Yeah, but only because the relevant computers ran on UNIX, so used UNIX time and didn't even know it was the year 2000. Now that we're coming up to 2^30, they'll all go busurk and your nuclear weapons will fire off in any direction. Though not at random.
Computers haven't stopped grammar evolving. I find some sentences without contractions ungrammatical, but a computer won't mark them as such, but nor will it mark the contracted form ungrammatical. Also, in my dialect, there takes ''s', regardless of whether it's plural or singular ('there's a million people here'). A relatively recent innovation (I didn't even realise it was an innovation till it was brought to my attention though).
o:sVu, Di @dv{:ntidZ @v @ kn=sist@nt sp{liN @z D{t D@ pkj1}j{r@d@iz @v mai dailekt n@id@n bOD@ j1} (XSAMPA. Less oddly, we might have: orso, dhe advowntidj ov a consistant spalling iz dhat dhe pekuyaredyz ov my dylect need'n bodha you)
I'm not sure what formenting means, and it isn't a dictionary. I will avoid trying to hypothesising because I'll probably get it wrong.
That being said, yes, the people and organisations who were able to do something to stop it are guilty to some extent or another. If this includes members of the UN, please convict them and punish them. Until then, they have the responsibility to punish those who have commit crimes within their jurisdiction. Genocide is wrong. The people who are responsible for it deserve to be punished. I don't care whether the people punishing were involved in the crime. All the better, in fact.
Sorry about commenting on your commenting on the internet. I assumed you assumed that by arguing against genocide-inciting speech, I was implicitly arguing for UN-control. Hell no. No-one should control the internet.
And, depending on reason and result, so they should. If I co-ordinate with you to kill someone, but I'm not even in the same country as the person killing (who wouldn't've done it without me inticing him), am I not guilty?---I would certainly hope so.
Power is an amazing thing. The abuse of it, no matter how it's done, is unacceptible.
(OTOH, I would think it gastly if it had've been just anyone who encouraged the genocide getting tried in this way.)
Break into their houses at night and install Mozilla. Make it the default browser. Give in the IE icon.
Re:Electronic Voting already exists and works
on
Cringley on E-voting
·
· Score: 1
When I voted when I was 18 (November last year), I put my ballot into a simple cardboard box. The laws of physics could be used to work out exactly where in the box it fell, so someone paying acute attention might just be able to work out who I voted for, but they would have to know things like the exact way I'd folded my ballot, how the other ballots in the box laid, what the air conditions were like inside the box, and any number of other variables. Not to mention that they'd have to open the box before it got moved, because once it's moved, there's a lot of other variables to take into account. Or the fact that because it was the first time I voted, I took longer to vote than the other people voting at the same time, so they'd still have to match what I looked like to who I was.
Security is still possible with a paper trail.
(Alternatively, they could've watched over my shoulder. Entirely possible, but they could do this no matter how you vote.)
1) I will freely license my code for use in commercial products (ie, use BSD license not GPL.)
While I prefer truely free (i.e. public domain) to the BSDL and the freer BSDL to the GPL, I should point out that there's absolutely nothing stopping GPL code being used in commercial products.
Bastards! That clashes with the Simpsons! Can't the stations co-ordinate, instead of clashing? (And I've only got free-to-air, it's not like there's ten things on at once...)
Re:Described in Linux Journal months ago
on
Home Directory In CVS
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
I initially liked it too. Then I realised that instead of pushing the boundaries further, it just stops when it reaches them and becomes a square! Is that the image we want to project?
You simply cannot trust "the state" to do the right thing. If you could, then you wouldn't need the Bill of Rights (or non US equivalant where you live).
I live in Australia. We have no bill of rights equivalent. I'm not in gaol.
My understanding is that Australia has them, and they're pretty similar to the US. I did a google a few weeks ago, and I don't pretend to really have understood what I read, but I think they looked to the US to work out what they should do.
Internet Explorer also does FTP, and I think when it was first written Gopher. It may still do Gopher. Therefore, Internet Explorer does more than just the web, and Web Explorer would be the misnomer.
Why exactly is it that Americans or Slashdotters or Slashdotters who are Americans are so scared of their Government? One thing that comes from reading/. with this naive brain of mine is: should I be too?
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah, but only because the relevant computers ran on UNIX, so used UNIX time and didn't even know it was the year 2000. Now that we're coming up to 2^30, they'll all go busurk and your nuclear weapons will fire off in any direction. Though not at random.
This is more insightful than funny, even if it is expressed as a joke, people...
So you get a day off about once every four years?
'All the time' is much more accurate way to say what you mean. Try it sometime.
Actually, I think you meant that not everything is good all the time. I know some things are good some of the time.
Try living in Australia... Yay, we get to wait till Boxing Day for LoTR!
Stupid people in Australia have voted with a preferential system using paper for upward of 80 years.
Computers haven't stopped grammar evolving. I find some sentences without contractions ungrammatical, but a computer won't mark them as such, but nor will it mark the contracted form ungrammatical. Also, in my dialect, there takes ''s', regardless of whether it's plural or singular ('there's a million people here'). A relatively recent innovation (I didn't even realise it was an innovation till it was brought to my attention though).
o:sVu, Di @dv{:ntidZ @v @ kn=sist@nt sp{liN @z D{t D@ pkj1}j{r@d@iz @v mai dailekt n@id@n bOD@ j1} (XSAMPA. Less oddly, we might have:
orso, dhe advowntidj ov a consistant spalling iz dhat dhe pekuyaredyz ov my dylect need'n bodha you)
I'm not sure what formenting means, and it isn't a dictionary. I will avoid trying to hypothesising because I'll probably get it wrong.
That being said, yes, the people and organisations who were able to do something to stop it are guilty to some extent or another. If this includes members of the UN, please convict them and punish them. Until then, they have the responsibility to punish those who have commit crimes within their jurisdiction. Genocide is wrong. The people who are responsible for it deserve to be punished. I don't care whether the people punishing were involved in the crime. All the better, in fact.
Sorry about commenting on your commenting on the internet. I assumed you assumed that by arguing against genocide-inciting speech, I was implicitly arguing for UN-control. Hell no. No-one should control the internet.
Just because someone didn't do something when they could've doesn't make a crime less of a crime. Not being stopped isn't an excuse.
And I never said anything about whether the UN should control the Internet.
On the other hand, a government might want to know what, exactly, the OS does, and if it's safe.
And, depending on reason and result, so they should. If I co-ordinate with you to kill someone, but I'm not even in the same country as the person killing (who wouldn't've done it without me inticing him), am I not guilty?---I would certainly hope so.
Power is an amazing thing. The abuse of it, no matter how it's done, is unacceptible.
(OTOH, I would think it gastly if it had've been just anyone who encouraged the genocide getting tried in this way.)
Break into their houses at night and install Mozilla. Make it the default browser. Give in the IE icon.
When I voted when I was 18 (November last year), I put my ballot into a simple cardboard box. The laws of physics could be used to work out exactly where in the box it fell, so someone paying acute attention might just be able to work out who I voted for, but they would have to know things like the exact way I'd folded my ballot, how the other ballots in the box laid, what the air conditions were like inside the box, and any number of other variables. Not to mention that they'd have to open the box before it got moved, because once it's moved, there's a lot of other variables to take into account. Or the fact that because it was the first time I voted, I took longer to vote than the other people voting at the same time, so they'd still have to match what I looked like to who I was.
Security is still possible with a paper trail.
(Alternatively, they could've watched over my shoulder. Entirely possible, but they could do this no matter how you vote.)
Just because something is wrong doesn't mean it's against the law. Conversely, just because something's againast the law doesn't mean it's wrong.
No. Rot-13 isn't an encryption, it's an encoding. The AA would need to be the same letters, and the R and A would have to continue being different.
1) I will freely license my code for use in commercial products (ie, use BSD license not GPL.)
While I prefer truely free (i.e. public domain) to the BSDL and the freer BSDL to the GPL, I should point out that there's absolutely nothing stopping GPL code being used in commercial products.
Bastards! That clashes with the Simpsons! Can't the stations co-ordinate, instead of clashing? (And I've only got free-to-air, it's not like there's ten things on at once...)
Perhaps it's stuff that matters?
I initially liked it too. Then I realised that instead of pushing the boundaries further, it just stops when it reaches them and becomes a square! Is that the image we want to project?
You simply cannot trust "the state" to do the right thing. If you could, then you wouldn't need the Bill of Rights (or non US equivalant where you live).
I live in Australia. We have no bill of rights equivalent. I'm not in gaol.
Oh dear god yes. Damn the 'Liberal' party and their ridiculous nomenclature.
Actually, the Liberal Party uses an older definition of 'liberal'. And they are Liberal---economically.
My understanding is that Australia has them, and they're pretty similar to the US. I did a google a few weeks ago, and I don't pretend to really have understood what I read, but I think they looked to the US to work out what they should do.
Internet Explorer also does FTP, and I think when it was first written Gopher. It may still do Gopher. Therefore, Internet Explorer does more than just the web, and Web Explorer would be the misnomer.
I looked on 15 minutes ago (and it's the Australian evening on the 16th by now, but I'm aware they ban us in US time).
Why exactly is it that Americans or Slashdotters or Slashdotters who are Americans are so scared of their Government? One thing that comes from reading /. with this naive brain of mine is: should I be too?