That's the same thing as the Chinese government saying they're not censoring your free speech, they're just protecting society from the physical results of your call to overthrow the government.in the same way that the US arrests terrorists.
To which I have only one answer: Is the censored criticism true or not? If the criticism is true, no legal action against it is justified. No matter how much harm truth may cause to some (or even all) people, it still needs to be said because it is the truth.
Technically speaking, when you're punished for defamation, it's not for the act of speech itself. It's for the malicious intent and actual harm you have done when you said something that is demonstrably not true.
Freedom of speech does not mean freedom from the consequences of your speech.
Let me tell you a joke: The director of KGB was interviewed at the peak of Soviet era. When the reporter asked about freedom of speech, the director replied: "Our country has complete freedom of speech. Freedom after speech is a whole different matter though."
I realize many slashdotters think this is a result of the two-party system, and I respect that opinion, but I still think the problem has far more to do with the voters. I think giving them more options will merely give them more ways to vote against their own interests.
Two-party system in itself is not the cause. It makes the problem a lot worse but doesn't cause it on its own because we can see a lot of the same here in Europe. The real cause is rampant corruption. And you can't solve rampant corruption just by voting when votes are treated as carte blanche by politicians. If anything can at least partially solve the problem, it's citizens taking much more active part in decision making.
How could losing the ability to reproduce be beneficial to ones own reproduction among social placental mammals? The obvious thing that comes to mind is that you get slightly longer life (you can't die from giving birth anymore) which you will use (driven by your instincts) to take care of your grandkids so that the faster and stronger members of your tribe (in other words, your adult kids) can go get food.
Traditional compile&run feedback loop is tight enough for most practical applications. That IDE with real-time feedback doesn't give you anything new if you work on something abstract (as opposed to say procedurally generated graphics) and you understand the code very well because seeing the actual problem in the one-size-fits-all printout takes as much effort as actually stepping through the code in your head. So the only effect I can foresee for this thing is encouraging more shotgun debugging among bad programmers and allowing them to stick with it because they'll have even less motivation to learn better practices.
You didn't miss anything because what he shows in the video can be pretty much summed up as "you don't need to understand your own code anymore". And although the guy didn't put it that way, that's how everybody who doesn't know better will understand it. On the other hand those who know better will see this as nothing more than a pretty toy.
You're thinking a little narrow. You've found a problem with this style of programming and therefore dismiss its merits.
Actually, Junta's right on spot. This thing does have some practical application but a very limited one. Outside this narrow scope, it becomes a mere toy. Those with enough experience don't need it and those without experience will fail miserably at trying to use as substitute for experience as have many generations of unexperienced programmers before them. Computer programming often deals with problems too complicated for this thing.
I can see a practical application right off the bat - completely silent cooling for computers and satellites. As I understand, particularly the latter is a huge pain in the ass for engineers.
Most of Europe where ADSL with shitty upload speed is the best available offer begs to differ.
HTTP download and illegal streaming sites go up and down, and it's not a very pleasant experience either -- those who have money will use the simpler legal options.
Yeah, but try explaining to the copyright cartel that they actually have to provide those simpler legal options if we are to use them. Where I live, the legal option is anything but simple while the simple option is not legal (to be more specific, it is legal for leechers but not for seeders).
I did a bit of cloning for a school which had two groups of identical machines. What I did: install a full system on one machine, use Sysprep, reboot to System Rescue CD and create system image using Partimage, then restore the image on other machines. It worked fine within each group but if I tried to restore the image in the other group (one group was about 3 years older than the other so there was completely different hardware), all I got was BSOD right after bootloader. Sysprep documentation says that reference and destination machines must have compatible HAL and the same ACPI interface. That was apparently not the case there. So what's your suggestion?
Exactly. If you're low on cash and somebody keeps taking your budget and giving you junk instead of working machines, switch to bare-metal-only policy for acquiring new machines. Making your own Linux install image is pretty easy and it takes much less post-instal setup than cloned image of Windows (plus there's no trouble with minor differences in hardware which can make cloning Windows installations between different machines impossible). As a bonus, you can then report the superintendent for wasting money on useless Windows licences.
Slashdot Mirror
That's the same thing as the Chinese government saying they're not censoring your free speech, they're just protecting society from the physical results of your call to overthrow the government.in the same way that the US arrests terrorists.
To which I have only one answer: Is the censored criticism true or not? If the criticism is true, no legal action against it is justified. No matter how much harm truth may cause to some (or even all) people, it still needs to be said because it is the truth.
Technically speaking, when you're punished for defamation, it's not for the act of speech itself. It's for the malicious intent and actual harm you have done when you said something that is demonstrably not true.
Freedom of speech does not mean freedom from the consequences of your speech.
Let me tell you a joke: The director of KGB was interviewed at the peak of Soviet era. When the reporter asked about freedom of speech, the director replied: "Our country has complete freedom of speech. Freedom after speech is a whole different matter though."
I realize many slashdotters think this is a result of the two-party system, and I respect that opinion, but I still think the problem has far more to do with the voters. I think giving them more options will merely give them more ways to vote against their own interests.
Two-party system in itself is not the cause. It makes the problem a lot worse but doesn't cause it on its own because we can see a lot of the same here in Europe. The real cause is rampant corruption. And you can't solve rampant corruption just by voting when votes are treated as carte blanche by politicians. If anything can at least partially solve the problem, it's citizens taking much more active part in decision making.
Wearing Guy Fawkes mask on the street all the time suddenly seems like a VERY good idea...
How could losing the ability to reproduce be beneficial to ones own reproduction among social placental mammals? The obvious thing that comes to mind is that you get slightly longer life (you can't die from giving birth anymore) which you will use (driven by your instincts) to take care of your grandkids so that the faster and stronger members of your tribe (in other words, your adult kids) can go get food.
Then you should play Knights of the Old Republic.
And in the end, all of those "counterarguments" come down to the creationist having no fscking clue what evolution actually is and how it works.
Text of Compromise 20 (AMC 20) can be found on page 28 of this document which I found on publications page of JURI under "Votes".
Less than 1% of the desktop market can't justify development for an entire alternate platform?
*cough*Android*cough*
I'm talking about marketers bribing doctors to prescribe specific drugs.
And it's still not education. Actually, in places where medical care is run by the state, we call this corruption.
No and no.
Traditional compile&run feedback loop is tight enough for most practical applications. That IDE with real-time feedback doesn't give you anything new if you work on something abstract (as opposed to say procedurally generated graphics) and you understand the code very well because seeing the actual problem in the one-size-fits-all printout takes as much effort as actually stepping through the code in your head. So the only effect I can foresee for this thing is encouraging more shotgun debugging among bad programmers and allowing them to stick with it because they'll have even less motivation to learn better practices.
You didn't miss anything because what he shows in the video can be pretty much summed up as "you don't need to understand your own code anymore". And although the guy didn't put it that way, that's how everybody who doesn't know better will understand it. On the other hand those who know better will see this as nothing more than a pretty toy.
You're thinking a little narrow. You've found a problem with this style of programming and therefore dismiss its merits.
Actually, Junta's right on spot. This thing does have some practical application but a very limited one. Outside this narrow scope, it becomes a mere toy. Those with enough experience don't need it and those without experience will fail miserably at trying to use as substitute for experience as have many generations of unexperienced programmers before them. Computer programming often deals with problems too complicated for this thing.
And the correct answer is... wait for it... AC didn't RTFA!
Yes, as long as you shine the excess light somewhere outside. Though the question is how big the cooling panel with "enough of these" will be.
I can see a practical application right off the bat - completely silent cooling for computers and satellites. As I understand, particularly the latter is a huge pain in the ass for engineers.
Encryption is always an option. You can interact with people just fine, just ask them to use proper measures and teach them how if necessary.
The only difference between a state and a private enterprise is the number of shareholders and their direct power to influence things.
most network tech is symmetric,
Most of Europe where ADSL with shitty upload speed is the best available offer begs to differ.
HTTP download and illegal streaming sites go up and down, and it's not a very pleasant experience either -- those who have money will use the simpler legal options.
Yeah, but try explaining to the copyright cartel that they actually have to provide those simpler legal options if we are to use them. Where I live, the legal option is anything but simple while the simple option is not legal (to be more specific, it is legal for leechers but not for seeders).
Except that sticking fingers into your ears while speaking will render that gun useless.
I did a bit of cloning for a school which had two groups of identical machines. What I did: install a full system on one machine, use Sysprep, reboot to System Rescue CD and create system image using Partimage, then restore the image on other machines. It worked fine within each group but if I tried to restore the image in the other group (one group was about 3 years older than the other so there was completely different hardware), all I got was BSOD right after bootloader. Sysprep documentation says that reference and destination machines must have compatible HAL and the same ACPI interface. That was apparently not the case there. So what's your suggestion?
Exactly. If you're low on cash and somebody keeps taking your budget and giving you junk instead of working machines, switch to bare-metal-only policy for acquiring new machines. Making your own Linux install image is pretty easy and it takes much less post-instal setup than cloned image of Windows (plus there's no trouble with minor differences in hardware which can make cloning Windows installations between different machines impossible). As a bonus, you can then report the superintendent for wasting money on useless Windows licences.