We'll be pretty fucked too, if we regulate, cap, retard, and tax energy, technology and our economy due to a threat that may not turn out to be true, fueled by puppets of the socialist left.
Well, if you do it smartly, the worst thing that would happen if we regulate, cap, retard and tax energy and our economy is that our economy will be prepared for an energy-sparse world even before oil runs out. Saves maybe a few wars and a couple of life-or-death situations. Yes I know, the free market can solve all without any foresight whatsoever, but maybe, just maybe the free market is a random grab-for-all that will run out of steam the moment that you cannot 'take' energy from the soil anymore?
The polarization comes from two sides. You have sketched your problems with the side of the climate scientists that (think they) have found a huge problem and are trying all they can to get something done with that, fighting against any opposing view. As many do, you forget to look at what their opponents are.
The opponent of human-induced climate change is humbling. It is namely the status-quo. (Human induced) climate change is bad news not just for oil companies, but for banks, industry, anything that depends on burning fossil fuels: i.e., the economy.
So the fight is between the climate change scientists + their hippie groupies and the economy, all 400 trillion dollars of it.
So, from this perspective, you might be able to infer that opposition has been a bit on the heavy side. Why should we kill our economy for some unproven stuff that some hippie scientists have been providing? That was the tune of the nineties. So nothing happened. Now there is some more proof that actual climate change is occuring, but ha! you cannot prove it was us humans doing it! No this cannot be proven but it's a dishonest cop out.
So it is a set of hippie scientist that are obviously overconcerned with the figures they are measuring versus 400 trillion dollars worth of people 100% concerned with next quarter's financial report, combined with all people that like their way of life as it is know thank-you-very-much.
And you are complaining about the defensiveness of the hippies?
I'm not surprised there is a way to avoid being insecure, but that's beside the point. What I did, dumb user that I am, is what I would do on my own machine. I see the package 'openssh', I install it, and expect to be good to go from there. I did not expect to be vulnerable, even for a microsecond. No program should install a backdoor on any system, and this is what openssh on the iPhone did by default!
Then to think that this is on the iPhone platform, where people are expecting to just download an app and look at it maybe later, this is a nightmare to happen. And it happened. Furthermore, even when in the process of jailbreaking, the openssh app itself is being promoted for install. Guess what, most 'dumb' users will assume that this would enhance their experience somewhat, they would not realize that this would install a backdoor to their system, nor would they use it.
As for solving this, yes this is nontrivial but given the way the platform works (no shell by default), a necessity. The best approach is probably to bundle it with a terminal program like Mobile Terminal that you have to fire up to set the ssh password manually before you can log in remotely. That his would make openssh impossible to use for the real 'dumb user' is an additional benefit.
SSH should not install insecurely. Even in the time to log in and change the password, your device could be compromised. Instead of blaming the user (under which is the guy that installed ssh and never looked at it again), blame the distributor. He shipped a product that's insecure on install, and needs to be hardened by hand. That's stupid.
No amount of AV is going to protect against a user's stupidity.
And no amount of AV is going to protect against vendor/distributor stupidity either. Here we have a program, running on a non-firewalled device, which on install, instead of being non-functional, opens up to the whole world with a default password. This is not the 1990's people! In this day and age, I expect a program to be secure by default... whatever it takes, even if it means it is non-functional at install.
I actually have a jailbroken iphone on which I installed openssh. When I logged in I immediately realized the risk I was running and changed the password. However, between the time of installing openssh on my iPhone and the moment I changed the password there was at least a period of 5 minutes in which people could have hijacked the machine. Unforgivable. This distributor should be ashamed of himself.
In Holland the dykes and levees are build to withstand catastrophic events that happen once in 10,000 years. The NO levees were build to withstand catastrophic events that happen once in 200 years. This is a political choice and has nothing to do with actual weather conditions. New Orleans could have been protected with levees that would withstand cat-5 or worse, it was simply deemed too expensive. Obviously, a once-in-200 years event is bound to occur in a few generations, so you can say the New Orleans catastrophe was planned.
Interestingly enough, the Dutch deltaworks cost around 12 billion guilders (= 5 billion euros). The NO catastrophe costs a multitude, and it is practically certain that better levees would have been cheaper. It's about the politics, where NO decided not to bother with protection.
So in essence Tufte invents "graphs without axes, in-line with text", calls them sparklines. Then excel comes along and invents 'sparklines in a spreadheet', which, after proper removal of the redundant items (in-line with text), can be expaned to 'graphs without axes in a spreadsheet'. Bravo Excel: you're patenting the removal of one of your features!
It's no more permissible to assert the existence of a *principle* with no evidence than the existence of a *thing*.
Excellent, and let's call this statement the 'paradox of hey!'. This principle asserts that any principle is inadmissible as it is not rooted in fact, thereby invalidating itself.
Hmm, your reply doesn't make much sense. From your link:
A republic is a form of government in which the head of state is not a monarch[1] and the people (or at least a part of its people)[2] have an impact on its government
So, on the statement "we are no longer a democracy", you are answering: "correct, we are not a monarchy".
Truly, check it out. There are democratic republics (apparently not the US, but let's say France and Germany), non-democratic republics (US, China), democratic monarchies (Denmark for instance), and non-democratic monarchies (Saudi-Arabia). I know that you get taught in school that the US is not a direct democracy, but a representative democracy, but given that since ancient Athens we haven't seen a direct democracy, it is safe to assume that if one utters the word democracy it is with an silent 'representative'. Correcting this with saying that the US is a republic is very close to a non-sequitur.
So Microsoft looked at this and said, "wow, Java apps really suck shit when running on Windows, because it has very little in the way of integration." And they added the integration to their own version of Java. And Sun sued, and Microsoft stopped shipping it, and now Java's completely dead on the client-side.
Microsoft started to build a JVM (Embrace). Microsoft started to put Windows specific integration code and libraries in the 'java.*' namespace (Extend). This was contractually forbidden, but MS ignored that. If Sun would not have done a thing, we would have a version of java where no dev knows which stuff works on windows, and which works generally (Extinguish). Sun stopped that. Java still exists because of Sun not trusting MS.
I think the article argues that your 'impression' that evolutionary change is being stifled by both medicine and civilization is plain false. Also, it might be that the goal of most humans is to lead an fruitful and interesting lifes, but also that's irrelevant. Bottom line remains that whoever spawns most progeny will spread their genes. It is that simple.
You might want to think things through a bit more, as your preliminary paragraph displays a very incorrect view of how selection operates. Whoever makes most kids, takes over the population, genetically. Also, if dwarven females are that ugly, there you have an immediate selection pressure against them taking over.
You forget that a walled garden is very comforting and nice. You can temporarily forget about the harshness of reality and enjoy yourself, courtesy of megacorp.inc. People like that. But they do choose. They choose Apple for their computer experience, maybe Microsoft for their console experience, and maybe take a cruise for their holidays. There's a big market for taking care of people, as people really hate to figure out everything for themselves.
Your entire argument holds equally well for alcohol as one of the more serious addictive and inebriating substances. In effect, alcohol is worse than cocaine and meth w.r.t. these two properties. (Western) Society consists of millions upon millions of people who drink alcohol on a daily basis. These people are both able to work and hang on to a relationship. There's some health issues related to this, but nothing of epidemic proportions.
Thus, your assertion that an addictive and inebriating substance necessarily leads to a dysfunctional life is demonstrably false.
You might want to read up on the addictiveness of alcohol, especially w.r.t. cocaine. According to your argumentation, we should legalize cocaine and ban alcohol, and then there will be fewer alcoholics. History has already proven you wrong, want to try that again?
Okay, 70% of the population wants a public option. The majority of the morons in congress subscribes to the party that wants a public option. The majority (maybe even supermajority) of the senate is in hands of the party that wants a public option. The president wants a public option. What is there to negotiate?
Oh boy, the usual sloppiness of terms rears its ugly head. If we would be a bit more precise and say for instance 'freedom to express one's opinion' instead of 'free speech', a lot of discussion about the freedom of shouting fire in a theatre is suddenly superfluous. Same here, if we were just to use 'competitive market' instead of a 'free market', the parent's confusion on whether a regulated market can ever be 'truly free' would be avoided. (No, we don't care whether the market is regulated or not, we just want that everybody has a chance to compete on the market)
It would really help if people would state what freedoms they are actually trying to achieve, rather than this vacuous word 'free'. That just doesn't work. Free software? Same thing, it's the 'freedom to tinker' that RMS is after, I guess.
The police wouldn't be dumb enough to use that as evidence.
Ha! You obviously don't know about the utter cluelesness of the Dutch authorities. In actuality, these phone calls have found their way to court in numerous occasions, even to the point that a 3 year investigation of the Hell's Angels was thrown out of court as their evidence consisted of the perps talking to their lawyers.
You see, in the Netherlands the police is stupid, and the prosecuters are worse. The only reason anybody gets locked up at all is because our judges are possibly even more stupid and (still) expect that the prosecution has done their job rather than outright lie. In some cases that fantasy becomes too difficult to maintain, and then a case gets thrown out.
Sheesh. You guess that ISPs are going to be allowed to block all of VOIP because one call is illegal? They'll have Google & Skype on their case in the blink of an eye. Kill p2p? Possibly, but given that currently they are allowed to throttle whatever they like, the fact that p2p still exists means they really don't care. It's even better: when an ISP starts to determine what is legal and what is illegal on their network, they will quite likely lose common carrier status, and can be hold accountable for what people do on their network. That not going to happen.
And for the thing between countries? Do you think the FCC has anything to say outside of the US? Dutch don't care about the FCC, neither do the Swedes, nor the French. Net neutrality needs to be fought for in every country, not just the US.
You've answered your own question. If the EU dissaproves of the merger, OracleSun needs to close shop in Europe. That's obviously not acceptable for OracleSun, so they wait for approval before continuing the merger. A merged OracleSun that cannot do business in Europe is worth less than a single Oracle that can.
Which is complete shit and they are certainly _not_ the two biggest database solutions out there.
Really? Care to name the two biggest database solutions that are not Oracle and MySQL? DB2/Postgres/Firebird aren't it, and the rest is not even on the radar...
Slashdot Mirror
Well, if you do it smartly, the worst thing that would happen if we regulate, cap, retard and tax energy and our economy is that our economy will be prepared for an energy-sparse world even before oil runs out. Saves maybe a few wars and a couple of life-or-death situations. Yes I know, the free market can solve all without any foresight whatsoever, but maybe, just maybe the free market is a random grab-for-all that will run out of steam the moment that you cannot 'take' energy from the soil anymore?
Marketing. Greenland was named such to attract settlers.
The opponent of human-induced climate change is humbling. It is namely the status-quo. (Human induced) climate change is bad news not just for oil companies, but for banks, industry, anything that depends on burning fossil fuels: i.e., the economy. So the fight is between the climate change scientists + their hippie groupies and the economy, all 400 trillion dollars of it.
So, from this perspective, you might be able to infer that opposition has been a bit on the heavy side. Why should we kill our economy for some unproven stuff that some hippie scientists have been providing? That was the tune of the nineties. So nothing happened. Now there is some more proof that actual climate change is occuring, but ha! you cannot prove it was us humans doing it! No this cannot be proven but it's a dishonest cop out.
So it is a set of hippie scientist that are obviously overconcerned with the figures they are measuring versus 400 trillion dollars worth of people 100% concerned with next quarter's financial report, combined with all people that like their way of life as it is know thank-you-very-much.
And you are complaining about the defensiveness of the hippies?
(Hey, this is kind of fun, having the same discussion twice: once full, once abbreviated)
Then to think that this is on the iPhone platform, where people are expecting to just download an app and look at it maybe later, this is a nightmare to happen. And it happened. Furthermore, even when in the process of jailbreaking, the openssh app itself is being promoted for install. Guess what, most 'dumb' users will assume that this would enhance their experience somewhat, they would not realize that this would install a backdoor to their system, nor would they use it.
As for solving this, yes this is nontrivial but given the way the platform works (no shell by default), a necessity. The best approach is probably to bundle it with a terminal program like Mobile Terminal that you have to fire up to set the ssh password manually before you can log in remotely. That his would make openssh impossible to use for the real 'dumb user' is an additional benefit.
SSH should not install insecurely. Even in the time to log in and change the password, your device could be compromised. Instead of blaming the user (under which is the guy that installed ssh and never looked at it again), blame the distributor. He shipped a product that's insecure on install, and needs to be hardened by hand. That's stupid.
No amount of AV is going to protect against a user's stupidity.
And no amount of AV is going to protect against vendor/distributor stupidity either. Here we have a program, running on a non-firewalled device, which on install, instead of being non-functional, opens up to the whole world with a default password. This is not the 1990's people! In this day and age, I expect a program to be secure by default... whatever it takes, even if it means it is non-functional at install.
I actually have a jailbroken iphone on which I installed openssh. When I logged in I immediately realized the risk I was running and changed the password. However, between the time of installing openssh on my iPhone and the moment I changed the password there was at least a period of 5 minutes in which people could have hijacked the machine. Unforgivable. This distributor should be ashamed of himself.
Interestingly enough, the Dutch deltaworks cost around 12 billion guilders (= 5 billion euros). The NO catastrophe costs a multitude, and it is practically certain that better levees would have been cheaper. It's about the politics, where NO decided not to bother with protection.
So in essence Tufte invents "graphs without axes, in-line with text", calls them sparklines. Then excel comes along and invents 'sparklines in a spreadheet', which, after proper removal of the redundant items (in-line with text), can be expaned to 'graphs without axes in a spreadsheet'. Bravo Excel: you're patenting the removal of one of your features!
Apologies to Dijkstra.
Excellent, and let's call this statement the 'paradox of hey!'. This principle asserts that any principle is inadmissible as it is not rooted in fact, thereby invalidating itself.
So, on the statement "we are no longer a democracy", you are answering: "correct, we are not a monarchy".
Truly, check it out. There are democratic republics (apparently not the US, but let's say France and Germany), non-democratic republics (US, China), democratic monarchies (Denmark for instance), and non-democratic monarchies (Saudi-Arabia). I know that you get taught in school that the US is not a direct democracy, but a representative democracy, but given that since ancient Athens we haven't seen a direct democracy, it is safe to assume that if one utters the word democracy it is with an silent 'representative'. Correcting this with saying that the US is a republic is very close to a non-sequitur.
Microsoft started to build a JVM (Embrace). Microsoft started to put Windows specific integration code and libraries in the 'java.*' namespace (Extend). This was contractually forbidden, but MS ignored that. If Sun would not have done a thing, we would have a version of java where no dev knows which stuff works on windows, and which works generally (Extinguish). Sun stopped that. Java still exists because of Sun not trusting MS.
There is no genetic advantage to being sterile. Therefore, ants and bees do not exist.
You might want to think things through a bit more, as your preliminary paragraph displays a very incorrect view of how selection operates. Whoever makes most kids, takes over the population, genetically. Also, if dwarven females are that ugly, there you have an immediate selection pressure against them taking over.
You forget that a walled garden is very comforting and nice. You can temporarily forget about the harshness of reality and enjoy yourself, courtesy of megacorp.inc. People like that. But they do choose. They choose Apple for their computer experience, maybe Microsoft for their console experience, and maybe take a cruise for their holidays. There's a big market for taking care of people, as people really hate to figure out everything for themselves.
Thus, your assertion that an addictive and inebriating substance necessarily leads to a dysfunctional life is demonstrably false.
You might want to read up on the addictiveness of alcohol, especially w.r.t. cocaine. According to your argumentation, we should legalize cocaine and ban alcohol, and then there will be fewer alcoholics. History has already proven you wrong, want to try that again?
Okay, 70% of the population wants a public option. The majority of the morons in congress subscribes to the party that wants a public option. The majority (maybe even supermajority) of the senate is in hands of the party that wants a public option. The president wants a public option. What is there to negotiate?
It would really help if people would state what freedoms they are actually trying to achieve, rather than this vacuous word 'free'. That just doesn't work. Free software? Same thing, it's the 'freedom to tinker' that RMS is after, I guess.
It could still be insignificant. An R-squared of 30% based on 3 datapoints is insignificant. On 10000 it is highly significant.
Ha! You obviously don't know about the utter cluelesness of the Dutch authorities. In actuality, these phone calls have found their way to court in numerous occasions, even to the point that a 3 year investigation of the Hell's Angels was thrown out of court as their evidence consisted of the perps talking to their lawyers.
You see, in the Netherlands the police is stupid, and the prosecuters are worse. The only reason anybody gets locked up at all is because our judges are possibly even more stupid and (still) expect that the prosecution has done their job rather than outright lie. In some cases that fantasy becomes too difficult to maintain, and then a case gets thrown out.
And for the thing between countries? Do you think the FCC has anything to say outside of the US? Dutch don't care about the FCC, neither do the Swedes, nor the French. Net neutrality needs to be fought for in every country, not just the US.
You've answered your own question. If the EU dissaproves of the merger, OracleSun needs to close shop in Europe. That's obviously not acceptable for OracleSun, so they wait for approval before continuing the merger. A merged OracleSun that cannot do business in Europe is worth less than a single Oracle that can.
Really? Care to name the two biggest database solutions that are not Oracle and MySQL? DB2/Postgres/Firebird aren't it, and the rest is not even on the radar...