You know, that's a terrible argument. You're saying it's wrong, but you're not giving any supporting evidence. I'm assuming that you know both Green and Latin to make such a statement. The good old "I'm smarter than you, so I'm right" doesn't cut it, especially when your audience may be as smart or smarter than you.
So how correct or incorrect is virii? Well, if you consider "the men of..." would seem to convey the same idea of the biblical Legion demon (my name is legion, for we are many.). If a virus is one attacker (attack vector, or soldier), many could be conveyed as a legion. That would imply many men of. We are always very comfortable anthropomorphizing inanimate objects, would it be wrong to consider multiple virus to be the men of, or the army of, or the legion of? It would seem appropriate to follow that with the name of their creator. Virii haxor? Dear god, I hope I don't give an uber-leet script kiddie any ideas. Ok kids, be good, stay in school, m'kay?
I guess the most important thing we should remember is that language is what we've made of it. There are people who want to be linguistic purists. What are you being pure about? You've picked an arbitrary point in history, and have romanticized so much, you too believe there is to never be progress. I won't argue against the idea that many modern linguistic trends are wrong, but words adopted into common use, regardless of how badly they are spelled, or how awful they may be, they become words. Search on Google for "new words in [year]" (replace year with a number), and you'll find all kinds of interesting words that you probably believed existed "forever".
I'm very happy that "cougar" and "tramp-stamp" became official words in 2010. Now I don't have to say "A lovely older woman with sexual interests a younger men, who has a tattoo on her lower back". "Cougar with a tramp stamp" not only has a nice ring to it, but it sounds real dirty.:)
So... It doesn't matter if you think you know Latin, Greek, or English. If everyone else says it's right, and the use is continued, in time they will be right. I'd be willing to bet the majority of what we say now (including this message) would have been impossible to decipher based on linguistic standards even a few hundred years ago. Don't even consider looking back more than about 450 years, "Modern English" didn't even exist.
For a second there, I thought you were serious.:) Then my sarcasm alert start ringing the "Deep Sarcasm" tone. I'd describe it, but it's in my head. Shhhh, don't mess with my insanities.:)
I wouldn't be terribly surprised if that was the case.
I know the Facebook app on Blackberry (not Windows Live) keeps the phone very busy. Both my girlfriend and I had Blackberry 8330's. She installed the Facebook app, and found the phone to be unresponsive at times (like about 3 times a week). I installed it on mine, and the same happened. Uninstalling it fixed the problem. Otherwise, we'd find the phones not working, and have to remove the battery to reboot it (the buttons were unresponsive).
Besides being unresponsive, it was horribly slow trying to do anything on the Internet (over the 3G network). Uninstalling the app fixed it. I know they synchronize profile pictures, so I'd suspect repeatedly downloading the profile pictures. If it worked properly, I wouldn't mind. I have no download quota through my provider. It doesn't do me a lot of good for my phone to lock up though.
I wouldn't think that the Win7 phone is much different than the Blackberry app, at least in general behavior.
Test an app in a nice safe place (in-house, phone simulator, or whatever). Works great. Then it goes to production, and you find out that it does pesky things like take up too much bandwidth.
I've seen projects that worked great in-house, between the developers machines and the in-house testing servers. In production though, where the servers aren't in the next room, and the customer doesn't have a 100Mb/s line on a switched network, things just don't work the same way.
From seeing several botched smartphone implementations lately, it looks like little to no field testing is done any more. I'm surprised that they don't make a few hundred prototypes, and hand them out throughout the company, saying "use this instead of your own cell phone". It seems "field" testing is done in a lab. Then it's up to us consumers to find out that they work great as long as you're within a few feet of the tower, and have unlimited data plans.
I found my Blackberry (8330) worked great, except at one place I was working. Normally in the city, the phone always just worked, and the battery would last for days. Then I was working in the middle of BFE, where coverage was spotty at best. To talk on the phone, or even get text messages, I had to stand in one part of the parking lot. Since most of the drive, and anywhere in the building didn't have coverage, the battery would die about 6 hours into the day, with no phone calls or texts. I stopped working there, and voila, the battery was back to surviving for days at a time.
For those who don't know, cell phones generally turn up their transmit power, until they can reach a tower. Then they'll bring the transmit power back down to what is necessary. This normally saves your battery life, while ensuring coverage. If there's no coverage to be found, it wastes the battery life with the transmitter at max power until service can be found.
You could change the first line to "pill popping, crack smoking, heroin shooting pedophile, with his sister / sex slave locked in the basement" and you'd still get the same response.
Well, he may get other responses like "Is she hot?", and "Pictures or it never happened.".:)
You're right. All they're showing is trending towards people buying more apps through iTunes than music. I didn't read the whole thing (I lost interest shortly after the graph), but it doesn't seem to include factors such as changes in the market. Has there been a trend of increasing numbers of applications, or making previously expensive applications cheaper? Maybe it's a trend that there are more iTunes devices out there. Or possibly that while the customer base continues to grow, the customers have all the music that they're looking for, and start purchasing more apps. In the last case, the red line would indicate longer term customers, and the blue line newer customers. I'm sure the question that Apple is asking is, what is the next line going to be? Despite what people tend to believe, those growth lines cannot always go up. Eventually they'll taper off. I had the same argument years ago with several people discussing the housing market. "It'll keep growing" they said, and I asked the simple question "what's supporting it?" As they learned more recently, absolutely nothing, and poof, their houses dropped in value.
See, that's the thing though. The userspace tools are already there. It's fine and dandy to suggest Cygwin, or any of several tool sets that are not included with Windows. The problem isn't my machine. It's every time I sit down at a strange machine, and find the tools aren't there. For example, I just started a new job. There are about 100 or so machines, mostly Windows. I could push an update out to all of the machines to add on tools, but that doesn't help when someone (say a C-level someone) says "my laptop isn't working, fix it). Or say my own laptop dies, and I go pick up another one. The standard userspace tools aren't there. I guess the whole subject seems silly to people who use and prefer Windows. Some of us have used a whole variety of platforms, and appreciate consistency.
(and -t isn't compatible to anything on other platforms)
Everyone else: traceroute
Windows: tracert
(and damned if I haven't typed "traceroute" a million times on various Windows machines)
Everyone else: netstat -a -n | grep LISTEN
Windows: netstat -a -n
Except, there's no obvious way to only show listening ports. And I tried the previously mentioned select-string as a replacement for grep in both cmd and powershell, and that doesn't work either.
If there was say a well established set of rules that virtually all operating systems followed, wouldn't you think it would be prudent that the ugly kid on the block follow those rules? I've worked on Linux, Solaris (and cousins), BSD (and cousins), OSX, Irix, and Digital Unix. I've also worked on every Windows platform since Windows 3.1, and touched OS/2 and BeOS. Every modern OS (like, you can still find one in production), except for the Windows platform, you can use the same tools on any of them, with rare exceptions. They don't require add-ons for standard tasks. They don't rename standard tasks to obscure names. They "just work"(tm).
Lets consider what comes with the OS, not what you have to install. I know cygwin does a lot. I see that there's a SUA "Utilities and SDK for UNIX-based Applications_AMD64.exe" that Windows has available, if you have the "Subsystem for UNIX-based Applications" turned on. You still have to download almost 500MB from Microsoft, so I won't consider that "comes with the OS".
In Windows 7, lets poke around with powershell, as you suggested.
PS C:\Users\User\Desktop> which The term 'which' is not recognized as the name of a cmdlet, function, script fi [SNIP]
Oops, that doesn't work. Ok, lets try a few other things.
PS C:\Users\User\Desktop> top The term 'top' is not recognized as the name of a cmdlet, function, script file [SNIP]
PS C:\Users\User\Desktop> grep The term 'grep' is not recognized as the name of a cmdlet, function, script fil [SNIP]
PS C:\Users\User\Desktop> cut The term 'cut' is not recognized as the name of a cmdlet, function, script file [SNIP]
Ok, that really sucked, and was really ugly. I had to snip out the other 7 lines on each error to get through the filters on here.
I already know "which" works on OSX, so lets look around OSX.
mac-pro:~ User$ uname -a Darwin mac-pro.local 10.6.0 Darwin Kernel Version 10.6.0: Wed Nov 10 18:13:17 PST 2010; root:xnu-1504.9.26~3/RELEASE_I386 i386
mac-pro:~ User$ which top /usr/bin/top
mac-pro:~ User$ which ps /bin/ps
mac-pro:~ User$ which grep /usr/bin/grep
mac-pro:~ User$ which sort /usr/bin/sort
mac-pro:~ User$ which cat /bin/cat
Nice. How about an older Linux machine...
uname -a Linux p01 2.6.27.7 #1 SMP Sun Dec 7 22:31:27 GMT 2008 x86_64 AMD Opteron(tm) Processor 240 AuthenticAMD GNU/Linux
which top /usr/bin/top
which ps /bin/ps
which grep ./grep
which sort /bin/sort
which cat /bin/cat
It can pretty much be said that any OS other than Windows, comes with the same standard tools. But hey, some people love Windows. I use it a lot too. I have to support an awful lot of Windows desktops, and servers. Standards there are rough. There are plenty of things that give Windows admins headaches. Just try telling a user how to do something without first asking "what version of Windows are you using", or already knowing. Knowing your average user, if you ask, they won't know. And yes, I was just brought in to a place where a lot of the desktops are still WinXP, and don't have enough memory nor drive space to upgrade to anything else.
There are plenty of misunderstandings with children. Years ago, someone I was dating had a son who was about 5 at the time. He refused to take a bath without help. The "help" was standing there waiting for him to wash up. Lots of "wash your face", "no really, wash your face", "wash your hair... with shampoo this time". The door was opened the whole time, and mom could hear exactly what was happening. I wasn't entertained by it. I had better things to do, like flirt with mom.:)
Around the time he was 13, he mentioned that he didn't know why, but I used to give him his bath. Luckily, mom heard him say it, and explained what happened. We laughed about it, but saw how it could be taken completely wrong. Ya, I'd rather not get in trouble for a kid remembering something wrong.
The previous message, as I understood it, was saying that the 10 year old girl was asking for explicit sex acts. That is out of character for any 10 year old child, unless they were exposed to something very wrong.
If, in the hypothetical situation, I were to come to you and ask for your advice on how to proceed, if it's something that you'd need to report, you would likely advise me to report it too. If it's nothing, you'd advise so, and there wouldn't be anything to report. Say in another situation someone came to you and said "this kid is acting out", and you saw it as perfectly normal childhood behavior, would you report it to CPS?
Wouldn't you agree, doing something is much better than doing nothing and then mentioning it as weird on Slashdot at some point in the future?
My girlfriend has a Mac. Right now, I have a Windows machine beside hers, because I'm gaming on it a good bit. I make up for this by having a Linux server farm, so I do "real" work on those machines.
She's seen where I've had issues on my Windows machine. I get frustrated. She watched me work through a mystery blue-screen problem that turned out to be a particular version of the video driver was causing. It was very difficult to diagnose, and using the Microsoft provided driver, or the manufacturers most recent driver was not the fix. {sigh}
On her machine, she was running into some issues also. She plays a few full-screen games. One of the games was performing horribly. To diagnose it, I ssh'd to her machine while she was gaming. Using standard tools (like top, ps, and kill), I was able to help her out. For example, from the desktop, she knew she had closed an application. From top, I could see that it not only wasn't dead, but it was taking up half the memory in the machine. While she was playing the game, I could see the system was using over 80% of the memory (2Gb), and and when it started swapping, that's when the performance went to hell. I helped keep the machine performing ok by killing unwanted applications while she was playing. You can't do that on a Windows machine without a bit of 3rd party magic and virgin sacrifices.
Then there was parsing some information. She has a book cataloging program. She wanted to import the information from one application to another one. She pointed & clicked around for a while, and was making very slow progress. She was to the point where she had a file with almost 2000 records, that she needed to clean up to import. It would have taken her quite a while, so I shelled in and did "cat file.txt | cut -f 2 -d , | sort > import_me.txt" Voila, one line, and it was done. Again, standard tools for *nix, Linux, and OSX, that are not standard for Windows (adding 3rd party apps doesn't count).
I've been trying to encourage her to get familiar with working in the shell. She understands what to do.
We're to the point of wanting to set her up with a hackintosh. I have spare hardware that would build her a very nice fast machine with more memory than hers has. Even the 2GB upgrade was expensive for the Mac. It's outrageously priced from Apple, and still overly expensive from 3rd parties. We ordered it from Crucial, who had the best price for the required full buffered RAM. She likes the idea of my spare 6GB RAM, and faster CPU, than spending thousands on a new Mac. Her only consideration now is how pretty the case is going to be. There's an alienware-like case on CompUSA's site that I'm considering for her.:)
Lets use the example of a 30 year old man with a 16 year old girl. He ends up in jail for 2 years, while the girl reaches age of consent. She says "Nope, no problem.", and now his conviction is overturned. Why did he spend two years in jail? Because of a technicality? On findings such as that, the state frequently must pay a settlement because they made a mistake.
In the intervening two years, she could have met another boy (man, woman, whatever), and now be totally "in love" with him. I've, unfortunately, been around teenage girls (girlfriend's children, or friends of their children). Besides the massive headaches and financial burden, one of the things I've learned is that they fall in and out of love every few minutes. In two years, she'll be "in love" with someone new, and care less about the guy she was "in love" with two years ago. If you want to gamble your freedom on the fact that when a girl turns 18, she'll say "I still say it was consentual", I'd give you about a 10% chance that you'll see the freedom on that day. More than likely, she'll look back at it as a huge mistake, and how that the older guy took advantage of her.
The biggest problem is, it is still against the law. To fix that, petition your government to change the law. You'll look like a real pillar of society if you say "Lets change the age of consent to 15". Laws like this are to protect the children. No, my 15 year old daughter shouldn't be sleeping with a 30 year old man. I heard a great formula for calculating age difference. (older_age * 0.5) + 7 . For a 30 year old person, the youngest he should be with is 22. For the younger to be 15, the older should be 16. My state has outlined the age of consent responsibly, to protect from jailing young adults. There's a floating age gap from 15 to 18. If he's 18, she can be 16. Without that in place, you could have kids in high school finding themselves in jail for dating at an age appropriate level.
The best solution, should a 15 year old really be "in love" with a 30 year old, would be to NOT SLEEP WITH THEM. Sex is great, and most people will agree with that (or else you're doing it wrong). If you really like someone, and you really have as much in common as you think you do, you can wait a few years to have sex. If there's nothing there, then whatever you thought you had of a relationship will dissolve before you get a chance.
The example you provided was an edge case, not the norm. If he had thought with the head on his shoulders, rather than the one in his pants, he would have waited, and now he would be happily married with 3 kids, and no conviction behind him.
Depending on the level of detailed dialogue you are describing, she may have been a victim of sexual abuse. They may have rationalized that the sexual abuse has positive results. For example, a bad adult does sexual acts, and then rewards the child. The child may associate the act with the result, and try to initiate the act with others for similar rewards.
Most 10 year olds can't carry on an unsupported dialogue of sexual matters. For most (and yes, the average have has been growing younger), they simply have no interest. For others, they've had no exposure. Most (but not all) parents keep their children away from what they perceive as dangers for the childs development, which includes movie violence and sexuality. If the dialogue was beyond what you may see in a R or NC17 movie, you should consider that there is something pretty serious going on. Talk to a professional about it. Ask the simple questions, "This happened. Should I notify someone?" If you have school age children, a call to the schools child psychologist may be helpful, or your local child protective services. The child protective services call may start unwanted actions, but if there is something bad going on, they should definitely be involved.
Most importantly, don't be involved. It's not up to you to investigate such things. Besides tainting evidence, being too involved can be bad for your health (i.e., the bad adult may seek to silence you). Leave investigations up to the experts. For the sake of your safety and mental health, it's better to give the anonymous tip, than to become a witness. If you get too involved, you may become a suspect, rather than just a witness.
They use quantum entanglement. The controllers aren't just tied to the gaming console, but they power an evil intergalactic space fleet on the other side of our known universe.
The simplest definition of mysticism is "belief in the mystery", or a leap of faith to believe what is shown, rather than wanting to learn the truth.
Magic is mysticism for the audience. They see someone hover, a girl cut in half, or disappear from a sealed box, to the audience it was a mystery. To you or I, we try to get a glimpse of how the illusion was created. Depending on the skill and method of the artist, we may never get a hint of how it was done.
If we were allowed to know the technology behind it, many people would be disappointed to know that the magic was just technology. Others, like you and I, would appreciate how they did it.
When I see a real guru fly in a way unexplainable by technology, magic carpet or otherwise, I'll agree with you. There are plenty of people who have dedicated their lives to such pursuits. Most of them say that they aren't worthy, therefore were not able to accomplish it, or they'll tell you that it happened.
I've been around quite a bit, and I have yet to see anyone floating without a technological method to accomplish it. And no, saying "it doesn't work because you don't believe" doesn't hold water. I am open minded. I would love the opportunity to observe all the factors related to such an action. Just like a stage magician, any such performance is well controlled, if not a completely fabricated tale.
I'll leave it up to you to prove me wrong. And no, online videos don't cut it. I've watched Superman withstand being shot, blown up, vehicles being thrown at him, and turning back time by countering the rotation of the Earth. I've watched Bruce Willis blow up an asteroid. I've seen the dead walk, the vampires fly, werewolves morph. I've seen countless alien invasions devastate the Earth. I've even seen the stones of Stonehenge move and control the annihilation of the earth (BTW, don't bother watch "Stonehenge Armageddon"). On more simplistic methods, I've seen "proof" of "ghosts" through tricks of the camera (many YouTube videos) and less convincing methods (the numerous Ghost Hunter shows, which are purely theatrical presentations with no special effects).
Any and every "impossible" feat has a rational explanation. Well, unless you give in to the idea that you must have faith. Faith works well for con men and cults. It has no place in rational society.
It's just more proof that a theorist can yank whatever wacky theory out of their ass, and write it up as a paper. Funny thing is, if us normal people were to do the same thing, we'd likely be put in a nice padded room for a few years.
I do kind of like the concept that everything is in contact with everything else. My DNA has a direct link to any of my DNA that may be out there, and I could use that to control the other part. Unfortunately, when the kids become teenagers, that theory is blown complete out the window. I'm pretty sure *MY* DNA isn't telling anyone to be a rebellious teenager. Well, not any more at least. My DNA has already been through all of that right along with the rest of me.:)
Illusionists by a variety of names have been making people believe in impossible things. All it takes is an audience to believe the mysticism or mythology, before asking to understand the technology. Too many people are willing to believe the "miracle" answer, without understanding the technological answer.
If I read your comment right, you've grown beyond the mysticism answers. If we can only drag a few billion other people past the threshold, humanity would be in good shape.
So are you saying that the theory that says stupid is contagious is wrong? Every time I see one stupid-infected person, there are other stupid-infected individuals nearby. I've seen instances where one stupid (but buxom) blond walks into a room, and every man and half the women are turned into drooling idiots. The incubation period appears to be less than a second.
That, kind sir, is what is going to be the Apocalypse of 2012. Not a comet crashing into the earth. Not a grand flood. It will be a viral pandemic of stupid.
Just as we've done with vampires and zombies in centuries past, we must eliminate the threat now! Do it quickly, before you become too stupid to act!
What was that you were saying about causality and correlation? Which is better, to prove me wrong, or agree and thin out the scourge of stupid?:)
You forget the "fun" factor. Imagine what archeologists will be saying in a few thousand years about some oversized monument to some imaginary beings in the sky.
Slashdot Mirror
You know, that's a terrible argument. You're saying it's wrong, but you're not giving any supporting evidence. I'm assuming that you know both Green and Latin to make such a statement. The good old "I'm smarter than you, so I'm right" doesn't cut it, especially when your audience may be as smart or smarter than you.
If virii is wrong, at least give us the translation of what virii means. In Latin, virii seems to translate to "The men of...". In Greek, it doesn't translate to anything.
So how correct or incorrect is virii? Well, if you consider "the men of..." would seem to convey the same idea of the biblical Legion demon (my name is legion, for we are many.). If a virus is one attacker (attack vector, or soldier), many could be conveyed as a legion. That would imply many men of. We are always very comfortable anthropomorphizing inanimate objects, would it be wrong to consider multiple virus to be the men of, or the army of, or the legion of? It would seem appropriate to follow that with the name of their creator. Virii haxor? Dear god, I hope I don't give an uber-leet script kiddie any ideas. Ok kids, be good, stay in school, m'kay?
I guess the most important thing we should remember is that language is what we've made of it. There are people who want to be linguistic purists. What are you being pure about? You've picked an arbitrary point in history, and have romanticized so much, you too believe there is to never be progress. I won't argue against the idea that many modern linguistic trends are wrong, but words adopted into common use, regardless of how badly they are spelled, or how awful they may be, they become words. Search on Google for "new words in [year]" (replace year with a number), and you'll find all kinds of interesting words that you probably believed existed "forever".
New words in 1806 2006.
I'm very happy that "cougar" and "tramp-stamp" became official words in 2010. Now I don't have to say "A lovely older woman with sexual interests a younger men, who has a tattoo on her lower back". "Cougar with a tramp stamp" not only has a nice ring to it, but it sounds real dirty. :)
So... It doesn't matter if you think you know Latin, Greek, or English. If everyone else says it's right, and the use is continued, in time they will be right. I'd be willing to bet the majority of what we say now (including this message) would have been impossible to decipher based on linguistic standards even a few hundred years ago. Don't even consider looking back more than about 450 years, "Modern English" didn't even exist.
For a second there, I thought you were serious. :) Then my sarcasm alert start ringing the "Deep Sarcasm" tone. I'd describe it, but it's in my head. Shhhh, don't mess with my insanities. :)
I wouldn't be terribly surprised if that was the case.
I know the Facebook app on Blackberry (not Windows Live) keeps the phone very busy. Both my girlfriend and I had Blackberry 8330's. She installed the Facebook app, and found the phone to be unresponsive at times (like about 3 times a week). I installed it on mine, and the same happened. Uninstalling it fixed the problem. Otherwise, we'd find the phones not working, and have to remove the battery to reboot it (the buttons were unresponsive).
Besides being unresponsive, it was horribly slow trying to do anything on the Internet (over the 3G network). Uninstalling the app fixed it. I know they synchronize profile pictures, so I'd suspect repeatedly downloading the profile pictures. If it worked properly, I wouldn't mind. I have no download quota through my provider. It doesn't do me a lot of good for my phone to lock up though.
I wouldn't think that the Win7 phone is much different than the Blackberry app, at least in general behavior.
I've seen plenty of this in the past.
Test an app in a nice safe place (in-house, phone simulator, or whatever). Works great. Then it goes to production, and you find out that it does pesky things like take up too much bandwidth.
I've seen projects that worked great in-house, between the developers machines and the in-house testing servers. In production though, where the servers aren't in the next room, and the customer doesn't have a 100Mb/s line on a switched network, things just don't work the same way.
From seeing several botched smartphone implementations lately, it looks like little to no field testing is done any more. I'm surprised that they don't make a few hundred prototypes, and hand them out throughout the company, saying "use this instead of your own cell phone". It seems "field" testing is done in a lab. Then it's up to us consumers to find out that they work great as long as you're within a few feet of the tower, and have unlimited data plans.
I found my Blackberry (8330) worked great, except at one place I was working. Normally in the city, the phone always just worked, and the battery would last for days. Then I was working in the middle of BFE, where coverage was spotty at best. To talk on the phone, or even get text messages, I had to stand in one part of the parking lot. Since most of the drive, and anywhere in the building didn't have coverage, the battery would die about 6 hours into the day, with no phone calls or texts. I stopped working there, and voila, the battery was back to surviving for days at a time.
For those who don't know, cell phones generally turn up their transmit power, until they can reach a tower. Then they'll bring the transmit power back down to what is necessary. This normally saves your battery life, while ensuring coverage. If there's no coverage to be found, it wastes the battery life with the transmitter at max power until service can be found.
You could change the first line to "pill popping, crack smoking, heroin shooting pedophile, with his sister / sex slave locked in the basement" and you'd still get the same response.
Well, he may get other responses like "Is she hot?", and "Pictures or it never happened.". :)
No, it's actually the O2STK.
Sorry, we just got done watching all the "Middleman" episodes. :)
My boxii take serious offense to that, you insensitive clod. :)
You're right. All they're showing is trending towards people buying more apps through iTunes than music. I didn't read the whole thing (I lost interest shortly after the graph), but it doesn't seem to include factors such as changes in the market. Has there been a trend of increasing numbers of applications, or making previously expensive applications cheaper? Maybe it's a trend that there are more iTunes devices out there. Or possibly that while the customer base continues to grow, the customers have all the music that they're looking for, and start purchasing more apps. In the last case, the red line would indicate longer term customers, and the blue line newer customers. I'm sure the question that Apple is asking is, what is the next line going to be? Despite what people tend to believe, those growth lines cannot always go up. Eventually they'll taper off. I had the same argument years ago with several people discussing the housing market. "It'll keep growing" they said, and I asked the simple question "what's supporting it?" As they learned more recently, absolutely nothing, and poof, their houses dropped in value.
You don't sell them, you fool. You rent them out. How exactly did this conversation drift to prostitution?
See, that's the thing though. The userspace tools are already there. It's fine and dandy to suggest Cygwin, or any of several tool sets that are not included with Windows. The problem isn't my machine. It's every time I sit down at a strange machine, and find the tools aren't there. For example, I just started a new job. There are about 100 or so machines, mostly Windows. I could push an update out to all of the machines to add on tools, but that doesn't help when someone (say a C-level someone) says "my laptop isn't working, fix it). Or say my own laptop dies, and I go pick up another one. The standard userspace tools aren't there. I guess the whole subject seems silly to people who use and prefer Windows. Some of us have used a whole variety of platforms, and appreciate consistency.
Hmmm, let me think on this for a second.
To ping a host until abort:
Everyone else: ping [hostname]
Windows: ping -t [hostname]
(and -t isn't compatible to anything on other platforms)
Everyone else: traceroute
Windows: tracert
(and damned if I haven't typed "traceroute" a million times on various Windows machines)
Everyone else: netstat -a -n | grep LISTEN
Windows: netstat -a -n
Except, there's no obvious way to only show listening ports. And I tried the previously mentioned select-string as a replacement for grep in both cmd and powershell, and that doesn't work either.
So, completely compatible, except they aren't.
If there was say a well established set of rules that virtually all operating systems followed, wouldn't you think it would be prudent that the ugly kid on the block follow those rules? I've worked on Linux, Solaris (and cousins), BSD (and cousins), OSX, Irix, and Digital Unix. I've also worked on every Windows platform since Windows 3.1, and touched OS/2 and BeOS. Every modern OS (like, you can still find one in production), except for the Windows platform, you can use the same tools on any of them, with rare exceptions. They don't require add-ons for standard tasks. They don't rename standard tasks to obscure names. They "just work"(tm).
Actually, I'm on Windows 7 x64 Ultimate.
Lets consider what comes with the OS, not what you have to install. I know cygwin does a lot. I see that there's a SUA "Utilities and SDK for UNIX-based Applications_AMD64.exe" that Windows has available, if you have the "Subsystem for UNIX-based Applications" turned on. You still have to download almost 500MB from Microsoft, so I won't consider that "comes with the OS".
In Windows 7, lets poke around with powershell, as you suggested.
Oops, that doesn't work. Ok, lets try a few other things.
Ok, that really sucked, and was really ugly. I had to snip out the other 7 lines on each error to get through the filters on here.
I already know "which" works on OSX, so lets look around OSX.
Nice. How about an older Linux machine...
It can pretty much be said that any OS other than Windows, comes with the same standard tools. But hey, some people love Windows. I use it a lot too. I have to support an awful lot of Windows desktops, and servers. Standards there are rough. There are plenty of things that give Windows admins headaches. Just try telling a user how to do something without first asking "what version of Windows are you using", or already knowing. Knowing your average user, if you ask, they won't know. And yes, I was just brought in to a place where a lot of the desktops are still WinXP, and don't have enough memory nor drive space to upgrade to anything else.
There are plenty of misunderstandings with children. Years ago, someone I was dating had a son who was about 5 at the time. He refused to take a bath without help. The "help" was standing there waiting for him to wash up. Lots of "wash your face", "no really, wash your face", "wash your hair ... with shampoo this time". The door was opened the whole time, and mom could hear exactly what was happening. I wasn't entertained by it. I had better things to do, like flirt with mom. :)
Around the time he was 13, he mentioned that he didn't know why, but I used to give him his bath. Luckily, mom heard him say it, and explained what happened. We laughed about it, but saw how it could be taken completely wrong. Ya, I'd rather not get in trouble for a kid remembering something wrong.
The previous message, as I understood it, was saying that the 10 year old girl was asking for explicit sex acts. That is out of character for any 10 year old child, unless they were exposed to something very wrong.
If, in the hypothetical situation, I were to come to you and ask for your advice on how to proceed, if it's something that you'd need to report, you would likely advise me to report it too. If it's nothing, you'd advise so, and there wouldn't be anything to report. Say in another situation someone came to you and said "this kid is acting out", and you saw it as perfectly normal childhood behavior, would you report it to CPS?
Wouldn't you agree, doing something is much better than doing nothing and then mentioning it as weird on Slashdot at some point in the future?
Actually... :)
My girlfriend has a Mac. Right now, I have a Windows machine beside hers, because I'm gaming on it a good bit. I make up for this by having a Linux server farm, so I do "real" work on those machines.
She's seen where I've had issues on my Windows machine. I get frustrated. She watched me work through a mystery blue-screen problem that turned out to be a particular version of the video driver was causing. It was very difficult to diagnose, and using the Microsoft provided driver, or the manufacturers most recent driver was not the fix. {sigh}
On her machine, she was running into some issues also. She plays a few full-screen games. One of the games was performing horribly. To diagnose it, I ssh'd to her machine while she was gaming. Using standard tools (like top, ps, and kill), I was able to help her out. For example, from the desktop, she knew she had closed an application. From top, I could see that it not only wasn't dead, but it was taking up half the memory in the machine. While she was playing the game, I could see the system was using over 80% of the memory (2Gb), and and when it started swapping, that's when the performance went to hell. I helped keep the machine performing ok by killing unwanted applications while she was playing. You can't do that on a Windows machine without a bit of 3rd party magic and virgin sacrifices.
Then there was parsing some information. She has a book cataloging program. She wanted to import the information from one application to another one. She pointed & clicked around for a while, and was making very slow progress. She was to the point where she had a file with almost 2000 records, that she needed to clean up to import. It would have taken her quite a while, so I shelled in and did "cat file.txt | cut -f 2 -d , | sort > import_me.txt" Voila, one line, and it was done. Again, standard tools for *nix, Linux, and OSX, that are not standard for Windows (adding 3rd party apps doesn't count).
I've been trying to encourage her to get familiar with working in the shell. She understands what to do.
We're to the point of wanting to set her up with a hackintosh. I have spare hardware that would build her a very nice fast machine with more memory than hers has. Even the 2GB upgrade was expensive for the Mac. It's outrageously priced from Apple, and still overly expensive from 3rd parties. We ordered it from Crucial, who had the best price for the required full buffered RAM. She likes the idea of my spare 6GB RAM, and faster CPU, than spending thousands on a new Mac. Her only consideration now is how pretty the case is going to be. There's an alienware-like case on CompUSA's site that I'm considering for her. :)
There are way too many problems with that.
Lets use the example of a 30 year old man with a 16 year old girl. He ends up in jail for 2 years, while the girl reaches age of consent. She says "Nope, no problem.", and now his conviction is overturned. Why did he spend two years in jail? Because of a technicality? On findings such as that, the state frequently must pay a settlement because they made a mistake.
In the intervening two years, she could have met another boy (man, woman, whatever), and now be totally "in love" with him. I've, unfortunately, been around teenage girls (girlfriend's children, or friends of their children). Besides the massive headaches and financial burden, one of the things I've learned is that they fall in and out of love every few minutes. In two years, she'll be "in love" with someone new, and care less about the guy she was "in love" with two years ago. If you want to gamble your freedom on the fact that when a girl turns 18, she'll say "I still say it was consentual", I'd give you about a 10% chance that you'll see the freedom on that day. More than likely, she'll look back at it as a huge mistake, and how that the older guy took advantage of her.
The biggest problem is, it is still against the law. To fix that, petition your government to change the law. You'll look like a real pillar of society if you say "Lets change the age of consent to 15". Laws like this are to protect the children. No, my 15 year old daughter shouldn't be sleeping with a 30 year old man. I heard a great formula for calculating age difference. (older_age * 0.5) + 7 . For a 30 year old person, the youngest he should be with is 22. For the younger to be 15, the older should be 16. My state has outlined the age of consent responsibly, to protect from jailing young adults. There's a floating age gap from 15 to 18. If he's 18, she can be 16. Without that in place, you could have kids in high school finding themselves in jail for dating at an age appropriate level.
The best solution, should a 15 year old really be "in love" with a 30 year old, would be to NOT SLEEP WITH THEM. Sex is great, and most people will agree with that (or else you're doing it wrong). If you really like someone, and you really have as much in common as you think you do, you can wait a few years to have sex. If there's nothing there, then whatever you thought you had of a relationship will dissolve before you get a chance.
The example you provided was an edge case, not the norm. If he had thought with the head on his shoulders, rather than the one in his pants, he would have waited, and now he would be happily married with 3 kids, and no conviction behind him.
Depending on the level of detailed dialogue you are describing, she may have been a victim of sexual abuse. They may have rationalized that the sexual abuse has positive results. For example, a bad adult does sexual acts, and then rewards the child. The child may associate the act with the result, and try to initiate the act with others for similar rewards.
Most 10 year olds can't carry on an unsupported dialogue of sexual matters. For most (and yes, the average have has been growing younger), they simply have no interest. For others, they've had no exposure. Most (but not all) parents keep their children away from what they perceive as dangers for the childs development, which includes movie violence and sexuality. If the dialogue was beyond what you may see in a R or NC17 movie, you should consider that there is something pretty serious going on. Talk to a professional about it. Ask the simple questions, "This happened. Should I notify someone?" If you have school age children, a call to the schools child psychologist may be helpful, or your local child protective services. The child protective services call may start unwanted actions, but if there is something bad going on, they should definitely be involved.
Most importantly, don't be involved. It's not up to you to investigate such things. Besides tainting evidence, being too involved can be bad for your health (i.e., the bad adult may seek to silence you). Leave investigations up to the experts. For the sake of your safety and mental health, it's better to give the anonymous tip, than to become a witness. If you get too involved, you may become a suspect, rather than just a witness.
They use quantum entanglement. The controllers aren't just tied to the gaming console, but they power an evil intergalactic space fleet on the other side of our known universe.
But shhhh, that's a secret. :)
Well, that's what I was trying to describe.
The simplest definition of mysticism is "belief in the mystery", or a leap of faith to believe what is shown, rather than wanting to learn the truth.
Magic is mysticism for the audience. They see someone hover, a girl cut in half, or disappear from a sealed box, to the audience it was a mystery. To you or I, we try to get a glimpse of how the illusion was created. Depending on the skill and method of the artist, we may never get a hint of how it was done.
If we were allowed to know the technology behind it, many people would be disappointed to know that the magic was just technology. Others, like you and I, would appreciate how they did it.
When I see a real guru fly in a way unexplainable by technology, magic carpet or otherwise, I'll agree with you. There are plenty of people who have dedicated their lives to such pursuits. Most of them say that they aren't worthy, therefore were not able to accomplish it, or they'll tell you that it happened.
I've been around quite a bit, and I have yet to see anyone floating without a technological method to accomplish it. And no, saying "it doesn't work because you don't believe" doesn't hold water. I am open minded. I would love the opportunity to observe all the factors related to such an action. Just like a stage magician, any such performance is well controlled, if not a completely fabricated tale.
I'll leave it up to you to prove me wrong. And no, online videos don't cut it. I've watched Superman withstand being shot, blown up, vehicles being thrown at him, and turning back time by countering the rotation of the Earth. I've watched Bruce Willis blow up an asteroid. I've seen the dead walk, the vampires fly, werewolves morph. I've seen countless alien invasions devastate the Earth. I've even seen the stones of Stonehenge move and control the annihilation of the earth (BTW, don't bother watch "Stonehenge Armageddon"). On more simplistic methods, I've seen "proof" of "ghosts" through tricks of the camera (many YouTube videos) and less convincing methods (the numerous Ghost Hunter shows, which are purely theatrical presentations with no special effects).
Any and every "impossible" feat has a rational explanation. Well, unless you give in to the idea that you must have faith. Faith works well for con men and cults. It has no place in rational society.
It's just more proof that a theorist can yank whatever wacky theory out of their ass, and write it up as a paper. Funny thing is, if us normal people were to do the same thing, we'd likely be put in a nice padded room for a few years.
I do kind of like the concept that everything is in contact with everything else. My DNA has a direct link to any of my DNA that may be out there, and I could use that to control the other part. Unfortunately, when the kids become teenagers, that theory is blown complete out the window. I'm pretty sure *MY* DNA isn't telling anyone to be a rebellious teenager. Well, not any more at least. My DNA has already been through all of that right along with the rest of me. :)
Well, people can levitate. To understand how, a separation of mysticism, mythology, and technology must be maintained.
You can watch a magician (mysticism) make a human float, and he/she will have the audience believing exactly what they saw.
You can hear and read about how a religious figure (mythology) floated.
And then you can be taught (technology) hundreds of ways to make a person levitate. theatrical flying harnesses, forced air, glass floor/ceiling and perspective. How about not just a person, but an entire train full of people? Even something as simple (and expensive, and stupid) as hanging from a rope under a helicopter (ala Robert Downey Jr in Air America).
Illusionists by a variety of names have been making people believe in impossible things. All it takes is an audience to believe the mysticism or mythology, before asking to understand the technology. Too many people are willing to believe the "miracle" answer, without understanding the technological answer.
If I read your comment right, you've grown beyond the mysticism answers. If we can only drag a few billion other people past the threshold, humanity would be in good shape.
So are you saying that the theory that says stupid is contagious is wrong? Every time I see one stupid-infected person, there are other stupid-infected individuals nearby. I've seen instances where one stupid (but buxom) blond walks into a room, and every man and half the women are turned into drooling idiots. The incubation period appears to be less than a second.
That, kind sir, is what is going to be the Apocalypse of 2012. Not a comet crashing into the earth. Not a grand flood. It will be a viral pandemic of stupid.
Just as we've done with vampires and zombies in centuries past, we must eliminate the threat now! Do it quickly, before you become too stupid to act!
What was that you were saying about causality and correlation? Which is better, to prove me wrong, or agree and thin out the scourge of stupid? :)
You forget the "fun" factor. Imagine what archeologists will be saying in a few thousand years about some oversized monument to some imaginary beings in the sky.
Too bad we won't be around to hear it.