In my experience, first it was video that could only barely (if at all) do X, then Winmodems (bleah!), then network interfaces, then sound, now WiFi.
That was my order of troubles also (well, except for sound. Sound?), it's just that the last step of it happened 5-7 years ago.
I don't much care about sound either, but it's useful for when friends elsewhere send me DVDs that I can only play in Linux (region encoding). As for WiFi, I was slow to the game. I didn't bother with it until recently. *My* two boxes have no trouble with it, but this Inspiron 1525 (that my step-dad found discarded in an alley) does. I'll figure it out. I used to own an i4k that had no trouble with anything. This 1525 is just one of those "gotchas" that show up from time to time ("Rasafrackin', jiggafriggen...").
America did not release their diplomatic cables. Assange did.
To his credit as a journalist. "If you've nothing to hide, what have you to fear?"
And while some of the more childish members of slashdot may not see the distinction, it is there.
Chyaa, and some of the more vociferous AC astroturfers are desperately trying to turn the clock back to the time when whistle blowers were not protected by law, and when journalists didn't have Fifth Estate protections. "Land of The Free, Home of The Brave" are now empty words, or were they always?
3) Do you really believe that diplomatic immunity was *intended* to be used in the way Ecuador is trying to use it, to shield an alleged criminal from prosecution?
Most certainly when people like you are willing to consider him an alleged criminal when he's not been charged with any crime, when a prosecutor merely wishes to interview him, and when he's tweaked the nose of a bullying "World Cop" superpower.
I think it's admirable that the Aussie gov't is wondering what's going on and what are the US' intentions toward one of its citizens. Good on ya, guvs.
The man is a walking tinfoil hat's wet dream, made tangible and given human form. Speculation is far, FAR more than enough to fire up his followers.
You don't have to be an "Assange follower" to think this situation stinks to high heaven. If he's such an obvious nutbar, a tinfoil hat's wet dream, why are the US' authorities so freaked out about him and what he's done? What's really so different about what Wikileaks did and what Daniel Ellsberg and the New York Times did?
What should be interesting is that there are US citizens that want Assagne in jail, the one that gave them some insight of what really do the people that they elected to represent them.
That shouldn't be much of a surprise, considering some of those elected representatives consider the US would be justified in assassinating him.
Growing up, I would never have expected this sort of behaviour from the US. John Wayne must be spinning in his grave.
I'm saying if Assange offered any technical advice to Manning on how to secretly transfer information in order to hide Mannings involvement, that could fall under the area of conspiracy.
By that logic, notice on Wikileak's homepage suggesting the use of GnuPG/PGP would create a conspiracy. I think the US' authorities are out of control and desperately need to be taught a lesson in civility.
At the end of the day parents who don't want to take responsibility for parenting will blame the school regardless...
I can suggest another way. Every browser maintains a browsing history. Configure them to clear the history every time they exit, but not before emailing the history to the kid's parents. If they want to, they can check what the kid's been up to and do their parenting as they wish. If not, the school's in the clear since they reported it to them.
Installing Ubuntu has been a piece of cake on every system I've done it on over the years.
You haven't been trying hard enough. I love Linux, and the *BSDs, but we're always going to find ourselves chasing hardware support since the manufacturers (well, many) couldn't care less about supporting us and they love to stick us with so far unsupported (by the devs) proprietary stuff. Even if you stick to older hardware to give the devs a chance to do something with that crap, some systems will inevitably fall through the cracks. I'm mostly talking about laptops in my case. In my experience, first it was video that could only barely (if at all) do X, then Winmodems (bleah!), then network interfaces, then sound, now WiFi. It doesn't much help when curveballs like PulseAudio get tossed in at the last minute. My HP dv4 AMD 64 bit Turion machine still won't do sound (using Debian testing), while my 32 bit Gateway AMD Sempron does *everything* swimmingly (running Debian stable).
I just spent a weekend trying distro after distro trying to find one that even detected the internal wifi in an Inspiron 1525. Finally, LinuxMint did. Woohoo! Unfortunately, it refuses to connect to my parents wifi router, while it has no trouble with my sister's. Needs research, and a wired connection (which isn't easy to do these days, damnit); pain in the butt. Sucks to be us sometimes, dependent upon hardware support.
Don't get me wrong, it's a lot better now than it used to be and live CDs/DVDs make the process a lot easier than it used to be, but there'll always be rotten boxes that refuse to play nice. Still better than banging your head on Win* and Mac, though.
"can be tracked without warrant" != "is being tracked without warrant"
Yeah, big difference, except now the cops can tell the telcos they want regular tracking data on all cellphones held for them for five years in case they ask for it. They don't need a warrant. Biiiiiig difference.
Remember, you can't simply take back what you said because the damage might have already been done once you said it.
Here in The West, we've somewhat of an axiom: "'Tis better to be thought a fool, than to open one's mouth and confirm the fact."
Speech doesn't cause damage of any kind to anything. Children often say foolish things, yet we discount their foolishness understanding they just don't know. How is it that the Thai royal family, or Islam..., can't just discount insults against them as simple ignorance to be ignored, instead of throwing the perp into jail or calling for Jihad?
They're just other forms of insecure tyrants. They believe at bottom that their ideas can't really stand on their own merits so they impose control instead.
The murderers of Danish cartoonists should be shot on sight as the vermin they are. The world doesn't need their sort.
Call again later when someone more senior is available. Contact the patient's advocate at the hospital to lodge your complaint for the bureaucratic hoops you were forced to jump through. Move on with your life.
These are white people problems--get over it. The [guy] isn't Rosa Parks.
Good advice, but you're wrong. The guy shouldn't have needed to get bitchy to get what they'd just made him sign away his life to get. On the other hand, the "one in charge" had an obligation to protect the kid's documentation, so good on her. She overdid it, but I'd prefer she did that than the alternative.
These are not "white people problems", and you're a jerk for suggesting they are. You people need to fix your tort law system, which is what causes this imbecility. Hauling out the "sue" card first is the silliest course of action possible.
The majority of people would express a preference to be tracked online if given the choice? Yes/No.
The majority of people would express a preference to allow commercial entitities and advertisers to offer them a richer, more relevant, and more personalized web surfing experience if given the choice? Yes/No.
Look around you. The answer is "Yes."
So now you're claiming users are aware of, and accept, present levels of tracking?
Aware of, no. Accept, yes. It may be the elitist in me that thinks this but apathy and ignorance reign among the mass of humanity, especially online. Hell, most of them use Windows, and IE is the Internet, FFS.
We could trivially do another simple experiment, and that's to survey a few 'average users' to find out if they actually realize how much they are being tracked online. I am guessing most would be pretty unhappy with what they learn.
Really? I would guess you're wrong. I think it really depends on what slant you put on the question. You and I may see DHS and Big Brother and commercial datamining. They may see "a more relevant or accurate result from their web searches and more relevantly targetted web ads", etc.
Actually, as we develop software, I've done such surveys informally on some of our userbase, and most don't even have a clue of even the most basic tracking that is going on (most go wide-eyed if you simply explain to them a little bit of how Facebook can 'see' what sites you visit online if you have logged on to Facebook, and the site has a Facebook 'Like' button - USERS DO NOT KNOW).
I agree, though you must be talking to a more sophisticated crowd than I do. Those I see don't care, or if they do, they consider it a feature. "If the web knows more about me, I get a better, more personalized experience."
Your claims of informed consent are utter bullshit.
I claimed nothing. I just re-framed the stated question as gov't or corps would ask it, not as my friends at EFF would wish it asked.
FWIW, I hate this surveillance society that's been built on the web, I hate the commercialization of the web and the Internet, and I hate that people like my Mom have to be actively protected from those pirannas. I'm not oblivious, however, to the fact that we're all swimming with sharks.
Should I be disgusted with myself for having spent my career empowering some of those sharks (building or fixing their systems, building and programming their web backend dbs, fixing their crack-addled, eleven year old POS programs)? Considering what some of them have done with my work, I think yes. The Nuremburg Defense doesn't work, no matter how much the rent needs to be paid. We've all been co-opted if we're helping them.
The majority of people would express a preference to be tracked online if given the choice? Yes/No.
"The majority of people would express a preference to allow commercial entitities and advertisers to offer them a richer, more relevant, and more personalized web surfing experience if given the choice? Yes/No."
In the middle of the Cold War, nobody can afford the cost having a hippie as a national hero.
Which was an exactly wrong headed decision. Western counter culture, the whole rock & roll and blue jeans stuff, was among the strongest and most threatening influences undermining the commies control of their populations. That's odd because The Establishment in the West felt just as threatened by the same things.
How about the first guy that actually gets out of line gets his ass kicked?
Yes, let's go straight to violence when there are plenty of other solutions in front of us.
I don't know where you're from but around here, that's a much overused figure of speech. It doesn't necessarily presume actual physical contact. Cf. "kickass video", & etc. Cf. "badass", & etc. It's black ghetto slang. I wish we'd have grown beyond "gangsta" worship by now, but some things die slowly.
...a software maker may prefer to have these handled by a "distributor/importer" who gouges the consumer.
This may be the claim, but how often is software from the likes of Microsoft available in anything other than "US English"?
From the likes of Microsoft? Who ****ing cares?!? Why the hell do you *still* insist on using it? Everything about how they work and what they demand of you offends you, yet you still insist on going there. Huh.:-P
Find yourself an obsolete unused box and load LinuxMint on it, and you can learn to never have to complain about your software again. Note, it asks you what language you want to use before it installs. A mouse click enables an encrypted $HOME.
You're missing out on a teriffic deal! No EULA, just a GPL.
Correlation does not equal causation. You should hit yourself with a hammer under various circumstances, to narrow the possibilities.
I wonder why it is I so often find myself upon reading posts like yours thinking, "You first." You could perform that experiment yourself. So many advocates, yet so few volunteers.
"Put your money where your mouth is," I believe is how the saying goes.
If you're willing to say that 1 is not an integer...
No. It certainly is an Integer.
... then 0.9999..... is not an integer.
Agreed.
Conversely, tell me what the difference is between 1 and 0.99999
They're in different number systems. One's (pun intended) an integer, and the other's a Rational (?) number. The latter can be rounded up to the other and the Integers are a subset of the Rationals but the former does not equal the latter.
Conversely, tell me what the difference is between 1 and 0.99999...
Does that "0.99999..." mean "0.99 repetend"? That's difficult to answer (how big is infinity?). Otherwise: echo "1 - 0.99999" | bc -l.00001
How about this, 1 = 1/3 + 1/3 + 1/3 right? then 1 = 0.33333.....+0.33333......+0.33333....... = 0.9999999.....
echo "100 / 3" | bc -l 33.33333333333333333333 which I assume means "33.333 repetend". That's called an approximation. Approximation doesn't mean "equals."
If a number is contained by the set of integers (the number 1), any representation of that number that is equal to that number is also in the same set of integers, since it is the same number.
"0.999 repetend" in the Rational Number system is a close approximation in that system to the number one in the Integer number system.
How many angels can you fit on the head of a pin? FYI, I'm a High School dropout, so this is Grade Ten stuff for me. I may not remember correctly Rational, Irrational, Real, & etc. I've always loved math but I've never considered myself good at it. I still seriously despise my eight grade math teacher for having tried to suck all the fun out of it in the name of regimentation. Bastard!
Slashdot Mirror
In my experience, first it was video that could only barely (if at all) do X, then Winmodems (bleah!), then network interfaces, then sound, now WiFi.
That was my order of troubles also (well, except for sound. Sound?), it's just that the last step of it happened 5-7 years ago.
I don't much care about sound either, but it's useful for when friends elsewhere send me DVDs that I can only play in Linux (region encoding). As for WiFi, I was slow to the game. I didn't bother with it until recently. *My* two boxes have no trouble with it, but this Inspiron 1525 (that my step-dad found discarded in an alley) does. I'll figure it out. I used to own an i4k that had no trouble with anything. This 1525 is just one of those "gotchas" that show up from time to time ("Rasafrackin', jiggafriggen ...").
America did not release their diplomatic cables. Assange did.
To his credit as a journalist. "If you've nothing to hide, what have you to fear?"
And while some of the more childish members of slashdot may not see the distinction, it is there.
Chyaa, and some of the more vociferous AC astroturfers are desperately trying to turn the clock back to the time when whistle blowers were not protected by law, and when journalists didn't have Fifth Estate protections. "Land of The Free, Home of The Brave" are now empty words, or were they always?
When is the New York Times to be charged?
3) Do you really believe that diplomatic immunity was *intended* to be used in the way Ecuador is trying to use it, to shield an alleged criminal from prosecution?
Most certainly when people like you are willing to consider him an alleged criminal when he's not been charged with any crime, when a prosecutor merely wishes to interview him, and when he's tweaked the nose of a bullying "World Cop" superpower.
I think it's admirable that the Aussie gov't is wondering what's going on and what are the US' intentions toward one of its citizens. Good on ya, guvs.
The man is a walking tinfoil hat's wet dream, made tangible and given human form. Speculation is far, FAR more than enough to fire up his followers.
You don't have to be an "Assange follower" to think this situation stinks to high heaven. If he's such an obvious nutbar, a tinfoil hat's wet dream, why are the US' authorities so freaked out about him and what he's done? What's really so different about what Wikileaks did and what Daniel Ellsberg and the New York Times did?
What should be interesting is that there are US citizens that want Assagne in jail, the one that gave them some insight of what really do the people that they elected to represent them.
That shouldn't be much of a surprise, considering some of those elected representatives consider the US would be justified in assassinating him.
Growing up, I would never have expected this sort of behaviour from the US. John Wayne must be spinning in his grave.
I'm saying if Assange offered any technical advice to Manning on how to secretly transfer information in order to hide Mannings involvement, that could fall under the area of conspiracy.
By that logic, notice on Wikileak's homepage suggesting the use of GnuPG/PGP would create a conspiracy. I think the US' authorities are out of control and desperately need to be taught a lesson in civility.
this is not a democracy, it is a Republic.
Okay, smart guy, why don't you tell us what is the difference between the two? Have you looked at a dictionary recently?
At the end of the day parents who don't want to take responsibility for parenting will blame the school regardless ...
I can suggest another way. Every browser maintains a browsing history. Configure them to clear the history every time they exit, but not before emailing the history to the kid's parents. If they want to, they can check what the kid's been up to and do their parenting as they wish. If not, the school's in the clear since they reported it to them.
Yes, I know that manufacturers don't open specs and write Windows-only drivers. I know it's not Linux's fault.
At least once it is supported, it generally stays supported. Unlike the others that rip out support for old hardware that's no longer bleeding edge.
Now lets compare this to Linux: Where is the "find drivers" button? Or right its called "Google your damned ass off" ...
No, at least in LinuxMint it's the "Find Proprietary Drivers" icon.
If you haven't even tried to run a LiveCD in a decade, why would you consider yourself qualified to criticize it?
Installing Ubuntu has been a piece of cake on every system I've done it on over the years.
You haven't been trying hard enough. I love Linux, and the *BSDs, but we're always going to find ourselves chasing hardware support since the manufacturers (well, many) couldn't care less about supporting us and they love to stick us with so far unsupported (by the devs) proprietary stuff. Even if you stick to older hardware to give the devs a chance to do something with that crap, some systems will inevitably fall through the cracks. I'm mostly talking about laptops in my case. In my experience, first it was video that could only barely (if at all) do X, then Winmodems (bleah!), then network interfaces, then sound, now WiFi. It doesn't much help when curveballs like PulseAudio get tossed in at the last minute. My HP dv4 AMD 64 bit Turion machine still won't do sound (using Debian testing), while my 32 bit Gateway AMD Sempron does *everything* swimmingly (running Debian stable).
I just spent a weekend trying distro after distro trying to find one that even detected the internal wifi in an Inspiron 1525. Finally, LinuxMint did. Woohoo! Unfortunately, it refuses to connect to my parents wifi router, while it has no trouble with my sister's. Needs research, and a wired connection (which isn't easy to do these days, damnit); pain in the butt. Sucks to be us sometimes, dependent upon hardware support.
Don't get me wrong, it's a lot better now than it used to be and live CDs/DVDs make the process a lot easier than it used to be, but there'll always be rotten boxes that refuse to play nice. Still better than banging your head on Win* and Mac, though.
"can be tracked without warrant" != "is being tracked without warrant"
Yeah, big difference, except now the cops can tell the telcos they want regular tracking data on all cellphones held for them for five years in case they ask for it. They don't need a warrant. Biiiiiig difference.
Then again, they could just ask the NSA for it.
Remember, you can't simply take back what you said because the damage might have already been done once you said it.
Here in The West, we've somewhat of an axiom: "'Tis better to be thought a fool, than to open one's mouth and confirm the fact."
Speech doesn't cause damage of any kind to anything. Children often say foolish things, yet we discount their foolishness understanding they just don't know. How is it that the Thai royal family, or Islam ..., can't just discount insults against them as simple ignorance to be ignored, instead of throwing the perp into jail or calling for Jihad?
They're just other forms of insecure tyrants. They believe at bottom that their ideas can't really stand on their own merits so they impose control instead.
The murderers of Danish cartoonists should be shot on sight as the vermin they are. The world doesn't need their sort.
Call again later when someone more senior is available. Contact the patient's advocate at the hospital to lodge your complaint for the bureaucratic hoops you were forced to jump through. Move on with your life.
These are white people problems--get over it. The [guy] isn't Rosa Parks.
Good advice, but you're wrong. The guy shouldn't have needed to get bitchy to get what they'd just made him sign away his life to get. On the other hand, the "one in charge" had an obligation to protect the kid's documentation, so good on her. She overdid it, but I'd prefer she did that than the alternative.
These are not "white people problems", and you're a jerk for suggesting they are. You people need to fix your tort law system, which is what causes this imbecility. Hauling out the "sue" card first is the silliest course of action possible.
Perhaps Bloomberg needs to be better acquainted with Boston harbour?
Indeed so, but no issue with federal kidnapping charges if you just dump him in the East River instead.
From what I've heard, that may constitute "cruel and unusual punishment", which may be illegal under your Constitution, yes?
Or is that not what you meant? *innocent look*
*Smirk* back at ya.
I believe you can "opt-out" by moving to another country.
Yes, and since when did "The Land of the Free, Home of the Brave" consider that an option?
Perhaps Bloomberg needs to be better acquainted with Boston harbour?
The majority of people would express a preference to be tracked online if given the choice? Yes/No.
The majority of people would express a preference to allow commercial entitities and advertisers to offer them a richer, more relevant, and more personalized web surfing experience if given the choice? Yes/No.
Look around you. The answer is "Yes."
So now you're claiming users are aware of, and accept, present levels of tracking?
Aware of, no. Accept, yes. It may be the elitist in me that thinks this but apathy and ignorance reign among the mass of humanity, especially online. Hell, most of them use Windows, and IE is the Internet, FFS.
We could trivially do another simple experiment, and that's to survey a few 'average users' to find out if they actually realize how much they are being tracked online. I am guessing most would be pretty unhappy with what they learn.
Really? I would guess you're wrong. I think it really depends on what slant you put on the question. You and I may see DHS and Big Brother and commercial datamining. They may see "a more relevant or accurate result from their web searches and more relevantly targetted web ads", etc.
Actually, as we develop software, I've done such surveys informally on some of our userbase, and most don't even have a clue of even the most basic tracking that is going on (most go wide-eyed if you simply explain to them a little bit of how Facebook can 'see' what sites you visit online if you have logged on to Facebook, and the site has a Facebook 'Like' button - USERS DO NOT KNOW).
I agree, though you must be talking to a more sophisticated crowd than I do. Those I see don't care, or if they do, they consider it a feature. "If the web knows more about me, I get a better, more personalized experience."
Your claims of informed consent are utter bullshit.
I claimed nothing. I just re-framed the stated question as gov't or corps would ask it, not as my friends at EFF would wish it asked.
FWIW, I hate this surveillance society that's been built on the web, I hate the commercialization of the web and the Internet, and I hate that people like my Mom have to be actively protected from those pirannas. I'm not oblivious, however, to the fact that we're all swimming with sharks.
Should I be disgusted with myself for having spent my career empowering some of those sharks (building or fixing their systems, building and programming their web backend dbs, fixing their crack-addled, eleven year old POS programs)? Considering what some of them have done with my work, I think yes. The Nuremburg Defense doesn't work, no matter how much the rent needs to be paid. We've all been co-opted if we're helping them.
Currently, I'm on strike awaiting epiphany.
The majority of people would express a preference to be tracked online if given the choice? Yes/No.
"The majority of people would express a preference to allow commercial entitities and advertisers to offer them a richer, more relevant, and more personalized web surfing experience if given the choice? Yes/No."
Look around you. The answer is "Yes."
In the middle of the Cold War, nobody can afford the cost having a hippie as a national hero.
Which was an exactly wrong headed decision. Western counter culture, the whole rock & roll and blue jeans stuff, was among the strongest and most threatening influences undermining the commies control of their populations. That's odd because The Establishment in the West felt just as threatened by the same things.
(-e**(i*pi) st post)
Least ignorant First Post, ever. On topic even.
How about the first guy that actually gets out of line gets his ass kicked?
Yes, let's go straight to violence when there are plenty of other solutions in front of us.
I don't know where you're from but around here, that's a much overused figure of speech. It doesn't necessarily presume actual physical contact. Cf. "kickass video", & etc. Cf. "badass", & etc. It's black ghetto slang. I wish we'd have grown beyond "gangsta" worship by now, but some things die slowly.
Not that I disagree, but did you know George Washington was considered a terrorist by some?
"Freedom's just another word for nothing left to lose, ..."
...a software maker may prefer to have these handled by a "distributor/importer" who gouges the consumer.
This may be the claim, but how often is software from the likes of Microsoft available in anything other than "US English"?
From the likes of Microsoft? Who ****ing cares?!? Why the hell do you *still* insist on using it? Everything about how they work and what they demand of you offends you, yet you still insist on going there. Huh. :-P
Find yourself an obsolete unused box and load LinuxMint on it, and you can learn to never have to complain about your software again. Note, it asks you what language you want to use before it installs. A mouse click enables an encrypted $HOME.
You're missing out on a teriffic deal! No EULA, just a GPL.
Correlation does not equal causation. You should hit yourself with a hammer under various circumstances, to narrow the possibilities.
I wonder why it is I so often find myself upon reading posts like yours thinking, "You first." You could perform that experiment yourself. So many advocates, yet so few volunteers.
"Put your money where your mouth is," I believe is how the saying goes.
If you're willing to say that 1 is not an integer ...
No. It certainly is an Integer.
... then 0.9999..... is not an integer.
Agreed.
Conversely, tell me what the difference is between 1 and 0.99999
They're in different number systems. One's (pun intended) an integer, and the other's a Rational (?) number. The latter can be rounded up to the other and the Integers are a subset of the Rationals but the former does not equal the latter.
Conversely, tell me what the difference is between 1 and 0.99999...
Does that "0.99999..." mean "0.99 repetend"? That's difficult to answer (how big is infinity?). Otherwise: .00001
echo "1 - 0.99999" | bc -l
How about this, 1 = 1/3 + 1/3 + 1/3 right? then 1 = 0.33333.....+0.33333......+0.33333....... = 0.9999999.....
echo "100 / 3" | bc -l
33.33333333333333333333
which I assume means "33.333 repetend". That's called an approximation. Approximation doesn't mean "equals."
If a number is contained by the set of integers (the number 1), any representation of that number that is equal to that number is also in the same set of integers, since it is the same number.
"0.999 repetend" in the Rational Number system is a close approximation in that system to the number one in the Integer number system.
How many angels can you fit on the head of a pin? FYI, I'm a High School dropout, so this is Grade Ten stuff for me. I may not remember correctly Rational, Irrational, Real, & etc. I've always loved math but I've never considered myself good at it. I still seriously despise my eight grade math teacher for having tried to suck all the fun out of it in the name of regimentation. Bastard!