I'm not sure whether to mod you +1 funny or -1 troll.
I lived in LA for 4 years and it seems like it should be +1 insightful to me. But 911 conspiracy theories, even in jest, raise big time hackles on/., so don't plan on seeing in good karma come out of Ethanol-fueled's post even though I'm 100% confident (s)he is kidding.
Splash some body fluids here, drop some hair there, and smear some skin cells at a strategic location, and voila "we have DNA evidence that places the defendant at the scene of the crime."
Congratulations on stumbling on the plot from GATTACA. But your +n insightful is deserved because of the twist--although I've heard that prostitutes sell used condoms for this very reason. I can't find any links on the web to this effect so maybe its simply a urban legend. Hopefully defense attorneys with a modicum of intelligence will figure out that they can use planted DNA evidence as a defense.
Just like a bunch of/.ers. First they want to pirate songs they don't own licenses for and now they want to make sandwiches without licensing the process from Mickey Ds.
Yes I think you aren't getting it--it might be the political environment in which you were raised. But I also think the mods have been unfair to you. Another cornerstone of democracy is to respect differences of opinion. In fact, I had to give up 5 mod points I already doled out in this thread to enter this discussion.
If he'd said "I don't agree that the speeding law is a just law, so I will break it", then I wouldn't disagree.
This shouldn't be a requirement. All it requires to give one moral grounds to break a law is to have evidence that a government entity has no moral authority to enforce the law to begin with. The power to reject the moral authority of a governing institution is the principal power of the people in a democracy and is their greatest threat against law breaking by those who govern them, including the police.
I'm challenging the idea that breaking the law is fine and dandy just because someone else does.
No, breaking the law is fine and dandy depending on who that someone else is. It makes a big, big difference. If it means that you won't pay your taxes if Joe the Plumber didn't, then that isn't fine and dandy. But if you don't want to pay your taxes when the government does not reciprocate with representation, then not paying your taxes is fine and dandy and should be expected. I hope you understand the difference. If not, I can point you to a good American history textbook. Or are you some kind of anti-American pinko commie who doesn't understand why the USA was created?
Clearly I'm the moron, because you made a statement and I assumed you actually meant what you said.
To clarify, in case its a little opaque for you--the statement "when cops start obeying the law, so will I" means that cops represent the government entity that creates laws. When cops break these laws, the government entity effectively breaks its own laws. If that government entity turns a blind eye to this law breaking, it has sacrificed any and all of its moral authority. Moral authority is the only absolute authority any law can have. When this moral authority is gone, then the populace has no absolute reason to obey any law and can and *should* break laws they disagree with or don't like. This is one of the corner stones of civil disobedience and it is an important component of democracy. So quit being righteous and try to think about the motivation about what people say.
When you see people blatantly breaking the law and you are aware of abuse by the police at the same time, you might consider whether that particular municipality has let its moral authority slip. I'm waiting for your righteous rebuttal before I provide half a dozen real world examples of this effect in action. But make sure you are very indignant and condescending when you rebut, or it won't be worth my time.
You see, cops *need* that drive, that determination that this is the guy in order to feel good enough to bring the evidence before the prosecutor.
You make it sound like cops are power junkies with all this talk of *need*. I don't think the emphasis you added is an accident in this regard.
If law enforcement were honest to the judicial process, they would make arrests on probable cause and not on some sort of *need*, as you put it.
A prosecutor should hold herself to a similar legal ideal in that she should prosecute, or file charges, based on her belief that the evidence of a crime erases any reasonable doubt. In other words, she should first gather enough evidence to have a case that should, by all probability, result in a guilty verdict from a jury.
This approach is the ideal. In reality, incentives are not based on ideals. Cops get a power rush and probably bonus compensation for aggressive arrest records. Prosecutors get promoted based on the number of successful prosecutions--whether those prosecutions come by plea or verdict.
In the present case, it appears that the state used its power to lean on an individual until the individual's least painful option was to take a guilty plea for a minor charge rather than continue a battle indefinitely against a superior power. In short, the state forced a surrender and compromised its moral authority in the process.
As a cop, or whatever you are, you might applaud this result because of your *needs*. But, when the state compromises its moral authority, it also compromises the moral authority of its executive arm, namely the police. As a consequence it makes the job of the police more difficult and only erodes public opinion of law enforcement. Just like a drug junkie, any satisfaction a power junkie cop may get from torturing someone with prosecution until they surrender only serves to make the occupation of a law enforcement officer that much less rewarding.
My opinion is that power junkie cops deserve these consequences for indulging their *needs*.
Whichever one you cmd-tabbed to... oh wait, Macs don't work like that.
Correct. If its minimized, its in the doc and you click on it. I know--you want a keyboard way to get the window. Tough luck.
Hey, you know what I want in a stock windows install? I want a unix terminal with ls, and middle button pasting and all the bells and whistles of a BSD subsystem.
Uh-oh. Windows doesn't work like that. I'm a fucking genius for stating the obvious, aren't I?
The barrier to entry is such that girls need to overcome social pressure
Whatever.
When boys see that little C program, some significant fraction of them wonder "what's it doing?" When girls see it, a greatly smaller fraction wonder "what's it doing?" That's the difference. Boys and girls are fundamentally different. I'm surprised people can't tell just by looking.
When he says "minimize", he means to click the small "-" in the "X-+" group of buttons
OK. If you read his description of the problem, its confusing. He first says "maximize" and then "minimize" and then "alt-tab". But now I understand the behavior. But I think its a case of something that is inherently an undefined operation. What if you have 4 windows minimized from an app and then command-tab to that app? Which window should pop up? If you ask 4 people, you might get 4 different answers. I would say LIFO, some would say FIFO, and others might say the oldest and others might say the newest and others might even say "surprise me". You might even hear others say "I minimized them for a reason, keep'em that way."
We produce so few scientists and engineers, because the rewards are so pathetic for the capacity of work being done.
We produce an ample supply of scientists given appropriate compensation. As we import more scientists from other countries, wages go down because supply goes up. This will drive Americans out of science and into more lucrative careers. A scientist used to expect to get a faculty position at about 28 to 30 in this country. Now the average is about 38. As we import more scientists, this number will only go up because the imported labor makes it easier to have a larger worker to PI ratio and a larger pool of workers translates into greater and more protracted competition for PI positions.
So what does this mean to all of the kids out there trying to choose a major? Well, as a public service, I will tell them: STAY THE FUCK OUT OF SCIENCE UNLESS YOU KNOW FOR GODDAMN SURE THAT YOU WILL BE PERFECTLY HAPPY RUNNING EXPERIMENTS FOR SOMEONE ELSE FOR MUCH OF YOUR LIFE.
The dream of having a PI position before you turn gray died in the '80s.
Because I couldn't do it you must be lying. Glad you're not my tech support guy. Seriously, if I came back at my boss (or client) and said this, I'd be out on my arse, so top marks in customer service.
"Which app?" means "which application?" What I mean to say is which program does this? I'm curious to know. Macs have a lot of quirks. I don't use Spaces because it sucks hard with quirks, so I'm not going to argue with you about the possibility of quirks. In fact, if I could reproduce what you are saying, I'd have fun demonstrating the behavior to my friend who thinks that macs are "just toys". Never mind that my mac mini (aka "The Doorstop") can run circles around his AMD fedora box.
But now that you have copped a defensive attitude, I'm wondering if you aren't just making this stuff up. I actually believed you for a while there. Then I realized that you don't alt-tab through apps in OS X, you command-tab through them--bullshit flag #1. Also, the behavior you mention is reminiscent of something I've observed in windows, where you can minimize a window and not get it back easily. The application just sits in the task bar but has no windows--you can't even "maximize" them into existence. Bullshit flag #2. Also a google for Traffic Office manager os x yields no identifiable results. Bigtime bullshit flag #3. Yup, only *now* that I've had time to contemplate it, I know you are bullshitting. Good try.
The question is whether you think your trollish bullshit is actually amusing, because if there were a plonk file for slashdot, I'd put you right in it.
Have you noticed the file system is not case sensitive?
You choose to not have a case sensitive file system and complain about it. I'll leave understanding what I mean as an exercise for the reader. Hint: disk utility.
I develop for windows, linux, freebsd, and os x on a coreduo mac mini using Parallels. I have done a *lot* of science using purely unix tools on a mac box. I build my own gnu replacements for the some of the bsd tools that come standard with mac, like sort, ls, and yacc. I've built almost everything you can think of and compiled.so libraries I wrote on a fedora 6 box as.dylib libraries right on my mac. If you don't think Mac is Unix, you don't know what Unix is or how to use it. I've done hard-core science computation on IRIX, Tru64, Linux, Sun OS, and OS X, going back to '93. I've built on all of these--if it can be built, I can probably build it. So trust me when I tell you that OS X is Unix and that you just have some learning to do. Also, although I don't love everything mac, I do love the Unix side of it.
Try maximizing a window on a mac. Minimize a window, then alt-tab back to that app. You get the app, with no window! You then get the 'pleasure' of moving the mouse to the menu bar, selecting the window menu, and hopefully finding the window you wanted.
I couldn't reproduce this. Which app?
OSX server (both tiger and leopard) fail in such spectacular manners that it would make your head spin.
I've been administrating a 10.4 server box for nearly 2.5 years. Setup sucked and I had to reinstall, but after that, it's worked flawlessly ever since. I only need to pay attention to it after power outages. Except for a perfectly defective dhcp server/nat router, I couldn't be happier with it.
If you install FileMaker server on OSX Server
There is your problem. I'll hint to the fix: postgresql.
On some Apple made apps closing the main windows does not close the app, on others (still made by apple) it does.
Yes, it would be nice if Apple made their admins read the Apple user interface guidelines. I think the cake-taker was netinfo manager.
As for the sluggishness of Aqua--yup. Four major upgrades later, a tripling of processor speeds, a quintupling of memory, and nearly two orders of magnitude of hard drive sizes later, you still need to wait six minutes to resize a window in Firefox. I don't know whose fault that is, but it needs improvement.
Try Quantum Chemistry by McQuarrie for quantum theory--one of my favorites. It will get you up to speed on waves. I would have never thought there could be such a thing as a gentle introduction to the Schroedinger Equation, but McQuarrie is the closest there is. You can't go wrong with Atkins's Physical Chemistry for thermodynamics. For electrodynamics, there is Jackson. The classic on Information Theory is Cover and Thomas. For gravity, read Gravity (I've never read it though)--beware that its so thick, it has its own gravitational field. But I guess you don't mean relativistic physics. Decent Newtonian mechanics books are a dime a dozen because you don't need more than calculus to learn it.
Unfortunately, you're mixing correlation with causation.
I'm perfectly aware of the 2nd great/. mantra. (The first being something about Hitler and Goodwin.) "Correlationblahblahblah" is even a tag, in case you hadn't noticed. But the statement "A does not necessarily imply B" is not the same as "A necessarily does not imply B". We work to identify correlation to take advantage of it. Forming new habits in the hope of effecting a positive change is predicated on the irrefutable possibility that correlation might reflect causation.
Slashdot Mirror
This tape will self destruct in five seconds. Good Luck!
How can some people be technically proficient enough to be interested in slashdot, but so gullible
That "whooshing" sound is not a patriot missile, if you know what I mean.
I'm not sure whether to mod you +1 funny or -1 troll.
I lived in LA for 4 years and it seems like it should be +1 insightful to me. But 911 conspiracy theories, even in jest, raise big time hackles on /., so don't plan on seeing in good karma come out of Ethanol-fueled's post even though I'm 100% confident (s)he is kidding.
Splash some body fluids here, drop some hair there, and smear some skin cells at a strategic location, and voila "we have DNA evidence that places the defendant at the scene of the crime."
Congratulations on stumbling on the plot from GATTACA. But your +n insightful is deserved because of the twist--although I've heard that prostitutes sell used condoms for this very reason. I can't find any links on the web to this effect so maybe its simply a urban legend. Hopefully defense attorneys with a modicum of intelligence will figure out that they can use planted DNA evidence as a defense.
Looks like a double entendre tag to me.
Just like a bunch of /.ers. First they want to pirate songs they don't own licenses for and now they want to make sandwiches without licensing the process from Mickey Ds.
Yes I think you aren't getting it--it might be the political environment in which you were raised. But I also think the mods have been unfair to you. Another cornerstone of democracy is to respect differences of opinion. In fact, I had to give up 5 mod points I already doled out in this thread to enter this discussion.
If he'd said "I don't agree that the speeding law is a just law, so I will break it", then I wouldn't disagree.
This shouldn't be a requirement. All it requires to give one moral grounds to break a law is to have evidence that a government entity has no moral authority to enforce the law to begin with. The power to reject the moral authority of a governing institution is the principal power of the people in a democracy and is their greatest threat against law breaking by those who govern them, including the police.
I'm challenging the idea that breaking the law is fine and dandy just because someone else does.
No, breaking the law is fine and dandy depending on who that someone else is. It makes a big, big difference. If it means that you won't pay your taxes if Joe the Plumber didn't, then that isn't fine and dandy. But if you don't want to pay your taxes when the government does not reciprocate with representation, then not paying your taxes is fine and dandy and should be expected. I hope you understand the difference. If not, I can point you to a good American history textbook. Or are you some kind of anti-American pinko commie who doesn't understand why the USA was created?
Clearly I'm the moron, because you made a statement and I assumed you actually meant what you said.
To clarify, in case its a little opaque for you--the statement "when cops start obeying the law, so will I" means that cops represent the government entity that creates laws. When cops break these laws, the government entity effectively breaks its own laws. If that government entity turns a blind eye to this law breaking, it has sacrificed any and all of its moral authority. Moral authority is the only absolute authority any law can have. When this moral authority is gone, then the populace has no absolute reason to obey any law and can and *should* break laws they disagree with or don't like. This is one of the corner stones of civil disobedience and it is an important component of democracy. So quit being righteous and try to think about the motivation about what people say.
When you see people blatantly breaking the law and you are aware of abuse by the police at the same time, you might consider whether that particular municipality has let its moral authority slip. I'm waiting for your righteous rebuttal before I provide half a dozen real world examples of this effect in action. But make sure you are very indignant and condescending when you rebut, or it won't be worth my time.
You see, cops *need* that drive, that determination that this is the guy in order to feel good enough to bring the evidence before the prosecutor.
You make it sound like cops are power junkies with all this talk of *need*. I don't think the emphasis you added is an accident in this regard.
If law enforcement were honest to the judicial process, they would make arrests on probable cause and not on some sort of *need*, as you put it.
A prosecutor should hold herself to a similar legal ideal in that she should prosecute, or file charges, based on her belief that the evidence of a crime erases any reasonable doubt. In other words, she should first gather enough evidence to have a case that should, by all probability, result in a guilty verdict from a jury.
This approach is the ideal. In reality, incentives are not based on ideals. Cops get a power rush and probably bonus compensation for aggressive arrest records. Prosecutors get promoted based on the number of successful prosecutions--whether those prosecutions come by plea or verdict.
In the present case, it appears that the state used its power to lean on an individual until the individual's least painful option was to take a guilty plea for a minor charge rather than continue a battle indefinitely against a superior power. In short, the state forced a surrender and compromised its moral authority in the process.
As a cop, or whatever you are, you might applaud this result because of your *needs*. But, when the state compromises its moral authority, it also compromises the moral authority of its executive arm, namely the police. As a consequence it makes the job of the police more difficult and only erodes public opinion of law enforcement. Just like a drug junkie, any satisfaction a power junkie cop may get from torturing someone with prosecution until they surrender only serves to make the occupation of a law enforcement officer that much less rewarding.
My opinion is that power junkie cops deserve these consequences for indulging their *needs*.
How did you know I got that from the resume? I think you fail worse.
Don't be surprised when marriage proposals from fellow /.ers start show up in your email by the truckload.
Whichever one you cmd-tabbed to... oh wait, Macs don't work like that.
Correct. If its minimized, its in the doc and you click on it. I know--you want a keyboard way to get the window. Tough luck.
Hey, you know what I want in a stock windows install? I want a unix terminal with ls, and middle button pasting and all the bells and whistles of a BSD subsystem.
Uh-oh. Windows doesn't work like that. I'm a fucking genius for stating the obvious, aren't I?
But the latter comment could be true.
So you are saying that women are too thin-skinned. You're a sexist.
The barrier to entry is such that girls need to overcome social pressure
Whatever.
When boys see that little C program, some significant fraction of them wonder "what's it doing?" When girls see it, a greatly smaller fraction wonder "what's it doing?" That's the difference. Boys and girls are fundamentally different. I'm surprised people can't tell just by looking.
When he says "minimize", he means to click the small "-" in the "X-+" group of buttons
OK. If you read his description of the problem, its confusing. He first says "maximize" and then "minimize" and then "alt-tab". But now I understand the behavior. But I think its a case of something that is inherently an undefined operation. What if you have 4 windows minimized from an app and then command-tab to that app? Which window should pop up? If you ask 4 people, you might get 4 different answers. I would say LIFO, some would say FIFO, and others might say the oldest and others might say the newest and others might even say "surprise me". You might even hear others say "I minimized them for a reason, keep'em that way."
And when most people retell it, they inevitably get into a geek debate about mean vs. average.
I think you mean "median"--or did you set me up for that?
We produce so few scientists and engineers, because the rewards are so pathetic for the capacity of work being done.
We produce an ample supply of scientists given appropriate compensation. As we import more scientists from other countries, wages go down because supply goes up. This will drive Americans out of science and into more lucrative careers. A scientist used to expect to get a faculty position at about 28 to 30 in this country. Now the average is about 38. As we import more scientists, this number will only go up because the imported labor makes it easier to have a larger worker to PI ratio and a larger pool of workers translates into greater and more protracted competition for PI positions.
So what does this mean to all of the kids out there trying to choose a major? Well, as a public service, I will tell them: STAY THE FUCK OUT OF SCIENCE UNLESS YOU KNOW FOR GODDAMN SURE THAT YOU WILL BE PERFECTLY HAPPY RUNNING EXPERIMENTS FOR SOMEONE ELSE FOR MUCH OF YOUR LIFE.
The dream of having a PI position before you turn gray died in the '80s.
I couldn't reproduce this. Which app?
Because I couldn't do it you must be lying. Glad you're not my tech support guy. Seriously, if I came back at my boss (or client) and said this, I'd be out on my arse, so top marks in customer service.
"Which app?" means "which application?" What I mean to say is which program does this? I'm curious to know. Macs have a lot of quirks. I don't use Spaces because it sucks hard with quirks, so I'm not going to argue with you about the possibility of quirks. In fact, if I could reproduce what you are saying, I'd have fun demonstrating the behavior to my friend who thinks that macs are "just toys". Never mind that my mac mini (aka "The Doorstop") can run circles around his AMD fedora box.
But now that you have copped a defensive attitude, I'm wondering if you aren't just making this stuff up. I actually believed you for a while there. Then I realized that you don't alt-tab through apps in OS X, you command-tab through them--bullshit flag #1. Also, the behavior you mention is reminiscent of something I've observed in windows, where you can minimize a window and not get it back easily. The application just sits in the task bar but has no windows--you can't even "maximize" them into existence. Bullshit flag #2. Also a google for Traffic Office manager os x yields no identifiable results. Bigtime bullshit flag #3. Yup, only *now* that I've had time to contemplate it, I know you are bullshitting. Good try.
The question is whether you think your trollish bullshit is actually amusing, because if there were a plonk file for slashdot, I'd put you right in it.
Have you noticed the file system is not case sensitive?
You choose to not have a case sensitive file system and complain about it. I'll leave understanding what I mean as an exercise for the reader. Hint: disk utility.
I develop for windows, linux, freebsd, and os x on a coreduo mac mini using Parallels. I have done a *lot* of science using purely unix tools on a mac box. I build my own gnu replacements for the some of the bsd tools that come standard with mac, like sort, ls, and yacc. I've built almost everything you can think of and compiled .so libraries I wrote on a fedora 6 box as .dylib libraries right on my mac. If you don't think Mac is Unix, you don't know what Unix is or how to use it. I've done hard-core science computation on IRIX, Tru64, Linux, Sun OS, and OS X, going back to '93. I've built on all of these--if it can be built, I can probably build it. So trust me when I tell you that OS X is Unix and that you just have some learning to do. Also, although I don't love everything mac, I do love the Unix side of it.
Try maximizing a window on a mac. Minimize a window, then alt-tab back to that app. You get the app, with no window! You then get the 'pleasure' of moving the mouse to the menu bar, selecting the window menu, and hopefully finding the window you wanted.
I couldn't reproduce this. Which app?
OSX server (both tiger and leopard) fail in such spectacular manners that it would make your head spin.
I've been administrating a 10.4 server box for nearly 2.5 years. Setup sucked and I had to reinstall, but after that, it's worked flawlessly ever since. I only need to pay attention to it after power outages. Except for a perfectly defective dhcp server/nat router, I couldn't be happier with it.
If you install FileMaker server on OSX Server
There is your problem. I'll hint to the fix: postgresql.
On some Apple made apps closing the main windows does not close the app, on others (still made by apple) it does.
Yes, it would be nice if Apple made their admins read the Apple user interface guidelines. I think the cake-taker was netinfo manager.
As for the sluggishness of Aqua--yup. Four major upgrades later, a tripling of processor speeds, a quintupling of memory, and nearly two orders of magnitude of hard drive sizes later, you still need to wait six minutes to resize a window in Firefox. I don't know whose fault that is, but it needs improvement.
Try Quantum Chemistry by McQuarrie for quantum theory--one of my favorites. It will get you up to speed on waves. I would have never thought there could be such a thing as a gentle introduction to the Schroedinger Equation, but McQuarrie is the closest there is. You can't go wrong with Atkins's Physical Chemistry for thermodynamics. For electrodynamics, there is Jackson. The classic on Information Theory is Cover and Thomas. For gravity, read Gravity (I've never read it though)--beware that its so thick, it has its own gravitational field. But I guess you don't mean relativistic physics. Decent Newtonian mechanics books are a dime a dozen because you don't need more than calculus to learn it.
So how does that compute?
I compute your age to be 24.
Unfortunately, you're mixing correlation with causation.
I'm perfectly aware of the 2nd great /. mantra. (The first being something about Hitler and Goodwin.) "Correlationblahblahblah" is even a tag, in case you hadn't noticed. But the statement "A does not necessarily imply B" is not the same as "A necessarily does not imply B". We work to identify correlation to take advantage of it. Forming new habits in the hope of effecting a positive change is predicated on the irrefutable possibility that correlation might reflect causation.