And equally important, to me: why is anyone actually defending this potential life-ruiner? Why don't the cops, prosecutors, and judges want to switch to another brand without the same tainted reputation? I would think that the goal of a prosecutor, in particular, is to get convictions and not advocate one specific brand of test equipment.
In all 50 states, refusal to take a breathalyzer at the police station will result in a 1 year(minimum) suspension of your drivers license.
I've heard that refusal to take the breathalyzer is a civil offense, while a DUI is a criminal offense, and the penalty for the latter is always greater than for the former. The consequent advice was to refuse a breathalyzer if you know you'd fail so that you only get the civil penalties.
Not being in the habit of driving drunk, I haven't actually looked into it. Anyone know if there's any truth in that theory?
the public puts very little value on browser speed. Those spending their resources optimizing for it rather than other features get few users as a result.
Oh, but they do! They just might not realize it yet. I didn't think Safari 3 was particularly slow until I installed the 4 beta, and now I'd never go back. I didn't know how much sluggishness was caused by slow scripting.
why would you do that? Did you keep the deepfreeze? God, man, why?
Well, a younger and more naive me thought that I could just blast it out with a powerwasher. For those contemplating similar projects: give up. Seriously. It can't be done. If my wife and I can't scrub something clean, it's uncleanable.
Thinks tried and abandoned:
Bleach (by the gallon)
The power washer
Comet
Brillo pads
Pounds of baking soda
Pounds of activated charcoal
Replacing the seals
Disassembly, cleaning, and reassembly
We eventually resorted to selling it to my cheap friend Curtis. There's nothing he won't tolerate for a bargain.
I had a similar experience when one of my kids unplugged the deep freeze where we'd stored a quarter hog that we'd gotten as a present, and no one noticed for about 6 months. One day I wondered why there were so many flies around the back of the garage, opened the deep freeze, and instantly puked. It wasn't a matter of "being tough" or "strong stomached"; something raced from my olfactory nerves to the ancient, reptilian part of my brain which immediately issued the "purge upper GI tract" interrupt.
It was horrible. I ended up painting my nose and upper lip with Vick's Vapor Rub, tying two bandanas and a sweatshirt around my face, and shoveling out the re-frozen pigslush with a snowshovel. Neighbors from down the block were coming outside to find the cause of the stench.
My impression of most Apple users is that they want not to use Microsoft products and do hide inside an elitist little club where there is no need for most of them to be concerned about technical issues.
I'm typing this on a Mac that was practically given to me. I like it at home because I come back from work worn out from wrangling Unix servers all day. I use my EeePC with Ubuntu more, honestly, but this is a nice desktop when the occasion calls for one.
My wife has an iMac because she thinks it's cute and easy to use.
I just gave my mom an older iMac because she didn't have a computer and I don't want to deal with the support hassles of a PC.
So, from my immediate circle of Mac users, I find a Unix sysadmin and two computer neophytes who couldn't care less about impressing anyone else. It sounds like your real issue is with vocal advocates, and you just don't notice the ones speaking in favor of your chosen platforms.
Last time I saw McWiFi, it was Windows only and needed some sort of login. I run Linux so no McWiFi for me...
Really? Last time I saw it, it was wide open. The time before that, I had to open Safari on my iTouch, click "I Agree", then run my other applications.
I think every major version is a service pack, except Apple charges $150 for it, and changes the API enough that you can't run new software. I wanted to run XCode on my 10.4 laptop, so I had to go buy a 10.5 upgrade, even though it didn't have any new features I actually cared about.
You made that up. First, Leopard was $129 - not $150 - from launch day. Second, 10.4 shipped with Xcode. Either you don't really own a Mac, you chose to upgrade to the 10.5 version of Xcode for a specific reason and got what you paid for, or you're seriously confused.
I realize I can throttle the video encoding to a single core, but I'm just using that as an example... if all apps start using all cores, aren't we right back where we started, just going a little faster? I love being able to do so much at once...
"nice" (or the equivalent on your OS) is your friend. You paid for all of those cores, right? Might as well use them!
I don't see them as being hypocritical for allowing their own ads given the tremendous service(which increases safety while speeding up browsing) they provide for free.
What about the tremendous service the other sites provide for free? I let sites show me advertising in exchange for giving me free content, because I think that's a better deal than having to pay for it directly. I don't use an ad blocker, and I haven't even disabled my Slashdot ads (although I could probably make the case that I've actually earned that right on this specific forum).
NoScript doesn't provide more of a service than the content-generating sites you're visiting. If someone makes their ads more obnoxious than you can tolerate, then don't go back there.
Then you're not developing free (gratis) software. You are developing paid-for software that has one paying customer (your boss) who decided others can also have it (gratis).
That's a meaninglessly stupid distinction. All work is paid for in some way, whether it be by selling it or having it sponsored by an employer or even done for free on a PC donated by a charity. At some level, someone is investing the resources (i.e. paying) for the work to get done.
I can't name a single piece of gratis software by your standard. Linux sure isn't, and neither is any major program I run on it.
The problem with free (gratis) is that it doesn't pay the bills for the developer. I'm not talking about being greedy, but accessories like kids, spouse and house come in handy in winter:-)
News to me. My boss lets me release my work projects as Free Software because they're not related to our business (i.e., we need their functionality but only as a means to an end) and we're not set up to handle software sales or support. If we're not going to make money off it, and someone else could use it, then why not? We've gotten bug reports and feature requests that made it work better, so we're actually better off for having given it away.
I think you'll find that the vast majority of FOSS comes from similar situations.
I realize that most of the slashdot crowd thinks having to do everything from the command line based on a man page is a good thing, but for the rest of us it stopped being cool when we got out of school and had to get a job where they expected us to actually get shit done and not sit around all day with our thumbs up our asses playing with Linux.
That's cute. In response, 99% of Linux users would've used their package manager to install the equivalent and all its dependencies, and the other 1% would've downloaded the source to deal with it themselves (because someone has to make the packages, right)?
So let's boil down your argument to: "I bet people using a different computer system than mine like to do things a dumb way! I'm smart! Har-har-har!"
Slashdot Mirror
And equally important, to me: why is anyone actually defending this potential life-ruiner? Why don't the cops, prosecutors, and judges want to switch to another brand without the same tainted reputation? I would think that the goal of a prosecutor, in particular, is to get convictions and not advocate one specific brand of test equipment.
In all 50 states, refusal to take a breathalyzer at the police station will result in a 1 year(minimum) suspension of your drivers license.
I've heard that refusal to take the breathalyzer is a civil offense, while a DUI is a criminal offense, and the penalty for the latter is always greater than for the former. The consequent advice was to refuse a breathalyzer if you know you'd fail so that you only get the civil penalties.
Not being in the habit of driving drunk, I haven't actually looked into it. Anyone know if there's any truth in that theory?
Sorry to cut it to you, but NAT is here to stay. As a security paradigm, there's no surface attack to a user's PC that isn't even visible.
If only you could devise some kind of wall between your machine and the fiery flames that didn't require NAT, but alas, such is merely dreaming.
besides, all of that cocaine in the air has to pass through the scrubbers
Awesome! I didn't even think about that when I wrote the original post! Honest!
Wow, that's literally what we did. "Hey, Internet's broken. Walk?", and we went outside and got a little sun and fresh air. Thanks, Google!
Giant airscrubbers on every block, faithfully tended by the loyal.
the public puts very little value on browser speed. Those spending their resources optimizing for it rather than other features get few users as a result.
Oh, but they do! They just might not realize it yet. I didn't think Safari 3 was particularly slow until I installed the 4 beta, and now I'd never go back. I didn't know how much sluggishness was caused by slow scripting.
No one uses flash drives at work.
We do, because it's easier and less error-prone than asking our customers to send us certain data on burned CDs.
why would you do that? Did you keep the deepfreeze? God, man, why?
Well, a younger and more naive me thought that I could just blast it out with a powerwasher. For those contemplating similar projects: give up. Seriously. It can't be done. If my wife and I can't scrub something clean, it's uncleanable.
Thinks tried and abandoned:
We eventually resorted to selling it to my cheap friend Curtis. There's nothing he won't tolerate for a bargain.
I had a similar experience when one of my kids unplugged the deep freeze where we'd stored a quarter hog that we'd gotten as a present, and no one noticed for about 6 months. One day I wondered why there were so many flies around the back of the garage, opened the deep freeze, and instantly puked. It wasn't a matter of "being tough" or "strong stomached"; something raced from my olfactory nerves to the ancient, reptilian part of my brain which immediately issued the "purge upper GI tract" interrupt.
It was horrible. I ended up painting my nose and upper lip with Vick's Vapor Rub, tying two bandanas and a sweatshirt around my face, and shoveling out the re-frozen pigslush with a snowshovel. Neighbors from down the block were coming outside to find the cause of the stench.
My impression of most Apple users is that they want not to use Microsoft products and do hide inside an elitist little club where there is no need for most of them to be concerned about technical issues.
I'm typing this on a Mac that was practically given to me. I like it at home because I come back from work worn out from wrangling Unix servers all day. I use my EeePC with Ubuntu more, honestly, but this is a nice desktop when the occasion calls for one.
My wife has an iMac because she thinks it's cute and easy to use.
I just gave my mom an older iMac because she didn't have a computer and I don't want to deal with the support hassles of a PC.
So, from my immediate circle of Mac users, I find a Unix sysadmin and two computer neophytes who couldn't care less about impressing anyone else. It sounds like your real issue is with vocal advocates, and you just don't notice the ones speaking in favor of your chosen platforms.
Weird. The only times I've used coffee shop Wi-Fi were when I was at Barnes and Noble and wanted to get some book reviews before buying.
Last time I saw McWiFi, it was Windows only and needed some sort of login. I run Linux so no McWiFi for me...
Really? Last time I saw it, it was wide open. The time before that, I had to open Safari on my iTouch, click "I Agree", then run my other applications.
Really? Your friend with a PhD in food likes to cook for herself? I would not have guessed as much.
I think every major version is a service pack, except Apple charges $150 for it, and changes the API enough that you can't run new software. I wanted to run XCode on my 10.4 laptop, so I had to go buy a 10.5 upgrade, even though it didn't have any new features I actually cared about.
You made that up. First, Leopard was $129 - not $150 - from launch day. Second, 10.4 shipped with Xcode. Either you don't really own a Mac, you chose to upgrade to the 10.5 version of Xcode for a specific reason and got what you paid for, or you're seriously confused.
Typed on Kubuntu, so don't try the "fanboy" card.
I realize I can throttle the video encoding to a single core, but I'm just using that as an example... if all apps start using all cores, aren't we right back where we started, just going a little faster? I love being able to do so much at once...
"nice" (or the equivalent on your OS) is your friend. You paid for all of those cores, right? Might as well use them!
I did too, but I chose not to. I've gotten a lot out of Slashdot over the years, and if they make a few clams showing me ads, then more power to them.
The first time you get infected by some malware in an advertisement that was put onto an ad network by a malicious jackass, you'll change your tune.
No doubt. I'll start whistling dixie and wonder who the hell wrote malware that targets Konqueror on FreeBSD/amd64.
I had the same reaction. I'm much less likely to turn off or block the advertising since they're so nice about it.
I don't see them as being hypocritical for allowing their own ads given the tremendous service(which increases safety while speeding up browsing) they provide for free.
What about the tremendous service the other sites provide for free? I let sites show me advertising in exchange for giving me free content, because I think that's a better deal than having to pay for it directly. I don't use an ad blocker, and I haven't even disabled my Slashdot ads (although I could probably make the case that I've actually earned that right on this specific forum).
NoScript doesn't provide more of a service than the content-generating sites you're visiting. If someone makes their ads more obnoxious than you can tolerate, then don't go back there.
Yet another claim that is not supported by anything.
As opposed to your well-supported and not-wholly-anecdotal claims.
Then you're not developing free (gratis) software. You are developing paid-for software that has one paying customer (your boss) who decided others can also have it (gratis).
That's a meaninglessly stupid distinction. All work is paid for in some way, whether it be by selling it or having it sponsored by an employer or even done for free on a PC donated by a charity. At some level, someone is investing the resources (i.e. paying) for the work to get done.
I can't name a single piece of gratis software by your standard. Linux sure isn't, and neither is any major program I run on it.
The problem with free (gratis) is that it doesn't pay the bills for the developer. I'm not talking about being greedy, but accessories like kids, spouse and house come in handy in winter :-)
News to me. My boss lets me release my work projects as Free Software because they're not related to our business (i.e., we need their functionality but only as a means to an end) and we're not set up to handle software sales or support. If we're not going to make money off it, and someone else could use it, then why not? We've gotten bug reports and feature requests that made it work better, so we're actually better off for having given it away.
I think you'll find that the vast majority of FOSS comes from similar situations.
I realize that most of the slashdot crowd thinks having to do everything from the command line based on a man page is a good thing, but for the rest of us it stopped being cool when we got out of school and had to get a job where they expected us to actually get shit done and not sit around all day with our thumbs up our asses playing with Linux.
That's cute. In response, 99% of Linux users would've used their package manager to install the equivalent and all its dependencies, and the other 1% would've downloaded the source to deal with it themselves (because someone has to make the packages, right)?
So let's boil down your argument to: "I bet people using a different computer system than mine like to do things a dumb way! I'm smart! Har-har-har!"
By that definition, all crypto functions are hash functions. Hint: hashes are typically considered to be one-way and fixed length.