Just write to them explaining why they are in breach of contract and that you consider the contract null and void. Then stop paying them. Worked for me....
Do you subscribe to the idea 'if my room-mate catches <fatal airborne virus> it's not my problem' ?
Presumably not and guess what? It's the same scenario - we all live in a shared reality (unless evidence to the contrary is discovered:) - just as people's biases come out when they choose their words, their needs come out when they choose their actions. If someone is unable to manage themselves to the extent that they are able to buy food to sustain themselves, their need to survive is going to mandate some kind of action which will probably result in your loss if you are in the vicinity.
Take this to its logical conclusion and the most self-serving thing one can do is to do one's utmost to ensure that *everyone* in society has everything they need, physically, emotionally, intellectually,.. in every 'need-dimension'.
Do you subscribe to the idea 'if my room-mate catches <fatal airborne virus>' ?
Presumably not and guess what? It's the same scenario - we all live in a shared reality (unless evidence to the contrary is discovered:) - just as people's biases come out when they choose their words, their needs come out when they choose their actions. If someone is unable to manage themselves to the extent that they are able to buy food to sustain themselves, their need to survive is going to mandate some kind of action which will probably result in your loss if you are in the vicinity.
Take this to its logical conclusion and the most self-serving thing one can do is to do one's utmost to ensure that *everyone* in society has everything they need, physically, emotionally, intellectually,.. in every 'need-dimension'.
Umm, isn't this a well-known phenomenon? i.e. What you appear to be holding-up as apparently absurd is in fact an accurate explanation of what occurs when we exercise.
Disclaimer: I am not a biochemist / neuroscientist.
Purely for informational purposes I'm not a USAnian and so have no interest in USAnian politics - after all, it's not as if corporations run politicians who run the government who pressure foreign governments into acting in a way which serves USAnian corporporate interests... so it doesn't affect me - oh wait.
However, if the chimp's owner has the power to have the USAnian supreme court forcibly stop the recount which *would* have chosen the non-chimp, that chimp has an unfair advantage - not to mention (as mentioned in my original post) having the votes of anyone who has in the past been a felon or shared a name with a felon (I'm not making this up, really:) discounted yet the votes of dead people are somehow allowed to count for the chimp.... I mean what the fuck. Anyhow, I digress...
PS. Why haven't I been modded troll ? Wake up trollerators.
And that's what happens when you make everybody do the job that the police are supposed to be doing.
I find your tone suggests that the police have spare capacity.
If the police start chasing down criminals, how are all the pregnant mothers gonna get tazered and do you really want to set in motion a chain of events that ends with a donut-mountain eclipsing the sun?
Let me get this straight: we're talking about the Social Security Administration, who is responsible for assigning every citizen a unique number which is then used to pay out benefits, and is also used by everybody's dog to act as a unique ID, presumably including the criminal justice system. The very same people who *dole out* these numbers can't be bothered to use them to cross-check whether somebody should stop getting benefits because of this law???
So..... do you think it was deliberate ? or did the whole organisation experience a group-brainfart ?
Am I hallucinating or did GeeDoubleYouBee use the exact same sql query to strike votes against him from the record during the farce that was the downfall of the legitimate president-elect ? Almost suuuure, I read something along these lines at some point....
...and smart enough to ensure that the tools are always to hand. Sounds pretty good to me, like the step we took many years ago when we outsourced smelling-things to "man's best friend" leaving spare brain capacity to develop new levels of intelligence.
Come on, get serious. Cold War or not, the leaders of China are murderers.
Need I remind you that the USAnian government had orchestrated and committed more acts of terrorism than the rest of the world combined. Surely then, that counts as murder? or is it only wrong when it's non-americans?
Moderation hint: this is factually accurate and stated without intention to cause a flame-war, so 'troll' isn't appropriate...
Deng graduated from Ziyuan No. 2 High School in Guilin in July and was sent to Guangxi Qihang Survival Training Camp, a branch set up by Guangzhou Self-help Teenager Development Training Center on Saturday by his parents.
They had read an ad about the camp online and hoped the experience would help rid their son of his Internet addiction.
Wtf. They didn't book themselves a place?
I don't see how internet addiction should be considered a real thing. As long as he's not descended to using a mac, it's all good;-)
A software security device / linux firewall running on a dedicated machine is a piece of software. Within it is an implicit state machine which ensures that it behaves correctly given the many forms of external attack.
A similar (although slightly different) implicit state machine may be implemented within another piece of software, acting as a firewall which defends the host machine itself.
There's nothing inherent about having the firewall software on a stand-alone machine which makes it more 'secure'. In neither case can you be 100% sure that the software itself and host-OS are completely opaque to attacks.
Having a well-designed software firewall (plus many additional features making this more than a firewall) running on the machine you wish to protect gives you an additional level of security that you would otherwise not have.
This is so because the software firewall running on the machine-to-be-protected has access to information which is not transmitted and therefore unavailable to stand-alone firewalls.
This information may be used to specify access-control rules which are therefore more fine-grained than those available to a stand-alone firewall.
e.g. if an outgoing HTTP connection is made, the local software firewall is aware whether it's trojan.exe which is making the request or opera.exe
In addition, the software firewall (security product) is able to apply rules to control the behaviour of applications falling in a variety of positions within the spectrum of trust.
For example (from Outpost):
* window hooking
* dde communication
* application window control
* ole automation control
* process memory injection
* process termination
* low-level network access
* driver load
* direct disk access
* dns api request
* network-enabled application launch
* keyboard logging
* executable change
etc..
Even with a perfect set of rules and engine to apply them, rules covering any possible attack vector, the computer would still be subject to attack if the software firewall itself could be compromised. I'm aware that Outpost takes various steps to make itself resistant to such attacks, thus increasing one's certainty of immunity to attack.
Perhaps you could enlighten me and anyone else reading as to the flaw in my reasoning?
Really? So anyone should be allowed to drive whichever vehicle they want too, even if it's prone to blowing up on the highway and taking other cars with it? Get real.
That's a fail in your 'Car Analogy 101' course...
Anyone should be able to drive any car, regardless of whether it has a top-of-the-line security system to keep "teh evil fux" (tm) out.. it's other predators that are the problem, the gp is saying.
Slashdot Mirror
Just write to them explaining why they are in breach of contract and that you consider the contract null and void. Then stop paying them. Worked for me....
Uhh... fixed that for myself.
Do you subscribe to the idea 'if my room-mate catches <fatal airborne virus>' ?
Presumably not and guess what? It's the same scenario - we all live in a shared reality (unless evidence to the contrary is discovered :) - just as people's biases come out when they choose their words, their needs come out when they choose their actions. If someone is unable to manage themselves to the extent that they are able to buy food to sustain themselves, their need to survive is going to mandate some kind of action which will probably result in your loss if you are in the vicinity.
Take this to its logical conclusion and the most self-serving thing one can do is to do one's utmost to ensure that *everyone* in society has everything they need, physically, emotionally, intellectually, .. in every 'need-dimension'.
Umm, isn't this a well-known phenomenon? i.e. What you appear to be holding-up as apparently absurd is in fact an accurate explanation of what occurs when we exercise.
Disclaimer: I am not a biochemist / neuroscientist.
Perhaps you haven't heard; we're all identical and so we need a set of laws which treats us as such.
Well volunteered citizen.
Purely for informational purposes I'm not a USAnian and so have no interest in USAnian politics - after all, it's not as if corporations run politicians who run the government who pressure foreign governments into acting in a way which serves USAnian corporporate interests... so it doesn't affect me - oh wait.
However, if the chimp's owner has the power to have the USAnian supreme court forcibly stop the recount which *would* have chosen the non-chimp, that chimp has an unfair advantage - not to mention (as mentioned in my original post) having the votes of anyone who has in the past been a felon or shared a name with a felon (I'm not making this up, really :) discounted yet the votes of dead people are somehow allowed to count for the chimp.... I mean what the fuck. Anyhow, I digress...
PS. Why haven't I been modded troll ? Wake up trollerators.
You're confused. My post is *about* GeeDoubleYouBee - I'm not saying that I *am* GeeDoubleYouBee...
"Score 2, Troll" - uhh, do I win some kind of prize for spotting this? how could this happen?
I find your tone suggests that the police have spare capacity.
If the police start chasing down criminals, how are all the pregnant mothers gonna get tazered and do you really want to set in motion a chain of events that ends with a donut-mountain eclipsing the sun?
Doesn't that only happen over here in the UK ?
What is the square root of astronomical ?
So..... do you think it was deliberate ? or did the whole organisation experience a group-brainfart ?
Am I hallucinating or did GeeDoubleYouBee use the exact same sql query to strike votes against him from the record during the farce that was the downfall of the legitimate president-elect ? Almost suuuure, I read something along these lines at some point....
...and smart enough to ensure that the tools are always to hand. Sounds pretty good to me, like the step we took many years ago when we outsourced smelling-things to "man's best friend" leaving spare brain capacity to develop new levels of intelligence.
You realise that they almost certainly have no wi-fi there, yes?
Oh really? Why don't *you* try getting elected to high office whilst openly stating that you are an atheist ?
Need I remind you that the USAnian government had orchestrated and committed more acts of terrorism than the rest of the world combined. Surely then, that counts as murder? or is it only wrong when it's non-americans?
Moderation hint: this is factually accurate and stated without intention to cause a flame-war, so 'troll' isn't appropriate...
Wtf. They didn't book themselves a place?
I don't see how internet addiction should be considered a real thing. As long as he's not descended to using a mac, it's all good ;-)
So, the guy's computer is loaded down with pictures of kittens. Why are the police involved?
Ok, here's some logic if I must spell it out...
A software security device / linux firewall running on a dedicated machine is a piece of software. Within it is an implicit state machine which ensures that it behaves correctly given the many forms of external attack.
A similar (although slightly different) implicit state machine may be implemented within another piece of software, acting as a firewall which defends the host machine itself.
There's nothing inherent about having the firewall software on a stand-alone machine which makes it more 'secure'. In neither case can you be 100% sure that the software itself and host-OS are completely opaque to attacks.
Having a well-designed software firewall (plus many additional features making this more than a firewall) running on the machine you wish to protect gives you an additional level of security that you would otherwise not have.
This is so because the software firewall running on the machine-to-be-protected has access to information which is not transmitted and therefore unavailable to stand-alone firewalls.
This information may be used to specify access-control rules which are therefore more fine-grained than those available to a stand-alone firewall.
e.g. if an outgoing HTTP connection is made, the local software firewall is aware whether it's trojan.exe which is making the request or opera.exe
In addition, the software firewall (security product) is able to apply rules to control the behaviour of applications falling in a variety of positions within the spectrum of trust.
For example (from Outpost):
* window hooking
* dde communication
* application window control
* ole automation control
* process memory injection
* process termination
* low-level network access
* driver load
* direct disk access
* dns api request
* network-enabled application launch
* keyboard logging
* executable change
etc..
Even with a perfect set of rules and engine to apply them, rules covering any possible attack vector, the computer would still be subject to attack if the software firewall itself could be compromised. I'm aware that Outpost takes various steps to make itself resistant to such attacks, thus increasing one's certainty of immunity to attack.
Perhaps you could enlighten me and anyone else reading as to the flaw in my reasoning?
It's not a question of following the banner of some alternative browser manufacturer, it's about making one's life easier and/or better.
The windows sidebar works for me. Manage your tabs as a list, multi-select, filter, close, minimize etc..
It's awesome huh? Name another browser which can have 50-70 tabs open and still feel snappy..
I cannot understand why there's such poor uptake by the general n00bs^H^H^H^H^Hpublic.
That's a fail in your 'Car Analogy 101' course...
Anyone should be able to drive any car, regardless of whether it has a top-of-the-line security system to keep "teh evil fux" (tm) out.. it's other predators that are the problem, the gp is saying.