I think it's a juvenile attitude. "I willfully don't profit off my stuff so nobody else should either."
Juvenile? Isn't it the commercial entities who don't want to pay for development the ones with the juvenile attitude? "You gave these people your software for free, so why can't I have it for free?" What is stopping these commercial interests from approaching the authors and buying non-GPL licenses for the code?
Re:Shouldn't Apple put something like this out?
on
MythTV 0.17 Released
·
· Score: 1
And if you don't live in the US, like 95% of the world's population? Zap2it isn't much use then.
Are you claiming that you didn't need to do any driver or other configuration to get a nice MythTV setup going? No X configuration?
What I'm getting to is this is why I think cats are stupid. There are solitary animals that are smarter, such as organs and octopuses.
That doesn't make cats stupid. You're using faulty logic.
Both of those creatues have enough 1. social intelligence to recognize individual people, conceal evidence from them, hide escape attempts and cladestine feeding, and 2. object manipulation intelligence, for maze solving, lock picking, cage escaping, etc. Cats are good at neither of these.
You're simply wrong about both these points. You clearly haven't spent a lot of time around cats or you'd know that they do display the social intelligence your talking about in point 1, and while they don't have the manual dexterity of either octopi or orangutans, they do display as good object manipulation intelligence as say dogs. An example of the later is how quickly cats pick up the use of cat doors, and the different way different cats will use them - our cat will push at the flat with her forehead, yet a friend's cat uses a paw to test the door.
I don't think bringing sanitary habits into the discussion is going to help your position at all. Dogs may go outside (if trained properly), but so will cats when properly trained. I've lived with probably a dozen different cats and very few of them ever went inside and I can only think of one who did it more than once. At least cats don't eat their own shit, and they know how to bury it.
As far as your claim that they are not socially aware, I don't agree. Cats are generally solo hunters (with the exception of lions), so they don't form packs like dogs do, but they are certain aware of groups and hierarchies. If you live with several cats you'll notice that usually only one of them defends the territory against outsiders. My wife and I currently own a cat who obviously recognises that me, my wife, and the cat form a group. She displays affection to both of us, but in very different ways, and she doesn't show affection to anyone else. My sister-in-law lived with us for a year, and yet our cat never formed a bond with her to anywhere near the extent she has with us. As far as cats go, I think our current one is pretty stupid. But she still displays intelligence.
That's because bacon tastes gooood. Pork chops taste gooood.
Re:Shouldn't Apple put something like this out?
on
MythTV 0.17 Released
·
· Score: 1
sudo apt-get install mythtv;
sudo apt-get upgrade;...not THAT hard...
Great, you've got an uptodate MythTV install that doesn't work because nothing's configured. You haven't setup the drivers for your capture card. You haven't configured your graphics card to output overscan NTSC or PAL signals. You haven't configured your channels or guide data source. You haven't got any IR stuff working. You haven't made sure your audio capture source and volumes are correctly set. You haven't setup X to automatically log into a MythTV session. There's a massive difference between installing the MythTV software and having a usable PVR setup. For you to claim it's that easy only confirms that you've never done it.
Re:Shouldn't Apple put something like this out?
on
MythTV 0.17 Released
·
· Score: 1
Have you tried KnoppMyth?
Yep. Couldn't get it to install properly (can't remember why, sorry). Also tried to use it as a frontend and it locked up on boot: some sort of driver issue - maybe the USB keyboard I was using. I now have a working Gentoo based setup, but it was a lot of work to get it going.
There are too many separate components required to get MythTV to work for KnoppMyth to do everything automatically. I mean you need to setup kernel drivers for your capture card, video drivers (including configuring overscan), audio has to be correctly configured (volume settings and capture source etc), lirc has to be configured for whatever hardware you have, guide downloads (which are easy in the US, but not in many other countries), and there are a lot of software dependencies if you use many of the Myth modules (MythVideo, MythMusic, MythGame etc). I think KnoppMyth works ok if you've got a pretty standard setup (i.e. Hauppage card), and not so well for anything else.
Yeah, I've seen that. It doesn't actually freeze - it'll finish eventually (unless you run out of page space), at least with Win 2000. It's annoying, but how often do you want to open images that size in a browser anyway?
Yeah, Skylab was fine, but that was back in the 70's. After the Space Shuttle, NASA went down the tubes. Where was our space station after Skylab? We didn't have one, until the ISS, which was many years later.
So if the Russian space program was so good, why did they them so many attempts to get a usable station? Let's look at them:
Salyut-1 (Zarya), launched April 19, 1971. The first crew docked but was not able to enter the station. Deorbited in October.
DOS-2, July 29, 1972. Did not reach the orbit due to the Proton launcher failure.
Salyut-2, April 3, 1973. Depressurized after being hit by debris from the exploded Proton upper stage. Deorbited a month later.
Cosmos-557, May 11, 1973. A control system failure caused the drainage of the onboard fuel. Deorbited the same month.
Salyut-3, June 25, 1974. They final got a crew to a station, for a visit lasting 15 days. A second mission to attempt to crew station had to be aborted due to docking problems. The Soyuz-15 vehicle passed the station at a relative speed of 72 kilometers per hour and only 40 meters away. Two more narrow misses occured before the mission was aborted.
Salyut-4, Dec. 26, 1974. Visited by two crews, and was in orbit for just over two years. Finally some success.
Salyut-5, June 22, 1976. Three attempts where made to rendezvous . The first mission succeeded, but required manual docking. The crew had to return early due to contaminated air in the station (probably a fuel leak). The second mission also couldn't dock automatically, but used up too much fuel for a manual attempt. The third mission was successful, but the allotment of Soyuz vehicle for this station was exhausted so no further mission were possible.
Salyut-6, Sept. 29, 1977. The first crew was not able to dock with the station. Again. Up for 5 years, this was the most successful station for the Russians until Mir. 16 crews visited.
Salyut-7, April 19 , 1982. Lasted nine years, with 9 visits.
Mir, Feb. 20, 1986 - 2001. Hugely successful, and yet the number of problems and near misses is extremely disturbing and would not have been accepted by NASA. Note that rendezvous problems continued to plague the missions throughout Mir's life.
How many Skylab attempts were there? One. Why? Because NASA got it right the first time. Now admittedly it wasn't up there for long, and they had problems with that launch, too, and the whole thing was a bit of a hack (it was a converted Saturn 1B booster), but still.
Yes, the Russians have been financially supported by the US, but why is that? If American engineering is so great, why don't we just do it ourselves? Because we're too bloated and inefficient.
Well the ISS is an international effort. Modules have been, and are being, produced by several countries, not because of any greater efficiency in doing it that way, but because of a desire for the space station to be a global effort. That is why the US bailed out the Russian space program when the country could no longer afford to run it, despite how super efficient it is (note sarcasm).
The Russians are saving our butts right now, because otherwise the crew of the ISS would have died from lack of supplies, thanks to our complete inability (or unwillingness) to put anything in orbit since Discovery blew up. They just use their simple, cheap Soyuz. Why don't we have a simple, cheap vehicle like that?
Because it's not useful in itself. The Russians are not capable of putting a space station up, so what exactly would they use Soyuz for, if the US had not provided the lifting capability necessary for the station? It's a matter of using the best tool for the job. Since Soyuz is available, NASA doesn't need a similar vehicle. But that is not to say they are not capable of producing one.
As for ISS modules, I'm not too sure about this, but wasn't Mir at least
Which country still has a functional and successful space program? Russia. They can lauch people and payloads into orbit for a fraction of what it costs us with our bloated Space Shuttles, and they've been doing so for years. They also have a successful track record with space stations, first with Mir, and now with the ISS which wouldn't even be functioning or in use if the Russians hadn't saved our butts several times.
I wish people would stop holding up Russia as having this great space program. You're taking a very one sided view. For example, you state that the ISS wouldn't exist without "if the Russians hadn't saved our butts several times", yet evidentally forget that the Russians cannot put objects the size of the ISS modules into orbit, and have been financially supported by the US to do as much as they have. Without your "bloated Space Shuttles" there would be no ISS. You mention Mir, and the Russian's "successful track record with space stations", yet seem to have forgotten Skylab. Russia did and do acheive a lot, yes. They have also failed often, more often than the US, both at achieving their goals, and in terms of catastrophically failed missions. They also benefited from American pioneering work more often than the US did from theirs. Buran is a classic case in point.
So in other words: they don't know who the fuck the girl is.
Knowing hwat she looks like does not tell them who she is, you silly fucking idiot.
From the site:
Members of the Toronto Police Service Child Exploitation Section and Toronto Crime Stoppers are trying to find the place where a nine-year-old girl was sexually abused two or three years ago.
If they don't know who she is, how do they know she was nine? They know who she is. They don't know who the offender was. It's all quite obvious to everyone but you. So tell me again, who's the idiot?
Thus absolutely, positively ensuring no one is going to be able to rescue her from her abuse because no one knows who the hell she is.
What the fuck are you on about? Or should that just be wtf are you on? The police know who she is. They took her out of the picture. They are trying to identify the LOCATION not the GIRL. Jesus.
So far as "pointing you to them" fuck off with your troll. You want'em, you find'em. I haven't seen them in quite a while, but then I don't look for them. The group where I saw them is one of the most popular groups among the pix groups, so it's a safe bet Millions of people have seen them. If you monitor a few youth groups I'm sure you'll reach some "satisfaction" in no time.
So in other words you have absolutely nothing to back up your assertion that these pictures are "all over the net".
What possible differnece does that make een on the slim chance you're right?
If it's not the same set of pictures you believe are so ubiquitous, then not revealing the girl obviously avoids the possibility of the victim being identified. Fucking duh.
Fact: her pictures are all over the net. It's insane to say "we can't show her picture because it might cause her harm" when her fucking pciture has ALREADY been posted all over the net.
Her pictures are not all over the net. You claim to have seen them, but I don't see anyone else doing so. Why don't you point us to them, if they're so easy to find.
If someone tricks me into giving them my ATM card, how is it the bank's fault? It's essentially the same thing.
It's not (the same thing, or the banks fault). If you give someone else your card you are implicitly giving them authorization to access your accounts, whether you understand the consequences or not. But when someone steals your card (or, as in this case, steals your online banking credentials), you have not given them authorization (implicit or explicit). That is the difference. If you give someone your card, or your online password, the bank can legitimately say that the recipient is authorized to access the account, and that you gave that authorization. In the case of a stolen card, they don't have that ability. Instead they have moved money from your account without authorization. That's why you are generally not liable for money taken out of your account with a stolen card, unless you fail to report it.
So what happens if I use an old analog-style wireless phone for my banking and someone with a portable radio overhears my conversation and intercepts my account information? Is the bank still responsible for the breach of security?
The bank is not responsible, but they should accept the loss because the bank did not verify that the order to move money came from an authorized source. The bank must have a valid order to move money from an account and they don't have that in either the case the story is covering or your hypothetical situation. That is why many banks (at least outside the US) use stronger security than just a password and secure session. One of my banks uses captchas, for example. Others have mentioned one time pads and smartcards.
Also, the man regularly initiated international wire transfers, hence no fraud alert triggered.
Unfortunate for the bank. He still shouldn't be liable. Except in the case of conspiracy theory 5: that he owns the account at the other end and has faked the whole virus thing.
Nobody's going to want to stay in the hotel room where these indiscretions took place. Who would want to sleep on a bed where a 9 year old girl was raped?
And which room was it? Most rooms in a hotel are essentially identical. How would you tell that you were in the room in those pictures?
Maybe the picture with the fountain you've seen is not the one the police have? It is apparently at Disney World, after all. Might not be the same girl.
Actually I think child porn laws are often phrased in terms of the age the (alleged) offender believes the subject is, not the subject's actual age. So if someone downloads what they believe is child porn they are breaking the law, regardless of the true age of the subject. This is different to (e.g.) statutory rape statutes, where the accused's belief that the subject is of legal age is often no defense.
Then you don't want the penalty for rape / molestation to be any higher than twice the penalty for rape / molestation + a murder otherwise the criminal logically should commit the murder once they have decided to commit the sex crime.
Of course rapists don't behave logically, otherwise they wouldn't be offending.
Another aspect of this is that no matter how harsh the penalties are there are still people who will break the law. The death penalty has not eliminated the crimes it has been applied to, and in fact I don't believe it has even significantly reduced the incidence of those crimes. I guess this point can be taken in favour of not increasing the penalty for rape out of proportion to the penalty for murder.
Slashdot Mirror
Are you claiming that you didn't need to do any driver or other configuration to get a nice MythTV setup going? No X configuration?
As far as your claim that they are not socially aware, I don't agree. Cats are generally solo hunters (with the exception of lions), so they don't form packs like dogs do, but they are certain aware of groups and hierarchies. If you live with several cats you'll notice that usually only one of them defends the territory against outsiders. My wife and I currently own a cat who obviously recognises that me, my wife, and the cat form a group. She displays affection to both of us, but in very different ways, and she doesn't show affection to anyone else. My sister-in-law lived with us for a year, and yet our cat never formed a bond with her to anywhere near the extent she has with us. As far as cats go, I think our current one is pretty stupid. But she still displays intelligence.
That's because bacon tastes gooood. Pork chops taste gooood.
There are too many separate components required to get MythTV to work for KnoppMyth to do everything automatically. I mean you need to setup kernel drivers for your capture card, video drivers (including configuring overscan), audio has to be correctly configured (volume settings and capture source etc), lirc has to be configured for whatever hardware you have, guide downloads (which are easy in the US, but not in many other countries), and there are a lot of software dependencies if you use many of the Myth modules (MythVideo, MythMusic, MythGame etc). I think KnoppMyth works ok if you've got a pretty standard setup (i.e. Hauppage card), and not so well for anything else.
Yeah, I've seen that. It doesn't actually freeze - it'll finish eventually (unless you run out of page space), at least with Win 2000. It's annoying, but how often do you want to open images that size in a browser anyway?
Why would Google need to host Wikipedia to do that?
Possible, though I'm not sure why Google would need to host Wikipedia for that.
So if the Russian space program was so good, why did they them so many attempts to get a usable station? Let's look at them:
How many Skylab attempts were there? One. Why? Because NASA got it right the first time. Now admittedly it wasn't up there for long, and they had problems with that launch, too, and the whole thing was a bit of a hack (it was a converted Saturn 1B booster), but still.
Well the ISS is an international effort. Modules have been, and are being, produced by several countries, not because of any greater efficiency in doing it that way, but because of a desire for the space station to be a global effort. That is why the US bailed out the Russian space program when the country could no longer afford to run it, despite how super efficient it is (note sarcasm).
Because it's not useful in itself. The Russians are not capable of putting a space station up, so what exactly would they use Soyuz for, if the US had not provided the lifting capability necessary for the station? It's a matter of using the best tool for the job. Since Soyuz is available, NASA doesn't need a similar vehicle. But that is not to say they are not capable of producing one.
Maybe the picture with the fountain you've seen is not the one the police have? It is apparently at Disney World, after all. Might not be the same girl.
Actually I think child porn laws are often phrased in terms of the age the (alleged) offender believes the subject is, not the subject's actual age. So if someone downloads what they believe is child porn they are breaking the law, regardless of the true age of the subject. This is different to (e.g.) statutory rape statutes, where the accused's belief that the subject is of legal age is often no defense.
Another aspect of this is that no matter how harsh the penalties are there are still people who will break the law. The death penalty has not eliminated the crimes it has been applied to, and in fact I don't believe it has even significantly reduced the incidence of those crimes. I guess this point can be taken in favour of not increasing the penalty for rape out of proportion to the penalty for murder.
Yep, vol 4 I mean. I did the preview and everything.