But hardware/driver issues aside, I don't believe Windows can be more stable than linux.
Other than a hardware/driver issue? How would you begin to prove a statement like this? Just the two kernels running? Which one will fail first? Ok, without any drivers, how are you even going to know...
The real problems with an OS installation IS the drivers. As you state, a bad driver can raise havoc with your system integrity. How do you know that your sluggishness problemns aren't caused by your installed apps and/or drivers?
I really don't give a shit. I'm not a suicide bomber, I don't give a shit about my stuff being searched. Better that than a bomb get on a train and kill a load of people. There's no argument to that. You've lost.
The fact that you don't care is part of the problem. To be a mature, complete member of society, you really need to care about things like this. Otherwise your lot will always be to be that scared little guy, jealous of others' ability to buy iPods, $5 brews and $8 stale sandwiches. No matter how (in the case of the $8 stale sandwiches) misguided they be. Of course, you don't care about unreasonable searches. You spend all your time hating those, as you put it, "Sandal-wearing, turtle-neck jumpered, left-wing, limp-wristed graphic designers who pay half a day's wages for a cup of sugary coffee from a trendy cafe."
As Gertrude said, "The lady doth protest too much, methinks."
London isn't America. I thought you knew that. I was writing of my experiences in NY. Slashdot, being an American based web page elicits commentary on issues affecting, mostly, American readers. I alluded to this in my original comment to you. Here's my quote:
I understand that this event happended in the UK but we now have random searches in NYC subways as well.
I had a clue you were british since you misspelled a couple of words and used wacky vernacular like coppers, not often used in the US.
Anyway, you're final comment reveals your true problem. You're a scared, small, ignorant, bigoted person. That explains so much. You're probably so frustrated with your lack of control over your own life and miserable occupation that you think this mindlessness should extend to everyone.
In what circumstances do you feel that uttering the idea, "But then I don't look like a paki so I've nothing to worry about." is appropriate? Look at the subject of this last thread. Read the last word. Liberty. Look up the meaning in a dictionary if you have to. Please try to understand the meaning. It might be hard but you need to grow a little in order to join the rest of us.
See... You kind of prove my point. You are so afraid and scared that you can't even think straight anymore. I can feel the froth coming out of your mouth from the chair, here in my bedroom.
Again, let's analyze your... argument.
Fucking hell, there are terrorists trying to blow people up, and you're worried about the coppers looking at the tampons in your handbag. Get some priorities!
Yes, there ARE terrorists trying to blow people up. You are correct. I'll stipulate to that. Am I worried about the coppers looking for tampons in my handbag? Well, I guess the reference to tampons in my handbag is a not too veiled knock on my masculinity. You've never seen me and you only know me from this conversation so I'll let the ad hominem attack go uncommented. Like I said, you're a scared little guy or girl. 'nuff said about that.
However, I AM worried by coppers looking in MY bag as well as others' bags. I'm not convinced that it is productive and even if it was, it would worry me because it is blatant disregard for the foundations of our government.
If someone's carrying contraband, or they're an illegal immigrant (like that Brazilian suicider), then they have no right to complain about being searched.
Now that's just silly. Of course they do. Have they given up all their rights by committing a violation of the law? Again, I refer to the founders of our government. When they wrote the Constitution and Bill of Rights, they and subsequent lawmakers have defined exactly under what situations our civil rights can be removed. I'm pretty sure that walking into a train station a few years after the country's been attacked isn't one of those cases. It's as if the government wants to make insure that we grow used small intrusions like these.
This country is fucking insane!!!!
Again, I disagree with you. I think a number of people in positions of power in our various forms of government are afraid. Just like you. Unfortunately, they have more power than to just spew nonsense on Slashdot. I really want to attribute their actions as just well-meaning mistakes due to their inability to create an effective plan to address the situation. I really believe in the long run these mistakes will be recognized by smarter, calmer people as just wrong-headedness and eventually reversed.
Hey... Make sure you look under your bed before you go to bed tonight. Could be a bogeyman underneath...
I think someone would be a coward if they were so willing to hand over control of their daily life to the "authorities" in the vain hopes that somehow they would be protected from all danger.
I understand that this event happended in the UK but we now have random searches in NYC subways as well. Last Tuesday I saw a phalanx of police officers inside the turnstiles in Manhattan (5th Ave downtown E train, I believe). The rules are supposed to be that you get warning of impending searches. In this caser, since the police search only after you've paid your fare, people are more likely to accept the search than lose the fare -- The warning is effectively muted. They didn't seem to be searching a lot of people. I only saw them search one group of high school aged students who were being rowdy.
But the whole idea is un-american! I'm supposed to be free of searches in the absence of a warrant or reasonable suspicion of doing wrong. Entering a subway is not reasonable suspicion.
It's NOT OK for me to accept this in the vein of, "it's done to protect us". The people that started our government had a deep mis-trust of governement. This is because government has the power to strip away peoples rights. I personally think it's a bad idea to raise a generation of citizens that are comfortable with letting some of their rights slowly be eroded away. As citizens, we should vehemently protest intrusions such as these.
Ok, so now maybe you understand better where my beliefs lie. Let me address each of your statements one at a time.
I think that being a coward would be someone who is scared of being searched...
Your example isn't necessarily the hallmark of a coward. People could have many reasons for being afraid of searches. They may be carrying contraband. They may not be citizens. They may not like the police. They may not like the skin color of the person performing the search. They may not care to be touched by the gender of the person performing the search. I may not like some of these reasons for fearing a search but I don't think that makes any of them cowards.
...someone who wants terrorists to be able to bomb up whoever they want because they can't be searched.
Ok, so I guess you're implication is that I'm a coward because I want terrorists to be able to bomb up whoever they want, because they can't be searched. Well, I never said I wanted terrorists to be able to bomb up whoever they want. In fact, quite the opposite. Thankfully I didn't know anyone who was killed four years ago. People in the town that I live in had family members killed. My wife was working in a hospital in Manhattan that night. She was asked to work a number of hours of overtime to help with the trauma cases that never came. I had friends that worked downtown that had to walk home to Brooklyn because all the trains were shut down. I worried about them, being unable to contact them that afternoon. So while I wasn't touched by the tragedy personally, I feel some of its effects.
But I recognize an underlying stench of fear in a lot of people that share sentiments like yours. I don't know if it's feelings of powerlessness or fear of death that makes people so afraid that they stop thinking and living. It appears that you are so wrapped up in your fear that you're willing to accept all types of prohibitions on all of our behavior. The rest of us just want to live and enjoy life.
And you know what? It's all for nothing. If nothing else changes, there will probably be another successful attack on the US. More innocent people are going to die.
I think the only way to prevent future tragedies like this is to understand why other cultures hate us so much. So far, our government doesn't seem willing to invest too much time in that. For one thing, they're too busy installing processes to combat terrorism -- like random searches. I wish we'd spend some time understanding the terrorist.
Well, you seem to be quite an expert! It's kind of the same concept, though, isn't it? I guess the big difference is that the new treatment uses folate to attach to the tumor cell receptors. Yes, that part is new. I don't know about brilliant. At least not any more brilliant than attaching taxol to a protein instead of using a toxic solvent.
Are you an oncologist or do you just have a passing knowledge of the concepts?
I sent the link to my wife, an Oncology Nurse Practitioner. She said that this type of transport mechanism isn't all that new.
She went on to say that they've already packaged Taxol (a breast CA chemo) in a similar way and supplied this link for more info. It's called Abraxane.
I think Webex is expensive but it works. You can share applications across a presentation. You can accomodate dial-in capabilities. It takes a little bit to learn how to host a presentation but it's easy for participants.
The main thing I've noticed about libritarians is that they are generally well intentioned, rational, people who have an overly simplistic and in some ways naive world-view...
That's why I leave the hard decisions to the politicians!
You're quite right about the murkiness of this issue. We have such a grand tradition of lending libraries in our country and I believe that they provide a necessary service. So much so, that in some cases, I'm willing to give them the benefit of the doubt when they provide services that I don't always agree with.
I can't really put my finger on it but there seems to be something different about requiring someone to go to a library and check out a book or video or use the internet. There is some effort involved on the part of the user. Generally, he can't sit at home and silently take advantage of this municipally provided service that competes with commercial entities. Also, the service provided seems to be not quite as good when compared to commercial alternatives. For example, in my library, the videos and DVDs available aren't new releases. They seem to be a few months behind. This seems correct to me, somehow. If you want the latest video now, you need to be able to provide for your family and still have a little bit left over for luxuries. This usually requires some hard work. Unless your last name is Bush but I digress...
Municipally provided broadband seems different, somehow. It may be my distrust of government to provide services like this at a lower cost than commercial entities. I fully believe that a commercially provided service is the least expensive way to provide this service. Government has toop many ways to hide the true costs. For example, when Optimum Online sends me a bill, I know exactly how much my broadband connection is going to cost me. When I see the cost for trash collection on my tax bill, I always wonder, "Do they pay the employees retirement benefits out of this money or does that come out of the general fund?" Without this information, how can I make a reasonable decision about the true cost of trash collection. Maybe it would be cheaper to remove this service from the village and contract with an outside company. But I don' really know and since I'm esentially lazy and slightly risk-averse, I tend to stick with what is known -- My tax bil is $X and I can afford that on my budget.
Perhaps if local governments properly reported their expenditures, citizens could make better decisions about which services their local governments should provide.
Actually, I don't believe there are many private companies that provide police services. At least in New York (where I live), I don't believe there are any.
I think you're confusing private security with a real Police department employing peace officers. Most states have laws requiring you to report certain crimes and infractions and in some cases, civil damages to the police department. I don't think you can report these cases to your local security company. You could always hiree a private investigator to investigate a crime but I doubt he's going to arrest anyone...
That's a good point. I'm going to get a little pedantic here, I think.
Libraries and bookstores serve different purposes. Bookstores allow you to purchase books. Libraries lend you the book and make you return it after a period. You don't own the book. If there were commercial lending libraries, then I think I would complain a bit about the existence of libraries.
However, my library does loan video tapes and DVDs. I've even borrowed a few movies and watched and returned them. It's never really bothered me that the library loans videos and DVDs. I guess I'm just not consistent in my behavior. You got me!
The library already loans videos so there's not too much I can do about it. If it ever comes up to a local referendum, I'll be sure to vote to remove video loaning from the library.
It may not make me too popular with my neighbors. Especially those that can't afford to rent movies. But I believe it's not the role of government to provide non-essential goods and services to the populace.
I guess you could make an argument that entertainment is an essential need. Ask anyone with a three year old. And to force people to show proof of economic need to rent movies seems undignified. I really can't explain this inconsistency in my behavior and I've babbled long enough, so take it for what it's worth...
Slashdot Mirror
Get used to Zonk's screw-ups. Around here, we refer to him as Zonk the fuck-tard.
...and it figures how Zonk posted this. I've always said that fuck-tard is anally fixated.
What? You would expect something different than ignorance from Zonk the Fuck-tard?
I agree with previous comments, Digg's comments suck. But the best thing about Digg... No Zonk the fuck-tard!
Other than a hardware/driver issue? How would you begin to prove a statement like this? Just the two kernels running? Which one will fail first? Ok, without any drivers, how are you even going to know...
The real problems with an OS installation IS the drivers. As you state, a bad driver can raise havoc with your system integrity. How do you know that your sluggishness problemns aren't caused by your installed apps and/or drivers?
The fact that you don't care is part of the problem. To be a mature, complete member of society, you really need to care about things like this. Otherwise your lot will always be to be that scared little guy, jealous of others' ability to buy iPods, $5 brews and $8 stale sandwiches. No matter how (in the case of the $8 stale sandwiches) misguided they be. Of course, you don't care about unreasonable searches. You spend all your time hating those, as you put it, "Sandal-wearing, turtle-neck jumpered, left-wing, limp-wristed graphic designers who pay half a day's wages for a cup of sugary coffee from a trendy cafe."
As Gertrude said, "The lady doth protest too much, methinks."
I had a clue you were british since you misspelled a couple of words and used wacky vernacular like coppers, not often used in the US.
Anyway, you're final comment reveals your true problem. You're a scared, small, ignorant, bigoted person. That explains so much. You're probably so frustrated with your lack of control over your own life and miserable occupation that you think this mindlessness should extend to everyone.
In what circumstances do you feel that uttering the idea, "But then I don't look like a paki so I've nothing to worry about." is appropriate? Look at the subject of this last thread. Read the last word. Liberty. Look up the meaning in a dictionary if you have to. Please try to understand the meaning. It might be hard but you need to grow a little in order to join the rest of us.
Again, let's analyze your... argument.
Yes, there ARE terrorists trying to blow people up. You are correct. I'll stipulate to that. Am I worried about the coppers looking for tampons in my handbag? Well, I guess the reference to tampons in my handbag is a not too veiled knock on my masculinity. You've never seen me and you only know me from this conversation so I'll let the ad hominem attack go uncommented. Like I said, you're a scared little guy or girl. 'nuff said about that.
However, I AM worried by coppers looking in MY bag as well as others' bags. I'm not convinced that it is productive and even if it was, it would worry me because it is blatant disregard for the foundations of our government.
Now that's just silly. Of course they do. Have they given up all their rights by committing a violation of the law? Again, I refer to the founders of our government. When they wrote the Constitution and Bill of Rights, they and subsequent lawmakers have defined exactly under what situations our civil rights can be removed. I'm pretty sure that walking into a train station a few years after the country's been attacked isn't one of those cases. It's as if the government wants to make insure that we grow used small intrusions like these.
Again, I disagree with you. I think a number of people in positions of power in our various forms of government are afraid. Just like you. Unfortunately, they have more power than to just spew nonsense on Slashdot. I really want to attribute their actions as just well-meaning mistakes due to their inability to create an effective plan to address the situation. I really believe in the long run these mistakes will be recognized by smarter, calmer people as just wrong-headedness and eventually reversed.
Hey... Make sure you look under your bed before you go to bed tonight. Could be a bogeyman underneath...
I think NMerriam said it very well:
I understand that this event happended in the UK but we now have random searches in NYC subways as well. Last Tuesday I saw a phalanx of police officers inside the turnstiles in Manhattan (5th Ave downtown E train, I believe). The rules are supposed to be that you get warning of impending searches. In this caser, since the police search only after you've paid your fare, people are more likely to accept the search than lose the fare -- The warning is effectively muted. They didn't seem to be searching a lot of people. I only saw them search one group of high school aged students who were being rowdy.
But the whole idea is un-american! I'm supposed to be free of searches in the absence of a warrant or reasonable suspicion of doing wrong. Entering a subway is not reasonable suspicion.
It's NOT OK for me to accept this in the vein of, "it's done to protect us". The people that started our government had a deep mis-trust of governement. This is because government has the power to strip away peoples rights. I personally think it's a bad idea to raise a generation of citizens that are comfortable with letting some of their rights slowly be eroded away. As citizens, we should vehemently protest intrusions such as these.
Ok, so now maybe you understand better where my beliefs lie. Let me address each of your statements one at a time.
Your example isn't necessarily the hallmark of a coward. People could have many reasons for being afraid of searches. They may be carrying contraband. They may not be citizens. They may not like the police. They may not like the skin color of the person performing the search. They may not care to be touched by the gender of the person performing the search. I may not like some of these reasons for fearing a search but I don't think that makes any of them cowards.
Ok, so I guess you're implication is that I'm a coward because I want terrorists to be able to bomb up whoever they want, because they can't be searched. Well, I never said I wanted terrorists to be able to bomb up whoever they want. In fact, quite the opposite. Thankfully I didn't know anyone who was killed four years ago. People in the town that I live in had family members killed. My wife was working in a hospital in Manhattan that night. She was asked to work a number of hours of overtime to help with the trauma cases that never came. I had friends that worked downtown that had to walk home to Brooklyn because all the trains were shut down. I worried about them, being unable to contact them that afternoon. So while I wasn't touched by the tragedy personally, I feel some of its effects.
But I recognize an underlying stench of fear in a lot of people that share sentiments like yours. I don't know if it's feelings of powerlessness or fear of death that makes people so afraid that they stop thinking and living. It appears that you are so wrapped up in your fear that you're willing to accept all types of prohibitions on all of our behavior. The rest of us just want to live and enjoy life.
And you know what? It's all for nothing. If nothing else changes, there will probably be another successful attack on the US. More innocent people are going to die.
I think the only way to prevent future tragedies like this is to understand why other cultures hate us so much. So far, our government doesn't seem willing to invest too much time in that. For one thing, they're too busy installing processes to combat terrorism -- like random searches. I wish we'd spend some time understanding the terrorist.
You sir, are certainly Anonymous. Even more importantly, you are definitely a coward.
But it doesn't make sense.
Aren't you going to fix your sig line?
Hmmm... Explain this "expanded to infinity" concept of which you speak.
Umm... Eight can't approach 9. |9 - 8| is always 1. It can never get arbitrarily small.
Thought you'd want to know...
Who cares? It's France. It's not like anything useful is going on over there, anyway...
Well, you seem to be quite an expert! It's kind of the same concept, though, isn't it? I guess the big difference is that the new treatment uses folate to attach to the tumor cell receptors. Yes, that part is new. I don't know about brilliant. At least not any more brilliant than attaching taxol to a protein instead of using a toxic solvent.
Are you an oncologist or do you just have a passing knowledge of the concepts?
I sent the link to my wife, an Oncology Nurse Practitioner. She said that this type of transport mechanism isn't all that new.
She went on to say that they've already packaged Taxol (a breast CA chemo) in a similar way and supplied this link for more info. It's called Abraxane.
Technically, Haiku is supposed to reflect an aspect of nature or spirituality. I guess it works if you worship the CueCat...
I expect the University of Kansas Jailbirds will be holding something similar, soon.
Your third sentence contradicts itself in most states. According to MADD, 42 states have Dram Shop laws.
I think Webex is expensive but it works. You can share applications across a presentation. You can accomodate dial-in capabilities. It takes a little bit to learn how to host a presentation but it's easy for participants.
...you insensitive clod!
My wife, however, has a son. She's a nurse. I'm a software weeny. Are we the counter-example?
Hopefully, this will be marked redundant...
The main thing I've noticed about libritarians is that they are generally well intentioned, rational, people who have an overly simplistic and in some ways naive world-view...
That's why I leave the hard decisions to the politicians!
You're quite right about the murkiness of this issue. We have such a grand tradition of lending libraries in our country and I believe that they provide a necessary service. So much so, that in some cases, I'm willing to give them the benefit of the doubt when they provide services that I don't always agree with.
I can't really put my finger on it but there seems to be something different about requiring someone to go to a library and check out a book or video or use the internet. There is some effort involved on the part of the user. Generally, he can't sit at home and silently take advantage of this municipally provided service that competes with commercial entities. Also, the service provided seems to be not quite as good when compared to commercial alternatives. For example, in my library, the videos and DVDs available aren't new releases. They seem to be a few months behind. This seems correct to me, somehow. If you want the latest video now, you need to be able to provide for your family and still have a little bit left over for luxuries. This usually requires some hard work. Unless your last name is Bush but I digress...
Municipally provided broadband seems different, somehow. It may be my distrust of government to provide services like this at a lower cost than commercial entities. I fully believe that a commercially provided service is the least expensive way to provide this service. Government has toop many ways to hide the true costs. For example, when Optimum Online sends me a bill, I know exactly how much my broadband connection is going to cost me. When I see the cost for trash collection on my tax bill, I always wonder, "Do they pay the employees retirement benefits out of this money or does that come out of the general fund?" Without this information, how can I make a reasonable decision about the true cost of trash collection. Maybe it would be cheaper to remove this service from the village and contract with an outside company. But I don' really know and since I'm esentially lazy and slightly risk-averse, I tend to stick with what is known -- My tax bil is $X and I can afford that on my budget.
Perhaps if local governments properly reported their expenditures, citizens could make better decisions about which services their local governments should provide.
Actually, I don't believe there are many private companies that provide police services. At least in New York (where I live), I don't believe there are any.
I think you're confusing private security with a real Police department employing peace officers. Most states have laws requiring you to report certain crimes and infractions and in some cases, civil damages to the police department. I don't think you can report these cases to your local security company. You could always hiree a private investigator to investigate a crime but I doubt he's going to arrest anyone...
That's a good point. I'm going to get a little pedantic here, I think.
Libraries and bookstores serve different purposes. Bookstores allow you to purchase books. Libraries lend you the book and make you return it after a period. You don't own the book. If there were commercial lending libraries, then I think I would complain a bit about the existence of libraries.
However, my library does loan video tapes and DVDs. I've even borrowed a few movies and watched and returned them. It's never really bothered me that the library loans videos and DVDs. I guess I'm just not consistent in my behavior. You got me!
The library already loans videos so there's not too much I can do about it. If it ever comes up to a local referendum, I'll be sure to vote to remove video loaning from the library.
It may not make me too popular with my neighbors. Especially those that can't afford to rent movies. But I believe it's not the role of government to provide non-essential goods and services to the populace.
I guess you could make an argument that entertainment is an essential need. Ask anyone with a three year old. And to force people to show proof of economic need to rent movies seems undignified. I really can't explain this inconsistency in my behavior and I've babbled long enough, so take it for what it's worth...