In theory, if yahoo was taken over by microsoft, microsoft would control more of the search engine world than google. Remember overture? that was bought out by yahoo and it was a strong competitor against google adsense. I def. do not think yahoo is worth that asking price....microsoft is agressivly trying to consolidate the web advertising market and level the field with google. Somehow...I dont see that happening.
There are many benefits to what google is doing...but pretty much anything they touch loses its virginity...I mean privacy. Thousands of private servers have been indexed on google becuase people dont understand the privacy issues created by indexing information (infact whenever I need the latest [INSERT SOFTWARE HERE] and I need good download speeds becuase torrents are too slow... I just google index of/[INSERT FILE FROM INSTALL HERE]. Most private servers are completly unaware they have been indexed. Google aspires to be an all-knowing thing. Guess what, if you know everything, theres nothing private about that. I believe that a centralized information resource such as google is on a fast track to dangerous. That indexed information should be deleted after a certain time.
The point I really wanted to make is not where MAD fails (it is effective), but the opportunity cost it has on defense. In my opinion, if we focused on anti-coercion measures to create an ideal defense infrastructure as much as the research we put into gaining an escalated advantage of the status-quo, we wouldn't have a crappy missle retaliation system that dosn't work. That is speculation, but at the same time the opportunity cost should not be ignored just becuase MAD remains effective. I believe a better system would focus on a defense-centric policy that could deter attacks in a way that would maintain the status-quo and render subsequent strikes as futile. A smaller offensive measure would be used for retaliation, but not with the intention of assured destruction. The small force would be used to strike back and wear the enemy down over repeated attacks since a defense-centric policy will allow enemies to launched repeated strikes knowing the counter attack will not be large. The goal of the defense-centric policy would be economic control of resources. Eventually the enemy will no longer be able to sustain an offense, in which the small counter force can now entirley destroy the enemy. So basically the longer the enemy attacks, the easier it will become for the counter force to destroy the enemy. Again, all speculation and opion. I know video game expirience isn't real-world credible but in Starcraft and Warcraft, this strategy dominated. It was the most effective in FFAs. BTW, a grammar tree?...that is...evil >=) (wh00ps that grammar sequence was the reformat command).;)
I commented above on the US official policy towards nuclear detterrence (MAD policy). There are several instances where MAD makes some pretty shaky assumptions. Most are common sense stuff at the bottom of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mutual_assured_destruction . No sources cited, but if you have ever play starcraft you will understand how regularly those assumptions DO FAIL., lol. For example, I always kept backup ghosts with a dropper, but whenever I got nuked, it was game over even if the second strike destroyed the enemy, the first strike always had a greater chance of deterring an expected retaliation and prepared to rebuild accordingly. However, a defense-centric policy deterred first strikes. Too bad the US invests so much more in offense rather than defense). My point is, there are assumptions where deterrence does fail. That's why were so scared of Terrorists becuase MAD cannot be applied to them since they do not view their destruction as a reason NOT to attack. There are instances where infrastructure has failed and was ONLY dettered through insubordnation of foriegn policy (see Petroc's case). Is it science...no. Is it politics, clearly.
Don't take my posts literally; it's just code to control my botnet.
That's one of most clever sigs I've seen (prob becuase I too control my botnets with slashdot postings). EXEC jhsad34287Kjfa;p_=234$ cmd.exe/c echo "no im just kidding....or am I?" END .
Back to the nukes. To comment on your point, what's even worse is that the US official foriegn policy is MAD (Mutually Assured Destruction, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mutual_assured_destruction). Not only does this contradict our species effort to surive, but it's like saying, since you punched me, I will punch you back just as hard. This is our defense strategy as opposed to focusing on efforts to block or dodge a punch. Instead of stockpiling nukes we could be using that opportunity cost for effective defense that does not cause esclation AND prevents a successful nuclear strike. Guess what, we have the MAD policy in place and completly neglect the figures...oh well I dont give a shit about resolving conflict, if you punch me in your face I'll hit you in your face until you pull your knife out, thats when I pull out my gun. MAD is the worst policy ever, we could have developed a force field if we didn't have to spend all of our resources on offense;)
I think the government could have just as easily chosen a library...they chose the Masque in order to strategically bring the public regularly into Masques. I suspect Indonesia (the people) might be practicing Islam with a "hands-off" approach and the government agenda is to "realign" the publics faith in favor of a more "hands-on" approach. The hands-off approach I'm talking about is similar to how Islam is practiced in a country like Turkey. Considering that the Turkish people interpret Ramadan "fasting" simply as not getting drunk for a while and cutting back on the smokes. Not to mention Turkey's unique Islamic practice of Topless nude beaches and the general public's CULT worship of metallica; It dosn't stop there...laws against wearing islamic clothing in public buildings to the point of such devotion that the Turkish public is currently impeaching their president for allowing headscarves in Turkish Universities. I think Indonesia is headed towards Turkish Islam and the government isn't ready for that kind of "hands off". Somtimes I wonder if Turkish people generally regard themselves as Islam as more of a "suicide bombing public insurance program".
It's a marketing ploy. They are trying to say to the world "ok we screwed up, look were already making a better one". By making it seem like they quickly fixed the "Vista" bug, it gives their consumers more confidence.
Google can't be trusted....I think it's stupid to store your most sensitive emails, conversations, and documents, on someone elses property. Use scroogle over an SSH tunnel, tor, or freenet. Any centralized organization that collects even the most unimportant data in mass amounts can turn that data into established paterns, habits, etc. Information they do NOT need to know about you. Augementation > Algorithm.
I concur, a similar instance would be the word "authentic" in the food industry. Most people use the word "authentic' to indicate that a meal is prepared similarly to where it would be prepared where the recipe originated. I just don't see how food in a box can be labeled authentic. Any alternate interpretations of the words seem to be redundant in describing the item...
Just like the phrase "easy to use", "authentic" seems to be so ambiguous in actual application that it only endures use for sensationalism (unless research backs it up).
They were decoys while I entered RPG code into the banks crappy AS400s. Now that money is no longer an obstacle, I can devote my full attention to training my clone. >=)
Network Admin? Nothing special here folks. I started programming in C when I was 9 . By the time I was in middle school I had installed custom written hacks on my public schools network and used the programs to inflate my reading score (we got scored for books we read). I then used my inflated score to purchase prize items. That way I wouldn't be bothered reading school material when I could read my LOTR, or Redwall. For every 11-year-old network admin there are 4 11 year old hackers inflating their reading grades. It's like a microcosm of the real world...
Slashdot Mirror
Open XChange trumps Citadel by a wide margin.
Our government is playing parent again...watch out nanny net is coming!
In theory, if yahoo was taken over by microsoft, microsoft would control more of the search engine world than google. Remember overture? that was bought out by yahoo and it was a strong competitor against google adsense. I def. do not think yahoo is worth that asking price....microsoft is agressivly trying to consolidate the web advertising market and level the field with google. Somehow...I dont see that happening.
haha do you know somone named Adrian Wisernig? If so, tell him a random /. comment mentioned him.
We have one lie detection method that works 100% . It's called torture. Keep doing it and eventually you'll detect a lie.
Speaking of which...wikileaks.org just recieved the Scientology Thetan operating manual. Pretty scary stuff.
Although the FSM is awesome, I pray to Joe Peshi. He's gets it done.
There are many benefits to what google is doing...but pretty much anything they touch loses its virginity...I mean privacy. Thousands of private servers have been indexed on google becuase people dont understand the privacy issues created by indexing information (infact whenever I need the latest [INSERT SOFTWARE HERE] and I need good download speeds becuase torrents are too slow... I just google index of /[INSERT FILE FROM INSTALL HERE]. Most private servers are completly unaware they have been indexed. Google aspires to be an all-knowing thing. Guess what, if you know everything, theres nothing private about that. I believe that a centralized information resource such as google is on a fast track to dangerous. That indexed information should be deleted after a certain time.
The point I really wanted to make is not where MAD fails (it is effective), but the opportunity cost it has on defense. In my opinion, if we focused on anti-coercion measures to create an ideal defense infrastructure as much as the research we put into gaining an escalated advantage of the status-quo, we wouldn't have a crappy missle retaliation system that dosn't work. That is speculation, but at the same time the opportunity cost should not be ignored just becuase MAD remains effective. I believe a better system would focus on a defense-centric policy that could deter attacks in a way that would maintain the status-quo and render subsequent strikes as futile. A smaller offensive measure would be used for retaliation, but not with the intention of assured destruction. The small force would be used to strike back and wear the enemy down over repeated attacks since a defense-centric policy will allow enemies to launched repeated strikes knowing the counter attack will not be large. The goal of the defense-centric policy would be economic control of resources. Eventually the enemy will no longer be able to sustain an offense, in which the small counter force can now entirley destroy the enemy. So basically the longer the enemy attacks, the easier it will become for the counter force to destroy the enemy. Again, all speculation and opion. I know video game expirience isn't real-world credible but in Starcraft and Warcraft, this strategy dominated. It was the most effective in FFAs. ;)
BTW, a grammar tree?...that is...evil >=) (wh00ps that grammar sequence was the reformat command).
I commented above on the US official policy towards nuclear detterrence (MAD policy). There are several instances where MAD makes some pretty shaky assumptions. Most are common sense stuff at the bottom of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mutual_assured_destruction . No sources cited, but if you have ever play starcraft you will understand how regularly those assumptions DO FAIL., lol. For example, I always kept backup ghosts with a dropper, but whenever I got nuked, it was game over even if the second strike destroyed the enemy, the first strike always had a greater chance of deterring an expected retaliation and prepared to rebuild accordingly. However, a defense-centric policy deterred first strikes. Too bad the US invests so much more in offense rather than defense). My point is, there are assumptions where deterrence does fail. That's why were so scared of Terrorists becuase MAD cannot be applied to them since they do not view their destruction as a reason NOT to attack. There are instances where infrastructure has failed and was ONLY dettered through insubordnation of foriegn policy (see Petroc's case). Is it science...no. Is it politics, clearly.
That's one of most clever sigs I've seen (prob becuase I too control my botnets with slashdot postings). EXEC jhsad34287Kjfa;p_=234$ cmd.exe
Back to the nukes. To comment on your point, what's even worse is that the US official foriegn policy is MAD (Mutually Assured Destruction, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mutual_assured_destruction). Not only does this contradict our species effort to surive, but it's like saying, since you punched me, I will punch you back just as hard. This is our defense strategy as opposed to focusing on efforts to block or dodge a punch. Instead of stockpiling nukes we could be using that opportunity cost for effective defense that does not cause esclation AND prevents a successful nuclear strike. Guess what, we have the MAD policy in place and completly neglect the figures...oh well I dont give a shit about resolving conflict, if you punch me in your face I'll hit you in your face until you pull your knife out, thats when I pull out my gun. MAD is the worst policy ever, we could have developed a force field if we didn't have to spend all of our resources on offense
I think the government could have just as easily chosen a library...they chose the Masque in order to strategically bring the public regularly into Masques. I suspect Indonesia (the people) might be practicing Islam with a "hands-off" approach and the government agenda is to "realign" the publics faith in favor of a more "hands-on" approach. The hands-off approach I'm talking about is similar to how Islam is practiced in a country like Turkey. Considering that the Turkish people interpret Ramadan "fasting" simply as not getting drunk for a while and cutting back on the smokes. Not to mention Turkey's unique Islamic practice of Topless nude beaches and the general public's CULT worship of metallica; It dosn't stop there...laws against wearing islamic clothing in public buildings to the point of such devotion that the Turkish public is currently impeaching their president for allowing headscarves in Turkish Universities. I think Indonesia is headed towards Turkish Islam and the government isn't ready for that kind of "hands off". Somtimes I wonder if Turkish people generally regard themselves as Islam as more of a "suicide bombing public insurance program".
No they screwed up so bad they realized it needed a complete name change.
Yeah $2.6 million dollars? No problem, I have a couple of euros in my pocket....
It's a marketing ploy. They are trying to say to the world "ok we screwed up, look were already making a better one". By making it seem like they quickly fixed the "Vista" bug, it gives their consumers more confidence.
Im going to move to the UK just to be a part of that law suit. Sell outs, I'm going to pipe them to /dev/null
Google can't be trusted....I think it's stupid to store your most sensitive emails, conversations, and documents, on someone elses property. Use scroogle over an SSH tunnel, tor, or freenet. Any centralized organization that collects even the most unimportant data in mass amounts can turn that data into established paterns, habits, etc. Information they do NOT need to know about you. Augementation > Algorithm.
I think the OSS movement is strikingly similar to the free trade movement. Oh wait, we (the US) opposed Free Trade at first too...didn't we ;)
Looks like large software companies are playing government. Information should flow freely =)
I, for one, welcome our gambling overlords.
I concur, a similar instance would be the word "authentic" in the food industry. Most people use the word "authentic' to indicate that a meal is prepared similarly to where it would be prepared where the recipe originated. I just don't see how food in a box can be labeled authentic. Any alternate interpretations of the words seem to be redundant in describing the item...
Just like the phrase "easy to use", "authentic" seems to be so ambiguous in actual application that it only endures use for sensationalism (unless research backs it up).
sounds exactly like imeem.com
great...i get subcontracted a lot of their fed. work. =(
Anyone want to offer me a new job?
They were decoys while I entered RPG code into the banks crappy AS400s. Now that money is no longer an obstacle, I can devote my full attention to training my clone. >=)
Network Admin? Nothing special here folks. I started programming in C when I was 9 . By the time I was in middle school I had installed custom written hacks on my public schools network and used the programs to inflate my reading score (we got scored for books we read). I then used my inflated score to purchase prize items. That way I wouldn't be bothered reading school material when I could read my LOTR, or Redwall. For every 11-year-old network admin there are 4 11 year old hackers inflating their reading grades. It's like a microcosm of the real world...
Freelance online for experience and build a portfolio one project at a time. Stay away from .NET until you have mastered ASM .