The French police didn't do a lot, because if they don't catch the car-burning vandals red-handed, there is very little evidence to find and apprehend them, and the physical damage is covered by the insurance anyway.
So yeah, that's a perfectly valid set of priorities. And yes, they did send in reinforcements, including the riot police, to increase the chances of catching the vandals red-handed.
And next time you want to spout your racist bullshit, please have the balls to actually say that you're referring to the North African descended folks in the banlieues, instead of hiding behind weaselly codewords like 'appeasement'.
Like, say, mandating that a politician opposed to certain of Westminster's viewpoints is not allowed to be shown on TV? And the BBC going along without a peep?
It is a fact that the BBC allowed itself to be used by the British government to censor the major political party representing the Republicans in Northern Ireland.
apt-cache show <packagename>. If it's a meta-package, the Debian devs are usually good enough to provide that in the description. In fact, the standard phrase goes something like "This is a meta-package that depends on all other packages to facilitate install. It can be safely removed after install."
Windows installs end-user applications in/Program Files, dependencies either in the application folders or in/Windows/system32, the documentation and resources within the application folders and the rest of the core system files in/Windows, and puts all the home folders in/Users
And this is different from the FHS how? The executables go in/usr/bin, the data files in/usr/share, the dependent libraries in/usr/lib, and the config is spread over/etc (for system-wide defaults) and $HOME (for user-specific settings). How is that different from exutables in C:\Program Files, dependent libraries in C:\Windows\system32, static data goes wherever the developer likes and system-wide settings in HKLM and user settings in HKCU in the registry?
You're a moron if you're trying to dis Linux for spreading application files over a few pre-defined locations, while praising Windows for doing the exact bloody same thing.
Learn to bloody well read, you wanker. Ms. Wilderman's comments on what is or isn't appropriate use of a residential area for a chemical research facility is a zoning issue coming up.
[the authorities] should simply follow the Constitution and due process.
And your Constitution (assuming you're an American) says that you shall be safeguarded against unreasonable searches. Now, how is the local fire department doing an on the spot inspection of the premises after an emergency call for a fire an unreasonable search? It is in fact common sense to inspect the premises for structural damages and possible fire hazards immediately after putting out a fire, and if quantities of unknown, possibly hazardous, substances are found, I know of no fireman that wouldn't call in assistance. There is no thinking in Western legal philosophy that would qualify this as an unreasonable intrusion of the State in a private matter. None at all. If you think there is, I'd like to see some citations.
You cannot read. Orwell specifically mentions in the passage you quote that blanket condemnations should be avoided, and yet you apply his words to all English pacifists.
Orwell did plenty of insulting himself. Which you would have known, if you had read anything beyond the out of context quotes that make the rounds in the reactionary echo chamber.
Ah yes. The famous anti-pacifism rant Orwell published at the beginning of World War II. The one that keeps making the rounds on conservative blogs, being posted by idiots like you who have not read a letter of Orwell's other work. By posting this, you give yourself away as yet another stupid parrot.
To reiterate what someone else already posted: Orwell retracted that position. Which you would have known, if you had actually read his collected essays.
It really pains me to see how reactionary scum like you try to hide behind one of the most honest men the twentieth century gave us, without giving his memory even the respect to actually read his work. Then again, I take solace in the fact that Orwell also gives plenty of tools to identify blackshirt-supporting, Daily Mail-reading closet fascists like you.
Maybe this is because some problems are quite simply not urgent, and making sure they have the same response time as urgent problems would cost an inordinate amount of money.
Politicians in the Netherlands also like to make a talking point about waiting lists in order to further demolish our health care system. Guess what? Most of the waiting lists they whine about are for non-life-threatening ailments.
You guys that whine about a few months of waiting remind me of the middle managers who want their mailbox quota increased ASAP, and their request treated like a priority-1 incident, instead of just moving their email to an off-line location. You're both lusers.
If it's nitrates, I wonder if the concentration coming from a road surface after rainfall is significant anyway. With current farming techniques, nitrate levels in the groundwater supply are already a problem, and processes to deal with that are already in place. The high-density pork and poultry farming techniques prevalent in the Netherlands produce huge amounts of nitrates.
If this road surface amounts to a drop in the bucket for our current nitrate problem, but cleans the air of pollutants, it might be a net win.
There's a fourth option: SafeBoot. I recently got the basic Administrator training for the product, and it is very nice. Integrates well with enterprise directory services like AD and LDAP, for central deployment of configs, uses decent well-documented standard crypto algorithms and key exchange protocols, and is very transparent in use. All that you see of the encryption is a password entry on boot, everything else is completely transparent.
Just asserting that it does not make any difference is not the same as explaining it. Since you are so smart, why don't you try explaining why Microsofts own whitepaper is wrong on this subject, as they seem to contradict you directly?
No, you're still sidestepping the question. How does Vista decide to play premium content without restriction, or degrade/block it, without using CPU time? Please explain how that works without invoking magic, willya?
Here's a hint: don't try. It's impossible. Unless you are trying to claim to be Aleister Crowley.
I do see however, that you managed to sidetrack the question quite well with your invective. So care to try again? How does Vista decide that a video stream must follow the PVP or not, without using CPU time?
DRM isn't an issue when it comes to CPU utilisation. Especially when you aren't watching anything DRM'ed.
Well then, please explain how Vista decides not to apply restriction to non-DRM'ed content. Be especially precise to explain how Vista does that without using magic.
You have absolutely no idea what is involved in process control. For one, this is a mechanical operation (even if highly automated) using temperature-sensitive materials. The slightest deviation can create huge differences in the final output. Basically, you're dealing with a chaotic system that must be kept in balance by careful operation.
I have done a stint as a process operator in a bottle factory. Do you know how much trouble we had to go to to keep the oven temperatures and the materials mixes constant? Do you know how much influence outside factors could have on a process that seemingly ran automatically? And that's for glass bottles, that surely require less tolerances than Lego building bricks.
Now, the state of the art in automation has progressed of course, but without well-trained operators and a Bastardly QA department, Lego would deliver bricks as good as the no-name competition. In other words: bricks with such lousy tolerances that, as someone already pointed out, they fall off the finished model.
Unfortunately, the chip used in the Oyster Card is the same one that the Dutch government was planning on rolling out this summer in the Dutch nationwide public transport system. And this was mentioned in TFA.
So take your attitude, and shove it where the sun doesn't shine, OK?
Slashdot Mirror
The French police didn't do a lot, because if they don't catch the car-burning vandals red-handed, there is very little evidence to find and apprehend them, and the physical damage is covered by the insurance anyway.
So yeah, that's a perfectly valid set of priorities. And yes, they did send in reinforcements, including the riot police, to increase the chances of catching the vandals red-handed.
And next time you want to spout your racist bullshit, please have the balls to actually say that you're referring to the North African descended folks in the banlieues, instead of hiding behind weaselly codewords like 'appeasement'.
Mart
Like, say, mandating that a politician opposed to certain of Westminster's viewpoints is not allowed to be shown on TV? And the BBC going along without a peep?
It is a fact that the BBC allowed itself to be used by the British government to censor the major political party representing the Republicans in Northern Ireland.
Mart
apt-cache show <packagename>. If it's a meta-package, the Debian devs are usually good enough to provide that in the description. In fact, the standard phrase goes something like "This is a meta-package that depends on all other packages to facilitate install. It can be safely removed after install."
Mart
And this is different from the FHS how? The executables go in /usr/bin, the data files in /usr/share, the dependent libraries in /usr/lib, and the config is spread over /etc (for system-wide defaults) and $HOME (for user-specific settings). How is that different from exutables in C:\Program Files, dependent libraries in C:\Windows\system32, static data goes wherever the developer likes and system-wide settings in HKLM and user settings in HKCU in the registry?
You're a moron if you're trying to dis Linux for spreading application files over a few pre-defined locations, while praising Windows for doing the exact bloody same thing.
Mart
Learn to bloody well read, you wanker. Ms. Wilderman's comments on what is or isn't appropriate use of a residential area for a chemical research facility is a zoning issue coming up.
Mart
And your Constitution (assuming you're an American) says that you shall be safeguarded against unreasonable searches. Now, how is the local fire department doing an on the spot inspection of the premises after an emergency call for a fire an unreasonable search? It is in fact common sense to inspect the premises for structural damages and possible fire hazards immediately after putting out a fire, and if quantities of unknown, possibly hazardous, substances are found, I know of no fireman that wouldn't call in assistance. There is no thinking in Western legal philosophy that would qualify this as an unreasonable intrusion of the State in a private matter. None at all. If you think there is, I'd like to see some citations.
Mart
No-one has anything like it?
<looks at Nokia phone menu>
Gee, what's that Download option doing there? There sure are no applications below that, are there?
Mart
You cannot read. Orwell specifically mentions in the passage you quote that blanket condemnations should be avoided, and yet you apply his words to all English pacifists.
Does becoming a reactionary require a lobotomy?
Mart
Orwell did plenty of insulting himself. Which you would have known, if you had read anything beyond the out of context quotes that make the rounds in the reactionary echo chamber.
Mart
Ah yes. The famous anti-pacifism rant Orwell published at the beginning of World War II. The one that keeps making the rounds on conservative blogs, being posted by idiots like you who have not read a letter of Orwell's other work. By posting this, you give yourself away as yet another stupid parrot.
To reiterate what someone else already posted: Orwell retracted that position. Which you would have known, if you had actually read his collected essays.
It really pains me to see how reactionary scum like you try to hide behind one of the most honest men the twentieth century gave us, without giving his memory even the respect to actually read his work. Then again, I take solace in the fact that Orwell also gives plenty of tools to identify blackshirt-supporting, Daily Mail-reading closet fascists like you.
Mart
Anecdote <> Data.
Mart
Answer the question. Why is planning roads 'planning your own life' and planning public transport 'planning other people's lives'?
Mart
Maybe this is because some problems are quite simply not urgent, and making sure they have the same response time as urgent problems would cost an inordinate amount of money.
Politicians in the Netherlands also like to make a talking point about waiting lists in order to further demolish our health care system. Guess what? Most of the waiting lists they whine about are for non-life-threatening ailments.
You guys that whine about a few months of waiting remind me of the middle managers who want their mailbox quota increased ASAP, and their request treated like a priority-1 incident, instead of just moving their email to an off-line location. You're both lusers.
Mart
If it's nitrates, I wonder if the concentration coming from a road surface after rainfall is significant anyway. With current farming techniques, nitrate levels in the groundwater supply are already a problem, and processes to deal with that are already in place. The high-density pork and poultry farming techniques prevalent in the Netherlands produce huge amounts of nitrates.
If this road surface amounts to a drop in the bucket for our current nitrate problem, but cleans the air of pollutants, it might be a net win.
Mart
There's a fourth option: SafeBoot. I recently got the basic Administrator training for the product, and it is very nice. Integrates well with enterprise directory services like AD and LDAP, for central deployment of configs, uses decent well-documented standard crypto algorithms and key exchange protocols, and is very transparent in use. All that you see of the encryption is a password entry on boot, everything else is completely transparent.
Mart
So, you get trounced in a debate, and you resort to spite moderations, eh? Fucking sore loser.
Mart
Just asserting that it does not make any difference is not the same as explaining it. Since you are so smart, why don't you try explaining why Microsofts own whitepaper is wrong on this subject, as they seem to contradict you directly?
Mart
No, you're still sidestepping the question. How does Vista decide to play premium content without restriction, or degrade/block it, without using CPU time? Please explain how that works without invoking magic, willya?
Here's a hint: don't try. It's impossible. Unless you are trying to claim to be Aleister Crowley.
Mart
I do see however, that you managed to sidetrack the question quite well with your invective. So care to try again? How does Vista decide that a video stream must follow the PVP or not, without using CPU time?
Since the Media Gateway Interface is involved after a program has already decoded the content, why do you bring up a red herring?
Fuck off and die, asshole.
So that means Vista does use CPU cycles for DRM checks. Which in fact is consistent with Microsofts own whitepaper on the subject. So you were wrong.
Mart
Well then, please explain how Vista decides not to apply restriction to non-DRM'ed content. Be especially precise to explain how Vista does that without using magic.
Mart
That's what you keep reading in it. I think that suggests more about your thought processes...
Mart
You have absolutely no idea what is involved in process control. For one, this is a mechanical operation (even if highly automated) using temperature-sensitive materials. The slightest deviation can create huge differences in the final output. Basically, you're dealing with a chaotic system that must be kept in balance by careful operation.
I have done a stint as a process operator in a bottle factory. Do you know how much trouble we had to go to to keep the oven temperatures and the materials mixes constant? Do you know how much influence outside factors could have on a process that seemingly ran automatically? And that's for glass bottles, that surely require less tolerances than Lego building bricks.
Now, the state of the art in automation has progressed of course, but without well-trained operators and a Bastardly QA department, Lego would deliver bricks as good as the no-name competition. In other words: bricks with such lousy tolerances that, as someone already pointed out, they fall off the finished model.
Mart
Unfortunately, the chip used in the Oyster Card is the same one that the Dutch government was planning on rolling out this summer in the Dutch nationwide public transport system. And this was mentioned in TFA.
So take your attitude, and shove it where the sun doesn't shine, OK?
Mart