As for hypothetical situations where two children have sex, you take naked pictures of yourself as a child and circulate them as an adult, etc. I do not know. I suppose it would have to be tried in court.
It's not a hypothetical--it has happened numerous times. There are plenty of registered sex offenders and inmates who were convicted of producing child pornography, in addition to the regular distribution/possession charges. Freest nation on earth and all that...
There are plenty of stories of people withstanding torture. A lot of American POWs never gave in, because they believed in their cause, believed their cause was greater than them, or their families...Love of God, or Country is a very powerful thing.
"A lot"? Hardly. Closer to a handful. Nearly everyone breaks eventually--those that don't are often just killed.
If torture would save my family, I'd still be against it.
Just as you can't say how you'd respond to torture, you really can't say that you'd be against torture to save your family unless you have been there.
I apologize for the Hollywood scenario, but imagine your spouse and children being held by some child porn ring, being raped regularly. The group doesn't want a ransom, but you've got your hands on one of the perps... he won't talk. You don't start slapping him around at all? I call bullshit.
I am not condoning or promoting torture. I don't want it to be legal. But I can damned well see situations where I would want to use it. And that's why we have laws.
Schools in very low income areas may be different, but it is the same at average universities and community colleges, and has been for a few years now. Even CS departments are filled with Macs. Go ask any college student. Then ask a kid with a Lenovo if he would prefer a Mac.
I tried to mod this "-1, Delusional", but it looks like the communists in the NSA hacked Slashdot and removed that option again. Those evil bastards! I heard they eat unicorn meat.
There have been a few big generational shifts. Officers who had to deal with conscripts definitely favored the stick over the carrot, but I think that mindset is largely gone these days. Most of the huge changes occurred in the 70s and 80s, so most senior officers these days learned more progressive management from the beginning. Of course there are some selection biases at play... officers who can't lead often find themselves entering the civilian workforce sooner and more often than those who can. There are certainly still terrible officers in the military, good officers turned civy, and so forth.
There are also big differences between fields. From my experience, officers with field experience in selective units tend to be the best, with a ton of good officers in rescue, aviation, special ops, etc. More junior fighter pilots generally aren't so great as officers. They come from very officer-heavy units and don't have to work *with* enlisted as much (compared to, say, cargo pilots).
You're dead wrong. The military has to worry about both morale and retention, particularly in the enlisted ranks. Depending on the service+occupation, enlisted are on 2-6 year contracts. They are just starting to get good at their jobs when it comes time to re-up. Low retention = shitty NCO corps (middle and field management) plus a lack of skilled technicians, engineers, aviators, instructors, you name it. And there is a bit of a cascading effect as more junior members see talent fleeing.
Low morale also significantly degrades performance. While service members can't just quit, they can and do call in sick (malingering), work slower, and make more mistakes.
The military is constantly testing and adopting new management techniques for precisely these reasons.
While your argument is great, you have to remember that the GP may not actually care about regulation closing businesses. When was the last time you saw conservative outrage over the jobs lost due to government regulation of abortion clinics? Marijuana dispensaries? Adult toy stores? Strip clubs?
I think it's safe to say that most conservatives have no problem with big government regulating businesses out of existence. They just like pollution.
I think Tea Party folks want to... make everyone pay something...instead of paying 8% sales tax and 28% income tax, for example, a person might simply pay 20% sales tax.
Your proposed tax policy is an economic death sentence for the low and middle classes. I wish to unsubscribe from your newsletter.
Liberals and conservatives are not both sides of the same coin. Not at all.
You are confusing republican and democrat with conservative and liberal. The truth is that both democrats and republicans are conservative. Both are the enemy of America, the nation founded on liberal ideals.
TBF, there are a few different definitions of "liberal", and each party claims its own form. Republicans love to advocate Neoliberalism, Democrats believe in [very] limited Social Liberalism, and both parties selectively quote Classical Liberals.
I concede that SATA may be able to work well with ZFS. Assuming a competent admin, non-buggy software, quality hardware, and an organization willing to spend the extra to have the aforementioned requirements.
a) was my biggest point. We agree. I've just seen this sort of foolishness far more often in hacked together ZFS systems because people think they can build enterprise-class systems with software alone. My point is that hardware matters too. Fuck timeouts, if someone tried to skimp $20/TB on their storage I will not be responsible for their data. They probably won't pay me anyways.
b) I wasn't aware of that as the root cause, so thanks for the explanation. I'll look into it out of curiosity, but not because it is my job to find/fix Solaris's bugs.
Most of what I work on needs IOPs far more than TBs. Most demand 5 9s or better, and many can't tolerate any data loss. I'm happy enough with SAS for primary, tyvm.
I'm sure you already know this, but for others reading: I've seen a heck of a lot of problems on SATA raidz2s. For the love of FSM, Bob, God, or all that is holy, do not use Green drives! Use SAS if you want reliability and performance.
I've asked the same thing for a while (and here on/.). As for selling the videos online, Big Sister in the Czech Republic did this. The sex was free for male guests, but they had to pay a small entrance fee and sign the contracts.
...trying new approaches and responding to feedback on those changes will create an overall better product.
FTFY.
I find it incredibly frustrating... a company that seeks to manage the world's information can barely acknowledge feedback, let alone give outward signs of responding to it.
True enough, but any scheme that makes me buy and own another thing is failure prone - it could break, get lost or stolen. Too many flawed assumptions about the real world are complicating the pursuit of useful solutions.
If it gets stolen, the thief has until 5 minutes after I realize it was stolen (probably ~30m). They have to break my phone's encryption or guess my PIN, then figure out my google password and login to my account. All before I login and disable google authenticator, generate new backup codes, and switch to a different 2-factor system.
To keep my account, they also have to remove every possible avenue of account recovery I have.
Authenticator isn't perfect, but combined with Google's other security features, I have to say my Gmail account is among the most secure accounts I have. At least from non-state actors.
For these people, owning a firearm is already illegal, using it during the commission of a crime is illegal and murder is certainly illegal. Creating yet another law for them to break wouldn't even slow them down since they already work outside the law to acquire the firearms. It would be like making more laws about how pharmacies dispense drugs in an attempt to stop crack dealers.
It [gun acquisition by felons] is only nominally illegal and rarely enforced. You may think that makes it "illegal", but if you can easily do something with little risk of getting caught, it's effectively closer to legal. California just funded an effort to seize weapons from felons known to have them, but I doubt many red states are doing this.
Many of the proposed laws are designed to make it harder to do things that are currently illegal. What's the point in making it illegal for felons to buy weapons when they can untraceably do so without background checks?
Can you imagine the conservative reaction to liberals pursuing gay marriage in this fashion? Pass a law saying the government is forbidden from collecting gender information, couples can legally marry without any paperwork, etc. and then randomly revoke a handful of marriage licenses during traffic stops. I'm sure the Freedom Lovers would support that.
Stop! Godwintime! Is it hypocrisy for a rapist to call Hitler a murderer?
Now that the purge is complete, the GOP is almost exclusively hateful, at least in terms of policies and rhetoric. And with the Southern Strategy it has become an umbrella organization for hate groups. I'm going to write a list of hypothetical people and let you guess which party they most likely belong to:
Someone who advocates the violent overthrow of the federal government
Someone who believes certain types of doctors deserve to be murdered
A KKK member
Someone who believes the poor are moochers
An old man who calls a young woman a slut
Parents who disown their child for their sexual choices
The DP has their share of assholes, but, while the GOP encourages their crazies, the extreme left is not tolerated within the Democratic Party.
If he wasn't lying, he would be arrested for violation of his LIFE LONG NDA you sign when you take a job with the The FBI.
...The only thing agents can't discuss is material related to an active or ongoing investigation, or material that has been classified. There no evidence that either condition has been met here.
He is full of shit. Normally I respect your views, but this time you are too.
You honestly think an NSA-led program to collect every single email, phone call, and text message wouldn't be classified? Really?
Intelligence sources and methods are always classified. The FBI has access to plenty of classified in national security issues... they're just not, as the article said, able to use classified in court. Aside from the legality concerns, doing so would expose sources and methods.
For the same reason, the FBI doesn't go arresting every jackass/whistleblower who talks about classified programs on CNN. Some of them are exposing classified, but others are spouting bullshit to further their careers. Arresting only the latter would verify their validity (exposing methods/sources), and arresting both types wouldn't go over well. Although it might make CNN somewhat respectable again.
WTF is an "Oil Company"? Companies like BP and Shell and Exxon started "getting off oil" decades ago. They're all "energy companies" now, and oil is just 1 product.
So you're saying Exxon is an "energy company" because oil is "just 1 product"? Really? That's like saying McDonald's isn't a fast food place because they also sell bottled water. Oil and oil byproducts compose the vast majority of Exxon's operations. Natural gas too, of course, but renewables and other energy sources are pretty minor in comparison. 1%? Don't have recent figures.
As an investor with a serious chunk of change in energy companies, I dearly wish they were this fountain of greed and profits people who know nothing about the industry imagine them to be! The energy company stocks have underperformed the S&P500 by about 30% over the past 5 years.
Gosh, that's amazing! If you start your graph right in the middle of the great recession, it looks like the S&P 500 was doing really well and energy companies barely held. Of course, if you step back a bit you'll see energy companies did fairly well during the bust. Exxon outperformed the S&P 500 over the last 10 years (+144% vs +70%). And it yields decent dividends, too.
Hell, Exxon is doing so terribly they can't even beat their 2008 record of $45.22 billion annual profit on $482 billion revenue. But I guess it's hard being the most profitable company in the world with a P/E of 9 when investors think facebook is worth buying at P/E of 1,800+ and 1/5th the market cap.
We will transition when each of us as consumers finds it cheaper to transition. Neither the oil companies nor the environmentalists can or should do much to delay or hasten that day.
While quite obviously true, you leave out one important fact: policy decisions determine which energy source is cheaper. And there is no "neutral" policy that leaves the market undistorted.
Good points, even I didn't know a few of these. A few oddities worth mentioning (because they bother me so) are 1) re-signing like the 101 North/South to East/West in parts of LA and 2) Hawaii has interstates *facepalm*. Yes, I know why, it just drives me crazy when I am there.
Slashdot Mirror
As for hypothetical situations where two children have sex, you take naked pictures of yourself as a child and circulate them as an adult, etc. I do not know. I suppose it would have to be tried in court.
It's not a hypothetical--it has happened numerous times. There are plenty of registered sex offenders and inmates who were convicted of producing child pornography, in addition to the regular distribution/possession charges. Freest nation on earth and all that...
There are plenty of stories of people withstanding torture. A lot of American POWs never gave in, because they believed in their cause, believed their cause was greater than them, or their families...Love of God, or Country is a very powerful thing.
"A lot"? Hardly. Closer to a handful. Nearly everyone breaks eventually--those that don't are often just killed.
If torture would save my family, I'd still be against it.
Just as you can't say how you'd respond to torture, you really can't say that you'd be against torture to save your family unless you have been there.
I apologize for the Hollywood scenario, but imagine your spouse and children being held by some child porn ring, being raped regularly. The group doesn't want a ransom, but you've got your hands on one of the perps... he won't talk. You don't start slapping him around at all? I call bullshit.
I am not condoning or promoting torture. I don't want it to be legal. But I can damned well see situations where I would want to use it. And that's why we have laws.
The last time the US invaded a nation-state: 2003.
But the relevant question is "can the US maintain air superiority without manned aircraft?" and the answer to that is "No."
Schools in very low income areas may be different, but it is the same at average universities and community colleges, and has been for a few years now. Even CS departments are filled with Macs. Go ask any college student. Then ask a kid with a Lenovo if he would prefer a Mac.
I tried to mod this "-1, Delusional", but it looks like the communists in the NSA hacked Slashdot and removed that option again. Those evil bastards! I heard they eat unicorn meat.
Someone really hates sex...
There have been a few big generational shifts. Officers who had to deal with conscripts definitely favored the stick over the carrot, but I think that mindset is largely gone these days. Most of the huge changes occurred in the 70s and 80s, so most senior officers these days learned more progressive management from the beginning. Of course there are some selection biases at play... officers who can't lead often find themselves entering the civilian workforce sooner and more often than those who can. There are certainly still terrible officers in the military, good officers turned civy, and so forth.
There are also big differences between fields. From my experience, officers with field experience in selective units tend to be the best, with a ton of good officers in rescue, aviation, special ops, etc. More junior fighter pilots generally aren't so great as officers. They come from very officer-heavy units and don't have to work *with* enlisted as much (compared to, say, cargo pilots).
You're dead wrong. The military has to worry about both morale and retention, particularly in the enlisted ranks. Depending on the service+occupation, enlisted are on 2-6 year contracts. They are just starting to get good at their jobs when it comes time to re-up. Low retention = shitty NCO corps (middle and field management) plus a lack of skilled technicians, engineers, aviators, instructors, you name it. And there is a bit of a cascading effect as more junior members see talent fleeing.
Low morale also significantly degrades performance. While service members can't just quit, they can and do call in sick (malingering), work slower, and make more mistakes.
The military is constantly testing and adopting new management techniques for precisely these reasons.
Right-click the start button and you can shutdown. Big improvement right there. But Windows 8.1 is still pretty damned stupid.
While your argument is great, you have to remember that the GP may not actually care about regulation closing businesses. When was the last time you saw conservative outrage over the jobs lost due to government regulation of abortion clinics? Marijuana dispensaries? Adult toy stores? Strip clubs?
I think it's safe to say that most conservatives have no problem with big government regulating businesses out of existence. They just like pollution.
I think Tea Party folks want to ... make everyone pay something...instead of paying 8% sales tax and 28% income tax, for example, a person might simply pay 20% sales tax.
Your proposed tax policy is an economic death sentence for the low and middle classes. I wish to unsubscribe from your newsletter.
Xsan? Good luck getting support from Apple. It's dead, along with everything else Apple sold to enterprise.
StorNext is great, though, if you have the need and budget for it. I'd probably go all Quantum right now, though. They have some sweet solutions.
Liberals and conservatives are not both sides of the same coin. Not at all.
You are confusing republican and democrat with conservative and liberal. The truth is that both democrats and republicans are conservative. Both are the enemy of America, the nation founded on liberal ideals.
TBF, there are a few different definitions of "liberal", and each party claims its own form. Republicans love to advocate Neoliberalism, Democrats believe in [very] limited Social Liberalism, and both parties selectively quote Classical Liberals.
I concede that SATA may be able to work well with ZFS. Assuming a competent admin, non-buggy software, quality hardware, and an organization willing to spend the extra to have the aforementioned requirements.
a) was my biggest point. We agree. I've just seen this sort of foolishness far more often in hacked together ZFS systems because people think they can build enterprise-class systems with software alone. My point is that hardware matters too. Fuck timeouts, if someone tried to skimp $20/TB on their storage I will not be responsible for their data. They probably won't pay me anyways.
b) I wasn't aware of that as the root cause, so thanks for the explanation. I'll look into it out of curiosity, but not because it is my job to find/fix Solaris's bugs.
Most of what I work on needs IOPs far more than TBs. Most demand 5 9s or better, and many can't tolerate any data loss. I'm happy enough with SAS for primary, tyvm.
I'm sure you already know this, but for others reading: I've seen a heck of a lot of problems on SATA raidz2s. For the love of FSM, Bob, God, or all that is holy, do not use Green drives! Use SAS if you want reliability and performance.
Your list is a bit off. #5 should be "Be black and murder a white girl", #6 white male.
I've asked the same thing for a while (and here on /.). As for selling the videos online, Big Sister in the Czech Republic did this. The sex was free for male guests, but they had to pay a small entrance fee and sign the contracts.
...trying new approaches and responding to feedback on those changes will create an overall better product.
FTFY.
I find it incredibly frustrating... a company that seeks to manage the world's information can barely acknowledge feedback, let alone give outward signs of responding to it.
True enough, but any scheme that makes me buy and own another thing is failure prone - it could break, get lost or stolen. Too many flawed assumptions about the real world are complicating the pursuit of useful solutions.
If it gets stolen, the thief has until 5 minutes after I realize it was stolen (probably ~30m). They have to break my phone's encryption or guess my PIN, then figure out my google password and login to my account. All before I login and disable google authenticator, generate new backup codes, and switch to a different 2-factor system.
To keep my account, they also have to remove every possible avenue of account recovery I have.
Authenticator isn't perfect, but combined with Google's other security features, I have to say my Gmail account is among the most secure accounts I have. At least from non-state actors.
For these people, owning a firearm is already illegal, using it during the commission of a crime is illegal and murder is certainly illegal. Creating yet another law for them to break wouldn't even slow them down since they already work outside the law to acquire the firearms. It would be like making more laws about how pharmacies dispense drugs in an attempt to stop crack dealers.
It [gun acquisition by felons] is only nominally illegal and rarely enforced. You may think that makes it "illegal", but if you can easily do something with little risk of getting caught, it's effectively closer to legal. California just funded an effort to seize weapons from felons known to have them, but I doubt many red states are doing this.
Many of the proposed laws are designed to make it harder to do things that are currently illegal. What's the point in making it illegal for felons to buy weapons when they can untraceably do so without background checks?
Can you imagine the conservative reaction to liberals pursuing gay marriage in this fashion? Pass a law saying the government is forbidden from collecting gender information, couples can legally marry without any paperwork, etc. and then randomly revoke a handful of marriage licenses during traffic stops. I'm sure the Freedom Lovers would support that.
The DP has their share of assholes, but, while the GOP encourages their crazies, the extreme left is not tolerated within the Democratic Party.
If he wasn't lying, he would be arrested for violation of his LIFE LONG NDA you sign when you take a job with the The FBI.
...The only thing agents can't discuss is material related to an active or ongoing investigation, or material that has been classified. There no evidence that either condition has been met here.
He is full of shit. Normally I respect your views, but this time you are too.
You honestly think an NSA-led program to collect every single email, phone call, and text message wouldn't be classified? Really?
Intelligence sources and methods are always classified. The FBI has access to plenty of classified in national security issues... they're just not, as the article said, able to use classified in court. Aside from the legality concerns, doing so would expose sources and methods.
For the same reason, the FBI doesn't go arresting every jackass/whistleblower who talks about classified programs on CNN. Some of them are exposing classified, but others are spouting bullshit to further their careers. Arresting only the latter would verify their validity (exposing methods/sources), and arresting both types wouldn't go over well. Although it might make CNN somewhat respectable again.
You could say the same of popping a paper bag between your hands, where do you draw the line between "bomb" and "harmless fun thing that goes pop?"
Now that law enforcement are calling pressure cookers WMD, I think it's safe to say you are describing a high yield explosive.
WTF is an "Oil Company"? Companies like BP and Shell and Exxon started "getting off oil" decades ago. They're all "energy companies" now, and oil is just 1 product.
So you're saying Exxon is an "energy company" because oil is "just 1 product"? Really? That's like saying McDonald's isn't a fast food place because they also sell bottled water. Oil and oil byproducts compose the vast majority of Exxon's operations. Natural gas too, of course, but renewables and other energy sources are pretty minor in comparison. 1%? Don't have recent figures.
As an investor with a serious chunk of change in energy companies, I dearly wish they were this fountain of greed and profits people who know nothing about the industry imagine them to be! The energy company stocks have underperformed the S&P500 by about 30% over the past 5 years.
Gosh, that's amazing! If you start your graph right in the middle of the great recession, it looks like the S&P 500 was doing really well and energy companies barely held. Of course, if you step back a bit you'll see energy companies did fairly well during the bust. Exxon outperformed the S&P 500 over the last 10 years (+144% vs +70%). And it yields decent dividends, too.
Hell, Exxon is doing so terribly they can't even beat their 2008 record of $45.22 billion annual profit on $482 billion revenue. But I guess it's hard being the most profitable company in the world with a P/E of 9 when investors think facebook is worth buying at P/E of 1,800+ and 1/5th the market cap.
We will transition when each of us as consumers finds it cheaper to transition. Neither the oil companies nor the environmentalists can or should do much to delay or hasten that day.
While quite obviously true, you leave out one important fact: policy decisions determine which energy source is cheaper. And there is no "neutral" policy that leaves the market undistorted.
Good points, even I didn't know a few of these. A few oddities worth mentioning (because they bother me so) are 1) re-signing like the 101 North/South to East/West in parts of LA and 2) Hawaii has interstates *facepalm*. Yes, I know why, it just drives me crazy when I am there.