do you really think law enforcement would ever be expected to wait to get a warrant before rescuing a kidnap victim?
Only if they want to convict the kidnapper. Using warrants and following the law are sort of important when it comes to convicting someone of a crime.
You're not talking about looking for evidence of a commited crime, but a violent crime (murder, rape, kidnapping) in progress. There's a very big difference.
"The goverment" implies the federal goverment. Especially when you're crediting them with controlling the diamond trade and banking interest rates all in the same sentance. Yeah, that clearly implies "big goverment". You're citing something your county took it upon themselves to do as one of your examples of why we need reform at the national level.
but it isn't getting better mileage. It is easy to design to maximize horsepower. The difficult part is maximizing mpg while maintaining acceptable performance.
It's about an 8% increase in fuel economy, which is pretty good, but downright impressive with almost twice the power. It's pretty disingenuous to imply that all they did was crank out more power. It's also not really a reasonable comparison to say 26 MPG "sucks" compared to a subcompact economy car, because it's phenomenal for a 400+ HP sports car.
I don't think you read the AC's post fully. The important part was how unions have fuckall nothing to do with the conversation, and in no way are any kind of equivalent to the UK civil service.
Religious people make up a decent chuck of society. They should have representation, that's the point of goverment. The majority of our presidents have been religious, and that didn't mean they were all personal-value-imposing zealots. The problem of not making informed, objective decisions can't be solved by taking away people's ability to make decisions at all - the problem with overkill religion in politics is when they're forcing their beliefs or values on people, how can you solve that problem by forcing yours on them?
Oftentimes monopolies arise, not through the free market, but via government order: Such as granting Comcast a monopoly in my neighborhood,
Your city. Your city made a franchise agreement with Comcast, typically in order to enforce requirements for customer service, uptime, service quality, etc. That has absolutely nothing to do with "big goverment". Federal regulation to take that ability away from the states/municipalities would be the only real way to solve that problem.
Censorship is a weapon used by the government against its people. Even if some people would be performing the exact same act (null-routing ip ranges, or nx'ing a domain name), it still wouldn't be censorship.
You can (arguably incorrectly) fight over semantics all you want. There's still no rational defense in fighting for a free and unrestricted internet by silencing the voice of anyone who disagrees with you. No matter what word you use to describe the act, the spirit of that tactic's still the same. It's cartoonishly hyprocritical, counter-productive since it causes more crackdowns on privacy, and typically misdirected because you aren't actually doing anything to fight the laws or policies that caused the problem. Not only is silencing people completely and entirely contradictory to the idea of a free internet, but widespread, quick-on-the-draw DDoS attacks and the like are a threat to being able to have one.
I've read the whole article and they do say in other words that they don't support their types of attack... they didn't say to stop it.:)
Then you have lousy reading comprehension.
FTFA:
“We believe in the open and free Internet, where anyone can express their views. Even if we strongly disagree with them and even if they hate us,” the group said.
“So don’t fight them using their ugly methods. DDOS and blocks are both forms of censorship.
“If you want to help; start a tracker, arrange a manifestation, join or start a pirate party, teach your friends the art of bittorrent, set up a proxy, write your political representatives, develop a new p2p protocol, print some pro piracy posters and decorate your town with, support our promo bay artists.”
It's a great way to catch breaking news if you don't sit in front of a TV all day. Yesterday would be a prime example, glancing down at my phone on an afternoon smoke break to find out the president had announced his support of same-sex marriage. It was a good hour or so before that had made its way through the major news sources. You can find accounts for everything from local news, to your state-level organizations and agencies, to specific committees in congress or the house.
Computer Science. Interesting game. The only winning move is not to play.
If ever there was a model for how the 1% differ from the 99%, this is it. This jackass can LIE on his resume to become CEO of a major corporation, and you bet he's getting paid more per month than I make in a year. Furthermore, even when he's "let go", he'll walk away with the GDP of small nations. Enough to live comfortably for the rest of his days. FOR LYING.
The rest of us would be tossed out on the street, with a warning that we're lucky we're not in jail.
Seriously, what a fucked up world we are living in.
The one little hole in this is that you're acting like a CS degree from the 70's was the reason he got the job. Odds are, no one involved in the hiring process thought it was important enough to look into or consider. He has the job because of his experience and work history, now what he went to school for before I (and likely you) were born. You don't become the CEO of a company like Yahoo by replying to a Monster posting and giving a couple references, you do it by being able to show decades of work history and leadership experience. While I agree that there should be consequences for lying on his resume, I think it's important to keep how much of a footnote that actually is in context. It's like someone in their 30's lying about their high school GPA.
What's the difference between a web server running code on your system and a carrier doing it?
There wouldn't be much, which is completely and entirely irrelevant since the web site would be running the code on their own server and not your system.
There's a very big difference between s/w collecting information on a private communications device that you own, and a website choosing to run a service on their own site.
The problem is that you are living in a fairy tale of the past. Millions of people have been displaced by cheap labor pouring in on HB-1 visas, and that piece of paper may very soon be the only way to attain a job that isn't flipping burgers for a person of voting age. The world is a darker place than when you were born and the fact that you already have experience not withstanding, trying to make it, let alone get ahead for young people coming out of school is bugger-all hard and get harder by the minute. Show some compassion and sympathy for those who have hurdles to leap that you never had, and won't if you are the least bit lucky.
We are being squeezed by uncaring interests, from all sides, more and more, and its easy to blame others for not being responsible, but it doesn't take much of a hiccup any more to find yourself out in the cold and with a bank account that looks like Mother Hubbards Cupboard. Your personal comfort is not the measure of fairness in a society, and as the wealth continues to fly out of the middle class in this "Trickle !-Down Economy", you should be very careful for whom the bell tolls.
I'm really not sure how any of this relates to my post. I'm only in my late-20's, I'm more than aware of what the job market is like for recent grads. I didn't, in any way, say that degrees weren't important or basically necessary, just that a lot of companies aren't going to ask you for an official transcript to prove it. I didn't say anything to "blame others for not being responsible", I just said that there's usually several months given before repayment starts, and that if you hadn't found a job or aren't making enough money to afford your payments, there are options available to deal with that. There really weren't any subtle implications or underlying messages there, just a direct response to another poster's misunderstood statement that this meant people couldn't get jobs in their field until their loans were paid off.
Fortunately beta car are not allowed on roads, or else every car manufacturer would claim their car is a beta version and get away with it. Go shill elsewhere.
You're completely and entirely incorrect. Manufacturers test pre-production vehicles on roads, and that's exactly what Google's doing here.
You can't work until you start paying us back and you can't pay us back until you start work.
Seems a bizzare way of organising things. In the UK you can't pay back your student loans until you earn a certain minimum wage and then it starts to come out from your pay like a tax as a percentage of your wage.
Except that isn't what happens. They're holding transcripts if you default on the loans, not if you haven't started paying on them yet. You've usually got a six month deferment after graduation, and there are plenty of deferments and forbearances for unemployement, economic hardships, insufficient income. I'm not sure why/.ers are getting the idea that people are being denied their transcript fresh out the door.
The dilemma is that in order to pay off your student loans you need decent work, but in order to get decent work you need to pay off your student loans.
No, the dilemma is that if you default on your student loans, you might have a problem getting "decent work". But as someone who's done sysadmin work for a national telecommunications company, a major payment processing business and a defense contractor, I've never been asked to provide or allow a request for a transcript. That may be annecdotal, but it's fair to say that there are plenty of "decent" jobs that aren't going to be held up by a transcript. And you certainly don't need to have your loans paid off before you can get a good job. Besides, you're usually in deferment for six months after graduation, so you've got that much time to either find a job in your field or at least something to pay the bills - and if you can't, you should be able to qualify for some kind of forbearance, deferment or economic hardship.
I find it weird that much of Slashdot was so actively on the bandwagon that cited having Internet Explorer installed on Windows computers was some kind of evil monopoly, but thinks that it's absurd that Windows Media Player DVD playback capabilities have been lumped into a Media Center add-on package. This is what the "M$"-bashers have been demanding for years - that Microsoft doesn't force their non-essential products as parts of the OS or its default installation.
Slashdot Mirror
do you really think law enforcement would ever be expected to wait to get a warrant before rescuing a kidnap victim?
Only if they want to convict the kidnapper. Using warrants and following the law are sort of important when it comes to convicting someone of a crime.
You're not talking about looking for evidence of a commited crime, but a violent crime (murder, rape, kidnapping) in progress. There's a very big difference.
"The goverment" implies the federal goverment. Especially when you're crediting them with controlling the diamond trade and banking interest rates all in the same sentance. Yeah, that clearly implies "big goverment". You're citing something your county took it upon themselves to do as one of your examples of why we need reform at the national level.
but it isn't getting better mileage. It is easy to design to maximize horsepower. The difficult part is maximizing mpg while maintaining acceptable performance.
It's about an 8% increase in fuel economy, which is pretty good, but downright impressive with almost twice the power. It's pretty disingenuous to imply that all they did was crank out more power. It's also not really a reasonable comparison to say 26 MPG "sucks" compared to a subcompact economy car, because it's phenomenal for a 400+ HP sports car.
I don't think you read the AC's post fully. The important part was how unions have fuckall nothing to do with the conversation, and in no way are any kind of equivalent to the UK civil service.
He doesn't mean it's factually correct, he means that it's a statement of fact - something that can be objectively proven wrong or right.
Religious people make up a decent chuck of society. They should have representation, that's the point of goverment. The majority of our presidents have been religious, and that didn't mean they were all personal-value-imposing zealots. The problem of not making informed, objective decisions can't be solved by taking away people's ability to make decisions at all - the problem with overkill religion in politics is when they're forcing their beliefs or values on people, how can you solve that problem by forcing yours on them?
Oftentimes monopolies arise, not through the free market, but via government order: Such as granting Comcast a monopoly in my neighborhood,
Your city. Your city made a franchise agreement with Comcast, typically in order to enforce requirements for customer service, uptime, service quality, etc. That has absolutely nothing to do with "big goverment". Federal regulation to take that ability away from the states/municipalities would be the only real way to solve that problem.
why humans always insist that all animal behavior is instinctual and not thoughtful.
That's easy. It's obviously instinctual for humans to insist that.
You think?
Well ain't that cute. But they're wrong.
Censorship is a weapon used by the government against its people. Even if some people would be performing the exact same act (null-routing ip ranges, or nx'ing a domain name), it still wouldn't be censorship.
You can (arguably incorrectly) fight over semantics all you want. There's still no rational defense in fighting for a free and unrestricted internet by silencing the voice of anyone who disagrees with you. No matter what word you use to describe the act, the spirit of that tactic's still the same. It's cartoonishly hyprocritical, counter-productive since it causes more crackdowns on privacy, and typically misdirected because you aren't actually doing anything to fight the laws or policies that caused the problem. Not only is silencing people completely and entirely contradictory to the idea of a free internet, but widespread, quick-on-the-draw DDoS attacks and the like are a threat to being able to have one.
I've read the whole article and they do say in other words that they don't support their types of attack... they didn't say to stop it. :)
Then you have lousy reading comprehension. FTFA:
“We believe in the open and free Internet, where anyone can express their views. Even if we strongly disagree with them and even if they hate us,” the group said.
“So don’t fight them using their ugly methods. DDOS and blocks are both forms of censorship.
“If you want to help; start a tracker, arrange a manifestation, join or start a pirate party, teach your friends the art of bittorrent, set up a proxy, write your political representatives, develop a new p2p protocol, print some pro piracy posters and decorate your town with, support our promo bay artists.”
It's a great way to catch breaking news if you don't sit in front of a TV all day. Yesterday would be a prime example, glancing down at my phone on an afternoon smoke break to find out the president had announced his support of same-sex marriage. It was a good hour or so before that had made its way through the major news sources. You can find accounts for everything from local news, to your state-level organizations and agencies, to specific committees in congress or the house.
Computer Science. Interesting game. The only winning move is not to play.
If ever there was a model for how the 1% differ from the 99%, this is it. This jackass can LIE on his resume to become CEO of a major corporation, and you bet he's getting paid more per month than I make in a year. Furthermore, even when he's "let go", he'll walk away with the GDP of small nations. Enough to live comfortably for the rest of his days. FOR LYING.
The rest of us would be tossed out on the street, with a warning that we're lucky we're not in jail.
Seriously, what a fucked up world we are living in.
The one little hole in this is that you're acting like a CS degree from the 70's was the reason he got the job. Odds are, no one involved in the hiring process thought it was important enough to look into or consider. He has the job because of his experience and work history, now what he went to school for before I (and likely you) were born. You don't become the CEO of a company like Yahoo by replying to a Monster posting and giving a couple references, you do it by being able to show decades of work history and leadership experience. While I agree that there should be consequences for lying on his resume, I think it's important to keep how much of a footnote that actually is in context. It's like someone in their 30's lying about their high school GPA.
Chief Pretend Privacy for Publicity Officer
What's the difference between a web server running code on your system and a carrier doing it?
There wouldn't be much, which is completely and entirely irrelevant since the web site would be running the code on their own server and not your system.
There's a very big difference between s/w collecting information on a private communications device that you own, and a website choosing to run a service on their own site.
Chief Privacy Officer. CPO. They really should just toss a 3 in the front! Haha, yesss 3-CPO! Ahh Star Wars :)
-americamatrix
It's C-3PO, you insensitive clod!
Negative, "alpha" versions are test mules, the automotive industry has described pre-production vehicles as the "beta" versions of cars over and over again.
The problem is that you are living in a fairy tale of the past. Millions of people have been displaced by cheap labor pouring in on HB-1 visas, and that piece of paper may very soon be the only way to attain a job that isn't flipping burgers for a person of voting age. The world is a darker place than when you were born and the fact that you already have experience not withstanding, trying to make it, let alone get ahead for young people coming out of school is bugger-all hard and get harder by the minute. Show some compassion and sympathy for those who have hurdles to leap that you never had, and won't if you are the least bit lucky.
We are being squeezed by uncaring interests, from all sides, more and more, and its easy to blame others for not being responsible, but it doesn't take much of a hiccup any more to find yourself out in the cold and with a bank account that looks like Mother Hubbards Cupboard. Your personal comfort is not the measure of fairness in a society, and as the wealth continues to fly out of the middle class in this "Trickle !-Down Economy", you should be very careful for whom the bell tolls.
I'm really not sure how any of this relates to my post. I'm only in my late-20's, I'm more than aware of what the job market is like for recent grads. I didn't, in any way, say that degrees weren't important or basically necessary, just that a lot of companies aren't going to ask you for an official transcript to prove it. I didn't say anything to "blame others for not being responsible", I just said that there's usually several months given before repayment starts, and that if you hadn't found a job or aren't making enough money to afford your payments, there are options available to deal with that. There really weren't any subtle implications or underlying messages there, just a direct response to another poster's misunderstood statement that this meant people couldn't get jobs in their field until their loans were paid off.
Fortunately beta car are not allowed on roads, or else every car manufacturer would claim their car is a beta version and get away with it. Go shill elsewhere.
You're completely and entirely incorrect. Manufacturers test pre-production vehicles on roads, and that's exactly what Google's doing here.
You can't work until you start paying us back and you can't pay us back until you start work. Seems a bizzare way of organising things. In the UK you can't pay back your student loans until you earn a certain minimum wage and then it starts to come out from your pay like a tax as a percentage of your wage.
Except that isn't what happens. They're holding transcripts if you default on the loans, not if you haven't started paying on them yet. You've usually got a six month deferment after graduation, and there are plenty of deferments and forbearances for unemployement, economic hardships, insufficient income. I'm not sure why /.ers are getting the idea that people are being denied their transcript fresh out the door.
GI Bill ... Instead of asking the government to give an education to them
Yeah, going to college on GI Bill money is far superior to government aid!
Actually, yeah, there's a pretty significant difference between asking for a handout and earning education compensation by providing service.
The dilemma is that in order to pay off your student loans you need decent work, but in order to get decent work you need to pay off your student loans.
No, the dilemma is that if you default on your student loans, you might have a problem getting "decent work". But as someone who's done sysadmin work for a national telecommunications company, a major payment processing business and a defense contractor, I've never been asked to provide or allow a request for a transcript. That may be annecdotal, but it's fair to say that there are plenty of "decent" jobs that aren't going to be held up by a transcript. And you certainly don't need to have your loans paid off before you can get a good job. Besides, you're usually in deferment for six months after graduation, so you've got that much time to either find a job in your field or at least something to pay the bills - and if you can't, you should be able to qualify for some kind of forbearance, deferment or economic hardship.
mastered
I see what you did there.
You took the bait!
How difficult is it to switch them on?
It's as easy as flipping a...
I find it weird that much of Slashdot was so actively on the bandwagon that cited having Internet Explorer installed on Windows computers was some kind of evil monopoly, but thinks that it's absurd that Windows Media Player DVD playback capabilities have been lumped into a Media Center add-on package. This is what the "M$"-bashers have been demanding for years - that Microsoft doesn't force their non-essential products as parts of the OS or its default installation.