My bad, I tried this out, but didn't wait long enough for the test message. It checks to see that a window can actually open, so even Opera is blocked.
Just tell Opera to kill pop-ups AND identify itself as IE, and the site is viewable WITHOUT pop-ups. And it's not like this is a new thing with Opera, they were able to get around MSN blocking non-IE browsers as well. Their "technology" was obsolete the minute they launched it.
Waiting? I'd say management is way ahead of you, seeing the inherent advantages of inserting computer scientists into cubes. Well, just about anything into cubes. Now where's my red stapler?
This gets modded to "5, Insightful"? If that were true, the nominees would have been voted down. They aren't even making to the floor for a vote thanks to Senator Leahy.
Not to engage in the dead-horse debate about abortion, it's important for people to realize there are *two* sides in the argument. Bush happens to be on the side the believes that a fetus has the spark of human life, and the rest of the position follows from that. If you want to argue whether or not that's the case, I don't want to hear it because it has nothing to do with the fact it's part of Bush's philosophy.
Now, having that point of view, how can people that would roundly condemn Nazi medical experiments blame Bush for taking a position that acknowledges the other side, but refuses to give support to medical experimentation that results from a practice he believes to be immoral? Or should morality be completely removed from politics?
I didn't realize California had folded in the legislative branch into the executive branch. Most other places, the legislature passes laws, and the Governor signs them.
This is a step in the right direction. Now if I can just convince my college's student government that a Constitutional Monarchy is a much better form of government than this President/Senate/Court deal . . .
They shouldn't prevent anyone from making and distributing free software.
What this company was doing wasn't piracy, they extended the use of the computer. God forbid the day comes and I can't put a new piece of hardware in my computer for the sole reason of letting a monopoly wanna-be take more of my cash.
The RIAA isn't fighting an intellectual batte. . .
on
RIAA Smacked by DoS
·
· Score: 1
They're fighting to win, and it doesn't matter how they do it. Can we really blame the opposition for adopting like tactics?
Look at the American Revolution. On one hand, you had Sam Adams, on the other John Adams. Sam was the hacker (if you'll pardon the phrase), John was the intellectual. They were both very good at those areas, and complimented each other splendidly. I say, the more often the RIAA is hacked/DoSed, the better. The more courtroom/legislative victories we have, the better. The two aren't mutually exclusive. The hacker/cracker shows that people are pissed off at the RIAA, and the intellectual explains why.
The A7N is, if memory serves, Asus's nForce board. That comes with ethernet, sound, and video. The monitor is something that should be bought locally to save on shipping, and the rest is trivial or salvageable.
I don't know, IMHO the tech support and warranty aren't worth the 100% markup. Hell, who really needs tech support for a private desktop? If you're ordering for a business or ordering a server, sure. But for personal use?
I just finished reading Crypto, and this sounds an awful lot like the escrow system the government was
proposing and security advocates fought so hard against in the early 90's. Has anything changed to make this system more palatable?
Troops are not obsolete
on
The Drone War
·
· Score: 1
Prior to the Taliban's colapse, the American media generally over-estimated the Taliban's competence and under-estimated that of the opposition forces. We assumed that they would be able to hold against the Northern Alliance, despite our bombings, and that we'd have to do the job ourselves. That's where the view of massive deployment of troops was put into our minds.
We've seen advances in arial warfare technology, sure, but there has still not been an instance of air-power dislodging a determined enemy from the ground he holds. In "Into the Storm", Tom Clancy quotes a Iraqi tank officer, saying that his unit still had the majority of their tanks even after the air assault. It wasn't until they engaged American tanks that their unit was destroyed. The situtation has not changed much since then, as it was a Northern Alliance offensive, not American bombings, that eventually dislodged Taliban positions. We were lucky to be fighting in a nation that was in the midst of a civil war, and we could rely on one of the sides to do the ground work.
Our success, our lack of casualities, is often mistaken as a result of our military technology. In Desert Storm, the Iraqi's had military technology on par with us: advanced Soviet tanks, artillery, aircraft, missle-defenses. It was superior training and planning that won that war. We had been planning for a decade how to defeat Soviet military tactics (which Iraq implemented), and Desert Storm is the public vindication of those plans. In Afghanistan, they had shown that they could hurt a sophisticated opponent. Technology does not account for our dramatic success there either. There might come a day when our lack of casualities is a result of "drones", but it is not here yet. For now, our armed forces are still very human and in the end, it's still the troops that win the war.
Slashdot Mirror
My bad, I tried this out, but didn't wait long enough for the test message. It checks to see that a window can actually open, so even Opera is blocked.
Just tell Opera to kill pop-ups AND identify itself as IE, and the site is viewable WITHOUT pop-ups. And it's not like this is a new thing with Opera, they were able to get around MSN blocking non-IE browsers as well. Their "technology" was obsolete the minute they launched it.
Waiting? I'd say management is way ahead of you, seeing the inherent advantages of inserting computer scientists into cubes. Well, just about anything into cubes. Now where's my red stapler?
What language is "(!=)"?
I was going to say that Microsoft could compliment it's "Switch to XP" ad campaign with "Linux Crashes", but that would be too easy.
From 5 to -1, but retaining the Insightful tag. I don't know wether my faith is restored in the Slashdot moderation system or not . . .
Um, whose name is at the bottom of the DMCA? I'm pretty sure it's not Bush's. Want a high comment score on Slashdot? Bash Bush.
This gets modded to "5, Insightful"? If that were true, the nominees would have been voted down. They aren't even making to the floor for a vote thanks to Senator Leahy.
Not to engage in the dead-horse debate about abortion, it's important for people to realize there are *two* sides in the argument. Bush happens to be on the side the believes that a fetus has the spark of human life, and the rest of the position follows from that. If you want to argue whether or not that's the case, I don't want to hear it because it has nothing to do with the fact it's part of Bush's philosophy.
Now, having that point of view, how can people that would roundly condemn Nazi medical experiments blame Bush for taking a position that acknowledges the other side, but refuses to give support to medical experimentation that results from a practice he believes to be immoral? Or should morality be completely removed from politics?
I didn't realize California had folded in the legislative branch into the executive branch. Most other places, the legislature passes laws, and the Governor signs them.
This is a step in the right direction. Now if I can just convince my college's student government that a Constitutional Monarchy is a much better form of government than this President/Senate/Court deal . . .
They shouldn't prevent anyone from making and distributing free software.
What this company was doing wasn't piracy, they extended the use of the computer. God forbid the day comes and I can't put a new piece of hardware in my computer for the sole reason of letting a monopoly wanna-be take more of my cash.
They're fighting to win, and it doesn't matter how they do it. Can we really blame the opposition for adopting like tactics?
Look at the American Revolution. On one hand, you had Sam Adams, on the other John Adams. Sam was the hacker (if you'll pardon the phrase), John was the intellectual. They were both very good at those areas, and complimented each other splendidly. I say, the more often the RIAA is hacked/DoSed, the better. The more courtroom/legislative victories we have, the better. The two aren't mutually exclusive. The hacker/cracker shows that people are pissed off at the RIAA, and the intellectual explains why.
The A7N is, if memory serves, Asus's nForce board. That comes with ethernet, sound, and video. The monitor is something that should be bought locally to save on shipping, and the rest is trivial or salvageable. I don't know, IMHO the tech support and warranty aren't worth the 100% markup. Hell, who really needs tech support for a private desktop? If you're ordering for a business or ordering a server, sure. But for personal use?
I just finished reading Crypto, and this sounds an awful lot like the escrow system the government was proposing and security advocates fought so hard against in the early 90's. Has anything changed to make this system more palatable?
Prior to the Taliban's colapse, the American media generally over-estimated the Taliban's competence and under-estimated that of the opposition forces. We assumed that they would be able to hold against the Northern Alliance, despite our bombings, and that we'd have to do the job ourselves. That's where the view of massive deployment of troops was put into our minds.
We've seen advances in arial warfare technology, sure, but there has still not been an instance of air-power dislodging a determined enemy from the ground he holds. In "Into the Storm", Tom Clancy quotes a Iraqi tank officer, saying that his unit still had the majority of their tanks even after the air assault. It wasn't until they engaged American tanks that their unit was destroyed. The situtation has not changed much since then, as it was a Northern Alliance offensive, not American bombings, that eventually dislodged Taliban positions. We were lucky to be fighting in a nation that was in the midst of a civil war, and we could rely on one of the sides to do the ground work.
Our success, our lack of casualities, is often mistaken as a result of our military technology. In Desert Storm, the Iraqi's had military technology on par with us: advanced Soviet tanks, artillery, aircraft, missle-defenses. It was superior training and planning that won that war. We had been planning for a decade how to defeat Soviet military tactics (which Iraq implemented), and Desert Storm is the public vindication of those plans. In Afghanistan, they had shown that they could hurt a sophisticated opponent. Technology does not account for our dramatic success there either. There might come a day when our lack of casualities is a result of "drones", but it is not here yet. For now, our armed forces are still very human and in the end, it's still the troops that win the war.