Now is only the could work in Cold Fusion and Death Panels!
Now is only the could work in sentence structure!
Apologies if you made this post without the aid of caffeine... or if you're quoting verbatim from Palin's blog (which I kinda doubted at first since it uses the words "cold fusion" but that COULD be some obscure Alaskan sexual practise)
If the head of the FBI, the guy who knows all the secrets, that sees all the scams all the time almost falls for this, what can we expect from you average house folks? Scams are getting more and more elaborate this days.
I have to agree that scams are getting more and more elaborate, but I find it very hard to imagine that the head of the FBI "knows all the secrets," and "sees all the scams all the time". People at the top of any organization are there to manage "What is important?" and the larger the organization is the less they understand how any of it works.
I think there may be a correlation between consumption of unhealthy food, and quality of parenting. Parents who do a good job tend not to encourage consumption of junk food. The same parents steer their kids away from becoming criminals.
And it's equally likely that it can be viewed from a self control angle as well. People with a poor "internal parent" that does not restrain consumption of junk food are less likely to act with restraint in other areas.
The real interesting questions are: How do some children of bad parents develop internal restraint? and How do some children of good parents develop poor self control?
Your post is a really interesting read, but did you consider that he set passwords to protect the system in the first place? All it takes is a clueless supervisor who can't admit that he was wrong to end up _exactly_ where we are now.
Assuming that the guy is not misanthropic, having Asperger's, _very_ stupid or was forced to do what he did, he is just a victim of the terrorist hacker craze. The level of sophistication of the source which describes a computer as "the hard drive" and the fact that this is a Mirror story, this is the most likely explanation, by far.
I personally thought this myself. You mean a source that describes the crime as "installing passwords" may not understand the situation?/fake-shock
However Nick's point stands even in this case, the guy in question is as much a victim of his reputation as anything else. What he said/did to create that reputation or what he may have failed to do to change it are not known to us, but his situation shows that it wasn't well engineered.
Maybe you need authority to "install passwords"... I've had plenty of access to plenty of computers but I've NEVER installed a password. Maybe I need authority to be able to do such a hackerly deed.
"Run there's a socialist trying to death-panel gramma!"
Hey Jimbob, I never said Opera didn't start this for their own profit... I just said it's not some sort of governmental conspiracy on their behalf, apparently this contradicts your perspective./off
The purpose of approaching a governing council with a legal complaint alleging antitrust is to have an official evaluation of whether a fair market exists, and if a fair market does not exist then competition is to be fostered at the expense of the monopoly.
That's why it matters that 4 companies are getting free advertising here, because it's about balancing the opportunity in a market.
so either:
a) you don't understand this
b) you are a bigoted Amerizealot, who has been trained to fear Europe
c) you are a bigoted Conservizealot, who has been trained to fear regulation
The real question is not whether Hussein was despotic or not, it's why the American authorities saw fit to support a man, who had proven himself despotic and ruthless in his rise to power, in an aggressive action against Iran. If you were on a board of directors, would you appoint the CEO of one of your failed subsidiaries to be it's bastion against communism in the Middle East?
dunno sounds plausible... either I guess it comes down to "Government mismanagement does not excuse despotism, and the fact that someone is later publicly revealed to be a despot does not remove government responsibility"
The public really needs to demand that core services (defense, police, fire fighters, courts, transportation) be funded first and funded generously, that the social services be funded next, and that corporate interests & pork barrel kickbacks & empire building be funded with the scraps that are left over from the core budget and user fees.
One longterm method to avoid user stress is "cross-compatibility".
New methods should be built around consistency. I personally dislike the new version of office, but I agree that the ribbon method is well implemented within it, because it is consistent within itself as a package. Such consistency is not going to exist among other (non-M$ Office) implementations of it.
With a menu based system you could go from Word to Lotus to Photoshop and still know that you could find "Paste Special" under edit. As each development team gets creative with their interpretations of "advanced functionality" this consistency disappears. My concerns are over M$ promoting their ribbons as an aesthetic without replicable standards.
Agreed completely! (and with Commadore 64 Love also)
From the perspective of someone who spends more time describing over the phone how to do something in office, rather than using it: The ribbon has completely decontexualized functions from their relationship to each other and from meaningful labels.
Even though I will concede that M$ Office has done a workable job of implementing this (and I'm sure Mozilla can as well) just imagine what horrendous implementations we will see as less capable developers make use of this new tool.
Your point is that capitalism is an evil beast that needs to be brought down before it fills the world with broken-from-the-factory useless shit that looks pretty.... right?
And here I didn't expect to agree with you, I've got a lot to learn.
I don't know what your "normal" is but in my world, yes, normal people do indeed know what Windows is. They know because they use a PC or laptop and occasionally have trouble with their OS and therefore need tp fix something. It's amusing to see how often "normal" users are made to look less intelligent than your average Slashdot reader here. It's done a lot. And in my real world experience, it's just not the case.
"Normal users" don't fix things themselves... even if a simple click does it for them.
If you ask a "normal user" what version of MS Word they have they will likely answer "Vista".
If you work in an environment where this is not true than most of us will be very jealous and skeptical of your stories.
I've never eaten Mooreslaw but you can't beat a classic. Coleslaw is made of sweet cabbagey goodness, while Mooreslaw is made of silicon wafers; silicon does not taste or digest well.
oh and about the chips (we call them "fries" in the US)... micro chips are a bad idea! Give me big starchy chunks of potato everytime.
p.s. Is the article about the same thing the tags are about?
I would guess it's because he is using "open source farming" instead of GM (sterile) hybrids his seeds for next year are a portion of this year's crop.
Even so, there is a preciously small chance of mutating (via microwave radiation from a cell tower) the germ cells of an annual plant such that an altered, viable seed results. Or perhaps to put it more clearly, this happens all the time for a host of factors such that microwave radiation from a cell tower is going to be down in the noise as a cause of mutation.
Furthermore, most farmers I know buy seed each year, even if the crop isn't "GM (sterile)". (Just because a crop is GM doesn't mean it is sterile, BTW. The sterile nature of some GM crops is just a "feature" which requires farmers to buy seed stock for each crop, as I understand it.)
I think we should study the effects of Microwave towers. To date, we have no evidence that the towers are harmful, based on a number of studies. I do not think we have laid this issue to rest, since what frequencies we use, and how we transmit them is still a matter of rapid change.
In this case, the fellow's objections shouldn't carry too much weight. That is because, as a reasonable matter of policy, we haven't anything to support his fears other than the fact that he does indeed have fears of radiation. But we should study the issue, because, while we have no reason to think he is right to be fearful, we don't have enough information to say categorically that he wrong.
Policy ought to be based on the best information we have, yet we should work to make sure we have better information in the future just in case the best information we have might possibly have missed a significant risk.
Nice response. I'm not exactly advocating that we treat this guy's claims as fact, I'm just very surprised that more people can't assess it as a question/issue that we should seek clarity on rather than crying "he's a witch burn him". (Yeah I know I'm being surprised by irrational prejudices from Americans/Slashdotters... and I fell dumb about that.) . . p.s. Yes, GM doesn't necessarily mean sterile... but hybrid usually does. Both forms of sterility can be avoided but there is driving interest for seed companies to direct R&D along plant lines that already have sterility as a feature. In any case I mentioned it as a reminder that he is probably considering this from a multi-generational aspect rather than an annual one.
The point is, at some level, there is some evidence that microwave radiation in the ranges used by cell phones (roughly 380 mhz to 2 mhz) may have some effect on organisms.
Now, assuming that the fellow reseeds his crop each year (garlic is an annual, after all), one wonders why he is all that worried in any event.
. I would guess it's because he is using "open source farming" instead of GM (sterile) hybrids his seeds for next year are a portion of this year's crop. . I know that I should be used to the culture here, but honestly I'm surprised that there is such blank scorn being handed out here. The above poster is one of the few moderate thinkers who simply acknowledges that we don't have evidence of a risk in this situation BUT we do have reason to suspect interaction. With that in mind we should approach this from the same perspective of protective skepticism* that most of us have regarding our networks or systems. "You want to install something? Prove to me it's NOT harmful." . A sufficient degree of involvement in programming or system administration creates our own voodoo beliefs, particularly if we suspect that something "may interact"; and while certain items of belief may eventually be proven false on the whole we save ourselves a lot of trouble by following those superstitions until we have evidence to work with. . (To clarify my terms:) "protective skepticism" = { "Prove to me it's safe" or "prove to me I should" } as a contrast to "progressive skepticism" = {"Prove to me it's harmful" or "Prove to me I shouldn't"}
Except he's claiming that complexity of word definitions create ignorance... and you're pointing out that only the ignorant are confused by complexity in word definitions.
The Linux NTFS drivers are working well now. That's what I use on my shared partition.
Except if the portable drive is pulled out of the machine without being properly unmounted. Then the filesystem is unclean, and the Linux NTFS driver doesn't know how to replay the journal. So the thing becomes unusable until you stick it into a Windows machine and then remove it properly. Of course, you shouldn't be pulling it out without unmounting . . . that can cause serious data loss on some cheap USB drives, apparently, regardless of journaling.
It's not so much that the driver doesn't know how, I think it's more of a protection decision. By default if a drive is marked "dirty" it will not auto mount. Reinserting into a winbox is one method, however you can run into this when trying to mount a standard HDD from a windows machine that no longer boots. It's useful to know that you can also do a force mount the command is something like: mount -t ntfs-3g/dev/sdb1/media/disk -o defaults,force,umask=0
. p.s. a dumb thing with windows security is that some user restrictions (such as you might see on public machines) can prevent the ability to safely remove a USB.
Slashdot Mirror
Yo Dawg, I heard you liked idiot replies, so here's an idiot reply for your idiot reply!
Now is only the could work in Cold Fusion and Death Panels!
Now is only the could work in sentence structure!
Apologies if you made this post without the aid of caffeine... or if you're quoting verbatim from Palin's blog (which I kinda doubted at first since it uses the words "cold fusion" but that COULD be some obscure Alaskan sexual practise)
Now see what happens when you post as an AC?
You say something insightful, relevant, and coherent.... and I'm the only one who reads it.
If the head of the FBI, the guy who knows all the secrets, that sees all the scams all the time almost falls for this, what can we expect from you average house folks? Scams are getting more and more elaborate this days.
I have to agree that scams are getting more and more elaborate, but I find it very hard to imagine that the head of the FBI "knows all the secrets," and "sees all the scams all the time".
People at the top of any organization are there to manage "What is important?" and the larger the organization is the less they understand how any of it works.
I think there may be a correlation between consumption of unhealthy food, and quality of parenting. Parents who do a good job tend not to encourage consumption of junk food. The same parents steer their kids away from becoming criminals.
And it's equally likely that it can be viewed from a self control angle as well. People with a poor "internal parent" that does not restrain consumption of junk food are less likely to act with restraint in other areas.
The real interesting questions are:
How do some children of bad parents develop internal restraint? and How do some children of good parents develop poor self control?
Your post is a really interesting read, but did you consider that he set passwords to protect the system in the first place? All it takes is a clueless supervisor who can't admit that he was wrong to end up _exactly_ where we are now.
Assuming that the guy is not misanthropic, having Asperger's, _very_ stupid or was forced to do what he did, he is just a victim of the terrorist hacker craze. The level of sophistication of the source which describes a computer as "the hard drive" and the fact that this is a Mirror story, this is the most likely explanation, by far.
I personally thought this myself. /fake-shock
You mean a source that describes the crime as "installing passwords" may not understand the situation?
However Nick's point stands even in this case, the guy in question is as much a victim of his reputation as anything else. What he said/did to create that reputation or what he may have failed to do to change it are not known to us, but his situation shows that it wasn't well engineered.
Maybe you need authority to "install passwords"... I've had plenty of access to plenty of computers but I've NEVER installed a password. Maybe I need authority to be able to do such a hackerly deed.
"Run there's a socialist trying to death-panel gramma!"
Hey Jimbob, /off
I never said Opera didn't start this for their own profit... I just said it's not some sort of governmental conspiracy on their behalf, apparently this contradicts your perspective.
Yes... opera is getting a free thing
The purpose of approaching a governing council with a legal complaint alleging antitrust is to have an official evaluation of whether a fair market exists, and if a fair market does not exist then competition is to be fostered at the expense of the monopoly.
That's why it matters that 4 companies are getting free advertising here, because it's about balancing the opportunity in a market.
so either:
a) you don't understand this
b) you are a bigoted Amerizealot, who has been trained to fear Europe
c) you are a bigoted Conservizealot, who has been trained to fear regulation
d) you just hate opera
e) all of the above
The real question is not whether Hussein was despotic or not, it's why the American authorities saw fit to support a man, who had proven himself despotic and ruthless in his rise to power, in an aggressive action against Iran. If you were on a board of directors, would you appoint the CEO of one of your failed subsidiaries to be it's bastion against communism in the Middle East?
dunno sounds plausible... either I guess it comes down to "Government mismanagement does not excuse despotism, and the fact that someone is later publicly revealed to be a despot does not remove government responsibility"
IMO there are 3 significant facts:
1) We cannot prove/disprove Global Warming in a satisfactory way, if we wait for proof then the time to react in either direction will have passed.
2) CO2 either DOES or DOES NOT affect the environment as a whole, ultimately it has become a political football.
3) We ARE treating the earth like a whore.
There is nothing we can do about the first 2 facts.
The public really needs to demand that core services (defense, police, fire fighters, courts, transportation) be funded first and funded generously, that the social services be funded next, and that corporate interests & pork barrel kickbacks & empire building be funded with the scraps that are left over from the core budget and user fees.
clarified that a bit for you
Let me guess... you used to watch Malcolm in the Middle?
Windows key + L for lock
p.s. Dosbox works great for Wing Commander
One longterm method to avoid user stress is "cross-compatibility".
New methods should be built around consistency. I personally dislike the new version of office, but I agree that the ribbon method is well implemented within it, because it is consistent within itself as a package.
Such consistency is not going to exist among other (non-M$ Office) implementations of it.
With a menu based system you could go from Word to Lotus to Photoshop and still know that you could find "Paste Special" under edit. As each development team gets creative with their interpretations of "advanced functionality" this consistency disappears. My concerns are over M$ promoting their ribbons as an aesthetic without replicable standards.
Agreed completely! (and with Commadore 64 Love also)
From the perspective of someone who spends more time describing over the phone how to do something in office, rather than using it: The ribbon has completely decontexualized functions from their relationship to each other and from meaningful labels.
Even though I will concede that M$ Office has done a workable job of implementing this (and I'm sure Mozilla can as well) just imagine what horrendous implementations we will see as less capable developers make use of this new tool.
Your point is that capitalism is an evil beast that needs to be brought down before it fills the world with broken-from-the-factory useless shit that looks pretty.... right?
And here I didn't expect to agree with you, I've got a lot to learn.
I don't know what your "normal" is but in my world, yes, normal people do indeed know what Windows is. They know because they use a PC or laptop and occasionally have trouble with their OS and therefore need tp fix something.
It's amusing to see how often "normal" users are made to look less intelligent than your average Slashdot reader here. It's done a lot. And in my real world experience, it's just not the case.
"Normal users" don't fix things themselves... even if a simple click does it for them.
If you ask a "normal user" what version of MS Word they have they will likely answer "Vista".
If you work in an environment where this is not true than most of us will be very jealous and skeptical of your stories.
Oh sure... silicone vs silicon gets +funny
but point out that the story is tagged "coleslaw" and some wanker marks you off topic.
I've never eaten Mooreslaw but you can't beat a classic. Coleslaw is made of sweet cabbagey goodness, while Mooreslaw is made of silicon wafers; silicon does not taste or digest well.
oh and about the chips (we call them "fries" in the US)... micro chips are a bad idea! Give me big starchy chunks of potato everytime.
p.s. Is the article about the same thing the tags are about?
I would guess it's because he is using "open source farming" instead of GM (sterile) hybrids his seeds for next year are a portion of this year's crop.
Even so, there is a preciously small chance of mutating (via microwave radiation from a cell tower) the germ cells of an annual plant such that an altered, viable seed results. Or perhaps to put it more clearly, this happens all the time for a host of factors such that microwave radiation from a cell tower is going to be down in the noise as a cause of mutation.
Furthermore, most farmers I know buy seed each year, even if the crop isn't "GM (sterile)". (Just because a crop is GM doesn't mean it is sterile, BTW. The sterile nature of some GM crops is just a "feature" which requires farmers to buy seed stock for each crop, as I understand it.)
I think we should study the effects of Microwave towers. To date, we have no evidence that the towers are harmful, based on a number of studies. I do not think we have laid this issue to rest, since what frequencies we use, and how we transmit them is still a matter of rapid change.
In this case, the fellow's objections shouldn't carry too much weight. That is because, as a reasonable matter of policy, we haven't anything to support his fears other than the fact that he does indeed have fears of radiation. But we should study the issue, because, while we have no reason to think he is right to be fearful, we don't have enough information to say categorically that he wrong.
Policy ought to be based on the best information we have, yet we should work to make sure we have better information in the future just in case the best information we have might possibly have missed a significant risk.
Nice response. I'm not exactly advocating that we treat this guy's claims as fact, I'm just very surprised that more people can't assess it as a question/issue that we should seek clarity on rather than crying "he's a witch burn him". (Yeah I know I'm being surprised by irrational prejudices from Americans/Slashdotters... and I fell dumb about that.)
.
.
p.s. Yes, GM doesn't necessarily mean sterile... but hybrid usually does. Both forms of sterility can be avoided but there is driving interest for seed companies to direct R&D along plant lines that already have sterility as a feature. In any case I mentioned it as a reminder that he is probably considering this from a multi-generational aspect rather than an annual one.
The point is, at some level, there is some evidence that microwave radiation in the ranges used by cell phones (roughly 380 mhz to 2 mhz) may have some effect on organisms.
Now, assuming that the fellow reseeds his crop each year (garlic is an annual, after all), one wonders why he is all that worried in any event.
.
I would guess it's because he is using "open source farming" instead of GM (sterile) hybrids his seeds for next year are a portion of this year's crop.
.
I know that I should be used to the culture here, but honestly I'm surprised that there is such blank scorn being handed out here. The above poster is one of the few moderate thinkers who simply acknowledges that we don't have evidence of a risk in this situation BUT we do have reason to suspect interaction.
With that in mind we should approach this from the same perspective of protective skepticism* that most of us have regarding our networks or systems. "You want to install something? Prove to me it's NOT harmful."
.
A sufficient degree of involvement in programming or system administration creates our own voodoo beliefs, particularly if we suspect that something "may interact"; and while certain items of belief may eventually be proven false on the whole we save ourselves a lot of trouble by following those superstitions until we have evidence to work with.
.
(To clarify my terms:)
"protective skepticism" = { "Prove to me it's safe" or "prove to me I should" }
as a contrast to "progressive skepticism" = {"Prove to me it's harmful" or "Prove to me I shouldn't"}
To be fair, I'm doing exactly the same thing...
Except he's claiming that complexity of word definitions create ignorance...
and you're pointing out that only the ignorant are confused by complexity in word definitions.
The Linux NTFS drivers are working well now. That's what I use on my shared partition.
Except if the portable drive is pulled out of the machine without being properly unmounted. Then the filesystem is unclean, and the Linux NTFS driver doesn't know how to replay the journal. So the thing becomes unusable until you stick it into a Windows machine and then remove it properly. Of course, you shouldn't be pulling it out without unmounting . . . that can cause serious data loss on some cheap USB drives, apparently, regardless of journaling.
It's not so much that the driver doesn't know how, I think it's more of a protection decision. By default if a drive is marked "dirty" it will not auto mount. /dev/sdb1 /media/disk -o defaults,force,umask=0
Reinserting into a winbox is one method, however you can run into this when trying to mount a standard HDD from a windows machine that no longer boots. It's useful to know that you can also do a force mount the command is something like:
mount -t ntfs-3g
.
p.s. a dumb thing with windows security is that some user restrictions (such as you might see on public machines) can prevent the ability to safely remove a USB.