1. Pursued these companies for company tax, not just make them pass on GST from our pockets.
2. More funding to the ACCC to make these companies actually stick to Australian Consumer Laws (i.e. Sony PSN & Steam)
3. Do something about the price disparity to overseas that can not be reasonably be explained by the tax, shipping, costs to do business in Australia, etc.
But knowing this government, it will just be another hairbrain implementation that hurts anyone who is not a middle/upper-class baby-boomer.
2. ACCC? Aren't they the mob that reckoned Andrew Forrest's (Fortescue) plan to "cap iron ore prices" wasn't "acting as a cartel"? (even though it turned out to actually be the case). About as much chance as ACMA ignoring the Packer funded Christian nutjobs plans for internet filtering (that just happens to block overseas digital casinos) and their directors leaving for jobs with Salmat (quit pretending to police spam and get more money distributing junk mail).
3. You mean like - implementthe House of Representatives Standing Committee on Infrastructure and Communications recommendations? Not. Going. To. Happen. Don't forget we need to finance a war. Well several wars actually. And then there's the wars we're not officially in - yet (coughAfricacoughIrancough). Long live perpetual war. Blessed is the USA for they lead us to a partnership of peace and prosperity (and lower domestic petroleum prices).
It makes no sense at all if Uber isn't collecting GST. The GST is essentially a value-add tax applied to all domestic sales of goods or services. It doesn't apply to hobbies, exports, and personal imports up to a certain value. But I can't see any way Uber should be exempt from GST. It's clearly provision of a service for money, and hence subject to GST. Yet another way these goons think they can just avoid the law.
If you charge to drive someone somewhere GST applies. No special case for Uber. Source: ATO Canberra.
Linux is a monolithic system. Not so great, read efficient in a distributed space.
Reason Linux was successful:
Timing: Everyone was fed up on FOSS OSes.
blah, blah, piss, piss, diss, diss.
Linux worked, Linux still works. You can and could submit changes and they would either be accepted or rejected. They are the reasons Linux is successful. Sure the piss on the furniture posters can point to obscure kernels that theoretically are "better" - but, ironically, they miss the point - it is the most widely used kernel. So all the reasons other kernels are "better", are wrong.
Pointing to timing is like claiming that Google, eBay, Ffffacebook, and Amazon all succeeded because they were a better idea, or just the right timing - which is also bullshit or other good ideas wouldn't have failed. They all succeeded because they were "good" (not best) ideas, the timing wasn't terrible, and the projects controlled the engines that drove the projects (Open Source). Same reason Linux the kernel and various userlands, that bum weasels conflate as the same thing, succeeds. Google, IBM, and others "get it" (why re-invent the wheel when long-term support and testing are by far the biggest part of development costs?).
Why would you need to buy everyone in California a Jack Russell?
Agreed. It's a sad state of affairs when an anonymous coward makes more intelligent comments than posters with an account. If some breeds of dog can reliably detect distant earthquakes why the fuck would thousands of dogs be required for a warning system? And even if that was a requirement - there are already thousands of dogs. (sigh).
I made the comment about dogs in partial jest. I was kind of hoping someone would post to a serious study about the ability of animals to detect P waves. Noted that P waves don't travel far: but it's unlikely they don't also create other effects (acoustic, electrical); they match the warning period. I've also heard anecdotes that high frequency noises produced by rock particles sliding over each other during the early compression stages may precede the events that cause P waves.
I've seen some bad studies that make the presumption that all dogs have the same hearing abilities and reactions to certain frequencies (the worst are the lost dog "statistics") - but none that would likely produce useful results. It did occur to me that there's (possibly?) no money in an earthquake detection system based on animals - thought there may be something to the considerable body of anecdotal evidence.
Where I live there is an artillery firing range nearby - my dog would always, reliably, indicate a mortar explosion a few seconds before I felt it through the floor. but not in the same manner as an earthquake. She'd jump on my lap and try and burrow under my jumper. The shaking, eye-bulging and hair raising on the ridge of her back was the same as when an earthquake (hundreds of miles away) would occur - but when earthquakes were about to happen she wouldn't jump up and she would frantically try and drag me (grab trouser leg with teeth and drag towards door) outside. I suspect she wasn't unique and other owners of Jack Russells on nearby properties reported the same behavior.
Given the number of earthquakes and degree of damage they do I'm surprised no one seems to have done a serious study. I wouldn't consider my experience a serious study - though I always took it seriously (zero false alarms). Reasons she may not of been able to detect earthquakes: perhaps she thought is was a really big mortar and had some ability to detect an electrical effect (no hair on her belly), or sound that warned of an imminent explosion (detonators? some of the bangs are just buried plastique, not mortars) ; human bias meant I just don't remember false alarms; other faults I can't think of.
And they give more than 10 seconds warning. My Jack Russell cross (with Fox Terrier) had distinctive behavior that announced earthquakes. A minute - a minute and a half before quakes she'd act like it was a bad thunderstorm (try and hide under me). About 20 seconds before hand she'd start barking furiously with a mohawk-type ridge of hair standing up along her spine and try and drag me outside, once outside she'd go back to trying to hide under me. Others have reported the same reaction with Jack Russells
It took a while before we associated the behavior with earthquakes that were often too small or distant for us to notice.
Not all dogs will reliably detect earthquakes but Jack Russells seem to be very sensitive (they can't stand to be near wood fires or in the same room as an audio recording of one either) - possibly because either/or they are a "below ground dog" (love going down burrows); are "ratters" (have the hearing to listen to rodents).
Oh? Why wouldn't I just read/run/systemd/journal instead?
[unplugs disk that/var is mounted on and starts box]
var.mount mount process exited, code=exited status=32
hmmm, no information on what went wrong?
That's what systemd tells you not the output of the actual mount utility.
It could lie. What if mount fails because of a severe filesystem error ? What if the initrd is broken and the actual mount helper utility is not present ?
No answer to why I wouldn't just read/run/systemd/journal? NOTE: another strawman corner case is not an answer - it's just dodging a question.
For the output of mount I'd just replace moron with the name of the relevant unit I want output from.
Do you have any evidence that systemd lies?
You made a claim that systemd would give no information if/var didn't mount - I demonstrate that it does and you respond with more claims. That, by definition, is dodgy. My experience is that when a kernel build fails I still get information about the failure - likewise broken initrds. Maybe you should supply some actual evidence? Confirmation bias much? You do know what evidence is right? e.g. the sort of things you'd put in a useful bug report. Until you base your claims/"concerns" on such I'm going to go with the evidence to date, despite trying to find support for the presumption of your good intentions - that you're full of shit.
Facts are good - hand wavy "concerns" not so much. And don't let the conflating "default" with "no choice" cloud your perfectly rational objections.
I think Debian made a mistake by again making Gnome the desktop default. They should have stuck to XFCE or chosen LXDE, which is approaching Gnome 2 in usability..
Maybe you don't understand choices? Debian allows you to install many desktops - or none. Feel free to set your standards by the lowest common denominator (masses has a silent m?). But not every Debian user calls continuously hitting Enter an install. Even point and click retards can choose a different desktop from the gui installer menu - so why do you pretend default is something forced on you?
Debian - the Universal operating system.
The word you use, think, doesn't mean what you believe it means.
If only systemd did logging. If only sad anonymous arseclowns had someway of finding answers for themselves.
But If you can't write to these log files because your root or/var filesystem doesn't mount
then you would have wished for stdout/stderr on the console !
Oh? Why wouldn't I just read/run/systemd/journal instead?
[unplugs disk that/var is mounted on and starts box] var.mount mount process exited, code=exited status=32 hmmm, no information on what went wrong?
journalctl -u moron It seems you are correct. I do apologise (unless I got the unit wrong...).
Please continue posting your informative advice.
P.S. Weren't you the genius who wondered why "we" don't know what happened before time and space began? Where do I sign up for your newsletter?
Perhaps it will kill your glorified memories of how GNU/Linux used to work. Things are changing and most importantly, things are improving. You don't have to like those improvements, but they are. The people that make GNU/Linux distributions, especially Debian, are super-serious about it. They would not have used systemd if it threatened the system's existence.
Linux is dead. Someone said udev would kill it, and they were right. Oh wait...
(Pretend you had never heard of Google. Now you might understand just how fucking stupid it is to direct someone to google.com to learn about Google)
Pretend you're an arseclown and can't use the links on an entry page for a company, to find out about a company. Oh wait - you don't have to pretend.
In todays tech news someone from a tech company died. In arseclown news yet another arseclown couldn't find arseclown.org so trolled as anonymous coward on slashdot instead. When interviewed the arseclown said "I hate tech, it's full of smart people who make me feel stupid, when I'm not busy pissing on people's furniture I like to troll on/. and talk about my genitals, the shrink says it makes me feel less (rightfully) socially marginalized"
"Personal Computers'", "Micro Computers", "Home Computers" - are all nebulous terms..i.e the MCA bus and EISA were also in "Personal Computers", and "Business Computers". Some could argue that the IBM PS/2 was the first "true" PC (integrated VGA, mouse, keyboard, plus hard drive and floppy drive). At one point x86 was part of the "Personal Computer" criteria, then it became anything that would interpret x86 (AMD-64). Now ARM devices are "Personal Computers".
Semantic pedantics enjoy pointless arguments have no point of any importance to make.
If a PC runs business software is it still a PC? If you put it on the floor is a desktop? Did you see those pictures of Lady Gaga? (sigh). Oh, and you're grammer is wrong. (I was going to work the word "nowadays", and the phrase "moving forwards", but...)
CO2 works fine too, but the hand flapping and increased respiration attempts aren't real pretty to watch
I'm pretty sure that the increased respiration attempts aren't enjoyable to endure either - the body senses heightened levels of CO2 as a sign of suffocation. Whereas CO simply attaches to red blood cells instead of O2, meaning there's no sense of suffocation.
I never said it was fun. Don't kid yourself that nitrogen being "painless" makes the experience any less unpleasant the person being executed. Heroin overdoses are very pleasant (I know that first-hand from a misspent youth). But only the deluded or those sick of life would willingly submit the experience - no matter how "pain free" the process. All your "humanity" is nothing more than the moral high ground of someone out of touch with reality. Knowing you are going to die real soon by any means makes the situation real. Very few take that awareness gracefully - and all those that do, that I've known, gain a greater respect for all life as a consequence - all others theorize from the safety of denial. Knowing you will die someday is not the same. You'll know the difference when it happens - I hope you never have to be that aware.
If you can't bear to kill your 'criminal' by ripping off their heads with a rope tied to the back of a F100 you're just putting lipstick on a pig and calling it pretty.
I strongly disagree with this sentiment.
And I support your right to hold the opinion your deserve - even when it's wrong.
Even if you're against capital punishment you can still recognize the reality of the current situation and desire a better form of execution.
No - I can't. Your logic is flawed. Executions don't prevent crimes, slapping a political approval on murder doesn't change the reality. Hence the lipstick on a pig metaphor. Making it "nice" is just butter for those without bread.
It's quite simple, if you yourself were to be executed which method would you think is more humane?
Again your logic is flawed (how's that confirmation bias working out?). It's akin to asking me for a defense plan against an invasion of Martians (or whether I want to be punched or kicked in the balls).
At least then the innocent people we kill wouldn't have to suffer while it's done.
Wow! You really are one sick fucker.
If you're going to embrace state sanctioned murder you should realize that the pain and embarrassment of the method of execution are irrelevant to the person being executed at the time. It's the audience, and those twisted blood lusting promoters of execution that worry about the ironic "humanity" of the method. The dead get over it pretty quick.
Nitrogen really is a good method. I learned about its use in this area when I read about 2 NASA(?) engineers who died right after a fuel tank was flushed with nitrogen. One walked into the middle of it for whatever reason and then collapsed, then the second went in to see what was wrong and he collapsed. They say it brings a bit of euphoria and then eternal sleep.
CO2 works fine too, but the hand flapping and increased respiration attempts aren't real pretty to watch (though worrying about the aesthetics of how you kill someone is, um, just fucking weird). CO also works just fine - no hand flapping or straining to breath, but it also has aesthetic "issues".
Note: I don't support state sanctioned murder - if for no other reason than the abysmal record the US has for justice - even when the condemned was actually guilty of the crime, the crime was arguably that of the state, not the condemned (homeowner shoots unarmed petty thief, petty thief that is not shot
dead is convicted). I doubt there are many people outside the US that don't believe there is something extremely wrong with the self-appointed moral guardian of the world (life imprisonment for a joint, fines for giving out food, secret trade agreements that breach US sponsored International Human rights, etc, etc).
If you can't bear to kill your 'criminal' by ripping off their heads with a rope tied to the back of a F100 you're just putting lipstick on a pig and calling it pretty. And yes, there really are a large number of US 'citizens' that'd like (Facebook style) the F100 method (sadly it's not unique to the US), just look at the comments on/. from people cheering the idea of prison rape, or the human hemorrhoid that gets all excited at the idea of using liquid nitrogen and a hammer for state executions. On second thought - maybe state execution is the answer, just not for the people you put inside the cells of your prisons with the world's highest percentage of incarceration[*1].
Disclaimer: I spent part of my youth in Missouri (pronounced "misery") within sight of Monsanto - it's not Denmark that reeks of something seriously rotten.
[*1] I know.. (sigh), those that deny their ugly blood lust will point to statistically insignificant data from countries with populations of less than 100K, and simultaneously justify their own countries imprisonment rate, and their "right" to armed self-defense - whilst remaining blind to all the inherent contradictions. i.e. if your prison and justice system worked your 'citizens' wouldn't need guns, and you'd have the safest nation on earth. Roll on the triumph of optimism over experience like the Sherman tank of freedom, and whenever you lose a hand - double up.
How about discussing the technical differences and pros & cons instead of the source then? A post below does that and is way more informative than just listing off other protocols and saying nothing about them.
Nooooooo!! It should be decided by a house vote. Face-painters rule!
a search engine that searches the internet. Not parts of the internet, all of the internet.
I'd also like the search engine to do Boolean and regex.
P.S. I couldn't give a flying fuck if it:- has ads; tries to profile my search queries. I can at least attempt to get avoid those things. But if it does not index the entire internet it's as useful as a range of shoes that consist of one size and one style only.. And no, I don't care if it doesn't come with a free set of steak knives and is 100% dolphin free and kind to puppies, as long as it indexes everything
I don't care if Bill Gates wrote the back end, hell, I'd use it even if it was run by the scumbag behind DuckDuckFuckADuck.
Maybe the reason why geniuses are so miserable is because they look around and find themselves surrounded by morons.
Maybe - it (might) be dependent on several things: definition of genius (high level abilities across a range of fields); reaction to competition.
Not being a genius I'd be guessing - and that'd be ironic given my experience with people who consider me "very intelligent" and then say "I don't understand why you don't waste your abilities" (i.e. why aren't I famous/richer/better fit their stereotype of what "smart" people do). My experience is that the smarter someone is - the less certain they are of their abilities (the more you know, the more you know you don't know). One perception is that society (the average) recognises and rewards those that are not as clever as they claim to be (or good). E.g. Not so smart. If you are so smart why don't you cure cancer/old age? Smarter. Because I can extrapolate. (none of those things would improve the world in which I live) Not so smart You are an idiot.
As someone mentioned earlier in this thread - expectation is an important component. One of the smartest people I know lives under a bush - his family had high expectations for him and got him scholarships in the "best" schools. Their expectations were that he would do much "better" than them (make more money, get more respect). He thought (correctly) that they were ignorant and relied too much on the opinion of those "who appointed themselves as peers". So he went the the "best" schools - on scholarships offered to raise the academic ratings in order to attract the offspring of the wealthy, and not surprisingly was victimized and did not get to join the exclusive boys clubs. I don't know whether the unrealistic expectations of his family or the first-hand insights into the lives and realities of those who society calls successful, caused him to reject societies expected standards. He's clean and healthy - and one of the happiest people I know.... so I have no reason to doubt he's still very, very smart.
Some things he's said:- the very smart are a threat to those that are not so smart - so if you're smart, play dumb; the only way to get smarter is to challenge people who are even smarter (so being surrounded by morons might have several effects); most people are too stupid to know how stupid they are; approval is a prison - pick your jailer carefully; most things are without reason or purpose and the dumbest thing is to search for reason where there is none; happiness is a choice; don't ask me - if you can't work it out the answer is valueless.
My point - if I have one, is that I'm not sure "smarter" people are unhappier because the smartest people I've ever met are not obviously smart (they hide their abilities). There is a myth that those that are much smarter than the average have an advantage - which is like believing that because you have 20 years experience at fighting you can beat someone twice your weight who has no experience. Numbers of people is like the weight of your opponent. It also overlooks the fact that in life we rarely get to chose the games we play - you may be much smarter than your colleagues, but they may have devoted their lives to licking arses - and if you are so much smarter than your boss unless he takes advantage of your superior abilities you are of no greater value than your dumber colleague. You are also more cautious about implementing changes - your dumb colleague is not. Perhaps being smarter means that you are unwilling to shit upstream because of the perceived consequences (you drink that water) - your dumber competition is not so constrained and achieves greater financial success.... Does your extra smart make you aware of this? Does your extra smart make you realise that there is no point in trying to educate your dumber competitor or their customers?
Call me a cynic - but if Twitter chose Ireland for "privacy" purposes then it's a huge coincidence it just happens to be cheaper - as well
Switzerland is not as private as Ireland, because, um, CERN is just another name for GCHQ, unless.... oh crap, GCHQ is an NSA partner (cough* we keep the data, NSA keeps the index/metadata*cough).
Never mind, I'm obviously delusional - GCHQ doesn't have access to Ireland, what was I thinking? As you were, carry on, nothing to see here...
Slashdot Mirror
I would support this if the government:
1. Pursued these companies for company tax, not just make them pass on GST from our pockets. 2. More funding to the ACCC to make these companies actually stick to Australian Consumer Laws (i.e. Sony PSN & Steam) 3. Do something about the price disparity to overseas that can not be reasonably be explained by the tax, shipping, costs to do business in Australia, etc.
But knowing this government, it will just be another hairbrain implementation that hurts anyone who is not a middle/upper-class baby-boomer.
It makes no sense at all if Uber isn't collecting GST. The GST is essentially a value-add tax applied to all domestic sales of goods or services. It doesn't apply to hobbies, exports, and personal imports up to a certain value. But I can't see any way Uber should be exempt from GST. It's clearly provision of a service for money, and hence subject to GST. Yet another way these goons think they can just avoid the law.
If you charge to drive someone somewhere GST applies. No special case for Uber. Source: ATO Canberra.
Drinks kool-aid?
Linux is a monolithic system. Not so great, read efficient in a distributed space.
Reason Linux was successful:
Timing: Everyone was fed up on FOSS OSes.
blah, blah, piss, piss, diss, diss.
Linux worked, Linux still works. You can and could submit changes and they would either be accepted or rejected. They are the reasons Linux is successful. Sure the piss on the furniture posters can point to obscure kernels that theoretically are "better" - but, ironically, they miss the point - it is the most widely used kernel. So all the reasons other kernels are "better", are wrong.
Pointing to timing is like claiming that Google, eBay, Ffffacebook, and Amazon all succeeded because they were a better idea, or just the right timing - which is also bullshit or other good ideas wouldn't have failed. They all succeeded because they were "good" (not best) ideas, the timing wasn't terrible, and the projects controlled the engines that drove the projects (Open Source). Same reason Linux the kernel and various userlands, that bum weasels conflate as the same thing, succeeds. Google, IBM, and others "get it" (why re-invent the wheel when long-term support and testing are by far the biggest part of development costs?).
Back in the late 1980s, the W6FXN 2 meter repeater
Damn! I and I've got mod points to burn but can't mod this story. Someone please mod this up.
[mutter, mutter] Where's the tag for good science overlooked because it's not sexy.
Why would you need to buy everyone in California a Jack Russell?
Agreed. It's a sad state of affairs when an anonymous coward makes more intelligent comments than posters with an account. If some breeds of dog can reliably detect distant earthquakes why the fuck would thousands of dogs be required for a warning system? And even if that was a requirement - there are already thousands of dogs. (sigh).
I made the comment about dogs in partial jest. I was kind of hoping someone would post to a serious study about the ability of animals to detect P waves. Noted that P waves don't travel far: but it's unlikely they don't also create other effects (acoustic, electrical); they match the warning period. I've also heard anecdotes that high frequency noises produced by rock particles sliding over each other during the early compression stages may precede the events that cause P waves.
I've seen some bad studies that make the presumption that all dogs have the same hearing abilities and reactions to certain frequencies (the worst are the lost dog "statistics") - but none that would likely produce useful results. It did occur to me that there's (possibly?) no money in an earthquake detection system based on animals - thought there may be something to the considerable body of anecdotal evidence.
Where I live there is an artillery firing range nearby - my dog would always, reliably, indicate a mortar explosion a few seconds before I felt it through the floor. but not in the same manner as an earthquake. She'd jump on my lap and try and burrow under my jumper. The shaking, eye-bulging and hair raising on the ridge of her back was the same as when an earthquake (hundreds of miles away) would occur - but when earthquakes were about to happen she wouldn't jump up and she would frantically try and drag me (grab trouser leg with teeth and drag towards door) outside. I suspect she wasn't unique and other owners of Jack Russells on nearby properties reported the same behavior.
Given the number of earthquakes and degree of damage they do I'm surprised no one seems to have done a serious study. I wouldn't consider my experience a serious study - though I always took it seriously (zero false alarms). Reasons she may not of been able to detect earthquakes: perhaps she thought is was a really big mortar and had some ability to detect an electrical effect (no hair on her belly), or sound that warned of an imminent explosion (detonators? some of the bangs are just buried plastique, not mortars) ; human bias meant I just don't remember false alarms; other faults I can't think of.
Are you sure she wasn't just using Twitter when you weren't looking?
Don't take that the wrong way.
And they give more than 10 seconds warning. My Jack Russell cross (with Fox Terrier) had distinctive behavior that announced earthquakes. A minute - a minute and a half before quakes she'd act like it was a bad thunderstorm (try and hide under me). About 20 seconds before hand she'd start barking furiously with a mohawk-type ridge of hair standing up along her spine and try and drag me outside, once outside she'd go back to trying to hide under me. Others have reported the same reaction with Jack Russells
It took a while before we associated the behavior with earthquakes that were often too small or distant for us to notice.
Not all dogs will reliably detect earthquakes but Jack Russells seem to be very sensitive (they can't stand to be near wood fires or in the same room as an audio recording of one either) - possibly because either/or they are a "below ground dog" (love going down burrows); are "ratters" (have the hearing to listen to rodents).
That's what systemd tells you not the output of the actual mount utility.
It could lie. What if mount fails because of a severe filesystem error ? What if the initrd is broken and the actual mount helper utility is not present ?
No answer to why I wouldn't just read /run/systemd/journal? NOTE: another strawman corner case is not an answer - it's just dodging a question.
For the output of mount I'd just replace moron with the name of the relevant unit I want output from.
Do you have any evidence that systemd lies?
You made a claim that systemd would give no information if /var didn't mount - I demonstrate that it does and you respond with more claims. That, by definition, is dodgy. My experience is that when a kernel build fails I still get information about the failure - likewise broken initrds. Maybe you should supply some actual evidence? Confirmation bias much? You do know what evidence is right? e.g. the sort of things you'd put in a useful bug report. Until you base your claims/"concerns" on such I'm going to go with the evidence to date, despite trying to find support for the presumption of your good intentions - that you're full of shit.
Facts are good - hand wavy "concerns" not so much. And don't let the conflating "default" with "no choice" cloud your perfectly rational objections.
I think Debian made a mistake by again making Gnome the desktop default. They should have stuck to XFCE or chosen LXDE, which is approaching Gnome 2 in usability..
Maybe you don't understand choices? Debian allows you to install many desktops - or none. Feel free to set your standards by the lowest common denominator (masses has a silent m?). But not every Debian user calls continuously hitting Enter an install. Even point and click retards can choose a different desktop from the gui installer menu - so why do you pretend default is something forced on you?
Debian - the Universal operating system.
The word you use, think, doesn't mean what you believe it means.
If only systemd did logging. If only sad anonymous arseclowns had someway of finding answers for themselves.
But If you can't write to these log files because your root or /var filesystem doesn't mount
then you would have wished for stdout/stderr on the console !
Oh? Why wouldn't I just read /run/systemd/journal instead?
[unplugs disk that /var is mounted on and starts box]
var.mount mount process exited, code=exited status=32
hmmm, no information on what went wrong?
journalctl -u moron
It seems you are correct. I do apologise (unless I got the unit wrong...).
Please continue posting your informative advice.
P.S. Weren't you the genius who wondered why "we" don't know what happened before time and space began? Where do I sign up for your newsletter?
Perhaps it will kill your glorified memories of how GNU/Linux used to work. Things are changing and most importantly, things are improving. You don't have to like those improvements, but they are. The people that make GNU/Linux distributions, especially Debian, are super-serious about it. They would not have used systemd if it threatened the system's existence.
Linux is dead. Someone said udev would kill it, and they were right. Oh wait...
> systemd is default.
That sucks. Since it swallows stderr and syslog output, that makes it very hard to troubleshoot start-up problems.
If only systemd did logging. If only sad anonymous arseclowns had someway of finding answers for themselves.
(Pretend you had never heard of Google. Now you might understand just how fucking stupid it is to direct someone to google.com to learn about Google)
Pretend you're an arseclown and can't use the links on an entry page for a company, to find out about a company. Oh wait - you don't have to pretend.
In todays tech news someone from a tech company died. In arseclown news yet another arseclown couldn't find arseclown.org so trolled as anonymous coward on slashdot instead. When interviewed the arseclown said "I hate tech, it's full of smart people who make me feel stupid, when I'm not busy pissing on people's furniture I like to troll on /. and talk about my genitals, the shrink says it makes me feel less (rightfully) socially marginalized"
Try not to waste my time the next time, some thinking before writing makes a huge difference.
Tickets much? Who makes your hats - Barnum and Bailey?
"Personal Computers'", "Micro Computers", "Home Computers" - are all nebulous terms. .i.e the MCA bus and EISA were also in "Personal Computers", and "Business Computers". Some could argue that the IBM PS/2 was the first "true" PC (integrated VGA, mouse, keyboard, plus hard drive and floppy drive). At one point x86 was part of the "Personal Computer" criteria, then it became anything that would interpret x86 (AMD-64). Now ARM devices are "Personal Computers".
Semantic pedantics enjoy pointless arguments have no point of any importance to make.
If a PC runs business software is it still a PC? If you put it on the floor is a desktop? Did you see those pictures of Lady Gaga? (sigh). Oh, and you're grammer is wrong. (I was going to work the word "nowadays", and the phrase "moving forwards", but...)
Killing someone with 100% CO2 would certainly be cruel.
And killing someone by any means when they don't want to die is not cruel? Do you prefer a particular shade of lipstick on your pig?
CO2 works fine too, but the hand flapping and increased respiration attempts aren't real pretty to watch
I'm pretty sure that the increased respiration attempts aren't enjoyable to endure either - the body senses heightened levels of CO2 as a sign of suffocation. Whereas CO simply attaches to red blood cells instead of O2, meaning there's no sense of suffocation.
I never said it was fun. Don't kid yourself that nitrogen being "painless" makes the experience any less unpleasant the person being executed. Heroin overdoses are very pleasant (I know that first-hand from a misspent youth). But only the deluded or those sick of life would willingly submit the experience - no matter how "pain free" the process. All your "humanity" is nothing more than the moral high ground of someone out of touch with reality. Knowing you are going to die real soon by any means makes the situation real. Very few take that awareness gracefully - and all those that do, that I've known, gain a greater respect for all life as a consequence - all others theorize from the safety of denial. Knowing you will die someday is not the same. You'll know the difference when it happens - I hope you never have to be that aware.
If you can't bear to kill your 'criminal' by ripping off their heads with a rope tied to the back of a F100 you're just putting lipstick on a pig and calling it pretty.
I strongly disagree with this sentiment.
And I support your right to hold the opinion your deserve - even when it's wrong.
Even if you're against capital punishment you can still recognize the reality of the current situation and desire a better form of execution.
No - I can't. Your logic is flawed. Executions don't prevent crimes, slapping a political approval on murder doesn't change the reality. Hence the lipstick on a pig metaphor. Making it "nice" is just butter for those without bread.
It's quite simple, if you yourself were to be executed which method would you think is more humane?
Again your logic is flawed (how's that confirmation bias working out?). It's akin to asking me for a defense plan against an invasion of Martians (or whether I want to be punched or kicked in the balls).
At least then the innocent people we kill wouldn't have to suffer while it's done.
Wow! You really are one sick fucker.
If you're going to embrace state sanctioned murder you should realize that the pain and embarrassment of the method of execution are irrelevant to the person being executed at the time. It's the audience, and those twisted blood lusting promoters of execution that worry about the ironic "humanity" of the method. The dead get over it pretty quick.
Nitrogen really is a good method. I learned about its use in this area when I read about 2 NASA(?) engineers who died right after a fuel tank was flushed with nitrogen. One walked into the middle of it for whatever reason and then collapsed, then the second went in to see what was wrong and he collapsed. They say it brings a bit of euphoria and then eternal sleep.
CO2 works fine too, but the hand flapping and increased respiration attempts aren't real pretty to watch (though worrying about the aesthetics of how you kill someone is, um, just fucking weird). CO also works just fine - no hand flapping or straining to breath, but it also has aesthetic "issues".
Note: I don't support state sanctioned murder - if for no other reason than the abysmal record the US has for justice - even when the condemned was actually guilty of the crime, the crime was arguably that of the state, not the condemned (homeowner shoots unarmed petty thief, petty thief that is not shot dead is convicted). I doubt there are many people outside the US that don't believe there is something extremely wrong with the self-appointed moral guardian of the world (life imprisonment for a joint, fines for giving out food, secret trade agreements that breach US sponsored International Human rights, etc, etc).
If you can't bear to kill your 'criminal' by ripping off their heads with a rope tied to the back of a F100 you're just putting lipstick on a pig and calling it pretty. And yes, there really are a large number of US 'citizens' that'd like (Facebook style) the F100 method (sadly it's not unique to the US), just look at the comments on /. from people cheering the idea of prison rape, or the human hemorrhoid that gets all excited at the idea of using liquid nitrogen and a hammer for state executions. On second thought - maybe state execution is the answer, just not for the people you put inside the cells of your prisons with the world's highest percentage of incarceration[*1].
Disclaimer: I spent part of my youth in Missouri (pronounced "misery") within sight of Monsanto - it's not Denmark that reeks of something seriously rotten.
[*1] I know.. (sigh), those that deny their ugly blood lust will point to statistically insignificant data from countries with populations of less than 100K, and simultaneously justify their own countries imprisonment rate, and their "right" to armed self-defense - whilst remaining blind to all the inherent contradictions. i.e. if your prison and justice system worked your 'citizens' wouldn't need guns, and you'd have the safest nation on earth. Roll on the triumph of optimism over experience like the Sherman tank of freedom, and whenever you lose a hand - double up.
How about discussing the technical differences and pros & cons instead of the source then? A post below does that and is way more informative than just listing off other protocols and saying nothing about them.
Nooooooo!! It should be decided by a house vote. Face-painters rule!
That search engine will be hunted down and convicted of breaking the DMCA.
a search engine that searches the internet. Not parts of the internet, all of the internet.
I'd also like the search engine to do Boolean and regex.
P.S. I couldn't give a flying fuck if it:- has ads; tries to profile my search queries. I can at least attempt to get avoid those things. But if it does not index the entire internet it's as useful as a range of shoes that consist of one size and one style only.. And no, I don't care if it doesn't come with a free set of steak knives and is 100% dolphin free and kind to puppies, as long as it indexes everything
I don't care if Bill Gates wrote the back end, hell, I'd use it even if it was run by the scumbag behind DuckDuckFuckADuck.
Thanks
Maybe the reason why geniuses are so miserable is because they look around and find themselves surrounded by morons.
Maybe - it (might) be dependent on several things: definition of genius (high level abilities across a range of fields); reaction to competition.
Not being a genius I'd be guessing - and that'd be ironic given my experience with people who consider me "very intelligent" and then say "I don't understand why you don't waste your abilities" (i.e. why aren't I famous/richer/better fit their stereotype of what "smart" people do). My experience is that the smarter someone is - the less certain they are of their abilities (the more you know, the more you know you don't know). One perception is that society (the average) recognises and rewards those that are not as clever as they claim to be (or good). E.g. Not so smart. If you are so smart why don't you cure cancer/old age? Smarter. Because I can extrapolate. (none of those things would improve the world in which I live) Not so smart You are an idiot.
As someone mentioned earlier in this thread - expectation is an important component. One of the smartest people I know lives under a bush - his family had high expectations for him and got him scholarships in the "best" schools. Their expectations were that he would do much "better" than them (make more money, get more respect). He thought (correctly) that they were ignorant and relied too much on the opinion of those "who appointed themselves as peers". So he went the the "best" schools - on scholarships offered to raise the academic ratings in order to attract the offspring of the wealthy, and not surprisingly was victimized and did not get to join the exclusive boys clubs. I don't know whether the unrealistic expectations of his family or the first-hand insights into the lives and realities of those who society calls successful, caused him to reject societies expected standards. He's clean and healthy - and one of the happiest people I know.... so I have no reason to doubt he's still very, very smart.
Some things he's said:- the very smart are a threat to those that are not so smart - so if you're smart, play dumb; the only way to get smarter is to challenge people who are even smarter (so being surrounded by morons might have several effects); most people are too stupid to know how stupid they are; approval is a prison - pick your jailer carefully; most things are without reason or purpose and the dumbest thing is to search for reason where there is none; happiness is a choice; don't ask me - if you can't work it out the answer is valueless.
My point - if I have one, is that I'm not sure "smarter" people are unhappier because the smartest people I've ever met are not obviously smart (they hide their abilities). There is a myth that those that are much smarter than the average have an advantage - which is like believing that because you have 20 years experience at fighting you can beat someone twice your weight who has no experience. Numbers of people is like the weight of your opponent. It also overlooks the fact that in life we rarely get to chose the games we play - you may be much smarter than your colleagues, but they may have devoted their lives to licking arses - and if you are so much smarter than your boss unless he takes advantage of your superior abilities you are of no greater value than your dumber colleague. You are also more cautious about implementing changes - your dumb colleague is not. Perhaps being smarter means that you are unwilling to shit upstream because of the perceived consequences (you drink that water) - your dumber competition is not so constrained and achieves greater financial success.... Does your extra smart make you aware of this? Does your extra smart make you realise that there is no point in trying to educate your dumber competitor or their customers?
Tricky..
Exactly. Point a loaded gun at a playful dog and he'll be all excited by the new game.
Apropos of little - what I hate most is the happiness of the stupid.
Call me a cynic - but if Twitter chose Ireland for "privacy" purposes then it's a huge coincidence it just happens to be cheaper - as well
Switzerland is not as private as Ireland, because, um, CERN is just another name for GCHQ, unless.... oh crap, GCHQ is an NSA partner (cough* we keep the data, NSA keeps the index/metadata*cough).
Never mind, I'm obviously delusional - GCHQ doesn't have access to Ireland, what was I thinking? As you were, carry on, nothing to see here...