they failed to avail themselves of the quick, easy, and cheap solution.
Why should they be forced to do anything? Google should use its awesome psychic powahs to automatically determine that when they put out information for the whole world to read, they don't actually want the whole world to read it. Or remember that it ever existed once it's gone.
Who cares if a hacker can loosen the seal on a voting machine and swap out the flashcard with one containing a virus designed to spread to all the machines?
Who cares if the central vote counter stations have a trivial-to-hack dialin connection?
Who cares if voting machines return negative numbers for a candidate?
Any time this comes up, all we get is millions of mindless Republicans droning on and on, "bush won get over it bush won get over it bush won get over it." But none of it gets fixed.
One day, someone is going to steal the election out from under your noses, and then you'll be wishing you had fixed the problem instead of pointing and laughing.
Disclaimer: Long ago I used to work for Bb. I own Bb stock. I'm rather unhappy with this litigation.:(
Well then, withdraw your proxy's voting rights, attend the next stockholders' meeting, and voice your concerns.
More than "must get money at all costs" corporations are beholden to follow their stockholders' wishes. If (in the general scheme of things) stockholders start to express concern that their company is wasting its money patenting someone else's invention, or better yet, express concern that the company will be liable for the other side's costs for this stupid litigation, then perhaps corporations will stop doing this.
Of course your voice is only as large as your share, and no doubt the majority of the stock is actually held by other soulless corporations that must get money at all costs, so it probably will not do all that much. But at least it's a start.
And exactly why do you think your supporters would be in favor of you arresting everyone who opposes you?
Look out the window. Out there is a world where the President and Vice President repeatedly tell America that their opposition "validates the terrorists", "supports the terrorists", or whatever the villification word of the day is. How many times will he say it before their followers believe it? How many of their followers don't believe it now?
Most people pay taxes out of social responsibility, not fear of government reprisal. It's only Libertarians who believe that everyone doesn't want to pay any taxes at all.
What about all the other crimes, why does social responsibility not prevent them? Given the number of criminals then it's surprising that libertarians haven't taken the country by storm.
Sounds good for me, all I have to do is arrest all of the opponent's followers. Spitting on the sidewalk? Swearing on Sunday? Hitching your horse to a public post? There are thousands of century old laws on the books in cities, states, and even at the federal level that have no place in modern America, just waiting to be exploited.
This is such a stupid quote. The primary power the government has is TAXES not criminal crackdowns.
If there was no crackdown, who would pay the taxes? Which power begets the other?
The legitimacy of the invasion is immaterial to the legitimacy of our current presence.
So if I break some law, I shouldn't be punished as long as I stop breaking the law? Or does this logic only apply to Republicans? Over and over I've seen this, whether it's Republicans scrambling to save DeLay by repealing their ethics rules, or the Republicans scrambling to save DeLay's district by challenging their election laws, or the Republicans scrambling to legalize Bush's wiretap program (which cannot be viewed as anything other than an admission that he had broken the law).
Breaking the law can be honorable, or even the right thing to do, but even King and Ghandi accepted and invited the punishement for the laws they broke. True followers of the idea of civil disobedience would accept no less, the remainder are just spoiled rich college kids who think they can do what they want without punishment. The problem is that now the spoiled kids are running the nation.
I understand the "we broke it, we bought it" situation in Iraq, but once the bull has been let loose in the china shop, the correct answer is to get it out or put it down, not to make it the cashier. Bush should be impeached, and whoever replaces him (well, Cheney, obviously, unless he gets impeached too. I hear theres a whole line of people waiting to get that spot, the majority of them Republican, even) should not just turn tail and run.
As other people have pointed out, all Bush has to go to war is his "authorization to use force" against "terrorists". It's been determined that not only was Iraq not related to Al Qaeda, members of the administration clearly manipulated intelligence to show that Saddam was, indicating that members of the administration knew that Iraq was not a terrorist target and therefore did not fall beneath the authorization of force.
Even in your dream world where we are at war with every nutso who waves a rifle and claims so, Iraq was not part of Radical Islam (and in fact was our last real buffer against it in the region) and therefore the attack on Iraq was not justified by that. Since the terrorists did not flood into Iraq until we created the power void by removing its dictator with no plan whatsoever for future control of the country, you cannot claim that the terrorists there now are what authorized the attack initially.
So the President directed the army to attack a nation that we were not at war with, that he was not authorized to attack. That sounds like an impeachable offense to me.
so not taking threats seriously - and personally - is pretty damned stupid.
Where are the changes requested by the 9/11 committee years ago? Richard Reid tried to set his shoe on fire, why am I allowed to bring matches on board an airplane? One pair of british bombers allegedly planned to bring their infant along for the ride in order to smuggle explosive fluids in the baby bottle, why am I allowed to bring a baby and baby bottle?
This goes way beyond some useless eavesdropping bill, show me anything after Afghanistan that shows that the government is taking this seriously.
Or as Olbermann put it, why do we still have a gaping hole in the ground? Why did we not rebuild in order to show the terrorists that America won't put up with their shit?
Perhaps, then, the most responsible thing to do is to provide a proof of concept to the software company to prove that your bug is serious, and then post publically "I have found a bug in foobar. By restricting network access to the whammy service to trusted systems, you can mitigate the risk of attack. A proof of concept has been provided to the company but will not be made available to the public."
The Air Force is saying that if the US conscience wants to the US to use non-lethal weapons, it better be willing to stick it's own neck on the line in the face of such non-lethal weapons.
Yeah? Well maybe if he asked permission first, he'd get people willing to stick their necks on the line. Using it on a riot is just asking for trouble, not only from the rioters, but what about the parade or whatever that they're rioting at, the people in the buildings around the riot, people just trying to get to work, the people trying to control the riot, and everyone else gawking at the spectacle.
That raises a different question, what if schools' performance really is funding-driven? Where I am, public schools receive most of their funding from the property taxes off the surrounding areas. If the property values go down because people are not competing to live there for the school anymore, will the school performance drop as their funding dries up? (I'm strictly referring to public schools, since private schools (around here) don't seem to restrict their clients to a particular geographic area).
The interesting thing about it is that not only does it test the applicant's ability to use various PHP tools (in a roundabout way) it also forces awareness of some of the stupider things people do in their site designs. Hidden values in forms that are expected to be secure because you can't see them in the browser, aren't. People can post anything to your form from anywhere, not just from the page you thought they should be coming from, and so on.
That said, I've done the kind of automation that they're looking for, and all I can say about it is that if my "targets" for scraping had tags like <mistake> that told me the important parts, my job would be five billion times easier. Especially if the tag was always the same. Nothing like setting up a script that logs into a website, "navigates" to the page I want and read the parts of the page that were interesting to me, only to have the company completely redesign their website... now if only companies would use SOAP.
blah blah blah AND WHAT ABOUT THE NEGATIVE VOTES?!
That's exactly what I was talking about. This has nothing to do with chads, recounts or anything else, electronic voting machines gave a candidate a negative vote count, something that is not possible no matter how many dead people voted, how many military ballots disappeared, or how many idiots couldnt poke holes in paper. But one side's too busy thumping their chest while the other is too busy crying and sobbing to do anything about it.
This, my fellow slashdotters, is how America dies. Not with a bang, but with two parties that are too busy playing tug of war with the country to care about how badly they've ripped the place up.
One already gave Al Gore a negative number of votes, but when anyone brings that up, the Bush fans just start chating "gore lost get over it" over and over in a monotonous hum until nothing seems to matter any more.
The Columbine tragedy could have been avoided by parents parenting and knowing what their children are doing and who they are doing it with and what is going on in their lives.
The columbine tragedy would not have even needed to be "avoided" if schools were places of learning instead of a game of beating the snot out of weaker kids until they decide to fight back and fight to win.
As for the rest of the children, other people are writing about kids (and young adults) who are afraid to go outside alone, how exactly would parents watching their children like hawks 24x7 well into their teens instill the kind of confidence and independence that human beings require in order to operate?
Heck most kids when I was growing up had to ride their bikes over to the grocery store for mom all the time even when we were about 8 years old or so.
Yeah, but now there's pedophiles every three feet just waiting to grab your 8 year old if you so much as blink. Terrorists, kidnappers, murderers abound, and parents just don't let their kids go alone anymore. No, the kid has to be protected, shadowed 100% of the time, shielded from the world, because if he's not being nabbed by pedos, he's browsing the pr0n or *gasp* jaywalking.
If I grew up in a world where my parents acted like that, I'd rather push pixels around on a screen where I can't get hurt than go out in the world alone too.
My objection to this is simply that the proponents don't appear to be able to explain how their plan will achieve their apparent goal of getting kids into the best schools. Apparently the idea is that the parents of kids at crappy schools will use the voucher to get their kid into a good school. Fair enough right? And the parents of kids at good schools will use them to get into crappy ones? Because, you know, good schools are typically full.
Of course, new schools will be built to fill the demand. And they'll all be made from pure Grade-A 100% Good School Bricks. And hire Good School teachers. And they'll tell you to pull your little Timmy out of The School of Suck, and enroll him in the Good School. And when Timmy fails out of college because he didn't actually learn anything, the owner of the brand new "Good School" will have laughed his way all the way to the bank many times over.
Slashdot Mirror
they failed to avail themselves of the quick, easy, and cheap solution.
Why should they be forced to do anything? Google should use its awesome psychic powahs to automatically determine that when they put out information for the whole world to read, they don't actually want the whole world to read it. Or remember that it ever existed once it's gone.
Why would a player need to scan thousands of tags per minute?
;)
How many RPMs do DVDs get in the average DVD player? How often do you think the tag is going to fly by the rfid pickup?
Some universities demand that students live on campus at least their freshman year.
hundreds of examples of isolated incidents
Two people dying because safes fell on them are isolated incidents.
Hundreds of safes crushing people is an epidemic.
So hey, how about those elections!?!!11!one
Who cares if a hacker can loosen the seal on a voting machine and swap out the flashcard with one containing a virus designed to spread to all the machines?
Who cares if the central vote counter stations have a trivial-to-hack dialin connection?
Who cares if voting machines return negative numbers for a candidate?
Any time this comes up, all we get is millions of mindless Republicans droning on and on, "bush won get over it bush won get over it bush won get over it." But none of it gets fixed.
One day, someone is going to steal the election out from under your noses, and then you'll be wishing you had fixed the problem instead of pointing and laughing.
You have the Freedom of Speech. Nowhere is it written that you have Freedom of Easy-to-Access Speech
Tell me, Mr. Infernal, what good is a phone call... if you are unable to speak?
Disclaimer: Long ago I used to work for Bb. I own Bb stock. I'm rather unhappy with this litigation. :(
Well then, withdraw your proxy's voting rights, attend the next stockholders' meeting, and voice your concerns.
More than "must get money at all costs" corporations are beholden to follow their stockholders' wishes. If (in the general scheme of things) stockholders start to express concern that their company is wasting its money patenting someone else's invention, or better yet, express concern that the company will be liable for the other side's costs for this stupid litigation, then perhaps corporations will stop doing this.
Of course your voice is only as large as your share, and no doubt the majority of the stock is actually held by other soulless corporations that must get money at all costs, so it probably will not do all that much. But at least it's a start.
And exactly why do you think your supporters would be in favor of you arresting everyone who opposes you?
Look out the window. Out there is a world where the President and Vice President repeatedly tell America that their opposition "validates the terrorists", "supports the terrorists", or whatever the villification word of the day is. How many times will he say it before their followers believe it? How many of their followers don't believe it now?
Most people pay taxes out of social responsibility, not fear of government reprisal. It's only Libertarians who believe that everyone doesn't want to pay any taxes at all.
What about all the other crimes, why does social responsibility not prevent them? Given the number of criminals then it's surprising that libertarians haven't taken the country by storm.
Oh wait, criminals can't vote.
CRIMINALS CAN'T VOTE
Sounds good for me, all I have to do is arrest all of the opponent's followers. Spitting on the sidewalk? Swearing on Sunday? Hitching your horse to a public post? There are thousands of century old laws on the books in cities, states, and even at the federal level that have no place in modern America, just waiting to be exploited.
This is such a stupid quote. The primary power the government has is TAXES not criminal crackdowns.
If there was no crackdown, who would pay the taxes? Which power begets the other?
The legitimacy of the invasion is immaterial to the legitimacy of our current presence.
So if I break some law, I shouldn't be punished as long as I stop breaking the law? Or does this logic only apply to Republicans? Over and over I've seen this, whether it's Republicans scrambling to save DeLay by repealing their ethics rules, or the Republicans scrambling to save DeLay's district by challenging their election laws, or the Republicans scrambling to legalize Bush's wiretap program (which cannot be viewed as anything other than an admission that he had broken the law).
Breaking the law can be honorable, or even the right thing to do, but even King and Ghandi accepted and invited the punishement for the laws they broke. True followers of the idea of civil disobedience would accept no less, the remainder are just spoiled rich college kids who think they can do what they want without punishment. The problem is that now the spoiled kids are running the nation.
I understand the "we broke it, we bought it" situation in Iraq, but once the bull has been let loose in the china shop, the correct answer is to get it out or put it down, not to make it the cashier. Bush should be impeached, and whoever replaces him (well, Cheney, obviously, unless he gets impeached too. I hear theres a whole line of people waiting to get that spot, the majority of them Republican, even) should not just turn tail and run.
As other people have pointed out, all Bush has to go to war is his "authorization to use force" against "terrorists". It's been determined that not only was Iraq not related to Al Qaeda, members of the administration clearly manipulated intelligence to show that Saddam was, indicating that members of the administration knew that Iraq was not a terrorist target and therefore did not fall beneath the authorization of force.
Even in your dream world where we are at war with every nutso who waves a rifle and claims so, Iraq was not part of Radical Islam (and in fact was our last real buffer against it in the region) and therefore the attack on Iraq was not justified by that. Since the terrorists did not flood into Iraq until we created the power void by removing its dictator with no plan whatsoever for future control of the country, you cannot claim that the terrorists there now are what authorized the attack initially.
So the President directed the army to attack a nation that we were not at war with, that he was not authorized to attack. That sounds like an impeachable offense to me.
so not taking threats seriously - and personally - is pretty damned stupid.
Where are the changes requested by the 9/11 committee years ago?
Richard Reid tried to set his shoe on fire, why am I allowed to bring matches on board an airplane?
One pair of british bombers allegedly planned to bring their infant along for the ride in order to smuggle explosive fluids in the baby bottle, why am I allowed to bring a baby and baby bottle?
This goes way beyond some useless eavesdropping bill, show me anything after Afghanistan that shows that the government is taking this seriously.
Or as Olbermann put it, why do we still have a gaping hole in the ground? Why did we not rebuild in order to show the terrorists that America won't put up with their shit?
Perhaps, then, the most responsible thing to do is to provide a proof of concept to the software company to prove that your bug is serious, and then post publically "I have found a bug in foobar. By restricting network access to the whammy service to trusted systems, you can mitigate the risk of attack. A proof of concept has been provided to the company but will not be made available to the public."
block my bus route while they're kickin' in a Starbucks window while gulping down a Seattle's Best Latte, I say field test away.
Enjoy your "hot seat" while you're sitting in the bus stuck behind the protestors, and in the line of the beam.
The Air Force is saying that if the US conscience wants to the US to use non-lethal weapons, it better be willing to stick it's own neck on the line in the face of such non-lethal weapons.
Yeah? Well maybe if he asked permission first, he'd get people willing to stick their necks on the line. Using it on a riot is just asking for trouble, not only from the rioters, but what about the parade or whatever that they're rioting at, the people in the buildings around the riot, people just trying to get to work, the people trying to control the riot, and everyone else gawking at the spectacle.
That raises a different question, what if schools' performance really is funding-driven? Where I am, public schools receive most of their funding from the property taxes off the surrounding areas. If the property values go down because people are not competing to live there for the school anymore, will the school performance drop as their funding dries up? (I'm strictly referring to public schools, since private schools (around here) don't seem to restrict their clients to a particular geographic area).
'FQDN' and not 'domain name'
Well, they're not the same thing... (but the guy should have still figured out what you meant, even if he was being pedantic about it)
If the Playstation Network already does match making, friends lists, chatting etc. then why would you need to stack XFire on top of it?
Cross-platform support with a title on the PC? I hear that Sony runs one or two tiny MMOs that nobody's ever heard of.
The interesting thing about it is that not only does it test the applicant's ability to use various PHP tools (in a roundabout way) it also forces awareness of some of the stupider things people do in their site designs. Hidden values in forms that are expected to be secure because you can't see them in the browser, aren't. People can post anything to your form from anywhere, not just from the page you thought they should be coming from, and so on.
That said, I've done the kind of automation that they're looking for, and all I can say about it is that if my "targets" for scraping had tags like <mistake> that told me the important parts, my job would be five billion times easier. Especially if the tag was always the same. Nothing like setting up a script that logs into a website, "navigates" to the page I want and read the parts of the page that were interesting to me, only to have the company completely redesign their website... now if only companies would use SOAP.
blah blah blah AND WHAT ABOUT THE NEGATIVE VOTES?!
That's exactly what I was talking about. This has nothing to do with chads, recounts or anything else, electronic voting machines gave a candidate a negative vote count, something that is not possible no matter how many dead people voted, how many military ballots disappeared, or how many idiots couldnt poke holes in paper. But one side's too busy thumping their chest while the other is too busy crying and sobbing to do anything about it.
This, my fellow slashdotters, is how America dies. Not with a bang, but with two parties that are too busy playing tug of war with the country to care about how badly they've ripped the place up.
Elite bastards, the lot of you.
One already gave Al Gore a negative number of votes, but when anyone brings that up, the Bush fans just start chating "gore lost get over it" over and over in a monotonous hum until nothing seems to matter any more.
The Columbine tragedy could have been avoided by parents parenting and knowing what their children are doing and who they are doing it with and what is going on in their lives.
The columbine tragedy would not have even needed to be "avoided" if schools were places of learning instead of a game of beating the snot out of weaker kids until they decide to fight back and fight to win.
As for the rest of the children, other people are writing about kids (and young adults) who are afraid to go outside alone, how exactly would parents watching their children like hawks 24x7 well into their teens instill the kind of confidence and independence that human beings require in order to operate?
Heck most kids when I was growing up had to ride their bikes over to the grocery store for mom all the time even when we were about 8 years old or so.
Yeah, but now there's pedophiles every three feet just waiting to grab your 8 year old if you so much as blink. Terrorists, kidnappers, murderers abound, and parents just don't let their kids go alone anymore. No, the kid has to be protected, shadowed 100% of the time, shielded from the world, because if he's not being nabbed by pedos, he's browsing the pr0n or *gasp* jaywalking.
If I grew up in a world where my parents acted like that, I'd rather push pixels around on a screen where I can't get hurt than go out in the world alone too.
school vouchers as a solution to this problem.
My objection to this is simply that the proponents don't appear to be able to explain how their plan will achieve their apparent goal of getting kids into the best schools. Apparently the idea is that the parents of kids at crappy schools will use the voucher to get their kid into a good school. Fair enough right? And the parents of kids at good schools will use them to get into crappy ones? Because, you know, good schools are typically full.
Of course, new schools will be built to fill the demand. And they'll all be made from pure Grade-A 100% Good School Bricks. And hire Good School teachers. And they'll tell you to pull your little Timmy out of The School of Suck, and enroll him in the Good School. And when Timmy fails out of college because he didn't actually learn anything, the owner of the brand new "Good School" will have laughed his way all the way to the bank many times over.