That kind of personality quirk is not necessarily a sign of genetic stupidity. It's just a sign of extreme disinterest.
There are people who treat their cars more or less the same way: they are not the least bit interested in what is going on, literally, "under the hood". Warning lights? Pffff. Unless it stops the car, interrupting their life, they don't give a crap.
Car dealers love them.
And frankly, while such people can be annoying, I find them infinitely preferable to type that treats people like inanimate objects.
What really happened is that Democrats completely lost their nerve after Viet Nam.
No. What happened was that after they lost their war-of-choice in Vietnam, Republicans then sold the American public the idea that their own democratically elected government was the enemy. (Wave the flag, hate what it represents.) And persuaded them to slash taxes - largely on the mega rich.
The national infrastructure you so rightly laud cost money to build. A lot of it. That money came from taxes. Putting a man on the moon also wasn't free. With the advent of "Reaganomics", both parties had to drop non-critical programs. And guess what? To most people, keeping crooks off the street and kids from starving is more important than space exploration. So when Reagan, aided by conservative Democrat turned Republican Phil Gramm, slashed taxes on billionaires, that's what both Democrats and Republicans focused on.
The absurdity of your position is lauding the very man who brought about the destruction of America's position of leadership in the world: Ronald Reagan, and his ideological descendant, George W. Bush.
Nobody is going to follow the leadership of a nation that refuses to take care of its own people.
I... don't stand by the race-baiting... He does uncover the ugly underbelly of the politics of "Hope" with specific examples. Here's a little word of advice: When reading the diatribes of racists, bigots, and other emotionally stunted people, consider the possibility that such people may even stoop to mischaracterization. Or even lying.
Hard to believe, but never the less, true.
A second piece of wisdom. You do yourself a disservice praising and quoting a piece liberally sprinkled with the following kinds of phrases: "Magic Negro", "Negro clown", "young gentleman of color is claiming to have had a sexual encounter with Saint Barack", "because Obama is a socialist, a Democrat, and - especially - a Negro". It strongly suggests that you yourself are quite comfortable with overt racism and pathological hate. And it leads me to the conclusion, Mr. Cornelius, that you are engaged in a crude form of psychological rationalization for your own unstated racist sentiments.
Here's the history for those who don't want to follow the link. ExtJS has developed a JavaScript framework. They originally licensed as "LGPL", but with the added proviso that it was only for non-commercial use. Since the whole point of the LGPL is to allow commercial apps to link with it, this made little sense. Now they've gone to GPL3.0, only for non-commercial use, which is a little more honest about their intent.
Apparently some have tried to fork the original "LGPL" code, but since it never has been released without the "no non-commercial apps" restriction, using any forked code in a commercial product is copyright infringement.
This has nothing to do with the GPL3.0 or the LGPL. It has to do with one company, and the restrictions they've put on their licenses.
And so what? They wrote the code. They get to license it.
If parents would actually PARENT, maybe we wouldn't need so much of a "Nanny" state. But until that happens, comparisons to 1984esque totalitarianism is absurd.
All it takes is some "vigilante" to seed the honeypot address by signing up...
One of the keys to creating a honeypot is that you don't broadcast to the bad guys the fact that it's a honeypot. Obviously if spammers know it's a honeypot, not only can they joe-job your honeypot, they can simply take it out of their list, bypassing it.
So the takeaway isn't that honeypots are useless. It's to name your honeypot "john.h.believable@mydomain.org", not "spambucket-honeypot@mydomain.org"
And we are supposed to believe that all the peer-reviewed science that Al Gore references is "bogus" because you say so? You consider making a fact-free assertion to be an effective counter?
According to his letter, Gonzalez hasn't actually subjected the program to judicial oversight. What he's done is gone judge-shopping to find a single judge to declare the entire program authorized.
The problem is, that's not how warrants work. Warrants have to be specific and time limited - to avoid exactly the behavior that Gonzalez in engaging in: blanket invasion into the privacy of all Americans without any legitimate reason to think they're doing anything wrong.
Remember: the laws we have on civil liberties aren't there to protect the guilty. They're there to protect the innocent, namely us.
Well I'm late to the discussion, so I doubt this will be modded up. But I think it's pretty clear that far from String theory being given a pass, scientifically, it's actually being unfairly criticized.
The first - false - criticism is that String theory makes no testable predictions. It does. The problem is that we simply don't have the technology to test it yet. (And building a particle accellerator to test by brute force may never be humanly possible.)
Unfortunate, yes. But there is a difference between not being able to test a prediction, and a theory that makes no testable predictions. Bose-Einstein Condensates was a testable predition made far in advance of any physical ability, at the time, to execute the test. Did that make the theory any less scientific when Bose (and more abstractly, Einstein) proposed it?
The second criticism is that String theory is just math. Let me remind you that String (M-) theory is still one of the very few self-consistent models that entirely subsumes all other physical theories. When created, it was the only model that wasn't flat out disproven by the evidence.
Again, unifying math may seem like a trivial point to some people. But it's not. Scientifically speaking, any theory that predicts things and isn't proven wrong (yet) beats a theory that is proven wrong, no matter how useful it was in the past.
As much as the Slashdot community hates it, the DMCA is utterly clear on the topic. If a copyright owner can't even be bothered to send a DMCA-takedown notice about their content, then no harm, no foul.
This required "opt-out" of other people using your material is a pretty powerful concept. That's why Clinton & the old Republican Congress balanced it with such an easy to use form.
Google/Youtube has nothing to worry about legally. Other than ass--le judges who try to reinterpret law to add damages where none are warranted.
We need to start working on carbon sequestration right now, unless you want 140 degree summers across the entire midwest belt. And we need to use carbon taxes as our main source of governmental revenue, not stupid things like employment taxes.
I really think that unless we do something immediately, the habitability of at least half the landmass on Earth will be be jeapordy.
It's not like other industries where good CEO-sense can take you a long way.
Aside from corruption from having special friends in the government, there is little evidence that good "CEO-sense" (whatever that means) has much to do with success. In fact, the only way we have of evaluating good "CEO-sense" is by looking backwards, which makes every CEO lucky enough to inherit a good market position "good" by tautology.
But as a predictor, as they always say in the buz, "past performance is not a guide to future performance".
...so I can't spend a lot of time in dicussing this, but I always that the main benefit of micro-kernels is completely wasted unless you actually have utilities that can work in partially-functioning environments. What good is it to be able to continue to run a kernel even with your SCSI drive disabled, if all your software to fix the problem is on the SCSI drive?
Now in theory I could see a high-availability microkernel being a good, less expensive alternative, to a classic mainframe environment, especially if you had a well written auto-healing system built in as a default. But that would require a lot of work outside the kernel that just isn't being done right now. And until it is, micro-kernels don't have anything more to offer than monolithic kernerls.
To put it in API terms - it doesn't matter very much whether your library correctly returns an error code for every possible circumstance, when most user level code doesn't bother to check it (or just exits immediately on even addressable errors).
I'm glad these people have suddenly gotten the idea that there is a lot of knowledge in the global community that can be shared, but seriously, how is this better than Wikipedia, Expert's Exchange, or plain old Google?
What does this tool offer that's better in any way?
Move along. There's nothing to see.
Sure, phishers are more clever than spammers. There's more money involved, so it attracts organized crime. Still, there are some pretty basic things both Mozilla Thunderbird and MS could do to combat the problem:
Bring up a warning dialog whenever you click on an email link whose body goes to a different domain than the text.
Make that warning dialog in large RED LETTERS talking about the likelihood that it is a SCAM - if the referenced text is formatted like a hyperlink and points to a different address
Hardcode in the top 100 sites subject to phishing, with a comparative of the hypertext links to known addresses. References to the site name in the text will cause the email client to check all embedded hyperlinks against their official published versions
Set up a cooperative site for email clients that have direct internet access to automatically check against w/o hardcoding.
Phishing is easier than spam to combat because it is constrained by the requirement to look authentic. And that can be used to virtually eliminate it.
A failure of many people in the European left is that they try to use politically motivated judges and commissions when they lose in the court of public opinion. Americans don't think highly of the practice, because it is essentially anti-democratic. US judges don't think much of the practice because they know that their only inherent power comes from the respect of the people - a power they'd quickly lose if they became viewed as politicans in judicial robes. Of course, this has already happened in Europe and the UN, which is why they're dominated by toothless judges and commissions that everyone but their political allies ignore.
The EFF's weakness isn't that they lose. It's that they fight cases they shouldn't. You want to structure things so that even if you lose in the court because the law's wrong, the publicity is positive so that you can go to the people to make the law right. Never take a case that detracts from your credibility.
Case in point: Mr. "Bonhomie Snoutintroff" whines that the EFF won't be able to get a US judge to rule that anonymous travel on eminently hijackable aircraft is a fundamental right. Well, duh. In the face of worldwide terrorism, NO ONE could do that. It's settled law that aircraft travel is not treated the same as walking down the street (which is why the government can legally search you prior to boarding). The real question is why did the EFF take this up at all? Is there no better place to spend their energies?
The longer the ductwork, the more turns, and the more severe those turns, the more your fans have to work to achieve the same pressure and airflow. This, because of the increased friction in the pipe.
Now admittedly, friction isn't as important to gasses as it is to other states of matter, but it can have an effect, especially in high flow cooling.
The Slashdot editotial policy is pretty obviously slanted Libertarian. Go back and look at the accepted political threads, and you'll see Libertarian coverage in massive disproportion to that party's ability to actually do anything.
This article, decrying laws prohibiting anonymous funding of political speech is exactly the same as the Libertarian position. It is expressly not a position that a majority of Democrats and Republicans would take; both want limits on anonymous political donations, they just disagree on exactly what.
Listen up, moron mods: something isn't "Redundant" if its posted within a few minutes of another identical "Insightful" comment. All that means is that two people didn't see that observation already in the record, started at the same time, and one of them was a tiny bit faster in the typing, spellcheck, and submit.
My rule when I Metamod is that any marking of "Redundant" had better come at least 20 minutes behind the comment it's supposed to copy. Otherwise you get Meta-modded DOWN.
Commenting on Slashdot shouldn't be a race to get your comment in the quickest. The last thing this blog needs is quick, trite, misspelled, one-liners.
A guy goes into a small business convention and gets roped in by some huckster trying to get him into a Multilevel Marketing company. After sitting through his lecture about how great the opportunity is, how it's can't miss, how he can just get everyone around him to buy the company's crap at outrageous prices, and there isn't much investment, the guy gets asked "Come on! What have you got to lose?"
His answer: "All my friends".
"Push marketing" types, also known as salesmen, keep trying to push crap products onto people. But generally, good products sell themselves.
8. Many kinds of (flash) ads surprise you with sound. This can be highly annoying for casual browsing at work (or home when the family is asleep).
9. Some ads surprise you with things that - depending on your work environment - might be considered Not Safe For Work. Surprisingly, this usually isn't porn sites (which I don't surf anyway), but things like risque cartoons and Sports Illustrated body painting.
10. Because I can. Seriously - if there was a way to delete all ads from TV, wouldn't most people do it?
This isn't to say that advertising isn't effective with me. I often turn on ads for specialty sites that I'm using to research what sort of product to purchase. Quite frankly, this is the most effective time to reach me anyway, since I've usually made up my mind that I need something and am making decisions about it.
The low-built Pentagon was hit just like the WTC buildings on 9/11 and it didn't collapse to the ground. So if we're going to say New Orleans shouldn't be rebuilt under water, why are we building gravity-defying skyscrapers?
And remember, "nature" doesn't want so many people on the Earth. We're way beyond what most species' population limits. Should we just let half the human population die off?
Personally, I'm all in favor of respecting nature. But I don't think we should surrender to it.
Slashdot Mirror
That kind of personality quirk is not necessarily a sign of genetic stupidity. It's just a sign of extreme disinterest.
There are people who treat their cars more or less the same way: they are not the least bit interested in what is going on, literally, "under the hood". Warning lights? Pffff. Unless it stops the car, interrupting their life, they don't give a crap.
Car dealers love them.
And frankly, while such people can be annoying, I find them infinitely preferable to type that treats people like inanimate objects.
What really happened is that Democrats completely lost their nerve after Viet Nam.
No. What happened was that after they lost their war-of-choice in Vietnam, Republicans then sold the American public the idea that their own democratically elected government was the enemy. (Wave the flag, hate what it represents.) And persuaded them to slash taxes - largely on the mega rich.
The national infrastructure you so rightly laud cost money to build. A lot of it. That money came from taxes. Putting a man on the moon also wasn't free. With the advent of "Reaganomics", both parties had to drop non-critical programs. And guess what? To most people, keeping crooks off the street and kids from starving is more important than space exploration. So when Reagan, aided by conservative Democrat turned Republican Phil Gramm, slashed taxes on billionaires, that's what both Democrats and Republicans focused on.
The absurdity of your position is lauding the very man who brought about the destruction of America's position of leadership in the world: Ronald Reagan, and his ideological descendant, George W. Bush.
Nobody is going to follow the leadership of a nation that refuses to take care of its own people.
Hard to believe, but never the less, true.
A second piece of wisdom. You do yourself a disservice praising and quoting a piece liberally sprinkled with the following kinds of phrases: "Magic Negro", "Negro clown", "young gentleman of color is claiming to have had a sexual encounter with Saint Barack", "because Obama is a socialist, a Democrat, and - especially - a Negro". It strongly suggests that you yourself are quite comfortable with overt racism and pathological hate. And it leads me to the conclusion, Mr. Cornelius, that you are engaged in a crude form of psychological rationalization for your own unstated racist sentiments.
A little self-introspection may be in order.
It was - and is - a marketing tool by a privately held company.
Here's the history for those who don't want to follow the link. ExtJS has developed a JavaScript framework. They originally licensed as "LGPL", but with the added proviso that it was only for non-commercial use. Since the whole point of the LGPL is to allow commercial apps to link with it, this made little sense. Now they've gone to GPL3.0, only for non-commercial use, which is a little more honest about their intent.
Apparently some have tried to fork the original "LGPL" code, but since it never has been released without the "no non-commercial apps" restriction, using any forked code in a commercial product is copyright infringement.
This has nothing to do with the GPL3.0 or the LGPL. It has to do with one company, and the restrictions they've put on their licenses.
And so what? They wrote the code. They get to license it.
...which is what these kids actually need.
If parents would actually PARENT, maybe we wouldn't need so much of a "Nanny" state. But until that happens, comparisons to 1984esque totalitarianism is absurd.
It kept me from ever being in danger of becoming an unprepared teen father.
All it takes is some "vigilante" to seed the honeypot address by signing up...
One of the keys to creating a honeypot is that you don't broadcast to the bad guys the fact that it's a honeypot. Obviously if spammers know it's a honeypot, not only can they joe-job your honeypot, they can simply take it out of their list, bypassing it.
So the takeaway isn't that honeypots are useless. It's to name your honeypot "john.h.believable@mydomain.org", not "spambucket-honeypot@mydomain.org"
And we are supposed to believe that all the peer-reviewed science that Al Gore references is "bogus" because you say so? You consider making a fact-free assertion to be an effective counter?
That seems a tad unscientific to me.
...because just about everything in the whole store would have a sticker on it.
Apples? Cloned. Potatos? Cloned. Bannanas? Cloned.
Most commercial strawberries are propagated via runners.
Corn is a freak hybrid. Always has been.
And yet a bunch of kook Californians are trying to use cloning to stoke fear in consumers.
Never say the hard left isn't as anti-scientific as the hard right.
According to his letter, Gonzalez hasn't actually subjected the program to judicial oversight. What he's done is gone judge-shopping to find a single judge to declare the entire program authorized.
The problem is, that's not how warrants work. Warrants have to be specific and time limited - to avoid exactly the behavior that Gonzalez in engaging in: blanket invasion into the privacy of all Americans without any legitimate reason to think they're doing anything wrong.
Remember: the laws we have on civil liberties aren't there to protect the guilty. They're there to protect the innocent, namely us.
Well I'm late to the discussion, so I doubt this will be modded up. But I think it's pretty clear that far from String theory being given a pass, scientifically, it's actually being unfairly criticized.
The first - false - criticism is that String theory makes no testable predictions. It does. The problem is that we simply don't have the technology to test it yet. (And building a particle accellerator to test by brute force may never be humanly possible.)
Unfortunate, yes. But there is a difference between not being able to test a prediction, and a theory that makes no testable predictions. Bose-Einstein Condensates was a testable predition made far in advance of any physical ability, at the time, to execute the test. Did that make the theory any less scientific when Bose (and more abstractly, Einstein) proposed it?
The second criticism is that String theory is just math. Let me remind you that String (M-) theory is still one of the very few self-consistent models that entirely subsumes all other physical theories. When created, it was the only model that wasn't flat out disproven by the evidence.
Again, unifying math may seem like a trivial point to some people. But it's not. Scientifically speaking, any theory that predicts things and isn't proven wrong (yet) beats a theory that is proven wrong, no matter how useful it was in the past.
As much as the Slashdot community hates it, the DMCA is utterly clear on the topic. If a copyright owner can't even be bothered to send a DMCA-takedown notice about their content, then no harm, no foul.
This required "opt-out" of other people using your material is a pretty powerful concept. That's why Clinton & the old Republican Congress balanced it with such an easy to use form.
Google/Youtube has nothing to worry about legally. Other than ass--le judges who try to reinterpret law to add damages where none are warranted.
We need to start working on carbon sequestration right now, unless you want 140 degree summers across the entire midwest belt. And we need to use carbon taxes as our main source of governmental revenue, not stupid things like employment taxes.
I really think that unless we do something immediately, the habitability of at least half the landmass on Earth will be be jeapordy.
It's not like other industries where good CEO-sense can take you a long way.
Aside from corruption from having special friends in the government, there is little evidence that good "CEO-sense" (whatever that means) has much to do with success. In fact, the only way we have of evaluating good "CEO-sense" is by looking backwards, which makes every CEO lucky enough to inherit a good market position "good" by tautology.
But as a predictor, as they always say in the buz, "past performance is not a guide to future performance".
...so I can't spend a lot of time in dicussing this, but I always that the main benefit of micro-kernels is completely wasted unless you actually have utilities that can work in partially-functioning environments. What good is it to be able to continue to run a kernel even with your SCSI drive disabled, if all your software to fix the problem is on the SCSI drive?
Now in theory I could see a high-availability microkernel being a good, less expensive alternative, to a classic mainframe environment, especially if you had a well written auto-healing system built in as a default. But that would require a lot of work outside the kernel that just isn't being done right now. And until it is, micro-kernels don't have anything more to offer than monolithic kernerls.
To put it in API terms - it doesn't matter very much whether your library correctly returns an error code for every possible circumstance, when most user level code doesn't bother to check it (or just exits immediately on even addressable errors).
I'm glad these people have suddenly gotten the idea that there is a lot of knowledge in the global community that can be shared, but seriously, how is this better than Wikipedia, Expert's Exchange, or plain old Google?
What does this tool offer that's better in any way?
Move along. There's nothing to see.
Phishing is easier than spam to combat because it is constrained by the requirement to look authentic. And that can be used to virtually eliminate it.
A failure of many people in the European left is that they try to use politically motivated judges and commissions when they lose in the court of public opinion. Americans don't think highly of the practice, because it is essentially anti-democratic. US judges don't think much of the practice because they know that their only inherent power comes from the respect of the people - a power they'd quickly lose if they became viewed as politicans in judicial robes. Of course, this has already happened in Europe and the UN, which is why they're dominated by toothless judges and commissions that everyone but their political allies ignore.
The EFF's weakness isn't that they lose. It's that they fight cases they shouldn't. You want to structure things so that even if you lose in the court because the law's wrong, the publicity is positive so that you can go to the people to make the law right. Never take a case that detracts from your credibility.
Case in point: Mr. "Bonhomie Snoutintroff" whines that the EFF won't be able to get a US judge to rule that anonymous travel on eminently hijackable aircraft is a fundamental right. Well, duh. In the face of worldwide terrorism, NO ONE could do that. It's settled law that aircraft travel is not treated the same as walking down the street (which is why the government can legally search you prior to boarding). The real question is why did the EFF take this up at all? Is there no better place to spend their energies?
Pick your fights, EFF. Pick your fights.
The longer the ductwork, the more turns, and the more severe those turns, the more your fans have to work to achieve the same pressure and airflow. This, because of the increased friction in the pipe.
Now admittedly, friction isn't as important to gasses as it is to other states of matter, but it can have an effect, especially in high flow cooling.
The Slashdot editotial policy is pretty obviously slanted Libertarian. Go back and look at the accepted political threads, and you'll see Libertarian coverage in massive disproportion to that party's ability to actually do anything.
This article, decrying laws prohibiting anonymous funding of political speech is exactly the same as the Libertarian position. It is expressly not a position that a majority of Democrats and Republicans would take; both want limits on anonymous political donations, they just disagree on exactly what.
Listen up, moron mods: something isn't "Redundant" if its posted within a few minutes of another identical "Insightful" comment. All that means is that two people didn't see that observation already in the record, started at the same time, and one of them was a tiny bit faster in the typing, spellcheck, and submit.
My rule when I Metamod is that any marking of "Redundant" had better come at least 20 minutes behind the comment it's supposed to copy. Otherwise you get Meta-modded DOWN.
Commenting on Slashdot shouldn't be a race to get your comment in the quickest. The last thing this blog needs is quick, trite, misspelled, one-liners.
By my count, that's 43 "areas" per page. Each "area" is one or two lines.
Not much specificity in there, methinks.
They probably filed it under seal to keep the whole OSS community from howling in laughter.
A guy goes into a small business convention and gets roped in by some huckster trying to get him into a Multilevel Marketing company. After sitting through his lecture about how great the opportunity is, how it's can't miss, how he can just get everyone around him to buy the company's crap at outrageous prices, and there isn't much investment, the guy gets asked "Come on! What have you got to lose?"
His answer: "All my friends".
"Push marketing" types, also known as salesmen, keep trying to push crap products onto people. But generally, good products sell themselves.
8. Many kinds of (flash) ads surprise you with sound. This can be highly annoying for casual browsing at work (or home when the family is asleep).
9. Some ads surprise you with things that - depending on your work environment - might be considered Not Safe For Work. Surprisingly, this usually isn't porn sites (which I don't surf anyway), but things like risque cartoons and Sports Illustrated body painting.
10. Because I can. Seriously - if there was a way to delete all ads from TV, wouldn't most people do it?
This isn't to say that advertising isn't effective with me. I often turn on ads for specialty sites that I'm using to research what sort of product to purchase. Quite frankly, this is the most effective time to reach me anyway, since I've usually made up my mind that I need something and am making decisions about it.
The low-built Pentagon was hit just like the WTC buildings on 9/11 and it didn't collapse to the ground. So if we're going to say New Orleans shouldn't be rebuilt under water, why are we building gravity-defying skyscrapers?
And remember, "nature" doesn't want so many people on the Earth. We're way beyond what most species' population limits. Should we just let half the human population die off?
Personally, I'm all in favor of respecting nature. But I don't think we should surrender to it.