1) I wasn't running in this election. Nobody I wanted to win did, but they wouldn't have if Kerry won either. Does that tell you anything? Maybe...
2) I don't have a base, but if I did, it would probably BELONG TO US.
3) This "fucking nation" was put together (founded) on ideals that were considered to be more important than any person's life. These ideals include respect for individual freedoms, an end to tyrrany, and (gasp!) a voice of the people in government. I think if the nation was again subjected to tyrrany, the founders would have no qualms with whatever violent solution might arise.
4) My recommendation to start a civil war is only applicable when the people lose the ability to affect the government. Voting used to (and may still) take care of that "voice of the people in government" problem quite nicely, but IF IT DOESN'T, now or in the future, we have a problem on our hands.
Whether democrats or republicans are in the White House or Congress, if they got there in a fraudulent election, the system has failed. Anyone who wants to bury their head in the sand and pretend everything is fine is welcome to, but I won't be among them.
I'm not saying I think we should all rise up against the government because of a potential failure in the system. I'm not saying the claims of these people have any merits. But in the general sense, if the elections are found to be fraudulent, I would prefer my solution to one of ignorance and condoned tyrrany. This would be true no matter who is in office, what party they came from, and whether I (thought I) voted for them.
4) I don't think that the -people- of any given state were given the opportunity to "certify" the voting machines they ended up using. If I remember correctly, there were at least a few states (probably more like 30) that had at least some voting machines with no paper trail. Are you telling me that all the citizens of that state (and in a Presidential election, the citizens of the country) are responsible for the "certification" decision made by one person or possibly a committee in the governor's office?
Side-note: "The electorate chose not to limit the current president to a single term."... that is assuming the elections were fair. At this point, I'm inclined to thing that they were, and there is very little (if any) cause for concern. Such cause for concern -might- arise, and if it does, I am -not- going to bury -my- head in the sand. THAT was my point (in case I didn't make it clearly).
civil war is better than ignorant peace. if your solution to the problems with the electoral process is to ignore them, stick your head in the sand, and have faith (despite evidence to the contrary), you've already lost what you were trying to protect. you might have peace, but you have to admit, you have theoretically zero control over the electoral process.
i'd prefer civil war to faith in a broken electoral process. faith doesn't fix it. it just means we'll have false happiness while things get bad... really bad.
do you suppose the record companies haven't been paid for their sales either?
oh wait, no? they have? i guess that's a weird iTunes problem then.
i'm betting this is one of those pesky instances of PEBKAC --- "problem exists between keyboard and chair"
in this case, the "problem" is the guy between a keyboard and really fancy office chair who decides he doesn't have to pay you because you're not on a record label with lawyers.
you can't look at "the network" (the protocol and application that facilitates transfer) and assign blame for content any more than you can do so for ftp. why not, you might ask?
simply because the creators of the protocol and application are not legally responsible for what people do with it.
the kazaa application and protocol (not CONTENT) have just as much non-infringing potential use as ftp, and ftp has just as much -infringing- potential use as kazaa. there is nothing about the application and protocol that makes it more open to infringement... rather it's easier to use, so those who are more likely to infringe are more likely to use it than ftp.
if push came to shove, and kazaa was banned (along with various other similar P2P apps), there is no doubt in my mind FTP servers would pop up that would run rampant with mp3 and divx piracy.
would you support banning ftp then?
and what do you ban after that? IRC? http?
there is nothing about the kazaa application and protocol that inherently lends itself to piracy any more than those other protocols. the application lends itself to widespread USE by those who would pirate simply by being easy to use, but the last time I checked, easy to use was not a bad thing from a legal perspective.
the fact that other methods exist doesn't invalidate this one. if everybody happened to be using ratio-based FTP servers (like they were back in the day) to trade mp3s, you wouldn't argue that FTP servers should be banned because "you can trade legit files other ways", would you?
the tool exists completely seperately from its uses. unless you want to make the provider of a tool responsible for the users' uses, you can't really argue that any given tool should be banned.
if kazaa was banned, it's not as though illegal filesharing would stop. it would simply move to another tool. do we then ban that tool?
the argument of the prosecution in this case is that kazaa is a service, not a tool, and therefore the responsibility of the provider when used by a user/customer. if you don't argue that, then you have no grounds on which to blame the provider of the tool.
To make that process a bit easier, just run Java Desktop System (their linux distribution)... it actually IS a "sun workstation" in the sense that it's workstation software released by Sun.
Or go with Novell's. A "real" (read: company-based) distribution that looks very professional can be bought boxed cheaply; just buy the box and produce the paper license this t00l wants.
I occasionally send in homework by e-mail directly to professors. It's not usually (a) normal or (b) appreciated, but it is sometimes an option when some of us are running late and can't make it to class to turn it in (for instance).
It does indeed open corrupted.doc files that crash Word... I did it once at work, to the amazement of everyone present (myself included). However, it did lose a bit of the formatting. Nothing that 5 minutes of dragging pictures around couldn't fix, though.
there's a 1.0 firefox build for BeOS... check it out at http://www.livejournal.com/community/bezilla/59105.html
it works pretty well in my limited testing, but there's one caveat... it may not work with a previous Firefox profile, and it may not be able to generate its own, so download an empty profile from here: http://www.bebits.com/bob/18058/firefox10-emptypro filebeos-v1.zip and unzip to/boot/home/config/settings
The purpose of a recount this time around is a bit different than the purpose in 2000. The recount in 2000 was to get around that pesky margin of error, and as such, 1000 votes was feasible (though improbable) and 100,000 votes would have been statistically impossible.
However, the recount this time is being called for because of potential tampering with voting machines. Such tampering statewide could easily produce the 100,000 vote difference, because although it's outside the margin of error, it's certainly not ouside the margin of (ALL VOTES) which is potentially (mathematically speaking) the number of votes changed.
It is highly unlikely that 100,000 votes were changed by voting machines, but not as unlikely as you make it sound.
What IS unlikely, however, is that a hand recount will turn out differently, because the ones changed (if any) would probably be those with no paper trail and no verifiability.
Signing up for Cox cable internet when I moved into my apartment...
Me: "Hi, I'd like my account activated" (there is a web-based activation procedure that requires some activeX components, but it says to call if you're having problems... and apparently not running windows is a "problem")
Support: "OK. What windows version are you running?"
"So our calls are happily sent across the country through random strangers?"
Actually, that's true.
Skype's NAT traversal works by using a non-firewalled 3rd party... which means (in real terms) anyone running Skype who is not firewalled is a candidate to act as a "server" for the two firewalled people talking. I assume these servers are chosen randomly among Skype users, or are those with the best bandwidth / least latency.
I think you're confusing browser and "e-mail client." Something like Firefox adopted by Google would have nothing at all to do with POP3 support. However, if they decided to extend Thunderbird or the entire Mozilla suite...... then they would turn into AOL very quickly.
That might actually be desirable for them, but Google and feature-bloat are not words that I ever want to associate.
that 2% is largely irrelevant, as the president is elected by the electoral college and not the popular vote.
the electoral college is a system in which the popular votes of each state are supposed to (but don't have to) determine that state's electoral votes. the number of electoral votes per state is roughly determined by population, but is a minimum of three.
the actual difference that matters is the 136,000 votes in Ohio. if Kerry had won Ohio, or Florida (I don't know what the difference was there), he would be the next president...
given that we've seen voting mistakes supposedly affecting up to 88,000 votes in one "mistake" (or sabotage), it would take two "mistakes" of the kind we've seen in one state to change the president.
the treaty is important not just for lowering emissions, but for gaining the respect and support of the world.
if we are reducing emissions faster than kyoto already, then don't screw the kyoto treaty, -sign- it... because we've already done what it requires. all we would be changing by signing it is gaining world respect and support.
i'm betting the original claim about reducing emissions is missing a fact or two that would put it in perspective. there's gotta be a reason reducing emissions is a good thing (when we go it alone) but signing kyoto is bad... what is that again?
Voting next Tuesday will not give anybody a better understanding of the difference between a patent and a copyright.
No, but it might just give the president a better understanding of the difference. And if we're lucky, it just might have a "trickle-down" effect into DHS. Or we might assume that more intelligent people will be appointing more intelligent people (not that that is a fair assumption, just throwing it out as a possibility).
Short of taking up arms, how are we supposed to make this "the land of the free" besides voting?
Yet, somehow, the number of American soldiers killed in Iraq monthly hasn't been declining at all since the beginning of the war (not that it's been going up significantly either).
Worldwide bloodshed might be going down, but -our- body count in Iraq isn't.
because that 500x slowdown is not on the "emulated" processor (the speed of which is determined by your own processor, you don't just set it). so if you had a 12.5 ghz processor and a 68k emulator with a 500x slowdown, yes, you'd be emulating a 25 mhz 68k.
if you could arbitrarily set the CPU speed of your emulated processor, why not make it 10 billion ghz, and have the fastest cpu ever! yeah, that's a great idea!
As far as I know, it originally came from the term "phreak", which was actually a (valid!) shortened form of Phone Freaking... get it? The first part of one word and the second part of another?
The use of ph to replace f, however, lost its connection to phones (and thus validity) when things like networks started to be used for hax0ring.
Slashdot Mirror
1) I wasn't running in this election. Nobody I wanted to win did, but they wouldn't have if Kerry won either. Does that tell you anything? Maybe...
... that is assuming the elections were fair. At this point, I'm inclined to thing that they were, and there is very little (if any) cause for concern. Such cause for concern -might- arise, and if it does, I am -not- going to bury -my- head in the sand. THAT was my point (in case I didn't make it clearly).
2) I don't have a base, but if I did, it would probably BELONG TO US.
3) This "fucking nation" was put together (founded) on ideals that were considered to be more important than any person's life. These ideals include respect for individual freedoms, an end to tyrrany, and (gasp!) a voice of the people in government. I think if the nation was again subjected to tyrrany, the founders would have no qualms with whatever violent solution might arise.
4) My recommendation to start a civil war is only applicable when the people lose the ability to affect the government. Voting used to (and may still) take care of that "voice of the people in government" problem quite nicely, but IF IT DOESN'T, now or in the future, we have a problem on our hands.
Whether democrats or republicans are in the White House or Congress, if they got there in a fraudulent election, the system has failed. Anyone who wants to bury their head in the sand and pretend everything is fine is welcome to, but I won't be among them.
I'm not saying I think we should all rise up against the government because of a potential failure in the system. I'm not saying the claims of these people have any merits. But in the general sense, if the elections are found to be fraudulent, I would prefer my solution to one of ignorance and condoned tyrrany. This would be true no matter who is in office, what party they came from, and whether I (thought I) voted for them.
4) I don't think that the -people- of any given state were given the opportunity to "certify" the voting machines they ended up using. If I remember correctly, there were at least a few states (probably more like 30) that had at least some voting machines with no paper trail. Are you telling me that all the citizens of that state (and in a Presidential election, the citizens of the country) are responsible for the "certification" decision made by one person or possibly a committee in the governor's office?
Side-note: "The electorate chose not to limit the current president to a single term."
civil war is better than ignorant peace. if your solution to the problems with the electoral process is to ignore them, stick your head in the sand, and have faith (despite evidence to the contrary), you've already lost what you were trying to protect. you might have peace, but you have to admit, you have theoretically zero control over the electoral process.
i'd prefer civil war to faith in a broken electoral process. faith doesn't fix it. it just means we'll have false happiness while things get bad... really bad.
wow...
do you suppose the record companies haven't been paid for their sales either?
oh wait, no? they have? i guess that's a weird iTunes problem then.
i'm betting this is one of those pesky instances of PEBKAC --- "problem exists between keyboard and chair"
in this case, the "problem" is the guy between a keyboard and really fancy office chair who decides he doesn't have to pay you because you're not on a record label with lawyers.
i wasn't making myself clear--
you can't look at "the network" (the protocol and application that facilitates transfer) and assign blame for content any more than you can do so for ftp. why not, you might ask?
simply because the creators of the protocol and application are not legally responsible for what people do with it.
the kazaa application and protocol (not CONTENT) have just as much non-infringing potential use as ftp, and ftp has just as much -infringing- potential use as kazaa. there is nothing about the application and protocol that makes it more open to infringement... rather it's easier to use, so those who are more likely to infringe are more likely to use it than ftp.
if push came to shove, and kazaa was banned (along with various other similar P2P apps), there is no doubt in my mind FTP servers would pop up that would run rampant with mp3 and divx piracy.
would you support banning ftp then?
and what do you ban after that? IRC? http?
there is nothing about the kazaa application and protocol that inherently lends itself to piracy any more than those other protocols. the application lends itself to widespread USE by those who would pirate simply by being easy to use, but the last time I checked, easy to use was not a bad thing from a legal perspective.
the fact that other methods exist doesn't invalidate this one. if everybody happened to be using ratio-based FTP servers (like they were back in the day) to trade mp3s, you wouldn't argue that FTP servers should be banned because "you can trade legit files other ways", would you?
the tool exists completely seperately from its uses. unless you want to make the provider of a tool responsible for the users' uses, you can't really argue that any given tool should be banned.
if kazaa was banned, it's not as though illegal filesharing would stop. it would simply move to another tool. do we then ban that tool?
the argument of the prosecution in this case is that kazaa is a service, not a tool, and therefore the responsibility of the provider when used by a user/customer. if you don't argue that, then you have no grounds on which to blame the provider of the tool.
See? Microsoft isn't a monopoly. The compete with themselves!!!
To make that process a bit easier, just run Java Desktop System (their linux distribution)... it actually IS a "sun workstation" in the sense that it's workstation software released by Sun.
Or go with Novell's. A "real" (read: company-based) distribution that looks very professional can be bought boxed cheaply; just buy the box and produce the paper license this t00l wants.
I, for one, would be very interested in seeing it.
Sounds kind of like Revolution OS, but less dry (I love revolution OS but my friends get bored watching it).
I occasionally send in homework by e-mail directly to professors. It's not usually (a) normal or (b) appreciated, but it is sometimes an option when some of us are running late and can't make it to class to turn it in (for instance).
It does indeed open corrupted .doc files that crash Word... I did it once at work, to the amazement of everyone present (myself included). However, it did lose a bit of the formatting. Nothing that 5 minutes of dragging pictures around couldn't fix, though.
you try finding every hole in millions of lines of code
That would be a hell of a lot easier to do if I had access to the code.
Lots of people do it constantly!
there's a 1.0 firefox build for BeOS... check it out at http://www.livejournal.com/community/bezilla/59105 .html
o filebeos-v1.zip and unzip to /boot/home/config/settings
:)
it works pretty well in my limited testing, but there's one caveat... it may not work with a previous Firefox profile, and it may not be able to generate its own, so download an empty profile from here: http://www.bebits.com/bob/18058/firefox10-emptypr
have fun
The purpose of a recount this time around is a bit different than the purpose in 2000. The recount in 2000 was to get around that pesky margin of error, and as such, 1000 votes was feasible (though improbable) and 100,000 votes would have been statistically impossible.
However, the recount this time is being called for because of potential tampering with voting machines. Such tampering statewide could easily produce the 100,000 vote difference, because although it's outside the margin of error, it's certainly not ouside the margin of (ALL VOTES) which is potentially (mathematically speaking) the number of votes changed.
It is highly unlikely that 100,000 votes were changed by voting machines, but not as unlikely as you make it sound.
What IS unlikely, however, is that a hand recount will turn out differently, because the ones changed (if any) would probably be those with no paper trail and no verifiability.
Signing up for Cox cable internet when I moved into my apartment...
Me: "Hi, I'd like my account activated" (there is a web-based activation procedure that requires some activeX components, but it says to call if you're having problems... and apparently not running windows is a "problem")
Support: "OK. What windows version are you running?"
Me: "I'm not running Windows, I'm running Linux."
Support: "Is that 98 or XP?"
I nearly choked on my own digust.
"So our calls are happily sent across the country through random strangers?"
Actually, that's true.
Skype's NAT traversal works by using a non-firewalled 3rd party... which means (in real terms) anyone running Skype who is not firewalled is a candidate to act as a "server" for the two firewalled people talking. I assume these servers are chosen randomly among Skype users, or are those with the best bandwidth / least latency.
I think you're confusing browser and "e-mail client." Something like Firefox adopted by Google would have nothing at all to do with POP3 support. However, if they decided to extend Thunderbird or the entire Mozilla suite... ... then they would turn into AOL very quickly.
That might actually be desirable for them, but Google and feature-bloat are not words that I ever want to associate.
that 2% is largely irrelevant, as the president is elected by the electoral college and not the popular vote.
the electoral college is a system in which the popular votes of each state are supposed to (but don't have to) determine that state's electoral votes. the number of electoral votes per state is roughly determined by population, but is a minimum of three.
the actual difference that matters is the 136,000 votes in Ohio. if Kerry had won Ohio, or Florida (I don't know what the difference was there), he would be the next president...
given that we've seen voting mistakes supposedly affecting up to 88,000 votes in one "mistake" (or sabotage), it would take two "mistakes" of the kind we've seen in one state to change the president.
the treaty is important not just for lowering emissions, but for gaining the respect and support of the world.
if we are reducing emissions faster than kyoto already, then don't screw the kyoto treaty, -sign- it... because we've already done what it requires. all we would be changing by signing it is gaining world respect and support.
i'm betting the original claim about reducing emissions is missing a fact or two that would put it in perspective. there's gotta be a reason reducing emissions is a good thing (when we go it alone) but signing kyoto is bad... what is that again?
MOD THIS UP!!!
Yeah... it's here
Voting next Tuesday will not give anybody a better understanding of the difference between a patent and a copyright.
No, but it might just give the president a better understanding of the difference. And if we're lucky, it just might have a "trickle-down" effect into DHS. Or we might assume that more intelligent people will be appointing more intelligent people (not that that is a fair assumption, just throwing it out as a possibility).
Short of taking up arms, how are we supposed to make this "the land of the free" besides voting?
Yet, somehow, the number of American soldiers killed in Iraq monthly hasn't been declining at all since the beginning of the war (not that it's been going up significantly either).
Worldwide bloodshed might be going down, but -our- body count in Iraq isn't.
1107 and counting, people.
http://icasualties.org/oif/
because that 500x slowdown is not on the "emulated" processor (the speed of which is determined by your own processor, you don't just set it). so if you had a 12.5 ghz processor and a 68k emulator with a 500x slowdown, yes, you'd be emulating a 25 mhz 68k.
if you could arbitrarily set the CPU speed of your emulated processor, why not make it 10 billion ghz, and have the fastest cpu ever! yeah, that's a great idea!
As far as I know, it originally came from the term "phreak", which was actually a (valid!) shortened form of Phone Freaking... get it? The first part of one word and the second part of another?
The use of ph to replace f, however, lost its connection to phones (and thus validity) when things like networks started to be used for hax0ring.
As a B-student undergrad, I'm -insulted- by your comparison. The author wouldn't survive two weeks as an undergrad... ... at least in CS.
Now as a sociology major... that guy is getting an A.