Yes, although I don't feel like tracking it down. They acknowledge that it would be nice to use standards-compliant html and style sheets and such (and even posted a story where a guy did a mockup of/. with style sheets), but changing all of the code would be a lot of work and isn't a big priority for them right now.
I don't think it's the same. Using gun in the commission of a crime is more serious than not using one because the presence of the gun makes it more likely that someone will be shot and thus is something to be discouraged. I don't think that breaking into someone's house to steal stuff by using lock picks is inherently worse or more dangerous than doing so without lockpicks.
You're right that it varies by states. There are also some states where it is legal to own lockpicks, but where using them in the process of committing a crime gets you a stiffer penalty than the same crime would if you hadn't used lockpicks. Which is a bit strange.
I tried setting browser.tabs.opentabfor.windowopen to true, and links are still opening in a new window. For example, the links on fark to the individual new stories (which use target=_blank) are still opening new windows rather than new tabs. Any idea why? I'm running Firefox 0.9.3. Does this setting work in Firefox as well as Mozilla?
Ignore parent, I see that someone below said that it's browser.tabs.opentabfor.windowopen. But I tried that and it didn't work. I'll go reply to the post suggesting this, so ignore this. Sorry.
Is there a setting to make Firefox automatically open any link with target=_blank (or that otherwise would open in a new window) in a new tab? I know I could middle click, but that isn't helpful when I didn't know the link was going to open a new window (and left-clicked expecting to just navigate the current tab).
I've heard that universities often pay extra for thier fire protection.
Apparently the same with police protection. At Harvard, we had the "Harvard University Police Department", which consisted of real cops (not private security guards) that effectively worked for the university. They were technically part of the Cambridge Police Department, but just worked around the campus. They even had patrol cars with license plates like "HUPD3", "HUPD4", etc., which reminded me much of Ghostbusters. And I'm pretty sure the university was (at least partially) funding them. Personally, I think the idea of a private institution (for profit or not) being able to get its own police is frightening.
Is the Libertarian Party (or Badnarik specifically) really proposing a (non-zero) flat tax? I haven't read through the whole blog, etc., so sorry if that's covered somewhere. But I thought the Libertarian Party wanted to do away with federal income tax entirely. Is this not the case? I'm mainly going by their platform in the last presidential election, so it may have changed.
You may be right, but this whole "the employee should just bend over and take it" attitude is not something people want to do or hear about it.
He's not bending over and taking it. And no one is encouraging him to. He's quitting his job. Bending over and taking it is when you stay with a job you hate and we all agree that that sucks. Leaving and going elsewhere is mature, professional and reasonable.
And how many times has the general public been told by any system administrative group "We will never ask for your usename and password.
I have never been told by Bank of America (who happens to be my bank) that their website won't ask for a username and passord in order to authenticate me. Which is reasonable because real websites do ask for this. I have no idea why you think that a sysadmin would make this claim, since it isn't true.
Interesting. So if you navigate to a different page (assuming the Safari example) with more content, does it resize your window to fit it when you navigate? That would be sort of disconcerting. Or does it leave it the size that fit the last page so that I need to click on the plus button again to make it fit the new content? That would be frustrating and tedious (especially if each page I visit happens to be bigger than the last). Frankly, I can't imagine what behavior it could have that wouldn't be obnoxious, other than believing that when I say to maximize the window I really mean it (which it apparently refuses to do). So what's the actual behavior?
You completely misunderstood my analogy. I said that even if you already have security you believe to be effective (like the guards with the oil) adding extra security precautions on top of that (like the moat) can be a good idea. The point is that just because you have security you believe to be solid, extra security on top of that can't hurt, even if by itself that extra security wouldn't be adequate. Your tunnel doesn't demonstrate this at all; it just explains what the word "obscurity" means, which wasn't the point.
Which misses the point that someone who would attempt to change the server address and port *must* believe that it is effective, otherwise why do it?
It's called defense in depth. Just because you believe that your underlying security is solid and you know that obscurity by itself wouldn't be a complete solution doesn't mean that adding some obscurity on top of what you have as an extra level of security is a bad idea. Just because I know that you can cross a moat doesn't mean I'm not going to put a moat full of alligators around my castle in addition to the guys on top of the walls with boiling oil and so forth.
And if you really believe that obscurity never has a place in security, does that mean you will happily give out all your passwords, etc., because they were useless anyway?
In other news (offtopic), where did my "Older Stuff" slashbox on the home page go? I went to my home page preferences to add a Politics slashbox when they added that section (which retroactively contains old politics stories, very nice) and now I don't have "Older Stuff" anymore. It's there when I'm not logged in. But I don't see it listed anymore as a choice in preferences (it should be in bold since it's one of the defaults for non-logged-in users). I'm so confused. Any help? Thanks.
I agree, but personally, I think making any *game* out of real historical wars is wrong.
Do you also think that movies and books about real wars are wrong? Or is there some reason that movies can better "simulate the real fear of dying that soldiers face"? I can't think of any.
In any case, the United States is not a Democracy, it is a Republic.
Main Entry: democracy Pronunciation: di-'mä-kr&-sE Function: noun Inflected Form(s): plural -cies Etymology: Middle French democratie, from Late Latin democratia, from Greek dEmokratia, from dEmos + -kratia -cracy 1 a : government by the people; especially : rule of the majority b : a government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised by them directly or indirectly through a system of representation usually involving periodically held free elections 2 : a political unit that has a democratic government 3 capitalized : the principles and policies of the Democratic party in the U.S. 4 : the common people especially when constituting the source of political authority 5 : the absence of hereditary or arbitrary class distinctions or privileges
Please look carefully at definition 1b (and also 3, which shows why you don't want to capitalize Democracy here). Just because we have elected representatives (i.e., we are a republic) does not mean that we are not a democracy. You are creating a false dichotomy. Your (run on) sentence has about as much causal logic as the statement "The United States is not a democracy; it is laregly located in North America".
They are "using" the call letters in the sense that they are mentioning them. They aren't claiming that they are the station. There is nothing wrong with mentioning the name of a competitor. For example, if you were making generic soda, you could say "Compare ours to Coca-Cola" on the packaging, as long as you didn't misrepresent your product as being Coca-Cola. Generic brands do this all the time.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes. Next time someone brings up the urban myth about the Chevy Nova, I'm going to point out that this thing exists.
Yes, although I don't feel like tracking it down. They acknowledge that it would be nice to use standards-compliant html and style sheets and such (and even posted a story where a guy did a mockup of /. with style sheets), but changing all of the code would be a lot of work and isn't a big priority for them right now.
I don't think it's the same. Using gun in the commission of a crime is more serious than not using one because the presence of the gun makes it more likely that someone will be shot and thus is something to be discouraged. I don't think that breaking into someone's house to steal stuff by using lock picks is inherently worse or more dangerous than doing so without lockpicks.
Unless, presumably, the urinator has recently eaten a lot of fucking rice.
Can you explain the difference?
You're right that it varies by states. There are also some states where it is legal to own lockpicks, but where using them in the process of committing a crime gets you a stiffer penalty than the same crime would if you hadn't used lockpicks. Which is a bit strange.
I tried setting browser.tabs.opentabfor.windowopen to true, and links are still opening in a new window. For example, the links on fark to the individual new stories (which use target=_blank) are still opening new windows rather than new tabs. Any idea why? I'm running Firefox 0.9.3. Does this setting work in Firefox as well as Mozilla?
Ignore parent, I see that someone below said that it's browser.tabs.opentabfor.windowopen. But I tried that and it didn't work. I'll go reply to the post suggesting this, so ignore this. Sorry.
Is there a setting to make Firefox automatically open any link with target=_blank (or that otherwise would open in a new window) in a new tab? I know I could middle click, but that isn't helpful when I didn't know the link was going to open a new window (and left-clicked expecting to just navigate the current tab).
Apparently the same with police protection. At Harvard, we had the "Harvard University Police Department", which consisted of real cops (not private security guards) that effectively worked for the university. They were technically part of the Cambridge Police Department, but just worked around the campus. They even had patrol cars with license plates like "HUPD3", "HUPD4", etc., which reminded me much of Ghostbusters. And I'm pretty sure the university was (at least partially) funding them. Personally, I think the idea of a private institution (for profit or not) being able to get its own police is frightening.
This isn't "obvious" at all. A first post can be redundant just the same as it can be anything else.
Is the Libertarian Party (or Badnarik specifically) really proposing a (non-zero) flat tax? I haven't read through the whole blog, etc., so sorry if that's covered somewhere. But I thought the Libertarian Party wanted to do away with federal income tax entirely. Is this not the case? I'm mainly going by their platform in the last presidential election, so it may have changed.
I would expect that any burglar, with the possible exception of the hamburglar, would be familiar with ADT.
No, they're all welcome. He clearly stated that this is a "bi weekly happy hour".
He's not bending over and taking it. And no one is encouraging him to. He's quitting his job. Bending over and taking it is when you stay with a job you hate and we all agree that that sucks. Leaving and going elsewhere is mature, professional and reasonable.
So you would consider the earth to be a moon? Or is your definition incomplete?
I'd imagine must of it is unix flavors other than linux.
I have never been told by Bank of America (who happens to be my bank) that their website won't ask for a username and passord in order to authenticate me. Which is reasonable because real websites do ask for this. I have no idea why you think that a sysadmin would make this claim, since it isn't true.
Out of curiousity, why would someone need three sound cards in one machine?
Interesting. So if you navigate to a different page (assuming the Safari example) with more content, does it resize your window to fit it when you navigate? That would be sort of disconcerting. Or does it leave it the size that fit the last page so that I need to click on the plus button again to make it fit the new content? That would be frustrating and tedious (especially if each page I visit happens to be bigger than the last). Frankly, I can't imagine what behavior it could have that wouldn't be obnoxious, other than believing that when I say to maximize the window I really mean it (which it apparently refuses to do). So what's the actual behavior?
You completely misunderstood my analogy. I said that even if you already have security you believe to be effective (like the guards with the oil) adding extra security precautions on top of that (like the moat) can be a good idea. The point is that just because you have security you believe to be solid, extra security on top of that can't hurt, even if by itself that extra security wouldn't be adequate. Your tunnel doesn't demonstrate this at all; it just explains what the word "obscurity" means, which wasn't the point.
It's called defense in depth. Just because you believe that your underlying security is solid and you know that obscurity by itself wouldn't be a complete solution doesn't mean that adding some obscurity on top of what you have as an extra level of security is a bad idea. Just because I know that you can cross a moat doesn't mean I'm not going to put a moat full of alligators around my castle in addition to the guys on top of the walls with boiling oil and so forth.
And if you really believe that obscurity never has a place in security, does that mean you will happily give out all your passwords, etc., because they were useless anyway?
In other news (offtopic), where did my "Older Stuff" slashbox on the home page go? I went to my home page preferences to add a Politics slashbox when they added that section (which retroactively contains old politics stories, very nice) and now I don't have "Older Stuff" anymore. It's there when I'm not logged in. But I don't see it listed anymore as a choice in preferences (it should be in bold since it's one of the defaults for non-logged-in users). I'm so confused. Any help? Thanks.
Do you also think that movies and books about real wars are wrong? Or is there some reason that movies can better "simulate the real fear of dying that soldiers face"? I can't think of any.
Main Entry: democracy
Pronunciation: di-'mä-kr&-sE
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural -cies
Etymology: Middle French democratie, from Late Latin democratia, from Greek dEmokratia, from dEmos + -kratia -cracy
1 a : government by the people; especially : rule of the majority b : a government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised by them directly or indirectly through a system of representation usually involving periodically held free elections
2 : a political unit that has a democratic government
3 capitalized : the principles and policies of the Democratic party in the U.S.
4 : the common people especially when constituting the source of political authority
5 : the absence of hereditary or arbitrary class distinctions or privileges
Please look carefully at definition 1b (and also 3, which shows why you don't want to capitalize Democracy here). Just because we have elected representatives (i.e., we are a republic) does not mean that we are not a democracy. You are creating a false dichotomy. Your (run on) sentence has about as much causal logic as the statement "The United States is not a democracy; it is laregly located in North America".
They are "using" the call letters in the sense that they are mentioning them. They aren't claiming that they are the station. There is nothing wrong with mentioning the name of a competitor. For example, if you were making generic soda, you could say "Compare ours to Coca-Cola" on the packaging, as long as you didn't misrepresent your product as being Coca-Cola. Generic brands do this all the time.