Instead of "codec" in the above post, use "singing dancing ponies". The idea is, a codec was presented to the user as a necessary component for something he wanted to see or hear. The fact is, the codec itself was malware. And, the clueless consumer agrees to installation, and clicks through all of the OS's warnings about unsafe, unsigned, unauthorized, unwarranted, unwanted, unfit bullshit.
Yes, a codec with privileges WILL own a Mac, a Linux, a BSD, a Unix, or any other box.
But, few of us grant privileges to the shitware that Windows users commonly grant Admin rights to!
"In the jungle at night and you can hear the predators circling alone...."
Ah-ha-ha! Big belly laugh. You poor sod - you don't realize that you are NOT alone. All those XP and Win7 users without a clue are your fellow tribesmen! The predator isn't circling - he's crunching the bones of your tribesmen!! And, when the food runs out, and you're the only target left, rather than the toughest target, he'll be coming after you!
That's one good reason for using Linux, I guess. All the Windows tribe will be consumed and shat out before the predator looks very hard at us in the Linux tribe!
Uhhhhmmmm - I never did bash Comcast - but I'll admit that I thought they were probably being dicks when I read the story early this morning. Sorry, Comcast. I'll wait til you are bigger dicks before thinking bad things about you!
This is getting rather comical. My birth year is right there in my nick. Intel value? Maybe you need to look and see how much valuable intel we got from our waterboarding. Rummy can tell you better than that idiot Cheney, and his cheerleaders.
Or, maybe you think that Osama was going to surrender information with the "nice guy" approach? What was the nice guy going to offer him? A silk rope for his hanging? A nice pork pie for his last meal?
Interrogations in this country have gone to shit since the day Bush took office. I'm not sure there are enough people in power to ensure that proper interrogation techniques would be used on Osama. It would have likely been more of those silly-assed "enhanced interrogation" techniques that were used, and those yield complete garbage.
Phht. Whatever. Again, we got his hard drives, and his dead tree journals. Osama was very unlikely to contribute anything or value in person.
Good grief. What, exactly did you expect to do with him, anyway? Oh - I have an idea. Media circus, huge court circle jerk, more of the whooping and dancing in the streets by retards, a huge legal fight after he's found guilty about whether he should be executed, more media circus, and yet MORE media circus.
I have a better idea. Just get everyone together for some mutual masturbation. Same result, far less hassle.
Binny boy really gets to you, doesn't it? I could come up with a lot more that might bother you, too. Remember Slick Willy? Or, Herr Bush?
Oh - the "fucking idiot". Isn't it hard to keep the moral high ground while shouting "FUCKING IDIOT!!"???
If I recall correctly, the first viruses to ever exist were Unix viruses. And, if I recall correctly, there are a few dozen *nix viruses. If I strain my brain, I think that I can figure out how to stop them. "Don't install software from untrusted sources" takes care of most of them. "Never run as root" shoots down a few more. "Operate with minimum permissions possible" takes care of a couple more. Hmmmm. How 'bout "Pretty ponies are fake!"? That should about take care of *nix viruses.
How many Windows viruses are there?
Now, if you want another comparison that might be more "fair" - you might consider "exploits". There are a lot of *nix exploits out there, aside from social engineering and phishing. You should investigate some of them, and see how easy it is to hack my Unix-like machine. Yeah, you can do it - but you'll work your ass off. First, you'll have to pretty much guess which OS I'm using this week, and which kernel it is using this week, take another guess about the software installed, then which versions are installed, then you'll have to try to figure out whether my versions are patched against the exploits you have in mind. Have fun exploiting my systems! Security through obscurity may not be the best answer in the world - but it is an answer!!!
We got his hard drives. We got his journals. We got his live-in courier. We got damned near everything. Alright - so he might have taken a couple secrets to the bottom of the ocean with him. Phht. Calm down, son.
And, yes, Binny Boy. What? Do you have a copyright or trademark right to that name, or what?
Agree, with your post, and with the Vatican's statement.
In real life, I knew a guy who really needed killing. I spent a couple years contemplating the deed. He almost gave me enough justification a couple times. (No, I won't go into details - I'd be typing all day!" The old bastard finally died. It was sobering. I felt kinda good, but there wasn't any singing and dancing. And, I never have gone to the cemetery to piss on his grave, like I promised him that I would do.
Satisfaction is enough. Rejoicing is just - I dunno - ignorance? hubris? stupid? bestial? savage? My education is lacking, I just can't come up with the right word.
All I can say is, "Bring it on!" I'm not the juvenile who once thought it necessary to go out in a blaze of glory, but I'm not a doddering old codger who is going to just fall over for you either.;^)
Allow me to point out that the Nuremburg trials weren't exactly United States trials. I've never looked into the composition of the courts, the witnesses, the advocates/lawyers/advisers, or anything, but I believe that everything was done by people from around the world, under international law. The US may have had (undoubtady DID) a leading role in the trials, but they weren't US courts, held by US judges, and decided under US law.
"isn't a free nation of laws suppose to hold the law above all risks?"
Sorry, but you have the wrong terminology, which places the wrong emphasis on the law. Had you put the word "reasonable" in there, then I could agree with you.
"isn't a free nation of laws suppose to hold the law above all reasonable risks?"
That one word has meant the difference between life and death for uncountable men and women who have been put on trial. But, outside the court rooms, that word takes on a whole new meaning. What is reasonable? Is it reasonable to expect the US to stage what would turn into the most expensive trial in history, for the likes of Osama bin Laden? Is it reasonable to demand that the police, the military, and the justice department provide the necessary security for all persons involved in the trial? Is it reasonable to expect some dramatic strike or another someplace in the world against American interests during the trial?
Reasonable. No, I for one don't think that a trial would have been reasonable at all.
Yes, I agree with laxguy's statement about partying in the streets. When the ragheads - AHEM - Muslims danced in the streets after 9/11, we frowned on them, and named them animals, or worse. Then we take out one of theirs, and we behave in the same manner.
Me? I feel satisfaction that one of our enemies has been put down - but singing and dancing? Crap - I don't have time for that childishness.
Actually, you have something of a point there. From my point of view, Binny Boy needed killing, no matter what. If he had waved a white flag, and crawled out of the compound praising America, and kissed every Seal's ass in sight, he still needed killing. I don't care if it was an ordered assasination, or he went down fighting. It just makes no difference.
But, IF - and I stress IF - Binny was shot down like a rabid dog, then the US should have announced it in just those terms. There's no need to pull punches, gloss over the truth, or to sugar coat it. Just tell the world, "We killed the bastard, end of story!"
That's not terribly unfair a description. Yes, a lot of people join the military because they don't see any better options in life. No job, no scholarship, join the military, or go hungry, or stay in Mama's basement? And, corporate America is perfectly happy to push youngsters into that position, because the military, in almost all instances, is "protecting" corporate interests abroad.
Nice summary, and I mostly agree with you. However - you seem to sympathize with Private Manning, and I do not. More, Manning's detention has been characterized as for his self protection. I'm not real sure how much I believe that, but it's out there, and it's reasonable.
Before anyone gets the wrong idea, I support Wikileaks, and I also support Assange. Some people might not understand, but I detest manning for violating his oaths, general orders, and a myriad of orders from his superiors. On the other hand, Wikileaks is not subject to US law, they have no reason to display any kind of loyalty to the US. Wikileaks is doing what they are supposed to do, while Manning did not do what he is supposed to do.
Spot on. I can be characterized in a lot of ways, some complimentary, some not. But, I am what I am, and I like it. To hell with anyone who doesn't like it, LMAO!
Agreed. But, there isn't even a real correlation here.
"Robbins lists several companies—including Yahoo!—that prioritize hiring quirky individuals"
That is NOT a widespread practice. Most companies want - most companies DEMAND that you show up for work, do your job, and mostly go unnoticed. They don't want quirks. Author found a niche market for geeks with quirks, and he thinks that he has discovered something really noteworthy. Phhht.
2000 feet is rather close range. In fact, that is hailing distance today, even without a radio. It's much to close to allow potential hostiles. Anything within range of a mounted machine gun - an old Mk 2, or newer, is fair game to be blown out of the water.
I went looking for machine gun ranges, and found some cool numbers - but this little sweetheart would be perfect for the job! http://www.pcf45.com/misfire/mortar.html Incendiary rounds in the machine gun, and HE rounds with proximity fuses in the mortar - that will take care of anything the pirates are ever likely to own!!
Well, I won't convince anyone who doesn't want to be convinced - but you really should look into Somali history. You will note, I hope, that I have distinguished between the cultural levels of the two peoples. The Apache had a culture that was very much superior to that of the Somali. While the Apache seemed to be less "civilized" than some of the other American tribes - they undeniably had civilization. Nomads, on the other hand, lack almost everything that contributes to anything we might term "civilization". And, there you find the real differences between Somali warriors and Apache. One on one, or in small unit tactics, the great-great grandfathers of today's Somalis would very likely have held their own against the Apache.
Being intentionally obtuse wins no points with me. There is a tremendous difference between a defensive force stationed aboard a ship, and an offensive force intent on taking over a ship. If there is no other distinction that you are capable of grasping, then consider the INTENT of each force. The defensive force focused on surviving passage along the coast of Somalia with their possessions intact. The offensive force is intent on taking something that does not belong to them. It's as clear cut as any cops 'n robbers show on television. Somewhat good guys against evil sumbitches.
"The Apache were superb, truly skilled in tactics and in individual effectiveness."
Basically what I said. Superb fighters. Not great strategists, but superb fighters.
And, obviously, you are unaware of Somalian HISTORY. I DID NOT compare today's pirates to yesterday's Apache - I compared their HISTORY to the Apache. Did the Somali, or did the Somali not, beat the living shit out of the Brits, who had better technology, better logistics, and much more money to throw at the problem? Do you think that today's sorry excuses for pirates could have done that? I certainly don't think so.
Look past current events, and look at the race, culture, or ethnic group. Somalis have as good a history as FIGHTERS as the Apache, your personal pride and prejudices notwithstanding.
That said, I'll point to the fact that the Somali are basically a nomadic people, while the Apache are more agrarian, and far more civilized.
See, that's the problem. You see it as a legal problem, when in reality, it's a military problem. When the pirates are going about in armed vessels and attacking passersby, it's a military problem. It doesn't take a lawyer to understand that - it takes a lawyer to obfuscate it.
Oh - I'm sure those Navy lawyers are paid. I pay them, and so do you if you're an American citizen. I don't much like the idea of subsidizing lawyers who make a military problem more complex than it need be.
I have zero idea who AC is, or how truthful he is - but he describes the single best way to deal with pirates. Put a killer team on the lucrative targets, and kill the damned pirates when they get close enough. It works. No fuss, no muss, no repeat offenders, no fortunes spent on idiot lawyers.
We all know that our forces are hamstrung by "rules of engagement", yada yada yada. I'm in complete agreement with you. All the naval forces in the area - China, Spain, US, UK, France, ALL of them should be inspecting all boats and ships. When they find a band of men aboard a ship or boat who are armed, take them into custody and sink their boat, incarcerate them for a few years while one or another court system deals with them, and let them go when they are old men.
If anyone resists inspection or arrest, blow them away. Resistance includes fleeing, of course. Either it's 100% cooperation with the naval forces, or it's death, simple as that.
I've heard far to many bullshit ideas about "nonlethal" means of "repelling" pirates. That shit's for idiots without a clue!
Slashdot Mirror
*sigh*
Instead of "codec" in the above post, use "singing dancing ponies". The idea is, a codec was presented to the user as a necessary component for something he wanted to see or hear. The fact is, the codec itself was malware. And, the clueless consumer agrees to installation, and clicks through all of the OS's warnings about unsafe, unsigned, unauthorized, unwarranted, unwanted, unfit bullshit.
Yes, a codec with privileges WILL own a Mac, a Linux, a BSD, a Unix, or any other box.
But, few of us grant privileges to the shitware that Windows users commonly grant Admin rights to!
"In the jungle at night and you can hear the predators circling alone. ..."
Ah-ha-ha! Big belly laugh. You poor sod - you don't realize that you are NOT alone. All those XP and Win7 users without a clue are your fellow tribesmen! The predator isn't circling - he's crunching the bones of your tribesmen!! And, when the food runs out, and you're the only target left, rather than the toughest target, he'll be coming after you!
That's one good reason for using Linux, I guess. All the Windows tribe will be consumed and shat out before the predator looks very hard at us in the Linux tribe!
Uhhhhmmmm - I never did bash Comcast - but I'll admit that I thought they were probably being dicks when I read the story early this morning. Sorry, Comcast. I'll wait til you are bigger dicks before thinking bad things about you!
This is getting rather comical. My birth year is right there in my nick. Intel value? Maybe you need to look and see how much valuable intel we got from our waterboarding. Rummy can tell you better than that idiot Cheney, and his cheerleaders.
http://andrewsullivan.thedailybeast.com/2011/05/the-republican-spin.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed:+andrewsullivan/rApM+(The+Daily+Dish)
Or, maybe you think that Osama was going to surrender information with the "nice guy" approach? What was the nice guy going to offer him? A silk rope for his hanging? A nice pork pie for his last meal?
Interrogations in this country have gone to shit since the day Bush took office. I'm not sure there are enough people in power to ensure that proper interrogation techniques would be used on Osama. It would have likely been more of those silly-assed "enhanced interrogation" techniques that were used, and those yield complete garbage.
Phht. Whatever. Again, we got his hard drives, and his dead tree journals. Osama was very unlikely to contribute anything or value in person.
Good grief. What, exactly did you expect to do with him, anyway? Oh - I have an idea. Media circus, huge court circle jerk, more of the whooping and dancing in the streets by retards, a huge legal fight after he's found guilty about whether he should be executed, more media circus, and yet MORE media circus.
I have a better idea. Just get everyone together for some mutual masturbation. Same result, far less hassle.
Binny boy really gets to you, doesn't it? I could come up with a lot more that might bother you, too. Remember Slick Willy? Or, Herr Bush?
Oh - the "fucking idiot". Isn't it hard to keep the moral high ground while shouting "FUCKING IDIOT!!"???
If I recall correctly, the first viruses to ever exist were Unix viruses. And, if I recall correctly, there are a few dozen *nix viruses. If I strain my brain, I think that I can figure out how to stop them. "Don't install software from untrusted sources" takes care of most of them. "Never run as root" shoots down a few more. "Operate with minimum permissions possible" takes care of a couple more. Hmmmm. How 'bout "Pretty ponies are fake!"? That should about take care of *nix viruses.
How many Windows viruses are there?
Now, if you want another comparison that might be more "fair" - you might consider "exploits". There are a lot of *nix exploits out there, aside from social engineering and phishing. You should investigate some of them, and see how easy it is to hack my Unix-like machine. Yeah, you can do it - but you'll work your ass off. First, you'll have to pretty much guess which OS I'm using this week, and which kernel it is using this week, take another guess about the software installed, then which versions are installed, then you'll have to try to figure out whether my versions are patched against the exploits you have in mind. Have fun exploiting my systems! Security through obscurity may not be the best answer in the world - but it is an answer!!!
We got his hard drives. We got his journals. We got his live-in courier. We got damned near everything. Alright - so he might have taken a couple secrets to the bottom of the ocean with him. Phht. Calm down, son.
And, yes, Binny Boy. What? Do you have a copyright or trademark right to that name, or what?
Agree, with your post, and with the Vatican's statement.
In real life, I knew a guy who really needed killing. I spent a couple years contemplating the deed. He almost gave me enough justification a couple times. (No, I won't go into details - I'd be typing all day!" The old bastard finally died. It was sobering. I felt kinda good, but there wasn't any singing and dancing. And, I never have gone to the cemetery to piss on his grave, like I promised him that I would do.
Satisfaction is enough. Rejoicing is just - I dunno - ignorance? hubris? stupid? bestial? savage? My education is lacking, I just can't come up with the right word.
All I can say is, "Bring it on!" I'm not the juvenile who once thought it necessary to go out in a blaze of glory, but I'm not a doddering old codger who is going to just fall over for you either. ;^)
Allow me to point out that the Nuremburg trials weren't exactly United States trials. I've never looked into the composition of the courts, the witnesses, the advocates/lawyers/advisers, or anything, but I believe that everything was done by people from around the world, under international law. The US may have had (undoubtady DID) a leading role in the trials, but they weren't US courts, held by US judges, and decided under US law.
That said - your point is taken.
"isn't a free nation of laws suppose to hold the law above all risks?"
Sorry, but you have the wrong terminology, which places the wrong emphasis on the law. Had you put the word "reasonable" in there, then I could agree with you.
"isn't a free nation of laws suppose to hold the law above all reasonable risks?"
That one word has meant the difference between life and death for uncountable men and women who have been put on trial. But, outside the court rooms, that word takes on a whole new meaning. What is reasonable? Is it reasonable to expect the US to stage what would turn into the most expensive trial in history, for the likes of Osama bin Laden? Is it reasonable to demand that the police, the military, and the justice department provide the necessary security for all persons involved in the trial? Is it reasonable to expect some dramatic strike or another someplace in the world against American interests during the trial?
Reasonable. No, I for one don't think that a trial would have been reasonable at all.
Yes, I agree with laxguy's statement about partying in the streets. When the ragheads - AHEM - Muslims danced in the streets after 9/11, we frowned on them, and named them animals, or worse. Then we take out one of theirs, and we behave in the same manner.
Me? I feel satisfaction that one of our enemies has been put down - but singing and dancing? Crap - I don't have time for that childishness.
Actually, you have something of a point there. From my point of view, Binny Boy needed killing, no matter what. If he had waved a white flag, and crawled out of the compound praising America, and kissed every Seal's ass in sight, he still needed killing. I don't care if it was an ordered assasination, or he went down fighting. It just makes no difference.
But, IF - and I stress IF - Binny was shot down like a rabid dog, then the US should have announced it in just those terms. There's no need to pull punches, gloss over the truth, or to sugar coat it. Just tell the world, "We killed the bastard, end of story!"
That's not terribly unfair a description. Yes, a lot of people join the military because they don't see any better options in life. No job, no scholarship, join the military, or go hungry, or stay in Mama's basement? And, corporate America is perfectly happy to push youngsters into that position, because the military, in almost all instances, is "protecting" corporate interests abroad.
Nice summary, and I mostly agree with you. However - you seem to sympathize with Private Manning, and I do not. More, Manning's detention has been characterized as for his self protection. I'm not real sure how much I believe that, but it's out there, and it's reasonable.
Before anyone gets the wrong idea, I support Wikileaks, and I also support Assange. Some people might not understand, but I detest manning for violating his oaths, general orders, and a myriad of orders from his superiors. On the other hand, Wikileaks is not subject to US law, they have no reason to display any kind of loyalty to the US. Wikileaks is doing what they are supposed to do, while Manning did not do what he is supposed to do.
But, again, nice summary.
Actually, I was trying to figure out how to use the waste energy from the computer cluster to power the grow lights in my basement - any ideas?
"However, I do know that I love who I am"
Spot on. I can be characterized in a lot of ways, some complimentary, some not. But, I am what I am, and I like it. To hell with anyone who doesn't like it, LMAO!
Agreed. But, there isn't even a real correlation here.
"Robbins lists several companies—including Yahoo!—that prioritize hiring quirky individuals"
That is NOT a widespread practice. Most companies want - most companies DEMAND that you show up for work, do your job, and mostly go unnoticed. They don't want quirks. Author found a niche market for geeks with quirks, and he thinks that he has discovered something really noteworthy. Phhht.
2000 feet is rather close range. In fact, that is hailing distance today, even without a radio. It's much to close to allow potential hostiles. Anything within range of a mounted machine gun - an old Mk 2, or newer, is fair game to be blown out of the water.
I went looking for machine gun ranges, and found some cool numbers - but this little sweetheart would be perfect for the job!
http://www.pcf45.com/misfire/mortar.html Incendiary rounds in the machine gun, and HE rounds with proximity fuses in the mortar - that will take care of anything the pirates are ever likely to own!!
Well, I won't convince anyone who doesn't want to be convinced - but you really should look into Somali history. You will note, I hope, that I have distinguished between the cultural levels of the two peoples. The Apache had a culture that was very much superior to that of the Somali. While the Apache seemed to be less "civilized" than some of the other American tribes - they undeniably had civilization. Nomads, on the other hand, lack almost everything that contributes to anything we might term "civilization". And, there you find the real differences between Somali warriors and Apache. One on one, or in small unit tactics, the great-great grandfathers of today's Somalis would very likely have held their own against the Apache.
Being intentionally obtuse wins no points with me. There is a tremendous difference between a defensive force stationed aboard a ship, and an offensive force intent on taking over a ship. If there is no other distinction that you are capable of grasping, then consider the INTENT of each force. The defensive force focused on surviving passage along the coast of Somalia with their possessions intact. The offensive force is intent on taking something that does not belong to them. It's as clear cut as any cops 'n robbers show on television. Somewhat good guys against evil sumbitches.
"The Apache were superb, truly skilled in tactics and in individual effectiveness."
Basically what I said. Superb fighters. Not great strategists, but superb fighters.
And, obviously, you are unaware of Somalian HISTORY. I DID NOT compare today's pirates to yesterday's Apache - I compared their HISTORY to the Apache. Did the Somali, or did the Somali not, beat the living shit out of the Brits, who had better technology, better logistics, and much more money to throw at the problem? Do you think that today's sorry excuses for pirates could have done that? I certainly don't think so.
Look past current events, and look at the race, culture, or ethnic group. Somalis have as good a history as FIGHTERS as the Apache, your personal pride and prejudices notwithstanding.
That said, I'll point to the fact that the Somali are basically a nomadic people, while the Apache are more agrarian, and far more civilized.
See, that's the problem. You see it as a legal problem, when in reality, it's a military problem. When the pirates are going about in armed vessels and attacking passersby, it's a military problem. It doesn't take a lawyer to understand that - it takes a lawyer to obfuscate it.
Oh - I'm sure those Navy lawyers are paid. I pay them, and so do you if you're an American citizen. I don't much like the idea of subsidizing lawyers who make a military problem more complex than it need be.
I have zero idea who AC is, or how truthful he is - but he describes the single best way to deal with pirates. Put a killer team on the lucrative targets, and kill the damned pirates when they get close enough. It works. No fuss, no muss, no repeat offenders, no fortunes spent on idiot lawyers.
Simple solution. Kill all the lawyers.
We all know that our forces are hamstrung by "rules of engagement", yada yada yada. I'm in complete agreement with you. All the naval forces in the area - China, Spain, US, UK, France, ALL of them should be inspecting all boats and ships. When they find a band of men aboard a ship or boat who are armed, take them into custody and sink their boat, incarcerate them for a few years while one or another court system deals with them, and let them go when they are old men.
If anyone resists inspection or arrest, blow them away. Resistance includes fleeing, of course. Either it's 100% cooperation with the naval forces, or it's death, simple as that.
I've heard far to many bullshit ideas about "nonlethal" means of "repelling" pirates. That shit's for idiots without a clue!