There shouldn't be a financial industry! Industry produces and commerce sells.
Finance == value. You can print money, but that actually causes all money to lose value, which is the opposite of what a finance "industry" should be doing. There's a lot of financial commerce happening, though; our money is being bought from us at a deflated rate and sold to the rich for even less.
You sir, are a naive tool. The financial industry provides the capital upon which industry is built. Without it, the only people with enough capital to create industry are the rich.
Mexicans are now the largest racial group in California. Would you suggest California should make Spanish the state language? The U.S. decisively does NOT have a national language. If you can't lose your bigotry, then get out of my glorious melting pot of a nation.
1. Wasn't aware that "Mexican" was a racial group, thanks for clearing that up.
2. Do you really believe that "the U.S. decisively does NOT have a national language"? I mean, I know that it's not official, but c'mon. Is there any question what the national language is in this country?
Re:More than scientific learning
on
LHC Success!
·
· Score: 5, Informative
And the ones who lost their bets with Stephen Hawking about whether they'd find the Higgs Boson.
Isn't the real science not happening for like another 11 months?
Re:Who needs privacy when people are so predictabl
on
Blown to Bits
·
· Score: 1
Despite attempts to stir up debate, there's nothing debatable about that one. Creationism is flat wrong. Talk of "bias" on an "issue" like that makes as much sense as a debate over whether 2+2=4 or 2+2=5
Hello? How can you say it's just flat wrong. It's still not able to be answered absolutely. Here's the thing I think most people confuse. People that believe in creationism, I am *not* one of them but I get it, don't necessarily believe that that means there is no evolution. They just believe that the evolution was kicked of by a deity. Even if you can prove that life was kicked off by the big bang and evolved from there, you still can't prove that a deity wasn't involved in the process. You *can* prove that all the accounts about creation in the bible are false, at least the time lines and such, but you still can't prove that god didn't create the materials and situation that started the big bang.
I don't believe it, but still, you can't prove it didn't happen so to say that the *theory* is "flat wrong" shows your bias.
Re:Who's censoring now!?
on
Blown to Bits
·
· Score: 0, Troll
I'm alright. Have you seen Get a Sense of Humor or Loosen Up recently?
Yeah, he just went right over your head with Johnny Sarcasm.
Re:Who needs privacy when people are so predictabl
on
Blown to Bits
·
· Score: 1
Even repeating the same things in completely fictional works enough times forms public opinion. People watching shows like Dalls, The OC, and Friends tend to think all Americans live in big, comfortably appointed homes in trendy areas and drink $5 a cup coffee all day long.
I've been thinking about that exact point quite a bit lately in the context of "big governement". I had the opportunity to work with some city forensic computer guys lately and was surprised at how little they can actually do. "Phone Dumps" and other monitoring type stuff is actually a bitch for them to get their hands on, while all the while I assumed it was like Law and Order. (ok not really but still, I think most people do) That leads me to wonder how many people really think that all the stuff that the "government" can do on television and in the movies is really true. Youtube is full of really paranoid people who think really paranoid thoughts based on television shows and movies. Kinda funny really.
Re:Who needs privacy when people are so predictabl
on
Blown to Bits
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
I really detest a majority of the media, Fox News, provides a particular easy example of people wanting to hear what they already believe. It provides affirmation that they are smart because people on the tv are saying what they believe.
That coupled with this...
I took am guilty of this to a certain extent, but I recognize it as a weakness and try to address it. Between the Bush/Gore election and 9/11 I swore off network news. Now I read "The Economist" because it has non-US centric view of the world and listen to NPR on my way to work. It helps. But I must admit that I do not read books are articles defending "intelligent" design, when I am convinced of evolution. Maybe people believe their ideology so thoroughly that they choose not to challenge it...
could be argued as great hypocrisy. You listen to NPR because it affirms what you already believe. Plus, I know lots of people that consume the Fox News product so that they can continue to be disgusted by "the other side". NPR is no different than network news. It's people with an agenda. It's human nature. With a powerful platform, come powerful opinions. It's unavoidable. So, as you said, people migrate to what they believe. (for whatever reason)
Re:Who's censoring now!?
on
Blown to Bits
·
· Score: 4, Funny
Stupid liberals are all in a tizzy when we don't let the mainstream media get away with turning the Superbowl into a hardcore fuckfest in front of millions of innocent children, but then they want us to fact check everything we say. No hypocrisy there, nope.
Hi Strawman, my name is Slippery Slope. How's things?
McCain, of course, may have his own views, but his VP choice shows that he's more interested in appeasing the religious right and radical conservatives than insisting that his administration's policies are based on the best scientific evidence available.
Guess what? Most people who vote believe in creationism. That's why we have the mess we have now. Why would a politician NOT pander to voters? When the rest of the intelligent population of this lazy ass country get off their asses long enough to cast a fucking vote, we'll be doing a lot better.
Nor any evidence that it happened. Rezko's wife made a bunch of money on that land, so what "favor" she is supposed to have done Obama remains mysterious.
Um...wrong. Rezko's wife sold Obama a piece of property for $104,500 that she had paid $625,000 for just six months prior. How do you consider that making "a bunch of money"?
Except he wasn't even charged (your link is full of speculation that is 7 months out of date).
You mean Rezko? He was charged for soliciting kickbacks, a scandal with another one of his politician friends.
Despite what people may think, there is no crime in charging too little for land.
No, but with Rezko's pas behavior, it's questionable at best. Here's the facts from the Chicago Sun.
A few months after Obama became a U.S. senator, he and Rezko's wife, Rita, bought adjacent pieces of property from a doctor in Chicago's Kenwood neighborhood -- a deal that has dogged Obama the last two years. The doctor sold the mansion to Obama for $1.65 million -- $300,000 below the asking price. Rezko's wife paid full price -- $625,000 -- for the adjacent vacant lot. The deals closed in June 2005. Six months later, Obama paid Rezko's wife $104,500 for a strip of her land, so he could have a bigger yard. At the time, it had been widely reported that Tony Rezko was under federal investigation. Questioned later about the timing of the Rezko deal, Obama called it "boneheaded" because people might think the Rezkos had done him a favor.
So they'll attack her on political corruption then
Ah...buth then they'll talk about his political corruption then. Nothing liking buying a house for pennies on the dollar from someone endicted on federal charges.
Some of these systems had blank Admin passwords. If I did that where I work I would be sacked for incompetence.
I agree that it was irresponsible on the admins part, but he still broke into them. A locked house and an unlocked house make no difference in the law, if you enter, you're breaking and entering and that's illegal.
The real problem is that by exposing how lax the securit was he has caused the US government considerable embarrassment, for this they will make him rot in prison for a very long while.
Perhaps, or perhaps the real problem is saying that it's OK to break into another country's military computer systems as long as you're only looking for proof of UFOs.
Also, as a British citizen I do object to an extradition treaty that only works in one direction. Ideally we should refuse all future extraditions until the US agrees to the same provisions we have, but since the US would never do that it is a moot point really. I would rather that every American criminal could not just come over here to escape prosecution since that certainly does not help anyone.
Yeah, well that's a you problem. If your governement was silly enough to make that agreement, then that's their problem. I feel you....I'd hate that.
Legally, intention makes all the difference as to what you can be convicted of.
I'm not saying that intention has nothing to do with the law, I'm saying that in *this case* I don't see what his intention has to do with it. I feel like he should be extridited regardless of his intentions. (which let's face it, nobody knows but him)
His defence team would do better to point out how this case is already decided in the press. The press seem to be helping to condemn him before he goes to trial, by constantly highlighting the apparent scale of what he is said to have done.
Dude, he broke into military computer systems. He admits it. I don't see what his intention has to do with it. I don't care if he was looking for lolcats. He broke into military systems, nasa systems, and he completely admits it. What's the defense? He ought to face the consequences, if it's jail_time, so be it.
If you roll in the Java world, then check out the Blackberry. It's really easy to develop for, there's a bunch of tools out there, and installing and removing apps is a breeze through the USB cable. (or a server for that matter)
Exactly, I think everyone at Slashdot knows that if someone has physical access to your hardware, you've already lost the security game.
I don't know if that applies to the Blackberry family. 10 tries and the phone wipes itself out to factory settings only to be recovered by the enterprise BES server. Haven't read a whole lot about holes in that strategy.
Look, it is every corporation's right to mislead people.
Yeah, not in advertising though. In most civilized countries, that's against the law. Interesting to point out though, that in this case, it's not the goverment. I get the sarcasm though.
Slashdot Mirror
There shouldn't be a financial industry! Industry produces and commerce sells. Finance == value. You can print money, but that actually causes all money to lose value, which is the opposite of what a finance "industry" should be doing. There's a lot of financial commerce happening, though; our money is being bought from us at a deflated rate and sold to the rich for even less.
You sir, are a naive tool. The financial industry provides the capital upon which industry is built. Without it, the only people with enough capital to create industry are the rich.
Mexicans are now the largest racial group in California. Would you suggest California should make Spanish the state language? The U.S. decisively does NOT have a national language. If you can't lose your bigotry, then get out of my glorious melting pot of a nation.
1. Wasn't aware that "Mexican" was a racial group, thanks for clearing that up.
2. Do you really believe that "the U.S. decisively does NOT have a national language"? I mean, I know that it's not official, but c'mon. Is there any question what the national language is in this country?
And the ones who lost their bets with Stephen Hawking about whether they'd find the Higgs Boson.
Isn't the real science not happening for like another 11 months?
Despite attempts to stir up debate, there's nothing debatable about that one. Creationism is flat wrong. Talk of "bias" on an "issue" like that makes as much sense as a debate over whether 2+2=4 or 2+2=5
Hello? How can you say it's just flat wrong. It's still not able to be answered absolutely. Here's the thing I think most people confuse. People that believe in creationism, I am *not* one of them but I get it, don't necessarily believe that that means there is no evolution. They just believe that the evolution was kicked of by a deity. Even if you can prove that life was kicked off by the big bang and evolved from there, you still can't prove that a deity wasn't involved in the process. You *can* prove that all the accounts about creation in the bible are false, at least the time lines and such, but you still can't prove that god didn't create the materials and situation that started the big bang.
I don't believe it, but still, you can't prove it didn't happen so to say that the *theory* is "flat wrong" shows your bias.
I'm alright. Have you seen Get a Sense of Humor or Loosen Up recently?
Yeah, he just went right over your head with Johnny Sarcasm.
Even repeating the same things in completely fictional works enough times forms public opinion. People watching shows like Dalls, The OC, and Friends tend to think all Americans live in big, comfortably appointed homes in trendy areas and drink $5 a cup coffee all day long.
I've been thinking about that exact point quite a bit lately in the context of "big governement". I had the opportunity to work with some city forensic computer guys lately and was surprised at how little they can actually do. "Phone Dumps" and other monitoring type stuff is actually a bitch for them to get their hands on, while all the while I assumed it was like Law and Order. (ok not really but still, I think most people do) That leads me to wonder how many people really think that all the stuff that the "government" can do on television and in the movies is really true. Youtube is full of really paranoid people who think really paranoid thoughts based on television shows and movies. Kinda funny really.
I really detest a majority of the media, Fox News, provides a particular easy example of people wanting to hear what they already believe. It provides affirmation that they are smart because people on the tv are saying what they believe.
That coupled with this...
I took am guilty of this to a certain extent, but I recognize it as a weakness and try to address it. Between the Bush/Gore election and 9/11 I swore off network news. Now I read "The Economist" because it has non-US centric view of the world and listen to NPR on my way to work. It helps. But I must admit that I do not read books are articles defending "intelligent" design, when I am convinced of evolution. Maybe people believe their ideology so thoroughly that they choose not to challenge it...
could be argued as great hypocrisy. You listen to NPR because it affirms what you already believe. Plus, I know lots of people that consume the Fox News product so that they can continue to be disgusted by "the other side". NPR is no different than network news. It's people with an agenda. It's human nature. With a powerful platform, come powerful opinions. It's unavoidable. So, as you said, people migrate to what they believe. (for whatever reason)
Stupid liberals are all in a tizzy when we don't let the mainstream media get away with turning the Superbowl into a hardcore fuckfest in front of millions of innocent children, but then they want us to fact check everything we say. No hypocrisy there, nope.
Hi Strawman, my name is Slippery Slope. How's things?
This is very bad for Intel (and probably AMD, why not?) since there will be a much more cheaply made multi-core CPU available on the market.
I guess we'll see about that. I did find, however, the best quote ever from TFA
"The decision makers and [Chinese] IT community have come to realize that CPUs [central processing units] are important."
Um...yeah.
Ok. So what? When was the last time that happened? 200 years ago? More?
because it's their home and this isn't china where the government can forcibly move millions of people at their whim.
Says who? Last time I checked, it's was perfectly legal and done all the time.
McCain, of course, may have his own views, but his VP choice shows that he's more interested in appeasing the religious right and radical conservatives than insisting that his administration's policies are based on the best scientific evidence available.
Guess what? Most people who vote believe in creationism. That's why we have the mess we have now. Why would a politician NOT pander to voters? When the rest of the intelligent population of this lazy ass country get off their asses long enough to cast a fucking vote, we'll be doing a lot better.
Nor any evidence that it happened. Rezko's wife made a bunch of money on that land, so what "favor" she is supposed to have done Obama remains mysterious.
Um...wrong. Rezko's wife sold Obama a piece of property for $104,500 that she had paid $625,000 for just six months prior. How do you consider that making "a bunch of money"?
Except he wasn't even charged (your link is full of speculation that is 7 months out of date).
You mean Rezko? He was charged for soliciting kickbacks, a scandal with another one of his politician friends.
Despite what people may think, there is no crime in charging too little for land.
No, but with Rezko's pas behavior, it's questionable at best. Here's the facts from the Chicago Sun.
A few months after Obama became a U.S. senator, he and Rezko's wife, Rita, bought adjacent pieces of property from a doctor in Chicago's Kenwood neighborhood -- a deal that has dogged Obama the last two years. The doctor sold the mansion to Obama for $1.65 million -- $300,000 below the asking price. Rezko's wife paid full price -- $625,000 -- for the adjacent vacant lot. The deals closed in June 2005. Six months later, Obama paid Rezko's wife $104,500 for a strip of her land, so he could have a bigger yard. At the time, it had been widely reported that Tony Rezko was under federal investigation. Questioned later about the timing of the Rezko deal, Obama called it "boneheaded" because people might think the Rezkos had done him a favor.
That's not questionable at best?
The result, as you can see, is ruin.
Um...let's not call it ruin quite yet.
It's not ok to expose conspiracies then?
That's fine, as long as you're not breaking the law in order to do it.
OFC
You keep saying that word...offshore fiber channel? open fiber control? Huh?
So they'll attack her on political corruption then
Ah...buth then they'll talk about his political corruption then. Nothing liking buying a house for pennies on the dollar from someone endicted on federal charges.
Those are all EXCELLENT questions, yet hard to get answered with people like you around.
Yeah, goddamn reality. It's tough, I know.
Some of these systems had blank Admin passwords. If I did that where I work I would be sacked for incompetence.
I agree that it was irresponsible on the admins part, but he still broke into them. A locked house and an unlocked house make no difference in the law, if you enter, you're breaking and entering and that's illegal.
The real problem is that by exposing how lax the securit was he has caused the US government considerable embarrassment, for this they will make him rot in prison for a very long while.
Perhaps, or perhaps the real problem is saying that it's OK to break into another country's military computer systems as long as you're only looking for proof of UFOs.
Also, as a British citizen I do object to an extradition treaty that only works in one direction. Ideally we should refuse all future extraditions until the US agrees to the same provisions we have, but since the US would never do that it is a moot point really. I would rather that every American criminal could not just come over here to escape prosecution since that certainly does not help anyone.
Yeah, well that's a you problem. If your governement was silly enough to make that agreement, then that's their problem. I feel you....I'd hate that.
Legally, intention makes all the difference as to what you can be convicted of.
I'm not saying that intention has nothing to do with the law, I'm saying that in *this case* I don't see what his intention has to do with it. I feel like he should be extridited regardless of his intentions. (which let's face it, nobody knows but him)
His defence team would do better to point out how this case is already decided in the press. The press seem to be helping to condemn him before he goes to trial, by constantly highlighting the apparent scale of what he is said to have done.
Dude, he broke into military computer systems. He admits it. I don't see what his intention has to do with it. I don't care if he was looking for lolcats. He broke into military systems, nasa systems, and he completely admits it. What's the defense? He ought to face the consequences, if it's jail_time, so be it.
If you roll in the Java world, then check out the Blackberry. It's really easy to develop for, there's a bunch of tools out there, and installing and removing apps is a breeze through the USB cable. (or a server for that matter)
The hard drive or flash memory can be removed and read by a computer with a compatible interface.
Um. No, it can't. Not in the blackberry anyways, at least not without decrypting it first and good luck with that.
Exactly, I think everyone at Slashdot knows that if someone has physical access to your hardware, you've already lost the security game.
I don't know if that applies to the Blackberry family. 10 tries and the phone wipes itself out to factory settings only to be recovered by the enterprise BES server. Haven't read a whole lot about holes in that strategy.
Look, it is every corporation's right to mislead people.
Yeah, not in advertising though. In most civilized countries, that's against the law. Interesting to point out though, that in this case, it's not the goverment. I get the sarcasm though.