Unlike most/.ers I am not a big open source fanboy (I am not opposed to it , Im just agnostic). But even I can see that this guy is a moron. These large open source projects are not going away. A bunch of people out of work and living on unemployment are going to be looking for something to do.. if anything the bad economy is going to increase participation in these open source projects. What an idiot.
I can imagine that there are some people somewhere who give a flying crap about this. I am not one of them. In fact I find it amusing that so many people are upset.
I know I am probably in the minority here in hate-microsoft.central but I thought the ad was kinda funny. Normally Bill is kind of a dick I hear but I guess he can be funny too.
How could anyone NOT know what Vista looks like (and acts) at this point? Why do I picture 99 out of 100 of the users in these videos sitting down at the machine and saying "This sure as hell looks like Vista" and then getting frustrated and leaving.
The iPhone doesn't "restrict my freedom", I don't own one. Even if I did it would be my choice and I could very easily choose to buy something else. It seems to me these folks simply don't like the product and should avoid it.
Annoying the poor saps who have to work at the apple stores seems like a childish and unproductive thing to do..
I agree. What the apologists will tell you is "Trust us, we'll only go after the bad people. Yur not a bad person are you? No? Well then you have nothing to worry about."
So in this case they prosecuted a bully who drove a girl to commit suicide. But the law could apply to anyone who posts on/. A fucked up law is still fucked up even if it has only been applied to people who "deserve" it. So far anyway...
I don't understand what is happening here. I remember google doing something back when the auction was going on to keep the spectrum open. I guess I didn't understand what that meant. Does google now want to control what verizon does on the network? Is the spectrum open or not?
There is no strawman. You asked what options police have but failed to provide a situation. I simply provided one to remedy your oversight.
If you would like to provide one I will gladly apply common sense to it.
Your saying that I need to decide whether force is needed is situations where it is "implied that force is needed"? Well then, of course force is needed. That one is easy.
Now define that and we'll be all set. Any officer who violates it can then be put in jail.
It's not my job to write guidelines for police conduct. It is my right as a citizen however to be free from thugs with badges wielding torture devices with impunity.
I don't care if we send them out there with foam bats and squirt guns. If they can't learn to play nice with their toys then that is what they should have so that no more citizens are tortured at the whim of a cop.
Remember no one asked them to do this job. They claim they do it becuase they like helping people. Well they can help me without the Tasers thank you very much or they can find another job.
I would never take a job like that. It seems rather foolish to me. I wouldn't trust the judgement of someone who would take such a job, and I certainly wouldn't trust them with a torture device.
For alternatives please consider CEO of a large corporation, it pays better and has way less danger of being killed by a crack head.
Cops put up with shit because they are cops. Quit complaining or don't be a cop.
A cars primary purpose is to transport people and things. The only purpose a taser has is to inflict pain so that a person submits. The UN hasn't classified cars as torture devices becuase they aren't fucking retarded.
A device that has no other purpose than to cause pain has no other application than torture.
Again, until people like you can consider options like finding a translator for a confused man in a Candian airport instead of only picking from the options of gun, taser or baton we will continue to have these problems. I would prefer that police had common sense, but sadly common sense is not very common and until it becomes so police should not have torture devices at their disposal.
In what situation? The one where they killed the man in the canadian airport? How about finding a translator and finding out what his problem is? How about finding out why he is there and trying to help him sort it out?
Or maybe you are referring too the time the cops maced an infant here in Portland. Another option would have been to give the baby a bottle. You are assuming every situation should be solve with a taser, gun, baton or pepper spray. That is the exact mentality that makes me think they shouldn't have them. Total lack of imagination like this is the problem. Until you can demonstrate that you can think of other options besides tasering or shooting, you should not be allowed to have tasers or guns.
You can't ask questions like that without context. The point is that officers too often use tasers when they shouldn't and can't seem to make sound judgements.
Tasers only have one purpose; to inflict immobilizing pain. A camera many other uses with torture probably way way down the list, so it can't really be categorized as a torture device. However, if you would like to replace all police tasers with SLR cameras I would accept that as a reasonable compromise.
There are no national standards for police forces as far as education or intelligence. In fact I read one article a few years ago about a fellow who was denied a job with the police department becuase his IQ was too high and he would "get bored".
An informal search on google for "police qualifications" reveals the following as a typical requirements for being a police officer:
Be 21 years of age or older, have a High School Diploma or its equivalent GED certificate, a valid Driver's License, the physical strength and agility sufficient to perform law enforcement work.
They also have to get a C on a test (lower if they served in the armed forces and learned how to kill people effectively)
So not much more than a burger flipper (except for the trained killer bonus). Would you arm McDonald cooks with torture devices and give them the right to zap anyone they wanted?
I for one don't want to arm high school quarterbacks who somehow managed graduate from the American public school system with torture devices and set them loose on the public.
The job of policing in this country is thankless and underpaid. This forces police departments to hire the people who's main attraction to the job is that they get to carry a gun and drive a car with shiny lights on top.
There are countless examples of police using Tasers inappropriately and killing or injuring people. Tasers should be banned until we either start hiring officers who have good judgment and some measure of compassion or there are strict guidelines for use and jail sentences for every officer who uses them inappropriately.
One thing cops and others always say in defense of officers is that they "risk their lives everyday" to protect us. Fine, if they recognize that risk then they should be able to do that job without torture devices. If they are unwilling to do the job without Tasers then they should go get a job flipping burgers and leave the job to the real men.
I for one would never take such a job. It seems boring, dangerous, and underpaid. Zapping people with tasers doesn't hold enough of an attraction for me to make it worth my time.
Cops get tased in very controlled circumstances (spotters, padded floor with ems on hand) and only for extremely short durations and only once. They then feel like they can tase people who are standing on concrete, in poor health, for as long as they want, and as many times as they want. Just once I'd like to do some real world testing on cops like they do on citizens routinely. If they got pissed at how much I was enjoying it, well I'd just give em another jolt to calm them down. This would continue until they saw my the logic of my superior reasoning.
...but I really think this is complete BS. You don't affect something that far away simply by being in the path of the light that came off of it millions of years ago. The universe just doesn't operate that way. You affect the light itself sure, but not the origin of the light. I suppose if you got hit with one of them entangles particles we keep hearing about you might affect it's twin but i understand that that is pretty rare.
I don't seem to remember feeling any compassion for the cow that gave her life for my hamburger last night. In fact I behaved much like a tiger would, tho probably not as hungry since I didn't have to chase it down and rip it's throat out..
Compassion for other humans and fuzzy cute things has been evolved into us. It helps our offspring survive, and it helps us survive. Compassion in a super intelligent machine would hopefully be a result of the desire for self preservation but who knows? A super intelligent machine is a totally and completely different animal (so to speak)- never having had to evolve to gain life. It's view of the universe would most probably be completely different from our own.
Of course we will probably make it in our own image, which would make us.. oh never mind.
That is what I would do. Why stop? Can you save the guy? Can you do anything productive or will you just be creating a traffic jam and pissing off the cops that have to respond to the incident? Spending my day waiting around to be interviewed for five minutes just to say "I saw a car on fire, it looked like it hit the tollbooth" is not my idea of fun or productive. It's sad the guy was killed, but there is really nothing anyone could do to make the situation better...
I don't know enough about the subject to comment on whether global warming is a real thing or not. But I keep coming back to this: what do 90% of scientists have to gain by claiming that human beings are warming the planet? I can't think of a single thing. If this is a conspiracy then what the fuck is the goal?
I can see plently of reasons for claiming that "we just don't know enough yet" or "Burning fossil fuels has no effect on the atmosphere" and they all have to do with money, who has it , and who will get more of it.
This guy may or may not have a legitimate position on global warming, but most of the people I have seen contradicting conventional wisdom are somehow financially connected to the oil business. Is this guy?
Slashdot Mirror
Unlike most /.ers I am not a big open source fanboy (I am not opposed to it , Im just agnostic). But even I can see that this guy is a moron. These large open source projects are not going away. A bunch of people out of work and living on unemployment are going to be looking for something to do.. if anything the bad economy is going to increase participation in these open source projects. What an idiot.
I can imagine that there are some people somewhere who give a flying crap about this. I am not one of them. In fact I find it amusing that so many people are upset.
I know I am probably in the minority here in hate-microsoft.central but I thought the ad was kinda funny. Normally Bill is kind of a dick I hear but I guess he can be funny too.
How could anyone NOT know what Vista looks like (and acts) at this point? Why do I picture 99 out of 100 of the users in these videos sitting down at the machine and saying "This sure as hell looks like Vista" and then getting frustrated and leaving.
The iPhone doesn't "restrict my freedom", I don't own one. Even if I did it would be my choice and I could very easily choose to buy something else. It seems to me these folks simply don't like the product and should avoid it.
Annoying the poor saps who have to work at the apple stores seems like a childish and unproductive thing to do..
I agree. What the apologists will tell you is "Trust us, we'll only go after the bad people. Yur not a bad person are you? No? Well then you have nothing to worry about."
So in this case they prosecuted a bully who drove a girl to commit suicide. But the law could apply to anyone who posts on /. A fucked up law is still fucked up even if it has only been applied to people who "deserve" it. So far anyway...
The law needs to be fixed.
I don't understand what is happening here. I remember google doing something back when the auction was going on to keep the spectrum open. I guess I didn't understand what that meant. Does google now want to control what verizon does on the network? Is the spectrum open or not?
I'm lost.
There is no strawman. You asked what options police have but failed to provide a situation. I simply provided one to remedy your oversight.
If you would like to provide one I will gladly apply common sense to it.
Your saying that I need to decide whether force is needed is situations where it is "implied that force is needed"? Well then, of course force is needed. That one is easy.
Now define that and we'll be all set. Any officer who violates it can then be put in jail.
It's not my job to write guidelines for police conduct. It is my right as a citizen however to be free from thugs with badges wielding torture devices with impunity.
I don't care if we send them out there with foam bats and squirt guns. If they can't learn to play nice with their toys then that is what they should have so that no more citizens are tortured at the whim of a cop.
Remember no one asked them to do this job. They claim they do it becuase they like helping people. Well they can help me without the Tasers thank you very much or they can find another job.
I would never take a job like that. It seems rather foolish to me. I wouldn't trust the judgement of someone who would take such a job, and I certainly wouldn't trust them with a torture device.
For alternatives please consider CEO of a large corporation, it pays better and has way less danger of being killed by a crack head.
Cops put up with shit because they are cops. Quit complaining or don't be a cop.
A cars primary purpose is to transport people and things. The only purpose a taser has is to inflict pain so that a person submits. The UN hasn't classified cars as torture devices becuase they aren't fucking retarded.
A device that has no other purpose than to cause pain has no other application than torture.
Again, until people like you can consider options like finding a translator for a confused man in a Candian airport instead of only picking from the options of gun, taser or baton we will continue to have these problems. I would prefer that police had common sense, but sadly common sense is not very common and until it becomes so police should not have torture devices at their disposal.
Death seems like a lasting effect to me.
In what situation? The one where they killed the man in the canadian airport? How about finding a translator and finding out what his problem is? How about finding out why he is there and trying to help him sort it out?
Or maybe you are referring too the time the cops maced an infant here in Portland. Another option would have been to give the baby a bottle. You are assuming every situation should be solve with a taser, gun, baton or pepper spray. That is the exact mentality that makes me think they shouldn't have them. Total lack of imagination like this is the problem. Until you can demonstrate that you can think of other options besides tasering or shooting, you should not be allowed to have tasers or guns.
You can't ask questions like that without context. The point is that officers too often use tasers when they shouldn't and can't seem to make sound judgements.
Tasers only have one purpose; to inflict immobilizing pain. A camera many other uses with torture probably way way down the list, so it can't really be categorized as a torture device. However, if you would like to replace all police tasers with SLR cameras I would accept that as a reasonable compromise.
Who said anything about idiots, race or social status? I think you doth protest too much.
There are no national standards for police forces as far as education or intelligence. In fact I read one article a few years ago about a fellow who was denied a job with the police department becuase his IQ was too high and he would "get bored".
An informal search on google for "police qualifications" reveals the following as a typical requirements for being a police officer:
Be 21 years of age or older, have a High School Diploma or its equivalent GED certificate, a valid Driver's License, the physical strength and agility sufficient to perform law enforcement work.
They also have to get a C on a test (lower if they served in the armed forces and learned how to kill people effectively)
So not much more than a burger flipper (except for the trained killer bonus). Would you arm McDonald cooks with torture devices and give them the right to zap anyone they wanted?
I for one don't want to arm high school quarterbacks who somehow managed graduate from the American public school system with torture devices and set them loose on the public.
The job of policing in this country is thankless and underpaid. This forces police departments to hire the people who's main attraction to the job is that they get to carry a gun and drive a car with shiny lights on top.
There are countless examples of police using Tasers inappropriately and killing or injuring people. Tasers should be banned until we either start hiring officers who have good judgment and some measure of compassion or there are strict guidelines for use and jail sentences for every officer who uses them inappropriately.
One thing cops and others always say in defense of officers is that they "risk their lives everyday" to protect us. Fine, if they recognize that risk then they should be able to do that job without torture devices. If they are unwilling to do the job without Tasers then they should go get a job flipping burgers and leave the job to the real men.
I for one would never take such a job. It seems boring, dangerous, and underpaid. Zapping people with tasers doesn't hold enough of an attraction for me to make it worth my time.
I just found my new favorite cable company! You can't buy advertising like this, Blue Jeans Cable must be thrilled.
That was the problem with my PMM, I'm still cashing the gov t checks every month... But Im not really sposed to talk about it.
Cops get tased in very controlled circumstances (spotters, padded floor with ems on hand) and only for extremely short durations and only once. They then feel like they can tase people who are standing on concrete, in poor health, for as long as they want, and as many times as they want. Just once I'd like to do some real world testing on cops like they do on citizens routinely. If they got pissed at how much I was enjoying it, well I'd just give em another jolt to calm them down. This would continue until they saw my the logic of my superior reasoning.
...but I really think this is complete BS. You don't affect something that far away simply by being in the path of the light that came off of it millions of years ago. The universe just doesn't operate that way. You affect the light itself sure, but not the origin of the light. I suppose if you got hit with one of them entangles particles we keep hearing about you might affect it's twin but i understand that that is pretty rare.
I don't seem to remember feeling any compassion for the cow that gave her life for my hamburger last night. In fact I behaved much like a tiger would, tho probably not as hungry since I didn't have to chase it down and rip it's throat out.. Compassion for other humans and fuzzy cute things has been evolved into us. It helps our offspring survive, and it helps us survive. Compassion in a super intelligent machine would hopefully be a result of the desire for self preservation but who knows? A super intelligent machine is a totally and completely different animal (so to speak)- never having had to evolve to gain life. It's view of the universe would most probably be completely different from our own. Of course we will probably make it in our own image, which would make us.. oh never mind.
The wiser I get, the stupider I seem.
I'm trying to feel bad for Tivo, but it isn't working for some reason. I wonder why that is... wierd.
That is what I would do. Why stop? Can you save the guy? Can you do anything productive or will you just be creating a traffic jam and pissing off the cops that have to respond to the incident? Spending my day waiting around to be interviewed for five minutes just to say "I saw a car on fire, it looked like it hit the tollbooth" is not my idea of fun or productive. It's sad the guy was killed, but there is really nothing anyone could do to make the situation better...
Because it's a hell of a lot more fun than using a mouse trap and the mouse is just as dead.
I don't know enough about the subject to comment on whether global warming is a real thing or not. But I keep coming back to this: what do 90% of scientists have to gain by claiming that human beings are warming the planet? I can't think of a single thing. If this is a conspiracy then what the fuck is the goal? I can see plently of reasons for claiming that "we just don't know enough yet" or "Burning fossil fuels has no effect on the atmosphere" and they all have to do with money, who has it , and who will get more of it. This guy may or may not have a legitimate position on global warming, but most of the people I have seen contradicting conventional wisdom are somehow financially connected to the oil business. Is this guy?
Here is a dot with a star after it .*