Yeah, 30 years ago I saw teachers striking too but that isn't happening in WI now. Salary is capped and teachers cannot strike by law. Sick outs are a possibility but you had better not want to retire as a teacher. If you participate and don't have 144 sick days accumulated when you retire health benefits are decimated. My wife's a teacher and what's happening with her union absolutely bewilders me.
You make the piss poor assumption that garcia is allowed to strike. While you may see autoworkers striking you aren't going to see that happening with teachers or air traffic controllers.
Which brings up another point. Who is assuming that an IT union would be permitted to strike? All the government has to determine is that we are vital and then they'll just pass a law saying we can't strike. Without the ability to strike a union means absolutely nothing imnsho.
So in other words the issue isn't that you don't have options, the issue is the only thing this Internet is good for is wanking on/. instead of doing some research and finding a canidate you want to cast a vote for.
Next time you want to bitch about how we only have a "two party" system at least devote a minute or two in front of the mirror.
True, you can always complain, but it weakens your position immensely when you couldn't even be bothered to put your money where your mouth is.
It is not as if an American has to go through compulsory military service or run the risk of getting their tounge cut out and stuffed in a shirt pocket by exercising their right to vote. It's not as if it takes a lot of effort to be aware of the canidates or the issues - especially this time around. And it isn't that hard to get up and actually vote. Need a ride? Call City Hall and they'll hook you up. In another state? Go get a ballot sent to you.
People who are so hyped on exercising their right to free speech just so they can vent vacuous opinions then forgo exercising the one right that gives all those opinions purpose boggles my mind.
Just so we get away from this Webster's crap, when it comes to legal definintions a monopoly does not mean no competition. One part of the definition is that the company is immune to market pressure from competition.
We need a little less www.dictionary.com and a little more West's Business Law I think.
That isn't feasible. The mass majority of users out there are not going to have the time to become security aware. The curve to getting there is too steep and requires devoting too much time. Somehow, systems out there will have to be redone to have a secure foundation and security measures, like patching, will require automation. This is as true for a corporate system as it is for a home system.
My personal opinion is the spammers are using SPF as a legal tactic. They can try to disavow liability if someone accuses them of sending unwanted spam. "Did it have our SPF data? No? It wasn't us." It makes them seem reasonable and staying on the straight and narrow.
It's worse actually. As was pointed out at Groklaw by AllParadox, who actually practiced law instead of playing one on/.:
A headnote is a legal analysis by someone who is probably not connected to the case.....
Headnotes can perfectly contradict the actual findings of the court. <emphasis mine>
And, iirc, SCO did nearly that. They quoted the headnote and got the caselaw wrong. AllParadox put it better than I ever could. This was definitely a "Stupid newbie stunt"
Everybody has requested a jury trial. It's just that at this point and time we really haven't gotten past the discovery phase of the trial. Currently, it is Judges Kimball and Wells making decisions here and that is only because the issues being presented are a matter of law and not of fact. Whatever gets past all these summary judgements and dismissal motions will go before a jury.
Yep. You got that one head on. SCO really can't come up with an expert that will ever come close to trumping Prof. Davis. Who really wants to go rep for rep against this guy defending SCO's inane claims? It would be professional suicide. IBM definitely showed SCO what it means to submit expert testimony. MIT rocket scientists my ass.
I wonder if the Nazgul who sent that declaration to the court started muttering "now I am become Shiva..."
It gets better. The other expert IBM has is Prof. Randall Davis. He goes over the methodology SCO used to determine copied code and tears apart SCO's claims that they need more code from IBM. When I read it I felt like I was witnessing a clusterbomb being dropped on SCO's entire case. It really is a beautiful piece of work and by the end leaves no doubt that the man is worth every penny of the $550/hour fee he charged IBM.
There has got to be a fanatic somewhere. Why as a Taoist would you ever allow yourself to get worked up over a trivial issue like a book title? So the author uses Tao instead of the saying Way. And you don't even know the guy or why he chose the title. Or maybe he didn't. It could have been the publisher which chose the title.
Maybe when you have a little less ego and a bit more Tao in you you can come back and do something Lao Tzu would have appreciated.
"You guys"? WTF? Are you actually so misguided as to think everybody posting here is holding up FOSS development with our little/. debates?
From what I've seen looking at the major FOSS development communities you listed they code and just keep moving on. Nobody is really wasting tons of time going on COLA and spending hours debating whether it should be GNU/Linux or just Linux.
Now the people that are debating this in the IETF? Well that's their job. This stuff needs to get sorted out so the proposed standard can be applied as widely as possible. Considering how deep FOSS is in the email infrastructure I, as a user and administrator, want this debate on whether the proposed changes are compatible or not.
Note: I have not gone into all the gory details of this issue but I did RTFA. So here goes:
OpenBSD did it when they made CARP. Cisco wouldn't play so not only did the OBSD team create a new solution but they created a superior solution. Is there any reason why the FOSS community could not come up with an alternative and try submitting it to the IETF? (I do know that the OBSD developers got stuffed when they tried this but maybe it might work here.)
How in the hell did you get modded insightful for that stunningly simple-minded quip? There are 28 categories of events ranging from gymnastics to sailing (you know that sport with boats.) There are over 202 nations sending 10,500 athletes to compete. The event is televised world-wide whereas most high-school track meets only make a blurb in the local paper. Your nation's prestige doesn't revolve around whether State Finals come off without a hitch.
I believe we're just going to have to agree to disagree on this particuliar issue. You're simply lumping JFETS into a nebulous category of military spending and ignoring my points of why the system is a good investment.
And you are right. You're being overly dramatic. I have no clue as to where this "war with no reason" thing comes from but it has nothing to do with the topic at hand. fwiw, gibbsjoh's biggest fallacy is asserting that JFETS is a way to kill people. JFETS is a simulator. It's not a gun, it's not a nuke, it's not a WoMD. It's a training tool to develop the skills a soldier needs to survive and properly respond to a situation. That he and apparently you wish to assert JFETS is just another way to kill people is flawed. I have more than adequately pointed that out.
As for your "no reason" comment, in regards to JFETS I completely disagree. The fact is how we must address modern military conflict has dramatically changed since the Cold War. The difficulties of creating the multitude of live exercies we face in the 21st century in order to train our troops is probably cost prohibative. JFETS appears from the article to be a cost effective and flexible tool. Again, I've brought this up before and you've chosen to ignore the issue. Whatever.
You're not being realistic. Funding a military is going to happen no matter what. The question is whether the money is well spent, which admittedly it is often not. But in this case I would say that it is. The simulations in the long run will cut down on the expense of live exercises and as I noted above allow for training scenerios that might be unfeasible in normal training sessions.
If the system over time proves cost effective then those savings could be rolled into other programs. Maybe happen, maybe not but at least this system provides an opprotunity for that to happen. Continuing to rely on live exercises, especially as equipment costs more and more, most definately won't.
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah, 30 years ago I saw teachers striking too but that isn't happening in WI now. Salary is capped and teachers cannot strike by law. Sick outs are a possibility but you had better not want to retire as a teacher. If you participate and don't have 144 sick days accumulated when you retire health benefits are decimated. My wife's a teacher and what's happening with her union absolutely bewilders me.
Which brings up another point. Who is assuming that an IT union would be permitted to strike? All the government has to determine is that we are vital and then they'll just pass a law saying we can't strike. Without the ability to strike a union means absolutely nothing imnsho.
Definitely wasn't Genesis' friend.
Next time you want to bitch about how we only have a "two party" system at least devote a minute or two in front of the mirror.
None of the Above. A card carrying member of the Dissent Party.
It is not as if an American has to go through compulsory military service or run the risk of getting their tounge cut out and stuffed in a shirt pocket by exercising their right to vote. It's not as if it takes a lot of effort to be aware of the canidates or the issues - especially this time around. And it isn't that hard to get up and actually vote. Need a ride? Call City Hall and they'll hook you up. In another state? Go get a ballot sent to you.
People who are so hyped on exercising their right to free speech just so they can vent vacuous opinions then forgo exercising the one right that gives all those opinions purpose boggles my mind.
We need a little less www.dictionary.com and a little more West's Business Law I think.
You're assuming that everyone will do the SPF check.
Meesa so horny. Meesa love you long time.
That isn't feasible. The mass majority of users out there are not going to have the time to become security aware. The curve to getting there is too steep and requires devoting too much time. Somehow, systems out there will have to be redone to have a secure foundation and security measures, like patching, will require automation. This is as true for a corporate system as it is for a home system.
As to whether that is the actual case....
it's your own damn fault when you cut your finger.
And, iirc, SCO did nearly that. They quoted the headnote and got the caselaw wrong. AllParadox put it better than I ever could. This was definitely a "Stupid newbie stunt"
Everybody has requested a jury trial. It's just that at this point and time we really haven't gotten past the discovery phase of the trial. Currently, it is Judges Kimball and Wells making decisions here and that is only because the issues being presented are a matter of law and not of fact. Whatever gets past all these summary judgements and dismissal motions will go before a jury.
I wonder if the Nazgul who sent that declaration to the court started muttering "now I am become Shiva..."
It gets better. The other expert IBM has is Prof. Randall Davis. He goes over the methodology SCO used to determine copied code and tears apart SCO's claims that they need more code from IBM. When I read it I felt like I was witnessing a clusterbomb being dropped on SCO's entire case. It really is a beautiful piece of work and by the end leaves no doubt that the man is worth every penny of the $550/hour fee he charged IBM.
Maybe when you have a little less ego and a bit more Tao in you you can come back and do something Lao Tzu would have appreciated.
Laugh at it.
Who saw the end of "Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back" and didn't stand up and cheer? :)
peter303, you must be new here.
From what I've seen looking at the major FOSS development communities you listed they code and just keep moving on. Nobody is really wasting tons of time going on COLA and spending hours debating whether it should be GNU/Linux or just Linux.
Now the people that are debating this in the IETF? Well that's their job. This stuff needs to get sorted out so the proposed standard can be applied as widely as possible. Considering how deep FOSS is in the email infrastructure I, as a user and administrator, want this debate on whether the proposed changes are compatible or not.
OpenBSD did it when they made CARP. Cisco wouldn't play so not only did the OBSD team create a new solution but they created a superior solution. Is there any reason why the FOSS community could not come up with an alternative and try submitting it to the IETF? (I do know that the OBSD developers got stuffed when they tried this but maybe it might work here.)
WTF? You never heard of Economies of Scale?
So how long until a NetHack port is complete? Come on, we all know what's important.
And you are right. You're being overly dramatic. I have no clue as to where this "war with no reason" thing comes from but it has nothing to do with the topic at hand. fwiw, gibbsjoh's biggest fallacy is asserting that JFETS is a way to kill people. JFETS is a simulator. It's not a gun, it's not a nuke, it's not a WoMD. It's a training tool to develop the skills a soldier needs to survive and properly respond to a situation. That he and apparently you wish to assert JFETS is just another way to kill people is flawed. I have more than adequately pointed that out.
As for your "no reason" comment, in regards to JFETS I completely disagree. The fact is how we must address modern military conflict has dramatically changed since the Cold War. The difficulties of creating the multitude of live exercies we face in the 21st century in order to train our troops is probably cost prohibative. JFETS appears from the article to be a cost effective and flexible tool. Again, I've brought this up before and you've chosen to ignore the issue. Whatever.
If the system over time proves cost effective then those savings could be rolled into other programs. Maybe happen, maybe not but at least this system provides an opprotunity for that to happen. Continuing to rely on live exercises, especially as equipment costs more and more, most definately won't.