You're still claiming that God was involved in creating the universe. I don't see how you can claim that and NOT be a creationist. And a theist.
Not in colloquial English. Words have specific meanings, and "creationist" refers to something specific that your definition doesn't accurately capture.
No, creationists believe that any "big bang" was God's handiwork:
Genesis 1:1 "In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth."
So, if you believe that some imaginary invisible and mathematically impossible in this universe God created the Big Bang to set thing in motion, you're definitely a creationist.
BTW, in colloquial english, that would be "religious nutbar", not "creationist"
first definition of colloquial from dictionary.com: characteristic of or appropriate to ordinary or familiar conversation rather than formal speech or writing; informal.
Species: are creatures who dont bread with each other
So, loganberries (a cross between blackberries and raspberries) doesn't exist. Neither do peppermint, tangeloes (even though they've been around for thousands of years), grapefruits, triticale (wheat+rye), durum wheat (oh well, guess all that pasta is fake after all), grizzly+polar bear hybrids, sheep (54 chromosomes)+goat (60 chromosomes) hybrids, wild horse(66 chromosomes)+domestic horse(64 chromosomes) hybrids, beefalo, coydogs, coywolves, wolfdogs, mules, hinnies, zebroids, wholphins (dolphin+false killer whale), blynx, and wolves with black pelts (from breeding with dogs).
As for your contention that wolves had all the information necessary to create dogs, that's false. While all dogs today are descended from grey wolves, there were 4 different gene clade mutation events that gave rise to the domestic dog, starting with one ~40k-130k years ago. Breeding 2 wolves doesn't ever create a chihuahua.
but it doesn't show it getting more complex, actually the opposite, a weaker fish
Evolution doesn't work by producing ever-more complex examples. Case in point - cats. The domestic cat brain loses 2/3 of its brain cells during it's early growth - they simply aren't needed for its' environmental niche, and a waste of resources, so the cats that pruned back on brain cells were able to survive on less food, etc.
Adders Tongue has 1200 chromosomes. Guess that makes them more complex than humans.
Or if you want to go by the number of genes, Amoebas got us beat 209 times over (670,000,000,000 for the amoeba, 3,200,000,000 for humans).
Natural selection never made any claims about producing anything other than creatures best fit for their environmental niche. Not as your "evolution as change going up hill". More complex encoding/expressing techniques allow for fewer resources, much easier disruption/mutation, and quicker evolution through natural selection for each niche. That's one reason why we saw such quick evolution in humans despite the relatively small number of genes, and one reason why amoebas are still amoebas - too much redundant stability and too many genes that only encode for one trait, or are just there as junk pairs, acting as scaffolding to stabilize the dna structure.
Or the toxic sludge caused enough mutations, some of which included an immunity to that same toxic sludge. You certainly don't need to have fish that had a pre-existing immunity. Every copy of every animal has a certain number of mutations - humans have, on average, 60 per person. Increase the environmental stressors (radiation, pollutants, etc) and that number is going to go up.
What are all those circuit boards doing in the water anyway?
They're evolving into your next generation water-proof iPhone, you ignorant clod!
Why do you think the fish survived? The PCBs don't affect them because they too have evolved their own version of the Jobsian Reality Distortion Field!
If you went to an evolutionary biology conference and said "I believe God created the Big Bang, and once life arose, evolution kicked in" most would have no problem with that and would not qualify you as a "creationist."
Sure it would. You're still claiming that God was involved in creating the universe. I don't see how you can claim that and NOT be a creationist. And a theist.
Re:It's not just what you say, but how
on
The RMS Tour Rider
·
· Score: 1
Android can run atop BSD with a bit of work (after all, if you can boot linux on it, you can get the info you need to boot another OS). You can be sure that Google has that as a "Plan B" (one of many - another one being to allow.java source files (as opposed to java.class files) to be converted to run under the dalvek VM). The switch is always just one lawsuit / injunction away.
In fact, doing so (and dumping the dalvek VM for java source being translated into c source) would allow for a few things:
1. The use of position-independent binary code would eliminate a whole family of malware exploits;
2. The speedup of using native code would allow for parallel execution of the same instructions on two independent cores - if the results differ at any sequence point, you either have a hardware failure or you've been p0wned. It's been done by mainframes for quite some time;
3. It would allow for languages other than java to be used;
4. Compilation of the source on servers run by the marketplace would allow for the application of more heuristics, for example, to detect when a program contains code that wants to ask for privileges it shouldn't by some round-about technique. It would also allow for automatic updates when a bug is found, rather than the developer having to push them out. And code would be signed as known-good.
5. The same techniques would allow the same source to be cross-compiled for other markets/devices, such as Apple's iOS and WP7 (one source to rule them all!), encouraging jailbreaking and side-loading on those devices:-)
In the long run, it's not about the underlying operating system - not even the underlying hardware, past a certain point. It's about running programs people want to run - and they don't care if part of the underlying technology is linux or bsd or darwin or integrity or microware os-9 or qnx or whatever.
Also, your chart is misleading - it fails to include *any* count of closed-source / non-free programs, which greatly outnumber "free" programs. And you missed my point - that software licensed under the GPL is less free than, for example, software licensed under the BSD or MIT or Apache licenses. The GPL doesn't meet any of the 4 freedoms listed on the home page of the fsf (fsf.org). It contains restrictions (first freedom listed), including restrictions on sharing (second freedom listed - "you must provide yadda yadda yadda "), restrictions on adaptation (third freedom listed ex: linking) and restrictions on working with others (fourth freedom listed ex: linking, distribution, combining with non-copyleft software).
If it's so successful, why is it that even Walmart failed with their $200 linux PC when everyone was fed up with Vista? It's because the linux desktop is a real mess. On this laptop, which worked fine on a fresh install, sound regularly goes to 100% of one core and requires me to kill the process and delete a few files, wireless was nuked by 2 separate upgrades and is no longer recoverable, programs that use the QT libraries will sometimes go into an infinite loop and have to be killed, it keeps telling me that my battery is broken (even though it works just fine and gives hours of use when I forget to plug it in, same as when it was new), and I had to kill off and delete both the "display notifications in the panel" and "indexing dis-service" because they ended up also being total cpu hogs.
Couple that with random times where X goes to 100%, random 5-second pauses where everything just stops (but top doesn't show why), random failures in other desktops that I have to use until a new patch comes out that fixes some of the worst behaviours, frequent failures on calls to painting the window client area on many apps, despite disabling compositing, and the linux desktop is definitely not ready for consumer use, never mind that it can't even run most of the programs that people want to use.
Heck, just go look at all the "features" that the l
I have the feeling that sometimes, an idea is inevitable because of a confluence of events/history, and that's why we often see the same idea invented or discovery made almost simultaneously by multiple people or groups.
In other cases, it really is a "one off" individual / event, like the Mule in Asimov's Foundation Trilogy.
I think, though, that personal computers were inevitable. All the original hobby computers came with unique operating systems (how much could you squeeze in with 4k of ram, after all? The sense of freedom I got from upgrading to 64k for $100 - no that's not a typo - 64k, not 640k - has not been duplicated since:-).
Back in the '80s, Microware OS-9 Level 2 was already bringing cheap ($99, including a really nice ring binder manual) compact multi-user multi-tasking to the masses, complete with both multiple console and graphical windows in 128k. If we didn't have the *bsds, I think we'd have had some other variant, and a bunch of clones and free implementations as people "scratched their itches."
This isn't to take away what Ritchie did. To the contrary, shrinking Multics down to size, as well as developing a more-or-less portable language that didn't require a runtime interpreter, were BIG advances.
I'm not belittling what Ritchie accomplished - quite the contrary, I think that c continues to be more important than any of the languages that have since been developed, and that unix will continue to be the gold standard for operating systems for at least another generation.
Does this mean we should have a "day" for him? It's a free world - there's nothing stopping anyone from marking a day on the calendar as Dennis Ritchie Day. I don't expect it would get to the masses, any more than I expect people to be making a big thing out of "Oh, it's Steve Jobs Day" a decade from now - not unless they can get a paid holiday out of it.
Einstein had more impact thn Steve Jobs or Dennis Ritchie
[citation needed]
Alexander Fleming had more impact than any of them. In terms of absolute impact, Hitler also had more. The advances in emergency medicine, the Cold War and the moon race, along with the forced accelerated growth of technologies like VLSI, which gave us modern electronics, were all directly traceable to the consequences of having to squash that freak.
No - just lived through a time where the government had to call in the army to help patrol the streets because cells were putting bombs in the stock exchange, kidnapping a foreign diplomat, financing their activities by bank robberies, killing one government minister, stuffing bombs in mailboxes and stuff.
You know what though - lets say I'm a drug cartel boss sitting in Mexico somewhere. I get this little message and I ask myself, have they actually got this information? I mean this information can be got, but it would take years of sophisticated intelligence work that probably the Mexican authorities themselves haven't got. And its not like the lists of the corrupt are sitting somewhere on a webserver just waiting for a junior high SQL injection - most of this stuff happens very far off the books.
The problem isn't "Do the have the info?" The cartel KNOWS they have the info, since the cops and pols do, and aren't acting on it because they're on the payroll. The problem is that Anonymous isn't on the payroll, there's no way to buy their silence, and Anonymous is going to expose who is on the cartel's payroll to the OTHER cartels.
Illegal drugs are a very competitive - and literally cut-throat - business. You're the leader of a cartel and you know that the info is out there, and that Anonymous very likely have it (cops and pols aren't exactly comp sci security specialists). And that your whole network is about to be exposed. You don't have time to recruit your own team of hackers, and even if you did, you'd have no way of knowing if they weren't plants, either by another cartel, anonymous, the DEA or some other law wnforcement agency, the CIA (hey, what better way to set up your next "drugs for hostages" deal) or whatever.
Nope - not gonna fly. And you don't have time to hunt down all this guys relatives and acquaintances, because you're too busy making sure that all the people who are about to be exposed STAY bought.
On the kiddie porn thing, it was the list of users on the servers, so it was accurate.
On the current list, there's no more guarantee of accuracy than, say, your stupid no-fly list. Or wrongfully-convicted murderers on death row. So, to paraphrase you, does that help you understand why for several decades your government has been at war with you, citizen?
To quote you - "Getting people murdered isn't how the good guys act" - why do you put up with such things? Isn't it time to end the war on drugs, as well as the military-industrial-congressional complex? You know, the one your last honest president warned about?
Or maybe the Zetas are going to find the dickheads who yanked the guy, and make an example of them? Because the one thing organized crime doesn't want is anything that threatens "the business."
It allows them to save face - "Here's your guy - we didn't order it" and use it as an excuse "clean house^W^Wsettle a few old scores" at the same time - a win-win for both sides.
You get a one-word text message - "LEAVE359" - you drop whatever you are doing immediately and go into hiding. You should have some cash to be able to go completely dark - rent a room somewhere, go live on skid row or at a shelter for a while, buy a used car for cash, throw on a stolen license plate (and put YOUR plate on the car you swiped it from - nobody checks their own license plate), or even just use a bicycle and a backpack - you can cover 100 miles in a few days that way, and that gets you to a different city, and gives enough time to accumulate enough "road dirt" and rough edges to change your appearance somewhat. A quick-and-dirty hair dye job, hair cut, different (or no) glasses, your own mom won't recognize you in a lineup.
Take a job for cash in the new location, rent a cheap room, get a burn phone, call a predefined number and wait, knowing it may be a few years before you're contacted.
Considering modus operandi of Los Zetas, I would fully expect the person in question to be released - as a set of disjoint parts, and probably with a video detailing the process.
Remember, when they call them "ultra-violent", it's not an overstatement. It's a cartel that thrives on violence and terror it begets to control their areas.
Anonymous is already aware of that. So, when doing nothing is going to result in your aforementioned scenario, why not try something different, if only to make them - and everyone else - think twice about jacking a member of Anonymous.
Anonymous is just using the same logic as the Russians did - and if you recall, it worked. And they're in a better position to do it than the Russians were, because it's not like the drug cartel can target other members of Anonymous. So the cartel really has only two choices - release the hostage, or lose a lot more than "an eye for an eye."
All that to try to say that Anonymous putting one of the largest hordes of Kiddie Porn off the net is no big deal. If it's no big deal, why didn't the cops do it?
Hm. I've actually never seen a profit center outsourced -- the risk isn't worth it, typically.
Willfully blind? Profit centers are outsourced all the time. Ever see a captive spin-off? Or a division sold for cash plus a percentage of shares? You know, like IBM did with their PC biz? Or GM with EDS in 1996?
As to the language thing: he's right. Maybe *you* need more than 12 months of professional experience to master a language, but *I* don't, and my better coworkers don't, either.
Most languages you can get the basics in a day or two. However, you certainly cannot "master" c in under 6 months. Call back when you're able to write non-trivial c programs such as servers without leaking memory and then we'll talk, because obviously you can't.
The poster obviously doesn't understand the difference between a profit center and a cost center. The widget makers are too busy making widgets to get them into the customers' hands in exchange for money. Yes, yes, the sales people can't sell widgets without widget makers making some (well, they'll try. The successful ones are called con artists) but those could be widgets made by anybody. That's why the widget makers are not profit centers, and why companies outsource their widget making but not their sales department.
Companies outsource both sales and marketing all the time. From hiring boiler rooms of telemarketers to Madison Avenue ad companies, it's been done for decades.
Slashdot Mirror
No, creationists believe that any "big bang" was God's handiwork:
So, if you believe that some imaginary invisible and mathematically impossible in this universe God created the Big Bang to set thing in motion, you're definitely a creationist.
BTW, in colloquial english, that would be "religious nutbar", not "creationist"
first definition of colloquial from dictionary.com: characteristic of or appropriate to ordinary or familiar conversation rather than formal speech or writing; informal.
So, loganberries (a cross between blackberries and raspberries) doesn't exist. Neither do peppermint, tangeloes (even though they've been around for thousands of years), grapefruits, triticale (wheat+rye), durum wheat (oh well, guess all that pasta is fake after all), grizzly+polar bear hybrids, sheep (54 chromosomes)+goat (60 chromosomes) hybrids, wild horse(66 chromosomes)+domestic horse(64 chromosomes) hybrids, beefalo, coydogs, coywolves, wolfdogs, mules, hinnies, zebroids, wholphins (dolphin+false killer whale), blynx, and wolves with black pelts (from breeding with dogs).
As for your contention that wolves had all the information necessary to create dogs, that's false. While all dogs today are descended from grey wolves, there were 4 different gene clade mutation events that gave rise to the domestic dog, starting with one ~40k-130k years ago. Breeding 2 wolves doesn't ever create a chihuahua.
Pics of ligon, tigon, leapon, zorse, zonkey, zony, etc
Also, Dawkins is not a hard-core atheist.
Evolution doesn't work by producing ever-more complex examples. Case in point - cats. The domestic cat brain loses 2/3 of its brain cells during it's early growth - they simply aren't needed for its' environmental niche, and a waste of resources, so the cats that pruned back on brain cells were able to survive on less food, etc.
Adders Tongue has 1200 chromosomes. Guess that makes them more complex than humans.
Or if you want to go by the number of genes, Amoebas got us beat 209 times over (670,000,000,000 for the amoeba, 3,200,000,000 for humans).
Natural selection never made any claims about producing anything other than creatures best fit for their environmental niche. Not as your "evolution as change going up hill". More complex encoding/expressing techniques allow for fewer resources, much easier disruption/mutation, and quicker evolution through natural selection for each niche. That's one reason why we saw such quick evolution in humans despite the relatively small number of genes, and one reason why amoebas are still amoebas - too much redundant stability and too many genes that only encode for one trait, or are just there as junk pairs, acting as scaffolding to stabilize the dna structure.
Or the toxic sludge caused enough mutations, some of which included an immunity to that same toxic sludge. You certainly don't need to have fish that had a pre-existing immunity. Every copy of every animal has a certain number of mutations - humans have, on average, 60 per person. Increase the environmental stressors (radiation, pollutants, etc) and that number is going to go up.
They're evolving into your next generation water-proof iPhone, you ignorant clod!
Why do you think the fish survived? The PCBs don't affect them because they too have evolved their own version of the Jobsian Reality Distortion Field!
Sure it would. You're still claiming that God was involved in creating the universe. I don't see how you can claim that and NOT be a creationist. And a theist.
Android can run atop BSD with a bit of work (after all, if you can boot linux on it, you can get the info you need to boot another OS). You can be sure that Google has that as a "Plan B" (one of many - another one being to allow .java source files (as opposed to java .class files) to be converted to run under the dalvek VM). The switch is always just one lawsuit / injunction away.
In fact, doing so (and dumping the dalvek VM for java source being translated into c source) would allow for a few things:
1. The use of position-independent binary code would eliminate a whole family of malware exploits; :-)
2. The speedup of using native code would allow for parallel execution of the same instructions on two independent cores - if the results differ at any sequence point, you either have a hardware failure or you've been p0wned. It's been done by mainframes for quite some time;
3. It would allow for languages other than java to be used;
4. Compilation of the source on servers run by the marketplace would allow for the application of more heuristics, for example, to detect when a program contains code that wants to ask for privileges it shouldn't by some round-about technique. It would also allow for automatic updates when a bug is found, rather than the developer having to push them out. And code would be signed as known-good.
5. The same techniques would allow the same source to be cross-compiled for other markets/devices, such as Apple's iOS and WP7 (one source to rule them all!), encouraging jailbreaking and side-loading on those devices
In the long run, it's not about the underlying operating system - not even the underlying hardware, past a certain point. It's about running programs people want to run - and they don't care if part of the underlying technology is linux or bsd or darwin or integrity or microware os-9 or qnx or whatever.
Also, your chart is misleading - it fails to include *any* count of closed-source / non-free programs, which greatly outnumber "free" programs. And you missed my point - that software licensed under the GPL is less free than, for example, software licensed under the BSD or MIT or Apache licenses. The GPL doesn't meet any of the 4 freedoms listed on the home page of the fsf (fsf.org). It contains restrictions (first freedom listed), including restrictions on sharing (second freedom listed - "you must provide yadda yadda yadda "), restrictions on adaptation (third freedom listed ex: linking) and restrictions on working with others (fourth freedom listed ex: linking, distribution, combining with non-copyleft software).
If it's so successful, why is it that even Walmart failed with their $200 linux PC when everyone was fed up with Vista? It's because the linux desktop is a real mess. On this laptop, which worked fine on a fresh install, sound regularly goes to 100% of one core and requires me to kill the process and delete a few files, wireless was nuked by 2 separate upgrades and is no longer recoverable, programs that use the QT libraries will sometimes go into an infinite loop and have to be killed, it keeps telling me that my battery is broken (even though it works just fine and gives hours of use when I forget to plug it in, same as when it was new), and I had to kill off and delete both the "display notifications in the panel" and "indexing dis-service" because they ended up also being total cpu hogs.
Couple that with random times where X goes to 100%, random 5-second pauses where everything just stops (but top doesn't show why), random failures in other desktops that I have to use until a new patch comes out that fixes some of the worst behaviours, frequent failures on calls to painting the window client area on many apps, despite disabling compositing, and the linux desktop is definitely not ready for consumer use, never mind that it can't even run most of the programs that people want to use.
Heck, just go look at all the "features" that the l
Anyone stopped for DWB would disagree. Also, even judges say that between 5% and 14% of all convictions are of innocent people.
In other words, justice is often being meted out based on arbitrary factors, not facts.
I have the feeling that sometimes, an idea is inevitable because of a confluence of events/history, and that's why we often see the same idea invented or discovery made almost simultaneously by multiple people or groups.
In other cases, it really is a "one off" individual / event, like the Mule in Asimov's Foundation Trilogy.
I think, though, that personal computers were inevitable. All the original hobby computers came with unique operating systems (how much could you squeeze in with 4k of ram, after all? The sense of freedom I got from upgrading to 64k for $100 - no that's not a typo - 64k, not 640k - has not been duplicated since :-).
Back in the '80s, Microware OS-9 Level 2 was already bringing cheap ($99, including a really nice ring binder manual) compact multi-user multi-tasking to the masses, complete with both multiple console and graphical windows in 128k. If we didn't have the *bsds, I think we'd have had some other variant, and a bunch of clones and free implementations as people "scratched their itches."
This isn't to take away what Ritchie did. To the contrary, shrinking Multics down to size, as well as developing a more-or-less portable language that didn't require a runtime interpreter, were BIG advances.
A "mock" zombie invasion?
That's what they want you to think ...
I'm not belittling what Ritchie accomplished - quite the contrary, I think that c continues to be more important than any of the languages that have since been developed, and that unix will continue to be the gold standard for operating systems for at least another generation.
Does this mean we should have a "day" for him? It's a free world - there's nothing stopping anyone from marking a day on the calendar as Dennis Ritchie Day. I don't expect it would get to the masses, any more than I expect people to be making a big thing out of "Oh, it's Steve Jobs Day" a decade from now - not unless they can get a paid holiday out of it.
[citation needed]
Alexander Fleming had more impact than any of them. In terms of absolute impact, Hitler also had more. The advances in emergency medicine, the Cold War and the moon race, along with the forced accelerated growth of technologies like VLSI, which gave us modern electronics, were all directly traceable to the consequences of having to squash that freak.
free() at last!
free() at last!
Error: Double free or corruption.
Aborted!
No - just lived through a time where the government had to call in the army to help patrol the streets because cells were putting bombs in the stock exchange, kidnapping a foreign diplomat, financing their activities by bank robberies, killing one government minister, stuffing bombs in mailboxes and stuff.
A decent-sized fire generates its own winds.
The problem isn't "Do the have the info?" The cartel KNOWS they have the info, since the cops and pols do, and aren't acting on it because they're on the payroll. The problem is that Anonymous isn't on the payroll, there's no way to buy their silence, and Anonymous is going to expose who is on the cartel's payroll to the OTHER cartels.
Illegal drugs are a very competitive - and literally cut-throat - business. You're the leader of a cartel and you know that the info is out there, and that Anonymous very likely have it (cops and pols aren't exactly comp sci security specialists). And that your whole network is about to be exposed. You don't have time to recruit your own team of hackers, and even if you did, you'd have no way of knowing if they weren't plants, either by another cartel, anonymous, the DEA or some other law wnforcement agency, the CIA (hey, what better way to set up your next "drugs for hostages" deal) or whatever.
Nope - not gonna fly. And you don't have time to hunt down all this guys relatives and acquaintances, because you're too busy making sure that all the people who are about to be exposed STAY bought.
Sorry, that's not *my* code :-p
Stop with the hot air about trying to push the less threatening term "climate change" - you're contributing to global warming.
On the kiddie porn thing, it was the list of users on the servers, so it was accurate.
On the current list, there's no more guarantee of accuracy than, say, your stupid no-fly list. Or wrongfully-convicted murderers on death row. So, to paraphrase you, does that help you understand why for several decades your government has been at war with you, citizen?
To quote you - "Getting people murdered isn't how the good guys act" - why do you put up with such things? Isn't it time to end the war on drugs, as well as the military-industrial-congressional complex? You know, the one your last honest president warned about?
It allows them to save face - "Here's your guy - we didn't order it" and use it as an excuse "clean house^W^Wsettle a few old scores" at the same time - a win-win for both sides.
You get a one-word text message - "LEAVE359" - you drop whatever you are doing immediately and go into hiding. You should have some cash to be able to go completely dark - rent a room somewhere, go live on skid row or at a shelter for a while, buy a used car for cash, throw on a stolen license plate (and put YOUR plate on the car you swiped it from - nobody checks their own license plate), or even just use a bicycle and a backpack - you can cover 100 miles in a few days that way, and that gets you to a different city, and gives enough time to accumulate enough "road dirt" and rough edges to change your appearance somewhat. A quick-and-dirty hair dye job, hair cut, different (or no) glasses, your own mom won't recognize you in a lineup.
Take a job for cash in the new location, rent a cheap room, get a burn phone, call a predefined number and wait, knowing it may be a few years before you're contacted.
Anonymous is already aware of that. So, when doing nothing is going to result in your aforementioned scenario, why not try something different, if only to make them - and everyone else - think twice about jacking a member of Anonymous.
Anonymous is just using the same logic as the Russians did - and if you recall, it worked. And they're in a better position to do it than the Russians were, because it's not like the drug cartel can target other members of Anonymous. So the cartel really has only two choices - release the hostage, or lose a lot more than "an eye for an eye."
All that to try to say that Anonymous putting one of the largest hordes of Kiddie Porn off the net is no big deal. If it's no big deal, why didn't the cops do it?
Willfully blind? Profit centers are outsourced all the time. Ever see a captive spin-off? Or a division sold for cash plus a percentage of shares? You know, like IBM did with their PC biz? Or GM with EDS in 1996?
Most languages you can get the basics in a day or two. However, you certainly cannot "master" c in under 6 months. Call back when you're able to write non-trivial c programs such as servers without leaking memory and then we'll talk, because obviously you can't.
I call BS.
Companies outsource both sales and marketing all the time. From hiring boiler rooms of telemarketers to Madison Avenue ad companies, it's been done for decades.