ThE REle@$3 9rOup5 +YP1c@lly H4vE on3 OR TWO l34d3R5, +Wo Or ThREe O+HeR M@n493r5 C4Lled "coUNCiL m3m83Rs," 10 tO 15 $+4fF M3MB3R$ who wORK 0N ReL3@53$ @Nd 50 +0 100 mem83r$ WhO $1mply H4vE 4Cc3s$ t0 +3H r3L34$35.
mR. S4NkU5, 0nE 0ph +Eh +w0 LEAd3R5 oF dR1nkORD1E, w3nT BY +H3 0nl1nE N@ME 3RifLL3H, 0R "HEllPh1R3" SP3llED 84ckw4rd. Th3 0+h3R L34D3R, WH0 Go35 BY +EH ONl1Ne N4M3 bandiDo, l1V35 1N @u$+R4li@ 4ND H@5 nOt n0T 8e3n CH4Rg3d, Ju$+1ce D3P4R+M3n+ 0fph1cI4L5 5@1d.
l1k3 $1m1L4r R3lEA$3 gR0Up$, dRINKOrD1E DIV1D3D +EH l@8Or. 5uPpL13R$, 0Ph+3N In$1d3R$ 4T 4 $OPHtwArE c0mp4ny, PrOv1Ded V3R51on5 0F +He SOPHTW4re. cR@ckeR$, Wh0 h4d +h3 m05+ TEChNOLog1c4Lly C0MpL3x ROl3, 5tr1PP3D tEh PRo9RamS oph thE1r pr0tecTIoN5. +e5T3r5 tHEN m4dE 5uR3 +h4+ Teh uNPR0+EcT3D V3r$10n5 OF tH3 50FTW4r3 WORk3D PR0perlY. F1n@lLY, TH3R3 w3r3 paCkER5 anD "prE-ER5" WhO WERe r35pOn$iblE f0r dIVidIn9 T3H Pro9R@m$ iN+0 5m4LL pHiL3S 4ND D15+Ri8UT1n9 THeM to REL345E S1+E$.
Mr. s4NKU$ 5+@rTeD ouT @$ 4 +e5+3R 4ND 4 pack3R FoR dr1NK0RdIE 83PhorE m0v1Ng 1nTO a L3@D3r5H1p P0S1+1On. "+HEr3 WER3N't +H4t m4ny pEopL3 WH0 w@n+eD t0 dO te5t1ng 4Nd PAckiNG b3C4u$3 it W4$ C0N51deRED grUN+ woRK," H3 541d.
Granted, it'll probably get sued by the WWE (World Wrestling Entertainment) who was recently sued by the WWF (World Wildlife Fund).
Even still, the Royal Rumble between Superman, Scooby Doo, Batman, the Penguin, Wonderwoman, Catwoman, and Tonya Harding, would be a truly kickass event.
I wish we studied using open-source methods
on
Open-Source Biology
·
· Score: 3, Funny
Any bank which requires me to have a Passport account won't get my business. The one thing about capitalism is that you -can- force unwanted business to end, simply by going to their competitors.
Of course, people are going to say that we don't want the RIAA/MPAA/??AA/etc but as a matter of fact, general society does, and we -do- still support them (by seeing movies, buying cds, etc)... the other difference is that they're a monopoly.
OTOH, no bank has a monopoly. As soon as Passport gets picked again, and credit cards numbers are out, people won't use it, and will demand a different method. (Note: viruses on desktop computers don't matter to people, because the general public doesn't store crucial data on their home computers) --
As soon as people start demanding non-Passport methods of authentication, banks -will- provide.
I don't think you realized, but otherfreeware programs come with servers installed. Because they all offer the same functionality (ie: remote administration) there is no real purpose to create a separate XP Server Edition.
Piece of advice: when writing a topic, any use of acronyms that have a high possibility of being misunderstood (ie: World Wildlife Fund) should be explained, so as to prevent people from being mistaken.
I, for one, have -never- heard of the World Wildlife Fund before this, and I'm sure there are others like me, who thought why the fsck are we believe the World Wrestling Foundation these days?
I mean, how often have I wanted to describe something to someone else, but just can't seem to get the right words? Assuming this is integrated well enough, just snap a picture and send it along... it's often not worth it to dig out the digital camera, snap a shot, hook it up to the PC, grab the pic, scale it, e-mail it, wait for the other person to get it, etc, etc...
I didn't even think about that, but that about makes it very useful.
Imagine talking to some chick you've never seen before and want to know what she looks like; hey flash your phone!
But seriously, it would be really convenient, as most people already keep cell phones on them all the time. I wouldn't mind have a camera -in- the phone.
Many posts regarding the interface describe it as "good once you get to know it." The challenge for any good interface designer isn't to just throw together bunches of related buttons and sliders, but to hopefully make their use, as well as the process required to learn them, as easy as practically possible.
Not necessarily; EMACS, for example, has a pretty steep learning curve. OTH, it is by far one of the best editors available (depending on who you ask). I've never used Blender, so I can't say much for it, but just saying, that a good interface doesn't need to very intuitive, but should be easy to use *once you've learned to use it*.
I agree; it wasn't meant to be informative, more of just a wiseass comment.... whoever modded that +1 Informative has absolutely no clue... +1 Funny would've been much more appropriate, or even -1 Almost Funny
Anyways, since you don't want to become bored while watching the grass, i've got some green "equipment" you might find handy. My pager number is.... oh fuck, the Feds........
First, if someone is sufficiently despearate for food they will do despearate things. Many (though, very notably, not all) will kill for food under such circumstances, even though the act is considered by most to be immoral even under such extreme circumstances. Correct, although, it's not even under extreme circumstances. There's an abundance of food for people of even an average budget (in the States) yet many people eat meat. Meat is derived by the killing of innocent animals, though most people would probably claim it's different, because they're not human.
But wait, what about dogs? Would you kill a dog for food? If not, why not? Where do you draw the line?
The reason most people won't eat dogs or cats (in the States; it's eaten in Eastern countries) is because we've become attached to them as animals.
IMO, the main reason *most* people would not kill other people or animals is not because of morals, but rather because of the fear of being ostracized, arrested, etc.
[ Note, I pretty much agree with you completely (except the last statement: I'd save my child's life over someone else's )... I'm just posting this to expand the question, as most people seem to think there's a black-and-white line, where instead there's a very grey line, and it mostly depends on how we perceive the intended victim, whether human or not]
No if all human monkeys were like me, we'd have our priorities straight. Given the fact that it's not common occurance to be offered your child's life for someone else's, it doesn't really matter what anyone would do. This is purely theoretical, and neither my argument nor yours (or anybody else's for that matter) has any relevance in the real world.
The question did specify any condtions such as starving children, etc. Therefore, the question is "Would you do it right now, sitting in your job interview in your good suit in your highly technologically advanced society?" Are your children currently starving? If they are, maybe you should spend less time on/. I expanded the question to make a point. I don't have any children (yet), but the way I was raised, my parents made many sacrifices for me and my little brother. I would do the same for my children, whether the sacrifice involves me or some random stranger.
Also, since you think it is moral/ethical/whatever to anonymously murder complete strangers, Under certain circumstances, yes.
you must therefore accept that it is moral/ethical/whatever for complete strangers to anonymously murder you. I would be surprised if this were the case. If somebody (who did not know) could save their child by killing me, they should kill me. I wouldn't exactly appreciate it, but I would expect, and not blame, them, as their child should be far important to them than me.
As mentioned in this post the million dollars is simply because that's what was stated in the article. The amount of money is meaningless. I would do the same for just enough to make sure they could live.
The million dollars was just because that's what was stated in the post.
I'd have the same reaction even if all my family got was enough money just to survive (shelter and food), and without it, they would most certainly be dead.
I understand that in most cases this is immoral. I am simply defending the fact that under certain circumstances would I hit the button...
I don't think this is what they were talking about. Killing for money is one thing, killing for survival is completely different. Personally, I do have morals, and I do have a nice job that ensures (at least temporarily) that I won't be facing the underside of a dumpster lid for my next meal. No.. there isn't a monetary price for a person's life.
Right, as I explained in another post: If I had a comfy job, or even an okay job, no, I would not kill someone for an extra million dollars. I'm also not referring to the article; I don't agree with their statement. I am however, defending the fact, that under certain specific circumstances, I, and many other people, too, would kill for a price.
First off, that's not human nature, you fucking sick motherfucker. Wrong. Yes it is. SURVIVAL UNDER ANY POSSIBLE MEANS is human nature.
Do you eat meat? Guess what, you indirectly kill animals for food. How is that any different?
It's in your best interest to live by this moral code else you too could end up dead due to the actions of a person much like yourself. So yes, it is in your SELF INTEREST to not kill strangers. Wrong. It is in my SELF-INTEREST to take care of me and my family. If it came down to my kid's life or some random stranger's life, I'll keep my kid's life. Similar thing: If I had to sacrifice my life to save my kid's life, I would do the same.
If someone broke into your house at midnight, and you didn't know why they were there, what would you do? What if you say them brandishing a knife? A gun? What if they were in your kid's room?
Under the right circumstances, you will kill. It's not only HUMAN nature, but ANIMAL NATURE to survive AT ALL COSTS.
No, both of you are obviously very ill. Do you only obey the law because you are afraid of getting caught?
No, it comes down to my morals. However, my responsibility lies to my family first instead of somebody else. Granted, murder is one of the most immoral acts out there; However, if his life means absolutely nothing to me (as in, I don't know him, or anything about his family, and aren't ever going to know) and my family desperately neds the money (ie: for food, not going out and having fun) then yes, my obligations call for hitting the button.
A similar question: Would you sacrifice your life to give your family a million dollars? If they desperately needed it, and I knew that they would only think I dieed in some accident, then, yes.
I'd be more apt to say it's about the value of money. Let me explain:
Would I kill someone in my family for any amount of money? No, not a chance.
What about some random stranger? Depends: If I'm making enough money to live comfortably, no. If I'm not making much money, but I don't have any family (ie: just taking care of myself), no. If my family is in dire need of money, possibly. If I have to physically murder the person, and have a serious possibility of getting caught: I dunno, depends on how much I need the money, and what I have to do. If I have to physically murder the person, and most likely won't get caught: Depends on my mood, and what I have to do. If I just have to hit a button, and have never seen or known the person before, and ave no way of getting caught, Chances are Yes.
It doesn't make me less of a moral person; it's just human nature. And my family and kids come before anybody else. If somebody else's death does not affect me in any way, what's stopping me from killing him?
As a side note, I read an interview with a professional hitman once. He explained that when he killed people, he did not want to know anything about them (their name, their family, etc), because he might not want to kill them. OTOH, if he only knows what they look like and where they are, it's "just a hit". He'd fall into the zone before taking the hit, and wouldnt remember anything about it afterwards.
Imagine there's a peasant somewhere halfway across the world. If you could push a button and kill the person without getting caught, would you do it for a million dollars?'
If not, at what price would you? Oh, so you've got morals, ay? What if you had no money, and your family and kids were starving to death? It's winter, you don't make enough money at your job to give your kids any shelter or food, and they're out hiding in the dumpster behind McDonald's trying to fend off frostbite while getting some free food. Would you do it then?
-- Better yet, for a little irony: what if the person at the other end of the button was Jack Valenti, George Bush, Osama bin Laden? Would your views be different then?
--
Every man has a price; You just have to find that price.
Slashdot Mirror
L45+ W33K, @t 493 29, john 54NKu5 jr. M0v3D 0u+ 0Ph HI$ p4r3n+5' hou5E Ph0R T3H F1R$+ +ime. he 4nd h1$ p@R3NTS dr0v3 150 m1l35 From TheiR H0m3 iN 5ubUrB4N phIL@Delph14 +0 h15 N3w oN3: 4 ph3D3r4l PENI+en+14Ry In @lLENWo0d, p@.
mr. 54nKU5, WhO 3nTerEd +HE M1N1MUM-53CUR1TY pr1$0n on julY 2 t0 $3rv3 4 46-m0N+h s3NtenC3, 1$ 4 5oPh+-5p0K3n, CHURCh901ng cOmpu+er T3cHNIcian WHo 5+ILl h45 +3H pLU$h 5+UpHFed wHaLE5 pHR0m hiS cHiLDHO0d.
But Un1TEd S+4tE5 CU5+0M5 seRv1C3 1NvE5+ig4tors 4ND Pr0$eCU+0rs $4y hE w4S 4l50 A RIn9le4d3r OPH 4n 1N+3RN4+IOn@l gAn9 of 5oF+W4r3 PIR@te$ th@+ DEpr1VeD C0MpANi3S 0pH M1Lli0N5 of dOlL4R5 +HR0U9H +h3 1LL394L D15tR1bU+1on 0PH c0PyrighT3D 5Of+W@R3, 94ME$ 4nD M0v1e5 0n +eh 1N+ErN3T. iN ph3BrU4Ry, MR. $@nKU5 plE4d3d 9UiL+y T0 @ fEl0Ny C0uN+ OPH c0nspiRACY T0 Comm1+ COpYRIgHt infR1N9emENT.
+He P1R4Cy 9r0uP, KN0Wn 45 drinKoRd13, W4$ @m0Ng +3H Chi3f t@r93T$ 0PH M0Re +H4n 100 c0oRD1N@T3D R4iDS iN +Eh uN1T3D sT4t35 4Nd @8rO@D l45+ dEc3MB3R. 50 F4R 15 PEOPle In +3H un1+3D StA+35 H4V3 pL34d3d gUiL+Y +0 Cr1M1naL ch4R935 As 4 r3SUl+ 0F tH3 RA1d$, INcLuD1N9 4 DUk3 un1v3R51tY $+UDENT, 4 prOgr4MMER 4+ thE uNIvERsItY of c@L1fORn14 @+ lO5 4NG3Les, 4N EMploYEE @+ 4n 1nT3rN3T 5erV1c3 pROv1dEr 4ND 5eV3r@l ExEcUtiVe5 4T technol0gY ComP@N1e$. SO F@R mr. 5@NKU$ 4nd f1V3 0thER5 h@Ve Be3N 53nT3NC3D to pRi$0n.
1N+3Rv13w$ WiTh MR. 54nku5 @nD O+h3r$ 1nv0LvEd In teh C@5e, 1NcLUd1NG CU$+0ms @nD l4w 3npHOrcem3nt oFF1C14L$, ofF3R @n unU$u4L 9LImP53 1nT0 +EH worLD of 1n+ErNE+ PiR4cy. 1T 1$ A COMMUNIty 0f 5OrT$, Wi+H P3rHaP5 30 M@J0r gr0UpS Th@+ 1$5U3 PIrat3d pR0DUC+$ 8y cRACk1Ng +Eh copY-PRO+Ec+i0N cod35 OpH SOPHTw@RE oR MakiNG iLLICI+ dUpL1C@+e5 0f MOV135.
m@NY OpH +h3 PIr4t3s 5@Y +hey WerE m0+1v4t3d le$5 8Y monEY th@n 8Y 4 5en$3 0ph C0Mp3+i+10N, Pr3S+ige 4nd +eH en+ErT@1nMEnt vAlu3 OF Di5TRi8U+1N9 +3H P1r4+3d go0d5, wH1ch +HEY c4LL "war3z."
"m0$T 0Ph T3H P3opl3 1 h@vE b33N 4roUnD WItH 4R3 n0t 0uT tO Ch3@T 4ny8oDy," 54Id Mr. 54NkU$, a L4R93, 5Hy maN whO W0rked @5 @ cOmpuTeR t3Chn1C1An 4+ @ 9@teW4y $TOR3. "tHeY 4r3 0UT +o H@V3 FUn. IT'$ jU5t @ Ho88Y."
In @n IN+erVi3W b3PhoR3 H3 W3NT 0phF +O pr1$0n, mR. 5@nKUs 5@1d he e@Rn3d nO monEy fR0m 50pHTWar3 PIR4cy. h3 DE5Cr18eD IT r4+H3r @5 @ $0C14l Ac+iVi+Y +h4T cON$umED H1m.
hE rec0unTEd +h3 d4Y wh3n @B0Ut 40 4rm3d cU$+0m5 4gen+5 5wOopEd 1nT0 h15 WoRkpL4C3. "i F3L+ L1KE 5om30NE wh0 HAD JU5t MUrdereD 50 Pe0pL3," He $4ID.
Pr0sEcU+OR$ $@Y +H4+ mr. 54nku$ HELPed $+34L MIlL1oNs Of doLl4R5' w0RTH 0ph in+3Llec+uaL Prop3R+y. 4ND DE5P1t3 +eH 9uiltY pl3@5 pHR0m HIm @nD 0thER5, +Hey 4dd, ThE 5+e4L1nG coN+INu35 Bec4U53 0f The naTUr3 OF th3 D15+ri8u+i0n M3DIum.
"TH4+'5 Teh D1Ff3RencE -- 1N thE OLd W0Rld, 1Ph j00 5t0Pp3D +h3 $oURc3, j00 5+OPpeD Th3 P1RaCY," 54id m1CH4eL du8oS3, 4 JU$+iCe deP4R+Ment l@wyeR wH0 Pl@y3d 4 PIvOT4l ROle 1N thE p1r@CY 1nvE5T19@+1ON. "bU+ 4Ll +3h $tuPHpH +h4+ Dr1nK0rDi3 PUT OUT +heR3 c0N+1nU35 to bE 0ut +H3R3."
wh1lE iN+ErnEt P1r4cY 5Lowed ImmeDi@+ElY 4pht3R +he d3CEMbeR R@1d$, @cT1v1tY h45 piCKed up @94iN, Inv3sT19@t0RS $@Y. PH0R EX@MPl3, wARcR@fT 1I1, 4N 3@G3rly 4nTIcip@t3d g4me FrOm bLizZ4RD 3NTERt41nmEnt, W45 "cR4ck3d" 4Nd r3le4SEd tO TH3 1nT3rn3+ 0nlY on3 D4Y apHTeR 4 M4S+3R cD F0r +EH g@me w45 CR34+Ed 1n m1D-jUNe.
phoR Dr1nKorD1e M3mB3R$, pIr4Cy w4s TEH TecHnOl0GiCAl EKw1v4l3nt 0f J0Y r1D1n9 -- 4 PH0rM 0pH Br4VADo +h@t C0uLD 941n theM 4Cc3Pt4NC3 iN 4 hIEr@RcH1C4l $oCi4L 5pHER3.
"i+'$ 4Ll 4b0uT 5t@TUre," $4iD d@ViD 9r1M3$ 0ph ArliN9toN, T3x., a DRINK0RdI3 m3MbeR wh0 W0RkEd 45 @ C0mpu+3R 3NG1Ne3r @+ CheCK po1n+ $oFTWaR3, 4 C0Mp4NY Th4T 5P3Ci@LiZE5 1N $ECUr1+y 5oLU+10N5 For 50PhtW4R3. "THeY 4R3 JU5+ +RY1N9 +O M4k3 4 n4me ph0r tHeM$3lve5 For N0 r345oN 0+HER +H@n $3LF-gR4+1PH1C4+10n." MR. 9RiME$ 1$ 53rV1nG 4 37-M0Nth PRisoN S3N+3nCe aFtER pL34DIN9 GuIL+y +o +3H 54mE Ch4r9E +h4t MR. $4nku5 dID.
"i+'5 +h3 5@M3 r3450n tH4T P3oPL3 J01n 9@nG$," $4Id ALl@N doODY, +3h Cu$TOM$ 53Rv1Ce InV35tI9A+Or WHO L3D TEh DR1NK0rD1e inV3$T1g@+10N, p4r+ 0f 4 8r04D3R 4nTi-p1r@CY C@mP41gN c@LLEd 0Per@T10n 8UCc4n33r. "+H3y'r3 h4N9iN9 ou+ on th3 CYB3R-S+r3Et CORNeR."
8UT iN c0NTr45t t0 p3+Ty crImIN@l$ And W4rrin9 94n95, 1nT3RN3+ P1r4cy gR0Up5 H4vE @ WORlDwide 1MP4c+ 0f 4t l345t +3n$ 0ph M1LlI0n$ 0ph doLl4R5, 1Ph N0+ Mor3. 5UcH 9ROuP5 $3CuRe +HE1r REPut4t10N5 bY R3le4SiN9 Th0USANd$ of Fr33 mOv13$, g4M35, MU51C And s0PH+w@R3 Pr09r4m5 ON +eH 1Nt3rne+ 34CH Ye@r.
WHIL3 5uch 9RouP5 r4RElY PR0pHI+ F1nANc14lly FRoM +H31R @Ct1v1t135, th31r w4r3z (pRon0UnCEd liK3 Th3 w0rD w4R35), PROliF3r4+3 r4piDlY @r0unD +3H W0Rld, r3@CHiNG +Ho53 whO d0 5eLl +h3M Ph0R 94iN -- F0r 3X4MPlE, P3OPL3 Wh0 H4wK +he sOf+wAR3 +hR0UgH P4y-For-4CcE55 WE8 5IT35 or BUrN +H3M 0N cD'5 FOR $@le On +HE 5TR3E+, 1N 5h0Ps 0r 4t 1N+3Rn3t 4UcTiOn 5ITe5.
+He Copi35 "B3com3 +3h R4w M@+3Ri4l5 +h4+ 0thER5 U$e F0R COmMerCI@l PiR4cY," 54id Bo8 KrU9ER, pReS1DeN+ oph THe 8u51n355 $0ftw@r3 @Ll1@ncE, 4N 1nDu$+Ry 9r0up +H4t 4ss3r+5 +h4+ $oFTW4re p1R@CY cO5Ts $10.1 8ill1On 4 Y34r 1N l0$+ $@LES w0rldWId3.
tH3 V1C+1m5 OPh pIR@CY TAKE +hE THR34+ v3RY 5Er1ou$ly. h@V4rd VOlD, pR3$Id3n+ 0PH 4N 31ghT-p3R50N COMP4NY 1N CINcinN4Ti c4LL3d v0lD $0lU+10N$, w4$ HoRRiPH13d t0 dI$C0vER +haT Dr1Nk0RdIE H@D rEl34$ED 4 pHr3E V3R$10n 0Ph 4 5PEci4l1Z3D 3n9in3ER1n9 pr09R4M Th4+ h15 CoMP4NY $old PH0R $9,500.
"+h4+ w@5 V3ry 5C@RY," mR. vOLD s41d. "TH3Y Do NOt UndEr5+4nD +HE 1Mp4CT Of copYr19H+ Infr1N93mEnT, 35P3CI4lLy ON tHE $M4lL3r cOmpAN1e5."
4l+h0U9h +eH w@r3z scEnE TOOK RO0+ ONLy iN +eh 3aRLy 1990'5, p1R4cy H4$ eXp4ND3D r@P1dlY, P@rt1culaRLY 1n +H3 l@5+ fiVe Ye4r5.
1ncr3A$inG 4CC3s5 +O +3H iNt3RnE+ WORLdWiDE, ch34p c0mpU+er 5torA93 cOsT5 @Nd T3H PR0L1fER@+I0N 0F Dig1+IzEd MeDi4 h@ve H3lP3d 53+ ofph @n INtErN4+1Onal 0nLInE 5H0PP1n9 5Pr3e 1n WHiCh jU5t A8out @nYONE C4n 0bT@1N 4 PIR4Ted vER510N 0f a C0v3t3D $0phTw@re PR0gr4m, C0mPUTer 9aM3 0r M0vIE OPEnly @nd e45ILY.
by contr@$t, +Eh W4rEZ gR0Up$ th3M$3Lve$ t3Nd +O oper@t3 iN 5ecr3CY, REly1n9 on 3Ncryp+I0n +EChnoLOgIe$, D1s9UI5eD 1nT3rNet protOc0l @ddR35$e5 @Nd INv1te-0NLY cH@T Ch@Nnels. 4Nd +heIR wOrlD i5 hi9Hly 5Truc+uRED, wi+h 4 5+r1CT hi3r4RChY @nd rulE5.
th3 p1R4+E5 4r3 0r94Niz3d IN+0 tw0 m@IN +yP3$: R3Le453 gRoUp5 Th4t pr0dUc3 +H3 p1r4+eD W0RK5 aND c0UrI3r GrouP5 th4+ 5ErV3 a5 WorLdwid3 d15TrIBU+ORs.
g0VERNM3Nt 1Nv3$T1g@+or$ 3$+1m@T3 +H@+ tH3RE 4re ROUgHLY 30 M@joR rEL34$3 9r0up$ 3Nli5TIn9 5Ome 1,500 P30ple Ar0uNd tEh w0rLd. 1N teH DriNkOrd1e r41D$ lA$t d3cEMb3r, w4rr@n+$ W3R3 $3Rv3D 0n 5u5pECtED MEMBers 1N 8rI+41N, @U5+r@lI4, f1Nl4nD, NOrWAy @Nd $W3D3n. MR. dU8O5E 541D +H@+ 4+ LEa5+ H4lF 0PH dRINk0rD13'5 MEM8eR5 l1VED OU+51de thE uN1T3D 5+aTE5.
dIfphEREnT w4r3z 9roUP5 f0cu5 on DifphErENT pR0dUCT l1N3$. gr0up$ lIke pH@irLigHt AND R4Zor1911 @r3 Kn0wN pH0R G4M3 r3l3@5e$. phTF @ND IMmoRtal vCd reL3a53 m0vI35, @ PUr5UIT +H4+ rELI3$ L3$5 on 0VeRC0mIN9 PR0Tec+1oN 5ch3Mes tH4N oN 9E++In9 iLLEg1+1M4+3 4cce$5 t0 Recent FIlM5 tO DuPliC4+E +H3M. 4 gR0Up CALlEd P0pZ, PHOr ParEN+5 On 'PUTerZ, Ph0cu53$ ON chIlDR3N'5 9AmE5.
drink0RD13, Wh1ch i5 perhAp5 8Es+ KNoWn F0R H4vIN9 cR4CK3D wind0w5 95 weeK$ B3foR3 I+ w@$ r3le@sEd 8y M1cr0$0Ph+, h4$ MOR3 R3CEntly C0nC3N+Ra+eD 0n 3xp3NS1ve 5p3Ci4liZ3d 50F+w@re LIke mR. V0LD'S EnG1neer1NG pR09R4m.
"1+'$ k3WL t0 RELeA53 s0mETHIn9 +H@+ c0$+5 $18,000," 54id Mr. 9r1me$, the Dr1NK0Rdi3 mEMb3r Fr0m 4Rl1n9+On, +3X. "8AS1C4lLy, 1f i+ W45n't pHOr U5, j00 WOuld n3v3r 533 ThI5 P13c3 0f $0PHtw4R3."
w4ReZ inV0lVe PHREnZiED c0mP3+1ti0N. 9roup$ r@Ce +0 be T3H Fir5T T0 ReLeA5e p0puL@r M0V13$ @ND 9@m3S, 8U+ Kw4LITy I$ 1MPoRTAn+ Too. gR0UP5 t@k3 j@8$ 4+ oN3 @No+her'5 reL34535. imMoR+@l vCd Call3d 4 c0mPe+1+oR'$ RElE@$E 0f TH3 dISNey PH1Lm "l1l0 AND $+1+cH" 5u8P4r, De$cRIbin9 t3h C0PY 45 "v3ry d4rk, sh4ky 4ND P1Xil4+3d." I+ 0FF3rEd i+5 0WNZOR V3r$1ON @s aN iMPR0vemen+.
ThE REle@$3 9rOup5 +YP1c@lly H4vE on3 OR TWO l34d3R5, +Wo Or ThREe O+HeR M@n493r5 C4Lled "coUNCiL m3m83Rs," 10 tO 15 $+4fF M3MB3R$ who wORK 0N ReL3@53$ @Nd 50 +0 100 mem83r$ WhO $1mply H4vE 4Cc3s$ t0 +3H r3L34$35.
mR. S4NkU5, 0nE 0ph +Eh +w0 LEAd3R5 oF dR1nkORD1E, w3nT BY +H3 0nl1nE N@ME 3RifLL3H, 0R "HEllPh1R3" SP3llED 84ckw4rd. Th3 0+h3R L34D3R, WH0 Go35 BY +EH ONl1Ne N4M3 bandiDo, l1V35 1N @u$+R4li@ 4ND H@5 nOt n0T 8e3n CH4Rg3d, Ju$+1ce D3P4R+M3n+ 0fph1cI4L5 5@1d.
l1k3 $1m1L4r R3lEA$3 gR0Up$, dRINKOrD1E DIV1D3D +EH l@8Or. 5uPpL13R$, 0Ph+3N In$1d3R$ 4T 4 $OPHtwArE c0mp4ny, PrOv1Ded V3R51on5 0F +He SOPHTW4re. cR@ckeR$, Wh0 h4d +h3 m05+ TEChNOLog1c4Lly C0MpL3x ROl3, 5tr1PP3D tEh PRo9RamS oph thE1r pr0tecTIoN5. +e5T3r5 tHEN m4dE 5uR3 +h4+ Teh uNPR0+EcT3D V3r$10n5 OF tH3 50FTW4r3 WORk3D PR0perlY. F1n@lLY, TH3R3 w3r3 paCkER5 anD "prE-ER5" WhO WERe r35pOn$iblE f0r dIVidIn9 T3H Pro9R@m$ iN+0 5m4LL pHiL3S 4ND D15+Ri8UT1n9 THeM to REL345E S1+E$.
Mr. s4NKU$ 5+@rTeD ouT @$ 4 +e5+3R 4ND 4 pack3R FoR dr1NK0RdIE 83PhorE m0v1Ng 1nTO a L3@D3r5H1p P0S1+1On. "+HEr3 WER3N't +H4t m4ny pEopL3 WH0 w@n+eD t0 dO te5t1ng 4Nd PAckiNG b3C4u$3 it W4$ C0N51deRED grUN+ woRK," H3 541d.
+H3 w@rEZ cOmMuni+y H4s NUM3rOu$ D@t@b4$e5 +0 K33P tR@CK 0F +3h +h0u5@ND5 0F r3Le4535. peOPle C4n peRfORm Wh4+ 4rE Kn0WN 45 "duP3 cHeck$," 0R 534RChE5 +O D3T3rmiNe wH3+H3R 4 pr0GR4M 0R 4 m0viE haS 4LreadY b3EN relE@53D.
Th3 150N3W5 W3b 51+e (www.1$n0New5.C0m) KeEp5 a pUblIC d@t4B45e 0ph +h3 INPhoRM4+iON FiLe5 +H4+ acc0mP@ny e@ch W4reZ rEL3453. $Uch fiLE5 $pEc1PhY who W4s RESP0N5I8lE Ph0R +HE r3LEa53, wheN It W4$ m@d3 @v41L48LE @Nd H0W m@ny PH1L35 ThE PR0duC+ H@5 b3En broKEn D0WN 1Nto, A5 WeLl 4s REv1EW5. tH3 w4Rez gROuP$ PR1V4+ELy m4iN+41n 4 DAt4B4S3 kNOwN @$ CH3Ckp0in+ +h4+ H45 4UTom4+eD 50FtW4r3 493N+$, 0r 8o+5, +H@+ ke3p 48r34S+ 0F w@r3Z R3l345E5 4S theY oCcUR.
ONC3 TEH PhilE5 @rr1VE a+ tHe R3l345E $1+e5, c0UR1ER 9R0UP$ +4kE oVeR 4nD mov3 +h3m +hR0UGH @ 5y5T3MAtic Di5+RiBU+10N cH41N. w1thIn 10 m1nu+3$ 0pH @ W4rez r3l345e, TEh p1R4tED PRODUc+ 15 c0Pi3D +0 4 phEw Doz3n CEnTR@L dI5+R1bU+10N cEn+3rS On tH3 IN+erN3T.
9oV3RNM3n+ oPhfiC1@Ls E$+Ima+e +H4t WI+HiN SIx h0Ur5, lOwer-LEv3L c0UrI3R5 +H3N COpY f1l3S +O 4Bou+ 10,000 Pu8lICLy 4v41L@BL3 SITE5 4RouNd T3h IN+3RNE+. w1TH1N TwO 0r ThR3e d@Y$, +eH MOv1E5 4nD Pr0GR@M +RIckL3 0Nt0 U53N3t 9rOup5 @nd 0N+o pEer-to-pEeR s0PHTW@r3 n3+W0rKS l1K3 k4Z@4 4nD MoRpheU5. ONc3 +hE PhiLE5 bEC0M3 pu8LiC, +HEy 4R3 3$seN+iaLlY av41l48L3 t0 4Ny0ne wHO 9Oe5 LO0K1Ng F0R tH3M.
"4lL IT T4Ke5 15 0NE P3R$0N +O pUT i+ oN A N3W$GR0uP -- +Hen IT ExplOd3$," $@id d4vid rOcci, wh0 run$ I$0New$.
th3 coUr1er 9R0up5, lik3 t3h rEL34$e GR0up5, 4Re phuEL3D by c0Mp3+I+I0n. TH3 90V3RNM3Nt 35+iM@+35 +hA+ 3,500 pE0Ple 4R3 INVolV3D iN T3H M05+ L33T courIeR GR0uP$, WhicH InClUde RIsc 4nD m0ON5hIN3.
c0ur13r5 4R3 r4nkeD 1N gR0Up5 4ND @5 1nD1V1du4L5 w1+H @ 5CoRing 5y5+3M. th3RE 4R3 We3kly r@nK1n9S, 4ll-t1M3 R@Nk1NG$ 4ND R3GI0N4L r4nKingS (un1+eD 5T4+3S v5. 3UR0P3, foR 3XampL3).
c0ur1Er gROUP$ 4R3 $IZeD Up 1n $h4D0WY e-m41l PuBl1C4+I0n5 l1kE @MErIc4n C0uRier R3vI3W 4Nd couRier w33KT0p 5c0reC4rD iN 5P0r+$-$TYL3 COMMeNt4rY. "JU5+ No+ KW1Te eN0u9H foR risc TH1S +IME 8u+ 4n @wE50me te4M ePhPhorT 1N WH1Ch wE $eE $OME n1CE INDiV1dU4l p3RphOrM@nce @5 w3ll," A RECEnT RevieW r34d.
4LThouGH r3lE@5e @nd Cour13r GrOUP5 en9@93 IN L1++L3 DIR3cT CoMm3RcI@l 4ct1v1+Y, 4 1997 3xT3n5I0N In phEdEr4l COPYr19H+ L4w m4DE PiR4cy 4 cr1Me 3veN 1F tH3Re 15 no m0NET4RY pr0PH1T.
prOS3CU+oR5 54y +h4+ MoNEy IS 835iD3 +hE P01NT In +h3 UnD3r9R0uNd piR@TE ECOn0MY. t3h Rele@5e5 PH0rM +h3 b@51$ 0ph 4 8@r+3rING Sy$+3m 1N WhicH mem8er5 Tr@De, Ho4Rd 4nD colL3cT W4R3Z. 4CcE55 to 50FTW@R3 S+0r4g3 siT35 I5 GR4n+eD 1N 3XcHAn9e ph0r h4Rdw4R3, 5ervEr $P4cE 4nD 0+HeR +echN0L0G1C4L gOoD5.
"y0U don'+ Ne3D +0 M@K3 M0N3y, Wh3n j00 DoN'+ N3ED MOneY T0 bUy tH1$ S+uFF," mR. du8O53 5A1d. "8Y pAR+1CIP4+1N9 In 4 9rOuP, th3Y 9O+ +eh kEy +0 +H3 c4nDy $tORe. 4nY moVIE, G@me, 50F+w@Re +hEY couLD ev3r W4N+, Th3y COuld get."
5+ill, GiV3N The 48$3nCe 0pH PEr50n4l pR0ph1+, sOME DrInk0rd1E m3Mb3R5 W3rE 5urpr1seD by +3h PrI$On 5en+3NCe5 +h3y rEc31v3d, 93Ner4LlY pHRom +Hre3 +0 FOuR Ye@rS. "WE werEn'+ cr1m1n4l-M1ndeD," mR. 9RImE5 54Id. "W3 NEv3r @n+1cIP4+ED th@T 4 comP4nY w0uld l05e 4 54le @S 4 R35ul+ 0F 0Ne 9Uy 1N CHiN4 DownL0@dinG it 4nd 8UrNing it 0NTO @ Cd @nD 53LLiN9 1+ t0 h4lf 0F ChiN@."
8u+ +h4+ 4r9UMeNt f4il5 To rE$0N@Te PhoR c0PyriGhT hOlDErs L1k3 Mr. v0LD. "1pH J00 lIk3 +0rCH1N9 hOu535 fOr PhuN, J00 DON't 9@1n 4NYth1n9 PHRom ToRch1NG s0m380Dy's hOu5e," hE 541d. "8U+ TH4t H0me0wN3R W1lL c3R+A1NLY SUphpHEr @ m4+3r14L lO$$."
The Superhuman Royal Rumble.
Granted, it'll probably get sued by the WWE (World Wrestling Entertainment) who was recently sued by the WWF (World Wildlife Fund).
Even still, the Royal Rumble between Superman, Scooby Doo, Batman, the Penguin, Wonderwoman, Catwoman, and Tonya Harding, would be a truly kickass event.
especially when studying the
(drumroll please)
female anatomy.
Any bank which requires me to have a Passport account won't get my business. The one thing about capitalism is that you -can- force unwanted business to end, simply by going to their competitors.
... the other difference is that they're a monopoly.
Of course, people are going to say that we don't want the RIAA/MPAA/??AA/etc but as a matter of fact, general society does, and we -do- still support them (by seeing movies, buying cds, etc)
OTOH, no bank has a monopoly. As soon as Passport gets picked again, and credit cards numbers are out, people won't use it, and will demand a different method. (Note: viruses on desktop computers don't matter to people, because the general public doesn't store crucial data on their home computers) --
As soon as people start demanding non-Passport methods of authentication, banks -will- provide.
I don't think you realized, but other freeware programs come with servers installed. Because they all offer the same functionality (ie: remote administration) there is no real purpose to create a separate XP Server Edition.
; )
Piece of advice: when writing a topic, any use of acronyms that have a high possibility of being misunderstood (ie: World Wildlife Fund) should be explained, so as to prevent people from being mistaken.
I, for one, have -never- heard of the World Wildlife Fund before this, and I'm sure there are others like me, who thought why the fsck are we believe the World Wrestling Foundation these days?
I mean, how often have I wanted to describe something to someone else, but just can't seem to get the right words? Assuming this is integrated well enough, just snap a picture and send it along... it's often not worth it to dig out the digital camera, snap a shot, hook it up to the PC, grab the pic, scale it, e-mail it, wait for the other person to get it, etc, etc...
I didn't even think about that, but that about makes it very useful.
Imagine talking to some chick you've never seen before and want to know what she looks like; hey flash your phone!
But seriously, it would be really convenient, as most people already keep cell phones on them all the time. I wouldn't mind have a camera -in- the phone.
Many posts regarding the interface describe it as "good once you get to know it." The challenge for any good interface designer isn't to just throw together bunches of related buttons and sliders, but to hopefully make their use, as well as the process required to learn them, as easy as practically possible.
Not necessarily; EMACS, for example, has a pretty steep learning curve. OTH, it is by far one of the best editors available (depending on who you ask). I've never used Blender, so I can't say much for it, but just saying, that a good interface doesn't need to very intuitive, but should be easy to use *once you've learned to use it*.
I agree; it wasn't meant to be informative, more of just a wiseass comment.... whoever modded that +1 Informative has absolutely no clue ... +1 Funny would've been much more appropriate, or even -1 Almost Funny
Anyways, since you don't want to become bored while watching the grass, i've got some green "equipment" you might find handy. My pager number is .... oh fuck, the Feds........
2.something if I remember correctly... ;)
Who are you?
Or, more specifically, male or female?
ala FreeBSD, OpenBSD (One remote hole in the default install, in nearly 6 years!) , OpenSSH, Apache, etc.
Instead, let's use proprietary "secure" software, ala Win2000, IIS, etc.
Not really surprised...you had to state that he's offering jobs, didn't you?
First, if someone is sufficiently despearate for food they will do despearate things. Many (though, very notably, not all) will kill for food under such circumstances, even though the act is considered by most to be immoral even under such extreme circumstances.
... I'm just posting this to expand the question, as most people seem to think there's a black-and-white line, where instead there's a very grey line, and it mostly depends on how we perceive the intended victim, whether human or not]
Correct, although, it's not even under extreme circumstances. There's an abundance of food for people of even an average budget (in the States) yet many people eat meat. Meat is derived by the killing of innocent animals, though most people would probably claim it's different, because they're not human.
But wait, what about dogs? Would you kill a dog for food? If not, why not? Where do you draw the line?
The reason most people won't eat dogs or cats (in the States; it's eaten in Eastern countries) is because we've become attached to them as animals.
IMO, the main reason *most* people would not kill other people or animals is not because of morals, but rather because of the fear of being ostracized, arrested, etc.
[ Note, I pretty much agree with you completely (except the last statement: I'd save my child's life over someone else's )
No if all human monkeys were like me, we'd have our priorities straight. Given the fact that it's not common occurance to be offered your child's life for someone else's, it doesn't really matter what anyone would do. This is purely theoretical, and neither my argument nor yours (or anybody else's for that matter) has any relevance in the real world.
Exactly, as I previously said, "Every man has a price" though the price does often include other non-financial factors.
The question did specify any condtions such as starving children, etc. Therefore, the question is "Would you do it right now, sitting in your job interview in your good suit in your highly technologically advanced society?" Are your children currently starving? If they are, maybe you should spend less time on /.
I expanded the question to make a point. I don't have any children (yet), but the way I was raised, my parents made many sacrifices for me and my little brother. I would do the same for my children, whether the sacrifice involves me or some random stranger.
Also, since you think it is moral/ethical/whatever to anonymously murder complete strangers,
Under certain circumstances, yes.
you must therefore accept that it is moral/ethical/whatever for complete strangers to anonymously murder you. I would be surprised if this were the case.
If somebody (who did not know) could save their child by killing me, they should kill me. I wouldn't exactly appreciate it, but I would expect, and not blame, them, as their child should be far important to them than me.
As mentioned in this post the million dollars is simply because that's what was stated in the article. The amount of money is meaningless. I would do the same for just enough to make sure they could live.
The million dollars was just because that's what was stated in the post.
I'd have the same reaction even if all my family got was enough money just to survive (shelter and food), and without it, they would most certainly be dead.
I understand that in most cases this is immoral. I am simply defending the fact that under certain circumstances would I hit the button...
I don't think this is what they were talking about. Killing for money is one thing, killing for survival is completely different. Personally, I do have morals, and I do have a nice job that ensures (at least temporarily) that I won't be facing the underside of a dumpster lid for my next meal. No.. there isn't a monetary price for a person's life.
Right, as I explained in another post: If I had a comfy job, or even an okay job, no, I would not kill someone for an extra million dollars. I'm also not referring to the article; I don't agree with their statement. I am however, defending the fact, that under certain specific circumstances, I, and many other people, too, would kill for a price.
First off, that's not human nature, you fucking sick motherfucker.
Wrong. Yes it is. SURVIVAL UNDER ANY POSSIBLE MEANS is human nature.
Do you eat meat? Guess what, you indirectly kill animals for food. How is that any different?
It's in your best interest to live by this moral code else you too could end up dead due to the actions of a person much like yourself. So yes, it is in your SELF INTEREST to not kill strangers.
Wrong. It is in my SELF-INTEREST to take care of me and my family. If it came down to my kid's life or some random stranger's life, I'll keep my kid's life. Similar thing: If I had to sacrifice my life to save my kid's life, I would do the same.
If someone broke into your house at midnight, and you didn't know why they were there, what would you do?
What if you say them brandishing a knife? A gun? What if they were in your kid's room?
Under the right circumstances, you will kill. It's not only HUMAN nature, but ANIMAL NATURE to survive AT ALL COSTS.
No, both of you are obviously very ill. Do you only obey the law because you are afraid of getting caught?
No, it comes down to my morals. However, my responsibility lies to my family first instead of somebody else. Granted, murder is one of the most immoral acts out there; However, if his life means absolutely nothing to me (as in, I don't know him, or anything about his family, and aren't ever going to know) and my family desperately neds the money (ie: for food, not going out and having fun) then yes, my obligations call for hitting the button.
A similar question: Would you sacrifice your life to give your family a million dollars? If they desperately needed it, and I knew that they would only think I dieed in some accident, then, yes.
Exactly, it's not about the value of life.
I'd be more apt to say it's about the value of money. Let me explain:
Would I kill someone in my family for any amount of money? No, not a chance.
What about some random stranger? Depends:
If I'm making enough money to live comfortably, no.
If I'm not making much money, but I don't have any family (ie: just taking care of myself), no.
If my family is in dire need of money, possibly.
If I have to physically murder the person, and have a serious possibility of getting caught: I dunno, depends on how much I need the money, and what I have to do.
If I have to physically murder the person, and most likely won't get caught: Depends on my mood, and what I have to do.
If I just have to hit a button, and have never seen or known the person before, and ave no way of getting caught, Chances are Yes.
It doesn't make me less of a moral person; it's just human nature. And my family and kids come before anybody else. If somebody else's death does not affect me in any way, what's stopping me from killing him?
As a side note, I read an interview with a professional hitman once. He explained that when he killed people, he did not want to know anything about them (their name, their family, etc), because he might not want to kill them. OTOH, if he only knows what they look like and where they are, it's "just a hit". He'd fall into the zone before taking the hit, and wouldnt remember anything about it afterwards.
Imagine there's a peasant somewhere halfway across the world. If you could push a button and kill the person without getting caught, would you do it for a million dollars?'
If not, at what price would you? Oh, so you've got morals, ay? What if you had no money, and your family and kids were starving to death? It's winter, you don't make enough money at your job to give your kids any shelter or food, and they're out hiding in the dumpster behind McDonald's trying to fend off frostbite while getting some free food. Would you do it then?
--
Better yet, for a little irony: what if the person at the other end of the button was Jack Valenti, George Bush, Osama bin Laden? Would your views be different then?
--
Every man has a price; You just have to find that price.