How the heck can you keep missing the point and the word of the law, over and over and over and over again. Watching, Recording and Publishing are three different things that are treated differently by the law, stop confusing them.
Note that I said serious disease. HPV is not a serious disease, the flu is not a serious disease either (in most cases).
This doesn't mean you go out of your way to kiss people that have the flu or have unprotected sex with every stranger you meet, it just means that if you use moderate protection (use condom, avoid obviously sick people etc) then you'll probably be just fine, some people won't be fine but some people have car accidents, that doesn't mean you shouldn't drive a car.
Almost everything you do in life carries some level of risk, the proper reaction is to take standard safety precautions and go on with your life, if you avoid everything risky then sure you might live longer, but you won't have a life worth living.
Isn't those rates calculated by people filling out questionnaires and otherwise have normal sex-lives? And as far as I can tell the transmission rates for HIV atleast is trivial for oral sex (There are numerous other sex diseases, but most of the common ones are easily treatable and if you're paranoid you can just test yourself and your partners)
Most people seem to be able to go through their lives having sex with multiple partners and not get any serious disease (Chlamydia rates are scarily high though)
Well, I don't know about the US, but in the Sweden they do put that information online, though ofcourse we have public healthcare and the State has a vested interest in having people do as much self-diagnosis as possible to cut down on the cost of General Practitioners so we have both online databases of common ailments and a telephone number you can call to have a nurse help you with more complex diagnosis's (Though if it's serious or you need medication you'll be refered to the doctor)
One of the funkier things we've had implemented recently is that people can send in cameraphone pictures of their strange skin spots to a doctor and they'll be told if it's harmless or not.
Well, almost all consumers are both lazy and impatient which is why there's entire industries built around that (Fast Food anyone?) so you'd hope the industry would consider that.
Does it matter? Most government computers don't hold any terribly interesting information, you can neither create great damage by blowing it up nor steal anything of value.
On computers that do store things of great value there might be virtue to take special precautions, but I don't see how the effort/value equation would balance for the general case.
In theory, in practice you'll have to live with that secure software is a dream you'll never achieve.
If I had to choose between the Government using a large well known OS like Windows 7 or something they hacked together themselves, I'd much prefer Windows 7 because you can be reasonably sure it won't randomly implode and if it had glaring backdoors we'd know about them by now. (Though I'd probably feel even better if they'd use something linux based)
That really depends on what you're trying to do. I think it's ludicrous to expect the government to write it's own OS/browser/text editor. When you're doing some generic task then generic off the shelf software is best for the job. Custom software is only viable when you're doing something rather specialized.
It should be noted that I base this mostly of experience with the Swedish low level government, but I get the impression government work pretty much the same everywhere.
"Way to buy into a myth. This is false for two reasons: 1) it assumes that sort of thing never happens in the private sector 2) The US government does very well at cross communication. there are problems, but not as bad as people who sell solution would lead you to believe."
It doesn't matter if that sort of thing happens in the private sector or not, what matters is the number of bureaucratic loops you have to jump through to get work done (Though there is a lot of that for contracting private companies aswell). There's also the very common issue of "We're low on manpower right now, we'll start coding your project in 2 years".
"because the government would only ever need one application? and that application would never need new features?
Are you stupid or just blinded by fallacy's about the government you believe without question?"
Each individual part of the government usually only needs one custom application and it only needs to be updated if the law changes to such a degree the specification doesn't apply anymore (For instance if someone decided that from now on your social security payment should be a multiple of your IQ then then the department incharge of social security would probably need to have their software rewritten), the government as a whole does need a ton of software and the software developed by department of X in state A would probably work just fine in department of X in state B too but the problem is as noted that they have a hard time coordinating and just saying they should coordinate better doesn't mean they suddenly will.
"no. The have opted for contractors becasue of political ideoolgy and ignorance, not for a trong business need." Are you trying to claim with a straight face that the social democrats use contractors for ideological reasons?
Because inhouse software is famous for being so much better in those respects?
I don't know how it works in the US, but in Sweden when the government needs some sort of custom software made they write down the exact specifications they want and get it ordered. That is as far as I can tell the exact same process you'd go through when ordering it inhouse.
It's irrational to believe that the contractors would be any worse at writing the code then inhouse.
We don't make enough food, we starve to death, we don't make enough software we.......?
At the end of the day software is just yet another export product, while it would be bad for the economy if the software industry wasn't competitive (just like it would be bad for the economy if the car/toys/foresting industries wern't competitive) the country doesn't literally die if it fails, you'll just have to live with it being slightly less prioritized.
It's clear you've never seen the government at work. There's two issues with the govenrment writing it's own software.
1) Each individual part of the government only needs custom made software once every 5 years or so 2) Every government in the known history of mankind has been utterly incompetent in cross-department communication
Since you can't reasonably expect the government to hire teams of programmers to write software one year and sit on their asses for 4 years while there's on demand and that traditionally trying to centralize the work leads to horror stories, you can see why most governments (even the socialists) have opted for contractors.
While reversing it is easy enough, about 50% of men who do it remain infertile due to the body becoming hostile to sperm while it was leaking into the body rather going through the channel.
Slashdot Mirror
How the heck can you keep missing the point and the word of the law, over and over and over and over again. Watching, Recording and Publishing are three different things that are treated differently by the law, stop confusing them.
The article writer said that we don't need any /more/ of those sites, he didn't say that the ones that already exist should die.
Note that I said serious disease. HPV is not a serious disease, the flu is not a serious disease either (in most cases).
This doesn't mean you go out of your way to kiss people that have the flu or have unprotected sex with every stranger you meet, it just means that if you use moderate protection (use condom, avoid obviously sick people etc) then you'll probably be just fine, some people won't be fine but some people have car accidents, that doesn't mean you shouldn't drive a car.
Almost everything you do in life carries some level of risk, the proper reaction is to take standard safety precautions and go on with your life, if you avoid everything risky then sure you might live longer, but you won't have a life worth living.
Isn't those rates calculated by people filling out questionnaires and otherwise have normal sex-lives? And as far as I can tell the transmission rates for HIV atleast is trivial for oral sex (There are numerous other sex diseases, but most of the common ones are easily treatable and if you're paranoid you can just test yourself and your partners)
Most people seem to be able to go through their lives having sex with multiple partners and not get any serious disease (Chlamydia rates are scarily high though)
On average you get infected with aids/HIV once every thousand years if you use a condom. (Down from 14ish without)
I'd like to introduce you to this little invention we call a condom.
Actually you can be locked up forever without a trial through civil commitment.
Well, I don't know about the US, but in the Sweden they do put that information online, though ofcourse we have public healthcare and the State has a vested interest in having people do as much self-diagnosis as possible to cut down on the cost of General Practitioners so we have both online databases of common ailments and a telephone number you can call to have a nurse help you with more complex diagnosis's (Though if it's serious or you need medication you'll be refered to the doctor)
One of the funkier things we've had implemented recently is that people can send in cameraphone pictures of their strange skin spots to a doctor and they'll be told if it's harmless or not.
Well, almost all consumers are both lazy and impatient which is why there's entire industries built around that (Fast Food anyone?) so you'd hope the industry would consider that.
Does it matter? Most government computers don't hold any terribly interesting information, you can neither create great damage by blowing it up nor steal anything of value.
On computers that do store things of great value there might be virtue to take special precautions, but I don't see how the effort/value equation would balance for the general case.
In theory, in practice you'll have to live with that secure software is a dream you'll never achieve.
If I had to choose between the Government using a large well known OS like Windows 7 or something they hacked together themselves, I'd much prefer Windows 7 because you can be reasonably sure it won't randomly implode and if it had glaring backdoors we'd know about them by now. (Though I'd probably feel even better if they'd use something linux based)
That really depends on what you're trying to do. I think it's ludicrous to expect the government to write it's own OS/browser/text editor. When you're doing some generic task then generic off the shelf software is best for the job. Custom software is only viable when you're doing something rather specialized.
It should be noted that I base this mostly of experience with the Swedish low level government, but I get the impression government work pretty much the same everywhere.
"Way to buy into a myth. This is false for two reasons:
1) it assumes that sort of thing never happens in the private sector
2) The US government does very well at cross communication. there are problems, but not as bad as people who sell solution would lead you to believe."
It doesn't matter if that sort of thing happens in the private sector or not, what matters is the number of bureaucratic loops you have to jump through to get work done (Though there is a lot of that for contracting private companies aswell). There's also the very common issue of "We're low on manpower right now, we'll start coding your project in 2 years".
"because the government would only ever need one application? and that application would never need new features?
Are you stupid or just blinded by fallacy's about the government you believe without question?"
Each individual part of the government usually only needs one custom application and it only needs to be updated if the law changes to such a degree the specification doesn't apply anymore (For instance if someone decided that from now on your social security payment should be a multiple of your IQ then then the department incharge of social security would probably need to have their software rewritten), the government as a whole does need a ton of software and the software developed by department of X in state A would probably work just fine in department of X in state B too but the problem is as noted that they have a hard time coordinating and just saying they should coordinate better doesn't mean they suddenly will.
"no. The have opted for contractors becasue of political ideoolgy and ignorance, not for a trong business need."
Are you trying to claim with a straight face that the social democrats use contractors for ideological reasons?
Because inhouse software is famous for being so much better in those respects?
I don't know how it works in the US, but in Sweden when the government needs some sort of custom software made they write down the exact specifications they want and get it ordered. That is as far as I can tell the exact same process you'd go through when ordering it inhouse.
It's irrational to believe that the contractors would be any worse at writing the code then inhouse.
No federally funded organisation would be allowed to say "Let's pray for a minute"
But neither are they allowed to say "You're not allowed to pray"
What they're meant to do is say "Here's the food" and then the seniors can do whatever the heck they'd like.
We don't make enough food, we starve to death, we don't make enough software we.......?
At the end of the day software is just yet another export product, while it would be bad for the economy if the software industry wasn't competitive (just like it would be bad for the economy if the car/toys/foresting industries wern't competitive) the country doesn't literally die if it fails, you'll just have to live with it being slightly less prioritized.
It's clear you've never seen the government at work. There's two issues with the govenrment writing it's own software.
1) Each individual part of the government only needs custom made software once every 5 years or so
2) Every government in the known history of mankind has been utterly incompetent in cross-department communication
Since you can't reasonably expect the government to hire teams of programmers to write software one year and sit on their asses for 4 years while there's on demand and that traditionally trying to centralize the work leads to horror stories, you can see why most governments (even the socialists) have opted for contractors.
Why don't we have a government tinfoil hat office? Clearly we're under great threat of alien mindrays.
Ofcourse they know people will make important decisions based on it, they just don't want to get sued over it.
They apparently had forms in their store the customers could fill out and EB would mail it in for them.
While reversing it is easy enough, about 50% of men who do it remain infertile due to the body becoming hostile to sperm while it was leaking into the body rather going through the channel.
What's up with people thinking the market is run by magic pixies?
What makes you think that being valid in Germany means it's valid in the European Patent Office?
There is only one known case where a software patent has been held up in court in Europe so I'm not quite sure where you're getting that from.
I'd be extremely surprised considering the vast majority of the EU nations are against.