...from my 37 years on this rock, I've seen the descriptor of ASD go from savant to a whole swathe of "abnormality", from minor zoneouts (such as I have frequently) to total withdrawal (which I have in times of extreme stress). All have been applied to me in passing although I've never had anything like an official diagnosis. I used to act out at school, not because I was ADHD (as false a diagnosis as MSbP), but because I was bored: I had already learned what the teachers were trying to teach me. Problem was, as is common today, the school teaches at the rate of the slowest kid in class. I could think faster than all those kids, even the teachers, combined. So according to them I was the one with the problem - in a way they were right. They were holding me back.
It's not mental illness, it's a defence mechanism.
Back to the topic: ASD/ADHD/AS descriptors have become so diluted over the years, the terms could be applied to anybody. Have you checked out the standard mental health questionnaires? So full of leading questions, you couldn't say no to more than half of them - which is pretty much a guarantee that in any given situation, you could be assessed as having traits of some debilitating mental illness or other that would disqualify you from mixing in public. It's used in the UK on a regular basis to remove children from parents where in fact there is absolutely nothing wrong with the parents, yet one simple questionnaire that takes five minutes to answer ticks the boxes of psychotic, MSbP, NPD, ASPD, any number of "diagnoses" that immediately justifies the forced separation of families.
What we have now is those diagnoses being publicly scrutinised as it's now emerged that the assessments have been carried out by persons unqualified to do so, while claiming that they are qualified. Roy Meadow, Andrew Kawalek, Bruno Bettelheim, David Southall (just some names off the top of my head and I have extensive files on those and more) - all frauds, and provably so. Dangerous ones at that. All have had their hand in removal of many thousands of children from their families on the basis of fabricated mental illness. Southall does not even have a degree, yet he is on the GMC roll as a practising psychologist with license to carry out drug experiments on children. Gentlemen and ladies, I bullshit ye not.
I think it's useful when inserting subtitles (which I have on for foreign language pieces of dialogue). Other than that, it's just damn annoying having a significant percentage of screen real estate not being used.
I do love those laptops. The 8100/8200, C640/C840 - those four models all had completely interchangeable parts! Right down to the 14", 15" and 15.4" panels!
Still got my i8200 running a P4m 2.0 with 2GB RAM, 100GB HDD, DVDRW, 1600x1200 15.4" panel on GF4 Go440 AGP graphics.
Processor fans are getting hard to come by though...
Walmart are selling some extreme budget (sub-£100) integrated DTV/DVD players with 15" 1366x768 panels. They look nice, but if I'm buying something that small I want a fucking laptop chassis attached to it.
Video is PRECISELY the reason. 768/800 vertical is optimal without making it obvious, for DVD (which is 720p). If you want higher vertical resolution in consumer kit, then you'd be looking at something with a BluRay drive in it, because I don't think there's a manufacturer around that puts a 1080/1200v monitor and a DVD drive together. It's ALL geared toward entertainment on-tap.
I don't quite get that... plug n play monitors are generally good when it comes to Windows guessing the optimum resolution, viewable diagonal size is surely just a matter of another field? That said, I remember back in the ugly days of configuring X you had to put in the screen diagonal as well as the resolution...
...the fact that cheap laptops are generally 1366x768??
I have one (Toshiba L755D), and while the laptop itself is friggin' great (6GB RAM, 500GB hybrid HDD, HD graphics and HDMI port), the panel SUCKS! So I use that for the desktop functions when I'm at home, with a 1440x900 HP 19" plugged in. OK it's not that much bigger resolution wise than the internal 15.6" panel but it increases my available desktop space to something semi-usable.
My previous laptop was another Toshiba (Satellite P100), same size laptop but with a dual core Intel instead of AMD which this one has, and the 17" panel (lid overhang on the machine was a totally weird design decision, but still...) went to 1600x1200. Still have the panel, might see if it'll fit the base on this one...
If the data being held can not be proved to be infringing prior to any charges being laid, then the **AA cartel is liable for damages to the actual owners of the data, ie the Megaupload users, for their not being able to access their own data. If the *AA want to pursue this and meanwhile hold all the data to ransom, then they better fuckin' pony up.
If this mess is being headed up by Federal prosecutors then it's for the State to pay for storage.
OK, let's get really pedantic on this: let's have the client accounts and logs of Megaupload and have someone go through the fuckin' lot, put all the infringing stuff in one box and have a lot of John Doe cases and give the rest of the data back to MU with a big fat fuckin' sorry and a reacharound for the legitimate client base, because those people are getting royally FUCKED.
Humanity also survived a few hundred thousand years before the advent of nutrient-negative slop that impersonated food - the difference between now and the peak of [insert historical empire here] is that they built their immune systems on real food, not this pasteurised, boiled, microwaved, vacuum-packed, irradiated, freeze dried, left on a shelf for a year shite most of us have to put up with. The sooner more people realise this and adjust their diets accordingly, the sooner companies such as Monsanto and Pfizer and Glaxo~1 will go the way of the dinosaur as their manufactured pharmaceutical market dries up and the healthier people will feel and the happier they'll be. Until then, keep popping those horsepills. Suckers.
To preempt any naysayers: I'd rather live 40 years in peak physical health than 80 being dependent on drugs which cost MONEY which a lot of us don't have much of.
My mother worried when I *didn't* come home caked in mud after playing out with my friends all day... saying that, I have never had a cold, flu, chest infection or anything. Never had a day off school or work through illness either.
up to three concurrent machines (choose from: Mac OS X (1 desktop), XP (1 desktop), OpenSuSE 11.4 (default 4 desktops), NetBSD (2 desktops), Android (1 desktop)), on a Windows 7 host.
I'd rather be ruled by nobody but myself - Government is there for the good and interests of the People; the second that it ceases to be that (eg by removing rights to gather, to speak one's mind, or to restrict travel wherever and however, whenever), it needs to be removed. Be that a "democratically" elected Government, a constitutional Monarch, or whatever. Charles I was a tyrant who saw Parliament as a threat to his supreme power over his subjects, the People saw this and Cromwell was the only person in a position to call for his impeachment on charges of treason. OK, it wasn't a popular move (by what metric this popularity is measured I don't know). I don't think Cromwell was in it for himself as much as for the People; he fought at Marston Moor, Naseby and Preston against the Royalists and defeated them every time. Probably didn't help his cause with his opposite view to the Gentry that Church and State should not mix.
I don't think the Government was acting in the best interests of the People at all in the lead up to the Great Depression. Particularly given that it was Government policy at the time that banks could operate uninsured (so when the 9,000-odd banks failed during the 30's all the accounts disappeared without trace), coupled with the consolidation of the Federal Reserve and the Treasury and their legislated authority to print unbacked debt notes, the legislated high tariffs on imports causing artificially reduced trading with Europe and Asia, America quickly broke itself.
Historical note: It was "mob rule" that removed Charles I (by decapitating him) when he attempted to usurp legislative power from Parliament (hence to remove legislative power from the People) in 1649. It was "mob rule" that caused the Government to repeal Poll Tax (although they got their own back by calling it something else) in 1990.
"Mob rule" is merely the intimidation of legitimate authorities (notwithstanding the lawfulness, or lack thereof, of their actions), used as a perjorative form of majoritarianism where actions by the majority are viewed as illegal by the ruling minority (such as mass refusal to pay taxes, or go-slow days on highways, or occupations of public buildings, to name three of the less extreme examples). For more extreme examples, look up "Arab Spring", the 2004 Republican National Convention where bikes were used to gridlock cities across the US, the English Civil War, the October Revolution... all examples of where the subjugated majority said "NO MORE!" and backed up their denials with actions.
If it involves stifling creativity, removing our rights, or otherwise telling us that we can't do what we previously *could*, then it most certainly does not warrant PII.
I used to build HPCs. Doesn't require secured logins from the nodes, does when I incorporate remote admin for the head node, but that's to named accounts with passwords from the off. Those admin accounts are created locally from a Master account which is specifically excluded from remote access.
This is what happens when login credentials are based on the SSN, which is a serialised integer system. One wrong digit doesn't throw an error - it fuckin' logs you in as someone else!
um... section 71 of the Serious Organised Crime and Police Act 2005:
Assistance by offender: immunity from prosecution
(1)If a specified prosecutor thinks that for the purposes of the investigation or prosecution of any offence it is appropriate to offer any person immunity from prosecution he may give the person a written notice under this subsection (an “immunity notice”).
(2)If a person is given an immunity notice, no proceedings for an offence of a description specified in the notice may be brought against that person in England and Wales or Northern Ireland except in circumstances specified in the notice.
(3)An immunity notice ceases to have effect in relation to the person to whom it is given if the person fails to comply with any conditions specified in the notice. (4)Each of the following is a specified prosecutor— (a)the Director of Public Prosecutions; (b)the Director of Revenue and Customs Prosecutions; (c)the Director of the Serious Fraud Office; (d)the Director of Public Prosecutions for Northern Ireland; (e)a prosecutor designated for the purposes of this section by a prosecutor mentioned in paragraphs (a) to (d). (5)The Director of Public Prosecutions or a person designated by him under subsection (4)(e) may not give an immunity notice in relation to proceedings in Northern Ireland. (6)The Director of Public Prosecutions for Northern Ireland or a person designated by him under subsection (4)(e) may not give an immunity notice in relation to proceedings in England and Wales. (7)An immunity notice must not be given in relation to an offence under section 188 of the Enterprise Act 2002 (c. 40) (cartel offences). --
So what that basically does is gives anyone who is carrying out work for a public authority, immunity from prosecution for ANYTHING except racketeering (including murder!) if they turn evidence in ANY OTHER CASE.
So, yeah, I think they covered that there, buddy. "1984" is immune from prosecution if they turn over the video intercept for the child porn offence/s, regardless of whether or not they saved a copy for the messroom or their private collection.
I think more people ought to don IRLED hats when they go out - these handy gadgets overwhelm the sensors on CCTV cameras, rendering you electronically anonymous. Leave your cellphone home and the worst you'll get is some rentacop telling you to take your hat off - to which the reply "fuck off" is usually sufficient to stop him bugging you further.
Slashdot Mirror
"I'm sorry, that information is classified."
...from my 37 years on this rock, I've seen the descriptor of ASD go from savant to a whole swathe of "abnormality", from minor zoneouts (such as I have frequently) to total withdrawal (which I have in times of extreme stress). All have been applied to me in passing although I've never had anything like an official diagnosis. I used to act out at school, not because I was ADHD (as false a diagnosis as MSbP), but because I was bored: I had already learned what the teachers were trying to teach me. Problem was, as is common today, the school teaches at the rate of the slowest kid in class. I could think faster than all those kids, even the teachers, combined. So according to them I was the one with the problem - in a way they were right. They were holding me back.
It's not mental illness, it's a defence mechanism.
Back to the topic: ASD/ADHD/AS descriptors have become so diluted over the years, the terms could be applied to anybody. Have you checked out the standard mental health questionnaires? So full of leading questions, you couldn't say no to more than half of them - which is pretty much a guarantee that in any given situation, you could be assessed as having traits of some debilitating mental illness or other that would disqualify you from mixing in public. It's used in the UK on a regular basis to remove children from parents where in fact there is absolutely nothing wrong with the parents, yet one simple questionnaire that takes five minutes to answer ticks the boxes of psychotic, MSbP, NPD, ASPD, any number of "diagnoses" that immediately justifies the forced separation of families.
What we have now is those diagnoses being publicly scrutinised as it's now emerged that the assessments have been carried out by persons unqualified to do so, while claiming that they are qualified. Roy Meadow, Andrew Kawalek, Bruno Bettelheim, David Southall (just some names off the top of my head and I have extensive files on those and more) - all frauds, and provably so. Dangerous ones at that. All have had their hand in removal of many thousands of children from their families on the basis of fabricated mental illness. Southall does not even have a degree, yet he is on the GMC roll as a practising psychologist with license to carry out drug experiments on children. Gentlemen and ladies, I bullshit ye not.
I think it's useful when inserting subtitles (which I have on for foreign language pieces of dialogue). Other than that, it's just damn annoying having a significant percentage of screen real estate not being used.
yep, my bad. I was thinking of an abandoned technology (HD DVD).
hmmm... my EeePC 1008HA screen is 1024x600 native but will squish to 1024x768 (useful for some apps such as my mixing software)
I do love those laptops. The 8100/8200, C640/C840 - those four models all had completely interchangeable parts! Right down to the 14", 15" and 15.4" panels!
Still got my i8200 running a P4m 2.0 with 2GB RAM, 100GB HDD, DVDRW, 1600x1200 15.4" panel on GF4 Go440 AGP graphics.
Processor fans are getting hard to come by though...
Walmart are selling some extreme budget (sub-£100) integrated DTV/DVD players with 15" 1366x768 panels. They look nice, but if I'm buying something that small I want a fucking laptop chassis attached to it.
Video is PRECISELY the reason. 768/800 vertical is optimal without making it obvious, for DVD (which is 720p). If you want higher vertical resolution in consumer kit, then you'd be looking at something with a BluRay drive in it, because I don't think there's a manufacturer around that puts a 1080/1200v monitor and a DVD drive together. It's ALL geared toward entertainment on-tap.
1920x1080, incidentally, is the format for standard Blu-Ray. At 1920x1200 you'd have horizontal bars.
I don't quite get that... plug n play monitors are generally good when it comes to Windows guessing the optimum resolution, viewable diagonal size is surely just a matter of another field? That said, I remember back in the ugly days of configuring X you had to put in the screen diagonal as well as the resolution...
...the fact that cheap laptops are generally 1366x768??
I have one (Toshiba L755D), and while the laptop itself is friggin' great (6GB RAM, 500GB hybrid HDD, HD graphics and HDMI port), the panel SUCKS! So I use that for the desktop functions when I'm at home, with a 1440x900 HP 19" plugged in. OK it's not that much bigger resolution wise than the internal 15.6" panel but it increases my available desktop space to something semi-usable.
My previous laptop was another Toshiba (Satellite P100), same size laptop but with a dual core Intel instead of AMD which this one has, and the 17" panel (lid overhang on the machine was a totally weird design decision, but still...) went to 1600x1200. Still have the panel, might see if it'll fit the base on this one...
If the data being held can not be proved to be infringing prior to any charges being laid, then the **AA cartel is liable for damages to the actual owners of the data, ie the Megaupload users, for their not being able to access their own data. If the *AA want to pursue this and meanwhile hold all the data to ransom, then they better fuckin' pony up.
If this mess is being headed up by Federal prosecutors then it's for the State to pay for storage.
OK, let's get really pedantic on this: let's have the client accounts and logs of Megaupload and have someone go through the fuckin' lot, put all the infringing stuff in one box and have a lot of John Doe cases and give the rest of the data back to MU with a big fat fuckin' sorry and a reacharound for the legitimate client base, because those people are getting royally FUCKED.
Humanity also survived a few hundred thousand years before the advent of nutrient-negative slop that impersonated food - the difference between now and the peak of [insert historical empire here] is that they built their immune systems on real food, not this pasteurised, boiled, microwaved, vacuum-packed, irradiated, freeze dried, left on a shelf for a year shite most of us have to put up with. The sooner more people realise this and adjust their diets accordingly, the sooner companies such as Monsanto and Pfizer and Glaxo~1 will go the way of the dinosaur as their manufactured pharmaceutical market dries up and the healthier people will feel and the happier they'll be. Until then, keep popping those horsepills. Suckers.
To preempt any naysayers: I'd rather live 40 years in peak physical health than 80 being dependent on drugs which cost MONEY which a lot of us don't have much of.
My mother worried when I *didn't* come home caked in mud after playing out with my friends all day... saying that, I have never had a cold, flu, chest infection or anything. Never had a day off school or work through illness either.
Forgot to mention, my SuSE instance runs Beryl/KDE. Sweetest desktop ever. Wonder when Windows is getting this?
up to three concurrent machines (choose from: Mac OS X (1 desktop), XP (1 desktop), OpenSuSE 11.4 (default 4 desktops), NetBSD (2 desktops), Android (1 desktop)), on a Windows 7 host.
I'd rather be ruled by nobody but myself - Government is there for the good and interests of the People; the second that it ceases to be that (eg by removing rights to gather, to speak one's mind, or to restrict travel wherever and however, whenever), it needs to be removed. Be that a "democratically" elected Government, a constitutional Monarch, or whatever. Charles I was a tyrant who saw Parliament as a threat to his supreme power over his subjects, the People saw this and Cromwell was the only person in a position to call for his impeachment on charges of treason. OK, it wasn't a popular move (by what metric this popularity is measured I don't know). I don't think Cromwell was in it for himself as much as for the People; he fought at Marston Moor, Naseby and Preston against the Royalists and defeated them every time. Probably didn't help his cause with his opposite view to the Gentry that Church and State should not mix.
I don't think the Government was acting in the best interests of the People at all in the lead up to the Great Depression. Particularly given that it was Government policy at the time that banks could operate uninsured (so when the 9,000-odd banks failed during the 30's all the accounts disappeared without trace), coupled with the consolidation of the Federal Reserve and the Treasury and their legislated authority to print unbacked debt notes, the legislated high tariffs on imports causing artificially reduced trading with Europe and Asia, America quickly broke itself.
Historical note: It was "mob rule" that removed Charles I (by decapitating him) when he attempted to usurp legislative power from Parliament (hence to remove legislative power from the People) in 1649.
It was "mob rule" that caused the Government to repeal Poll Tax (although they got their own back by calling it something else) in 1990.
"Mob rule" is merely the intimidation of legitimate authorities (notwithstanding the lawfulness, or lack thereof, of their actions), used as a perjorative form of majoritarianism where actions by the majority are viewed as illegal by the ruling minority (such as mass refusal to pay taxes, or go-slow days on highways, or occupations of public buildings, to name three of the less extreme examples). For more extreme examples, look up "Arab Spring", the 2004 Republican National Convention where bikes were used to gridlock cities across the US, the English Civil War, the October Revolution... all examples of where the subjugated majority said "NO MORE!" and backed up their denials with actions.
If it involves stifling creativity, removing our rights, or otherwise telling us that we can't do what we previously *could*, then it most certainly does not warrant PII.
I used to build HPCs. Doesn't require secured logins from the nodes, does when I incorporate remote admin for the head node, but that's to named accounts with passwords from the off. Those admin accounts are created locally from a Master account which is specifically excluded from remote access.
wait, what?? I don't even get how that happens. Someone care to enlighten this rock?
This is what happens when login credentials are based on the SSN, which is a serialised integer system. One wrong digit doesn't throw an error - it fuckin' logs you in as someone else!
um... section 71 of the Serious Organised Crime and Police Act 2005:
Assistance by offender: immunity from prosecution
(1)If a specified prosecutor thinks that for the purposes of the investigation or prosecution of any offence it is appropriate to offer any person immunity from prosecution he may give the person a written notice under this subsection (an “immunity notice”).
(2)If a person is given an immunity notice, no proceedings for an offence of a description specified in the notice may be brought against that person in England and Wales or Northern Ireland except in circumstances specified in the notice.
(3)An immunity notice ceases to have effect in relation to the person to whom it is given if the person fails to comply with any conditions specified in the notice.
(4)Each of the following is a specified prosecutor—
(a)the Director of Public Prosecutions;
(b)the Director of Revenue and Customs Prosecutions;
(c)the Director of the Serious Fraud Office;
(d)the Director of Public Prosecutions for Northern Ireland;
(e)a prosecutor designated for the purposes of this section by a prosecutor mentioned in paragraphs (a) to (d).
(5)The Director of Public Prosecutions or a person designated by him under subsection (4)(e) may not give an immunity notice in relation to proceedings in Northern Ireland.
(6)The Director of Public Prosecutions for Northern Ireland or a person designated by him under subsection (4)(e) may not give an immunity notice in relation to proceedings in England and Wales.
(7)An immunity notice must not be given in relation to an offence under section 188 of the Enterprise Act 2002 (c. 40) (cartel offences).
--
So what that basically does is gives anyone who is carrying out work for a public authority, immunity from prosecution for ANYTHING except racketeering (including murder!) if they turn evidence in ANY OTHER CASE.
So, yeah, I think they covered that there, buddy. "1984" is immune from prosecution if they turn over the video intercept for the child porn offence/s, regardless of whether or not they saved a copy for the messroom or their private collection.
I think more people ought to don IRLED hats when they go out - these handy gadgets overwhelm the sensors on CCTV cameras, rendering you electronically anonymous. Leave your cellphone home and the worst you'll get is some rentacop telling you to take your hat off - to which the reply "fuck off" is usually sufficient to stop him bugging you further.