That's a big improvement over 24,000. Is the lethality reduced as well? We can think about managing something that becomes largely harmless in under 1000 years, but I'm against establishing a permanent sacrifice zone for waste. One thing about land: we're not getting (significantly) more of it.
But if the components are unmanagable for their 200 years, that presents another problem.
Why was reprocessing in the U.S. banned? Knee-jerking? Was the process scarier than what I gather is current technique, the French Process?
Is there a safe way to store any amount of this stuff? Sounds like you have reduced an insoluble problem without changing that insoluble characteristic.
Can you keep reprocessing until there is nothing? Doesn't sound like that's what you meant.
It's political suicide for most politicians to be on the record as anti-environment, but the current crop is. Newt Gingrich used to give lessons on showing up for the cameras with a shovel on Arbor Day so you could greenwash your career before going back to gut the Clean Air Act.
Exxon is anti-environment. They apparently hired all the laid off biostitutes from the Tobacco Institute. The TI was responsible for scientific studies that found nicotine was more wholesome than Vitamin C.
W is anti-environment. He has made a career out of serving the convenience of polluters. As governor of Texas, he passed a "Pollute All You Want" law which provided for voluntary emissions reductions at power plants. Oddly enough, nobody volunteered and Houston took over as the US #1 most polluted city. I am awaiting the Voluntary Terrorism Reduction plan.
Orson is a bit of a dumbass - there are many who don't consider rape a problem. It was, maybe is, legal for a man to rape his wife in many states. It is often not a priority for police and prosecutors. Anybody who blames the victim.
Never took soc. Wasted my time in econ - the flip side of the pseudo-science coin. Astrology for the raised-in-a-wicker-basket set.
*Lots* of things are value-neutral, neither moral nor immoral.
When you are in a hole, you should stop digging. Unless you want the hole deeper, I guess. I recommend learning to say, "You're right. What I meant to say was..."
1) Profit isn't an ethical obligation. 2) even if it were, it's not the primary one. You say both. If it is primary, then it's more important than others. If you have some other definition, please state what it is. If it is more important than others, then businesses are correct in pursuing it to the detriment of other ethical obligations where such obligations conflict. This is a ludicrous proposition and you shouldn't have made it or repeated it.
As for #1, that's the same as saying that self-interest == ethics, while in fact they are frequently in conflict. Is this seriously in dispute here? "made money" == "did the right thing" ? To know if this is true you have to know whether they made the money ethically. Were they dishonest? Did they steal?
Sure, profit is the goal of a business. But it has no moral or ethical weight. That's like a toddler saying she has an ethical duty to pursue cookies. Of course she wants cookies. That might be her primary drive. But the pursuit of those cookies is, or should be, subject to the constraints of ethics and/or morality. She is not more moral or ethical for obtaining the cookies. She would be, if she took turns and shared.
Ethics are expensive. That's why you get credit for having them. That's what makes ethical people admirable. If doing the right thing were always easy, it wouldn't be worth discussing.
Nothing difficult, you are just wrong. It's not a word game. Profit is not an ethical goal. It's value-neutral. If it were in the set of ethical considerations, your use of the term "primary" elevates it above other considerations. That's ethically bankrupt.
This sounds really...sound. Pretty reasonable, too. I can't see anybody supporting all releases forever, but I like the predictability of not revising the life downward. Everybody should do that, and I see some claims that others do. Good for the others.
Other especially interesting bits: the free support forum. I willingly grant that nobody can support freeloaders extensively, but providing a website where the freeloaders can support each other is pretty cool. Bandwidth & server maintenance aren't cheap.
The shareholders are the employers. No employer can ethically oblige you to be unethical, just as a soldier is not obligated to obey an unlawful order. Nor can a coach ethically require a team member to cheat in sports. Profit does not trump other ethical requirements.
Sure, the officer of a public company has an obligation to do right by the shareholders, but only to the extent that other obligations aren't shredded.
Bunkered a colleague's cube
on
Cube House
·
· Score: 1
I had some sandbags (actually, gunny-sacks) and put them on top of a framework over the top of the cube. Then some others cut some branches for the camouflage. Looked pretty cool, but I can't find the picture.
I thought Bush was a complete nitwit - and he was. "Fuzzy math! Fuzzy math! (My coaches prep'd me endlessly for this one! Oh! Oh! Call on me, teacher!)"
And the thing is, the equation was equivalent to 1-1 != 2. How was that fuzzy? If you divert Social Security receipts to private investment accounts, where do the current payments for existing retirees come from?
Either an idiot, or a liar.
But that's not how the debate was evaluated. So the spin - "Bush didn't soil himself" ==> "Bush held his own in debate with the guy we all know is smarter and more capable" helped him. So yeah, I guess in that sense he won. He was still an inferior candidate and remains an inadeqate human being.
I actually wrote a fan letter to the Mighty Bruce and got a response.
Bubba played in Seattle longer than TIII. Of course, TIII sold more tickets while it was out, but still...
I have no use for self-satisfied camp. This movie was a goof, and almost by definition anything with an Elvis theme is camp. But the folks who made it gave it their best. They didn't mail it in, they didn't fail to care because it was just camp. There's no "just" to it at all. They put into it all they had, and I honor them for it. It was as magnificent as a tawdry low budget movie can be. I will be getting the DVD as well.
My boss looked at the lack of productivity and concluded there was a lack of aptitude. That hurt. It was a lack of dilligence that got me fired, not sk33lz! But he wasn't clueful enough to know. I have since made sure that, in addition to hitting/. I get some serious mojo done.
Doesn't apply to this guy's situation. His situation sucks. I agree that the willingness not to share the results from the get-go indicates a setup. But why the raise 2 months prior?
Have you been to Southern California? Ever hiked in the hills? The chaparral is a biome of tinder. When the rains come in the wet winters, it produces growth that then dries out all spring and summer, leading to a tinderbox. Some of the plants have flammable sap and some species require fire for seeds to germinate. There is also a characteristic weather pattern of hot, high winds (the Santa Ana's) which fan flames, if there are any.
There is also no commercial logging in Southern California. So who is going to thin the brush?
It is also stupid to suggest that logging could remove significant quantities of this tinder. It is probably stupid to suggest this as a means of fire prevention ANYWHERE, and I think Slade knew that. Are we really going to selectively thin in every stand of every forest in the U.S.? Not feasible. And Slade knows it. He was just using wildfires to give his contributers a loophole so they could rape public lands without hinderance. Once it was passed, Slade admitted, with glee, that he'd pulled a fast one. The law means what it means. There are no proven immortal species of trees, especially when they are exposed to pests, illness, and vandalism.
Skeletor was evil. His salvage timber rider, tagged onto an unrelated bill, was unmitigated evil. It permitted, without the usual reviews, the removal of trees "dying or in danger of dying" to reduce the risk of forest fires (or the risk of reduced campaign contributions). If you take a chainsaw to a tree, it's "in danger of dying" which is exactly how he meant it, but he also intended that it would be misunderstood and therefor passed.
I sic'd the state attorney general on them when they had a premium service with few-click signup for a free trial. To unsubscribe, there was a web page. That did nothing. After I entered my unsubscribe info, the page digested it and then gave me a phone number to call.
Completely bogus barrier to cancel. The AG contacted them, and they replied that it's an accepted practice by such paragons of virtue as AOL.
He's hostile to intellect
on
Global Dimming
·
· Score: 1
He's a fundy - doubts evolution, has no patience for doubt, no use for curiosity. He thinks he knows all he needs to. He doesn't want to hear from anyone but those who will reinforce his preconceptions. "I get all my news from unbiased sources: my staff."
This twit was born a member of the ruling class and has inherited all the pointy-haired bossiness. Total failure in business, despite massive advantages. Most of us can't raise capital on the strength of our dad's political connections. He got rich as a tax-fattened tick. Emminent domain was used as a tool to bludgeon property from private citizens to benefit other private citizens in building a new stadium for the Texas Rangers. Additional property was stolen in this manner for development AROUND the stadium.
The only money he ever made has a real stench to it.
Neither a lie nor deceitful
on
Global Dimming
·
· Score: 1
He claimed, truthfully, that he was into the possibilities of the net way before his fellow congress critters, and supported it. He didn't claim to have invented it.
But the real question is what, if anything, did Gore actually do to create the modern Internet? According to Vincent Cerf, a senior vice president with MCI Worldcom who's been called the Father of the Internet, "The Internet would not be where it is in the United States without the strong support given to it and related research areas by the Vice President in his current role and in his earlier role as Senator."
The inventor of the Mosaic Browser, Marc Andreesen, credits Gore with making his work possible. He received a federal grant through Gore's High Performance Computing Act. The University of Pennsylvania's Dave Ferber says that without Gore the Internet "would not be where it is today."
From http://www.lostcommunity.org/bbs/thread-view.asp?t hreadid=297&start=1
'But the real question is what, if anything, did Gore actually do to create the modern Internet? According to Vincent Cerf, a senior vice president with MCI Worldcom who's been called the Father of the Internet, "The Internet would not be where it is in the United States without the strong support given to it and related research areas by the Vice President in his current role and in his earlier role as Senator."
The inventor of the Mosaic Browser, Marc Andreesen, credits Gore with making his work possible. He received a federal grant through Gore's High Performance Computing Act. The University of Pennsylvania's Dave Ferber says that without Gore the Internet "would not be where it is today."Joseph E. Traub, a computer science professor at Columbia University, claims that Gore "was perhaps the first political leader to grasp the importance of networking the country. Could we perhaps see an end to cheap shots from politicians and pundits about inventing the Internet?" '
It's a security conference. SANS does a lot of cool things and in the course I took, the instructor was way l337. Very smart, very cool, good presenter. This was stuff I could have picked up on my own but just hadn't gotten around to it. It was an efficient brain-dump. There was a vendor expo I didn't spend any time at, but I could have.
Pretty vast gulf between that and the typical MCSE track, read-from-the-mandatory-course-book thing I'm used to.
If all of the major worms have appeared AFTER patch releases, then I'd be willing to grant that reverse-engineering is probably involved in those cases. It strikes me as unlikely that the exploits would always follow the patch unless there was a relationship. But the vulnerability announcement itself may be clue enough. I don't know what the historical record is, but I would be surprised if all of the email worms/viri stemmed from a patch. Or even a vulnerability announcement where no patch was available to provide specific clues to the exploit.
And like you said, there's an advantage to keeping quite about something exploitable. Since we know that independent researchers are coming up with vulnerabilities and POC code, there's no reason that black hats can't do the same thing (and keep it secret). I'm afraid we're stuck with a full disclosure model so that if we choose to be dilligent we have a chance.
MS has claimed that worms come from reverse-engineering vulnerability patches, but I'm not convinced. If an outside researcher found the problem, what makes you think a Black Hat didn't (and has been keeping quiet)?
I have moments of intense frustration, but I'm learning. And the things that are cool in Free OS's outweigh the things that suck (dependency hell). There just aren't any things that strike me as cool in the Windows world.
I don't want a teletubby desktop. I don't want arbitrary restrictions driving my costs. I don't want to keep track of licenses. The SPA tried to extort some money from us and the ensuing audit took many, many hours that could have been spent doing cool shit with our network. Figure that in the TCO. Figure end of life forcing an otherwise unecessary upgrade. RH pulling support for 9.0 is a bit of a problem, but I have learned to compile from source! I can even build an rpm. So I don't need Redhat to support my now-legacy servers. I can nurse them along until the pain of that outweighs the pain of switching. My call. Staying on NT 4.0? Not if you connect it to anything. Uh uhhh. Not your call.
It is cool to use stuff made as a labor of love, an act of generosity, or simple itch-scratching. We can go so much farther with the source!
Slashdot Mirror
That's a big improvement over 24,000. Is the lethality reduced as well? We can think about managing something that becomes largely harmless in under 1000 years, but I'm against establishing a permanent sacrifice zone for waste. One thing about land: we're not getting (significantly) more of it.
But if the components are unmanagable for their 200 years, that presents another problem.
Why was reprocessing in the U.S. banned? Knee-jerking? Was the process scarier than what I gather is current technique, the French Process?
"If we snuffed just a dozen cats, we'd save more birds than are killed by turbines."
I'll get started.
Is there a safe way to store any amount of this stuff? Sounds like you have reduced an insoluble problem without changing that insoluble characteristic.
Can you keep reprocessing until there is nothing? Doesn't sound like that's what you meant.
It's political suicide for most politicians to be on the record as anti-environment, but the current crop is. Newt Gingrich used to give lessons on showing up for the cameras with a shovel on Arbor Day so you could greenwash your career before going back to gut the Clean Air Act.
Exxon is anti-environment. They apparently hired all the laid off biostitutes from the Tobacco Institute. The TI was responsible for scientific studies that found nicotine was more wholesome than Vitamin C.
W is anti-environment. He has made a career out of serving the convenience of polluters. As governor of Texas, he passed a "Pollute All You Want" law which provided for voluntary emissions reductions at power plants. Oddly enough, nobody volunteered and Houston took over as the US #1 most polluted city. I am awaiting the Voluntary Terrorism Reduction plan.
Orson is a bit of a dumbass - there are many who don't consider rape a problem. It was, maybe is, legal for a man to rape his wife in many states. It is often not a priority for police and prosecutors. Anybody who blames the victim.
It doesn't reflect the waves.
I used aluminum siding for mine. But I cut it with tinsnips.
Never took soc. Wasted my time in econ - the flip side of the pseudo-science coin. Astrology for the raised-in-a-wicker-basket set.
*Lots* of things are value-neutral, neither moral nor immoral.
When you are in a hole, you should stop digging. Unless you want the hole deeper, I guess. I recommend learning to say, "You're right. What I meant to say was..."
1) Profit isn't an ethical obligation. 2) even if it were, it's not the primary one. You say both. If it is primary, then it's more important than others. If you have some other definition, please state what it is. If it is more important than others, then businesses are correct in pursuing it to the detriment of other ethical obligations where such obligations conflict. This is a ludicrous proposition and you shouldn't have made it or repeated it.
As for #1, that's the same as saying that self-interest == ethics, while in fact they are frequently in conflict. Is this seriously in dispute here? "made money" == "did the right thing" ? To know if this is true you have to know whether they made the money ethically. Were they dishonest? Did they steal?
Sure, profit is the goal of a business. But it has no moral or ethical weight. That's like a toddler saying she has an ethical duty to pursue cookies. Of course she wants cookies. That might be her primary drive. But the pursuit of those cookies is, or should be, subject to the constraints of ethics and/or morality. She is not more moral or ethical for obtaining the cookies. She would be, if she took turns and shared.
Ethics are expensive. That's why you get credit for having them. That's what makes ethical people admirable. If doing the right thing were always easy, it wouldn't be worth discussing.
Nothing difficult, you are just wrong. It's not a word game. Profit is not an ethical goal. It's value-neutral. If it were in the set of ethical considerations, your use of the term "primary" elevates it above other considerations. That's ethically bankrupt.
"The primary ethical obligation of a business is to turn a profit."
If that's not what you meant, fine.
This sounds really...sound. Pretty reasonable, too. I can't see anybody supporting all releases forever, but I like the predictability of not revising the life downward. Everybody should do that, and I see some claims that others do. Good for the others.
Other especially interesting bits: the free support forum. I willingly grant that nobody can support freeloaders extensively, but providing a website where the freeloaders can support each other is pretty cool. Bandwidth & server maintenance aren't cheap.
Even for a publically owned company.
It's the goal pursued within ethical constraints.
The shareholders are the employers. No employer can ethically oblige you to be unethical, just as a soldier is not obligated to obey an unlawful order. Nor can a coach ethically require a team member to cheat in sports. Profit does not trump other ethical requirements.
Sure, the officer of a public company has an obligation to do right by the shareholders, but only to the extent that other obligations aren't shredded.
I had some sandbags (actually, gunny-sacks) and put them on top of a framework over the top of the cube. Then some others cut some branches for the camouflage. Looked pretty cool, but I can't find the picture.
I thought Bush was a complete nitwit - and he was.
"Fuzzy math! Fuzzy math! (My coaches prep'd me endlessly for this one! Oh! Oh! Call on me, teacher!)"
And the thing is, the equation was equivalent to 1-1 != 2. How was that fuzzy? If you divert Social Security receipts to private investment accounts, where do the current payments for existing retirees come from?
Either an idiot, or a liar.
But that's not how the debate was evaluated. So the spin - "Bush didn't soil himself" ==> "Bush held his own in debate with the guy we all know is smarter and more capable" helped him. So yeah, I guess in that sense he won. He was still an inferior candidate and remains an inadeqate human being.
I actually wrote a fan letter to the Mighty Bruce and got a response.
Bubba played in Seattle longer than TIII. Of course, TIII sold more tickets while it was out, but still...
I have no use for self-satisfied camp. This movie was a goof, and almost by definition anything with an Elvis theme is camp. But the folks who made it gave it their best. They didn't mail it in, they didn't fail to care because it was just camp. There's no "just" to it at all. They put into it all they had, and I honor them for it. It was as magnificent as a tawdry low budget movie can be. I will be getting the DVD as well.
My boss looked at the lack of productivity and concluded there was a lack of aptitude. That hurt. It was a lack of dilligence that got me fired, not sk33lz! But he wasn't clueful enough to know. I have since made sure that, in addition to hitting /. I get some serious mojo done.
Doesn't apply to this guy's situation. His situation sucks. I agree that the willingness not to share the results from the get-go indicates a setup. But why the raise 2 months prior?
maybe an ice age. Or a flood.
Have you been to Southern California? Ever hiked in the hills? The chaparral is a biome of tinder. When the rains come in the wet winters, it produces growth that then dries out all spring and summer, leading to a tinderbox. Some of the plants have flammable sap and some species require fire for seeds to germinate. There is also a characteristic weather pattern of hot, high winds (the Santa Ana's) which fan flames, if there are any.
There is also no commercial logging in Southern California. So who is going to thin the brush?
It is also stupid to suggest that logging could remove significant quantities of this tinder. It is probably stupid to suggest this as a means of fire prevention ANYWHERE, and I think Slade knew that. Are we really going to selectively thin in every stand of every forest in the U.S.? Not feasible. And Slade knows it. He was just using wildfires to give his contributers a loophole so they could rape public lands without hinderance. Once it was passed, Slade admitted, with glee, that he'd pulled a fast one. The law means what it means. There are no proven immortal species of trees, especially when they are exposed to pests, illness, and vandalism.
Skeletor was evil. His salvage timber rider, tagged onto an unrelated bill, was unmitigated evil. It permitted, without the usual reviews, the removal of trees "dying or in danger of dying" to reduce the risk of forest fires (or the risk of reduced campaign contributions). If you take a chainsaw to a tree, it's "in danger of dying" which is exactly how he meant it, but he also intended that it would be misunderstood and therefor passed.
Rot in hell, Slade!
Pun inadvertent, but what the heck
I sic'd the state attorney general on them when they had a premium service with few-click signup for a free trial. To unsubscribe, there was a web page. That did nothing. After I entered my unsubscribe info, the page digested it and then gave me a phone number to call.
Completely bogus barrier to cancel. The AG contacted them, and they replied that it's an accepted practice by such paragons of virtue as AOL.
He's a fundy - doubts evolution, has no patience for doubt, no use for curiosity. He thinks he knows all he needs to. He doesn't want to hear from anyone but those who will reinforce his preconceptions. "I get all my news from unbiased sources: my staff."
This twit was born a member of the ruling class and has inherited all the pointy-haired bossiness. Total failure in business, despite massive advantages. Most of us can't raise capital on the strength of our dad's political connections. He got rich as a tax-fattened tick. Emminent domain was used as a tool to bludgeon property from private citizens to benefit other private citizens in building a new stadium for the Texas Rangers. Additional property was stolen in this manner for development AROUND the stadium.
The only money he ever made has a real stench to it.
He claimed, truthfully, that he was into the possibilities of the net way before his fellow congress critters, and supported it. He didn't claim to have invented it.
t hreadid=297&start=1
But the real question is what, if anything, did Gore actually do to create the modern Internet? According to Vincent Cerf, a senior vice president with MCI Worldcom who's been called the Father of the Internet, "The Internet would not be where it is in the United States without the strong support given to it and related research areas by the Vice President in his current role and in his earlier role as Senator."
The inventor of the Mosaic Browser, Marc Andreesen, credits Gore with making his work possible. He received a federal grant through Gore's High Performance Computing Act. The University of Pennsylvania's Dave Ferber says that without Gore the Internet "would not be where it is today."
From http://www.lostcommunity.org/bbs/thread-view.asp?
'But the real question is what, if anything, did Gore actually do to create the modern Internet? According to Vincent Cerf, a senior vice president with MCI Worldcom who's been called the Father of the Internet, "The Internet would not be where it is in the United States without the strong support given to it and related research areas by the Vice President in his current role and in his earlier role as Senator."
The inventor of the Mosaic Browser, Marc Andreesen, credits Gore with making his work possible. He received a federal grant through Gore's High Performance Computing Act. The University of Pennsylvania's Dave Ferber says that without Gore the Internet "would not be where it is today."Joseph E. Traub, a computer science professor at Columbia University, claims that Gore "was perhaps the first political leader to grasp the importance of networking the country. Could we perhaps see an end to cheap shots from politicians and pundits about inventing the Internet?" '
It's a security conference. SANS does a lot of cool things and in the course I took, the instructor was way l337. Very smart, very cool, good presenter. This was stuff I could have picked up on my own but just hadn't gotten around to it. It was an efficient brain-dump. There was a vendor expo I didn't spend any time at, but I could have.
Pretty vast gulf between that and the typical MCSE track, read-from-the-mandatory-course-book thing I'm used to.
I'd have no use for a pure vendor expo, though.
deebodahooo deebordahee bork! bork! bork!
If all of the major worms have appeared AFTER patch releases, then I'd be willing to grant that reverse-engineering is probably involved in those cases. It strikes me as unlikely that the exploits would always follow the patch unless there was a relationship. But the vulnerability announcement itself may be clue enough. I don't know what the historical record is, but I would be surprised if all of the email worms/viri stemmed from a patch. Or even a vulnerability announcement where no patch was available to provide specific clues to the exploit.
And like you said, there's an advantage to keeping quite about something exploitable. Since we know that independent researchers are coming up with vulnerabilities and POC code, there's no reason that black hats can't do the same thing (and keep it secret). I'm afraid we're stuck with a full disclosure model so that if we choose to be dilligent we have a chance.
ftp.sco.com has an adjacent ip, probably on the same switch, and it is perfectly responsive. It's not a bandwidth clogging attack.
MS has claimed that worms come from reverse-engineering vulnerability patches, but I'm not convinced. If an outside researcher found the problem, what makes you think a Black Hat didn't (and has been keeping quiet)?
I have moments of intense frustration, but I'm learning. And the things that are cool in Free OS's outweigh the things that suck (dependency hell). There just aren't any things that strike me as cool in the Windows world.
I don't want a teletubby desktop. I don't want arbitrary restrictions driving my costs. I don't want to keep track of licenses. The SPA tried to extort some money from us and the ensuing audit took many, many hours that could have been spent doing cool shit with our network. Figure that in the TCO. Figure end of life forcing an otherwise unecessary upgrade. RH pulling support for 9.0 is a bit of a problem, but I have learned to compile from source! I can even build an rpm. So I don't need Redhat to support my now-legacy servers. I can nurse them along until the pain of that outweighs the pain of switching. My call. Staying on NT 4.0? Not if you connect it to anything. Uh uhhh. Not your call.
It is cool to use stuff made as a labor of love, an act of generosity, or simple itch-scratching. We can go so much farther with the source!