the rest of us either see beyond or don't even factor into our decisions. I won't go as far as accusing Josh Susser of being a reverse and/or closet bigot, but by fostering the concept of carefully orchestrated tokenism and posting passive-aggressive tweets he fails to understand that a) he is the divisive one and b) he hinders, rather than furthers the cause of true blind equality we'd all like to see in the world.
Because religion isn't dangerous. Crazy people that use religion as an excuse for their actions are dangerous.
It depends what your definition is. If 'dangerous' includes indoctrination into superstition, the suppression of critical analysis and of humanist morality in place of ideological dogma, forwarding backwards concepts such as anti-contraception in AIDS-riddled Africa and anti-abortion at the cost of the mother's life (etc. ad nauseum) then yes it is dangerous.
Worst of all, religion denies all of man's achievements, ascribing them instead to an all-mighty deity who simply bequeaths them on a whim. What a wonderful belief system... not.
Even when cherry-picking from the Christian buffet to avoid nonsense like a 6000-year old universe and original sin and taking it down to its barest essence, you still end up with a fear/reward system that promises *infinite* and *eternal* pleasure or pain depending upon how you lived your seventy-odd years of life here on earth. People who behave because they long for heaven or are afraid of hell are my definition of crazy.
So while the rest of the world is happily masturbating to images and videos, you go sit in your safe Christian corner and say a prayer for Cameron. He's likely to need all the help he can get next election (em, but I guess prayer doesn't always work, eh Romney?).
No question the guy is a mega-douche for posting this, but I'm more befuddled what spawns this Jerry-Springeresque "look at what a tool I am" mentality. Perhaps it is just the closest things modern humans have to a dead-end-evolution-type effect, where those who aren't meant to survive do or say something repulsive in full view of the digital world, only to spend the rest of their lives applying for jobs who Google -> wtf? -> fail! this guy into a shitty life.
And, ahem, girls know Google too. So maybe it isn't all that far from Darwin's theory after all. Nature finds a way, I guess.
So you go, Matthew Wood, isolate yourself from the gene pool and general society. If I need crude, I'll look to a guy like George Carlin who knew the difference between rebellion and unwashed cruelty.
Slashdot Mirror
There was a fellow a couple years ago who was sued for writing a sequel to "Catcher in the Rye"
Yea, by fucking J.D. Salinger himself (or did mentioning that little tidbit weaken your argument too much to make it worthy of a mention?)
So sad that this is where you've invested your moral outrage, that one of the century's most noted author's sued because he didn't want some talentless ass hat publishing fan fiction (a.k.a. unoriginal self-indulgent feculence) to muddy his genuine, original and critically acclaimed novel.
Hammer on Disney and the other greedycorps all you want, but when a living author wants to protect his own work/invention/legacy, he has every right to do so and piss on every self-righteous dick (including the comparatively talentless hacks of the world) who tells him otherwise.
Personally, I'd rather not work for a firm where the quality of my work doesn't equate in the least with the pay calculations.
Wow, that was like a triple-negative sentence ... absolutely no idea if you are for or against being a slacker and fair pay for laziness ... and don't think you didn't break my brain with that ... er, in the least.
Of course, given the NSA can dictate terms to the President, Congress and Federal judges, the coup might have already happened. Would you notice if it had? Would you care?
People would notice when the next elections weren't held, or the person winning the vote didn't take office.
The Devil's greatest trick is convincing you he doesn't exist. Now, while I'm loathe to use a religious maxim to point out the error in your thinking, it seemed apt.
If you looked behind the curtain of freedom and democracy you are pointing your finger at, you'd see self-interest groups (corporations, the very rich) applying lobbyists and likely more nefarious means of manipulation/regulation/control on their local/state/federal politicians, those very politicians whose only real motivation is to win the next election, and the media manipulating the population's fear/greed/loneliness to keep them tuned into their 'message' and keep them consuming (to appease their corporate owners and financial sponsors respectively). All backed up by a failed education system and two-parents-working economy that produces nothing but mindless minions who almost universally ignore and accept as required (or forget/abandon their occasional outrage so fast the separation from outright indifference is negligible).
But hey, if you are comfortable with the illusion of freedom and control over your future, more power to you.
Just being a non-US citizen doesn't make a person a foreign power. Spying on the governments of other countries, fine. Spying on the citizens of other countries is just as bad as spying on US citizens.
I have no problem with it.
So just to be clear, Mr. ordinary self-interested citizen of the USA, as long as your criminal Stasi organizations and the douche politicians that enable them are only spying on the ordinary, law-abiding people outside your borders, you're good to go?
I can't help but think you'd be pissing furious if you found out the GCHQ had recorded all of your conversations for the last few years, and would be first to whine about the illegality of it all. And at how hard I'll laugh when it turns out to be true.
To make universal knowledge a reality, it is first necessary to have all books and journals available in torrents and file sharing sites everywhere. When we can all download knowledge as easily as the latest hollywood blockbuster, only *then* can the politicians be convinced to change the laws to agree with what people already expect by that time.
<sarcasm>Yes, because that's exactly what happened with movies and music.</sarcasm>
And what the hell are "unavoidable facts on the ground". Sounds like you're talking dog shit.
There should be profit sharing involved. And key people - like the lead developers and lead creatives - should get a big enough share of that profit to motivate them and entice them to use it on other projects to keep them fresh.
You have made a common but (as Sheldon would say) not forgiveable error in your reasoning. Two, in fact.
First, the "Talent" makes big money because they actually draw people to the movie. Enough to justify their huge salary? Yes. The market wouldn't bear it otherwise. Nobody, esp. studio execs., gives RDJ $25 mil because they dig the goatee. By your logic, grips and best boys should be getting big pay checks too.
There is *no* parallel in gaming, or at best the company itself is the "Talent". Voice actors, capture artists, designers, etc. do not individually draw major numbers of customers to purchase a game. The only people who do (and they are few in number) are creative director-types who do, in fact, earn great pay checks.
As to profit sharing, should these self-same developers take a huge pay cut if the work was a failure? Or, do only the people who a) built their company up from the ground, over years or decades, to reach this point, and/or b) poured all the front-money including salaries into the project, have to suffer if the game fails?
These developers you speak of are absolutely free to quit their secure jobs, go start a company, develop their own games and keep all the profits. They don't, of course, and that's why they don't get to show up with a cup in their hand when their company's 'AAA' hits it big.
If you paying to remove your photo, then chances are you are a hypocrite who as attacked and ridiculed others for that behaviour and well, you deserve what you get.
What an insanely vapid rant, on literally every single point you made.
I've never had a cause to worry about this, but the undertones of patheti-sad rage in your middle-school English rant seem to indicate you have some pretty deep-seated issues, though I cannot fathom how this topic triggered them. How you can so blithely validate extorting people who a) may not have been convicted of anything yet, b) may actually be innocent or even c) if guilty, will be punished within the confines of the accepted legal system, of which public humiliation has not been a meaningful component since the stocks?
These are absurd leech sites serving no purpose other than to earn money, and survive on the backs of the lowest form of smug, self-satisfying losers who get off on having a list of faces who they can finally point to and shout, "see, there are people lower on the totem pole than me!"
Ah, wait ... I think I just figured you out.
ColdFusion is built on JRun...
Hey, the 90's are calling, they want your comment back.
ColdFusion runs on Tomcat now.
You'd think the British people would have noticed by now.
Been living here two years and trust me, they have.
Everybody here want's everything re-privatized. Power, gas, the trains, etc. The lies that the politicians told during the money grab (better cheaper service through competition) have of course not panned out. Competition is a farce, there is monopoly and scarcity of choice everywhere, unabashed price fixing and price increases that far outpace infrastructure costs and inflation (i.e. solely to increase profit), all in the absence of regulation and built on the backs of trillions of dollars of a tax-derived infrastructure.
All I see and hear is whining and whinging, though. No reason for the greed to stop, in absence of any real will to stop them.
I struggle to imagine how your example could be any more pointless. Like pissing into the wind and congratulating yourself because you remembered to keep your mouth closed.
Especially this -> You can't pirate and ebook/magazine? Is this just some petty terminology hangup, would you prefer the terms steal/infringe/plagiarize/redistribute illegally? The other possibility is that you're suggesting that copywrite doesn't exist, or that it isn't a crime. If so, I imagine you must also cheer when banker's foreclose on junk mortgages (and double-dip by shorting them) and wall streeter's game stocks and profit while Gramma's pension halves in value. After all, they're getting away with being thieving dicks too, gaming the system and smiling because it's so hard to get caught breaking the law ... what's the difference?
The fact is, you'll never get through to the poetmatt mentality. If you are distributing digitally there will always be tools too thick to realize the consequences of their petty arrogance, that their actions directly jeopardize the source of the material perhaps irrevocably (especially in niche markets).
If you can't find a way of monetizing the content through secondary channels (professional support, training, high charges for advertising, timely feeds, or perhaps just using digital only as a supplement or enhancement to subscribers) it's possible your business model isn't going to translate to the digital age. I'd suggest polling your clients directly, ask them what they are looking for and maybe you'll find a safe, no-hassle way of delivering it or a new way of operating that fits your current skill sets / resources.
Why does the funnel clamped to the stand move just at the moment of the breakage?
I'm assuming its so that there is a bit more space for the next drop of tar to form, since the one that just fell is going to take some time to incorporate into the bottom mass. Probably didn't have to happen right right away, but it would allow the next drop to begin forming from the earliest possible fixed rest point.
I'm betting that the longish length of the previous one had the monitor worried for years that it would reach the bottom mass without pinching off first.
There is nothing in the article that supports your conclusion. From the article:
So your outrage is what, that MIT isn't proceeding in the good faith that the government would bear the burden of protecting their staff's identities. Yea, that makes sense.
If somebody solicits your attention through forced indignation, its a sure sign you are talking to either a) a zealot or b) a drum beater looking for a pat on the back. Nobody thinks what happened to Aaron was reasonable (other than those fetid US attorneys and prosecutors who build their careers by prosecuting beyond reason or justice), but selling shit as Shinola just tarnishes the overall conversation around it, even if there is a grain of truth in what you are selling.
But there is! Scorch marks on the roof in front of the tail section.
Check it here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-23295115 [bbc video feed]
... it crashes without even needing to leave the jetway.
And you think Apple and Microsoft are any less evil?? How many wind and solar farms are they bankrolling? What kind of phone are YOU using, hypocrite?
I have two words for you -- bribery and extortion. It's how politics work in the US.
To be fair, neither of the companies you cited actually have (had?) the mandate "Do No Evil" plastered next to their names. It's pretty ballsy to come out with that statement and yet then crap like this, especially when they just shrug their shoulders and say "um, yea, dude gives us tax breaks" when you call them on it.
Can't say I disagree about the rest, though. Corporations hijacked American democracy decades ago, everything they do is just smoke and mirrors to hide their unabashed self-interest.
-------
"Life is pain, Highness. Anyone who says differently is selling something." ... Man In Black
if they're upset about other people controlling the pricing of their work, then maybe they shouldn't have sold that right off. The barrier to entry for distributing e-books is minuscule - if an author wants to maintain control over the distribution of their work, there is absolutely nothing stopping them these days.
Wow, just no barrier to stupidity on the internet, is there. Do you realize how fantastically low the success rate is for e-books? No distribution, no public awareness, no marketing ... other than the seventeen people following you on twitter. I'm not saying publishers go out of their way to push every book (far, far from it) but without a physical presence on the bookshelves you chance of getting noticed or even an ounce of publicity is fantastically low.
Your suggestion is akin to suggesting a farmer open a fruit stand instead of working with wholesalers.
At this point you will likely point out one or two of those exceptions as some sort of straw man argument. Me, I've just worked in and around the industry for decades (on both sides).
Authors control the supply ... I'm going to laugh about that one for a while.
then what, nothing in OSS land takes responsibility for itself, its free it (sort of works) if it doesnt fix it your self or fuck off
You sound like the sort of anonymous coward (appropriate) who's part of the "hey, why should I pay for support if the product is free" crowd. If you are using it, chances are you are making money off of it, and off the many devs who have contributed and the *paying* clients who pay for support, fixes and updates.
And where are you? Standing there whining with a cup in your hand, pissed off because nobody gives a shit about your problems. OS doesn't mean free, chuckles. You need something fixing according to your own needs and timeline, man up and give back something to the community. Doesn't even have to be code or cash, drop the dev a line and trade some documenting time or support work on the forums to get your issue dealt with.
So, go ahead and piss into the wind while the rest of us make the most out of OS by treating as part of our business instead of something the world owes us.
Sorry, you are comparing causative and cognitive experiences.
In this context (head on a new body), hungry and horny or arthritic are as environmental as living on a ship, up the side of a mountain or in the middle of the desert. Differences in environment shape your experiences, but your mind is the system that defines how you react to them. So, losing a body is just a magnification of what a person would experience if they lost, say, an arm or leg. Some will excel in their new circumstance, some will wither, some will continue to plod along. That's because there's no change in the conscious self, only the circumstances in which the self now exists.
Your examples are too reductive. Switching bodies isn't going to make you like eggs any better than the last body, or hate birds or want to go fishing. The body, on the other hand, will never get to fishing again if the brain now attached to it doesn't like to.
We hope to provide a view of this to the website owner and yes, push them a little to get their security ducks in a row.
No, you don't. If you did you'd have built your system to make *them* aware first, instead of posting a "don't blame the messenger" shame tool that exposes their vulnerabilities.
The hacking-promotes-security argument is weak sauce, even more so in your case. The vast percentage of people you've exposed (i.e. not anonymous mega-corps, but rather small mom-and-pops set up and left un-managed by unskilled sysadmins, innocuous self-hosting newbies, etc.) will likely never encounter your list, even after it provides scriptkiddies with an easily digestible list of opportunities who wipe their servers and turn them into warez hubs only to be rinse-repeated because they will *never* know any better.
You are merely a new vector for the disease, selling itself as a cure. Where in this is your moment to feel proud?
So publishing a list of vulnerabilities on websites serves the purpose of shaming the website operators into better protecting their users.
So by that logic, I assume you rape every woman you pass on a dark street, mug the elderly who don't go out in groups, and commit every other crime of opportunity to shame people into what *you* consider proper, minimum safe behavior. How brave and noble of you.
I'm so tired of people dressing up shitty behavior under the guise of protecting them when really all they are doing is being selfish, self-satisfying little asshats.
If this guy wasn't such a douche, he'd be emailing the websites a notice letting them know of the vulnerabilities, not making the list available for everybody. This would have been a good example of how decent behavior could have helped protect both visitors and the site owners, instead of what at best will become a life lesson taught through severe litigation and (if we are lucky) state prosecution.
Seriously, Venus is in the living zone as well.
Seriously, so is Earth.
I see a lot of posts in here about banning guns. They are far more controlled where I live (Canada), but rest assured shootings that happen in Canada are always with black-market guns. It's not the people who legally purchase and register firearms doing these things, it's those who obtain them illegally.
You may argue that making guns harder to get, like here, reduces this kind of thing. That may be correct. But no matter what, people can get anything, and they will, if sufficiently demented, do something bad.
What's the answer to that?
'
I call bullshit, FUD-boy. I doubt you could prove even a single one one of your claims.
I too am Canadian, and wouldn't have the foggiest idea how to get a "black market gun", and doubt many of my neighbors would either. Never mind some meek, socially damaged dude who'd probably set warning flags off where-ever he went. Even scum who would *sell* these kinds of guns wouldn't be interested in the couple of hundred bucks the Columbine-looking shit would be offering. And in the end if you did manage to find one, you can sure as hell bet it was made or at least traffic'd through good old America so you've just circled around to the stated problem.
The fact is, the gun is the enabler. There is no way this kid would have killed 2 people let alone 26 if all he'd had to work with was a set of steak knives, and possibly wouldn't have even considered attempting it without the firepower to back his cowardly bullshit move. The same would apply to all the cowards who kill this way. The gun (or knife, for that matter) carrier is the easiest way to identify the sniveling cowards in the crowd. I've never understood the damaged logic some 2-bit self-entitled sack of shit has that convinces him that attacking an unarmed person makes him anything more than a cowardly worm.
The NRA might as well relabel themselves as the Paranoid People's Association of Cowards, sponsored by the Unethical Abusement of Nonsequiter Statistics and Random Bullshit, Inc. We, being Socialist Pinkos, would not qualify for membership.
Cheers to this. One of my best friends is Indian. We code the same way, solve problems in similar ways, and often borrow code from each other because our methods and approaches are interchangeable even though we've only known each other for a couple of years. When it comes to code we share zero fucking diversity, even though I'm a middle-aged white guy and he's a Sikh styling in his dastar. Conversely I spend hours every week arguing with a stubborn white-male colleague who's methodologies and coding style are completely different than mine. Diversity galore.
Diversity cheerleaders are simply shallow thinkers. They base their opinions on all the bigoted ideas that the rest of us either see beyond or don't even factor into our decisions. I won't go as far as accusing Josh Susser of being a reverse and/or closet bigot, but by fostering the concept of carefully orchestrated tokenism and posting passive-aggressive tweets he fails to understand that a) he is the divisive one and b) he hinders, rather than furthers the cause of true blind equality we'd all like to see in the world.
It depends what your definition is. If 'dangerous' includes indoctrination into superstition, the suppression of critical analysis and of humanist morality in place of ideological dogma, forwarding backwards concepts such as anti-contraception in AIDS-riddled Africa and anti-abortion at the cost of the mother's life (etc. ad nauseum) then yes it is dangerous.
Worst of all, religion denies all of man's achievements, ascribing them instead to an all-mighty deity who simply bequeaths them on a whim. What a wonderful belief system ... not.
Even when cherry-picking from the Christian buffet to avoid nonsense like a 6000-year old universe and original sin and taking it down to its barest essence, you still end up with a fear/reward system that promises *infinite* and *eternal* pleasure or pain depending upon how you lived your seventy-odd years of life here on earth. People who behave because they long for heaven or are afraid of hell are my definition of crazy.
So while the rest of the world is happily masturbating to images and videos, you go sit in your safe Christian corner and say a prayer for Cameron. He's likely to need all the help he can get next election (em, but I guess prayer doesn't always work, eh Romney?).
No question the guy is a mega-douche for posting this, but I'm more befuddled what spawns this Jerry-Springeresque "look at what a tool I am" mentality. Perhaps it is just the closest things modern humans have to a dead-end-evolution-type effect, where those who aren't meant to survive do or say something repulsive in full view of the digital world, only to spend the rest of their lives applying for jobs who Google -> wtf? -> fail! this guy into a shitty life.
And, ahem, girls know Google too. So maybe it isn't all that far from Darwin's theory after all. Nature finds a way, I guess.
So you go, Matthew Wood, isolate yourself from the gene pool and general society. If I need crude, I'll look to a guy like George Carlin who knew the difference between rebellion and unwashed cruelty.