Odd that you would pick Morgan Stanley for your example -- they're working with Redhat to switch to linux for some of their operations.
My point wasn't that you shouldn't learn windows if you're in a windows shop -- my point was that Linux/Unix administrators get paid better, and that Linux/Unix have a much greater market share than you obviously think -- even in corporate environments. If you're looking for a job, that's a better place to look. Plus, you don't have to steal win2k, or lie on your resume...
Two things:
1. Why would you want to "steal" W2kAS/exchange when you can get linux/sendmail/qmail for free(legally), and Unix/Linux admins get paid more?
2. Don't ever lie on your resume -- it will come back to haunt you.
Umm.... the book was published in the mid 1950's. It's not like this is news. Most people already know the whole story -- even the few around here who aren't Tolkien fans. I read them when I was 12 (Including the silmarillion -- unlike the author of the article).
You may be technically correct, but I've never heard of a CO's recommendation being ignored. Have you? In my experience, when the CO says "get this person out of the military", It's done immediately. Also, I've never heard of a CO recommending separation without an Article 15 -- it may have happened, but the two are so closely intertwined that for all intents and purposes that's the way it works.
Typically I don't respond to AC's... but this is a fair question, so I'll take a stab. The point is that military personnel do not enjoy the protection that is provided to civilians by law. However, they are still subject to federal laws (such as copyright law).
Since Article 15's are not criminal punishments, I'd like to know which other organization has the right to deny me the freedom to come and and go for 45 days, and assign me to humiliating jobs outside my job description for an extra two hours every day, regulate my bed time and the time I get up, muster me for inspection nine times per day (I had to shave before EVERY single inspection). Any ideas? I couldn't think of any. You're a prisoner -- plain and simple. It's just not called jail -- it's called "restriction."
I'm sure your points of law are correct, the problem is that an article 15 is not really subject to those laws. It's much more more far-reaching than most civilians understand.
My point about bargaining for level of punishment was more directed to the simple fact that in the military when you're brought up on charges (to an article 15 hearing) you could have any number of witnesses who say you didn't do it, as long as an officer says you did, you're guilty. Regardless of the evidence (there are no rules of evidence in an article 15 -- anything the JAG wishes to present is accepted), regardless of anything. You're guilty -- it's a very bad feeling to know that nothing you say or do can affect the outcome of the hearing, regardless of your guilt or innocence.
And by the way -- I would have requested a court-martial in a heartbeat. I was a sailor on a ship -- so I'm well aware of that restriction. Soldiers and sailors deployed away from the US for all intents and purposes have no rights that are not specifically granted to them in the UCMJ (the right against self-incrimination is in the UCMJ) -- regardless of what federal law or the Constitution says. There are arguments for and against this -- in the military, the CO has to be assured of complete obedience in all areas to ensure that he can accomplish his mission. At the same time, article 15 hearings can be frequently misused in situations where this concern has no bearing.
Ah... but you still miss the point.
You may always request legal counsel. However, when you do, you are looked at as "trying to get off" in a situation where you are already guilty. Remember what I said about guilt being a forgone conclusion at mast? Requesting a lawyer just makes the punishment worse -- in most cases, a lawyer at mast is simply ignored, never even given a chance to speak. I've been there too -- as the "main attraction" as you so eloquently put it, and as a witness. It is in the best interests of these middies to simply take the article 15 and go on with their lives -- requesting a court-martial (this is where the diff between shore and sea duty comes in -- you may NOT request a court-martial on sea duty), simply puts them at risk of being convicted of a federal crime. At least with an article 1e5 they can get out of th military and try to start a real life somewhere else. At worst they suck up 45/45 and maybe a BCD (probably not -- it would probably be an admin discharge in this case)... As opposed to possible jail time, a dishonorable discharge, and a permanent federal conviction on their record.
Ultimately, I suspect these will simply be handled with a few token dismissals and most of the "minor" offenders will be put on probation for the duration of their remaining time at the academy.
But I will never buy anything from any company that uses a pop-up to try to sell it to me. NEVER. And by extension, that means that I will never click on their pop-up either. So I should be considered a thief because someone doesn't like the fact that I can't stand their method of advertising?
nope. sorry.
cite all the cases you want, it doesn't change the fact that the UCMJ is not really subject to the constitution. Certain articles of the bill of rights are in the UCMJ, such as the right against self-incrimination at a court-martial.
The problem is that you fail to understand the distinction between a court-martial and an article 15 hearing, which is what these young dumb-asses are going face. Article 15 hearings are not federal court cases, and as such are not subject to the constitution. The only thing that is limited is the punishment that can be handed down -- i.e. your CO can't sentence you to keel-hauling or flogging with a cat-o-nine-tails anymore. He can, however, summarily dismiss you from the military -- which is just as bad as far as these people are concerned. There are no rules -- if you try to request legal representation you will be pushed to rescind that request, as it will only make your punishment worse.
I know -- I've been to an article 15 hearing (coloquially known as Captain's Mast in the Navy). You are guilty from the moment charges are filed -- nothing you say or do will change the outcome. Everything from that point on is based on trying to minimize the punishment you get for whatever you were accused of, guilty or not.
My personal experience with XFS has been horrible -- I've had several partitions completely trashed.
Quoting from the Gentoo x86 install guide:
"Please be careful with XFS; this filesystem has a tendency to fry lots of data if the system crashes or you lose power. Originally, it seemed like a promising filesystem but it now appears that this tendency to lose data is a major achilles' heel."
I would not recommend XFS until some major work has been done.
A screwdriver is designed to protect you from crossing line voltage at 110 volts -- 25kv will very likely break down the insulation in the grip instantly, shocking and possibly killing you. Even if it doesn't -- 25kv will cause a small explosion when it hits the screwdriver. Pieces of metal, fire and smoke will fly everywhere. There's a reason the procedures for shorting a CRT involve using electrical gloves rated over 10kv, a faceshield, goggles and a shorting probe that's certified above the level of electricity you're dealing with.
That's not enough. Technically, a good capacitor can hold a charge for months. I work on military displays that are considered charged until you physically discharge them with a shorting probe -- that's the category computer monitors are in. If you don't know how to discharge a monitor safely -- you shouldn't be taking the cover off. EVER.
Another point: Even if you do know how to do this, don't work alone -- it's too easy to make a mistake, and 25kv can seriously mess you up. It may not even kill you right away -- I've heard of cases where someone was shocked, failed to report it, and dropped dead up to 12 hours later for no apparent reason. High voltage is EXTREMELY dangerous.
The FBI doesn't care unless there's over something like 25k involved. 600 dollars in a donation fund isn't even going to get them to bat an eye, unfortunately.
So many people don't understand this about Open Source -- the military doesn't necessarily distribute its programs externally, and as a result, we don't have to distribute our source.
Besides -- we'd rather have the source of the applications we run (speaking as a sysadmin). That way we have the option of ensuring our software hasn't been trojaned. That, I think, is the most important advantage of using open source for the military.
You're correct. 500ma means that the power supply can deliver 500 mili-amps, depending on the load. current = voltage/resistance, so if you vary the voltage (assuming the resistance stays mostly the same as it's a property of the device), your current draw will increase/decrease. You're quite safe plugging a device that requires 100 ma into a 500ma power supply, as long as the voltage matches. Try it the other way around and you'll smoke your power supply, though.
JSF is a stealth fighter. Afterburners are very bad things to use over enemy territory in a stealth jet. I'm sure the JSF is built to have almost no heat signature at all -- lighting off the afterburners would negate any advantage it has in terms of stealth.
nah... perhaps you should go back to english 101. Try reading that sentence again -- this time, please leave the commas in it.
The ammendment makes two statements. The first clearly states that a well regulated militia is necessary to the security of a free state. Then, in a second, related statement, it says that the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be abridged. The second statement follows from the first -- it's not dependent on it. In fact, the first statement is dependent on the second -- let me paraphrase for a minute:
Due to the fact that a well regulated militia is necessary to the security of a free state, and the fact that a militia cannot be created if the people do not have the right to bear arms, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.
Nowhere does it say that you have to be a member of an organized militia to keep and bear arms -- in fact, it says that you cannot have a militia if the people don't have the right to bear arms! And since a militia is necessary to the security of a free state, it follows that my right to keep and bear arms may not be infringed upon by the state.
Our right to keep and bear arms is a last-ditch defense against a tyrannical government. That's what the founding fathers said. I've said it before, I'll say it again -- gun control is the first step to tyranny.
nitpick: Recruiters never tell the truth. Ever. They twist and distort the truth with everything they say -- it's all lies.
And there's no such thing as a guaranteed school in the Air Force -- that's why I picked the Navy.
In all seriousness -- if you want a career in networking, go into the Navy as a CT. Just make sure you've never done anything you don't want them to find out about -- the background check is pretty rigorous.
that's just my sig -- I got tired of people posting mindless drivel in reply to my comments, and not having the guts to put their names on them. Has nothing to do with you...:)
a) agreed
b) agreed -- publish, free of any licensing restrictions. Or under the GPL, or something like it.
And finally -- remove the clause from their OEM agreements that prohibits OEMs from selling machines without windows on them.
I think those three things would eliminate MS as a monopoly -- I think Office would continue to sell just fine, but they would have to reduce the price. I think it's a pretty well-accepted fact that their pricing structure is hideous. They sell to students and colleges for around 100 bucks a license, but stick it to home users and businesses for 550+??? I wouldn't object to paying maybe 150 for Office -- but I won't pay 550 for the whole suite for my home use.
I love Office XP -- it's really a wonderful program -- but if you can't afford it (I can't -- I use it at school), there has to be a way to interoperate with it. I think what they've done with their file formats is more anti-competetive than anything relating to browser-bundling.
You're forgetting that MS has a major hold over Apple. Without Office for OSX, Apple goes back to being a niche pc with a niche os that will only get used by graphic designers -- and they'll have a wintel box on their desk right along with the mac so they can get "real work" done. Until OO or somebody has an office suite available that's 100% compatible with MS's file formats, hang it up -- Apple will fall right into line. In fact, I'm surprised they haven't said anything about it yet.
This was discussed in great detail and at length in the original threads about Nimda a year ago. I think the general conclusion of the community (if you can really say there was one) was that the legal risk (at least for those of us in the states) was too high to do it.
Slashdot Mirror
Odd that you would pick Morgan Stanley for your example -- they're working with Redhat to switch to linux for some of their operations.
My point wasn't that you shouldn't learn windows if you're in a windows shop -- my point was that Linux/Unix administrators get paid better, and that Linux/Unix have a much greater market share than you obviously think -- even in corporate environments. If you're looking for a job, that's a better place to look. Plus, you don't have to steal win2k, or lie on your resume...
Two things:
1. Why would you want to "steal" W2kAS/exchange when you can get linux/sendmail/qmail for free(legally), and Unix/Linux admins get paid more?
2. Don't ever lie on your resume -- it will come back to haunt you.
Umm.... the book was published in the mid 1950's. It's not like this is news. Most people already know the whole story -- even the few around here who aren't Tolkien fans. I read them when I was 12 (Including the silmarillion -- unlike the author of the article).
restriction on shore duty and restriction on a ship are two completely different worlds.
You may be technically correct, but I've never heard of a CO's recommendation being ignored. Have you? In my experience, when the CO says "get this person out of the military", It's done immediately. Also, I've never heard of a CO recommending separation without an Article 15 -- it may have happened, but the two are so closely intertwined that for all intents and purposes that's the way it works.
Typically I don't respond to AC's... but this is a fair question, so I'll take a stab. The point is that military personnel do not enjoy the protection that is provided to civilians by law. However, they are still subject to federal laws (such as copyright law).
I'm sure your points of law are correct, the problem is that an article 15 is not really subject to those laws. It's much more more far-reaching than most civilians understand.
My point about bargaining for level of punishment was more directed to the simple fact that in the military when you're brought up on charges (to an article 15 hearing) you could have any number of witnesses who say you didn't do it, as long as an officer says you did, you're guilty. Regardless of the evidence (there are no rules of evidence in an article 15 -- anything the JAG wishes to present is accepted), regardless of anything. You're guilty -- it's a very bad feeling to know that nothing you say or do can affect the outcome of the hearing, regardless of your guilt or innocence.
And by the way -- I would have requested a court-martial in a heartbeat. I was a sailor on a ship -- so I'm well aware of that restriction. Soldiers and sailors deployed away from the US for all intents and purposes have no rights that are not specifically granted to them in the UCMJ (the right against self-incrimination is in the UCMJ) -- regardless of what federal law or the Constitution says. There are arguments for and against this -- in the military, the CO has to be assured of complete obedience in all areas to ensure that he can accomplish his mission. At the same time, article 15 hearings can be frequently misused in situations where this concern has no bearing.
Ah... but you still miss the point.
You may always request legal counsel. However, when you do, you are looked at as "trying to get off" in a situation where you are already guilty. Remember what I said about guilt being a forgone conclusion at mast? Requesting a lawyer just makes the punishment worse -- in most cases, a lawyer at mast is simply ignored, never even given a chance to speak. I've been there too -- as the "main attraction" as you so eloquently put it, and as a witness. It is in the best interests of these middies to simply take the article 15 and go on with their lives -- requesting a court-martial (this is where the diff between shore and sea duty comes in -- you may NOT request a court-martial on sea duty), simply puts them at risk of being convicted of a federal crime. At least with an article 1e5 they can get out of th military and try to start a real life somewhere else. At worst they suck up 45/45 and maybe a BCD (probably not -- it would probably be an admin discharge in this case)... As opposed to possible jail time, a dishonorable discharge, and a permanent federal conviction on their record.
Ultimately, I suspect these will simply be handled with a few token dismissals and most of the "minor" offenders will be put on probation for the duration of their remaining time at the academy.
But I will never buy anything from any company that uses a pop-up to try to sell it to me. NEVER. And by extension, that means that I will never click on their pop-up either. So I should be considered a thief because someone doesn't like the fact that I can't stand their method of advertising?
cite all the cases you want, it doesn't change the fact that the UCMJ is not really subject to the constitution. Certain articles of the bill of rights are in the UCMJ, such as the right against self-incrimination at a court-martial.
The problem is that you fail to understand the distinction between a court-martial and an article 15 hearing, which is what these young dumb-asses are going face. Article 15 hearings are not federal court cases, and as such are not subject to the constitution. The only thing that is limited is the punishment that can be handed down -- i.e. your CO can't sentence you to keel-hauling or flogging with a cat-o-nine-tails anymore. He can, however, summarily dismiss you from the military -- which is just as bad as far as these people are concerned. There are no rules -- if you try to request legal representation you will be pushed to rescind that request, as it will only make your punishment worse.
I know -- I've been to an article 15 hearing (coloquially known as Captain's Mast in the Navy). You are guilty from the moment charges are filed -- nothing you say or do will change the outcome. Everything from that point on is based on trying to minimize the punishment you get for whatever you were accused of, guilty or not.
Quoting from the Gentoo x86 install guide:
I would not recommend XFS until some major work has been done.
A screwdriver is designed to protect you from crossing line voltage at 110 volts -- 25kv will very likely break down the insulation in the grip instantly, shocking and possibly killing you. Even if it doesn't -- 25kv will cause a small explosion when it hits the screwdriver. Pieces of metal, fire and smoke will fly everywhere. There's a reason the procedures for shorting a CRT involve using electrical gloves rated over 10kv, a faceshield, goggles and a shorting probe that's certified above the level of electricity you're dealing with.
Another point: Even if you do know how to do this, don't work alone -- it's too easy to make a mistake, and 25kv can seriously mess you up. It may not even kill you right away -- I've heard of cases where someone was shocked, failed to report it, and dropped dead up to 12 hours later for no apparent reason. High voltage is EXTREMELY dangerous.
The FBI doesn't care unless there's over something like 25k involved. 600 dollars in a donation fund isn't even going to get them to bat an eye, unfortunately.
So many people don't understand this about Open Source -- the military doesn't necessarily distribute its programs externally, and as a result, we don't have to distribute our source.
Besides -- we'd rather have the source of the applications we run (speaking as a sysadmin). That way we have the option of ensuring our software hasn't been trojaned. That, I think, is the most important advantage of using open source for the military.
You're correct. 500ma means that the power supply can deliver 500 mili-amps, depending on the load. current = voltage/resistance, so if you vary the voltage (assuming the resistance stays mostly the same as it's a property of the device), your current draw will increase/decrease. You're quite safe plugging a device that requires 100 ma into a 500ma power supply, as long as the voltage matches. Try it the other way around and you'll smoke your power supply, though.
JSF is a stealth fighter. Afterburners are very bad things to use over enemy territory in a stealth jet. I'm sure the JSF is built to have almost no heat signature at all -- lighting off the afterburners would negate any advantage it has in terms of stealth.
The ammendment makes two statements. The first clearly states that a well regulated militia is necessary to the security of a free state. Then, in a second, related statement, it says that the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be abridged. The second statement follows from the first -- it's not dependent on it. In fact, the first statement is dependent on the second -- let me paraphrase for a minute:
Due to the fact that a well regulated militia is necessary to the security of a free state, and the fact that a militia cannot be created if the people do not have the right to bear arms, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.
Nowhere does it say that you have to be a member of an organized militia to keep and bear arms -- in fact, it says that you cannot have a militia if the people don't have the right to bear arms! And since a militia is necessary to the security of a free state, it follows that my right to keep and bear arms may not be infringed upon by the state.
Our right to keep and bear arms is a last-ditch defense against a tyrannical government. That's what the founding fathers said. I've said it before, I'll say it again -- gun control is the first step to tyranny.
In all seriousness -- if you want a career in networking, go into the Navy as a CT. Just make sure you've never done anything you don't want them to find out about -- the background check is pretty rigorous.
a) agreed
b) agreed -- publish, free of any licensing restrictions. Or under the GPL, or something like it.
And finally -- remove the clause from their OEM agreements that prohibits OEMs from selling machines without windows on them.
I think those three things would eliminate MS as a monopoly -- I think Office would continue to sell just fine, but they would have to reduce the price. I think it's a pretty well-accepted fact that their pricing structure is hideous. They sell to students and colleges for around 100 bucks a license, but stick it to home users and businesses for 550+??? I wouldn't object to paying maybe 150 for Office -- but I won't pay 550 for the whole suite for my home use.
That would be a great day for the world...
I love Office XP -- it's really a wonderful program -- but if you can't afford it (I can't -- I use it at school), there has to be a way to interoperate with it. I think what they've done with their file formats is more anti-competetive than anything relating to browser-bundling.
You're forgetting that MS has a major hold over Apple. Without Office for OSX, Apple goes back to being a niche pc with a niche os that will only get used by graphic designers -- and they'll have a wintel box on their desk right along with the mac so they can get "real work" done. Until OO or somebody has an office suite available that's 100% compatible with MS's file formats, hang it up -- Apple will fall right into line. In fact, I'm surprised they haven't said anything about it yet.
Do we like lindows today?
This was discussed in great detail and at length in the original threads about Nimda a year ago. I think the general conclusion of the community (if you can really say there was one) was that the legal risk (at least for those of us in the states) was too high to do it.
Easiest strategy for when you find yourself without support -- chuck the ball at the enemy and then shoot him and take it back... :)