I third or fourth the trac. Its pretty easy to set up and is easy to use, once you get to its wiki syntax. I particularly like its code comparison features, showing revisions as they've changed so you can see why something stopped working after a merge.
I'm sorry you think I'm a nut. My belief is belief, yes. But its also grounded on logic and reasonability. As well as evidence from the Bible. I know it appears to be illogical in that I'm trying to argue from within a particular system of belief instead of arguing from outside the system to attempt to prove my point. But it actually is more logically correct to argue from the standpoint of internal consistency given that I actually do believe that God is really capable of total sovereignty. There is certainly more evidence than just the Bible to corroborate the existence of Jesus and his actions (Josephus, archeological clues, even the Koran). But because I believe that God is really capable of proving His own existence I rely most on the Bible to describe the truth.
As to your particular points/questions.
1)"how do we know which version of the Bible is his word?"
The version that most closely approximates the earliest manuscripts that most consistently agree. As far as English translations go, most scholars would agree that its either New American Standard Bible (NASB) or the English Standard Version (ESV). It turns out that there really aren't that many inconsistencies amongst the different copies we have access to now-a-days. Most of the differences are things like "the Lord Jesus Christ" vs. "Jesus Christ the Lord" it counts as a difference, but its really not meaningfully different. If you're serious about examining this topic, and I hope you are, take a listen to this presentation by Dr. Dan Wallace. It's excellent. Very academic from one of the world's leading scholars.
2)"You have just as much evidence the fairy exists as you do god."
Actually the main reason I believe in God is because there is an empty tomb where the body of Jesus was initially laid. Its empty because He rose from the dead which sort of serves as a receipt of payment for our sins, thus satisfying God's righteous wrath against those sins. Now if you're going to try and make the "the disciples stole the body" argument, I'm sad to say that the evidence is quite stacked against that one. (1) they were a rag-tag group of laborers who were dispersed and scared when their leader was killed and had no ability or courage to try and 'rescue his body' (2) The body was buried in a tomb with a huge rock rolled down hill, sealed by the Roman seal, and guarded by a bunch of Roman soldiers. See point 1, there's no way they were going to move the stone, break the seal, and defeat a bunch of guards. Matthew 27:57-64 describes all of this.
I hope that answers some of your questions. Please feel free to continue this thread if you want to discuss things further.
I don't understand what you mean. Are you saying that the Bible describes God, but is not His words given to us? How do you deal with 2 Timothy 3:16 "All scripture is God breathed and useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting, and training in righteousness"? This verse seems pretty clearly saying that scripture comes from God and communicates His meaning. You say the Bible is a pointer to the "Word of God", are you saying there is some extra-Biblical revelation that is recorded elsewhere?
Please don't mis-interpret my question as baiting you. I've just never heard your argument before and I'm trying to understand it.
It turns out that if God is really God then He is able to ensure that only His word is actually included in the Bible. We sort of throw this term 'God' around without realizing sometimes what that word means. In orthodox Christianity God is omnipotent (all powerful), omnipresent (everwhere & everywhen), and omniscient (all knowing). If God really has those attributes, then it follows that He would be able to make sure His book was exactly what He wanted it to be. When the authors of the Bible wrote the text they were led by the Holy Spirit to write God's words. When the church fathers got together to assemble the books of the Bible the Holy Spirit led them as well. When I read the Bible today, I can feel the Holy Spirit enlivening the words on the page.
You ask how does someone decide what books are in the Bible? My answer is God decides.
I just spent 3 months doing cloud computing where we used a 'columner database' similar to big table. We got around the problems because the database was auto indexed lexigraphically by key and we'd make up different keys to help us index the data to find various 'cells' of data quickly and easily. It was beautiful because if we decided a day later that we wanted a new column, we just changed our keys to include the new column and it was there. That way we could quickly prototype, eventually settle on good 'table structure' for lack of a better term, and we could withdraw results very quickly. We could also add new columns much later if we needed to, like if we wanted to store totally different types of data in the same tables later.
The downside to this database is that its very inefficient for rapid transactions. So you would never use it for something like ebay, where the records change 'status' (from for sale to sold). But you could easily use it for something like craigslist or google which stores __lots__ of data that doesn't change.
I've been working on cloud at work and we broke it down this way.
Cloud as a service: Which is like you said a platform to deliver distributed processing on various tasks. For example, do all your virus scanning on a network service that provides virus scanning so that you don't have to bother with keeping virus defs up to date, and provides other benefits.
Cloud as computation engine: Which is where you use the cloud to actually do the compute intensive tasks sort of the way google uses it. Following our AV example, if you use the cloud to do calculations on how many machines have had virus X on it, and then store all the viruses in the cloud to compare their various similarities and evolution and deployment patterns, you might come up with some very interesting conclusions about the sources of malware and their future. This uses the cloud too as a database to store the results for easy query ala BigTable. So in effect you're doing more traditional 'beowulf' type calculations. (insert slashdot joke here about beowulf;)
At work, I just finished a 3 month project where we tried to apply cloud processing power (using hadoop, and internally developed version of bigTable) against a difficult problem set. We were starting to get the hang of things and producing results by the time the project period ended. But the Killer concept we learned after about a month was:
Have good node-provisioning and management software.
We wrote a few python scripts to move config files around and do auto-provisioning, but I think we should have spent more time on this. Given the amount of headache we all had to do to keep the cloud up and running. Stuff would break, and it took us often a long time to figure out the problem and then do something about it.
The office that took on the project after we left, was told to spend some time creating a better system admin, provisioning software suite or give up the project. Its not exactly sexy work to fix the behind the curtain problems, but they will bite you if you don't spend some time on it up-front.
I couldn't agree with you more. Why is it that congresspeople think they can circumvent or undermine the constitution?
It blows my mind, for example, that they're trying to make Washington D.C. a state. Article 1, Section 8: "To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of particular States, and the Acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places..."
The District is explicitly NOT a state. Without an Amendment, how can they even consider thislegislation?
Wow, I can't quite tell from the post, the internet does have a habit of strangling emotion, but it appears you generally want to know the answer.
That being the case, you're in luck. You can tell whether someone knows what they're talking about, by whether or not what they say lines up with what the Bible teaches.
I know that sounds a bit circular when they come to you with a Bible in their hands and say for instance: "See it says, 'Wives submit to your husbands', so Women have to do everything their Man says." Turns out the person who pedantically holds to that is ignoring the next verse which says Husbands should sacrifice their lives for their wives.
So I guess the point I'm trying to get to is, you have to read the Bible to know if what they're trying to sell you is a bill of goods or not. You have to practice this skill, like any other skill, to be good at it. And honestly its not always easy. Though it was one of the cool things about the Reformation. The reformers said that we didn't need a person to interpret the Bible for us, that God was actually capable of making His meaning clear to us if we seriously asked for it.
Maybe another way to answer this question is to listen to what they're saying and try to see if whatever they're preaching is lifting up God/Jesus or themselves? If it's the former, they're probably Biblically correct. If we assume that God was the true author behind the Bible, then wouldn't He focus on Himself and His glory, not ours? So if someone comes to you and says "God loves you and wants you to be rich" you can bet that the speaker doesn't know his/her Bible well. Because the majority of the Bible tells the story of God's concern for His glory which is magnified by the grace (undeserved favor) he gives to people that try to avoid Him as they pursue their own selfish desires. It speaks only a little about personal wealth, and when it does it usually is warning against the wealth since it fools people into thinking they're safe instead of depending on God.
Not trying to be pedantic or anything, but if you just take the parts of the Bible that you think are "good" for you, similar to Ben Franklin or Thomas Jefferson for that matter, you run an awful big risk. What if the parts that you ignored were equally as true as the parts you kept in? In fact often the parts that people like to keep only logically follow if the parts that people like to keep out are true as well.
I'll just pick one example of something that most people like to keep in. Jesus's death and Resurrection. The first question I have to ask is Why did he have to die for people's sins? Couldn't God just sort of sweep them under the table and ignore them, the way a 'loving' parent might do for a kid who occasionally steals from her liquor cabinet? To extend the illustration, what if the kid steals liquor and he drives drunk and kills someone. Wouldn't you cry out for justice against both the kid and the parent? Both had a responsibility to not disobey, and yet they did. Justice demands that they both be punished.
Its the same with Sin. Things that we do or think that violate God's law are bad enough that they deserve punishment. It turns out for a perfect God, sin can only be punished by death, since only death is both serious enough to assuage the travesty of sin, and ensures that the person won't spoil God's perfection.
So now what is God left to do? Sin's bad and deserves justice, God is Just so he must punish Sin, but He loves those whom He's made, so He devised a way to both satisfy His Judgment and show His love. He sacrificed His Son for us to take that penalty, and then He raised His Son from the dead to show that His Son's death was acceptable as payment. He even goes beyond that and places Jesus's perfect righteous on us so that we can join Him in heaven. Our only requirement is to believe that this is true.
So that got a little longer than I meant it to, but I hope you get at least a glimpse of the danger of taking only part of the Bible. I will of course not be offended if you don't agree with what I've written, though I will be sad due to the risk you are willingly, though without complete knowledge, taking.
U.S. Military required to be ipv6 by 2012
on
One Step Closer to IPv6
·
· Score: 2, Informative
http://www.ipv6.com/articles/military/Military-and-IPv6.htm is just one example showing how the U.S. Military is required to be all ipv6 by 2012, in fact there's large chunks of the network that are supposed to be moving to IPv6 before then. So I'd say that's your "ball-rolling" starter. I have no idea how many networks and computers the U.S. Military represents, but considering they have an entire TLD, I assume they have a few. And I'd also be willing to bet that all the big router & OS vendors out there don't want to loose a big fat juicy customer like the U.S. Military, and therefore will do whatever it takes to get that network up and running.
You know in some senses, I think using the military as a guinea pig for things like this is a good thing for federal tax dollars to be spent on.
Another tool that helps me out is LXR (http://lxr.linux.no/). I know we all use it to help us browse the kernel, but really it will browse anything. I like the ability with tabbed browsers to start my way from main following through functions and seeing where my nose ends up. I also have been known to try and follow a particular function to the end and then roll back up the tree. --doug >
parent post is right. I would also recommend reading some books that lay out examples of good management styles. My two favorite books on those topics are quick easy reads, that are interesting in themselves let alone for their "management skills".
Cigars, Whiskey & Winning: Leadership Lessons from General Ulysses S. Grant "In 1861, Grant was a clerk in his father's leather work shop. Three years later, he was the commanding general of the United States Army. He was managing an organization of over on million men, the largest in the world at the time. He was overseeing simultaneous operations on multiple fronts that spanned the continent, and he was succeeding where everyone before him had failed".
Shackleton's Way: Leadership Lessons from the Great Antarctic Explorer "Sir Ernest Shackleton has been called "the greatest leader that ever came on God's earth, bar none" for saving the lives of the 27 men stranded with him in the Antarctic for almost two years. He was able to save every one of them in the harshest environment on earth."
Dude, I haven't cried laughing at a slashdot post in a long time. Wish I had some modpoints to donate. My wife is looking at me with one of her "Why did I marry him again?" looks. Hilarious. --doug >
My father was the same way. He insisted that anything that a console could do, a computer could do better. So he purchased us a Vic-20, with a tape reader. I remember playing q-bert on it until I couldn't see straight. Then I remember selling it when we moved to Kansas at a garage sale. Of course by then we'd gotten an Olivetti. This computer was basically loaned to us by my uncle for a couple of years while my dad got his Masters in C.S. I remember writing pascal code on that thing when I was in 5th grade! I think it had only a meg of ram or so, and was based off of the Intel 8088.
I also remember one time going into my dad's office and wanting to play "math blaster". I saw that something was running so I just killed the process with good ol ^c and started up my game. About 15 minutes later my dad woke up from a nap and let out the most heart-rending scream I've ever heard from him to date. Apparently he'd been compiling some class project for the last few hours and had passed out waiting for it to finish. I of course blew it all away and he had to start the compile over from scratch.
Ahh.. The memories, like the corners of my mind....
Couldn't agree more. As much as I don't really like them, they should have picked someone like stone-cold or goldberg. At least they are the right size and have the appropriate amount of brains. Also Venom wasn't really funny. He was just mean. An earlier poster mentioned carnage who was a little funny. That would have been a much better cast.
And whatever happend to the Lizard story line. The success of the films so far has been that they've been focusing on heros that are intimately involved with Peter's life. Doc Conners in fact has already been mentioned in the film. Why not keep the story tight and inter-related instead of branching out to new un-mentioned characters.
I'd like to second/third this motion. It not only has many ways to win, but it has no dice! which after playing games like Axis & Alies or Risk, its fun to get away from totally random games like that.
Another really fun game is called Princes of Florence. Its all about building a villa that will attract artisans and scientists to your villa so that they will accomplish great works. It has a lot of different ways to win and there's just enough "screw your neighbor" to make it fun.
Re:is this just an excuse to write sloppy code
on
Hardened PHP
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
I couldn't agree more with this poster. I think education of programmers in our Computer science educational instutiutions is lacking severly in teaching new programers about what dangers poorly written code can result in. I did a semester research project on the subject for my masters.
(http://www.csee.umbc.edu/~cress1/cmsc791.html)
All the educators I included in my project had very little if any clue about secure programming issues and after being presented with teaching alternatives were interested to include them in their curriculum.
Does anyone else have any experiece where their professors hammered home the point that insecure and poorly written code can have catestrophic results?
I'm assuming your a CS student. Approach one of your CS professors who has a security clue. Make him aware of the problem, see if he'll help you communicate with the School SysAdmins and administrators. I recently did this very thing and once everyone involved understood the problem, they let me turn the solution into my Master's Thesis. which may be better then getting 'paid' to fix the problem.
I big one he missed was, every smashing new idea coming out of academia is based on linux. Though this is mostly because it's free and the source code is available, which makes this more of a correlary, but still an important one. C.S. students learn about C.S. on linux. Therefor they understand it and are comfortable with it. It follows then, that those creative enough to start their own companies or invent something new will use linux.
I think the above poster has an excellent point. Why is it that only the U.S. government is involved in putting big Dollars towards a space program? If NASA took the following two steps I think we'd see an awesome increase in world-wide pride and sense of human accomplishment.
First of all they need to start selling ad space on their launch vehicles. Russia does it, heck I'd even go for a rotating sponsorship like the CocaCola STS mission #120 or whatever.
Second of all NASA was most successful in the 60's because they had a single minded focus and bent their collective will towards one goal. Beat those Ruskies to the moon! NASA needs to decide on a singular mission focus and work towards it. They need to develop 5-10 year plans and accomplish one goal at a time until we can leave the solar system or colonize a planet.
"Multi-level insecure operating systems may have special levels for attack programs; the evil bit MUST be set by default on packets emanating from programs running at such levels. However, the system MAY provide an API to allow it to be cleared for non-malicious activity by users who normally engage in attack behavior." A slight against M$ perhaps...
And my other fav was:
"In networks protected by firewalls, it is axiomatic that all attackers are on the outside of the firewall. Therefore, hosts inside the firewall MUST NOT set the evil bit on any packets." Esp considering how many people actually believe the second quote.
As someone who actually does work for the government (USA) I can validate a lot of your complaints. But I can also point out that there is light at the end of the tunnel for actual employees. Since I'm not a contractor, my boss listens to me because I do good work and have proven myself time and again. If I say something is dumb or a waste of money, it is. Most large buisnesses work the same as the government (making bad decisions and not listening to their people). Or don't you ever read Dilbert?
As far as spending money ridiculously, I had big problems with this when I first got there too. The contractors had freaking BOSE cube speakers mounted on the walls that they never used but they had them because they had to spend the contract money on something!! After complaining to my boss he pointed out that the government's duty is to help out the economy. It is always our job to pay more then we should for something because that means John Q. who gets paid by us will then buy the more expensive Car, likely wash it more often at the local car wash and spend more money on gas. All of these extra expenditures help provide jobs for other people. I know that's basically Reagan 'Trickle-down Economics' but that's the way they really think. And in the middle of a recession like we are, I tend to agree with them. You'll notice that even though the rest of the country is in trouble, the DC Metro is still doing gang-busters economy-wise. Lastly you have to also understand that in the government you are rewarded more for controlling a huge budget than you are for saving money. I haven't figured this out exactly yet, but that's the way it is.
I've worked for the government for 3 years (right out of college). I've loved every minute of it. No one repeat no one has the flexibility that the government can provide you. Not only in choosing what you want to do and where you want to do it, but also in LEAVE! For just about every government employee during your first 3 years you earn 4 hours of anual leave & 4 hours of sick leave EVERY TWO WEEKS!! After 3 Years you bump to 6 Hours/2 weeks, after 15 years you jump to 8 hrs/2 weeks. That means you can take off every other friday FOR ONLY 72 HOURS OF WORK! Nobody else grants you that kind of freedom. Also your hours cary over year to year. There's a max of 240 hours but as long as you spend your new hours earned that year you can cary over 6 WEEKS of Leave every year! You can spend that time whenever you want and it doesn't have to be in some sort of regular 2-week span during the summer or slow buisness period. And sick leave never disapears! and you can use it for anything remotely medically related including family stuff because of Famliy Medical Leave Act. Other reasons I work for the government is PRIDE like the previous poster. I love my country (USA) and I'm not physically able to serve in the Military (that and I have an authority issue), so I went civillian. Lastly it's cool to know stuff that others don't know and to work on bleeding edge projects that could only be funded by the gov't because they're too outlandish right now, but might eventually change the world as we know it.
Slashdot Mirror
I third or fourth the trac. Its pretty easy to set up and is easy to use, once you get to its wiki syntax. I particularly like its code comparison features, showing revisions as they've changed so you can see why something stopped working after a merge.
I'm sorry you think I'm a nut. My belief is belief, yes. But its also grounded on logic and reasonability. As well as evidence from the Bible. I know it appears to be illogical in that I'm trying to argue from within a particular system of belief instead of arguing from outside the system to attempt to prove my point. But it actually is more logically correct to argue from the standpoint of internal consistency given that I actually do believe that God is really capable of total sovereignty. There is certainly more evidence than just the Bible to corroborate the existence of Jesus and his actions (Josephus, archeological clues, even the Koran). But because I believe that God is really capable of proving His own existence I rely most on the Bible to describe the truth.
As to your particular points/questions.
1)"how do we know which version of the Bible is his word?"
The version that most closely approximates the earliest manuscripts that most consistently agree. As far as English translations go, most scholars would agree that its either New American Standard Bible (NASB) or the English Standard Version (ESV). It turns out that there really aren't that many inconsistencies amongst the different copies we have access to now-a-days. Most of the differences are things like "the Lord Jesus Christ" vs. "Jesus Christ the Lord" it counts as a difference, but its really not meaningfully different. If you're serious about examining this topic, and I hope you are, take a listen to this presentation by Dr. Dan Wallace. It's excellent. Very academic from one of the world's leading scholars.
2)"You have just as much evidence the fairy exists as you do god."
Actually the main reason I believe in God is because there is an empty tomb where the body of Jesus was initially laid. Its empty because He rose from the dead which sort of serves as a receipt of payment for our sins, thus satisfying God's righteous wrath against those sins. Now if you're going to try and make the "the disciples stole the body" argument, I'm sad to say that the evidence is quite stacked against that one. (1) they were a rag-tag group of laborers who were dispersed and scared when their leader was killed and had no ability or courage to try and 'rescue his body' (2) The body was buried in a tomb with a huge rock rolled down hill, sealed by the Roman seal, and guarded by a bunch of Roman soldiers. See point 1, there's no way they were going to move the stone, break the seal, and defeat a bunch of guards. Matthew 27:57-64 describes all of this.
I hope that answers some of your questions. Please feel free to continue this thread if you want to discuss things further.
I don't understand what you mean. Are you saying that the Bible describes God, but is not His words given to us? How do you deal with 2 Timothy 3:16 "All scripture is God breathed and useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting, and training in righteousness"? This verse seems pretty clearly saying that scripture comes from God and communicates His meaning. You say the Bible is a pointer to the "Word of God", are you saying there is some extra-Biblical revelation that is recorded elsewhere? Please don't mis-interpret my question as baiting you. I've just never heard your argument before and I'm trying to understand it.
It turns out that if God is really God then He is able to ensure that only His word is actually included in the Bible. We sort of throw this term 'God' around without realizing sometimes what that word means. In orthodox Christianity God is omnipotent (all powerful), omnipresent (everwhere & everywhen), and omniscient (all knowing). If God really has those attributes, then it follows that He would be able to make sure His book was exactly what He wanted it to be. When the authors of the Bible wrote the text they were led by the Holy Spirit to write God's words. When the church fathers got together to assemble the books of the Bible the Holy Spirit led them as well. When I read the Bible today, I can feel the Holy Spirit enlivening the words on the page. You ask how does someone decide what books are in the Bible? My answer is God decides.
I just spent 3 months doing cloud computing where we used a 'columner database' similar to big table. We got around the problems because the database was auto indexed lexigraphically by key and we'd make up different keys to help us index the data to find various 'cells' of data quickly and easily. It was beautiful because if we decided a day later that we wanted a new column, we just changed our keys to include the new column and it was there. That way we could quickly prototype, eventually settle on good 'table structure' for lack of a better term, and we could withdraw results very quickly. We could also add new columns much later if we needed to, like if we wanted to store totally different types of data in the same tables later.
The downside to this database is that its very inefficient for rapid transactions. So you would never use it for something like ebay, where the records change 'status' (from for sale to sold). But you could easily use it for something like craigslist or google which stores __lots__ of data that doesn't change.
I've been working on cloud at work and we broke it down this way.
;)
Cloud as a service: Which is like you said a platform to deliver distributed processing on various tasks. For example, do all your virus scanning on a network service that provides virus scanning so that you don't have to bother with keeping virus defs up to date, and provides other benefits.
Cloud as computation engine: Which is where you use the cloud to actually do the compute intensive tasks sort of the way google uses it. Following our AV example, if you use the cloud to do calculations on how many machines have had virus X on it, and then store all the viruses in the cloud to compare their various similarities and evolution and deployment patterns, you might come up with some very interesting conclusions about the sources of malware and their future. This uses the cloud too as a database to store the results for easy query ala BigTable. So in effect you're doing more traditional 'beowulf' type calculations. (insert slashdot joke here about beowulf
At work, I just finished a 3 month project where we tried to apply cloud processing power (using hadoop, and internally developed version of bigTable) against a difficult problem set. We were starting to get the hang of things and producing results by the time the project period ended. But the Killer concept we learned after about a month was:
Have good node-provisioning and management software.
We wrote a few python scripts to move config files around and do auto-provisioning, but I think we should have spent more time on this. Given the amount of headache we all had to do to keep the cloud up and running. Stuff would break, and it took us often a long time to figure out the problem and then do something about it.
The office that took on the project after we left, was told to spend some time creating a better system admin, provisioning software suite or give up the project. Its not exactly sexy work to fix the behind the curtain problems, but they will bite you if you don't spend some time on it up-front.
Wow, I don't think I've ever heard such a succinct defense of the 2nd amendment.
Well played sir.
I couldn't agree with you more. Why is it that congresspeople think they can circumvent or undermine the constitution?
It blows my mind, for example, that they're trying to make Washington D.C. a state. Article 1, Section 8: "To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of particular States, and the Acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places..."
The District is explicitly NOT a state. Without an Amendment, how can they even consider this legislation?
Wow, I can't quite tell from the post, the internet does have a habit of strangling emotion, but it appears you generally want to know the answer.
That being the case, you're in luck. You can tell whether someone knows what they're talking about, by whether or not what they say lines up with what the Bible teaches.
I know that sounds a bit circular when they come to you with a Bible in their hands and say for instance: "See it says, 'Wives submit to your husbands', so Women have to do everything their Man says." Turns out the person who pedantically holds to that is ignoring the next verse which says Husbands should sacrifice their lives for their wives.
So I guess the point I'm trying to get to is, you have to read the Bible to know if what they're trying to sell you is a bill of goods or not. You have to practice this skill, like any other skill, to be good at it. And honestly its not always easy. Though it was one of the cool things about the Reformation. The reformers said that we didn't need a person to interpret the Bible for us, that God was actually capable of making His meaning clear to us if we seriously asked for it.
Maybe another way to answer this question is to listen to what they're saying and try to see if whatever they're preaching is lifting up God/Jesus or themselves? If it's the former, they're probably Biblically correct. If we assume that God was the true author behind the Bible, then wouldn't He focus on Himself and His glory, not ours? So if someone comes to you and says "God loves you and wants you to be rich" you can bet that the speaker doesn't know his/her Bible well. Because the majority of the Bible tells the story of God's concern for His glory which is magnified by the grace (undeserved favor) he gives to people that try to avoid Him as they pursue their own selfish desires. It speaks only a little about personal wealth, and when it does it usually is warning against the wealth since it fools people into thinking they're safe instead of depending on God.
Not trying to be pedantic or anything, but if you just take the parts of the Bible that you think are "good" for you, similar to Ben Franklin or Thomas Jefferson for that matter, you run an awful big risk. What if the parts that you ignored were equally as true as the parts you kept in? In fact often the parts that people like to keep only logically follow if the parts that people like to keep out are true as well.
I'll just pick one example of something that most people like to keep in. Jesus's death and Resurrection. The first question I have to ask is Why did he have to die for people's sins? Couldn't God just sort of sweep them under the table and ignore them, the way a 'loving' parent might do for a kid who occasionally steals from her liquor cabinet? To extend the illustration, what if the kid steals liquor and he drives drunk and kills someone. Wouldn't you cry out for justice against both the kid and the parent? Both had a responsibility to not disobey, and yet they did. Justice demands that they both be punished.
Its the same with Sin. Things that we do or think that violate God's law are bad enough that they deserve punishment. It turns out for a perfect God, sin can only be punished by death, since only death is both serious enough to assuage the travesty of sin, and ensures that the person won't spoil God's perfection.
So now what is God left to do? Sin's bad and deserves justice, God is Just so he must punish Sin, but He loves those whom He's made, so He devised a way to both satisfy His Judgment and show His love. He sacrificed His Son for us to take that penalty, and then He raised His Son from the dead to show that His Son's death was acceptable as payment. He even goes beyond that and places Jesus's perfect righteous on us so that we can join Him in heaven. Our only requirement is to believe that this is true.
So that got a little longer than I meant it to, but I hope you get at least a glimpse of the danger of taking only part of the Bible. I will of course not be offended if you don't agree with what I've written, though I will be sad due to the risk you are willingly, though without complete knowledge, taking.
http://www.ipv6.com/articles/military/Military-and-IPv6.htm
is just one example showing how the U.S. Military is required to be all ipv6 by 2012, in fact there's large chunks of the network that are supposed to be moving to IPv6 before then. So I'd say that's your "ball-rolling" starter. I have no idea how many networks and computers the U.S. Military represents, but considering they have an entire TLD, I assume they have a few. And I'd also be willing to bet that all the big router & OS vendors out there don't want to loose a big fat juicy customer like the U.S. Military, and therefore will do whatever it takes to get that network up and running.
You know in some senses, I think using the military as a guinea pig for things like this is a good thing for federal tax dollars to be spent on.
Another tool that helps me out is LXR (http://lxr.linux.no/). I know we all use it to help us browse the kernel, but really it will browse anything. I like the ability with tabbed browsers to start my way from main following through functions and seeing where my nose ends up. I also have been known to try and follow a particular function to the end and then roll back up the tree.
--doug >
parent post is right.
I would also recommend reading some books that lay out examples of good management styles. My two favorite books on those topics are quick easy reads, that are interesting in themselves let alone for their "management skills".
Cigars, Whiskey & Winning: Leadership Lessons from General Ulysses S. Grant
"In 1861, Grant was a clerk in his father's leather work shop. Three years later, he was the commanding general of the United States Army. He was managing an organization of over on million men, the largest in the world at the time. He was overseeing simultaneous operations on multiple fronts that spanned the continent, and he was succeeding where everyone before him had failed".
Shackleton's Way: Leadership Lessons from the Great Antarctic Explorer
"Sir Ernest Shackleton has been called "the greatest leader that ever came on God's earth, bar none" for saving the lives of the 27 men stranded with him in the Antarctic for almost two years. He was able to save every one of them in the harshest environment on earth."
Dude,
I haven't cried laughing at a slashdot post in a long time. Wish I had some modpoints to donate.
My wife is looking at me with one of her "Why did I marry him again?" looks.
Hilarious.
--doug >
I also remember one time going into my dad's office and wanting to play "math blaster". I saw that something was running so I just killed the process with good ol ^c and started up my game. About 15 minutes later my dad woke up from a nap and let out the most heart-rending scream I've ever heard from him to date. Apparently he'd been compiling some class project for the last few hours and had passed out waiting for it to finish. I of course blew it all away and he had to start the compile over from scratch.
Ahh.. The memories, like the corners of my mind....
Couldn't agree more. As much as I don't really like them, they should have picked someone like stone-cold or goldberg. At least they are the right size and have the appropriate amount of brains. Also Venom wasn't really funny. He was just mean. An earlier poster mentioned carnage who was a little funny. That would have been a much better cast.
And whatever happend to the Lizard story line. The success of the films so far has been that they've been focusing on heros that are intimately involved with Peter's life. Doc Conners in fact has already been mentioned in the film. Why not keep the story tight and inter-related instead of branching out to new un-mentioned characters.
I'd like to second/third this motion. It not only has many ways to win, but it has no dice! which after playing games like Axis & Alies or Risk, its fun to get away from totally random games like that. Another really fun game is called Princes of Florence. Its all about building a villa that will attract artisans and scientists to your villa so that they will accomplish great works. It has a lot of different ways to win and there's just enough "screw your neighbor" to make it fun.
I couldn't agree more with this poster. I think education of programmers in our Computer science educational instutiutions is lacking severly in teaching new programers about what dangers poorly written code can result in. I did a semester research project on the subject for my masters. (http://www.csee.umbc.edu/~cress1/cmsc791.html) All the educators I included in my project had very little if any clue about secure programming issues and after being presented with teaching alternatives were interested to include them in their curriculum. Does anyone else have any experiece where their professors hammered home the point that insecure and poorly written code can have catestrophic results?
I'm assuming your a CS student. Approach one of your CS professors who has a security clue. Make him aware of the problem, see if he'll help you communicate with the School SysAdmins and administrators. I recently did this very thing and once everyone involved understood the problem, they let me turn the solution into my Master's Thesis. which may be better then getting 'paid' to fix the problem.
I big one he missed was, every smashing new idea coming out of academia is based on linux. Though this is mostly because it's free and the source code is available, which makes this more of a correlary, but still an important one. C.S. students learn about C.S. on linux. Therefor they understand it and are comfortable with it. It follows then, that those creative enough to start their own companies or invent something new will use linux.
I think the above poster has an excellent point. Why is it that only the U.S. government is involved in putting big Dollars towards a space program? If NASA took the following two steps I think we'd see an awesome increase in world-wide pride and sense of human accomplishment.
First of all they need to start selling ad space on their launch vehicles. Russia does it, heck I'd even go for a rotating sponsorship like the CocaCola STS mission #120 or whatever.
Second of all NASA was most successful in the 60's because they had a single minded focus and bent their collective will towards one goal. Beat those Ruskies to the moon! NASA needs to decide on a singular mission focus and work towards it. They need to develop 5-10 year plans and accomplish one goal at a time until we can leave the solar system or colonize a planet.
"Multi-level insecure operating systems may have special levels for attack programs; the evil bit MUST be set by default on packets emanating from programs running at such levels. However, the system MAY provide an API to allow it to be cleared for non-malicious activity by users who normally engage in attack behavior."
A slight against M$ perhaps...
And my other fav was: "In networks protected by firewalls, it is axiomatic that all attackers are on the outside of the firewall. Therefore, hosts inside the firewall MUST NOT set the evil bit on any packets."
Esp considering how many people actually believe the second quote.
As someone who actually does work for the government (USA) I can validate a lot of your complaints. But I can also point out that there is light at the end of the tunnel for actual employees. Since I'm not a contractor, my boss listens to me because I do good work and have proven myself time and again. If I say something is dumb or a waste of money, it is. Most large buisnesses work the same as the government (making bad decisions and not listening to their people). Or don't you ever read Dilbert?
As far as spending money ridiculously, I had big problems with this when I first got there too. The contractors had freaking BOSE cube speakers mounted on the walls that they never used but they had them because they had to spend the contract money on something!! After complaining to my boss he pointed out that the government's duty is to help out the economy. It is always our job to pay more then we should for something because that means John Q. who gets paid by us will then buy the more expensive Car, likely wash it more often at the local car wash and spend more money on gas. All of these extra expenditures help provide jobs for other people. I know that's basically Reagan 'Trickle-down Economics' but that's the way they really think. And in the middle of a recession like we are, I tend to agree with them. You'll notice that even though the rest of the country is in trouble, the DC Metro is still doing gang-busters economy-wise.
Lastly you have to also understand that in the government you are rewarded more for controlling a huge budget than you are for saving money. I haven't figured this out exactly yet, but that's the way it is.
I've worked for the government for 3 years (right out of college). I've loved every minute of it. No one repeat no one has the flexibility that the government can provide you. Not only in choosing what you want to do and where you want to do it, but also in LEAVE! For just about every government employee during your first 3 years you earn 4 hours of anual leave & 4 hours of sick leave EVERY TWO WEEKS!! After 3 Years you bump to 6 Hours/2 weeks, after 15 years you jump to 8 hrs/2 weeks. That means you can take off every other friday FOR ONLY 72 HOURS OF WORK! Nobody else grants you that kind of freedom. Also your hours cary over year to year. There's a max of 240 hours but as long as you spend your new hours earned that year you can cary over 6 WEEKS of Leave every year! You can spend that time whenever you want and it doesn't have to be in some sort of regular 2-week span during the summer or slow buisness period.
And sick leave never disapears! and you can use it for anything remotely medically related including family stuff because of Famliy Medical Leave Act.
Other reasons I work for the government is PRIDE like the previous poster. I love my country (USA) and I'm not physically able to serve in the Military (that and I have an authority issue), so I went civillian. Lastly it's cool to know stuff that others don't know and to work on bleeding edge projects that could only be funded by the gov't because they're too outlandish right now, but might eventually change the world as we know it.