That's it. You pick a channel (or two) and you go with it. If you care about state and local elections, then pick a broadcast network, since CNN isn't going to cover San Francisco's Proposition R. You want some fine grain coverage, or fine grain coverage outside of your media market? Secretary of State websites.
Youre done.
Twitter? HA! And double HA! Those losers watch TV. Twitter doesn't break a damn thing.
I know we're your wayward cousins from "across the pond" So you can be forgiven if you didn't get the memo. Allow me to quote the most relevant part:
Pattern-Seeking Data-Mining Methods Are of Limited Usefulness
Routine forms of data mining can provide important assistance in the fight against terrorism by expanding and speeding traditional investigative work, the report says. For example, investigators can quickly search multiple databases to learn who has transferred money to or communicated with a suspect. More generally, if analysts have a historical basis for believing a certain pattern of activity is linked to terrorism, then mining for similar patterns may generate useful investigative leads.
Far more problematic are automated data-mining techniques that search databases for unusual patterns of activity not already known to be associated with terrorists, the report says. Although these methods have been useful in the private sector for spotting consumer fraud, they are less helpful for counterterrorism precisely because so little is known about what patterns indicate terrorist activity; as a result, they are likely to generate huge numbers of false leads. Such techniques might, however, have some value as secondary components of a counterterrorism system to assist human analysts. Actions such as arrest, search, or denial of rights should never be taken solely on the basis of an automated data-mining result, the report adds.
The committee also examined behavioral surveillance techniques, which try to identify terrorists by observing behavior or measuring physiological states. There is no scientific consensus on whether these techniques are ready for use at all in counterterrorism, the report says; at most they should be used for preliminary screening, to identify those who merit follow-up investigation. Further, they have enormous potential for privacy violations because they will inevitably force targeted individuals to explain and justify their mental and emotional states.
What? You were aware? You just don't care. You like establishing a culture of fear for political purposes, and don't care about what us eggheads say? Oh sorry. Keep calm and carry on.
There's simply no reason to switch. Every browser gives you pretty much the same experience, so what's the hook with Chrome? Google says it's Gears, but frankly there's not a lot of stuff out there that uses gears, so why should I care? Also, with Chrome being at such a small share, any support for Gears is going to have to work with IE, FF, and Safari, simply because that's what people use. Chrome was always a yawn, just like 95% of all Google Apps.
If you really think having tech support on your resume is unfairly holding you back, then take it off and try again. Really, what are they going to do? Not hire you? They're already doing that.
What makes you think that a 14 to 16 year old has any idea about what it is they like to do and how to turn that into a viable career. Teenagers, are just beginning to discover/define who they are. Before they do that, they can't even begin to reflect upon it.
Yeah that might seem swell, but you have to realize that you're not the common case.
Stripping out these apps is the wrong move by microsoft. Look at apple. The machines are turnkey. You unbox it, plug it in, turn it on, and you can literally start making movies. Apple even ran an ad about this very thing.
Bad move SteveB. You're flailing. First you whined about how people only want the ipod because it looks better (Yeah, well then quit whining and fix that.), then it's pairing the most dynamic and hippest personalities of the 1990s together ten years too late, then it's playing Pepsi to Coke, by not only pulling a Folger's crystals, but saying "nuh-uh!" to you competitors ad, and thus reinforcing them, and now it's moving in the exact wrong direction of what people want, a simple (but not simplistic) immediate setup.
All you need to know, is that Cheney, Rumsfield, and whole lot are throwbacks from the Nixon administration, and want to "restore" the presidency to Nixon level. Now this would all seem relatively innocuous, or at least inane, until remember Nixon's famous quote from his Robert Frost interview:
"When the president does it, that means it's not illegal."
Interestingly enough, the Republicans like to talk big about the rule of law, but then turn around and have no problem with, and in fact argue that they are duty bound to ignore subpoenas. (Todd Palin, just being the most recent one; but that's small time compared to Rove and Harriet Miers.)
Then you also have this gang promoting the prima facia absurdity of unitary executive, and that the president can prevent investigations into himself and even pardon himself for any crimes, which of course aren't crimes, because "when the president does it, that means it's not illegal."
So yes. They do believe that they are above the law.
Of course the GPL forces to developers to sign away rights ostensibly in order to protect rights for redistribution and modification of source code. However, there is nothing in the GPL that prevents me from slapping a click through EULA on Gimp that says, "everything you make is mine." It does go against the spirit, but I'd say that a click through EULA that says, "Everything you make is Creative Commons" would be completely in the spirit of the FSF and the GPL.
The strange thing is. I've seen plenty of "free" programs that had click through licenses, and it was always the GPL. (Sadly, I can't point to a specific case, since once you click through, you're done. I *think* xsane had one, but don't hold me to that.) They always annoyed me because the GPL is not an EULA, it's a source and distribution license.
That's specious reasoning. You only need to wire the places where people live, and Alaska and the Rocky Mountain states are comparatively empty. Let's take Wyoming, the least populous state, has 522,830 people in 253,348 sq km, at an ave density of 2.08 per sq km. Compare this to the city of San Francsico that is not only more populous (764,976 residents), and physically smaller at 600.7 sq km (only 121 of which are actually land), gives you a population density of 6,324.4 / sq km. In the SF Metro area is 7,264,887 people in 9,128.2 sq km at an ave density of 795.9 persons / sq km. Yet, SF doesn't have the pipes that the rest of the modern world has.
The United States is falling behind infrastructure because the companies with the municipal monopolies don't want to invest in it. Instead, they'd rather take the short view where infrastructure improvements are viewed as simply a loss rather than an investment.
We started the millennium fifth in the world in broadband penetration, and now we're 22nd. What happened? Well competition , actually decreased, and with less competition there's less incentive to improve.
Japan, and hell, Sweden not only have faster pipes, but they actually cost less too. Let me repeat that. Americans are paying more for less. Now why? Well at least in Japan, the monolopies like NTT, have to resell their pipes to competitors at wholesale prices. Luckily for Americans, this isn't the case.
Among their most egregious offenses was a requirement of a Notarized statement from a doctor certifying that they had a small penis. Amazingly, remarkably few customers availed themselves of the refund offer.
Show me where in the TCP-IP stack "censorship rerouting" is. It was always a metaphor, and a not very good one, since there's plenty of places where this routing doesn't happen. China? Iran? Any of these places ring a bell?
If content encryption is on, then the blackberry won't send data via the data port or bluetooth until the password is entered. Enter the wrong password 10 times and the blackberry securely wipes itself.
Of course this is dependent on the software acting the way you describe. It's just as easy to have the dongle send some command, and then have the data dumped regardless of the encryption status. Sure, you'd have encrypted data (assuming of course that the password isn't stored in a two-way cipher on the phone itself.), but your faith in "oh but it won't send anything without my password" is naive.
Some very smart people at RIM have looked at wireless email from end-to-end. The blackberry platform has also been audited from end-to-end by many governments and tech experts.
The security of the wireless email is irrelevant here. We're essentially talking about cloning phones via physical access.
Which perfectly explains why ATI has opened up their internal documentation and started helping out the people working on completely Free drivers. Oh wait...
ATI didn't have any linux drivers! So this isn't so much "Wow! We've drank the kool-aid and want to subscribe to your newsletter," as much as, "Go away kid. We've got real work to do. Have fun."
Totally, not the same thing as, "We already wrote the driver for you, and still you complain." Nice try though.
You ought to know better -- the term "free" has many meanings, only some of which apply to the public domain. The FSF has never made a secret of the specific meanings that they mean when they use the term "Free." I believe there is a phrase, you've probably heard it, about beer...
You're right that they have always published material that attempted to explain the difference. Of course this confusion is intentional, since the problem is obvious to every native English speaker, which RMS is. No, he wanted to be clever, and was too clever by half. This obvious problem in language was the whole reason "open" is used.
The other problem with term is that RMS wants you to think that the software is "free" as in "unencumbered," but it's not. It has restrictions. That is just an out and out lie. You might as well say, "The color of this is blue. Of course, by 'blue', I mean 'purple'." That's Orwellian.
Well, I think the question can be answered with a question - why not just use Microsoft Vista?
Easy. Vista isn't Unix.
I like Gnewsense because it is free as in freedom, as opposed to free as in beer. I have no need of the binary blobs and such that Ubuntu has. Using Gnewsense makes me aware of what is free and not free. There still is no full-fledged free Java right now (although Sun says they're releasing a free version of Java). Yes there are free clones, but not a full-fledged one like Sun's. This is something I didn't know until I began using an OS in the Debian family (previously I used Debian, now I use Gnewsense). It also makes me aware of the freeness of stuff like Flash on sites like Youtube. I use gnash, which has problems, and I haven't even fully hooked it into Firefox yet - I grab the Youtube URL and run videos on the command line. It also makes me aware of free Flash alternatives like SVG.
Your dedication to maintaining a substandard existence is admirable. No wait. That's not the word. What is it? Oh yeah. Pitiable.
Oh. And SVG doesn't support video, so you're still screwed.
You're missing the point in having a free (as in freedom) operating system. This is not about "getting hardware support at any costs" but "having a free os". Of course some hardware won't work with GNewSense. But this way, the distro supports hardware manufacturers who release their drivers under a free license (because their user don't have any problems!).
I call delusional bullshit, and here's why.
You say that GNewSense (which is an apt, name if there ever has been for an FSF project) "supports hardware manufactures." No it doesn't. It doesn't actually "support" anything. It doesn't encourage manufacturers to release anything, because there's no incentive to do so. There's no financial incentive, and there's no user base incentive.
Let's say there's some piece of hardware that there's a significant demand for a Linux driver. The manufacturer writes a driver for Linux. It works. But now some less than 1% comes around demanding that driver be released, but one already has been. Now the problem with the driver isn't that it doesn't exist, or doesn't work. It's that some vocal minority simply refuses to use it. That's a personal problem of their own manufacturing. They've made the affirmative choice to live in a world of suck, and no one is under any obligation to help them.
Also, let's not call GPL software "free." It's legally encumbered, just like everything else. If you want something to be truly free, then public domain it.
You can release code under whatever license you want. That's fine. I don't have a problem with the GPL per se. I have a problem with people getting all self-righteous and pulling a New Speak (or would that be "GNU-Speak"?) and abusing the word "free". It doesn't mean that, and it never did. (And don't even begin to pull that bullshit that there's no word in the English language that means "libre". There is. It's "liberated".)
The fact is, that the status of Tibet has always been much more muddy than either the PRC or the Free Tibet hippies want us to believe. Tibet has nominally been part of China, but with an incredible level autonomy, to the point of de facto independence.
The other unsettling fact is that Tibet was a backward feudalistic theocracy. It's still greatly underdeveloped, but has improved economically under the PRC. Of course this doesn't given the PRC the right to shoot people.
Also, to say that the PLA was "invited," to spread "democratic reforms" (Yes. Those are the exactly words I that English-language CCTV-9 used when talking about the history of Tibet.) is laughable.
You have a very unusual idea of what a infringement is. How exactly is anyone's right to protest limited or curtailed?
As a bad analogy, you are free to move furniture in your house, and only your family's wishes may constrain you. However what will you say if I, a total stranger, set up demonstrations around your house demanding that a certain desk should be moved into a certain corner, and not where it is now?
Ignore you.
Go back to your crappy Ayn Rand fan club, or get a dictionary. You're using words that you don't understand.
I've met several CS grads and grad students from the Ivy League, and have to say I'm not impressed. For all the hooplah around the Ivy League, there isn't a bit a difference between them and any other CS department.
The Ivy League is just a brand, and a brand that is much more valuable in the liberal arts, not the sciences.
Slashdot Mirror
What makes you think that this is viral marketting? Twitter has many true believer users. Some of which read /. .
Either produce some proof, or shut the hell up.
Let me tell you how the campaigns do it.
They watch TV.
That's it. You pick a channel (or two) and you go with it. If you care about state and local elections, then pick a broadcast network, since CNN isn't going to cover San Francisco's Proposition R. You want some fine grain coverage, or fine grain coverage outside of your media market? Secretary of State websites.
Youre done.
Twitter? HA! And double HA! Those losers watch TV. Twitter doesn't break a damn thing.
1. Get a better provider that isn't a jack ass.
2. Stop being a cheap ass.
Yeah. You are.
I know we're your wayward cousins from "across the pond" So you can be forgiven if you didn't get the memo. Allow me to quote the most relevant part:
What? You were aware? You just don't care. You like establishing a culture of fear for political purposes, and don't care about what us eggheads say? Oh sorry. Keep calm and carry on.
The National Academies.
There's simply no reason to switch. Every browser gives you pretty much the same experience, so what's the hook with Chrome? Google says it's Gears, but frankly there's not a lot of stuff out there that uses gears, so why should I care? Also, with Chrome being at such a small share, any support for Gears is going to have to work with IE, FF, and Safari, simply because that's what people use. Chrome was always a yawn, just like 95% of all Google Apps.
Lawerence Lessig has made the GOP's shitlist. So keep that in mind this November.
If you really think having tech support on your resume is unfairly holding you back, then take it off and try again. Really, what are they going to do? Not hire you? They're already doing that.
What makes you think that a 14 to 16 year old has any idea about what it is they like to do and how to turn that into a viable career. Teenagers, are just beginning to discover/define who they are. Before they do that, they can't even begin to reflect upon it.
Yeah that might seem swell, but you have to realize that you're not the common case.
Stripping out these apps is the wrong move by microsoft. Look at apple. The machines are turnkey. You unbox it, plug it in, turn it on, and you can literally start making movies. Apple even ran an ad about this very thing.
Bad move SteveB. You're flailing. First you whined about how people only want the ipod because it looks better (Yeah, well then quit whining and fix that.), then it's pairing the most dynamic and hippest personalities of the 1990s together ten years too late, then it's playing Pepsi to Coke, by not only pulling a Folger's crystals, but saying "nuh-uh!" to you competitors ad, and thus reinforcing them, and now it's moving in the exact wrong direction of what people want, a simple (but not simplistic) immediate setup.
Bravo.
All you need to know, is that Cheney, Rumsfield, and whole lot are throwbacks from the Nixon administration, and want to "restore" the presidency to Nixon level. Now this would all seem relatively innocuous, or at least inane, until remember Nixon's famous quote from his Robert Frost interview:
"When the president does it, that means it's not illegal."
Interestingly enough, the Republicans like to talk big about the rule of law, but then turn around and have no problem with, and in fact argue that they are duty bound to ignore subpoenas. (Todd Palin, just being the most recent one; but that's small time compared to Rove and Harriet Miers.)
Then you also have this gang promoting the prima facia absurdity of unitary executive, and that the president can prevent investigations into himself and even pardon himself for any crimes, which of course aren't crimes, because "when the president does it, that means it's not illegal."
So yes. They do believe that they are above the law.
Of course the GPL forces to developers to sign away rights ostensibly in order to protect rights for redistribution and modification of source code. However, there is nothing in the GPL that prevents me from slapping a click through EULA on Gimp that says, "everything you make is mine." It does go against the spirit, but I'd say that a click through EULA that says, "Everything you make is Creative Commons" would be completely in the spirit of the FSF and the GPL.
The strange thing is. I've seen plenty of "free" programs that had click through licenses, and it was always the GPL. (Sadly, I can't point to a specific case, since once you click through, you're done. I *think* xsane had one, but don't hold me to that.) They always annoyed me because the GPL is not an EULA, it's a source and distribution license.
That's specious reasoning. You only need to wire the places where people live, and Alaska and the Rocky Mountain states are comparatively empty. Let's take Wyoming, the least populous state, has 522,830 people in 253,348 sq km, at an ave density of 2.08 per sq km. Compare this to the city of San Francsico that is not only more populous (764,976 residents), and physically smaller at 600.7 sq km (only 121 of which are actually land), gives you a population density of 6,324.4 / sq km. In the SF Metro area is 7,264,887 people in 9,128.2 sq km at an ave density of 795.9 persons / sq km. Yet, SF doesn't have the pipes that the rest of the modern world has.
The United States is falling behind infrastructure because the companies with the municipal monopolies don't want to invest in it. Instead, they'd rather take the short view where infrastructure improvements are viewed as simply a loss rather than an investment.
We started the millennium fifth in the world in broadband penetration, and now we're 22nd. What happened? Well competition , actually decreased, and with less competition there's less incentive to improve.
Japan, and hell, Sweden not only have faster pipes, but they actually cost less too. Let me repeat that. Americans are paying more for less. Now why? Well at least in Japan, the monolopies like NTT, have to resell their pipes to competitors at wholesale prices. Luckily for Americans, this isn't the case.
So in conclusion: we suck.
"Sorry, but do to a supply chain issue, we can not fulfill your order. Here's your refund, courtesy of The Anal Sex and Fetish Perversion Company."
Show me where in the TCP-IP stack "censorship rerouting" is. It was always a metaphor, and a not very good one, since there's plenty of places where this routing doesn't happen. China? Iran? Any of these places ring a bell?
If content encryption is on, then the blackberry won't send data via the data port or bluetooth until the password is entered. Enter the wrong password 10 times and the blackberry securely wipes itself.
Of course this is dependent on the software acting the way you describe. It's just as easy to have the dongle send some command, and then have the data dumped regardless of the encryption status. Sure, you'd have encrypted data (assuming of course that the password isn't stored in a two-way cipher on the phone itself.), but your faith in "oh but it won't send anything without my password" is naive.
Some very smart people at RIM have looked at wireless email from end-to-end. The blackberry platform has also been audited from end-to-end by many governments and tech experts.
The security of the wireless email is irrelevant here. We're essentially talking about cloning phones via physical access.
ATI didn't have any linux drivers! So this isn't so much "Wow! We've drank the kool-aid and want to subscribe to your newsletter," as much as, "Go away kid. We've got real work to do. Have fun."
Totally, not the same thing as, "We already wrote the driver for you, and still you complain." Nice try though.
You're right that they have always published material that attempted to explain the difference. Of course this confusion is intentional, since the problem is obvious to every native English speaker, which RMS is. No, he wanted to be clever, and was too clever by half. This obvious problem in language was the whole reason "open" is used.
The other problem with term is that RMS wants you to think that the software is "free" as in "unencumbered," but it's not. It has restrictions. That is just an out and out lie. You might as well say, "The color of this is blue. Of course, by 'blue', I mean 'purple'." That's Orwellian.
Freedom is Slavery.
Easy. Vista isn't Unix.
Your dedication to maintaining a substandard existence is admirable. No wait. That's not the word. What is it? Oh yeah. Pitiable.
Oh. And SVG doesn't support video, so you're still screwed.
I call delusional bullshit, and here's why.
You say that GNewSense (which is an apt, name if there ever has been for an FSF project) "supports hardware manufactures." No it doesn't. It doesn't actually "support" anything. It doesn't encourage manufacturers to release anything, because there's no incentive to do so. There's no financial incentive, and there's no user base incentive.
Let's say there's some piece of hardware that there's a significant demand for a Linux driver. The manufacturer writes a driver for Linux. It works. But now some less than 1% comes around demanding that driver be released, but one already has been. Now the problem with the driver isn't that it doesn't exist, or doesn't work. It's that some vocal minority simply refuses to use it. That's a personal problem of their own manufacturing. They've made the affirmative choice to live in a world of suck, and no one is under any obligation to help them.
Also, let's not call GPL software "free." It's legally encumbered, just like everything else. If you want something to be truly free, then public domain it.
You can release code under whatever license you want. That's fine. I don't have a problem with the GPL per se. I have a problem with people getting all self-righteous and pulling a New Speak (or would that be "GNU-Speak"?) and abusing the word "free". It doesn't mean that, and it never did. (And don't even begin to pull that bullshit that there's no word in the English language that means "libre". There is. It's "liberated".)
The fact is, that the status of Tibet has always been much more muddy than either the PRC or the Free Tibet hippies want us to believe. Tibet has nominally been part of China, but with an incredible level autonomy, to the point of de facto independence.
The other unsettling fact is that Tibet was a backward feudalistic theocracy. It's still greatly underdeveloped, but has improved economically under the PRC. Of course this doesn't given the PRC the right to shoot people.
Also, to say that the PLA was "invited," to spread "democratic reforms" (Yes. Those are the exactly words I that English-language CCTV-9 used when talking about the history of Tibet.) is laughable.
You have a very unusual idea of what a infringement is. How exactly is anyone's right to protest limited or curtailed?
Ignore you.
Go back to your crappy Ayn Rand fan club, or get a dictionary. You're using words that you don't understand.
grue
I've met several CS grads and grad students from the Ivy League, and have to say I'm not impressed. For all the hooplah around the Ivy League, there isn't a bit a difference between them and any other CS department.
The Ivy League is just a brand, and a brand that is much more valuable in the liberal arts, not the sciences.
Same thing pretty much is tru