I'm sorry, but configuring a $50 mini router is cheaper than the time it takes to plug in, unplug, plugin, unplug etc ad nausium. Or the stress caused to MOBO's for repeating the process several times a day.
Especially when the Computer and wall socket are under / behind desks.
Now if your time isn't worth anything and you don't care about broken RJ45 connectors..... then by all means go for it.
Or, Indymedia could realize that the post itself is dangerous to society as a whole, and should be looked into by the police.
Of course, this is a slippery slope that they may not want to walk down on, but then they shouldn't complain when their servers are seized. I don't know if they have "searxh warrants" in England (I suppose they do) or not, but when the police want the poster's ID, it is clear that they serious about getting it.
They simply should have said... "Releasing the info under duress". Because the government now has more info than they really wanted, and that doesn't really serve anyone.
Yes, in the same way that having unprotected sex gives people the possibility of getting an SDT including a couple of really nasty REAL Virii like HIV and HPV, both of which can lead to HORRIBLE and painful deaths.
Don't like the potential consequences? Talk to GOD (or Mother earth, FSM or fate of Evolution)
Bad Shit happens. If you think it shouldn't YAY for you. That doesn't change a thing.
"o keep an eye on what our employees - public officials - are doing. "
Okay, Great!
But we are so far beyond this at this point. The last 700 BILLION was spent with little or no oversight. It is TIME to give up even thinking we "the people" are in control. The Bureaucrats are in control now, the republic has stopped functioning.
When the Senate votes to give emergency powers to the new "Chancellor", and he promises to give up those powers when the "crisis" has ended, don't say you didn't see it coming.
And now the left cannot blame Darth Cheney and the Evil Lord Bush. But They will be the ones Cheering their new emperor.
Day 2 was saying "No Lobbyists" followed by appointing at least one "Lobbyist" (an possibly others).
Not only that but Robert Reich's "No white men need apply" (paraphrase) statement a couple of weeks ago... and the various other problems with appointments (eg Tax man not paying taxes)and I'm not all that excited right now.
I think people are going to be incredibly disappointed in BHO results in the end.
Just this morning I heard BHO say roughly the equivalent of "Something has to be done, we're doing something. Therefore it has to be done". He has NO CLUE and is in way over his head at this point. He is just "Guessing" like it is some academic discussion.
But it is too late now, we are stuck with ivory tower policies for the next 4 years. Hopefully it won't be as bad as the last eight!
How about blaming the guy who released him from custody over political dogma?
I'm not sure you realize that the chances of those in Gitmo trying to blow more shit up and kill more people upon release is actually quite high.
And just about no sane country wants them. I suggest we release them in Delaware or Connecticut, where most people are against GITMO. Or perhaps William Ares will take them in! After all they have so much in common!
So, what you're saying is that ignorance of the law is an excuse? So you're saying that playing stupid and dumb is an excuse to do stupid and dumb things?
I'm sorry, but DUMB should hurt.
I'm not trying to protect the kids that are stupid, I'm trying to protect society from the Stupid. They should be charged if they broke the law. If you don't like the law, change it (and good luck with that), don't vote for people who support laws like this (I don't), and if you want to protest stupid laws by breaking them, then go to a school and take off all your clothes right in the middle of the Quad.
No, if it isn't expressly against the law (no prohibition) then there is no violation of the law. What the current law does is define what is and isn't legal in a more systemic way, and clarifies intent.
This also goes towards court rulings, which can and often change over time. Just because a court rules something legal (or illegal) doesn't permanently make it that way. In fact, something may be illegal in one jurisdiction and completely legal in another, based on two separate court rulings on the same law. These typically go to the SCOTUS for review, but not always.
I find it somewhat interesting how much the Antibushbots cannot get passed GWB. Get over it. He's not President any longer. Seriously
The question is, when one of the released guys goes and blows up something big and important, will BHO take full and complete responsibility for it, or will he blame GWB and Gitmo for it.
You see, there is a ready made excuse for anyone being released doing something horrible. The question is, are you WILLING to accept that when it happens, and what the hell are you going to say to the families of those that have died?
Even if we are all "Nicey Nicey" some people will STILL hate us. And they will STILL try to blow shit up because of that hatred. Liberals can never understand this, which is why they are perpetual victims.
No. They weren't thinking at all, that's more of the problem than anything. They weren't thinking that those naked pictures would end up on some public forum for all to see. They weren't thinking about the Job in three years they wouldn't get because of it. They weren't thinking.
Branded as what? Slut, Bimbo? Which branded epithet is worse than the others? How about idiot?
I'm not prude about anything. It isn't about being or not being "prude". Do you wear clothes? If so, is that being "prudish"?
The Horror isn't sharing them with your partner, it is just that those pictures most likely aren't going to stay with just the "partners", and in many cases already, end up being posted for the whole world to see.
The age of minority is only partly the issue. They are called minors because they tend NOT to think things through completely, often ignoring long term issues or ignorance of the law. We have rules for people under 18 for a reason, mostly because society has deemed people under 18 generally irresponsible for their own actions, and this case is just another example of it.
I guess when your daughters are suffering Head and Neck Cancer from HPV infections, you'll claim life isn't fair.
You may call it "Prudish" but I call it Prudent.
Of course, you weren't thinking of head and neck cancer, and neither were they. Again, that is my point, they weren't thinking at all.
The kids can actually OBEY the rules (gasp, horror) and not use cell phones in violation of campus rules!
Typically, kids are warned "put the cell phone away" several times before confiscation. So, the kids gawking at naked pictures of their classmates caused suspicion and probably ignored the repeated reprimands.
You know, sometimes the kids actually deserve to get caught. I know that all these "rules" are a pain, but if you teach contempt for rules (even if you don't like them) you'll end up with people who CAN NOT fathom why there are any rules in the first place, and who don't know which rules to follow, so they end up SHOCKED when the rules are enforced.
Not only that, I'm starting to see a bunch of software written in.Net crap. Why not write it in QT, and have an application that can run on just about every platform out there WITHOUT bowing before Microsoft, who could eat your lunch should you write the "Killer Ap".
Seriously between Wine 1.x and QT, there is no reason to write applications to Windows.
You should have paid the $220 more at the local store. They provided the excellent service and deserve it.
Unless you want everyone to provide the same crappy service for cheap prices.
The sales guy earned it, don't you think????
If you ever wonder why you get crappy service at the big box store, it is because when price is all that matters to the customer, then having better informed (higher cost) sales reps is an expense they can't afford.
1) Price 2) Quality 3) Service
Pick any two. If you want better service, reward it.
"Why should corps be silent on issues that affect them? "
Same reason why you probably don't want church's speaking to those same issues. EXACT same reason.
What if GOOGLE took a stand against gay marriage, because it would increase "costs" associated with benefits? Would you support Google's outspokeness then? Or is free speech only if you agree with what is being said?
This is the problem with political expediency, if it good for the goose, it is good for the gander (keeping with the sex theme).
"Just let any two adults get married (modulo consanguinity or whatever). "
Really? You would allow people to marry their sister (or brother)? Cousin?
And why we're at it, why not allow for Polygamy? Isn't that more acceptable world wide than Gay Marriage?
If you don't want limits, then really stand up for NO LIMITS. Else it becomes a battle of defining marriage, and then it why not say "marriage is between one man, one woman" ??
You see, the issue becomes one of defining it according to political AND religious ideology, and there is no "good" solution that doesn't exclude someone for something. The moment you accept exclusion of one, then the debate DOES revolve around where to draw that line.
"I don't know where religios people get off trying to tell gay people that they don't have the right to share insurance, file taxes together, and visit each other in the hospital; which are about the only rights being legally married entitles you to anyway."
I'm "religious" and I actually agree. I think the state should have NO regard to the marital status of anyone, nor say what is or isn't "marriage". I think everybody should define it the way they want to define it. LDS can go back to Polygamy even. Angelina Jolie can marry her brother even.
There is no reason why the state should be involved in any way shape or form. Period.
And that also means the state can't tell companies to give insurance to "domestic partners" or "gays" or even "Heterosexuals". This would mean each company would define benefits according to its own rules!
Slashdot Mirror
My view is .. "it ain't done till Windows 7 doesn't run"
I think they should tweak it so that Windows 7 boots, but every 30 mins or so it crashes. Call it ... Karma!
I'm sorry, but configuring a $50 mini router is cheaper than the time it takes to plug in, unplug, plugin, unplug etc ad nausium. Or the stress caused to MOBO's for repeating the process several times a day.
Especially when the Computer and wall socket are under / behind desks.
Now if your time isn't worth anything and you don't care about broken RJ45 connectors ..... then by all means go for it.
Does it reach -232 degrees Celsius?????
Or, Indymedia could realize that the post itself is dangerous to society as a whole, and should be looked into by the police.
Of course, this is a slippery slope that they may not want to walk down on, but then they shouldn't complain when their servers are seized. I don't know if they have "searxh warrants" in England (I suppose they do) or not, but when the police want the poster's ID, it is clear that they serious about getting it.
They simply should have said ... "Releasing the info under duress". Because the government now has more info than they really wanted, and that doesn't really serve anyone.
I hope that is a joke.
"was already being used somewhere else on the network."
*Cough* That's what those mini routers are for*Cough*. :-D
Yes, in the same way that having unprotected sex gives people the possibility of getting an SDT including a couple of really nasty REAL Virii like HIV and HPV, both of which can lead to HORRIBLE and painful deaths.
Don't like the potential consequences? Talk to GOD (or Mother earth, FSM or fate of Evolution)
Bad Shit happens. If you think it shouldn't YAY for you. That doesn't change a thing.
"o keep an eye on what our employees - public officials - are doing. "
Okay, Great!
But we are so far beyond this at this point. The last 700 BILLION was spent with little or no oversight. It is TIME to give up even thinking we "the people" are in control. The Bureaucrats are in control now, the republic has stopped functioning.
When the Senate votes to give emergency powers to the new "Chancellor", and he promises to give up those powers when the "crisis" has ended, don't say you didn't see it coming.
And now the left cannot blame Darth Cheney and the Evil Lord Bush. But They will be the ones Cheering their new emperor.
Day 2 was saying "No Lobbyists" followed by appointing at least one "Lobbyist" (an possibly others).
Not only that but Robert Reich's "No white men need apply" (paraphrase) statement a couple of weeks ago ... and the various other problems with appointments (eg Tax man not paying taxes)and I'm not all that excited right now.
I think people are going to be incredibly disappointed in BHO results in the end.
Just this morning I heard BHO say roughly the equivalent of "Something has to be done, we're doing something. Therefore it has to be done". He has NO CLUE and is in way over his head at this point. He is just "Guessing" like it is some academic discussion.
But it is too late now, we are stuck with ivory tower policies for the next 4 years. Hopefully it won't be as bad as the last eight!
How about blaming the guy who released him from custody over political dogma?
I'm not sure you realize that the chances of those in Gitmo trying to blow more shit up and kill more people upon release is actually quite high.
And just about no sane country wants them. I suggest we release them in Delaware or Connecticut, where most people are against GITMO. Or perhaps William Ares will take them in! After all they have so much in common!
I suggest that we house the inmates in the upper north east states where NIMBI runs rampant.
So the loved ones should blame GWB, BHO, or the Terrorist who should have been locked up?
It is fun to see people play the blame game.
Oh, and btw, many of the guys already released ended up dead in Afghanistan, shooting at American Soldiers.
The liberals completely underestimate the culture of death in Islam.
So, what you're saying is that ignorance of the law is an excuse? So you're saying that playing stupid and dumb is an excuse to do stupid and dumb things?
I'm sorry, but DUMB should hurt.
I'm not trying to protect the kids that are stupid, I'm trying to protect society from the Stupid. They should be charged if they broke the law. If you don't like the law, change it (and good luck with that), don't vote for people who support laws like this (I don't), and if you want to protest stupid laws by breaking them, then go to a school and take off all your clothes right in the middle of the Quad.
I tend to ignore people I don't like.
No, if it isn't expressly against the law (no prohibition) then there is no violation of the law. What the current law does is define what is and isn't legal in a more systemic way, and clarifies intent.
This also goes towards court rulings, which can and often change over time. Just because a court rules something legal (or illegal) doesn't permanently make it that way. In fact, something may be illegal in one jurisdiction and completely legal in another, based on two separate court rulings on the same law. These typically go to the SCOTUS for review, but not always.
I find it somewhat interesting how much the Antibushbots cannot get passed GWB. Get over it. He's not President any longer. Seriously
The question is, when one of the released guys goes and blows up something big and important, will BHO take full and complete responsibility for it, or will he blame GWB and Gitmo for it.
You see, there is a ready made excuse for anyone being released doing something horrible. The question is, are you WILLING to accept that when it happens, and what the hell are you going to say to the families of those that have died?
Even if we are all "Nicey Nicey" some people will STILL hate us. And they will STILL try to blow shit up because of that hatred. Liberals can never understand this, which is why they are perpetual victims.
You are an idiot!
-- waiting for someone lower ID to say the same to me
No. They weren't thinking at all, that's more of the problem than anything. They weren't thinking that those naked pictures would end up on some public forum for all to see. They weren't thinking about the Job in three years they wouldn't get because of it. They weren't thinking.
Branded as what? Slut, Bimbo? Which branded epithet is worse than the others? How about idiot?
I'm not prude about anything. It isn't about being or not being "prude". Do you wear clothes? If so, is that being "prudish"?
The Horror isn't sharing them with your partner, it is just that those pictures most likely aren't going to stay with just the "partners", and in many cases already, end up being posted for the whole world to see.
The age of minority is only partly the issue. They are called minors because they tend NOT to think things through completely, often ignoring long term issues or ignorance of the law. We have rules for people under 18 for a reason, mostly because society has deemed people under 18 generally irresponsible for their own actions, and this case is just another example of it.
I guess when your daughters are suffering Head and Neck Cancer from HPV infections, you'll claim life isn't fair.
You may call it "Prudish" but I call it Prudent.
Of course, you weren't thinking of head and neck cancer, and neither were they. Again, that is my point, they weren't thinking at all.
New Tag ... "tasareuseless" :-D Thanks for the suggestion!
"Do you have any fucking idea what just the fact that they've been charged will do to their lives? "
They obviously didn't care enough to NOT take the pictures that could haunt them forever. But you know that's just me.
Let see, they are old enough to know what they are doing, until they get caught and then it is they are too young to know what they are doing.
GOT IT!
OR
The kids can actually OBEY the rules (gasp, horror) and not use cell phones in violation of campus rules!
Typically, kids are warned "put the cell phone away" several times before confiscation. So, the kids gawking at naked pictures of their classmates caused suspicion and probably ignored the repeated reprimands.
You know, sometimes the kids actually deserve to get caught. I know that all these "rules" are a pain, but if you teach contempt for rules (even if you don't like them) you'll end up with people who CAN NOT fathom why there are any rules in the first place, and who don't know which rules to follow, so they end up SHOCKED when the rules are enforced.
Not only that, I'm starting to see a bunch of software written in .Net crap. Why not write it in QT, and have an application that can run on just about every platform out there WITHOUT bowing before Microsoft, who could eat your lunch should you write the "Killer Ap".
Seriously between Wine 1.x and QT, there is no reason to write applications to Windows.
You should have paid the $220 more at the local store. They provided the excellent service and deserve it.
Unless you want everyone to provide the same crappy service for cheap prices.
The sales guy earned it, don't you think????
If you ever wonder why you get crappy service at the big box store, it is because when price is all that matters to the customer, then having better informed (higher cost) sales reps is an expense they can't afford.
1) Price
2) Quality
3) Service
Pick any two. If you want better service, reward it.
"Why should corps be silent on issues that affect them? "
Same reason why you probably don't want church's speaking to those same issues. EXACT same reason.
What if GOOGLE took a stand against gay marriage, because it would increase "costs" associated with benefits? Would you support Google's outspokeness then? Or is free speech only if you agree with what is being said?
This is the problem with political expediency, if it good for the goose, it is good for the gander (keeping with the sex theme).
"Just let any two adults get married (modulo consanguinity or whatever). "
Really? You would allow people to marry their sister (or brother)? Cousin?
And why we're at it, why not allow for Polygamy? Isn't that more acceptable world wide than Gay Marriage?
If you don't want limits, then really stand up for NO LIMITS. Else it becomes a battle of defining marriage, and then it why not say "marriage is between one man, one woman" ??
You see, the issue becomes one of defining it according to political AND religious ideology, and there is no "good" solution that doesn't exclude someone for something. The moment you accept exclusion of one, then the debate DOES revolve around where to draw that line.
"I don't know where religios people get off trying to tell gay people that they don't have the right to share insurance, file taxes together, and visit each other in the hospital; which are about the only rights being legally married entitles you to anyway."
I'm "religious" and I actually agree. I think the state should have NO regard to the marital status of anyone, nor say what is or isn't "marriage". I think everybody should define it the way they want to define it. LDS can go back to Polygamy even. Angelina Jolie can marry her brother even.
There is no reason why the state should be involved in any way shape or form. Period.
And that also means the state can't tell companies to give insurance to "domestic partners" or "gays" or even "Heterosexuals". This would mean each company would define benefits according to its own rules!