..what will they do when the person in front of you reclines their seat wayyyy back? At best, you can kiss off using your laptop the rest of the trip. At worst, your laptop monitor goes SCRUNTCH! as if catches in the seat behind you.
Maybe instead of Internet access, they should work on giving passengers enough room to use their laptops.
Is the media shared? Can I set up dsniff or something and what what the executive in first class is up to? You know, watch him plotting corporate intrigue, closing that big deal, shredding accounting records, etc.?
Will Windows file sharing be blocked? If not, it would be lots of fun to see who is in your network neighborhood. Kind of like the old days with cable modems.
Could someone have a little pop-up window show up on passenger laptops that says "This plane has been boarded by alien space invaders. Stay calm. They mean us no harm"? Or maybe "I am Colonel Ogo Mumbasso from Nigeria. If you help me transfer money, I will arrange frequent flyer miles..."
Oh come on! He is 15 years old! I bet there isn't a single/. poster who did not have a bad attitude at that age. Ditto with his comments about Linux and his use of the GPL. Has no-one here ever made an ill considered post?
One of the nice things about a lack of maturity is that it is often outgrown. We should keep this in mind before branding this fellow a "liar".
I've heard credible stories (from the students themselves) of being given extra credit in classes for posting a favorable review of the Professor's book to Amazon.
Find several reputable peer-reviewed journals in the social sciences or public policy
Find a university library, sit at a terminal, and do a search on these journals. Use key words like "gun control" "crime" etc.
Read the relevant articles your search has produced
Maybe there is a faculty member or graduate student interested in assisting with this. Good solid research papers may come to completely opposite conclsions, simply because the context and assumptions of their research differ. An academic experienced in interpreting these may help. Be sure to find someone without an ax to grind on either side
You are correct in being sceptical of those who have an axe to grind. There are some fairly obvious fallacies invoked in partisan research, a good text on statistics may help. For example, one is inferring from a correlation in aggregate data that another correlation must exist at the individual level.
Using Hercules . Emulates S/370 hardware fairly well. haven't done this myself - though I have seen some nice versions working well. Some older versions of IBM's MVS operating system are in the public domain (I think MVT from the 1980's), and was told that one could even load the latest os/390 (this is of course a violation of the licensing, though I doubt IBM cares about a single Linux instance...)
If anyone out in Slashdotland wants to play with a mainframe, this is pretty darn close.
Try a Home brewing kit . Very practical, end results are usually quite tasty and can be shared with non-geek friends. A good way for a frustrated chemist to ply their trade.
A complex of dormitories at the University of California at Irvine is called Middle Earth . Included in phase one is (among others) a dorm called "Hobbiton".
Nothing like a sewer pipe though, depending on what you had to drink, it may start to look like one...
They looked at more than a million records collected by the US Geological Survey between 1990 to 1993 that were not associated with traditional seismic disturbances, such as Earthquakes
These guys could use some help. Here's my idea: Put the information on line, distribute a client to analyze it. Surely the possibility of a quark collision is at least as good as finding an intelligent signal from another planet?
During the 1980's many dictatorships fell, not because of invasion, but through internal upheaval.
How many of the following regimes were overthrown by a gun-owning citizenry:
- Argentina? - Chile? - Paraguay - Czechoslovakia? - Poland? - Hungary? - South Korea? - Every other Soviet satellite or Latin American dictatorship (except Cuba)?
Correct answer is NONE!
Gun onwership therefore is useless when it comes to defending freedom. The notion of armed citizens challenging opression is bogus. In absolutely no case has an armed citizen's revolt created democracy out of dictatorship.
A combination of economic collapse and defection of the military brought about most of the above, with labor unrest contributing in the case of Poland (and a military defeat in the Falklands in Argentina).
If there is a lesson here, it is that we need a military representative of the citizenry at large, and that we need to ensure dictatorships suffer the consequences of their economic mismanagement.
I have never seen a valid argument for this gun nut crap.
I think the real argument might go:
1. Owning a gun makes me feel powerful 2. I believe I can challenge the government with my gun 3. "All power comes from the barrel of a gun" 4. Therefore the absence of other rights doesn't bother me as long as I have my gun
Ashcroft is very sly about trampling on other rights, while leaving gun owners alone. He can eliminate the liberties that matter, while keeping the masses content with the liberty that doesn't matter.
Well the "track changes" feature has changed DRAMATICALLY between Word 2002 and prior versions. I've had 2002 since April and still struggle with this. The prior version had all track changes functions on a single menu. They are now split into different menus. Certain options seem to only be accessible via inscrutible hieroglyphic symbols (I think Microsoft calls these "tool bars").
Methods for modifying styles have also dramatically changed, as has the effect of applying styles. You can no longer go back to your default style by simply applying "normal". "normal" often does nothing to change text that has been modified (e.g., it does not remove italics as it once did, etc.). In addition, there is this mysterious "clear formatting" style that is sometimes there, sometimes not.
These are just the obvious ones. I am fed up with the way MS scrambles its products user interface under the guise of "improvement". If there is one thing that should be constant between versions, it should be how you access commands and their effect.
Certain MP3 files are an attract-ant
on
Ants Invade iBook
·
· Score: 1
I don't think it was the warmth or even the tasty aroma of the wiring that attracted them. You must have been playing some "classic" 1980s music in order to attract the ants.
RealAudio (yes there is streaming content I like that requires it)
Quicktime
Eudora (How to set up a mailing list - friends and family - in KDEmail?)
Generally sound and media software, streamripper, Roxio, etc. Like to capture streaming audio and burn onto CDs, etc.
I'm sure there are open source alternatives to these, but there is a cost/benefit tradeoff in terms of my own time. Do I spend $50 for a Windows product, or spend hours searching for, downloading, and configuring free open source utilities that may or may not work?
Keep in mind the ACLU gets lots of $$ from the entertainment industry and wealthy individuals who made their fortunes in this industry. While they (these contributors) have a vested interested in keeping Hollywood censor-free, it would be amusing to see the wiggling if the ACLU ever came fully out in favor of defending P2P.
Not that the ACLU is a bad organization, just helps to keep a perspective sometimes
I'm afraid blaming the lowest ranking person for the policy failures of those at the top is not confined to the military. I worked for a "Big 5" (now "Final 4") CPA/Consulting firm, and would regularly see low paid new hires "counseled out" as a consequence of poorly sold, poorly managed projects performed for seriously disfunctional clients.
Such as sending them bogus notices that they have won a valuable sweepstakes prize, then busting them when they show up to collect. Bruce Schneier was right, there is no such thing as a "criminal genuis"
A government which can arbitrarily restrict access to items which may or may not be harmful depending on the user is an unjust government.
Now I hate to keep making the same old argument, but this this make restrictions on agricultural poisons unjust? Restrictions against carrying switchblades (yes, these are illegal in most places)? Deciding who can be licensed to use explosives (demolition contractors)? Deciding who can drive a motor vehicle (hint: Get enough "driving under the influence" citations and your license will be revoked)? Crop dusting aircraft? Other private planes? Narcotics?
I think it is amazing that Americans accept stringent regulation of all sorts of lethal devices and substances without any problem at all - but the moment similar restrictions are suggested for firearms, the attack dogs of the NRA are in full force.
Owning a gun out of fear makes the owner much more dangerous and likely to use the gun. Fear does not support rational deliberate thought. Fearful people lash out impulsively - exactly what I do not want a gun owning neighbor doing
Now owning a gun because it is a very cool historical piece (e.g. WWI firearm) is a different matter. To a lesser extent so is owning a gun to hunt, excluding tired/confused/drunk huntiners hitting a human instead of the prey.
If you (or anyone else) is so worried about their personal security, I would suggest that instead of a gun, you consider a German Shephard or a Rottweiler or some other large intelligent canine.
A dog will protect your property when you are not at home. A gun will sit there and do nothing.
A dog know friend from foe, and will not attack a friend. A gun will kill whoever it is shot at.
Criminals will commit crimes just to steal a gun. Very few criminals will break into a home to steal a dog.
A dog provides friendship, exercise, and hours of amusement. A gun is used to kill. Period.
You are afraid of criminals, then go to the nearest pound and adopt a suitable breed of dog.
If instead you insist on owning a gun out of fear, you are a menace to your neighbors and everyone else within firing range.
Outlawing guns may not stop crime, but if it shuts up people like you it would be worth it.
The biggest argument in favor of gun control are the obsessed agressive insane individuals who worship gun ownership as a religion.
There is no other deadly machine or substance that is allowed the freedom that firewarms are allowed. Automobiles are registered, drivers are required to carry ID, possession of poisonous substances is strictly controlled, explosives are available only by permit. I'm not allowed to store organo-phosphate pesticides (=nerve gas) at home, yet the gun advocates believe they should be allowed to own any firearm with no restrictions whatever
Sounds like a very strange obsession to me. And yes, if some group advocated home use of organophosphate pesticides (or dynamite or radioactive substances...), I WOULD call them "jackals" and "murders"
Slashdot Mirror
Maybe instead of Internet access, they should work on giving passengers enough room to use their laptops.
Will Windows file sharing be blocked? If not, it would be lots of fun to see who is in your network neighborhood. Kind of like the old days with cable modems.
Could someone have a little pop-up window show up on passenger laptops that says "This plane has been boarded by alien space invaders. Stay calm. They mean us no harm"? Or maybe "I am Colonel Ogo Mumbasso from Nigeria. If you help me transfer money, I will arrange frequent flyer miles..."
Oh come on! He is 15 years old! I bet there isn't a single
One of the nice things about a lack of maturity is that it is often outgrown. We should keep this in mind before branding this fellow a "liar".
I've heard credible stories (from the students themselves) of being given extra credit in classes for posting a favorable review of the Professor's book to Amazon.
Find several reputable peer-reviewed journals in the social sciences or public policy
Find a university library, sit at a terminal, and do a search on these journals. Use key words like "gun control" "crime" etc.
Read the relevant articles your search has produced
Maybe there is a faculty member or graduate student interested in assisting with this. Good solid research papers may come to completely opposite conclsions, simply because the context and assumptions of their research differ. An academic experienced in interpreting these may help. Be sure to find someone without an ax to grind on either side
You are correct in being sceptical of those who have an axe to grind. There are some fairly obvious fallacies invoked in partisan research, a good text on statistics may help. For example, one is inferring from a correlation in aggregate data that another correlation must exist at the individual level.
If anyone out in Slashdotland wants to play with a mainframe, this is pretty darn close.
Another good reference is here
Home wine making kits are another good one - full of all types of uses for geek toys like hydrometers, pH meters, hand refractometers, etc.
Note to USAians: Your right to brew at home is embedded in the US Constitution. Celebrate our freedom loving country by brewing your own.
Follow my instructions exactly and I promise you will not be hurt. Really.
Nothing like a sewer pipe though, depending on what you had to drink, it may start to look like one...
In which case the current owner's of John Cage's intellectual property will be paying you a visit....
These guys could use some help. Here's my idea: Put the information on line, distribute a client to analyze it. Surely the possibility of a quark collision is at least as good as finding an intelligent signal from another planet?
During the 1980's many dictatorships fell, not because of invasion, but through internal upheaval.
How many of the following regimes were overthrown by a gun-owning citizenry:
- Argentina?
- Chile?
- Paraguay
- Czechoslovakia?
- Poland?
- Hungary?
- South Korea?
- Every other Soviet satellite or Latin American dictatorship (except Cuba)?
Correct answer is NONE!
Gun onwership therefore is useless when it comes to defending freedom. The notion of armed citizens challenging opression is bogus. In absolutely no case has an armed citizen's revolt created democracy out of dictatorship.
A combination of economic collapse and defection of the military brought about most of the above, with labor unrest contributing in the case of Poland (and a military defeat in the Falklands in Argentina).
If there is a lesson here, it is that we need a military representative of the citizenry at large, and that we need to ensure dictatorships suffer the consequences of their economic mismanagement.
And we don't want you anyway! Life here is much better with you staying where you are.
I think the real argument might go:
1. Owning a gun makes me feel powerful
2. I believe I can challenge the government with my gun
3. "All power comes from the barrel of a gun"
4. Therefore the absence of other rights doesn't bother me as long as I have my gun
Ashcroft is very sly about trampling on other rights, while leaving gun owners alone. He can eliminate the liberties that matter, while keeping the masses content with the liberty that doesn't matter.
Methods for modifying styles have also dramatically changed, as has the effect of applying styles. You can no longer go back to your default style by simply applying "normal". "normal" often does nothing to change text that has been modified (e.g., it does not remove italics as it once did, etc.). In addition, there is this mysterious "clear formatting" style that is sometimes there, sometimes not.
These are just the obvious ones. I am fed up with the way MS scrambles its products user interface under the guise of "improvement". If there is one thing that should be constant between versions, it should be how you access commands and their effect.
I don't think it was the warmth or even the tasty aroma of the wiring that attracted them. You must have been playing some "classic" 1980s music in order to attract the ants.
RealAudio (yes there is streaming content I like that requires it)
Quicktime
Eudora (How to set up a mailing list - friends and family - in KDEmail?)
Generally sound and media software, streamripper, Roxio, etc. Like to capture streaming audio and burn onto CDs, etc.
I'm sure there are open source alternatives to these, but there is a cost/benefit tradeoff in terms of my own time. Do I spend $50 for a Windows product, or spend hours searching for, downloading, and configuring free open source utilities that may or may not work?
So did the network cards have to certify that they have not smoked dope in the last 7 years?
And if they "do drugs", willthey no longer be allowed to process "secret" data?
Seriously, I've known network cards that I will swear were high on something.
Keep in mind the ACLU gets lots of $$ from the entertainment industry and wealthy individuals who made their fortunes in this industry. While they (these contributors) have a vested interested in keeping Hollywood censor-free, it would be amusing to see the wiggling if the ACLU ever came fully out in favor of defending P2P.
Not that the ACLU is a bad organization, just helps to keep a perspective sometimes
I'm afraid blaming the lowest ranking person for the policy failures of those at the top is not confined to the military. I worked for a "Big 5" (now "Final 4") CPA/Consulting firm, and would regularly see low paid new hires "counseled out" as a consequence of poorly sold, poorly managed projects performed for seriously disfunctional clients.
Best example is Being me the Head of WIllie the Mail Boy .
Such as sending them bogus notices that they have won a valuable sweepstakes prize, then busting them when they show up to collect. Bruce Schneier was right, there is no such thing as a "criminal genuis"
A government which can arbitrarily restrict access to items which may or may not be harmful depending on the user is an unjust government.
Now I hate to keep making the same old argument, but this this make restrictions on agricultural poisons unjust? Restrictions against carrying switchblades (yes, these are illegal in most places)? Deciding who can be licensed to use explosives (demolition contractors)? Deciding who can drive a motor vehicle (hint: Get enough "driving under the influence" citations and your license will be revoked)? Crop dusting aircraft? Other private planes? Narcotics?
I think it is amazing that Americans accept stringent regulation of all sorts of lethal devices and substances without any problem at all - but the moment similar restrictions are suggested for firearms, the attack dogs of the NRA are in full force.
Owning a gun out of fear makes the owner much more dangerous and likely to use the gun. Fear does not support rational deliberate thought. Fearful people lash out impulsively - exactly what I do not want a gun owning neighbor doing
Now owning a gun because it is a very cool historical piece (e.g. WWI firearm) is a different matter. To a lesser extent so is owning a gun to hunt, excluding tired/confused/drunk huntiners hitting a human instead of the prey.
If you (or anyone else) is so worried about their personal security, I would suggest that instead of a gun, you consider a German Shephard or a Rottweiler or some other large intelligent canine.
A dog will protect your property when you are not at home. A gun will sit there and do nothing.
A dog know friend from foe, and will not attack a friend. A gun will kill whoever it is shot at.
Criminals will commit crimes just to steal a gun. Very few criminals will break into a home to steal a dog.
A dog provides friendship, exercise, and hours of amusement. A gun is used to kill. Period.
You are afraid of criminals, then go to the nearest pound and adopt a suitable breed of dog.
If instead you insist on owning a gun out of fear, you are a menace to your neighbors and everyone else within firing range.
Outlawing guns may not stop crime, but if it shuts up people like you it would be worth it.
The biggest argument in favor of gun control are the obsessed agressive insane individuals who worship gun ownership as a religion.
There is no other deadly machine or substance that is allowed the freedom that firewarms are allowed. Automobiles are registered, drivers are required to carry ID, possession of poisonous substances is strictly controlled, explosives are available only by permit. I'm not allowed to store organo-phosphate pesticides (=nerve gas) at home, yet the gun advocates believe they should be allowed to own any firearm with no restrictions whatever
Sounds like a very strange obsession to me. And yes, if some group advocated home use of organophosphate pesticides (or dynamite or radioactive substances...), I WOULD call them "jackals" and "murders"