Nonsense. There is plenty of evidence...in the sense that there was plenty of evidence of WMDs in Iraq before the US invaded. It's just...slightly manufactured.
"Both sides have absolutely no idea how to appeal to the average voter." -> Well, duh! It's hard to talk with a silver spoon in your mouth. Plus the only time they speak with the average voter is while they are running an election campaign; and even then, they ask questions like "You are voting for me, right?" and "What do I have to do to get you to contribute to my fund?"
On a side note, I love how they attempt to fix the difficulties with the Financials industry. Aside from saddling the taxpayer with the bailouts (dumbest move, politically, anywhere, ever), I get to enjoy listening to the cacophony of attempts to regulate or deregulate said industry. We have one party, who wants to blindly remove laws -> "Yes, let us remove the laws which introduced a trade barrier into this market, while we remove the laws which stipulate that selling fraudulent securities to buyers would be punished harshly"; the other party, on the other hand, wants to blindly add laws -> "Yes, let add the law that forbids trading outfits from driving up the price of a stock moments before they put through a client's purchase order, while we add a law that puts the taxpayer on the hook for millions of extremely-risky mortgages." I swear to God, it's like that (spam) scene in Monty Python where no matter what pick off the menu, it has to come with a side order of corruption.
Me: "So, what I'd like is for you to drop the protectionist policies that have unduly enriched the few while thieving the rest of us; I'd also like to have this thieving / fraud nonsense go away." Party of Purple: "Sure. Sure. We'll do all of that, and we'll also include this law which charges people excessive amounts to buy or sell various positions." Me: "Umm, no. I want what I asked for, not that extra bit." Party of Purple: "Yes, we're giving you what you asked for." Me: "But not that 'charging people excessive amounts' bit, right?" Party of Purple: "*" Me: "Hello? I don't want that positions thing to be a part of this legislation." Party of Purple: "But it has to be. That's the only way it will pass!" Me: "That's right. I don't want that part to pass into law." Party of Purple: "But we already wrote it up with that in there." Me: "Then write a new one." Party of Purple: "Too late, it already passed into law; we had to make some concessions though, so only the part about taxing people excessively was saved." Me: "OMFG!"
Which is why we need a new option: a confidence vote on the government itself.
You've seen the supreme problem: what if there are dozens of candidates (for any office), but they all suck donkey dick? What if the populace is laughing so hard at the current slate of politicians, and their wanna-be replacements, that they simply don't have the breathe to tell their parties that they want a 'do over' on their offerings? That they are comically that bad? That comedians have used up all of their material for the next 4-years (assuming presidential) before the elections are even held?
"obviously a joke to anyone with more than two brain cells to rub together" -> Funny you should mention that. Rumor has it, the policy enforcement agencies in the US do employ a battery of intelligence tests to ensure that they only admit applicants who will not become, well, bored with the job. The kinds of people who find tying their shoe-laces to be somewhat challenging. That sort of thing.
But I have heard that occasionally some of the brighter variety slip through the net. I believe they're the ones who do not feel threatened by the presence of a video camera, nor are they inclined to shoot the family dog during a raid. One or two of them might even offer opinions on current law issues that are not considered "going with the pack."
To which we respond: "Silly, why are you wearing those clothes? Do you have something to hide? Must be drugs / pirated software / Korans. Now off with them, put on some of this baby oil as we get the camera (for your mugshots, and we will be taking a number of them today) ready."
Agreed. The Far North states are just as much a part of the good old United States as the Far South states (Mexico & friends).
We only let them think they are independent (with their own provincial government) so that they are easier to control. It's basically the same deal the UK has with the United States.
If the world economy collapses, you'll get 3 types: those who will try to control you through food, those who will try to control you through gold / silver / various precious things, and those who will try to control you through weaponry.
The guy with the gun will think it gives him an unlimited credit card when dealing with the guys with the food / gold; see, he thinks that he only needs to threaten people with the gun, doesn't need to actually use the ammunition (perhaps sparingly), so he can ride this out.
The guy with the gold will think that people will do anything for whatever gold he has. It is fungible, and non-perishable, and is seen as worth a trade in even unfortunate times. However, the guy with the gun is going to try and take it from him, and the guy with the food may conspire to wait until the man has perished (from lack of food) to collect the gold. Even if he is willing to trade, the guy with the food may ask for a ransom-worth of gold.
The guy with the food thinks that he will get by, that he can trade for what he needs, and will no doubt make out like a king, as people will come to him for advice on how to grow / acquire their own food. In reality, if people are starving, they won't care to trade, and whatever livestock / plants are out there in the open, ripe for the pickings. Bear in mind, these people aren't above eating immature plants / animals (egg-laying hen is eaten), so an entire harvest could be lost by halfway through the growing season.
Honestly, I'd op (for my own safety) for hunting rifle (food and protection) and a book on local edible mushrooms. Although the food is a need more immediate, and gold an intermediate goal (whenever things stabilize enough that transactions are worth using gold again). Gold only succeeds the utility of the other two in the event that the global economy burns, but small pockets of local economies are still functioning.
Although, I imagine that your idea of currency is tied to the number of merchants that accept it, with some idea of critical mass. Hence, if / when 700 million people are engaging in various transactions using BitCoins, you will think of it as a currency.
Which reminds me. Any idea what Bitcoinica was running? PHP + MySQL? I want to keep track of the number of Bitcoin websites that are compromised because of those two technologies. For posterity's sake.
On a more serious note, why, oh why, does the Bitcoin community have an obsession with keeping hideous amounts of Bitcoins in easily compromisable, online accounts? Is the idea of keeping a copy of your wallet on the MicroSD card in your phone (secured with a password), and a backup somewhere at home (behind a bookcase), really that difficult to get used to? And any transactions out of network (Bitcoins -> local currency), should be done as quickly as possible (send only the Bitcoins you want to sell to the exchange, and make the transaction within a 12-hour window; buy Bitcoins, and immediately whisk them off to your wallet)? Is the idea of online banking with Bitcoins, knowing that all these amateurs haven't the slightest clue how to secure a database & are getting hacked on an hourly basis, really, really worth it?
tldr; Come on guys, treat it like cash. You don't go carrying around $300,000 in small bills (in your back pocket), so why are you putting next month's rent / your life savings in insecure accounts?
Indeed. This is a Merger / Acquisition that, from a quality of life standpoint, I do not prefer to see.
Opera Mobile is...a very nice browser on my Droid. A very, very nice browser. I'd like to keep it that way (the thought of Facebook posting to my wall with updates based off of my latest webpage viewings is more than a little disturbing; "lightknight said he would be at Ken's BBQ by 5:00PM, but we can see that he accessed Google Maps 21 minutes ago, and his GPS / location shows him at least 47 minutes away. -> 5:01 PM").
Well, that customer testimonial has sold me! Unfortunately, I've already spent this month's IT budget on some Nigerian anti-virus software (they requested I pay for it in person, my flight leaves in an hour...busy busy), so I can't buy any.
However, a close friend of mine has confided in me that the company he works for is having some major, major security problems, and has given him a HUGE budget to buy whatever he needs to shore things up. His number is 202-324-3000, ask for "Bob" (his last name escapes me, I think it's Russian; lots of consonants, very few vowels).
P.S. Getting through the company phone system can be a bit of a pain (they have this automated system, and they are always changing their options...it can be quite trying). If you can't find him in the company phone book, just ask the operator to find his extension for you. Bear in mind, these people are all about security, so they may say things like "we do not have a Bob working for us" or "do you know who you are talking to?"; just relax, it's all a bluff. Bob's pretty far up there on the company hierarchy, and sometimes these annoying sales people dial the wrong number...just tell them that you "now exactly who you are talking to, and it's not Bob" (you need to be insistent at times with these people, so don't give up). There is, of course, a chance that Bob might be out of his office; if that's the case, ask them to put on their chief IT security guy (he handles purchase orders when Bob isn't around), and tell him everything you've told me here. Be sure to have him install a demo version of the software on his machine, and to walk him through the features; he'll be so impressed, he will probably ask for an on-site demonstration from you and your fellow coworkers. Also, remember to mention any other software your company makes, that he might be interested in.
Because it's easier to take, and apologize later, than it is to ask permission.
Hence the basis for all governmental / corporate / law enforcement / union activities -> for example, if an officer of the law demands something, even if the written law / case law is unclear, people will typically give it to him / her; later on, when sued, the officer can explain to the court that 'he / she didn't know they couldn't do that,' and is let off with the legal equivalent of a love tap. The damage, however, has already been done; and the people are now subject to 'jurisdictional creep,' where it is the burden of the common man to prove his rights / privileges in court, while simultaneously disproving the rights / privileges of his offenders (many of whom occupy higher places than the offended, with greater resources and connections).
The current rules for the small guy are "DO NOT, unless explicitly told to"; the current rules for everyone else are "DO, unless explicitly told not to." I imagine such legal disorder preceeded the fall of many of the larger governments throughout history.
Slashdot Mirror
Mmmm, yes and no. Arbitration cannot be a unilateral choice. As such, most EULAs can and will be nuked.
Nonsense. There is plenty of evidence...in the sense that there was plenty of evidence of WMDs in Iraq before the US invaded. It's just...slightly manufactured.
How much would you wager that the US will tell him that they will return the funds, but he needs to fly to the US to pick them up in person? ;-)
"Both sides have absolutely no idea how to appeal to the average voter." -> Well, duh! It's hard to talk with a silver spoon in your mouth. Plus the only time they speak with the average voter is while they are running an election campaign; and even then, they ask questions like "You are voting for me, right?" and "What do I have to do to get you to contribute to my fund?"
On a side note, I love how they attempt to fix the difficulties with the Financials industry. Aside from saddling the taxpayer with the bailouts (dumbest move, politically, anywhere, ever), I get to enjoy listening to the cacophony of attempts to regulate or deregulate said industry. We have one party, who wants to blindly remove laws -> "Yes, let us remove the laws which introduced a trade barrier into this market, while we remove the laws which stipulate that selling fraudulent securities to buyers would be punished harshly"; the other party, on the other hand, wants to blindly add laws -> "Yes, let add the law that forbids trading outfits from driving up the price of a stock moments before they put through a client's purchase order, while we add a law that puts the taxpayer on the hook for millions of extremely-risky mortgages." I swear to God, it's like that (spam) scene in Monty Python where no matter what pick off the menu, it has to come with a side order of corruption.
Me: "So, what I'd like is for you to drop the protectionist policies that have unduly enriched the few while thieving the rest of us; I'd also like to have this thieving / fraud nonsense go away."
Party of Purple: "Sure. Sure. We'll do all of that, and we'll also include this law which charges people excessive amounts to buy or sell various positions."
Me: "Umm, no. I want what I asked for, not that extra bit."
Party of Purple: "Yes, we're giving you what you asked for."
Me: "But not that 'charging people excessive amounts' bit, right?"
Party of Purple: "*"
Me: "Hello? I don't want that positions thing to be a part of this legislation."
Party of Purple: "But it has to be. That's the only way it will pass!"
Me: "That's right. I don't want that part to pass into law."
Party of Purple: "But we already wrote it up with that in there."
Me: "Then write a new one."
Party of Purple: "Too late, it already passed into law; we had to make some concessions though, so only the part about taxing people excessively was saved."
Me: "OMFG!"
And that is how our Congress works.
Which is why we need a new option: a confidence vote on the government itself.
You've seen the supreme problem: what if there are dozens of candidates (for any office), but they all suck donkey dick? What if the populace is laughing so hard at the current slate of politicians, and their wanna-be replacements, that they simply don't have the breathe to tell their parties that they want a 'do over' on their offerings? That they are comically that bad? That comedians have used up all of their material for the next 4-years (assuming presidential) before the elections are even held?
"obviously a joke to anyone with more than two brain cells to rub together" -> Funny you should mention that. Rumor has it, the policy enforcement agencies in the US do employ a battery of intelligence tests to ensure that they only admit applicants who will not become, well, bored with the job. The kinds of people who find tying their shoe-laces to be somewhat challenging. That sort of thing.
But I have heard that occasionally some of the brighter variety slip through the net. I believe they're the ones who do not feel threatened by the presence of a video camera, nor are they inclined to shoot the family dog during a raid. One or two of them might even offer opinions on current law issues that are not considered "going with the pack."
So...only someone who might be a hair's breadth away from being classified as "sub-human" would misinterpret what is clearly NOT a bomb threat.
To which we respond: "Silly, why are you wearing those clothes? Do you have something to hide? Must be drugs / pirated software / Korans. Now off with them, put on some of this baby oil as we get the camera (for your mugshots, and we will be taking a number of them today) ready."
They're already working on it in the US. See Google vs. Oracle, and CISPA.
Hmm. DOSing the program with too much data. I like that idea.
Does anyone know (roughly) what their storage capacity is? I mean, just how aggressive do we want this thing to be?
Agreed. The Far North states are just as much a part of the good old United States as the Far South states (Mexico & friends).
We only let them think they are independent (with their own provincial government) so that they are easier to control. It's basically the same deal the UK has with the United States.
Smart man.
They're both trying very hard; can't you say anything positive? ;-)
If the world economy collapses, you'll get 3 types: those who will try to control you through food, those who will try to control you through gold / silver / various precious things, and those who will try to control you through weaponry.
The guy with the gun will think it gives him an unlimited credit card when dealing with the guys with the food / gold; see, he thinks that he only needs to threaten people with the gun, doesn't need to actually use the ammunition (perhaps sparingly), so he can ride this out.
The guy with the gold will think that people will do anything for whatever gold he has. It is fungible, and non-perishable, and is seen as worth a trade in even unfortunate times. However, the guy with the gun is going to try and take it from him, and the guy with the food may conspire to wait until the man has perished (from lack of food) to collect the gold. Even if he is willing to trade, the guy with the food may ask for a ransom-worth of gold.
The guy with the food thinks that he will get by, that he can trade for what he needs, and will no doubt make out like a king, as people will come to him for advice on how to grow / acquire their own food. In reality, if people are starving, they won't care to trade, and whatever livestock / plants are out there in the open, ripe for the pickings. Bear in mind, these people aren't above eating immature plants / animals (egg-laying hen is eaten), so an entire harvest could be lost by halfway through the growing season.
Honestly, I'd op (for my own safety) for hunting rifle (food and protection) and a book on local edible mushrooms. Although the food is a need more immediate, and gold an intermediate goal (whenever things stabilize enough that transactions are worth using gold again). Gold only succeeds the utility of the other two in the event that the global economy burns, but small pockets of local economies are still functioning.
Nonsense. Bitcoins are a currency.
Although, I imagine that your idea of currency is tied to the number of merchants that accept it, with some idea of critical mass. Hence, if / when 700 million people are engaging in various transactions using BitCoins, you will think of it as a currency.
Which reminds me. Any idea what Bitcoinica was running? PHP + MySQL? I want to keep track of the number of Bitcoin websites that are compromised because of those two technologies. For posterity's sake.
On a more serious note, why, oh why, does the Bitcoin community have an obsession with keeping hideous amounts of Bitcoins in easily compromisable, online accounts? Is the idea of keeping a copy of your wallet on the MicroSD card in your phone (secured with a password), and a backup somewhere at home (behind a bookcase), really that difficult to get used to? And any transactions out of network (Bitcoins -> local currency), should be done as quickly as possible (send only the Bitcoins you want to sell to the exchange, and make the transaction within a 12-hour window; buy Bitcoins, and immediately whisk them off to your wallet)? Is the idea of online banking with Bitcoins, knowing that all these amateurs haven't the slightest clue how to secure a database & are getting hacked on an hourly basis, really, really worth it?
tldr; Come on guys, treat it like cash. You don't go carrying around $300,000 in small bills (in your back pocket), so why are you putting next month's rent / your life savings in insecure accounts?
Indeed. This is a Merger / Acquisition that, from a quality of life standpoint, I do not prefer to see.
Opera Mobile is...a very nice browser on my Droid. A very, very nice browser. I'd like to keep it that way (the thought of Facebook posting to my wall with updates based off of my latest webpage viewings is more than a little disturbing; "lightknight said he would be at Ken's BBQ by 5:00PM, but we can see that he accessed Google Maps 21 minutes ago, and his GPS / location shows him at least 47 minutes away. -> 5:01 PM").
Hmm. On an off topic note, I am starting to think that thing is a bot.
Might I suggest the /. admins that they employ a simple script that grabs the IP address (and whatever else) whenever someone posts with that text?
Then post the info to 4-Chan. I hear they have remarkable turn-around times when dealing with objects of sufficient irritation.
Well, that customer testimonial has sold me! Unfortunately, I've already spent this month's IT budget on some Nigerian anti-virus software (they requested I pay for it in person, my flight leaves in an hour...busy busy), so I can't buy any.
However, a close friend of mine has confided in me that the company he works for is having some major, major security problems, and has given him a HUGE budget to buy whatever he needs to shore things up. His number is 202-324-3000, ask for "Bob" (his last name escapes me, I think it's Russian; lots of consonants, very few vowels).
P.S. Getting through the company phone system can be a bit of a pain (they have this automated system, and they are always changing their options...it can be quite trying). If you can't find him in the company phone book, just ask the operator to find his extension for you. Bear in mind, these people are all about security, so they may say things like "we do not have a Bob working for us" or "do you know who you are talking to?"; just relax, it's all a bluff. Bob's pretty far up there on the company hierarchy, and sometimes these annoying sales people dial the wrong number...just tell them that you "now exactly who you are talking to, and it's not Bob" (you need to be insistent at times with these people, so don't give up). There is, of course, a chance that Bob might be out of his office; if that's the case, ask them to put on their chief IT security guy (he handles purchase orders when Bob isn't around), and tell him everything you've told me here. Be sure to have him install a demo version of the software on his machine, and to walk him through the features; he'll be so impressed, he will probably ask for an on-site demonstration from you and your fellow coworkers. Also, remember to mention any other software your company makes, that he might be interested in.
I'm guessing the total sum of the manpower for attaching and creating all those labels, GM or Organic, adds up to a non-trivial amount of money.
*facepalm*
And what is the likelihood they will succeed?
Because it's easier to take, and apologize later, than it is to ask permission.
Hence the basis for all governmental / corporate / law enforcement / union activities -> for example, if an officer of the law demands something, even if the written law / case law is unclear, people will typically give it to him / her; later on, when sued, the officer can explain to the court that 'he / she didn't know they couldn't do that,' and is let off with the legal equivalent of a love tap. The damage, however, has already been done; and the people are now subject to 'jurisdictional creep,' where it is the burden of the common man to prove his rights / privileges in court, while simultaneously disproving the rights / privileges of his offenders (many of whom occupy higher places than the offended, with greater resources and connections).
The current rules for the small guy are "DO NOT, unless explicitly told to"; the current rules for everyone else are "DO, unless explicitly told not to." I imagine such legal disorder preceeded the fall of many of the larger governments throughout history.
And yet you know that some future astronaut will try to charge his / her iPod off of it...
Mmmmmmmmm. Ebay.
"Slightly used Lunar Lander L@@K!!!"
Dude, this isn't war. It's the next thing up.
Square -> Cube -> Tesseract
Battle -> War -> This Thing