I'd say it's not dead until Mr. Hollings is...or perhaps not until Disney Co. is...
The monkeys in Washington DC might have heard us, but believe me, they'll find another way to earn a good ROI on the money given them by the large corporate interests - public opinion be dammed!
There are virtually no other options to Windows. That's why it's a MONOPOLY! Can I ask, what part of MONOPOLY didn't you understand.
Lexus doesn't have 95+% market share. If they did, the courts certainly would regulate how they did business.
MS has a monopoly - the government regulates them to provide broad choice for the consumers when MS doesn't regulate themselves.
MS can get away from the goverment regulating them. Just stop engaging in anti-competitive behavior. It seems that every discussion that follows this path, seems to ignore that MS was found guilty of abusing it's monopoly position. That's what brought the Gvmt down on them. They could have acted differently, and never been "regulated" by the government.
MS's actions are responsible for the regulation. This is like a pedophile complaining that the tracking beacon he has to wear, to make sure he doesn't prey on any more kids, is "bad." Sure, it normally would be. If you weren't a convicted felon/pedophile who was likely to reoffend, I'd have lots of sympathy for you. But, you're a danger to society, and you'll just have to suffer some damages that resulted from your behavior.
Perhaps, you should talk about oversell, and how the cable model is a burst model etc.
You didn't - perhaps you meant to, but you didn't!
I didn't think that TW allowed you to run servers, so I don't think we're talking about "warez repositories" - but again, what you mean is that you can't expect to pull the full burst bandwidth all the time - and that's true enough.
But I don't think that the costs of bandwidth are nearly what people crack them up to be. I used to be on a metered DSL connection. Problem was that the provider didn't ever lower the bandwidth charge over more than 3 years while bandwidth costs took a serious dive.
Anyone have the IP cost for say an OC-192 pipe. I'd like to know what the actual bandwidth costs at higher data-rates!
I'm glad to pay for what I use, provided it's a reasonable cost. Since I've not yet found anyone that is willing to actually price bandwidth for what it costs, I'll go elsewhere.
I do think that Cable users should be entitled to pull as much data as they want. At least until the cable co's start using some truth in advertising. They trumpet 3Mb/s+ speeds and try to attract the very users they now claim are "costing" them so much money. Well, that's like the CueCat people claiming that those free scanners they gave away are only to be used for their software - "therwise we'll go bankrupt!" Sheesh, cry me a river. Advertise what you can deliver, and then actually deliver what you promise. When the cable co's actually do this, you might hear gnashing of teeth about bandwidth charges, but then at least they'll have the moral imperative to do so...
What this looks like to me, is a MBA type saying "Hey, we've got a goldmine here!" and forgetting about lots of the details.
Hey bonehead - lets look at the costs for said T1.
The T1 circuit from your telco is probably more than 2/3 of that cost.
The IP feed less than 1/3 of the total charge.
Not only that, but the oversell rates on T1's is generally much lower than that of cable and DSL.
You're comparing apples and oranges. If I buy a T1, I'm a serious user, and I expect a QOS guarantee. For example, I should get 786Kb/s minimum over a short period of time. Generally, I should be able to continuously pull 1.544Mb/s. DSL and Cable expect the inverse of this. Short bursts to capacity, and much longer periods of very low or no useage.
Finally, the point made by others, is that economy of scale prevails. You buy an OC3 or larger, perhaps much larger. The cost per Mb/s drops dramatically.
You can put a DS-3 in the CO if you want! Hows that going to bandwidth bottleneck you?
The telco links all the CO's via a frame or ATM cloud. I would bet there's Gb/s of bandwidth to virtually any CO.
You may find that Cable is great, but just wait until TW/AT&T/etc put way too many people on your cable segment. What to do then? You can't switch ISP's like you can with DSL.
Sure, my DSL doesn't provide the massive burst bandwidth that cable does, but it does provide me with many other things that I find really important.
Static IP's! Choice of ISP! Higher upstream bandwidth/Symmetrical bandwidth, or at last more symmetrical than cable. Try to get a 768 or 1Mb/s upstream connection via cable. (I don't need the expense of T1, and I don't need the lower oversell either in most cases. Getting a higher upstream pipe is great for lots of apps - esp VPN - both in and out!)
So, cable might meet your needs, but DSL gives me lots more choices that help me avoid the crap a single vendor lock-in can give you.
What ever works - I really like DSL, but if cable works for what you want, so be it. (It's generally my experience that cable is great for entertainment (browse the web, check your mail etc.) and DSL is better for work stuff (FTP Server, VPN, Mail server etc.)
Try this on Netware...it works as it should, and has worked this way for more than 10 years.
You'll see folder A, B, & C with nothing in them - because you don't have rights, as well as browse through them down to folder D.
Folder D will have all the files and such that you have rights to.
Browsing to user directories, or shares below them that the user wants to share with other users and such, without mapping a drive is lots easer when things work this way - browse to the server, open the users folder, open user X's folder (you're user Y) still all you see is the folder - open the shared directory below, and bingo - all the rights you have - read or read/write etc.
True, about the 3rd party liability - I think, UCITA has some weird stuff in it.
It effects the uniform commercial code, and it could effect that portion of the law relating to 3rd party liability - I just don't know. Persuing several hundred pages of legaleese isn't high on my list of pleasureable things to do.
Ok, bloke, have you ever seen EA's on OS/2? You can ask the OS what the association is, and it will tell you. Same with the MAC.
As for the network setup.
Setup folder A Inside folder A setup B & C inside C, setup D
Now give user Fred full rights to D, but no rights to A,C or C.
Try to use explorer to browse to D. It won't work. If you put in the direct path to D, you can get there, but you can't browse. Or setup a drive map that points directly to the D folder. To browse, you have to at least have the browse right to A,B,C.
That just sucks. Netware can do this just fine. I'd assume that looking down the tree to see if you might have more rights to some folder farther down in the tree isn't exactly a easy thing to do, so MS just decided it wasn't important.
What do you want to bet that Doofus Digital is somewhere that UCITA has passed. (I.E. Virginia, and one other state...)
That basically exempts the manufacturer from liability in situations just like this.
UCITA - just the start of scummy legislation that screwes us all over. The saving grace with UCITA is that it hass to pass through all the states. This makes lots more hands to grease, and thus the corps that would love to see us screwed, have a much harder time of it.
If cloning devalues human life - you can argue both ways - then might we not expect similar and perhaps continued actions in devaluing human life and the choices that result?!
(Just for your information, I'm protecting a viewpoint that I don't particularly have a strong position on. I support the right to choose (abortion) and death with dignity, but I can also see the concerns of the parent of the thread. The slippery-slope fallacy as pointed out is, and I quote "The Slippery Slope is a fallacy in which a person asserts that some event must inevitably follow from another without any argument for the inevitability of the event in question."
The poster postulated that devaluing human life would allow for cloning, and that subsequent devauluation could lead to more devaluation, and more stark consequenses.
Perhaps you disagree, but it clearly doesn't follow the Slippery Slope Fallacy.
How about JUST KILLING THE STUPID EXTENSTION ENTIRELY!
I really hate Windows' use of extenstions. Why should extensions control the application association. Remember OS/2? It had an EA (extended attribute) that assocated the file with an application.
I have all sorts of problems with users renaming files so they associate with the wrong thing, then they wonder why Word won't open an EXE properly - or other similarly stupid thing.
The extension should either not exist, or only exist for additional naming info. It shouldn't have anything to do with application association.
Windows, it seems has never done it right the first time. Every time we get to be the test subjects for MS's stupid ideas. (How about clippy! DAMN!) Sometime they eventually get it right. (How about Network file share rights and inheritance in NT! Every user that has rights to a folder farther down in the tree must have at least browse rights to every directory higher in the tree to use explorer to navigate to the folder they have rights to...that also allows them to see all the files in the folders they shouldn't!)
Note, that I don't particularly care for the Dems any more...
BUT at least, they only screwed you subtley. Sure, Ashcroft thinks you should be able to have any firearm you want, but, well, tap and traces should be authorized by the district attorney? SHEESH!
One more point...thne tyranny of this age is monetary, not force. Actually it does come down to force, but the iron fist behind force is that of financial power. Neither the dems or the reps want you (ave joe) to have lots of power. They want to concentrate it in few hands, so they can stroke and control that power base. Having to satisfy lots of "common" folk isn't too easy, and makes the control of power lots harder.
It you believe that either of the parties is concerned about you, you're either filthy rich, or deluded.
I don't think I attacked anyone except the Bush Admin. I don't think any comparisons are out of line. Perhaps you disagree, but I see the betrayal of our trust in them, for power and politcal longevity, are quite evil in themselves.
Herr Ashcroft, is the item I assume you refer to. I really don't think that we're headed down a road that much different than the Nazis. Sure, it doesn't look too bad now, but wait a while. Unless there is some serious turns away from the positions we've set in the last 12 months, we're headed for some very rough times ahead.
So, no, I don't view my attacks as "ad hominem". In fact, they don't fit the "ad hominem" model. I'm attacking the loss of the very rights that "Herr" envisions or invokes. So, calling Ashcroft "Herr" isn't ad hominem at all. If I said he was an "Ugly Wife Beater" (which doesn't have any bearing on the argument) than that would be an ad hominem attack.
The fact that I view the administrations actions as Nazi'ish is key to the core of the argument. Same goes for Stooge.
This whole block... One for EVIL TERRORISTS. Another for EVIL RELIGEONS (Like Protestants, Catholics, Muslims, Budhists, Jews, LDS, JW How about one for Poor Deadbeat Black and Colored Men/Women/Children - upscale ones are better - and all whites are OK right? Now, we need another standard for those deviants Gays and Lesbians, surely you don't expect us to protect them the same as our White, Straight, Rich, Male, Protestants do you?!
...was supposed to have a [HeavySarcasm] [/HeavySarcasm] tagset around it. Since I didn't preview, oh well.
Just let it be clear, that I am being as sarcastic as I possibly could be!
This whole freaking argument has has me really really pissy! (Sorry, I don't mean to dog you, you're just in the wrong place at the right time...)
Why the hell shouldn't we treat non US citizens and companies the same as US citizens and companies.
Herr Ashcroft and all the other Bush Stooge Appointees TM seem to think that since you're not a US citizen, and you're evil, that we should give you different terms that everyone else. Oh, you're not a US citizen, oh, then you don't need dur process...or the right to face your accusers, or the right to a trial by jury, or a innocent unless proven to beyond a reasonable doubt standard.
This whole mindset is bloody scary. We hold up our justice system, and loudly proclaim that it's the best in the world. That it's really fair, and has the best balance of fairness and justice. Then, when it pleases us, we claim that those who aren't citizens deserve a less (much less IMHO) perfect system. SHEESH!
I'll only say this once. If we have the perfect system, and want others to follow our lead, we have no business using some "less perfect" system to adjudcate legal cases here in the US. US citizen/company or not, I'm perfectly happy to follow the SAME rules for all. If we can't do this, perhaps we should just create special rules for all those classes of people out there.
One for EVIL TERRORISTS. Another for EVIL RELIGEONS (Like Protestants, Catholics, Muslims, Budhists, Jews, LDS, JW How about one for Poor Deadbeat Black and Colored Men/Women/Children - upscale ones are better - and all whites are OK right? Now, we need another standard for those deviants Gays and Lesbians, surely you don't expect us to protect them the same as our White, Straight, Rich, Male, Protestants do you?!
This whole thing of one standard for some, and a different standard for others is the most scary slippery slope I've ever seen.
Herr Ashcroft and the Bush Stoogies, along with George "Rolling-Blackout" Herbert Walker Bush have set the stage for a colossal shift in the rights of Americans. We've already taken the step of classifying some as different, and then dramatically taking away their rights. Now, all that remains, is for you or me to be suddenly moved to a "different" class. Today it's citizens vs. non, but tomorrow, who knows.
This doesn't work if the individual is incapacitated.
I am a climber, and envisioned such a device about 6 years ago. Started some initial investigation, but it's a hard device to make. Plus I have better things to do. Perhaps I could have been rich?
It was called SA. The Gvmt turned SA off a couple of years ago - there was even a story about it here. But even without SA, the GPS signal isn't good enough to get better than about 5-10m. Enter differential GPS. These are an additional set of sattelites that know their position exactly. They monitor the GPS network and then send out separate corrections to the GPS signals. This allows for much greater vertical accuracy, and gives a 1-5m accuracy.
Even better, it's like me connecting to your web server, and your web server crashing because I used Opera, rather than IE. Then you get the police to obtain a search warrant, because my machine caused yours to crash, and you didn't have any better explaination.
Sounds like a case of CYA to me.
If I connect to your machine, that you've publicly connected to the internet, and you're offering services on, and send valid packets to request service, and your machine crashes? Well, too bad. Fix it, or learn to live with a server that doesn't work right.
What else is an SMTP server to do, other than accept mail. If your mail server crashes because it can't understand the mail, then it's the mail servers problem. NOT THE PERSON SENDING THE MAIL! Now, if I hacked my way into your internal network, and then used a non-public SMTP server to send mail, you might have a case.
That's like designing software that doesn't account for all types of input. When someone puts something in that you didn't anticipate, and the software crashes, then you blame the person who entered the data? Sheesh! Talk about passing hte buck.
Perhaps SillyMe out to get smacked by the clue stick.
If we have juries composed of individuals such as yourself, we might as well allow Herr Ashcroft to act as Judge, Jury and Executioner.
How about zipping down to your hospital, and getting a full cranial curettage. It should improve your common sense.
Getting a search warrant, usually requires a very high probability that a crime occured. Since they really didn't know what had happened in the first place, it would seem hard to believe that any probability existed at all.
As far as I'm concerned if you get spammed, it's your fault.
My house is sited behind 48 inches of reinforced concrete. I have machine-gun pillboxes sited on each corner, each manned 24 hrs a dat. My house never gets burglarized. If you don't do the same and you do get burglarized, it's your fault.
Most of us have physical addresses, so this doesn't matter to the rest of us.
So, lets make the story more shrill, lets just infer that opening any email might be a binding legal document.
Sheesh!
It's a novel legal argument, that certianly has some problems, but generally used it's not, and most certainly won't become widely used either.
How about leaving sensationalism to the Weekly World News, the Sun or the National Inquirer, and just post stories without the whining "the sky is falling" prose?!
Hows this for a high score! I think this might be my max score, but I didn't do an exhaustive search...
SPAM: Start SpamAssassin results ----- SPAM: This mail is probably spam. The original message has been altered SPAM: so you can recognise or block similar unwanted mail in future, using SPAM: the built-in mail filtering support in your mail reader. SPAM: SPAM: Content analysis details: (38.1 hits, 5 required) SPAM: Hit! (0.5 points) 'Received:' has 'may be forged' warning SPAM: Hit! (2.6 points) From: ends in numbers SPAM: Hit! (1.2 points) BODY:/body.*bgcolor=\S+/i SPAM: Hit! (2.2 points) BODY:/International Executive Guild/ SPAM: Hit! (2.8 points) BODY:/to (?:be removed|be deleted|no longer receive th(?:is|ese) messages?) (?:from|send|reply|[e-]*mail)/i SPAM: Hit! (2.5 points) BODY: *JavaScript/i SPAM: Hit! (3.5 points) BODY:/CHANGE EMAIL ADDRESS IN ACTION OF FORM/ SPAM: Hit! (1.9 points) BODY:/mailto:[a-z]+\ SPAM: Hit! (1.3 points) BODY: A WHOLE LINE OF YELLING DETECTED SPAM: Hit! (0.9 points) BODY:/subject.*remove/i SPAM: Hit! (3.3 points) BODY:/mailto:\S+\?subject=[3D=\s"']*remove/is SPAM: Hit! (3.1 points) BODY:/action=[3D=\s"']*mailto:/is SPAM: Hit! (0.1 points) BODY:/\n\n.*=[3D=\s"']*mailto:/is SPAM: Hit! (2.2 points) BODY: Link to a URL containing "remove" SPAM: Hit! (2.6 points) BODY:/\n\n.*mailto:\S+\?subject=/is SPAM: Hit! (2 points) Received via a relay in bl.spamcop.net SPAM: [RBL check: found relay 14.140.88.61.bl.spamcop.net.] SPAM: Hit! (2 points) Received via a relay in relays.ordb.org SPAM: [RBL check: found relay 14.140.88.61.relays.ordb.org.] SPAM: Hit! (3.4 points) Subject contains a unique ID number SPAM: SPAM: End of SpamAssassin results
Now we'll talk about the fox that jumped over the hedge and through the lameness filter crap. And we went through the woods over the lameness filter to grandmas house we went.
Sam I am green eggs and ham... Sam I am green eggs and ham. Sam I am green eggs and ham. Sam I am green eggs and ham. Sam I am green eggs and ham... Sam lameness filter I am.
Slashdot Mirror
Oh, by the way. It's not REALLY dead yet.
I'd say it's not dead until Mr. Hollings is...or perhaps not until Disney Co. is...
The monkeys in Washington DC might have heard us, but believe me, they'll find another way to earn a good ROI on the money given them by the large corporate interests - public opinion be dammed!
Cheers!
You are a DOPE!
There are virtually no other options to Windows. That's why it's a MONOPOLY! Can I ask, what part of MONOPOLY didn't you understand.
Lexus doesn't have 95+% market share. If they did, the courts certainly would regulate how they did business.
MS has a monopoly - the government regulates them to provide broad choice for the consumers when MS doesn't regulate themselves.
MS can get away from the goverment regulating them. Just stop engaging in anti-competitive behavior. It seems that every discussion that follows this path, seems to ignore that MS was found guilty of abusing it's monopoly position. That's what brought the Gvmt down on them. They could have acted differently, and never been "regulated" by the government.
MS's actions are responsible for the regulation. This is like a pedophile complaining that the tracking beacon he has to wear, to make sure he doesn't prey on any more kids, is "bad." Sure, it normally would be. If you weren't a convicted felon/pedophile who was likely to reoffend, I'd have lots of sympathy for you. But, you're a danger to society, and you'll just have to suffer some damages that resulted from your behavior.
Cheers!
Perhaps, you should talk about oversell, and how the cable model is a burst model etc.
You didn't - perhaps you meant to, but you didn't!
I didn't think that TW allowed you to run servers, so I don't think we're talking about "warez repositories" - but again, what you mean is that you can't expect to pull the full burst bandwidth all the time - and that's true enough.
But I don't think that the costs of bandwidth are nearly what people crack them up to be. I used to be on a metered DSL connection. Problem was that the provider didn't ever lower the bandwidth charge over more than 3 years while bandwidth costs took a serious dive.
Anyone have the IP cost for say an OC-192 pipe. I'd like to know what the actual bandwidth costs at higher data-rates!
I'm glad to pay for what I use, provided it's a reasonable cost. Since I've not yet found anyone that is willing to actually price bandwidth for what it costs, I'll go elsewhere.
I do think that Cable users should be entitled to pull as much data as they want. At least until the cable co's start using some truth in advertising. They trumpet 3Mb/s+ speeds and try to attract the very users they now claim are "costing" them so much money. Well, that's like the CueCat people claiming that those free scanners they gave away are only to be used for their software - "therwise we'll go bankrupt!" Sheesh, cry me a river. Advertise what you can deliver, and then actually deliver what you promise. When the cable co's actually do this, you might hear gnashing of teeth about bandwidth charges, but then at least they'll have the moral imperative to do so...
What this looks like to me, is a MBA type saying "Hey, we've got a goldmine here!" and forgetting about lots of the details.
These will come to bite them very soon.
Cheers!
Hey bonehead - lets look at the costs for said T1.
The T1 circuit from your telco is probably more than 2/3 of that cost.
The IP feed less than 1/3 of the total charge.
Not only that, but the oversell rates on T1's is generally much lower than that of cable and DSL.
You're comparing apples and oranges. If I buy a T1, I'm a serious user, and I expect a QOS guarantee. For example, I should get 786Kb/s minimum over a short period of time. Generally, I should be able to continuously pull 1.544Mb/s. DSL and Cable expect the inverse of this. Short bursts to capacity, and much longer periods of very low or no useage.
Finally, the point made by others, is that economy of scale prevails. You buy an OC3 or larger, perhaps much larger. The cost per Mb/s drops dramatically.
Cheers!
What have you been smoking...
You can put a DS-3 in the CO if you want! Hows that going to bandwidth bottleneck you?
The telco links all the CO's via a frame or ATM cloud. I would bet there's Gb/s of bandwidth to virtually any CO.
You may find that Cable is great, but just wait until TW/AT&T/etc put way too many people on your cable segment. What to do then? You can't switch ISP's like you can with DSL.
Sure, my DSL doesn't provide the massive burst bandwidth that cable does, but it does provide me with many other things that I find really important.
Static IP's!
Choice of ISP!
Higher upstream bandwidth/Symmetrical bandwidth, or at last more symmetrical than cable. Try to get a 768 or 1Mb/s upstream connection via cable. (I don't need the expense of T1, and I don't need the lower oversell either in most cases. Getting a higher upstream pipe is great for lots of apps - esp VPN - both in and out!)
So, cable might meet your needs, but DSL gives me lots more choices that help me avoid the crap a single vendor lock-in can give you.
What ever works - I really like DSL, but if cable works for what you want, so be it. (It's generally my experience that cable is great for entertainment (browse the web, check your mail etc.) and DSL is better for work stuff (FTP Server, VPN, Mail server etc.)
Cheers!
Try this on Netware...it works as it should, and has worked this way for more than 10 years.
You'll see folder A, B, & C with nothing in them - because you don't have rights, as well as browse through them down to folder D.
Folder D will have all the files and such that you have rights to.
Browsing to user directories, or shares below them that the user wants to share with other users and such, without mapping a drive is lots easer when things work this way - browse to the server, open the users folder, open user X's folder (you're user Y) still all you see is the folder - open the shared directory below, and bingo - all the rights you have - read or read/write etc.
Cheers!
True, about the 3rd party liability - I think, UCITA has some weird stuff in it.
It effects the uniform commercial code, and it could effect that portion of the law relating to 3rd party liability - I just don't know. Persuing several hundred pages of legaleese isn't high on my list of pleasureable things to do.
Anyway...
Cheers!
Ok, bloke, have you ever seen EA's on OS/2? You can ask the OS what the association is, and it will tell you. Same with the MAC.
As for the network setup.
Setup folder A
Inside folder A setup B & C
inside C, setup D
Now give user Fred full rights to D, but no rights to A,C or C.
Try to use explorer to browse to D.
It won't work.
If you put in the direct path to D, you can get there, but you can't browse. Or setup a drive map that points directly to the D folder.
To browse, you have to at least have the browse right to A,B,C.
That just sucks. Netware can do this just fine. I'd assume that looking down the tree to see if you might have more rights to some folder farther down in the tree isn't exactly a easy thing to do, so MS just decided it wasn't important.
Cheers!
What do you want to bet that Doofus Digital is somewhere that UCITA has passed. (I.E. Virginia, and one other state...)
That basically exempts the manufacturer from liability in situations just like this.
UCITA - just the start of scummy legislation that screwes us all over. The saving grace with UCITA is that it hass to pass through all the states. This makes lots more hands to grease, and thus the corps that would love to see us screwed, have a much harder time of it.
Cheers!
Ok, Einstein...
If cloning devalues human life - you can argue both ways - then might we not expect similar and perhaps continued actions in devaluing human life and the choices that result?!
(Just for your information, I'm protecting a viewpoint that I don't particularly have a strong position on. I support the right to choose (abortion) and death with dignity, but I can also see the concerns of the parent of the thread. The slippery-slope fallacy as pointed out is, and I quote
"The Slippery Slope is a fallacy in which a person asserts that some event must inevitably follow from another without any argument for the inevitability of the event in question."
The poster postulated that devaluing human life would allow for cloning, and that subsequent devauluation could lead to more devaluation, and more stark consequenses.
Perhaps you disagree, but it clearly doesn't follow the Slippery Slope Fallacy.
Cheers!
How about JUST KILLING THE STUPID EXTENSTION ENTIRELY!
I really hate Windows' use of extenstions. Why should extensions control the application association. Remember OS/2? It had an EA (extended attribute) that assocated the file with an application.
I have all sorts of problems with users renaming files so they associate with the wrong thing, then they wonder why Word won't open an EXE properly - or other similarly stupid thing.
The extension should either not exist, or only exist for additional naming info. It shouldn't have anything to do with application association.
Windows, it seems has never done it right the first time. Every time we get to be the test subjects for MS's stupid ideas. (How about clippy! DAMN!) Sometime they eventually get it right. (How about Network file share rights and inheritance in NT! Every user that has rights to a folder farther down in the tree must have at least browse rights to every directory higher in the tree to use explorer to navigate to the folder they have rights to...that also allows them to see all the files in the folders they shouldn't!)
I'll quit ranting now!
Cheers!
I do think that we are accepting cloning and the possible ill effects says something about the value we place on human life.
If we value human life less, than the possibility of such things following increases.
(I'm an Oregonian too - BTW, I DID vote to pass the DWD law - both times!)
I don't think that the things he suggests will happen will actually happen, but the concerns raised about the value we place on human life are valid.
Cheers!
And you sir are a moron!
The events are related. The proposition is certainly a possibility - even though I disagree.
You are the fallacy!
Cheers!
Note, that I don't particularly care for the Dems any more...
BUT at least, they only screwed you subtley. Sure, Ashcroft thinks you should be able to have any firearm you want, but, well, tap and traces should be authorized by the district attorney? SHEESH!
One more point...thne tyranny of this age is monetary, not force. Actually it does come down to force, but the iron fist behind force is that of financial power. Neither the dems or the reps want you (ave joe) to have lots of power. They want to concentrate it in few hands, so they can stroke and control that power base. Having to satisfy lots of "common" folk isn't too easy, and makes the control of power lots harder.
It you believe that either of the parties is concerned about you, you're either filthy rich, or deluded.
Cheers!
I don't think I attacked anyone except the Bush Admin. I don't think any comparisons are out of line. Perhaps you disagree, but I see the betrayal of our trust in them, for power and politcal longevity, are quite evil in themselves.
Herr Ashcroft, is the item I assume you refer to. I really don't think that we're headed down a road that much different than the Nazis. Sure, it doesn't look too bad now, but wait a while. Unless there is some serious turns away from the positions we've set in the last 12 months, we're headed for some very rough times ahead.
So, no, I don't view my attacks as "ad hominem". In fact, they don't fit the "ad hominem" model. I'm attacking the loss of the very rights that "Herr" envisions or invokes. So, calling Ashcroft "Herr" isn't ad hominem at all. If I said he was an "Ugly Wife Beater" (which doesn't have any bearing on the argument) than that would be an ad hominem attack.
The fact that I view the administrations actions as Nazi'ish is key to the core of the argument. Same goes for Stooge.
Cheers!
Well, slashdot wiped out my pseudo html tags.
This whole block...
One for EVIL TERRORISTS.
Another for EVIL RELIGEONS (Like Protestants, Catholics, Muslims, Budhists, Jews, LDS, JW
How about one for Poor Deadbeat Black and Colored Men/Women/Children - upscale ones are better - and all whites are OK right?
Now, we need another standard for those deviants Gays and Lesbians, surely you don't expect us to protect them the same as our White, Straight, Rich, Male, Protestants do you?!
...was supposed to have a [HeavySarcasm] [/HeavySarcasm] tagset around it. Since I didn't preview, oh well.
Just let it be clear, that I am being as sarcastic as I possibly could be!
This whole freaking argument has has me really really pissy! (Sorry, I don't mean to dog you, you're just in the wrong place at the right time...)
Why the hell shouldn't we treat non US citizens and companies the same as US citizens and companies.
Herr Ashcroft and all the other Bush Stooge Appointees TM seem to think that since you're not a US citizen, and you're evil, that we should give you different terms that everyone else. Oh, you're not a US citizen, oh, then you don't need dur process...or the right to face your accusers, or the right to a trial by jury, or a innocent unless proven to beyond a reasonable doubt standard.
This whole mindset is bloody scary. We hold up our justice system, and loudly proclaim that it's the best in the world. That it's really fair, and has the best balance of fairness and justice. Then, when it pleases us, we claim that those who aren't citizens deserve a less (much less IMHO) perfect system. SHEESH!
I'll only say this once. If we have the perfect system, and want others to follow our lead, we have no business using some "less perfect" system to adjudcate legal cases here in the US. US citizen/company or not, I'm perfectly happy to follow the SAME rules for all. If we can't do this, perhaps we should just create special rules for all those classes of people out there.
One for EVIL TERRORISTS.
Another for EVIL RELIGEONS (Like Protestants, Catholics, Muslims, Budhists, Jews, LDS, JW
How about one for Poor Deadbeat Black and Colored Men/Women/Children - upscale ones are better - and all whites are OK right?
Now, we need another standard for those deviants Gays and Lesbians, surely you don't expect us to protect them the same as our White, Straight, Rich, Male, Protestants do you?!
This whole thing of one standard for some, and a different standard for others is the most scary slippery slope I've ever seen.
Herr Ashcroft and the Bush Stoogies, along with George "Rolling-Blackout" Herbert Walker Bush have set the stage for a colossal shift in the rights of Americans. We've already taken the step of classifying some as different, and then dramatically taking away their rights. Now, all that remains, is for you or me to be suddenly moved to a "different" class. Today it's citizens vs. non, but tomorrow, who knows.
Cheers!
Like adding more cells is easy...
In high density areas, ie Downtown Dallas, NYC, Seattle, the cost to setting up a new cell site are not trivial!
Perhaps the shared issues won't become a real issue. (This might be a real good place for reasonable bandwidth charges i.e. $/Mb etc).
I guess we'll wait and see...
Cheers!
This doesn't work if the individual is incapacitated.
I am a climber, and envisioned such a device about 6 years ago. Started some initial investigation, but it's a hard device to make. Plus I have better things to do. Perhaps I could have been rich?
Anyhow.
Cheers!
It was called SA. The Gvmt turned SA off a couple of years ago - there was even a story about it here. But even without SA, the GPS signal isn't good enough to get better than about 5-10m. Enter differential GPS. These are an additional set of sattelites that know their position exactly. They monitor the GPS network and then send out separate corrections to the GPS signals. This allows for much greater vertical accuracy, and gives a 1-5m accuracy.
Cheers!
Even better, it's like me connecting to your web server, and your web server crashing because I used Opera, rather than IE. Then you get the police to obtain a search warrant, because my machine caused yours to crash, and you didn't have any better explaination.
Sounds like a case of CYA to me.
If I connect to your machine, that you've publicly connected to the internet, and you're offering services on, and send valid packets to request service, and your machine crashes? Well, too bad. Fix it, or learn to live with a server that doesn't work right.
What else is an SMTP server to do, other than accept mail. If your mail server crashes because it can't understand the mail, then it's the mail servers problem. NOT THE PERSON SENDING THE MAIL! Now, if I hacked my way into your internal network, and then used a non-public SMTP server to send mail, you might have a case.
That's like designing software that doesn't account for all types of input. When someone puts something in that you didn't anticipate, and the software crashes, then you blame the person who entered the data? Sheesh! Talk about passing hte buck.
Perhaps SillyMe out to get smacked by the clue stick.
Cheers!
You sir, are a TOTAL MORON!
If we have juries composed of individuals such as yourself, we might as well allow Herr Ashcroft to act as Judge, Jury and Executioner.
How about zipping down to your hospital, and getting a full cranial curettage. It should improve your common sense.
Getting a search warrant, usually requires a very high probability that a crime occured. Since they really didn't know what had happened in the first place, it would seem hard to believe that any probability existed at all.
Cheers!
As far as I'm concerned if you get spammed, it's your fault.
My house is sited behind 48 inches of reinforced concrete. I have machine-gun pillboxes sited on each corner, each manned 24 hrs a dat. My house never gets burglarized. If you don't do the same and you do get burglarized, it's your fault.
Sheesh!
Need I say more?
Cheers!
Most of us have physical addresses, so this doesn't matter to the rest of us.
So, lets make the story more shrill, lets just infer that opening any email might be a binding legal document.
Sheesh!
It's a novel legal argument, that certianly has some problems, but generally used it's not, and most certainly won't become widely used either.
How about leaving sensationalism to the Weekly World News, the Sun or the National Inquirer, and just post stories without the whining "the sky is falling" prose?!
Cheers!
Hows this for a high score! I think this might be my max score, but I didn't do an exhaustive search...
/body .*bgcolor=\S+/i /International Executive Guild/ /to (?:be removed|be deleted|no longer receive th(?:is|ese) messages?) (?:from|send|reply|[e-]*mail)/i /CHANGE EMAIL ADDRESS IN ACTION OF FORM/ /mailto:[a-z]+\ /subject.*remove/i /mailto:\S+\?subject=[3D=\s"']*remove/is /action=[3D=\s"']*mailto:/is /\n\n.*=[3D=\s"']*mailto:/is /\n\n.*mailto:\S+\?subject=/is
SPAM: Start SpamAssassin results -----
SPAM: This mail is probably spam. The original message has been altered
SPAM: so you can recognise or block similar unwanted mail in future, using
SPAM: the built-in mail filtering support in your mail reader.
SPAM:
SPAM: Content analysis details: (38.1 hits, 5 required)
SPAM: Hit! (0.5 points) 'Received:' has 'may be forged' warning
SPAM: Hit! (2.6 points) From: ends in numbers
SPAM: Hit! (1.2 points) BODY:
SPAM: Hit! (2.2 points) BODY:
SPAM: Hit! (2.8 points) BODY:
SPAM: Hit! (2.5 points) BODY: *JavaScript/i
SPAM: Hit! (3.5 points) BODY:
SPAM: Hit! (1.9 points) BODY:
SPAM: Hit! (1.3 points) BODY: A WHOLE LINE OF YELLING DETECTED
SPAM: Hit! (0.9 points) BODY:
SPAM: Hit! (3.3 points) BODY:
SPAM: Hit! (3.1 points) BODY:
SPAM: Hit! (0.1 points) BODY:
SPAM: Hit! (2.2 points) BODY: Link to a URL containing "remove"
SPAM: Hit! (2.6 points) BODY:
SPAM: Hit! (2 points) Received via a relay in bl.spamcop.net
SPAM: [RBL check: found relay 14.140.88.61.bl.spamcop.net.]
SPAM: Hit! (2 points) Received via a relay in relays.ordb.org
SPAM: [RBL check: found relay 14.140.88.61.relays.ordb.org.]
SPAM: Hit! (3.4 points) Subject contains a unique ID number
SPAM:
SPAM: End of SpamAssassin results
Now we'll talk about the fox that jumped over the hedge and through the lameness filter crap. And we went through the woods over the lameness filter to grandmas house we went.
Sam I am green eggs and ham... Sam I am green eggs and ham. Sam I am green eggs and ham. Sam I am green eggs and ham. Sam I am green eggs and ham... Sam lameness filter I am.