i haven't been using win7 regularly but i used it for about half an hour on my friend's laptop. the taskbar is simply horrid. i download a file in firefox, and the downloads windows opens. i click on the firefox main window and keep surfing. after a while a notification tells me that all files have been downloaded. so now i move the cursor to the firefox icon, wait. wait some more. now i get two identical sized windows above the taskbar. i squint, trying to see which one is the downloads and not the main. finally, i hover over what seems to be the downloads window. wait. wait. wait. oh yes, its in the front now. happy and delighted i move my cursor quickly back from the taskbar. but guess what, its gone!!! this sort of utter crap can be sold only by ms.
multiple ways to do the same thing is not bad. its good. it lets the user choose. its the basic philosophy behind linux (it seems to me). only apple retards like you can turn this feature into a demonstration of microsoft's failing. when on the contrary this is one of the few things ms has done correctly. one more thing that ms has done correctly is to ward of fanbois like you. just read your posts again. your mind simply cannot fathom that something can be done in more than one way.
i agree that unencrypted data flowing through the air is liable to be intercepted freely but your assertion that "someone published a list of every wifi hotspot on their train line" is the same as what google did, is wrong. google did not merely record ssids, they recorded the data too. also your solution to google's snooping that "As a side note, how many people complaining about Google's collection of wireless information actually bothered to uncheck that little box that says "Broadcast SSID"" is ineffective, because they can easily sniff the data packets even on a network which does not broadcast its ssid. once again, i agree that what google did is nothing wrong. but they did NOT merely log the ssids.
Clearly knowledge satisfies you on some level otherwise you wouldn't be saying this.
true. my statement should not include satisfaction. its a kind of confusing, circular-logic thing. usually happy and satisfied go hand-in-hand but here, knowledge satisfies me even if it makes me miserable. but then if i am miserable how can i be satisfied? o_O
but I am also occasionally envious of those who are blissfully ignorant.
i'm not. i pity them. maybe its a sign of immaturity, maybe i'll grow out of it.
knowledge and happiness/satisfaction are not mutually exclusive unless you actively choose to focus on things that make you unhappy. One such indication of this is that you like to watch the news and complain a lot, yet keep looking for more things to complain about.
There's always going to be enough bad things happening to make you truly miserable if you want to be. I like having Slashdot as my main source of news. There's still a lot of complaining, but I don't get notified every time someone is murdered/raped. I know these things are going on (ie I'm not ignorant not trying to pretend that I am), and I hate it, but I really can't stop other people doing these things, and I am not going to actively try to make myself miserable by subjecting myself to it constantly.
completely agree. i never watch news on tv. nor on the web. i read the newspaper, but just skim over the headlines. murder/rape/riots have always been happening and they will escalate as our population grows. nothing to worry too much about, because the best way to reduce this is (imo) to do your own work honestly and efficiently. otoh, reading slashdot lets me know about things that are new and cutting edge. and inspite of all the trolls, i've never been audience to insightful debates that occur on slashdot everyday. people i meet in real life are really dumb, pathetic, shallow. not like that here.
The only other way to stop being miserable about other people's pain is to become desensitised to it
everyone's already pretty desensitized here. let me tell you a bit about the place where i live. my friend and i were standing by the side of the road, in front of the local market, waiting to cross the road. in the afternoon, in broad daylight and about 100 people in view. a couple of crooks with a steel rod and a knife come running and hit my friend on the legs with the rod. they took all his money and his cellphone and left him with a massive bruise. i got ignored somehow. nobody did anything. they got away. we went to a nearby hospital, got my friend bandaged and returned to our homes. people here (including me) just accept this sort of thing and get on. a police superintendent inspector i know had his house looted. lots of electronics and some jewelry was taken. he did not file a report. why? because he knows (he is an inspector) that nothing is going to happen. the thieves will never be caught. when you have to live through this, it is quite understandable that people do not give a fuck about privacy, google and anything so abstract. enough offtopic for today i think.
Funny, by the way, how Google wondered about the legality of having its data inspected by the data protection authority.
Nothing "funny" about it; they probably have good lawyers, lawyers who advised them that handing over the data to the "data protection authority" without a court order may itself constitute a violation of German privacy laws.
Usually that would mean sending someone to have a look and see and perhaps sample the data.
Or it might mean that the "data protection authority" goes on a massive data mining quest to identify file sharers, pornographers, and anybody who runs an open WLAN, and then charges all of those people with breaking the law. They couldn't drive around collecting that data themselves, but they can obtain it from Google. Probably it doesn't mean that in this specific case, but it sets a bad precedent.
Think about it: if you were a government intent on violating people's privacy, what would be the best place to do it? That's right: the "data protection authority", armed with a legal right to request and inspect anybody's data without a court order, just to look for more "data protection violations".
you are free to have any opinion but being ignorant or feigning ignorance is completely unacceptable to me. i'd take knowledge over happiness/satisfaction any day.
when i trust google more than the government. what is the eu going to do with the data? isn't the best thing to destroy it? yes it was terribly weong of google to collect it, so punish them. fine them heavily so they won't do it again. but what is the point of handing it over to the govt?
yes then it becomes sort of no one's responsibility. the other librarians just say they can't do anything and the original one is already stupid. you are right, this sort of roadblock happens in many similar things and puts you in a very helpless situation.
there is no need to ask why in this case. the reason has been clearly communicated: to act as a convenient alternative to library cards. the same thing i could say about a school which tells its students to bring laptops to school. now according to you, children should 'question authority'. whereas it is clear(to me) that a laptop would be very useful in class. of course the school could have open wifi and sniff every child's data stream, but that would be illegal to do. similarly, in the path from fingerprint ids to an orwellian society, there are several things that would be heavily illegal. when those illegal tings are done by a school, you would be free to sue the perpetrators, and make them pay. thus, according to me, it is wrong to oppose this. this is a paranoid stance that will do us harm in the long run. we must assume good intent in others' actions unless clear proof to the contrary is available.
but if that happens, the culprit and cause would be a stupid librarian, who would not loan out a book to a child just because of a petty mischief. its the same logic as don't allow citizens to buy guns as they allow them to kill each other. the correct way is to give everyone a gun and prosecute murderers in court.
In simplest terms, it now makes you an identifiable suspect at any location you've visited.
at a public place like a shopping mall where robbery has occurred, they will find hundreds of prints besides your own. so, unless the police is completely retarded, they will not call in suspects based on fingerprints. at a private place like a friend's place where theft has occured if your print is found what is the problem with going and clearing out your name with an alibi or asking your friend to tell them that you are not a thief?
I'd personally rather not have them come bother me because they found my fingerprint in a gas station that got robbed 4 hours after I made a purchase and thus I don't want them to have any data about my fingerprints that's tied to things like my name and address.
but if the police does its job properly, you will not be suspected just because they found your prints at a public crime scene, if many others are also found. of course if the police still traps you then this is not a problem with fingerprints, its a problem with the police. in no way can a fingerprint be abused without the abuser breaking some law, for which he can be punished.
in what way will this lead to an orwellian society? no freedoms are being obstructed or anything. please give me a sequential list of things that lead from fingerprint id system for library books to orwell. i feel there is something that you find obvious but i am unable to spot.
so lets see. i poked a boy with my pencil. i did it very hard. he still has a mark on his hand where i did it. so a pencil can be used to bully children. lets not allow them. retarded logic on your part.
what's wrong with fingerprints? they are very convenient and foolproof as user ids. your fingerprint is not secret info. it is public. i can ask you for your pen and take your prints off it. why does it spook everyone off????
fuck all. i can't wait for the day all of you are turned into mind-fucked zombies, aimlessly sleepwalking in front of me so i can blow your heads off with my shotgun.
40% 28/70. the test does not measure empathy at all. it measures how empathetic the test-taker wants to be. i want to be cold-blooded and selfish (even though i may actually be very empathetic) so i scored low. somebody loves the idea of helping others so he would score high (even if he is very selfish in real life).
Slashdot Mirror
I think the usual order is: First purchase, then install. :-)
i think you are not taking into account all those chines who first install, then when it doesn't work, purchase a key.
i haven't been using win7 regularly but i used it for about half an hour on my friend's laptop. the taskbar is simply horrid. i download a file in firefox, and the downloads windows opens. i click on the firefox main window and keep surfing. after a while a notification tells me that all files have been downloaded. so now i move the cursor to the firefox icon, wait. wait some more. now i get two identical sized windows above the taskbar. i squint, trying to see which one is the downloads and not the main. finally, i hover over what seems to be the downloads window. wait. wait. wait. oh yes, its in the front now. happy and delighted i move my cursor quickly back from the taskbar. but guess what, its gone!!!
this sort of utter crap can be sold only by ms.
multiple ways to do the same thing is not bad. its good. it lets the user choose. its the basic philosophy behind linux (it seems to me). only apple retards like you can turn this feature into a demonstration of microsoft's failing. when on the contrary this is one of the few things ms has done correctly. one more thing that ms has done correctly is to ward of fanbois like you.
just read your posts again. your mind simply cannot fathom that something can be done in more than one way.
and its so nearly perfect that your mind screams "PHOTOSHOP!!!!!!!".
i agree that unencrypted data flowing through the air is liable to be intercepted freely but your assertion that "someone published a list of every wifi hotspot on their train line" is the same as what google did, is wrong. google did not merely record ssids, they recorded the data too. also your solution to google's snooping that "As a side note, how many people complaining about Google's collection of wireless information actually bothered to uncheck that little box that says "Broadcast SSID"" is ineffective, because they can easily sniff the data packets even on a network which does not broadcast its ssid.
once again, i agree that what google did is nothing wrong. but they did NOT merely log the ssids.
Clearly knowledge satisfies you on some level otherwise you wouldn't be saying this.
true. my statement should not include satisfaction. its a kind of confusing, circular-logic thing. usually happy and satisfied go hand-in-hand but here, knowledge satisfies me even if it makes me miserable. but then if i am miserable how can i be satisfied? o_O
but I am also occasionally envious of those who are blissfully ignorant.
i'm not. i pity them. maybe its a sign of immaturity, maybe i'll grow out of it.
knowledge and happiness/satisfaction are not mutually exclusive unless you actively choose to focus on things that make you unhappy. One such indication of this is that you like to watch the news and complain a lot, yet keep looking for more things to complain about. There's always going to be enough bad things happening to make you truly miserable if you want to be. I like having Slashdot as my main source of news. There's still a lot of complaining, but I don't get notified every time someone is murdered/raped. I know these things are going on (ie I'm not ignorant not trying to pretend that I am), and I hate it, but I really can't stop other people doing these things, and I am not going to actively try to make myself miserable by subjecting myself to it constantly.
completely agree. i never watch news on tv. nor on the web. i read the newspaper, but just skim over the headlines. murder/rape/riots have always been happening and they will escalate as our population grows. nothing to worry too much about, because the best way to reduce this is (imo) to do your own work honestly and efficiently. otoh, reading slashdot lets me know about things that are new and cutting edge. and inspite of all the trolls, i've never been audience to insightful debates that occur on slashdot everyday. people i meet in real life are really dumb, pathetic, shallow. not like that here.
The only other way to stop being miserable about other people's pain is to become desensitised to it
everyone's already pretty desensitized here. let me tell you a bit about the place where i live. my friend and i were standing by the side of the road, in front of the local market, waiting to cross the road. in the afternoon, in broad daylight and about 100 people in view. a couple of crooks with a steel rod and a knife come running and hit my friend on the legs with the rod. they took all his money and his cellphone and left him with a massive bruise. i got ignored somehow. nobody did anything. they got away. we went to a nearby hospital, got my friend bandaged and returned to our homes. people here (including me) just accept this sort of thing and get on.
a police superintendent inspector i know had his house looted. lots of electronics and some jewelry was taken. he did not file a report. why? because he knows (he is an inspector) that nothing is going to happen. the thieves will never be caught.
when you have to live through this, it is quite understandable that people do not give a fuck about privacy, google and anything so abstract.
enough offtopic for today i think.
Tell your friends it's Linux, not GNU/Linux!
ftfy
Funny, by the way, how Google wondered about the legality of having its data inspected by the data protection authority.
Nothing "funny" about it; they probably have good lawyers, lawyers who advised them that handing over the data to the "data protection authority" without a court order may itself constitute a violation of German privacy laws.
Usually that would mean sending someone to have a look and see and perhaps sample the data.
Or it might mean that the "data protection authority" goes on a massive data mining quest to identify file sharers, pornographers, and anybody who runs an open WLAN, and then charges all of those people with breaking the law. They couldn't drive around collecting that data themselves, but they can obtain it from Google. Probably it doesn't mean that in this specific case, but it sets a bad precedent.
Think about it: if you were a government intent on violating people's privacy, what would be the best place to do it? That's right: the "data protection authority", armed with a legal right to request and inspect anybody's data without a court order, just to look for more "data protection violations".
so when did pornography become illegal , then?
i doubt that google recorded 600GBS of SSID. don't you think it would be absurd?? i meaan ssids are usually 6-10 characters in length arent they?
I'll take being happy over being right any day.
you are free to have any opinion but being ignorant or feigning ignorance is completely unacceptable to me. i'd take knowledge over happiness/satisfaction any day.
when i trust google more than the government. what is the eu going to do with the data? isn't the best thing to destroy it? yes it was terribly weong of google to collect it, so punish them. fine them heavily so they won't do it again. but what is the point of handing it over to the govt?
yes then it becomes sort of no one's responsibility. the other librarians just say they can't do anything and the original one is already stupid. you are right, this sort of roadblock happens in many similar things and puts you in a very helpless situation.
there is no need to ask why in this case. the reason has been clearly communicated: to act as a convenient alternative to library cards. the same thing i could say about a school which tells its students to bring laptops to school. now according to you, children should 'question authority'. whereas it is clear(to me) that a laptop would be very useful in class. of course the school could have open wifi and sniff every child's data stream, but that would be illegal to do. similarly, in the path from fingerprint ids to an orwellian society, there are several things that would be heavily illegal. when those illegal tings are done by a school, you would be free to sue the perpetrators, and make them pay. thus, according to me, it is wrong to oppose this. this is a paranoid stance that will do us harm in the long run. we must assume good intent in others' actions unless clear proof to the contrary is available.
but if that happens, the culprit and cause would be a stupid librarian, who would not loan out a book to a child just because of a petty mischief. its the same logic as don't allow citizens to buy guns as they allow them to kill each other. the correct way is to give everyone a gun and prosecute murderers in court.
In simplest terms, it now makes you an identifiable suspect at any location you've visited.
at a public place like a shopping mall where robbery has occurred, they will find hundreds of prints besides your own. so, unless the police is completely retarded, they will not call in suspects based on fingerprints.
at a private place like a friend's place where theft has occured if your print is found what is the problem with going and clearing out your name with an alibi or asking your friend to tell them that you are not a thief?
I'd personally rather not have them come bother me because they found my fingerprint in a gas station that got robbed 4 hours after I made a purchase and thus I don't want them to have any data about my fingerprints that's tied to things like my name and address.
but if the police does its job properly, you will not be suspected just because they found your prints at a public crime scene, if many others are also found. of course if the police still traps you then this is not a problem with fingerprints, its a problem with the police. in no way can a fingerprint be abused without the abuser breaking some law, for which he can be punished.
in what way will this lead to an orwellian society? no freedoms are being obstructed or anything. please give me a sequential list of things that lead from fingerprint id system for library books to orwell. i feel there is something that you find obvious but i am unable to spot.
its like that everywhere. you can go to court and have them issue an order to banks but only when they refuse to do so on your order.
what problem do you have with the police being able to "verify, with some degree of accuracy, that the print belongs to a specific child"?
why do you have a problem with the police storing your fingerprints?? or your child's? what sort of abuse can they do??
so lets see. i poked a boy with my pencil. i did it very hard. he still has a mark on his hand where i did it. so a pencil can be used to bully children. lets not allow them. retarded logic on your part.
what's wrong with fingerprints? they are very convenient and foolproof as user ids. your fingerprint is not secret info. it is public. i can ask you for your pen and take your prints off it. why does it spook everyone off????
fuck all. i can't wait for the day all of you are turned into mind-fucked zombies, aimlessly sleepwalking in front of me so i can blow your heads off with my shotgun.
40% 28/70. the test does not measure empathy at all. it measures how empathetic the test-taker wants to be. i want to be cold-blooded and selfish (even though i may actually be very empathetic) so i scored low. somebody loves the idea of helping others so he would score high (even if he is very selfish in real life).
i beat you. i scored 28!! but i'm just going to college in july.