Who is really REALLY afriad of a "national emergency" that requires a "temporary extension of the current administration" happening in the next year or so?
Why bother? Just get another tool to be the affable, electable front man for the same cabal of puppetmasters that works across the street. It's not like there's term limits or Senate confirmation for the White House Chief of Staff.
And if your tool isn't more affable or electable than the Democrat, just get a no-bid contract for some Diebold voting machines. American Democracy(tm) is preserved for another four years!
Bush and the governor of my home state are the best two reasons for parliamentary government in the United States I can think of.
They can't make you testify to your password, if revealing your password incriminates you.
I imagine they could.* Because unless the string of your password is "On November 13th, I mollsted little Jimmy Robinson at his home in Flint." the password itself isn't incriminating. The fact that it's the only thing standing between police and incriminating information is irrelevant. The same way that unless you're a wanted fugitive, you can't plead the Fifth when police ask for your name or ID.
Hell, the Fifth Amendment, by its own terms only applies to sworn testimony of a defendant in open court. Miranda and the rest of Fifth Amendment case law are prophylactics (the Court's word, not mine) designed to keep an investigation or trial from getting to the point of people having to plead the Fifth in open court and in doing so implicitly admit guilt.
* But I won't be a lawyer until November and that's if I just passed the bar exam I took this week.
I wonder how much of this perception is due to teenagers primarily having access to e-mail by way of web-based mail services because they can get those independent of their parents and/or for free.
I mean, yeah you can POP or IMAP gmail and hotmail and their ilk if you want to download a mail client your parents could break into, then learn how to set it up and possibly even pay a $20 per month or year or whatever for the privilege. If you're -- *ugh* a *total* geek -- maybe you can get a shell account from the guy who used to run the local BBS.
Otherwise, kids won't have access to all the features of e-mail, and more importantly peers who regularly use e-mail until college. And even then, unless you learn how to set up a mail client or get Daddy or IT to do it for you you'll still have a cumbersome and less-than-full-featured experience of e-mail by using the university's webmail if they offer it.
I think they slipped through an Adobe Reader sploit publishing PDF files ostensibly containing smoking-gun info on damning privacy abuses that was submitted to a big tech blog populated by privacy enthusiasts.
Oh! Crap!
By the way, I hope there was more on his page to constitute a bomb threat than that picture in his profile. I never knew it was a crime to root for Wile E. Coyote over the Road Runner.
Most people who immigrate illegally don't do so because they're the international equivalent of kleptomaniacs, driven by the rush of doing something antisocial and avoiding getting caught. They do it because we've set the supply of appropriate visas for particular countries so far below demand.
Racist means believing some races are better than others. Which was the stated reason behind our immigration policy for decades. Back when it was "kool" to be in the Klan. We first started imposing limits on how many people could immigrate from particular countries to keep out the Chinese in the late 1800's. Because of political upheaval over there, the number of Chinese in the U.S. doubled from 1870 - 1880. And they didn't fit the domestic racial paradigm of White vs. Negro. Our subsequent quota system worked to keep out as many people who weren't Western European Protestants as possible until rather recently.
Our immigration laws aren't nearly as insidious as they once were. But even today, our immigration laws limit overland immigration and set flat world-wide ceilings, both giving priority to relatives of recent legal immigrants. Which is all well and good until you consider how neatly it perpetuates previous blatantly racist policies through seemingly color-blind language.
We could end illegal immigration tomorrow by, as the original poster suggested, not denying so many visa applications from law-abiding foreign nationals looking to emigrate.
We just want a name and simple background check. We are not bigots. Hell, for that matter, I feel the immigration quota should be raised to the number of estimated illegals in the country. What is it, 12,000,000. The number of legal immigrants is capped at 250,000. That's a joke! NO wonder there are so many illegals!
I think there'd be a lot more room to negotiate and a lot less name-calling if more people on the anti-amnesty, stronger-enforcement side would put artificial restrictions on legal immigration up on the table. But they haven't. Even most people on the pro-amnesty, immigrant rights side won't reconsider the racist quotas and sponsorship requirements we have.
It sounds like "vibrant" to them simply means over-saturated. It wouldn't be difficult to tweak ANY of the images to be more "vibrant".
It's really impossible to tell which photo more faithfully reproduces the actual scene, without seeing it in person. The Nokia may work well on animation colors, but if people come out high-contrast, looking more like cartoons, it's not a good camera
A decade ago, Fujifilm was beating the pants off of Kodak in the consumer (not necessarily professional) market segment precisely because it yielded more-saturated-than-real-life prints when developed.
People want their memories, er, pictures to look like they were taken in full sun even if it was really lit by tungsten filament. Professionals and enthusiasts would rather take the picture accurately, and wait to see if gussying it up in Photoshop is absolutely necessary.
the problem with people, especially on slashdot, is technophilia: we are always trying, almost fetishistically, to mechanize processes, even if they don't need to be. in most cases, this fetishism is harmless. but when faith in democracy is on the line, our technophilia needs to take a hike
I think this may be the one issue where the slashdot consensus is ludditism. I don't think I've seen a comment let alone a story that supports the efforts of commercial vote-by-computer proposals. And when stories pop out that proposing non-commercial computer voting methods, they are regarded with due skepticism.
A lot of people here want to roll it all the way back to pen on paper counted by hand, except when adaptive technologies are absolutely necessary.
So many Web 2.0 apps seem like a natural fit for use on mobile phones -- more so, in fact, than the PCs they were written for.... Frankly, I wonder why anyone would even want to use them while sitting at a desk.
Eh... I figure if Sir David had been the star of a weekly cable show in his 30's and 40's he'd have been just as wild and crazy... "This is perhaps the only time that you will ever see a sloth in a hurry."
And if Steve had made it into his 60's he probably would have mellowed out. *sniff*
I like 'em both.
It'll be interesting to see if the former will have anything to say.
By my calculations that means that congressmen can be bought for less than $400K. My, my, my what an insanely great ROI.
That's all well and good, but you need to buy more than one to do anything. Maybe not a sure-fire majority in all cases (that'd amount to over $120B), but even one from each side in the House and the Senate -- so your legislation will have bi-partisan(tm) support -- gets you over $1.5M.
So, now the Pirate Bay can be locked up for breaking U.S. copyright law, but we can claim Swedish law as a defense? Time to start sending my own hillarious kiss-off letters to Time-Warner Music.
So yeah, there is more crap. It's inevitable. But also, there is a higher percentage of crap because the forces that cull lower quality are also weaker.
So now it should be, "ninety-two percent of everything is crap"
Funny, I always thought that Trusted Computing was a means of Microsoft (or, in fact, any of the software/hardware vendors) being able to say, "Oh, they're running something we don't want them running" and disable it. Trusted Computing is WGA at the hardware level. Except *worse*.
As it relates to mass-market computers for consumers, yes. There, the vendor (and potentially, the vendor's business partners) has the keys and keeps them from the purchaser of the computer. In this case, the Army (purchaser) will have the keys to its machines, and can use them to idiot-proof the computers from the end users: soldiers, who wouldn't be in a position to get tech help if their new GPS/pda/radio/rifle convergence device stopped working because they loaded a trojan onto it thinking it was H0t 13zB1an F1hGt00r p1L07z!!!
That part isn't bad in itself; that's what trusted computing is supposed to be about. Idiot-proofing mission-critical computers that aren't going to be used by system admins, I mean. Though some lesbian fighter pilot porn would be good, too. Hell, why not real lesbian fighter pilots, while we're thinking about it.
The problem is, getting the chip makers into mass production means we're that much closer to having it forced on mass-market computers. So even if we could get our hands on some lesbian fighter pilot porn, we wouldn't want to watch it, because it might offer Microsoft or Pat Robertson or whoever has the "keys" to our computer the reason they need to turn our five-hundred dollar machine into an incriminating doorstop.
Sincere answer: because these laptops, if produced in sufficiently large quantities will allegedly only cost $100 apiece.
Cynical answer: because the corporate sponsors of the program are seeking to create a user base for Linux in the developing world, where they aren't subject to a Windows monopoly over software that can run on their hardware, or an Apple monopoly over hardware that doesn't need MS software.
More to the point, several developed countries (like India, actually) are federal, with education handled by the sub-national governments and local entities. So pointing to national governments is a bit misleading. While no U.S. state is planning to give its kids hand-crank powered laptops, Maine is trying to get iBooks into the hands of all its junior high students.
Of course, I'm still skeptical about the usefulness of computers to small children in general, and at students' classroom desks in higher grades.
Re:missing part of the mod: transparent hand
on
Output Mouse
·
· Score: 3, Funny
Like so many mods: It's as awesome as it is useless!
The mouse, I mean. Not a transparent hand. I can think of some ways that'd be useful. Especially if it was really transparent. But even if it just showed all the bones and muscles and blood vessels, you could still gross people out.
Seeing this fake coloring book about lawyers, and then reading that makes me think that's great "story" for a similarly fake childrens' book about what's going on. Might get a couple people to care.
But if we take away standby -- which draws 2W -- there's gonna be some idiots who leave their TV's outright on, drawing... I don't know... say, 150W because they can't turn it back on with the remote. If only one television in fifty is owned by somebody that freakin' lazy, we come out losing in the end.
Slashdot Mirror
Why bother? Just get another tool to be the affable, electable front man for the same cabal of puppetmasters that works across the street. It's not like there's term limits or Senate confirmation for the White House Chief of Staff.
And if your tool isn't more affable or electable than the Democrat, just get a no-bid contract for some Diebold voting machines. American Democracy(tm) is preserved for another four years!
Bush and the governor of my home state are the best two reasons for parliamentary government in the United States I can think of.
I imagine they could.* Because unless the string of your password is "On November 13th, I mollsted little Jimmy Robinson at his home in Flint." the password itself isn't incriminating. The fact that it's the only thing standing between police and incriminating information is irrelevant. The same way that unless you're a wanted fugitive, you can't plead the Fifth when police ask for your name or ID.
Hell, the Fifth Amendment, by its own terms only applies to sworn testimony of a defendant in open court. Miranda and the rest of Fifth Amendment case law are prophylactics (the Court's word, not mine) designed to keep an investigation or trial from getting to the point of people having to plead the Fifth in open court and in doing so implicitly admit guilt.
* But I won't be a lawyer until November and that's if I just passed the bar exam I took this week.
I wonder how much of this perception is due to teenagers primarily having access to e-mail by way of web-based mail services because they can get those independent of their parents and/or for free.
I mean, yeah you can POP or IMAP gmail and hotmail and their ilk if you want to download a mail client your parents could break into, then learn how to set it up and possibly even pay a $20 per month or year or whatever for the privilege. If you're -- *ugh* a *total* geek -- maybe you can get a shell account from the guy who used to run the local BBS.
Otherwise, kids won't have access to all the features of e-mail, and more importantly peers who regularly use e-mail until college. And even then, unless you learn how to set up a mail client or get Daddy or IT to do it for you you'll still have a cumbersome and less-than-full-featured experience of e-mail by using the university's webmail if they offer it.
I think they slipped through an Adobe Reader sploit publishing PDF files ostensibly containing smoking-gun info on damning privacy abuses that was submitted to a big tech blog populated by privacy enthusiasts.
Oh! Crap!
By the way, I hope there was more on his page to constitute a bomb threat than that picture in his profile. I never knew it was a crime to root for Wile E. Coyote over the Road Runner.
But how else are the Chinese restaurants going to justify the three-partition styrofoam plate format?
Nah. They'd claim to own the copyright on static, too.
Most people who immigrate illegally don't do so because they're the international equivalent of kleptomaniacs, driven by the rush of doing something antisocial and avoiding getting caught. They do it because we've set the supply of appropriate visas for particular countries so far below demand.
Racist means believing some races are better than others. Which was the stated reason behind our immigration policy for decades. Back when it was "kool" to be in the Klan. We first started imposing limits on how many people could immigrate from particular countries to keep out the Chinese in the late 1800's. Because of political upheaval over there, the number of Chinese in the U.S. doubled from 1870 - 1880. And they didn't fit the domestic racial paradigm of White vs. Negro. Our subsequent quota system worked to keep out as many people who weren't Western European Protestants as possible until rather recently.
Our immigration laws aren't nearly as insidious as they once were. But even today, our immigration laws limit overland immigration and set flat world-wide ceilings, both giving priority to relatives of recent legal immigrants. Which is all well and good until you consider how neatly it perpetuates previous blatantly racist policies through seemingly color-blind language.
We could end illegal immigration tomorrow by, as the original poster suggested, not denying so many visa applications from law-abiding foreign nationals looking to emigrate.
I think there'd be a lot more room to negotiate and a lot less name-calling if more people on the anti-amnesty, stronger-enforcement side would put artificial restrictions on legal immigration up on the table. But they haven't. Even most people on the pro-amnesty, immigrant rights side won't reconsider the racist quotas and sponsorship requirements we have.
Go figure.
A decade ago, Fujifilm was beating the pants off of Kodak in the consumer (not necessarily professional) market segment precisely because it yielded more-saturated-than-real-life prints when developed.
People want their memories, er, pictures to look like they were taken in full sun even if it was really lit by tungsten filament. Professionals and enthusiasts would rather take the picture accurately, and wait to see if gussying it up in Photoshop is absolutely necessary.
I think this may be the one issue where the slashdot consensus is ludditism. I don't think I've seen a comment let alone a story that supports the efforts of commercial vote-by-computer proposals. And when stories pop out that proposing non-commercial computer voting methods, they are regarded with due skepticism.
A lot of people here want to roll it all the way back to pen on paper counted by hand, except when adaptive technologies are absolutely necessary.
Quoth the poster:
Because it's more fun than actually working.
Eh... I figure if Sir David had been the star of a weekly cable show in his 30's and 40's he'd have been just as wild and crazy... "This is perhaps the only time that you will ever see a sloth in a hurry."
And if Steve had made it into his 60's he probably would have mellowed out. *sniff*
I like 'em both.
It'll be interesting to see if the former will have anything to say.
And to think: the French thought there was no good reason for us to control Teh Intarwebs.
Or could they have wildcarded .cm already?
There's probably a joke about net neutrality in there, too. But it's too early / late for me to find it.
That's all well and good, but you need to buy more than one to do anything. Maybe not a sure-fire majority in all cases (that'd amount to over $120B), but even one from each side in the House and the Senate -- so your legislation will have bi-partisan(tm) support -- gets you over $1.5M.
So, now the Pirate Bay can be locked up for breaking U.S. copyright law, but we can claim Swedish law as a defense? Time to start sending my own hillarious kiss-off letters to Time-Warner Music.
Lukas Grunwald is a traitor for exposing weaknesses in our programs to keep Americans safe from Tara.
. . .
What do you mean: We can't arrest a German for treason against the United States?
*weee*EEEE*oooo*
Dammit, is this mic still on?
I didn't see the show, but it'd have been freaking hillarious if this had transpired on live t.v.
This isn't hacktivism, though... it's CYBERWARFARE!.
Why? I don't know.
So now it should be, "ninety-two percent of everything is crap"
As it relates to mass-market computers for consumers, yes. There, the vendor (and potentially, the vendor's business partners) has the keys and keeps them from the purchaser of the computer. In this case, the Army (purchaser) will have the keys to its machines, and can use them to idiot-proof the computers from the end users: soldiers, who wouldn't be in a position to get tech help if their new GPS/pda/radio/rifle convergence device stopped working because they loaded a trojan onto it thinking it was H0t 13zB1an F1hGt00r p1L07z!!!
That part isn't bad in itself; that's what trusted computing is supposed to be about. Idiot-proofing mission-critical computers that aren't going to be used by system admins, I mean. Though some lesbian fighter pilot porn would be good, too. Hell, why not real lesbian fighter pilots, while we're thinking about it.
The problem is, getting the chip makers into mass production means we're that much closer to having it forced on mass-market computers. So even if we could get our hands on some lesbian fighter pilot porn, we wouldn't want to watch it, because it might offer Microsoft or Pat Robertson or whoever has the "keys" to our computer the reason they need to turn our five-hundred dollar machine into an incriminating doorstop.
Sincere answer: because these laptops, if produced in sufficiently large quantities will allegedly only cost $100 apiece.
Cynical answer: because the corporate sponsors of the program are seeking to create a user base for Linux in the developing world, where they aren't subject to a Windows monopoly over software that can run on their hardware, or an Apple monopoly over hardware that doesn't need MS software.
More to the point, several developed countries (like India, actually) are federal, with education handled by the sub-national governments and local entities. So pointing to national governments is a bit misleading. While no U.S. state is planning to give its kids hand-crank powered laptops, Maine is trying to get iBooks into the hands of all its junior high students.
Of course, I'm still skeptical about the usefulness of computers to small children in general, and at students' classroom desks in higher grades.
Like so many mods: It's as awesome as it is useless!
The mouse, I mean. Not a transparent hand. I can think of some ways that'd be useful. Especially if it was really transparent. But even if it just showed all the bones and muscles and blood vessels, you could still gross people out.
Seeing this fake coloring book about lawyers, and then reading that makes me think that's great "story" for a similarly fake childrens' book about what's going on. Might get a couple people to care.
If only I could draw.
But if we take away standby -- which draws 2W -- there's gonna be some idiots who leave their TV's outright on, drawing... I don't know... say, 150W because they can't turn it back on with the remote. If only one television in fifty is owned by somebody that freakin' lazy, we come out losing in the end.