The question isn't whether what THEY'RE doing is right, but if what you're doing is. If you seriously contend that you would rather kill an intruder than scare him away, then as far as I'm concerned you're probably more dangerous than him.
A normally socialized dog (i.e. not raised in a cage out back) won't attack family members. Dogs, like most of the smarter animals, recognize children and will tolerate behavior from them that they won't from adults.
Keep in mind guard dogs and watch dogs are two different things. You probably want the second; you just need something to scare off people. There are plenty of good breeds to go with; you might want to look into one of my favorite breeds, Newfoundlands. VERY intimidating--adult males reach about 150 pounds, they look like black bears, and they're incredibly strong, able to pull 2000 lbs--but also unbelievably sweet natured and friendly. They don't make great guard dogs but they do make decent watchdogs, and they're good with kids (but so big that really young ones should be supervised around them); as a very young child I was known to ride around on my aunt's newfie.
Actually the best training is at work; home networks just don't typically have the complexity you find in a business environment. Unfortunately most people can't just hang out with a linux admin team for a few months to pick up stuff.
That doesn't really say much. I mean, theoretically all 52% of Torontoans from outside Canada could have come from one place. I didn't find Toronto especially diverse compared to say NYC when I visited it.
Yes. Go to NYC public schools for a few years and you'll see impossibly old books. Now if you'll excuse me I'm going to try to catch the 9 o'clock gyrocopter to Siam...
You Yanks ought to demand proportional representation. It works well here in continental Europe
Well, actually, it doesn't work that well. Most countries in continental Europe have to be frank worse governments. Exceptions exist, of course, like in Scandinavia or the Low Countries, but I wouldn't want what they have in eastern or southern Europe.
Which is why I specified the EDITOR'S comments, not the story submitter's. You know, the non-italicized statement at the end of the story? That's the editor's.
Been reading here for years and I have never seen a hint of Republican or Libertarian views expressed in/. editorializing and there certainly isn't a lack of editorializing.
Hahahahahahahahahahahahahaha! Ohhh, good one. Wait, you were serious?! Are you functionally illiterate? I've lost track of how often the editors make some libertarian comment against laws or government regulations or taxes.
Most of the resistance is not due to possible accidents; that's an intellectually dishonest strawman argument the rabidly pro-nuclear people throw around to divert attention from the waste problem (the same way the anti-environmentalists try to turn any discussion of air pollution controls into a global warming issue). There is a lot of nuclear waste building up in temporary waste storage facilities, and people want to increase that rate? It's insane. And I mean, look at this statement:
As for the nuclear waste generated aftewards there are a number of clever idea's about how to deal with it including one which disposes of it in the giant fusion reaction that is our Sun.
"Clever ideas" does not a practical solution make. Just because someone somewhere threw together an idea doesn't mean that we should plan on it working. What do we do with the waste now? Reprocessing doesn't help, when you're done you still have waste. Transmutation might work, but we haven't achieved it yet. Shooting it into space would work, but that requires developing a system to do that. The parent seems to argue that simply having the idea will somehow magically remove the waste from this planet. How about we develop a solution FIRST, then build more plants?
We're guaranteeing that we will not have enough energy to sustain our civilization. And most importantly, we're guaranteeing that we will NEVER reach another star system.
Because if one country cancels its manned space program now, there's NO chance of ANYONE else EVER having one? That's some interesting logic.
Actually a lot of text adventure games had illustrations. Magnetic Scrolls games (Guild of Thieves, Fish!, etc) at the time had the best graphics in the game industry.
Seriously, this was probably the most annoying Infocom game ever published, and I doubt I would have ever made it through without a guide I found on the net years later.
I got further in HHGTTG than I did in Plundered Hearts. Well, Plundered Hearts wasn't that difficult, I just could never stay focused on the puzzles, I spent all my time trying to get the heroine naked.
Is economics perfect? Of course not, especially when it comes to trying to influence change on a major economy. But that doesn't make it worthless. That just means that it's damn hard to make a prediction about how any system that complex is going to behave.
True. But economists, unlike metereologists, insist that everyone listen to their long-term predictions and plan accordingly.
Nobody's laughing at the article--there's not much to laugh at. It's propaganda under the guise of economic analysis. It's trying to get us to swallow something that really isn't too palatable by pretending that economic predictive powers are greater than they are.
To use your analogy, it's like a metereologist telling us what the weather is going to be in two years, THEN telling us to act on that information now.
Slashdot Mirror
The question isn't whether what THEY'RE doing is right, but if what you're doing is. If you seriously contend that you would rather kill an intruder than scare him away, then as far as I'm concerned you're probably more dangerous than him.
A normally socialized dog (i.e. not raised in a cage out back) won't attack family members. Dogs, like most of the smarter animals, recognize children and will tolerate behavior from them that they won't from adults.
Keep in mind guard dogs and watch dogs are two different things. You probably want the second; you just need something to scare off people. There are plenty of good breeds to go with; you might want to look into one of my favorite breeds, Newfoundlands. VERY intimidating--adult males reach about 150 pounds, they look like black bears, and they're incredibly strong, able to pull 2000 lbs--but also unbelievably sweet natured and friendly. They don't make great guard dogs but they do make decent watchdogs, and they're good with kids (but so big that really young ones should be supervised around them); as a very young child I was known to ride around on my aunt's newfie.
Thats how it should be, for an armed society is a polite society.
Yeah, go tell that to someone in Somalia or Afghanistan.
In short, these guys come up with nice ideas that don't work due to real world constraints.
Oh, they're libertarians?
Actually the best training is at work; home networks just don't typically have the complexity you find in a business environment. Unfortunately most people can't just hang out with a linux admin team for a few months to pick up stuff.
I still have the originals on laserdisc (widescreen) and my laserdisc player still works - so some of us can keep the dream alive.
An elegant format for a more civilized time.
That doesn't really say much. I mean, theoretically all 52% of Torontoans from outside Canada could have come from one place. I didn't find Toronto especially diverse compared to say NYC when I visited it.
Yes. Go to NYC public schools for a few years and you'll see impossibly old books. Now if you'll excuse me I'm going to try to catch the 9 o'clock gyrocopter to Siam...
Indeed, Canada contains the most multicultural major city in the world -- Toronto.
Do you have anything to back this up? I've seen it claimed elsewhere, but nobody seems to have proof.
You Yanks ought to demand proportional representation. It works well here in continental Europe
Well, actually, it doesn't work that well. Most countries in continental Europe have to be frank worse governments. Exceptions exist, of course, like in Scandinavia or the Low Countries, but I wouldn't want what they have in eastern or southern Europe.
Which is why I specified the EDITOR'S comments, not the story submitter's. You know, the non-italicized statement at the end of the story? That's the editor's.
"Which distribution do you prefer?" probably wouldn't receive a very useful response.
No, you just think that. And you're wrong.
Been reading here for years and I have never seen a hint of Republican or Libertarian views expressed in /. editorializing and there certainly isn't a lack of editorializing.
Hahahahahahahahahahahahahaha! Ohhh, good one. Wait, you were serious?! Are you functionally illiterate? I've lost track of how often the editors make some libertarian comment against laws or government regulations or taxes.
Most of the resistance is not due to possible accidents; that's an intellectually dishonest strawman argument the rabidly pro-nuclear people throw around to divert attention from the waste problem (the same way the anti-environmentalists try to turn any discussion of air pollution controls into a global warming issue). There is a lot of nuclear waste building up in temporary waste storage facilities, and people want to increase that rate? It's insane. And I mean, look at this statement:
As for the nuclear waste generated aftewards there are a number of clever idea's about how to deal with it including one which disposes of it in the giant fusion reaction that is our Sun.
"Clever ideas" does not a practical solution make. Just because someone somewhere threw together an idea doesn't mean that we should plan on it working. What do we do with the waste now? Reprocessing doesn't help, when you're done you still have waste. Transmutation might work, but we haven't achieved it yet. Shooting it into space would work, but that requires developing a system to do that. The parent seems to argue that simply having the idea will somehow magically remove the waste from this planet. How about we develop a solution FIRST, then build more plants?
(like the entire information equivalent for our global genome fitting on a 100 pound laptop!).
Get this man a Thinkpad!
The Indian market will soon be able to compensate although it won't be so idiotically "spend spend spend!" as here
Are you crazy? India has an ENORMOUS deficit, they're even more fiscally irresponsible than we are...
We're guaranteeing that we will not have enough energy to sustain our civilization. And most importantly, we're guaranteeing that we will NEVER reach another star system.
Because if one country cancels its manned space program now, there's NO chance of ANYONE else EVER having one? That's some interesting logic.
I guess my musical tastes aren't anywhere close to mainstream any more.
As long as you don't start wearing ironic t-shirts and black-framed glasses you'll be fine.
Why not read the article first? It will be fun, I promise.
Actually a lot of text adventure games had illustrations. Magnetic Scrolls games (Guild of Thieves, Fish!, etc) at the time had the best graphics in the game industry.
Seriously, this was probably the most annoying Infocom game ever published, and I doubt I would have ever made it through without a guide I found on the net years later.
I got further in HHGTTG than I did in Plundered Hearts. Well, Plundered Hearts wasn't that difficult, I just could never stay focused on the puzzles, I spent all my time trying to get the heroine naked.
Was? She's still alive, you know...
Want a tip? Find out how to make an existing company more efficient, thus profitable. Then go make a pitch. You might be suprised.
After they either ignore you or simply take your idea and show you the door? No, I wouldn't be surprised.
Is economics perfect? Of course not, especially when it comes to trying to influence change on a major economy. But that doesn't make it worthless. That just means that it's damn hard to make a prediction about how any system that complex is going to behave.
True. But economists, unlike metereologists, insist that everyone listen to their long-term predictions and plan accordingly.
Nobody's laughing at the article--there's not much to laugh at. It's propaganda under the guise of economic analysis. It's trying to get us to swallow something that really isn't too palatable by pretending that economic predictive powers are greater than they are.
To use your analogy, it's like a metereologist telling us what the weather is going to be in two years, THEN telling us to act on that information now.