I think you left out a little thing called "The Resurrection." It happens to be the most important day of remembrance to the Christians.
Although the resurrection is important, kenosis only refers to Christ's act of humbling himself by the "emptying" of himself and taking on human form; it doesn't refer to the totality of Christ's human life, passion, and resurrection...
"they're running up against the fact that most people buy discreet components that do particular things."
I bet Bill's happy that folks are only interested in discreet components... heck, if what people really wanted were discrete components, his plans for world domination would be screwed!
Perhaps his adherance to faith led to such views? Uncertainty I can imagine would put a large dent in the concept of an omniscient Lord.
It would? AFAIK, the uncertainty principle only points to our inability to ascertain the location and velocity of sub-atomic particles without affecting one or the other.
so, an omniscient God wouldn't be subject to the same limitations that non-omniscient creatures are. Uncertainty, then, would seem to flow more naturally with a belief in a supreme power (or, conversely, in nihilism, but that's another story...)
well, other than the "of the parable" part, which I'm not groking, that last part makes sense.
essentially, he's saying that, by participating in cyberspace (MUD, blog, whatever), you create a reality based on the cyberspace paradigm, but your reality reflects your experience and the identity you've created.
In other words, just like IRL, your reality in cyberspace is based on your perception of yourself and your experiences in your environment.
uhh... investment is gambling! here, though, they're not gambling... they're looking to limit their exposure to loss. if SCO wins, they have a bit of investment in SCO, so they're happy. if SCO loses, their clients' investments in Linux still are valuable, so they're happy. this is just a tool to allow them to limit losses, regardless what happens...
This is an unusual investment for a bank. It's a pure speculative play.
umm... no, it's not speculation; it's a hedge.
as in, "some of our clients have invested in linux; if SCO wins, our clients lose. so, we've invested in SCO, so that we all don't lose big, regardless how it turns out"...
Yeah, well, they'll show the stuff they had to edit out (character development, etc) in the "extra 43 minutes of footage 4-DVD extended set!!!!" that's coming out next November...
* what level of experience does your salary reflect?
* do you require the problems to be solved in a given (set of) language(s)? if so, which?
* do your "programming problems" test competency in syntax? programming paradigms? creative problem-solving skills?
* do you really believe that those who are truly passionate about technology are incompetents? if so, how have you managed to staff previous development positions? isn't it possible that there's a mismatch between job qualifications and salary levels?
in the case of a criminal trial, where the goal of the defense is to establish reasonable doubt, a defense attorney must simply establish that it is possible that a jealous hacker may have framed the defendant. it's quite likely that, if the jury weren't clueful, the defense could skip over all technology issues and raise the question, "couldn't a reasonably clueful jealous hacker have framed my client?"
on the other hand, in a civil case, where the prosecution might attempt to show that the source of the attack was the defendant's computer, a defense attorney would attempt to throw up a technology smoke-screen. this type of defense would simply attempt to counter-act a prosecution's "here's how it was done" argument with a "here's how a 'l33t' hacker could frame such an attack" argument. in this case, a defense attorney could hope to prevail.
so, i don't think that i was confused; instead, i attempted to argue that, in either type of case, a defendant could prevail with one of these type of arguments...
I'm not sure I'd buy that one... in fact, if I were some hacker's defense attorney, I'd sure argue that my client's skills placed him/her squarely in the crosshairs of a jealous rival who wished to do him/her harm by planting a trojan... *and* making sure it led back to him/her!
ahh... aren't conspiracy theories beautiful?
and, it seems clear that your average jury of 12 AOLers will glaze over about five minutes into the heavy tech testimony, thus giving the creative defense attorney more than enough room to sell "reasonable doubt", or at least to befuddle anyone trying to weigh a "preponderance of evidence"...
From Gamespy's email: "In contrast to simply advising GameSpy of these vulnerabilities, by publishing this software to the world at large
you are clearly facilitating the intentional crashing of GameSpy's server by
others".
so, incredulously, he asks whether bug research is a criminal act and bug researchers criminals.
Unfortunately, the answer today in America is a simple "yes". that is, unless you feel like researching and then hoarding your findings.
These carts would likely be connected wirelessly to a central PC / server in the main office, and could be simple dumb terminals for whatever messages they'd send out. It'd be simple to make them location-specific, too... strategically locate your access points, and use that info to send specific product info to the unit.
now then... who needs to insert a virus? there'd be one vanilla comm standard, and likely, store personnel wouldn't have either the skills or motivation to change whatever out-of-the-box security comes with the system.
someone with a PDA could just walk around, and if they have a program that decrypts cart transmissions, it could simply send commands to carts it sees transmitting.
i agree with the other posters... it'd simply be aggravating: bombing folks with a constant stream of beeps; sending repeated reminders ("buy Fruit Loops... buy Fruit Loops... buy Fruit Loops...").
sadly, it'd probably pretty easy to hack, if one had the inclination...
What? This is the first time you've seen such a thing? Time to wake up and smell the victory gin...
At many of my (previous) employers, there are political action committees (PACs) to which management is "strongly" encouraged to donate, and exempt employees are recommended to donate.
among their usual actions are a election-time list of candidates whose views on industry-relevant issues are favorable to the company.
U.S. v Microsoft (draw -- Bush administration lost interest)
Gore v Florida (lost)
Napster (lost)
You know, though, where's the evidence that he's turned "to the dark side"? He's a lawyer -- he's simply a paid advocate. The fact that you're against M$, for Gore, and for Napster doesn't imply that he is, as well...
yes, but compile just means "is syntactically correct". Legal code is syntactically correct (generally speaking, right?).
If you were trying to imply a relationship between successful compilation and semantic correctness, well... it just doesn't grok, either in computer code or legal code...
how many folks go to a record store to pick up CD-Rs for data? Sure, it's possible, but I'm thinking that most folks go to a store that sells computers, etc, for their CD-Rs.
I'm guessing that most think, "OK, I'm going to burn a CD on my PC... time to pick up some blanks at Best Buy." Just a mindset thing, ya know?
One parting thought... if they're looking at Best Buy and Circuit City sales, though, given that they also sell recorded CDs, well then, that's a whole 'nother thing. They might as well include sales figures of floppies, backup tapes, CompactFlash, etc...
...it would seem that way, since the article (you do RTFA, don't you?) implies that the tax would be felt on top of sales taxes, and could be applied against lease payments or depreciation.
now, then... what exactly is "LAN equipment"?
cabling?
would any PC count? would there be exceptions for stand-alone PCs?
how about wireless LANs?
i guess any hand-held with wireless capabilities would be subject, too, then, huh?
this would be nightmarish for the average consumer to figure out!
once they see how onerous this would be, I suspect that corporate interests would put the kibosh on this...
Slashdot Mirror
Although the resurrection is important, kenosis only refers to Christ's act of humbling himself by the "emptying" of himself and taking on human form; it doesn't refer to the totality of Christ's human life, passion, and resurrection...
I bet Bill's happy that folks are only interested in discreet components... heck, if what people really wanted were discrete components, his plans for world domination would be screwed!
Perhaps his adherance to faith led to such views? Uncertainty I can imagine would put a large dent in the concept of an omniscient Lord.
It would? AFAIK, the uncertainty principle only points to our inability to ascertain the location and velocity of sub-atomic particles without affecting one or the other.
so, an omniscient God wouldn't be subject to the same limitations that non-omniscient creatures are. Uncertainty, then, would seem to flow more naturally with a belief in a supreme power (or, conversely, in nihilism, but that's another story...)
essentially, he's saying that, by participating in cyberspace (MUD, blog, whatever), you create a reality based on the cyberspace paradigm, but your reality reflects your experience and the identity you've created.
In other words, just like IRL, your reality in cyberspace is based on your perception of yourself and your experiences in your environment.
umm... no, it's not speculation; it's a hedge.
as in, "some of our clients have invested in linux; if SCO wins, our clients lose. so, we've invested in SCO, so that we all don't lose big, regardless how it turns out" ...
Yeah, well, they'll show the stuff they had to edit out (character development, etc) in the "extra 43 minutes of footage 4-DVD extended set!!!!" that's coming out next November...
MC,
a couple of questions for you:
* what level of experience does your salary reflect?
* do you require the problems to be solved in a given (set of) language(s)? if so, which?
* do your "programming problems" test competency in syntax? programming paradigms? creative problem-solving skills?
* do you really believe that those who are truly passionate about technology are incompetents? if so, how have you managed to staff previous development positions? isn't it possible that there's a mismatch between job qualifications and salary levels?
Just curious...
in the case of a criminal trial, where the goal of the defense is to establish reasonable doubt, a defense attorney must simply establish that it is possible that a jealous hacker may have framed the defendant. it's quite likely that, if the jury weren't clueful, the defense could skip over all technology issues and raise the question, "couldn't a reasonably clueful jealous hacker have framed my client?"
on the other hand, in a civil case, where the prosecution might attempt to show that the source of the attack was the defendant's computer, a defense attorney would attempt to throw up a technology smoke-screen. this type of defense would simply attempt to counter-act a prosecution's "here's how it was done" argument with a "here's how a 'l33t' hacker could frame such an attack" argument. in this case, a defense attorney could hope to prevail.
so, i don't think that i was confused; instead, i attempted to argue that, in either type of case, a defendant could prevail with one of these type of arguments...
ahh... aren't conspiracy theories beautiful?
and, it seems clear that your average jury of 12 AOLers will glaze over about five minutes into the heavy tech testimony, thus giving the creative defense attorney more than enough room to sell "reasonable doubt", or at least to befuddle anyone trying to weigh a "preponderance of evidence" ...
so, incredulously, he asks whether bug research is a criminal act and bug researchers criminals.
Unfortunately, the answer today in America is a simple "yes". that is, unless you feel like researching and then hoarding your findings.
(yes, you were in the armed services; very nice. now put down those scissors and go play.)
now then... who needs to insert a virus? there'd be one vanilla comm standard, and likely, store personnel wouldn't have either the skills or motivation to change whatever out-of-the-box security comes with the system.
someone with a PDA could just walk around, and if they have a program that decrypts cart transmissions, it could simply send commands to carts it sees transmitting.
i agree with the other posters ... it'd simply be aggravating: bombing folks with a constant stream of beeps; sending repeated reminders ("buy Fruit Loops... buy Fruit Loops... buy Fruit Loops...").
sadly, it'd probably pretty easy to hack, if one had the inclination...
At many of my (previous) employers, there are political action committees (PACs) to which management is "strongly" encouraged to donate, and exempt employees are recommended to donate.
among their usual actions are a election-time list of candidates whose views on industry-relevant issues are favorable to the company.
anyway, the study isn't yet complete, nor the paper written (although the peer review will probably be the most entertaining part of the show)..
whereas the OP took Boies to task for aligning with a "great enemy", i'm simply pointing out that he's in it for the bucks, not for the cause...
U.S. v Microsoft (draw -- Bush administration lost interest)
Gore v Florida (lost)
Napster (lost)
You know, though, where's the evidence that he's turned "to the dark side"? He's a lawyer -- he's simply a paid advocate. The fact that you're against M$, for Gore, and for Napster doesn't imply that he is, as well...
If you were trying to imply a relationship between successful compilation and semantic correctness, well ... it just doesn't grok, either in computer code or legal code...
Well, yeah, but if you can't stop your own member organizations from defrauding kids, why do you think the gub'mint will do any better?
Oh... you want us to think you're talking about Kazaa... riiiiiiightttttttt.
how many folks go to a record store to pick up CD-Rs for data? Sure, it's possible, but I'm thinking that most folks go to a store that sells computers, etc, for their CD-Rs.
I'm guessing that most think, "OK, I'm going to burn a CD on my PC ... time to pick up some blanks at Best Buy." Just a mindset thing, ya know?
One parting thought ... if they're looking at Best Buy and Circuit City sales, though, given that they also sell recorded CDs, well then, that's a whole 'nother thing. They might as well include sales figures of floppies, backup tapes, CompactFlash, etc...
1. Yes
2. No
3. Mu
now, then ... what exactly is "LAN equipment"?
cabling?
would any PC count? would there be exceptions for stand-alone PCs?
how about wireless LANs?
i guess any hand-held with wireless capabilities would be subject, too, then, huh?
this would be nightmarish for the average consumer to figure out!
once they see how onerous this would be, I suspect that corporate interests would put the kibosh on this...
wow... first time I've ever seen the Bene Gesserit Litany against Fear written in 1337 ...