I was tired of the "We use Macs because they don't get attacked by viruses and hackers" refrain from Mac nuts.
So what? I'm not a mac nut. If anything, I'm more partial to Linux, but I say the same thing. Is this guy trying to imply that anyone who cites this perfectly valid reason to prefer macs to PCs is a nut? Real mature.
I generally counter with what is apparently a secret carefully hidden from Mac zealots: "That's because only a fraction of the world uses Macs. What's the point of attacking a niche market? No one will notice!"
Actually, he's wrong. There are reasons beyond marketshare why macs are more secure than PCs, but frankly, who cares? When I go home at night, the last thing I want to do is spend my evening reinstalling my OS because my girlfriend clicked on a "see my vacation pictures" email. Fortunately, that's not something I've ever had to do. Whether that's because macs are more secure by design or because no one bothers to write virii for them really doesn't matter to me. All that does matter is that running my computer is a lot less of a pain in the ass.
So I am by no means a Windows apologist or Microsoft partisan.
So what? If your arguments were solid, it wouldn't matter if you were. If not, it also doesn't matter.
Ultimately, those on the Mac fringe have to face facts: Panther and Jaguar were not better at outrunning vulnerabilities than Windows.
Really? Got any evidence to back that up, mister ulanoff? Or is just this your expert opinion? Because I just read your bio, and I didn't see a damn thing that indicates you know architecture or the security implications of design choices from a goatse.cx post.
Bill O'Reilly just called, and he wants his credibility back.
Perhaps Sun should put some weight behind SWT if they want to regain trust in Java on the desktop. JFC is a nice GUI API, but unfortunately it turns out slug like apps which are inconsistent on every platform they run on.
Even better:
Perhaps Scott McNealy could put some effort into STFU if he wants Java to regain credibility at all. Java is a nice platform, but unfortuntely, it turns out to be Sun's tools in their irrationaly "let's bash Microsoft at all costs" strategy.
Thank you for that. Gradual transitions are pretty much accepted by science, and don't require miracles: something moderately useful can be selected for and adapted to high complexity very quickly *on the geological scale*. The difference from jumper to glider to flight isn't as big as the theologists would like you to believe. Good grief, we have flying fish, flying squirels and flying snakes. None of them actually fly (they glide) but if such diverse animals can independently become airborn, then it isn't much of a trick.
As was this:
Similarly, the eye is often brought up as "but it wouldn't work if all the parts weren't there". Light sensitivity is useful unto itself, and the individual steps are simple once you have light sensitivity. Shutters for the light sensitive areas? Optical concentration of light? Each can be created independently, but surely those who get the combinations right are more "fit".
Had you stopped there, you would have made an interesting and valid point about creationists. Alas, you proceed to destroy your credibility with an ad hominem attack:
Of course, creationists come from the same school of thought as radical religionists everywhere: "don't think, don't make progress and whatever you do, don't argue with us. God told us were right."
One could argue that you come from the same school as Slashdotters everywhere: "don't let your arguments speak for yourself; everyone who doesn't think exactly as you do is an idiot; and whatever you do, make sure your post includes at least one grammatical error". One could, but I won't.
Ummm..that may actually be the only part I agree with. It's basically saying that he shouldn't get any special treatment for publishing this discovery as an academic paper, rather than a less prestigious method. I totally agree. However, that statement, on its own, totally begs the question -- theft needs to be shown, and it's clear to anyone with half a clue that this student did not commit theft or piracy by publishing his findings. Further, this statement is irrelevent because Mr. Halderman is innocent of wrongdoing with or without any academic credentials.
Re:In the review summary
on
Beyond Fear
·
· Score: 1
So we have a reduction in income taxes, a removal of dividend taxes, all sorts of extensions to unemploymet insurance, and a crackdown on Wall Street corruption. What the hell else do you want?
Repeal of the freaking steel tariffs. They're killing manufacturing.
The author of that link seems to assume that tuition is meant to pay for education, even at large univerities such as MIT, rather than a piece of paper.
Don't assume that just because you didn't enjoy IJ, nobody would. That book was far from unreadable. Personally, I found IJ to be far more readable than a lot of books/.ers seem to like (The Illuminatus! Trilogy, Children of Dune). To each his own...My g/f and I got together over Infinite Jest, and we're both currently on our second read...what a joy it is to read!
Re:Other reviews by Timothy
on
Decipher
·
· Score: 1
You also fogot Mulholland Drive: umm.. umm... Diane.. um... hysterical old couple..
Of course, this will end up screwing the poor more than anyone else, of course, because payroll taxes aren't progressive - everyone pays the same percent no matter what.
Actually, it's worse than that. Payroll taxes are regressive. You only pay them on the first $87,000 of your salary.
RE: Joy Division -- they may be well produced, but consider how many people get hooked on them through their Still album. That album was horribly produced -- it contains a very poorly recorded, very powerful recording of their last concert. That band's mistakes were left as is, and Ian Curtis's voice sounds like shit (very distored at parts), but it's an incredibly powerful album that introduces a good many people to Joy Division.
Not true. You obviously aren't familiar with Frank Black and The Pixies -- that's where Cobain (and nearly every other decent rock band to come out of the early 90s) got his melodic mind.
Based on that, I'm assuming a more reasonable level of 20 hours of hacking a day (I *have* done this) that's 3.75 lines of code per hour or one per 16 seconds.
Get some sleep, dude. Your math's off. I hope you don't mix up i and j in a nested loop the same way you mix up hours and minutes.
Galaxy Quest has a pretty bad one -- and it's in the actual movie, not just the TV edit. There's a scene where Sigourney Weavery says "Screw that!" while her lips very obviously mouth the words "Fuck that!"
I just took a look at your website. Judging by the books you've written, it seems like you're skilled. I can't believe you're only charging $20/hr for consulting services... how do you eat?
You compress it, and then encrypt it, moron. If you'd read the friggin spec, you'd realize that XML Encryption doesn't *just* encrypt xml -- it's a way of embedding encryption information in your xml, to allow you to exchange between machines in a language and platform independent manner. You can use XML encryption to encrypt binary, data, even.
Slashdot Mirror
Sorry about switching from the third person to the second person. That was bad of me.
It wouldn't be as bad if it didn't stink of shit.
I was tired of the "We use Macs because they don't get attacked by viruses and hackers" refrain from Mac nuts.
So what? I'm not a mac nut. If anything, I'm more partial to Linux, but I say the same thing. Is this guy trying to imply that anyone who cites this perfectly valid reason to prefer macs to PCs is a nut? Real mature.
I generally counter with what is apparently a secret carefully hidden from Mac zealots: "That's because only a fraction of the world uses Macs. What's the point of attacking a niche market? No one will notice!"
Actually, he's wrong. There are reasons beyond marketshare why macs are more secure than PCs, but frankly, who cares? When I go home at night, the last thing I want to do is spend my evening reinstalling my OS because my girlfriend clicked on a "see my vacation pictures" email. Fortunately, that's not something I've ever had to do. Whether that's because macs are more secure by design or because no one bothers to write virii for them really doesn't matter to me. All that does matter is that running my computer is a lot less of a pain in the ass.
So I am by no means a Windows apologist or Microsoft partisan.
So what? If your arguments were solid, it wouldn't matter if you were. If not, it also doesn't matter.
Ultimately, those on the Mac fringe have to face facts: Panther and Jaguar were not better at outrunning vulnerabilities than Windows.
Really? Got any evidence to back that up, mister
ulanoff? Or is just this your expert opinion? Because I just read your bio, and I didn't see a damn thing that indicates you know architecture or the security implications of design choices from a goatse.cx post.
Bill O'Reilly just called, and he wants his credibility back.
Perhaps Sun should put some weight behind SWT if they want to regain trust in Java on the desktop. JFC is a nice GUI API, but unfortunately it turns out slug like apps which are inconsistent on every platform they run on.
Even better:
Perhaps Scott McNealy could put some effort into STFU if he wants Java to regain credibility at all. Java is a nice platform, but unfortuntely, it turns out to be Sun's tools in their irrationaly "let's bash Microsoft at all costs" strategy.
Q: How many frat boys does it take to screw in a light-bulb?
A: Frat boys don't screw in light-bulbs. They screw in puddles of vomit.
I would like to meet this "Tammy" to determine if she is as easy as you say.
nice sig dude
This was a good post.
This was interesting:
Thank you for that. Gradual transitions are pretty much accepted by science, and don't require miracles: something moderately useful can be selected for and adapted to high complexity very quickly *on the geological scale*. The difference from jumper to glider to flight isn't as big as the theologists would like you to believe. Good grief, we have flying fish, flying squirels and flying snakes. None of them actually fly (they glide) but if such diverse animals can independently become airborn, then it isn't much of a trick.
As was this:
Similarly, the eye is often brought up as "but it wouldn't work if all the parts weren't there". Light sensitivity is useful unto itself, and the individual steps are simple once you have light sensitivity. Shutters for the light sensitive areas? Optical concentration of light? Each can be created independently, but surely those who get the combinations right are more "fit".
Had you stopped there, you would have made an interesting and valid point about creationists. Alas, you proceed to destroy your credibility with an ad hominem attack:
Of course, creationists come from the same school of thought as radical religionists everywhere: "don't think, don't make progress and whatever you do, don't argue with us. God told us were right."
One could argue that you come from the same school as Slashdotters everywhere: "don't let your arguments speak for yourself; everyone who doesn't think exactly as you do is an idiot; and whatever you do, make sure your post includes at least one grammatical error". One could, but I won't.
Ummm..that may actually be the only part I agree with. It's basically saying that he shouldn't get any special treatment for publishing this discovery as an academic paper, rather than a less prestigious method. I totally agree. However, that statement, on its own, totally begs the question -- theft needs to be shown, and it's clear to anyone with half a clue that this student did not commit theft or piracy by publishing his findings. Further, this statement is irrelevent because Mr. Halderman is innocent of wrongdoing with or without any academic credentials.
Nope.
So we have a reduction in income taxes, a removal of dividend taxes, all sorts of extensions to unemploymet insurance, and a crackdown on Wall Street corruption. What the hell else do you want?
Repeal of the freaking steel tariffs. They're killing manufacturing.
The author of that link seems to assume that tuition is meant to pay for education, even at large univerities such as MIT, rather than a piece of paper.
Sorry I was at a ball game all afternoon drinking beer.
Fuck it. Those bastards. Not getting any of my moneyl Fucking bastards. Fuck 'em all.
Don't assume that just because you didn't enjoy IJ, nobody would. That book was far from unreadable. Personally, I found IJ to be far more readable than a lot of books /.ers seem to like (The Illuminatus! Trilogy, Children of Dune). To each his own...My g/f and I got together over Infinite Jest, and we're both currently on our second read...what a joy it is to read!
You also fogot Mulholland Drive: umm.. umm... Diane.. um... hysterical old couple..
Of course, this will end up screwing the poor more than anyone else, of course, because payroll taxes aren't progressive - everyone pays the same percent no matter what.
Actually, it's worse than that. Payroll taxes are regressive. You only pay them on the first $87,000 of your salary.
RE: Joy Division -- they may be well produced, but consider how many people get hooked on them through their Still album. That album was horribly produced -- it contains a very poorly recorded, very powerful recording of their last concert. That band's mistakes were left as is, and Ian Curtis's voice sounds like shit (very distored at parts), but it's an incredibly powerful album that introduces a good many people to Joy Division.
Not true. You obviously aren't familiar with Frank Black and The Pixies -- that's where Cobain (and nearly every other decent rock band to come out of the early 90s) got his melodic mind.
And anyone who has no credit cards should consider themselves uncivilized.
Bullshit. From ESR's webpage: "I do not have a credit card. This is deliberate; I value my privacy."
whenYouCan(keepReferencingYourObjects)->LikeThi
This code is a horrible violation of the
Law of Demeter. If you're doing this, formatting is not your biggest concern.
Based on that, I'm assuming a more reasonable level of 20 hours of hacking a day (I *have* done this) that's 3.75 lines of code per hour or one per 16 seconds.
Get some sleep, dude. Your math's off. I hope you don't mix up i and j in a nested loop the same way you mix up hours and minutes.
Galaxy Quest has a pretty bad one -- and it's in the actual movie, not just the TV edit. There's a scene where Sigourney Weavery says "Screw that!" while her lips very obviously mouth the words "Fuck that!"
Good try, Robert Sanders. We're still not going to hire you.
I just took a look at your website. Judging by the books you've written, it seems like you're skilled. I can't believe you're only charging $20/hr for consulting services... how do you eat?
You compress it, and then encrypt it, moron. If you'd read the friggin spec, you'd realize that XML Encryption doesn't *just* encrypt xml -- it's a way of embedding encryption information in your xml, to allow you to exchange between machines in a language and platform independent manner. You can use XML encryption to encrypt binary, data, even.