And so many college students drinking way too much and hurting themselves or others. Which is always followed up by a community crackdown on underage drinking rather than dealing with the issue with an ounce of thought or understanding.
There is one reason why high school teachers should have the final say, maturity. High school aged kids lack it.
Horsehockey. A teacher who breaks out the paddle or hands out detention at the first hint of being challenged is the one showing immaturity and childishness. The only difference between an authoritarian teacher and a spoiled brat is age and a paddle.
Is it not the job of schools to prepare kids for the real world?
And unless that kid is going to be spending his whole life in the military, cracking the whip over irrelevant issues is not going to prepare him for the the real world.
If you do not obey the rules of your employer, you get fired.
Last time I checked, kids were not paid to go to school.
Sure sure. But cracking the whip instead of picking your battles just encourages more disobedience and rebellion, and on issues more serious than running an alternative web browser.
iThe appropriate response for the time was to take five seconds to Google Firefox.exe and find out if he was telling the truth, especially considering the 12 day gap between the date of the incident and the date of the detention.
OS X's File Vault and Windows Vista's Bitlocker are not in the same class. File Vault is like a post office's safety deposit box compared to Vista's Bitlocker, which is like a bank vault in comparison.
Uh, no. The only difference between File Vault and Bitlocker is that the latter also encrypts application files by default - it still has a non encrypted boot volume. There is nothing preventing you from doing the same on a Mac, you just need to move those files to an encrypted disk image.
A more appropriate comparison to File Vault is Windows 2000's Encrypting File System, which was released over three years before OS X 10.3 was.
Uh, no. All it takes to break EFS is to hack a user's password, which is trivial to do under default settings. And even if you do disable the storing of passwords in LM hash, you can still break EFS by resetting the Administrator password, which is also trivial to do with physical access.
I was thinking I would finally make it through an Apple story without some group think kneejerker saying "now if this were Microsoft, you'd all be up in arms" but I see the streak is unbroken.
when it comes to Apple. But you screwed up: when you're jerking that knee at something they've done, you *must* include the requisite statement: "but if this were Microsoft, you'd all be up in arms..."
Apple used to be a good company...ten years ago.
Ten years ago their stock was ~$15 a share. Right now it's $190 per share, and that's after a few splits. I would trade one of your kidneys for a few hundred shares of 1997 Apple stock.
Which only happened subsequent to, and directly attributable to, the release of XP.
Nonsense. Microsoft developed and released the same versions of DirectX for Windows 9x and Windows 2000 at the same time. And when they didn't, it was only as a lame reason to "encourage" people to upgrade, to ME, XP and now Vista. Furthermore, DX 8 was almost certainly developed on 2000, not XP - you don't want to be developing stuff like this on a beta OS. Same with DX10 and XP - there is no reason for Microsoft NOT to release DX10 for XP other than to strongarm some sales of Vista..
XP's improvement over Windows 2000 was to bring NT to the home user. Home users were stuck with 98SE or ME up until XP.
The only "bringing it to the home user" was in putting out a cheaper castrato, XP Home. 2000 ran old programs just fine, worked with hardware just fine, and once MS released DX for 2000, it ran games just fine as well.
only without the big disparity in cost. Firewire doesn't tax the CPU, and is faster than USB 2.0, even at 400 Mpbs. And it took years for USB to add features like booting and the ability to link devices together without the need for a computer.
I did this once, and shortly after the signs saying "$10 min. card purchases" was removed.
And if they didn't have it coming for offering you poor service, you were a complete dick to do so. Yes, it's against their TOS, but those terms are bullshit, along with prohibiting ID checks.
2003 is signifigant because Iran, seeing what the US did to Saddam the Baathists, decided not to give the US an excuse to keep right on going. Remember, in 2003 Iraq wasn't the total disaster it seems now, and the US effort looked successful enough that the Iranians were worried. So, in effect, seeing "what the US did to Iraq" made them NOT want nukes.
No, that's the BS spin being put out now by neocons who have been pushing, hard, for war on Iran for the last year. And to try and cover up the fact that they have been completely full of it for the last year, they now have the balls to say that the reason Iranian leaders closed the program was because they saw what happened to Iraq. Aside from the attempt at misdirection, you're forgetting North Korea and Pakistan, that actually have nuclear weapons, have been left unmolested by the Republican warmongers. So no, the real lesson is: don't have nukes, get invaded. Have nukes, don't get invaded.
After stopping the program, Iran went to length to hide that fact from the rest of the world - fighting with UN inspectors, etc.
Not really. Iran is Iraq 2.0, from the freamongering to the bogus claims of WMD. The difference is this time the CIA wasn't bowled over by Dick Cheney, and the press actually mentioned the contrary evidence this time, though it seems to have pained them greatly.
Why didn't they throw open the doors and say "Look, see? Nothing here."
Yes, because every country is eager to have foreigners rooting around in their national security with no probable cause. The U.S. and Israel could set a great example here by allowing open inspections of their nuclear weapon programs.
Assuming that the "cancellation" of the weapons program isn't a scam, why do they have a nuclear program at all? They sit atop huge supplies of energy; why go to the effort of a reactor program for electricity generation?
Air pollution. Global warming. Nuclear powered ships.
The point I'm trying to make is that there is that, just because Iran may not be actively developing weapons, doesn't mean that they plant daisies and their farts smell like jasmine. There is something going on with their nuclear program that they are not revealing. Is that a good reason to invade?
Wonderbar. The problem with all this harping on Iran is that you don't get to have one standard for yourself and your allies and one for everyone else. If they don't want nations in the Middle East arming themselves, they can start by disarming Israel.
Of course not; but then I always thought the "Invade Iran" thing was more of a Democrat invention to give them another stick to beat Bush with, like the whole "reinstate the draft" thing.
Then you've been on crack. Lots and lots of crack. The neocons have been pushing for an attack on Iran for for some time now; this isn't some Democratic conspiracy to make Bush look bad, nor is reinstating the draft. Republicans can make themselves look bad on their own.
Just to be clear: we are talking about the state sponsoring (on paper) of genocide here.
No, we aren't. Yes, they want Israel the Zionist country to go away, but they don't want to slaughter the Jews living there. Hell, outside of Israel most Jews in the Middle East live in Iran, and there are Jewish members of the Iranian parliament.
And they're right: Israel was made with complete disregard for the people who were already living there. The Gypsies were just as much victims of the Nazi genocide as the Jews, where's their homeland? Israel can complain about security when they go back to the 1967 borders and grant the Right of Return.
And on the whole nuclear weapons bit. Yes we are the only country that has used nuclear weapons is vastly overblown in my mind. Not because the strikes on Hiroshima and Nagasaki were not horrific, but because in the scale of horrors done during WWII they are not the worst. If you just concentrate on bombing during WWII then you have to realize that a single night of the fire bombing of Tokyo killed 100,000 people.
Ah, the "firebombing" chestnut. It's disingenuous to compare a night of firebombing to a single nuclear weapon.
Slashdot Mirror
And so many college students drinking way too much and hurting themselves or others. Which is always followed up by a community crackdown on underage drinking rather than dealing with the issue with an ounce of thought or understanding.
Just curious, were you better at the maths than the englishs? :)
Respect works both ways.
Then the teacher should have shown some.
There is one reason why high school teachers should have the final say, maturity. High school aged kids lack it.
Horsehockey. A teacher who breaks out the paddle or hands out detention at the first hint of being challenged is the one showing immaturity and childishness. The only difference between an authoritarian teacher and a spoiled brat is age and a paddle.
Great, and when you start paying students to go to school, all of you "if you did this at work you'd be fired" guys will have a point.
Nicely put. If you want to crack the whip anytime a student hints at challenging you, you should join the military and be a drill instructor.
That's nice. What's the teacher's punishment for acting even more childish?
Is it not the job of schools to prepare kids for the real world?
And unless that kid is going to be spending his whole life in the military, cracking the whip over irrelevant issues is not going to prepare him for the the real world.
If you do not obey the rules of your employer, you get fired.
Last time I checked, kids were not paid to go to school.
There, I fixed this for you.
Sure sure. But cracking the whip instead of picking your battles just encourages more disobedience and rebellion, and on issues more serious than running an alternative web browser.
iThe appropriate response for the time was to take five seconds to Google Firefox.exe and find out if he was telling the truth, especially considering the 12 day gap between the date of the incident and the date of the detention.
They place blind obedience over learning.
OS X's File Vault and Windows Vista's Bitlocker are not in the same class. File Vault is like a post office's safety deposit box compared to Vista's Bitlocker, which is like a bank vault in comparison.
Uh, no. The only difference between File Vault and Bitlocker is that the latter also encrypts application files by default - it still has a non encrypted boot volume. There is nothing preventing you from doing the same on a Mac, you just need to move those files to an encrypted disk image.
A more appropriate comparison to File Vault is Windows 2000's Encrypting File System, which was released over three years before OS X 10.3 was.
Uh, no. All it takes to break EFS is to hack a user's password, which is trivial to do under default settings. And even if you do disable the storing of passwords in LM hash, you can still break EFS by resetting the Administrator password, which is also trivial to do with physical access.
Better luck next time.
I was thinking I would finally make it through an Apple story without some group think kneejerker saying "now if this were Microsoft, you'd all be up in arms" but I see the streak is unbroken.
I've had to reboot my macbook pro twice in the last couple of weeks because of new versions of quicktime to fix security flaws
Then don't download it. Duh. Updates are optional.
And how many worms and viruses did Windows have in that time, Sparky?
Filevault encryption - announced in Vista first
Yawn. File Vault was released over three years before Vista was.
when it comes to Apple. But you screwed up: when you're jerking that knee at something they've done, you *must* include the requisite statement: "but if this were Microsoft, you'd all be up in arms..."
Apple used to be a good company...ten years ago.
Ten years ago their stock was ~$15 a share. Right now it's $190 per share, and that's after a few splits. I would trade one of your kidneys for a few hundred shares of 1997 Apple stock.
Which only happened subsequent to, and directly attributable to, the release of XP.
Nonsense. Microsoft developed and released the same versions of DirectX for Windows 9x and Windows 2000 at the same time. And when they didn't, it was only as a lame reason to "encourage" people to upgrade, to ME, XP and now Vista. Furthermore, DX 8 was almost certainly developed on 2000, not XP - you don't want to be developing stuff like this on a beta OS. Same with DX10 and XP - there is no reason for Microsoft NOT to release DX10 for XP other than to strongarm some sales of Vista..
XP's improvement over Windows 2000 was to bring NT to the home user. Home users were stuck with 98SE or ME up until XP.
The only "bringing it to the home user" was in putting out a cheaper castrato, XP Home. 2000 ran old programs just fine, worked with hardware just fine, and once MS released DX for 2000, it ran games just fine as well.
only without the big disparity in cost. Firewire doesn't tax the CPU, and is faster than USB 2.0, even at 400 Mpbs. And it took years for USB to add features like booting and the ability to link devices together without the need for a computer.
So please define "fairly simple DRM" then!
Does it matter what he says? You're obviously an anti-Apple fanboy looking for an excuse to jerk that knee.
A bullshit choice is no choice at all. Because if they do so...
Some people like me don't use cash anymore, so if they refuse to take Visa, they lose 100% of my business.
...they go out of business.
I did this once, and shortly after the signs saying "$10 min. card purchases" was removed.
And if they didn't have it coming for offering you poor service, you were a complete dick to do so. Yes, it's against their TOS, but those terms are bullshit, along with prohibiting ID checks.
Your link has a date of December 10th, and your link has a date of one day after that.
2003 is signifigant because Iran, seeing what the US did to Saddam the Baathists, decided not to give the US an excuse to keep right on going. Remember, in 2003 Iraq wasn't the total disaster it seems now, and the US effort looked successful enough that the Iranians were worried. So, in effect, seeing "what the US did to Iraq" made them NOT want nukes.
No, that's the BS spin being put out now by neocons who have been pushing, hard, for war on Iran for the last year. And to try and cover up the fact that they have been completely full of it for the last year, they now have the balls to say that the reason Iranian leaders closed the program was because they saw what happened to Iraq. Aside from the attempt at misdirection, you're forgetting North Korea and Pakistan, that actually have nuclear weapons, have been left unmolested by the Republican warmongers. So no, the real lesson is: don't have nukes, get invaded. Have nukes, don't get invaded.
After stopping the program, Iran went to length to hide that fact from the rest of the world - fighting with UN inspectors, etc.
Not really. Iran is Iraq 2.0, from the freamongering to the bogus claims of WMD. The difference is this time the CIA wasn't bowled over by Dick Cheney, and the press actually mentioned the contrary evidence this time, though it seems to have pained them greatly.
Why didn't they throw open the doors and say "Look, see? Nothing here."
Yes, because every country is eager to have foreigners rooting around in their national security with no probable cause. The U.S. and Israel could set a great example here by allowing open inspections of their nuclear weapon programs.
Assuming that the "cancellation" of the weapons program isn't a scam, why do they have a nuclear program at all? They sit atop huge supplies of energy; why go to the effort of a reactor program for electricity generation?
Air pollution. Global warming. Nuclear powered ships.
The point I'm trying to make is that there is that, just because Iran may not be actively developing weapons, doesn't mean that they plant daisies and their farts smell like jasmine. There is something going on with their nuclear program that they are not revealing. Is that a good reason to invade?
Wonderbar. The problem with all this harping on Iran is that you don't get to have one standard for yourself and your allies and one for everyone else. If they don't want nations in the Middle East arming themselves, they can start by disarming Israel.
Of course not; but then I always thought the "Invade Iran" thing was more of a Democrat invention to give them another stick to beat Bush with, like the whole "reinstate the draft" thing.
Then you've been on crack. Lots and lots of crack. The neocons have been pushing for an attack on Iran for for some time now; this isn't some Democratic conspiracy to make Bush look bad, nor is reinstating the draft. Republicans can make themselves look bad on their own.
Just to be clear: we are talking about the state sponsoring (on paper) of genocide here.
No, we aren't. Yes, they want Israel the Zionist country to go away, but they don't want to slaughter the Jews living there. Hell, outside of Israel most Jews in the Middle East live in Iran, and there are Jewish members of the Iranian parliament.
And they're right: Israel was made with complete disregard for the people who were already living there. The Gypsies were just as much victims of the Nazi genocide as the Jews, where's their homeland? Israel can complain about security when they go back to the 1967 borders and grant the Right of Return.
And on the whole nuclear weapons bit. Yes we are the only country that has used nuclear weapons is vastly overblown in my mind. Not because the strikes on Hiroshima and Nagasaki were not horrific, but because in the scale of horrors done during WWII they are not the worst. If you just concentrate on bombing during WWII then you have to realize that a single night of the fire bombing of Tokyo killed 100,000 people.
Ah, the "firebombing" chestnut. It's disingenuous to compare a night of firebombing to a single nuclear weapon.