If someone were to dump poison chemicals in your water supply, YOU would be their greatest threat.
Government is a paper tiger to all but the law abiding.
Then you should help change the government instead of taking the law into your own hands. A society where everyone practises vigilantism is more dangerous to the honest individual than a society where the government has a monopoly on force and uses this monopoly to protect honest individuals.
Ich brauch nur:
1) einen Grund, warum das Window fuer die Mailregeln zu gross ist.
Die Regeln in Mail.app? Keine Ahnung, ich verwende nicht Mail.app:-) Aber bei mir ist das Fenster für die Regeln scheinbar nicht sehr gross...
2) eine Erklaerung darueber, wie meine Bilder leicht zu Photobucket zu uploaden, wenn sie in einem iPhoto Album steht. (Jedes gegebene Method dauert sehr lang!)
Ich verwende Flickr, da gibts verschiedene Plug-ins. Scheinbar ist aber Flock gut, und PictureSync sollte auch funktionieren.
3) einen Grund, warum ich keine Stills direkt abspeichern kann, sondern ein neues Clip machen muss (das ich dann entfernen muss).
Das verstehe ich nicht. Um spezifische Fotos zu exportieren, kannst du sie einfach auswählen, bevor du "Export" wählst.
Ich danke dir fuer die guten Woerten ueber mein Deutsch, aber mein Wortschatz ist echt klein, und ich spreche Deutsch nicht regelmaessig. Hat mein Deutschkentnisse dich verursacht, mich zu ent"foe"en?
Ja, ich dachte mir, wenn sich jemand schon die Mühe macht und auf Deutsch schreibt, kann er nicht so schlimm sein:-)
How many times have you been abused (robbed under color of law/authority) by a cop? How many times have you been attacked by an idiot with a gun (other than a cop or "official" agent)??
Neither has happened to me. In fact, I've never been attacked or robbed at all. However, I fail to see what this has got to do with my point.
And speaking of your declaration, how do you know you're a non criminal? Have any of your past hobbies been declared criminal? Do any of them run that risk? Do any activities you've ever partaken in, now carry a legal penalty? Things change, and government gets bigger. Never smaller. Sooner or later you'll be a criminal too. Even if its a ticket for expired tags, or driving 2 mph faster than the "speed limit", preferably in a speed trap (as those are used SOLELY for the raising of revenue from their hapless victims), you will eventually be a "criminal."
So you advocate being armed to protect yourself against the government. I can actually agree with that, to a certain point. However, this is different from what GP said, namely: "The only fear a criminal has, is someone OTHER than a cop who draws a gun. That or a lynch mob."
GP did not advocate protecting himself against the government, he claimed that the government would not act against crime, and that it was thus his job, or a lynch mob's.
I see the point in arming yourself in case government changes make it necessary to have a resistance. I do not see the point in arming yourself so you can go after criminals or form lynch mobs. In the second case, the lynch mob poses a bigger threat to innocent people than criminals do.
The only fear a criminal has, is someone OTHER than a cop who draws a gun. That or a lynch mob.
As a non-criminal, I would say that is my only fear, too. To me, armed idiots who think they have to take the law into their own hands seem more dangerous than both the police or other criminals.
As readers on kotaku.com found out, that is possibly a planted puff piece and might not have actually happened at all:
I went online to find other coverage of this story to see what kind of spin was being put on it. Searching for Paxton Galvanek returned no news results. However, it did point out that he's the president of a marketing firm in New Jersey. Given that the headline mentions "press release" and how there's no source link, I'm going to call this a plant. Unfortunately, I doubt this really happened. It would be good if it did, but given that no news agencies (not even local news) have covered it, and the hero in question is an advertising engine, I'm taking the whole thing with a grain or two of salt. http://kotaku.com/346176/americas-army-player-saves-real-life#c3777221
Not to mention that pulling somebody from a car without first figuring out what their injuries are is a fucking bad idea, unless the car is about to explode (hint: it isn't, unless you're in a movie).
You've got it backwards. In a real democracy, there are repercussions for fucking up. Most obvious, you don't get re-elected. In the private industry, there's jack shit people can do. As long as a company makes money, all's good for them - even if they make money at the expense of the public good.
Wars don't get started for political reasons, but for economic reasons.
But then, I think your post was meant to be ironic, anyway.
Es gibt zwei Kontextmenu-Einträge: "Datei anzeigen" und "Originaldatei anzeigen". Das eine zeigt das original-File im Finder, das andere die aktuelle Version. Ist wirklich nicht schwierig zu finden.
Na ja, nachdem du sogar einen youtube-Film gemacht hast, ist wirklich offensichtlich, dass du dich auf einen Standpunkt festgelegt hast. Weitere Diskussion erübrigt sich damit.
Yes, I Know how to right-click on a track-pad and two-button mouse, thanks. Despite the complete lack of mention of this option in any help menu.
It's definitely mentioned in the help menu and the user's guide. New Macs even have little movies right in the preferences application which show you how to use gestures.
You guys are being remarkably inconsistent. One of you says there's a "show in finder" option, another says it's a "show file" option, and now you're saying it's supposed to be "show original".
Sigh. Look, I realize now you're just trolling. I'm kinda sorry I tried to help you. I have no idea how the menu item is called on your system because I'm on a german system, and you're presumably on an US system, so my menu items are in german and yours are in english. I see it is too much to ask to simply right-click on an image and see for yourself.
Okay, I don't *normally* use an FTP service when uploadint to photobucket, but I guess I was supposed to configure an FTP server. Must have missed that flyer when the MacBook arrived.
It was just an example. Works like that with every other app, I chose FTP because it is a popular application for file uploading. What the hell is wrong with you...
Yeah, good point. Going through all that crap is MUCH easier than "save as".
It actually is. Not that you'd ever know. It's obvious that you don't really care about these things, you're just looking for ways to troll people. Again, I apologize for trying to help you. Have a nice day, sir.
Okay, you seem to have little experience with Macs. I would suggest that just asking is more likely to get positive responses than ranting. Either way, I'll try to help you with some of your issues.
in fact 2 options: show edited photo in finder or show a backed-up original.
Sorry, a lot of people claim this, but it just isn't there. I'm not sure what you're doing, but a lot of people claim this because it is there. Just checking... right-click on image, show original, yep. It's there.
I right-click (OOOPS!!!! not supposed to talk about right-clicking, Yeah, I think it's generally called a secondary click (some people like to switch the two mouse buttons). Other than that, all Macs come with two-button mice, and all MacBooks come with multitouch trackpads which do the secondary click when you tap with two fingers, or hold two fingers on the pad and click.
I *did* export it -- to iPhoto, where it doesn't seem to let me do anything with it except look at it in some useless album. I am guessing that you usually use Windows. On Windows, most functions are accessed using commands, menu items, toolbar icons or the context menu. On Macs, many functions are accessed using drag-and-drop (inside an applicaton or between applications) and gestures.
I didn't think of dragging it to the desktop, but what would be the point? I don't want it in the desktop, I want it in a file I can easily refer to on upload If you want to upload your image, you can drag the image to an FTP application or to a file upload form element right from within iPhoto.
Apparently, I'm supposed to go through the painstaking process of downsizing the iPhoto window, pulling up finder, and then dragging it to the right folder. No, you're not. You can switch applications, use Exposé and use Spaces during a drag operation. Furthermore, if you drag on a folder and wait for a bit, the folder will open. So you would probably do something like this: Start dragging in iPhoto, hit Cmd-Tab to get to the finder, go to your folder, drop.
GP's described behaviour seemed rather intuitive to me. GGP didn't figure it out, so probably he does need to read a manual, but I would guess most people would have figured out how to do what GP explained without reating a manual. Furthermore, GGP was talking about Xcode, which is an IDE. I doubt most people expect to just be able to use a tool as complex as an IDE.
Okay, so the logic is: Since you do not need root privileges to alter ~/Applications, a malicious application run by the user could put another malicious application into ~/Applications which would then be run by the user. If you are able to put something into ~/Applications, the user has already run a malicious application!
How is that bad if the user has already started a malicious application which installed the malicious application?
As you can probably guess (and people have said, such as on NPR just the other day)... he is a modern Ed Wood, except Wood's movies had a charm about them (sort of like a 2nd grade play) where Boll's are just bad (like a bad play at a real opera company).
Actually, I love Boll's movies. Both his and Ed Wood's are perfect for an evening with a bunch of beers and a bunch of pals. I hope somebody makes MST3K-style versions of Boll's movies.
Yeah. He's one of these "wait a minute... that was him too???" guys. I've seen tons of movies with him, but often I've only figured out afterwards that he played the role.
It doesn't take special permissions to put stuff in ~/Applications.
And that matters because...? ~/Applications is just a regular directory. You don't need to put an app in there for it to run, and apps in there don't get any additional privileges.
mac people are either hippies, self important starbucks customers, media ediors, or mac software programmers and 3/4 of them are dumb enough to install this new "scanner" 50% Insightful
(Score:1, Insightful)
The next time somebody claims/. moderators are pro-Apple and will mod down all dissenting opinions, I'm going to point to this flamebait.
While I haven't seen a Mac user claim that Macs can't be infected by viruses, I see morons complaining about supposed Mac snobs in each damn article about Mac security.
I'm not sure who's the snob here, Artie MacStrawman or you, who seems to think Mac users are dumb, deluded snobs.
1) This is not a virus 2) Now that you've implied that there are virusees for Mac OS X, please provide evidence
There's no reason why Macs couldn't geet viruses. Most viruses rely on human stupidity for propagation, and there definitely are dumb Mac users. But the edge cuts both ways: If you feel the need to complain about Artie MacStrawman, you should provide some evidence that your complaint isn't just as stupid as Artie's claims.
Re:You're *not* "copying files" to an MP3 player
on
Origin of the iPhone
·
· Score: 1
And that bit about it continuing the podcast at the same place is one damn good feature.
Yeah, I love that, too. There's a bunch of things which syncs both ways. I can rate songs on my iPod and iPhone, and iTunes will copy the new ratings back to the library. I can create playlists on the devices, and they will be moved to iTunes the next time I connect the two.
Even if you don't use all that, using iTunes has an advantage: it saves space on the device. iTunes stores (as far as I can tell) only one copy of each album art image on the iPod, even if several MP3 files use the same image. And since album art looks really nice on the iPods and the iPhone, I don't want to remove the images from the songs, so it's quite a bit of space that I can use for actual content:-)
But yeah, if you don't intend to use all these features, you don't miss out on much by managing by hand, in Explorer.
Yeah, he's doing some absolutely awesome stuff. Makes me wish I could grow up now. On the other hand, I'll probably be dead once the world is flooded due to global warming and Mad Max meets Waterworld, so I shouldn't feel to bad for not having a computer when I was 14, I guess:-)
I think you could also use exploding RFID chips. I've seen that in a movie with the Highlander guy, so it must be true. Also, I think Danny the dog had a pretty cool collar thingie, too. Shiny!
Yeah I know that but if its legal then that means there would be companies made to supply it. Those companies will want to advertise just like alcohol and tobacco companies.
Dude, that already occurs. Did you go to any kind of club recently?
Fully legalizing drugs would at least regulate advertisment and control quality.
They dont fully understand what legalizing it means.
Depends on the drug in question. In some countries, there are plans to legalize ownership and growing of cannabis (within defined limits), while selling it remains illegal. "Legal" doesn't necessarily mean that you have to allow companies to produce and supply the product. Might as well just mean you aren't going to criminalize the users.
A simple fact that many Slashdotters apparently find hard to grasp is that the "slippery slope" is a logical fallacy. That means it's not a valid argument. Sorry, but there you are.
Depends on the particular subject. In this case, it's somewhat clear to me that gradual acceptance might occur, and that we should thus not accept it.
First, we tag criminals, maybe even only those who accept it. After a few years, there are some success stories, and it becomes mandatory, it's just criminals after all. People see that nothing bad seems to happen, and a few well-publicised cases occur where the tags prevented a crime from happening. So then people start using them as batches, for entry in clubs and similar stuff. It's cool to get a tag, you get to feel a bit like a criminal, you impress your friends (did it hurt? wow, let me feel!). Next, some people tag their children. After all, it makes them save, and you can always remove it later, and it didn't do anything bad to all those cool people. But of course, you don't remove it later, it's convenient to just leave it in. Then, some kid gets rescued because of his tag, and next thing you know, you get some kind of tax reduction if you tag your kid. Some more years, and it's mandatory with the option to remove it when you reach a certain age. Then, that option disappears.
One huge step will not be accepted by the people. A ton of small steps which all seem logical and inconsequential very well might be.
Slashdot Mirror
Because Linux does not support DRM? I find it kind of interesting that the Linux kernel supports trusted computing, while Mac OS X does not.
Government is a paper tiger to all but the law abiding.
Then you should help change the government instead of taking the law into your own hands. A society where everyone practises vigilantism is more dangerous to the honest individual than a society where the government has a monopoly on force and uses this monopoly to protect honest individuals.
Die Regeln in Mail.app? Keine Ahnung, ich verwende nicht Mail.app :-) Aber bei mir ist das Fenster für die Regeln scheinbar nicht sehr gross...
2) eine Erklaerung darueber, wie meine Bilder leicht zu Photobucket zu uploaden, wenn sie in einem iPhoto Album steht. (Jedes gegebene Method dauert sehr lang!)Ich verwende Flickr, da gibts verschiedene Plug-ins. Scheinbar ist aber Flock gut, und PictureSync sollte auch funktionieren.
3) einen Grund, warum ich keine Stills direkt abspeichern kann, sondern ein neues Clip machen muss (das ich dann entfernen muss).Das verstehe ich nicht. Um spezifische Fotos zu exportieren, kannst du sie einfach auswählen, bevor du "Export" wählst.
Ich danke dir fuer die guten Woerten ueber mein Deutsch, aber mein Wortschatz ist echt klein, und ich spreche Deutsch nicht regelmaessig. Hat mein Deutschkentnisse dich verursacht, mich zu ent"foe"en?Ja, ich dachte mir, wenn sich jemand schon die Mühe macht und auf Deutsch schreibt, kann er nicht so schlimm sein :-)
Wo hast du so gut Deutsch gelernt?
Neither has happened to me. In fact, I've never been attacked or robbed at all. However, I fail to see what this has got to do with my point.
And speaking of your declaration, how do you know you're a non criminal? Have any of your past hobbies been declared criminal? Do any of them run that risk? Do any activities you've ever partaken in, now carry a legal penalty? Things change, and government gets bigger. Never smaller. Sooner or later you'll be a criminal too. Even if its a ticket for expired tags, or driving 2 mph faster than the "speed limit", preferably in a speed trap (as those are used SOLELY for the raising of revenue from their hapless victims), you will eventually be a "criminal."So you advocate being armed to protect yourself against the government. I can actually agree with that, to a certain point. However, this is different from what GP said, namely: "The only fear a criminal has, is someone OTHER than a cop who draws a gun. That or a lynch mob."
GP did not advocate protecting himself against the government, he claimed that the government would not act against crime, and that it was thus his job, or a lynch mob's.
I see the point in arming yourself in case government changes make it necessary to have a resistance. I do not see the point in arming yourself so you can go after criminals or form lynch mobs. In the second case, the lynch mob poses a bigger threat to innocent people than criminals do.
As a non-criminal, I would say that is my only fear, too. To me, armed idiots who think they have to take the law into their own hands seem more dangerous than both the police or other criminals.
Not to mention that pulling somebody from a car without first figuring out what their injuries are is a fucking bad idea, unless the car is about to explode (hint: it isn't, unless you're in a movie).
Are you implying Bush got reelected?
You've got it backwards. In a real democracy, there are repercussions for fucking up. Most obvious, you don't get re-elected. In the private industry, there's jack shit people can do. As long as a company makes money, all's good for them - even if they make money at the expense of the public good.
Wars don't get started for political reasons, but for economic reasons.
But then, I think your post was meant to be ironic, anyway.
Hey, dein Deutsch ist gut, gratuliere!
Es gibt zwei Kontextmenu-Einträge: "Datei anzeigen" und "Originaldatei anzeigen". Das eine zeigt das original-File im Finder, das andere die aktuelle Version. Ist wirklich nicht schwierig zu finden.
Na ja, nachdem du sogar einen youtube-Film gemacht hast, ist wirklich offensichtlich, dass du dich auf einen Standpunkt festgelegt hast. Weitere Diskussion erübrigt sich damit.
It's definitely mentioned in the help menu and the user's guide. New Macs even have little movies right in the preferences application which show you how to use gestures.
You guys are being remarkably inconsistent. One of you says there's a "show in finder" option, another says it's a "show file" option, and now you're saying it's supposed to be "show original".Sigh. Look, I realize now you're just trolling. I'm kinda sorry I tried to help you. I have no idea how the menu item is called on your system because I'm on a german system, and you're presumably on an US system, so my menu items are in german and yours are in english. I see it is too much to ask to simply right-click on an image and see for yourself.
Okay, I don't *normally* use an FTP service when uploadint to photobucket, but I guess I was supposed to configure an FTP server. Must have missed that flyer when the MacBook arrived.It was just an example. Works like that with every other app, I chose FTP because it is a popular application for file uploading. What the hell is wrong with you...
Yeah, good point. Going through all that crap is MUCH easier than "save as".It actually is. Not that you'd ever know. It's obvious that you don't really care about these things, you're just looking for ways to troll people. Again, I apologize for trying to help you. Have a nice day, sir.
GP's described behaviour seemed rather intuitive to me. GGP didn't figure it out, so probably he does need to read a manual, but I would guess most people would have figured out how to do what GP explained without reating a manual. Furthermore, GGP was talking about Xcode, which is an IDE. I doubt most people expect to just be able to use a tool as complex as an IDE.
Okay, so the logic is: Since you do not need root privileges to alter ~/Applications, a malicious application run by the user could put another malicious application into ~/Applications which would then be run by the user. If you are able to put something into ~/Applications, the user has already run a malicious application!
How is that bad if the user has already started a malicious application which installed the malicious application?
Yeah, that answers my question. Not. See GP's comment about the ~/Applications folder, please. I was replying to that.
Actually, I love Boll's movies. Both his and Ed Wood's are perfect for an evening with a bunch of beers and a bunch of pals. I hope somebody makes MST3K-style versions of Boll's movies.
Yeah. He's one of these "wait a minute... that was him too???" guys. I've seen tons of movies with him, but often I've only figured out afterwards that he played the role.
And that matters because...? ~/Applications is just a regular directory. You don't need to put an app in there for it to run, and apps in there don't get any additional privileges.
(Score:1, Insightful)
The next time somebody claims
While I haven't seen a Mac user claim that Macs can't be infected by viruses, I see morons complaining about supposed Mac snobs in each damn article about Mac security.
I'm not sure who's the snob here, Artie MacStrawman or you, who seems to think Mac users are dumb, deluded snobs.
1) This is not a virus
2) Now that you've implied that there are virusees for Mac OS X, please provide evidence
There's no reason why Macs couldn't geet viruses. Most viruses rely on human stupidity for propagation, and there definitely are dumb Mac users. But the edge cuts both ways: If you feel the need to complain about Artie MacStrawman, you should provide some evidence that your complaint isn't just as stupid as Artie's claims.
Yeah, I love that, too. There's a bunch of things which syncs both ways. I can rate songs on my iPod and iPhone, and iTunes will copy the new ratings back to the library. I can create playlists on the devices, and they will be moved to iTunes the next time I connect the two.
Even if you don't use all that, using iTunes has an advantage: it saves space on the device. iTunes stores (as far as I can tell) only one copy of each album art image on the iPod, even if several MP3 files use the same image. And since album art looks really nice on the iPods and the iPhone, I don't want to remove the images from the songs, so it's quite a bit of space that I can use for actual content :-)
But yeah, if you don't intend to use all these features, you don't miss out on much by managing by hand, in Explorer.
Yeah, he's doing some absolutely awesome stuff. Makes me wish I could grow up now. On the other hand, I'll probably be dead once the world is flooded due to global warming and Mad Max meets Waterworld, so I shouldn't feel to bad for not having a computer when I was 14, I guess :-)
I think you could also use exploding RFID chips. I've seen that in a movie with the Highlander guy, so it must be true. Also, I think Danny the dog had a pretty cool collar thingie, too. Shiny!
Dude, that already occurs. Did you go to any kind of club recently?
Fully legalizing drugs would at least regulate advertisment and control quality.
They dont fully understand what legalizing it means.Depends on the drug in question. In some countries, there are plans to legalize ownership and growing of cannabis (within defined limits), while selling it remains illegal. "Legal" doesn't necessarily mean that you have to allow companies to produce and supply the product. Might as well just mean you aren't going to criminalize the users.
Depends on the particular subject. In this case, it's somewhat clear to me that gradual acceptance might occur, and that we should thus not accept it.
First, we tag criminals, maybe even only those who accept it. After a few years, there are some success stories, and it becomes mandatory, it's just criminals after all. People see that nothing bad seems to happen, and a few well-publicised cases occur where the tags prevented a crime from happening. So then people start using them as batches, for entry in clubs and similar stuff. It's cool to get a tag, you get to feel a bit like a criminal, you impress your friends (did it hurt? wow, let me feel!). Next, some people tag their children. After all, it makes them save, and you can always remove it later, and it didn't do anything bad to all those cool people. But of course, you don't remove it later, it's convenient to just leave it in. Then, some kid gets rescued because of his tag, and next thing you know, you get some kind of tax reduction if you tag your kid. Some more years, and it's mandatory with the option to remove it when you reach a certain age. Then, that option disappears.
One huge step will not be accepted by the people. A ton of small steps which all seem logical and inconsequential very well might be.