We let individuals with little power on their own to form organizations to increase negotiating power... So it must make sense to allow massive corporations to form uber-massive collectives to crush employees? Are you... Fucking insane?
No. You're talking about applying punishment to the very people who are responsible for enforcing punishments. You simply can't deal with people like that the same way as other people -- the jail is run by the same person you are trying to put in jail. So you have to find some other type of deterrent, and this is it. It's a bummer that some bad guys might walk because of it, but the protection of normal people's basic rights is more important than, well, pretty much anything else.
So a Non-Disclosure doesn't waive my right to free speech?
No, it doesn't. You can sign an NDA then spill the beans. The government won't do a damn thing about it. Now, the guy you signed the NDA with will probably sue your ass off, but if you didn't want that maybe you shouldn't have signed the contract.
I wish I could ignore contracts without people suing me. For instance, my mortgage agreement. That would be a great one to just forget about.
You posted two completely wrong things in one thread. Number one, if the police ask you to incriminate yourself, and you oblige, the case is tainted. Dude, what the fuck are you smoking? Number two, police can't use their two eyes to perceive evidence while legitimately inside your house -- not only are you smoking something, it must be the good shit.
At 6:00 PST it had 11837 sigs, at 6:30 it had 12199, and at 7:30 it had 12948. That's pretty consistently about 740 signatures per hour, which means it could hit 25000 signatures before the end of tomorrow, well before the Feb. 20 end date. Obviously, that rate shouldn't be expected to keep up forever, and I wonder how much of that is due directly to Slashdot, but... At least we'll get to hear what Obama has to say about it. Unless he decides to just ignore it like he's started doing.
Also, WTF is up with signing in? I couldn't do it with Chrome, had to use Internet Explorer of all things.
you just cannot stop others believing in their religion.
Whoa. Saying a couple words to magically obliterate somebody's religious beliefs. That's one fucking awesome trick, tell me more about how it works. I'd love to use that on a few people.
You're joking, right? It's "toe", as in to stand with your toes right up to the line. Everybody standing in a straight line presenting a united front. It is not "towing."
What does making out in public have to do with being married to somebody? When you see a guy wearing a wedding ring do you instantly imagine him having sex with his wife? After all, that's what married people do?
Well, since its a radio broadcast and its indecent, it is almost certainly a violation of FCC rules on indecent broadcasts.
Yeah. Just imagine all those little children with their WiFi scanners, right on schedule, 7:00 PM before bedtime. They sit down, cozy in their pajamas, perhaps with a glass of milk, maybe a cookie if they're lucky. They flip the switch. The backlight flickers... The night's entertainment is about to begin!
The first of the evening's wicked lineup of SSIDs scrolls by: "WiAccess1519." It's a rough start, but I think MacKenzie in the back just cracked a little smile. Here comes another: "MyDirtySocks2012." That one raises a laugh from most of the crowd.
Another SSID blips onto the screen. This time it's... it's... it's horrific. Unrepeatable, even by the New York Times or Slashdot. "RichardStallmanIsAFilthyHippie191919." Total shock and silence. Roberto, one of the smaller kids, a vulnerable little fellow who lost his mom in a terrible chopstick sharpening accident in May 2009, is the first to break down. As he slips into convulsions and loses consciousness, we wonder how anybody could be so cruel as to broadcast such a hateful message into the ears and eyes of millions of young children. For shame.
any reasonable person would be offended by such speech, possibly even incited to violence, so I think a case could be made for fighting words.
Yeah, definitely fighting words. Get real. Assuming someone was indeed offended by it, what are they going to do? Break out their WiFi range finder, locate the access point, lurk around for the owner to appear and then beat the crap out him? Flip out randomly and beat up the next person who wanders past? In either case, blame falls squarely on the sociopath who is beating people up.
Seriously? I've heard many bad things about COBOL, a lot of it from my own mother who coded in it for many years... But I've never heard a bad word about a COBOL programmer. Can you imagine having to work with that? They're anything but retarded.
All this DDoS attack does is stir up the public's fear of anarchy and crime
It does? Some douchbag sites that nobody with a life ever visits anyway go offline and this is going to stir up fear?
Take a look at Google News. See anything strange? Like, the complete absence of mention of this crap? Don't you think media would be cashing in on this? Where are the articles?
Good going, Anonymous. Way to go, way to justify the surveillance-state.
Taking down a couple websites temporarily? You're fucking kidding, right?
All it justifies is punishment against those who carried out the attacks. Will the government crack down because of this? Maybe, but that's taking the bait that has been set out for them. Don't you get it, that's the whole point -- it's like a little kid daring him parent to hit him. Oh, you may want to... But you better not do it.
The distinction between a pound of force and a pound of pass is just pedantry. Out in space, which is the only place the distinction even matters, the pound is not even the unit which is used. It's ONLY used by people standing on the surface of the planet. For any useful practical purpose the distinction is irrelevant.
Even when quoting the mass of interstellar objects, the intended meaning of "a pound" is the amount of mass that would produce one pound of force on the surface of the Earth. Otherwise, in order to interpret the number properly, people would need to know the value of the local gravitational field. Nobody is interested in performing such calculations, but Americans DO know intuitively how much "a pound" is and that's why it's quoted in those units.
You clearly have a lot of denial going on, and your rationalization that your wife shouldn't be checking up on you is clearly part of that.
You know what was the greatest thing I gained after coming clean, taking control of my own behavior, and vowing to be open with my wife? Self respect. Self respect that I hadn't felt in a long time. The knowledge that I *am* a good person, despite being imperfect. What used to be "secrecy" became simple "privacy," the sort that other people have.
But above all, you know what my self respect gives me? The ability to tell you to go fuck yourself with a pointy stick and walk away, secure in the knowledge that I'm a good person who need answer to no one, least of all some pseudonymous fuck on the Internet.
Your explanation is exactly why she should have your passwords.
You're assuming my email is some kind of treasure trove of information I was hiding from my wife. The idea that there are people I'd confess that to before telling my own wife is laughable, even more ridiculous is the idea that I'd do it over email. I desperately wanted to tell my wife all about it but shame is powerful. Eventually I overcame that.
I gave my GF my Facebook password because it felt good that I can trust her with it and vice versa.
More likely, you gave her your password because you thought it would get you laid. That's what I mean by emotional blackmail.
When you get married, you share finances which requires a lot more trust than any Facebook account.
If there's no trust there shouldn't have been a marriage. My wife could wake up one morning and decide she's the reincarnation of Pol Pot, I don't give a fuck. She's my WIFE. Trust? Trust doesn't even begin to describe it. Trust was the only reason I was able to reveal my secrets (which I was keeping out of shame, not fear -- hell, I'll even tell you what the secrets were: I drank way more than she knew about, and I smoked, which she thought I had quit doing).
If I am so worried about someone using Facebook to blackmail me, I would just change the password ahead of time.
That is not at all the kind of blackmail I was talking about.
I couldn't resist, does that make sense to you? You don't give her yours, and she doesn't give you yours. Isn't that redundant?
Yes, I made a typo.
If you don't have any secrets doesn't that means she knows what your passwords are?
I didn't call her into the bathroom this morning to examine the shape of my morning turd, does that mean I'm keeping secrets? Not telling somebody something is not the same as keeping a secret. If she wanted the passwords she could ask me. She doesn't ask me, because she doesn't need them.
That would be the difference between A asking B for their password, and B offering A their password. The first instance is a sign of distrust. The second is a sign of trust.
No, the second is a sign of a fundamental misunderstanding of the nature of healthy human relationships, trust, and individuality. It is pure co-dependence. It's a form of emotional hedging which leads to emotional blackmail -- "I gave you my PASSWORDS! How can you DO this to me!"
It's kids being naive stupid fucks, that's all.
I used to keep two very big secrets from my wife. Those secrets put a terrible strain on our relationship. Eventually, I came out with it, I was met with understanding and forgiveness, and our relationship improved tremendously. I now hold no secrets from my wife, but I sure as hell do not give her my passwords nor does she give me mine. It has nothing to do with trust, it is about PRIVACY. If she wants to know something about me she can always ASK ME.
Can they? I deeply suspect that Microsoft will make OEMs agree that any and all tablets running Windows will meet the logo requirements, or they won't get the OEM agreement they want (IE no Windows for your tablets.)
Where is Microsoft's leverage? No such devices exist! Nobody is dependent on Windows ARM to get shit done. A threat to take away something that doesn't even exist is an empty threat. They are completely at the mercy of the manufacturers.
The only thing MS is requiring is that you play by their rules if you want to use their trademark. Seeing as there is no present market for Windows-capable ARM devices, I do not see how such a requirement amounts to an abuse of monopoly status -- there IS no monopoly status in this market segment.
On the other hand, there are already plenty of ARM devices out there which do NOT run Windows. These devices are enormously successful already. You can buy one right now. You are complaining that you cannot put a non-Windows OS on some hypothetical device that has been designed exclusively to run Windows and sports the Windows logo. You are talking nonsense.
Slashdot Mirror
We let individuals with little power on their own to form organizations to increase negotiating power... So it must make sense to allow massive corporations to form uber-massive collectives to crush employees? Are you... Fucking insane?
No. You're talking about applying punishment to the very people who are responsible for enforcing punishments. You simply can't deal with people like that the same way as other people -- the jail is run by the same person you are trying to put in jail. So you have to find some other type of deterrent, and this is it. It's a bummer that some bad guys might walk because of it, but the protection of normal people's basic rights is more important than, well, pretty much anything else.
Brits say "but MS is made up of thousands of people." So? Your car is made of thousands of parts, you don't say "my car are out of gas," do you?
No, they say "My car are out of petrol."
So a Non-Disclosure doesn't waive my right to free speech?
No, it doesn't. You can sign an NDA then spill the beans. The government won't do a damn thing about it. Now, the guy you signed the NDA with will probably sue your ass off, but if you didn't want that maybe you shouldn't have signed the contract.
I wish I could ignore contracts without people suing me. For instance, my mortgage agreement. That would be a great one to just forget about.
You posted two completely wrong things in one thread. Number one, if the police ask you to incriminate yourself, and you oblige, the case is tainted. Dude, what the fuck are you smoking? Number two, police can't use their two eyes to perceive evidence while legitimately inside your house -- not only are you smoking something, it must be the good shit.
At 6:00 PST it had 11837 sigs, at 6:30 it had 12199, and at 7:30 it had 12948. That's pretty consistently about 740 signatures per hour, which means it could hit 25000 signatures before the end of tomorrow, well before the Feb. 20 end date. Obviously, that rate shouldn't be expected to keep up forever, and I wonder how much of that is due directly to Slashdot, but... At least we'll get to hear what Obama has to say about it. Unless he decides to just ignore it like he's started doing.
Also, WTF is up with signing in? I couldn't do it with Chrome, had to use Internet Explorer of all things.
you just cannot stop others believing in their religion.
Whoa. Saying a couple words to magically obliterate somebody's religious beliefs. That's one fucking awesome trick, tell me more about how it works. I'd love to use that on a few people.
You're joking, right? It's "toe", as in to stand with your toes right up to the line. Everybody standing in a straight line presenting a united front. It is not "towing."
What does making out in public have to do with being married to somebody? When you see a guy wearing a wedding ring do you instantly imagine him having sex with his wife? After all, that's what married people do?
Well, since its a radio broadcast and its indecent, it is almost certainly a violation of FCC rules on indecent broadcasts.
Yeah. Just imagine all those little children with their WiFi scanners, right on schedule, 7:00 PM before bedtime. They sit down, cozy in their pajamas, perhaps with a glass of milk, maybe a cookie if they're lucky. They flip the switch. The backlight flickers... The night's entertainment is about to begin!
The first of the evening's wicked lineup of SSIDs scrolls by: "WiAccess1519." It's a rough start, but I think MacKenzie in the back just cracked a little smile. Here comes another: "MyDirtySocks2012." That one raises a laugh from most of the crowd.
Another SSID blips onto the screen. This time it's... it's... it's horrific. Unrepeatable, even by the New York Times or Slashdot. "RichardStallmanIsAFilthyHippie191919." Total shock and silence. Roberto, one of the smaller kids, a vulnerable little fellow who lost his mom in a terrible chopstick sharpening accident in May 2009, is the first to break down. As he slips into convulsions and loses consciousness, we wonder how anybody could be so cruel as to broadcast such a hateful message into the ears and eyes of millions of young children. For shame.
any reasonable person would be offended by such speech, possibly even incited to violence, so I think a case could be made for fighting words.
Yeah, definitely fighting words. Get real. Assuming someone was indeed offended by it, what are they going to do? Break out their WiFi range finder, locate the access point, lurk around for the owner to appear and then beat the crap out him? Flip out randomly and beat up the next person who wanders past? In either case, blame falls squarely on the sociopath who is beating people up.
Seriously? I've heard many bad things about COBOL, a lot of it from my own mother who coded in it for many years... But I've never heard a bad word about a COBOL programmer. Can you imagine having to work with that? They're anything but retarded.
All this DDoS attack does is stir up the public's fear of anarchy and crime
It does? Some douchbag sites that nobody with a life ever visits anyway go offline and this is going to stir up fear?
Take a look at Google News. See anything strange? Like, the complete absence of mention of this crap? Don't you think media would be cashing in on this? Where are the articles?
Good going, Anonymous. Way to go, way to justify the surveillance-state.
Taking down a couple websites temporarily? You're fucking kidding, right?
All it justifies is punishment against those who carried out the attacks. Will the government crack down because of this? Maybe, but that's taking the bait that has been set out for them. Don't you get it, that's the whole point -- it's like a little kid daring him parent to hit him. Oh, you may want to... But you better not do it.
The distinction between a pound of force and a pound of pass is just pedantry. Out in space, which is the only place the distinction even matters, the pound is not even the unit which is used. It's ONLY used by people standing on the surface of the planet. For any useful practical purpose the distinction is irrelevant.
Even when quoting the mass of interstellar objects, the intended meaning of "a pound" is the amount of mass that would produce one pound of force on the surface of the Earth. Otherwise, in order to interpret the number properly, people would need to know the value of the local gravitational field. Nobody is interested in performing such calculations, but Americans DO know intuitively how much "a pound" is and that's why it's quoted in those units.
So would I what? I don't understand.
You clearly have a lot of denial going on, and your rationalization that your wife shouldn't be checking up on you is clearly part of that.
You know what was the greatest thing I gained after coming clean, taking control of my own behavior, and vowing to be open with my wife? Self respect. Self respect that I hadn't felt in a long time. The knowledge that I *am* a good person, despite being imperfect. What used to be "secrecy" became simple "privacy," the sort that other people have.
But above all, you know what my self respect gives me? The ability to tell you to go fuck yourself with a pointy stick and walk away, secure in the knowledge that I'm a good person who need answer to no one, least of all some pseudonymous fuck on the Internet.
Your explanation is exactly why she should have your passwords.
You're assuming my email is some kind of treasure trove of information I was hiding from my wife. The idea that there are people I'd confess that to before telling my own wife is laughable, even more ridiculous is the idea that I'd do it over email. I desperately wanted to tell my wife all about it but shame is powerful. Eventually I overcame that.
I gave my GF my Facebook password because it felt good that I can trust her with it and vice versa.
More likely, you gave her your password because you thought it would get you laid. That's what I mean by emotional blackmail.
When you get married, you share finances which requires a lot more trust than any Facebook account.
If there's no trust there shouldn't have been a marriage. My wife could wake up one morning and decide she's the reincarnation of Pol Pot, I don't give a fuck. She's my WIFE. Trust? Trust doesn't even begin to describe it. Trust was the only reason I was able to reveal my secrets (which I was keeping out of shame, not fear -- hell, I'll even tell you what the secrets were: I drank way more than she knew about, and I smoked, which she thought I had quit doing).
If I am so worried about someone using Facebook to blackmail me, I would just change the password ahead of time.
That is not at all the kind of blackmail I was talking about.
I couldn't resist, does that make sense to you? You don't give her yours, and she doesn't give you yours. Isn't that redundant?
Yes, I made a typo.
If you don't have any secrets doesn't that means she knows what your passwords are?
I didn't call her into the bathroom this morning to examine the shape of my morning turd, does that mean I'm keeping secrets? Not telling somebody something is not the same as keeping a secret. If she wanted the passwords she could ask me. She doesn't ask me, because she doesn't need them.
That would be the difference between A asking B for their password, and B offering A their password. The first instance is a sign of distrust. The second is a sign of trust.
No, the second is a sign of a fundamental misunderstanding of the nature of healthy human relationships, trust, and individuality. It is pure co-dependence. It's a form of emotional hedging which leads to emotional blackmail -- "I gave you my PASSWORDS! How can you DO this to me!"
It's kids being naive stupid fucks, that's all.
I used to keep two very big secrets from my wife. Those secrets put a terrible strain on our relationship. Eventually, I came out with it, I was met with understanding and forgiveness, and our relationship improved tremendously. I now hold no secrets from my wife, but I sure as hell do not give her my passwords nor does she give me mine. It has nothing to do with trust, it is about PRIVACY. If she wants to know something about me she can always ASK ME.
You know somebody who had $600,000 in CASH sitting around? What... the... fuck. And apparently, money didn't buy happiness in that case. Wow.
Courts on both sides of the Atlantic came to that conclusion
Good, so we're protected from that happening again. If they try to pull something, it should be open and shut. Right?
Can they? I deeply suspect that Microsoft will make OEMs agree that any and all tablets running Windows will meet the logo requirements, or they won't get the OEM agreement they want (IE no Windows for your tablets.)
Where is Microsoft's leverage? No such devices exist! Nobody is dependent on Windows ARM to get shit done. A threat to take away something that doesn't even exist is an empty threat. They are completely at the mercy of the manufacturers.
The only thing MS is requiring is that you play by their rules if you want to use their trademark. Seeing as there is no present market for Windows-capable ARM devices, I do not see how such a requirement amounts to an abuse of monopoly status -- there IS no monopoly status in this market segment.
On the other hand, there are already plenty of ARM devices out there which do NOT run Windows. These devices are enormously successful already. You can buy one right now. You are complaining that you cannot put a non-Windows OS on some hypothetical device that has been designed exclusively to run Windows and sports the Windows logo. You are talking nonsense.