Um, why not? Israel wouldn't and couldn't even continue to exist without the undying and enthusiastic support of the USA
What makes you say that? They seemed to do quite fine for all those years we didnt support them.
You DO realize they are a first world country, with an incredible military, right? Id be interested to see in what way and for what reason you think they wouldnt "continue to exist" without our support (and what on earth makes you think our support has been "undying" historically).
You are proving to everybody that you have no idea what is really going on.
And you proved that you didnt get past the first line of my post, to where i stated "it may be bad evidence....", or where i stated
And you will note the difficulty in actually getting a conviction with such bad evidence; all of the RIAAs wins have basically been either people who were guilty and perjured themselves into a corner (Tenenbaum), or people who were guilty and also... perjured themselves into a corner (Rasset).
Theres some kind of irony in claiming I need a clue, and then arguing for the very thing I stated in my post due to readingfail.
No, I was anticipating scores of users failing to understand what it actually is, and complaining that random people would be able to tamper with their search results, which is not at all how it works.
Microsoft has been doing what Microsoft got busted for for the last 15 years. (Is IE rendering engine removable yet? Didnt you just do a complete rewrite of windows? SURELY you addressed that complaint...)
Google behaves a heck of a lot better than MS; they actually make it easy to pick up your data and go somewhere else. Try that with hotmail-- have they enabled free-for-all pop / imap yet, or does that still come with a fee? Microsoft operates within a mentality of "lock things in and make it hard to leave". Theyre getting better due to pressure from the market, but Google has avoided lockin from the get-go.
Microsoft wants to get its Bing search bar out there
Any "unfair monopoly leverage" claims MS might have had are lost when they bring up the Bing bar or anything to do with Windows Live, as those are pre-installed on like 80% of computers (by monopoly leverage, in fact).
They make an interesting claim that Google is giving Android an unfair advantage by somehow preventing Microsoft from making a kick-ass Youtube client for Windows Phone 7
Interesting as in bogus, maybe. My Blackberry (a "strictly business" phone!) has no issues getting on youtube and playing video. This is a phone whose browser is liable to lock up on any serious kind of javascript, and where cameras are generally a concession. If RIM can get it right, its kind of hard to have sympathy for anyone who cant.
So, First, Google are mean because they have a popular site and haven't made it easy for competitors to use that content (YouTube).
Like Exchange and OWA-- it would be terrible if Thunderbird or Evolution had 3rd class access to MAPI, or if alternative browsers couldn't search or flag or set out of office replies in firefox or chrome on OWA 2003 or OWA 2007. Terrible, I tell you.
Im not really clear on how not giving unemployment benefits has gone from being "how the world works (dont work, dont eat)" to "its unfair, i deserve this". The program has its good points, but when people start feeling entitled to it, perhaps its a clue that its gone overboard.
To be fair, they no longer make their premier enterprise groupware suite unusable on other browsers; the very latest version is actually functional in chrome. So its not QUITE as hypocritical as it could be.
precisely because you are assumed guilty until proven innocent.
Thats not quite accurate; if they are pointing the finger at you, it is because they have evidence that A) illegal activity occurred at your [dorm | library station | house], and B) you were at said location.
You can argue that thats not enough, but to imply that there isnt some evidence is just incorrect. RIAA has had evidence; its just been bad evidence. And you will note the difficulty in actually getting a conviction with such bad evidence; all of the RIAAs wins have basically been either people who were guilty and perjured themselves into a corner (Tenenbaum), or people who were guilty and also... perjured themselves into a corner (Rasset). Nothing prevents you from falsly accusing your neighbor of something with tenuous evidence; youll simply lose your case and likely be liable for defense's costs (and possibly a countersuing).
Oh for goodness sake using wifi internet has nothing to do with free speech-- and anonymity doesnt require public wifi.
The internet is basically all private entities; you do realize that the first amendment holds precious little sway there, when blogspot or blogger or facebook can just say "you cant post that" and you have essentially no recourse, right? And good luck hosting your own server on the library's free public wifi...
The paranoia and fear that large corporations and their lawyers will descend on you and destroy you for helping your friends is antisocial.
If you let every stranger borrow your gun, you are likely to get in a heap of trouble. If you let every stranger drive your car, you are likely to get a heap of tickets. If you sublet your appartment to strangers, dont act suprised when you get the bill for their property damage.
Antivirus are a useful second line of defense, the first line being "keep your crap up to date". I mean, otherwise you cant protect yourself from that 0-day that the vendor wont have a patch for for 2 weeks, even though all the AV firms have a definition out tomorrow.
And if a virus attempts to spread through network share (by replacing folders with EXEs with folder icons), having an AV that detects it is really useful.
This is why they didnt give you a supervisors name, or any further details on the phone call. There was nothing resembling evidence; it was all rumor and assertion.
FAIL on the part of everyone who blindly believes some slashdot story that doesnt name the supervisor, or any details of methodology, or any details beyond the finders name.
I mean seriously, do people really take all slashdot stories at face value?
It would be nice if we had more to a story than a link that doesnt work, a nameless and ID-less supervisor, and an utter lack of any other relevant details.
I mean, I get that corporations can be scummy. And I get that theres a mentality of "bloggers are the underdogs and therefore the good guys". But come on, are we really so naieve as to take every story posted to slashdot at face value?
Its not a great situation, but its not chernobyl as is being claimed. AFAIK, radiation levels are going DOWN, not up, and the temperature of the core will decrease over the weeks, not increase (or perhaps I should say, the heat it gives off; clearly its temperature depends on how much coolant there is). I havent read anything that indicates we are likely to have much more than the few deaths we had from the hydrogen explosion.
If you have any non-sensationalist information to the contrary, that would be welcome, of course; just be sure to provide link, as I am all to wary of the misinformation flying around this topic ("chernobyl!"; "radioactive cloud drifting towards california!"; etc etc).
For starters, your idea of 20% of murderers caught and convicted seems to be made up; statistics were hard to find, but everything I found shows a much higher conviction rate.
When you descended into religion bashing, I think your posts quality and relevancy cratered, but lets address your claims...
Well, the Christian doctrines are pretty strong on the whole "no killing except in self defense" thing (if even that provision is allowed), so I fail to see how someone believing strongly in such a faith is more likely to commit murders. As for Islam, getting into their afterlife actually requires you to live a virtuous life, and to hope that your good deeds outweigh your bad ones. Again, murder is specifically forbidden; there are passages that talk of the death penalty, and war / self defense is allowed, but killing someone on the streets would not be. Once again, I fail to see a correlation between murders in this or any country (ignoring the Muslim / Israeli conflict, as that would kind of count as a war...) and belief in such a religion. Mormons also believe that living a moral life has an impact on said afterlife, so here again, one doesnt go around murdering willy-nilly if they are truly focused on the afterlife.
But because "life" is meaningless to them and only the "afterlife" counts, it doesn't matter.
Spoken like someone who has no actual knowledge of what the religions teach, and has given it no thought. Heres a brainteaser-- if religions make people not care about the present life, how come we dont see religious folk committing suicide left and right? Ah but, you say, what about suicide bombers? What about cults? Well, according to this, there seem to have been under 300 suicide bombings between 2002 and 2008 in Afghanistan. Between 1983 and 2000, there were under 300 suicide bombings combined for the Tamil Tigers (who have the lead with 171, incidentally, not even being muslim-- this is folks dying for an athiestic cause), Hezebollah (25), Hamas (22), Islamic Jihad (8), and several others. This in fact seems to directly contradict your assumptions, as the leader, the Tigers, has more bombings to its name than all the rest combined, and this for a non-religious cause!
SecurID wasnt compromised, RSA was. Apparently the breach had no effect on the security of the dongles, according to RSA (and I havent seen any report to the contrary).
Honestly, that WOULD be the correct solution. Its not punishing them, but it does make them responsible for their choices, and thats pretty important to keep people from getting complacent or thinking they dont have to care who they choose.
Slashdot Mirror
Um, why not? Israel wouldn't and couldn't even continue to exist without the undying and enthusiastic support of the USA
What makes you say that? They seemed to do quite fine for all those years we didnt support them.
You DO realize they are a first world country, with an incredible military, right? Id be interested to see in what way and for what reason you think they wouldnt "continue to exist" without our support (and what on earth makes you think our support has been "undying" historically).
You are proving to everybody that you have no idea what is really going on.
And you proved that you didnt get past the first line of my post, to where i stated "it may be bad evidence....", or where i stated
And you will note the difficulty in actually getting a conviction with such bad evidence; all of the RIAAs wins have basically been either people who were guilty and perjured themselves into a corner (Tenenbaum), or people who were guilty and also... perjured themselves into a corner (Rasset).
Theres some kind of irony in claiming I need a clue, and then arguing for the very thing I stated in my post due to readingfail.
No, I was anticipating scores of users failing to understand what it actually is, and complaining that random people would be able to tamper with their search results, which is not at all how it works.
It was news about a change that google will be making shortly. Who would you rather they cite, the Bing blog?
In before scores of users fail to read article and consequently raise concerns that are addressed by said article...
Topic Locked.
(wonder if this will actually work?)
The average person is stupid beyond belief.
And apparently arrogant too.
Microsoft has been doing what Microsoft got busted for for the last 15 years. (Is IE rendering engine removable yet? Didnt you just do a complete rewrite of windows? SURELY you addressed that complaint...)
Google behaves a heck of a lot better than MS; they actually make it easy to pick up your data and go somewhere else. Try that with hotmail-- have they enabled free-for-all pop / imap yet, or does that still come with a fee? Microsoft operates within a mentality of "lock things in and make it hard to leave". Theyre getting better due to pressure from the market, but Google has avoided lockin from the get-go.
Microsoft wants to get its Bing search bar out there
Any "unfair monopoly leverage" claims MS might have had are lost when they bring up the Bing bar or anything to do with Windows Live, as those are pre-installed on like 80% of computers (by monopoly leverage, in fact).
They make an interesting claim that Google is giving Android an unfair advantage by somehow preventing Microsoft from making a kick-ass Youtube client for Windows Phone 7
Interesting as in bogus, maybe. My Blackberry (a "strictly business" phone!) has no issues getting on youtube and playing video. This is a phone whose browser is liable to lock up on any serious kind of javascript, and where cameras are generally a concession. If RIM can get it right, its kind of hard to have sympathy for anyone who cant.
So, First, Google are mean because they have a popular site and haven't made it easy for competitors to use that content (YouTube).
Like Exchange and OWA-- it would be terrible if Thunderbird or Evolution had 3rd class access to MAPI, or if alternative browsers couldn't search or flag or set out of office replies in firefox or chrome on OWA 2003 or OWA 2007. Terrible, I tell you.
Pot, meet kettle.
So go ahead, cut those unemployment benefits
Im not really clear on how not giving unemployment benefits has gone from being "how the world works (dont work, dont eat)" to "its unfair, i deserve this". The program has its good points, but when people start feeling entitled to it, perhaps its a clue that its gone overboard.
To be fair, they no longer make their premier enterprise groupware suite unusable on other browsers; the very latest version is actually functional in chrome. So its not QUITE as hypocritical as it could be.
precisely because you are assumed guilty until proven innocent.
Thats not quite accurate; if they are pointing the finger at you, it is because they have evidence that A) illegal activity occurred at your [dorm | library station | house], and B) you were at said location.
You can argue that thats not enough, but to imply that there isnt some evidence is just incorrect. RIAA has had evidence; its just been bad evidence. And you will note the difficulty in actually getting a conviction with such bad evidence; all of the RIAAs wins have basically been either people who were guilty and perjured themselves into a corner (Tenenbaum), or people who were guilty and also... perjured themselves into a corner (Rasset). Nothing prevents you from falsly accusing your neighbor of something with tenuous evidence; youll simply lose your case and likely be liable for defense's costs (and possibly a countersuing).
Oh for goodness sake using wifi internet has nothing to do with free speech-- and anonymity doesnt require public wifi.
The internet is basically all private entities; you do realize that the first amendment holds precious little sway there, when blogspot or blogger or facebook can just say "you cant post that" and you have essentially no recourse, right? And good luck hosting your own server on the library's free public wifi...
The paranoia and fear that large corporations and their lawyers will descend on you and destroy you for helping your friends is antisocial.
If you let every stranger borrow your gun, you are likely to get in a heap of trouble. If you let every stranger drive your car, you are likely to get a heap of tickets. If you sublet your appartment to strangers, dont act suprised when you get the bill for their property damage.
Why do you expect it to be so different for wifi?
Everyone who left a comment decrying Samsung in the last article is just as much to blame. You give approval to such antics by your reaction.
Antivirus are a useful second line of defense, the first line being "keep your crap up to date". I mean, otherwise you cant protect yourself from that 0-day that the vendor wont have a patch for for 2 weeks, even though all the AV firms have a definition out tomorrow.
And if a virus attempts to spread through network share (by replacing folders with EXEs with folder icons), having an AV that detects it is really useful.
This is why they didnt give you a supervisors name, or any further details on the phone call. There was nothing resembling evidence; it was all rumor and assertion.
FAIL on the part of everyone who blindly believes some slashdot story that doesnt name the supervisor, or any details of methodology, or any details beyond the finders name.
I mean seriously, do people really take all slashdot stories at face value?
It would be nice if we had more to a story than a link that doesnt work, a nameless and ID-less supervisor, and an utter lack of any other relevant details.
I mean, I get that corporations can be scummy. And I get that theres a mentality of "bloggers are the underdogs and therefore the good guys". But come on, are we really so naieve as to take every story posted to slashdot at face value?
Its not a great situation, but its not chernobyl as is being claimed. AFAIK, radiation levels are going DOWN, not up, and the temperature of the core will decrease over the weeks, not increase (or perhaps I should say, the heat it gives off; clearly its temperature depends on how much coolant there is). I havent read anything that indicates we are likely to have much more than the few deaths we had from the hydrogen explosion.
If you have any non-sensationalist information to the contrary, that would be welcome, of course; just be sure to provide link, as I am all to wary of the misinformation flying around this topic ("chernobyl!"; "radioactive cloud drifting towards california!"; etc etc).
For starters, your idea of 20% of murderers caught and convicted seems to be made up; statistics were hard to find, but everything I found shows a much higher conviction rate.
When you descended into religion bashing, I think your posts quality and relevancy cratered, but lets address your claims...
Well, the Christian doctrines are pretty strong on the whole "no killing except in self defense" thing (if even that provision is allowed), so I fail to see how someone believing strongly in such a faith is more likely to commit murders.
As for Islam, getting into their afterlife actually requires you to live a virtuous life, and to hope that your good deeds outweigh your bad ones. Again, murder is specifically forbidden; there are passages that talk of the death penalty, and war / self defense is allowed, but killing someone on the streets would not be. Once again, I fail to see a correlation between murders in this or any country (ignoring the Muslim / Israeli conflict, as that would kind of count as a war...) and belief in such a religion.
Mormons also believe that living a moral life has an impact on said afterlife, so here again, one doesnt go around murdering willy-nilly if they are truly focused on the afterlife.
But because "life" is meaningless to them and only the "afterlife" counts, it doesn't matter.
Spoken like someone who has no actual knowledge of what the religions teach, and has given it no thought. Heres a brainteaser-- if religions make people not care about the present life, how come we dont see religious folk committing suicide left and right?
Ah but, you say, what about suicide bombers? What about cults?
Well, according to this, there seem to have been under 300 suicide bombings between 2002 and 2008 in Afghanistan. Between 1983 and 2000, there were under 300 suicide bombings combined for the Tamil Tigers (who have the lead with 171, incidentally, not even being muslim-- this is folks dying for an athiestic cause), Hezebollah (25), Hamas (22), Islamic Jihad (8), and several others. This in fact seems to directly contradict your assumptions, as the leader, the Tigers, has more bombings to its name than all the rest combined, and this for a non-religious cause!
SecurID wasnt compromised, RSA was. Apparently the breach had no effect on the security of the dongles, according to RSA (and I havent seen any report to the contrary).
Honestly, that WOULD be the correct solution. Its not punishing them, but it does make them responsible for their choices, and thats pretty important to keep people from getting complacent or thinking they dont have to care who they choose.