Actually, everyone else thinks one large button is really stupid. I guess I'm just stuck with this CRAZY notion I came up with one day that two buttons are twice as functional as one button. CRAZY, I KNOW.
And hold down a button while clicking? Why don't I just do my computing by drawing in the dirt with a sharpened rock while I'm at it?
True enough - my point was that at the moment, Apple doesn't seem to care about the server market. The announcement of an Intel-based server would indicate that they still want a piece of it.
I think you are missing the really obvious point here - the fact that granting shell access over SSH leads to a non-administrative user gaining root access in 30 MINUTES makes the OS entirely unsuitable in a server environment.
True, a Mac Mini isn't typically going to be used as a server, but if Apple decides to make some kind of Intel based server, this kind of thing is a HUGE problem.
I'm late to this party, but Internet 2 and Web 2.0 are COMPLETELY different things. Internet 2 is a new, faster network deployed to large numbers of universities nationwide (it's more than that, too, read their page). Web 2.0 is a new buzzword among reporter types that describes a category of internet applications - lately, AJAX has been the big thing with that category.
No seriously, whichever asshole is moderating people redundant on first posts tonight - could you maybe anonymously reply to this topic and explain how in the fuck you think the first or second post in a story can be redundant? Maybe being able to read a fucking dictionary should be a requirement before you're given mod points. Seriously, people.
Did you read the document, or just the first two sentences? In the FIRST PARAGRAPH, they mention that the government doesn't need the information and that Google therefore shouldn't have to provide it. The first paragraph of this document is a neat summary of the points they will be making, sort of like the first paragraph of a college paper. If you go through the rest of the document, they make barely any arguments about user privacy, instead focusing about 90% of their attention on whether a third party in a case can be compelled to give up trade secrets. It would seem that there is quite a bit more legal precedent for this argument than the privacy one.
As usual, everyone on Slashdot can only focus on whether Google is "good" or "evil" today.
There is seriously about a paragraph in that document that says things like that, and about 15 pages of "The government doesn't need this data for anything so we don't think we should have to provide it." The privacy thing is just an extra, tacked on argument to try to strengthen their case.
I think the more important point they made in their argument is that entities which are in NO way involved in legal cases should not be compelled to give up confidential information unless that information is extremely relevant to the case. Read the linked opposition - the point of users' confidentiality is only barely touched upon, whereas several pages are spent on the irrelevancy issue.
I completely agree with Google on this. If the government can request mountains of data from private companies in a case whose STATED purpose is to do a review of the data in order to sort of think about maybe making a law one of these days, then anyone should be able to request that same data for any equally as stupid reason, really. The DOJ shouldn't get special treatment in the courts.
Most people have only one or two choices for ISPs, and MAYBE three if they're lucky. In my area, I have one cable provider, one telco providing DSL, and I think there's some satellite company that is expensive and has extremely horrid bandwidth. Basically, your cute idea that everyone should just up and switch ISPs is a pipe dream at best.
The other guy gave a very solid answer, but to put this in the simplest terms possible, since a lot of people don't seem to understand this - the stock price was as high as it was largely due to those analysts' projections. If those projections, for whatever reason, are incorrect (which in this case they were) then the stock is simply not worth as much money as people thought.
Had the projections been lower in the first place, the stock would already not have been at such a high price.
I don't even completely disagree with you about people's responsibility in keeping hot beverages off of themselves, but I actually really hate it when my coffee is blazing hot. It doesn't taste better that way because you CAN'T drink it. Think about it - if Stella Liebeck got third degree burns on her thighs, what would that coffee have done to the inside of someone's mouth? So seriously, while you have a point, why would you WANT coffee that is 200 degrees?
This happens almost every time I get coffee at a Gas N' Shop or something on the highway. I have to leave it sit for twenty minutes before I can even take a sip. One time I just turned on the AC and pointed the vent at it for a while. What is the fucking point?
Did ANYONE read the article? The guy's hearing wasn't even damaged - it specifically says that in there. He is suing because he thinks his iPod MIGHT damage his hearing if he keeps turning it up so loud.
Also, he evidently can not control himself to lower the volume because the warning that Apple ALREADY ships with the damn thing is not sufficient to alter his idiotic behavior.
3. What if the virus was written by ALIENS from the MOON and they're taking over our computers as the first HORRIBLE step toward COMPLETE DOMINANCE OF HUMANITY???!!! Oh, and, and MS is CONSPIRING with them! by putting ALIEN BACKDOORS in WINDOWS and writing ET WORMS!!!!
So wait, Google behaving in exactly the manner requested by the Chinese government in order to do business in their country is going to cause CHANGE in the Chinese government over time, even though the relationship as it exists is already mutually beneficial for both parties?
...and beating it to death with your reinforced concrete head. Seriously, I bet there are at least one thousand different people who have already posted the car analogy. There are at least 10,000 people who have posted one of these irritating WHY? questions. WHY DO PEOPLE WANT TO DO THINGS? I DON'T WANT TO DO THINGS. EVERYONE SHOULD STOP DOING THINGS.
Most of the people posting this useless, annoying garbage are just trolling. What's your excuse?
You relativism people are all full of shit. China is not as free as the US, or for that matter, any country in the West, and people are going to damn well say so, and they'll be right, no matter what you say about it. China's government is extremely repressive of any cynicism in the press about its practices - the examples of this are numerous. Sure, the average person on the street might not give a shit about any of it - because they're not in a position of influence, the government naturally doesn't care about them or what they say either.
I hesitate to make a tired 1984 reference, but do you remember how the proles in that book were allowed to speak their minds without repercussion? The woman who flips out in the movie theater doesn't get a rat cage strapped to her face - they just throw her out of the place, because she is unimportant and no one cares what she says.
So yeah, maybe most people in China don't have a problem with their government, but anyone who does is sure as hell going to have a rough time of it if people start listening to them.
Everyone's seen it probably a hundred times. What is the point of dragging it out again just now? Are you saying that first, Microsoft came for a Chinese blogger, and you didn't speak out because you are not a Chinese blogger? Is Microsoft going to come for you next, and no one will be left to speak for you?
No seriously, STOP CUTTING AND PASTING THIS CRAP ON SLASHDOT.
When I was in Germany, my language skills being as rusty as they are, it took me a couple of tries to be able to differentiate between regular water and carbonated water in stores, since they basically look the same before you open the bottle and take a drink.
I never got used to having a big mouthful of bubbly water on a hot summer day.
Have you ever met a hippie with a profit motive? This whole thing makes me sad - it is a story about people growing old and losing all of their youthful ideals. It happens to most people, and sometimes it is for the better, but these guys are the fucking Greatful Dead, and they symbolized an entire era that was fundamentally opposed to this sort of thing.
I mean seriously, it doesn't matter that the Internet exists now - these guys are wiping their asses with their own band's history.
Why does it matter whether what he spends his time on is important to YOU? How much time have you spent trying to have a career to support a family or build a better lifestyle for yourself or whatever? This guy's work is going to potentially make him millions of dollars. His eleven years of work are going to pay off for his entire family. I'd say that's pretty important.
Not everyone has the inclination to save the world. I know I don't.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, everyone else thinks one large button is really stupid. I guess I'm just stuck with this CRAZY notion I came up with one day that two buttons are twice as functional as one button. CRAZY, I KNOW.
And hold down a button while clicking? Why don't I just do my computing by drawing in the dirt with a sharpened rock while I'm at it?
I hate you and your stupid fucking redundant car analogy - the fifteen thousandth in the last month, by the way. Nice job being a repetitive asshole.
Here's an analogy for you: How's about I buy your face and put my fist in it?
True enough - my point was that at the moment, Apple doesn't seem to care about the server market. The announcement of an Intel-based server would indicate that they still want a piece of it.
I think you are missing the really obvious point here - the fact that granting shell access over SSH leads to a non-administrative user gaining root access in 30 MINUTES makes the OS entirely unsuitable in a server environment.
True, a Mac Mini isn't typically going to be used as a server, but if Apple decides to make some kind of Intel based server, this kind of thing is a HUGE problem.
WOW - Best response ever. You OWE it to Slashdot to continue to post things like this.
I'm late to this party, but Internet 2 and Web 2.0 are COMPLETELY different things. Internet 2 is a new, faster network deployed to large numbers of universities nationwide (it's more than that, too, read their page). Web 2.0 is a new buzzword among reporter types that describes a category of internet applications - lately, AJAX has been the big thing with that category.
Trust me, it all confuses me sometimes, too.
No seriously, whichever asshole is moderating people redundant on first posts tonight - could you maybe anonymously reply to this topic and explain how in the fuck you think the first or second post in a story can be redundant? Maybe being able to read a fucking dictionary should be a requirement before you're given mod points. Seriously, people.
Did you read the document, or just the first two sentences? In the FIRST PARAGRAPH, they mention that the government doesn't need the information and that Google therefore shouldn't have to provide it. The first paragraph of this document is a neat summary of the points they will be making, sort of like the first paragraph of a college paper. If you go through the rest of the document, they make barely any arguments about user privacy, instead focusing about 90% of their attention on whether a third party in a case can be compelled to give up trade secrets. It would seem that there is quite a bit more legal precedent for this argument than the privacy one.
As usual, everyone on Slashdot can only focus on whether Google is "good" or "evil" today.
There is seriously about a paragraph in that document that says things like that, and about 15 pages of "The government doesn't need this data for anything so we don't think we should have to provide it." The privacy thing is just an extra, tacked on argument to try to strengthen their case.
I think the more important point they made in their argument is that entities which are in NO way involved in legal cases should not be compelled to give up confidential information unless that information is extremely relevant to the case. Read the linked opposition - the point of users' confidentiality is only barely touched upon, whereas several pages are spent on the irrelevancy issue.
I completely agree with Google on this. If the government can request mountains of data from private companies in a case whose STATED purpose is to do a review of the data in order to sort of think about maybe making a law one of these days, then anyone should be able to request that same data for any equally as stupid reason, really. The DOJ shouldn't get special treatment in the courts.
Most people have only one or two choices for ISPs, and MAYBE three if they're lucky. In my area, I have one cable provider, one telco providing DSL, and I think there's some satellite company that is expensive and has extremely horrid bandwidth. Basically, your cute idea that everyone should just up and switch ISPs is a pipe dream at best.
I prefer to call such usage the "dumbening" of language. How's that for evolution? I am LITERALLY calling you a jackass!
The other guy gave a very solid answer, but to put this in the simplest terms possible, since a lot of people don't seem to understand this - the stock price was as high as it was largely due to those analysts' projections. If those projections, for whatever reason, are incorrect (which in this case they were) then the stock is simply not worth as much money as people thought.
Had the projections been lower in the first place, the stock would already not have been at such a high price.
I don't even completely disagree with you about people's responsibility in keeping hot beverages off of themselves, but I actually really hate it when my coffee is blazing hot. It doesn't taste better that way because you CAN'T drink it. Think about it - if Stella Liebeck got third degree burns on her thighs, what would that coffee have done to the inside of someone's mouth? So seriously, while you have a point, why would you WANT coffee that is 200 degrees?
This happens almost every time I get coffee at a Gas N' Shop or something on the highway. I have to leave it sit for twenty minutes before I can even take a sip. One time I just turned on the AC and pointed the vent at it for a while. What is the fucking point?
Did ANYONE read the article? The guy's hearing wasn't even damaged - it specifically says that in there. He is suing because he thinks his iPod MIGHT damage his hearing if he keeps turning it up so loud.
Also, he evidently can not control himself to lower the volume because the warning that Apple ALREADY ships with the damn thing is not sufficient to alter his idiotic behavior.
3. What if the virus was written by ALIENS from the MOON and they're taking over our computers as the first HORRIBLE step toward COMPLETE DOMINANCE OF HUMANITY???!!! Oh, and, and MS is CONSPIRING with them! by putting ALIEN BACKDOORS in WINDOWS and writing ET WORMS!!!!
Paranoid much?
So wait, Google behaving in exactly the manner requested by the Chinese government in order to do business in their country is going to cause CHANGE in the Chinese government over time, even though the relationship as it exists is already mutually beneficial for both parties?
Really?
...and beating it to death with your reinforced concrete head. Seriously, I bet there are at least one thousand different people who have already posted the car analogy. There are at least 10,000 people who have posted one of these irritating WHY? questions. WHY DO PEOPLE WANT TO DO THINGS? I DON'T WANT TO DO THINGS. EVERYONE SHOULD STOP DOING THINGS.
Most of the people posting this useless, annoying garbage are just trolling. What's your excuse?
About 65 people asked this question already. It's in that discussion up above. People gave the EXACT SAME answers in almost every case.
I am not going to answer you. I am going to simply ask WHAT IN THE LOVE OF FUCK IS WRONG WITH YOUR BROKEN FUCKING BRAIN?
You relativism people are all full of shit. China is not as free as the US, or for that matter, any country in the West, and people are going to damn well say so, and they'll be right, no matter what you say about it. China's government is extremely repressive of any cynicism in the press about its practices - the examples of this are numerous. Sure, the average person on the street might not give a shit about any of it - because they're not in a position of influence, the government naturally doesn't care about them or what they say either.
I hesitate to make a tired 1984 reference, but do you remember how the proles in that book were allowed to speak their minds without repercussion? The woman who flips out in the movie theater doesn't get a rat cage strapped to her face - they just throw her out of the place, because she is unimportant and no one cares what she says.
So yeah, maybe most people in China don't have a problem with their government, but anyone who does is sure as hell going to have a rough time of it if people start listening to them.
Everyone's seen it probably a hundred times. What is the point of dragging it out again just now? Are you saying that first, Microsoft came for a Chinese blogger, and you didn't speak out because you are not a Chinese blogger? Is Microsoft going to come for you next, and no one will be left to speak for you?
No seriously, STOP CUTTING AND PASTING THIS CRAP ON SLASHDOT.
He meant to ask when an MSN Search widget would be available in Google's widget directory.
When I was in Germany, my language skills being as rusty as they are, it took me a couple of tries to be able to differentiate between regular water and carbonated water in stores, since they basically look the same before you open the bottle and take a drink.
I never got used to having a big mouthful of bubbly water on a hot summer day.
Have you ever met a hippie with a profit motive? This whole thing makes me sad - it is a story about people growing old and losing all of their youthful ideals. It happens to most people, and sometimes it is for the better, but these guys are the fucking Greatful Dead, and they symbolized an entire era that was fundamentally opposed to this sort of thing.
I mean seriously, it doesn't matter that the Internet exists now - these guys are wiping their asses with their own band's history.
Why does it matter whether what he spends his time on is important to YOU? How much time have you spent trying to have a career to support a family or build a better lifestyle for yourself or whatever? This guy's work is going to potentially make him millions of dollars. His eleven years of work are going to pay off for his entire family. I'd say that's pretty important.
Not everyone has the inclination to save the world. I know I don't.