"Any political contributions must be made to a government pool."
So you are in favor of abrogating my Constitutional right to back the candidate of my choice, directly? And you propose to eliminate political parties as well? I think there is an amendment that says something about "peaceably assembling" that kinda guarantees that you can form and operate political parties.
"Every candidate gets the same amount."
And here's the other flaw.
Say I give $10 to the pro-Foo candidate, you give $50 to the anti-Foo candidate, both go into the pool.
Now funds are released, and Ms Pro-Foo gets 30, Mr Anti-Foo gets 30. Thanks for paying to get my views heard even though they may be inimical to yours and harmful to society.
And "Now with the political parties gone"... do I get a pony when I vote in that fantasy land of yours too?
Surprised nobody mentioned my (ancient) favorites -- then again, so few people left doing hardcore C/C++ systems coding. Seems to all be Java these days. Feh, tykes.
No links - no karma whoring.
The C Programing Language (K&R) The C++ Programming Language -- Special 3rd Edition (Stroustrup) Effective STL: 50 Specific Ways to Improve Your Use of the Standard Template Library (Myers) Exceptional C++: 47 Engineering Puzzles, Programming Problems, and Solutions (Herb Sutter)
The Scheme Programming Language (Dybvig) [we use Scheme as one of our scripting engines] Lua 5.1 Reference Manual (Ierusalimschy, et al.) [This is our "less complex" scripting engine]
Python Cookbook (Martelli, et al.) [use this for prototyping and one-off lightweight apps - be sure to get the newest version] Classic Shell Scripting (Robbins) [great for reminding you what you forgot since the last time you wrote a shell script]
Writing Effective Use Cases (Alistair Cockburn) Design Patterns: Elements of Reusable Object-Oriented Software (Gamma)
Unix Programming Environment (Kernighan & Pike) Unix Network Programming, All Volumes (Stevens et al.) Advanced Programming in the UNIX Environment (W. Richard Stevens)
Big pile of Oreilly flavor of the month books.
Of Course, Knuth even though I never use em much - more for the snob appeal I guess, or to throw at managers looking for technical explanations.
Oh and I almost forgot:
ANSI Common Lisp (Graham) - but (as you can see above) we use Scheme.
Dunno why I keep that Lisp book around except for the nerdity.
Well it looks like googles Beta translation leaves a bit to be desired:
There is not an expense bottle and the iron tub it defends together and it gives.
Infiltration it sleeps but after detecting the above object, the intelligent elder brother watch guard robot which is the possibility of hacker directly with the weapon which is affixed on the inside until control was initially developed from country. This robot when it reaches, from next year demonstration is the prospect which will be arranged in the cease-fire line back.
Love your sig "Be A Patriot Murder a Republican"/sarcasm
Inciting to murder you political opponents, even in jest, reveals a lot about you and the fascist mentality you express. You're no better than Pol Pot on the left or McVeigh and the whackos on the right with that sort of a saying.
Guys like you make it damn hard for me to argue against Republican caricatures of the left - your delusions and ignorance, mixed with the amazing ability to ignore facts that show you to be wrong (30 years of f**king up the country for Repubs? Um... they balanced the Budget under Clinton, amongst other things), mark you as a self-blinkered raging fanatic. Every bit as nasty as those whom you purport to hate. You demonstrate that you have chosen to define yourself by what you hate.
Might want to check the mirror first when you ask what's wrong with this country (all of us should). I think your hatred of the Religious Right has blinded you. You live on hatred every bit as much as those "God Hates Fags" people do, you guys deserve each other - leave the rest of us the hell alone.
Excuse me, wasn't there a mass of unemployment in IT during the last 5+ years? And working retail part time at Walmart isnt exactly germane to the CV is it?
So thats why there are resumes with gaps for anyone that was working prior to 2000.
Being unemployed does make for having an employment "gap". Anyone IT Pro that could stay employed continueously during the IT Crash and Telecom Crash and the Outsourcing Crash and so on is NOT going to be too interested in hunting jobs.
Sheesh, attitude like that, no wonder you can't find anyone to work for you.
After a combat tour of duty in the Army in Iraq during the first sandbox war and one in ashcanistan as a reservist, me being a bit late or busy at the office as a civilian wasn't that bad a deal for my wife nor me. That perspective in some ways makes for a far different view of what's important.
Some things simply are not worth the money. Some things are. To me, my country is, so if you're wonderin why i was in the Army - that's why I took the oath and put up with some stupidity, lots of risk and the definite possiblilty of dying in a job you _can't_ quit. The rewards certainly weren't monetary, but there are rewards that you can't measre that way, especially as you get older. Its not all roses and glory (very little of it is actually). Having done my duty I hung up the uniform for good because it was hurting my marriage.
In my experience, your wife has to know she's at the top of your list (other than God if you are religious and even then you must use some sense), certainly ahead of the kids and definitely ahead of the job. But dont forget you BOTH have to work hard at it or it will fail. A long marriage isnt easy.
If push comes to shove, you have to have the courage to shove the job. Better to be squeezing by working retail with 40 hour weeks and happy with your marriage than doing IT pulling 60-70 hour weeks and miserable wrecking your marriage.
In my opinion, an IT job is not worth it compared to a marriage.
Actually, its not "soooo yesterday" if you watch the commentary.
Its about how talking to dictators generally doesnt change them and actually allows them to flourish.
And that specifically applies to Kim Jong Il and his nukes and missiles in North Korea, which has gotten worse under the "all carrot no stick" approach.
Itr pretty relevant to today - and a warning to the Bush administration to not repreat the mistakes Jimmy Carter forced on Predident Clinton's administration (and that Albright pushed for as well - and so she is rightfully the butt of the jokes).
You are as bad as the Fundamentalists - "I have no need to search further". OK then I assume you can accept "Its in the Bible, Case Closed" as an acceptable argument against Evolution?
If you can be convinced by a propaganda movie to ignore the UN studies and the basic physics involved, then you are well and truly stupid.
DU is NOT a WMD - you are an idiot to continue to hold such an unfounded opinionin the face of the facts.
Saddam Hussein's links to terrorism have been proven by documents showing he helped to fund the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine.
The PFLP, whose history of terrorism dates back to the "black September" hijackings of 1970, was personally vetted by Saddam to receive oil vouchers worth £40 million.
The deal has been uncovered by US investigators, trawling millions of pages of documents showing a network of diplomats bribed by Saddam's regimes, and political parties who qualified for backhanded payments from Baghdad.
His financial support also extended to Abu Al-Abbas, leader of the Palestinian Liberation Front - another terrorist group - who was allocated 11.5 million barrels of oil.
The PLO is also named as a main beneficiary from Saddam's scheme - receiving four million barrels under its own name and five million barrels for its "political bureau". The cash was again passed through Syria, a known conduit for Palestinian terror organisations.
OH, you said WESTERN terrorism (define that? Israel is to the WEST fo Iraq last time I saw a map). I suppose - in your view its Ok that he backed terrorism in the middle east since it sounds like there is nothing wrong with letting Arabs and Jews die to terrorists.
And thats just the start of it - the terror training camps at Slma Pak, etc - its all out there in the government and press reports from documents captured in Iraq. So you might want to be a bit more careful with flippant off-hand bashing that isnt supported by facts.
Christ on a cruth, this has brought out all the DU trolls...
The facts, once again (from further up the thread):
DU isnt regular uranium, learn the science, not the hype. There has been a study done on the effects of DU ammunition. The UNEP report concluded in 2001 and found that the hazards are minimal. The most significant hazard seems to be that someone will pick up a round and keep it in close proximity of their person for an extended period of time.
The interesting thing about the DU 'debate' is that most of the people who have done scientific studies on the DU will say 'it's not particularly dangerous, but there are so many factors involved, we can't be 100% sure' while the anti-DU activists always seem to have absolute certainty about their data despite it being based on shoddy papers by undergrads in unralted fields (geology instead of physics, for instance).
In your particular case, please cast aside your political biases and prejudices (your post screams "tin-foil-hat anti-Bush", nearly to the degree that the Limbots are non-thinkinly pro-Bush), and look at the real science from credible sources. Fearmongering in the name of your politics is wrong, whether its conservative or liberal.
Bottom line is that DU is DEPLETED, and is about as radioactive as common dirt and as hazardous as any other heavy metal, like lead. You wouldn't want to make pipes or plates or silverware out of it, but other than that its simply not "radioactive" as you make it out to be.
DU isnt regular uranium, learn the science, not the hype. There has been a study done on the effects of DU ammunition. The UNEP report concluded in 2001 and found that the hazards are minimal. The most significant hazard seems to be that someone will pick up a round and keep it in close proximity of their person for an extended period of time.
The interesting thing about the DU 'debate' is that most of the people who have done scientific studies on the DU will say 'it's not particularly dangerous, but there are so many factors involved, we can't be 100% sure' while the anti-DU activists always seem to have absolute certainty about their data despite it being based on shoddy papers by undergrads in unralted fields (geology instead of physics, for instance).
Bottom line is that DU is DEPLETED, and is about as radioactive as common dirt and as hazardous as any other heavy metal, like lead. You wouldn't want to make pipes or plates or silverware out of it, but other than that its simply not as "radioactive" as you make it out to be.
The decision in question was so laughable and poorly reasoned that it *will* be thrown out on appeal. The judge was a partisan hack whose legal analysis would have failed were it submitted as a practice brief by a first year law school student. So a stay is the proper course for the court of appeals, givne the large probability that the Government will sustain its case and overturn the original judge's poor work.
There are far many more issues open thhan were addressed int he case - and they are being argued all over the place here, while you completely miss the point.
All of you on both sides seem to have missed the court's decision itself was flawed and poorly reasoned (read the lawblogs commentaries form whenit was first released - it was panned, left and right). The original judgement was not properly based in the law at all. BOTH sides commented on this when the decision was handed down. the only people taking it at face value were the Bash Bush At Any Cost crowd. Those who actually practice law were cringing at the poor quality of the judgement and expecting this very action by the appeals court - an action that will tie down any and all further attempts to limit the warrantless intercepts until this case is resolved.
It will be eventually overturned - and THAT is why the appeals court has stayed that decision pending the appeals process. Not becasue the program in question was right or wrong, but that the decision by the judge was horrendously poor.
There are plenty of good legal arguments to curtail the warrantless intercepts. And they will eventually make it to court and have a fair hearing. Its a shame this crappy original decision is going to dealy so many of them as it is demolished and overturned in the appeals system.
Again, there are many good arguments and legal reasons that favor curtailment of the warrantless intercept program.
Unfortunately, the original decision was bereft of *all* of those good reasons, and it deserves to be tossed out as a matter of correcting bad jurisprudence.
My ecomment modded "flamebait" for calling the main article old news & possibly troll? My post wasnt flamebait - see wikipedia:
"Flamebait is a message posted to a public Internet discussion group, such as a forum, newsgroup or mailing list, with the intent of provoking an angry response (a "flame") or argument over a topic the troll often has no real interest in. "
I was not provoking angry responses - I was calling attention to the lack of worth and waste of/. space that the original article was. And I have a real interest in the avoidance of posting such trolls by Zonk and the other editors here. Slashdot is a fairly functional site, but if it continues to pollute itself with editorial trolling it becomes less and less useful. And don't say "filter" - I happen to like a lot of the political articles here - except when they are mislabeled as being political, or are simply a waste of time and the result of piss-poor editorial judgement (as this one was).
As for my commentary being flambeait: Lets see - the/. article is about a CNN article thats about a Time Magazine article thats about the fact that there is controversy over federal funding of embryonic stemcell research.
Whoa, real news there!/sarcasm
So
a) its not "news" - its OLD. This has been ongoing for quite a while.
b) its not even original content - its a pointer to a pointer.
c) there is no new technical content at all - and what contect it did contain was at the "Tie Magazine" level of comprehesionion - far below that of what I would presume a Slashdotter to hold.
d) it notes that some oppose fed funfing on relibious grounds, that others opposed it on libertarian grounds, and that other desire the governemnt to fund it. Well, duh!
e) it brings nothing new except for the chance to bring out all the "I hate Bush" and "I hate lefties" peopel so they can call each other names.
So, my post was accurate:
This "/. article" was neither news nor new, it was a troll by the editors - one which will bring out all the flame-bait posters and trolls form the left and right.
Come on Zonk - save the "Politics" part of/. for stuff that matters - nto a rehas of old arguments, but real news!
And mods, learn the definitions before you moderate. At worst, if you wanted to modwaste the mod points and mod it down, mod it "Off topic".
"Try to install Ubuntu without random crashes all the way, including some Python entrails thrown into your face."
OK - I take you up on that offer. I tried - and had 17 installs without a single "random crash all the way" nor any "Python entrails".
Your statement sounds like bullshit to me. Random crashes? Yeah right - if that were the case Ubuntu/Xunbuntu/Kubuntu would be hammered all over the place on the web. I think you're lying or else not using the latest release, or else are trying to still use your old 386SX PC as the install platform.
The 14 (Yes 14, I did several offices in a R&D area, per company policy no imaging allowed) scratch installs I did all went smoothly - no "entrails" nor any other faults. 6.06 LTS was smooth as silk. Same goes replacing Redhat ES3 with a server install for one of the researchers who did the install himself.
The 3 I did at home: no problem. Set right up, replacing a cranky Fedora install, a SuSE 9.3 (my main PC) and a Gentoo setup that I left to rot long ago.
So I have no idea what you are talking about (and I doubt you do either) - if in doubt, take the text install and it just works. And whats wrong with it looking like Windows? That's far better than the standard crap installer Debian has been saddled with since forever in their release line. Or the FreeBSD installer prior to the latest.
I believe your complaints to be exaggerated or else simply lies for a troll - or else one of those disgruntled Debian Purist types that shows up in every Ubuntu discussion.
Good luck with things - if you are having troubles that don't seem to exist for much anyone else, then you're going to need it.
flamebaiter is Workin' Hard For You
on
Growing Insulin
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
***"Well, by banning the public funding of stem cell research today, George Bush has helped you towards the cure! His great deeds are hastening the Rapture, when the good people (those who accept Jesus Christ as their Lord) will be cured."***
Mods, how the hell did that rate an "insightful"? Its off topic at best, and more probably flamebait. So I'm going to flame it, especially since I have relatives that are directly affected by the research in question and the disease in the topic (Diabetes).
Stop with the political BULLSHIT! You Bush-bashers are getting as bad as the Bible thumpers that voted for him.
There has been no embrionic stem cell research that has shown hope for diabetes. Or much anything else for that matter - there have been severe complications in damn near everything done with embryonic stem cells. They simply are not panning out - indeed the most promising results ended up being a hoaxed/forged set of results over in Korea. Nothing else substantial has come of this. Thats why the Feds shoudl nto be funding it - there are better areas of stem cell research to put tax money on.
The federal government is wasing money to fund crap like the embryonic research when it should be going to the more mainstream R&D lines. And as far ast stem cells go, the best stuff I've read about or head of is coming from R&D with marrow stem cells or placental-cord cells.
But political assholes like you would rather get an issue to beat up the fundies with than to work toward the best probable set of solutions.
If somone wants to do embryonic stem cell research, thats fine by me - let them fund it themselves. Nothing stopping them at all.
But put the Fed money to work where it shows the most promise - and that most definitely is *not* embryonic stem cells. So stop using stem cells as a political football.
Bush is doing the right thing with his veto. Its questionable on the reasons he is putting forth, but good in the end results. Like a stopped clock, his hands this time are aligning with the right things. Let some time pass and I'm sure you can find somethign legitimate to beat him up over. But get your politics out of the funding questions.
Not everyone opposed to federal funding of embryonic stem cell research is an anti-abortion activist, there are good reasons to oppose the funding (but not the research if thats where people want to waste their own money).
Actually that statment is pretty clear to someone with domain knowledge. Like any other knowlege domain, its probably very abstruse to the outside. Remember, Feynman was not famous for only being a physicist, but for being a physicist that could make himself understood to those outside of his domain of expertise (c.f. Feynman's lectures).
Its actually a very concise and clear explanation of that part of the data plan. The problem for you is that you do not have the context, nor subject matter expertise, so it appears to make no sense to you. I, on the other hand, have handled and created classified compartmented documents "back in the day", so its meaning is perfectly clear to me. Its also quite obvious this is from a section about how to carry across message-handling markings ("Classification" and "Dissementation" restrictions & caveats) from one agency to another, or even intra-agency stuff. This indicates to me that you probably pulled it from the Intelligence part of the namespace.
Bascially, the part you quoted says, in more coloquial English:
To control who gets to see this portion of data, the document is marked over-all AND portions are marked individually. To properly mark a portion of a document, (usually a paragraph), ther may be some paragraphs in a document that are "secret", some may be "unclassified", some may be US-only, some may be releasable to NATO, or various and sundry combinations of these types of things. To designate these "portion classifications, caveats and dissementation controls" and properly "mark" this portion fo the document, there is either (a) a single abreviated term, or else (b) a list of abbrevaited terms delimited by spaces. These terms can be found in a document called the "CAPCO Reigster". The only exception to this rule is the "REL" term, which means "Releasable To". Therefore, the values normally found after the REL term in a portion of a document should be put into the "releasableTo" attribute of this portion of a document, instead of the normal dissemenation control data block part of the document.
Thats a lot of context that isnt needed by someone reading a spec, governmentor otherwise. The spec assumes a given level of subject matter and domain expertise. To dumb it down would be wrong - that is the best way to lard up and bloat a spec, or else allow a spec so loose as to be useless in constraining the data properly. And, as you mention, "XML is upposed to make it easier to manipulate data by providing unambiguous definitions". The quoted text in your post is an example of a *very* _un_ambiguous definition of a data field. And contrary to your belief, its not just goverment that created such hard-to-scan (for outsiders) documents/specs, I've seen banks, health companies, telecom companies, aerospace [and other places that cannot afford a "loose" data type] write very similar specifications that contain similar definitions.
You'll see much of the same once you get out into the world.
Actually they do sometimes leave a note about open windows or an open garage with apparently nobody home. Its simply a matter of public safety during routine patrols. Just like the wireless stuff is during routine patrols - they aren't going out of their way to map and scan.
Your paranoia has overcome your common sense. And it might help if you'd RTFA - they describe the process as beign part of routine activity, not a special "hunt down OpenAP's" program. And the security they do is just offering the peron a borchure on how to secure theer network and the risks of leaving it open.
"... Mr. I went to 12 hours of community college to qualify for a law enforcement job"
DEAD wrong.
Accredited police academies are 2 years long, 16 sem hours per term, and have a summer class requirement, taught at a College Sophomore level. And thats on top of being able to pass phsycial and security exams, a urinalysis, and a polygraph, as well as having to pass exams on legal limits, the law itself, and qualify with live fire on a range with a handgun.
So no, you're not talking to a dufus, and its damend arrogant to suppose you will have to "lecture" the police officer about network security. All he is doing is offereing a brochure on how to secure an access point, in case you didnt know anything about it. And if its some fo the police I've known, they may know as much as or more than you: remember that they employ computer forensic specialists these days who knwo thsi stuff inside and out in order to be able to solve crimes.
Sheesh. What is up with/.'s childish, paranoic and stupid responses to this?
I'll be sure to relay all whitehouse.gov death threats, skriptkiddy attacks on pentagon.mil and irc bot-net controlling through YOUR open access point. Good luck handling the legal repercussions when the FBI or Secret Service has Comcast trace the activity - and it comes out to an IP assigned to you in their RADIUS logs. You'll EVENTUALLY be able to prove your innocence - but only after a lengthy and costly time in court trying to explain all of the above to a judge with the US District Attorney bearing down hard, and Secret Service agents testifying against you with an email that's legally linked to you IP via RADIUS logs from your ISP.
Now, to be a bit less inflammatory than you: Get a grip and read the article! The sheriff's department in question are not there to stop you from doing anything (legal) that you want to with your network; they arent even monitoring the activity on it - jsut that its an open access point, and nothing further. They are trying to deliver clues to the clueless who are NOT intentionally running an open access point. Soccer Mom or Baseball Dad got it at best-buy, plugged it in, and off they go wiht the laptop from work. They have no idea they are vulnerable, leaving windows shares, and all kinds of other personal data open to the world. They are NOT "trying to monitor the wifi network of every single person in the county". You really need to adjust the tinfoil, your beanie appears to be slipping.
This is akin to the police driving by on routine patrol, and without entering your house, leaving a note on your door warning you about the possible burglary you are exposing yourself to with a window you left open. No nefarious plans to scan you for kiddie porn, nor arrest you for running an open access point.
This is just an instance of a benign program in a largely suburban middleclass area. And you might want to thank them: the fact that they have detected you as an open point might be used in your defense if someone does use your access point for nefarious and illegal activities: the police already know it they are more likely to accept your story about not being the one sending nastygrams to DubyaBush/TedKennedy/.
Knee-jerk responses like yours often end up with a lot less knee and far too much jerk. You might want to consider that the police are not always out to be repressive monsters - sometimes they actually do "protect and serve" the public proactively.
So slow it down an think a bit. And take off the reality distortion blinders you've placed on yourself.
Slashdot Mirror
Better Idea? Umm, no. Think about it.
"Any political contributions must be made to a government pool."
So you are in favor of abrogating my Constitutional right to back the candidate of my choice, directly? And you propose to eliminate political parties as well? I think there is an amendment that says something about "peaceably assembling" that kinda guarantees that you can form and operate political parties.
"Every candidate gets the same amount."
And here's the other flaw.
Say I give $10 to the pro-Foo candidate, you give $50 to the anti-Foo candidate, both go into the pool.
Now funds are released, and Ms Pro-Foo gets 30, Mr Anti-Foo gets 30. Thanks for paying to get my views heard even though they may be inimical to yours and harmful to society.
And "Now with the political parties gone"... do I get a pony when I vote in that fantasy land of yours too?
Damn. While I was looking at my shelf picking them out, about 2/3 of them were posted.
LOL!
Surprised nobody mentioned my (ancient) favorites -- then again, so few people left doing hardcore C/C++ systems coding. Seems to all be Java these days. Feh, tykes.
No links - no karma whoring.
The C Programing Language (K&R)
The C++ Programming Language -- Special 3rd Edition (Stroustrup)
Effective STL: 50 Specific Ways to Improve Your Use of the Standard Template Library (Myers)
Exceptional C++: 47 Engineering Puzzles, Programming Problems, and Solutions (Herb Sutter)
The Scheme Programming Language (Dybvig) [we use Scheme as one of our scripting engines]
Lua 5.1 Reference Manual (Ierusalimschy, et al.) [This is our "less complex" scripting engine]
Python Cookbook (Martelli, et al.) [use this for prototyping and one-off lightweight apps - be sure to get the newest version]
Classic Shell Scripting (Robbins) [great for reminding you what you forgot since the last time you wrote a shell script]
Writing Effective Use Cases (Alistair Cockburn)
Design Patterns: Elements of Reusable Object-Oriented Software (Gamma)
Unix Programming Environment (Kernighan & Pike)
Unix Network Programming, All Volumes (Stevens et al.)
Advanced Programming in the UNIX Environment (W. Richard Stevens)
Big pile of Oreilly flavor of the month books.
Of Course, Knuth even though I never use em much - more for the snob appeal I guess, or to throw at managers looking for technical explanations.
Oh and I almost forgot:
ANSI Common Lisp (Graham) - but (as you can see above) we use Scheme.
Dunno why I keep that Lisp book around except for the nerdity.
Check it out at the Google translation Korean to English URL
But at least the video is pretty cool.
Love your sig "Be A Patriot Murder a Republican" /sarcasm
Inciting to murder you political opponents, even in jest, reveals a lot about you and the fascist mentality you express. You're no better than Pol Pot on the left or McVeigh and the whackos on the right with that sort of a saying.
Guys like you make it damn hard for me to argue against Republican caricatures of the left - your delusions and ignorance, mixed with the amazing ability to ignore facts that show you to be wrong (30 years of f**king up the country for Repubs? Um... they balanced the Budget under Clinton, amongst other things), mark you as a self-blinkered raging fanatic. Every bit as nasty as those whom you purport to hate. You demonstrate that you have chosen to define yourself by what you hate.
Might want to check the mirror first when you ask what's wrong with this country (all of us should). I think your hatred of the Religious Right has blinded you. You live on hatred every bit as much as those "God Hates Fags" people do, you guys deserve each other - leave the rest of us the hell alone.
Stop with the hate, enough already.
"gaps" in the Resume are "bad things"?
Excuse me, wasn't there a mass of unemployment in IT during the last 5+ years? And working retail part time at Walmart isnt exactly germane to the CV is it?
So thats why there are resumes with gaps for anyone that was working prior to 2000.
Being unemployed does make for having an employment "gap". Anyone IT Pro that could stay employed continueously during the IT Crash and Telecom Crash and the Outsourcing Crash and so on is NOT going to be too interested in hunting jobs.
Sheesh, attitude like that, no wonder you can't find anyone to work for you.
LOL - thats why I ALWAYS meta-mod "redundant" mods as wrong.
After a combat tour of duty in the Army in Iraq during the first sandbox war and one in ashcanistan as a reservist, me being a bit late or busy at the office as a civilian wasn't that bad a deal for my wife nor me. That perspective in some ways makes for a far different view of what's important.
Some things simply are not worth the money. Some things are. To me, my country is, so if you're wonderin why i was in the Army - that's why I took the oath and put up with some stupidity, lots of risk and the definite possiblilty of dying in a job you _can't_ quit. The rewards certainly weren't monetary, but there are rewards that you can't measre that way, especially as you get older. Its not all roses and glory (very little of it is actually). Having done my duty I hung up the uniform for good because it was hurting my marriage.
In my experience, your wife has to know she's at the top of your list (other than God if you are religious and even then you must use some sense), certainly ahead of the kids and definitely ahead of the job. But dont forget you BOTH have to work hard at it or it will fail. A long marriage isnt easy.
If push comes to shove, you have to have the courage to shove the job. Better to be squeezing by working retail with 40 hour weeks and happy with your marriage than doing IT pulling 60-70 hour weeks and miserable wrecking your marriage.
In my opinion, an IT job is not worth it compared to a marriage.
Actually, its not "soooo yesterday" if you watch the commentary.
Its about how talking to dictators generally doesnt change them and actually allows them to flourish.
And that specifically applies to Kim Jong Il and his nukes and missiles in North Korea, which has gotten worse under the "all carrot no stick" approach.
Itr pretty relevant to today - and a warning to the Bush administration to not repreat the mistakes Jimmy Carter forced on Predident Clinton's administration (and that Albright pushed for as well - and so she is rightfully the butt of the jokes).
... pondering what I'm pondering?
You are as bad as the Fundamentalists - "I have no need to search further". OK then I assume you can accept "Its in the Bible, Case Closed" as an acceptable argument against Evolution?
If you can be convinced by a propaganda movie to ignore the UN studies and the basic physics involved, then you are well and truly stupid.
DU is NOT a WMD - you are an idiot to continue to hold such an unfounded opinionin the face of the facts.
True - but even then the amount of radioactivity is minimal.
As another poster pointed out, its the toxicity you have to watch out for.
"... which now turns out not to be true "
Really? Care to back that assertion up?
Saddam Hussein's links to terrorism have been proven by documents showing he helped to fund the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine.
The PFLP, whose history of terrorism dates back to the "black September" hijackings of 1970, was personally vetted by Saddam to receive oil vouchers worth £40 million.
The deal has been uncovered by US investigators, trawling millions of pages of documents showing a network of diplomats bribed by Saddam's regimes, and political parties who qualified for backhanded payments from Baghdad.
His financial support also extended to Abu Al-Abbas, leader of the Palestinian Liberation Front - another terrorist group - who was allocated 11.5 million barrels of oil.
The PLO is also named as a main beneficiary from Saddam's scheme - receiving four million barrels under its own name and five million barrels for its "political bureau". The cash was again passed through Syria, a known conduit for Palestinian terror organisations.
OH, you said WESTERN terrorism (define that? Israel is to the WEST fo Iraq last time I saw a map). I suppose - in your view its Ok that he backed terrorism in the middle east since it sounds like there is nothing wrong with letting Arabs and Jews die to terrorists.
And thats just the start of it - the terror training camps at Slma Pak, etc - its all out there in the government and press reports from documents captured in Iraq. So you might want to be a bit more careful with flippant off-hand bashing that isnt supported by facts.
Christ on a cruth, this has brought out all the DU trolls...
The facts, once again (from further up the thread):
DU isnt regular uranium, learn the science, not the hype. There has been a study done on the effects of DU ammunition. The UNEP report concluded in 2001 and found that the hazards are minimal. The most significant hazard seems to be that someone will pick up a round and keep it in close proximity of their person for an extended period of time.
The interesting thing about the DU 'debate' is that most of the people who have done scientific studies on the DU will say 'it's not particularly dangerous, but there are so many factors involved, we can't be 100% sure' while the anti-DU activists always seem to have absolute certainty about their data despite it being based on shoddy papers by undergrads in unralted fields (geology instead of physics, for instance).
In your particular case, please cast aside your political biases and prejudices (your post screams "tin-foil-hat anti-Bush", nearly to the degree that the Limbots are non-thinkinly pro-Bush), and look at the real science from credible sources. Fearmongering in the name of your politics is wrong, whether its conservative or liberal.
Bottom line is that DU is DEPLETED, and is about as radioactive as common dirt and as hazardous as any other heavy metal, like lead. You wouldn't want to make pipes or plates or silverware out of it, but other than that its simply not "radioactive" as you make it out to be.
Answer to you question: Nothing.
DU isnt regular uranium, learn the science, not the hype. There has been a study done on the effects of DU ammunition. The UNEP report concluded in 2001 and found that the hazards are minimal. The most significant hazard seems to be that someone will pick up a round and keep it in close proximity of their person for an extended period of time.
The interesting thing about the DU 'debate' is that most of the people who have done scientific studies on the DU will say 'it's not particularly dangerous, but there are so many factors involved, we can't be 100% sure' while the anti-DU activists always seem to have absolute certainty about their data despite it being based on shoddy papers by undergrads in unralted fields (geology instead of physics, for instance).
Bottom line is that DU is DEPLETED, and is about as radioactive as common dirt and as hazardous as any other heavy metal, like lead. You wouldn't want to make pipes or plates or silverware out of it, but other than that its simply not as "radioactive" as you make it out to be.
The decision in question was so laughable and poorly reasoned that it *will* be thrown out on appeal. The judge was a partisan hack whose legal analysis would have failed were it submitted as a practice brief by a first year law school student. So a stay is the proper course for the court of appeals, givne the large probability that the Government will sustain its case and overturn the original judge's poor work.
There are far many more issues open thhan were addressed int he case - and they are being argued all over the place here, while you completely miss the point.
All of you on both sides seem to have missed the court's decision itself was flawed and poorly reasoned (read the lawblogs commentaries form whenit was first released - it was panned, left and right). The original judgement was not properly based in the law at all. BOTH sides commented on this when the decision was handed down. the only people taking it at face value were the Bash Bush At Any Cost crowd. Those who actually practice law were cringing at the poor quality of the judgement and expecting this very action by the appeals court - an action that will tie down any and all further attempts to limit the warrantless intercepts until this case is resolved.
It will be eventually overturned - and THAT is why the appeals court has stayed that decision pending the appeals process. Not becasue the program in question was right or wrong, but that the decision by the judge was horrendously poor.
There are plenty of good legal arguments to curtail the warrantless intercepts. And they will eventually make it to court and have a fair hearing. Its a shame this crappy original decision is going to dealy so many of them as it is demolished and overturned in the appeals system.
Again, there are many good arguments and legal reasons that favor curtailment of the warrantless intercept program.
Unfortunately, the original decision was bereft of *all* of those good reasons, and it deserves to be tossed out as a matter of correcting bad jurisprudence.
Trixbox is for Kids!
(Sorry couldn't resist).
My ecomment modded "flamebait" for calling the main article old news & possibly troll? My post wasnt flamebait - see wikipedia:
/. space that the original article was. And I have a real interest in the avoidance of posting such trolls by Zonk and the other editors here. Slashdot is a fairly functional site, but if it continues to pollute itself with editorial trolling it becomes less and less useful. And don't say "filter" - I happen to like a lot of the political articles here - except when they are mislabeled as being political, or are simply a waste of time and the result of piss-poor editorial judgement (as this one was).
/. article is about a CNN article thats about a Time Magazine article thats about the fact that there is controversy over federal funding of embryonic stemcell research.
/sarcasm
/. for stuff that matters - nto a rehas of old arguments, but real news!
"Flamebait is a message posted to a public Internet discussion group, such as a forum, newsgroup or mailing list, with the intent of provoking an angry response (a "flame") or argument over a topic the troll often has no real interest in. "
I was not provoking angry responses - I was calling attention to the lack of worth and waste of
As for my commentary being flambeait: Lets see - the
Whoa, real news there!
So
a) its not "news" - its OLD. This has been ongoing for quite a while.
b) its not even original content - its a pointer to a pointer.
c) there is no new technical content at all - and what contect it did contain was at the "Tie Magazine" level of comprehesionion - far below that of what I would presume a Slashdotter to hold.
d) it notes that some oppose fed funfing on relibious grounds, that others opposed it on libertarian grounds, and that other desire the governemnt to fund it. Well, duh!
e) it brings nothing new except for the chance to bring out all the "I hate Bush" and "I hate lefties" peopel so they can call each other names.
So, my post was accurate:
This "/. article" was neither news nor new, it was a troll by the editors - one which will bring out all the flame-bait posters and trolls form the left and right.
Come on Zonk - save the "Politics" part of
And mods, learn the definitions before you moderate. At worst, if you wanted to modwaste the mod points and mod it down, mod it "Off topic".
Sheesh. This is old stuff, not news- and its got flambait-y aroma to boot.
Get ready for the Bushitler and Moonbat namecalling contests.
Reposting CNN and Time magazine articles - hardly "news" nor "tech" saavy.
Whatever happened to Slashdot? Sigh.
"Try to install Ubuntu without random crashes all the way, including some Python entrails thrown into your face."
OK - I take you up on that offer. I tried - and had 17 installs without a single "random crash all the way" nor any "Python entrails".
Your statement sounds like bullshit to me. Random crashes? Yeah right - if that were the case Ubuntu/Xunbuntu/Kubuntu would be hammered all over the place on the web. I think you're lying or else not using the latest release, or else are trying to still use your old 386SX PC as the install platform.
The 14 (Yes 14, I did several offices in a R&D area, per company policy no imaging allowed) scratch installs I did all went smoothly - no "entrails" nor any other faults. 6.06 LTS was smooth as silk. Same goes replacing Redhat ES3 with a server install for one of the researchers who did the install himself.
The 3 I did at home: no problem. Set right up, replacing a cranky Fedora install, a SuSE 9.3 (my main PC) and a Gentoo setup that I left to rot long ago.
So I have no idea what you are talking about (and I doubt you do either) - if in doubt, take the text install and it just works. And whats wrong with it looking like Windows? That's far better than the standard crap installer Debian has been saddled with since forever in their release line. Or the FreeBSD installer prior to the latest.
I believe your complaints to be exaggerated or else simply lies for a troll - or else one of those disgruntled Debian Purist types that shows up in every Ubuntu discussion.
Good luck with things - if you are having troubles that don't seem to exist for much anyone else, then you're going to need it.
***"Well, by banning the public funding of stem cell research today, George Bush has helped you towards the cure! His great deeds are hastening the Rapture, when the good people (those who accept Jesus Christ as their Lord) will be cured."***
Mods, how the hell did that rate an "insightful"? Its off topic at best, and more probably flamebait. So I'm going to flame it, especially since I have relatives that are directly affected by the research in question and the disease in the topic (Diabetes).
Stop with the political BULLSHIT! You Bush-bashers are getting as bad as the Bible thumpers that voted for him.
There has been no embrionic stem cell research that has shown hope for diabetes. Or much anything else for that matter - there have been severe complications in damn near everything done with embryonic stem cells. They simply are not panning out - indeed the most promising results ended up being a hoaxed/forged set of results over in Korea. Nothing else substantial has come of this. Thats why the Feds shoudl nto be funding it - there are better areas of stem cell research to put tax money on.
The federal government is wasing money to fund crap like the embryonic research when it should be going to the more mainstream R&D lines. And as far ast stem cells go, the best stuff I've read about or head of is coming from R&D with marrow stem cells or placental-cord cells.
But political assholes like you would rather get an issue to beat up the fundies with than to work toward the best probable set of solutions.
If somone wants to do embryonic stem cell research, thats fine by me - let them fund it themselves. Nothing stopping them at all.
But put the Fed money to work where it shows the most promise - and that most definitely is *not* embryonic stem cells. So stop using stem cells as a political football.
Bush is doing the right thing with his veto. Its questionable on the reasons he is putting forth, but good in the end results. Like a stopped clock, his hands this time are aligning with the right things. Let some time pass and I'm sure you can find somethign legitimate to beat him up over. But get your politics out of the funding questions.
Not everyone opposed to federal funding of embryonic stem cell research is an anti-abortion activist, there are good reasons to oppose the funding (but not the research if thats where people want to waste their own money).
Actually that statment is pretty clear to someone with domain knowledge. Like any other knowlege domain, its probably very abstruse to the outside. Remember, Feynman was not famous for only being a physicist, but for being a physicist that could make himself understood to those outside of his domain of expertise (c.f. Feynman's lectures).
Its actually a very concise and clear explanation of that part of the data plan. The problem for you is that you do not have the context, nor subject matter expertise, so it appears to make no sense to you. I, on the other hand, have handled and created classified compartmented documents "back in the day", so its meaning is perfectly clear to me. Its also quite obvious this is from a section about how to carry across message-handling markings ("Classification" and "Dissementation" restrictions & caveats) from one agency to another, or even intra-agency stuff. This indicates to me that you probably pulled it from the Intelligence part of the namespace.
Bascially, the part you quoted says, in more coloquial English:
To control who gets to see this portion of data, the document is marked over-all AND portions are marked individually. To properly mark a portion of a document, (usually a paragraph), ther may be some paragraphs in a document that are "secret", some may be "unclassified", some may be US-only, some may be releasable to NATO, or various and sundry combinations of these types of things. To designate these "portion classifications, caveats and dissementation controls" and properly "mark" this portion fo the document, there is either (a) a single abreviated term, or else (b) a list of abbrevaited terms delimited by spaces. These terms can be found in a document called the "CAPCO Reigster". The only exception to this rule is the "REL" term, which means "Releasable To". Therefore, the values normally found after the REL term in a portion of a document should be put into the "releasableTo" attribute of this portion of a document, instead of the normal dissemenation control data block part of the document.
Thats a lot of context that isnt needed by someone reading a spec, governmentor otherwise. The spec assumes a given level of subject matter and domain expertise. To dumb it down would be wrong - that is the best way to lard up and bloat a spec, or else allow a spec so loose as to be useless in constraining the data properly. And, as you mention, "XML is upposed to make it easier to manipulate data by providing unambiguous definitions". The quoted text in your post is an example of a *very* _un_ambiguous definition of a data field. And contrary to your belief, its not just goverment that created such hard-to-scan (for outsiders) documents/specs, I've seen banks, health companies, telecom companies, aerospace [and other places that cannot afford a "loose" data type] write very similar specifications that contain similar definitions.
You'll see much of the same once you get out into the world.
HTH.
Actually they do sometimes leave a note about open windows or an open garage with apparently nobody home. Its simply a matter of public safety during routine patrols. Just like the wireless stuff is during routine patrols - they aren't going out of their way to map and scan.
Your paranoia has overcome your common sense. And it might help if you'd RTFA - they describe the process as beign part of routine activity, not a special "hunt down OpenAP's" program. And the security they do is just offering the peron a borchure on how to secure theer network and the risks of leaving it open.
Correct your knowledge base:
/.'s childish, paranoic and stupid responses to this?
"... Mr. I went to 12 hours of community college to qualify for a law enforcement job"
DEAD wrong.
Accredited police academies are 2 years long, 16 sem hours per term, and have a summer class requirement, taught at a College Sophomore level. And thats on top of being able to pass phsycial and security exams, a urinalysis, and a polygraph, as well as having to pass exams on legal limits, the law itself, and qualify with live fire on a range with a handgun.
So no, you're not talking to a dufus, and its damend arrogant to suppose you will have to "lecture" the police officer about network security. All he is doing is offereing a brochure on how to secure an access point, in case you didnt know anything about it. And if its some fo the police I've known, they may know as much as or more than you: remember that they employ computer forensic specialists these days who knwo thsi stuff inside and out in order to be able to solve crimes.
Sheesh. What is up with
Thanks!
I'll be sure to relay all whitehouse.gov death threats, skriptkiddy attacks on pentagon.mil and irc bot-net controlling through YOUR open access point. Good luck handling the legal repercussions when the FBI or Secret Service has Comcast trace the activity - and it comes out to an IP assigned to you in their RADIUS logs. You'll EVENTUALLY be able to prove your innocence - but only after a lengthy and costly time in court trying to explain all of the above to a judge with the US District Attorney bearing down hard, and Secret Service agents testifying against you with an email that's legally linked to you IP via RADIUS logs from your ISP.
Now, to be a bit less inflammatory than you: Get a grip and read the article! The sheriff's department in question are not there to stop you from doing anything (legal) that you want to with your network; they arent even monitoring the activity on it - jsut that its an open access point, and nothing further. They are trying to deliver clues to the clueless who are NOT intentionally running an open access point. Soccer Mom or Baseball Dad got it at best-buy, plugged it in, and off they go wiht the laptop from work. They have no idea they are vulnerable, leaving windows shares, and all kinds of other personal data open to the world. They are NOT "trying to monitor the wifi network of every single person in the county". You really need to adjust the tinfoil, your beanie appears to be slipping.
This is akin to the police driving by on routine patrol, and without entering your house, leaving a note on your door warning you about the possible burglary you are exposing yourself to with a window you left open. No nefarious plans to scan you for kiddie porn, nor arrest you for running an open access point.
This is just an instance of a benign program in a largely suburban middleclass area. And you might want to thank them: the fact that they have detected you as an open point might be used in your defense if someone does use your access point for nefarious and illegal activities: the police already know it they are more likely to accept your story about not being the one sending nastygrams to DubyaBush/TedKennedy/.
Knee-jerk responses like yours often end up with a lot less knee and far too much jerk. You might want to consider that the police are not always out to be repressive monsters - sometimes they actually do "protect and serve" the public proactively.
So slow it down an think a bit. And take off the reality distortion blinders you've placed on yourself.