I see your point - and it is a ton better than it was in the privacy of a home where the hidden message revealed itself - but can you still see what I'm saying about how this will be used? I'm pointing to the calls to use it in other cases, with more shocking images, against less extreme people - right here in this thread.
I guess I'm saying; yes, this isn't the most horrible thing ever... does that make it good?
I know this is going to get a bit of hate, and I considered for a moment posting as anon, but meh -- if it's worth saying, it's worth taking the blame for it.
I don't like this. I think that subversively trying to inject your opinions into another group gets into that gray area of suppression of free speech. (Yes, I know, I know, they're Nazis -- you can't get a more polarized group than this, and the entire mentality of Godwin's law is in effect here, this is too volatile of a emotional package to make a decent point.)
But, if we were to look at it generally (i.e. Replace 'Neo-Nazi' with '$group_name') and just make the same argument -- you'd start to find it a lot less funny, and perhaps even offensive. For example, had Neo-Nazis used the same method to secretly trick a huge number of people into wearing Swasticas ("I swear, it was a picture of a dog before I washed it!") There would be outrage over the "subversive attack" used to "deface" the, arguably, victims.
(I only use the quotes to stress those words, clearly if I think we shouldn't do it to Neo-Nazis, I think we shouldn't do it at all.)
To paraphrase Billy Gates here; "Let's do this to the Tea Party." -- So the next step is suppression of political ideologies that you find wrong? Is this really funny so long as it's not happening to American Liberals?
How do PCs being on create more volcanic activity and forest fires? Oh, that's right, we're still on that 70's kick that the world is ending... Still not sure of the date? I thought not.
Very well said. Purpose of the donated PCs is a huge factor. You should also consider the capacity of the recipient to upkeep the machine, and if they plan to use any platform specific software -- would be kinda silly to switch OS's if they're waiting with Windows specific software. There's a huge range of Linux distros, if you do choose to switch, but that's a whole 'nother can o' worms.
So, Apple can sue over patents, and the RIAA can extort money, but if you combine the two it's suddenly over the line? Don't get me wrong, this guy had it coming, but let's not pretend that somehow the issue of patent trolling and extortion is being dealt with on any decent level. Had this guy worked for any large company, he'd be in the clear.
You don't think that, if a clear profit margin is demonstrated, they won't pick it up? I'd expect them to, even if at an arm's distance via child companies.
Very well said;
We've all been witness to anonymous fora; behold 4chan. A de facto art of a strong social network is security and privacy, and the first step towards any semblance of either is to address identity. I'm not saying that I agree with Google's actions of enforcement, but the rule of naming structure is a valid concept. Claiming that it's purely for marketing is sensationalist and petty.
Slashdot Mirror
I was just being comical. (Well, trying.)
And Microsoft is lecturing the tech world about being open and free with software. I'm pretty sure that's one of the signs of apocalypse.
Apple did not make the first tablet, nor the first successful tablet.
I see your point - and it is a ton better than it was in the privacy of a home where the hidden message revealed itself - but can you still see what I'm saying about how this will be used? I'm pointing to the calls to use it in other cases, with more shocking images, against less extreme people - right here in this thread. I guess I'm saying; yes, this isn't the most horrible thing ever... does that make it good?
I know this is going to get a bit of hate, and I considered for a moment posting as anon, but meh -- if it's worth saying, it's worth taking the blame for it. I don't like this. I think that subversively trying to inject your opinions into another group gets into that gray area of suppression of free speech. (Yes, I know, I know, they're Nazis -- you can't get a more polarized group than this, and the entire mentality of Godwin's law is in effect here, this is too volatile of a emotional package to make a decent point.) But, if we were to look at it generally (i.e. Replace 'Neo-Nazi' with '$group_name') and just make the same argument -- you'd start to find it a lot less funny, and perhaps even offensive. For example, had Neo-Nazis used the same method to secretly trick a huge number of people into wearing Swasticas ("I swear, it was a picture of a dog before I washed it!") There would be outrage over the "subversive attack" used to "deface" the, arguably, victims. (I only use the quotes to stress those words, clearly if I think we shouldn't do it to Neo-Nazis, I think we shouldn't do it at all.) To paraphrase Billy Gates here; "Let's do this to the Tea Party." -- So the next step is suppression of political ideologies that you find wrong? Is this really funny so long as it's not happening to American Liberals?
Also finally getting ASLR... somewhat working. That was a huge step. So yes, Lion is good work from Apple.
How do PCs being on create more volcanic activity and forest fires? Oh, that's right, we're still on that 70's kick that the world is ending... Still not sure of the date? I thought not.
Very well said. Purpose of the donated PCs is a huge factor. You should also consider the capacity of the recipient to upkeep the machine, and if they plan to use any platform specific software -- would be kinda silly to switch OS's if they're waiting with Windows specific software. There's a huge range of Linux distros, if you do choose to switch, but that's a whole 'nother can o' worms.
They should try this case in Germany.
So, Apple can sue over patents, and the RIAA can extort money, but if you combine the two it's suddenly over the line? Don't get me wrong, this guy had it coming, but let's not pretend that somehow the issue of patent trolling and extortion is being dealt with on any decent level. Had this guy worked for any large company, he'd be in the clear.
I'd say it's sensationalist, but my bigger issue is that Apple doesn't make a secure OS, even with stand-alone setups.
You don't think that, if a clear profit margin is demonstrated, they won't pick it up? I'd expect them to, even if at an arm's distance via child companies.
Very well said; We've all been witness to anonymous fora; behold 4chan. A de facto art of a strong social network is security and privacy, and the first step towards any semblance of either is to address identity. I'm not saying that I agree with Google's actions of enforcement, but the rule of naming structure is a valid concept. Claiming that it's purely for marketing is sensationalist and petty.
>Implying that the sample was random.