He wasn't forced into the military, he willfully joined up. So he knows the rules (he learned OPSEC on day one) and broke them anyway, which makes him a traitor. His actions endangered the lives of soldiers around the world and undermined their effort (regardless if you agree with it or not). It's an insult to anyone who has worn the uniform. But of course all you armchair warriors will disagree because you know nothing about what it's like to serve a single day let alone in combat, well except for maybe Call of Duty. Let me be clear, a soldiers life isn't a political pawn!
There are several people making this valid point here, but they're all posting AC. Why is that?
Does anyone else just feel worn out by all political BS in the U.S these days? I mean, it seems like Congress is nothing more than a group of professional trolls at this point. They never, ever seem capable of doing anything useful, or beneficial for the citizens of this country anymore. It's exhausting.
I believe the founders made it this way on purpose. Those who designed this country knew well of the dangers of concentrated (i.e. "effective") power. They instead designed a completely unique government, with lots of checks and balances, that grinds along very slowly and is largely ineffective. You might see it as being a group of "professional trolls," but I see it as a brilliantly designed buffer against tyranny. Leave the real heavy lifting to the states or municipalities, who can actually respond directly to the needs of the people.
So I say: let the trolls troll. Sometimes there's a good political theater to be had. It's when the feds actually become capable of "doing anything useful" (such as nationalizing 11% of the US economy in one bill) that I start to get nervous.
As the saying goes, America has the worst system of government out there... except for all the others.
Shouldn't searches be illegal without a warrant? I thought that we are innocent until proven guilty. Is there a specific law that allows searches without a warrant?
It goes like this:
You are arrested for loitering. The police have the right to search your person to make sure you have no weapons and are safe to put in the police car and turn their backs on you.
During the search, they find a mobile device, which could contain weapons or otherwise cause trouble with the arrest, so they take that.
A recent ruling in California has now stated that they police can rifle through all the data in your mobile device without warrant, because it constitutes items in "plain sight" (at least I think that's how the ruling went). Similar to if you invite the police into your apartment and they see a bloody knife, they can use that evidence against you in court even though they never got a search warrant.
This hasn't been tested by the supreme court, and I'm almost certain if there is an unlock password on the phone you are under no obligation to give it up unless ordered to do so by a judge (even then it's a bit iffy).
But I'm not a lawyer. I just watch Law & Order and read slashdot.
Why do they keep putting time and effort into making sequels of shit games, yet they refuse to do the minimal-effort massive-profit thing of re-releasing FF7 with high-def graphics?:-|
That is such an awesome idea I might actually consider buying a game console just so I could play that game.
Re:The "two features" thread starts here ...
on
Xfce 4.8 Released
·
· Score: 1
Love the dockapps! My preferred setup is to run windowmaker inside of gnome just so I can get by 64x64 dockapps, but sometimes that causes too much hassle and I just end up running windowmaker by itself. There's a few ways to switch gnome's window manager, the most reliable is to set the registry key to what you want:
1. run gconf-editor
2. find the key "/desktop/gnome/session/required_components/windowmanager", and change that to/usr/bin/wmaker
3. create the window maker desktop file at/usr/share/xsessions/wmaker.desktop, something like [Desktop Entry] Name=Window maker Comment=This session logs you into Window Maker Exec=/usr/bin/wmaker # no icon yet, only the top three are currently used Icon= Type=Application
I know there's some airheaded nutjobs out there saying that vaccinations are evil because there's an infinitesimal chance of getting sick from them, but to the pro-vaccine crowd I say: doesn't the idea of government mandated vaccines bother you just a little bit? People like Dean Edell basically say that parents should be thrown in jail for not vaccinating their kids. Others think that employers should have the right to mandate the injection of a vaccine as a pre-requisite for work. We can agree that vaccines are a Good Thing, but doesn't the final decision of what vaccines to take or not take lie with the individual or parent themselves?
Fuck censorship. Also, fuck you, lazy parents who probably teach your children far more offensive beliefs...
I assume that's a stab at the conservative right? You do realize that, in general, it's the left that champions censorship like this in order to protect the feelings of the poor and persecuted. It's the democrats (perhaps because they are the party of slavery itself) who would love to re-write the entire era out of history, and pretend that good ol' southern dixicrats have ALWAYS loved the black man.
Of course, there is no silver bullet. It really comes down to you being able to convince them with your charisma and charm (+1 charisma is big bonus). These things rarely show up on the bottom line. If they do, it's 6 months down the road and management will just attribute it to some new rock-star salesman.
Sorry to be a downer, but that's the life of an engineer.
The truth is that Net Neutrality is the government taking over the Internet, while a lack of Net Neutrality is big business taking over the Internet. Sorry little man, but you can't win;
Not quite true. If I don't like the way "big business" is regulating the Internet, I'm free to start my own business to compete with "big business," one which is less expensive and provides more features to customers. This is still possible even in today's heavily regulated free market economy.
On the other hand, I am not free to start a competing government and remain an American citizen. This is the fundamental flaw in most government regulatory arguments: bad companies tend to go away, but bad government regulations tend to stick around for a LONG LONG time.
Chess is an artful mastery of planning, brainpower, and pattern recognition that cannot be matched, but it's NOT warfare, not the way it matters.
O, but it is...
The more you play chess, the more you realize that life in general is chess, and that life does includes warfare. The (grossly understated) realization is this: you must judge your next move in terms of how you're opponent will react to it. A move that makes your position look better means nothing if it is countered with a simple pawn push. Or, more simply said, DON'T MAKE STUPID MOVES. Whereupon, the majority of the game becomes finding the stupid moves and not making them.
This is the (again, grossly simplified) theory of warfare. Don't make stupid, easily countered moves. Don't stand your troops in a line of red coats in a field and expect the other side to "play fair." Don't think your king is strong enough to be attacked on two fronts. Don't attack Russia in the winter. Never go against a Sicilian when death is on the line... and so on.
Stop spreading FUD. Net Neutrality is about preventing corporate control, not granting government control.
Problem is, to prevent corporate control, you must grant the government control over the corporation. And why would we want to prevent corporate control anyway? I get paid by a corporation. I don't want them to be controlled by the government.
And what's worse, we're talking about government control over information. How long until some government executive decides that the real reason for so much negative press is that the ISPs simply MUST be throttling his supporters, and invokes "net neutrality" as justification for political censorship?
No? Oh, right. JA is defined as a judge doing what I don't like, i.e. being liberal.
Actually, "judicial activism" refers to a non-elected judge, who is not accountable to the voters and who sometimes has tenures of a lifetime of employement, making rulings to effectively write new law. In previous societies, these "judges" were known as "kings."
IMHO, the fatal flaw with the bill is that it doesn't (as a first step) try the low-cost solutions to fixing our system:
1. Abolish the anti-trust exemptions for health insurers. Yes. You heard me. I bet you didn't even know that so-called "progressives" are so ready, willing and able to ignore one of the key ideas of the original Progressive Era, circa 1900.
2. Price transparency. In most states you can't even check to see if you're being ripped off because price lists are secret!
3. Eliminate provider networks. All insurers must pay the same rates from all providers, and must accept claims from any licensed practitioner.
4. Uniform, standard billing codes.
Right on, for all points. It should by now be very clear to everyone that "controlling costs" was NEVER EVER the purpose of healthcare reform. The purpose was to increase the size and control of government, period. Costs will continue to go up, perhaps even faster than before, until the only entity that can afford to offer health insurance is the GOVERNMENT ITSELF.
He is being charged with cyberstalking, wire fraud, mail fraud, and making interstate threats, and faces up to 50 years in prison if convicted on all counts.
FIFTY YEARS? Holy crap. I am so glad I got out of SEO. Shady, shady business is that industry.
you believe "slashdot" has the ability to "reward"? what would make you think that or care if you weren't a marketeer attempting to sway public opinion?
Not true. AltaVista is now the only remaining engine to publish link data, after MS pulled the plug on backlink results from yahoo as one of the steps toward the site's dissolution in favor of Bing. Who knows how long it will last, but it's there now.
I ditched this Chinese bank back in 1999, while I was still in college. I don't know why anyone gives them a dime of hard-earned cash. They already own the majority of American debt, why give them your paycheck also?
Most definitely felt in Schenectady NY (Clifton Park, actually), about 300 miles south-east of the epicenter. Felt like the entire building was a ship on the ocean for a good 10 seconds.
I'm not really seeing the market for this. So I want a device that plays internet radio, but don't want to just get an iPod dock, use a laptop/netbook and uses Wi-Fi so it isn't like your getting always available portable internet. If you have a home theater system, why wouldn't you just have a HTPC and just use VLC and connect to the internet radio that way, if you don't have a home theater system, why not just use an iPod or laptop?
I reject this argument for three very important reasons:
1) people have been predicting the death of radio ever since the invention of the TV, yet somehow, its still here. With the invention of the internet, people still predict the death of live media and live broadcast. They remain wrong. Internet radio will adapt to become as simple as the transistor radio is today.
2) I can play my internet radio station on an iPhone anywhere that 3G service is available. However, I would not purchase a $100 radio and a $50/month contract just to listen to internet radio. If the cost was $20, and the contract non-existant (in some download-only data plan, for example), then everyone could get one for the car and internet radio would explode.
3) live broadcast will never die. I've gotten into several arguments with people who think that since I can just "listen to a podcast," then live broadcast media is effectively dead. This is obviously false, since people seem to tend to want to be part of the crowd, and therefore will want to be listening to the same thing at the same time; that is, live broadcast, or "radio."
I believe internet radio will become ubiquitous. Internet video and TV will only happen/after/ internet radio becomes normal.
www.browserchoice.eu is an alias for prod.bswh.glbdns.microsoft.com
WTF? I thought the EU decision only required that the user is able to install windows w/o installing IE automatically. I did not know that MS is now legally required to provide free advertising to their competitors. I'm not a microsoft fan, but I didn't realize it had gone this far...
Editors, I love ya, but if anyone on earth really did discover "how to teleport" anything, I'm pretty sure I'd be seeing it scroll by on the CNN news ticker right now. It wouldn't be the first time/. has scooped the media complex, but so far its been 2 hours since the story was posted, and I don't see any breaking news on Channel 6. Seriously, enough with the sensationalist headlines. Call me when you have my flying car or jet pack ready.
It is fully within Apple's right to send the cease-and-desist letters to Valleywag. Its basically telling them "if you continue this, we will sue you for damages, and we will win." I see no action taken by the attorney general on anyone's behalf, since almost all speech -- even speech prohibited by another party by contract -- is protected by the US constitution. However, the constitution does not protect you from the consequences of that speech, including being sued for large sums of money.
What if Valleywag received word that Apple was using lead and arsenic in their new tablet product. How could it be illegal for them to publish this information?
Sounds to me that he's searching for things to have a problem with, and fully admits it. At the very end of the article, he responds to his own point 7, where he complains about the grammatical heresy of the Android programming concept of "Intents":
Quite honestly, if my complaint about how the word 'Intent' makes for awkward grammatical constructions ranks in the top 10, I'd say the Android platform is doing pretty well for itself.
If "good debugging" and "poor grammar" are two of the top ten worst points about the platform, then I'd consider it quite a positive article.
Slashdot Mirror
He wasn't forced into the military, he willfully joined up. So he knows the rules (he learned OPSEC on day one) and broke them anyway, which makes him a traitor. His actions endangered the lives of soldiers around the world and undermined their effort (regardless if you agree with it or not). It's an insult to anyone who has worn the uniform. But of course all you armchair warriors will disagree because you know nothing about what it's like to serve a single day let alone in combat, well except for maybe Call of Duty. Let me be clear, a soldiers life isn't a political pawn!
There are several people making this valid point here, but they're all posting AC. Why is that?
Does anyone else just feel worn out by all political BS in the U.S these days? I mean, it seems like Congress is nothing more than a group of professional trolls at this point. They never, ever seem capable of doing anything useful, or beneficial for the citizens of this country anymore. It's exhausting.
I believe the founders made it this way on purpose. Those who designed this country knew well of the dangers of concentrated (i.e. "effective") power. They instead designed a completely unique government, with lots of checks and balances, that grinds along very slowly and is largely ineffective. You might see it as being a group of "professional trolls," but I see it as a brilliantly designed buffer against tyranny. Leave the real heavy lifting to the states or municipalities, who can actually respond directly to the needs of the people.
So I say: let the trolls troll. Sometimes there's a good political theater to be had. It's when the feds actually become capable of "doing anything useful" (such as nationalizing 11% of the US economy in one bill) that I start to get nervous.
As the saying goes, America has the worst system of government out there... except for all the others.
Shouldn't searches be illegal without a warrant? I thought that we are innocent until proven guilty. Is there a specific law that allows searches without a warrant?
It goes like this:
This hasn't been tested by the supreme court, and I'm almost certain if there is an unlock password on the phone you are under no obligation to give it up unless ordered to do so by a judge (even then it's a bit iffy).
But I'm not a lawyer. I just watch Law & Order and read slashdot.
Why do they keep putting time and effort into making sequels of shit games, yet they refuse to do the minimal-effort massive-profit thing of re-releasing FF7 with high-def graphics? :-|
That is such an awesome idea I might actually consider buying a game console just so I could play that game.
Love the dockapps! My preferred setup is to run windowmaker inside of gnome just so I can get by 64x64 dockapps, but sometimes that causes too much hassle and I just end up running windowmaker by itself. There's a few ways to switch gnome's window manager, the most reliable is to set the registry key to what you want:
1. run gconf-editor /usr/bin/wmaker /usr/share/xsessions/wmaker.desktop, something like
2. find the key "/desktop/gnome/session/required_components/windowmanager", and change that to
3. create the window maker desktop file at
[Desktop Entry]
Name=Window maker
Comment=This session logs you into Window Maker
Exec=/usr/bin/wmaker
# no icon yet, only the top three are currently used
Icon=
Type=Application
I know there's some airheaded nutjobs out there saying that vaccinations are evil because there's an infinitesimal chance of getting sick from them, but to the pro-vaccine crowd I say: doesn't the idea of government mandated vaccines bother you just a little bit? People like Dean Edell basically say that parents should be thrown in jail for not vaccinating their kids. Others think that employers should have the right to mandate the injection of a vaccine as a pre-requisite for work. We can agree that vaccines are a Good Thing, but doesn't the final decision of what vaccines to take or not take lie with the individual or parent themselves?
Fuck censorship. Also, fuck you, lazy parents who probably teach your children far more offensive beliefs...
I assume that's a stab at the conservative right? You do realize that, in general, it's the left that champions censorship like this in order to protect the feelings of the poor and persecuted. It's the democrats (perhaps because they are the party of slavery itself) who would love to re-write the entire era out of history, and pretend that good ol' southern dixicrats have ALWAYS loved the black man.
What a load of crap.
I asked the same question on stack overflow and got some good responses:
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/432512/how-to-convince-management-that-qa-is-important
Of course, there is no silver bullet. It really comes down to you being able to convince them with your charisma and charm (+1 charisma is big bonus). These things rarely show up on the bottom line. If they do, it's 6 months down the road and management will just attribute it to some new rock-star salesman.
Sorry to be a downer, but that's the life of an engineer.
The truth is that Net Neutrality is the government taking over the Internet, while a lack of Net Neutrality is big business taking over the Internet. Sorry little man, but you can't win;
Not quite true. If I don't like the way "big business" is regulating the Internet, I'm free to start my own business to compete with "big business," one which is less expensive and provides more features to customers. This is still possible even in today's heavily regulated free market economy.
On the other hand, I am not free to start a competing government and remain an American citizen. This is the fundamental flaw in most government regulatory arguments: bad companies tend to go away, but bad government regulations tend to stick around for a LONG LONG time.
Chess is an artful mastery of planning, brainpower, and pattern recognition that cannot be matched, but it's NOT warfare, not the way it matters.
O, but it is...
The more you play chess, the more you realize that life in general is chess, and that life does includes warfare. The (grossly understated) realization is this: you must judge your next move in terms of how you're opponent will react to it. A move that makes your position look better means nothing if it is countered with a simple pawn push. Or, more simply said, DON'T MAKE STUPID MOVES. Whereupon, the majority of the game becomes finding the stupid moves and not making them.
This is the (again, grossly simplified) theory of warfare. Don't make stupid, easily countered moves. Don't stand your troops in a line of red coats in a field and expect the other side to "play fair." Don't think your king is strong enough to be attacked on two fronts. Don't attack Russia in the winter. Never go against a Sicilian when death is on the line... and so on.
Stop spreading FUD. Net Neutrality is about preventing corporate control, not granting government control.
Problem is, to prevent corporate control, you must grant the government control over the corporation. And why would we want to prevent corporate control anyway? I get paid by a corporation. I don't want them to be controlled by the government.
And what's worse, we're talking about government control over information. How long until some government executive decides that the real reason for so much negative press is that the ISPs simply MUST be throttling his supporters, and invokes "net neutrality" as justification for political censorship?
No? Oh, right. JA is defined as a judge doing what I don't like, i.e. being liberal.
Actually, "judicial activism" refers to a non-elected judge, who is not accountable to the voters and who sometimes has tenures of a lifetime of employement, making rulings to effectively write new law. In previous societies, these "judges" were known as "kings."
IMHO, the fatal flaw with the bill is that it doesn't (as a first step) try the low-cost solutions to fixing our system:
Right on, for all points. It should by now be very clear to everyone that "controlling costs" was NEVER EVER the purpose of healthcare reform. The purpose was to increase the size and control of government, period. Costs will continue to go up, perhaps even faster than before, until the only entity that can afford to offer health insurance is the GOVERNMENT ITSELF.
And that is the end of America.
He is being charged with cyberstalking, wire fraud, mail fraud, and making interstate threats, and faces up to 50 years in prison if convicted on all counts.
FIFTY YEARS? Holy crap. I am so glad I got out of SEO. Shady, shady business is that industry.
you believe "slashdot" has the ability to "reward"? what would make you think that or care if you weren't a marketeer attempting to sway public opinion?
MOD PARENT UP
There's more info on the spread of this exploit from Paul Mutton at Netcraft
Well, then it must be true if Netcraft confirms it.
I remember Altavista. Horrible results.
Not true. AltaVista is now the only remaining engine to publish link data, after MS pulled the plug on backlink results from yahoo as one of the steps toward the site's dissolution in favor of Bing. Who knows how long it will last, but it's there now.
Observe the backlinks to a recent slashdot story.
I ditched this Chinese bank back in 1999, while I was still in college. I don't know why anyone gives them a dime of hard-earned cash. They already own the majority of American debt, why give them your paycheck also?
Most definitely felt in Schenectady NY (Clifton Park, actually), about 300 miles south-east of the epicenter. Felt like the entire building was a ship on the ocean for a good 10 seconds.
I'm not really seeing the market for this. So I want a device that plays internet radio, but don't want to just get an iPod dock, use a laptop/netbook and uses Wi-Fi so it isn't like your getting always available portable internet. If you have a home theater system, why wouldn't you just have a HTPC and just use VLC and connect to the internet radio that way, if you don't have a home theater system, why not just use an iPod or laptop?
I reject this argument for three very important reasons:
1) people have been predicting the death of radio ever since the invention of the TV, yet somehow, its still here. With the invention of the internet, people still predict the death of live media and live broadcast. They remain wrong. Internet radio will adapt to become as simple as the transistor radio is today.
2) I can play my internet radio station on an iPhone anywhere that 3G service is available. However, I would not purchase a $100 radio and a $50/month contract just to listen to internet radio. If the cost was $20, and the contract non-existant (in some download-only data plan, for example), then everyone could get one for the car and internet radio would explode.
3) live broadcast will never die. I've gotten into several arguments with people who think that since I can just "listen to a podcast," then live broadcast media is effectively dead. This is obviously false, since people seem to tend to want to be part of the crowd, and therefore will want to be listening to the same thing at the same time; that is, live broadcast, or "radio."
I believe internet radio will become ubiquitous. Internet video and TV will only happen /after/ internet radio becomes normal.
-dave
we have a new vector, victor!
www.browserchoice.eu is an alias for prod.bswh.glbdns.microsoft.com
WTF? I thought the EU decision only required that the user is able to install windows w/o installing IE automatically. I did not know that MS is now legally required to provide free advertising to their competitors. I'm not a microsoft fan, but I didn't realize it had gone this far...
Editors, I love ya, but if anyone on earth really did discover "how to teleport" anything, I'm pretty sure I'd be seeing it scroll by on the CNN news ticker right now. It wouldn't be the first time /. has scooped the media complex, but so far its been 2 hours since the story was posted, and I don't see any breaking news on Channel 6. Seriously, enough with the sensationalist headlines. Call me when you have my flying car or jet pack ready.
It is fully within Apple's right to send the cease-and-desist letters to Valleywag. Its basically telling them "if you continue this, we will sue you for damages, and we will win." I see no action taken by the attorney general on anyone's behalf, since almost all speech -- even speech prohibited by another party by contract -- is protected by the US constitution. However, the constitution does not protect you from the consequences of that speech, including being sued for large sums of money.
What if Valleywag received word that Apple was using lead and arsenic in their new tablet product. How could it be illegal for them to publish this information?
Sounds to me that he's searching for things to have a problem with, and fully admits it. At the very end of the article, he responds to
his own point 7, where he complains about the grammatical heresy of the Android programming concept of "Intents":
Quite honestly, if my complaint about how the word 'Intent' makes for awkward grammatical constructions ranks in the top 10, I'd say the Android platform is doing pretty well for itself.
If "good debugging" and "poor grammar" are two of the top ten worst points about the platform, then I'd consider it quite a positive article.