>I'm sick of everyone saying "all i want is a >phone that texts and calls, not a camera". GET >USED TO IT. For a techy site such as/. seems >like there are allot of readers that have a >massive fear of new technology.
It's not fear, Dr Freud, it's just a cigar;)
>I bet you were the ones who said "texting? what >the f*%k do I need that for, I just want a phone >so I can be contacted only in emergencies".
I still do say that. Actually, I usually leave it off. *I'll* do the calling and have the emergencies, thank you very much;)
>Anyway, I am currently employed in the mobile >industry, and I have some shocking news for you.
Er, by this point I was not shocked to learn that;)
Even though the "rules" are hardly friendly (VPN requiring explicit access to each server and port, slow bureaucracy for additions and changes, no remote control access allowed to work desktop and thus software, etc.), it has been fantastic to periodically work days or weeks from home over a VPN via SecurID.
Wife abroad while I cared for 2-year old daughter (worked during naps, early mornings, and late nights)
Make up out of office time in convenient chunks without taking vacation
Family medical problems, situations like that
And despite many comments here, I'm not a manager or CEO, nor am I in India;)
I've seen the "whole quote" many times; it is always trotted out as if it were a defense or something.:)
So, he followed his disprovable (and false) grandiose claim with a vaporous bag of grandiose claims that are too vague to be disproven. And that makes it OK?
Didn't it ever bother you that their crowd had to have their words carefully parsed every week or so, to "prove" that they hadn't lied about yet another thing? They would either use odd phrasing in the first place, or just pick a word and dispute the meaning when later called upon it.
He made a sweeping claim that he "took the initiative in creating the Internet" that was clearly intended to be taken as it was, and just as clearly intended to be deniable if called on it.
It's not a "myth" that he did this, nor anything to be proud of, if you're a Gore-ite... I notice Gore-ites sure get uncomfortable about it.
Also while this case is in Germany and the US often does its own thing, there is something to be said about how the world can influence the US. The US and its citizens like to think they are the ones calling the shots, but the simple fact is that America is influenced by trends around the globe.
You might want to look at what your obsession says about you... frankly I don't give a rat's behind about what Germans think about me...
This is one reason Snopes sometimes bugs me. It is not an "urban legend" that Gore made a sweeping claim, clearly intended to be interpreted as it was, but carefully crafted to be deniable.
Gore's devotees, however, were clearly quite discomfited by his claim...
This Snopes article is basically an opinion piece, trying to pass as a skeptical debunking piece.
No way! No law or regulation ever works, nor any solution that doesn't involve Perl.
And you can trust my/. certified predictions - as you know, we've had 15 more 9/11 incidents, and no terrorist has ever been caught, because they all use PGP, and are impossible to monitor or stop;)
Which particular section of the US constitution are they referring to? I don't recall anything in there about the right to spam, the right to install spyware or the write to take over someone else's computer in pursuit of the almighty dollar -- but as a UK citizen I admit to not having read it as closely as a US citizen may have done.
Fascinating how rights that don't exist appear as they please the reader... while those that do exist (2nd) vanish...
The funny thing is that they have done a controlled study, and you haven't. No matter what you believe until you actually do a controlled study you're opinion would seem to be wrong.
Your faith is touching - that the methodology was sound, that it wasn't constructed to produce a given result, that it was conducted as stated...
In any case, the Slashdot audience is probably more likely to work in an office environment than the general population. Where annoying ringtones are heard:
In meetings.
In presentations, even after the speaker has requested that phones be set to vibrate or turned off.
Most annoyingly, in empty cubicles, left there by the owner, to ring, and ring, and ring...
No doubt these episodes don't bother a kid at the mall much, or somebody who stays at home answering survey calls. They bug the crap out of me...
I've noticed a horrible uptick in completely non-technical folk who insist on talking about viruses in completely unrelated forums.
Because, you know, it is just vital that they thunder at each other the importance of running commercial virus scanners, and that they loudly, publicly misunderstand the FROM header...
I occasionally mention that they need to stop clicking 'OK' and generally being idiots, but somehow they do not appreciate my free advice...;)
Flashmobs are to the 2000's as streaking was to the 70's; merely the obnoxious fad of the times. Thirty years from now, flashmobs will be footnote of history, dragged out of archival footage whenever news shows (or whatever replaces news shows) want to give context to the time.
Maybe not even that... it's not like those of us in the normal part of the country ("flyover county") have ever even seen a "flashmob"... nor are a bunch of idiots standing around inappropriately quite as visually arresting as a naked person.
talk about a profiler's goldmine. don't tell me any of you believe google (a for-profit company) wouldn't scan every last email for "marketing" reasons?
Fine; so I'll use them for all my technical email lists and so forth, I get the awesome searching power (instead of the crappy or non-existant archive searches that email lists usually have).
If they want to give me free stuff, I'll just use it how I see fit. Sounds good to me:)
I realize that I still reflexively bookmark good sites, even though I almost never use the bookmarks (beyond the few I put on the Links/Personal toolbar). I just go to Google for everything.
Yet I'd like to harness the value of that information. I wish I could do a google search, limited to the bookmarked hosts. Weighted by how many bookmarks I have for that host. So if I have 30 bookmarks at 4guysfromrolla or whatever those results come to the top.
Should be possible by running a daily script on my bookmarks.html, to build a searching script. Do individual site searches for each host, ordered by the number of times the hosts occur in the bookmarks, then merge the results. Just haven't got around to it...
So, are you saying that you agree with the poster's assertion of facts? If so, one might conclude that you think the US should be allowed to commit any crime, regardless of international law, as long as the primary victim of the crime is a communist state, because communists are bad, and they deserve it.
I'm saying that I don't think that Reagan mined
the harbor just because he felt insulted by something the dictator said. I'm saying that to believe that as the motive is childish and stupid.
>>Nicaragua was a communist puppet state. >>Nicaragua's "head of state" was a brutal communist >>dictator. And contrary to little slashdot kiddie >>beliefs, communism is not just an epithet. > >so that makes it ok to mine their harbor? I don't >follow your logic, such as it is.
Yes, it is OK to mine the harbor of a dictatorhip to hasten it's demise. You may not agree with that, but it isn't that hard of a concept to understand.
I don't understand how your name-calling was meant to invalidate the post you were replying to? I thought funding and supporting revolutionary soldiers in other countries would be considered supporting terrorism, but apparently it was alright for Reagan and his buddies, even though they had to break international and American law to be able to do it, and then perjure themselves afterwards to cover it up.
There you go again... (sorry, couldn't resist since the context is Reagan)...
It isn't "name calling" to call a dictatorship a dictatorship. Yes, supporting revolution against dictatorships is good, while it is not good against non-dictatorships. Do you really not understand that?
I can't think of anything that's terribly legal. I knew there was a reason I never do anything important on publically-accessible terminals. I guess it's a nice device to own if you're a bad parent with a tinfoil hat.
How on earth would just using the device make you "a bad parent with a tinfoil hat"?
Contrary to kid's beliefs, most parents have little interest in snooping on whether your friend Monica likes Jeff and also got new shoes, or whatever. However, it would be nice to have some forensic material available to save your ass if you get involved with something stupid.
Attorney Humlen, lecturer in international law at the university of Oslo, has a lot of strange, sometimes funny anecdotes about international events. As I recall, he recounted the nicaragua harbor-mining incident more or less like this:
Nicaragua's head of state said something unflattering about Reagan in a public speech. Reagan, perhaps as a result of the onset of senile dementia, thought that mining the harbors of Nicaragua was a reasonable response.
This of course provoked incredulous responses from the rest of the world, and the court in question did rule the action illegal. However, since US support for the court was essential to its success, they made the penalty as light as they possibly could: just pay for the cleanup, please.
The sad part is you probably actually believe this. And you got enough Slashbots to mod you "informative".
Nicaragua was a communist puppet state. Nicaragua's "head of state" was a brutal communist dictator. And contrary to little slashdot kiddie beliefs, communism is not just an epithet.
have always been the masters of irreverence. The silly and sometimes seemingly lame sketches have always just been a veneer over them thumbing their noses at God, Queen and Country, bureaucracy, castes and whatever else they thought deserved a bit of a dressing down. Satire was their means of writing an indignant letter to the editor.
... which is pretty lame, nowadays. I love their humor, but only because I can evoke the distant memory of the things that they were skewering. It's very dated.
The things that they poked fun at (except bureaucracy) are long gone (at least as mainstream societal forces). We're all David Letterman now, sarcastically jabbing at the last century's orthodoxy as though it makes us soooo clever... the Python stance is the mainstream now.
Meanwhile, today's pet orthodoxies go mostly unchallenged, as usual...
Slashdot Mirror
>I'm sick of everyone saying "all i want is a /. seems
;)
;)
;)
>phone that texts and calls, not a camera". GET
>USED TO IT. For a techy site such as
>like there are allot of readers that have a
>massive fear of new technology.
It's not fear, Dr Freud, it's just a cigar
>I bet you were the ones who said "texting? what
>the f*%k do I need that for, I just want a phone
>so I can be contacted only in emergencies".
I still do say that. Actually, I usually leave it
off. *I'll* do the calling and have the
emergencies, thank you very much
>Anyway, I am currently employed in the mobile
>industry, and I have some shocking news for you.
Er, by this point I was not shocked to learn that
Even though the "rules" are hardly friendly (VPN requiring explicit access to each server and port, slow bureaucracy for additions and changes, no remote control access allowed to work desktop and thus software, etc.), it has been fantastic to periodically work days or weeks from home over a VPN via SecurID.
And despite many comments here, I'm not a manager or CEO, nor am I in India ;)
Why do so many Slashdotters think that Bush and his minions would be the ones to abuse this type of system?
Ever think it might be the crowd who wants the "village" to raise your child?
I've seen the "whole quote" many times; it is always trotted out as if it were a defense or something. :)
So, he followed his disprovable (and false) grandiose claim with a vaporous bag of grandiose claims that are too vague to be disproven. And that makes it OK?
Didn't it ever bother you that their crowd had to have their words carefully parsed every week or so, to "prove" that they hadn't lied about yet another thing? They would either use odd phrasing in the first place, or just pick a word and dispute the meaning when later called upon it.
He made a sweeping claim that he "took the initiative in creating the Internet" that was clearly intended to be taken as it was, and just as clearly intended to be deniable if called on it.
It's not a "myth" that he did this, nor anything to be proud of, if you're a Gore-ite ... I notice Gore-ites sure get uncomfortable about it.
That's not what I said. I said that I don't give a rat's behind about what Germans think of me. Big difference.
Also while this case is in Germany and the US often does its own thing, there is something to be said about how the world can influence the US. The US and its citizens like to think they are the ones calling the shots, but the simple fact is that America is influenced by trends around the globe.
You might want to look at what your obsession says about you ... frankly I don't give a rat's behind about what Germans think about me ...
Your quote is out of context
This is one reason Snopes sometimes bugs me. It is not an "urban legend" that Gore made a sweeping claim, clearly intended to be interpreted as it was, but carefully crafted to be deniable.
Gore's devotees, however, were clearly quite discomfited by his claim ...
This Snopes article is basically an opinion piece, trying to pass as a skeptical debunking piece.
Anyway, I wonder if it will work?
No way! No law or regulation ever works, nor any solution that doesn't involve Perl.
And you can trust my /. certified predictions - as you know, we've had 15 more 9/11 incidents, and no terrorist has ever been caught, because they all use PGP, and are impossible to monitor or stop ;)
Which particular section of the US constitution are they referring to? I don't recall anything in there about the right to spam, the right to install spyware or the write to take over someone else's computer in pursuit of the almighty dollar -- but as a UK citizen I admit to not having read it as closely as a US citizen may have done.
Fascinating how rights that don't exist appear as they please the reader ... while those that do exist (2nd) vanish ...
... don't go all strict constructionist on me now!
The Right to Advertise is right in there, next to the Right to Private Abortions and the Right to Join The National Guard In Order To Bear Arms.
;)
The funny thing is that they have done a controlled study, and you haven't. No matter what you believe until you actually do a controlled study you're opinion would seem to be wrong.
Your faith is touching - that the methodology was sound, that it wasn't constructed to produce a given result, that it was conducted as stated ...
In any case, the Slashdot audience is probably more likely to work in an office environment than the general population. Where annoying ringtones are heard:
No doubt these episodes don't bother a kid at the mall much, or somebody who stays at home answering survey calls. They bug the crap out of me ...
I've noticed a horrible uptick in completely non-technical folk who insist on talking about viruses in completely unrelated forums.
Because, you know, it is just vital that they thunder at each other the importance of running commercial virus scanners, and that they loudly, publicly misunderstand the FROM header ...
I occasionally mention that they need to stop clicking 'OK' and generally being idiots, but somehow they do not appreciate my free advice ... ;)
Flashmobs are to the 2000's as streaking was to the 70's; merely the obnoxious fad of the times. Thirty years from now, flashmobs will be footnote of history, dragged out of archival footage whenever news shows (or whatever replaces news shows) want to give context to the time.
Maybe not even that ... it's not like those of us in the normal part of the country ("flyover county") have ever even seen a "flashmob" ... nor are a bunch of idiots standing around inappropriately quite as visually arresting as a naked person.
No, civilized countries write dates either as DDMMYYYY or YYYYMMDD, you don't just juggle the digits around.
Ooga booga! Grrrrr ...
Oops, that must be my uncivilized side showing. I meant, "grow up, smartass" :)
Or you could write dates like most airlines do 01APR04 or in this case 11MAR04..
Probably a wise idea in this heterogenous world ...
talk about a profiler's goldmine. don't tell me any of you believe google (a for-profit company) wouldn't scan every last email for "marketing" reasons?
Fine; so I'll use them for all my technical email lists and so forth, I get the awesome searching power (instead of the crappy or non-existant archive searches that email lists usually have).
If they want to give me free stuff, I'll just use it how I see fit. Sounds good to me :)
I've been thinking about this for weeks ...
I realize that I still reflexively bookmark good sites, even though I almost never use the bookmarks (beyond the few I put on the Links/Personal toolbar). I just go to Google for everything.
Yet I'd like to harness the value of that information. I wish I could do a google search, limited to the bookmarked hosts. Weighted by how many bookmarks I have for that host. So if I have 30 bookmarks at 4guysfromrolla or whatever those results come to the top.
Should be possible by running a daily script on my bookmarks.html, to build a searching script. Do individual site searches for each host, ordered by the number of times the hosts occur in the bookmarks, then merge the results. Just haven't got around to it...
You can't beat their convenience, safety, utility, and the freedom that they provide.
You go live in a rat's nest if you want to. Just stop trying to legislate it on me.
Sure:
http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ho/time/dr/17741.htm
So, are you saying that you agree with the poster's assertion of facts? If so, one might conclude that you think the US should be allowed to commit any crime, regardless of international law, as long as the primary victim of the crime is a communist state, because communists are bad, and they deserve it.
I'm saying that I don't think that Reagan mined the harbor just because he felt insulted by something the dictator said. I'm saying that to believe that as the motive is childish and stupid.
>>Nicaragua was a communist puppet state.
>>Nicaragua's "head of state" was a brutal communist
>>dictator. And contrary to little slashdot kiddie
>>beliefs, communism is not just an epithet.
>
>so that makes it ok to mine their harbor? I don't
>follow your logic, such as it is.
Yes, it is OK to mine the harbor of a dictatorhip
to hasten it's demise. You may not agree with
that, but it isn't that hard of a concept to
understand.
I don't understand how your name-calling was meant to invalidate the post you were replying to? I thought funding and supporting revolutionary soldiers in other countries would be considered supporting terrorism, but apparently it was alright for Reagan and his buddies, even though they had to break international and American law to be able to do it, and then perjure themselves afterwards to cover it up.
There you go again ... (sorry, couldn't resist since the context is Reagan) ...
It isn't "name calling" to call a dictatorship a dictatorship. Yes, supporting revolution against dictatorships is good, while it is not good against non-dictatorships. Do you really not understand that?
I can't think of anything that's terribly legal. I knew there was a reason I never do anything important on publically-accessible terminals. I guess it's a nice device to own if you're a bad parent with a tinfoil hat.
How on earth would just using the device make you "a bad parent with a tinfoil hat"?
Contrary to kid's beliefs, most parents have little interest in snooping on whether your friend Monica likes Jeff and also got new shoes, or whatever. However, it would be nice to have some forensic material available to save your ass if you get involved with something stupid.
Attorney Humlen, lecturer in international law at the university of Oslo, has a lot of strange, sometimes funny anecdotes about international events. As I recall, he recounted the nicaragua harbor-mining incident more or less like this: Nicaragua's head of state said something unflattering about Reagan in a public speech. Reagan, perhaps as a result of the onset of senile dementia, thought that mining the harbors of Nicaragua was a reasonable response. This of course provoked incredulous responses from the rest of the world, and the court in question did rule the action illegal. However, since US support for the court was essential to its success, they made the penalty as light as they possibly could: just pay for the cleanup, please.
The sad part is you probably actually believe this. And you got enough Slashbots to mod you "informative".
Nicaragua was a communist puppet state. Nicaragua's "head of state" was a brutal communist dictator. And contrary to little slashdot kiddie beliefs, communism is not just an epithet.
have always been the masters of irreverence. The silly and sometimes seemingly lame sketches have always just been a veneer over them thumbing their noses at God, Queen and Country, bureaucracy, castes and whatever else they thought deserved a bit of a dressing down. Satire was their means of writing an indignant letter to the editor.
... which is pretty lame, nowadays. I love their humor, but only because I can evoke the distant memory of the things that they were skewering. It's very dated.
The things that they poked fun at (except bureaucracy) are long gone (at least as mainstream societal forces). We're all David Letterman now, sarcastically jabbing at the last century's orthodoxy as though it makes us soooo clever ... the Python stance is the mainstream now.
Meanwhile, today's pet orthodoxies go mostly unchallenged, as usual ...