Anyone in advertising that I've ever spoken with always insists people love advertising. However, I've never spoken to anyone outside of advertising that says they like ads
Governments say "You want us to keep you safe from yourself"
Rapists also say things such as "She actually wanted it"
Of course advertisers are going to say everyone loves ads. They would have to admit to themselves how much misery and frustration they cause everyone if they didn't.
Most[1] people have a tendency to feel guilty and bad when they cause other people grief and strife. So to keep that from happening, it is a lot easier to convince yourself you are doing the world a favor instead of changing your actions or beliefs.
[1] "Most" might not be the best word here, and I am probably being overly optimistic.. But whatever the ratio, while I can easily believe 'most' people are selfish and self serving, I have to also believe 'most' people aren't purposely evil.
I've yet to see a good Linux/Unix distribution that offers centralized patch management in an easily administered manner to compare with WSUS.
Kernel issues still require a reboot.
apt is far far superior to any tool that claims to be package management for windows, including WSUS which btw is for Microsoft updates ONLY. Yes you can install.MSI installers using group policy and a shared folder, but sadly not much software outside of Microsoft products (and even then occasionally) use that format. (Setup.exe needs to die, or gain full support for domain pushes)
Ksplice lets you upgrade the running linux kernel with no reboots needed as well. In fact if you install Ksplice in Ubuntu, it integrates the live kernel patching in with apt!
One of my colo servers has an 826 day uptime, yet is running the latest kernel and user-land as of Wednesday night.
Now, if you know of any tools for windows domains to do the same thing as apt and ksplice (and isn't a php+perl mess) to push out packages (preferably more than just.MSI), and to install MS patches without needing to reboot, I will _gladly_ eat my words and thank you profusely.
Basically a radioactive isotope is injected into the person, and this isotope decays over time, emitting positrons. The isotopes are usually generated on-site using a cyclotron. The number of positrons emitted during a PET scan is not so large (each blip on the detector is a single decay event), and a cyclotron is relatively expensive.
Thank you, that puts a lot of the experience into perspective. I was previously under the incorrect assumption that the machine itself generated the positrons, when they were in the injection before the scan.
I figured the amount of particles needed for a scan was no where near a gram worth (Not for a single scan anyway.. probably over the machines lifetime you could get closer, but like I said, a gram is a hell of a lot of particles!)
I see from your wiki link: Cyclotron beams can be used to bombard other atoms to produce short-lived positron-emitting isotopes suitable for PET imaging.
That alone would imply those particular short lived isotopes would not be much use to the type of research the article is referring to, so would rule out any price difference between this method and a larger accelerator.
(This part is not directed at you, just the GP/GGP etc.)
I still don't understand why everyone is saying none of these methods would work at all however, simply because it costs energy to create them. Maybe if a surplus of energy was the goal, I could see the relation. I would imagine this research might even be helpful for such a goal, but this research is for figuring out the particles interactions, not for making energy. The extra energy needed to produce the particles is just a 'cost' no different than the rest of the hardware for the experiment.
It is also a tad upsetting to see my reasonably stated observation and question gets modded troll and off topic, yet the answer in reply gets modded up, when they are the exact same topic.:/ Why on earth would people with no interest in how the world around them works even want to read a site like slashdot?
Yeah, I do call that minute. Positrons (the cheap stuff) costs ~$25 Billion per gram. "Hundreds of billions" of positrons is a few orders of magnitude less than that (to put it mildly).
That is really strange to read actually.
I was recently in the hospital and required a PET scan. PET is positron emission tomography, and uses positrons (antimatter electrons) to peek inside the brain. The procedure wasn't fast, and was producing decent sized pictures. Implies lots of particles zipping through my body and to their detector and all that, which seems like a lot. Granted, a gram of particles is a hell of a lot of particles, and I don't know how much a PET scan produces.
But that machine seemed to have no problems generating a lot of antimatter, and does so multiple times daily I have no doubt. If the antimatter really cost $25 billion per gram, I would imagine my insurance company and/or hospital bill would have been much more amusing than it actually was at only a couple grand to insurance, and a couple hundred copay from me.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying you are wrong or anything (It is right there in wikipedia after all), and I really don't have any knowledge of exactly how PET scans generate their antimatter (Read: I don't work there, just a happy customer) so I assume there is some major difference I am missing..
But as I said, a gram of particles is a LOT of particles. Very useful work can result from much much much less. The research in the article might not need anywhere near that amount (or cost) of the stuff.
Sony didn't build the software, nor do I think the intent was to damage PCs. Most likely, they fell to marketing hype from these companies claiming their copy protection systems couldn't be broken.
OOOOHHHHH! Well yes, put that way, Sony is clearly the good guy here with no responsibility for the actions of the software they purchase/license/whatever and re-sold under their name!
That is the reality. But read what paypal is claiming, which is not that at all.
Paypal disabled the security researchers account for distributing software which they claim has no other use than hacking paypals encryption.
You and I know what is actually going on, but personally I refuse to use that as an excuse to let paypal out right lie about the reasons of their actions, and their press releases.
...or you can get a real phone, like one running Symbian, that has been able to do such for 'quite some time', and there's no one to stop you in future, either.
How is a device that is fully able to place and receive calls over a cellular network not a *real* phone?
An *open* phone, yes, the iPhone is not. But real? That's just anti-apple trolling.
So paypal violates their own privacy policy by not using working encryption, decides to commit the crime of theft against the one person trying to get paypal to stop violating their own policy, and quotes the reason is HE somehow caused them to not use working encryption!
I would so love to see some of the paypal directors in prison, like any of us would be if we committed the same crimes.
"Order" and "disorder" are human perceptions, not states of matter and energy. snip To you, which is more ordered: a bowl of cherries next to a glass of water, or a completely smooth blend of all of them?
Well, the cherries probably have a tiny bit of Iron in them, which is as ordered/stable as matter gets while still being matter.
As for the rest, both are disordered, with one being disordered and slightly disgusting to think about;P
There is only heat, and absence of heat. That is why they call it "heat death" since the universe's heat (or to be more scientific, ENERGY) eventually reduces to 0, thereby causing the universe to "die."
Practically yes, from the point of view of any given photon at that time.
But the universe will have the exact same amount of energy as right now. What will happen is the distance between any given two photons (or any other particle for that matter) will be further apart from each other, and moving even further apart from each other, faster than the speed of light.
This means after the moment of heat death, if two particles of energy are on a head on course with each other, moving at the speed of light, they will not be moving fast enough to ever get any closer to each other. In fact, two particles traveling towards each other at the speed of light, will make them appear to be moving further and further away.
This is due to the universe expansion, which at some point (assuming heat death is actually what will happen of course) means the space between *ALL* particles will be greater than the distance they can travel towards any other at the speed of light.
Thus, from the point of view of a particle, be it energy or a component of matter (long since ripped apart and not able to get close enough for the strong nuclear force to kick in and form an atom), it will appear there is no more energy at all, since all of it will be so far away the effects or interactions to happen.
I can spend less money on a Chevy if I buy a Ford instead.
But in spending $0 on a Chevy by buying a Ford, how are you owning a Chevy, as the parent states you will?
If he was talking about operating systems (or 'cars' in the generic sense) sure, but he specifically said owning Microsoft software, just as you are implying the same as you would OWN a Chevy by spending $0 on a Chevy and getting a Ford.
It just makes no sense. Possession doesn't work like that.
Yes, you can be immortal if you want. But part of the problem is that, in order to achieve immortality, you have to keep adding guanines to your telomeres. The problem with that, is that it gives you cancer,...;-)
I think I would gladly take cancer if I was assured it was not going to kill me due to being immortal;}
The summary makes this sound like a recent discovery but this has been known for some time. Also, it has more to do with cell aging than human aging.
That's kind of funny. At first, I read the title as the discovery itself was aging, and came to the correct conclusion if it not being a new discovery, despite that being a clear misunderstanding of the title.
So you're going to have 10 apps that all require a different server OS? I don't think so. At least not if the CTO has a clue.
Well yea, OK. You are technically correct (the best kind of correct!)
On one hand, that situation should NOT be as common place as it actually is, if things were done right.
But on the other hand, most CTOs do not have a clue. Even the ones who do, unless they are hired in from the start, have good odds of having legacy crap to support.
The 'newest latest and best' is not a phrase one usually associates with most business IT operations. Legacy, cruft, constant migrations, and CFO's calling the shots on technical decisions is the reality of corporate IT.
Sometimes the best solution to supporting legacy is a migration off it, but that is not MOST of the time. Most of the time you are stuck with it, so the best you can really do is make maintaining it as least painful as possible. VMs do this, and alleviate a lot of pain. Perhaps you are lucky and are in a working environment where you don't have those pains in the first place. Congrats, never quit there or risk getting fired! You found one of the few good places left to work at.
But not having experiencing the horrors that legacy IT support has to deal with, I am willing to guess that very little any of us can say will communicate how much VMs help shrink days of works down to hours, and hours of work down to minutes if not seconds.
Or you just run 1 server with 10 apps running on it. Which I'm pretty sure is how things used to be done before Vms became flavour of the month amongst lazy sysadmins.
How do you pull that one off when one or two of those apps won't run on anything newer than NT 4.0, a few only run XP or newer, and one wierd app requires windows 2003 server or better (but still server OS) and the other half of the applications are UNIX?
Do you just install to multiple C:\windows_XXX\ dirs and reboot frequently between them?
As for deployment - have you never heard of a tarball? OS dies - take app tarball to new server , untar. Hows that different to copying a VM machine file over?
Sorry for the second reply, but...
I would imagine a tarball of an OS would take more than 2 seconds to move from one machine to another. Every second over 2 seconds is wasted time.
Yes, you can move a running VM from one physical server to another, in seconds, while the OS in the VM never notices anything but a 100ms network burp (if that)
When you can take a server down, tar its backup to a new machine, boot it, and get it running, without any of the apps being offline at all nor the guest OS restarting, then maybe your method would work or be better than a VM. I don't see how that would be possible though, seeing as software can not run while tarred on your backup storage.
why have multiple OSes if they're all the same type of OS and the apps could all happily run on the same OS instance?
Well if that situation was ever true, you might have a point. In the real world, it rarely works out that way.
Especially so for load balancing.
Your solution is similar to a server with 2-3 power supplies, all plugged into the same powerstrip, yet claiming redundancy. It just doesn't work like that.
Instead of having app + OS you end up with app + VM + OS so how exactly is that benefiting anyone other than the power company for the extra electricity used?
I think you have that backwards. How can using 8-10 TIMES less electricity be considered a benefit for the power company, whom makes more money the more electricity you use?
If you need 10 machines, and run 10 servers, all 10 are using power.
If you replace all 10 with just one server that uses 1/10th the power of the above setup, and run 10 VMs on it to replace those 10 real computers, you've just removed a decimal place from your power usage!
The whole issue here is consent to harm. A soldier has consented to harm and death, while a civilian has made no such choice.
While your general point is sound, and I even agree, you forgot to take into account that the majority of the soldiers that are in the position to kill or be killed are drafted and also have no choice.
I am from the US, so we are fortunate in that there hasn't been a draft since Vietnam in the 60's, so at least for our soldiers since then you are correct.
Each country goes about drafting differently. A lot of the countries with dictators in control, almost never put their 'higher up' officers in harms way, only the 'grunts' that were drafted (in some cases, drafted right out of bed in the middle of the night at gun point)
By the way, why do most of the racist twats post anonymously? If you're so proud of yourself show yourself to the world.
First off, I am not defending racism, nor support it myself. I think judging a person by an aspect they have/had zero control over is pointless and counter productive, as well as a good way to make the outcome of that judgment wrong way more often than not.
That said, this is exactly the kind of thing Anonymous Coward is for! Posting opinions that go against the majority of the avg/common people, without fear of repercussions in sharing your opinion. Especially considering the alternative is for them to not post their opinion, and thus have no dialog or discussion over it.
Yes, little good can come from realizing racist people exist and post here. Little can be done in that case to use logic to debate and convince someone of a different understanding. But I also feel it is important to still provide such a platform for other such unpopular opinions which do not have that problem. (Not that you were arguing to get rid of AC of course.)
Yes, someone has the problem of their account being deactivated. This sucks. But, imagine, for one moment, had the opposite happened. Say, for instance, the judge ordered to bank to change the numbers of the 1,300 accounts, resulting in 1,300 people having to change their financial information on all documents relating to those accounts.
I don't see how it is better to annoy 1301 people instead of just 1300.
All of what you said needs done anyway. All 1300 of those people have had their account info leaked to the entire internet. After all, a bank capable of screwing up like this, there is no reason to believe they haven't emailed the account details out to more addresses than this one gmail account. In fact, by evidence of the fact they DID send out one email, that is proof they are capable of sending their customers account details to any random email address on the internet. With no proof that this did not happen already, one must assume it has and just has not been reported, or has been reported and covered up, just like the bank stated they wanted to happen with this one case.
How many copies of the email were sent out, and the email host simply deleted the users email without waiting for a court order? Can you prove it is zero? I can quote the bank saying that if it did happen, they would want that fact hidden from public view. So the fact it is not in the public view is no indication the bank hasn't emailed out customer information before, on top of the proof that the bank will NOT disclose any security issues, by their own admission.
So, either they change all 1300 accounts info to protect them, or those 1300 people will just be inconvenienced later when all of their account funds are stolen. The question isn't "if", only "when".
Brilliant solution! Instead of fixing their problem, just let those 1300 people have their money stolen AND shutdown some random persons email. That must be so much better...
Slashdot Mirror
Anyone in advertising that I've ever spoken with always insists people love advertising. However, I've never spoken to anyone outside of advertising that says they like ads
Governments say "You want us to keep you safe from yourself"
Rapists also say things such as "She actually wanted it"
Of course advertisers are going to say everyone loves ads. They would have to admit to themselves how much misery and frustration they cause everyone if they didn't.
Most[1] people have a tendency to feel guilty and bad when they cause other people grief and strife. So to keep that from happening, it is a lot easier to convince yourself you are doing the world a favor instead of changing your actions or beliefs.
[1] "Most" might not be the best word here, and I am probably being overly optimistic.. But whatever the ratio, while I can easily believe 'most' people are selfish and self serving, I have to also believe 'most' people aren't purposely evil.
I've yet to see a good Linux/Unix distribution that offers centralized patch management in an easily administered manner to compare with WSUS.
Kernel issues still require a reboot.
apt is far far superior to any tool that claims to be package management for windows, including WSUS which btw is for Microsoft updates ONLY. .MSI installers using group policy and a shared folder, but sadly not much software outside of Microsoft products (and even then occasionally) use that format. (Setup.exe needs to die, or gain full support for domain pushes)
Yes you can install
Ksplice lets you upgrade the running linux kernel with no reboots needed as well. In fact if you install Ksplice in Ubuntu, it integrates the live kernel patching in with apt!
One of my colo servers has an 826 day uptime, yet is running the latest kernel and user-land as of Wednesday night.
Now, if you know of any tools for windows domains to do the same thing as apt and ksplice (and isn't a php+perl mess) to push out packages (preferably more than just .MSI), and to install MS patches without needing to reboot, I will _gladly_ eat my words and thank you profusely.
(Please please have such tools to suggest!)
Basically a radioactive isotope is injected into the person, and this isotope decays over time, emitting positrons. The isotopes are usually generated on-site using a cyclotron. The number of positrons emitted during a PET scan is not so large (each blip on the detector is a single decay event), and a cyclotron is relatively expensive.
Thank you, that puts a lot of the experience into perspective. I was previously under the incorrect assumption that the machine itself generated the positrons, when they were in the injection before the scan.
I figured the amount of particles needed for a scan was no where near a gram worth (Not for a single scan anyway.. probably over the machines lifetime you could get closer, but like I said, a gram is a hell of a lot of particles!)
I see from your wiki link:
Cyclotron beams can be used to bombard other atoms to produce short-lived positron-emitting isotopes suitable for PET imaging.
That alone would imply those particular short lived isotopes would not be much use to the type of research the article is referring to, so would rule out any price difference between this method and a larger accelerator.
(This part is not directed at you, just the GP/GGP etc.)
I still don't understand why everyone is saying none of these methods would work at all however, simply because it costs energy to create them.
Maybe if a surplus of energy was the goal, I could see the relation.
I would imagine this research might even be helpful for such a goal, but this research is for figuring out the particles interactions, not for making energy.
The extra energy needed to produce the particles is just a 'cost' no different than the rest of the hardware for the experiment.
It is also a tad upsetting to see my reasonably stated observation and question gets modded troll and off topic, yet the answer in reply gets modded up, when they are the exact same topic. :/
Why on earth would people with no interest in how the world around them works even want to read a site like slashdot?
Yeah, I do call that minute. Positrons (the cheap stuff) costs ~$25 Billion per gram. "Hundreds of billions" of positrons is a few orders of magnitude less than that (to put it mildly).
That is really strange to read actually.
I was recently in the hospital and required a PET scan. PET is positron emission tomography, and uses positrons (antimatter electrons) to peek inside the brain.
The procedure wasn't fast, and was producing decent sized pictures. Implies lots of particles zipping through my body and to their detector and all that, which seems like a lot.
Granted, a gram of particles is a hell of a lot of particles, and I don't know how much a PET scan produces.
But that machine seemed to have no problems generating a lot of antimatter, and does so multiple times daily I have no doubt. If the antimatter really cost $25 billion per gram, I would imagine my insurance company and/or hospital bill would have been much more amusing than it actually was at only a couple grand to insurance, and a couple hundred copay from me.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying you are wrong or anything (It is right there in wikipedia after all), and I really don't have any knowledge of exactly how PET scans generate their antimatter (Read: I don't work there, just a happy customer) so I assume there is some major difference I am missing..
But as I said, a gram of particles is a LOT of particles. Very useful work can result from much much much less. The research in the article might not need anywhere near that amount (or cost) of the stuff.
Sony didn't build the software, nor do I think the intent was to damage PCs. Most likely, they fell to marketing hype from these companies claiming their copy protection systems couldn't be broken.
OOOOHHHHH! Well yes, put that way, Sony is clearly the good guy here with no responsibility for the actions of the software they purchase/license/whatever and re-sold under their name!
That is the reality. But read what paypal is claiming, which is not that at all.
Paypal disabled the security researchers account for distributing software which they claim has no other use than hacking paypals encryption.
You and I know what is actually going on, but personally I refuse to use that as an excuse to let paypal out right lie about the reasons of their actions, and their press releases.
P.S. Repeating what paypal announced is trolling?
...or you can get a real phone, like one running Symbian, that has been able to do such for 'quite some time', and there's no one to stop you in future, either.
How is a device that is fully able to place and receive calls over a cellular network not a *real* phone?
An *open* phone, yes, the iPhone is not. But real? That's just anti-apple trolling.
This is hilarious.
So paypal violates their own privacy policy by not using working encryption, decides to commit the crime of theft against the one person trying to get paypal to stop violating their own policy, and quotes the reason is HE somehow caused them to not use working encryption!
I would so love to see some of the paypal directors in prison, like any of us would be if we committed the same crimes.
"Order" and "disorder" are human perceptions, not states of matter and energy. snip
To you, which is more ordered: a bowl of cherries next to a glass of water, or a completely smooth blend of all of them?
Well, the cherries probably have a tiny bit of Iron in them, which is as ordered/stable as matter gets while still being matter.
As for the rest, both are disordered, with one being disordered and slightly disgusting to think about ;P
There is only heat, and absence of heat. That is why they call it "heat death" since the universe's heat (or to be more scientific, ENERGY) eventually reduces to 0, thereby causing the universe to "die."
Practically yes, from the point of view of any given photon at that time.
But the universe will have the exact same amount of energy as right now. What will happen is the distance between any given two photons (or any other particle for that matter) will be further apart from each other, and moving even further apart from each other, faster than the speed of light.
This means after the moment of heat death, if two particles of energy are on a head on course with each other, moving at the speed of light, they will not be moving fast enough to ever get any closer to each other.
In fact, two particles traveling towards each other at the speed of light, will make them appear to be moving further and further away.
This is due to the universe expansion, which at some point (assuming heat death is actually what will happen of course) means the space between *ALL* particles will be greater than the distance they can travel towards any other at the speed of light.
Thus, from the point of view of a particle, be it energy or a component of matter (long since ripped apart and not able to get close enough for the strong nuclear force to kick in and form an atom), it will appear there is no more energy at all, since all of it will be so far away the effects or interactions to happen.
I can spend less money on a Chevy if I buy a Ford instead.
But in spending $0 on a Chevy by buying a Ford, how are you owning a Chevy, as the parent states you will?
If he was talking about operating systems (or 'cars' in the generic sense) sure, but he specifically said owning Microsoft software, just as you are implying the same as you would OWN a Chevy by spending $0 on a Chevy and getting a Ford.
It just makes no sense. Possession doesn't work like that.
customers have a way of figuring out how to pay the least amount of cash possible to use Microsoft's software
Yes. It's "Format C:" followed by installing some flavor of Linux and Open Office.
You are modded as informative, so does this mean Microsoft now owns "some Linux flavor" as well as owns Open Office?
If not, how exactly is installing 'some linux distro' and open office a way to pay the least for Microsoft software??
Yes, you can be immortal if you want. But part of the problem is that, in order to achieve immortality, you have to keep adding guanines to your telomeres. The problem with that, is that it gives you cancer,... ;-)
I think I would gladly take cancer if I was assured it was not going to kill me due to being immortal ;}
The summary makes this sound like a recent discovery but this has been known for some time. Also, it has more to do with cell aging than human aging.
That's kind of funny. At first, I read the title as the discovery itself was aging, and came to the correct conclusion if it not being a new discovery, despite that being a clear misunderstanding of the title.
You'll figure it out in a few years when you are of legal age to go to work, never fear.
So you're going to have 10 apps that all require a different server OS? I don't think so. At least not if the CTO has a clue.
Well yea, OK. You are technically correct (the best kind of correct!)
On one hand, that situation should NOT be as common place as it actually is, if things were done right.
But on the other hand, most CTOs do not have a clue. Even the ones who do, unless they are hired in from the start, have good odds of having legacy crap to support.
The 'newest latest and best' is not a phrase one usually associates with most business IT operations. Legacy, cruft, constant migrations, and CFO's calling the shots on technical decisions is the reality of corporate IT.
Sometimes the best solution to supporting legacy is a migration off it, but that is not MOST of the time. Most of the time you are stuck with it, so the best you can really do is make maintaining it as least painful as possible.
VMs do this, and alleviate a lot of pain. Perhaps you are lucky and are in a working environment where you don't have those pains in the first place. Congrats, never quit there or risk getting fired! You found one of the few good places left to work at.
But not having experiencing the horrors that legacy IT support has to deal with, I am willing to guess that very little any of us can say will communicate how much VMs help shrink days of works down to hours, and hours of work down to minutes if not seconds.
Or you just run 1 server with 10 apps running on it. Which I'm pretty sure is how things used to be done before Vms became flavour of the month amongst lazy sysadmins.
How do you pull that one off when one or two of those apps won't run on anything newer than NT 4.0, a few only run XP or newer, and one wierd app requires windows 2003 server or better (but still server OS) and the other half of the applications are UNIX?
Do you just install to multiple C:\windows_XXX\ dirs and reboot frequently between them?
But what happens when iTunes refuses to identify her new heart as an iPhone?
That's what you get for purchasing the latest Palm Heart Pre ;P
As for deployment - have you never heard of a tarball? OS dies - take app tarball to new server , untar. Hows that different to copying a VM machine file over?
Sorry for the second reply, but...
I would imagine a tarball of an OS would take more than 2 seconds to move from one machine to another.
Every second over 2 seconds is wasted time.
Yes, you can move a running VM from one physical server to another, in seconds, while the OS in the VM never notices anything but a 100ms network burp (if that)
When you can take a server down, tar its backup to a new machine, boot it, and get it running, without any of the apps being offline at all nor the guest OS restarting, then maybe your method would work or be better than a VM. I don't see how that would be possible though, seeing as software can not run while tarred on your backup storage.
why have multiple OSes if they're all the same type of OS and the apps could all happily run on the same OS instance?
Well if that situation was ever true, you might have a point.
In the real world, it rarely works out that way.
Especially so for load balancing.
Your solution is similar to a server with 2-3 power supplies, all plugged into the same powerstrip, yet claiming redundancy. It just doesn't work like that.
Instead of having app + OS you end up with app + VM + OS so how exactly is that benefiting anyone other than the power company for the extra electricity used?
I think you have that backwards.
How can using 8-10 TIMES less electricity be considered a benefit for the power company, whom makes more money the more electricity you use?
If you need 10 machines, and run 10 servers, all 10 are using power.
If you replace all 10 with just one server that uses 1/10th the power of the above setup, and run 10 VMs on it to replace those 10 real computers, you've just removed a decimal place from your power usage!
The whole issue here is consent to harm. A soldier has consented to harm and death, while a civilian has made no such choice.
While your general point is sound, and I even agree, you forgot to take into account that the majority of the soldiers that are in the position to kill or be killed are drafted and also have no choice.
I am from the US, so we are fortunate in that there hasn't been a draft since Vietnam in the 60's, so at least for our soldiers since then you are correct.
Each country goes about drafting differently. A lot of the countries with dictators in control, almost never put their 'higher up' officers in harms way, only the 'grunts' that were drafted (in some cases, drafted right out of bed in the middle of the night at gun point)
Definitely sucks to be those people.
By the way, why do most of the racist twats post anonymously? If you're so proud of yourself show yourself to the world.
First off, I am not defending racism, nor support it myself. I think judging a person by an aspect they have/had zero control over is pointless and counter productive, as well as a good way to make the outcome of that judgment wrong way more often than not.
That said, this is exactly the kind of thing Anonymous Coward is for!
Posting opinions that go against the majority of the avg/common people, without fear of repercussions in sharing your opinion. Especially considering the alternative is for them to not post their opinion, and thus have no dialog or discussion over it.
Yes, little good can come from realizing racist people exist and post here. Little can be done in that case to use logic to debate and convince someone of a different understanding.
But I also feel it is important to still provide such a platform for other such unpopular opinions which do not have that problem. (Not that you were arguing to get rid of AC of course.)
His own server, perhaps?
So, your solution to the problem of "Not randomly having your email deactivated" is to have yourself thrown in prison?
Yes, someone has the problem of their account being deactivated. This sucks. But, imagine, for one moment, had the opposite happened. Say, for instance, the judge ordered to bank to change the numbers of the 1,300 accounts, resulting in 1,300 people having to change their financial information on all documents relating to those accounts.
I don't see how it is better to annoy 1301 people instead of just 1300.
All of what you said needs done anyway. All 1300 of those people have had their account info leaked to the entire internet.
After all, a bank capable of screwing up like this, there is no reason to believe they haven't emailed the account details out to more addresses than this one gmail account. In fact, by evidence of the fact they DID send out one email, that is proof they are capable of sending their customers account details to any random email address on the internet.
With no proof that this did not happen already, one must assume it has and just has not been reported, or has been reported and covered up, just like the bank stated they wanted to happen with this one case.
How many copies of the email were sent out, and the email host simply deleted the users email without waiting for a court order? Can you prove it is zero? I can quote the bank saying that if it did happen, they would want that fact hidden from public view.
So the fact it is not in the public view is no indication the bank hasn't emailed out customer information before, on top of the proof that the bank will NOT disclose any security issues, by their own admission.
So, either they change all 1300 accounts info to protect them, or those 1300 people will just be inconvenienced later when all of their account funds are stolen. The question isn't "if", only "when".
Brilliant solution! Instead of fixing their problem, just let those 1300 people have their money stolen AND shutdown some random persons email. That must be so much better...