Nothing says "viable political party" quite like a single-issue platform, and a name many associate with either raping and pillaging on the high seas or Walt Disney.
I think you missed the point of that particular exercise:) Even if they're the worst team in the COUNTRY, the school has to heap praise upon them or they'll feel bad about themselves. Jocks' egos need extra tender loving care!
I'd also argue it has something to do with the way our education system is tending towards punishing achievers for the benefit of underachievers. How social engineering has replaced acedemics; self-esteem over aptitude.
I'm sure you've seen the increasing number of high schools that have eliminated the valedictorian because acknowledging that achievement makes the other kids feel bad about themselves. That's just one symptom of the problem I've observed.
Remember "outcome-based education"? Look it up or ask a teacher from the 90's.
But, without a doubt, we know that mankind's abuse of fossil fuels alone is altering the global climate, melting the polar icecaps, generating more frequent and destructive tropical storms, and killing off massive species of plants and animials.
Yes indeed folks, we know this 100% for sure because SCIENTISTS say so!
If you honestly believe The People have any involvement, direct or otherwise, with the budgeting of (any) government these days, then I've got some beautiful swamp land in Florida to sell you.
"You are an even greater suspect than if you had made the vulnerability public."
And if you are responsible for making the vulnerability public, I think you should be held partially responsible for whatever damage comes about as a result.
"The idea is to help raise the third world up, not keep them dependant on the first world."
That's just a bit melodromatic, if not downright misleading, don't you think? Projects like this that rely solely on people's/companies' generocity should know better than to look a gift horse in the mouth.
Because it takes a lot less time/money to grow and transport rice to the affected areas than to establish an entire modern infrastructure in (and to) them. Ultimately that needs to be done too, but the rice is supposed to meet the more immediate critical needs. How is that bigoted? Your position on this is both arrogant and shortsighted.
The fact is that Bush has told us bald-faced lies about domestic spying activities, and at this point it would require a hearty steaming ladle-full of naivete to imagine that the general public now knows the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
He's certainly skirted around the truth, and most definitely hasn't been forthcoming with details on what his administration sees as essential security operations. But if you're going to claim he outright lied to the American people about the programs, this is where you need a source that doesn't lie by exclusion. Left out of the incriminating Bush quotes on wiretapping was this vital tidbit: "The Patriot Act authorizes what are called delayed notification search warrants." (from the actual speech). Without that, one could easily surmise that he was, in fact, directly contradicting himself. Michale Moore dupes a lot of people using the same method.
The fact is that the Bush administration has aptly demonstrated that it simply cannot be trusted, and the sorry fact is that we can be certain of precious little beyond that.
Yet many people (myself excluded) DO still trust him. Your assessment of his trustworthiness, while shared by fewer and fewer people every day, is still opinion, not fact.
The press stopped being an ally of the people long ago. That's not to say they are an enemy, but their allegiance clearly lies with The Almighty Dollar.
While I don't disagree with your general premise, I wish people such as yourself would stop confusing "strong opinion" for "fact". Speak softly and carry a big stick; which in this case would be credible (read: not left-leaning blogs) citations.
I know it's fun and easy to blame so many things on "the fundies", but would you mind referencing ANY influential Christian group that was lobbying ICANN over the.xxx TLD? And just because The Register says so, that doesn't make it true.
The problem is that we have all sorts of people defining for our users what they need, and then theorizing a solution around that narrow perception. Most people don't classify themselves the way we tend to here. They just want everything to work right out of the box. Unfortunately that includes many things that are completely out of the hands of Linux devs.
Personally, if I were in charge of defining the average home PC user's needs, they'd look like this (in order):
1. Internet (web/e-mail) 2. Gadgets (digital cameras, photo printers, etc.) 3. Games 4. Applications (accounting/tax software, professional documents)
Linux has #1 nailed down just fine. #4 is often hit or miss, and #2 and #3 depend mostly upon 3rd parties for support.
Before the average home PC user will be willing to switch from Windows (which works), they need to feel that things will work just as well, if nor better, on Linux. IMHO, Linux isn't even close in that regard.
Slashdot Mirror
Nothing says "viable political party" quite like a single-issue platform, and a name many associate with either raping and pillaging on the high seas or Walt Disney.
"That, or they're after the logs so that they can do it the American Way (tm) and start suing blind 90 year olds and quadriplegics."
Yes, because that's what the RIAA does here; targets blind 90 year olds and quadriplegics. Really, the hyperbolic cliches are really quite tiresome.
"We live in a nation where 45% of eligible voters believe the world is 6000 years old"
No we don't.
There, corrected that for ya.
I think you missed the point of that particular exercise :) Even if they're the worst team in the COUNTRY, the school has to heap praise upon them or they'll feel bad about themselves. Jocks' egos need extra tender loving care!
The fact that scientists don't often get additional follow-up grants for reports that say "Everything's A-OK!" is what makes me skeptical.
I'd also argue it has something to do with the way our education system is tending towards punishing achievers for the benefit of underachievers. How social engineering has replaced acedemics; self-esteem over aptitude.
I'm sure you've seen the increasing number of high schools that have eliminated the valedictorian because acknowledging that achievement makes the other kids feel bad about themselves. That's just one symptom of the problem I've observed.
Remember "outcome-based education"? Look it up or ask a teacher from the 90's.
You have plenty of experts to choose from, and just as many of them say mankind is causing the phenomenon as not. And they ALL have agendas.
Just me, though, I'm less inclined to trust government-supported doomsayers.
Security through obscurity?
No you're a sociopath because you gleefully engage in activities that can kill people.
But, without a doubt, we know that mankind's abuse of fossil fuels alone is altering the global climate, melting the polar icecaps, generating more frequent and destructive tropical storms, and killing off massive species of plants and animials.
Yes indeed folks, we know this 100% for sure because SCIENTISTS say so!
If you honestly believe The People have any involvement, direct or otherwise, with the budgeting of (any) government these days, then I've got some beautiful swamp land in Florida to sell you.
Like it or not, and for better or for worse, Windows brought the PC to the masses.
Now whether or not "the masses" are adequately equipped to experiment with something like Linux is certainly debatable.
However I'd be willing to bet that a good percentage of Slashdotters owe their livelihoods to Windows in one way or another.
I'm officially Godwining all "Filesharing isn't theft" threads.
"You are an even greater suspect than if you had made the vulnerability public."
And if you are responsible for making the vulnerability public, I think you should be held partially responsible for whatever damage comes about as a result.
Name ONE instance where someone notified (only) the company of their product's vulnerability and was taken to court over it.
These idiots get in trouble when they threaten to make the vulnerability public, or actually do so.
"The idea is to help raise the third world up, not keep them dependant on the first world."
That's just a bit melodromatic, if not downright misleading, don't you think? Projects like this that rely solely on people's/companies' generocity should know better than to look a gift horse in the mouth.
Is that why we (the hive mind) are so sympathetic towards SCO too?
Because it takes a lot less time/money to grow and transport rice to the affected areas than to establish an entire modern infrastructure in (and to) them. Ultimately that needs to be done too, but the rice is supposed to meet the more immediate critical needs. How is that bigoted? Your position on this is both arrogant and shortsighted.
The fact is that Bush has told us bald-faced lies about domestic spying activities, and at this point it would require a hearty steaming ladle-full of naivete to imagine that the general public now knows the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
He's certainly skirted around the truth, and most definitely hasn't been forthcoming with details on what his administration sees as essential security operations. But if you're going to claim he outright lied to the American people about the programs, this is where you need a source that doesn't lie by exclusion. Left out of the incriminating Bush quotes on wiretapping was this vital tidbit: "The Patriot Act authorizes what are called delayed notification search warrants." (from the actual speech). Without that, one could easily surmise that he was, in fact, directly contradicting himself. Michale Moore dupes a lot of people using the same method.
The fact is that the Bush administration has aptly demonstrated that it simply cannot be trusted, and the sorry fact is that we can be certain of precious little beyond that.
Yet many people (myself excluded) DO still trust him. Your assessment of his trustworthiness, while shared by fewer and fewer people every day, is still opinion, not fact.
You are asserting your interpretation of those factual events as fact itself.
The press stopped being an ally of the people long ago. That's not to say they are an enemy, but their allegiance clearly lies with The Almighty Dollar.
While I don't disagree with your general premise, I wish people such as yourself would stop confusing "strong opinion" for "fact". Speak softly and carry a big stick; which in this case would be credible (read: not left-leaning blogs) citations.
I know it's fun and easy to blame so many things on "the fundies", but would you mind referencing ANY influential Christian group that was lobbying ICANN over the .xxx TLD? And just because The Register says so, that doesn't make it true.
"...however helpful your intentions?"
I think you mis-spelled "vindictive".
Afterall, we're talking about a former employee, and considering how far things were taken, it doesn't sound like it was an amicable separation.
The problem is that we have all sorts of people defining for our users what they need, and then theorizing a solution around that narrow perception. Most people don't classify themselves the way we tend to here. They just want everything to work right out of the box. Unfortunately that includes many things that are completely out of the hands of Linux devs.
Personally, if I were in charge of defining the average home PC user's needs, they'd look like this (in order):
1. Internet (web/e-mail)
2. Gadgets (digital cameras, photo printers, etc.)
3. Games
4. Applications (accounting/tax software, professional documents)
Linux has #1 nailed down just fine. #4 is often hit or miss, and #2 and #3 depend mostly upon 3rd parties for support.
Before the average home PC user will be willing to switch from Windows (which works), they need to feel that things will work just as well, if nor better, on Linux. IMHO, Linux isn't even close in that regard.