Thanks, I don't want to make money from this. I want better internet service for myself and my community. I'm willing to work at it in order for that to happen, since certainly nobody else is doing it.
Exactly. I have two business DSL lines in a parallel/failover configuration, and we can barely swing Netflix streaming. Never mind when I need to upload 6GB of data to my server.
This is a great answer, glad it's modded up, but why funny? Anyway, I second this, it's about what I was going to say.
You just need some time and experience. The fact that you're even asking and thinking about it is a good sign.
A good friend of mine also has a theory about male technological hierarchical sorting, and that there's this sort of 'dick-measuring-contest' when a bunch of men meet up where they each sort out their place in the pecking order and their particular skills relative to each others', a self-organization. Could be some of that going on too.
Not judging the specific "Free Speech Zones" you speak about, but in general I think the government can regulate, within limits, the manner, place and time of speech.
Otherwise I could go to your street at 3 AM and express my political views with a megaphone.
Or I could put an outdoor in front of a public playground, featuring a woman having sex with a goat.
Well, this is a good point. So, can that apply to the Internet as a 'place'?
I meant that they are in line with those people in that they say and do really controversial things for personal/financial gain, not in terms of specific political ideology.
*Technically* Australia is not located in the Western World. However, it was settled and is largely populated by the descendents of people from the West and I would argue that the culture is primarily Western.
I understand, and IANAL. I just feel like the Free Speech Zone thing violates the spirit of the First Amendment, even if the courts have decided that doesn't violate the letter of the law.
I have to say, I don't generally like Hilary Clinton, but I was suitably impressed that Hilary Clinton basically said, "Yeah it's a terrible movie, and we do apologize that it offended you so much, but we allow people to make and post terrible movies here. Move along."
I would say that falsely yelling 'Fire' in a crowded room (I know, the canonical example of limitations to the First Amendment) is not equivalent to provoking rage. In one case, you are (falsely) advising people of a dangerous situation, and they are acting to self-preserve. They are more or less doing what rational, responsible people should do in trying to get out. In the case of provoking rage or provoking someone to commit a crime strictly with words (not, say, a gun to the head), that person would have to decide how they are going to respond to your words. If they respond in an illegal way, IMO, that is their responsibility and not yours. I understand this opinion may not mesh with case law in the USA.
Actually, I doubt that. They are not an extreme version of what the people controlling this country believe. They're a bunch of psychopaths that try to provoke a response so they can sue. I put them more in line with Anne Coulter and whatshisface on Fox that had his show finally shut down because he took it too far. I doubt they believe 1/3 of what they say, they're just in it for money and power.
Agreed. In fact it's quite important to note that freedom of speech does not mean freedom from consequences if your speech pisses people off. It just means the government can't stop you from speaking just because they don't like what you're saying.
That said, the government has been actively (IMHO) violating the first amendment for a while now, the most stark example being the emergence of "Free Speech Zones" when George W. Bush would travel.
I used T-Mobile for years, and was very happy with them in major metropolitan areas. I had to switch to Verizon when I moved to a rural area, and I hate them. We now have T-Mobile coverage here, so once the next batch of Nexus phones are announced, I'm switching back.
IME you can't beat the customer service from T-Mobile. Verizon's has been less than great and their prices are through the roof.
I read the OP as saying, "I love *NIX and that's all I really know in depth as an Admin. I have no clue how to find someone similar for Windows. How would I go about that?". I didn't read it as condescending, but clearly many here did.
GoldenEye would have been decent with a reasonable field of view and mouse/keyboard controls. The joystick on the N64 was just not adequate. It was like playing Quake with mittens on.
I am thinking of sites like Salesforce, Kashoo, Highrise, and many others, where they don't really have a good mobile site, but a tablet application is a very very useful thing to have. Always they implement for iOS first. It's obnoxious, even though I understand there are sound business reasons for it at the moment.
Android apps are generally expected to deal with a range of screen sizes. I know this causes a headache for developers, but if you own multiple devices in different form factors, it's a blessing.
Slashdot Mirror
Thanks, I don't want to make money from this. I want better internet service for myself and my community. I'm willing to work at it in order for that to happen, since certainly nobody else is doing it.
Exactly. I have two business DSL lines in a parallel/failover configuration, and we can barely swing Netflix streaming. Never mind when I need to upload 6GB of data to my server.
You don't know how hard I wish I could just do this.
Whoops, forgot to log in. OP here.
Oh wow. People actually did that? Frequently?
This is a great answer, glad it's modded up, but why funny? Anyway, I second this, it's about what I was going to say.
You just need some time and experience. The fact that you're even asking and thinking about it is a good sign.
A good friend of mine also has a theory about male technological hierarchical sorting, and that there's this sort of 'dick-measuring-contest' when a bunch of men meet up where they each sort out their place in the pecking order and their particular skills relative to each others', a self-organization. Could be some of that going on too.
It's what we call "increasing profit".
Not judging the specific "Free Speech Zones" you speak about, but in general I think the government can regulate, within limits, the manner, place and time of speech.
Otherwise I could go to your street at 3 AM and express my political views with a megaphone. Or I could put an outdoor in front of a public playground, featuring a woman having sex with a goat.
Well, this is a good point. So, can that apply to the Internet as a 'place'?
I meant that they are in line with those people in that they say and do really controversial things for personal/financial gain, not in terms of specific political ideology.
*Technically* Australia is not located in the Western World. However, it was settled and is largely populated by the descendents of people from the West and I would argue that the culture is primarily Western.
I understand, and IANAL. I just feel like the Free Speech Zone thing violates the spirit of the First Amendment, even if the courts have decided that doesn't violate the letter of the law.
Yeah any hope I had that Obama would improve things (I did hope so, though I did not vote for him) has been quashed.
I have to say, I don't generally like Hilary Clinton, but I was suitably impressed that Hilary Clinton basically said, "Yeah it's a terrible movie, and we do apologize that it offended you so much, but we allow people to make and post terrible movies here. Move along."
Think of the children!
I would say that falsely yelling 'Fire' in a crowded room (I know, the canonical example of limitations to the First Amendment) is not equivalent to provoking rage. In one case, you are (falsely) advising people of a dangerous situation, and they are acting to self-preserve. They are more or less doing what rational, responsible people should do in trying to get out. In the case of provoking rage or provoking someone to commit a crime strictly with words (not, say, a gun to the head), that person would have to decide how they are going to respond to your words. If they respond in an illegal way, IMO, that is their responsibility and not yours. I understand this opinion may not mesh with case law in the USA.
Oh no, but they're allowed to say that, because they are right!
Actually, I doubt that. They are not an extreme version of what the people controlling this country believe. They're a bunch of psychopaths that try to provoke a response so they can sue. I put them more in line with Anne Coulter and whatshisface on Fox that had his show finally shut down because he took it too far. I doubt they believe 1/3 of what they say, they're just in it for money and power.
Agreed. In fact it's quite important to note that freedom of speech does not mean freedom from consequences if your speech pisses people off. It just means the government can't stop you from speaking just because they don't like what you're saying. That said, the government has been actively (IMHO) violating the first amendment for a while now, the most stark example being the emergence of "Free Speech Zones" when George W. Bush would travel.
I used T-Mobile for years, and was very happy with them in major metropolitan areas. I had to switch to Verizon when I moved to a rural area, and I hate them. We now have T-Mobile coverage here, so once the next batch of Nexus phones are announced, I'm switching back.
IME you can't beat the customer service from T-Mobile. Verizon's has been less than great and their prices are through the roof.
It seems to me like a bad idea to have your UNIX admins try to figure it out when a good Windows admin is what's needed.
I read the OP as saying, "I love *NIX and that's all I really know in depth as an Admin. I have no clue how to find someone similar for Windows. How would I go about that?". I didn't read it as condescending, but clearly many here did.
GoldenEye would have been decent with a reasonable field of view and mouse/keyboard controls. The joystick on the N64 was just not adequate. It was like playing Quake with mittens on.
Don't get all defensive about Arch, GP was referring to Gentoo.
I am thinking of sites like Salesforce, Kashoo, Highrise, and many others, where they don't really have a good mobile site, but a tablet application is a very very useful thing to have. Always they implement for iOS first. It's obnoxious, even though I understand there are sound business reasons for it at the moment.
Android apps are generally expected to deal with a range of screen sizes. I know this causes a headache for developers, but if you own multiple devices in different form factors, it's a blessing.