Roasting puppies alive. Endangering neighborhoods. Wrecking cars. Burning down houses. (I don't buy their candle story either. What "confusion?" The family was at the entrance and removed immediately, the guy they were after was in the attic. So who was in the bedroom knocking down this alleged "candle"?) And if they really believed the guy was a walking arsenal, why did they show up at the scene unarmored? At least knowing that there would be no gun battle is a perfect excuse for not bothering to alert the neighbors.
As the Man In Charge, this is a direct reflection on him. If he is unaware of the behavior of his officers, or if he chooses to ignore it, then he is exhibiting gross incompetence and should be fired without retirement benefits. "Didn't get the memo" or "I wasn't aware of this" is NOT an excuse for incompetent mismanagement of a police force.
So, if the man isn't incompetent and is in total charge of the operation, then he must have condoned the operation. What word would YOU use for a man who condones chasing a 10 month old dog (who by the officer's own statement was not attacking anyone) back into the fire? What word would YOU use for someone who can't be bothered to move the child and wife away from a burning house, effectively forcing them to listen to their puppy as it burns to death, in addition to putting them at risk? What word would YOU use to describe a person who tells a child crying for her dog to "Shut the fuck up"? Personally, I think "sadists" is too good of a word to describe these people.
The buck for all this stops somewhere. If it isn't stopping at Joe, then you need to step back and take a look at the man you're defending and decide if he really is competent to fulfill the duties of his position. Because while being tough on crime makes for a great sound bite and eating green meat makes for a super photo-op, he is supposed to be running the show.
On the army: When you're in the army, you spend months training in whatever weather conditions happen to be that day. By the end of that, you're up for standing in a tent in Iraq. Thats what training is for.
You seem to think that if the majority of the people there are convicted criminals, thats "good enough". I guess you advocate shooting everyone and letting God sort them out. Maybe you think you live in a world where people who are arrested are arrested because they did something wrong. I live in the real world in a city called Houston, where not many years ago the cops decided to bust some street racers, only they got there and nobody was racing, so they arrested EVERYONE at a nearby K-Mart, and when that abuse of power couldn't get them hard enough, they arrested everyone eating dinner at the Sonic next door. Over 400 arrests, every single one of them was overturned, at the expense of the city as it requires a lawsuit in order to have the arrest record expunged. Just imagine what would have happened if these people had been treated in the ways you're defending.
I can just see the guys behind the cameras rushing to change their bets when the people favored to win complains to their coach about their sore legs or what not.
Maybe I'm just used to a slight variance, then. Hm.
Maybe thats my problem. After a decade of using a particular style of PC keyboard (short enter key, wide backspace, backslash above enter key), typing on anything else is difficult.
In fact, even though I haven't used a commodore 64 in 5 years or so now, I can still remember some of the keyboard layout (shift-2 is "). I came across this layout on a Japanese iMac keyboard a couple of years back and was amused by it.
My biggest disappointment with the 17" powerbook is that they used a dinky little keyboard with huge spaces on either side. WTF? They could have fit an almost-full-sized (less the numberpad) on there!
That was the one thing that kept me from taking my big hands and running out there to buy one the day they came out.
Works better than trying to legally define "food". You should see Texas's sales tax rules on food, its full of crazy things like "a sandwitch with roast beef that can fit in a 21 year old man's mouth sideways"
Texas recently had its tax-free weekend on clothing and other "necessities". I went on saturday for my yearly clothes run to buy $80 worth of clothing (three cheap shirts, two pairs of cheap slacks, a pack of underwear and a few pairs of socks)
I parked within 200 feet of the mall entrance. At both JC Penney's and Sears, I checked out without waiting in line. In past years, both of these would have been impossible. I suspect that Monday's paper will tell the truth of the state of the economy. No more counts of who has a job and who is buying a house, but real numbers: how much money is being spent.
Yes, most start up businesses fail in the first few years. What you didn't mention was that most businesses fail from mismanagement, not circumstances. So the answer is that no one should start a business? No one should take risks? We should all abandon all hope and just go "get a job"?
Not at all. This was in response to all the people who say "economy is sucking? Quit whining and start a company" as if its somehow a solution to the problem. Because clearly, 130K new consulting companies are obviously what our economy needs to turn this around.
a lot of money into research for alternative fuel sources
Here we are, $50/barrel oil staring us down, and all I want to do is find every last person who ever said "don't worry about it, we've got oil for decades" in response to people calling for reducing US oil dependency, and deep fry them in crude, battered.
the "rich" pay about 90% of all the taxes in this country, right?
I wonder how much money "the rich" have compared to the rest of us. Somewhere around 90% of the money? Then having 90% of the tax load is perfectly justifiable! I guess it depends on who you classify as "the rich".
No one "gave" me that opportunity, I created it with the help of the wife, WHILE I held a real job.
And what if you're one of the people who lost their jobs already? Had stable employment doing something they enjoyed doing and never once thought Enron would up and implode? What then? Would you tell these people to start their own jobs? Starting a company isn't a risk, its a HUGE risk. Only 2/3 of the startups "make it" over FOUR years. So what do you propose to the 33% of every guy who was laid off and started his own company and sank the last of his capital into it, and watched it crumple? Jump off the roof of the office building they've been evicted from? I've watched my dad's dreams crumple like that after starting his third company and watching it be taken advantage of and fail like the rest. "Nice patented idea there, I think I'll use it, because we've got better lawyers than you could EVER afford." "Pay you? Ha. You and what army of lawyers?" Where do you think the desperately seeking self-employment are going to get the cash to buy the lawyers that modern day business DEMANDS?
is it because of the 11 months of unemployement or poor planning?
Or because they busted the piggybank to survive?
I don't know if you've got kids or not, but raising three of them is not cheap. I've read in the paper that economists expect people to spend an average of $160K on each child through college. These days, all it takes is one hospital visit in those 11 months to bankrupt someone without insurance.
why can't they join a coordinated search for patterns in financial markets?
They could, but lets say they find a pattern and say "sell SCOX, its price will drop". Everyone will sell SCOX, and its price will drop, but will it be because of preexisting conditions? Or because of the reaction to the "pattern"?
You mentioned you started a new business, and I have to question the wisdom of that when you are having trouble with basic necessities. Starting a business is a huge risk, and taking that kind of risk when you are so close to financial ruin already is not the smartest thing to do.
Damned if you do, damned if you don't. I wonder if anyone who EVER told someone on/. "can't find work? just start your own company!" will reply to this.
Its not quite that simple. We don't trust the government to do that either, but when we're drawing this analogy between guns and technology, we're trusting that the NRA and other interested parties will jump in and help protect this slippery slope we're defending here. After all, when the makers of a tool become responsible for the acts of the people using that tool (for its intended purpose or not), what's next?
Not really, no. When I was in highschool, one of the big things going around our computer labs was a program that could take DOS executables and create a pascal program out of them. Of course, all of the symbol names were gone so it had wonderfully cryptic variable and procedure names. I'd have to say that was about 1994.
I now think its a good thing I stayed in college. If I had dropped out and tried to join the.com boom, I can see myself mooning the HR guy as my "standard" response to such crap.
Doesn't work like that. You could have steamed the envelope open yourself (or even mailed it to yourself taped closed) and then later added the stuff and sealed it.
Just mailing it to yourself is unacceptable. Likewise having a dated lab book without witnesses.
It would be at least halfway reasonable with respect to the constitutionally defined purpose of intellectual property if it WERE the content creators. But its not, its the publishers, the business organizations that are doing this, NOT the content creators. Do you think that Billy Wong and the Sixpacks cares whether or not the ipod plays.rm files? No, its just Apple the publisher. Read the DMCA, not a single word in there protects the author of a work, nor is there even language for permitting the author of a work to access his own work! The entire law is all about protecting the publishers' encryption schemes, copyrights be damned.
Actually its not that serious. Its trivial to modify/etc/inittab so that the good ol' three-fingered-salute does something, like restart the getty on the current console.
The question is, what is a "known good login"? Is just restarting the gettys and hoping that getty and login haven't been replaced known good enough? (Seems to work for windows)
Earlier they were dumping anything matching *mail*. We discovered this, this morning by searching for qmail sites. (this explains why you can't search for gmail, but you could search for yahoo)
They can't ban you from libGPLfoo.so.1. You have those binaries, you have to be able to get that source. Banning you from receiving a future version (from them, mind you, they can't ban you from receiving it from some third party) does not make libGPLfoo.so.1 any less free, so the license is met.
The problem that everyone seems to be having is that the GPL applies to one thing and one thing only: the current binaries and source that are being distributed. If it applied to every version then license changes would be impossible. By pushing penalties off onto some later thing, the current version is fully unrestricted and GPL-compliant.
I'm sure the FSF will make changes to the next GPL to address things like penalties outside of the scope of the particular software package, they've been talking about fixing a few things it for a while.
All the GPL says is that 1) if you get the binary from them, they have to 2) give the source to you too, and that 3) you're free to do whatever you want with the source as long as it stays GPL'd. I don't see how anything they do keeps you from starting at 1) and getting to 2) and from there getting to 3).
Slashdot Mirror
Roasting puppies alive. Endangering neighborhoods. Wrecking cars. Burning down houses. (I don't buy their candle story either. What "confusion?" The family was at the entrance and removed immediately, the guy they were after was in the attic. So who was in the bedroom knocking down this alleged "candle"?) And if they really believed the guy was a walking arsenal, why did they show up at the scene unarmored? At least knowing that there would be no gun battle is a perfect excuse for not bothering to alert the neighbors.
As the Man In Charge, this is a direct reflection on him. If he is unaware of the behavior of his officers, or if he chooses to ignore it, then he is exhibiting gross incompetence and should be fired without retirement benefits. "Didn't get the memo" or "I wasn't aware of this" is NOT an excuse for incompetent mismanagement of a police force.
So, if the man isn't incompetent and is in total charge of the operation, then he must have condoned the operation. What word would YOU use for a man who condones chasing a 10 month old dog (who by the officer's own statement was not attacking anyone) back into the fire? What word would YOU use for someone who can't be bothered to move the child and wife away from a burning house, effectively forcing them to listen to their puppy as it burns to death, in addition to putting them at risk? What word would YOU use to describe a person who tells a child crying for her dog to "Shut the fuck up"? Personally, I think "sadists" is too good of a word to describe these people.
The buck for all this stops somewhere. If it isn't stopping at Joe, then you need to step back and take a look at the man you're defending and decide if he really is competent to fulfill the duties of his position. Because while being tough on crime makes for a great sound bite and eating green meat makes for a super photo-op, he is supposed to be running the show.
On death: France surrenders to 104F heat. Almost 15,000 dead. And thats without the tents in the sun.
On the army: When you're in the army, you spend months training in whatever weather conditions happen to be that day. By the end of that, you're up for standing in a tent in Iraq. Thats what training is for.
You seem to think that if the majority of the people there are convicted criminals, thats "good enough". I guess you advocate shooting everyone and letting God sort them out. Maybe you think you live in a world where people who are arrested are arrested because they did something wrong. I live in the real world in a city called Houston, where not many years ago the cops decided to bust some street racers, only they got there and nobody was racing, so they arrested EVERYONE at a nearby K-Mart, and when that abuse of power couldn't get them hard enough, they arrested everyone eating dinner at the Sonic next door. Over 400 arrests, every single one of them was overturned, at the expense of the city as it requires a lawsuit in order to have the arrest record expunged. Just imagine what would have happened if these people had been treated in the ways you're defending.
And here's your cite for the 60 people set free on that prostitution sting.
I can just see the guys behind the cameras rushing to change their bets when the people favored to win complains to their coach about their sore legs or what not.
Maybe I'm just used to a slight variance, then. Hm.
Maybe thats my problem. After a decade of using a particular style of PC keyboard (short enter key, wide backspace, backslash above enter key), typing on anything else is difficult.
In fact, even though I haven't used a commodore 64 in 5 years or so now, I can still remember some of the keyboard layout (shift-2 is "). I came across this layout on a Japanese iMac keyboard a couple of years back and was amused by it.
My biggest disappointment with the 17" powerbook is that they used a dinky little keyboard with huge spaces on either side. WTF? They could have fit an almost-full-sized (less the numberpad) on there!
That was the one thing that kept me from taking my big hands and running out there to buy one the day they came out.
Works better than trying to legally define "food". You should see Texas's sales tax rules on food, its full of crazy things like "a sandwitch with roast beef that can fit in a 21 year old man's mouth sideways"
Texas recently had its tax-free weekend on clothing and other "necessities". I went on saturday for my yearly clothes run to buy $80 worth of clothing (three cheap shirts, two pairs of cheap slacks, a pack of underwear and a few pairs of socks)
I parked within 200 feet of the mall entrance. At both JC Penney's and Sears, I checked out without waiting in line. In past years, both of these would have been impossible. I suspect that Monday's paper will tell the truth of the state of the economy. No more counts of who has a job and who is buying a house, but real numbers: how much money is being spent.
Because thats what an income tax IS. Don't like it? I'm all for a national sales tax on non-edible items.
Yes, most start up businesses fail in the first few years. What you didn't mention was that most businesses fail from mismanagement, not circumstances. So the answer is that no one should start a business? No one should take risks? We should all abandon all hope and just go "get a job"?
Not at all. This was in response to all the people who say "economy is sucking? Quit whining and start a company" as if its somehow a solution to the problem. Because clearly, 130K new consulting companies are obviously what our economy needs to turn this around.
a lot of money into research for alternative fuel sources
Here we are, $50/barrel oil staring us down, and all I want to do is find every last person who ever said "don't worry about it, we've got oil for decades" in response to people calling for reducing US oil dependency, and deep fry them in crude, battered.
the "rich" pay about 90% of all the taxes in this country, right?
I wonder how much money "the rich" have compared to the rest of us. Somewhere around 90% of the money? Then having 90% of the tax load is perfectly justifiable! I guess it depends on who you classify as "the rich".
No one "gave" me that opportunity, I created it with the help of the wife, WHILE I held a real job.
And what if you're one of the people who lost their jobs already? Had stable employment doing something they enjoyed doing and never once thought Enron would up and implode? What then? Would you tell these people to start their own jobs? Starting a company isn't a risk, its a HUGE risk. Only 2/3 of the startups "make it" over FOUR years. So what do you propose to the 33% of every guy who was laid off and started his own company and sank the last of his capital into it, and watched it crumple? Jump off the roof of the office building they've been evicted from? I've watched my dad's dreams crumple like that after starting his third company and watching it be taken advantage of and fail like the rest. "Nice patented idea there, I think I'll use it, because we've got better lawyers than you could EVER afford." "Pay you? Ha. You and what army of lawyers?" Where do you think the desperately seeking self-employment are going to get the cash to buy the lawyers that modern day business DEMANDS?
is it because of the 11 months of unemployement or poor planning?
Or because they busted the piggybank to survive?
I don't know if you've got kids or not, but raising three of them is not cheap. I've read in the paper that economists expect people to spend an average of $160K on each child through college. These days, all it takes is one hospital visit in those 11 months to bankrupt someone without insurance.
why can't they join a coordinated search for patterns in financial markets?
They could, but lets say they find a pattern and say "sell SCOX, its price will drop". Everyone will sell SCOX, and its price will drop, but will it be because of preexisting conditions? Or because of the reaction to the "pattern"?
You mentioned you started a new business, and I have to question the wisdom of that when you are having trouble with basic necessities. Starting a business is a huge risk, and taking that kind of risk when you are so close to financial ruin already is not the smartest thing to do.
/. "can't find work? just start your own company!" will reply to this.
Damned if you do, damned if you don't. I wonder if anyone who EVER told someone on
Its not quite that simple. We don't trust the government to do that either, but when we're drawing this analogy between guns and technology, we're trusting that the NRA and other interested parties will jump in and help protect this slippery slope we're defending here. After all, when the makers of a tool become responsible for the acts of the people using that tool (for its intended purpose or not), what's next?
vaporware?
Not really, no. When I was in highschool, one of the big things going around our computer labs was a program that could take DOS executables and create a pascal program out of them. Of course, all of the symbol names were gone so it had wonderfully cryptic variable and procedure names. I'd have to say that was about 1994.
And they told me that was a "standard" contract.
.com boom, I can see myself mooning the HR guy as my "standard" response to such crap.
I now think its a good thing I stayed in college. If I had dropped out and tried to join the
Doesn't work like that. You could have steamed the envelope open yourself (or even mailed it to yourself taped closed) and then later added the stuff and sealed it.
Just mailing it to yourself is unacceptable. Likewise having a dated lab book without witnesses.
It would be at least halfway reasonable with respect to the constitutionally defined purpose of intellectual property if it WERE the content creators. But its not, its the publishers, the business organizations that are doing this, NOT the content creators. Do you think that Billy Wong and the Sixpacks cares whether or not the ipod plays .rm files? No, its just Apple the publisher. Read the DMCA, not a single word in there protects the author of a work, nor is there even language for permitting the author of a work to access his own work! The entire law is all about protecting the publishers' encryption schemes, copyrights be damned.
Actually its not that serious. Its trivial to modify /etc/inittab so that the good ol' three-fingered-salute does something, like restart the getty on the current console.
The question is, what is a "known good login"? Is just restarting the gettys and hoping that getty and login haven't been replaced known good enough? (Seems to work for windows)
BTW, the free speech zone at the DNC was selected and set up by the mayor, a republican. Probably for exactly this reason.
Earlier they were dumping anything matching *mail*. We discovered this, this morning by searching for qmail sites. (this explains why you can't search for gmail, but you could search for yahoo)
They can't ban you from libGPLfoo.so.1. You have those binaries, you have to be able to get that source. Banning you from receiving a future version (from them, mind you, they can't ban you from receiving it from some third party) does not make libGPLfoo.so.1 any less free, so the license is met.
The problem that everyone seems to be having is that the GPL applies to one thing and one thing only: the current binaries and source that are being distributed. If it applied to every version then license changes would be impossible. By pushing penalties off onto some later thing, the current version is fully unrestricted and GPL-compliant.
I'm sure the FSF will make changes to the next GPL to address things like penalties outside of the scope of the particular software package, they've been talking about fixing a few things it for a while.
All the GPL says is that 1) if you get the binary from them, they have to 2) give the source to you too, and that 3) you're free to do whatever you want with the source as long as it stays GPL'd. I don't see how anything they do keeps you from starting at 1) and getting to 2) and from there getting to 3).