The DHS agent serving/requesting the warrant only has qualified immunity though, so depending on the details (was the warrant obviously incorrect, was the request a clear fabrication) they could be liable. GROH v. RAMIREZ ET AL. is an example of qualified immunity not applying.
No it's not. Judges sign invalid warrants on occassions, law enforcement does more than the warrant specifies on occassions, law enforcement lies in their applications for a warrant and gets it signed on occassions. All of those involve a warrant signed by a judge, but both are violations of due process.
So because you don't like that sort of game people playing them for "no reward, no effect, and no return" should just kill themselves. But people wasting just as much time for "no reard, no effect, and no return" playing games you don't think are stupid should just keep on doing so?
Seriously what is the difference between spending 1 hour a day playing mafia wars and spending 1 hour a day playing call of duty and spending 1 hour a day playing dungeons and dragons and spending 1 hour a day playing tetris and spending 1 hour a day watching House? They're all equally time sinks with the onley upside being people get some enjoyment from them.
Yet again, I didn't say to reboot when the disk was full. Can you get that through your head? You're calling me stupid and rubbing my nose in something I never claimed - that seems retarded on your part. Why not instead claim that I'm an idiot because hitting a machine with a hammer is a dumb way to reload the named config files, after all I also didn't claim that.
If a working machine doesn't come up on a reboot, then I'm glad I rebooted at a time conveniant to me rather than it failing and not coming back up at peak usage time or on New Years Eve.
How is that hypocritical? It's doing two different things in two similar but different situations, not saying one thing and doing the opposite. It's just doing what is in you own intererst as opposed to what is "right".
And Obama already has a "kill switch" and hence claiming he "wants" one is a bit silly. Which part of the text of http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c111:S.3480%3A do you find to be so troubling and what new "kill switch" power is is granting that the President hasn't had since 1934 anyway?
But you can do that without the disconnecting option, so you are throwing out the baby (low commission trading) with the bathwater (high frequency trading).
Retardation has to do with not understanding the simple phrase "after fixing the problem", and then ranting about how I'm a "fucking stupid" for advocating something you made up.
And you've read all the source code of every program and operating system component running on the machine? And you know none of them have a bug triggered by the disk filling? Or a feature that gives undesirable results for you triggered by the disk filling?
And yes you don't need to reboot, chances are 99.9% of the time everything will be fine. But why take the risk?
Yes you fixed the root problem - you know "why the tip is melting" and it won't do so anymore. But you don't know what the failure itself has done to the other processes on the machine. Maybe there's a process that checks the disk space and stops writing logs if its full, but doesn't start writing them again once the disk clears up. Yes you could read through all the source code of all the programs running and find all those bugs and fix them and restart all those processes. Except of course you mightn't have the source code or the ability to fix them. So because you don't like the idea of rebooting you leave the machine up for some other process to fail due to the already fixed problem.
Note, you aren't rebooting to fix the problem (so you aren't just "buying a new pack of spark plugs every 1000 miles"), you are just taking 2 minutes to ensure no other unrelated things break due to the machine being a bad state for some time period.
Rebooting to fix the problem and hoping it doesn't happen again is stupid, but that isn't what was being claimed.
Say / filled up. You know what caused the problem and you've fixed it so it won't happen again. Why spend 2 weeks investigating every single running process on the machine to make sure it wasn't affected by the resource exhaustion when you can just reboot and be in a known good state? It's quick and simple and gets you into a known working state - seems much simpler than reading therough the source code for every running process on the machine.
Unless unix veteran is a code word for idiot of course.
Take #9: "Our thinking here is there's no reason why a reboot should ever be necessary other than kernel or hardware changes, and a reboot is simply another temporary approach to fixing the problem.". When a run away program fills the disk or sets off the OOM killer then after fixing the problem itself rebooting is the obviously wise thing to do - who knows what random proceess got put in a bad state by the resource exhaustion best reboot and get everything into a known good state.
And of course have fun when the machine does need to be rebooted for a "kernel of hardware change" and some vital service doesn't restart because no one checked that the damn init script was enabled.
one that I'm not in the USA, and two that I never intend to travel to the USA
Then you don't have any point to make at all.
You can equally threaten to kill Berlusconi and the Italian police won't do anything.
Of course the US does have a confirmed history of abducting foreigners in foriegn countries, though the SS doesn't seem to do that.
well, at least while such absurdities as a person getting into legal trouble for posting obviously insincere threats against the very public figure of the president
How is that an absurdity? Sure the Italian situation is likely different since there's a history of Berlusconi being about as close as you can be to an above the law dictator while actually still being democratically elected.
But if you make a threat, even in jest, on the President the SS is obviously going to investigate it if they find out about it. Say your work for the SS, would you rather spend a few hours visiting the person and getting them to explain they were joking (using all the normal interview techniques) and file the report saying "idiot kid making a joke, has long conservation about seriousness" or do nothing and have it turn out that that guy does in fact kill the President six months later. That second option is very "career limiting", that first one is really not much effort on your part and gets you away from the desk for a little bit - and the fact that there's now a file on the guy makes no difference to you.
Would you really rather the police of every stripe just decided without doing any investigation at all that "that's obviously not serious, just ignore it" about every crime?
America has a long history of Presidents being assassinated. 6 of the 8 Presidents during my lifetime have been subject to assassination attempts (from having a live grenade thown next to them, to being shot at, to being shot, to a guy planning to crash a jumbo into the white house actually hikacking the plane), 1 of the 2 remaining has been subject to threats considered serious. Hence they aren't going to just ignore something because it looks like it might be a joke.
It would be the normal business cycle, except that the government has stepped in and "stopped" the downside part, with the pretty obvious result that the bubble based booms get larger at each step and the next downside is even bigger and hence requires more to "stop" it. And it's getting pretty close to being big enough that it won't be able to "stopped" at which point we get the cumulative downside of all those busts we avoided (well avoided the bulk of) all at once. On the bright side it's going to be interesting to watch...
I'd argue the opposite. When money is made it gives a false impression of the well being of the economy and hence that morale you talk about is too high and we get huge bubbles that self sustain for a little while. Then some trigger causes people to notice it's all fantasy and it comes tumbling down - which resets morale back to being in line with the actual state of the economy.
So that "making money" part has a huge impact on the economy, it screws it up completely. The "losing money" part also has an impact but for the good - it restores some sanity (though of course it hurts). Well unless the government socialises the losses then it also screws over the economy on the way down - double the fun!
Slashdot Mirror
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=SQL+injection
The DHS agent serving/requesting the warrant only has qualified immunity though, so depending on the details (was the warrant obviously incorrect, was the request a clear fabrication) they could be liable. GROH v. RAMIREZ ET AL. is an example of qualified immunity not applying.
No it's not. Judges sign invalid warrants on occassions, law enforcement does more than the warrant specifies on occassions, law enforcement lies in their applications for a warrant and gets it signed on occassions. All of those involve a warrant signed by a judge, but both are violations of due process.
So because you don't like that sort of game people playing them for "no reward, no effect, and no return" should just kill themselves. But people wasting just as much time for "no reard, no effect, and no return" playing games you don't think are stupid should just keep on doing so?
Seriously what is the difference between spending 1 hour a day playing mafia wars and spending 1 hour a day playing call of duty and spending 1 hour a day playing dungeons and dragons and spending 1 hour a day playing tetris and spending 1 hour a day watching House? They're all equally time sinks with the onley upside being people get some enjoyment from them.
You seriously think you can't be friends with someone just because you don't list them as a friend in facebook?
Yet again, I didn't say to reboot when the disk was full. Can you get that through your head? You're calling me stupid and rubbing my nose in something I never claimed - that seems retarded on your part. Why not instead claim that I'm an idiot because hitting a machine with a hammer is a dumb way to reload the named config files, after all I also didn't claim that.
If a working machine doesn't come up on a reboot, then I'm glad I rebooted at a time conveniant to me rather than it failing and not coming back up at peak usage time or on New Years Eve.
How is that hypocritical? It's doing two different things in two similar but different situations, not saying one thing and doing the opposite. It's just doing what is in you own intererst as opposed to what is "right".
And Obama already has a "kill switch" and hence claiming he "wants" one is a bit silly. Which part of the text of http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c111:S.3480%3A do you find to be so troubling and what new "kill switch" power is is granting that the President hasn't had since 1934 anyway?
But those with the connections aren't likely to air gap them from the rest of their network.
But you can do that without the disconnecting option, so you are throwing out the baby (low commission trading) with the bathwater (high frequency trading).
Which is the mechanical aspect. Doing it all in software just doesn't count.
It means flat as a tortilla, not a pancake.
Iranians aren't arabs, so whether something "makes arabs more or less inclined" is irrelevant to them.
Retardation has to do with not understanding the simple phrase "after fixing the problem", and then ranting about how I'm a "fucking stupid" for advocating something you made up.
And you've read all the source code of every program and operating system component running on the machine? And you know none of them have a bug triggered by the disk filling? Or a feature that gives undesirable results for you triggered by the disk filling?
And yes you don't need to reboot, chances are 99.9% of the time everything will be fine. But why take the risk?
Yes you fixed the root problem - you know "why the tip is melting" and it won't do so anymore. But you don't know what the failure itself has done to the other processes on the machine. Maybe there's a process that checks the disk space and stops writing logs if its full, but doesn't start writing them again once the disk clears up. Yes you could read through all the source code of all the programs running and find all those bugs and fix them and restart all those processes. Except of course you mightn't have the source code or the ability to fix them. So because you don't like the idea of rebooting you leave the machine up for some other process to fail due to the already fixed problem.
Note, you aren't rebooting to fix the problem (so you aren't just "buying a new pack of spark plugs every 1000 miles"), you are just taking 2 minutes to ensure no other unrelated things break due to the machine being a bad state for some time period.
Rebooting to fix the problem and hoping it doesn't happen again is stupid, but that isn't what was being claimed.
anyone who actually believes anything Beck says can't do a google search anyway, since the drool keeps shorting out the keyboard.
But why take the risk?
Say / filled up. You know what caused the problem and you've fixed it so it won't happen again. Why spend 2 weeks investigating every single running process on the machine to make sure it wasn't affected by the resource exhaustion when you can just reboot and be in a known good state? It's quick and simple and gets you into a known working state - seems much simpler than reading therough the source code for every running process on the machine.
Do you seriously not know what the words "after fixing the problem itself" mean? Or are you just fucking retarded?
That's what developers do. Unix admins just say "the job ran as scheduled and did whatever the developers programmed it to do".
Unless unix veteran is a code word for idiot of course.
Take #9: "Our thinking here is there's no reason why a reboot should ever be necessary other than kernel or hardware changes, and a reboot is simply another temporary approach to fixing the problem.". When a run away program fills the disk or sets off the OOM killer then after fixing the problem itself rebooting is the obviously wise thing to do - who knows what random proceess got put in a bad state by the resource exhaustion best reboot and get everything into a known good state.
And of course have fun when the machine does need to be rebooted for a "kernel of hardware change" and some vital service doesn't restart because no one checked that the damn init script was enabled.
But those are not "forced". That's slashdot deleting/making inaccessible stuff they want to.
Paint one half of the cable blue and the other half white, and hide the switch point in a mass of cables somewhere.
Then you don't have any point to make at all.
You can equally threaten to kill Berlusconi and the Italian police won't do anything.
Of course the US does have a confirmed history of abducting foreigners in foriegn countries, though the SS doesn't seem to do that.
How is that an absurdity? Sure the Italian situation is likely different since there's a history of Berlusconi being about as close as you can be to an above the law dictator while actually still being democratically elected.
But if you make a threat, even in jest, on the President the SS is obviously going to investigate it if they find out about it. Say your work for the SS, would you rather spend a few hours visiting the person and getting them to explain they were joking (using all the normal interview techniques) and file the report saying "idiot kid making a joke, has long conservation about seriousness" or do nothing and have it turn out that that guy does in fact kill the President six months later. That second option is very "career limiting", that first one is really not much effort on your part and gets you away from the desk for a little bit - and the fact that there's now a file on the guy makes no difference to you.
Would you really rather the police of every stripe just decided without doing any investigation at all that "that's obviously not serious, just ignore it" about every crime?
America has a long history of Presidents being assassinated. 6 of the 8 Presidents during my lifetime have been subject to assassination attempts (from having a live grenade thown next to them, to being shot at, to being shot, to a guy planning to crash a jumbo into the white house actually hikacking the plane), 1 of the 2 remaining has been subject to threats considered serious. Hence they aren't going to just ignore something because it looks like it might be a joke.
Nothing?
"Holy shit, mass and energy are equivalent" doesn't tell you anything?
It should tell you:
Whenever I compress a spring that spring must increase in mass.
A spinning top has more mass than a non-spinning top.
And numerous other amazing implications.
It would be the normal business cycle, except that the government has stepped in and "stopped" the downside part, with the pretty obvious result that the bubble based booms get larger at each step and the next downside is even bigger and hence requires more to "stop" it. And it's getting pretty close to being big enough that it won't be able to "stopped" at which point we get the cumulative downside of all those busts we avoided (well avoided the bulk of) all at once. On the bright side it's going to be interesting to watch...
I'd argue the opposite. When money is made it gives a false impression of the well being of the economy and hence that morale you talk about is too high and we get huge bubbles that self sustain for a little while. Then some trigger causes people to notice it's all fantasy and it comes tumbling down - which resets morale back to being in line with the actual state of the economy.
So that "making money" part has a huge impact on the economy, it screws it up completely. The "losing money" part also has an impact but for the good - it restores some sanity (though of course it hurts). Well unless the government socialises the losses then it also screws over the economy on the way down - double the fun!