Accordingly to my access logs, bingbot is extremely aggressive compared to other search engine bots... It seems to request the same files repeatedly, over and over... At one point my server was pushing a steady 20mbit/sec of traffic to bingbot.
When you have the dominant engine, everyone out there will be trying to subvert your engine to get their (usually spam) pages to show up first... Exactly the same thing happened to altavista.
The mess of cables you see in asian cities, is why many asian cities can offer you gigabit fibre to your home at a very cheap price.
If you have a single cable on which anyone can lease bandwidth, who's going to build and operate the single cable? If it's a for-profit company then they will have a monopoly and increase the prices however they want, or just stop leasing the raw bandwidth and try to sell you bundled services, again at high prices and tying you in to all kinds of other crap you dont want, all while providing poor lowest-common-denominator service.
You need non profit or government to provide the cable, which some cities have been *trying* to do, but which keeps getting stalled or outright blocked in court by the incumbent telcos.
Modelling and sex work also tends to be highly paid while requiring no formal education, and at least in western countries women choose to enter such professions because it pays well, and aren't forced to do so. These opportunities are typically not available to men.
I've been called all kinds of things, and told to "go back home" and the same thing in somewhat more coarse language. I spend much of my life living and working in foreign countries, one in particular where i stand out significantly from the locals. I get called all kinds of things, sometimes in english and sometimes in the local language which people assume i can't understand. Unlike most western countries, behaviour like this is not frowned upon here and people don't try to hide it.
I dont care if people hate me, and i don't care what their reasons for hating me are. I'm not some precious snowflake expecting everyone to like me, and if someone hates me i'd much rather they be up front about it rather than pretending to be nice to my face. If someone gives me a stream of verbal (or written) abuse, i'll give it right back. Most people don't, and racial insults are often used casually between friends. I have friends who call me various things that many would consider "offensive", i respond right back with similar language.
The death of Heather Heyer was murder, and as i said above - draw the line at actual physical violence. Someone who commits murder should be dealt with accordingly, irrespective of their motives for committing the crime.
So toughen up, don't go crying because someone called you a chink, tell them to fuck off, call them something similar, or just ignore them and don't waste time thinking about it.
Because if those african-americans are members of gangs who are shooting each other, then it is the duty of the police to put a stop to this criminal activity. If the police are confronting a suspect who has a gun and is suspected of having used already to kill someone then naturally those officers will want to protect themselves from being killed by that suspect, which may necessitate shooting first because if you let the suspect shoot first it might be too late.
Are you advocating that black on black violence should not be dealt with by the law, and that the police should allow them to shoot each other? That would certainly reduce the number of blacks being shot by police, but would do nothing to reduce the number being shot overall.
People can be arrested more than once over a period of 7 years, infact most arrests are probably repeat offenders rather than 98 million different individuals being arrested.
By the same metric, for every one black criminal we'd expect 7 non black criminals... Everything being equal we'd expect 12.5% of the prison population to be black, matching the general population.
And yet US government statistics show that blacks account for 37.8% of the prison population (source: https://www.bop.gov/about/stat...)
If black are more likely to commit crimes, and be caught doing so, it stands to reason that they are also more likely to have interactions with police.
That's also not considering the nature of the crime which has attracted police attention and the behaviour of the suspect. A member of a known violent street gang is far more likely to provoke a police shooting than someone who is committing fraud from behind a desk.
How you behave when confronted by police is also a significant factor. If you comply with their instructions and hand over your weapons (or prove to them that you don't have any weapons) then your very unlikely to get shot. If you behave in a threatening way and the officers believe you might kill them then the natural self preservation instinct kicks in. Many people, white black and others have non violent interactions with police all the time. Just comply with their instructions and be polite and you won't get shot, if you feel you were treated unfairly file a complaint later.
So blacks being more likely to be shot by police is not necessarily a symptom of racism (indeed many blacks have been shot by black or other non white police officers), it's a symptom of blacks being more likely to commit crimes, more likely to attract police attention and more likely to react aggressively when confronted.
Various religious books also promote violence against certain people, and yet they are protected...
The key to everything is education.
If people are stupid and poorly educated, then they will be easily influenced by others. People who are smart and well educated will not be easily swayed irrespective of how much propaganda they read.
Of course the powers that be actually prefer the former group of people, as it is easier for them to control through the mass media. But in order for that to work, you need to ensure that the easily controlled masses are only exposed to *your* propaganda, and not to alternative propaganda. So you have to work to suppress any opposing views from being widely spread. This is how Kim Jong Un controls north korea, and yes this is how the original nazis controlled germany.
So do you want to live in a society where only speech deemed acceptable by the leadership is allowed, and anything else is banned? Or do you want to live in a society where any speech is allowed and the population are educated enough to identify and ignore damaging propaganda?
If you start with censorship, then the level of censorship will only increase over time until you end up with absolute tyranny. It's a slippery slope.
Sticks and stones may break my bones, but words can never hurt me.
Talking about nazism and racism, even promoting such views is free speech. It's not an assault on anyone, it's only words. If someone is promoting such views then at least you know where they stand and can decide wether to have dealings with them or not. Which is better than them holding such views in secret. Would you want to do business with someone who secretly hates you and thinks you have no right to live? I certainly wouldn't. I would choose to take my business elsewhere if i knew someone to be a nazi or hold any other such extremist views.
Anti-nazi speech should similarly be protected, and people should be just as free to tell nazis (and any other groups) exactly what they think of them.
Speech should be protected, draw the line at actual physical violence.
Exactly... If you silence someone and make their speech forbidden, then it will attract people *because* its forbidden. Hiding information from people is never a solution to anything. Nazis should be free to express their views, as should everyone else. If people are reasonably educated then they should be able to draw their own conclusions based on the information available to them.
It's also good to hear all viewpoints before you decide where you stand on an issue. Just because someone's views are commonly held as extreme doesn't mean they don't deserve a fair hearing. Once you've learned about their views then you can make an informed decision as to wether their opinion is bullshit, and if so why.
Saying you are against nazis because "omfg nazis!" is almost as stupid as promoting the common nazi ideals. If you're going to speak against something, you should at least have researched that topic thoroughly first so you understand exactly what you're speaking against.
For microsoft to do that, you'd need x86 phones... Yet Intel is abandoning the mobile atom series. Linux/android could have done it years ago, it's already possible to install a desktop linux distro on a phone and has been for years, connect it to an hdmi screen and use bluetooth keyboard/mouse and you have a full linux desktop with 99% of the same software you'd have on an x86 desktop. The problem is it has never really been marketed or made available by default, its just a hack that you can apply yourself.
Well here's the thing, if you treat everyone equally then you end up with a majority of white males in various roles such as tech. Different people are interested in different things, and different cultures have different biases. Girls in school for instance are usually not interested in technology, and their peers will shun the few that are.
People are different, they have different interests, different upbringing, different aspirations. Trying to artificially distort the proportion of different groups in the workplace is stupid. If people were interested in doing a particular job they would have studied for it, learned about it and applied for positions. In all my years working in tech, the vast majority of job applicants who have applied for jobs i've been responsible for have been white or asian males.
If you want women and other minorities to do tech roles, then look at schools and culture. If people are interested in these fields at an early age, and not discouraged (or bullied) away from them by their peers in school, then they will pursue careers in the subjects that most interest them. Trying to force "diversity quotas" and other stupid shit is simply a form of discrimination against the presently dominant groups, and will result in an overall lower standard of employee. As minorities account for far fewer applicants, you will need to apply far lower standards in order to ensure the same number of successful applicants vs the larger majority group.
There are also many professions which are typically not taken by white males, nursing for instance - are any steps being taken to increase the number of white males working as nurses?
If 99 women and 1 man apply for 5 nursing positions, how does the hospital satisfy a diversity quota saying that 50% of nurses should be male? What if the diversity quota is 20%, but the one man applying has no qualifications or experience and yet 30 of the women are highly qualified and experienced?
Having to "fix" something is a failure, regardless of who performs the fix. Having to reboot is not a fix, as the problem is only going to reoccur at some point.
The hardware and software are sold together as a complete unit, a failure of either is a failure of the purchased product.
Microsoft have succeeded in lowering peoples expectations to such a degree that these things seem acceptable.
That "previous experience" is the problem... If you've got previous experience from something else then your view is skewed towards that. Someone with no prior experience may have a wholly different experience.
Not necessarily... These systems may come with some exploitable services by default, but all of them can be turned off. While there might not be any updates from the original distributor, there's nothing to stop you updating things like SSH yourself.
The problem is not cars but excessive congestion... There are too many people travelling to the same place at the same time. You have too many businesses condensed into a small space, which pushes up the price of any nearby residential property and forces employees to live further away.
Banning cars will just cause massive inconvenience to people. Public transport is also over congested and only getting worse, and make it impossible to carry much with you among other things. Public transport is also often dangerous at night, or not running at all. Similarly walking alone at night is also often highly dangerous.
Instead of making it difficult for people who have no choice but to travel... Why not decrease the need for people to travel in the first place? Less/shorter journeys made, lower pollutants emitted.
Encourage remote working. Encourage businesses to change their working hours, so people are not travelling at peak times (honestly 9-5 is stupid, we have lights - we're not working in fields where daylight is required to work and we often deal with foreign clients/suppliers who keep different hours anyway). Encourage businesses to set up in different areas, so that their employees can actually find affordable housing within easy reach.
Such measures would actually make people's lives BETTER, and therefore are likely to be popular... Making it even more difficult or expensive to travel will only make people's lives WORSE. People don't want to waste hours of every day travelling.
I would walk to work if i could, but the only employers for my profession have their offices in the central business districts of large cities - i can't find or afford a reasonable property within walking distance.
They may have the stock android ui, but do they use the stock android kernel? You may find that they still require closed source drivers, and thus cannot be upgraded.
Also as bad as manufacturer versions of android are, the carrier versions are even worse...
Depends when the recall is announced... If the recall occurred *before* you leased the car, then you should reasonably expect for the lease company to have resolved the problem before supplying the car to you. If the recall occurs *after* you took possession of the car, then you'd expect whoever you lease the car from to inform you of the recall, and to ensure you're provided with a courtesy car while the work is being carried out. After all, if you earn a living as a cab driver the last thing you want is to be without a car for however long it takes to correct the problem as you can't be earning during this time.
Our old macs are all laptops, which are awkward and messy to put in the racks. Sure they work, and even have a built in UPS (which doesnt last very long anymore as the batteries are old), but they attract complaints from the datacenter staff as they look out of place.
And i'm not talking about remote management once the OS is running, that's simple enough. I mean remote lights out management for when the OS isn't booted for whatever reason. Most server grade hardware has this facility, and its extremely useful especially when you have servers colocated in remote locations. Apple don't offer any hardware with this capability anymore.
In some countries there is legislation requiring that the seller cover the cost of any returns if the goods were defective or failed to meet the advertised description in any way. Of course a lot of retailers won't tell you this, and people will still end up shipping things back at their own cost.
Except that Apple don't provide any server hardware to run it on, so you'd end up having to buy a mac mini and some kind of stand so you could mount it in the rack, and it still has no lights out remote management capability. For time machine all kinds of remote shares will work for hosting backups, most NAS devices include support.
It's also annoying having to buy a windows server license just to cache updates, but at least you can run that in any hypervisor.
If the updates were downloaded in a standard way, eg over http, then they would be much easier to cache. There's no reason not to download the large binary files in a standard way, and then verify the checksums/signatures afterwards to ensure the files haven't been tampered with.
Slashdot Mirror
Accordingly to my access logs, bingbot is extremely aggressive compared to other search engine bots... It seems to request the same files repeatedly, over and over... At one point my server was pushing a steady 20mbit/sec of traffic to bingbot.
When you have the dominant engine, everyone out there will be trying to subvert your engine to get their (usually spam) pages to show up first... Exactly the same thing happened to altavista.
Nationalise the infrastructure, rent it at cost to any provider who wants to offer services to end users.
The mess of cables you see in asian cities, is why many asian cities can offer you gigabit fibre to your home at a very cheap price.
If you have a single cable on which anyone can lease bandwidth, who's going to build and operate the single cable? If it's a for-profit company then they will have a monopoly and increase the prices however they want, or just stop leasing the raw bandwidth and try to sell you bundled services, again at high prices and tying you in to all kinds of other crap you dont want, all while providing poor lowest-common-denominator service.
You need non profit or government to provide the cable, which some cities have been *trying* to do, but which keeps getting stalled or outright blocked in court by the incumbent telcos.
Modelling and sex work also tends to be highly paid while requiring no formal education, and at least in western countries women choose to enter such professions because it pays well, and aren't forced to do so.
These opportunities are typically not available to men.
No...
But if something is going to be done then we should be educating people rather than stifling free speech.
I've been called all kinds of things, and told to "go back home" and the same thing in somewhat more coarse language. I spend much of my life living and working in foreign countries, one in particular where i stand out significantly from the locals. I get called all kinds of things, sometimes in english and sometimes in the local language which people assume i can't understand. Unlike most western countries, behaviour like this is not frowned upon here and people don't try to hide it.
I dont care if people hate me, and i don't care what their reasons for hating me are. I'm not some precious snowflake expecting everyone to like me, and if someone hates me i'd much rather they be up front about it rather than pretending to be nice to my face. If someone gives me a stream of verbal (or written) abuse, i'll give it right back.
Most people don't, and racial insults are often used casually between friends. I have friends who call me various things that many would consider "offensive", i respond right back with similar language.
The death of Heather Heyer was murder, and as i said above - draw the line at actual physical violence. Someone who commits murder should be dealt with accordingly, irrespective of their motives for committing the crime.
So toughen up, don't go crying because someone called you a chink, tell them to fuck off, call them something similar, or just ignore them and don't waste time thinking about it.
Because if those african-americans are members of gangs who are shooting each other, then it is the duty of the police to put a stop to this criminal activity.
If the police are confronting a suspect who has a gun and is suspected of having used already to kill someone then naturally those officers will want to protect themselves from being killed by that suspect, which may necessitate shooting first because if you let the suspect shoot first it might be too late.
Are you advocating that black on black violence should not be dealt with by the law, and that the police should allow them to shoot each other? That would certainly reduce the number of blacks being shot by police, but would do nothing to reduce the number being shot overall.
People can be arrested more than once over a period of 7 years, infact most arrests are probably repeat offenders rather than 98 million different individuals being arrested.
By the same metric, for every one black criminal we'd expect 7 non black criminals... Everything being equal we'd expect 12.5% of the prison population to be black, matching the general population.
And yet US government statistics show that blacks account for 37.8% of the prison population (source: https://www.bop.gov/about/stat...)
If black are more likely to commit crimes, and be caught doing so, it stands to reason that they are also more likely to have interactions with police.
That's also not considering the nature of the crime which has attracted police attention and the behaviour of the suspect. A member of a known violent street gang is far more likely to provoke a police shooting than someone who is committing fraud from behind a desk.
How you behave when confronted by police is also a significant factor. If you comply with their instructions and hand over your weapons (or prove to them that you don't have any weapons) then your very unlikely to get shot. If you behave in a threatening way and the officers believe you might kill them then the natural self preservation instinct kicks in.
Many people, white black and others have non violent interactions with police all the time. Just comply with their instructions and be polite and you won't get shot, if you feel you were treated unfairly file a complaint later.
So blacks being more likely to be shot by police is not necessarily a symptom of racism (indeed many blacks have been shot by black or other non white police officers), it's a symptom of blacks being more likely to commit crimes, more likely to attract police attention and more likely to react aggressively when confronted.
Various religious books also promote violence against certain people, and yet they are protected...
The key to everything is education.
If people are stupid and poorly educated, then they will be easily influenced by others.
People who are smart and well educated will not be easily swayed irrespective of how much propaganda they read.
Of course the powers that be actually prefer the former group of people, as it is easier for them to control through the mass media. But in order for that to work, you need to ensure that the easily controlled masses are only exposed to *your* propaganda, and not to alternative propaganda. So you have to work to suppress any opposing views from being widely spread.
This is how Kim Jong Un controls north korea, and yes this is how the original nazis controlled germany.
So do you want to live in a society where only speech deemed acceptable by the leadership is allowed, and anything else is banned?
Or do you want to live in a society where any speech is allowed and the population are educated enough to identify and ignore damaging propaganda?
If you start with censorship, then the level of censorship will only increase over time until you end up with absolute tyranny. It's a slippery slope.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/......
First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Socialist.
Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Trade Unionist.
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.
Sticks and stones may break my bones, but words can never hurt me.
Talking about nazism and racism, even promoting such views is free speech. It's not an assault on anyone, it's only words. If someone is promoting such views then at least you know where they stand and can decide wether to have dealings with them or not. Which is better than them holding such views in secret.
Would you want to do business with someone who secretly hates you and thinks you have no right to live? I certainly wouldn't. I would choose to take my business elsewhere if i knew someone to be a nazi or hold any other such extremist views.
Anti-nazi speech should similarly be protected, and people should be just as free to tell nazis (and any other groups) exactly what they think of them.
Speech should be protected, draw the line at actual physical violence.
Exactly...
If you silence someone and make their speech forbidden, then it will attract people *because* its forbidden.
Hiding information from people is never a solution to anything.
Nazis should be free to express their views, as should everyone else.
If people are reasonably educated then they should be able to draw their own conclusions based on the information available to them.
It's also good to hear all viewpoints before you decide where you stand on an issue. Just because someone's views are commonly held as extreme doesn't mean they don't deserve a fair hearing. Once you've learned about their views then you can make an informed decision as to wether their opinion is bullshit, and if so why.
Saying you are against nazis because "omfg nazis!" is almost as stupid as promoting the common nazi ideals. If you're going to speak against something, you should at least have researched that topic thoroughly first so you understand exactly what you're speaking against.
For microsoft to do that, you'd need x86 phones... Yet Intel is abandoning the mobile atom series.
Linux/android could have done it years ago, it's already possible to install a desktop linux distro on a phone and has been for years, connect it to an hdmi screen and use bluetooth keyboard/mouse and you have a full linux desktop with 99% of the same software you'd have on an x86 desktop.
The problem is it has never really been marketed or made available by default, its just a hack that you can apply yourself.
Way more, there were 64bit OS's in the mid 90s...
Well here's the thing, if you treat everyone equally then you end up with a majority of white males in various roles such as tech.
Different people are interested in different things, and different cultures have different biases. Girls in school for instance are usually not interested in technology, and their peers will shun the few that are.
People are different, they have different interests, different upbringing, different aspirations. Trying to artificially distort the proportion of different groups in the workplace is stupid. If people were interested in doing a particular job they would have studied for it, learned about it and applied for positions.
In all my years working in tech, the vast majority of job applicants who have applied for jobs i've been responsible for have been white or asian males.
If you want women and other minorities to do tech roles, then look at schools and culture. If people are interested in these fields at an early age, and not discouraged (or bullied) away from them by their peers in school, then they will pursue careers in the subjects that most interest them.
Trying to force "diversity quotas" and other stupid shit is simply a form of discrimination against the presently dominant groups, and will result in an overall lower standard of employee. As minorities account for far fewer applicants, you will need to apply far lower standards in order to ensure the same number of successful applicants vs the larger majority group.
There are also many professions which are typically not taken by white males, nursing for instance - are any steps being taken to increase the number of white males working as nurses?
If 99 women and 1 man apply for 5 nursing positions, how does the hospital satisfy a diversity quota saying that 50% of nurses should be male?
What if the diversity quota is 20%, but the one man applying has no qualifications or experience and yet 30 of the women are highly qualified and experienced?
Having to "fix" something is a failure, regardless of who performs the fix.
Having to reboot is not a fix, as the problem is only going to reoccur at some point.
The hardware and software are sold together as a complete unit, a failure of either is a failure of the purchased product.
Microsoft have succeeded in lowering peoples expectations to such a degree that these things seem acceptable.
That "previous experience" is the problem... If you've got previous experience from something else then your view is skewed towards that.
Someone with no prior experience may have a wholly different experience.
Not necessarily...
These systems may come with some exploitable services by default, but all of them can be turned off.
While there might not be any updates from the original distributor, there's nothing to stop you updating things like SSH yourself.
The problem is not cars but excessive congestion... There are too many people travelling to the same place at the same time. You have too many businesses condensed into a small space, which pushes up the price of any nearby residential property and forces employees to live further away.
Banning cars will just cause massive inconvenience to people. Public transport is also over congested and only getting worse, and make it impossible to carry much with you among other things. Public transport is also often dangerous at night, or not running at all. Similarly walking alone at night is also often highly dangerous.
Instead of making it difficult for people who have no choice but to travel...
Why not decrease the need for people to travel in the first place? Less/shorter journeys made, lower pollutants emitted.
Encourage remote working.
Encourage businesses to change their working hours, so people are not travelling at peak times (honestly 9-5 is stupid, we have lights - we're not working in fields where daylight is required to work and we often deal with foreign clients/suppliers who keep different hours anyway).
Encourage businesses to set up in different areas, so that their employees can actually find affordable housing within easy reach.
Such measures would actually make people's lives BETTER, and therefore are likely to be popular... Making it even more difficult or expensive to travel will only make people's lives WORSE. People don't want to waste hours of every day travelling.
I would walk to work if i could, but the only employers for my profession have their offices in the central business districts of large cities - i can't find or afford a reasonable property within walking distance.
They may have the stock android ui, but do they use the stock android kernel?
You may find that they still require closed source drivers, and thus cannot be upgraded.
Also as bad as manufacturer versions of android are, the carrier versions are even worse...
Depends when the recall is announced...
If the recall occurred *before* you leased the car, then you should reasonably expect for the lease company to have resolved the problem before supplying the car to you.
If the recall occurs *after* you took possession of the car, then you'd expect whoever you lease the car from to inform you of the recall, and to ensure you're provided with a courtesy car while the work is being carried out. After all, if you earn a living as a cab driver the last thing you want is to be without a car for however long it takes to correct the problem as you can't be earning during this time.
Our old macs are all laptops, which are awkward and messy to put in the racks. Sure they work, and even have a built in UPS (which doesnt last very long anymore as the batteries are old), but they attract complaints from the datacenter staff as they look out of place.
And i'm not talking about remote management once the OS is running, that's simple enough. I mean remote lights out management for when the OS isn't booted for whatever reason. Most server grade hardware has this facility, and its extremely useful especially when you have servers colocated in remote locations. Apple don't offer any hardware with this capability anymore.
In some countries there is legislation requiring that the seller cover the cost of any returns if the goods were defective or failed to meet the advertised description in any way.
Of course a lot of retailers won't tell you this, and people will still end up shipping things back at their own cost.
Except that Apple don't provide any server hardware to run it on, so you'd end up having to buy a mac mini and some kind of stand so you could mount it in the rack, and it still has no lights out remote management capability.
For time machine all kinds of remote shares will work for hosting backups, most NAS devices include support.
It's also annoying having to buy a windows server license just to cache updates, but at least you can run that in any hypervisor.
If the updates were downloaded in a standard way, eg over http, then they would be much easier to cache. There's no reason not to download the large binary files in a standard way, and then verify the checksums/signatures afterwards to ensure the files haven't been tampered with.