I don't know about everyone else, but I generally prefer configuration and choices over conventions provided that the choices are logical and make sense within context. If I wanted the Gods of GUI to choose for me then I would run MacOS and use Safari. Will someone please remind Mozilla (if it hasn't occurred to them already) that the primary advantage of their platform over the competition is choice? I don't mind them including ribbons as a choice. I don't even mind if they make ribbons the default choice as long as there are choices and I can choose the "classic" menus if I don't enjoy ribbons.
The strategy was not so much one of complete blockage, but rather a calculated foot dragging effort to be just good enough so that while people might grumble about IE they were not so annoyed that they switched browsers or, even worse, operating systems. This bought time for many Microsoft products, not least among them Office, to adapt gradually to the new reality of the Internet while at the same time blunting effective competition from web based alternatives to Microsoft's core products.
according to TFA it most certainly DID require multiple staggered detections combined with simultaneous loss of connection to multiple communications facilities (all of the actually) and even then a human in the launch bunker was still required to manually "push the button". If any of these "steps" failed to trigger the next within set timeframes then the system would automatically shut itself down.
There would be exactly one giant conflict. There wouldn't be much of humanity left after that.
We are still heading in that direction. Either the climate will do us in or we will do it ourselves or a combination of both. IMHO, the long term prospects for the survival of humanity, say the next 10,000 years or so, are actually quite low right now. At least during the Cold War we could count on the fact that the Soviets weren't crazy. Now with the North Koreans and Iranians going for nukes and the Pakistanis already possessing them, we cannot even say that much. Its actually quite depressing really.
Well if you would take the time to RTFA (yes, yes, yes, I know that this is Slashdot and no I am not new here) then you would see that the system does not automatically launch the missiles without human intervention. What happens (supposedly) is as follows:
If the system was turned on, then it would try to determine whether a nuclear weapon detonated in Russian territory.
If a detonation was detected, then the system would check to see if any communications links from the silos to the military HQ remained open.
If they did AND if some amount of time ranging from 15 minutes to an hour passed without further attack detections then the machine would assume that people were still around who could order a counter-attack and shut down
If all lines to HQ were dead AND additional attacks were detected within the timeframe then the machine would transfer launch authority immediately to whomever was in the launch bunkers, be that a colonel or a junior officer fresh out of academy, who could then decide whether or not to push the button. This special procedure bypassed the usual command and control procedures that prevented the bunker officer from simply pushing the button anytime he/she wished.
In any case it was still a human who had to decide whether or not to push the button, albeit a single one in this special case instead of the usual hierarchy; presumably because the hierarchy had all been killed already by a massive attack.
If the system was turned on and nothing happened then the system would shut down automatically. It would also shut down automatically if something did happen, but it could still reach HQ via the silo communications links (presumably these are numerous and redundant). In a way, this is actually more elegant than the US system of keeping bomber crews and command/control aircraft airborne 24-7 (now discontinued) to prevent a first strike from eliminating effective counter-attack capability. I have to admit that sometimes those Russians are pretty clever in their solutions to problems.
Maybe this is a stupid question, but why can't the surfaces that are exposed to the corrosive fluid (i.e. saltwater) simply be painted with a corrosion resistant paint?
As if you have some revelation of a secret inner meaning that only you know about? Chuck Palahniuk himself said that the book was written as a way to help interpret and record things that he and his friends were actually doing at the time. In fact he has stated that everything, except for the clubs themselves, was based upon stuff that he and his friends actually did. There is no single and final reason of why that one must know in order to "unlock" a "complete understanding" of the work. I put the quote out there because pro-advertising stance of the GP reminded me of the book and movie; saying that, "we must endure their ads simply because doing so is the right thing to do or somehow a moral obligation". It also fits with the concept of a world which doesn't care about us as individuals, unless we happen to be movie gods, sport stars, or guitar heroes (not the game playing kind). The thread put me in the mind of the themes of Fightclub so I presented the quote in support of my argument that I don't owe the advertisers anything and I will do whatever the hell I want to do whether they like it or not. So fuck them...and you too.
And if enough of us did it, the advertisers would give up, the business model would fail, and the pay sites would win.
So what? Why should I care about that? The world is a tough place and we the little guys get shat upon all the time by marketers, advertisers, and corporations. To quote Tyler Durden:
"Advertising has us chasing cars and clothes, working jobs we hate so we can buy shit we don't need. We're the middle children of history, man. No purpose or place. We have no Great War. No Great Depression. Our Great War's a spiritual war... our Great Depression is our lives. We've all been raised on television to believe that one day we'd all be millionaires, and movie gods, and rock stars. But we won't. And we're slowly learning that fact. And we're very, very pissed off."
Is it really so completely, unsparingly rotten out there these days?
In a word, yes; or at least it is for 99% of us. The only real solution is to become self-made and dependent upon nobody (difficult for a software developer). That way, when you succeed the rewards are yours and yours alone and when you fail you will know who to blame. Wealth gives one the power to do what seems best for oneself or what matters to us individually (including the power to say no). Without that power you are always, at some level, dependent upon the whims of another.
In fact you could virtually end malaria worldwide for the cost of two semi-avenged lives.
How would you then feed the millions that you save? The grain reserves of the first world are at their lowest levels in decades. This planet already has way too many people living on it to sustainably support using our present level of technology. Call me cynical if you wish, but if it comes down to destroying Al-Qaeda, the Taliban and Islamic militancy or saving a few million people in Africa from malaria (who will then subsequently die anyway from starvation and malnutrition) I would prefer to see the militants wiped out.
One the one hand you accuse Joe Sixpack of being too ignorant to estimate the life-time costs of running an appliance while at the same time neglecting to mention that government interference in the electricity market (especially in California), by fixing the price too low for example, encourages wasteful use while at the same time discouraging greater efficiency by minimizing the gains that can be realized from purchasing more efficient appliances. Yes, California tried deregulation before and got burned (because they did it stupidly), but just because California couldn't get it right the first time doesn't mean that some deregulation of rates wouldn't be a good thing (punishing wasteful users and rewarding those who invest in efficiency).
However, why should I go out and buy a new television for several hundred dollars (at least) when, as other posters have pointed out, it will only save me ~$18 per year in electricity costs? The Present Value of the accumulated savings does not, in many cases, fully justify the purchase of a new TV when a perfectly serviceable, albeit less energy efficient, and fully depreciated (i.e. fully owned) existing model is available and working. Now, some people decide to buy energy efficient appliances anyway because they enjoy doing more for the environment and can afford to do so, but if you want to appeal to consumers' financial sensibilities then you have to make dollars and cents when talking about relative savings from greater efficiencies. Otherwise, Joe Sixpack concludes (rightly) that some highfalutin scientist or politician is peeing on their leg and telling them that its raining.
A bit over-stated perhaps, but the concern is not merely theoretical. Is it reasonable to believe that Al-Qaeda wouldn't attack again if the opportunity presented itself? There is something to be said for keeping pressure on them and pinning them down in Afghanistan. Of course, we could probably be running that operation better too and I would like to see funds allocated to military uses spent wisely and judiciously so as to achieve the best possible results (i.e. let the generals decide how to run the detailed operations once the politicians have decided whether or not we should be involved). For example, Obama was wise to keep up and increase the current drone operations (probably on the recommendation of military advisors and generals in the field) and targeted killings of terrorist commanders and leadership (a page taken from the Israeli playbook; very effective at disrupting large attacks and long-term operations).
I wonder if certain telecoms who cooperated received more government business or favorable consideration in new contract negotiations or renewals? Where there pay-offs for loyalty and cooperation?
I guess I got modded troll for asking a question here on Slashdot (people must think that I am pro-telecom...ha) but thanks for answering. Yes, that sounds perfectly reasonable to ask for a warrant. If anything, this just goes to show that when it comes down to protecting their profits (or their continued survival) vs protecting their customers; most companies will sell their customers down the river to save their own skins. I suppose that this isn't exactly a revelation to the Slashdot crowd, but perhaps this will go some way towards rebutting the "nothing to hide" folks who insist that using encryption, fake IDs and anonymous forms of payment is paranoid at best and provides circumstantial evidence of criminal intent or "up to no good".
According to a TESCO spokesman from TFA: "If Jedi walk around our stores with their hoods on, they'll miss lots of special offers." Now obviously if they are really Jedi then they can "sense" all of their surroundings using the force (hood or no hood). In fact, they should know about the discounts before they are even put on the shelves by looking into the future.
So the Department of Homeland Security rolls up in the black SUVs with guns and says "Give us what we want or we will shut you down" to AT&T, Sprint, Verizon etc...So they cooperate and give the government what they want (whether they like it or not since the alternative is being forced to close). Now the government, albeit with different elected officials, comes back years later and says, "we are going to investigate and possibly prosecute you for cooperating"? Can someone please explain why that is even remotely fair to the telecoms?
And nothing will change it until more people know what's going on with it and are angry enough to make some changes.
Life in the real world is difficult, complex, and exhausting. We have enough to worry about without giving two shits about your copyrights. If I choose scan my wedding picutres that is between myself and my wife and nobody else and certainly not the F***ING photographer. There are far too many bullshit laws in this country and we cannot afford to waste our time worrying about it when the dinner needs to be cooked, bills paid, and homework finished.
When my kid reaches school age can I make sure she doesn't get exposure to this blatant pack of lies.
Yes there is. Send them to a private school of your choice or else educate them yourself. He who pays the piper calls the tune after all and if you really want to advance your children with a superior education then you must be willing to spend your own time and money, above and beyond the taxes which pay for the worthless public schools, to make it happen; there really isn't any other way.
Raising good corporate consumer citizens is what our public education system is designed to do. It was originally based upon the Prussian education system which was crafted to mold loyal citizens and soldiers who followed orders, didn't ask questions, and accepted the information selected and filtered for them by the elites (who themselves received an altogether different education; one designed to groom them for power over their future subjects). Intelligence and independent thought is dangerous for peasants and slaves, or so the thinking went, so it must be discouraged and beaten out of all but the elites at an early age lest we raise a generation who refuses to accept the system and the powers that be.
That is something that is not easily done, given how dependent our country has become on military spending to employ people
In case you hadn't noticed, all of that military spending also keeps your ass safe from the multitude of violent people who would like nothing better than to have what you have...by whatever means necessary. If it costs a few extra bucks to smoke Ali Kaboom's ass in Waziristan before he shows up over here in a shopping mall with an AK-47 and an explosive belt then I say so be it. Remember that Ali Kaboom doesn't want to negotiate with you. He doesn't want you to understand his problems or reasoning. You are either a taliban-style muslim or he kills you; to him its really that simple. Now, would I like to see the military spend money more efficiently and on the right sort of training and equipment? Sure, but that doesn't mean that I want to see their budget cut so that we can spend it on NASA or more welfare nanny state programs.
Given enough time any connection can be compromised
It should be stated that "enough time" is a very relative term. If I encrypt my wireless router with AES then potential attackers will probably move on to a connection that is secured with WEP (easily broken in minutes) or better yet, not secured at all. Nobody is going to spend millions of years breaking an AES key when there are more convenient and attractive targets just about everywhere.
Since when did the term 'App Store' come to describe any server offering applications for download? I swear, once the marketers get their hands on a new tech term, what comes out the other end is pure and unadulterated bullshit. Soon the term 'App Store' will have about as much meaning as 'The Cloud' and the marketers will have moved on to their next buzzword kill.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't know about everyone else, but I generally prefer configuration and choices over conventions provided that the choices are logical and make sense within context. If I wanted the Gods of GUI to choose for me then I would run MacOS and use Safari. Will someone please remind Mozilla (if it hasn't occurred to them already) that the primary advantage of their platform over the competition is choice? I don't mind them including ribbons as a choice. I don't even mind if they make ribbons the default choice as long as there are choices and I can choose the "classic" menus if I don't enjoy ribbons.
The strategy was not so much one of complete blockage, but rather a calculated foot dragging effort to be just good enough so that while people might grumble about IE they were not so annoyed that they switched browsers or, even worse, operating systems. This bought time for many Microsoft products, not least among them Office, to adapt gradually to the new reality of the Internet while at the same time blunting effective competition from web based alternatives to Microsoft's core products.
but they're not the company they used to be.
Once the bean counters get involved, generally after the IPO, NO company is the same or the way it used to be.
according to TFA it most certainly DID require multiple staggered detections combined with simultaneous loss of connection to multiple communications facilities (all of the actually) and even then a human in the launch bunker was still required to manually "push the button". If any of these "steps" failed to trigger the next within set timeframes then the system would automatically shut itself down.
There would be exactly one giant conflict. There wouldn't be much of humanity left after that.
We are still heading in that direction. Either the climate will do us in or we will do it ourselves or a combination of both. IMHO, the long term prospects for the survival of humanity, say the next 10,000 years or so, are actually quite low right now. At least during the Cold War we could count on the fact that the Soviets weren't crazy. Now with the North Koreans and Iranians going for nukes and the Pakistanis already possessing them, we cannot even say that much. Its actually quite depressing really.
Nothing can go wrong!
Well if you would take the time to RTFA (yes, yes, yes, I know that this is Slashdot and no I am not new here) then you would see that the system does not automatically launch the missiles without human intervention. What happens (supposedly) is as follows:
In any case it was still a human who had to decide whether or not to push the button, albeit a single one in this special case instead of the usual hierarchy; presumably because the hierarchy had all been killed already by a massive attack.
If the system was turned on and nothing happened then the system would shut down automatically. It would also shut down automatically if something did happen, but it could still reach HQ via the silo communications links (presumably these are numerous and redundant). In a way, this is actually more elegant than the US system of keeping bomber crews and command/control aircraft airborne 24-7 (now discontinued) to prevent a first strike from eliminating effective counter-attack capability. I have to admit that sometimes those Russians are pretty clever in their solutions to problems.
Maybe this is a stupid question, but why can't the surfaces that are exposed to the corrosive fluid (i.e. saltwater) simply be painted with a corrosion resistant paint?
As if you have some revelation of a secret inner meaning that only you know about? Chuck Palahniuk himself said that the book was written as a way to help interpret and record things that he and his friends were actually doing at the time. In fact he has stated that everything, except for the clubs themselves, was based upon stuff that he and his friends actually did. There is no single and final reason of why that one must know in order to "unlock" a "complete understanding" of the work. I put the quote out there because pro-advertising stance of the GP reminded me of the book and movie; saying that, "we must endure their ads simply because doing so is the right thing to do or somehow a moral obligation". It also fits with the concept of a world which doesn't care about us as individuals, unless we happen to be movie gods, sport stars, or guitar heroes (not the game playing kind). The thread put me in the mind of the themes of Fightclub so I presented the quote in support of my argument that I don't owe the advertisers anything and I will do whatever the hell I want to do whether they like it or not. So fuck them...and you too.
And if enough of us did it, the advertisers would give up, the business model would fail, and the pay sites would win.
So what? Why should I care about that? The world is a tough place and we the little guys get shat upon all the time by marketers, advertisers, and corporations. To quote Tyler Durden:
"Advertising has us chasing cars and clothes, working jobs we hate so we can buy shit we don't need. We're the middle children of history, man. No purpose or place. We have no Great War. No Great Depression. Our Great War's a spiritual war... our Great Depression is our lives. We've all been raised on television to believe that one day we'd all be millionaires, and movie gods, and rock stars. But we won't. And we're slowly learning that fact. And we're very, very pissed off."
Is it really so completely, unsparingly rotten out there these days?
In a word, yes; or at least it is for 99% of us. The only real solution is to become self-made and dependent upon nobody (difficult for a software developer). That way, when you succeed the rewards are yours and yours alone and when you fail you will know who to blame. Wealth gives one the power to do what seems best for oneself or what matters to us individually (including the power to say no). Without that power you are always, at some level, dependent upon the whims of another.
For example, however much you may hate advertising, you might be willing to go to a source with lots of ads and great journalism
Or you could just go to the source with lots of ads and great journalism...without the ads thanks to Adblock.
In fact you could virtually end malaria worldwide for the cost of two semi-avenged lives.
How would you then feed the millions that you save? The grain reserves of the first world are at their lowest levels in decades. This planet already has way too many people living on it to sustainably support using our present level of technology. Call me cynical if you wish, but if it comes down to destroying Al-Qaeda, the Taliban and Islamic militancy or saving a few million people in Africa from malaria (who will then subsequently die anyway from starvation and malnutrition) I would prefer to see the militants wiped out.
One the one hand you accuse Joe Sixpack of being too ignorant to estimate the life-time costs of running an appliance while at the same time neglecting to mention that government interference in the electricity market (especially in California), by fixing the price too low for example, encourages wasteful use while at the same time discouraging greater efficiency by minimizing the gains that can be realized from purchasing more efficient appliances. Yes, California tried deregulation before and got burned (because they did it stupidly), but just because California couldn't get it right the first time doesn't mean that some deregulation of rates wouldn't be a good thing (punishing wasteful users and rewarding those who invest in efficiency).
However, why should I go out and buy a new television for several hundred dollars (at least) when, as other posters have pointed out, it will only save me ~$18 per year in electricity costs? The Present Value of the accumulated savings does not, in many cases, fully justify the purchase of a new TV when a perfectly serviceable, albeit less energy efficient, and fully depreciated (i.e. fully owned) existing model is available and working. Now, some people decide to buy energy efficient appliances anyway because they enjoy doing more for the environment and can afford to do so, but if you want to appeal to consumers' financial sensibilities then you have to make dollars and cents when talking about relative savings from greater efficiencies. Otherwise, Joe Sixpack concludes (rightly) that some highfalutin scientist or politician is peeing on their leg and telling them that its raining.
A bit over-stated perhaps, but the concern is not merely theoretical. Is it reasonable to believe that Al-Qaeda wouldn't attack again if the opportunity presented itself? There is something to be said for keeping pressure on them and pinning them down in Afghanistan. Of course, we could probably be running that operation better too and I would like to see funds allocated to military uses spent wisely and judiciously so as to achieve the best possible results (i.e. let the generals decide how to run the detailed operations once the politicians have decided whether or not we should be involved). For example, Obama was wise to keep up and increase the current drone operations (probably on the recommendation of military advisors and generals in the field) and targeted killings of terrorist commanders and leadership (a page taken from the Israeli playbook; very effective at disrupting large attacks and long-term operations).
I wonder if certain telecoms who cooperated received more government business or favorable consideration in new contract negotiations or renewals? Where there pay-offs for loyalty and cooperation?
I guess I got modded troll for asking a question here on Slashdot (people must think that I am pro-telecom...ha) but thanks for answering. Yes, that sounds perfectly reasonable to ask for a warrant. If anything, this just goes to show that when it comes down to protecting their profits (or their continued survival) vs protecting their customers; most companies will sell their customers down the river to save their own skins. I suppose that this isn't exactly a revelation to the Slashdot crowd, but perhaps this will go some way towards rebutting the "nothing to hide" folks who insist that using encryption, fake IDs and anonymous forms of payment is paranoid at best and provides circumstantial evidence of criminal intent or "up to no good".
According to a TESCO spokesman from TFA: "If Jedi walk around our stores with their hoods on, they'll miss lots of special offers." Now obviously if they are really Jedi then they can "sense" all of their surroundings using the force (hood or no hood). In fact, they should know about the discounts before they are even put on the shelves by looking into the future.
So the Department of Homeland Security rolls up in the black SUVs with guns and says "Give us what we want or we will shut you down" to AT&T, Sprint, Verizon etc...So they cooperate and give the government what they want (whether they like it or not since the alternative is being forced to close). Now the government, albeit with different elected officials, comes back years later and says, "we are going to investigate and possibly prosecute you for cooperating"? Can someone please explain why that is even remotely fair to the telecoms?
And nothing will change it until more people know what's going on with it and are angry enough to make some changes.
Life in the real world is difficult, complex, and exhausting. We have enough to worry about without giving two shits about your copyrights. If I choose scan my wedding picutres that is between myself and my wife and nobody else and certainly not the F***ING photographer. There are far too many bullshit laws in this country and we cannot afford to waste our time worrying about it when the dinner needs to be cooked, bills paid, and homework finished.
- The People
When my kid reaches school age can I make sure she doesn't get exposure to this blatant pack of lies.
Yes there is. Send them to a private school of your choice or else educate them yourself. He who pays the piper calls the tune after all and if you really want to advance your children with a superior education then you must be willing to spend your own time and money, above and beyond the taxes which pay for the worthless public schools, to make it happen; there really isn't any other way.
Raising good corporate consumer citizens is what our public education system is designed to do. It was originally based upon the Prussian education system which was crafted to mold loyal citizens and soldiers who followed orders, didn't ask questions, and accepted the information selected and filtered for them by the elites (who themselves received an altogether different education; one designed to groom them for power over their future subjects). Intelligence and independent thought is dangerous for peasants and slaves, or so the thinking went, so it must be discouraged and beaten out of all but the elites at an early age lest we raise a generation who refuses to accept the system and the powers that be.
That is something that is not easily done, given how dependent our country has become on military spending to employ people
In case you hadn't noticed, all of that military spending also keeps your ass safe from the multitude of violent people who would like nothing better than to have what you have...by whatever means necessary. If it costs a few extra bucks to smoke Ali Kaboom's ass in Waziristan before he shows up over here in a shopping mall with an AK-47 and an explosive belt then I say so be it. Remember that Ali Kaboom doesn't want to negotiate with you. He doesn't want you to understand his problems or reasoning. You are either a taliban-style muslim or he kills you; to him its really that simple. Now, would I like to see the military spend money more efficiently and on the right sort of training and equipment? Sure, but that doesn't mean that I want to see their budget cut so that we can spend it on NASA or more welfare nanny state programs.
I have a resource that costs me nothing it makes good sense to share
Not if you are legally responsible for whatever happens on that network...
Given enough time any connection can be compromised
It should be stated that "enough time" is a very relative term. If I encrypt my wireless router with AES then potential attackers will probably move on to a connection that is secured with WEP (easily broken in minutes) or better yet, not secured at all. Nobody is going to spend millions of years breaking an AES key when there are more convenient and attractive targets just about everywhere.
Since when did the term 'App Store' come to describe any server offering applications for download? I swear, once the marketers get their hands on a new tech term, what comes out the other end is pure and unadulterated bullshit. Soon the term 'App Store' will have about as much meaning as 'The Cloud' and the marketers will have moved on to their next buzzword kill.