How do you figure? If you have 6 disks in RAID 6, with 2 redundant drives, you can lose any two drives and fully recover. With RAID10, you can usually recover from a two drive failure, but there's a 1 in 5 chance that the 2nd drive failure will be the mirror of the first failed drive.
You should have a home file server where everyone keeps everything. RAID 6 it. That way you never have to worry about dying hard drives.
Put RTorrent on it with a watch directory. Sign up to a private TV torrent tracker with an RSS feed. Download the torrents linked to by those feeds into your watch directory. Share the torrent directory via Samba.
Put a PC with XBMC anywhere you want to watch TV. Add your samba share as a source. You're done.
No, tinkering is what you end up with when things don't work as expected. Small things like my side mouse buttons not working, or the wifi actually being supported but requiring a very bleeding edge kernel......the lack of virtual desktops, the lack of window shading, the lack of built in ssh, the lack of filesystems in user space, the lack software repositories and all sorts of shitty little things I've had to deal with.
Windows is no better than Linux in regards to the amount of tinkering you have to do to get a usable system.
Ah, so it's not the law that's the actual sticking point. It's about getting the right kind of immigrants. As a matter of fact, you ARE opposed to legal immigration, if that legal immigration allows the wrong kind of people in.
So your original statement that "no one is really against legal immigration", isn't really totally accurate, is it?
We issue over one million visas per year, in a lottery system.
If people are still immigrating illegally, then it's not enough. Remember, you are claiming that the ONLY thing that matters is that immigrants go through a legal process. Legalize free border crossings for all, and then all immigrants will be legal. That should please everyone, right?
The issue of "legalization" is whether or not giving an amnesty to illegal aliens would only encourage more border jumping.
Complete and utter legalization of all immigration would eliminate border jumping, because everyone could come in through the front door.
I would love kio_slaves if they were implemented in a desktop independent manner. What good reason is there for virtual file systems to be tied to a GUI?
it's going to be a low-cost PC that lets them be highly interactive.'
A low cost personal computer that encourages tinkering? That sounds awfully familiar.
Shame that the hardware is the easiest part of the solution. Gates is correct there too, curriculum and competent teachers are going to be the biggest obstacle.
Don't worry. We'll get our chance to ridicule Mac users when Apple does something stupid with OS X. The lack of software freedom will bite them eventually.
In that case, if it's just the legal process, let's change the legal process. If we make legal immigration easier than illegal immigration then there would be no point to illegally immigrate. Then you have nothing to complain about, right?
Are you really that naive? If people only cared about the legal status of immigrants, then we could pass a bill to legalize every immigrant and please everyone. The fact that conservatives refuse every opportunity to make legal immigration easier proves that it's not the legality at all that's the issue.
If you ask the right question, I'm sure you can get your study to show ignorance from whichever side you dislike.
If it were so easy to do that, there would be as many studies showing how listeners of NPR are more misinformed than others. Where are they?
Besides, we're not just talking about ignorance. We're talking about misinformation. Fox News viewers are more likely to answer these questions incorrectly than people who watch *no news at all*. And that effect happens in a dose dependent manner, the more time you spend watching Fox News the more incorrect your answers tend to be. You don't get that kind of effect by accident.
Had Fox simply fought the claim that they were lying, then they would have implicitly accepted the idea that the government gets to decide what is and is not "truth" and thereby would have ceded the government's right do censor anything it considers "untrue".
We crossed that bridge a long time ago when we carved out exemptions for "shouting fire in a crowded theater", libel and slander, lying to federal agents, and fraud. Each of those is only an offense if the statements are untrue.
You parrot Fox News memes like a pro. Apologies for the misidentification. But if you quack like a duck, I'm going to peg you for a duck.
I can elaborate on some of your specific concerns then. You were concerned about the factual nature of climate change:
Of the seven links it provides, one of them is on Climate Change (not "facts" but "how much confidence do you that scientists to understand and predict a huge complicated system that they have almost no experience predicting?").
That's not all they asked. They asked about simple, verifiable, facts. "Is the Earth warmer today than it was 100 years ago?" is one such question. That doesn't rely on any sort of prediction, or any sort of interpretation of a model. The plain data is available for anyone who wants it. Fox News viewers still disagree with the fact that the Earth has warmed more than other news viewers.
although written in December 2010 before Obama released the birth certificate that finally shut Trump up, counted people's answer as "incorrect" if the people didn't believe Obama's was born in Hawaii
Trumps birtherism is exactly the kind of misinformation we're looking for. There was no more doubt in 2010 that Obama was born in Hawaii than there was that Bush was born in Connecticut. Trump and Fox manufactured the controversy for their own political ends. If you though that there was any doubt about Obama's birthplace in 2010, you were misled by propagandists. That's why it was marked inaccurate. Because it plainly was.
My point was that it is our fault (society) if the kids wander around in the streets without anything to do
You assume they did this because they didn't have anything better to do. Did you consider that they looked at the world and concluded that striking out in impotent rage was possibly the best thing they actually could do? It won't work, of course, but at least it's better than collaborating.
Well.. Somewhat agreed. Extra-curricular activities put the kids busy with something, shows them that they might be good at something and evolves their critical thinking which is good since now a days kids seem to admire brainless people - for this I would blame the broadcasting media.
These kids are already thinking critically. They've thought critically enough to understand that the CIA and SOCA are not the good guys. That puts them far, far ahead of most of the population.
That's also why the law enforcement response has been so robust. If these were just hooligans, spray painting in an alley they'd get far less trouble from the authorities. If they were bullies, assaulting children on their school bus daily, they'd probably get no trouble at all. Instead, they take on the established power structure and get what's coming to them for being uppity.
Exactly! What are the fundamental underpinnings of society?
Greed and hubris, as far as I can tell. This isn't a youth problem at all. It's a rational response to corruption at the highest levels.
Slashdot Mirror
By that argument, so could campaign finance restrictions. We know how that turned out.
As a society we've decided that all men are created equal and therefore should all have the same rights.
Then as a society, we should pay for them.
RAID 10 is much safer than RAID 6.
How do you figure? If you have 6 disks in RAID 6, with 2 redundant drives, you can lose any two drives and fully recover. With RAID10, you can usually recover from a two drive failure, but there's a 1 in 5 chance that the 2nd drive failure will be the mirror of the first failed drive.
I don't ridicule a Linux user who suffers breakage after an update, so why ridicule me personally if something fucks up in Windows?
Read the parent post to mine. Turnabout is fair play.
So? It would make them legal, and legality is your chief concern right?
I'm talking about the functionality actually functioning as intended.
I'm talking about the functionality functioning as I intend. That's the whole point of open source.
I maintain enough upload credit to download anything I want again.
The best things in life usually are.
You should have a home file server where everyone keeps everything. RAID 6 it. That way you never have to worry about dying hard drives.
Put RTorrent on it with a watch directory. Sign up to a private TV torrent tracker with an RSS feed. Download the torrents linked to by those feeds into your watch directory. Share the torrent directory via Samba.
Put a PC with XBMC anywhere you want to watch TV. Add your samba share as a source. You're done.
No, tinkering is what you end up with when things don't work as expected. Small things like my side mouse buttons not working, or the wifi actually being supported but requiring a very bleeding edge kernel... ...the lack of virtual desktops, the lack of window shading, the lack of built in ssh, the lack of filesystems in user space, the lack software repositories and all sorts of shitty little things I've had to deal with.
Windows is no better than Linux in regards to the amount of tinkering you have to do to get a usable system.
Things which start to suck tend to get replaced by things which suck less.
Indeed they do.
I think what he's actually saying here is more like, "L'Ãtat, c'est moi".
Ah, so it's not the law that's the actual sticking point. It's about getting the right kind of immigrants. As a matter of fact, you ARE opposed to legal immigration, if that legal immigration allows the wrong kind of people in.
So your original statement that "no one is really against legal immigration", isn't really totally accurate, is it?
This is a flat out, demonstrably false lie. Conservatives support legal immigration at about the same rates as self identified liberals and moderates
Then explain this
We issue over one million visas per year, in a lottery system.
If people are still immigrating illegally, then it's not enough. Remember, you are claiming that the ONLY thing that matters is that immigrants go through a legal process. Legalize free border crossings for all, and then all immigrants will be legal. That should please everyone, right?
The issue of "legalization" is whether or not giving an amnesty to illegal aliens would only encourage more border jumping.
Complete and utter legalization of all immigration would eliminate border jumping, because everyone could come in through the front door.
I would love kio_slaves if they were implemented in a desktop independent manner. What good reason is there for virtual file systems to be tied to a GUI?
But Linux on the desktop is complete shit and always has been.
All desktop operating systems are complete shit.
it's going to be a low-cost PC that lets them be highly interactive.'
A low cost personal computer that encourages tinkering? That sounds awfully familiar.
Shame that the hardware is the easiest part of the solution. Gates is correct there too, curriculum and competent teachers are going to be the biggest obstacle.
Don't worry. We'll get our chance to ridicule Mac users when Apple does something stupid with OS X. The lack of software freedom will bite them eventually.
In that case, if it's just the legal process, let's change the legal process. If we make legal immigration easier than illegal immigration then there would be no point to illegally immigrate. Then you have nothing to complain about, right?
Are you really that naive? If people only cared about the legal status of immigrants, then we could pass a bill to legalize every immigrant and please everyone. The fact that conservatives refuse every opportunity to make legal immigration easier proves that it's not the legality at all that's the issue.
If you ask the right question, I'm sure you can get your study to show ignorance from whichever side you dislike.
If it were so easy to do that, there would be as many studies showing how listeners of NPR are more misinformed than others. Where are they?
Besides, we're not just talking about ignorance. We're talking about misinformation. Fox News viewers are more likely to answer these questions incorrectly than people who watch *no news at all*. And that effect happens in a dose dependent manner, the more time you spend watching Fox News the more incorrect your answers tend to be. You don't get that kind of effect by accident.
Not wrong, seven different studies support my statement.
Had Fox simply fought the claim that they were lying, then they would have implicitly accepted the idea that the government gets to decide what is and is not "truth" and thereby would have ceded the government's right do censor anything it considers "untrue".
We crossed that bridge a long time ago when we carved out exemptions for "shouting fire in a crowded theater", libel and slander, lying to federal agents, and fraud. Each of those is only an offense if the statements are untrue.
You parrot Fox News memes like a pro. Apologies for the misidentification. But if you quack like a duck, I'm going to peg you for a duck.
I can elaborate on some of your specific concerns then. You were concerned about the factual nature of climate change:
That's not all they asked. They asked about simple, verifiable, facts. "Is the Earth warmer today than it was 100 years ago?" is one such question. That doesn't rely on any sort of prediction, or any sort of interpretation of a model. The plain data is available for anyone who wants it. Fox News viewers still disagree with the fact that the Earth has warmed more than other news viewers.
Trumps birtherism is exactly the kind of misinformation we're looking for. There was no more doubt in 2010 that Obama was born in Hawaii than there was that Bush was born in Connecticut. Trump and Fox manufactured the controversy for their own political ends. If you though that there was any doubt about Obama's birthplace in 2010, you were misled by propagandists. That's why it was marked inaccurate. Because it plainly was.
You're lucky. Everywhere I go local news seems to be the same useless heap of sensationalism plus sports and weather.
My point was that it is our fault (society) if the kids wander around in the streets without anything to do
You assume they did this because they didn't have anything better to do. Did you consider that they looked at the world and concluded that striking out in impotent rage was possibly the best thing they actually could do? It won't work, of course, but at least it's better than collaborating.
Well.. Somewhat agreed. Extra-curricular activities put the kids busy with something, shows them that they might be good at something and evolves their critical thinking which is good since now a days kids seem to admire brainless people - for this I would blame the broadcasting media.
These kids are already thinking critically. They've thought critically enough to understand that the CIA and SOCA are not the good guys. That puts them far, far ahead of most of the population.
That's also why the law enforcement response has been so robust. If these were just hooligans, spray painting in an alley they'd get far less trouble from the authorities. If they were bullies, assaulting children on their school bus daily, they'd probably get no trouble at all. Instead, they take on the established power structure and get what's coming to them for being uppity.
Exactly! What are the fundamental underpinnings of society?
Greed and hubris, as far as I can tell. This isn't a youth problem at all. It's a rational response to corruption at the highest levels.