OK, so, we have made someone aware of something, as the video was taken down for some violation or other. I wish there were a stupidity violation on youtube, but then, some forms of comedy would probably get chucked that are actually quite amusing. *ponders*
That's jut the point of this thing. They don't have to compare anything. They just look at the code that identifies the printer. They then call up the manufacturer and say, "To whom is this printer registered?" And then they know. Simple as that. They don't have to suspect you. Your printer was the source of this propaganda, whether or not you were the one using it.
Way to take something out of context.
your GP stated that:
He's opposing closing security holes that are obscure
I'm just pointing out that he *wants* to close it all, both security wise and access-wise. You know, paranoia, like we here at/. have. I'm just saying that you'd probably agree with him, if he were as far from the limelight as you.
I wish I could give you a better response than this but: the important consideration is not whether it would melt or not, but that the shape and Index of Refraction between the fiber's core and cladding are maintained. (That's the easy answer.) Also, fiber is heated to about 1800 kelvins (1527 Celsius) for the purposes of manufacturing the fiber (really detailed but interesting process).
Your statement is completely Sensible. In fact, it is so sensible that I propose that all countries of the world, in a spirit of compromise, create Anti-dickery Guidelines, following ISO standards (so the French can have a say without having to take a stand). I am sure that this will keep the countries from being dicks or engaging in dickery forevermore.
I'd like to point out that the original rebuttal that was quoted by you could have had a better counter. After all, AC referenced land in his rebuttal, as though that had anything to do with the quoted item, when the OP never said a damn thing about land.
Communism =/= Bad.
Communism = Bad Design.
Communism, by design, relies on the assumption that people are basically hard-working and willing to work for the common good. When you try to make it work, you realize that people aren't like that. Then you try to force it work and you end up employing a horribly tight grip to keep your government stable.
In small, isolated communities, communism can actually work fairly well. But then, there is no real diffusion of responsibility in that kind of situation. Everyone has a job to do, and everyone does it by necessity.
And this is why they should never have gone public. I don't have anything against them, but they are stupid panicky herd animals, as a whole, who don't care where the revenue comes from.
Actually from what I remember of the man, without crosschecking - I believe he works from a whitelist perspective - close it all and open what you need.
it is difficult to type correctly because of intentional typos
and a few numbers substituting for letters
i even get it wrong myself about 1/3 of the time even though i know it by heart
This is closer to haiku, but haiku-style? No, sir.
Typing bad is hard
Letters, numbers confuse me
Though I know: Error!
Thank you, for step one of social hacking.
I am about to proceed with a step two: find the most cantankerous person at your workplace.
Then Step 3: I'm in your networks, reading your data!
Yeah, I gave up IE a while back, but most users never noticed. I also managed to get corporate to allow me to train new users on information security. It doesn't work on everyone, but thankfully most get it after a few good examples.
It's called an analogy. It was a pretty good one too. He's basically asking why spend tons of cash for a negligible improvement in security. There's no such thing as an unbreakable system. That's why people use detection tools in conjunction with their security measures - if you can't stop em, find out who they are and prosecute them. But even that can be sidestepped with sufficient resources and intelligence on the part of the hacker.
I mean, this guy was the inventor of one of the more prominent (and actually pretty high ranking on the lists) anti-virus programs out there. I would say it is safe to assume that he has a pretty decent idea of what you can do to improve security. Also, notice that he is the inventor actually counseling people not to waste money on costly upgrades on software like the software he created and gets paid royalties on! How often does someone admonish people for overusing something that gets him paid?
Ron Paul campaign:
America should stop subsidizing the defenses of the rest of the world and worry more about its own national security interests, including its interests in a viable space program. As president, I will also work to remove barriers to private space flight.
This statement basically says he wants to keep the role of the government to national defense purposes, to which our space program has contributed greatly. He clearly sees private innovation as helpful in much the same way that we see open source development as a good thing (just wait until the private community stops communicating openly with each other).
2) Why Can't I Get a Straight Answer?
Ron Paul campaign:
The American people should expect clear and direct answers to their questions. Not only have I always strived to clearly state my position on issues, but my voting record backs up my commitment to the free-market, limited government philosophy I espouse on the campaign trail.
This answer has no conflict with #1. Some may think the quote of limits on government conflict with #1, but libertarians believe that the limits on government are not in the area of national defense, rather in the arena of internal policies that override the sovereignty of states. He believes in free-market (more than I do) and he supports limits on government. So he's basically saying that his voting record and his words match up.
3) Marijuana
Ron Paul campaign:
I oppose federal laws outlawing marijuana and I oppose federal interference with state medical marijuana laws.
This is pretty damn straightforward and does not conflict with the previous statements.
4) What do you think about technology?
Ron Paul campaign:
I favor enforcement of intellectual property rights; however, some of the steps taken to protect these rights impose unreasonable burdens on the consumers and even raise civil liberties concerns. As president, I will seek a balance between the interest of copyright holders and consumers of digital media.
He obfuscates his answer a small amount here, but not much. The question itself was badly flawed in that it required a a somewhat convoluted answer in order to get at both topics (which, in my opinion, should be answered in a dissertation for any worthwhile content) For a short answer, this is pretty good.
5) What do you think about patents?
Ron Paul campaign:
Patents have a role to play in encouraging innovation. While I do not have a plan for patent reform yet, I would want to work with Congress to make sure that the US patent system encourages and rewards innovation. Making sure the patent system is fair to small business and entrepreneurs, rewards the actual inventors of a product, and does not tilt the playing field to large corporations will be a priority in my administration's approach to patent law.
I think this is the best answer of all: he admits that he doesn't have a reform plan. He then blows a bit of sunshine our way in a nice little marketing ploy, yet managing to keep it honest.
The fate of Tank Man is still unknown. There are numerous accounts that say both and none is able to offer hard evidence.
And yes, the actions of this one man brought Chinese actions squarely into focus around the globe. This was arguably one of the most influential acts of this century.
Not the best analogy, but it does fall within accepted norms associative illustration.
It isn't all bugs, there are just some plain incompatible items (for instance VLOOKUP). Anyone that screws with lookup tables in excel would have to learn how to properly use INDEX() and MATCH() in conjunction.
However, that is a great reason to switch to Open Document formats: everything becomes portable. After standards are implemented, backwards compatibility quickly becomes a non-issue.
we've been talking about antiparticles for decades (has one of our colliders actually made one yet?), you talk of photons spontaneously appearing out of nothing, and nobody has ever witnessed any of these things.
Actually, yes, we have. In fact, they've managed anti-atoms, even.
That was worded poorly enough... with no actual quoted material in the fourth section.
*slams head on desk*
No, still doesn't work grammatically - the sentence reads badly enough that parsing is required to understand what you are saying. I'm glad you feel strongly about string theory, so strongly that your replies with respect to such come back garbled; however, please restrict your garbled statements on a timecube-like website of your own. If you wish to comment intelligently, please leave your counter-arguments and mathematical proofs on the table.
And no, I am not a String Theory fanboy. I don't really like it, actually.
Slashdot Mirror
OK, so, we have made someone aware of something, as the video was taken down for some violation or other. I wish there were a stupidity violation on youtube, but then, some forms of comedy would probably get chucked that are actually quite amusing. *ponders*
Yeah, I think he forgot which dictatorship he's dealing with here.
He also seems to forget that "s" =/= "apostrophe" in his parenthetical.
That's jut the point of this thing. They don't have to compare anything. They just look at the code that identifies the printer. They then call up the manufacturer and say, "To whom is this printer registered?" And then they know. Simple as that. They don't have to suspect you. Your printer was the source of this propaganda, whether or not you were the one using it.
your GP stated that: I'm just pointing out that he *wants* to close it all, both security wise and access-wise. You know, paranoia, like we here at
I thought it might be helpful to point out that Fusion splicing uses an arc welder that heats the fiber to 2k Celsius to fuse the fibers together.
How the hell is this offtopic? Someone needs to beat that moderator with a stick.
I wish I could give you a better response than this but: the important consideration is not whether it would melt or not, but that the shape and Index of Refraction between the fiber's core and cladding are maintained. (That's the easy answer.) Also, fiber is heated to about 1800 kelvins (1527 Celsius) for the purposes of manufacturing the fiber (really detailed but interesting process).
Your statement is completely Sensible. In fact, it is so sensible that I propose that all countries of the world, in a spirit of compromise, create Anti-dickery Guidelines, following ISO standards (so the French can have a say without having to take a stand). I am sure that this will keep the countries from being dicks or engaging in dickery forevermore.
I'd like to point out that the original rebuttal that was quoted by you could have had a better counter. After all, AC referenced land in his rebuttal, as though that had anything to do with the quoted item, when the OP never said a damn thing about land.
Mixed metaphors and repetition made me stop reading. Until then I was enjoying your metaphor/jargon salad.
Communism =/= Bad. Communism = Bad Design. Communism, by design, relies on the assumption that people are basically hard-working and willing to work for the common good. When you try to make it work, you realize that people aren't like that. Then you try to force it work and you end up employing a horribly tight grip to keep your government stable. In small, isolated communities, communism can actually work fairly well. But then, there is no real diffusion of responsibility in that kind of situation. Everyone has a job to do, and everyone does it by necessity.
And this is why they should never have gone public. I don't have anything against them, but they are stupid panicky herd animals, as a whole, who don't care where the revenue comes from.
Actually from what I remember of the man, without crosschecking - I believe he works from a whitelist perspective - close it all and open what you need.
and a few numbers substituting for letters
i even get it wrong myself about 1/3 of the time even though i know it by heart
This is closer to haiku, but haiku-style? No, sir.
Typing bad is hard
Letters, numbers confuse me
Though I know: Error!
Haiku!
Thank you, for step one of social hacking. I am about to proceed with a step two: find the most cantankerous person at your workplace. Then Step 3: I'm in your networks, reading your data!
Yeah, I gave up IE a while back, but most users never noticed. I also managed to get corporate to allow me to train new users on information security. It doesn't work on everyone, but thankfully most get it after a few good examples.
It's called an analogy. It was a pretty good one too. He's basically asking why spend tons of cash for a negligible improvement in security. There's no such thing as an unbreakable system. That's why people use detection tools in conjunction with their security measures - if you can't stop em, find out who they are and prosecute them. But even that can be sidestepped with sufficient resources and intelligence on the part of the hacker. I mean, this guy was the inventor of one of the more prominent (and actually pretty high ranking on the lists) anti-virus programs out there. I would say it is safe to assume that he has a pretty decent idea of what you can do to improve security. Also, notice that he is the inventor actually counseling people not to waste money on costly upgrades on software like the software he created and gets paid royalties on! How often does someone admonish people for overusing something that gets him paid?
The fate of Tank Man is still unknown. There are numerous accounts that say both and none is able to offer hard evidence. And yes, the actions of this one man brought Chinese actions squarely into focus around the globe. This was arguably one of the most influential acts of this century. Not the best analogy, but it does fall within accepted norms associative illustration.
It isn't all bugs, there are just some plain incompatible items (for instance VLOOKUP). Anyone that screws with lookup tables in excel would have to learn how to properly use INDEX() and MATCH() in conjunction. However, that is a great reason to switch to Open Document formats: everything becomes portable. After standards are implemented, backwards compatibility quickly becomes a non-issue.
Seriously, though, I agree with your response. I simply felt a bit of ribbing was in order.
Flamebait? I would mod him up as funny. Look at what he chose to attack in all of that insanity!
That was worded poorly enough... with no actual quoted material in the fourth section.
*slams head on desk*
No, still doesn't work grammatically - the sentence reads badly enough that parsing is required to understand what you are saying. I'm glad you feel strongly about string theory, so strongly that your replies with respect to such come back garbled; however, please restrict your garbled statements on a timecube-like website of your own. If you wish to comment intelligently, please leave your counter-arguments and mathematical proofs on the table.
And no, I am not a String Theory fanboy. I don't really like it, actually.