No one should resort to such means, but I also wouldn't feel sorry for Ivan from Uzbekistan if he ran into some trouble. You make trouble in the "Wild West," you get your knee blown off.
But you wouldn't even have to kill him or necessarily harm him. If he knew you could get to him, I would think that would be enough.
Large banks, trading firms, etc.. in the US, Europe, Japan etc.. will also have strong ties to law enforcement and regulators. Any DDoS attack against any of these organizations would be met with swift action by Interpol. They probably wouldn't have to resort to thuggery.
I do wonder though, if one of these offshore gambling operations hasn't considered taking care of such a problem "privately." How much does an international hit man cost? Hmm.. Sounds like a good techno-thriller plot.
sometimes a spade needs to just be called a spade, and a shit OS needs to be called a shit OS. Yeah, but why would that get you modded up? How many times does that need to be said?
I marked myself as "unwilling to moderate" because I don't want to be part of the groupthink- and the system sucks.
What if you make a great product, but you are a complete idiot and name it something like, say "OGG VORBIS" or you make your product's mascot something totally ridiculous and stupid like, say, a platypus in a devil suit.
Would it be bad if people didn't check out your elegant, superior product because you didn't have a MARKETING CELL IN YOUR BRAIN - because your product name sounds like something Cthulu coughed up?
Would it be bad if your iPod didn't play OGG VORBIS files? Would it be GOOD if one of the marketing imps, devils, or sorcerors helped you find a non-stupid, non-repulsive name for your fantastic product that actually DREW people to it and made people want to check it out? What if they came up with a cool, cheap way to ge the story out to people who might want to hear about it? Oh, sorry - that would be EVIL. Because it's MARKETING.
Marketing and PR are neither good nor evil. Marketing and PR for evil purposes (tobacco firms) are evil. Marketing and PR with high standards for good purposes (GOOD products, GOOD organizations) are GOOD.
The only way you can think marketing is objectively evil is if you think captialism is intrisically evil. If so, we don't even have common ground on which to disagree.
Bigotry, ignorance, and stupid product names are bad.
One thing that consultants are good at is marketing. One thing that OSS developers are ridiculously bad at is marketing. (Witness OGG VORBIS) The presence of athe Ajax meme on Slashdot is the proof in the pudding, so to speak.
OSS developers could make a lossless 90% compression codec - and they'd probably call it OMGWTFBBQ!& (pronounced BANGAMP) Then they'd complain because nobody would adopt their brilliant product.
Geeks don't like to admit it, but marketing is important.
Re:fan boys on parade
on
Longhorn Preview
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
AMEN. You have unused icons on your desktop.
Would you like me to continue to annoy the !@#!##%! out of you?
Why not just do away with DST completely, and by congressional mandate, require all businesses (banks, stores, employers, etc.) shift their hours back one hour?
Under what article would Congress have the authority to regulate when a private business opens or closes?
Nobody seems to give a crap about the Constitution these days, but that statement is beyond the pale.
And don't even get me started on the 10th Amendment!
You or I could come up with a "formal specification" that would have about the same effect as one by the MLA or any other group, including the Académie Française.
Prescriptivists have come up with specifications for years, but human language is a function of human thought. (or the other way around - we're still arguing about that)
Every person speaks his/her own infinitely complex idiolect which cannot be standardized through some specification as if it were a subset of SGML. Multiply the variations of each idiolect (or reduce variations into dialects) then try to come up with a standard that anyone is interested in. Good luck.
It's hard enough writing accurate DESCRIPTIONS of language. Prescription is right out.
And don't even get me started on the idiot school adminstrators who give "foreign language" credit for studying computer "languages."
I am one of those pitiful Mac fanboys and I say GO FOR IT. Use what works for you. For most people OS X is the best choice. I suppose Windows is the best choice for some people - I don't know whom, though.
I don't care what computer people use - I just want everyone to make informed decisions, not based on FUD, and most important, NOT CALL ME FOR WINDOWS SUPPORT.
I'd love to have MythTV features, but I don't have the time for it. If I spent a LONG TIME working on MythTV, I could probably make it work, but I don't want to. Even if I were an expert, it would take hours. (From what I've read) and then I'd have to maintain it.
I plugged in my TiVo and it worked. That's what I have time for. That, and Slashdot.
But I doubt you're smelly. I think you probably just enjoy tinkering more than I do.
Oh, and my wife would kill me the first time she turned on the TV and saw/usr/bin/something/something.
Hey, I have an idea. Let's slam America! All the cool kids are doing it.
I speak Spanish, French, Portuguese and Japanese. Without a doubt, French is the least useful second language I know.
What's the likelihood of someone who doesn't speak your language knowing French but NOT English? Except in some parts of Africa or Haiti - pretty low. And I can't understand Haitian creole anyway.
Now, if you speak French to actual French people, they'll appreciate it, even if they do speak English.
Oh, and there's a reason we're provincial. Have you noticed the ENORMOUS OCEANS off either coast? If we were a tiny country surrounded by countries that speak other languages, we'd be polyglots as well. Our multilingualism is an accident of geography and history - and that's all.
Look at Texas, New Mexico, Arizona, and California. LOTS of gringos there speak Spanish pretty well. Language learning is about opportunity + necessity. Proximity is what brings those two together.
And as international travel becomes cheaper and more common (better proximity), we'll see more multilingual Americans.
OK - since you asked- I'll tell you. But I'm *NOT* going to get into a flame war here. If anyone wants to discuss this reasonably, that's fine. But don't give me any crap - *I* didn't bring up abortion.
I hate to disappoint you, but abortion is always my first consideration.
Given identical views except with GWB pro-choice and JFK (heh) pro-life, I would have voted John Kerry, even though I disagree with him about almost everything else. No doubt.
For people like me who believe life begins at conception, abortion is a holocaust. People seem to think that to pro-lifers it's about prudishness or control of women's bodies. Maybe it's prudishness for some people - I don't know. But for me it's a human rights issue, plain and simple. Everything else is secondary. If you thought that millions of people were being murdered YEAR AFTER YEAR, how could you ignore that? (Yes, I understand that good, principled people believe different things about abortion - but given *my* beliefs about it, how can *I* vote any differently?)
Now as to the argument about Republicans not following through with the pro-life agenda - you're right. But they are A LOT better than the Democrats, who are openly hostile to pro-lifers. The most radical pro-abortion groups (and I use that term deliberately - they PROMOTE abortion, not "choice") like NARAL and Emily's List are 100% behind Democrats.
Most Dems are against even the most reasonable limits on abortion, like the ban on the revolting practice of partial-birth abortion (which is simply infanticide).
We can disagree about the humanity of zygote, or even an embryo, but when we're aborting full-term babies, I don't even think we have common ground for discussion. How can it not be murder? And Democrats are solidly behind this disgusting practice. Clinton vetoed the ban twice. President Bush signed it.
Now, there were a lot of reasons I voted for President Bush, but life was the #1 reason. If Democrats welcomed pro-life candidates or shunned partial-birth abortion, I might be able to vote for them. But they are completely in the pocket of radical pro-abortion (and less radical) pro-choice groups.
OK- I see your point. But I would argue that confiscating people's money is the same as saying they shouldn't be allowed to make money. Same chilling effect on work. Disincentivizing work is exactly why Europe's economy is now in the crapper.
I do find our culture ridiculous and ethically bankrupt, but I also find it beautiful and admirable. Of course I think, as I posted in this thread, that no one should ever be raped, anally or otherwise.
The constellation of values you displayed are typically called "liberal," and there is nothing intrinsically wrong with them. I dismiss them individually because I disagree with them. But to be honest, I didn't think your "judged by history" post merited a spirited fisking.
Anyway - someone who values liberty above all is ostensibly called a "libertarian." Libertarians don't rail against rich people. You are saying, in effect, people should be free to smoke pot, but they should NOT be free to make lots of money. In addition, you complain about prison abuse (rightly so!) but you don't propose a solution. That is a liberal class-warfare-inspired, libertine point of view.
I'd like to be rich and submissive, but I'm neither. I hope we're not judged by the wealth we have as I drive a 1988 Ford Escort. And no, I'm not gay, even though I have EXCELLENT tast. But I don't really understand how that's relevant.
If you would like me to address your original post, I will.
Ok, I'm a conservative Christian - so consider the source. We shouldn't credit gay people (or blame them, depending on your perspective) for Bush's loss.
With respect, since you seem to be open to other viewpoints - The "moral values" poll answer is really a narrative constructed by the press and the exit pollsters. (who are completely unimpeachable!)
If you put together terrorism, Iraq, and national security, they would dwarf "moral values." And most Bush voters DO put these three things together as one issue.
Also, what does "moral values" mean? It means something different to you than to me. To me, gay marriage isn't about "moral values." Neither is gambling - a big issue here in Oklahoma. And I'm a conservative christian fundy right-winger!
If you split out gay marriage, gambling, abortion, etc.. you'd get some different answers in exit polls. Furthermore, if you look at the margin of Bush victory in states with and without gay marriage bans, you'll see no significant difference.
Finally - the proportion of evangelicals who voted this year was no different than 2000. Sure, more of them voted. But more of EVERY group voted.
Finally - really, rape of any kind is never funny. No one deserves it and no one should ever condone it.
Slashdot Mirror
You're absolutely right.
No one should resort to such means, but I also wouldn't feel sorry for Ivan from Uzbekistan if he ran into some trouble. You make trouble in the "Wild West," you get your knee blown off.
But you wouldn't even have to kill him or necessarily harm him. If he knew you could get to him, I would think that would be enough.
Oh, crap! Am I supposed to be using an alias?
Large banks, trading firms, etc.. in the US, Europe, Japan etc.. will also have strong ties to law enforcement and regulators. Any DDoS attack against any of these organizations would be met with swift action by Interpol. They probably wouldn't have to resort to thuggery.
I do wonder though, if one of these offshore gambling operations hasn't considered taking care of such a problem "privately." How much does an international hit man cost? Hmm.. Sounds like a good techno-thriller plot.
Who says you never learn anything on Slashdot?
sometimes a spade needs to just be called a spade, and a shit OS needs to be called a shit OS.
Yeah, but why would that get you modded up? How many times does that need to be said?
I marked myself as "unwilling to moderate" because I don't want to be part of the groupthink- and the system sucks.
Evidently, Bill Hicks is a bigot.
Let's think about a world without marketing.
What if you make a great product, but you are a complete idiot and name it something like, say "OGG VORBIS" or you make your product's mascot something totally ridiculous and stupid like, say, a platypus in a devil suit.
Would it be bad if people didn't check out your elegant, superior product because you didn't have a MARKETING CELL IN YOUR BRAIN - because your product name sounds like something Cthulu coughed up?
Would it be bad if your iPod didn't play OGG VORBIS files? Would it be GOOD if one of the marketing imps, devils, or sorcerors helped you find a non-stupid, non-repulsive name for your fantastic product that actually DREW people to it and made people want to check it out? What if they came up with a cool, cheap way to ge the story out to people who might want to hear about it? Oh, sorry - that would be EVIL. Because it's MARKETING.
Marketing and PR are neither good nor evil. Marketing and PR for evil purposes (tobacco firms) are evil. Marketing and PR with high standards for good purposes (GOOD products, GOOD organizations) are GOOD.
The only way you can think marketing is objectively evil is if you think captialism is intrisically evil. If so, we don't even have common ground on which to disagree.
Bigotry, ignorance, and stupid product names are bad.
That is all.
One thing that consultants are good at is marketing. One thing that OSS developers are ridiculously bad at is marketing. (Witness OGG VORBIS) The presence of athe Ajax meme on Slashdot is the proof in the pudding, so to speak.
OSS developers could make a lossless 90% compression codec - and they'd probably call it OMGWTFBBQ!& (pronounced BANGAMP) Then they'd complain because nobody would adopt their brilliant product.
Geeks don't like to admit it, but marketing is important.
AMEN. You have unused icons on your desktop.
Would you like me to continue to annoy the !@#!##%! out of you?
This is fantastic for US workers, especially telecom workers. The telecom workers' union couldn't ask for better PR.
If they were smart, and completely devoid of ethics and morals, they'd start hiring Indian telecom workers to violate USians' privacy.
Yeah, in effect. But not really by fiat. DST is really a government suggestion - a mass hysteria that that we've all bought into.
If we decided, en masse to ignore it, the government couldn't do anything about it.
Why not just do away with DST completely, and by congressional mandate, require all businesses (banks, stores, employers, etc.) shift their hours back one hour?
Under what article would Congress have the authority to regulate when a private business opens or closes?
Nobody seems to give a crap about the Constitution these days, but that statement is beyond the pale.
And don't even get me started on the 10th Amendment!
You or I could come up with a "formal specification" that would have about the same effect as one by the MLA or any other group, including the Académie Française.
Prescriptivists have come up with specifications for years, but human language is a function of human thought. (or the other way around - we're still arguing about that)
Every person speaks his/her own infinitely complex idiolect which cannot be standardized through some specification as if it were a subset of SGML. Multiply the variations of each idiolect (or reduce variations into dialects) then try to come up with a standard that anyone is interested in. Good luck.
It's hard enough writing accurate DESCRIPTIONS of language. Prescription is right out.
And don't even get me started on the idiot school adminstrators who give "foreign language" credit for studying computer "languages."
P.S. - I also hate the "free iPod" crap
$whois crypticandsnooty.com
No match for "CRYPTICANDSNOOTY.COM"
--
Woo hoo! I have a new URI!
I am one of those pitiful Mac fanboys and I say GO FOR IT. Use what works for you. For most people OS X is the best choice. I suppose Windows is the best choice for some people - I don't know whom, though.
I don't care what computer people use - I just want everyone to make informed decisions, not based on FUD, and most important, NOT CALL ME FOR WINDOWS SUPPORT.
Cowboy Neal
to get to the bottom of how this happened.
e _i n_my_bonn/
http://blogs.oc.edu/ee/index.php?/dlovejoy/a_be
You, my friend = smart. That is an excellent plan.
I'm not so smart, but I have stopped doing Windows support. Too much hassle - too much can go wrong that you can get blamed for.
Disclaimer: IAALM. (Linux Moron)
/usr/bin/something/something.
I'd love to have MythTV features, but I don't have the time for it. If I spent a LONG TIME working on MythTV, I could probably make it work, but I don't want to. Even if I were an expert, it would take hours. (From what I've read) and then I'd have to maintain it.
I plugged in my TiVo and it worked. That's what I have time for. That, and Slashdot.
But I doubt you're smelly. I think you probably just enjoy tinkering more than I do.
Oh, and my wife would kill me the first time she turned on the TV and saw
Apparently it's very difficult to be vague in French.
Pas du tout
Hey, I have an idea. Let's slam America! All the cool kids are doing it.
I speak Spanish, French, Portuguese and Japanese. Without a doubt, French is the least useful second language I know.
What's the likelihood of someone who doesn't speak your language knowing French but NOT English? Except in some parts of Africa or Haiti - pretty low. And I can't understand Haitian creole anyway.
Now, if you speak French to actual French people, they'll appreciate it, even if they do speak English.
Oh, and there's a reason we're provincial. Have you noticed the ENORMOUS OCEANS off either coast? If we were a tiny country surrounded by countries that speak other languages, we'd be polyglots as well. Our multilingualism is an accident of geography and history - and that's all.
Look at Texas, New Mexico, Arizona, and California. LOTS of gringos there speak Spanish pretty well. Language learning is about opportunity + necessity. Proximity is what brings those two together.
And as international travel becomes cheaper and more common (better proximity), we'll see more multilingual Americans.
OK - since you asked- I'll tell you. But I'm *NOT* going to get into a flame war here. If anyone wants to discuss this reasonably, that's fine. But don't give me any crap - *I* didn't bring up abortion.
I hate to disappoint you, but abortion is always my first consideration.
Given identical views except with GWB pro-choice and JFK (heh) pro-life, I would have voted John Kerry, even though I disagree with him about almost everything else. No doubt.
For people like me who believe life begins at conception, abortion is a holocaust. People seem to think that to pro-lifers it's about prudishness or control of women's bodies. Maybe it's prudishness for some people - I don't know. But for me it's a human rights issue, plain and simple. Everything else is secondary. If you thought that millions of people were being murdered YEAR AFTER YEAR, how could you ignore that? (Yes, I understand that good, principled people believe different things about abortion - but given *my* beliefs about it, how can *I* vote any differently?)
Now as to the argument about Republicans not following through with the pro-life agenda - you're right. But they are A LOT better than the Democrats, who are openly hostile to pro-lifers. The most radical pro-abortion groups (and I use that term deliberately - they PROMOTE abortion, not "choice") like NARAL and Emily's List are 100% behind Democrats.
Most Dems are against even the most reasonable limits on abortion, like the ban on the revolting practice of partial-birth abortion (which is simply infanticide).
We can disagree about the humanity of zygote, or even an embryo, but when we're aborting full-term babies, I don't even think we have common ground for discussion. How can it not be murder? And Democrats are solidly behind this disgusting practice. Clinton vetoed the ban twice. President Bush signed it.
Now, there were a lot of reasons I voted for President Bush, but life was the #1 reason. If Democrats welcomed pro-life candidates or shunned partial-birth abortion, I might be able to vote for them. But they are completely in the pocket of radical pro-abortion (and less radical) pro-choice groups.
Now I shall go down in flames.
OK- I see your point. But I would argue that confiscating people's money is the same as saying they shouldn't be allowed to make money. Same chilling effect on work. Disincentivizing work is exactly why Europe's economy is now in the crapper.
I have no cake to mail you. And I don't know you. But Hapy Birthday anyway!
You are right on target. He should complain to the medical office, then to the company that produced the CD.
No one will do anything about it until they get a sufficient number of complaints.
I do find our culture ridiculous and ethically bankrupt, but I also find it beautiful and admirable. Of course I think, as I posted in this thread, that no one should ever be raped, anally or otherwise.
The constellation of values you displayed are typically called "liberal," and there is nothing intrinsically wrong with them. I dismiss them individually because I disagree with them. But to be honest, I didn't think your "judged by history" post merited a spirited fisking.
Anyway - someone who values liberty above all is ostensibly called a "libertarian." Libertarians don't rail against rich people. You are saying, in effect, people should be free to smoke pot, but they should NOT be free to make lots of money. In addition, you complain about prison abuse (rightly so!) but you don't propose a solution. That is a liberal class-warfare-inspired, libertine point of view.
I'd like to be rich and submissive, but I'm neither. I hope we're not judged by the wealth we have as I drive a 1988 Ford Escort. And no, I'm not gay, even though I have EXCELLENT tast. But I don't really understand how that's relevant.
If you would like me to address your original post, I will.
You forgot the Bush=Hitler meme. So you only get a 9/10 on the enraged liberal troll scale.
Ok, I'm a conservative Christian - so consider the source. We shouldn't credit gay people (or blame them, depending on your perspective) for Bush's loss.
With respect, since you seem to be open to other viewpoints - The "moral values" poll answer is really a narrative constructed by the press and the exit pollsters. (who are completely unimpeachable!)
If you put together terrorism, Iraq, and national security, they would dwarf "moral values." And most Bush voters DO put these three things together as one issue.
Also, what does "moral values" mean? It means something different to you than to me. To me, gay marriage isn't about "moral values." Neither is gambling - a big issue here in Oklahoma. And I'm a conservative christian fundy right-winger!
If you split out gay marriage, gambling, abortion, etc.. you'd get some different answers in exit polls. Furthermore, if you look at the margin of Bush victory in states with and without gay marriage bans, you'll see no significant difference.
Finally - the proportion of evangelicals who voted this year was no different than 2000. Sure, more of them voted. But more of EVERY group voted.
Finally - really, rape of any kind is never funny. No one deserves it and no one should ever condone it.