The problem is that partisanship has entered the judicial branch at all. No law, however well written, is immune to being twisted by sophistry until black means white and yes means no.
Even better, they claim no commit is a FEATURE!. They gently explain that it's nothing to worry about and that a committed rate is something businesses expect.
I flip over to their business rates and find STILL NO COMMIT.
And they have Amazon ads at the bottom of each page. Is it just me or does that lend the site that coveted unprofessional look?
The problem there is Comcast double dipping. Their users have already paid for best effort bandwidth. If Comcast has their hand out to Netflix (who is not currently their customer), then necessarily Comcast hasn't given their own customers best effort (if they can't do better, what is Netflix paying for?)
The worst abuses happen when the ISP itself provides content (for example video on demand) and takes steps to make other offers less attractive by deliberately providing them a poorer quality of service then their own VOD servers get.
Lets say you own a turnpike. Someone opens a gas station just off the turnpike. Fine and dandy. But you see that they make good money so you build your own gas station on the next exit. But the profits could be better so suddenly the off ramp next to the other guy's station is perpetually 'closed for repairs' yet the repairs never seem to happen. But pumping gas is a lot like work, so you offer the other guy a 'deal' For 10% of his profits, you will 'expidite' the 'repairs' and make sure they aren't 'necessary' again.
It's just one step up from organized crime offering 'insurance' to local businesses, because "you know, stuff happens, buildings burn down..."
Network neutrality is the people saying "that's pretty bad behavior for someone who wouldn't even be in business if not for that sweet public grant of right of way. Show some gratitude and cut it out!".
Entitlement is a word used mostly by people who don't believe in positive rights. For example, do you have a positive right to defend yourself or is it an entitlement?
Note that entitlement would be an acceptable term for positive rights except for the unwarranted negative connotation it has been given of late.
There is a choice, but our so-called leaders stand in the way. They have forgotten that the economy exists to serve the people (all of them), not the other way around. They treat the economy as if it was some sort of god.
I would be less worried about Secureboot if it was absolutely mandated to allow a user key and allow disabling. Alas, it hasn't been all that long and the one mandate out there (from MS) is now gone. It's interesting that it is supposed to be for the owner's benefit but typically doesn't offer a simple way for the user to bless a bootloader or OS nor does it offer a boot anyway option. Almost as if the benefit is meant for someone else.
Perhaps the best approach would have been for the firmware to be just a simple bootstrap with a well-defined handoff to stage two which would reside in a seperately re-writable segment of the flash rom.
That, in turn could do the rest of EFI or could be a more conventional bios or be replaced with SeaBIOS, bits of Coreboot, or whatever the user wants. I would expect the factory installed default to be a simple boot menu that can read MBR and GPT in order to load the disk based boot loader.
That would both improve reliability where needed and make sure that you could always replace the offending EFI if it wanted to insist on SecureBoot or other potentially harmful scheme.
Failing that, just go with the simplest possible bootstrap and let the OS or bootloader deal with the rest.
It's an odd blend of no chores and yet no actual free time. Even when unsupervised, they're locked up in the house (but no running!). Then people wonder why they don't exercise more.
It completely misses the aspect of positive freedoms. The conditions that maximise the negative freedoms (that is, rights to have others NOT do something) are often dismal for the positive freedoms. For example, Crusoe had it made as far as people not telling him he could not shout obscenities at 3 A.M. But reading whatever he wants? A bit hard when nobody is writing anything he can get to.
That argument only works when replying to an extremist. For example someone who never met a regulation he liked. Someone who wants to move the 'slider' a bit one way or the other, not so much.
In cases like this where the 'safety' is far from established but the cost to freedom is shown (even if a few steps out), it's even less appropriate.
Probably not. We'd have a few stories about how 40 years ago the flying car was banned to unanimous approval after a few notable incidents of 'motorists' crashing into schools and such.
There's little point. Specific answers to specific questions still implies that those answers could not have been used as educational material, only for cheating.
Knowing that the correct answer to question 52b is 28 (even with the steps to copy down) really isn't that helpful for general knowledge. It's still just an answer key, it's just not a complete answer key.
Agreed. The complete answer hasn't really been worked out yet. Part of it is that the old guard is doing it's best to keep the new small bands that won't deal with the devil from getting ahead. After all, once that happens, the gravy train is over.
Oh, I certainly have. They get their reputation mostly because so many shirk their actual job and busy themselves with ass covering and building a fiefdom.
That does not change what their job is at all, it just changes how well they (don't) do it.
That's a nice strawman you have there. You clearly picked your conclusion and then endowed the subject with the characteristics you felt would prove it.
The drug I had in mind was never on patent, it's been in use since the 18th century. They got a sweetheart deal from the FDA and upped the price immediately.
Deals between holders of an expired patent and generics producers to NOT compete are increasingly common. Even things that have never been patented are marked up well beyond reason.
Checking out is one thing. Playing soldiers, kicking the door in, and shooting the first thing that doesn't cower before them is quite another.
Evidence suggests there is far too much of the latter going on.
They don't hesitate to use IR to look in trying to find drugs (at least not until the courts slapped them for it), perhaps they should use it in exigent circumstances like when getting ready to kick the door in and go in with guns blazing.
Slashdot Mirror
So what you're saying is that the government has the Midas touch? They succeeded beyond anyone's wildest dreams?
The problem is that partisanship has entered the judicial branch at all. No law, however well written, is immune to being twisted by sophistry until black means white and yes means no.
Even better, they claim no commit is a FEATURE!. They gently explain that it's nothing to worry about and that a committed rate is something businesses expect.
I flip over to their business rates and find STILL NO COMMIT.
And they have Amazon ads at the bottom of each page. Is it just me or does that lend the site that coveted unprofessional look?
The problem there is Comcast double dipping. Their users have already paid for best effort bandwidth. If Comcast has their hand out to Netflix (who is not currently their customer), then necessarily Comcast hasn't given their own customers best effort (if they can't do better, what is Netflix paying for?)
The worst abuses happen when the ISP itself provides content (for example video on demand) and takes steps to make other offers less attractive by deliberately providing them a poorer quality of service then their own VOD servers get.
Lets say you own a turnpike. Someone opens a gas station just off the turnpike. Fine and dandy. But you see that they make good money so you build your own gas station on the next exit. But the profits could be better so suddenly the off ramp next to the other guy's station is perpetually 'closed for repairs' yet the repairs never seem to happen. But pumping gas is a lot like work, so you offer the other guy a 'deal' For 10% of his profits, you will 'expidite' the 'repairs' and make sure they aren't 'necessary' again.
It's just one step up from organized crime offering 'insurance' to local businesses, because "you know, stuff happens, buildings burn down..."
Network neutrality is the people saying "that's pretty bad behavior for someone who wouldn't even be in business if not for that sweet public grant of right of way. Show some gratitude and cut it out!".
Entitlement is a word used mostly by people who don't believe in positive rights. For example, do you have a positive right to defend yourself or is it an entitlement?
Note that entitlement would be an acceptable term for positive rights except for the unwarranted negative connotation it has been given of late.
There is a choice, but our so-called leaders stand in the way. They have forgotten that the economy exists to serve the people (all of them), not the other way around. They treat the economy as if it was some sort of god.
I would be less worried about Secureboot if it was absolutely mandated to allow a user key and allow disabling. Alas, it hasn't been all that long and the one mandate out there (from MS) is now gone. It's interesting that it is supposed to be for the owner's benefit but typically doesn't offer a simple way for the user to bless a bootloader or OS nor does it offer a boot anyway option. Almost as if the benefit is meant for someone else.
Perhaps the best approach would have been for the firmware to be just a simple bootstrap with a well-defined handoff to stage two which would reside in a seperately re-writable segment of the flash rom.
That, in turn could do the rest of EFI or could be a more conventional bios or be replaced with SeaBIOS, bits of Coreboot, or whatever the user wants. I would expect the factory installed default to be a simple boot menu that can read MBR and GPT in order to load the disk based boot loader.
That would both improve reliability where needed and make sure that you could always replace the offending EFI if it wanted to insist on SecureBoot or other potentially harmful scheme.
Failing that, just go with the simplest possible bootstrap and let the OS or bootloader deal with the rest.
It's an odd blend of no chores and yet no actual free time. Even when unsupervised, they're locked up in the house (but no running!). Then people wonder why they don't exercise more.
I once read an essay about how 'the novel' would be the downfall of civilization.
It completely misses the aspect of positive freedoms. The conditions that maximise the negative freedoms (that is, rights to have others NOT do something) are often dismal for the positive freedoms. For example, Crusoe had it made as far as people not telling him he could not shout obscenities at 3 A.M. But reading whatever he wants? A bit hard when nobody is writing anything he can get to.
That argument only works when replying to an extremist. For example someone who never met a regulation he liked. Someone who wants to move the 'slider' a bit one way or the other, not so much.
In cases like this where the 'safety' is far from established but the cost to freedom is shown (even if a few steps out), it's even less appropriate.
Schmidt also indicated that Google glass feels happy and feels like dancing.
Probably not. We'd have a few stories about how 40 years ago the flying car was banned to unanimous approval after a few notable incidents of 'motorists' crashing into schools and such.
There's little point. Specific answers to specific questions still implies that those answers could not have been used as educational material, only for cheating.
Knowing that the correct answer to question 52b is 28 (even with the steps to copy down) really isn't that helpful for general knowledge. It's still just an answer key, it's just not a complete answer key.
I'm guessing you've been confused by the /. interface (it stops indenting after a while) since I'm certainly not replying to myself.
I'll have that apology now...
I have no idea what you're talking about here. I will have to assume your cheese has slipped off the cracker.
Agreed. The complete answer hasn't really been worked out yet. Part of it is that the old guard is doing it's best to keep the new small bands that won't deal with the devil from getting ahead. After all, once that happens, the gravy train is over.
Oh, I certainly have. They get their reputation mostly because so many shirk their actual job and busy themselves with ass covering and building a fiefdom.
That does not change what their job is at all, it just changes how well they (don't) do it.
Perhaps you can get someone to slip you the answer. Ask around and flash some cash.
So you're saying the answer key would tell them everything they need to know?
There most certainly is a such thing. For example, sort_results (put_us_first) is biased. Sort_results(likely_user_preference) is not.
Spin yourself around until you believe red==green if you like but make no mistake, that's just you playing word games in your head.
That's a nice strawman you have there. You clearly picked your conclusion and then endowed the subject with the characteristics you felt would prove it.
Since you're making the extraordinary claim (that poor people have all the resources they need), I'll let you do the proving.
The drug I had in mind was never on patent, it's been in use since the 18th century. They got a sweetheart deal from the FDA and upped the price immediately.
Deals between holders of an expired patent and generics producers to NOT compete are increasingly common. Even things that have never been patented are marked up well beyond reason.
Checking out is one thing. Playing soldiers, kicking the door in, and shooting the first thing that doesn't cower before them is quite another.
Evidence suggests there is far too much of the latter going on.
They don't hesitate to use IR to look in trying to find drugs (at least not until the courts slapped them for it), perhaps they should use it in exigent circumstances like when getting ready to kick the door in and go in with guns blazing.