Fscking idiot. Where exactly did I say I was ignoring any rules? Oh wait, you mean the bit where I said I read books? Where were the rules about that again?
If you're not doing anything wrong, why get all strung up on the so
called invasion of your privacy?
Because what I consider wrong, and what the law considers wrong are sometimes at odds, the law frequently changes, so what isn't wrong today might be wrong tomorrow, and because what I consider wrong and what the public at large considers wrong are more frequently at odds.
If I want to buy books about growing pot or what the LSD experience is like or how to pilot a 777, it's nobody's goddamn business. If I use that information to do something illegal, then and only then does it become anyone else's business. I don't need to be harassed because I am interested in out-of-the mainstream activities, and that interest is no one's business unless it leads to lawbreaking behavior.
Last time I checked, the charge to your card qualified as a receipt, since you have evidence of the purchase on your statement. It works that way for all the legal nightmares of work reimbursement, I'd think it'd work elsewhere.
Uh, since you bought the DVD's I'd say it sounds an awful lot like you owned them; which means if the mailman was stealing, you should be able to get the police to return your stolen property, or sue the boy for the price of what he stole.
How much C++ is used in a transparent, free roaming over the web fashion? C# and Java are the obvious competitors for the space we're discussing, C++ is irrelevant.
It's not the program so much as the environment that he's concerned about. Ok, so the language lets you write unsafe code. Whoopty. Except you're passing that code around the.NET environment where it could do some really nasty things if you aren't careful.
The fallacy in your argument is that for every 10 developers who are working to write secure code (whether in a safe or unsafe language) there are at least 1 or 2 crackers working specifically to exploit how the code and the environment it runs in are unsafe. C# inherently makes this easier than java. Why would anyone allow.NET/C# code run on their machine is a mystery, because given Microsoft's track record, it seems that it will likely be yet another fruitful petri dish for crackers.
This is why I pitch a royal bitch about most certification and security analyses... they are testing things that are
not a part of the CORE OS. and therefore are meking everything a mess.
I think you're on the wrong track here. The point of a security certification is to assure that the SYSTEM (not just the OS, not just one app) is secure or not. EVERYTHING that is going to be run in production needs to be tested together, otherwise the test is worthless. On the other token, if some scam artist is testing things that you know AREN'T going to be run in production, you should flag them as the charlatan they are.
There's a lot more to life than being 'intellectually stimulated'. Playing outside exercises ALL of the body, including your brain (it doesn't take book learnin but it definitely takes smarts to play ball and win; even just wandering through the woods exposes you to a lot of reality that helps you know more about the world). Seems to me this is common sense, and doesn't need a scientific study any more than the recent "Smog causes Athsma" silliness.
which part of "being on standby for phone support" is remotely like "being on site in 15 minutes"? Or is there some other meaning of "be there in 15 minutes" that is outside the normal understanding of what you mean?
I know that Oracle has phone support, but that's not what the original claim was, as I read it.
I never said Linux was obsolete. I think Linux is great, and it has its place; when people try to tell me ridiculous reasons that they think Solaris is superior to Linux I laugh at them. But I don't use an industrial laser cutter to make woodshop projects, and I don't use my miter saw to try and make automobiles.
I am very confident saying that Sun will be out of business before Linux replaces Solaris.
Right. HP-UX and SCO are such enormously scalable OS', and SGI is really healthy right now.
As for IBM, if they want to abandon their Unix, more power to them. Until Linus gives up his bias against "big iron" Linux is never gonna scale for sh!t compared to Solaris.
"Most Oracle users don't use Sun Servers for moderate database requirements. They use Sun Servers when they need something you can scale the hell out of. Linux is nice but will *never* replace SunOS on Sparc."
You don't fucking get it with Oracle either. As someone who has had to try to coordinate my own (hardware/OS) support with Oracle for my customers, I can guarantee you that Oracle does not have someone "there" in 15 minutes.
This is not meant to be against Oracle, I can't be there in 15 minutes 90% of the time either, but geezus. If you're going to make the "support" argument, at least use some real world numbers.
My wife installed AudioGalaxy last summer, and we just went looking for any signs of this vx2 software on her machine and found nothing. I wonder if there's any data on what the window was that it was being bundled with AG?
(of course this begs the question of whether "regulation" "infringes" on the right to keep and bear Arms, and I'll give you different answers on different days, so I won't even try to be definitive).
The way I read this is as follows. There are two parts, the justification (the necessity of militia for the security of the state) and the actual statement. The actual statement is clearly "The right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed." No matter what the justification is, I don't see how you can contravene this basic statement without another amendment.
All you have to do is look closely at some of the more ridiculous decisions by the conservative side of the Supreme Court over the last 30 years to see the lie in your claim that "what the law ought to be" will be consistent with strict constructionist principles.
Strict constructionists are just like fundamentalist Christians, in that they will justify any behavior they think they ought within the confines of some amazingly narrow interpretation of their source material. And as I said before, I don't mean this criticism to allow the other side off the hook for their own failings. There are times when I agree with the rulings of either side of this issue, but such agreement is generally in spite of the avowed legal philosophy behind the rulings, rather than because of.
I have more sympathy for strict constructionism, but since it is so rarely (i.e. never to my knowledge) practiced with any consistency, I have no respect for those who use it to justify things that seem to me clearly ridiculous. Sadly I have to go to work shortly so I don't have time to dig up the specific examples right now.
I will now answer my own question. Mighta been nice for an editor to try this themself.... The release dates and cities are here and are for LA, NYC, San Francisco, Chicago, Pasadena, and Vancouver. Of course, only one theater is listed for each city, and the SF listing doesn't even have that info.
It's worth noting that there is really no such thing as a "strict constructionist interpretation of the Consitution". In every instance I can think of, the "strict constructionist" starts with a belief about what the law OUGHT to say, and then proceeds to find sections of the constitution that can be narrowly construed to mean what they want. Never mind precedent, other parts of the constitution, etc.
To be fair, this is only in stark contrast to the other type of interpretation of the constitution, where the justice will start with a belief about what the law OUGHT to say, and the proceeds to find sections of the constitution that can be broadly inferred to mean what they want. Never mind precendent, other parts of the constitution, etc.
Shredded mail? How often does that really happen, I mean really...
About once a month, because the mail delivery person tries to carelessly shove 4 or 5 catalogs (that I haven't even requested) through the mail slot along with a magazine that I'm subscribed to. About half the time the magazine is on the outside of the bundle and is the thing that gets shredded. Complaints get me nowhere.
I didn't say my mail was shredded before delivery, it's shredded DURING delivery.
Slashdot Mirror
Fscking idiot. Where exactly did I say I was ignoring any rules? Oh wait, you mean the bit where I said I read books? Where were the rules about that again?
Because what I consider wrong, and what the law considers wrong are sometimes at odds, the law frequently changes, so what isn't wrong today might be wrong tomorrow, and because what I consider wrong and what the public at large considers wrong are more frequently at odds.
If I want to buy books about growing pot or what the LSD experience is like or how to pilot a 777, it's nobody's goddamn business. If I use that information to do something illegal, then and only then does it become anyone else's business. I don't need to be harassed because I am interested in out-of-the mainstream activities, and that interest is no one's business unless it leads to lawbreaking behavior.
Last time I checked, the charge to your card qualified as a receipt, since you have evidence of the purchase on your statement. It works that way for all the legal nightmares of work reimbursement, I'd think it'd work elsewhere.
Uh, since you bought the DVD's I'd say it sounds an awful lot like you owned them; which means if the mailman was stealing, you should be able to get the police to return your stolen property, or sue the boy for the price of what he stole.
The review site linked in the main story comments that there is supposed to now be a Massachusetts distribution center, i.e. one on the east coast.
How much C++ is used in a transparent, free roaming over the web fashion? C# and Java are the obvious competitors for the space we're discussing, C++ is irrelevant.
The fallacy in your argument is that for every 10 developers who are working to write secure code (whether in a safe or unsafe language) there are at least 1 or 2 crackers working specifically to exploit how the code and the environment it runs in are unsafe. C# inherently makes this easier than java. Why would anyone allow .NET/C# code run on their machine is a mystery, because given Microsoft's track record, it seems that it will likely be yet another fruitful petri dish for crackers.
Perhaps your perceived bias against Creationists is a product of the author, not the scientists?
I think you're on the wrong track here. The point of a security certification is to assure that the SYSTEM (not just the OS, not just one app) is secure or not. EVERYTHING that is going to be run in production needs to be tested together, otherwise the test is worthless. On the other token, if some scam artist is testing things that you know AREN'T going to be run in production, you should flag them as the charlatan they are.
There's a lot more to life than being 'intellectually stimulated'. Playing outside exercises ALL of the body, including your brain (it doesn't take book learnin but it definitely takes smarts to play ball and win; even just wandering through the woods exposes you to a lot of reality that helps you know more about the world). Seems to me this is common sense, and doesn't need a scientific study any more than the recent "Smog causes Athsma" silliness.
I know that Oracle has phone support, but that's not what the original claim was, as I read it.
I am very confident saying that Sun will be out of business before Linux replaces Solaris.
2) How many individual system images?
3) How many sysadmins?
Hell, you can scale windows horizontally....
As for IBM, if they want to abandon their Unix, more power to them. Until Linus gives up his bias against "big iron" Linux is never gonna scale for sh!t compared to Solaris.
Isn't this fun?
This is not meant to be against Oracle, I can't be there in 15 minutes 90% of the time either, but geezus. If you're going to make the "support" argument, at least use some real world numbers.
My wife installed AudioGalaxy last summer, and we just went looking for any signs of this vx2 software on her machine and found nothing. I wonder if there's any data on what the window was that it was being bundled with AG?
(of course this begs the question of whether "regulation" "infringes" on the right to keep and bear Arms, and I'll give you different answers on different days, so I won't even try to be definitive).
The way I read this is as follows. There are two parts, the justification (the necessity of militia for the security of the state) and the actual statement. The actual statement is clearly "The right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed." No matter what the justification is, I don't see how you can contravene this basic statement without another amendment.
Strict constructionists are just like fundamentalist Christians, in that they will justify any behavior they think they ought within the confines of some amazingly narrow interpretation of their source material. And as I said before, I don't mean this criticism to allow the other side off the hook for their own failings. There are times when I agree with the rulings of either side of this issue, but such agreement is generally in spite of the avowed legal philosophy behind the rulings, rather than because of.
I have more sympathy for strict constructionism, but since it is so rarely (i.e. never to my knowledge) practiced with any consistency, I have no respect for those who use it to justify things that seem to me clearly ridiculous. Sadly I have to go to work shortly so I don't have time to dig up the specific examples right now.
I will now answer my own question. Mighta been nice for an editor to try this themself.... The release dates and cities are here and are for LA, NYC, San Francisco, Chicago, Pasadena, and Vancouver. Of course, only one theater is listed for each city, and the SF listing doesn't even have that info.
So where are the locations? I see nothing in the Yahoo review that talks about how limited or not the release is.
To be fair, this is only in stark contrast to the other type of interpretation of the constitution, where the justice will start with a belief about what the law OUGHT to say, and the proceeds to find sections of the constitution that can be broadly inferred to mean what they want. Never mind precendent, other parts of the constitution, etc.
Why is this insightful? Scott said "at least one" which is not the same thing as "only one".
About once a month, because the mail delivery person tries to carelessly shove 4 or 5 catalogs (that I haven't even requested) through the mail slot along with a magazine that I'm subscribed to. About half the time the magazine is on the outside of the bundle and is the thing that gets shredded. Complaints get me nowhere.
I didn't say my mail was shredded before delivery, it's shredded DURING delivery.