The ONLY application out there that does the same stuff is Lotus, and Lotus is so slow and clunky Outlook can't help but seem better to an uneducated user. For the record, if you think that Domino is superior to Exchange (by any measure) you're insane. Domino is slightly better at very large (10,000+ users) deployments. That's it. The tradeoff is paying twice as much in software and staff costs and having to deal with the worst email client ever made. And it won't work as well with your Blackberries.
There *ARE* Linux replacements just beginning to emerge. Most important being Scalix, the reincarnation of HP OpenMail, which is basically just Exchange on Unix. I haven't played with it much yet, but it definitely looks promising.
You are almost certainly guilty of some sort of trivial tax fraud, like failing to report sales tax on an out-of-state purchase, which is a felony. Ever copied any sort of disc? Felony. Do you own CD burning software? It can be argued to be a "circumvention device", possession of which is a felony. Do you drive a car? You've almost certainly committed felony "reckless driving" at some point (in many places it's felony reckless driving if you drive more than 10 mph over the speed limit). Do you own a knife with a blade longer than 2 inches? Carrying such a knife in public (even in your car) is a felony in many states.
That's just a few examples off the top of my head.
One other comment that bears to be added, there aren't really and PC manufacturers today that are selling upgradable computers. That's not to say that you can't rip it open and do some dirty work, but you're almost certainly voiding any chance of warranty support that you have. Most laptops are this way, as well as desktops. I'd like to point out that this is very explicitly NOT TRUE of most desktops. At least not of Dell, HP, Sony, IBM, and Micron (that's most of the major manufacturers), I don't know about Acer.. You can stick any random card you want in the system and all the rest of the hardware is still under warranty. Same applies to CPU, memory, etc. but the Dell warranty does not apply on those components. Many manufacturers (like Dell) will happily sell you "authorized" upgrade parts and will happily charge you to install them at an "authorized service center".
Laptops are slightly different. SOME laptops vendors have as part of their warranty agreement that if "unauthorized" personell crack the case it's no longer under warranty. I've never seen them enforce this, but there it is. End users are specifically allowed to upgrade memory and hard drive, as well as use whatever PC cards they want. Really, the only thing left to upgrade is the CPU (which may not be socketed) and the MiniPCI card, both of which involve completely disassembling the laptop.
Ever hear of the phrase "selective enforcement"? What you are talking about is a fantasy. In reality, police quite carefully pick and choose what laws they are going to enforce based largely on what's easy and what makes them look good.
Are the police constantly writing jaywalking tickets or busting businesses for tax fraud? Both crimes are commited near-constantly everywhere. In fact, most Americans commit multiple felonies every single day. If the police actually enforced ALL the laws the whole population would be in jail, especially the police themselves since they break the law far more often on average.
Unless facing pressure from "higher ups", police officers have complete discrecion on how they enforce the law. Famous examples include Southern officers refusing to enforce anti-discrimination legislation and conservative officers refusing to investigate crimes against abortion clinics.
If you still want to believe this: Please describe the tort you would take to court against a police officer that refused to enforce a particular law.
If they have reason to suspect you of stealing, they can search you No actually, they can't. This has been fought in courts many times, and the actual law of the land is that if a security guard (who is not a peace officer as well) TOUCHES you for any reason whatsoever without your explicit written permission, it's assault. The concept of "probable cause" only applies to police officers. Technically speaking, if a security guard personally sees you stealing the merchandise he STILL can't touch you. He has to wait for real police to arrive or he can be charged with assault.
Remember that the filing fee for small claims court is usually less than $50 and you can sue for up to $5000 in "pain and suffering" for security guards tacking you for doing nothing. This guy shouldn't sue the cops (who are judgment proof) he should sue Circuit City.
Just tell this to security guards to try to stop you: "You could tackle me, and then I'd beat your ass and sue the store. You will be out a job and the store will lose thousands of dollars. I make a living suing businesses, care to be next?"
This usually works.
Apparently club stores, like Costco, operate under different rules You sign a contract explicitly agreeing to such searches when you get your membership. However, this does not mean that Costco has the right to tackle and arrest you for not showing your receipt. ALL they can LEGALLY do is take away your membership, since you violated the terms of the contract. That's it.
The inward curving grips were brutal for my hands. The Madcatz controllers also had a six-button face (duplicating the shoulder buttons on the face) making it perfect for six-button fighting games, like Capcom vs. SNK. DC was basically THE platform for fighting games, with Soul Calibur being one of the launch titles and one of the best fighting games ever.
The crappy controllers didn't help either. This was the first system I've used where the third-party MadCatz controllers were DRAMATICALLY superior to the standard controllers. And piracy was also a factor.
I use LUKS partitions and use FreeOTFE to mount them in windows. I didn't know FreeOTFE supported LUKS partitions. I'll have to try that.
The NTFS write support in linux is unreliable (I've had it break a partition before); you're better off using ext2 and installing an ext2 driver for windows (though fscking after a crash is a pain). Or, if it's small enough for windows scandisk to work, fat32. I've tried it both ways, and it's buggy both ways. I had slightly more success with NTFS so I'm using it that way. But yeah, formating them ext2 and using the ext2 driver in Windows also works. I fsck'd the drives with a Linux LiveCD.
I'll have to call you on that. I can assure you, the Windows Media team work long and hard to fix any cracks to the WMDRM platform. Perhaps that is true NOW, but it certainly wasn't true in the early days. I was personally given a tool to crack Windows Media 3?(I don't remember the version #, it's the first one with DRM when they started calling it "Windows Media") my a member of the dev team. I wasn't working for MS at the time, but I was working for a company closely partnered. At the time, the engineer told me that the DRM was deliberately easy to remove for QA purposes.
I guess it's convenient to call people a troll when you disagree with their viewpoint. If your viewpoint is as inflammatory as "nobody cares about multimedia and videogames", then yeah.
It doesn't surprise me the videogame industry makes more than the film industry, though I seriously wonder if that's true (at least if you confine the figures to the USA market). Parents in this country give their spoiled kids a ridiculous amount of money to buy shit with, and that which doesn't go for movie tickets goes for videogames.
What the hell does my personal website have to do with any argument here anyway? It has everything to do with your claim that only "spoiled kids" are interested in videogames. I simply pointed out that many people would think that YOUR hobby, modding cars, is also mainly for "spoiled kids". I was stereotyping YOU the way YOU were stereotyping videogame players.
You have a completely irrational disdain for videogames. I get it. This also goes to your general reputation, meaning your disdain for Windows is also probably irrational and amounts to "I don't like it, therefore it's shit".
it's NOT an obscure subject, "The most intimate details of family life among a secretive religious sect." It's the DEFINITION of an obscure subject.
There is no "preservation" of bodily fluids. First off, I don't know if the idea that ejaculating makes you "impure" originates in India, and neither do you. I was simply questioning the logic of it, which is based on asceticism (why you clipped that part of my post I don't know). It has nothing to do with the fluid per se, but with denial of sexual gratification. That's the whole point of circumcision as well.
A literal read of Genesis is that all these events took place on Day 6 (quite a busy day), and given that the Hebrew word of Yom refers to day, but in Biblical Hebrew also refers to units of time, a literalist read is probably unnecessary. If it's not literally true, and it's allegory makes no sense (and is flatly wrong, see below) what is the point?
The pain of childbirth and needing to work simply demonstrates that mankind is responsible for their actions, and that it wasn't the Creator's ill will that gave them a rough lot in life, and they were offered perfection and chose reality. That's simply not what the Bible says, and it's a strange interpretation. You're implying that Adam and Eve made an informed choice, but the way the story is structured that's not possible. Adam and Eve didn't know about "the outside world" before Eve's transgression. Of course, you and I know the account is fictional, that's why it doesn't make any sense. None of this is consistent with the real history of humanity.
That seems unlikely. There is archaeological evidence that the Egyptians THOUGHT that they wiped out the Israelites, No there isn't. There is no evidence whatsoever that any people even vaguely similar to the Israelites ever existed in Egypt, unless you're peddling that line about Akhenanten. He wasn't Moses.
and the Biblical Jewish practice is HEAVILY based upon Egyptian practices. Most major Jewish practices are modified from the Egyptian ones, making the dedication to the God of Israel instead of the pagan gods. This only makes sense if the religion was started by someone leading Israelites out of Egypt, because it gave them worship that they understood. They are modified from the Cannanite practices which were based on Egyptian practices (and Babylonian and Assyrian). Most of the major aspects of Egyptian religion (the annual flood, funeral rites, etc.) didn't make it into Judaism. The Canaanites/proto-Jews didn't adopt monotheism until the influence of Zoroaster, hundreds of years later. One does not need Moses to explain these influences.
And Jewish law provides for Concubinage (trial marriages), marrying captives, slaves, etc. Both groups have laws governing "frowned upon behaviors," but discourage them or harass those that try to practice them. These haven't been mainstream practices in Judaism since the Talmud, and in Islam since the Sunni/Shi'a split. Which gets back to the original point of this thread, that Jewish law and Islamic law regarding women really isn't so different. Most Jews are liberalized and don't follow these laws strictly, just as many Muslims are liberalized and don't follow the laws strictly, but the laws themselves really aren't so dissimilar.
I can't decide if you're a troll or just a poorly-informed Linux zealot. I'll assume the latter for now.
This is probably right, but it's a driver issue, which is something that plagues Linux use with speciality/niche hardware. However, since the OP was talking about "the desktop experience", how many people actually use 7.1 on their typical desktop? I think most people are happy with 2 or 2.1. Typical desktop users aren't doing professional sound editing. And when was I talking about the "typical desktop". I was saying "This is shit that Linux on the desktop can't do that people want to do". 7.1 surround and professional video editing aren't "typical", but people actually DO want these things and you can't do them in Linux very well.
Totally wrong. In Ubuntu, you just install your media player(s), and the codec packs from the alternate repositories Except this didn't work for me. I couldn't get Real or Quicktime working. WMV only sort of worked. Maybe this has changed in the last year (the last time I installed Ubuntu).
And FWIW, you can do exactly the same thing in WIndows through "codec packs", I use the K-lite codec pack to play files in the Windows Classic player, or VLC, or any player I want. I too only had to install one file. And unlike Linux, everything actually works.
OpenGL does just about everything DirectX does. What, like sound and controller configs? I said "DirectX" not "Direct3D". It's the complete gaming framework that Linux is lacking (not really anymore, since there are a few out there now that nobody uses).
But back to my previous point, how many people care about playing DX games on their desktop? Sure, the teenagers think that's the only reason to own a computer, but for us adults who have real work to do, gaming is a non-factor. I'm leaning towards troll now.
You *DO* understand that the videogaming industry makes more than the film industry, right? Your comment is painfully uninformed.
How old are YOU anyway? I could just as easily claim, and with a lot more accuracy, that car mods are entirely the in the realm of dipshit teenage gearheads with too much time and money on their hands.
Truecrypt is cross-platform, Truecrypt volumes work in both Linux and Windows. Truecrypt is pretty much the ONLY encryption tool I've found that is cross-platform. In Linux it's a bit of a PITA, but it's worth it (for me anyway).
I made my Truecrypt volumes truly cross-platform by installing NTFS support in the kernel. I can take my data drives and move them completely unchanged between my Linux and Windows boxes which is teh awesome.
I'm really curious about what people seem to think is missing from the Linux kernel that impacts the desktop experience? I ask because I've been using Linux on the desktop since 1997 and I'd say starting around 2001 is when it reached parity with MS Windows. In particular: Sophisticated sound management. I dare you to get 7.1 working in Linux
Video stuff. Linux still has problems with vidoe drivers and and sort of high-performance video tasks.
Multimedia formats in general. It's a PITA to get WMV, Quicktime, Real, etc. working in Linux.
Gaming. There is nothing equivalent to DirectX in Linux (Yes, I'm aware of OpenGL and SDL. Not equivalent.)
For some stuff: development, web design, web browsing, email, Office tasks, etc. the Linux desktop works fine. It's when you want to do multimedia tasks that Linux falls down.
And the OP was right: Most of he companies spending money on Linux development see Linux as a server OS to replace proprietary Unixes like Solaris, not as a replacement to Windows on the desktop or as a "LAN server". Because of this, desktop Linux has been slowing and is an increasingly low priority for Linux developers since they're not getting paid to work on it.
The network stack in Vista uses 40% CPU time for simple file transfers - up from 15% in XP and 9% in Linux This doesn't even make any sense. I assume you're talking about equivalent hardware, and for XP vs. Vista this isn't correct. If you seperate out the network stuff you'll find it's about 20%. But it's not the stack, it's about SMB crap. Maybe you should actually read about Vista before bashing it.
And "Linux" isn't a target. RHEL5 running Samba is a target, and you'll find that it DOES outperform Windows Vista assuming you trim down the other services you are running. Of course, nobody claims that Vista is a great fileserver. Does RHEL5 running Samba outperform Windows Server 2003 (assuming you trim down the services on both systems) on the same hardware? No, it's basically a wash.
Unless Microsoft can demonstrate superior performance with Vista on identical hardware, users will conclude that DRM is such a burden on resources This is insane. Does RHEL5 demonstrate superior performance to RHEL4 on the same hardware? NO! Does MacOS X display superior performance to MacOS 9 on the same hardware (like 1st generation iMacs)? NO! Basically what you are saying has never been true. Performance improvements in MacOSX on the same hardware are largely due to bug fixes. Service Packs and bug fixes have also improved performance in Windows and Unix/Linux.
The FUD against Vista has been truly awesome, especially in regards to the DRM. The FACT is that RIGHT NOW, the content protection features of Vista (inflicted on them by the studios) don't do dick, and even if they did there are well-known cracks. This is like the earlier claims that WPA would destroy your systems and eat your brain.
Is Microsoft also the devil for creating a music and video DRM system at the behest of the studios (one that they deliberately made easy to crack)? Blame the fucking content producers, since they are the ones who dreamt up this crap.
People seem to be missing the real story here, which is about how Friendly Local Game Stores are a thing of the past. In the not-too-distant past this guy could have been running his own games store which could have chosen this sort of policy on it's own, regardless of lost sales.
Now all the FLGS have been eliminated by EBGames/Gamestop, who have a monopoly on video game stores in the USA. And these are bad people. Among other things, they blatantly ignore local laws by selling broken shit to kids and then refusing to accept returns.
The point isn't "Apple doesn't like Linux" it's that Apple is trying to block access to new iPods in third-party apps. That's highly annoying to those who use a third-party app to manage their iPods. This kind of crap (being forced to use iTunes) is exacty the reason I don't own an iPod.
If you already own an iPod, you do have an option. Rockbox is open-source firmware for many MP3 players, including iPods. It's quite impressive and superior to the standard iPod software in many ways. Most importantly it allows you to use your iPod freely (like a regular storage device).
A concerned parent is a GOOD thing, regardless of their technical naivetee. Being later than she should have been (and how much later--is he 13 or 17?) isn't ideal, but she's trying to deal with things. Accusing her of having sexual hangups and disliking porn as a result is total and utter conjecture on your part. It's an educated guess. I don't have a psychology degree, but you don't need one to understand common behavior patterns. Despite the fact that people don't want to admit it, the reality is that most people are pretty easy to stereotype. I said she has sexual hangups because almost EVERYONE has sexual hangups, it's an issue of how severe hers are. I said she disliked porn because experience and common sense tells me that an adult woman that regularly watches hard-core porn (a relative rarity) is probably pretty comfortable with sexuality and wouldn't mind if her teenaged son was exposed to "inappropriate content".
I should also point out here that everyone is making the assumption that she's talking about porn when we hear "inappropriate content". In theory, she could be trying to shield her son from exposure to violent, racist, or religious content. But we're all ASSUMING she's talking about porn because by far that is the most likely scenario.
There are two issues here: CAN she do it, and SHOULD she do it. The answer is most likely "no" to both questions.
Ask her this:
"Is your teenage son generally more computer literate than you are?"
If the answer to this is "yes", she has absolutely no chance whatsoever of filtering him whatsoever.
Then ask her:
"What are you afraid of your teenage son seeing on the internet that you think he hasn't already seen?"
This question should make her think a little. The year is 2007 and we're dealing with an American teenage boy that has access to the internet. He's almost certainly already seen hard-core porn. He probably already has a collection. The important part is that she understands this is normal and appropriate.
This is fundamentally about her, not about her son. She has sexual hangups and doesn't personally care for porn so she's projecting this on her son. She also doesn't understand that teenagers a sexual beings and will be strongly interested in sex, especially girls. Parents need to get used to the idea of their kids having sex, not at some distant date in the future but RIGHT NOW. Yeah, ALL kids. You should be teaching your 5-year-olds about sex because some of them ARE having it. Stop being so squeamish.
Most serious computer security professionals who have looked at e-voting systems are strongly of the opinion that e-voting should not exist. Experts on voting systems loudly concur. Paper ballots marked by a felt marker and then dropped into locked transparent plastic totes is the best system yet developed for voting. The UN strongly recommends such as system.
Computers do not necessarily make everything better. Other posters have explained at length that the networked nature of e-voting systems exposes the entire system to attack from a single, or very few, attackers. And more importantly, it can easily be done silently and secretly because it's very difficult for observers to know what's going on. Rigging paper voting is much harder because it requires coordination of many individuals and it's obvious to observers when tampering is taking place.
The primary argument for e-voting is to help elderly and disabled people who for some reason can't operate a pen. My response has always been the same: It sucks to be those people. Accommodations for the disabled have their limits, and if those accommodations put the very existence of our democracy at stake, we've gone to far. It is absurd to completely disregard the voting rights of 300 million Americans just a accommodate a handful of people.
No, you didn't read what I wrote. I said "WPA" and I meant it. Only self-destructing keys are proof against brute force attacks, and WPA keys don't self-destruct. So you can lob password attempts at them all day, and that's EXACTLY what I'm talking about. Dictionary and brute force, not vulnerability cracks. There's no passphrase limit, but most passphrases are 8 or less alphanumeric only because those were the WEP limits and most people still use them. How long does it take? It took me 9 minutes to get the passphrase "weak" brute-force on a Athlon64 box.
It's not about luck and it's not about hard work. As others have pointed out ditch diggers work hard. And while luck plays a significant part, the real secret is about social networking.
In other words, most rich people got rich because they were either born rich or did a good job schmoozing with rich people. It's not about how hard you work or what you know, it's about WHO you now. The richest people in our society are generally older white men with good social networking skills because they are in the best position to take advantage of the "old boy" networks that run everything.
Assuming that you don't observe the Laws of Family purity, since you hold them in complete contempt, you simply don't understand the practical implementation of these laws.
Since only a tiny handful of people implement these laws today, you will forgive me for a lack of comprehensive knowledge on the subject. I was talking about ancient (500-100 BCE) use of these laws.
It's a general "bodily fluids" make you impure idea. After ejaculation, a man is impure as well. To avoid nocturnal emissions screwing up the Yom Kippur service (requiring a last minute substitute), the High Priest had to stay up all night.
This doesn't even make any sense, mainly because you're misinterpreting. Since semen is stored in the body BEFORE ejaculation, logically ejaculation should make the body MORE pure if it's the fluid itself that's the problem. A similar idea is present in Hinduism, specifically Tantra, wherin a man is not supposed to ejaculate to PRESERVE the semem because it supposedly contains "vital energy".
I'm assuming the High Priest isn't allowed to masturbate or have sex (even with his wife) before the Yom Kippur service, right? That's because the prohibition about ejaculation isn't about fluids per se, but about denial of pleasure specifically, or "the physical world" in general. IOW, asceticism. The very definition of anti-sex.
your contention that this is all about men "taking women" whenever they want
I never said any such thing. I said that traditional Jewish law dramatically limited the political rights of women, not that Jewish law somehow ordered men to go around raping women.
Market? Skills? In an agrarian society? Okay, I get it, Prostitution empowered women and Jewish law was to punish them and keep their power away.
Again, you're reading into what I wrote. Ancient societies had artisans, craftspeople, scribes, etc. and women were barred from these professions (pretty much ANY profession) in ancient Judea. That's all I'm saying.
The Bible doesn't CREATE marriage, it governs it. It doesn't CREATE slavery, it governs and restricts it.
Well, this is just wrong. If Genesis is to be believed, YHWH did indeed create marriage. And since he created the humans that created slavery (presumably descendants of Cain) he created slavery as well. When a text makes the claims the Bible makes (the word of the creator of the universe), one should assume high standards of accuracy.
The conditions for women in the Bible are CERTAINLY better than they were in Egypt.
Since there were never Jews in Egypt and Exodus is fictional, this argument doesn't hold much weight.
The conditions in the Talmud were certainly better than they were under Roman occupation.
I'd agree with THIS wholeheartedly. But this only validates my point. If the ancient Jewish laws were correct and moral, why did they need revision (and I'd argue, complete abandonment) years later? This is actually a dig made against Muslims for refusing to "modernize" Islam. They argue: If the words of Mohammed were correct then, why are they wrong now?
There is nothing in the bible that suggests that sex is wrong, sinful, or immoral.
Genesis clearly states that the pain of childbirth is a direct punishment for Eve's transgressions. Genesis strongly implies that no sex or reproduction took place before the Fall and that sex and reproduction are the result of the Fall, and hence, inherently evil.
Women were definitely in danger if physically assaulted by a man.
IN KING'S COURT? That's what you argued. That women couldn't testify because they were easily physically intimidated, presumably when testifying in the KING'S COURT. I don't believe for one moment that security was so bad in the King's Court that women stood a good chance of being raped if they came to testify. And I find the notion that women are simpering cowards too afraid to go to
You've posted a remarkable number of posts on this topic claiming that WPA is unhackable. You are very wrong.
A hotspot using SERVED WPA keys sent from a RADIUS or WPA server like IAS is extremely difficult to crack for various reasons. Nobody, and I mean NOBODY, actually does this. I've done lots of IT consulting and I've never run into a single site that had 802.1 working.
PRE-SHARED KEYS are completely different. That's just a single key constantly re-transmitted, giving you lots of time to sniff it and lots of time to crack it.
Here's how you do it: Sit outside the target site with a laptop, the right kind of networking card, and probably some sort of booster antenna. Run your software to do packet intercept and sit around for a while recording lots of traffic. That traffic contains all you need to hack the WPA key. Go home. Run the WPA cracking tools on your beefy desktop PC to retrieve the password via dictionary attack or brute force. This will take a while, possibly weeks, but the pre-shared key is likely to stay unchanged.
Now you can go back to that hotspot and access it, assuming they haven't changed the pre-shared key.
I would rather the industry was self regulated, instead of having big government come in, who has no effin clue about games and tell us what we can and cannot have. Yup, that's the fear that's being played on. But IT'S NOT GOING TO HAPPEN. The Supreme Court, even the current conservative court, has been very firm on protecting freedom of expression unless government money is involved. Numerous state laws banning or limiting the sale of "violent" or "sexual" video games have been overturned. Even "virtual child porn" is 100% protected because the logic behind banning child porn is based on the children being harmed during production (it's pretty tortured logic). The same applies to film as well.
You might notice that society seems to somehow survive despite the fact we don't have this "ratings" crap on books. More on that below.
The ESRB isn't holding back the AO games, its society, its the general consensus that video games are still just for kids and therefore we have to protect the children from bad content. I don't think that's the general consensus anymore. But even if it were, it wouldn't matter. The problem is really a handful of Luddites (ex. Jack Thompson) agitating and politicians giving them too much credence. Politicians love easy issues that deflect from having to deal with real problems, and "banning violent/sexual X" has been as staple for decades.
Like Rock and Roll and Dungeons and Dragons, Video games are the scapegoat of the year Exactly correct. And if you remember, it was really only a handful of agitators that cared about the "devil-worship heavy metal music" and exactly ONE, Pat Pulling, that claimed D&D made people commit suicide. The Rock industry basically ignored the anti-metal preachers and eventually they found something else to bitch about. Pat Pulling is still a nut, but she (along with the whole "Satanic" scare of the '1980s) fizzled out to. This should give the videogame industry a good hint on how to react: Ignore them.
For me, I'm for the ESRB I'm not. The ratings are bogus and prevent good games from being made. The opposition (Jack Thompson et al) are luddites who hate video games and modern culture in general, the ESRB doesn't dissuade them one bit. So why bother? The only power they have is the power the media give them. The videogame industry just needs to hire a few pundits to appear on CNN saying that violent video games aren't a problem and that Jack Thompson is insane. That's what the D&D people did, and they had a lot less money.
And it works too: Notice the uproar about how the Harry Potter books are "witchcraft" and "Satanic"? Notice how nobody takes it seriously? J.K. Rowling totally ignored this criticism as being the ravings of crazy people, and rightly so.
And why is it that parents didn't need ratings to know that Harry Potter was appropriate for their children? Maybe it was the labeling as a "children's book" that tipped them off?
Slashdot Mirror
There *ARE* Linux replacements just beginning to emerge. Most important being Scalix, the reincarnation of HP OpenMail, which is basically just Exchange on Unix. I haven't played with it much yet, but it definitely looks promising.
You are almost certainly guilty of some sort of trivial tax fraud, like failing to report sales tax on an out-of-state purchase, which is a felony. Ever copied any sort of disc? Felony. Do you own CD burning software? It can be argued to be a "circumvention device", possession of which is a felony. Do you drive a car? You've almost certainly committed felony "reckless driving" at some point (in many places it's felony reckless driving if you drive more than 10 mph over the speed limit). Do you own a knife with a blade longer than 2 inches? Carrying such a knife in public (even in your car) is a felony in many states.
That's just a few examples off the top of my head.
Laptops are slightly different. SOME laptops vendors have as part of their warranty agreement that if "unauthorized" personell crack the case it's no longer under warranty. I've never seen them enforce this, but there it is. End users are specifically allowed to upgrade memory and hard drive, as well as use whatever PC cards they want. Really, the only thing left to upgrade is the CPU (which may not be socketed) and the MiniPCI card, both of which involve completely disassembling the laptop.
Ever hear of the phrase "selective enforcement"? What you are talking about is a fantasy. In reality, police quite carefully pick and choose what laws they are going to enforce based largely on what's easy and what makes them look good.
Are the police constantly writing jaywalking tickets or busting businesses for tax fraud? Both crimes are commited near-constantly everywhere. In fact, most Americans commit multiple felonies every single day. If the police actually enforced ALL the laws the whole population would be in jail, especially the police themselves since they break the law far more often on average.
Unless facing pressure from "higher ups", police officers have complete discrecion on how they enforce the law. Famous examples include Southern officers refusing to enforce anti-discrimination legislation and conservative officers refusing to investigate crimes against abortion clinics.
If you still want to believe this: Please describe the tort you would take to court against a police officer that refused to enforce a particular law.
Remember that the filing fee for small claims court is usually less than $50 and you can sue for up to $5000 in "pain and suffering" for security guards tacking you for doing nothing. This guy shouldn't sue the cops (who are judgment proof) he should sue Circuit City.
Just tell this to security guards to try to stop you: "You could tackle me, and then I'd beat your ass and sue the store. You will be out a job and the store will lose thousands of dollars. I make a living suing businesses, care to be next?"
This usually works. Apparently club stores, like Costco, operate under different rules You sign a contract explicitly agreeing to such searches when you get your membership. However, this does not mean that Costco has the right to tackle and arrest you for not showing your receipt. ALL they can LEGALLY do is take away your membership, since you violated the terms of the contract. That's it.
The inward curving grips were brutal for my hands. The Madcatz controllers also had a six-button face (duplicating the shoulder buttons on the face) making it perfect for six-button fighting games, like Capcom vs. SNK. DC was basically THE platform for fighting games, with Soul Calibur being one of the launch titles and one of the best fighting games ever.
The crappy controllers didn't help either. This was the first system I've used where the third-party MadCatz controllers were DRAMATICALLY superior to the standard controllers. And piracy was also a factor.
What the hell does my personal website have to do with any argument here anyway? It has everything to do with your claim that only "spoiled kids" are interested in videogames. I simply pointed out that many people would think that YOUR hobby, modding cars, is also mainly for "spoiled kids". I was stereotyping YOU the way YOU were stereotyping videogame players.
You have a completely irrational disdain for videogames. I get it. This also goes to your general reputation, meaning your disdain for Windows is also probably irrational and amounts to "I don't like it, therefore it's shit".
And FWIW, you can do exactly the same thing in WIndows through "codec packs", I use the K-lite codec pack to play files in the Windows Classic player, or VLC, or any player I want. I too only had to install one file. And unlike Linux, everything actually works. OpenGL does just about everything DirectX does. What, like sound and controller configs? I said "DirectX" not "Direct3D". It's the complete gaming framework that Linux is lacking (not really anymore, since there are a few out there now that nobody uses). But back to my previous point, how many people care about playing DX games on their desktop? Sure, the teenagers think that's the only reason to own a computer, but for us adults who have real work to do, gaming is a non-factor. I'm leaning towards troll now.
You *DO* understand that the videogaming industry makes more than the film industry, right? Your comment is painfully uninformed.
How old are YOU anyway? I could just as easily claim, and with a lot more accuracy, that car mods are entirely the in the realm of dipshit teenage gearheads with too much time and money on their hands.
Truecrypt is cross-platform, Truecrypt volumes work in both Linux and Windows. Truecrypt is pretty much the ONLY encryption tool I've found that is cross-platform. In Linux it's a bit of a PITA, but it's worth it (for me anyway).
I made my Truecrypt volumes truly cross-platform by installing NTFS support in the kernel. I can take my data drives and move them completely unchanged between my Linux and Windows boxes which is teh awesome.
Sophisticated sound management. I dare you to get 7.1 working in Linux
Video stuff. Linux still has problems with vidoe drivers and and sort of high-performance video tasks.
Multimedia formats in general. It's a PITA to get WMV, Quicktime, Real, etc. working in Linux.
Gaming. There is nothing equivalent to DirectX in Linux (Yes, I'm aware of OpenGL and SDL. Not equivalent.)
For some stuff: development, web design, web browsing, email, Office tasks, etc. the Linux desktop works fine. It's when you want to do multimedia tasks that Linux falls down.
And the OP was right: Most of he companies spending money on Linux development see Linux as a server OS to replace proprietary Unixes like Solaris, not as a replacement to Windows on the desktop or as a "LAN server". Because of this, desktop Linux has been slowing and is an increasingly low priority for Linux developers since they're not getting paid to work on it.
And "Linux" isn't a target. RHEL5 running Samba is a target, and you'll find that it DOES outperform Windows Vista assuming you trim down the other services you are running. Of course, nobody claims that Vista is a great fileserver. Does RHEL5 running Samba outperform Windows Server 2003 (assuming you trim down the services on both systems) on the same hardware? No, it's basically a wash. Unless Microsoft can demonstrate superior performance with Vista on identical hardware, users will conclude that DRM is such a burden on resources This is insane. Does RHEL5 demonstrate superior performance to RHEL4 on the same hardware? NO! Does MacOS X display superior performance to MacOS 9 on the same hardware (like 1st generation iMacs)? NO! Basically what you are saying has never been true. Performance improvements in MacOSX on the same hardware are largely due to bug fixes. Service Packs and bug fixes have also improved performance in Windows and Unix/Linux.
The FUD against Vista has been truly awesome, especially in regards to the DRM. The FACT is that RIGHT NOW, the content protection features of Vista (inflicted on them by the studios) don't do dick, and even if they did there are well-known cracks. This is like the earlier claims that WPA would destroy your systems and eat your brain.
Is Microsoft also the devil for creating a music and video DRM system at the behest of the studios (one that they deliberately made easy to crack)? Blame the fucking content producers, since they are the ones who dreamt up this crap.
People seem to be missing the real story here, which is about how Friendly Local Game Stores are a thing of the past. In the not-too-distant past this guy could have been running his own games store which could have chosen this sort of policy on it's own, regardless of lost sales.
Now all the FLGS have been eliminated by EBGames/Gamestop, who have a monopoly on video game stores in the USA. And these are bad people. Among other things, they blatantly ignore local laws by selling broken shit to kids and then refusing to accept returns.
Please mod the parent up.
The point isn't "Apple doesn't like Linux" it's that Apple is trying to block access to new iPods in third-party apps. That's highly annoying to those who use a third-party app to manage their iPods. This kind of crap (being forced to use iTunes) is exacty the reason I don't own an iPod.
If you already own an iPod, you do have an option. Rockbox is open-source firmware for many MP3 players, including iPods. It's quite impressive and superior to the standard iPod software in many ways. Most importantly it allows you to use your iPod freely (like a regular storage device).
I should also point out here that everyone is making the assumption that she's talking about porn when we hear "inappropriate content". In theory, she could be trying to shield her son from exposure to violent, racist, or religious content. But we're all ASSUMING she's talking about porn because by far that is the most likely scenario.
There are two issues here: CAN she do it, and SHOULD she do it. The answer is most likely "no" to both questions.
Ask her this:
"Is your teenage son generally more computer literate than you are?"
If the answer to this is "yes", she has absolutely no chance whatsoever of filtering him whatsoever.
Then ask her:
"What are you afraid of your teenage son seeing on the internet that you think he hasn't already seen?"
This question should make her think a little. The year is 2007 and we're dealing with an American teenage boy that has access to the internet. He's almost certainly already seen hard-core porn. He probably already has a collection. The important part is that she understands this is normal and appropriate.
This is fundamentally about her, not about her son. She has sexual hangups and doesn't personally care for porn so she's projecting this on her son. She also doesn't understand that teenagers a sexual beings and will be strongly interested in sex, especially girls. Parents need to get used to the idea of their kids having sex, not at some distant date in the future but RIGHT NOW. Yeah, ALL kids. You should be teaching your 5-year-olds about sex because some of them ARE having it. Stop being so squeamish.
Please mod the parent up.
Most serious computer security professionals who have looked at e-voting systems are strongly of the opinion that e-voting should not exist. Experts on voting systems loudly concur. Paper ballots marked by a felt marker and then dropped into locked transparent plastic totes is the best system yet developed for voting. The UN strongly recommends such as system.
Computers do not necessarily make everything better. Other posters have explained at length that the networked nature of e-voting systems exposes the entire system to attack from a single, or very few, attackers. And more importantly, it can easily be done silently and secretly because it's very difficult for observers to know what's going on. Rigging paper voting is much harder because it requires coordination of many individuals and it's obvious to observers when tampering is taking place.
The primary argument for e-voting is to help elderly and disabled people who for some reason can't operate a pen. My response has always been the same: It sucks to be those people. Accommodations for the disabled have their limits, and if those accommodations put the very existence of our democracy at stake, we've gone to far. It is absurd to completely disregard the voting rights of 300 million Americans just a accommodate a handful of people.
No, you didn't read what I wrote. I said "WPA" and I meant it. Only self-destructing keys are proof against brute force attacks, and WPA keys don't self-destruct. So you can lob password attempts at them all day, and that's EXACTLY what I'm talking about. Dictionary and brute force, not vulnerability cracks. There's no passphrase limit, but most passphrases are 8 or less alphanumeric only because those were the WEP limits and most people still use them. How long does it take? It took me 9 minutes to get the passphrase "weak" brute-force on a Athlon64 box.
It's not about luck and it's not about hard work. As others have pointed out ditch diggers work hard. And while luck plays a significant part, the real secret is about social networking.
In other words, most rich people got rich because they were either born rich or did a good job schmoozing with rich people. It's not about how hard you work or what you know, it's about WHO you now. The richest people in our society are generally older white men with good social networking skills because they are in the best position to take advantage of the "old boy" networks that run everything.
Assuming that you don't observe the Laws of Family purity, since you hold them in complete contempt, you simply don't understand the practical implementation of these laws.
Since only a tiny handful of people implement these laws today, you will forgive me for a lack of comprehensive knowledge on the subject. I was talking about ancient (500-100 BCE) use of these laws.
It's a general "bodily fluids" make you impure idea. After ejaculation, a man is impure as well. To avoid nocturnal emissions screwing up the Yom Kippur service (requiring a last minute substitute), the High Priest had to stay up all night.
This doesn't even make any sense, mainly because you're misinterpreting. Since semen is stored in the body BEFORE ejaculation, logically ejaculation should make the body MORE pure if it's the fluid itself that's the problem. A similar idea is present in Hinduism, specifically Tantra, wherin a man is not supposed to ejaculate to PRESERVE the semem because it supposedly contains "vital energy".
I'm assuming the High Priest isn't allowed to masturbate or have sex (even with his wife) before the Yom Kippur service, right? That's because the prohibition about ejaculation isn't about fluids per se, but about denial of pleasure specifically, or "the physical world" in general. IOW, asceticism. The very definition of anti-sex.
your contention that this is all about men "taking women" whenever they want
I never said any such thing. I said that traditional Jewish law dramatically limited the political rights of women, not that Jewish law somehow ordered men to go around raping women.
Market? Skills? In an agrarian society? Okay, I get it, Prostitution empowered women and Jewish law was to punish them and keep their power away.
Again, you're reading into what I wrote. Ancient societies had artisans, craftspeople, scribes, etc. and women were barred from these professions (pretty much ANY profession) in ancient Judea. That's all I'm saying.
The Bible doesn't CREATE marriage, it governs it. It doesn't CREATE slavery, it governs and restricts it.
Well, this is just wrong. If Genesis is to be believed, YHWH did indeed create marriage. And since he created the humans that created slavery (presumably descendants of Cain) he created slavery as well. When a text makes the claims the Bible makes (the word of the creator of the universe), one should assume high standards of accuracy.
The conditions for women in the Bible are CERTAINLY better than they were in Egypt.
Since there were never Jews in Egypt and Exodus is fictional, this argument doesn't hold much weight.
The conditions in the Talmud were certainly better than they were under Roman occupation.
I'd agree with THIS wholeheartedly. But this only validates my point. If the ancient Jewish laws were correct and moral, why did they need revision (and I'd argue, complete abandonment) years later? This is actually a dig made against Muslims for refusing to "modernize" Islam. They argue: If the words of Mohammed were correct then, why are they wrong now?
There is nothing in the bible that suggests that sex is wrong, sinful, or immoral.
Genesis clearly states that the pain of childbirth is a direct punishment for Eve's transgressions. Genesis strongly implies that no sex or reproduction took place before the Fall and that sex and reproduction are the result of the Fall, and hence, inherently evil.
Women were definitely in danger if physically assaulted by a man.
IN KING'S COURT? That's what you argued. That women couldn't testify because they were easily physically intimidated, presumably when testifying in the KING'S COURT. I don't believe for one moment that security was so bad in the King's Court that women stood a good chance of being raped if they came to testify. And I find the notion that women are simpering cowards too afraid to go to
You've posted a remarkable number of posts on this topic claiming that WPA is unhackable. You are very wrong.
A hotspot using SERVED WPA keys sent from a RADIUS or WPA server like IAS is extremely difficult to crack for various reasons. Nobody, and I mean NOBODY, actually does this. I've done lots of IT consulting and I've never run into a single site that had 802.1 working.
PRE-SHARED KEYS are completely different. That's just a single key constantly re-transmitted, giving you lots of time to sniff it and lots of time to crack it.
Here's how you do it: Sit outside the target site with a laptop, the right kind of networking card, and probably some sort of booster antenna. Run your software to do packet intercept and sit around for a while recording lots of traffic. That traffic contains all you need to hack the WPA key. Go home. Run the WPA cracking tools on your beefy desktop PC to retrieve the password via dictionary attack or brute force. This will take a while, possibly weeks, but the pre-shared key is likely to stay unchanged.
Now you can go back to that hotspot and access it, assuming they haven't changed the pre-shared key.
Or in a word: Aircrack-ng
So how much cash are you going to give me?
You might notice that society seems to somehow survive despite the fact we don't have this "ratings" crap on books. More on that below. The ESRB isn't holding back the AO games, its society, its the general consensus that video games are still just for kids and therefore we have to protect the children from bad content. I don't think that's the general consensus anymore. But even if it were, it wouldn't matter. The problem is really a handful of Luddites (ex. Jack Thompson) agitating and politicians giving them too much credence. Politicians love easy issues that deflect from having to deal with real problems, and "banning violent/sexual X" has been as staple for decades. Like Rock and Roll and Dungeons and Dragons, Video games are the scapegoat of the year Exactly correct. And if you remember, it was really only a handful of agitators that cared about the "devil-worship heavy metal music" and exactly ONE, Pat Pulling, that claimed D&D made people commit suicide. The Rock industry basically ignored the anti-metal preachers and eventually they found something else to bitch about. Pat Pulling is still a nut, but she (along with the whole "Satanic" scare of the '1980s) fizzled out to. This should give the videogame industry a good hint on how to react: Ignore them. For me, I'm for the ESRB I'm not. The ratings are bogus and prevent good games from being made. The opposition (Jack Thompson et al) are luddites who hate video games and modern culture in general, the ESRB doesn't dissuade them one bit. So why bother? The only power they have is the power the media give them. The videogame industry just needs to hire a few pundits to appear on CNN saying that violent video games aren't a problem and that Jack Thompson is insane. That's what the D&D people did, and they had a lot less money.
And it works too: Notice the uproar about how the Harry Potter books are "witchcraft" and "Satanic"? Notice how nobody takes it seriously? J.K. Rowling totally ignored this criticism as being the ravings of crazy people, and rightly so.
And why is it that parents didn't need ratings to know that Harry Potter was appropriate for their children? Maybe it was the labeling as a "children's book" that tipped them off?