Ok, for your whole thesis to work, you have turned a disgruntled employee into, what do you say, a "psychopathic enemy of society". That's quite a leg you've got to stand on. Seems to me that psychopathic enemies of society would be more like Ted Bundy and other killers, not disgruntled computer programmers that changed a few passwords around.
Again, for anybody interested, I'll dissect the clutter. ..
Please do.. you advocate a justice system mandates psychiatric treatment and puts away a guy for life for changing a couple of passwords. I wonder, based on that scale, how many lifetimes you can put away a murderer for? Does a speeding ticket get 10 years, in that scale?
Really, seriously, give yourself a break, go get a hammer and a chunk of marble, and just to get work on my statue. I'm just better than you and, it's just part of the natural order of things. I still love you in your inferiority, and you will be able to share in that love and gain a love of yourself as you completely your important work of making a statue of me.
He really seems to believe that he is beyond criticism.
Well, when you are as godlike brilliant as I am, I would think that criticism of me would be a proof of one's foolishness. It's certainly the case with you!
By the way, is my statue done yet? You have to hurry that up, because, when you get done with that, you need to also build a church to my genius. I might let you slide a bit on the deadline if you name a couple of your kids after me or, better still, George Bush.
The absurdity of your position is lauding the very man who brought about the destruction of America's position of leadership in the world: Ronald Reagan, and his ideological descendant, George W. Bush.
And yours is that you have no facts. The fact of the matter is that Medicare and Social Security are the single biggest reason that so many other programs are being dropped. When Medicare was first enacted, it was barely a line item on the budget and Democrats promised that it would stay that way. However, they lied and now we have a monster that has basically gobbled up every ounce of additional revenue in the budget. Had it not been for Reagan's supply side economics, there would have been no growth, and no medicare at all, and your prized social safety net would have been terrible.
Government is the enemy of innovation. The argument that Reagan made was to say that people shouldn't look to government as a friend to bale them out, but as an obstacle to their success, and waves of Democratic regulations certainly turned that into a reality. Just look at how all the goofy regulations of the Democrats in the late 1960s and early 1970s just killed the US economy. You think today's recession is bad? You should have a look at what Dems did to us in the 1970s.
You can keep talking about taxes on "rich" all you want, but the fact of the matter is, since the beginning of time, the argument is really about so-called progressive taxation. Republicans argue that everyone should have to work the same number of days per year to pay their taxes, whereas, Democrats argue that poor people shouldn't have to work at all, and rich people should work all of their lives -just- to pay taxes. They just cover up this little lie by spelling it as a higher percentage of income and arguing that's what's left. But, at the end, when Democrats really held sway, taxes on upper class people were such that someone had to work until December 10th JUST TO PAY THEIR TAXES.
This guy is just looking for easy handouts and ego-perks to feed his,"you should build a statue to worship me" egomania, (yes, he said that);
Hey, speaking of statue, where is my statue you were supposed to be making of me? How are you making out on that? I'm very disappointed in your progress.
Your economic analysis, by the way, is completely wrong. Seems to me that all the third world countries the USA trades with have a sudden tendency to get rich if they invest wisely their profits. Japan and Germany rebuilt themselves through trade after WWII, China is now a first world nation, as is South Korea, Taiwan, Indonesia, the Phillipines.. and now India is on the way. Yep, those people are all being exploited, terribly, as they shift from starving to death to being able to afford cars, cell phones and computers. If the USA is such a terrible empire, as you say, why is the world getting so much richer?
I think you'd best stay out of sound bite economic analysis, and get back to building your statue of me. I think it should be 50 feet high, and be very dramatic looking, like, I'm your great leader or something.
You must be tired after thrashing at all that straw. Just be careful about open flame - you might burn yourself up.
well you know brother, that old Thomas Nast elephant is still accurate to these day, mountains of straw, stupidly stumping through life and trampling everything in the way. Yep, our symbol is still an elephant for a good reason!
Democrats did, and here's the thing. Most of the "Reagan Republicans" and their intellectual descendants fondly remember when Democrats actually did embark on big visions and big crusade to try and make the world a place for free trade, free from tyranny. That old, old conservative isolationist wing of the Republican Party is basically a small minority.
What really happened is that Democrats completely lost their nerve after Viet Nam. Instead of looking at the war, and saying that they made some mistakes in its execution, and in fact, had actually started to turn things around once Westmoreland was replaced by Abrams, they have instead enshrined an ethic that lacks any sort of faith in the very government to do anything other than redistribute wealth.
I mean, Democrats are to be forever saluted for what they did from the 1940s through the 1960s. A lot of their ideas didn't work, but some did, and, we got the victory in World War II, built a national infrastructure that we've been living off of for 50 years, and put a man on the moon. They built a framework to stand against Soviet aggression and deftly avoided a world war without undermining American resolve. But, today's Democrats tend to reject a lot of that. Back in the 1960s, the Democrats who wanted NASA cut to pay for the poor were squelched, now they run the show. Today, the very idea of going to the moon, let alone mars, is considered to be just a handout, when it really, it is a project that harnesses the finest minds of the country towards a peaceful, momentus, national goal.
I would be willing to bet that if, in fact, a more muscular foreign policy candidate, one who really could articulate the American vision of free trade through Pax Americana, expansively, in the way that FDR and his ideological descendant, Reagan could, I would certainly support them, and, in fact, just about every Republican I know -would-. But instead today's Democratic party is consumed with identity politics and redistribution, sorta trying to divvying up the spoils but without the old Dems that still saw a need to get spoils to divvy.
Unfortunately though, through a catastrophe of party rules, Dems have a process that continually nominates the candidate who kowtows to a group of people that are in the minority. Republicans have a similar problem too, but, they at least have the sense to tend to set aside other policy differences so long as the free trade expansionist vision stands.
So... you basically want like, a Great (Fire)Wall of China?
Yes, but with the twist that people can get their systems certified to allow open access. Basically, if you run a device with a particular OS, the ISP would offer a direct access service and a surcharge to basically allow your computer to be open so long as it had a secure operating system and firewall combination. So basically, yeah, ironically, what the original poster said was true, is that, I would be kicking every old computer off the general internet and put them into safety internet land, and then let people who actually take care of the computing environment get open access. The downside of this, of course, is that it does create an internet rife for abuse by the government, and that I'm not particularly with, but, if, we're downloading virii and bots faster than we can circulate patches, you kinda need the government to step in and trust that your democratic processes are enough to keep it open and honest. Free enterprise doesn't build 20 aircraft carriers and an atomic bomb to go get them japs after Pearl Harbor, that's government work.
When it is Republicans that have had the vision to put the capital tools, trade agreements, and military forces in place to create a genuinely free trading global economy? No plan ever made by Democrats has lifted nearly all of Europe and then Asia out of poverty and into the modern world, but the Republican -decades- long commitment to free trade most definitely has. Ultimate, this does mean social change for everyone, but, it is a change in world that is much more peaceful than it has been in a long time, a world where there are increasingly more people that have than have not, a world where people with brains and ambition and want to work, are not held back by those who lack them.
All the Democrats offer, despite their supposed advantage in brains, is, largely reactionary. Obama's central campaign thrust is really "anti-Republican", and not anything really substantive as a view of life in and of itself. Obama argues -against- free trade, argues -against- American military expansion, and finally even seeks to argue -against- global wealth for everyone by demanding that the world accept a greater degree of poverty (thus rationalizing inefficient socialism), in the name of saving the environment.
Even the very idea of redistribution of wealth, is, in essence, a reactionary idea. Some people succeed, other people didn't, and so they invent a bunch of arguments that give their thugs a right to go and take that money, and even worse, demand that someone who is successful work more days per year to pay their taxes than someone who is not.
So, NOT torturing people ruins lives, eh? Whereas torturing people is an act of mercy? This is what you are claiming?
Let's compare:
Your plan - the victim spends many man hours trying to recover their passwords while the perp then spends years in jail, then cannot get any other job because he has a felony on the record.
My plan - the victim gets his passwords within a few hours, and the perp gets to walk. He would probably be fired, but he wouldn't have a prison sentence and a criminal record, and quite honestly, I would also make available some psychiatric help for the guy to better communicate and manage stress.
My approach benefits both the victim and the perp, resolves the situation, and allows society the maximum benefit of the talents of all of those involved. Your approach ruins the life of the perp and imposes significant hardship on the victim.
... because you are totally wrong and I am totally right.
You can call me loonie toons all you want but your logic remains completely flawed. On one hand, you argue that torture is terrible, and then, on the other hand, you agree that people would prefer to be tortured rather than suffer long prison terms. Then you argue that torture is morally wrong and a slippery slope towards, what?
Again, let's have some facts.
a) the guy admitted having the passwords and refused to give them up.
b) in doing so, our poster would have, at great expense, third parties attempt to hack them. Guess what, if he chooses a strong password and they are using Windows, it's not going to be so trivial to break into the SAM.
c) in doing so, our poster would have, at great expense, incarcerated the guy for up to several years.
d) the poster then argues that long prison sentences are necessary to avoid fascist states. I leave the reader to judge the logic of THAT argument!
I ask, again, what exactly is this accomplishing? The poster has labelled the man that hacked the computers and withheld the computers as a criminal. I am not so sure that this is the case. I think the perp in this case was reacting badly to stress in some way and frankly, given the financial circumstances our country is in, I think many of us ourselves feel it. Above all, I think there is a movement within the IT sector, among those of us who have had badges deactivated, police escorts and our stuff tossed out on the curb when data centers get sent off overseas, after working for years trying to make the company better, that we are implicitly criminals and not professionals.
What this man did was wrong, no doubt about it, but, again, do you really need to throw him in jail for years upon years? Is it really so horrible a crime to do so? Only if the victim has to spend thousands of dollars in down time and recovery services to get their passwords back up.
I thought, that the first measure of justice is simple: Does the punishment fit the crime? We have become so numb to doling out multiyear prison terms in hopes of some imagined deterrant effect that we have lost notice that we now have people now grow up pretty much thinking that at some point they will be tossed into prison for nearly every capricious sentence invented by the State. That, to me, is fascism....
Thus, I argue, the most merciful thing to do, for the victim, and the perp, is to waterboard the perp until he gives up the passwords, which, by all accounts takes only a few minutes, and then, let bygones be bygones. If the perp is willing to give up the passwords before then, there's no need for the waterboarding at all. But, I can't see how making a felon out of a stressed out guy that made -one- bad mistake, while at the same time making matters worse for the victim of the crime, benefits society in any way.
When I was younger, I used to believe in the slippery slope argument. I remember being told that if we had one more government program, or one too many deregulations, the country would go on a slippery slope either way. But neither happened. If anything, the political battles between liberals and conservatives of the 1980s have lead to so many role reversals that the only thing that is consistent about "conservative" and "liberal" are the words. There hasn't been a slippery slope on any issue, only an ongoing argument. Even in the case of the media and excessive violence and sex, there has been marked improvement. There is no slippery slope and it turns out that people have a pretty good barometer of what is right and what is wrong and that these morals are intrinsic to most humans, above and beyond even one's religious beliefs or even in the absence of them. They can sense when the pendulum has gone too far in one way or another and they tend to push things back towards the best moral ground that they can. It is not just that Americans are decent people, it is that the world is filled with decent people, and so long as we educate ourselves and our children to live by the Golden Rule, to live fairly, I just do not see how we could descend into the very barbarity that he should so describe.
Vista is the Windows Server 2003 kernel with some junk thrown in on it, and Windows Server 2008 is just the next generation of Windows Server 2003. So, right off the wheel, you are getting a better kernel in Windows Server 2008.
The thing is, though, if you are doing client development on Windows, you are probably going to want to be developing on Vista and on XP just so you can be using an OS that is tested.
# Delete all risks associated with a second new launch vehicle # Delete all costs associated with a second new launch vehicle # Optimum use of the existing NASA & contractor experience # Enable multiple upgrade paths
Basically, "hey, we're NASA, we're too stupid to design a new rocket, and let's just use the shuttle that, um, we already have."
I thought the whole point of Constellation was that the shuttle sucks. If the engineers had gotten the shuttle off the ground correctly to begin with, we wouldn't be having this conversation now, would we?
I would be willing to bet that most people would prefer 15 minutes of waterboarding torture to a year in jail, as you would have them do.
Your approach ruins lives. Mine doesn't. You are one sick dude, claiming ruin as a mercy, then having the delusional gall to proclaim those who disagree with you to be mentally ill.
If it were me involved, I'd -prefer- a quick round of torture to long term jail, any day of the week. Which is really worse? Getting waterboarded for 15 minutes, or going to jail for a couple of YEARS? Given the choice, I'm going for the waterboarding. The torture - is - the punishment, gets the password back, and the guy and the city can both move on with life. It's -better- for everyone.
You know, if anyone is mentally ill, it is arguably the liberal bent of this world. Republicans do all things in moderation, and some to excess, whereas you liberals deny yourselves every pleasure in life, from matters of the spirit, to family, to making a fire, to driving, to hunting, to shooting, to food, to work and acquiring things of great beauty, and all that leaves you with liberals with is that you have to put sex on the altar.
Its all you've allowed yourself to have.
In denying -everything- in your f-- up earth worshiping ego-less religion, you've turned yourselves into sexual deviants because you've placed way too much importance on it. Just because you are turning yourself into an animal because you can't admit that your own earth fest sucks donkey dick, doesn't mean that everyone else should jump into your neurotic hellhole.
I sure as hell do not want to become anything like you. You are all diseased... and if you kept to yourselves, it might be ok, but, you don't, and until you don't, there's always going to be the possibility that those who are sane are just going to have to someday deal with you diseased. You genuinely think you have some better way, and you just don't.
Screw all this administrative expense. Lock the engineer in a room with a couple of goons and waterboard him until he comes up with the password. It won't take more than twenty minutes. If I was President, I'd be on the phone to S.F. extending a pardon and offering the CIA to the locals if they need it. I'd say, "I got some dudes to get your passwords back.."
Then, I'd let the guy go. He did a bad thing, but he got tortured, fessed up, no harm no foul.
And please, if running in Intel, test your hyper-threading - not good for everything!
I'm almost to the point of recommending that hyperthreading should just be turned off because it so totally screws up floating point and more often than not, people needing loads of threads for crunching are terrible.
Took three months to fight the application developers (and they still don't get it?) - total misuse of threadpools in C#! And they were supposed to be the C#/.NET specialist - I'm just an OS guy (mainly MVS/Unix/Linux?) And I had a very good team writing the services for that subsystem but no saying anything about the application design?
By itself, Windows is actually a damned good product. I've actually had a good experience writing services for Windows. *nix stuff makes it easier to develop daemons but I think Windows has made it easier to deal with threads - at least until MS f--- up threaded debugging in Visual Studio.
But its the legion of VB RAD hackers come C# programmers that just wreck it for the rest of us. I have found, that keeps me into Linux, is that 80% of Windows developers are utterly incompetent, whereas 80% of Linux developers are actually very good.
Windows developers are often self taught and that's a good thing, but most have never had any formal Computer Science education and completely don't know everything is ultimately some kind of a graph and as such lack the tools to properly analyze problems. Instead, what you have is a bunch of retards applying Microsoft designed cookie cutter developmental processes to arrive at solutions and lack any sort of understanding as to what it is they are actually doing, and that MS dumbs some of its APIs down to cater to these people.
So, even though I like Windows, when I come home, I find myself firing up my Linux box even when it aggravates me, because, there's only so much stupid code that I can take in one day. But still, I still like the way Windows C SDK in some ways more than I like the way that X works. Had X just given a little more thought to 2d drawing when it was developed, and they had been able to agree on a standardized widget bundle, we would not have the mess that is GTK versus Qt all sitting on top of creaky X, and still only barely have device independent drawing in the way that Windows has had for nearly 20 years.
You do realize how many grandmothers are under the control of the bad guys, right?
And who opened the door for that? Why should Grandma have to have her computer ripped up so that some 20 something kid can be all gushy eyed about some Star Trek future and say hey "what happens when we plug a lawless country into this thing."
Does Grandma want to talk to non-western nations? Why should she, via her PC operating system expense, be forced to pay the incremental cost of a security that she doesn't want to use.
That's like saying, geez, there would be no gun crime if everyone owned a gun. Note that I'm a big second amendment guy, but, the argument of saying that to protect the right to have a gun, everyone must buy a gun, is rather wrong in and of itself, and so is the argument that everyone must invest in virus protection, firewalls, buffer overrun checks in everything, and denial of service and timeout monitoring and patches and all of the other crap that we have to do to have criminals on the internet.
This is happening because Microsoft shipped a version of Windows with services (designed with little or no consideration of security) turned on by default, but without providing any form of firewall.
My point is that we should have a national infrastructure where someone could plug their computer into the internet, regardless of operating system, and suffer no attacks at all. Consumers should not be forced to buy anti-virus software or firewalls or even have to worry about security. Your argument essentially says that consumers who pay for operating systems, be it indirectly via services or EU taxation, in the case of Linux, or through a PC tax in the case of Microsoft, should be required to pay in both inconvience, and costs.
Any why is this so? This is happening because a minority of users want to have an Internet that is universally open and world wide, and that they want to have all internet traffic remain essentially anonymous.
So, so that a minority of users can anonymously talk to Russia (which originates many of the bots), we have an entirely internet where the western world has to have every citizen under continual assault.
I would argue that, many people would be willing to trade anonymity for internet security in a heartbeat, and so, to an extent, the internet policy we have is entirely undemocratic.
So no, it is not Microsoft's fault that Windows is under assault, any more than it is the fault of a man walking down the street without a pistol for getting robbed. It is the fault of the people that built the internet, and say, hey, let's plug in a bunch of countries that have no laws and no values into it, and we've been paying for it ever since.
Imagine how many more choices we might have in operating systems and network services, if in fact, we did not have to worry about security up and down the entire stack.
It's too much money. Kick Russia off of the internet.
If the internet is so f--- up that plugging a new computer onto it brings it under immediate attack, then, well, the good guys have -lost-.
It's really time to start unplugging bad guys from the internet period, applying stricter filtering at the ISP level, and more rigidly filtering countries who don't police their networks.
Five minutes to be attacked? The internet is LOST.
They only -say- they are using all this computer power for weather forecasting. In reality, they are devising a new kind of anti-matter bomb, and they'll just use that sucker to take over the world. PRetty soon, the capital of Earth will be the University of Illinois, so, if you stole any books from the campus library, you'd better pony up, or you'll be on your way to the Gulag they plan on constructing in North Dakota.
No, what this means is that his applications really aren't burdening the CPU. If you build an MT Windows App that genuinely scales, then, it will most certainly give all the CPUs up. What's happening in his case, most likely, is that he's i/o bound and his cpus are doing nothing. OR, his applications aren't even multithreaded. Or both. I've written some MT C++ apps for Windows for crunching insurance prices and yep, they'll peg all the CPU that you can give it. Also, I wouldn't recommend even setting the task affinity in TM.
Of course, whether or not we should be inefficiently supporting those remote rural areas is a whole 'nother area of debate. I'm sure there's a lot of small town supporters that would scream bloody murder if you argue that those small towns should be allowed to disappear by cutting off any form of government infrastructure subsidy for those locations
Then we'd starve to death, and have no good whiskey, and a valuable market for guns and orthodontics would dry up.
Do you really think UPS couldn't eat the postal service's lunch on 1st Class postage if they were allowed to compete? Of course they could, which is why the Postal Workers unions make damned sure Congress never even brings the subject up.
Can you actually point to the section of the US code that prohibits a third party from delivering first class style mail? I mean, if a private company wanted to sell a service moving an ounce across 3000 miles for 50 cents, they could. IT's just, you'd have to be able to go to Wall Street and say, "well, once you invest in 100,000 delivery vans and thousands of local offices, then, I can go and compete with the USPS in a market segment that's slowly dying." It just doesn't look a business that has any upside to it. The other thing, too, is, that, being a quasi government entity, the USPS has to actually deliver to everyone. UPS doesn't. So, yeah, theoretically, if you privatized the mail, you might find out that actually wouldn't get -any- mail at all unless you lived in the more densely populated areas of the country.
In any case, now's exactly the time to be touting the miracles of capitalism, when, the we the taxpayers of the United States might be about to double the debt of the Federal Government winds up having to do an Amtrak on what's left of our mortgage and finance industry. Yeah, talk to me about the miracles of the private sector right when you go look at the price of Bear Sterns, Countrywide, National City Bank, Lehman Bros, and other stocks. Fine bunch of capitalists, they are, all getting bailed out in one way or the other by, wow, of all things, that grossly incompetent government.
It's interesting that, you really can't consistently argue in favor of the 2nd amendment being an individual right to keep and bear arms without also being in favor of the 5th. It's pretty clear that the FF's intended the search and seizure to avoid the very chilling effects described.
Slashdot Mirror
Ok, for your whole thesis to work, you have turned a disgruntled employee into, what do you say, a "psychopathic enemy of society". That's quite a leg you've got to stand on. Seems to me that psychopathic enemies of society would be more like Ted Bundy and other killers, not disgruntled computer programmers that changed a few passwords around.
Again, for anybody interested, I'll dissect the clutter. . .
Please do.. you advocate a justice system mandates psychiatric treatment and puts away a guy for life for changing a couple of passwords. I wonder, based on that scale, how many lifetimes you can put away a murderer for? Does a speeding ticket get 10 years, in that scale?
Really, seriously, give yourself a break, go get a hammer and a chunk of marble, and just to get work on my statue. I'm just better than you and, it's just part of the natural order of things. I still love you in your inferiority, and you will be able to share in that love and gain a love of yourself as you completely your important work of making a statue of me.
He really seems to believe that he is beyond criticism.
Well, when you are as godlike brilliant as I am, I would think that criticism of me would be a proof of one's foolishness. It's certainly the case with you!
By the way, is my statue done yet? You have to hurry that up, because, when you get done with that, you need to also build a church to my genius. I might let you slide a bit on the deadline if you name a couple of your kids after me or, better still, George Bush.
The absurdity of your position is lauding the very man who brought about the destruction of America's position of leadership in the world: Ronald Reagan, and his ideological descendant, George W. Bush.
And yours is that you have no facts. The fact of the matter is that Medicare and Social Security are the single biggest reason that so many other programs are being dropped. When Medicare was first enacted, it was barely a line item on the budget and Democrats promised that it would stay that way. However, they lied and now we have a monster that has basically gobbled up every ounce of additional revenue in the budget. Had it not been for Reagan's supply side economics, there would have been no growth, and no medicare at all, and your prized social safety net would have been terrible.
Government is the enemy of innovation. The argument that Reagan made was to say that people shouldn't look to government as a friend to bale them out, but as an obstacle to their success, and waves of Democratic regulations certainly turned that into a reality. Just look at how all the goofy regulations of the Democrats in the late 1960s and early 1970s just killed the US economy. You think today's recession is bad? You should have a look at what Dems did to us in the 1970s.
You can keep talking about taxes on "rich" all you want, but the fact of the matter is, since the beginning of time, the argument is really about so-called progressive taxation. Republicans argue that everyone should have to work the same number of days per year to pay their taxes, whereas, Democrats argue that poor people shouldn't have to work at all, and rich people should work all of their lives -just- to pay taxes. They just cover up this little lie by spelling it as a higher percentage of income and arguing that's what's left. But, at the end, when Democrats really held sway, taxes on upper class people were such that someone had to work until December 10th JUST TO PAY THEIR TAXES.
This guy is just looking for easy handouts and ego-perks to feed his,"you should build a statue to worship me" egomania, (yes, he said that);
Hey, speaking of statue, where is my statue you were supposed to be making of me? How are you making out on that? I'm very disappointed in your progress.
Your economic analysis, by the way, is completely wrong. Seems to me that all the third world countries the USA trades with have a sudden tendency to get rich if they invest wisely their profits. Japan and Germany rebuilt themselves through trade after WWII, China is now a first world nation, as is South Korea, Taiwan, Indonesia, the Phillipines.. and now India is on the way. Yep, those people are all being exploited, terribly, as they shift from starving to death to being able to afford cars, cell phones and computers. If the USA is such a terrible empire, as you say, why is the world getting so much richer?
I think you'd best stay out of sound bite economic analysis, and get back to building your statue of me. I think it should be 50 feet high, and be very dramatic looking, like, I'm your great leader or something.
You must be tired after thrashing at all that straw. Just be careful about open flame - you might burn yourself up.
well you know brother, that old Thomas Nast elephant is still accurate to these day, mountains of straw, stupidly stumping through life and trampling everything in the way. Yep, our symbol is still an elephant for a good reason!
Who came up with the Marshall Plan again
Democrats did, and here's the thing. Most of the "Reagan Republicans" and their intellectual descendants fondly remember when Democrats actually did embark on big visions and big crusade to try and make the world a place for free trade, free from tyranny. That old, old conservative isolationist wing of the Republican Party is basically a small minority.
What really happened is that Democrats completely lost their nerve after Viet Nam. Instead of looking at the war, and saying that they made some mistakes in its execution, and in fact, had actually started to turn things around once Westmoreland was replaced by Abrams, they have instead enshrined an ethic that lacks any sort of faith in the very government to do anything other than redistribute wealth.
I mean, Democrats are to be forever saluted for what they did from the 1940s through the 1960s. A lot of their ideas didn't work, but some did, and, we got the victory in World War II, built a national infrastructure that we've been living off of for 50 years, and put a man on the moon. They built a framework to stand against Soviet aggression and deftly avoided a world war without undermining American resolve. But, today's Democrats tend to reject a lot of that. Back in the 1960s, the Democrats who wanted NASA cut to pay for the poor were squelched, now they run the show. Today, the very idea of going to the moon, let alone mars, is considered to be just a handout, when it really, it is a project that harnesses the finest minds of the country towards a peaceful, momentus, national goal.
I would be willing to bet that if, in fact, a more muscular foreign policy candidate, one who really could articulate the American vision of free trade through Pax Americana, expansively, in the way that FDR and his ideological descendant, Reagan could, I would certainly support them, and, in fact, just about every Republican I know -would-. But instead today's Democratic party is consumed with identity politics and redistribution, sorta trying to divvying up the spoils but without the old Dems that still saw a need to get spoils to divvy.
Unfortunately though, through a catastrophe of party rules, Dems have a process that continually nominates the candidate who kowtows to a group of people that are in the minority. Republicans have a similar problem too, but, they at least have the sense to tend to set aside other policy differences so long as the free trade expansionist vision stands.
So... you basically want like, a Great (Fire)Wall of China?
Yes, but with the twist that people can get their systems certified to allow open access. Basically, if you run a device with a particular OS, the ISP would offer a direct access service and a surcharge to basically allow your computer to be open so long as it had a secure operating system and firewall combination. So basically, yeah, ironically, what the original poster said was true, is that, I would be kicking every old computer off the general internet and put them into safety internet land, and then let people who actually take care of the computing environment get open access. The downside of this, of course, is that it does create an internet rife for abuse by the government, and that I'm not particularly with, but, if, we're downloading virii and bots faster than we can circulate patches, you kinda need the government to step in and trust that your democratic processes are enough to keep it open and honest. Free enterprise doesn't build 20 aircraft carriers and an atomic bomb to go get them japs after Pearl Harbor, that's government work.
When it is Republicans that have had the vision to put the capital tools, trade agreements, and military forces in place to create a genuinely free trading global economy? No plan ever made by Democrats has lifted nearly all of Europe and then Asia out of poverty and into the modern world, but the Republican -decades- long commitment to free trade most definitely has. Ultimate, this does mean social change for everyone, but, it is a change in world that is much more peaceful than it has been in a long time, a world where there are increasingly more people that have than have not, a world where people with brains and ambition and want to work, are not held back by those who lack them.
All the Democrats offer, despite their supposed advantage in brains, is, largely reactionary. Obama's central campaign thrust is really "anti-Republican", and not anything really substantive as a view of life in and of itself. Obama argues -against- free trade, argues -against- American military expansion, and finally even seeks to argue -against- global wealth for everyone by demanding that the world accept a greater degree of poverty (thus rationalizing inefficient socialism), in the name of saving the environment.
Even the very idea of redistribution of wealth, is, in essence, a reactionary idea. Some people succeed, other people didn't, and so they invent a bunch of arguments that give their thugs a right to go and take that money, and even worse, demand that someone who is successful work more days per year to pay their taxes than someone who is not.
No, I just missed this article:
Vista SP1 gets kernel upgrade
So Vista pre-SP1 got the Win2003 kernel, and Vista SP1 got 2008.
You don't need to be an accusatory jackass. Dick.
So, NOT torturing people ruins lives, eh? Whereas torturing people is an act of mercy? This is what you are claiming?
Let's compare:
Your plan - the victim spends many man hours trying to recover their passwords while the perp then spends years in jail, then cannot get any other job because he has a felony on the record.
My plan - the victim gets his passwords within a few hours, and the perp gets to walk. He would probably be fired, but he wouldn't have a prison sentence and a criminal record, and quite honestly, I would also make available some psychiatric help for the guy to better communicate and manage stress.
My approach benefits both the victim and the perp, resolves the situation, and allows society the maximum benefit of the talents of all of those involved. Your approach ruins the life of the perp and imposes significant hardship on the victim.
I'm far more merciful than you!
... because you are totally wrong and I am totally right.
You can call me loonie toons all you want but your logic remains completely flawed. On one hand, you argue that torture is terrible, and then, on the other hand, you agree that people would prefer to be tortured rather than suffer long prison terms. Then you argue that torture is morally wrong and a slippery slope towards, what?
Again, let's have some facts.
a) the guy admitted having the passwords and refused to give them up.
b) in doing so, our poster would have, at great expense, third parties attempt to hack them. Guess what, if he chooses a strong password and they are using Windows, it's not going to be so trivial to break into the SAM.
c) in doing so, our poster would have, at great expense, incarcerated the guy for up to several years.
d) the poster then argues that long prison sentences are necessary to avoid fascist states. I leave the reader to judge the logic of THAT argument!
I ask, again, what exactly is this accomplishing? The poster has labelled the man that hacked the computers and withheld the computers as a criminal. I am not so sure that this is the case. I think the perp in this case was reacting badly to stress in some way and frankly, given the financial circumstances our country is in, I think many of us ourselves feel it. Above all, I think there is a movement within the IT sector, among those of us who have had badges deactivated, police escorts and our stuff tossed out on the curb when data centers get sent off overseas, after working for years trying to make the company better, that we are implicitly criminals and not professionals.
What this man did was wrong, no doubt about it, but, again, do you really need to throw him in jail for years upon years? Is it really so horrible a crime to do so? Only if the victim has to spend thousands of dollars in down time and recovery services to get their passwords back up.
I thought, that the first measure of justice is simple: Does the punishment fit the crime? We have become so numb to doling out multiyear prison terms in hopes of some imagined deterrant effect that we have lost notice that we now have people now grow up pretty much thinking that at some point they will be tossed into prison for nearly every capricious sentence invented by the State. That, to me, is fascism....
Thus, I argue, the most merciful thing to do, for the victim, and the perp, is to waterboard the perp until he gives up the passwords, which, by all accounts takes only a few minutes, and then, let bygones be bygones. If the perp is willing to give up the passwords before then, there's no need for the waterboarding at all. But, I can't see how making a felon out of a stressed out guy that made -one- bad mistake, while at the same time making matters worse for the victim of the crime, benefits society in any way.
When I was younger, I used to believe in the slippery slope argument. I remember being told that if we had one more government program, or one too many deregulations, the country would go on a slippery slope either way. But neither happened. If anything, the political battles between liberals and conservatives of the 1980s have lead to so many role reversals that the only thing that is consistent about "conservative" and "liberal" are the words. There hasn't been a slippery slope on any issue, only an ongoing argument. Even in the case of the media and excessive violence and sex, there has been marked improvement. There is no slippery slope and it turns out that people have a pretty good barometer of what is right and what is wrong and that these morals are intrinsic to most humans, above and beyond even one's religious beliefs or even in the absence of them. They can sense when the pendulum has gone too far in one way or another and they tend to push things back towards the best moral ground that they can. It is not just that Americans are decent people, it is that the world is filled with decent people, and so long as we educate ourselves and our children to live by the Golden Rule, to live fairly, I just do not see how we could descend into the very barbarity that he should so describe.
Vista is the Windows Server 2003 kernel with some junk thrown in on it, and Windows Server 2008 is just the next generation of Windows Server 2003. So, right off the wheel, you are getting a better kernel in Windows Server 2008.
The thing is, though, if you are doing client development on Windows, you are probably going to want to be developing on Vista and on XP just so you can be using an OS that is tested.
Read about the argument for this chumpy:
# Delete all risks associated with a second new launch vehicle
# Delete all costs associated with a second new launch vehicle
# Optimum use of the existing NASA & contractor experience
# Enable multiple upgrade paths
Basically, "hey, we're NASA, we're too stupid to design a new rocket, and let's just use the shuttle that, um, we already have."
I thought the whole point of Constellation was that the shuttle sucks. If the engineers had gotten the shuttle off the ground correctly to begin with, we wouldn't be having this conversation now, would we?
I would be willing to bet that most people would prefer 15 minutes of waterboarding torture to a year in jail, as you would have them do.
Your approach ruins lives. Mine doesn't. You are one sick dude, claiming ruin as a mercy, then having the delusional gall to proclaim those who disagree with you to be mentally ill.
Spare your preaching for the mirror!
If it were me involved, I'd -prefer- a quick round of torture to long term jail, any day of the week. Which is really worse? Getting waterboarded for 15 minutes, or going to jail for a couple of YEARS? Given the choice, I'm going for the waterboarding. The torture - is - the punishment, gets the password back, and the guy and the city can both move on with life. It's -better- for everyone.
You know, if anyone is mentally ill, it is arguably the liberal bent of this world. Republicans do all things in moderation, and some to excess, whereas you liberals deny yourselves every pleasure in life, from matters of the spirit, to family, to making a fire, to driving, to hunting, to shooting, to food, to work and acquiring things of great beauty, and all that leaves you with liberals with is that you have to put sex on the altar.
Its all you've allowed yourself to have.
In denying -everything- in your f-- up earth worshiping ego-less religion, you've turned yourselves into sexual deviants because you've placed way too much importance on it. Just because you are turning yourself into an animal because you can't admit that your own earth fest sucks donkey dick, doesn't mean that everyone else should jump into your neurotic hellhole.
I sure as hell do not want to become anything like you. You are all diseased... and if you kept to yourselves, it might be ok, but, you don't, and until you don't, there's always going to be the possibility that those who are sane are just going to have to someday deal with you diseased. You genuinely think you have some better way, and you just don't.
Screw all this administrative expense. Lock the engineer in a room with a couple of goons and waterboard him until he comes up with the password. It won't take more than twenty minutes. If I was President, I'd be on the phone to S.F. extending a pardon and offering the CIA to the locals if they need it. I'd say, "I got some dudes to get your passwords back.."
Then, I'd let the guy go. He did a bad thing, but he got tortured, fessed up, no harm no foul.
And please, if running in Intel, test your hyper-threading - not good for everything!
I'm almost to the point of recommending that hyperthreading should just be turned off because it so totally screws up floating point and more often than not, people needing loads of threads for crunching are terrible.
Took three months to fight the application developers (and they still don't get it?) - total misuse of threadpools in C#! And they were supposed to be the C#/.NET specialist - I'm just an OS guy (mainly MVS/Unix/Linux?) And I had a very good team writing the services for that subsystem but no saying anything about the application design?
By itself, Windows is actually a damned good product. I've actually had a good experience writing services for Windows. *nix stuff makes it easier to develop daemons but I think Windows has made it easier to deal with threads - at least until MS f--- up threaded debugging in Visual Studio.
But its the legion of VB RAD hackers come C# programmers that just wreck it for the rest of us.
I have found, that keeps me into Linux, is that 80% of Windows developers are utterly incompetent, whereas 80% of Linux developers are actually very good.
Windows developers are often self taught and that's a good thing, but most have never had any formal Computer Science education and completely don't know everything is ultimately some kind of a graph and as such lack the tools to properly analyze problems. Instead, what you have is a bunch of retards applying Microsoft designed cookie cutter developmental processes to arrive at solutions and lack any sort of understanding as to what it is they are actually doing, and that MS dumbs some of its APIs down to cater to these people.
So, even though I like Windows, when I come home, I find myself firing up my Linux box even when it aggravates me, because, there's only so much stupid code that I can take in one day. But still, I still like the way Windows C SDK in some ways more than I like the way that X works. Had X just given a little more thought to 2d drawing when it was developed, and they had been able to agree on a standardized widget bundle, we would not have the mess that is GTK versus Qt all sitting on top of creaky X, and still only barely have device independent drawing in the way that Windows has had for nearly 20 years.
You do realize how many grandmothers are under the control of the bad guys, right?
And who opened the door for that? Why should Grandma have to have her computer ripped up so that some 20 something kid can be all gushy eyed about some Star Trek future and say hey "what happens when we plug a lawless country into this thing."
Does Grandma want to talk to non-western nations? Why should she, via her PC operating system expense, be forced to pay the incremental cost of a security that she doesn't want to use.
That's like saying, geez, there would be no gun crime if everyone owned a gun. Note that I'm a big second amendment guy, but, the argument of saying that to protect the right to have a gun, everyone must buy a gun, is rather wrong in and of itself, and so is the argument that everyone must invest in virus protection, firewalls, buffer overrun checks in everything, and denial of service and timeout monitoring and patches and all of the other crap that we have to do to have criminals on the internet.
This is happening because Microsoft shipped a version of Windows with services (designed with little or no consideration of security) turned on by default, but without providing any form of firewall.
My point is that we should have a national infrastructure where someone could plug their computer into the internet, regardless of operating system, and suffer no attacks at all. Consumers should not be forced to buy anti-virus software or firewalls or even have to worry about security. Your argument essentially says that consumers who pay for operating systems, be it indirectly via services or EU taxation, in the case of Linux, or through a PC tax in the case of Microsoft, should be required to pay in both inconvience, and costs.
Any why is this so? This is happening because a minority of users want to have an Internet that is universally open and world wide, and that they want to have all internet traffic remain essentially anonymous.
So, so that a minority of users can anonymously talk to Russia (which originates many of the bots), we have an entirely internet where the western world has to have every citizen under continual assault.
I would argue that, many people would be willing to trade anonymity for internet security in a heartbeat, and so, to an extent, the internet policy we have is entirely undemocratic.
So no, it is not Microsoft's fault that Windows is under assault, any more than it is the fault of a man walking down the street without a pistol for getting robbed. It is the fault of the people that built the internet, and say, hey, let's plug in a bunch of countries that have no laws and no values into it, and we've been paying for it ever since.
Imagine how many more choices we might have in operating systems and network services, if in fact, we did not have to worry about security up and down the entire stack.
It's too much money. Kick Russia off of the internet.
If the internet is so f--- up that plugging a new computer onto it brings it under immediate attack, then, well, the good guys have -lost-.
It's really time to start unplugging bad guys from the internet period, applying stricter filtering at the ISP level, and more rigidly filtering countries who don't police their networks.
Five minutes to be attacked? The internet is LOST.
They only -say- they are using all this computer power for weather forecasting. In reality, they are devising a new kind of anti-matter bomb, and they'll just use that sucker to take over the world. PRetty soon, the capital of Earth will be the University of Illinois, so, if you stole any books from the campus library, you'd better pony up, or you'll be on your way to the Gulag they plan on constructing in North Dakota.
No, what this means is that his applications really aren't burdening the CPU. If you build an MT Windows App that genuinely scales, then, it will most certainly give all the CPUs up. What's happening in his case, most likely, is that he's i/o bound and his cpus are doing nothing. OR, his applications aren't even multithreaded. Or both. I've written some MT C++ apps for Windows for crunching insurance prices and yep, they'll peg all the CPU that you can give it. Also, I wouldn't recommend even setting the task affinity in TM.
Of course, whether or not we should be inefficiently supporting those remote rural areas is a whole 'nother area of debate. I'm sure there's a lot of small town supporters that would scream bloody murder if you argue that those small towns should be allowed to disappear by cutting off any form of government infrastructure subsidy for those locations
Then we'd starve to death, and have no good whiskey, and a valuable market for guns and orthodontics would dry up.
Do you really think UPS couldn't eat the postal service's lunch on 1st Class postage if they were allowed to compete? Of course they could, which is why the Postal Workers unions make damned sure Congress never even brings the subject up.
Can you actually point to the section of the US code that prohibits a third party from delivering first class style mail? I mean, if a private company wanted to sell a service moving an ounce across 3000 miles for 50 cents, they could. IT's just, you'd have to be able to go to Wall Street and say, "well, once you invest in 100,000 delivery vans and thousands of local offices, then, I can go and compete with the USPS in a market segment that's slowly dying." It just doesn't look a business that has any upside to it.
The other thing, too, is, that, being a quasi government entity, the USPS has to actually deliver to everyone. UPS doesn't. So, yeah, theoretically, if you privatized the mail, you might find out that actually wouldn't get -any- mail at all unless you lived in the more densely populated areas of the country.
In any case, now's exactly the time to be touting the miracles of capitalism, when, the we the taxpayers of the United States might be about to double the debt of the Federal Government winds up having to do an Amtrak on what's left of our mortgage and finance industry. Yeah, talk to me about the miracles of the private sector right when you go look at the price of Bear Sterns, Countrywide, National City Bank, Lehman Bros, and other stocks. Fine bunch of capitalists, they are, all getting bailed out in one way or the other by, wow, of all things, that grossly incompetent government.
Works for me.
It's interesting that, you really can't consistently argue in favor of the 2nd amendment being an individual right to keep and bear arms without also being in favor of the 5th. It's pretty clear that the FF's intended the search and seizure to avoid the very chilling effects described.