Agreed. It's the same as if you were driving. However, there could be a safe auto driver discount for your insurance if you allow the vehicle to do the driving more than you do...and if there is an added fee for driving a vehicle with auto drive that too will dictate it's adoption and incorporate liability costs. Further, there are these things called courts and they've been known to settle grey areas like these. "What did the manufacture know and when did they know it?" Also, as per usual...the life you save may be your own. As per usual, your life and property value will be reduced down to a number provided by an actuarial. The difference will be...that your responsibility and negligence may come down to software maintenance or lack thereof...instead of how many beers you were drinking prior...which will now have had no impact on the way the vehicle was driving.
Stalin abolished all the unions. After all, under Communist rule they were "no longer necessary." And yet somehow the Retardicans say "Unions are communism."
Heh. Hyperbole at it's finest.
Tell me, Moryath, was there anything else or anyone else in Soviet Russia that did something with trade unions? Did say, Lenin, write any letters to America or Europe? What was the intention? The audience was?
Is it impossible to imagine why some would have concerns about certain elements that appear to be ignorant of this historical fact or disingenuous about it's potential roles in American politics for the worse?
Some in this country are not in a hurry to deploy a failure prone implementation of Government.
When Saddam decided he was going to publicly sympathize with the Taliban post-9/11, that should have been a tip off that something wasn't right. When Saddam decided to up the payout to suicide bomber's families that attacked Israel post 9/11, that should have been a tip off that something wasn't right.
These two points are inconclusive. You are a dictator who lost a war to a foreign country. That same country is actively pursuing its interests in your area. People from your area attack that country. You do not sympathize with them? You HAVE TO, in front of the domestic audience, while being careful not to appear officially responsible in front of the rest of the world.
Well, I guess by that logic, if you are in the business of sending messages to a domestic audience YOU HAVE to do what YOU HAVE to do.
I'll await your implication that we should be smarter than that...
Nobody's arguing that. We are, however arguing that a) that didn't amount to a hill of beans, and b) boy, was that ever the mother of overreactions.
So you are arguing it...
a) Embassies, WTC, Cole, WTC again, Pentagon b) I guess relying on smart weapons was the proper continued reaction in your mind. You're of course welcome to your opinion...however, conversely, I wouldn't trust you to walk my dog down the street.
There's also the corollary argument that if the US (and other western countries) weren't so enamored with fucking around with these dipshit little countries in the first place, many of these problems simply wouldn't exist in the first place.
Perhaps.
Congrats on being technically correct and absolutely useless.
When Saddam decided he was going to publicly sympathize with the Taliban post-9/11, that should have been a tip off that something wasn't right.
When Saddam decided to up the payout to suicide bomber's families that attacked Israel post 9/11, that should have been a tip off that something wasn't right.
When Saddam decided to play shell games with the UNSC resolutions, that should have been a tip off that something wasn't right.
When European and Russian contractors were found selling dual use and prohibited items, that should have been a tip off that something wasn't right.
When Europe decided to the throw a colossal hissy fit over the end of food for oil, that should have been a tip off that something wasn't right.
When Europe was no longer calling for action of the humanitarian crisis being caused by food for oil, that should have been a tip off that something wasn't right.
When Europe then wanted to claim that the dual use items were broken, defective, etc., that should have been a tip off that something wasn't right.
When American liberals seized on the opportunity to finally be mad at Bush again for losing what they felt was a stolen election, that should have been a tip off that something wasn't right.
When everyone in the world and especially at the UN who previously didn't trust Saddam, started to say he's not so bad, that should have been a tip off that something wasn't right.
When Osama Bin Laden was ranting a raving about American air bases in holy land (Saudi Arabia), the same bases being used to police no fly zones in Iraq, and people were trying to downplay the Ba'athist's intelligence agency's comfort with consorting with the pre-cursor to Al Qaeda - Egyptian Islamic Jihad, that should have been a tip off that something wasn't right.
When a post-war inspection team took 18 months to scour a defeated Iraq, which I like to call "Iraq and Saddam at their most cooperative", only then were they able to confirm that their were no weapons and that Saddam only had breakout capacity for bio/chemical weapons, that should have been a tip off that something wasn't right.
---
Seriously. Responsible adults had to take the information they had at the time, and make a decision. I continue to agree that keeping the Ba'athist around, trusting bitter partisan enemies of the US administration, trusting UNSC nations that were financially hurt by the end of the food for oil program, and keeping a tentative situation of sanctions and containment, we're exactly top priority.
It may be true that the second war fomented terrorism. However, it is absolutely true that the Ba'athist containment/sanction process as agreed upon by the UN fomented terrorism at the expense of US security.
[blockquote]Did your grocery store ever offer you free bread and milk? Did they imply that this would be an ongoing offer? Was there ever a concern that your household was becoming dependant on that free bread and milk? And once you did become dependant on that free bread and milk, did your grocery store now demand the 4 bucks because they discovered one of your household members was learning how to bake bread?[/blockquote]Location please of this grocery story offering free bread and milk. Thank you. Mmmmmmm
There's no news like bad news, and nothing can replace the ego of an American who can say he/she "saw it as it happened"....especially when we "see it happen" on European soil. I know I for one, can't wait to get to say "I told you so" and "It was no doubt a result of European's foriegn policy during the cold war." At last, it's not to be, everyone knows terrorists have Europeans in their back pocket.;)
So witholding the data from closed drivers is just lessening the experience/reliability/etc of people who use Linux but who aren't Open Source zealots. That's the aim of the driver interface but it's a stupid one, and as I pointed out it's easy enough to circumvent.
If a kernel oops or panic occurs in a driver, it's important for the kernel developers to quickly know if it's a GPL driver (or a 3rd party binary only driver that they shouldn't even waste their time looking at). Too much noise is generated on LKML for broken binary drivers that just can't be fixed or troubleshooted.
Zealotry has it's hand in that Open Source people really only want to fix Open Source drivers.
Your clever circumvention idea is well known, it will not save you in getting kernel developer support, however.
Yes, Bush is Evil and all of that. dave420 is under some illusion that the US = Nazi Germany and somehow, Bush is going to have the ability to suspend the Constitution, draft and pass amendments and altering all of the parties of the US into some sort of Borg.
What he doesn't realize is that would totally usurp the power of the Legislative and Judicial branches, in addition to the rights of the states. "We the people" might fall for it, but all of the little govt. fiefdoms (if you will) that have actual for real power and are exercising it, aren't going to stand idly by and let it happen. No, they'll chop off Bush's dick and tell him how tasty it is, before they let the consititution be suspended or even let him "wipe his monkey arse" with it.
dave420, you clearly have not seen this before, the US != Nazi Germany. Bush != Hitler and the US constitution is not very maleable. The US is also not a democracy, the US is a Republic. Bush isn't some magical president. The end of his term is nigh. Whether it be less than 1 year from now, or less than 5 years.
So you admit it took more arms than Germany had to stop them... That means it's impossible to stop Bush from doing what he wants with guns, as he has most of them. Thanks for proving my point:)
You really must be some kind of retard. I proved my point, not yours. Bush is _not_ impossible to stop because he has all the guns. If there was a civil war, the rules are a lot different.
This has nothing to do with the cold war. This has everything to do with the fact the US needs the rest of the world to survive, yet seems reluctant to talk to people. It's like having a bi-polar neighbor with a shotgun. One second it's The Brady Bunch, the next it's When Good Neighbors Go Bad 3. The very fact you're arguing global relations like this is the school yard again highlights your complete lack of understanding on the subject. Seriously, it's funny.
Once again. Wrong assumption. You really need to quit with the school yard analogies. This isn't school, and the politics aren't the same. Whether you want to face facts or not, everyone agrees that we are talking about new world order. I am not talking WWE or Fox either. This is about the way things will be now and in the future.
Bi-polar neighbors? Let's not start with the backstabbing and in-fighting that is the European Union who often consider themselves the rest of the world. Want to know why the jobs are going to Indian and China? It's because the US really wants nothing to do with the whole EU mess. Cast your eyes on the new US, Chinese, and Indian alliances that are forming. US is securing oil production. EU is bitching about it, but not really doing anything because they can't tie their own shoe laces without Germany and France taking a vote on which one tie first and who should actually do it. Blanket statements about the US needing the rest of the world to survive is ridiculous, and untrue. The reverse of your statement would be closer to the truth.
understand completely where you're from. I can't emphasize that enough. I used to think like that when I was about 10. It was the mentality of "them and us" and the thought that only violence solved anything. We've seen in Iraq that even winning a war doesn't bring peace. The only way to do that is to talk about differences, not fight over them.
Talk about differences? Time for talking has come and gone. Quite honestly they would like nothing more than to see the US fall and every American dead, that isn't going to change by sitting down at a table. I'd prefer that US was around for me, my kids, and their kids. If the choice is us or them who survives, I pick us. Since the UN has been "piss poor" as a place to go to tattle on someone and solve problems. (I know you like the school yard analogies;-).
Anyway, peace is a relative term, since Bush... Terrorists are blowing up targets in Iraq vs the US. Better. Iraqi Oil production is under US control. Better. Saddam Hussein isn't issuing threats towards the US. Better. European Union is screwed out of Iraqi business deals. Too bad, should have played by the rules of the UN, but still, Better.
Regardless, I see Bush, successfully securing US long term interests in an active and productive manner. You are free to disagree, I've understood your argument, I feel that in the current environment and especially in the days to come it's bit dated. I would love if things were peaceful and shit wasn't blowing up. However, that isn't going to happen anytime soon, and asking the US to sit on it's hands isn't the right answer.
You didn't answer my question - if the guns were so successful at preventing people opposing their will, why on earth didn't they get stopped? Surely, as every country has guns, there must be no war.
First of all that wasn't your question, but I will answer it. Nazi Germany was stopped, and I might add with Guns. Specifically, because they were trampling rights. They have had a good run for a few years, but it didn't last long. The invocation of Godwin's law was merely a warning for others.
My statement about terrorism isn't a blanket statement. If you know anything about foreign policy and international diplomacy, you'd see that. The single outcome from Bush's insane foreign policy is alienating the rest of the world. That has a serious side effect: global terrorism. Bush realises that, as he's using it to keep himself in power (and all you sheep nicely scared at home, stuck to CNN/Fox/Whatever, sucking down propaganda).
The alienation is relative. You are going to have to accept the fact that the alliances of the cold war are no longer in effect. It's sad that they have to go, but it's the hard truth. The sooner you accept it, the better you will understand what is going on. The US does NOT HAVE to be friends with Europe, or anyone else. In fact it's better if we aren't so that new alliances can form and a new balance is achieved. Finally, no one at "home" is scared of terrorist anymore. In fact many people think they don't exist anymore, they are the new boogie men, etc. All of that was after Bush's foriegn policy.
Grown ups use their minds to solve differences, not their fists. When was the last time you saw a child scrape their knee and reason away the pain? They don't - they react and get all huffy, like America is doing now. It's behaving like a 400lb toddler with a skimmed knee. It thinks it's right (in fact, it's absolutely convinced it is), yet due to its incredibly narrow world view, it can't see that it isn't, by a long way.
*ring* *ring* 2001 called... they want their argument back. What you call an abuse of power, I call an excersize of power. Humans in general do terrible things when they disagree. It's a basic premise you can't reason away, no matter how much you'd like to. All it takes is one person to realize that if they pick up a stick that they can make things more favorable for themselves. At this point, I'd like to suggest you know nothing about humanity, you are just an idealist.
You seem to equate being passive with no results. That just goes to further highlight your limited perception of diplomacy. I bet, according to you, Gandhi didn't do anything.
Ghandi was active and did something. I equate being passive with Tibet. No land, and no culture, and for the people who were left behind, the elimination of their way of life. Don't put words in my mouth, or if you feel you have to... come up with a reasonable analogy and try to really understand where I am coming from.
So, if guns save people's rights, how come the Nazis walked over most of Europe?
Notice: Godwin's law is in full effect, now!
If you're telling me some accountants in Idaho who fire M16s at the weekend are going to be a match for whatever Bush throws at them, you need help. They ain't gonna protect shit.
Don't like voting machines? Aim them at the voting machines and fire. I certainly hope the accountants who are getting trigger time can hit the side of a refrigerator at close range. There are different ways to protect rights and achieve goals, without standing in a battlefield waiting to be shot.
If you support Bush's foreign policy, you support terrorism.
"If you use anything generated by fossil fuels, you support terrorism." There I can make a blanket statement too. Democrats drive cars that were forged with, built with, and regularly consume fossile fuels. Democrats support terrorism too!
Look, the people controlling the fossil fuels are just as greedy as we are. Not only that, they appear to have more of a nutsack than you and are willing to blow shit up to get what they want. Ask them what being passive got them? They already know, and have chosen their course of action. They certainly don't sit on slashdot behind a dave420 userid, smoking their pot. The only post that I saw where someone suggested something actually be done about defending their rights, ended up being nothing more than a partisan troll.
War is an extension of politics by other means. This is the real world, how about you let the grown-ups take care of things, mmmkay?
What did you have in mind? Unless you forgot to finish the end of that sentence with "defend our rights *with guns?", I am uninterested in what half hearted rallying/braveheart war cry you have.
Now all of a sudden you are on board with defending rights by any means neccessary. The "Bush sponsored broken electronic voting machines" were the final straw were they? How about you put down the partisanship. Left, right, center, all will sell you down the river as far your rights go. Only way to take back your rights are with force. However, left will take your guns away "to save the children", while the right calls you "a terrorist" for discussing anything related to guns. It won't matter who you put in office, it just depends on how you like your screwing.
Personally, I like Bush's foreign policy. It's high time the world understood the US is going to do as it pleases. Sure the other little countries are going to stand up for themselves, but that's to be expected. I'd rather see an active policy vs a passive one on the part of the US. However, Ashcroft, PATRIOT, domestic spying, et. al. I don't like one bit. However, I also didn't like the DMCA, weakness in the military, and the overall blatant pimp slickness that went on during Clinton's time.
Again, put down the partisanship. Someone who likes Bush, but also likes your ideas is only going to think you are a hoser because you try to tie "one magical thing" to a particular party.
Your call has been disconnected, please check the number you are dialing and try again...
Look, SElinux is only one aspect of a "secure system". All I am saying, is that worrying about backdoors from NSA's demonstratable implementation of a FLASK system is pointless if that is what you are depending on for security.
No one is selling you on they can find anything they want at will regardless of precautions. However, I am guessing very few of the slashdot crowd, have the ability to protect themselves from things like TEMPEST, men with guns, and professional spies. Worrying about backdoors on something the NSA gives out openly and publicly, should be the least of the worries for someone securing systems. However, I could be wrong, maybe everyone has their computers running linux off the net, in shield rooms, guarded by men with guns, and are worried about internal employees looking at data they shouldn't because of some NSA backdoor in SElinux.
You are ofcourse assuming that the NSA uses Linux. I seriously doubt, anything you find on the net is in operation at NSA guarding real secrets.
Anyway, the NSA has two tasks SIGINT (signal intelligence) or code breaking, and the other is Information Assurance as it relates to US National Security interests.
Both are broad tasks, the most exciting and romantic is ofcourse is the SIGINT code breaking, spying, espionage, being clever, etc.
The janitorial work is the Information Assurance, and that is the protecting of information.
Any contribution the NSA makes to Linux is most likely so people can see how ACL security is done right as it relates to FLASK. If the NSA was going to "sneak" backdoors in anywhere they wouldn't do it in broad daylight using the front door so that another intelligence agency could discover it, and exploit it. They took a published security technique and implemented a very vanilla implementation of it for the most widely used open source OS out there.
Finally, (and this goes for all of you tin foil hats too) if the NSA wants your information, they'll get it, Linux or SElinux, be damned. Nothing opens doors, passwords, and safes quicker than a man with a gun who moves with a purpose. Failing that, they'll just take what they need and put their in-house geeks on it.
No matter how much training a soldier receives, when real bullets start whizzing over their heads all that "it's a game" crap goes right out the window.
I whole heartedly agree with your post, except...
The primitive brain will continue to know the difference between real and virtual until we move to total immersion.
The total immersion would have to filter out, watching your buddies power armor, enhanced vision, thingy getting blown up into a crater. Some would consider tanks (power/reactive armor, powerful enhanced optics, etc) the same as what you just said. When you are in a tank line, and out of nowhere the tank next to you is touched off into a cloud of fire and smoke, good ole primitive brain comes back and explains to you the reality of the situation...
Well, the only valid point on your list is the large selection of Perl libraries. But that's like saying Windows is better because thousands of programs are available..
Not quite analagous, because that also means your definition of "better" for Ruby is like saying MacOS is better because there are fewer programs available.
For instance, docs and unit testing are pretty much the same in Perl, Ruby, Python, PHP, Java...
I must have screwed up my terminology. The unit testing I am referring to, is the built in stuff that comes with the Perl build process, the module build process, etc. Perl is second to none in testing. I would agree Perl, TCL, and Java docs are similiar in completeness. When I say complete, I mean documentation on how to embed and extend is available, is thorough, and all the intricacies are spelled out. Ruby, Python, and PHP are lacking. For example, at my command line I can type: perldoc perlxs, perldoc perlapi, perldoc perlembed, perldoc perlguts, and I have 10x more information about the innards and what is going on than the other languages.
The Perl and Python communities are full of people trying to show off.. it gets old after a while.
Not sure what you mean by show off. Ruby coders seem to be just as desperate as Python coders to demonstrate how their language is almost as powerful as Perl. When Ruby clutches the title of being the swiss army chainsaw in the industry, I think Ruby too, will have a reason to "show off".
One great think about Ruby community though, is that it's still small and friendly.
One awful thing about the Ruby community is that they pipe up about how they are almost as good as Perl whenever Perl is mentioned.. it's offtopic, untrue, and gets old after a while.
From the parent parent parent poster. "Ruby has almost all of the power of Perl, with none of the ugliness" isn't quite a fair statement, considering Ruby is lacking or behind on almost everything else Perl is superior at. Ruby is still playing catch up, and depending on who you ask, can also be considered ugly.
Slashdot Mirror
Agreed. It's the same as if you were driving. However, there could be a safe auto driver discount for your insurance if you allow the vehicle to do the driving more than you do...and if there is an added fee for driving a vehicle with auto drive that too will dictate it's adoption and incorporate liability costs. Further, there are these things called courts and they've been known to settle grey areas like these. "What did the manufacture know and when did they know it?" Also, as per usual...the life you save may be your own. As per usual, your life and property value will be reduced down to a number provided by an actuarial. The difference will be...that your responsibility and negligence may come down to software maintenance or lack thereof...instead of how many beers you were drinking prior...which will now have had no impact on the way the vehicle was driving.
Stalin abolished all the unions. After all, under Communist rule they were "no longer necessary." And yet somehow the Retardicans say "Unions are communism."
Heh. Hyperbole at it's finest.
Tell me, Moryath, was there anything else or anyone else in Soviet Russia that did something with trade unions? Did say, Lenin, write any letters to America or Europe? What was the intention? The audience was?
Is it impossible to imagine why some would have concerns about certain elements that appear to be ignorant of this historical fact or disingenuous about it's potential roles in American politics for the worse?
Some in this country are not in a hurry to deploy a failure prone implementation of Government.
Retardicans. How precious.
These two points are inconclusive. You are a dictator who lost a war to a foreign country. That same country is actively pursuing its interests in your area. People from your area attack that country. You do not sympathize with them? You HAVE TO, in front of the domestic audience, while being careful not to appear officially responsible in front of the rest of the world.
Well, I guess by that logic, if you are in the business of sending messages to a domestic audience YOU HAVE to do what YOU HAVE to do.
I'll await your implication that we should be smarter than that...
Nobody's arguing that. We are, however arguing that a) that didn't amount to a hill of beans, and b) boy, was that ever the mother of overreactions.
So you are arguing it...
a) Embassies, WTC, Cole, WTC again, Pentagon b) I guess relying on smart weapons was the proper continued reaction in your mind. You're of course welcome to your opinion...however, conversely, I wouldn't trust you to walk my dog down the street.
There's also the corollary argument that if the US (and other western countries) weren't so enamored with fucking around with these dipshit little countries in the first place, many of these problems simply wouldn't exist in the first place.
Perhaps.
Congrats on being technically correct and absolutely useless.
If I knew what this meant, I would respond.
Oh, yes, it was quite obvious.
When Saddam decided he was going to publicly sympathize with the Taliban post-9/11, that should have been a tip off that something wasn't right.
When Saddam decided to up the payout to suicide bomber's families that attacked Israel post 9/11, that should have been a tip off that something wasn't right.
When Saddam decided to play shell games with the UNSC resolutions, that should have been a tip off that something wasn't right.
When European and Russian contractors were found selling dual use and prohibited items, that should have been a tip off that something wasn't right.
When Europe decided to the throw a colossal hissy fit over the end of food for oil, that should have been a tip off that something wasn't right.
When Europe was no longer calling for action of the humanitarian crisis being caused by food for oil, that should have been a tip off that something wasn't right.
When Europe then wanted to claim that the dual use items were broken, defective, etc., that should have been a tip off that something wasn't right.
When American liberals seized on the opportunity to finally be mad at Bush again for losing what they felt was a stolen election, that should have been a tip off that something wasn't right.
When everyone in the world and especially at the UN who previously didn't trust Saddam, started to say he's not so bad, that should have been a tip off that something wasn't right.
When Osama Bin Laden was ranting a raving about American air bases in holy land (Saudi Arabia), the same bases being used to police no fly zones in Iraq, and people were trying to downplay the Ba'athist's intelligence agency's comfort with consorting with the pre-cursor to Al Qaeda - Egyptian Islamic Jihad, that should have been a tip off that something wasn't right.
When a post-war inspection team took 18 months to scour a defeated Iraq, which I like to call "Iraq and Saddam at their most cooperative", only then were they able to confirm that their were no weapons and that Saddam only had breakout capacity for bio/chemical weapons, that should have been a tip off that something wasn't right.
---
Seriously. Responsible adults had to take the information they had at the time, and make a decision. I continue to agree that keeping the Ba'athist around, trusting bitter partisan enemies of the US administration, trusting UNSC nations that were financially hurt by the end of the food for oil program, and keeping a tentative situation of sanctions and containment, we're exactly top priority.
It may be true that the second war fomented terrorism. However, it is absolutely true that the Ba'athist containment/sanction process as agreed upon by the UN fomented terrorism at the expense of US security.
Why do you hate America?
[blockquote]Did your grocery store ever offer you free bread and milk? Did they imply that this would be an ongoing offer? Was there ever a concern that your household was becoming dependant on that free bread and milk? And once you did become dependant on that free bread and milk, did your grocery store now demand the 4 bucks because they discovered one of your household members was learning how to bake bread?[/blockquote]Location please of this grocery story offering free bread and milk. Thank you. Mmmmmmm
...why are you still alive? Get as much Oracle for as little money as you possible can.
Negotiate tenaciously. Period.
There's no news like bad news, and nothing can replace the ego of an American who can say he/she "saw it as it happened". ...especially when we "see it happen" on European soil. I know I for one, can't wait to get to say "I told you so" and "It was no doubt a result of European's foriegn policy during the cold war." At last, it's not to be, everyone knows terrorists have Europeans in their back pocket. ;)
You are not secure! Go green. Go green!
or, "out of touch management"
Holy flawking shnit is that funny!
So witholding the data from closed drivers is just lessening the experience/reliability/etc of people who use Linux but who aren't Open Source zealots. That's the aim of the driver interface but it's a stupid one, and as I pointed out it's easy enough to circumvent.
If a kernel oops or panic occurs in a driver, it's important for the kernel developers to quickly know if it's a GPL driver (or a 3rd party binary only driver that they shouldn't even waste their time looking at). Too much noise is generated on LKML for broken binary drivers that just can't be fixed or troubleshooted.
Zealotry has it's hand in that Open Source people really only want to fix Open Source drivers.
Your clever circumvention idea is well known, it will not save you in getting kernel developer support, however.
I work for the company behind that. Traffic Pulse Networks. We'll be adding many more over the course of this year. "Stay tuned" nyuck nyuck
Yes, Bush is Evil and all of that. dave420 is under some illusion that the US = Nazi Germany and somehow, Bush is going to have the ability to suspend the Constitution, draft and pass amendments and altering all of the parties of the US into some sort of Borg.
What he doesn't realize is that would totally usurp the power of the Legislative and Judicial branches, in addition to the rights of the states. "We the people" might fall for it, but all of the little govt. fiefdoms (if you will) that have actual for real power and are exercising it, aren't going to stand idly by and let it happen. No, they'll chop off Bush's dick and tell him how tasty it is, before they let the consititution be suspended or even let him "wipe his monkey arse" with it.
dave420, you clearly have not seen this before, the US != Nazi Germany. Bush != Hitler and the US constitution is not very maleable. The US is also not a democracy, the US is a Republic. Bush isn't some magical president. The end of his term is nigh. Whether it be less than 1 year from now, or less than 5 years.
So you admit it took more arms than Germany had to stop them... That means it's impossible to stop Bush from doing what he wants with guns, as he has most of them. Thanks for proving my point :)
;-).
You really must be some kind of retard. I proved my point, not yours. Bush is _not_ impossible to stop because he has all the guns. If there was a civil war, the rules are a lot different.
This has nothing to do with the cold war. This has everything to do with the fact the US needs the rest of the world to survive, yet seems reluctant to talk to people. It's like having a bi-polar neighbor with a shotgun. One second it's The Brady Bunch, the next it's When Good Neighbors Go Bad 3. The very fact you're arguing global relations like this is the school yard again highlights your complete lack of understanding on the subject. Seriously, it's funny.
Once again. Wrong assumption. You really need to quit with the school yard analogies. This isn't school, and the politics aren't the same. Whether you want to face facts or not, everyone agrees that we are talking about new world order. I am not talking WWE or Fox either. This is about the way things will be now and in the future.
Bi-polar neighbors? Let's not start with the backstabbing and in-fighting that is the European Union who often consider themselves the rest of the world. Want to know why the jobs are going to Indian and China? It's because the US really wants nothing to do with the whole EU mess. Cast your eyes on the new US, Chinese, and Indian alliances that are forming. US is securing oil production. EU is bitching about it, but not really doing anything because they can't tie their own shoe laces without Germany and France taking a vote on which one tie first and who should actually do it. Blanket statements about the US needing the rest of the world to survive is ridiculous, and untrue. The reverse of your statement would be closer to the truth.
understand completely where you're from. I can't emphasize that enough. I used to think like that when I was about 10. It was the mentality of "them and us" and the thought that only violence solved anything. We've seen in Iraq that even winning a war doesn't bring peace. The only way to do that is to talk about differences, not fight over them.
Talk about differences? Time for talking has come and gone. Quite honestly they would like nothing more than to see the US fall and every American dead, that isn't going to change by sitting down at a table. I'd prefer that US was around for me, my kids, and their kids. If the choice is us or them who survives, I pick us. Since the UN has been "piss poor" as a place to go to tattle on someone and solve problems. (I know you like the school yard analogies
Anyway, peace is a relative term, since Bush... Terrorists are blowing up targets in Iraq vs the US. Better. Iraqi Oil production is under US control. Better. Saddam Hussein isn't issuing threats towards the US. Better. European Union is screwed out of Iraqi business deals. Too bad, should have played by the rules of the UN, but still, Better.
Regardless, I see Bush, successfully securing US long term interests in an active and productive manner. You are free to disagree, I've understood your argument, I feel that in the current environment and especially in the days to come it's bit dated. I would love if things were peaceful and shit wasn't blowing up. However, that isn't going to happen anytime soon, and asking the US to sit on it's hands isn't the right answer.
You didn't answer my question - if the guns were so successful at preventing people opposing their will, why on earth didn't they get stopped? Surely, as every country has guns, there must be no war.
First of all that wasn't your question, but I will answer it. Nazi Germany was stopped, and I might add with Guns. Specifically, because they were trampling rights. They have had a good run for a few years, but it didn't last long. The invocation of Godwin's law was merely a warning for others.
My statement about terrorism isn't a blanket statement. If you know anything about foreign policy and international diplomacy, you'd see that. The single outcome from Bush's insane foreign policy is alienating the rest of the world. That has a serious side effect: global terrorism. Bush realises that, as he's using it to keep himself in power (and all you sheep nicely scared at home, stuck to CNN/Fox/Whatever, sucking down propaganda).
The alienation is relative. You are going to have to accept the fact that the alliances of the cold war are no longer in effect. It's sad that they have to go, but it's the hard truth. The sooner you accept it, the better you will understand what is going on. The US does NOT HAVE to be friends with Europe, or anyone else. In fact it's better if we aren't so that new alliances can form and a new balance is achieved. Finally, no one at "home" is scared of terrorist anymore. In fact many people think they don't exist anymore, they are the new boogie men, etc. All of that was after Bush's foriegn policy.
Grown ups use their minds to solve differences, not their fists. When was the last time you saw a child scrape their knee and reason away the pain? They don't - they react and get all huffy, like America is doing now. It's behaving like a 400lb toddler with a skimmed knee. It thinks it's right (in fact, it's absolutely convinced it is), yet due to its incredibly narrow world view, it can't see that it isn't, by a long way.
*ring* *ring* 2001 called... they want their argument back. What you call an abuse of power, I call an excersize of power. Humans in general do terrible things when they disagree. It's a basic premise you can't reason away, no matter how much you'd like to. All it takes is one person to realize that if they pick up a stick that they can make things more favorable for themselves. At this point, I'd like to suggest you know nothing about humanity, you are just an idealist.
You seem to equate being passive with no results. That just goes to further highlight your limited perception of diplomacy. I bet, according to you, Gandhi didn't do anything.
Ghandi was active and did something. I equate being passive with Tibet. No land, and no culture, and for the people who were left behind, the elimination of their way of life. Don't put words in my mouth, or if you feel you have to... come up with a reasonable analogy and try to really understand where I am coming from.
So, if guns save people's rights, how come the Nazis walked over most of Europe?
Notice: Godwin's law is in full effect, now!
If you're telling me some accountants in Idaho who fire M16s at the weekend are going to be a match for whatever Bush throws at them, you need help. They ain't gonna protect shit.
Don't like voting machines? Aim them at the voting machines and fire. I certainly hope the accountants who are getting trigger time can hit the side of a refrigerator at close range. There are different ways to protect rights and achieve goals, without standing in a battlefield waiting to be shot.
If you support Bush's foreign policy, you support terrorism.
"If you use anything generated by fossil fuels, you support terrorism." There I can make a blanket statement too. Democrats drive cars that were forged with, built with, and regularly consume fossile fuels. Democrats support terrorism too!
Look, the people controlling the fossil fuels are just as greedy as we are. Not only that, they appear to have more of a nutsack than you and are willing to blow shit up to get what they want. Ask them what being passive got them? They already know, and have chosen their course of action. They certainly don't sit on slashdot behind a dave420 userid, smoking their pot. The only post that I saw where someone suggested something actually be done about defending their rights, ended up being nothing more than a partisan troll.
War is an extension of politics by other means. This is the real world, how about you let the grown-ups take care of things, mmmkay?
Are you guys ready to defend our rights?
What did you have in mind? Unless you forgot to finish the end of that sentence with "defend our rights *with guns?", I am uninterested in what half hearted rallying/braveheart war cry you have.
Now all of a sudden you are on board with defending rights by any means neccessary. The "Bush sponsored broken electronic voting machines" were the final straw were they? How about you put down the partisanship. Left, right, center, all will sell you down the river as far your rights go. Only way to take back your rights are with force. However, left will take your guns away "to save the children", while the right calls you "a terrorist" for discussing anything related to guns. It won't matter who you put in office, it just depends on how you like your screwing.
Personally, I like Bush's foreign policy. It's high time the world understood the US is going to do as it pleases. Sure the other little countries are going to stand up for themselves, but that's to be expected. I'd rather see an active policy vs a passive one on the part of the US. However, Ashcroft, PATRIOT, domestic spying, et. al. I don't like one bit. However, I also didn't like the DMCA, weakness in the military, and the overall blatant pimp slickness that went on during Clinton's time.
Again, put down the partisanship. Someone who likes Bush, but also likes your ideas is only going to think you are a hoser because you try to tie "one magical thing" to a particular party.
Your call has been disconnected, please check the number you are dialing and try again...
Look, SElinux is only one aspect of a "secure system". All I am saying, is that worrying about backdoors from NSA's demonstratable implementation of a FLASK system is pointless if that is what you are depending on for security.
No one is selling you on they can find anything they want at will regardless of precautions. However, I am guessing very few of the slashdot crowd, have the ability to protect themselves from things like TEMPEST, men with guns, and professional spies. Worrying about backdoors on something the NSA gives out openly and publicly, should be the least of the worries for someone securing systems. However, I could be wrong, maybe everyone has their computers running linux off the net, in shield rooms, guarded by men with guns, and are worried about internal employees looking at data they shouldn't because of some NSA backdoor in SElinux.
You are ofcourse assuming that the NSA uses Linux. I seriously doubt, anything you find on the net is in operation at NSA guarding real secrets.
Anyway, the NSA has two tasks SIGINT (signal intelligence) or code breaking, and the other is Information Assurance as it relates to US National Security interests.
Both are broad tasks, the most exciting and romantic is ofcourse is the SIGINT code breaking, spying, espionage, being clever, etc.
The janitorial work is the Information Assurance, and that is the protecting of information.
Any contribution the NSA makes to Linux is most likely so people can see how ACL security is done right as it relates to FLASK. If the NSA was going to "sneak" backdoors in anywhere they wouldn't do it in broad daylight using the front door so that another intelligence agency could discover it, and exploit it. They took a published security technique and implemented a very vanilla implementation of it for the most widely used open source OS out there.
Finally, (and this goes for all of you tin foil hats too) if the NSA wants your information, they'll get it, Linux or SElinux, be damned. Nothing opens doors, passwords, and safes quicker than a man with a gun who moves with a purpose. Failing that, they'll just take what they need and put their in-house geeks on it.
No matter how much training a soldier receives, when real bullets start whizzing over their heads all that "it's a game" crap goes right out the window.
I whole heartedly agree with your post, except...
The primitive brain will continue to know the difference between real and virtual until we move to total immersion.
The total immersion would have to filter out, watching your buddies power armor, enhanced vision, thingy getting blown up into a crater. Some would consider tanks (power/reactive armor, powerful enhanced optics, etc) the same as what you just said. When you are in a tank line, and out of nowhere the tank next to you is touched off into a cloud of fire and smoke, good ole primitive brain comes back and explains to you the reality of the situation...
Well, the only valid point on your list is the large selection of Perl libraries. But that's like saying Windows is better because thousands of programs are available..
Not quite analagous, because that also means your definition of "better" for Ruby is like saying MacOS is better because there are fewer programs available.
For instance, docs and unit testing are pretty much the same in Perl, Ruby, Python, PHP, Java...
I must have screwed up my terminology. The unit testing I am referring to, is the built in stuff that comes with the Perl build process, the module build process, etc. Perl is second to none in testing. I would agree Perl, TCL, and Java docs are similiar in completeness. When I say complete, I mean documentation on how to embed and extend is available, is thorough, and all the intricacies are spelled out. Ruby, Python, and PHP are lacking. For example, at my command line I can type: perldoc perlxs, perldoc perlapi, perldoc perlembed, perldoc perlguts, and I have 10x more information about the innards and what is going on than the other languages.
The Perl and Python communities are full of people trying to show off.. it gets old after a while.
Not sure what you mean by show off. Ruby coders seem to be just as desperate as Python coders to demonstrate how their language is almost as powerful as Perl. When Ruby clutches the title of being the swiss army chainsaw in the industry, I think Ruby too, will have a reason to "show off".
One great think about Ruby community though, is that it's still small and friendly.
One awful thing about the Ruby community is that they pipe up about how they are almost as good as Perl whenever Perl is mentioned.. it's offtopic, untrue, and gets old after a while.
No, I mean like:
..pales in comparison to...
...in addition to the mailing lists.
Doc
Something a little more thorough.
http://www.perldoc.com/
Unit Testing
Not just wrappers, but something a little more thorough and mature like say from executable to module.
Unit Testing
Library Repository
http://raa.ruby-lang.org/
http://www.cpan.org/
Portability
[Acorn] [AIX] [Amiga] [Apple] [Atari] [AtheOS] [BeOS] [BSD] [BSD/OS] [Coherent] [Compaq] [Concurrent] [Cygwin] [DG/UX] [Digital] [DEC OSF/1] [Digital UNIX] [DYNIX/ptx] [EMC] [Embedix] [EPOC] [FreeBSD] [Fujitsu-Siemens] [Guardian] [HP] [HP-UX] [IBM] [IRIX] [Japanese] [JPerl] [Linux] [LynxOS] [Macintosh] [Mac OS] [Mac OS X] [MachTen] [Minix] [MinGW] [MiNT] [MPE/iX] [MS-DOS] [MVS] [NetBSD] [NetWare] [NEWS-OS] [NextStep] [Novell] [NonStop] [NonStop-UX] [OpenBSD] [ODT] [OpenVMS] [Open UNIX] [OS/2] [OS/390] [OS/400] [OSF/1] [OSR] [Plan 9] [Pocket PC] [PowerMAX] [Psion] [QNX] [Reliant UNIX] [RISCOS] [SCO] [Sequent] [SGI] [Sharp] [Siemens] [SINIX] [Solaris] [SONY] [Sun] [Symbian] [Stratus] [Tandem] [Tru64] [Ultrix] [UNIX] [U/WIN] [Unixware] [VMS] [VOS] [Win32] [WinCE] [Windows 3.1] [Windows 95/98/Me/NT/2000/XP] [z/OS]
User Community
A little more world wide and established.
http://www.pm.org/
So, what were you on about again?
From the parent parent parent poster. "Ruby has almost all of the power of Perl, with none of the ugliness" isn't quite a fair statement, considering Ruby is lacking or behind on almost everything else Perl is superior at. Ruby is still playing catch up, and depending on who you ask, can also be considered ugly.
...provides almost all of Perls power, with none of the ugliness... [emphasis mine]
...or the online documentation, the unit testing facilities, the CPAN repositories, the portablility, or the developer community.
Sorry, but you had missed some things that Ruby has none of compared to Perl.