How about your parents robbed a bank when you were 6. Yeah, you had all of life's luxuries. You even went to Harvard and now you're a successful doctor.
Finally somebody figures out who robbed the bank, which comes as a shock to you. The government shows up, takes all your money, revokes your medical license, and even revokes your degree. Is that right?
We're not talking here about taking back what was wrongfully taken. Immigrants don't "take" anything; they pay rent for where they live, they work for money, etc. Talk about "tough consequences" is a little silly from someone who likely had ancestors along the line somewhere who kept slaves and ought to have been hanged (along with their children, of course) for the atrocities they committed.
Yeah, I can construct a strawman "choices have consequences" example too, but that's not what this is about. The way I see it, and I live in Texas, is that if they rounded up all the illegal immigrants and took them home (impossible anyway, but let's imagine) that the economic strength and quality of life here would be substantially degraded.
I also happen to think that they are people and that we ought not herd them around like cattle. Telling me "that's what the law says, tough" doesn't make sense because I live in a country where the law is formed by the will of the people, not some absolute dictator.
With our immigration law, people who wish to legally migrate to this country are absolutely NOT welcome to. That's why they come in illegally.
There's been a lot of argument about whether the illegal immigrants are good for the economy (some number pay taxes) or bad (some number live off welfare). Of course it's hard to come up with solid numbers because they're undocumented.
In any case, your simplistic view (the law is good, breaking it is bad) fails to account for the punishments we inflict upon those who were dragged into the country illegally by their parents, just to cite one example. The law requires them to move to Mexico -- that's just about as legitimate as a law that requires YOU to work standing on your head.
Sometimes the law doesn't make sense, and sometimes laws that have good intentions result in consequences that are not good. That's why the ACLU is interested in these people.
It's because they are a diverse group that isn't defined by a single stereotype.
Imagine what it would be like if, when you were 6 years old, your parents had moved to the US because back in Mexico they had trouble affording a basic life (food, shelter, etc.) 16 years later, you're 22, you went to school, you speak English, you've got a job and friends and a normal life.
You're still an illegal immigrant, you know, and "breaking the law" every day. You're constantly threatened with the idea that you ought to be shipped "back" to Mexico, even though you don't know anyone there, don't remember it at all, and aren't really that good at speaking Spanish.
Troll, you seem to believe that although everyone breaks laws, breaking immigration law is some kind of unforgivable sin or removes a person's right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. It's really not that big of a thing; they're just living in the "wrong" place.
IBM would appeal the discovery order, as he said. That's the order that requires IBM to come up with every change ever made to AIX code during development.
Personally, I see them as people who are afraid of the idea that the world is a complicated place and that figuring out what is right is hard to do. So they take the easy way out and view it as a place of stark us vs. them, good vs. evil simplicity.
Conviction would be nice. It's harder, I think, to actually seek what is right, and to be afraid that you haven't found it. So to me, anyway, it's easy to not admire their conviction.
1,500,000 miles per hour in feet per second: 2,200,000
I'm not "working with percent", and obviously the second number is nowhere near one fifth of the first. Dividing the first by the second leave me with 0.0022. So 0.002c is correct.
If I wanted to express that as a percentage I would multiply by 100 for 0.22%, or two tenths of one percent.
If you have a design that would actually work and nobody begins work on it, then you've violated your trust with the human race. That's why I don't believe you -- people with real big ideas feel an obligation which you obviously don't.
Yeah, and I have a proof that P=NP as well as an implementation of NP-complete in P, but this Slashdot comment box is too small to contain it.
IANAL but legally it doesn't matter if your employer "owns" the idea unless you are actually under an NDA. If they have a PATENT then it is public knowledge, and there is no copyright protection for machine designs. So I'm willing to bet that you're just a troll.
Separate signons for everything just means that when your wallet is stolen, along with the card where you've written down your 18 different passwords, you're in real trouble. If a password is compromised on a single-signon system you just change it and you're fine.
That sounds brilliant. I need to start a company so I can use those titles.
Want to come work for me as a Peasant I? Minimum wage and no benefits and you can't work more than 20 hours a week until you're promoted to a Peasant II.
Tricon was owned *by* Pepsi once upon a time, but they certainly do not own Pepsi. And they are called "Yum Brands" now. So your information is a little out of date at least.
Heck, if you have a time machine, *nothing* means anything. It's total chaos, up is down, end of the world, mice and elephants living together sort of stuff.
3.5 million of 7 billion is not half of one percent, it's five hundredths of one percent, or 0.05%. One half of one percent of 7 billion would be 35 million people.
Though I do agree that the 1% figure is pretty much wrong.
Yes, that is possible, and I'll tell you how to do it. Though beware, IANACE (I am not a crypto engineer)
Encryption systems with multiple keys can be made by encrypting the text with a secret key K, and then placing K itself at the beginning but encrypted with various keys X, Y, and Z. So if you have any of the keys X, Y, or Z, you can decrypt K and then you can decrypt the text.
Hypothetically it would not be so hard to take our key K, encrypt it with some insecure algorithm, then encrypt *that* with some strong algorithm via key T, and store it in the file. So if you are our semi-trusted party, you'll have key T, and you can obtain a version of K encrypted with an insecure algorithm. By using brute-force you could thus recover the key.
As I recall it's a little more restrictive than that: federally funded research is not allowed to make any use of any stem cell line other than the pre-existing ones. So they also cannot use new lines that were harvested by someone else.
Slashdot Mirror
You're constructing a fairly silly analogy.
How about your parents robbed a bank when you were 6. Yeah, you had all of life's luxuries. You even went to Harvard and now you're a successful doctor.
Finally somebody figures out who robbed the bank, which comes as a shock to you. The government shows up, takes all your money, revokes your medical license, and even revokes your degree. Is that right?
We're not talking here about taking back what was wrongfully taken. Immigrants don't "take" anything; they pay rent for where they live, they work for money, etc. Talk about "tough consequences" is a little silly from someone who likely had ancestors along the line somewhere who kept slaves and ought to have been hanged (along with their children, of course) for the atrocities they committed.
Yeah, I can construct a strawman "choices have consequences" example too, but that's not what this is about. The way I see it, and I live in Texas, is that if they rounded up all the illegal immigrants and took them home (impossible anyway, but let's imagine) that the economic strength and quality of life here would be substantially degraded.
I also happen to think that they are people and that we ought not herd them around like cattle. Telling me "that's what the law says, tough" doesn't make sense because I live in a country where the law is formed by the will of the people, not some absolute dictator.
With our immigration law, people who wish to legally migrate to this country are absolutely NOT welcome to. That's why they come in illegally.
There's been a lot of argument about whether the illegal immigrants are good for the economy (some number pay taxes) or bad (some number live off welfare). Of course it's hard to come up with solid numbers because they're undocumented.
In any case, your simplistic view (the law is good, breaking it is bad) fails to account for the punishments we inflict upon those who were dragged into the country illegally by their parents, just to cite one example. The law requires them to move to Mexico -- that's just about as legitimate as a law that requires YOU to work standing on your head.
Sometimes the law doesn't make sense, and sometimes laws that have good intentions result in consequences that are not good. That's why the ACLU is interested in these people.
But you didn't -- your parents did. We should punish people for what their parents do now?
It's because they are a diverse group that isn't defined by a single stereotype.
Imagine what it would be like if, when you were 6 years old, your parents had moved to the US because back in Mexico they had trouble affording a basic life (food, shelter, etc.) 16 years later, you're 22, you went to school, you speak English, you've got a job and friends and a normal life.
You're still an illegal immigrant, you know, and "breaking the law" every day. You're constantly threatened with the idea that you ought to be shipped "back" to Mexico, even though you don't know anyone there, don't remember it at all, and aren't really that good at speaking Spanish.
Troll, you seem to believe that although everyone breaks laws, breaking immigration law is some kind of unforgivable sin or removes a person's right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. It's really not that big of a thing; they're just living in the "wrong" place.
Yes, we know, but why include that in the product name? I bet X11R6 is older than half of Slashdot.
IBM would appeal the discovery order, as he said. That's the order that requires IBM to come up with every change ever made to AIX code during development.
Personally, I see them as people who are afraid of the idea that the world is a complicated place and that figuring out what is right is hard to do. So they take the easy way out and view it as a place of stark us vs. them, good vs. evil simplicity.
Conviction would be nice. It's harder, I think, to actually seek what is right, and to be afraid that you haven't found it. So to me, anyway, it's easy to not admire their conviction.
Change that to "she doesn't like it" and you're set.
From google:
c in feet per second: 983,571,086
1,500,000 miles per hour in feet per second: 2,200,000
I'm not "working with percent", and obviously the second number is nowhere near one fifth of the first. Dividing the first by the second leave me with 0.0022. So 0.002c is correct.
If I wanted to express that as a percentage I would multiply by 100 for 0.22%, or two tenths of one percent.
If you have a design that would actually work and nobody begins work on it, then you've violated your trust with the human race. That's why I don't believe you -- people with real big ideas feel an obligation which you obviously don't.
In Soviet Russia, BRESTs are low-maintenance!
Yeah, and I have a proof that P=NP as well as an implementation of NP-complete in P, but this Slashdot comment box is too small to contain it.
IANAL but legally it doesn't matter if your employer "owns" the idea unless you are actually under an NDA. If they have a PATENT then it is public knowledge, and there is no copyright protection for machine designs. So I'm willing to bet that you're just a troll.
Energy is measured in gigawatt-hours, not gigawatts per hour. You just want a hyphen, not a forward slash.
http://www.bsa.org
As far as I know it's only the two organizations -- I don't think we have anything against the NCAA.
So really it should be like {RI,MP}AA. Or better yet, {RIA,MPA,BS}A
Maybe we should just abandon "lose" and change the spelling to "looze". Thus loozing, loozed. I think it might help. This "loose" thing is a disease.
Separate signons for everything just means that when your wallet is stolen, along with the card where you've written down your 18 different passwords, you're in real trouble. If a password is compromised on a single-signon system you just change it and you're fine.
That sounds brilliant. I need to start a company so I can use those titles.
Want to come work for me as a Peasant I? Minimum wage and no benefits and you can't work more than 20 hours a week until you're promoted to a Peasant II.
Tricon was owned *by* Pepsi once upon a time, but they certainly do not own Pepsi. And they are called "Yum Brands" now. So your information is a little out of date at least.
Heck, if you have a time machine, *nothing* means anything. It's total chaos, up is down, end of the world, mice and elephants living together sort of stuff.
3.5 million of 7 billion is not half of one percent, it's five hundredths of one percent, or 0.05%. One half of one percent of 7 billion would be 35 million people.
Though I do agree that the 1% figure is pretty much wrong.
You've noticed that "slashdot.org" is a commercial site, right?
Since DES keys are 56 bits, obviously "some people" can't add.
Yes, that is possible, and I'll tell you how to do it. Though beware, IANACE (I am not a crypto engineer)
Encryption systems with multiple keys can be made by encrypting the text with a secret key K, and then placing K itself at the beginning but encrypted with various keys X, Y, and Z. So if you have any of the keys X, Y, or Z, you can decrypt K and then you can decrypt the text.
Hypothetically it would not be so hard to take our key K, encrypt it with some insecure algorithm, then encrypt *that* with some strong algorithm via key T, and store it in the file. So if you are our semi-trusted party, you'll have key T, and you can obtain a version of K encrypted with an insecure algorithm. By using brute-force you could thus recover the key.
As I recall it's a little more restrictive than that: federally funded research is not allowed to make any use of any stem cell line other than the pre-existing ones. So they also cannot use new lines that were harvested by someone else.