I think the point is that this particular attack only targeted IIS, and appears to be a bit of a biggie. So it's news. There is still a slight bias of course, and there will be plenty of bashing here and elsewhere, but it's noteworthy nonetheless.
If we assume that the definition that you produced is correct, then the free software fellows (let alone UNIX fans) don't fall under it. In the age we are in now, the political and the religious are separate. The free software movement is best described as a secular political movement (albeit with very narrow goals), and so cannot be religious. The UNIX fans are just expressing technical preferences.
Either you're saying that people who are into free software are a bit rigid and stuff (which is fairly vacuous if you ask me, although point made) and just got carried away, or you're trying to troll. And, well, when you get a bite that's as lame as this, one wonders why you would bother.
It's called Hit-a-Hint and it's really good. You hold the spacebar down and all the links that are currently visible get allocated a number. When you key in that number and release the spacebar it follows the link. It also works with form elements which is nice. Flash is still a pain to use though.
There are mandated certification schemes for doctors and lawyers (among many other professions). Which isn't a bad idea, in itself: there are medical quacks (dunno anything about potential legal quackery), and the certification process provides some protection against this, along with academic qualifications and so on.
Those can be viewed as legal monopolies, but I don't think it's much of an issue. Provided you're not a quack, that is. Then I imagine it's the height of injustice.
It might even be a good idea to certify IT professionals (beyond other schemes like Cisco certification), as the presence of IT quackery is manifest. How you'd go about it in an industry like IT would take a great deal of thought, though.
For every right, there is a corresponding duty. For instance, the right to free speech implies a duty on everyone else to allow that speech to occur. Your points about not having to agree or even listen stand, but freedom doesn't mean a life without responsibility. Maintaining that freedom is an important part of living in a free society.
It's interesting that the enlightened West is pledged to fighting terrorism, and yet what "terrorism" actually is appears to be a matter of some debate.
Browsers don't just implement HTTP, though. They have to have an HTML renderer at the very least. Then you get onto CSS and Javascript, which means making a virtual machine, and there are a whole slew of other technologies that your modern browser is expected to support (e.g. binary plugins for Flash, Java and what have you). Furthermore, they have to do these things in commonly-agreed ways, and those ways are being revised all the time. It's a mean task: no wonder so few actually manage to do it decently.
Last 100 years? Hell, pretty much the entirety of human history supports that statement. As an example, why did countries like Spain, England, France, the Netherlands and so on develop world empires when they did? Shipbuilding improvements and good access to the Atlantic. That is, better communications. Oh yes, guns and finance and stuff helped, but if that were the case, why didn't any big central European powers get any world empires at the time?
Communications, trade and prosperity are all very closely linked.
I'd have a lot more sympathy for arguments like yours if the money actually went to those people who did the work, but it doesn't. The money all goes to executives, and the "talent" gets thrown a few crumbs from their table.
I know a Polish biochemist who works as a maid over here in the UK. Makes more doing that than doing biochemistry stuff in Poland, so he's happy for the moment and sending the money back. I imagine this will change in a few years.
OK, have I been reading/. too long, or have I been reading XKCD too long? Because I knew exactly which comic that link refers to, without having to click it.
** bob.appleyard looks down at the XKCD he's wearing **
I know, after Thatcher and Reagan and what have you, it's fashionable to blame Keynes for everything bad in the world. Unfortunately for you, he realised what caused the Great Depression, and he came up with the plan to save capitalism when pretty much everyone else was convinced the party was over.
Keynes held that the design of the financial system is extremely important in creating an environment that's good for general prosperity. He got a huge part of it right, along with plenty of other things (e.g. predicting that the terms of the Versailles treaty, which pretty much everyone thought was cool, would only lead to another war). Many of the successes of the post-war boom can be put down to some of the changes in finance that Keynes' ideas brought about, and much of the return to boom-and-bust can be traced to abandoning his recommendations and returning to "the [key players in the financial] market rules OK." But this is economics, so say what you like, there'll be some smoothing function that'll see you through.
That Keynes became conflated with the fairly standard war-time economic controls, many of which just sort of carried on after WWII, or the various welfare systems in the west (many of which were set up long before Keynes picked up a pen), is not a failing of his. It's like putting the blame for Nazi eugenics on Darwin.
So yeah, governments can be oppressive and don't hold your rights sacrosanct. We knew that already. Don't blame some economics professor who had some sound ideas. Blame your governments. And do something about it, because you can. You're clearly American. That means, compared to most people in the world, you are immensely privileged, and have incomparable power to change stuff like this. Do that. Don't blame some dead prof. That's a cop-out, and it just makes it that little bit easier for your government to get away with it.
It doesn't matter how strong your security system is, it will fail. What happens when it does? I can't get a new $BodyPart if some fraudster spoofs it.
Modern day religions typically have a single benevolent deity the is normally credited with creation that extols it's followers to behave in a moral and kindly manner.
And what of the 2 billion or so people for whom that is not the case?
Slashdot Mirror
90%? Really? A slight exaggeration, perhaps?
Beating people up, smashing shop windows, attempted coups...
Works for me on f3b4. I had to disable compatibility checking, of course.
Is it me, or, like any good Shakespeare, are Slashdot trolls just becoming vaguely comic intermissions between the real action?
I think the point is that this particular attack only targeted IIS, and appears to be a bit of a biggie. So it's news. There is still a slight bias of course, and there will be plenty of bashing here and elsewhere, but it's noteworthy nonetheless.
If we assume that the definition that you produced is correct, then the free software fellows (let alone UNIX fans) don't fall under it. In the age we are in now, the political and the religious are separate. The free software movement is best described as a secular political movement (albeit with very narrow goals), and so cannot be religious. The UNIX fans are just expressing technical preferences.
Either you're saying that people who are into free software are a bit rigid and stuff (which is fairly vacuous if you ask me, although point made) and just got carried away, or you're trying to troll. And, well, when you get a bite that's as lame as this, one wonders why you would bother.
It's called Hit-a-Hint and it's really good. You hold the spacebar down and all the links that are currently visible get allocated a number. When you key in that number and release the spacebar it follows the link. It also works with form elements which is nice. Flash is still a pain to use though.
By buying the iPhone in the first place, you've lost, at least in the ways the FSF cares about.
There are mandated certification schemes for doctors and lawyers (among many other professions). Which isn't a bad idea, in itself: there are medical quacks (dunno anything about potential legal quackery), and the certification process provides some protection against this, along with academic qualifications and so on.
Those can be viewed as legal monopolies, but I don't think it's much of an issue. Provided you're not a quack, that is. Then I imagine it's the height of injustice.
It might even be a good idea to certify IT professionals (beyond other schemes like Cisco certification), as the presence of IT quackery is manifest. How you'd go about it in an industry like IT would take a great deal of thought, though.
For every right, there is a corresponding duty. For instance, the right to free speech implies a duty on everyone else to allow that speech to occur. Your points about not having to agree or even listen stand, but freedom doesn't mean a life without responsibility. Maintaining that freedom is an important part of living in a free society.
Well indeed. My point there was that using HTTP to share data and being a web browser are different things.
It's interesting that the enlightened West is pledged to fighting terrorism, and yet what "terrorism" actually is appears to be a matter of some debate.
Browsers don't just implement HTTP, though. They have to have an HTML renderer at the very least. Then you get onto CSS and Javascript, which means making a virtual machine, and there are a whole slew of other technologies that your modern browser is expected to support (e.g. binary plugins for Flash, Java and what have you). Furthermore, they have to do these things in commonly-agreed ways, and those ways are being revised all the time. It's a mean task: no wonder so few actually manage to do it decently.
Why isn't the submitter Anonymous?
Last 100 years? Hell, pretty much the entirety of human history supports that statement. As an example, why did countries like Spain, England, France, the Netherlands and so on develop world empires when they did? Shipbuilding improvements and good access to the Atlantic. That is, better communications. Oh yes, guns and finance and stuff helped, but if that were the case, why didn't any big central European powers get any world empires at the time?
Communications, trade and prosperity are all very closely linked.
It's already happened then, brilliant.
Welcome to capitalism.
I know a Polish biochemist who works as a maid over here in the UK. Makes more doing that than doing biochemistry stuff in Poland, so he's happy for the moment and sending the money back. I imagine this will change in a few years.
OK, have I been reading /. too long, or have I been reading XKCD too long? Because I knew exactly which comic that link refers to, without having to click it.
** bob.appleyard looks down at the XKCD he's wearing **
Yeah, I know.
It's both.
I know, after Thatcher and Reagan and what have you, it's fashionable to blame Keynes for everything bad in the world. Unfortunately for you, he realised what caused the Great Depression, and he came up with the plan to save capitalism when pretty much everyone else was convinced the party was over.
Keynes held that the design of the financial system is extremely important in creating an environment that's good for general prosperity. He got a huge part of it right, along with plenty of other things (e.g. predicting that the terms of the Versailles treaty, which pretty much everyone thought was cool, would only lead to another war). Many of the successes of the post-war boom can be put down to some of the changes in finance that Keynes' ideas brought about, and much of the return to boom-and-bust can be traced to abandoning his recommendations and returning to "the [key players in the financial] market rules OK." But this is economics, so say what you like, there'll be some smoothing function that'll see you through.
That Keynes became conflated with the fairly standard war-time economic controls, many of which just sort of carried on after WWII, or the various welfare systems in the west (many of which were set up long before Keynes picked up a pen), is not a failing of his. It's like putting the blame for Nazi eugenics on Darwin.
So yeah, governments can be oppressive and don't hold your rights sacrosanct. We knew that already. Don't blame some economics professor who had some sound ideas. Blame your governments. And do something about it, because you can. You're clearly American. That means, compared to most people in the world, you are immensely privileged, and have incomparable power to change stuff like this. Do that. Don't blame some dead prof. That's a cop-out, and it just makes it that little bit easier for your government to get away with it.
It's in the first chapter of the first book.
It doesn't matter how strong your security system is, it will fail. What happens when it does? I can't get a new $BodyPart if some fraudster spoofs it.
Thwarted again!
Modern day religions typically have a single benevolent deity the is normally credited with creation that extols it's followers to behave in a moral and kindly manner.
And what of the 2 billion or so people for whom that is not the case?
I think I can sort this out fair and square.
What does a cat do?
$ cat myfile
Cat rules!!
What does a dog do?
$ dog myfile
bash: dog: command not found
Oh dear.
The cat wins!!