More from the interview with Deputy Secretary of Defense Robert O. Work:
"We've developed a wide array of cybermunitions that fill various roles in our Comprehensive Cybercombat Arsenal (CCA). We can drop cyberbombs that selectively destroy the enemy's Information Superhighways and Network Bridges. We can keep out hostile cyberforces by putting up a very tall firewall and, if need be, surrounding the perimeter with cyberexplosive charges--our Minecraft is very strong. "
The Deputy Secretary leaned in conspiratorially, "Our most powerful cyberbombs can even level entire GeoCities."
He raised his eyebrows, nodded once, and finally leaned back in his chair, folding his arms with what can only be described as supreme confidence.
**Thank you, people of the Jewsish faith, for giving the Unites States its emergency services telephone number! It is much easier to use than having to know the number for the local police department everywhere you go!!**
Dig your detailed posts in this thread, and your points are well taken. However, is it so distasteful for White Guy [human] to be a big part of saving the day when White Guys [humans] are what the day needs saving from?
On one hand, it's a very common storytelling trope that the underdogs need a member of the other side fighting alongside them to truth the tide from "Oh shit" to "Maybe we can win this." This trope is echoed in, but is much broader than, the racial/Pocahontas thing.
It's the sympathizer, spy, defector, disenchanted scientist, good-hearted commander who just saw his side do The Unthinkable, reprogrammed Terminator, Senator helping the little guy navigate Big Politics, sentient program helping humanity against the machines, evil Jedi who sees his son get his ass kicked and has an epiphany, etc etc. The Na'vi weren't getting it done against a more advanced alien invading force, so it's not at all implausible that they needed some help from a guy who knew the inside baseball of that invading force.
On the other hand, you have plenty of historical examples of native forces doing just fine against interlopers, quite on their own without help from an interloper-insider (which is less common in real life than in stories anyway). However, this would be much more challenging to adapt into a movie-length story anything like the one Cameron wanted to tell in Avatar. It's just missing a lot of the built-in hooks for character development, plot inflection, and audience self-examination that come along with the insider trope.
This is an intriguing new submission strategy. Buff your word count, source an additional "authority," and go meta in one fell swoop. The best part is, "at least one Slashdot user" can support any point you'd care to make.
". . . providing a possible explanation for the anomalous gamma ray bursts. It should be noted, however, that at least one Slashdot user believes that all astrophysical phenomena can be explained by filaments of mysterious, electrically charged plasma."
". . . forensic technique to determine that the papers did indeed belong to Abraham Lincoln, who has been described by at least one Slashdot user as a 'fukin libtard SJW.'"
Really? Are you absolutely sure that those peer-reviewed papers didn't just have "global climate change" or "global warming" as keywords? Because that's how C13 actually selected their sample.
I'm reminded of a recent/. uproar about a paper that explored climate change from a global feminist perspective or some such.**
Surely we would work ourselves into Yet Another Uproar if a study of scientific consensus amongst climatologists didn't bother to screen out the feminism paper, an article on Hollywood depictions of AGW, a linguistic study of the evolving terminology of the climate change debate...
**FWIW that piece turned out to be much more reasonable than the farcical eye-roller people were trying to make it out to be.
Somewhere between 90 and 100% of/.ers are in agreement that this should be fun.
A recent meta-study concludes that the remaining 0-10% are actually correct in believing this will be a fairly shitty time, but are being silenced by a global cabal of carefree internet commenters who just want to have fun.
Who said anything about Obama? Moreover, who said anything about it being "cool" that the Obama administration has carried out extrajudicial killings (I'm assuming you mean "of American citizens", or maybe you are opposed to all use of lethal force by remote actors, I can't tell).
It's like the default tactic is to reframe every political discussion in terms of how terrible $hated_person in $opposing_party is, regardless of whether it's relevant or makes any sense. By all means, though, go on violently shaking that strawman with a picture of Obama's face taped to it. I look like a real idiot when you do that.
While you're busy with our scarecrow friend, I'd like to point out that understanding Trump is an objectively bad choice for president doesn't require shoehorning in any partisan baggage. You can grok this even if you:
- Think Obama is a bum
- Think Obama is great
- Hated George Bush
- Thought George Bush did a good job
- Think the government and everyone running it ought to adhere to strict, traditional Christian values
- Are a nihilist atheist socialist relativist
- Despise systemd
- Wrote systemd
- Are currently too drunk to spell your own name
The parts where you say "Translate" are, at least, positions. Some of your rebuttals evidence a fundamental misapprehension of economics, business, and geopolitics, but they are nonetheless positions on which we can differ.
The parts you call "Counter" are... not even? For example, Trump talking shit about $minorityGroup is not countered nor even distracted from by alluding to Guantanamo Bay, torture, or CIA meddling in foreign governments.
Even ignoring that what you're arguing there bears no resemblance to what I said, Trump is cool with torture, and wants to fill Gitmo back up. Translate: Hell yeah, man! Let's peel the skin off those jihadi bastards!
(I kid!!)
I think the reason so many CEO's attack Trump specifically is because he's not bought and paid for. They don't have him in their pocket, so there's no telling what he'd do as president. He's a wild card. Many people assume he'd "make America great again" but most likely he'd just do whatever got him a lot of news and made him popular.
No need to attribute to plutocratic machinations that which can be adequately explained by logic.
You're spot on about Trump being an unpredictable loose cannon. Large, established businesses and financial markets abhor precisely the kind of chaos Donald Trump promises to bring to the White House.
Say you run a business or manage investments. You'd like to have at least some vague idea of how things are going to go over the next week, month, quarter, year, and so on, so you can make somewhat-informed decisions about market conditions, raw materials, domestic and global trade conditions, capital outlays, etc.
So Donald Trump is POTUS. You wake up in the morning, and legitimately wonder if today President Trump is going to:
- Begin a campaign of mass deportations;
- Decide we shake down Mexico for billions of dollars and divert significant steel and cement production to build a big ass wall;
- Decide to cut an entire federal agency;
- Decide to end a major work visa program;
- Be totally cool with, or maybe start a war over, Putin's latest incursion into Eastern Europe;
- Simultaneously shit on the tourism industry and the Constitution by announcing an entire religion is forbidden from entering the country;
- Say some offhanded ridiculous thing that stirs up outrage/protest here or abroad;
- Say some offhanded ridiculous thing that makes it harder for people in $your_industry to do business here or abroad;
- Say something cute about [minorities/women/Muslims/poor people/some other group he thinks are 'total losers"] that paints America and American businesses in a bad light;
- Embarrass the country; act like running the country is a reality TV show;
- Try to shout over, or interfere with, or shut down a media outlet that's giving him problems;
- Refuse to raise the debt ceiling and/or let us default on some obligations;
- Cause worldwide condemnation and mutiny by ordering our armed forces to kill terrorists' family members;
- Pull troops out of Japan and South Korea and try to hand them nukes to make up for it;
- Start a WWIII-sized trade war;
- Start actual WWIII.
Regardless of what kind of job he's done running his own private sector interests, his unpredictability and volatility (a source of personal pride for him) would cause perpetual fear and chaos in the global economy. So it makes sense than just about any large corporation would look at that and say, "No thanks."
Q: "Help! Windows 7 just crashed and it gave me this QR code, now what?"
A: "That is your Microsoft Support link. It takes you to the Microsoft Store and allows you to purchase Windows 10. Thanks for giving us your cellphone info and good day."
If you have to ask, you should first look it up, then ask an informed question
One of the reasons why I come here is to be exposed to tech that I haven't seen before. See something that you're not familiar with? Look it up!
Yes, it is reasonable, in general, to expect people to Google easy-to-find information.
Yes, it is also reasonable to expect a news summary (anywhere) to give at least a cursory explanation of abbreviations, technical terms, or made up words with which a substantial portion of the readership will be unfamiliar.
It's just good policy in writing: don't fight human nature. People skimming a summary, even smart, technically minded people who are Google search ninjas, don't want to have to go traipsing off somewhere else to investigate why they should even be reading the summary in the first place.
It need not take a lot of space, either. Examples:
"Microsoft today announced that Zazzlebazzle, a tool for dynamically replacing code comments with emojis, is now available for free for every Visual Studio user."
"Microsoft today announced that Sprug, a responsive framework for synergizing cloud competencies, is now available for free for every Visual Studio user."
"Microsoft today announced that ^F+7d#, a popular object-disoriented programming language, is now available for free for every Visual Studio user."
Note that this is audience-specific--if you're writing for/., you shouldn't have to say "... encryption, which is the process of encoding messages or information in such a way that only authorized parties can read it..." But this one, yeah, they could've spent 7 words to fill in the uninformed about what a Xamarin is.
> YOU HEAD WEST AND ENCOUNTER [[STRANGER IN A VAN]].
> [[STRANGER IN A VAN]] OFFERS YOU [[UNIDENTIFIED CANDY]]. WHAT WILL YOU DO?
> YOU ACCEPT [[UNIDENTIFIED CANDY]] FROM [[STRANGER IN A VAN]].
> YOU CONSUME [[UNIDENTIFIED CANDY]].
> . . . . ..
> UNFORTUNATELY, [[UNIDENTIFIED CANDY]] TURNS OUT TO BE A [[MACADAMIA PLAGUE BAR]]. YOU CONTRACT [[THE PLAGUE]] AND DIE A GRUESOME DEATH.
> GAME OVER.
makes the old systems obsolete, but impossible to replace
No. It may be (difficult | expensive | unprofitable | complex | a pain in the ass | a (herculean | sisyphean | Korean | Crimean | many eon | diahrrea'in) task), perhaps.
They used their frickin laser beams to tunnel into the plumbing system. Had to cut through a lot of red tape to throw down the gauntlet and go the extra mile like this, but they really pulled into the fast lane and hit a home run here. I mean sharks in the toilet! Checkmate!
Slashdot Mirror
More from the interview with Deputy Secretary of Defense Robert O. Work:
"We've developed a wide array of cybermunitions that fill various roles in our Comprehensive Cybercombat Arsenal (CCA). We can drop cyberbombs that selectively destroy the enemy's Information Superhighways and Network Bridges. We can keep out hostile cyberforces by putting up a very tall firewall and, if need be, surrounding the perimeter with cyberexplosive charges--our Minecraft is very strong. "
The Deputy Secretary leaned in conspiratorially, "Our most powerful cyberbombs can even level entire GeoCities."
He raised his eyebrows, nodded once, and finally leaned back in his chair, folding his arms with what can only be described as supreme confidence.
Well I'll be damned, I had no idea Jews did 911.
**Thank you, people of the Jewsish faith, for giving the Unites States its emergency services telephone number! It is much easier to use than having to know the number for the local police department everywhere you go!!**
Mod jewsdid911 +1 Informative, pls.
Ah the Windows tagline that never was. Apparently it tested poorly in the scientific computing community, and with everyone else.
Dig your detailed posts in this thread, and your points are well taken. However, is it so distasteful for White Guy [human] to be a big part of saving the day when White Guys [humans] are what the day needs saving from?
On one hand, it's a very common storytelling trope that the underdogs need a member of the other side fighting alongside them to truth the tide from "Oh shit" to "Maybe we can win this." This trope is echoed in, but is much broader than, the racial/Pocahontas thing.
It's the sympathizer, spy, defector, disenchanted scientist, good-hearted commander who just saw his side do The Unthinkable, reprogrammed Terminator, Senator helping the little guy navigate Big Politics, sentient program helping humanity against the machines, evil Jedi who sees his son get his ass kicked and has an epiphany, etc etc. The Na'vi weren't getting it done against a more advanced alien invading force, so it's not at all implausible that they needed some help from a guy who knew the inside baseball of that invading force.
On the other hand, you have plenty of historical examples of native forces doing just fine against interlopers, quite on their own without help from an interloper-insider (which is less common in real life than in stories anyway). However, this would be much more challenging to adapt into a movie-length story anything like the one Cameron wanted to tell in Avatar. It's just missing a lot of the built-in hooks for character development, plot inflection, and audience self-examination that come along with the insider trope.
This is an intriguing new submission strategy. Buff your word count, source an additional "authority," and go meta in one fell swoop. The best part is, "at least one Slashdot user" can support any point you'd care to make.
". . . providing a possible explanation for the anomalous gamma ray bursts. It should be noted, however, that at least one Slashdot user believes that all astrophysical phenomena can be explained by filaments of mysterious, electrically charged plasma."
". . . forensic technique to determine that the papers did indeed belong to Abraham Lincoln, who has been described by at least one Slashdot user as a 'fukin libtard SJW.'"
Really? Are you absolutely sure that those peer-reviewed papers didn't just have "global climate change" or "global warming" as keywords? Because that's how C13 actually selected their sample.
I'm reminded of a recent /. uproar about a paper that explored climate change from a global feminist perspective or some such.**
Surely we would work ourselves into Yet Another Uproar if a study of scientific consensus amongst climatologists didn't bother to screen out the feminism paper, an article on Hollywood depictions of AGW, a linguistic study of the evolving terminology of the climate change debate...
**FWIW that piece turned out to be much more reasonable than the farcical eye-roller people were trying to make it out to be.
There is an exhaustive discussion here, but the crux of the biscuit is the parser (and conventions about how it should do its thing).
Which, I mean, who hasn't accidentally done that? The keys are like right next to each other.
I'm quite sure this is from an old bash.org post.
Right you are.
<tatclass> YOU ALL SUCK DICK
<tatclass> er.
<tatclass> hi.
<andy\code> A common typo.
<tatclass> the keys are like right next to each other.
Offsite, offline BACKUPS
Would not have helped in this situation. His typo resulted in this command:
"rm -rf --no-preserve-root --write-zeroes --shred-mbr --exec-all-ssh-hosts --douse-hydrofluoric --high-velocity-eject-removable-media --carpet-bomb-offsite-backup --salt-earth"
Which, I mean, who hasn't accidentally done that? The keys are like right next to each other.
Somewhere between 90 and 100% of /.ers are in agreement that this should be fun.
A recent meta-study concludes that the remaining 0-10% are actually correct in believing this will be a fairly shitty time, but are being silenced by a global cabal of carefree internet commenters who just want to have fun.
Who said anything about Obama? Moreover, who said anything about it being "cool" that the Obama administration has carried out extrajudicial killings (I'm assuming you mean "of American citizens", or maybe you are opposed to all use of lethal force by remote actors, I can't tell).
It's like the default tactic is to reframe every political discussion in terms of how terrible $hated_person in $opposing_party is, regardless of whether it's relevant or makes any sense. By all means, though, go on violently shaking that strawman with a picture of Obama's face taped to it. I look like a real idiot when you do that.
While you're busy with our scarecrow friend, I'd like to point out that understanding Trump is an objectively bad choice for president doesn't require shoehorning in any partisan baggage. You can grok this even if you:
- Think Obama is a bum
- Think Obama is great
- Hated George Bush
- Thought George Bush did a good job
- Think the government and everyone running it ought to adhere to strict, traditional Christian values
- Are a nihilist atheist socialist relativist
- Despise systemd
- Wrote systemd
- Are currently too drunk to spell your own name
Breaking that down:
The parts where you say "Translate" are, at least, positions. Some of your rebuttals evidence a fundamental misapprehension of economics, business, and geopolitics, but they are nonetheless positions on which we can differ.
The parts you call "Counter" are... not even? For example, Trump talking shit about $minorityGroup is not countered nor even distracted from by alluding to Guantanamo Bay, torture, or CIA meddling in foreign governments.
Even ignoring that what you're arguing there bears no resemblance to what I said, Trump is cool with torture, and wants to fill Gitmo back up.
Translate: Hell yeah, man! Let's peel the skin off those jihadi bastards!
(I kid!!)
I think the reason so many CEO's attack Trump specifically is because he's not bought and paid for. They don't have him in their pocket, so there's no telling what he'd do as president. He's a wild card. Many people assume he'd "make America great again" but most likely he'd just do whatever got him a lot of news and made him popular.
No need to attribute to plutocratic machinations that which can be adequately explained by logic.
You're spot on about Trump being an unpredictable loose cannon. Large, established businesses and financial markets abhor precisely the kind of chaos Donald Trump promises to bring to the White House.
Say you run a business or manage investments. You'd like to have at least some vague idea of how things are going to go over the next week, month, quarter, year, and so on, so you can make somewhat-informed decisions about market conditions, raw materials, domestic and global trade conditions, capital outlays, etc.
So Donald Trump is POTUS. You wake up in the morning, and legitimately wonder if today President Trump is going to:
- Begin a campaign of mass deportations;
- Decide we shake down Mexico for billions of dollars and divert significant steel and cement production to build a big ass wall;
- Decide to cut an entire federal agency;
- Decide to end a major work visa program;
- Be totally cool with, or maybe start a war over, Putin's latest incursion into Eastern Europe;
- Simultaneously shit on the tourism industry and the Constitution by announcing an entire religion is forbidden from entering the country;
- Say some offhanded ridiculous thing that stirs up outrage/protest here or abroad;
- Say some offhanded ridiculous thing that makes it harder for people in $your_industry to do business here or abroad;
- Say something cute about [minorities/women/Muslims/poor people/some other group he thinks are 'total losers"] that paints America and American businesses in a bad light;
- Embarrass the country; act like running the country is a reality TV show;
- Try to shout over, or interfere with, or shut down a media outlet that's giving him problems;
- Refuse to raise the debt ceiling and/or let us default on some obligations;
- Cause worldwide condemnation and mutiny by ordering our armed forces to kill terrorists' family members;
- Pull troops out of Japan and South Korea and try to hand them nukes to make up for it;
- Start a WWIII-sized trade war;
- Start actual WWIII.
Regardless of what kind of job he's done running his own private sector interests, his unpredictability and volatility (a source of personal pride for him) would cause perpetual fear and chaos in the global economy. So it makes sense than just about any large corporation would look at that and say, "No thanks."
Now see here, you young whipper snapper I don't know who you think you're deali$
I don't care one bit for your condescending, flippant attitude about line wrapp$
And while I was stapling punch cards to vacuum tubes in the golden age of compu$
I single-handedly rewrote our nuclear missile guidance systems on an 80x24 term$
And the whole time I was with Tim Leary ripped in half on sunshine acid and amy$
Look I'm sorry for what I said earlier about your mother, I just get cranky abo$
Constantly trampling my prize zinnias! And my fescue isn't going to reseed itse$
Jesus they're back, I have to go chase them off while waving a rake in the air.
Q: "Help! Windows 7 just crashed and it gave me this QR code, now what?"
A: "That is your Microsoft Support link. It takes you to the Microsoft Store and allows you to purchase Windows 10. Thanks for giving us your cellphone info and good day."
common logic = troll
slashdot = stagnated
Burma-Shave?
I rented $170 worth of From Justin to Kelly 4K and now my 64GB 6S has a total capacity of 96GB!
Please explain how two thirty year old people can create a zero year old baby.
This raises an interesting and rather pressing question: How is babby formed / how girl get pragnent?
... and new Cialis FSB is here to help you with all three!
[Energetic 70-somethings dance and laugh on an outdoor, string-bulb-lit dance floor as a jazz band plays]
If you have to ask, you should first look it up, then ask an informed question
One of the reasons why I come here is to be exposed to tech that I haven't seen before. See something that you're not familiar with? Look it up!
Yes, it is reasonable, in general, to expect people to Google easy-to-find information.
/., you shouldn't have to say "... encryption, which is the process of encoding messages or information in such a way that only authorized parties can read it..." But this one, yeah, they could've spent 7 words to fill in the uninformed about what a Xamarin is.
Yes, it is also reasonable to expect a news summary (anywhere) to give at least a cursory explanation of abbreviations, technical terms, or made up words with which a substantial portion of the readership will be unfamiliar.
It's just good policy in writing: don't fight human nature. People skimming a summary, even smart, technically minded people who are Google search ninjas, don't want to have to go traipsing off somewhere else to investigate why they should even be reading the summary in the first place.
It need not take a lot of space, either. Examples:
"Microsoft today announced that Zazzlebazzle, a tool for dynamically replacing code comments with emojis, is now available for free for every Visual Studio user."
"Microsoft today announced that Sprug, a responsive framework for synergizing cloud competencies, is now available for free for every Visual Studio user."
"Microsoft today announced that ^F+7d#, a popular object-disoriented programming language, is now available for free for every Visual Studio user."
Note that this is audience-specific--if you're writing for
> YOU HEAD WEST AND ENCOUNTER [[STRANGER IN A VAN]]. .
> [[STRANGER IN A VAN]] OFFERS YOU [[UNIDENTIFIED CANDY]]. WHAT WILL YOU DO?
> YOU ACCEPT [[UNIDENTIFIED CANDY]] FROM [[STRANGER IN A VAN]].
> YOU CONSUME [[UNIDENTIFIED CANDY]].
> . . . . .
> UNFORTUNATELY, [[UNIDENTIFIED CANDY]] TURNS OUT TO BE A [[MACADAMIA PLAGUE BAR]]. YOU CONTRACT [[THE PLAGUE]] AND DIE A GRUESOME DEATH.
> GAME OVER.
You Only Lose Owning Windows
including more management and security controls
EUPHEMISMS!
makes the old systems obsolete, but impossible to replace
No. It may be (difficult | expensive | unprofitable | complex | a pain in the ass | a (herculean | sisyphean | Korean | Crimean | many eon | diahrrea'in) task), perhaps.
But impossible? No.
They used their frickin laser beams to tunnel into the plumbing system. Had to cut through a lot of red tape to throw down the gauntlet and go the extra mile like this, but they really pulled into the fast lane and hit a home run here. I mean sharks in the toilet! Checkmate!