I will agree with this wholeheartedly. This is a place where DOS did it right and no linux distro yet has matched.
If you type foo/? in DOS, you'd get a one or two page SUMMARY of how to use the command, half of which was EXAMPLES of how to format command lines for different tasks. 95% of the time this was all that was needed -- for more details, you'd get a book.
Most Linux man pages are the exact opposite -- they tell you how to do everything under the sun over 20 pages of text, but never show how those options actually fit together on a command line. That is useful information, but it takes for granted that there are NO ambiguities whatsoever, which is very, very rare.
Show 5 or 6 examples and the "unwritten" rules of how to format the command can be quickly grasped in a way that 200 pages of specs could never make clear.
You are correct, cash advances on a credit card start accruing interest from the moment they are taken.
It used to be that cash and purchases were treated the same, with basically a month interest-free loan as long as you paid your bill in full, but people could just pay one card with a cash advance from another, and be able to borrow money interest-free for as long as they stayed under the credit limit.
Opinion is protected, yes. But the point made here is that untruthful things are being said -- and publishing untrue "facts" about private citizens (as opposed to public figures) is called libel.
You can call the professor an idiot, but you can't say he is bipolar unless you have medical evidence to back up your statement.
i agree with everything you said -- we should respond with serious efforts and do what we can to prevent or minimize attacks in the future.
But calling it a war gives the impression that it is possible to "defeat" the other side, and it is not. Security, as we in the computer industry are fond of saying, is a process, not a result. There is no end game to a war on terrorism, there is no way to finish it, no enemy capitol to capture or philosophical leader to kill.
Saying that we will only do something "to win the war on terror" is saying that we will never stop doing it -- there is nothing temporary about sacrifices we make in this conflict. As long as we make those choices with open eyes, fine, but don't mislead people into thinking that next year or next decade we will "win" and go back to normal.
When all else fails, a dead enemy is an ineffective enemy.
That's great -- who is the enemy? He looks like us, talks like us, lives in our community, works at our company, lives life like everyone else. He doesn't need a barracks or an airfield or a fuel depot -- he doesn't have to manufacture systems or keep financial ledgers. He doesn't need years of training, an anthem, a flag or a sponsor.
He just has to wake up one day and say "I think I'll rent a truck, fill it up with some stuff, and kill those people I disagree with".
The only way to make sure all the terrorists are dead is to just kill everyone who disagrees with you about anything, because SOME DAY they may disagree with you enough to turn violent.
I love liberty and freedom. Unfortunately, they were used as tools by terrorists.
Indeed it is unfortunate.
Free speech is used by the ignorant to challenge the educated, freedom of assembly is used by Nazis and the KKK to rally support and intimidate others, the 5th amendment is used by the guilty to avoid self-incrimination, and the 4th is used by criminals to conceal evidence of their crimes.
All of this is, indeed, unfortunate -- and exactly as it was meant to be in a free nation.
Wars, including the fight against terrorism, aren't about fighting "violence". They are about one side defeating the other side.
Yes, but the point of defeating the "other side" is to take their land, destroy their factories, etc. There is no way to defeat the "other side" in a war on drugs/terrorism/poverty. You can't stomp out a social ill or political disagreement with force, because there is no physical necessity belonging to the other side that may be destroyed or usurped.
Calling a political policy a "war" doesn't make it so.
You've rediscovered the Drake Equation, of course the problem is agreeing on the values for all those variables. Part of the motivation for searching on Mars and elsewhere nearby is to get more data for some of those variables.
What excites me is that this potential major court case involving open source will not be a david and goliath mismatch as I always feared would cast an unfair chill on free software.
Having IBM and Intel (among others) battling to protect the GNU license and clarify code ownership will ensure that the OSS side can't be simply defeated by burying them in paperwork and expensive legal maneuvers.
I say use whatever works best for what you are doing. if you want REAL security, you shouldnt use either of those OS's
Although it should be noted that anyone can download source and build the Darwin OS themselves http://developer.apple.com/darwin/ (Mac OS X is built on Darwin, which is built on BSD).
I pretty much agree with Hey!'s reasoning but most people (at least in the US) consider that to be anti-war. Note the number of people in this thread alone who assume that there is no third option in the question of "we should invade" vs "Saddam is a great leader".
In the Star Wars, Han Solo kills Greedo in the Cantina while Greedo is holding a gun on him (Greedo is a bounty hunter trying to shake down Han for money he owes Jabba the Hut). Han shoots him under the table.
This is, of course, perfectly in character for a scoundrel and smuggler who has to get by in the criminal underworld -- if he didn't shoot Greedo, he'd have been killed (or worse).
During the "enhancements" that Lucas made to the movies a few years ago they added in a quick laser blast from Greedo so that he shoots first, because Han Solo is a "hero" who would never shoot someone except in self-defense.
Not only is it stupid for characterization reasons, it also looks stupid because Greedo has been holding a gun 6 inches away from Han's face for the past few minutes and then misses by about 3 feet when he pulls the trigger.
It was just a pointless change that represents in a fraction of a second of film everything stupid Lucas has done over the past 20 years to diminish the work that he was once so respected for.
Although it could possibly say something about their supporters, the people who volunteer time, bandwidth and equipment to a candidate.
For example, corporations donating services are probably more likely to provide a commercial OS/Server than a group of IT grunts who want to volunteer services but don't see a point in buying commercial licenses.
I just bought a 32" LCD HDTV and even I think this is stupid expensive.
Even an ancient Packard Bell computer can output a 1280x768 image to an HDTV. Heck, an old Palm Pilot with one of the Presenter-to-go dongles can put out enough pixels for still images!
Slashdot Mirror
I will agree with this wholeheartedly. This is a place where DOS did it right and no linux distro yet has matched.
/? in DOS, you'd get a one or two page SUMMARY of how to use the command, half of which was EXAMPLES of how to format command lines for different tasks. 95% of the time this was all that was needed -- for more details, you'd get a book.
If you type foo
Most Linux man pages are the exact opposite -- they tell you how to do everything under the sun over 20 pages of text, but never show how those options actually fit together on a command line. That is useful information, but it takes for granted that there are NO ambiguities whatsoever, which is very, very rare.
Show 5 or 6 examples and the "unwritten" rules of how to format the command can be quickly grasped in a way that 200 pages of specs could never make clear.
You are correct, cash advances on a credit card start accruing interest from the moment they are taken.
It used to be that cash and purchases were treated the same, with basically a month interest-free loan as long as you paid your bill in full, but people could just pay one card with a cash advance from another, and be able to borrow money interest-free for as long as they stayed under the credit limit.
Germans collecting bilogical data about everyone who comes through their borders...what could go wrong?
That's funny about ethanol, I know most communities embrace the fresh smelling air from oil refineries.
Opinion is protected, yes. But the point made here is that untruthful things are being said -- and publishing untrue "facts" about private citizens (as opposed to public figures) is called libel.
You can call the professor an idiot, but you can't say he is bipolar unless you have medical evidence to back up your statement.
Hey, he didn't go to four years of Evil Computer Science school just to write another CMS.
i agree with everything you said -- we should respond with serious efforts and do what we can to prevent or minimize attacks in the future.
But calling it a war gives the impression that it is possible to "defeat" the other side, and it is not. Security, as we in the computer industry are fond of saying, is a process, not a result. There is no end game to a war on terrorism, there is no way to finish it, no enemy capitol to capture or philosophical leader to kill.
Saying that we will only do something "to win the war on terror" is saying that we will never stop doing it -- there is nothing temporary about sacrifices we make in this conflict. As long as we make those choices with open eyes, fine, but don't mislead people into thinking that next year or next decade we will "win" and go back to normal.
When all else fails, a dead enemy is an ineffective enemy.
That's great -- who is the enemy? He looks like us, talks like us, lives in our community, works at our company, lives life like everyone else. He doesn't need a barracks or an airfield or a fuel depot -- he doesn't have to manufacture systems or keep financial ledgers. He doesn't need years of training, an anthem, a flag or a sponsor.
He just has to wake up one day and say "I think I'll rent a truck, fill it up with some stuff, and kill those people I disagree with".
The only way to make sure all the terrorists are dead is to just kill everyone who disagrees with you about anything, because SOME DAY they may disagree with you enough to turn violent.
I love liberty and freedom. Unfortunately, they were used as tools by terrorists.
Indeed it is unfortunate.
Free speech is used by the ignorant to challenge the educated, freedom of assembly is used by Nazis and the KKK to rally support and intimidate others, the 5th amendment is used by the guilty to avoid self-incrimination, and the 4th is used by criminals to conceal evidence of their crimes.
All of this is, indeed, unfortunate -- and exactly as it was meant to be in a free nation.
Wars, including the fight against terrorism, aren't about fighting "violence". They are about one side defeating the other side.
Yes, but the point of defeating the "other side" is to take their land, destroy their factories, etc. There is no way to defeat the "other side" in a war on drugs/terrorism/poverty. You can't stomp out a social ill or political disagreement with force, because there is no physical necessity belonging to the other side that may be destroyed or usurped.
Calling a political policy a "war" doesn't make it so.
Sounds to me like they were making breakfast cereals...
You've rediscovered the Drake Equation, of course the problem is agreeing on the values for all those variables. Part of the motivation for searching on Mars and elsewhere nearby is to get more data for some of those variables.
I agree completely.
What excites me is that this potential major court case involving open source will not be a david and goliath mismatch as I always feared would cast an unfair chill on free software.
Having IBM and Intel (among others) battling to protect the GNU license and clarify code ownership will ensure that the OSS side can't be simply defeated by burying them in paperwork and expensive legal maneuvers.
I say use whatever works best for what you are doing. if you want REAL security, you shouldnt use either of those OS's
Although it should be noted that anyone can download source and build the Darwin OS themselves http://developer.apple.com/darwin/ (Mac OS X is built on Darwin, which is built on BSD).
I pretty much agree with Hey!'s reasoning but most people (at least in the US) consider that to be anti-war. Note the number of people in this thread alone who assume that there is no third option in the question of "we should invade" vs "Saddam is a great leader".
Note: Anti-War is not the same as Pro-Saddam.
GOOD JOB GUYS!!!!
I think Mac OS X would be the Tucker "Combat Car", rejected by the Army because it went "too fast" to be used by the military.
No, that is only for trademarks.
Copyright, like patents, are ironclad for their term, no matter what you do (or don' do).
As I recall, the XBox is a PIII @ 733, with only 64 MB of RAM (though folks have modded them to 128 successfully).
Or it could be that to give discounts to other places they have to jack prices in the US up.
It's actually very socialist...
I could have sworn that charging what the market will bear is capitalist.
In the Star Wars, Han Solo kills Greedo in the Cantina while Greedo is holding a gun on him (Greedo is a bounty hunter trying to shake down Han for money he owes Jabba the Hut). Han shoots him under the table.
This is, of course, perfectly in character for a scoundrel and smuggler who has to get by in the criminal underworld -- if he didn't shoot Greedo, he'd have been killed (or worse).
During the "enhancements" that Lucas made to the movies a few years ago they added in a quick laser blast from Greedo so that he shoots first, because Han Solo is a "hero" who would never shoot someone except in self-defense.
Not only is it stupid for characterization reasons, it also looks stupid because Greedo has been holding a gun 6 inches away from Han's face for the past few minutes and then misses by about 3 feet when he pulls the trigger.
It was just a pointless change that represents in a fraction of a second of film everything stupid Lucas has done over the past 20 years to diminish the work that he was once so respected for.
Although it could possibly say something about their supporters, the people who volunteer time, bandwidth and equipment to a candidate.
For example, corporations donating services are probably more likely to provide a commercial OS/Server than a group of IT grunts who want to volunteer services but don't see a point in buying commercial licenses.
The engineered virus is not contagious and does not affect humans
Why do I have a feeling something like that will be our epitaph?
Seriously, this is just the high-tech version of the punchline "hey, watch this!"
What is even funnier is that I've been through airports where the BSOD was clearly burned in. How long was that system crashed before someone noticed?
I just bought a 32" LCD HDTV and even I think this is stupid expensive.
Even an ancient Packard Bell computer can output a 1280x768 image to an HDTV. Heck, an old Palm Pilot with one of the Presenter-to-go dongles can put out enough pixels for still images!