It only works when the average consumer is knowledgeable and educated.
The case here is that the people who are not buying this, because they do not agree with the artificial restrictions Apple has wrapped around their product, don't constitute a large enough number to hurt Apple.
And since the money is flowing to they coffers anyway, the industry gets a kind of green light to go and cripple more products.
"Vote with your money" only works when a large number of people know and care enough to actually buy an alternative product (assuming there is an alternative product available.)
My thoughts exactly. I once saw Stallman talking about what he envisions for GPL and freedom of software in the future, and it really looks like he's aiming at a more collaborative and free society. Not only that, but he has taken positive and large steps in getting there, by turning copyright against itself and actively advocating free software and its benefits.
Genius indeed.
I see it as unfortunate that he doesn't get the recognition he deserves. If he were more "accepted", his ideas would probably have an even stronger impact.
For any really specific job you will need to customise Linux. Yes I know this is beyond the capabilities of most simpletons but if it is done (by someone else perhaps) it will result in far superior performance and results. The ability to customise Linux into either a general purpose or highly specialised OS is the strength of Linux.
And here Ubuntu Studio comes in handy. On a plain vanilla Ubuntu, one can simply apt-get ubuntustudio packages and get every customization done for them. It installs the main applications (audio-wise it's great) and even configures a real-time kernel.
Screw Last.fm. Grooveshark has a much better offer, is less anal-retentive and is much more accessible than Last.fm. If only they would provide a plugin for Songbird (or a decent API so someone could make it), they would have a killer internet radio.
If I could pick just one book to be turned into a movie it would be Cryptonomicon (specially since TLoTR's already done and The Hobbit is on its way).
It has the geek and math content that would make me happy, the sex appeal that would make me and my wife happy, and the historical related plot that would make me, my wife and my in-laws happy. A triple-win!
Last month my wife and I were taking some pictures at the Pavonia/Newport PATH station (between NJ and NY).
This station still holds the old-fashioned tiles and brick ceilings, so I took my camera out and started shooting (pictures, that is:-))
This woman dressed in PATH police uniform came to me and kindly asked me to stop taking pictures. When I asked why, she said that the flash could disturb the train conductors (as if they could lose a tunnel or something, right?)
Anyway, she didn't ask me to delete the pictures or anything, and since I had already taken more than enough, I let it pass without further ado (that and the fact that my wife wasn't too fond of being arrested.)
The votes are actually printed in paper, just in case the voting data is damaged:-)
But are they available for each voter to audit? I mean, if someone voted XY would this person be able to see the printed ballot and verify that it actually says XY?
Also, are these printed votes used for verifying the outcome of the election or are they used only in case of data damage?
Hmm, the fact that at least one e-voting machine can be broken into in less than 60 seconds is a tell-tale sign that there's something wrong with the system.
Besides, the election could easily be rigged by someone in control of the software, EVEN if your TSE (Portuguese for Supreme Electoral Court, I think) allows parties to check it (who knows what's really being loaded into each machine?)
But there's something quite simple that could be done: printing each ballot and depositing it in a sealed box -- just like a regular voting system. After announcing the votes as counted by the machines, the process of counting the ballots can begin and the election results would only be promulgated if both counts match.
By printing it the voter can confirm that her vote is going to who she wants, and since there will be real ballots involved, the vote can be guaranteed.
You could say: "oh, but then we don't need e-voting, since we'll have paper ballots anyway." But the difference here is that you'll have a quick counting that is most likely correct (since it'll be verified) and two systems validating each other.
They might be really interested not only in your old hardware, but also old software such as encyclopedias (Encarta, etc) and swags. BTW, if you're interested in donating some skills as well, there are nice projects available too (programming, web-design, drawing, etc.)
All of it might end up helping some kids in Africa (not the Spam-sending kind), and you can follow up with it through their website.
Interesting account, very opposite to my own experience: every article I've got published (in journals and conference proceedings) were processed by LaTeX using a formating class or style provided by the publisher.
My thesis was also formated using LaTeX and the university also gave me a LaTeX class.
heard of the first commandment? completely incompatible with the first amendment; either 'thou shalt have no other gods' or thou shalt have free practice of religion, but not both.
No, it's no incompatible. If you want to be a Jew or a Christian, than you should not have other gods. But being a Jew or a Christian is not an obligation, and you may choose not to in which case the Commandments do not apply, since you don't believe in them anyway.
the physical harm point was in an earlier post. how about answering my question? no examples? fine, I didn't expect you to anyway.
OK, let's try. Could you please give me an example of something that is as bad as stonings, tortures or death that is not a physical harm?
there is no amendment that says free speech should be curtailed if it upsets religious people!
Unless, of course it turns into harassment or discrimination.
I can respect you fully as a person by respecting your human rights without any respect for your religious beliefs. and respecting you as a person places no obligation on me to pay lip-service to whatever fantasy you choose to indulge in.
Yeah... up to the point you call someone a retard (please see your other post here.) When you reach that point, you are being disrespectfull.
I asked for examples of respecting people but not beliefs, and specifically mentioned no physical harm under any circumstances.
No, you didn't. You said:
when does only respecting people produce similar negative consequences as all the stonings, burnings, tortures and imprisonings done in the name of respect for beliefs?
So my examples fit perfectly to your request. They all ended in "similar negative consequences". The three of them were motivated by disrespect to someone's beliefs.
free speech and freedom from violence is far more important than hurt feelings of any religious group.
Anyone can exercise freedom of speech without being disrespectfull to any religious group. Keep in mind that the First Amendment also defends the free exercise of religion.
can you give me a single example where respecting people but not beliefs can ever make you go wrong?
Since I said beliefs, when present, are an integral part of what people are, to me there's no such thing as respecting people while disrespecting their beliefs.
Anyway, here goes an example that might fit what your asking: religious persecution is a way to disrespect someone's beliefs. If a regular group of people would be respected as human beings but a subset of this group would be persecuted for their religious orientation, disrespecting beliefs could lead to torture, imprisoning, stoning. Some examples are:
- the dechristianisation of France; - the Chinese Communist Party's ban on all religions; - the antisemitism employed by the Nazis.
can you point to popular atheist writings that come anywhere near the level of violence and threats that you can find within seconds of opening the Bible?
No, of course not. At least not to the same level of violence. I meant verbal abuses.
But since we're in this topic, I'd like to remind you that every piece of history has its own context. At the time the Old Testament was written, violence and war was the way things were handled. The land had to be protected, physical punishment was the norm, etc.
But as the context changes, so does the wording in the Bible, to the point of preaching the good and peace.
Whatever war is fought in the name of God or Allah is flawed in its conception. Be it the crusaders, the inquisitors, the suicidal bombers or the president.
yet you seem very eager to expect the worst from atheists though.
No, I don't. Many of my very dear friends are atheists, as are several of my colleagues in the scientific business. They chose to be so, and I chose otherwise, that's all. There's nothing to expect.
Slashdot Mirror
Hopefully VMWare will take notice of the good work being put onto vmt(4) and add official support to OpenBSD in ESX.
For once I've read the paper :-)
But I could not find a description of the technique utilized to recover the files.
They say that an "advanced hacker" will be able to recover the files, but I'd like to know how.
I've got my DataHand almost 10 years ago, and I still use it everyday, really love it.
This keyboard rid me of painful wrists problems and I highly recommend it.
If the OP is interested in it, there are foot pedals for changing modes, so you don't have to use the thumbs to access them:
http://www.datahand.com/products/accessories.htm
Left to right:
1) don't know
2) Ariel Rebel/Piper Fawn
3) Melisa A
4) Don't know
This was marked as funny, but I actually would like to know what kind of strategies FF should follow.
What does "survival mode" means in this case? Race in new features?
It only works when the average consumer is knowledgeable and educated.
The case here is that the people who are not buying this, because they do not agree with the artificial restrictions Apple has wrapped around their product, don't constitute a large enough number to hurt Apple.
And since the money is flowing to they coffers anyway, the industry gets a kind of green light to go and cripple more products.
"Vote with your money" only works when a large number of people know and care enough to actually buy an alternative product (assuming there is an alternative product available.)
My thoughts exactly. I once saw Stallman talking about what he envisions for GPL and freedom of software in the future, and it really looks like he's aiming at a more collaborative and free society. Not only that, but he has taken positive and large steps in getting there, by turning copyright against itself and actively advocating free software and its benefits.
Genius indeed.
I see it as unfortunate that he doesn't get the recognition he deserves. If he were more "accepted", his ideas would probably have an even stronger impact.
For any really specific job you will need to customise Linux. Yes I know this is beyond the capabilities of most simpletons but if it is done (by someone else perhaps) it will result in far superior performance and results. The ability to customise Linux into either a general purpose or highly specialised OS is the strength of Linux.
And here Ubuntu Studio comes in handy. On a plain vanilla Ubuntu, one can simply apt-get ubuntustudio packages and get every customization done for them. It installs the main applications (audio-wise it's great) and even configures a real-time kernel.
Screw Last.fm. Grooveshark has a much better offer, is less anal-retentive and is much more accessible than Last.fm. If only they would provide a plugin for Songbird (or a decent API so someone could make it), they would have a killer internet radio.
Ha, so true... we call ours "The Bomberman" :-D
Best comment in this thread!
If I could pick just one book to be turned into a movie it would be Cryptonomicon (specially since TLoTR's already done and The Hobbit is on its way).
It has the geek and math content that would make me happy, the sex appeal that would make me and my wife happy, and the historical related plot that would make me, my wife and my in-laws happy. A triple-win!
Last month my wife and I were taking some pictures at the Pavonia/Newport PATH station (between NJ and NY).
This station still holds the old-fashioned tiles and brick ceilings, so I took my camera out and started shooting (pictures, that is :-))
This woman dressed in PATH police uniform came to me and kindly asked me to stop taking pictures. When I asked why, she said that the flash could disturb the train conductors (as if they could lose a tunnel or something, right?)
Anyway, she didn't ask me to delete the pictures or anything, and since I had already taken more than enough, I let it pass without further ado (that and the fact that my wife wasn't too fond of being arrested.)
The lottery is a really smart thing to do, and if someone's able to check the ballots, than I think it's a pretty good system.
Thanks for clarifying!
The votes are actually printed in paper, just in case the voting data is damaged :-)
But are they available for each voter to audit? I mean, if someone voted XY would this person be able to see the printed ballot and verify that it actually says XY?
Also, are these printed votes used for verifying the outcome of the election or are they used only in case of data damage?
Hmm, the fact that at least one e-voting machine can be broken into in less than 60 seconds is a tell-tale sign that there's something wrong with the system.
Besides, the election could easily be rigged by someone in control of the software, EVEN if your TSE (Portuguese for Supreme Electoral Court, I think) allows parties to check it (who knows what's really being loaded into each machine?)
But there's something quite simple that could be done: printing each ballot and depositing it in a sealed box -- just like a regular voting system. After announcing the votes as counted by the machines, the process of counting the ballots can begin and the election results would only be promulgated if both counts match.
By printing it the voter can confirm that her vote is going to who she wants, and since there will be real ballots involved, the vote can be guaranteed.
You could say: "oh, but then we don't need e-voting, since we'll have paper ballots anyway." But the difference here is that you'll have a quick counting that is most likely correct (since it'll be verified) and two systems validating each other.
thePowerOfGrayskull was talking about the person he replied to, who indeed posted as AC and invoked the disclaimer.
Go to the message and click the "Parent" button at the bottom of it, and you'll see.
Apart from Free Geek, there's also Hackers For Charity.
They might be really interested not only in your old hardware, but also old software such as encyclopedias (Encarta, etc) and swags. BTW, if you're interested in donating some skills as well, there are nice projects available too (programming, web-design, drawing, etc.)
All of it might end up helping some kids in Africa (not the Spam-sending kind), and you can follow up with it through their website.
Interesting account, very opposite to my own experience: every article I've got published (in journals and conference proceedings) were processed by LaTeX using a formating class or style provided by the publisher.
My thesis was also formated using LaTeX and the university also gave me a LaTeX class.
heard of the first commandment? completely incompatible with the first amendment; either 'thou shalt have no other gods' or thou shalt have free practice of religion, but not both.
No, it's no incompatible. If you want to be a Jew or a Christian, than you should not have other gods. But being a Jew or a Christian is not an obligation, and you may choose not to in which case the Commandments do not apply, since you don't believe in them anyway.
the physical harm point was in an earlier post. how about answering my question? no examples? fine, I didn't expect you to anyway.
OK, let's try. Could you please give me an example of something that is as bad as stonings, tortures or death that is not a physical harm?
there is no amendment that says free speech should be curtailed if it upsets religious people!
Unless, of course it turns into harassment or discrimination.
I can respect you fully as a person by respecting your human rights without any respect for your religious beliefs. and respecting you as a person places no obligation on me to pay lip-service to whatever fantasy you choose to indulge in.
Yeah... up to the point you call someone a retard (please see your other post here.) When you reach that point, you are being disrespectfull.
I asked for examples of respecting people but not beliefs, and specifically mentioned no physical harm under any circumstances.
No, you didn't. You said:
when does only respecting people produce similar negative consequences as all the stonings, burnings, tortures and imprisonings done in the name of respect for beliefs?
So my examples fit perfectly to your request. They all ended in "similar negative consequences". The three of them were motivated by disrespect to someone's beliefs.
free speech and freedom from violence is far more important than hurt feelings of any religious group.
Anyone can exercise freedom of speech without being disrespectfull to any religious group. Keep in mind that the First Amendment also defends the free exercise of religion.
can you give me a single example where respecting people but not beliefs can ever make you go wrong?
Since I said beliefs, when present, are an integral part of what people are, to me there's no such thing as respecting people while disrespecting their beliefs.
Anyway, here goes an example that might fit what your asking: religious persecution is a way to disrespect someone's beliefs. If a regular group of people would be respected as human beings but a subset of this group would be persecuted for their religious orientation, disrespecting beliefs could lead to torture, imprisoning, stoning. Some examples are:
- the dechristianisation of France;
- the Chinese Communist Party's ban on all religions;
- the antisemitism employed by the Nazis.
Just to name a few.
can you point to popular atheist writings that come anywhere near the level of violence and threats that you can find within seconds of opening the Bible?
No, of course not. At least not to the same level of violence. I meant verbal abuses.
But since we're in this topic, I'd like to remind you that every piece of history has its own context. At the time the Old Testament was written, violence and war was the way things were handled. The land had to be protected, physical punishment was the norm, etc.
But as the context changes, so does the wording in the Bible, to the point of preaching the good and peace.
Whatever war is fought in the name of God or Allah is flawed in its conception. Be it the crusaders, the inquisitors, the suicidal bombers or the president.
yet you seem very eager to expect the worst from atheists though.
No, I don't. Many of my very dear friends are atheists, as are several of my colleagues in the scientific business. They chose to be so, and I chose otherwise, that's all. There's nothing to expect.
respect should be reserved for human beings themselves, not their beliefs.
Beliefs are part of our condition as human beings. Respect should be granted to them as well.
if I think believing Jesus is going to take you to paradise is retarded (which I do), then I can and will say so. that does not make me a fanatic.
If you would push your opinions on me constantly, trying to bring me to your side of the argument against my will, that would make you a fanatic, yes.
And I think that if I would tell you everyday that you should start believing in some deity, you would also call me a fanatic.
Fanaticism is simply a strong devotion to a cause. No matter what cause that is. It doesn't even have to be a bad thing.
I was not implying that you can't find fanatics on the theists' realm neither that all atheists are fanatics.
I said simply that here on /. it is more common to find atheists more inclined to be aggressive on the defense of their beliefs.