Lazy ERs maybe. But for those that care about the work they do I know that's not the case. Plus, if people would quit going to the ER except in the case of Life or Limb, we wouldn't have issues like this. But because people go to the ER they have to treat even the sniffles like it is a life or death or loss of limb issue. And that calls for throwing every antibiotic at your allergy induced asthmatic cough, plus chest X-Rays and mucus biopsies.
Here's something to think about the next time you feel you need to go to the ER. Can it wait until the local clinic is open & can treat you? Or is there a Dr you can call to see if you should go in? If you can answer "yes" to either of those questions, then DO NOT GO TO THE ER!!!!
Initially? Nothing more than any other church did(ie pull the program from their youth activities). In fact it was the initial dispute over this in the 90s that prompted my church to come up with an official young men's program should scouts ever lose it viability as a program to bring our young men up in. It's what we now use outside the US, and in conjunction with scouting in the US.
Yeah, that doesn't quite work when 90% of the people out there are idiots who watched last night's House or ER or Grey's w/e and think they know more than the Drs & nurses treating them. All of them think they need the latest drug & antibiotic. My oldest bro works in an ER and he told me one of their biggest jokes is which antibiotic is the best antiviral. Top that off with those who complain to management & billing that they didn't get the best treatment when they don't get the drug they wanted, even when the CDC & FDA have bulletins against its overuse.
I think you're completely disregarding that the BSA is a Mormon organization.
Umm, NO! I'm both an Eagle Scout & a Mormon. And yes, I did Scouting as part of my church youth activities. But at no point is one organization beholden to the other. We Mormons do hold a huge sway over the BSA. But we aren't the only ones, nor do we want to be. We have our own things to worry about, and our own ways of spreading our beliefs. Heck, knocking doors in a white shirt & tie is a heck of a lot easier way to spread a spiritual message than trying to do it through rowdy teenage boys.
What kind of car do you drive? Because, on a level surface, my car won't accelerate above 5 mph from a full stop without me pressing the accelerator, and that's over the distance of a few hundred feet. In fact, most times my car won't move if I don't put my foot on the accelerator.
That's why you pair GIT with GITLab(a private/local version of GIT Hub). Or if you want to purchase something, go with RTC or JIRA. RTC & JIRA have the added advantage of issue/bug tracking, but all offer you the capabilities of adding a SharePoint/Wiki like site to your revision tracking.
I agree with everything else you said, except that. The drivers who seem to have the biggest problem(including the one in TFA) are teenagers, who are not legal adults. Instead they are wannabe adults.
one of these days they'll probably start feeding the kids cardboard because every tiny little shit is allergic to something.
Nope, can't do that because cardboard has dyes added to it, which some people are allergic to. Not only that, but depending on the type of tree used for the wood pulp, there might be children allergic to those kinds of trees. And then there are the digestive issues when you try to digest wood products. And will the cardboard provided the FDA's recommended amount of fiber, vitamins, & minerals, while not including any salts, sugars, fats, proteins, or carbohydrates? Finally, heaven forbid that it contain anything from an animal and wasn't plucked out of the ground earlier that morning.
Lord do I hate people that think they know what's best for the rest of us & our children. Let me screw myself & children up in my own way. That's what my parent's did, and I turned out WAY better than the ones raised by the government(ie food stamps, "head start", etc).
Neither will guarantee defectless & errorless code. They help, but you still need to do more. If you are relying only on either, then your process is broken.
At the end of the day, nobody died from this leak.
Are you sure? Because of WikiLeaks carelessness in handling the documents given by PFC Manning a lot of names of informants and dissidents were revealed. Even the names of those who happened to visit US Embassies were revealed. Can you be certain that none of those were killed or in the very least made an example of, much like PFC Manning is being made an example of?
Just FYI, I don't agree that he should have gotten 35 years when more violent criminals can get < 10 years. Personally, I think he should have gotten a few years, have the NSA keep tabs on him(at least then their domestic spying might be justified), then be black listed from any job that entails any sort of confidentiality or security agreement. This would show he got punished(time served in jail), isn't put in a position where he can repeat his actions(black listing), and that if he leaks again then the government will know(NSA watching).
Reporting on war crimes should be considered a service to his country.
What war crime did he report on? You mean the Collateral Murder video? WikiLeaks "reported" on that. He did no such thing. He just took some documents and leaked them. If these had been financial documents or other "personal" documents, he would be held just as liable, even if they exposed the crimes of those to who the documents pertained.
So you are saying they should pay him and thank him, because he committed a worse offence than he did?
Yes. He tried to use their own method for reporting such problems. If he had just hacked it outright before telling them, then that'd be a different story. But when a company fails to use the information provided to them from their own communication channels, especially when it seems that they did so to screw someone out of a reward, then they deserve what they go & should still pay up.
If the info hadn't been released, CI's wouldn't have been endangered by having it known they were CI's. Assange only conceeded to redacting the information at the behest of the reporters he was working with. He had no intention of protecting anybody but himself. And in the end, because of WikiLeaks & those that worked with them's carelessness, unredacted versions of the documents were released in the wild. Since the US didn't want the documents released in the first place, it's fairly certain that US wouldn't have allowed that to happen.
And it's not just CI's that were affected. It has been reported by other organizations that their people were either forced out of various countries or put into harms way because their names were mentioned in various cables(didn't say why, just that they were mentioned). Even Chinese dissidents were hurt because they visited US Embassies. And all of this because some lowly analyst & a prick with a thing out for the US decided to share with the world the US's secrets.
In any measurable way his actions have made the world a better place, no not resulted in any demonstrable harm (except what the US deserves for its actions).
How well did WikiLeaks try to protect the innocent people caught up in all of this mess? They didn't seem to concerned when Assange said regarding confidential informants, "Well, they're informants, so if they get killed, they've got it coming to them. They deserve it." With statements like that can you be sure the later part of your statement is actually true? We can see the nominal defense help they gave PFC Manning. What about the troops that had additional harm placed upon them because of this? We know that Osama Bin Ladin had copies of these leaks on computers found at his compound. Please think before opening your mouth. You don't know what harm was caused by this.
Yes, a lot of good came from PFC Manning's leaks, but so did a lot of harm. And not all of it was just to the US's public image. Whistle blower channels exist for more than just keeping secrets secret. Part of it is so that innocents aren't harmed in the process of disclosure. Had Manning actually tried to use them, he might have found that out. But since he didn't we will never know. All we know is he decided that he knew more about what was good than everybody else around him, and that undo harm was caused.
You could go back just a bit further to see an even greater impact that a 3rd party had on the election. GWB's father lost his 2nd term due to Ross Perot taking almost 20% of the vote, which arguably would have gone to GHWB & led to his reelection.
The Obama Administration might be complicit in this, or it might have its hands tied. Because the secret courts have the authority to issue secret injunctions against any organization, including other parts of the Federal government, it is possible that Obama has no effective oversight on what they are doing
Oh please. If someone had said that about the Bush Administration or any other Administration, they would have been torn to shreds. Obama & his administration knew what the hell is & was going on. If he didn't it was because he chose not to. And if that's the case, then he's a bigger joke than Bush, who at least had the balls to take action(incorrectly or not). So no matter what, he gets to take the blame on this one, just like Bush 1 & 2 and Clinton.
While I might not support Snowden, I don't see putting sanctions on random countries as ending well for us. I personally want my government to just let it be. He stole some super secret documents that is going to embarrass our government. Try to catch the guy, but otherwise, just drop it already. Only going to piss somebody off.
Yeah, as if "doing bad things" was the only reason people stole from their employers. There are a myriad of reasons why someone would "leak" or "steal" confidential information from their employers, and most of them having nothing to do with the how their employer does business. There are such things as "bad" people, and they will do "evil" things no matter what.
Even if you believe that people are all good, and only break the rules to necessitate a greater good, that still has no bearing on how an entity conducts itself. Take for example Mitt Romney using TurboTax(or some other self filing service) to do his taxes. If TurboTax had an employee who was a Left Wing Nut Job and thought that Obama was going to rid the world of all its evils, and he decided to steal & leak Romney's tax returns, does that mean that TurboTax was an evil company? No, not in the least. Especially when they were following the laws that others thought were a good idea(data security anyone?). It does mean they hired a Left Wing Nut Job.
So what is your stance on polygamous or multiple partner relationships being recognized in civil unions? I only ask because besides same-sex relationships, the only "unacceptable" relationships are ones that are obviously unacceptable. Or what about roommates simply asking for the same benefits as "married" couples?
What I would like to see is a complete redefinition of what the government recognizes as a civil marriage, by removing the marriage part. Why can't I as a single guy, get the same advantages as a married couple with my roommates on our taxes & other social benefits? Or on the other end, what about those who are in a relationship with more than 1 person(ie polygamy)? Let me define my "family" as I see fit, and leave the government out of it entirely. Because as it stands, even after today, it's not fair.
Oh, there's even a bigger problem with Smith being in charge of the NSF budget. The dude's a Christian Scientist, but not a real scientist. I'm Mormon with my BS in Applied Physics, so I can get the religious vs scientific belief issues. But here's a dude who's whole religion rejects science outright. Up until recently, they'd rather let people die, suffer needlessly through debilitating diseases, or become permanently disabled because "they weren't believing right" and if they wanted to be healed they just needed to "think" themselves healed. And now one of them is in charge of how the US pays for scientific endeavors. WHAT THE @#$!?!?!?!? I expect in the next year or two there will be grants given for Indiana Jones like expeditions to locate the Arc, Noah's Ark, Solomon's Temple, and the wood that made up Christ's cross.
Slashdot Mirror
Lazy ERs maybe. But for those that care about the work they do I know that's not the case. Plus, if people would quit going to the ER except in the case of Life or Limb, we wouldn't have issues like this. But because people go to the ER they have to treat even the sniffles like it is a life or death or loss of limb issue. And that calls for throwing every antibiotic at your allergy induced asthmatic cough, plus chest X-Rays and mucus biopsies.
Here's something to think about the next time you feel you need to go to the ER. Can it wait until the local clinic is open & can treat you? Or is there a Dr you can call to see if you should go in? If you can answer "yes" to either of those questions, then DO NOT GO TO THE ER!!!!
Initially? Nothing more than any other church did(ie pull the program from their youth activities). In fact it was the initial dispute over this in the 90s that prompted my church to come up with an official young men's program should scouts ever lose it viability as a program to bring our young men up in. It's what we now use outside the US, and in conjunction with scouting in the US.
Yeah, that doesn't quite work when 90% of the people out there are idiots who watched last night's House or ER or Grey's w/e and think they know more than the Drs & nurses treating them. All of them think they need the latest drug & antibiotic. My oldest bro works in an ER and he told me one of their biggest jokes is which antibiotic is the best antiviral. Top that off with those who complain to management & billing that they didn't get the best treatment when they don't get the drug they wanted, even when the CDC & FDA have bulletins against its overuse.
I think you're completely disregarding that the BSA is a Mormon organization.
Umm, NO! I'm both an Eagle Scout & a Mormon. And yes, I did Scouting as part of my church youth activities. But at no point is one organization beholden to the other. We Mormons do hold a huge sway over the BSA. But we aren't the only ones, nor do we want to be. We have our own things to worry about, and our own ways of spreading our beliefs. Heck, knocking doors in a white shirt & tie is a heck of a lot easier way to spread a spiritual message than trying to do it through rowdy teenage boys.
What kind of car do you drive? Because, on a level surface, my car won't accelerate above 5 mph from a full stop without me pressing the accelerator, and that's over the distance of a few hundred feet. In fact, most times my car won't move if I don't put my foot on the accelerator.
That's why you pair GIT with GITLab(a private/local version of GIT Hub). Or if you want to purchase something, go with RTC or JIRA. RTC & JIRA have the added advantage of issue/bug tracking, but all offer you the capabilities of adding a SharePoint/Wiki like site to your revision tracking.
The driver is a legal adult.
I agree with everything else you said, except that. The drivers who seem to have the biggest problem(including the one in TFA) are teenagers, who are not legal adults. Instead they are wannabe adults.
one of these days they'll probably start feeding the kids cardboard because every tiny little shit is allergic to something.
Nope, can't do that because cardboard has dyes added to it, which some people are allergic to. Not only that, but depending on the type of tree used for the wood pulp, there might be children allergic to those kinds of trees. And then there are the digestive issues when you try to digest wood products. And will the cardboard provided the FDA's recommended amount of fiber, vitamins, & minerals, while not including any salts, sugars, fats, proteins, or carbohydrates? Finally, heaven forbid that it contain anything from an animal and wasn't plucked out of the ground earlier that morning.
Lord do I hate people that think they know what's best for the rest of us & our children. Let me screw myself & children up in my own way. That's what my parent's did, and I turned out WAY better than the ones raised by the government(ie food stamps, "head start", etc).
You sir are a moron. He did no such thing. He leaked un-redacted documents to WikiLeaks. Yes, they(WikiLeaks, not PFC Manning) initially redacted the information, but only when reporters refused to publish the documents unless they did. And later they had a security breach where the documents were leaked into the wild without the redactions. This has since put both international reporters & dissidents in great harm. In China for example, dissidents listed on the documents from PFC Manning were hunted down by what amounts to lynch mobs. And in parts of Africa, reporters were forcibly removed from countries because their names appeared on US Embassy visitor logs.
Try verifying your information before opening your moronic mouth.
Neither will guarantee defectless & errorless code. They help, but you still need to do more. If you are relying only on either, then your process is broken.
It is because you can't make the electrons move fast enough to switch between the different energy states without melting the entire thing.
How can you get anyone to read an article on science if you don't convince them you are violating the fundamental laws of the universe?
Heck, that's half the reason to read Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy.
At the end of the day, nobody died from this leak.
Are you sure? Because of WikiLeaks carelessness in handling the documents given by PFC Manning a lot of names of informants and dissidents were revealed. Even the names of those who happened to visit US Embassies were revealed. Can you be certain that none of those were killed or in the very least made an example of, much like PFC Manning is being made an example of?
Just FYI, I don't agree that he should have gotten 35 years when more violent criminals can get < 10 years. Personally, I think he should have gotten a few years, have the NSA keep tabs on him(at least then their domestic spying might be justified), then be black listed from any job that entails any sort of confidentiality or security agreement. This would show he got punished(time served in jail), isn't put in a position where he can repeat his actions(black listing), and that if he leaks again then the government will know(NSA watching).
Reporting on war crimes should be considered a service to his country.
What war crime did he report on? You mean the Collateral Murder video? WikiLeaks "reported" on that. He did no such thing. He just took some documents and leaked them. If these had been financial documents or other "personal" documents, he would be held just as liable, even if they exposed the crimes of those to who the documents pertained.
So you are saying they should pay him and thank him, because he committed a worse offence than he did?
Yes. He tried to use their own method for reporting such problems. If he had just hacked it outright before telling them, then that'd be a different story. But when a company fails to use the information provided to them from their own communication channels, especially when it seems that they did so to screw someone out of a reward, then they deserve what they go & should still pay up.
If the info hadn't been released, CI's wouldn't have been endangered by having it known they were CI's. Assange only conceeded to redacting the information at the behest of the reporters he was working with. He had no intention of protecting anybody but himself. And in the end, because of WikiLeaks & those that worked with them's carelessness, unredacted versions of the documents were released in the wild. Since the US didn't want the documents released in the first place, it's fairly certain that US wouldn't have allowed that to happen.
And it's not just CI's that were affected. It has been reported by other organizations that their people were either forced out of various countries or put into harms way because their names were mentioned in various cables(didn't say why, just that they were mentioned). Even Chinese dissidents were hurt because they visited US Embassies. And all of this because some lowly analyst & a prick with a thing out for the US decided to share with the world the US's secrets.
In any measurable way his actions have made the world a better place, no not resulted in any demonstrable harm (except what the US deserves for its actions).
How well did WikiLeaks try to protect the innocent people caught up in all of this mess? They didn't seem to concerned when Assange said regarding confidential informants, "Well, they're informants, so if they get killed, they've got it coming to them. They deserve it." With statements like that can you be sure the later part of your statement is actually true? We can see the nominal defense help they gave PFC Manning. What about the troops that had additional harm placed upon them because of this? We know that Osama Bin Ladin had copies of these leaks on computers found at his compound. Please think before opening your mouth. You don't know what harm was caused by this.
Yes, a lot of good came from PFC Manning's leaks, but so did a lot of harm. And not all of it was just to the US's public image. Whistle blower channels exist for more than just keeping secrets secret. Part of it is so that innocents aren't harmed in the process of disclosure. Had Manning actually tried to use them, he might have found that out. But since he didn't we will never know. All we know is he decided that he knew more about what was good than everybody else around him, and that undo harm was caused.
You could go back just a bit further to see an even greater impact that a 3rd party had on the election. GWB's father lost his 2nd term due to Ross Perot taking almost 20% of the vote, which arguably would have gone to GHWB & led to his reelection.
The Obama Administration might be complicit in this, or it might have its hands tied. Because the secret courts have the authority to issue secret injunctions against any organization, including other parts of the Federal government, it is possible that Obama has no effective oversight on what they are doing
Oh please. If someone had said that about the Bush Administration or any other Administration, they would have been torn to shreds. Obama & his administration knew what the hell is & was going on. If he didn't it was because he chose not to. And if that's the case, then he's a bigger joke than Bush, who at least had the balls to take action(incorrectly or not). So no matter what, he gets to take the blame on this one, just like Bush 1 & 2 and Clinton.
While I might not support Snowden, I don't see putting sanctions on random countries as ending well for us. I personally want my government to just let it be. He stole some super secret documents that is going to embarrass our government. Try to catch the guy, but otherwise, just drop it already. Only going to piss somebody off.
Yeah, as if "doing bad things" was the only reason people stole from their employers. There are a myriad of reasons why someone would "leak" or "steal" confidential information from their employers, and most of them having nothing to do with the how their employer does business. There are such things as "bad" people, and they will do "evil" things no matter what.
Even if you believe that people are all good, and only break the rules to necessitate a greater good, that still has no bearing on how an entity conducts itself. Take for example Mitt Romney using TurboTax(or some other self filing service) to do his taxes. If TurboTax had an employee who was a Left Wing Nut Job and thought that Obama was going to rid the world of all its evils, and he decided to steal & leak Romney's tax returns, does that mean that TurboTax was an evil company? No, not in the least. Especially when they were following the laws that others thought were a good idea(data security anyone?). It does mean they hired a Left Wing Nut Job.
So what is your stance on polygamous or multiple partner relationships being recognized in civil unions? I only ask because besides same-sex relationships, the only "unacceptable" relationships are ones that are obviously unacceptable. Or what about roommates simply asking for the same benefits as "married" couples?
What I would like to see is a complete redefinition of what the government recognizes as a civil marriage, by removing the marriage part. Why can't I as a single guy, get the same advantages as a married couple with my roommates on our taxes & other social benefits? Or on the other end, what about those who are in a relationship with more than 1 person(ie polygamy)? Let me define my "family" as I see fit, and leave the government out of it entirely. Because as it stands, even after today, it's not fair.
Oh, there's even a bigger problem with Smith being in charge of the NSF budget. The dude's a Christian Scientist, but not a real scientist. I'm Mormon with my BS in Applied Physics, so I can get the religious vs scientific belief issues. But here's a dude who's whole religion rejects science outright. Up until recently, they'd rather let people die, suffer needlessly through debilitating diseases, or become permanently disabled because "they weren't believing right" and if they wanted to be healed they just needed to "think" themselves healed. And now one of them is in charge of how the US pays for scientific endeavors. WHAT THE @#$!?!?!?!? I expect in the next year or two there will be grants given for Indiana Jones like expeditions to locate the Arc, Noah's Ark, Solomon's Temple, and the wood that made up Christ's cross.
Is that science you can only do if you're root?
Yes! Ok, so my spelling isn't so great.