"Well, you could accidentally drive into a wall as well, it doesn't mean we should make all cars drive at 10 miles an hour."
While this is true, he neglects to mention one very important thing: you don't have to pass a test in order to mess around with your computer. Unless someone standardizes a competancy test for computers which loads on first login for each user, there ought to be some level of protection for all the users on that machine (or any other machine connected to the internet) to prevent the "unlicensed driver" from causing harm.
[NPR-regurgitation]Actually, if the ocean stopped cycling water, we would die. The cycle of the water from the Pacific to the Northeastern Atlantic keeps western Europe at a bearable temperature. It also affects the climate in most parts of the US, and it keeps animals alive in the Atlantic and Pacific oceans.[/NPR-regurgitation]
I know Cornell has won. I go to Cornell and am an engineer, so I know all about it. The fuckup I was talking about was how they sent "welcome to cornell" emails to students that didn't get in.
If Cornell wins this maybe they'll finally start to get some positive coverage in the news after their last few fuckups, unless they send congratulation emails out to the losers... but i digress...
The point I'm making is that we are being charged about $45 a month (including December and January) for internet access. This internet access we're being charged for has performed sometimes worse than the local cable providor and will soon have more restrictions put on it that many internet providors.
I agree with what you're saying, but your original post made it seem like they are losing money by allowing us to use the internet, when we're clearly paying (not part of tuition, it's actually a separate bill) for access. That's been my main problem with the argument.
Thanks for your response, it helped clear things up.
That's not really the best comparison. Network use is completely different when we're paying for it (and paying out the ass I might add). If we're paying for the printer, I'm sure as hell going to make the most out of it.
Also, I was under the impression Cornell was part of internet2.
Resnet at Cornell is, at best, a real shady business.
The reaction from most people around here has been less than enthusiastic. You can easily burn through 2 GB of data in a month just by visiting ESPN.com to check game scores, or visiting any other media-heavy site. They claim it's better than the alternative (Roadrunner cable) and say that we're given options. Actually, we're not given any option if we live in the dorms. We are not allowed to have a cable internet connection installed, though most of the rooms have a cable jack installed already. Hell, we don't even get basic cable TV for free (little dongle on the cable wire apparently blocks cable...though, we did fix that problem early on in the year;) ). It's really disappointing to see how much they've changed things in the past couple years. I'm happy to be moving off campus next year.
We actually had wireless access points in some of the dorms (in the common areas like lounges and study lounges). They got pulled this year due to "lack of funding". It was great, some anonymous donor supplied the money for Cornell to set up wireless nodes all around campus. And now they took it away.
As if Ithaca NY didn't suck enough, now they're trying to limit our contact with civilization. Fantastic.
A lot of people have commented on how they would love to have dual/triple head display, which is obviously of importance to those who use it. And the general consensous seemed to be that it's features like that that make the Parhelia a great card. I think it's important to note, however, that GeForce 4 ti4600's come with dual head support and VIVO (video-in,video-out) support. They offer many of the same features at around $100 less. And by the time the Parhelia hits stores, the difference in price will most likely be greater. Hey, if you really need that third 17" flatscreen (and at that point you've already blown over $1000, you might as well go with the seemingly overpriced Parhelia). As for me and my two monitors, I think I'll stick with the performance and features of the gf 4 ti4600. And anyway, when you're playing Quake 3, do you really stop to stare at the miniscule "jaggies" on the steps? Please, when you're running a game at 1280x1024 you gotta realize it doesn't really matter all that much. Personally, for most of the "quality" tests on the HotHardware site, I didn't really see all that much of a difference between the screenshots, especially such a difference that would make me want to sacrifice more money and better performance for it.
Re-read it AGAIN. A theologian does not necessary imply the person is related in any way to a religious organization. Theology is the study of religion. A theologian is a person who studies religion. True, many theologians do go on to pursue a career related to religion, but it is not necessarily a given. And what's wrong with "religious" people having input in scientific research? If it weren't for religious/ethical complaints, the Nazi "scientific" experiments wouldn't have been noticed. I think it is very naive of people to think that either a purely scientific, or purely religious/ethics, point of view is sufficient to make decisions. It is NECESSARY to have a mix of the two, so neither one gets too carried away.
I applaud Bush and his decision. It was well-reasoned and informed solution. Remember, though: this only applies to federal funding of stem cell research. Private sector stem cell research can still continue unimpeded (unfortunately). So, scientists and researchers ought not complain.
Take Care,
Paul
which side are you taking here?
i think the police were right in taking the guy into custody. he was a flight risk. his first amendment rights are a non-issue in this case. But if you're saying he should have no first amendment rights, why should he have the right to a fair and timely trial? Shit, most felons who ARE US citizens don't get timely trials. The courts are full of miscreants waiting for trial, and they're all backed up. there is no such thing as a fair and timely trial these days, unless it's a murder trial.
Obviously russia seems to be agreeing with the US on this one or they'd have tried to extradite him. he should be lucky he gets arrested over here, and not in russia.
Ok...
1) This guy has every right to expose flaws in software that could potential cause major security problems in many companies. He's exercising his First Amendment right. Fantastic.
2) This guy is openly selling copies of software that takes advantage of this security hole for a profit. Eh....don't like the sound of that. That's EXACTLY like someone finding a security hole in an Apache web server that grants you root access, and then that person makes a program that takes advantage of that security hole and helps you break into someone's computer. Not only that, but he's selling that program for a profit to people who will use it to do just that. Now, doesn't that seem a bit odd?
I'm not saying the US gov't is looking much like a knight in shining armor right now, but you can't even pretend that this guy was *Just* exercising his first Amendment right. That's just like someone shooting a guy, and claiming he has the right to bear arms. Same thing here, just because he has the right to talk about the flaws, doesn't mean he can engage in an illegal activity because of it.
Please Don't show your twisted and rather poor understanding of the US government. It shows your ignorance.
This is not just for the united states. It was for other countries as well, but only Russia jumped on the boat with the USA.
If you want to talk about war-mongering countries, and about imperialism, talk to the british. This is an act by America to protect it's country and it's people. I don't think that's such a bad idea. As I previously posted:
Two men stand in a room, both facing each other with guns drawn. One man has a bulletproof suit on. would the other man shoot him, knowing that it would do no good? No. Would it make the other man more likely to shoot? No.
Take Care,
Paul.
I think it has been stated that the system has a 99% accuracy. Hell, i'd rather have that kinda protection than no protection at all.
Two guys standing in a room. Both are facing each other. Both men have guns pointed at each other. One man has a complete bulletproof suit on (only reason i don't just say bulletproof vest is because some dumbass will just say "shoot him in the face"). Is the other man going to shoot him? I highly doubt it. Does it make the man with the bulletproof suit more likely to shoot? No, it doesn't. One could certainly speculate that it would, but with no prior history of doing so, what would that chance be?
I find it disturbing that people like Saddam Hussein has access to nuclear warheads, and his obvious lack of concern for his people only further supports the idea that he would be more than happy to exact a little revenge at the United States. Granted, there is the threat of terrorism, but the department concentrating on the Missle Defense System does not also govern terrorism or terrorist acts. So, there really is no use saying that the money given to the MDS should be used for internal protection, since the 2 departments are funded seperately. There are a couple of countries that are rather pissed at the US, and as an American I want to be damn sure that no nuke is going to ruin my day.
As a previous post stated, we need to "think outside the box". Most people don't understand that this system is not going to stop a war that we think is going to happen tomorrow, it's for future use. You think that there's going to be peace for the next 50 years? Get real. With China on the rise, and many other small countries getting nukes from Russia's disarmament, it's only a matter of time and I, for one, want to know that my country is protecting my ass.
And concerning threats of an arms race: We're not building weapons, we're building defenses. China *may* be building up arms against the US, but it's not like we're racing to beat them to it. We're just building a defense network. Hey, and *even if* there were an arms race between the US and China, economically speaking we'd drive them into the ground if they tried to build up arms at the rate we would. The Chinese aren't stupid, and they realize there is no chance of them being able to build up their nuclear stockpile as quickly as we could.
Sometimes I enjoy reading the rather anti-government attitude of Slashdot, but this is rather retarded. If you want to complain about the US government, why not at least pick on something worthwhile.
The Athlon4 was the name given to the new mobile Athlon chips based on the Palimino core.
The AthlonMP was the name given to the workstation/server chip based on the Palimino core.
The Athlon4 is also the name given to the upcoming desktop chip based on the Palimino core. The ONLY difference between all 3 types of chips are the speed. The mobile was started in the high hundreds of MHz. The MPs start at 1GHz and the Athlon4 will start at 1.53GHz. To clarify, you can use regular Thunderbirds in the MP dual motherboards, and you will be able to run both the upcoming Athlon4 chips AND the Thouroughbred chips in the MP motherboard, since they are all exactly the same, just released at different times at different speeds for the different platforms. All compatible, all fast, all good.:)
Hope this clears things up.
Take Care,
Paul
For a company like Intel that's used to throwing huge curveballs at its customers and other developers, it's good to see that they can finally vary it up a bit.
Yeah, that was an illegal search because it was made without a warrant on private property. This is public property, so a warrant is not necessary. Nor is it illegal to take a picture of someone on public property even without their consent. If it were, there would be no papperazzi.
Uhhh...if you don't break the law, how is it a problem? You don't want to be affected by this system? Don't break the law.
It's not an invasion of privacy, it's not breaking the law. It's done in a public setting and it's perfectly legal. They can't really use the information gathered for anything else.
Stop bitching about it. There's no point.
Don't get me wrong, I don't like the idea of people spying on me. But, the streets are a public space, right? Not YOUR streets. The city's streets. Granted, we are tax payers so we 'own' the streets, blah blah blah. But we're not all out there shoveling them when there's snow, or cleaning them after a parade. No, the city uses our funds and thus owns the street. So they have every right to keep an eye on who is using their streets and what people are doing on their streets. They are not invading your privacy (in a legal sense) by taking pictures of you without consent(which is perfectly legal). Doesn't make it a nice thing to do, but it is legal, and hopefully will do some good.
Slashdot Mirror
While this is true, he neglects to mention one very important thing: you don't have to pass a test in order to mess around with your computer. Unless someone standardizes a competancy test for computers which loads on first login for each user, there ought to be some level of protection for all the users on that machine (or any other machine connected to the internet) to prevent the "unlicensed driver" from causing harm.
[NPR-regurgitation]Actually, if the ocean stopped cycling water, we would die. The cycle of the water from the Pacific to the Northeastern Atlantic keeps western Europe at a bearable temperature. It also affects the climate in most parts of the US, and it keeps animals alive in the Atlantic and Pacific oceans.[/NPR-regurgitation]
We have been so prosperous because we have *plentiful* natural resources.
Freedom doesn't bring prosperity, but its nice if the two go together.
I suppose you also believe terrorists are attacking us because of our freedom?
Well, they're not attacking us for our corn fields and orange groves.
I know Cornell has won. I go to Cornell and am an engineer, so I know all about it. The fuckup I was talking about was how they sent "welcome to cornell" emails to students that didn't get in.
If Cornell wins this maybe they'll finally start to get some positive coverage in the news after their last few fuckups, unless they send congratulation emails out to the losers... but i digress...
The point I'm making is that we are being charged about $45 a month (including December and January) for internet access. This internet access we're being charged for has performed sometimes worse than the local cable providor and will soon have more restrictions put on it that many internet providors.
I agree with what you're saying, but your original post made it seem like they are losing money by allowing us to use the internet, when we're clearly paying (not part of tuition, it's actually a separate bill) for access. That's been my main problem with the argument.
Thanks for your response, it helped clear things up.
Gee...thanks for correcting me?
Good to see you care.
Oh, and here
That's not really the best comparison. Network use is completely different when we're paying for it (and paying out the ass I might add). If we're paying for the printer, I'm sure as hell going to make the most out of it.
Also, I was under the impression Cornell was part of internet2.
Resnet at Cornell is, at best, a real shady business.
;) ). It's really disappointing to see how much they've changed things in the past couple years. I'm happy to be moving off campus next year.
The reaction from most people around here has been less than enthusiastic. You can easily burn through 2 GB of data in a month just by visiting ESPN.com to check game scores, or visiting any other media-heavy site. They claim it's better than the alternative (Roadrunner cable) and say that we're given options. Actually, we're not given any option if we live in the dorms. We are not allowed to have a cable internet connection installed, though most of the rooms have a cable jack installed already. Hell, we don't even get basic cable TV for free (little dongle on the cable wire apparently blocks cable...though, we did fix that problem early on in the year
We actually had wireless access points in some of the dorms (in the common areas like lounges and study lounges). They got pulled this year due to "lack of funding". It was great, some anonymous donor supplied the money for Cornell to set up wireless nodes all around campus. And now they took it away.
As if Ithaca NY didn't suck enough, now they're trying to limit our contact with civilization. Fantastic.
A lot of people have commented on how they would love to have dual/triple head display, which is obviously of importance to those who use it. And the general consensous seemed to be that it's features like that that make the Parhelia a great card. I think it's important to note, however, that GeForce 4 ti4600's come with dual head support and VIVO (video-in,video-out) support. They offer many of the same features at around $100 less. And by the time the Parhelia hits stores, the difference in price will most likely be greater. Hey, if you really need that third 17" flatscreen (and at that point you've already blown over $1000, you might as well go with the seemingly overpriced Parhelia). As for me and my two monitors, I think I'll stick with the performance and features of the gf 4 ti4600. And anyway, when you're playing Quake 3, do you really stop to stare at the miniscule "jaggies" on the steps? Please, when you're running a game at 1280x1024 you gotta realize it doesn't really matter all that much. Personally, for most of the "quality" tests on the HotHardware site, I didn't really see all that much of a difference between the screenshots, especially such a difference that would make me want to sacrifice more money and better performance for it.
Take Care,
Paul
Re-read it AGAIN. A theologian does not necessary imply the person is related in any way to a religious organization. Theology is the study of religion. A theologian is a person who studies religion. True, many theologians do go on to pursue a career related to religion, but it is not necessarily a given. And what's wrong with "religious" people having input in scientific research? If it weren't for religious/ethical complaints, the Nazi "scientific" experiments wouldn't have been noticed. I think it is very naive of people to think that either a purely scientific, or purely religious/ethics, point of view is sufficient to make decisions. It is NECESSARY to have a mix of the two, so neither one gets too carried away. I applaud Bush and his decision. It was well-reasoned and informed solution. Remember, though: this only applies to federal funding of stem cell research. Private sector stem cell research can still continue unimpeded (unfortunately). So, scientists and researchers ought not complain. Take Care, Paul
which side are you taking here? i think the police were right in taking the guy into custody. he was a flight risk. his first amendment rights are a non-issue in this case. But if you're saying he should have no first amendment rights, why should he have the right to a fair and timely trial? Shit, most felons who ARE US citizens don't get timely trials. The courts are full of miscreants waiting for trial, and they're all backed up. there is no such thing as a fair and timely trial these days, unless it's a murder trial. Obviously russia seems to be agreeing with the US on this one or they'd have tried to extradite him. he should be lucky he gets arrested over here, and not in russia.
Ok... 1) This guy has every right to expose flaws in software that could potential cause major security problems in many companies. He's exercising his First Amendment right. Fantastic. 2) This guy is openly selling copies of software that takes advantage of this security hole for a profit. Eh....don't like the sound of that. That's EXACTLY like someone finding a security hole in an Apache web server that grants you root access, and then that person makes a program that takes advantage of that security hole and helps you break into someone's computer. Not only that, but he's selling that program for a profit to people who will use it to do just that. Now, doesn't that seem a bit odd? I'm not saying the US gov't is looking much like a knight in shining armor right now, but you can't even pretend that this guy was *Just* exercising his first Amendment right. That's just like someone shooting a guy, and claiming he has the right to bear arms. Same thing here, just because he has the right to talk about the flaws, doesn't mean he can engage in an illegal activity because of it.
LOL, true. But Clinton did MANY more silly things than that. :)
This is not just for the united states. It was for other countries as well, but only Russia jumped on the boat with the USA.
If you want to talk about war-mongering countries, and about imperialism, talk to the british. This is an act by America to protect it's country and it's people. I don't think that's such a bad idea. As I previously posted: Two men stand in a room, both facing each other with guns drawn. One man has a bulletproof suit on. would the other man shoot him, knowing that it would do no good? No. Would it make the other man more likely to shoot? No. Take Care, Paul.
Two guys standing in a room. Both are facing each other. Both men have guns pointed at each other. One man has a complete bulletproof suit on (only reason i don't just say bulletproof vest is because some dumbass will just say "shoot him in the face"). Is the other man going to shoot him? I highly doubt it. Does it make the man with the bulletproof suit more likely to shoot? No, it doesn't. One could certainly speculate that it would, but with no prior history of doing so, what would that chance be?
Take Care, Paul
As a previous post stated, we need to "think outside the box". Most people don't understand that this system is not going to stop a war that we think is going to happen tomorrow, it's for future use. You think that there's going to be peace for the next 50 years? Get real. With China on the rise, and many other small countries getting nukes from Russia's disarmament, it's only a matter of time and I, for one, want to know that my country is protecting my ass.
And concerning threats of an arms race: We're not building weapons, we're building defenses. China *may* be building up arms against the US, but it's not like we're racing to beat them to it. We're just building a defense network. Hey, and *even if* there were an arms race between the US and China, economically speaking we'd drive them into the ground if they tried to build up arms at the rate we would. The Chinese aren't stupid, and they realize there is no chance of them being able to build up their nuclear stockpile as quickly as we could.
Sometimes I enjoy reading the rather anti-government attitude of Slashdot, but this is rather retarded. If you want to complain about the US government, why not at least pick on something worthwhile.
Take Care,
Paul.
The Athlon4 was the name given to the new mobile Athlon chips based on the Palimino core. The AthlonMP was the name given to the workstation/server chip based on the Palimino core. The Athlon4 is also the name given to the upcoming desktop chip based on the Palimino core. The ONLY difference between all 3 types of chips are the speed. The mobile was started in the high hundreds of MHz. The MPs start at 1GHz and the Athlon4 will start at 1.53GHz. To clarify, you can use regular Thunderbirds in the MP dual motherboards, and you will be able to run both the upcoming Athlon4 chips AND the Thouroughbred chips in the MP motherboard, since they are all exactly the same, just released at different times at different speeds for the different platforms. All compatible, all fast, all good. :)
Hope this clears things up.
Take Care,
Paul
For a company like Intel that's used to throwing huge curveballs at its customers and other developers, it's good to see that they can finally vary it up a bit.
Yeah, that was an illegal search because it was made without a warrant on private property. This is public property, so a warrant is not necessary. Nor is it illegal to take a picture of someone on public property even without their consent. If it were, there would be no papperazzi.
Uhhh...if you don't break the law, how is it a problem? You don't want to be affected by this system? Don't break the law. It's not an invasion of privacy, it's not breaking the law. It's done in a public setting and it's perfectly legal. They can't really use the information gathered for anything else. Stop bitching about it. There's no point.
Don't get me wrong, I don't like the idea of people spying on me. But, the streets are a public space, right? Not YOUR streets. The city's streets. Granted, we are tax payers so we 'own' the streets, blah blah blah. But we're not all out there shoveling them when there's snow, or cleaning them after a parade. No, the city uses our funds and thus owns the street. So they have every right to keep an eye on who is using their streets and what people are doing on their streets. They are not invading your privacy (in a legal sense) by taking pictures of you without consent(which is perfectly legal). Doesn't make it a nice thing to do, but it is legal, and hopefully will do some good.