Thank you for that belly-laugh inducing apology for your batshit-crazy religious schisms.
You may also wish to contemplate my sig... but I suspect you would rather not.
Look here boy, my mom never paid for internet. I've always paid for it myself, starting in 1984 or 1985 (don't remember, it's been a while). Latency and bandwidth with the 1200 baud modem were quite adequate for Trade Wars (on a BBS, not many internet games then), I'll have you know.
Can a true Christian willfully disobey parts of the Bible?
Yes, of course. It's called sinning, and the Catholics have complicated rituals and protocols for obtaining forgiveness: sinner confesses to priest/bishop/whatever, priest/bishop/whatever tells sinner to recite some number of various prayers as penance. Probably quite a lot of prayers would be needed to atone for murder and suchlike, but forgiveness is available. Next, you'll be telling us that Catholics aren't true Christians...
Of course, anyone (whether true Atheist or not) should be allowed to have a good belly-laugh at the Bardo Thodol, Bhagavad Gita, Bible, Dianetics, Kojiki, Koran, Rig Veda, Talmud, or any other "holy" book.
Perhaps they just don't want any more competition in that area, however feeble the competition is. It seems that there are already far too many countries with despicable laws enforcing religious fanaticism (Pakistan: death penalty for changing your religion. Malaysia: religion determined by ethnicity, etc.).
Communist! Everybody knows that, in a truly free society, the people who can't compete are ground into the dirt, and justly, by their own hand. And anybody who thinks this treatment is unfair is some kind of moral defective.
I know you're just being sarcastic (or maybe just facetious), but here's a nice quote:
"Every man holds his property subject to the general right of the community to regulate its use to whatever degree the public welfare may require." – Theodore Roosevelt
Now if only the public welfare actually meant something these days...
Let's play a game (but not global thermonuclear war if Apotheker might get involved). Try to guess what HP's next mega-blunder will be:
Dispose of inkjet printer business (and maybe laser printer and scanner businesses, too)
Reverse abandonment of WebOS devices, but after firing all the folk with know-how and pissing-off subcontractors
Announce a new combined book and app-store for iOS/Android/Kindle/Nook/etc. which will be a global leader
Declare that Jack Welch's "Destroy your business" is HP's new corporate slogan, but without the "Build your business" bit
Decide that all HP calculators will be replaced by models which are also smartphones and unusable in schools
Start work on a new desktop OS which is promised to obliterate Windows, OSX and Linux
Any other suggestions for batshit-crazy corporate directions to inspire Apotheker's next folly? Merely awarding grotesque bonuses and share options to the most destructive "leaders" does not count as stupid enough.
And, as with OpenOffice, the community will fork the Database and add a bunch of useful features to it.
Finally Oracle will either "donate" MySQL back to the community or keep it closed source and everyone will move over to PostgreSQL.
I suspect the binary-only extensions from Oracle are part of an attempt to prevent that sort of thing. After all, if a large part of the user base becomes reliant on non-forkable proprietary extensions during the next few years, then forking MySQL when Oracle's commitment to keep it FOSS expires would be largely fruitless. Moreover, relying on these extensions may also make it harder to port one's DB and related applications to Postgres or other alternatives. Furthermore, a MySQL donated to the community would be worthless to those who need the extensions (and nothing prevents Oracle from making those extensions quite expensive later). Conceivably, the extensions could even make it easier to port to a commercial DB offering from Oracle, if they are cunning enough.
For this reason, I'd say Mr. Proffitt is utterly wrong: there is much to worry about in these extensions. Each proprietary binary extension is potentially a poisoned chalice, and should be viewed as such.
How long did it take for LibreOffice to take over from OpenOffice?
You'll probably see a perfect replacement fork for MySQL the day it's open source life ends.
Perhaps the binary-only extensions from Oracle are part of an attempt to prevent that sort of thing. After all, if a large part of the user base is hooked on non-forkable proprietary extensions during the next few years, then forking MySQL when Oracle's commitment to keep it FOSS expires would be largely fruitless. Moreover, relying on these extensions may also make it harder to port one's DB and related applications to Postgres or other alternatives.
For this reason, I'd say Mr. Proffitt is utterly wrong: there is much to worry about. Each proprietary binary extension is potentially a poisoned chalice, and should be viewed as such.
What is the point of a $1k house when land costs at least 100x that amount?
There's lots of land available in Texas (to pick the state I live in) where it's around $200-$300/acre, and an acre is enough to put a few houses on. Granted, most of this land isn't terribly desirable, but getting a 1/3rd acre plot that's not too far from a city and not too bad for $1000 ought to be doable.
Then there's the cost of getting services to your chosen site. It costs a bit to get electricity, water, and sewerage to a building site, or to provide a drilled well and septic system in a site that's too remote for municipal services. And then there's the cost of preparing the site for the structure. In much of the world the foundation would need to be much more robust (possibly with drainage, insulation, etc.) than the bare-bones arrangement presented.
This is not to denigrate the concept of an inexpensive functional structure, which is good, but to point out that the cost of making a habitable house involves more than the headline cost of the structure itself.
Eg. sign up to gmail and dickhead@gmail.com - then sign up to slashdot as dick.head@gmail.com. All spam addressed to dick.head@gmail.com came via slashdot.
Richard Head probably didn't want his gmail address spewed around, you inconsiderate clod!
Facebook is a fake passport you self publish with engineered data. Better alma mater, highlights from my interesting past, fabrications of even more fantastic stuff. Friends with many olympians, nobel laureates, and big wigs, post in many languages.
Nice technique! I'm also an engineer (PhD), but averse to such immoderate self-aggrandizement.
The truth is in my LinkedIn profile, which contains no links to any pseudonymous accounts or references to any nom-de-net that I use. Even there, I don't present any links to our home web server, which is separate from all other web presences.
A bunch of bogus empty accounts exist on FaceBook, all with my real name or common mis-spellings of it (my name is quite distinctive, so this was a necessary defensive move). I have two Google+ accounts: one of them has my real name and is otherwise utterly empty - no friends/circles/content whatsoever; the other involves a pseudonym and is mostly empty. Similar pseudonyms are in use on a few other sites, none linking to either LinkedIn or our home server.
An aggregator might still make a link between some of these, but I take measures to make it difficult. I appear to be in two countries, use multiple PCs and browsers, all cookies (including LSOs) and history are cleared regularly, and so forth. Any ads I see online are usually irrelevant - health clubs, sushi offers, ballet shoes, American cars, and suchlike, and mostly in the wrong continent (especially the lawyers and life insurance).
Nothing kills a boner like a video of a raccoon dog being skinned alive for its fur.
At least, it kills the raccoon dog. Whether it kills the boner first or not would depend on what sort of sicko the boner-wielding person is. As others have noted, that's exactly the kind of sicko that PETA is likely to attract to this alleged web offering.
They want animals to be treated like humans and be covered by the same laws, which would result in them all being locked up for indecent exposure and public indecency.
Yep, dogs humping in public. Shocking, isn't it? And best not to mention horses... At least cats do it in the dark, if a little noisily.
Or just visit the zoo on a warm summer day. Most of the male animals have boners, in public, and in front of children. Obviously, they need to be convicted as child-molesting sex criminals. Hmmm, maybe that's why they're already locked up.
One can only hope that too much exposure doesn't result in people becoming sexually aroused by cruelty to animals. I really think that PETA should have thought this through a little bit more.
Evidence of thought processes at PETA is pretty thin. No doubt they'll attract almost exclusively either (i) people such as teenage males hopped up on hormones, who will ignore oodles of animal suffering in their quest for a few XXX images, or (ii) people with bizarre fetishes who would actually prefer the blood-splattered animals to be in the XXX-rated images. Perhaps it will even lead to a new genre of kitten-slasher porn or something equally gross (potential replacement for the goatse guy).
For a long time the only planets we found were 'hot Jupiters'. Jupiter sized planets very close to their star (inside Mercury's orbit).
Why weren't these planets stripped of their atmosphere?
Because nobody's there to sing "You can leave your hat on"?
From a quick perusal of the article, one group of sentences stands out:
"The final fate of the clumps and thus the outcome of the simulation in its entirety does depend on the cooling prescription (as also expected based on analytical models of Nayakshin 2010c,b,a), initial conditions, e.g., the disc mass, and missing physics (e.g., exact radiative transfer, and a better opacity, dust growth and fragmentation models) not yet included into the code. If radiative cooling of clumps is not suppressed sufficiently strongly at high densities, they may cool and collapse into massive gas giant planets or low mass brown dwarfs (Stamatellos & Whitworth 2008). Inward migration of such objects would disrupt them only if they migrate very close to the star, e.g., sub-AU distances that we do not resolve in our simulations."
In other words, they adopted certain assumptions which may not prove tenable, and which have a definite effect on the result of their simulations. Possibly courageous, possibly foolhardy.
Of course, had they limited their discussion to Wolf-Rayet stars, then stripping proto-Jupiters to leave only a rocky core would have been quite plausible. Such stars have extremely violent solar winds, and blow off their own upper layers during formation. However, Wolf-Rayet stars are an extreme of type O stars, and are thought to result in a supernova within 10^5 to 10^6 years of formation, so they are particularly short-lived. The authors were treating regular stars of mass not dissimilar to our Sol, so their conclusions are, to say the least, speculative.
Yes, there was uuencode, but that was about as cumbersome as sending source code and it was rarely used in email anyways.
For fairly large values of "rare", as I recall it. Using uuencode, possibly splitting a tar across several messages (to avoid filters), was common in the 80's because it was much less hassle than setting up an ftp site and sending login details for a one-time exchange. Also, the standard response to spam in the 80's (yes, it actually existed) was to send a few MB of core dump or other random binary in response, because the cretins usually used their own email addresses. That all changed in the 90's, and not always for the better.
...in a world where simply visiting the wrong website can infect you if Flash has an unpatched vulnerability, that's too simplistic.
Are you saying that Flash should be limited to Linux, BSD, OpenSolaris, and other operating systems with minimal protections? Better tell Adobe, because they always release new versions of Flash first for Windows. Does that imply Adobe is also complicit with the botmasters?
Sounds like a plan. Revoke all laws 10-20 years after they are passed, unless they can pass again.
Give the congresscritters something to do, so they can feel useful.
Maybe just something to do for ten minutes every year. That's how long it would take to vote through an omnibus bill renewing all legislation which was to expire that year. Attempts at debate would be sidestepped by invoking whatever rules are necessary (even if it involves misapplication of said rules). And the bill would likely be passed "by acclamation" or on "show of hands" or other means of avoiding documented responsibility by individual legislators.
If you want to get a sunset rule for legislation, it belongs in the constitution with explicit safeguards. For instance, it should emphatically prevent bundling of renewals, so that each and every bill to be renewed would need its own vote, and be accorded at least a token debate if a sufficient (but small) number of legislators so wish. The probable way around that, of course, is that each bill would be either trivially or toxically amended before it expires, thus resetting the clock. By toxic amendment, I mean the usual bundling of chalk and cheese that pollutes many bills in the US Congress (examples), where the debate would be clearly inadequate and concern only the current additions, rather than the stuff being renewed.
On Wednesday, a deeply regretful Helleso spoke to local radio
Regretful because he was caught. If he wasn't caught, probably he would have been quite happy.
Exactly. It should have said: "On Wednesday, Helleso guiltily spoke to local radio". The guilty regret being caught. He had been sliding down that slippery slope for a rather long time, and had repeatedly denied any wrongdoing before finally being cornered.
What makes you think that the airport cares whether you feel comfortable or not? The private firm, too, can tell you to go fuck yourself. They don't work for you, they work for whoever hired them. Private screening might still have "guidelines" that they will be required to follow, and I don't expect them to be too different from what we have with the TSA.
And "trouble-makers" might get shunted to the anal-fisting line either way...
Our PCs at home all perform incremental backups onto our server (Synology DS207) over the LAN. This takes place every night that a PC is left powered on (happens typically a couple of times per week). The server automatically backs itself up onto an external USB drive every night, and I swap that USB drive roughly every week, with one being stored in a secure place in the heated garage, which is a separate building to the house. I also keep an archive USB drive for each PC there, and these drives are updated with full backups as required.
The Synology supports remote backup to any rsync-compatible box, including encrypted backup over the internet. We don't use this feature, as local+LAN backups are sufficient for us. Most of the Synology site talks about Windows and Mac, but it supports our Linux PCs equally well.
Slashdot Mirror
Thank you for that belly-laugh inducing apology for your batshit-crazy religious schisms.
You may also wish to contemplate my sig... but I suspect you would rather not.
Look here boy, my mom never paid for internet. I've always paid for it myself, starting in 1984 or 1985 (don't remember, it's been a while). Latency and bandwidth with the 1200 baud modem were quite adequate for Trade Wars (on a BBS, not many internet games then), I'll have you know.
Can a true Christian willfully disobey parts of the Bible?
Yes, of course. It's called sinning, and the Catholics have complicated rituals and protocols for obtaining forgiveness: sinner confesses to priest/bishop/whatever, priest/bishop/whatever tells sinner to recite some number of various prayers as penance. Probably quite a lot of prayers would be needed to atone for murder and suchlike, but forgiveness is available. Next, you'll be telling us that Catholics aren't true Christians...
Of course, anyone (whether true Atheist or not) should be allowed to have a good belly-laugh at the Bardo Thodol, Bhagavad Gita, Bible, Dianetics, Kojiki, Koran, Rig Veda, Talmud, or any other "holy" book.
spreading religious hatred on the Internet
Perhaps they just don't want any more competition in that area, however feeble the competition is. It seems that there are already far too many countries with despicable laws enforcing religious fanaticism (Pakistan: death penalty for changing your religion. Malaysia: religion determined by ethnicity, etc.).
Communist! Everybody knows that, in a truly free society, the people who can't compete are ground into the dirt, and justly, by their own hand. And anybody who thinks this treatment is unfair is some kind of moral defective.
I know you're just being sarcastic (or maybe just facetious), but here's a nice quote:
"Every man holds his property subject to the general right of the community to regulate its use to whatever degree the public welfare may require." – Theodore Roosevelt
Now if only the public welfare actually meant something these days...
It makes perfect sense.
Let's say you were given a year to kill Hewlett-Packard.
Let's play a game (but not global thermonuclear war if Apotheker might get involved). Try to guess what HP's next mega-blunder will be:
Any other suggestions for batshit-crazy corporate directions to inspire Apotheker's next folly? Merely awarding grotesque bonuses and share options to the most destructive "leaders" does not count as stupid enough.
And, as with OpenOffice, the community will fork the Database and add a bunch of useful features to it.
Finally Oracle will either "donate" MySQL back to the community or keep it closed source and everyone will move over to PostgreSQL.
I suspect the binary-only extensions from Oracle are part of an attempt to prevent that sort of thing. After all, if a large part of the user base becomes reliant on non-forkable proprietary extensions during the next few years, then forking MySQL when Oracle's commitment to keep it FOSS expires would be largely fruitless. Moreover, relying on these extensions may also make it harder to port one's DB and related applications to Postgres or other alternatives. Furthermore, a MySQL donated to the community would be worthless to those who need the extensions (and nothing prevents Oracle from making those extensions quite expensive later). Conceivably, the extensions could even make it easier to port to a commercial DB offering from Oracle, if they are cunning enough.
For this reason, I'd say Mr. Proffitt is utterly wrong: there is much to worry about in these extensions. Each proprietary binary extension is potentially a poisoned chalice, and should be viewed as such.
How long did it take for LibreOffice to take over from OpenOffice?
You'll probably see a perfect replacement fork for MySQL the day it's open source life ends.
Perhaps the binary-only extensions from Oracle are part of an attempt to prevent that sort of thing. After all, if a large part of the user base is hooked on non-forkable proprietary extensions during the next few years, then forking MySQL when Oracle's commitment to keep it FOSS expires would be largely fruitless. Moreover, relying on these extensions may also make it harder to port one's DB and related applications to Postgres or other alternatives.
For this reason, I'd say Mr. Proffitt is utterly wrong: there is much to worry about. Each proprietary binary extension is potentially a poisoned chalice, and should be viewed as such.
What is the point of a $1k house when land costs at least 100x that amount?
There's lots of land available in Texas (to pick the state I live in) where it's around $200-$300/acre, and an acre is enough to put a few houses on. Granted, most of this land isn't terribly desirable, but getting a 1/3rd acre plot that's not too far from a city and not too bad for $1000 ought to be doable.
Then there's the cost of getting services to your chosen site. It costs a bit to get electricity, water, and sewerage to a building site, or to provide a drilled well and septic system in a site that's too remote for municipal services. And then there's the cost of preparing the site for the structure. In much of the world the foundation would need to be much more robust (possibly with drainage, insulation, etc.) than the bare-bones arrangement presented.
This is not to denigrate the concept of an inexpensive functional structure, which is good, but to point out that the cost of making a habitable house involves more than the headline cost of the structure itself.
Eg. sign up to gmail and dickhead@gmail.com - then sign up to slashdot as dick.head@gmail.com. All spam addressed to dick.head@gmail.com came via slashdot.
Richard Head probably didn't want his gmail address spewed around, you inconsiderate clod!
Facebook is a fake passport you self publish with engineered data. Better alma mater, highlights from my interesting past, fabrications of even more fantastic stuff. Friends with many olympians, nobel laureates, and big wigs, post in many languages.
Nice technique! I'm also an engineer (PhD), but averse to such immoderate self-aggrandizement.
The truth is in my LinkedIn profile, which contains no links to any pseudonymous accounts or references to any nom-de-net that I use. Even there, I don't present any links to our home web server, which is separate from all other web presences.
A bunch of bogus empty accounts exist on FaceBook, all with my real name or common mis-spellings of it (my name is quite distinctive, so this was a necessary defensive move). I have two Google+ accounts: one of them has my real name and is otherwise utterly empty - no friends/circles/content whatsoever; the other involves a pseudonym and is mostly empty. Similar pseudonyms are in use on a few other sites, none linking to either LinkedIn or our home server.
An aggregator might still make a link between some of these, but I take measures to make it difficult. I appear to be in two countries, use multiple PCs and browsers, all cookies (including LSOs) and history are cleared regularly, and so forth. Any ads I see online are usually irrelevant - health clubs, sushi offers, ballet shoes, American cars, and suchlike, and mostly in the wrong continent (especially the lawyers and life insurance).
Nothing kills a boner like a video of a raccoon dog being skinned alive for its fur.
At least, it kills the raccoon dog. Whether it kills the boner first or not would depend on what sort of sicko the boner-wielding person is. As others have noted, that's exactly the kind of sicko that PETA is likely to attract to this alleged web offering.
Fuck it, we're going full-on batshit.
What's so funny about this? He's just quoting the third episode where we'll be seeing some hardcore bat-anal.
Santorum is batty? Weirdly appropriate from PETA's viewpoint.
They want animals to be treated like humans and be covered by the same laws, which would result in them all being locked up for indecent exposure and public indecency.
Yep, dogs humping in public. Shocking, isn't it? And best not to mention horses... At least cats do it in the dark, if a little noisily.
Or just visit the zoo on a warm summer day. Most of the male animals have boners, in public, and in front of children. Obviously, they need to be convicted as child-molesting sex criminals. Hmmm, maybe that's why they're already locked up.
One can only hope that too much exposure doesn't result in people becoming sexually aroused by cruelty to animals. I really think that PETA should have thought this through a little bit more.
Evidence of thought processes at PETA is pretty thin. No doubt they'll attract almost exclusively either (i) people such as teenage males hopped up on hormones, who will ignore oodles of animal suffering in their quest for a few XXX images, or (ii) people with bizarre fetishes who would actually prefer the blood-splattered animals to be in the XXX-rated images. Perhaps it will even lead to a new genre of kitten-slasher porn or something equally gross (potential replacement for the goatse guy).
For a long time the only planets we found were 'hot Jupiters'. Jupiter sized planets very close to their star (inside Mercury's orbit).
Why weren't these planets stripped of their atmosphere?
Because nobody's there to sing "You can leave your hat on"?
From a quick perusal of the article, one group of sentences stands out:
"The final fate of the clumps and thus the outcome of the simulation in its entirety does depend on the cooling prescription (as also expected based on analytical models of Nayakshin 2010c,b,a), initial conditions, e.g., the disc mass, and missing physics (e.g., exact radiative transfer, and a better opacity, dust growth and fragmentation models) not yet included into the code. If radiative cooling of clumps is not suppressed sufficiently strongly at high densities, they may cool and collapse into massive gas giant planets or low mass brown dwarfs (Stamatellos & Whitworth 2008). Inward migration of such objects would disrupt them only if they migrate very close to the star, e.g., sub-AU distances that we do not resolve in our simulations."
In other words, they adopted certain assumptions which may not prove tenable, and which have a definite effect on the result of their simulations. Possibly courageous, possibly foolhardy.
Of course, had they limited their discussion to Wolf-Rayet stars, then stripping proto-Jupiters to leave only a rocky core would have been quite plausible. Such stars have extremely violent solar winds, and blow off their own upper layers during formation. However, Wolf-Rayet stars are an extreme of type O stars, and are thought to result in a supernova within 10^5 to 10^6 years of formation, so they are particularly short-lived. The authors were treating regular stars of mass not dissimilar to our Sol, so their conclusions are, to say the least, speculative.
Yes, there was uuencode, but that was about as cumbersome as sending source code and it was rarely used in email anyways.
For fairly large values of "rare", as I recall it. Using uuencode, possibly splitting a tar across several messages (to avoid filters), was common in the 80's because it was much less hassle than setting up an ftp site and sending login details for a one-time exchange. Also, the standard response to spam in the 80's (yes, it actually existed) was to send a few MB of core dump or other random binary in response, because the cretins usually used their own email addresses. That all changed in the 90's, and not always for the better.
Are you saying that Flash should be limited to Linux, BSD, OpenSolaris, and other operating systems with minimal protections? Better tell Adobe, because they always release new versions of Flash first for Windows. Does that imply Adobe is also complicit with the botmasters?
Sounds like a plan. Revoke all laws 10-20 years after they are passed, unless they can pass again.
Give the congresscritters something to do, so they can feel useful.
Maybe just something to do for ten minutes every year. That's how long it would take to vote through an omnibus bill renewing all legislation which was to expire that year. Attempts at debate would be sidestepped by invoking whatever rules are necessary (even if it involves misapplication of said rules). And the bill would likely be passed "by acclamation" or on "show of hands" or other means of avoiding documented responsibility by individual legislators.
If you want to get a sunset rule for legislation, it belongs in the constitution with explicit safeguards. For instance, it should emphatically prevent bundling of renewals, so that each and every bill to be renewed would need its own vote, and be accorded at least a token debate if a sufficient (but small) number of legislators so wish. The probable way around that, of course, is that each bill would be either trivially or toxically amended before it expires, thus resetting the clock. By toxic amendment, I mean the usual bundling of chalk and cheese that pollutes many bills in the US Congress (examples), where the debate would be clearly inadequate and concern only the current additions, rather than the stuff being renewed.
On Wednesday, a deeply regretful Helleso spoke to local radio
Regretful because he was caught. If he wasn't caught, probably he would have been quite happy.
Exactly. It should have said: "On Wednesday, Helleso guiltily spoke to local radio". The guilty regret being caught. He had been sliding down that slippery slope for a rather long time, and had repeatedly denied any wrongdoing before finally being cornered.
If you can see your genitals while wearing jeans, you are doing it wrong.
Depends on the person in the jeans. Camel toe can be aesthetically pleasing.
What makes you think that the airport cares whether you feel comfortable or not? The private firm, too, can tell you to go fuck yourself. They don't work for you, they work for whoever hired them. Private screening might still have "guidelines" that they will be required to follow, and I don't expect them to be too different from what we have with the TSA.
And "trouble-makers" might get shunted to the anal-fisting line either way...
Parent should be +5 informative or +5 insightful...
wtf @ title
I take it the word "Bro" has you confused. It's quite simple, Google will not track members of the 1st Infantry Division (United_States) or members of the Border Roads Organization, especially if said members are wearing a male bra while in a particular town in Sweden. Is it clear enough now?
Our PCs at home all perform incremental backups onto our server (Synology DS207) over the LAN. This takes place every night that a PC is left powered on (happens typically a couple of times per week). The server automatically backs itself up onto an external USB drive every night, and I swap that USB drive roughly every week, with one being stored in a secure place in the heated garage, which is a separate building to the house. I also keep an archive USB drive for each PC there, and these drives are updated with full backups as required.
The Synology supports remote backup to any rsync-compatible box, including encrypted backup over the internet. We don't use this feature, as local+LAN backups are sufficient for us. Most of the Synology site talks about Windows and Mac, but it supports our Linux PCs equally well.