Insightful? Really? Mods? I could see "Funny" maybe.
Your post fails to inform us how the GP is is wrong, nor how those speeches make President Obama deserving of the Nobel Peace Prize for actually doing
[...] the most or the best work for fraternity between nations, for the abolition or reduction of standing armies and for the holding and promotion of peace congresses.
Especially if you consider the fact that he did it in 2 weeks. I eagerly await your explanation.
BTW - The war statement isn't a declaration that GP wants millions dead, he's making a point that the Nobel committee has cheapened this award, and he hopes that they learn the lesson.
The conclusion is: His merits for nomination were non-existent, other than intent. This is important because the work done since the nomination usually isn't factored into the final award.
The President was nominated before any actions were taken to possibly deserve the nomination for any work done. If this had happened a year later, then there could be some sort of argument of whether or not he had accomplished anything. Right now, the argument is, "What exactly did he do in those 14 days?" I, for one, don't remember him taking a lot of action during his term as a senator either... But I'm open to any list of actions that I'm ignorant of.
What's tragic is that, based on the timing, it just reeks of politicism. This is unfortunate since this is a very distinguished award. Mother Teresa, Martin Luther King, and Tenzin Gyatso all earned this award for a lifetime of effort and work... To hand this to someone who merely "Seemed the opposite of someone that wasn't liked" is disappointing at best.
Answer: Sort of. It seems that there's a group of mods who've decided that anything that's subjective, or opinionated will be marked Flamebait. Any joke that they whoosh on gets marked Troll.
Solution(?): Metamoderate. Hopefully that lowers the chances of them getting to mod again.
Security through "meh" vs. Security through "I am INVINCIBLE" provides quite a difference in response. As summary/article/etc points out though, when you tell someone they can't do something, the first thing they want to do is... find a way to do it.
I suggest they send out flares and try to get others to make the same claim on bigger projects to divert the attention.
Right. That sounds like an awesome idea. How useful is that "secret" if the customer knows about it? It needs to be documented in that case, which means everyone knows about it, which means it's another attack surface. Plus, there must be a way of turning that feature back off.
If the customer doesn't know about it. It's only a matter of time before said hacker finds out about it, cause it will get out there. It also means that anyone who works (and worked for) said vendor can exploit that feature for their own purposes. The customer who paid for the software is just left out in the cold. Good job there. Sounds like an excellent reason to not use open code.
I think the point is that SSDs are one way to address the problem of rebuilds and thus, reliability. The limiting factor in disk bandwidth is the mechanical process of spinning the disk and getting the head over the right part and reading. A 6 Gb/s SATA interface was approved this year, but that was mostly due to the emergence of these SSDs. Yes, it's great that you can have a huge RAID-5 setup at home, and it's probably very little consequence if the array rebuilds for a couple days.
It's a whole different matter if you're a large business and you're sweating it out for those 2 days waiting for the rebuild to finish. Not because you'd lose your data... That's why you have backups. But if you have a second failure during that rebuild, you're looking at having to start the rebuild over again, and then you have to restore from tape. The solution for that is to have a second server with the setup... And depending on the cost of the first, may end up costing a lot more than those SSDs, especially if you factor in energy usage.
Since SSD's are still relatively new, yes, they're expensive. I also remember how 10 years ago, a 10 GB mechanical drive was about $100... The deal is, it's all about needs.. You don't need SSD at home... You don't need 99.999 uptime... But there are businesses and people that do. They'll be plenty happy to pay.
It's greed, the bottom line, and the people at the top don't have a clue how technology works in their favor... They are just looking for more streams for revenue. It's short sighted business gains so they can look good now. 5 years from now doesn't matter if they can make enough money now.
I stand pretty well corrected. I had a problem getting a voice plan from Sprint that covered Canada... They had a "service" where if I paid $5 a month, my calls into and from Canada would only cost 11 cents a minute instead of 40 cents... Which is why I had to switch to Verizon... If you're looking for pure data (which it sounds like you are) $100/month doesn't sound terrible if the coverage is good for you.
And I'm completely sure that all the legitimate home watchers will have no problem with their existing HD digital TVs requiring a decoder, and it'll do so much good cause you can just put your freaking DVR in after the decoder right?
Or will this force the Brits to have to shell out for a new TV?
Yea, solid idea. The DMCA thinks this is a bit too much...
1. Congratulations 2. My gut feeling is that this is something to keep an eye on the kids hearts to see if they're pushing too hard... or maybe something like that. They could use it as a lesson in heart health, and the effects of exercise. They could also use it as a way to demonstrate progress (or regress) in one's health over the course of the year. On the other hand, they could just be paranoid themselves, and being quite stupid about it.
I hope that this really is for some sort of educational usage. I think that the questioner is handling things (for the most part, not sure about the ask/. angle:D) alright... Asking the school is certainly an excellent way to find out what the goal is. If they get all dodgy about it, then go ahead and locate your nearest tin (or aluminum) hat and proceed with all caution.
Actually that shouldn't matter a damn. XP is in extended support, which means: security update support is still active. It's completely bogus, and against their own terms to not offer a security fix, especially for something that suffers the same exact bug (likely from the same exact code) in a newer, fixed OS.
This is MS trying to string arm companies into paying them for upgrades.
Slashdot Mirror
Insightful? Really? Mods? I could see "Funny" maybe.
Your post fails to inform us how the GP is is wrong, nor how those speeches make President Obama deserving of the Nobel Peace Prize for actually doing
[...] the most or the best work for fraternity between nations, for the abolition or reduction of standing armies and for the holding and promotion of peace congresses.
Especially if you consider the fact that he did it in 2 weeks. I eagerly await your explanation.
BTW - The war statement isn't a declaration that GP wants millions dead, he's making a point that the Nobel committee has cheapened this award, and he hopes that they learn the lesson.
The conclusion is:
His merits for nomination were non-existent, other than intent. This is important because the work done since the nomination usually isn't factored into the final award.
The President was nominated before any actions were taken to possibly deserve the nomination for any work done. If this had happened a year later, then there could be some sort of argument of whether or not he had accomplished anything. Right now, the argument is, "What exactly did he do in those 14 days?" I, for one, don't remember him taking a lot of action during his term as a senator either... But I'm open to any list of actions that I'm ignorant of.
What's tragic is that, based on the timing, it just reeks of politicism. This is unfortunate since this is a very distinguished award. Mother Teresa, Martin Luther King, and Tenzin Gyatso all earned this award for a lifetime of effort and work... To hand this to someone who merely "Seemed the opposite of someone that wasn't liked" is disappointing at best.
I, for one, welcome our new killer robotic bee overlords.
Answer:
Sort of. It seems that there's a group of mods who've decided that anything that's subjective, or opinionated will be marked Flamebait. Any joke that they whoosh on gets marked Troll.
Solution(?):
Metamoderate. Hopefully that lowers the chances of them getting to mod again.
"Never ascribe to malice that which is adequately explained by incompetence."
That should be amended to: "Tend to assume incompetence and not malice, unless it involves money."
And I say: You mother was a hamster, and your father smelled of elderberries.
I wouldn't even bother to wait for it to die. If the output sucks, it's not really doing its job anyway.
Security through "meh" vs. Security through "I am INVINCIBLE" provides quite a difference in response. As summary/article/etc points out though, when you tell someone they can't do something, the first thing they want to do is... find a way to do it.
I suggest they send out flares and try to get others to make the same claim on bigger projects to divert the attention.
For some reason, when I look at that thing, all I see are the air monsters that'll randomly pop up.
I'm also wondering if they can find enough dudes named Cid to take care of them if the military makes a bunch of them.
Actually, I commend you on solid negotiation, and getting away with it. He could've agreed to the trade, and given you the speeding ticket anyway.
That answer just pisses me off.
If I have a secret way of blocking a hacker...
Right. That sounds like an awesome idea. How useful is that "secret" if the customer knows about it? It needs to be documented in that case, which means everyone knows about it, which means it's another attack surface. Plus, there must be a way of turning that feature back off.
If the customer doesn't know about it. It's only a matter of time before said hacker finds out about it, cause it will get out there. It also means that anyone who works (and worked for) said vendor can exploit that feature for their own purposes. The customer who paid for the software is just left out in the cold. Good job there. Sounds like an excellent reason to not use open code.
Well done Nominum...
Let's be fair, I doubt anyone perusing these forums has either.
Many believe that it is only a crime if you get caught.
I think the point is that SSDs are one way to address the problem of rebuilds and thus, reliability. The limiting factor in disk bandwidth is the mechanical process of spinning the disk and getting the head over the right part and reading. A 6 Gb/s SATA interface was approved this year, but that was mostly due to the emergence of these SSDs. Yes, it's great that you can have a huge RAID-5 setup at home, and it's probably very little consequence if the array rebuilds for a couple days.
It's a whole different matter if you're a large business and you're sweating it out for those 2 days waiting for the rebuild to finish. Not because you'd lose your data... That's why you have backups. But if you have a second failure during that rebuild, you're looking at having to start the rebuild over again, and then you have to restore from tape. The solution for that is to have a second server with the setup... And depending on the cost of the first, may end up costing a lot more than those SSDs, especially if you factor in energy usage.
Since SSD's are still relatively new, yes, they're expensive. I also remember how 10 years ago, a 10 GB mechanical drive was about $100... The deal is, it's all about needs.. You don't need SSD at home... You don't need 99.999 uptime... But there are businesses and people that do. They'll be plenty happy to pay.
I'm sorry, that didn't quite work... a lot of people actually *go out there* and rent that software.
No... 100... BILLION!
It's greed, the bottom line, and the people at the top don't have a clue how technology works in their favor... They are just looking for more streams for revenue. It's short sighted business gains so they can look good now. 5 years from now doesn't matter if they can make enough money now.
Mike Godwin is applauding you sir.
I'm 28, and I have.. So we've got that narrowed down pretty solidly.
Only if they had a compelling environment, interesting characters, but extremely unfortunate dialogue.
I was about to say that Sprint's coverage in Canada is terribly expensive... but:
http://www1.sprintpcs.com/explore/ueContent.jsp?scTopic=wirelessData
I stand pretty well corrected. I had a problem getting a voice plan from Sprint that covered Canada... They had a "service" where if I paid $5 a month, my calls into and from Canada would only cost 11 cents a minute instead of 40 cents... Which is why I had to switch to Verizon... If you're looking for pure data (which it sounds like you are) $100/month doesn't sound terrible if the coverage is good for you.
No. I am allergic to cats.
And I'm completely sure that all the legitimate home watchers will have no problem with their existing HD digital TVs requiring a decoder, and it'll do so much good cause you can just put your freaking DVR in after the decoder right?
Or will this force the Brits to have to shell out for a new TV?
Yea, solid idea. The DMCA thinks this is a bit too much...
1. Congratulations
2. My gut feeling is that this is something to keep an eye on the kids hearts to see if they're pushing too hard... or maybe something like that. They could use it as a lesson in heart health, and the effects of exercise. They could also use it as a way to demonstrate progress (or regress) in one's health over the course of the year. On the other hand, they could just be paranoid themselves, and being quite stupid about it.
I hope that this really is for some sort of educational usage. I think that the questioner is handling things (for the most part, not sure about the ask /. angle :D) alright... Asking the school is certainly an excellent way to find out what the goal is. If they get all dodgy about it, then go ahead and locate your nearest tin (or aluminum) hat and proceed with all caution.
Actually that shouldn't matter a damn. XP is in extended support, which means: security update support is still active. It's completely bogus, and against their own terms to not offer a security fix, especially for something that suffers the same exact bug (likely from the same exact code) in a newer, fixed OS.
This is MS trying to string arm companies into paying them for upgrades.
http://support.microsoft.com/gp/lifepolicy