If the scientists have a problem with their funding being under the scrutiny of the taxpayers who are paying for it, they're welcome to get their funding from some place else.
Show me a business that's eager to keep their internal data on a 3rd party's *publicly accessable* server. That seems to me it'd be a little bit riskier than an isolated laptop getting lost. I've yet to work for a company that would even consider it.
Based on my experience, Chrome is a solution in search of a problem. I've had it running in a VM on my laptop. Seriously, if you're going to be springing for a low end notebook anyway, there's not much of a cost advantage to buying a ChromeOS machine and one that can run a full-featured OS. This might have made sense a few years ago when prices were higher, but a quick look around tells me I can get a refurbed notebook for around $200 that'll run Windows or Linux adequately to do anything Chrome does, and quite a bit more besides.
As a business tool, it's all but useless. Google provides no mechanism for installing even standard Linux VPN software which most companies provide for their remote employees. Or any other software, for that matter. Also, no company with a brain in their head is going to allow employees to be storing internal data on another company's servers. This might be a little more useful if a company could customize it to use internal servers rather than Google's, but as far as I've been able to tell, that option just doesn't exist.
As a striped down Linux distro, it isn't bad, but the lack of a mechanism for loading 3rd party software negates even that benefit. So you have to ask - who would use this, and why? There isn't even a cost advantage for the software. You can download a standard Linux distro that has all the features of Chrome, and a wealth of standard productivity tools to boot for the same price as Chrome - free.
More likely, he's in solitary for his own protection.
Right, that explains why he isn't allowed to exercise in his cell, and has no sheets or pillow on his bed.
The difference between scientists and non-scientists is not formal training, but attention to detail and the willingness to draw logical inferences from the data.
I agree. From TFA:
And as is true of many prisoners subjected to warped treatment of this sort, the brig's medical personnel now administer regular doses of anti-depressants to Manning to prevent his brain from snapping from the effects of this isolation.
Given that he's suffering from depression, removing items that could be used for suicide might be a reasonable precaution, no?
Maybe you're not quite the scientist you thought you were...
Greenwald is an idiot. A military prosecutor has 120 days to bring a case to trial. If the delay is longer than that, it's at the request of the defense. Manning could have demanded a speedy trial months ago, and there's not much the government could have done about it.
More likely, he's in solitary for his own protection. If he was put in the general prison population, he probably wouldn't last a week. Most soldiers don't take very kindly to treason.
These recent events have shown how reliant we are, in the West, on American companies which do not necessarily hold the same values as us. Unless you want to return to living in a cage, boycotting both VISA and Mastercard is simply not an option, and the same goes to some extent to using paypal. It's surely not a good idea that the American government have such power over money transactions of all countries in the West.
I'd almost agree with that, but the reality is that those are American companies in name only. Actually those are all multi-nationals that have no more loyalty to America than they do to any other country, and we're just as much at their mercy. If it we're to their advantage, those companies would happily pull up stakes and re-incorporate in China, India, Switzerland or the moon without batting an eye, and there's not really much America can do about it. Multi-nationals have grown to the point where they've become pretty much virtual countries in their own right, moving their assets to wherever it's to their greatest advantage, without regard to geographic or political boundatys.
Well, free speech is protected in the US somewhat better than it is in most of the rest of the world. Not necessarily because our elites are any more virtuous, but because they've realized that they can let us rant and rave all we want, and there still isn't a damn thing we can do about them.
And of course, the deniers already take *everything* as evidence for their views, so the chance that they won't seize on this is essentially non-existent.
Indeed. I might buy that if any of the information released revealed law-breaking by public officials, or that there was some public interest being served. (See Pentagon Papers.)
But none of that appears to be operative here. There's nothing in these documents besides the typical background noise of diplomacy. No obvious public interest has been served, and possibly the release of some of this information could be quite damaging.
There's no "whistle-blowing" involved here, it's just an exercise in sticking a thumb in the eye of The Man.
As far as I'm concerned, the whole matter is a tempest in a teapot. On the other hand, Assange is no hero, releasing government secrets just because they're government secrets is not heroic. If some government does manage to off the obnoxious tool, I can't say that I'll have much sympathy.
It is VERY effective. Look at the recent election results, people voted to protect the rights of rich people. Unemployed people voted against unemployment protection. All in the believe that they are some kind of middle class that doesn't need any government protection from the super rich. The divide between rich and poor has never been so big and the poor are voting to increase the gap.
And to that, a big fat "So what?". Explain to me how somebody else getting rich prevents me from getting rich. My income is predicated on what my employer is willing to pay me, and what I'm willing to accept, not what Bill Gates' net worth is on any particular day.
And there's a very good reason for me to vote to protect Bill Gates' wealth - if even he can't be assured of being secure in his property, how can I be assured of being secure in mine?
In the US, the divide between rich and poor has grown considerably over the past 30 years.
Um, so what? When you can explain to me how Steve Jobs getting rich has prevented me from getting rich, this might be something to worry about. But it's not like all of those yuppie swipples would have given their money to me if they hadn't bought an iPhone.
Word of advice: it's more helpful to concern yourself with what you earn, rather than what the guy next to you is earning.
Sounds like they already have the perfect candidate in mind from India on an H1B. They simply take his resume and adjust the requirements to match it so that no-one else will be able to qualify.
Well, the economists are right - the widespread effects are a net gain. The problem is that economics doesn't care where or who benefits from the gains. Free trade certainly increases the net amount of wealth in the world - consider it wasn't 50 years ago that India and China suffered from massive famines - but wealth created in India and China isn't doing your average Westerner much good. The concept of "national interest" has no meaning in economics.
The problem of the divide between rich and poor is irrelevant, in my book. Bill Gates may be getting richer faster than I am, but if I'm still getting richer, why should I care? Would I be any richer if Bill Gates didn't get rich? Actually, Bill Gates getting rich was to my benefit - in the process of doing so, he expanded a market that caused my skills to be more valuable. Can't complain about that!
Apparently Apple isn't that interested in the high-end server market, although they do have a pretty good server OS.
Given that Apple has decided that enterprise servers aren't their bailiwick, they'd probably be better off licensing the server OS to companies like HP and IBM, and letting them do the heavy lifting on the enterprise server thing. Because it sure doesn't look like Apple is going to do much else with it.
I forward X over SSH too - on a Mac, which doesn't use X as it's default display server either. The X server runs only when I'm using an X app. I'm not familiar with Wayland, but I don't why the same arrangement couldn't be supported on Linux.
Truthfully, this is probably a good decision on Ubuntu's part. X does some cool tricks, but it's still a rather clunky, disorganized interface compared to almost any other modern one. Better to support it as a legacy option, and kick the Linux/Unix desktop into the 21st century. You can still use X when you need it, without making it your default display manager.
There seem to be a lot of these cropping up lately. The other day I came across this picture.
Something tells me this is going to be a new fad, like listening to records backwards to hear hidden messages. "Can You Find the Time Traveler in This Picture?".
Maybe this is the bitch-slapping the US needs to pull it's head out of it's ass, and start doing the things it needs to do to be seriously competitive again.
Slashdot Mirror
If the scientists have a problem with their funding being under the scrutiny of the taxpayers who are paying for it, they're welcome to get their funding from some place else.
Show me a business that's eager to keep their internal data on a 3rd party's *publicly accessable* server. That seems to me it'd be a little bit riskier than an isolated laptop getting lost. I've yet to work for a company that would even consider it.
Based on my experience, Chrome is a solution in search of a problem. I've had it running in a VM on my laptop. Seriously, if you're going to be springing for a low end notebook anyway, there's not much of a cost advantage to buying a ChromeOS machine and one that can run a full-featured OS. This might have made sense a few years ago when prices were higher, but a quick look around tells me I can get a refurbed notebook for around $200 that'll run Windows or Linux adequately to do anything Chrome does, and quite a bit more besides.
As a business tool, it's all but useless. Google provides no mechanism for installing even standard Linux VPN software which most companies provide for their remote employees. Or any other software, for that matter. Also, no company with a brain in their head is going to allow employees to be storing internal data on another company's servers. This might be a little more useful if a company could customize it to use internal servers rather than Google's, but as far as I've been able to tell, that option just doesn't exist.
As a striped down Linux distro, it isn't bad, but the lack of a mechanism for loading 3rd party software negates even that benefit. So you have to ask - who would use this, and why? There isn't even a cost advantage for the software. You can download a standard Linux distro that has all the features of Chrome, and a wealth of standard productivity tools to boot for the same price as Chrome - free.
More likely, he's in solitary for his own protection.
Right, that explains why he isn't allowed to exercise in his cell, and has no sheets or pillow on his bed.
The difference between scientists and non-scientists is not formal training, but attention to detail and the willingness to draw logical inferences from the data.
I agree. From TFA:
And as is true of many prisoners subjected to warped treatment of this sort, the brig's medical personnel now administer regular doses of anti-depressants to Manning to prevent his brain from snapping from the effects of this isolation.
Given that he's suffering from depression, removing items that could be used for suicide might be a reasonable precaution, no?
Maybe you're not quite the scientist you thought you were...
Greenwald is an idiot. A military prosecutor has 120 days to bring a case to trial. If the delay is longer than that, it's at the request of the defense. Manning could have demanded a speedy trial months ago, and there's not much the government could have done about it.
More likely, he's in solitary for his own protection. If he was put in the general prison population, he probably wouldn't last a week. Most soldiers don't take very kindly to treason.
It's been going on a little longer than 30 years.
Well, most amusement parks are overhyped. Advertising, you know...
Once the tech process gets better, we can find more Earthlike planets instead of just these big ones. Still, encouraging.
Not that it'll do us much good. We won't be going to any exoplanets for a long, long time.....
Yes. And they have a virus that runs Windows...
Talk about a man bites dog story!
These recent events have shown how reliant we are, in the West, on American companies which do not necessarily hold the same values as us. Unless you want to return to living in a cage, boycotting both VISA and Mastercard is simply not an option, and the same goes to some extent to using paypal. It's surely not a good idea that the American government have such power over money transactions of all countries in the West.
I'd almost agree with that, but the reality is that those are American companies in name only. Actually those are all multi-nationals that have no more loyalty to America than they do to any other country, and we're just as much at their mercy. If it we're to their advantage, those companies would happily pull up stakes and re-incorporate in China, India, Switzerland or the moon without batting an eye, and there's not really much America can do about it. Multi-nationals have grown to the point where they've become pretty much virtual countries in their own right, moving their assets to wherever it's to their greatest advantage, without regard to geographic or political boundatys.
Well, free speech is protected in the US somewhat better than it is in most of the rest of the world. Not necessarily because our elites are any more virtuous, but because they've realized that they can let us rant and rave all we want, and there still isn't a damn thing we can do about them.
We may be free, but we're utterly powerless.
Believe it when you see it.
And of course, the deniers already take *everything* as evidence for their views, so the chance that they won't seize on this is essentially non-existent.
Yep! That's me!
Red panda - eats, shoots, and leaves.
Indeed. I might buy that if any of the information released revealed law-breaking by public officials, or that there was some public interest being served. (See Pentagon Papers.)
But none of that appears to be operative here. There's nothing in these documents besides the typical background noise of diplomacy. No obvious public interest has been served, and possibly the release of some of this information could be quite damaging.
There's no "whistle-blowing" involved here, it's just an exercise in sticking a thumb in the eye of The Man.
As far as I'm concerned, the whole matter is a tempest in a teapot. On the other hand, Assange is no hero, releasing government secrets just because they're government secrets is not heroic. If some government does manage to off the obnoxious tool, I can't say that I'll have much sympathy.
It is VERY effective. Look at the recent election results, people voted to protect the rights of rich people. Unemployed people voted against unemployment protection. All in the believe that they are some kind of middle class that doesn't need any government protection from the super rich. The divide between rich and poor has never been so big and the poor are voting to increase the gap.
And to that, a big fat "So what?". Explain to me how somebody else getting rich prevents me from getting rich. My income is predicated on what my employer is willing to pay me, and what I'm willing to accept, not what Bill Gates' net worth is on any particular day.
And there's a very good reason for me to vote to protect Bill Gates' wealth - if even he can't be assured of being secure in his property, how can I be assured of being secure in mine?
In the US, the divide between rich and poor has grown considerably over the past 30 years.
Um, so what? When you can explain to me how Steve Jobs getting rich has prevented me from getting rich, this might be something to worry about. But it's not like all of those yuppie swipples would have given their money to me if they hadn't bought an iPhone.
Word of advice: it's more helpful to concern yourself with what you earn, rather than what the guy next to you is earning.
Sounds like they already have the perfect candidate in mind from India on an H1B. They simply take his resume and adjust the requirements to match it so that no-one else will be able to qualify.
Yep. You nailed it.
That makes no sense. The Tea Party supports free trade. If you're for free trade, why are you worried about them?
Well, the economists are right - the widespread effects are a net gain. The problem is that economics doesn't care where or who benefits from the gains. Free trade certainly increases the net amount of wealth in the world - consider it wasn't 50 years ago that India and China suffered from massive famines - but wealth created in India and China isn't doing your average Westerner much good. The concept of "national interest" has no meaning in economics.
The problem of the divide between rich and poor is irrelevant, in my book. Bill Gates may be getting richer faster than I am, but if I'm still getting richer, why should I care? Would I be any richer if Bill Gates didn't get rich? Actually, Bill Gates getting rich was to my benefit - in the process of doing so, he expanded a market that caused my skills to be more valuable. Can't complain about that!
Apparently Apple isn't that interested in the high-end server market, although they do have a pretty good server OS.
Given that Apple has decided that enterprise servers aren't their bailiwick, they'd probably be better off licensing the server OS to companies like HP and IBM, and letting them do the heavy lifting on the enterprise server thing. Because it sure doesn't look like Apple is going to do much else with it.
I forward X over SSH too - on a Mac, which doesn't use X as it's default display server either. The X server runs only when I'm using an X app. I'm not familiar with Wayland, but I don't why the same arrangement couldn't be supported on Linux.
Truthfully, this is probably a good decision on Ubuntu's part. X does some cool tricks, but it's still a rather clunky, disorganized interface compared to almost any other modern one. Better to support it as a legacy option, and kick the Linux/Unix desktop into the 21st century. You can still use X when you need it, without making it your default display manager.
There seem to be a lot of these cropping up lately. The other day I came across this picture.
Something tells me this is going to be a new fad, like listening to records backwards to hear hidden messages. "Can You Find the Time Traveler in This Picture?".
Hell, maybe it'll even become a game show.
Where did I use the word "government"?
Maybe this is the bitch-slapping the US needs to pull it's head out of it's ass, and start doing the things it needs to do to be seriously competitive again.
Meh. Who am I kidding?