Re:Why can't a government employee use Yahoo?
on
Palin Email Hacker Found
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
Let's say that hypothetically, she was discussing government business on a Yahoo! account. One later crime committed against her does not mean she gets a pass on her own. Plus, she might be Vice President. Hell, maybe even President. So it does matter a bit more than what some punk does.
I think most, if not all, of the hardware was done by the Japanese team. And don't forget about the Saturn. Sega had a string of hardware duds until the Dreamcast. Although the DC did well, it was not going to be a PS2 killer, and they decided they weren't going to take another shot.
From what I can tell, a lot of Sega's problems were internal. It seemed like the bigger the project, the less likely Sega Corp & Sega of America would get along, which resulted in duplication of effort, and sometimes even sabotage. FWIW, I thought the Saturn was great. The real problem for everyone, I think, was that Sony could do no wrong for a while. I'm glad to see Nintendo take back some of the market.
IMO the word innovative has become extremely watered down these days. Every time someone who works for Apple or Microsoft goes to the bathroom, they feel the need to call it an innovation.
Musicians write new songs all the time. Are all of those songs innovative? No, definitely not all of them. Sorry, displaying information on a screen does not really call out to me as innovative. Qualifying it in reference to whether or not a lock is up is pretty arbitrary, so that doesn't really change it for me, either.
The LHC? Destroy the planet? Turn in your geek card. We may or may not let you go on digg, following a probationary period where you may only post comments on youtube.
To be honest, if it were about something unrelated, I think he'd have better standing, not worse. His use of the city+state combo is in line with the IOC's, so it's like he's making their point for them.
You realize that by "bailing out" AIG, they're helping a lot of citizens who are insured by AIG to not get screwed so badly that it further worsens the economy, right?
I will say that, at least in my personal life, I have dealt with lots of folks who were here doing exchange programs, or recently immigrated, etc. Not everyone speaks great English. I have never dreamed of doing anything less than bending over backwards to interpret what someone is saying. Not being able to communicate with the people around you is beyond terrible..it's mentally and emotionally taxing, and resembles something out of "The Twilight Zone".
But then, I'm a New Englander, and I'm first generation American. Two things that have kept me from devolving into a flag-waving asshole.
The people who have these incredibly clever (so they think) weasely statements like "I don't have a problem with X but they should at least Americanize" do not speak for most of us, and I hope the people reading these comments realize that. They're just louder than the rest of us. They are louder because they do not reflect on their own beliefs. That is, they are always sure of themselves, because they are morons.
And yet, I've never seen someone use words like "ensure" properly on this site. Most people can't tell the difference between "then" and "than", which is grade-school stuff.
Why have a higher standard for people who are still learning English than for people who are supposed to already know it? It's no use trying to correct bad English because all it earns you is "OK, shut up grammar nazi". Again, if we don't care about good English from people who speak it, what's wrong with giving the benefit of a doubt to someone who uses it on the side?
It's not that that doesn't happen, but usually it's agreed upon in advance by both parties, who happen to be on either side of a contract, for instance, in a lease agreement.
But like others have mentioned, in the US we are of the opinion that there shouldn't be up front risks in seeking justice.
I have very strong opinions in these matters, and I still have no reason to see this as anything other than a witch hunt. I don't know about his past performance, but if this was all over this one quote, it's a damn shame, because what he said was nowhere near "we should teach creationism in schools". It was more like "we should come up with good ways to show students why Creationism is not science, should they bring it up in class."
This makes the Royal Society look bad, it makes British science in general look bad, and it makes any scientist trying to defend the theory of evolution looks bad.
The differences matter, but voting against the guy you don't like, rather than for whoever seems like the best candidate to you, is exactly what's wrong with the office of the president in this country. If people voted third party, then the candidates would have to actually earn votes, rather than be lucky enough to be born with a little (D) or (R) after their name.
Can someone explain why this is a troll? I'm not the original poster, not that it even matters. I'm just someone who honestly wants to know why this is a troll. Didn't Obama promise not to vote for legislation that would grant immunity?
Didn't he turn around and vote for it? Yes, I know he said some nice things about how it was necessary at the time. But nice things don't become law. Bills do.
There is no "-1 let's not criticize the lesser of two evils".
I wasn't talking about keeping things hard. Usability is a great goal.
If something is a 1 minute task in Vista or OS X then it should be in Linux.
I'm not really seeing why. It'll be great when it happens, I just don't get the people demanding it. If we're talking about bringing computing to places where they can't afford Vista Ultimate or Apple hardware, I'm with you. But we both know that's not where the complaints come from. It's people who want their wireless driver in the kernel so they don't have to screw with ndiswrapper, etc. Then they do the whole "screw it, I'm going back to Windows" spiel on here.
LAMP is by far the standard server setup. So Linux is mature enough to support half of the web servers out there. I realize desktop maturity is a little different. Trust me, I'm not against improvement in any area, and there's clearly room for improvement.
I'm annoyed for the same reason...I see some of the comments as arrogant - like people acting pissed off that their new OS isn't exactly the same as what they're used to, when no one asked them to switch. I don't code and I have no vested interest in any of it. It just annoys me how everyone thinks they know exactly what linux needs but they fail to mention why they think it needs it.
It's great that Ubuntu is easy to use and install, and clearly great things are happening in that space that will benefit everybody. I just get tired of hearing "linux has to do this" or "linux has to do that". Why does it have to be anything to anybody? Standards was one reason I could come up with. OP was saying that somehow throwing a lot of ex-Windows users at Ubuntu might improve it, and I seriously doubt that. But I had forgotten that getting more users on board might get more hardware vendors on board, so in that way it does help. But it can hurt, too, as we're seeing with the Mozilla Foundation. Personally, I think sticking with official FF binaries at this point hurts Ubuntu's mission. It's more important that people get computing tasks done in an optimal way than they use specific software with a specific logo.
Bear in mind that this is all desktop linux, btw. Linux does quite well in the server market. So you get folks who catch all the buzz, want it on their desktop, but have hardware that is unsupported and they expect it all to be magic. Then they pop online and talk about how it isn't ready. Linux is more than a cheap Windows replacement. It's plenty ready.
Making linux usable isn't exactly on par with global warming.
But I hadn't thought of the fact that hardware vendors like to see people using the stuff before they support it. Which was a dumb thing to forget about.
Cool idea, but RDP and VNC are bad enough over WiFi. Regardless of bandwidth, latency becomes an issue. Throwing a VPN in the mix is not going to help things (though I suppose you could always make your screen-sharing ports public, but asking to get hacked is not worth it when a smaller laptop will do the trick).
Not saying I wouldn't do it (jailbroken iPhones make it easy) but giving a presentation is stressful enough without having to fight the computer, so I wouldn't expect something like that to catch on until the networks improve.
NTSC is sent as scanlines, not pixels. You could grab as many horizontal pixels as you wanted if you were going to digitize it.
That said, there *is* a maximum horizontal resolution, but it has to do with the carrier wave, not any set number of pixels. Typically the resolution of a particular set is measured in the number of concentric circles that can clearly be shown.
Slashdot Mirror
Let's say that hypothetically, she was discussing government business on a Yahoo! account. One later crime committed against her does not mean she gets a pass on her own. Plus, she might be Vice President. Hell, maybe even President. So it does matter a bit more than what some punk does.
This thing is one of a kind, highly advanced, and has 6 billion Euro worth of hardware designed to look at quantum particles.
So yeah, shit happens. Not a conspiracy.
I think most, if not all, of the hardware was done by the Japanese team. And don't forget about the Saturn. Sega had a string of hardware duds until the Dreamcast. Although the DC did well, it was not going to be a PS2 killer, and they decided they weren't going to take another shot.
From what I can tell, a lot of Sega's problems were internal. It seemed like the bigger the project, the less likely Sega Corp & Sega of America would get along, which resulted in duplication of effort, and sometimes even sabotage. FWIW, I thought the Saturn was great. The real problem for everyone, I think, was that Sony could do no wrong for a while. I'm glad to see Nintendo take back some of the market.
I think you underestimate how many banks are actually run by immortal (daywalking) vampires.
I think he was getting at the ethics more than the legality. And yes, there's a difference.
IMO the word innovative has become extremely watered down these days. Every time someone who works for Apple or Microsoft goes to the bathroom, they feel the need to call it an innovation.
Musicians write new songs all the time. Are all of those songs innovative? No, definitely not all of them. Sorry, displaying information on a screen does not really call out to me as innovative. Qualifying it in reference to whether or not a lock is up is pretty arbitrary, so that doesn't really change it for me, either.
The LHC? Destroy the planet? Turn in your geek card. We may or may not let you go on digg, following a probationary period where you may only post comments on youtube.
To be honest, if it were about something unrelated, I think he'd have better standing, not worse. His use of the city+state combo is in line with the IOC's, so it's like he's making their point for them.
You realize that by "bailing out" AIG, they're helping a lot of citizens who are insured by AIG to not get screwed so badly that it further worsens the economy, right?
You mean they were helping reward the government for not valuing freedom?,
:D ...
(cheap, but I couldn't resist...not registered with a party btw)
Dude, I do all those things, and I am American.
I will say that, at least in my personal life, I have dealt with lots of folks who were here doing exchange programs, or recently immigrated, etc. Not everyone speaks great English. I have never dreamed of doing anything less than bending over backwards to interpret what someone is saying. Not being able to communicate with the people around you is beyond terrible..it's mentally and emotionally taxing, and resembles something out of "The Twilight Zone".
But then, I'm a New Englander, and I'm first generation American. Two things that have kept me from devolving into a flag-waving asshole.
The people who have these incredibly clever (so they think) weasely statements like "I don't have a problem with X but they should at least Americanize" do not speak for most of us, and I hope the people reading these comments realize that. They're just louder than the rest of us. They are louder because they do not reflect on their own beliefs. That is, they are always sure of themselves, because they are morons.
And yet, I've never seen someone use words like "ensure" properly on this site. Most people can't tell the difference between "then" and "than", which is grade-school stuff.
Why have a higher standard for people who are still learning English than for people who are supposed to already know it? It's no use trying to correct bad English because all it earns you is "OK, shut up grammar nazi". Again, if we don't care about good English from people who speak it, what's wrong with giving the benefit of a doubt to someone who uses it on the side?
I'm sure that if you were willing to pay for their education, they'd take you up on the challenge.
It's not that that doesn't happen, but usually it's agreed upon in advance by both parties, who happen to be on either side of a contract, for instance, in a lease agreement.
But like others have mentioned, in the US we are of the opinion that there shouldn't be up front risks in seeking justice.
That's true...in my state free speech is a "First Article, Fourth Section" right.
I have very strong opinions in these matters, and I still have no reason to see this as anything other than a witch hunt. I don't know about his past performance, but if this was all over this one quote, it's a damn shame, because what he said was nowhere near "we should teach creationism in schools". It was more like "we should come up with good ways to show students why Creationism is not science, should they bring it up in class."
This makes the Royal Society look bad, it makes British science in general look bad, and it makes any scientist trying to defend the theory of evolution looks bad.
I've never met any moderates that published things like the Weekly Standard, but go ahead and believe that.
The differences matter, but voting against the guy you don't like, rather than for whoever seems like the best candidate to you, is exactly what's wrong with the office of the president in this country. If people voted third party, then the candidates would have to actually earn votes, rather than be lucky enough to be born with a little (D) or (R) after their name.
Can someone explain why this is a troll? I'm not the original poster, not that it even matters. I'm just someone who honestly wants to know why this is a troll. Didn't Obama promise not to vote for legislation that would grant immunity?
Didn't he turn around and vote for it? Yes, I know he said some nice things about how it was necessary at the time. But nice things don't become law. Bills do.
There is no "-1 let's not criticize the lesser of two evils".
If something is a 1 minute task in Vista or OS X then it should be in Linux.
I'm not really seeing why. It'll be great when it happens, I just don't get the people demanding it. If we're talking about bringing computing to places where they can't afford Vista Ultimate or Apple hardware, I'm with you. But we both know that's not where the complaints come from. It's people who want their wireless driver in the kernel so they don't have to screw with ndiswrapper, etc. Then they do the whole "screw it, I'm going back to Windows" spiel on here.
LAMP is by far the standard server setup. So Linux is mature enough to support half of the web servers out there. I realize desktop maturity is a little different. Trust me, I'm not against improvement in any area, and there's clearly room for improvement.
I'm annoyed for the same reason...I see some of the comments as arrogant - like people acting pissed off that their new OS isn't exactly the same as what they're used to, when no one asked them to switch. I don't code and I have no vested interest in any of it. It just annoys me how everyone thinks they know exactly what linux needs but they fail to mention why they think it needs it.
It's great that Ubuntu is easy to use and install, and clearly great things are happening in that space that will benefit everybody. I just get tired of hearing "linux has to do this" or "linux has to do that". Why does it have to be anything to anybody? Standards was one reason I could come up with. OP was saying that somehow throwing a lot of ex-Windows users at Ubuntu might improve it, and I seriously doubt that. But I had forgotten that getting more users on board might get more hardware vendors on board, so in that way it does help. But it can hurt, too, as we're seeing with the Mozilla Foundation. Personally, I think sticking with official FF binaries at this point hurts Ubuntu's mission. It's more important that people get computing tasks done in an optimal way than they use specific software with a specific logo.
Bear in mind that this is all desktop linux, btw. Linux does quite well in the server market. So you get folks who catch all the buzz, want it on their desktop, but have hardware that is unsupported and they expect it all to be magic. Then they pop online and talk about how it isn't ready. Linux is more than a cheap Windows replacement. It's plenty ready.
Making linux usable isn't exactly on par with global warming.
But I hadn't thought of the fact that hardware vendors like to see people using the stuff before they support it. Which was a dumb thing to forget about.
Cool idea, but RDP and VNC are bad enough over WiFi. Regardless of bandwidth, latency becomes an issue. Throwing a VPN in the mix is not going to help things (though I suppose you could always make your screen-sharing ports public, but asking to get hacked is not worth it when a smaller laptop will do the trick).
Not saying I wouldn't do it (jailbroken iPhones make it easy) but giving a presentation is stressful enough without having to fight the computer, so I wouldn't expect something like that to catch on until the networks improve.
NTSC is sent as scanlines, not pixels. You could grab as many horizontal pixels as you wanted if you were going to digitize it.
That said, there *is* a maximum horizontal resolution, but it has to do with the carrier wave, not any set number of pixels. Typically the resolution of a particular set is measured in the number of concentric circles that can clearly be shown.