There surely will be people with those genes in the general population most of whom will not become 100m runners.
What puts apparts those great athletes is a lifetime devoted to doing a sport. Any body abled person could become a professional athlete, not everybody could win, but it is perfectly feasible that with training any helthy person reaches quite decent sporting standards.
The difference between the champions and other athletes is in general so small that it becomes a statistical irrelevance (in 100m there is a 1 sec difference between the top of the class and the lousiest proper athletes, which is frankly nothing).
People working in big corporations are beginning to do their homework.
I have seen several projects in the last couple of years stopped on their tracks because they were intending to use Windows (in a situation in which it was not the best choice).
Many IT people have gotten away with being lazy for far too long by using WIndows without thinking and evaluating alternatives.
As for desktop users, it is time they start doing the same, your wife is extremely lucky, in my also anecdotal experience people are struggling against their WIndows computers, once they are introduced to the latest Linux or Apple machines, they realize there is another way of doing things, and some people are finding that way is better fo them.
A big manufacturer like Dell throwing their Linux Hat in the ring for real would be great for the industry as a whole (including MS, who could benefit from some healty competition, before they go down the suing your competition way of no return).
I do not use MS products, but given my encounters with MS documentation packaged with new products, I would be extremely surprised if anywhere it is mentioned what you helpfuly are recommending.
Users of WIndows systems have a very low expectation of how the machine ought to behave, this includes some degree of meddling to make it work.
And as for applications, well, if the underneath OS was fair to all, then applications would just need to follow published APIs and work with the OS manufacturer to make them better. BUt as we know, if you are in direct copetition with MS products, your are at a disadvantage because MS products will share lots of different resources with applications, to the point that it makes them appear faster.
Application designers then have to come around with the kind of tricks you mention in order to boost their performance in an environment that is at best uncooperative and at worst plain hostile.
"However, the appeals court did affirm in part Judge Jackson's ruling on monopolization. The D.C. Circuit remanded the case for consideration of a proper remedy for "drastically altered scope of liability" that the court had upheld, under Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly. The DOJ, now under the administration of U.S. President George W. Bush, announced on September 6, 2001 that it was no longer seeking to break up Microsoft and would instead seek a lesser antitrust penalty."
They were convicted. That is how I interpret the aobve. And certainly they were declare a monopoly. Officialy, as the article above maintains.
Also note that the appeal court did not reject any of the findings, only the behaviour of the judge.
A WEP protected router is clearly telling you to go away. If you crack it you clearly are contravening the wishes of the owner of the router and should be prosecuted for it (no matter how easy it is to crack the keys).
An unsecured router is clearly saying, by means of the communication protocol, that you are welcome to have a free lunch. It should be none of your concern how mush it costs to your nighbour, he clearly is giving you permission, so it is a non issue to you.
The onus should be in the owners of non secured routers. The protocol is widely known: unsecured means anybody can connect, secured means only people with the key can connect. If you obtain the key by deceit you should be braking the law.
Why is this simple, clear logic, failed to be understood on this website?
What is next? Suing people for connecting to an open ftp server?
The pro gun lobby and pro-gun nutcases alway cite Switzerland (I am sure most of them could not find it in a map) but conveneintly forget to say that you are not allowed to carry arms in public....
That whatever number of veterans would not act as an organized force, many of them would support whatever the government of the day says and a big amount of them will be in no position or inclination to fight anybody.
Also I don't see those armored thanks and aircrafts, heavy guns, mines and other palafernalia that vets keep in their backyards in case of such eventuality would happen.
In the UK (guns banned) there is a minimal amount of people killed by guns (mostly gangs or criminals attacking each other), ditto Germanny, Japan, Malaysia, heck, even Mexico may be better I think.
In the US life is cheap, thousends of people are killed by guns (in relative terms the US is far above any other country similar in other ways).
Slashdot Mirror
Don't keep the thing on all the time in a small room without ventilation.
There surely will be people with those genes in the general population most of whom will not become 100m runners.
What puts apparts those great athletes is a lifetime devoted to doing a sport. Any body abled person could become a professional athlete, not everybody could win, but it is perfectly feasible that with training any helthy person reaches quite decent sporting standards.
The difference between the champions and other athletes is in general so small that it becomes a statistical irrelevance (in 100m there is a 1 sec difference between the top of the class and the lousiest proper athletes, which is frankly nothing).
People working in big corporations are beginning to do their homework.
I have seen several projects in the last couple of years stopped on their tracks because they were intending to use Windows (in a situation in which it was not the best choice).
Many IT people have gotten away with being lazy for far too long by using WIndows without thinking and evaluating alternatives.
As for desktop users, it is time they start doing the same, your wife is extremely lucky, in my also anecdotal experience people are struggling against their WIndows computers, once they are introduced to the latest Linux or Apple machines, they realize there is another way of doing things, and some people are finding that way is better fo them.
A big manufacturer like Dell throwing their Linux Hat in the ring for real would be great for the industry as a whole (including MS, who could benefit from some healty competition, before they go down the suing your competition way of no return).
Who is imposing contractual restrictions on who when doing deals?
That should give you an idea of where the balance of power is.
It is MS saying to PC makers you can't do this or you can't do that.
PC makers obidiently follow as they are told.
I do not use MS products, but given my encounters with MS documentation packaged with new products, I would be extremely surprised if anywhere it is mentioned what you helpfuly are recommending.
Users of WIndows systems have a very low expectation of how the machine ought to behave, this includes some degree of meddling to make it work.
And as for applications, well, if the underneath OS was fair to all, then applications would just need to follow published APIs and work with the OS manufacturer to make them better. BUt as we know, if you are in direct copetition with MS products, your are at a disadvantage because MS products will share lots of different resources with applications, to the point that it makes them appear faster.
Application designers then have to come around with the kind of tricks you mention in order to boost their performance in an environment that is at best uncooperative and at worst plain hostile.
"However, the appeals court did affirm in part Judge Jackson's ruling on monopolization. The D.C. Circuit remanded the case for consideration of a proper remedy for "drastically altered scope of liability" that the court had upheld, under Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly. The DOJ, now under the administration of U.S. President George W. Bush, announced on September 6, 2001 that it was no longer seeking to break up Microsoft and would instead seek a lesser antitrust penalty."
They were convicted. That is how I interpret the aobve. And certainly they were declare a monopoly. Officialy, as the article above maintains.
Also note that the appeal court did not reject any of the findings, only the behaviour of the judge.
In any multiuser system you can't blame one of the users for the problem detected.
The logs would probe if it was the router's owner who downloaded stuff or some other people.
With that evidence (time, location) police would need to try to find who did actually downloaded stuff.
Look, as long a it does not become illegal to have an open router, you can't blame the owner for any activity going through its hardware.
We are talking about your wirless router that you did not secure in accordance with well publicized standards.
The standard clearly states that if you don't encrypt your connection, well, guess what, every body can connect.
That people without a clue do not get the above is depressing enough, that people technologically savvy press the issue is frankly despiriting.
A WEP protected router is clearly telling you to go away. If you crack it you clearly are contravening the wishes of the owner of the router and should be prosecuted for it (no matter how easy it is to crack the keys).
An unsecured router is clearly saying, by means of the communication protocol, that you are welcome to have a free lunch. It should be none of your concern how mush it costs to your nighbour, he clearly is giving you permission, so it is a non issue to you.
The onus should be in the owners of non secured routers. The protocol is widely known: unsecured means anybody can connect, secured means only people with the key can connect. If you obtain the key by deceit you should be braking the law.
Why is this simple, clear logic, failed to be understood on this website?
What is next? Suing people for connecting to an open ftp server?
So if you do not secure it, why should one need further invitation?
The parent article is an example of why I do so....
He was never armed. I am sure you knew that. ANd also you may know about "pacific resistence".
He would have been horrified at the suggestion of a society where every person is armed.
What he was referring to is to the racist attitudes of the British, not to the love of weapons of Indians.
Not the lack of them in the few civilized oasis in the US that resist such idiocity.
... is not clear to you?
The pro gun lobby and pro-gun nutcases alway cite Switzerland (I am sure most of them could not find it in a map) but conveneintly forget to say that you are not allowed to carry arms in public....
That whatever number of veterans would not act as an organized force, many of them would support whatever the government of the day says and a big amount of them will be in no position or inclination to fight anybody.
Also I don't see those armored thanks and aircrafts, heavy guns, mines and other palafernalia that vets keep in their backyards in case of such eventuality would happen.
And a fucking law that is broken, should be fixed, not followed blindly like if it was the written word of god or something.
By gun shoot.
Each year.
And your country is not a war zone.
If you don't class that as a bloodbath then I don't know how much more blood you need.
So guns would be taken from you.
So instead of such subjective judgment, the only reasonable alternative is to impose restrictions on everybody.
We don't need the majority to be nutters. A big minority of nutters will do.
Check the deaths by gun shoot by 1000 of population and ba ashamed in you are USian.
And you know it, but keep labouring the point ad nauseam.
There is no way wahtsoever that a guy armed with a knife only can put down 30 healthy teenagers or 20somethings.
There is absolute no way of that happening.
What is needed is that you convert that heart felt simphaty into political action.
Something is clearly wrong in the US and their love for guns, but most people there are prepared to do nothing to contain the problem.
We just need to drive the whole affiar underground, that way the immense majority of nutters could not act their derided fantasies.
It works in other countries, I see no reason why it could not work in the US.
In the UK (guns banned) there is a minimal amount of people killed by guns (mostly gangs or criminals attacking each other), ditto Germanny, Japan, Malaysia, heck, even Mexico may be better I think.
In the US life is cheap, thousends of people are killed by guns (in relative terms the US is far above any other country similar in other ways).
What else do I need to know?
In most cases where somebody is stabbed to dead, the victim is attacked simultaneously by several individuals.
In a one to one situation you still have good chances of survival even if you don't have a knife.
... your checks seems to be working wonders.