"And thou shalt eat it [as] barley cakes, and thou shalt bake it with dung that cometh out of man, in their sight."- Ezekiel 4:12
"For there are some eunuchs, which were so born from their mother's womb: and there are some eunuchs, which were made eunuchs of men: and there be eunuchs, which have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven's sake. He that is able to receive it, let him receive it." - Matthew 19:12
This is a public university. Granted, you can probably stand anywhere, at any time, and do just about anything and be in violation of some law or rule. That doesn't make it right, legal, constitutional or appropriate.
Dude, I guess it's going to have to happen to you before you'll realize it. Not all of us are so naive. Some of us recognize that this is not a good thing. It's not a case of a situation getting out of hand. It's an excessive use of authoritarian power. Just because they may have the ability to do so, does not make it right.
You must be a lawyer, the way you divert attention away from the real important issue and argue over technicalities.
You're obviously not watching the same video that we are.
After they shut his mic off, he is not allowed to leave. Police are there grabbing ahold of him. Even as Kerry clearly tells him to stay there so he can answer his question. That's way out of line.
Note that the audience applauded when he was removed from the mic.
Also note that nobody in the audience was threatened by the guy. Nobody moved away from him. His actions, however animated were not constituted as a threat to anyone, and certainly not worthy of the amount of force used.
Also note this is FLORIDA. This is the state where they passed a law saying it was OK to shoot someone if they look at you the wrong way.
Many people do not believe in this notion that one should always unconditionally bow to authority. The world would never ever change if people followed your bad advice. Sometimes the status quo needs to be challenged to improve things. If the guy wants to ask Kerry a few extra questions, he doesn't deserve to get assaulted over it, regardless of whether or not he violated some petty, trivial rule of politeness.
I just want to point something out. The guy may have been rude, but he didn't deserve the treatment he got.
You people that think he did. You are wrong. You are part of the problem. Would you have said Rosa Parks deserved what she got because she should have moved to the back of the bus?
The ability to speak out in our society is a sacred right, and whenever there's any "gray area" the end result should always bow in favor of freedom, not decorum or lawfulness. Those of you who disagree are clearly and simply misguided. And of course, the irony is people who don't think anything was done wrong here will be the first ones to whine like a baby, even worse than this guy, when their personal rights are infringed, perhaps by a draft, and at that time, it will be too late because idiot defenders of the status quo will have belittled earlier activists who were looking out for their interests. Wake up.
John Kerry wanted him to stay there while he answered his question. He stated as much in the video. Your claims don't have that much merit.
This is not a case of someone "going too far". If wanting to spend more than two minutes asking a government representative a few important questions that will affect yours and everyone else's future, is going too far, then we need to look around and ask ourselves what kind of country we live in? There's a difference between decorum and facism. And I suspect those of you who think this guy went too far, are way too lawful to be helpful in combatting the serious problems our nation is facing.
This is really great news. I have been using Eudora since 1995, and I have virtually every e-mail message I've ever sent/received online. Eudora is a great example of a well-designed, well-written program that stands the test of time. It's not hooked into Windows so that when the OS inevitibly dies, you have to use the "jaws of life" to get your data. You can copy the subdirectory to another machine and you're back in business. To many of us, Eudora never died. It's still an integral application and I'm happy to see someone continuing to develop it.
The same thing happened in the states during the WTO protests in Seattle. They found some drunk asses smashing stuff and focused on that as if the entire flock of protesters were just there to dance in the street and break things.
The worst part about all this is that there will probably be thousands of protesters with legitimate issues they want raised. And the news media will find the one tripped-out, bearded, hippy-dude beating on a djembe screaming "legalize meth!" and splatter that all over the television as an example of a typical activist.
I know many of you may not have choices for broadband, but this isn't surprising when you compare the legacy of telephone with cable companies. The former has been considered a common carrier and respected the data as autonomous. The latter, cable, has made as part of its business model, controlling data and limiting access to it. This is in-effect the fundamental difference between these two types of companies. If you care about data being free, you should not get your broadband service from a company who makes its money by feeding you little bits of traffic a la carte.
I recently purchased an alarm system from a popular web site called the Home Security Store. Not only do I feel their recommendations steered me away from better products for my application, but I've had a hellish time with their support. I've also submitted reviews for products to the web site and they apparently weren't approved, possibly because I didn't give the products a glowing review. The site also operates a whole slew of other domains pointing to different IP addresses which are basically the same storefront, and another alarm company told me they used to pay people to write reviews and cross link the sites. That explains why they're as popular as they are, but apparently didn't get that way because of the quality of their products & service.
The whole story is basically one long advertisement.
These days there is no distinction between editorial and advertising, thanks to the Fairness Doctrine being eliminated. While the FD never affected specialty print publications like PC World, the fact that for the most part, all mainstream media shamelessly panders to their advertisers has made the notion of objective reviewing almost nonexistent.
Am I the only one who has noticed that since CERT partnered with the US Government, the response time on advisories has been much slower, and the details and depth of reports are less comprehensive? CERT advisories used to be a critical part of our security strategy. Now by the time the hit the mailing list (if at all), they're more of an afterthought.
Is there a better alternative to CERT now because it just isn't cutting it. I am familiar with Bugtraq and Security Focus. By the time CERT mentions something, usually it's actively exploited. It wasn't always like this but now the service isn't nearly as helpful to administrators.
Speaking as the owner of an ISP that was hit by Hurricane Katrina, I can comment on this... while everyone else in the family was looking for a place to live, my customers demanded their web sites be back online ASAP, so it took me 24-48 hours to get everything back online even though our network never went down - the military took over the building and messed with the generator transfer switch and screwed things up.
I slept on floors and in peoples cars while I got the network back online. Only then did I concern myself with stuff like food and where I was going to live. I wish it didn't go down like that, but it did.
In a Web-based attack scenario, an attacker would have to host a Web site that contains a Web page that is used to exploit this vulnerability. An attacker could also attempt to compromise a Web site to have it serve up a Web page with malicious content attempting to exploit this vulnerability. An attacker would have no way to force users to visit a Web site. Instead, an attacker would have to persuade them to visit the Web site, typically by getting them to click a link that takes them to the attacker's site or a site compromised by the attacker.
Whew... for a moment there I was scared... apparently you can only be infected if you go to some web site that someone else has. And we all know how difficult it is for professional hackers to be able to set up web pages, and how rare it is for people to click on a link and go to that page.
This explains why Microsoft hasn't patched this issue yet. The mitigating factors are obviously quite obscure.
He wants to spend a console's CPU making games more intelligent, and he has found the Wii doesn't have the power to process things like complicated AI.
With all due respect, this is bullshit. Don't blame the hardware if you aren't a good enough programmer to make it work. This is the problem with today's developers. They expect computers to get faster and faster and need more and more memory because they're too lazy or not resourceful or creative enough to write efficient code.
One of the reasons why most games suck nowadays and are so boring is because of this very issue. Developers rely too much on hardware, faster graphics and better texture mapping in lieu of actual creative game design. Stop blaming the hardware because you have no creativity and can't program your way out of a paper bag!
Slashdot Mirror
Oooh, more good Bible advice:
"And thou shalt eat it [as] barley cakes, and thou shalt bake it with dung that cometh out of man, in their sight."- Ezekiel 4:12
"For there are some eunuchs, which were so born from their mother's womb: and there are some eunuchs, which were made eunuchs of men: and there be eunuchs, which have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven's sake. He that is able to receive it, let him receive it." - Matthew 19:12
Obviously that "liberal media" we hear so much about.
Where was he asked to leave?
All I see are cops grabbing at him.
This is a public university. Granted, you can probably stand anywhere, at any time, and do just about anything and be in violation of some law or rule. That doesn't make it right, legal, constitutional or appropriate.
Dude, I guess it's going to have to happen to you before you'll realize it. Not all of us are so naive. Some of us recognize that this is not a good thing. It's not a case of a situation getting out of hand. It's an excessive use of authoritarian power. Just because they may have the ability to do so, does not make it right.
You must be a lawyer, the way you divert attention away from the real important issue and argue over technicalities.
You're obviously not watching the same video that we are.
After they shut his mic off, he is not allowed to leave. Police are there grabbing ahold of him. Even as Kerry clearly tells him to stay there so he can answer his question. That's way out of line.
The guy wasn't at a state department dinner.
He was at a forum where people ask politicians questions.
You can't find a forum of this nature where people don't go over time.
In any case, getting arrested is way over the top. Trying someone's patience is not against the law, otherwise in this case, you would be arrested.
Note that the audience applauded when he was removed from the mic.
Also note that nobody in the audience was threatened by the guy. Nobody moved away from him. His actions, however animated were not constituted as a threat to anyone, and certainly not worthy of the amount of force used.
Also note this is FLORIDA. This is the state where they passed a law saying it was OK to shoot someone if they look at you the wrong way.
Many people do not believe in this notion that one should always unconditionally bow to authority. The world would never ever change if people followed your bad advice. Sometimes the status quo needs to be challenged to improve things. If the guy wants to ask Kerry a few extra questions, he doesn't deserve to get assaulted over it, regardless of whether or not he violated some petty, trivial rule of politeness.
I just want to point something out. The guy may have been rude, but he didn't deserve the treatment he got.
You people that think he did. You are wrong. You are part of the problem. Would you have said Rosa Parks deserved what she got because she should have moved to the back of the bus?
The ability to speak out in our society is a sacred right, and whenever there's any "gray area" the end result should always bow in favor of freedom, not decorum or lawfulness. Those of you who disagree are clearly and simply misguided. And of course, the irony is people who don't think anything was done wrong here will be the first ones to whine like a baby, even worse than this guy, when their personal rights are infringed, perhaps by a draft, and at that time, it will be too late because idiot defenders of the status quo will have belittled earlier activists who were looking out for their interests. Wake up.
John Kerry wanted him to stay there while he answered his question. He stated as much in the video. Your claims don't have that much merit.
This is not a case of someone "going too far". If wanting to spend more than two minutes asking a government representative a few important questions that will affect yours and everyone else's future, is going too far, then we need to look around and ask ourselves what kind of country we live in? There's a difference between decorum and facism. And I suspect those of you who think this guy went too far, are way too lawful to be helpful in combatting the serious problems our nation is facing.
Actually agnostic is a subset of atheist.
This is really great news. I have been using Eudora since 1995, and I have virtually every e-mail message I've ever sent/received online. Eudora is a great example of a well-designed, well-written program that stands the test of time. It's not hooked into Windows so that when the OS inevitibly dies, you have to use the "jaws of life" to get your data. You can copy the subdirectory to another machine and you're back in business. To many of us, Eudora never died. It's still an integral application and I'm happy to see someone continuing to develop it.
The same thing happened in the states during the WTO protests in Seattle. They found some drunk asses smashing stuff and focused on that as if the entire flock of protesters were just there to dance in the street and break things.
The worst part about all this is that there will probably be thousands of protesters with legitimate issues they want raised. And the news media will find the one tripped-out, bearded, hippy-dude beating on a djembe screaming "legalize meth!" and splatter that all over the television as an example of a typical activist.
The video of this protest, along with a more substantive interview can be found here.
Wow, mods aren't what they used to when articles like that get modded as a troll.
Wash your hands!
; )
I know many of you may not have choices for broadband, but this isn't surprising when you compare the legacy of telephone with cable companies. The former has been considered a common carrier and respected the data as autonomous. The latter, cable, has made as part of its business model, controlling data and limiting access to it. This is in-effect the fundamental difference between these two types of companies. If you care about data being free, you should not get your broadband service from a company who makes its money by feeding you little bits of traffic a la carte.
I recently purchased an alarm system from a popular web site called the Home Security Store. Not only do I feel their recommendations steered me away from better products for my application, but I've had a hellish time with their support. I've also submitted reviews for products to the web site and they apparently weren't approved, possibly because I didn't give the products a glowing review. The site also operates a whole slew of other domains pointing to different IP addresses which are basically the same storefront, and another alarm company told me they used to pay people to write reviews and cross link the sites. That explains why they're as popular as they are, but apparently didn't get that way because of the quality of their products & service.
The whole story is basically one long advertisement.
These days there is no distinction between editorial and advertising, thanks to the Fairness Doctrine being eliminated. While the FD never affected specialty print publications like PC World, the fact that for the most part, all mainstream media shamelessly panders to their advertisers has made the notion of objective reviewing almost nonexistent.
My thoughts exactly. This is a list of the top 100 products who have companies that schmooze PC World's editors the most effectively.
Am I the only one who has noticed that since CERT partnered with the US Government, the response time on advisories has been much slower, and the details and depth of reports are less comprehensive? CERT advisories used to be a critical part of our security strategy. Now by the time the hit the mailing list (if at all), they're more of an afterthought.
Is there a better alternative to CERT now because it just isn't cutting it. I am familiar with Bugtraq and Security Focus. By the time CERT mentions something, usually it's actively exploited. It wasn't always like this but now the service isn't nearly as helpful to administrators.
Speaking as the owner of an ISP that was hit by Hurricane Katrina, I can comment on this... while everyone else in the family was looking for a place to live, my customers demanded their web sites be back online ASAP, so it took me 24-48 hours to get everything back online even though our network never went down - the military took over the building and messed with the generator transfer switch and screwed things up.
I slept on floors and in peoples cars while I got the network back online. Only then did I concern myself with stuff like food and where I was going to live. I wish it didn't go down like that, but it did.
Reason # 45,873,200 why Tivo is the best commercial DVR on the planet.
In a Web-based attack scenario, an attacker would have to host a Web site that contains a Web page that is used to exploit this vulnerability. An attacker could also attempt to compromise a Web site to have it serve up a Web page with malicious content attempting to exploit this vulnerability. An attacker would have no way to force users to visit a Web site. Instead, an attacker would have to persuade them to visit the Web site, typically by getting them to click a link that takes them to the attacker's site or a site compromised by the attacker.
Whew... for a moment there I was scared... apparently you can only be infected if you go to some web site that someone else has. And we all know how difficult it is for professional hackers to be able to set up web pages, and how rare it is for people to click on a link and go to that page.
This explains why Microsoft hasn't patched this issue yet. The mitigating factors are obviously quite obscure.
If guy who touched the computer didn't get fired, then it's a true crime. He should have to pay the $200k too.
He wants to spend a console's CPU making games more intelligent, and he has found the Wii doesn't have the power to process things like complicated AI.
With all due respect, this is bullshit. Don't blame the hardware if you aren't a good enough programmer to make it work. This is the problem with today's developers. They expect computers to get faster and faster and need more and more memory because they're too lazy or not resourceful or creative enough to write efficient code.
One of the reasons why most games suck nowadays and are so boring is because of this very issue. Developers rely too much on hardware, faster graphics and better texture mapping in lieu of actual creative game design. Stop blaming the hardware because you have no creativity and can't program your way out of a paper bag!