[Michael's] business logic seems to be very sound. I hope he does well.
Also, note as Michael says, it is entirely possible to change this single-user = root behaviour, it's just not the default. It would be trivial to make an update that could do that for naive users should Lindows viruses and worms start to appear. I think it's not wrong for Michael to emphasise usability for "switchers" now -- remember that almost every new user on an "insecure" Lindows box is actually one less user on a totally insecure Windows box. The Lindows insecurities can be rapidly hardened, it's not reinventing the system as MS must, it's just turning on features that already exist.
>>anyone who puts scripting in any email program needs to be brutally killed in the streets
>There's nothing intrinsically wrong with scripting in any application.
I want scripting in my email app. What I don't want is it executing any scripts that come as attachments without at least asking if I really am so stupid. That goes for any HTML beyond text formatting too (no, DON'T fetch the 1x1 gif image that lets the fucking spammer know I've opened his fucking message).
They don't have to worry, by their logic, bugs in the software for the ICBM's will cause them to land so far off course that the SDI won't have to knock em' down anyway;-)
I see the smiley, but I'll respond seriously anyway: ICBMs work, they've been tested for decades. SDI needs to intercept 100% of incoming warheads, and also cope wth countermeasures such as dozens of dummy "warheads", chaff, simultaneous attacks on the observation satellites, etc. If 100 warheads were launched with 100 megaton warheads, and only one or two got through, you'd lose at least 10 milion people. If 10 got through prepare to live in Mad Max country.
So do I. Mine are called "floppy disks". I can carry around several books worth of information on one, and to access it almost every PC has a drive (a lot more than have Bluetooth). Cost: about 50c
Back in IBM XT days I had a "floppy" with Nortion Commander, Wodstar and a bunch other text files. Flew to Bangkok, stuck the disk in, and could work immediately.
For Mac users, back in about 1980 I had a Mac system disk, with MacWrite, MAcPaint and a bunch of other stuff.
No worries about driveby "Wardrivers" hacking my floppy.
Well, yes, but "positronic" was just gibberish, as he admitted, (not a lot of application for anti-matter in modern chips) and "psychohistory" remains fantasy. "Robotics" is the only one that came into use in the same sense as he used it.
Asimov is also credited with inventing the word "robotics". At least he complained that 20 or 30 years later (he started writing his robot stories in the early 1940s) that when the word came into use by real scientists that no one gave him a byline...
In that case, it'd be her problem, not anyone who passed it on after she'd released it. If harassed, people would be able to claim a defence that they had the reasonable expectation that it was freely downloadable (here we talk about "free as in beer" only, though) as the artist herself had released it.
And remember, we're talking about the "Fuck you" mp3, not an actual track from her album.
So if the RIAA and Madonna released this song with the expectation that users would share it were they not intentionaly contributing to break the same laws
No, because Madonna owns the copyright of that "song" she can distribute however she wants. It still remains her copyright, which means no one else could publish it -- though she would have a hard time getting any damages if she tried to sue anyone after intentionally releasing it to P2P.
Take this meaning of disappeared: "being assraped in a shower stall of a prison".
That's a silly abuse of the language. If you know where he is he hasn't been "disappeared". For that matter, if he's known to be alive, he certainly isn't.
the disappeared plural noun
people who have been killed by a government or army, usually for political reasons, and whose bodies have not been found Cambridge Dictionary
One would hope that people concerned with precision of expression (eg those who write computer code, as most do here) would be more careful with how they use words.
And here is some info on the origin of the Darth grotesque (not gargoyle), from
some essay cribbing site, which is unsourced but seems likely.
Washington National Cathedral has 107 carved stone gargoyles. No one has ever tried to count all of the grotesques - there are just too many ! The correct technical name for a grotesque is buttress gablet termination stone carving.
Most of our gargoyles were carved on the ground and installed later, when the construction reached the proper height. However, a few were actually carved in place, or in situ.
Many of our grotesques are actually beautiful angels. There are two hundred and eighty-eight (288) on the west tower pinnacles alone.
Four of the grotesques were designed by kids! In 1984 National Geographic World magazine held a draw-a-grotesque contest. The winners:
sagacious grotesque,
Bertha's braces,
raccoon on lookout, and
Darth Vader.
All are placed high on the northwest tower, but you can see them with binoculars.
In designing a gargoyle or grotesque at the Cathedral Medieval Workshop, participants learn that these monster-like forms were intended to look horrible because in the Middle Ages people believed they kept evil spirits away. Aside from their spiritual duties these strange creatures help prevent water from staining the limestone walls of the cathedral; the gargoyles spout it out of their mouths, while the grotesques just let it run off the tops of their heads or the tips of their noses. Plaster examples of modern grotesques -- Darth Vader, a raccoon, and a girl with a mouthful of braces -- loom over the workshop. These modern grotesques were designed by kids in National Geographic World Magazine's "Draw a Grotesque" contest. Sagacious Grotesque, the contest winner, shows a beast huddled under an umbrella trying to protect itself and the cathedral from rain.
Also, the link mentioned by an earlier poster, Plunkett, at the Stone Carver's Guild has actual images of the Vader gargoyle, which the original article does not. This also says "Mr. Plunkett remained at Washington Cathedral until its completion and dedication in 1990", so it appears thsi "news that matters" is over 12 years old.
What does a dress code have to do with anything?...You may use that argument to prevent "open carry"...
It was an example of how you can be required to act differently than you might wish, and have the legal right to, when at the workplace. Not simply because you "wear" a gun.
You omitted the most important: "unload, dismantle, and throw it in the river".
Anyway, in this specific case, I don't see why she has an untrammelled right to carry her gun into the workplace, considering that companies can have dress codes. This is often justified on the grounds of maintaining a specific image. It would be quite understandable that a company didn't want the image that staff wearing sidearms creates. Similarly if you do something (fail to shower for instance) that is certainly not illegal, but makes your colleagues uncomfortable, that also is a valid reason to ask the employee to modify their behaviour. I know I would be extremely uncomfortable knowing a coworker was carrying a gun.
I worked for a nice, but fairly uptight, lawyer once on a news web site. Though I wasn't a salesman or dealing with customers in any way, still he wanted the full shirt, tie, suit, leather shoes. It didn't improve the quality of work, and made me markedly uncomfortable on hot days (this is in the tropics), but that was part of the job.
ucky, the pdf of the book is in the Google Cache [216.239.53.100].
Actually, that's Google's HTML rendering of the PDF, and it's not complete, it has only 114 of 360 pages. It's almost 10 years old, don't panic, the nicely formatted PDF will turn up all over very soon.
But it is a clear fact of military history that armies do not prevail against popular guerrilla uprisings.
Many exceptions: the British regained control of India for another century after the Indian Mutiny. There were numerus rebellions against the Soviets, all suppressed brutally (Stalin simply moved all the Chechens to Siberia when they rebelled against him; it was only after the fall of Communism that they could return and rise up again), Tibet against China also crushed (in spite of CIA support), the Montagnards in Vietnam; the Romans crushed rebellions all the time - eg the Celts under Boadicea...
But I'd just like to return to my point, that though it may be less romantic, it's a lot less bloody and destructive to use the tools (such as the ballot box) within the modern states rather than trying to meet them head on with force and provoke bloody reprisals.
Because it's not journlism, it's basically a slightly-reworked ILM press release: "says Cliff Plumer, chief technology officer at special effects house Industrial Light and Magic."
I was watching the Reign of Fire DVD a few weeks ago (a dragon movie). In one of the "making of" extras, they showed that the director could see while he was filming the CGI dragons etc on his monitor along with the real actors. So this isn't new.
In fact, why don't you ask the Russian Army how that little city in Chechnya is holding out? Have they managed to maintain control of Grozny yet?
Well, that is an excellent example of where you'd end up with your citizen uprising. An occupying army that disappears anyone who fits the profile of a possible risk (basically any male over 14), a city destroyed, and about 10% of the population killed in the last 2 years (100,000 out of 1 million). Personally, I think getting the proportion of people who vote up would be a better way to moderate government excesses.
Now, name a particularly good reason why I shouldn't.
Some things are so potentially dangerous to the community that just becasue you appear to be sane now is not enough justification to allow you to play with lethal toys.
Especially if I could at any time come within range.
Slashdot Mirror
Also, note as Michael says, it is entirely possible to change this single-user = root behaviour, it's just not the default. It would be trivial to make an update that could do that for naive users should Lindows viruses and worms start to appear. I think it's not wrong for Michael to emphasise usability for "switchers" now -- remember that almost every new user on an "insecure" Lindows box is actually one less user on a totally insecure Windows box. The Lindows insecurities can be rapidly hardened, it's not reinventing the system as MS must, it's just turning on features that already exist.
>There's nothing intrinsically wrong with scripting in any application.
I want scripting in my email app. What I don't want is it executing any scripts that come as attachments without at least asking if I really am so stupid. That goes for any HTML beyond text formatting too (no, DON'T fetch the 1x1 gif image that lets the fucking spammer know I've opened his fucking message).
I see the smiley, but I'll respond seriously anyway: ICBMs work, they've been tested for decades. SDI needs to intercept 100% of incoming warheads, and also cope wth countermeasures such as dozens of dummy "warheads", chaff, simultaneous attacks on the observation satellites, etc. If 100 warheads were launched with 100 megaton warheads, and only one or two got through, you'd lose at least 10 milion people. If 10 got through prepare to live in Mad Max country.
Back in IBM XT days I had a "floppy" with Nortion Commander, Wodstar and a bunch other text files. Flew to Bangkok, stuck the disk in, and could work immediately.
For Mac users, back in about 1980 I had a Mac system disk, with MacWrite, MAcPaint and a bunch of other stuff.
No worries about driveby "Wardrivers" hacking my floppy.
Well, yes, but "positronic" was just gibberish, as he admitted, (not a lot of application for anti-matter in modern chips) and "psychohistory" remains fantasy. "Robotics" is the only one that came into use in the same sense as he used it.
Well, go all out for fuckingmachines.
Asimov is also credited with inventing the word "robotics". At least he complained that 20 or 30 years later (he started writing his robot stories in the early 1940s) that when the word came into use by real scientists that no one gave him a byline...
That was my point.
In that case, it'd be her problem, not anyone who passed it on after she'd released it. If harassed, people would be able to claim a defence that they had the reasonable expectation that it was freely downloadable (here we talk about "free as in beer" only, though) as the artist herself had released it.
And remember, we're talking about the "Fuck you" mp3, not an actual track from her album.
No, because Madonna owns the copyright of that "song" she can distribute however she wants. It still remains her copyright, which means no one else could publish it -- though she would have a hard time getting any damages if she tried to sue anyone after intentionally releasing it to P2P.
That's a silly abuse of the language. If you know where he is he hasn't been "disappeared". For that matter, if he's known to be alive, he certainly isn't.
One would hope that people concerned with precision of expression (eg those who write computer code, as most do here) would be more careful with how they use words.The employee in question had made it known she was wearing a gun. It was public knowledge.
Slashdot -- if it's not a dupe, it's old, or ripped from The Register. Or all three.
It was an example of how you can be required to act differently than you might wish, and have the legal right to, when at the workplace. Not simply because you "wear" a gun.
You omitted the most important: "unload, dismantle, and throw it in the river".
Anyway, in this specific case, I don't see why she has an untrammelled right to carry her gun into the workplace, considering that companies can have dress codes. This is often justified on the grounds of maintaining a specific image. It would be quite understandable that a company didn't want the image that staff wearing sidearms creates. Similarly if you do something (fail to shower for instance) that is certainly not illegal, but makes your colleagues uncomfortable, that also is a valid reason to ask the employee to modify their behaviour. I know I would be extremely uncomfortable knowing a coworker was carrying a gun.
I worked for a nice, but fairly uptight, lawyer once on a news web site. Though I wasn't a salesman or dealing with customers in any way, still he wanted the full shirt, tie, suit, leather shoes. It didn't improve the quality of work, and made me markedly uncomfortable on hot days (this is in the tropics), but that was part of the job.
Actually, that's Google's HTML rendering of the PDF, and it's not complete, it has only 114 of 360 pages. It's almost 10 years old, don't panic, the nicely formatted PDF will turn up all over very soon.
Many exceptions: the British regained control of India for another century after the Indian Mutiny. There were numerus rebellions against the Soviets, all suppressed brutally (Stalin simply moved all the Chechens to Siberia when they rebelled against him; it was only after the fall of Communism that they could return and rise up again), Tibet against China also crushed (in spite of CIA support), the Montagnards in Vietnam; the Romans crushed rebellions all the time - eg the Celts under Boadicea...
But I'd just like to return to my point, that though it may be less romantic, it's a lot less bloody and destructive to use the tools (such as the ballot box) within the modern states rather than trying to meet them head on with force and provoke bloody reprisals.
Not quite, I think your point was that the army can't win. My point was that doesn't mean the "people" win -- it's a disaster for them.
Because it's not journlism, it's basically a slightly-reworked ILM press release: "says Cliff Plumer, chief technology officer at special effects house Industrial Light and Magic."
I was watching the Reign of Fire DVD a few weeks ago (a dragon movie). In one of the "making of" extras, they showed that the director could see while he was filming the CGI dragons etc on his monitor along with the real actors. So this isn't new.
Well, that is an excellent example of where you'd end up with your citizen uprising. An occupying army that disappears anyone who fits the profile of a possible risk (basically any male over 14), a city destroyed, and about 10% of the population killed in the last 2 years (100,000 out of 1 million). Personally, I think getting the proportion of people who vote up would be a better way to moderate government excesses.
A lot of able-bodied men in Iraq had AKs. Didn't help them much in resisting the invasion. Did come in handy to the looters, though.
Some things are so potentially dangerous to the community that just becasue you appear to be sane now is not enough justification to allow you to play with lethal toys.
Especially if I could at any time come within range.