The deconfliction that needs to be done with assets that are collecting, assets that are targeting, assets picking up or dropping off troops, Iraqi commercial aircraft, VIP aircraft, ad nausem is just mind-boggling. The ATC there does this every day. Why is flying one UAV in the US that big a deal?
Because it's military-controlled airspace and they use modern technology, as opposed to civilian-controlled airspace that uses technology that was out of date in the 1960s.
and no court can make innumerable developers who can make or break a new web/it tech your friend by force.
No, but the "default" choice is often a more powerful cohersive mechanism than the court system. How many people still have "Tom" as a friend on Myspace, or use Internet Explorer "because it's there"?
"If users don't want to be tracked and there is a problem with tracking, then we should regulate tracking, not regulate cookies"
I'm glad we're agreed then. Cookies are used for tracking, so cookies should be regulated. But we won't treat cookies like they're special -- we'll regulate all other forms of tracking as well. That seems fair. In other, unrelated news -- anonymity doesn't exist. Sherlock Holmes may be a fictional character several hundred years dead now, but what he said back then applies today on the internet (which I paraphrase here) "Every place you go, you leave something behind and you take something with you." Tracking, therefore, is just a matter of following the (achem) tracks, and it's something anyone with a bit of skill can do.
The problem is, we're failing society as professionals in the IT field -- part of our work (which most likely isn't earning you money) is teaching our friends, family, and interested parties about these problems and how to protect themselves from it because nobody else can or will. That's what has allowed this kind of crap to permeate into the mainstream... It wouldn't be tolerated if people knew better.
Seriously, you're doing yourself a disservice by using IE6.
Hey! No need to be insulting. I don't use IE6; I just refuse to upgrade it. It's part of that whole "integrated into the OS" thing -- I'd burn it in cleansing fire if I could. I have been using Firefox for years, and have IETab installed for those few websites that stubbornly insist on using ActiveX controls (like Windows Update).
Okay, point made -- But it's a level of suck I can tolerate. The later versions leave me wondering why they don't offer free cans of Crisco with the "upgrade".
Well, the only problem here is that when you write a check, there isn't an electronic record authorizing the release of funds. Which means it's entirely up to the debited account-holder to verify that the amounts are correct. This depends entirely on OCR. Even with a 99.99% accuracy rate, it's going to read some of those numbers wrong and some of those errors will not be detected for days, weeks, or even a month. I'm betting they didn't change their terms of use though to give the debited account-holder more than 48 hours to report fraud (pretty standard), meaning the bank is compromising the security of all of its account-holders and expressly disclaiming liability for this -- all in the name of convenience. If that's true, I'd consider not banking there anymore; They've bypassed most of the safeguards electronic and paper checks ensure -- namely the accuracy of information and longer audit trail.
Disclaimer: I haven't verified their terms of use. I could be wrong.
This makes me wonder how aborting a human life far less developed than a toddler can still draw so much debate, while relatively little concern is shown for the thousands of lost lives of unwanted pets euthanized every year in animal shelters.
It's because of this twisted and horrible notion that our own species is somehow better than the common house dog.
And a "cultural bias" argument is more valid than an "emotion-driven" argument?
The original poster equated animal cruelty to child abuse. That implies that "animal = human", and thus entitled to the same protections. There is no society that now, or has ever existed, in which that belief gained any kind of recognition.
Face it. In most of the world, dogs are kept as pets and our relationship to them is unique, special, and valued.
And after all the rhetoric, calling me ignorant, and trying to sound logical, the true basis of your rebuttal is found: You have a thing for dogs. That's nice. You're still wrong.
I don't know if I buy that. I've seen plenty of asshats who are willing to harass people and destroy their property without the benefit of sharing their deeds with a broader audience.
True, but when someone picks up a video camera and starts recording their criminal activities in a willful fashion, they've advanced beyond mere asshattery and touch the realm of the sociopathic. It's quite clear that fame was the motivation behind a lot of these so-called "pranks". They wanted popularity and didn't care who suffered for it. That's quite a bit different than the average criminal, which often conducts their activities in an effort to avoid drawing attention to themselves, and the motivation is usually money.
Working at an abattoir doesn't make you a psychopath. Working at an abattoir so you can take animals to "the back room" and torture them before work does.
As the US Government has recently demonstrated to the world, the term 'torture' is subjective. It's like porn -- you know it when you see it, right? You have vegetarians that claim killing animals in and of itself is 'torture'. On the other extreme, you have corporate farms that pack animals in so tightly they die in double-digit percentages. It's not that they actively seek to harm the animal, they just want to maximize profits. Somewhere between these two extremes is a balancing point that we unquestionably accept as natural, even though historically that's a moving target. I would have to say 'torture' can be defined as anything intentionally and willfully done either largely or exclusively to cause pain to another. YMMV.
Yeah: Movies are made for entertainment. Pranknet was made for entertainment. They both use the same medium doing so. Pranknet wouldn't exist without an audience to consume it, just like any other entertainment product. It would seem that it doesn't matter how the entertainment was made (legal, illegal, whatever) -- what matters is the audience wants it.
successfully prodded unwitting victims to destroy hotel rooms and lobbies, set off sprinkler systems, activate fire alarms, and damage assorted fast food restaurants[...]Pranknet's hoaxes have caused millions of dollars in damages,
Movies cost hundreds of millions to create, market, distribute, and be consumed for the same reason: Entertainment. The difference is, movies are legal and often fictional. But does it matter to those watching? No. The deeper question here is -- why do people watch it? Why the popularity? The answer says a lot more about us, the audience, than it does about the criminals.
It's basically like abusing a child, and is just as sick.
"Just as sick" is subjective. Also, it's not like abusing a child, because an animal is not anything like a child, not legally, physiologically, or in any other significant way. This is an emotion-driven argument. In many countries, people eat dogs and cats and some places consider them a delicacy. I have yet to hear of a country that fries up children and serves them. Pets are glorified livestock.
That said... torturing of animals positively correlates with psychopathy.
...my dog is a lot like Einstein, in that her hair goes everywhere and she refuses to accept quantum mechanics.
There's no reason we can't have a Schrödinger's dog too. Try it. Whether the dog survives or not, it'll have a far greater appreciation of quantum mechanics. Note: Do not put Schrödinger dog with Schrödinger cat. Experimental results may be random.
'They may not be Einsteins, but are sure closer to humans than we thought.'
I don't think so. You're comparing a fully-mature animal to one in its infancy. We've long known that animals can learn behaviors that mimick that of humans -- in some cases, their physiological parts are superior to humans (the eyes of a hawk, for example). But to say they're "closer to humans than we thought" -- that's a quotable designed to be eaten up by the popular press because a lot of people are dog lovers and will jump at the chance to say "Aw, see, old charlie here is almost human smart!"
I'm sorry to say that, no, Charlie is still a dog. A creature that has spent several thousand years being domesticated by humans -- I'd damn well expect it to be able to emulate certain kinds of human behavior and show types of intelligence other animals do not, that's exactly what domestication is supposed to do. But a dog does not have near-human intelligence. It doesn't even have remotely human intelligence -- it has simply learned behaviors that we can understand and manipulate to a far greater degree than other animals.
"Does anyone know of a free, open-source textbook for basic computer literacy concepts (overview of hardware, software, operating systems, and file systems)?"
Physical books don't have source code.:D It sounds like you are looking for a "creative commons license" for a text that covers the aforementioned. However, those licenses are "free as in beer, not free as in freedom", to quote an old adage. There are write-ups on the various topics, but I haven't seen a book published under any kind of open license available in print. You may have to do what many instructors do -- which is create a workbook instead with various works. If you're looking to create a curriculum, I'd look past just text books. Take this for example; It's a short video with some of these concepts covered.
Google has an option for searching by "Usage rights". Consider using it to find some of these works.
Slashdot Mirror
The deconfliction that needs to be done with assets that are collecting, assets that are targeting, assets picking up or dropping off troops, Iraqi commercial aircraft, VIP aircraft, ad nausem is just mind-boggling. The ATC there does this every day. Why is flying one UAV in the US that big a deal?
Because it's military-controlled airspace and they use modern technology, as opposed to civilian-controlled airspace that uses technology that was out of date in the 1960s.
FYI: Girlintraining is a lesbian. -_-
XcusE mE iDon't know what you mEan.
iDie.
Can we please stop using BiCapitalization, using ALL CAPS for a name, and prefacing everything with either e, i, or x?
and no court can make innumerable developers who can make or break a new web/it tech your friend by force.
No, but the "default" choice is often a more powerful cohersive mechanism than the court system. How many people still have "Tom" as a friend on Myspace, or use Internet Explorer "because it's there"?
"If users don't want to be tracked and there is a problem with tracking, then we should regulate tracking, not regulate cookies"
I'm glad we're agreed then. Cookies are used for tracking, so cookies should be regulated. But we won't treat cookies like they're special -- we'll regulate all other forms of tracking as well. That seems fair. In other, unrelated news -- anonymity doesn't exist. Sherlock Holmes may be a fictional character several hundred years dead now, but what he said back then applies today on the internet (which I paraphrase here) "Every place you go, you leave something behind and you take something with you." Tracking, therefore, is just a matter of following the (achem) tracks, and it's something anyone with a bit of skill can do.
The problem is, we're failing society as professionals in the IT field -- part of our work (which most likely isn't earning you money) is teaching our friends, family, and interested parties about these problems and how to protect themselves from it because nobody else can or will. That's what has allowed this kind of crap to permeate into the mainstream... It wouldn't be tolerated if people knew better.
Seriously, you're doing yourself a disservice by using IE6.
Hey! No need to be insulting. I don't use IE6; I just refuse to upgrade it. It's part of that whole "integrated into the OS" thing -- I'd burn it in cleansing fire if I could. I have been using Firefox for years, and have IETab installed for those few websites that stubbornly insist on using ActiveX controls (like Windows Update).
I am pretty sure someone's made a IE6 theme for Firefox
Shun the non-believers! Shhhuuuuunnn...
Just the later ones?
Okay, point made -- But it's a level of suck I can tolerate. The later versions leave me wondering why they don't offer free cans of Crisco with the "upgrade".
I don't want to upgrade from IE6 for one very simple reason: I think the interfaces of the later IE versions suck donkey balls.
You don't seem to know much about USAA...
Given that its only office is on the East coast and I am not, I think that's a reasonable deduction and I said as much in my disclaimer...
Well, the only problem here is that when you write a check, there isn't an electronic record authorizing the release of funds. Which means it's entirely up to the debited account-holder to verify that the amounts are correct. This depends entirely on OCR. Even with a 99.99% accuracy rate, it's going to read some of those numbers wrong and some of those errors will not be detected for days, weeks, or even a month. I'm betting they didn't change their terms of use though to give the debited account-holder more than 48 hours to report fraud (pretty standard), meaning the bank is compromising the security of all of its account-holders and expressly disclaiming liability for this -- all in the name of convenience. If that's true, I'd consider not banking there anymore; They've bypassed most of the safeguards electronic and paper checks ensure -- namely the accuracy of information and longer audit trail.
Disclaimer: I haven't verified their terms of use. I could be wrong.
This makes me wonder how aborting a human life far less developed than a toddler can still draw so much debate, while relatively little concern is shown for the thousands of lost lives of unwanted pets euthanized every year in animal shelters.
It's because of this twisted and horrible notion that our own species is somehow better than the common house dog.
And a "cultural bias" argument is more valid than an "emotion-driven" argument?
The original poster equated animal cruelty to child abuse. That implies that "animal = human", and thus entitled to the same protections. There is no society that now, or has ever existed, in which that belief gained any kind of recognition.
Face it. In most of the world, dogs are kept as pets and our relationship to them is unique, special, and valued.
And after all the rhetoric, calling me ignorant, and trying to sound logical, the true basis of your rebuttal is found: You have a thing for dogs. That's nice. You're still wrong.
I don't know if I buy that. I've seen plenty of asshats who are willing to harass people and destroy their property without the benefit of sharing their deeds with a broader audience.
True, but when someone picks up a video camera and starts recording their criminal activities in a willful fashion, they've advanced beyond mere asshattery and touch the realm of the sociopathic. It's quite clear that fame was the motivation behind a lot of these so-called "pranks". They wanted popularity and didn't care who suffered for it. That's quite a bit different than the average criminal, which often conducts their activities in an effort to avoid drawing attention to themselves, and the motivation is usually money.
Working at an abattoir doesn't make you a psychopath. Working at an abattoir so you can take animals to "the back room" and torture them before work does.
As the US Government has recently demonstrated to the world, the term 'torture' is subjective. It's like porn -- you know it when you see it, right? You have vegetarians that claim killing animals in and of itself is 'torture'. On the other extreme, you have corporate farms that pack animals in so tightly they die in double-digit percentages. It's not that they actively seek to harm the animal, they just want to maximize profits. Somewhere between these two extremes is a balancing point that we unquestionably accept as natural, even though historically that's a moving target. I would have to say 'torture' can be defined as anything intentionally and willfully done either largely or exclusively to cause pain to another. YMMV.
Yeah: Movies are made for entertainment. Pranknet was made for entertainment. They both use the same medium doing so. Pranknet wouldn't exist without an audience to consume it, just like any other entertainment product. It would seem that it doesn't matter how the entertainment was made (legal, illegal, whatever) -- what matters is the audience wants it.
Why?
That whooshing sound over your head is the point you missed.
successfully prodded unwitting victims to destroy hotel rooms and lobbies, set off sprinkler systems, activate fire alarms, and damage assorted fast food restaurants[...]Pranknet's hoaxes have caused millions of dollars in damages,
Movies cost hundreds of millions to create, market, distribute, and be consumed for the same reason: Entertainment. The difference is, movies are legal and often fictional. But does it matter to those watching? No. The deeper question here is -- why do people watch it? Why the popularity? The answer says a lot more about us, the audience, than it does about the criminals.
It's basically like abusing a child, and is just as sick.
"Just as sick" is subjective. Also, it's not like abusing a child, because an animal is not anything like a child, not legally, physiologically, or in any other significant way. This is an emotion-driven argument. In many countries, people eat dogs and cats and some places consider them a delicacy. I have yet to hear of a country that fries up children and serves them. Pets are glorified livestock.
That said... torturing of animals positively correlates with psychopathy.
...my dog is a lot like Einstein, in that her hair goes everywhere and she refuses to accept quantum mechanics.
There's no reason we can't have a Schrödinger's dog too. Try it. Whether the dog survives or not, it'll have a far greater appreciation of quantum mechanics. Note: Do not put Schrödinger dog with Schrödinger cat. Experimental results may be random.
'They may not be Einsteins, but are sure closer to humans than we thought.'
I don't think so. You're comparing a fully-mature animal to one in its infancy. We've long known that animals can learn behaviors that mimick that of humans -- in some cases, their physiological parts are superior to humans (the eyes of a hawk, for example). But to say they're "closer to humans than we thought" -- that's a quotable designed to be eaten up by the popular press because a lot of people are dog lovers and will jump at the chance to say "Aw, see, old charlie here is almost human smart!"
I'm sorry to say that, no, Charlie is still a dog. A creature that has spent several thousand years being domesticated by humans -- I'd damn well expect it to be able to emulate certain kinds of human behavior and show types of intelligence other animals do not, that's exactly what domestication is supposed to do. But a dog does not have near-human intelligence. It doesn't even have remotely human intelligence -- it has simply learned behaviors that we can understand and manipulate to a far greater degree than other animals.
Achem. Cough. Anchor tag eaten. I mean this.
"Does anyone know of a free, open-source textbook for basic computer literacy concepts (overview of hardware, software, operating systems, and file systems)?"
Physical books don't have source code. :D It sounds like you are looking for a "creative commons license" for a text that covers the aforementioned. However, those licenses are "free as in beer, not free as in freedom", to quote an old adage. There are write-ups on the various topics, but I haven't seen a book published under any kind of open license available in print. You may have to do what many instructors do -- which is create a workbook instead with various works. If you're looking to create a curriculum, I'd look past just text books. Take this for example; It's a short video with some of these concepts covered.
Google has an option for searching by "Usage rights". Consider using it to find some of these works.
Is it too late to note that none of these problems would occur if we adopted ipv6? "Mandatory encryption", being the most obvious benefit.