Rainbow is an old cat. Cc is a kitten. Rainbow is chunky. Cc is still growing.
Ah, yes, and we all know that a cat's coat pattern changes radically as they grow up.
This proves something that biologists have known for years. The DNA molecule is not the definition of the instantiation of an individual lifeform. It's a lot more like blueprints and a lot less like computer code. Hell, it's not even so much blueprints as much as instructions for how to mix the concrete.
One little problem. If you play on freenet, you donate X amount of disk space (256 megs by default) to the anonymous collective. While it is pretty much impossible to establish just what is on your computer, Freenet is a haven for those who trade in kiddie porn, for example. This creates the technical possibility that your computer could be used to store and disseminate said material.
Therefore, if you're going to play on freenet, understand just what it is that you might be doing with your computer/bandwidth. Even if you don't have moral problems with this, the legal defense of deniability will evaporate when the first expert witness takes the stand and says that freenet is used extensively by pedophiles.
Only three kinds of people will let this change their behavior:
Do you honestly mean to support the moral value of social control based on your evaluations of the type of people who might resist that control? Do you understand that you've relegated the idea of individual rights to stereotype? What does freedom look like in your universe?
Which demonstrates well the problem of a police state. A police state is not about catching bad guys, it's about control. This is why you can post the suggestion that one perforate one's tires with an icepick and get pegged straight up to 5. All the moderators are too busy squashing those they don't like.
What is the best way to flush this out of yourself and find out which of your myriad talents (or meager few talents, depending on how you look at it) is the one you love?
Good question. My first response is to say, in response to your statement about writing, that it is that which you don't have to make yourself do. Then I remember my battles with Sendmail. Obviously, it's not that simple.:)
All I can really say is that I have always wanted to play with computers, and it has always been the thing I'm not supposed to be doing (be it computers in general, or Linux, etc.) I also know that if anyone had asked me what I really wanted to do, I would have responded much as you have. I even resented the western ideal of "following your one true dream" because I never could figure out exactly what that dream was, which very greatly pissed me off. In fact, as I think about it, there's really no way to tell you how to do that without patronizing you and belittling the struggle. Indeed, I'm even open to the idea that my experience might be the product of selective memory; having rewritten the story of my life to match where I am right now. (Wow, that's a really crappy answer, isn't it?)
The only thing of value that I can really tell you is to live right now. Focus on the present, and you'll be more centered and able to make the decisions (which all happen in the present) that affect your life without the burdens of the past's regrets or the future's fears. However I remember it, I do know that no action I ever took based on either fear or regret brought any good to my life. (I'm talking course-of-life stuff here, not that time I had to get out of the way of an oncoming bus.)
The other key thing is to figure out who you are. This takes time, solitude, and, in many cases, a philosophical construct that can provide an evaluative basis for who and what you are (Christianity for me, but, like all of this, that's something you have to figure out for yourself).
If you look back over the list of duplicates, nearly all of them are Taco's.
Those of us who are married know exactly what's going on here. When male human becomes married, all memory functions are relegated to the wife. I've been married for 10 years, and I do well to remember to wear pants, much less retain sufficient buffer space to run a news site.
No, I'm just inexperienced. I'm learning fast, though. More on that later.
I'm glad you're getting down moderated and I would join in if I hadn't used all my points solely to shut you up.
Don't sweat it. I have moderators chasing down days old comments I made in other threads to shut me up. Whatever effect you wish would be underway is definately occuring. I am honestly quite surprised. I'd never imagined someone could say something on slashdot which would be so offensive to the core community that a massive counter-response would be launched against me personally via not only moderation, but against comments in other threads. Especially when the issue at hand is a simple difference of opinion.
You continue to defend your wrong position (note that it can't be an opinion if it's disproven by fact which a ton of people have pointed out to you) either because you're trolling (quite well, since I bit) or because you can't admit you're wrong.
My point has been that suing people for trolling Internet fora is unreasonable. That is opinion, not fact, and I am very much aware at this point that, although I don't think of myself as doing so, speaking for trolls is verboten. There are those quite violently opposed to what I am saying, so it makes little sense to keep saying it. Very few respondents want to discuss this rationally, which is pretty much impossible from wihin this moderation shitstorm. I want to stop the disruption (based on the sheer number of mod points expended against me )my comments have had on Slashdot.
I've participated in the/. community because I like it, and because I believe in what/. is about. Before today, I hadn't gone more than one point away from the karma cap since a few months after I started posting around here. (This is the only/. account I hold.) I would like to apologize for what I've said and ask forgiveness, if for no other reason than to put forth some effort to restore order and calm folks down. I'm really shocked over what's going on here. That said, however, I can't honestly say that I'm too terribly ashamed to find myself looking at Slashdot from a perspective I've never had before, and looking at a very dirty underbelly for the first time. I've never personally found that people who have something interesting and insightful to say enjoy very much popular response to their saying it. (The numb emptyspeak of politics would seem to indicate that an inverse relationship exists) Therefore, I simply cannot summon the shame to say whatever needs to be said to abate the attack on my/. account. No apology is forthcoming. If this situation amounts to my excommunication from/., my only regret will be in not realizing what/. was about until now.
Well, I'm going to get out of this thread, because I've become the target of a moderation witchhunt, and if I want to preserve enough karma to M2 abusers out of the M1 queue, I really need to shut up.
It's clear that the slashdot crowd believes that rights flow from property ownership (your suggestion of practicing religion on public land is hilarious - I could just see the protests if someone tried to do a revival in a national park), and that webmaster == indisputable master of the universe. Luckily, I am a landowner and a webmaster, so the irrestible tide of anti freedom hypocrisy won't affect me very much.
But your freedom of speech may be limited on someone else's property.
Someone else's property begins at my property line, and continues in all directions for thousands of miles. Do you mean to suggest that the first amdendment applies to me only within the confines of my property? May I practice relgion only in my yard, and peaceably assemble only in my living room? What, as I referenced earlier, of those who don't own land? You seem to seriously believe that the first amendment exists only for these people at the behest of exceptions in their lease agreement. Did you read the part in the Declaration of Independence about how we (Americans) believe rights flow? Rights are inherent, not to be granted by the government, but you seem to have no problem relegating those rights to landowners.
If a tenant who happened to create offensive religious art, such as photos of crosses in bowls of urine, were evicted on that basis, would you find that to be reasonable? What about an employee fired for wearing a pentragram pendant? What would you say if, not only were the wiccan fired, but also sued for "disrupting the flow of business"?
You want landowners to have final say on all power in this country. Shall we allow only landowners to vote?
We tech people have become quite used to the Godlike power of webmaster, haven't we? Have we become so used to it that we don't understand the freedom equation anymore?
No it isn't. It's called private property and the principle has been around just as long as the first amendment.
Let's think about that for a moment. Are you suggesting that the freedom of speech only exists on one's own property? Suppose a landlord doesn't agree with a letter a tenant sent to the editor of a newspaper? Should that landlord be able to evict the tenant?
If you make noise on my property, I can kick you off.
Taking action against someone for criminal trespass is one thing. But you are talking about taking civil action against someone. A jury is not necessarily involved, and because civil law is about money rather than justice, you've just placed the first amendment in the purview of big money. See what happens when you confuse power with freedom?
To make your analogy more accurate. The homeless man was going into the restraunt, goosing the waitresses, yelling and throwing stuff until the customers left.
The idea that a commercial entity can incur an actionable loss because of the freedom of speech is a new and dangerous trend in our society right now, but the thought of suing every disruptive customer entering a public establishment is so absurd as to defy logical discourse. Are you trolling?
As individuals, we (Americans) live in a society that legally recognizes our inherent right of free speech. The corollary of that is that you might hear speech of which you disapprove. That is the price of freedom. Do you mean to suggest that a commercial entity is exempt from that cost, at the expense of the freedom of individuals?
If so, I must point out that you are in very poor company.
Jeez. That would call for one HELL of a decel burn on intercept with Mars. I guess that's one way to solve the deep space exploration problem - haul ass.
Seriously, though, I smell bullshit here. At best, look for a cover to divert billions in secret funding to the police state.
Re:WARNING: GOATSE LINK (Mod parent down)
on
GPS Jamming for $50
·
· Score: 0, Troll
Ugh. I've been trolled with ASCII porn.
Re:Problems for the military...
on
GPS Jamming for $50
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
Devices like this are sure to be major headaches for the GPS dependent US Military in the future...I wonder how they would get around them?
Based on what I've heard, the military has ways of getting around that problem. I don't think it's a major threat to their ability to operate. What it does do is make it difficult for rental car companies to keep track of where you are and how fast you've gone. I will also block most commercial use of GPS technology for invasive purposes.
To address your suggestion of banning jamming technology, it would be much more effective to ban the abuse of GPS information on the part of those who wish to violate our privacy. Then people would feel no need to build devices that could throw airplanes off course.
I went through a turning point in my career some time in 1998. I was a Novell CNE, and it became obvious to me that I needed to get an MCSE to stay competitive in the systems administration/integration job market. And so I set out to do so.
I knew enough about Novell to see the stupid games commercial software vendors play with each other at the expense of the customer and the sanity of consultants hired to make sense of the mess. Starting on the MCSE training track was sufficient to raise my level of disgust to the point that I began questioning my career. My impression was that the industry was soulless, that hard work was not rewarded, and that the only way to make money in the business was to take advantage of customers and profit by their ignorance.
Just as I was thinking of opening a restaurant, the nagging love that I'd always had for working with computers took hold, so I set myself to the task of reinventing myself.
I'd started playing with Linux just a few months before, and was hopelessly inept, but found that it had rekindled my love for working with computers. Up to this point, however, I'd never considered it more than a hobby. I remembered, however, that my original decision to pursue IT was not a matter of economics, but because I really loved it. I got into computers because of the joy of programming on my C64. Long before computers were cool; long before I even knew I could make money working with them, I loved them. I realized that my hobby with Linux was in keeping with my beginnings in computers, but that I'd been restricting the time I spent with it so that I could keep up with the latest interopability problems with Groupwise and Exchange.
I already knew I couln't go to another training class; that I couldn't pick up another trade rag; that I couldn't spend the rest of my career begging support reps to tell me the secrets of making shit work that are known only in internal documents, protected by inane marketing concerns. So despite how stupid a move it seemed at the time, I had no choice but to spend my downtime studying Linux. I started my career following my interests, and I knew I had to keep doing so.
Then, the bottom fell out of the IT industry. In 2001, the company I was with was absorbed by another one, and in the process about 90% of the original staff was eventually hemorrhaged. I saw the writing on the wall before it really got bad, and managed to round up enough solo Linux work to get out while they were still in the mood to beg me to stay. I refused. I did solo Linux consulting for a while, then landed a hot job with a very successful network outfit. I now work exclusively in Linux, writing network automation scripting and performing enterprise security audits. I've remained employed throughout the recession thus far, and my income has steadily increased.
Do what you love. The rest will follow. Life's too short to deal with bullshit.
So, you want to implement technology where any random third party can kill processes on your servers? In what universe should security people "get this"?
Slashdot Mirror
Rainbow is an old cat. Cc is a kitten. Rainbow is chunky. Cc is still growing.
Ah, yes, and we all know that a cat's coat pattern changes radically as they grow up.
This proves something that biologists have known for years. The DNA molecule is not the definition of the instantiation of an individual lifeform. It's a lot more like blueprints and a lot less like computer code. Hell, it's not even so much blueprints as much as instructions for how to mix the concrete.
Freenet baby!
One little problem. If you play on freenet, you donate X amount of disk space (256 megs by default) to the anonymous collective. While it is pretty much impossible to establish just what is on your computer, Freenet is a haven for those who trade in kiddie porn, for example. This creates the technical possibility that your computer could be used to store and disseminate said material.
Therefore, if you're going to play on freenet, understand just what it is that you might be doing with your computer/bandwidth. Even if you don't have moral problems with this, the legal defense of deniability will evaporate when the first expert witness takes the stand and says that freenet is used extensively by pedophiles.
Just a friendly heads-up.
Only three kinds of people will let this change their behavior:
Do you honestly mean to support the moral value of social control based on your evaluations of the type of people who might resist that control? Do you understand that you've relegated the idea of individual rights to stereotype? What does freedom look like in your universe?
Oh, the icepick was a joke. :)
Which demonstrates well the problem of a police state. A police state is not about catching bad guys, it's about control. This is why you can post the suggestion that one perforate one's tires with an icepick and get pegged straight up to 5. All the moderators are too busy squashing those they don't like.
What is the best way to flush this out of yourself and find out which of your myriad talents (or meager few talents, depending on how you look at it) is the one you love?
Good question. My first response is to say, in response to your statement about writing, that it is that which you don't have to make yourself do. Then I remember my battles with Sendmail. Obviously, it's not that simple. :)
All I can really say is that I have always wanted to play with computers, and it has always been the thing I'm not supposed to be doing (be it computers in general, or Linux, etc.) I also know that if anyone had asked me what I really wanted to do, I would have responded much as you have. I even resented the western ideal of "following your one true dream" because I never could figure out exactly what that dream was, which very greatly pissed me off. In fact, as I think about it, there's really no way to tell you how to do that without patronizing you and belittling the struggle. Indeed, I'm even open to the idea that my experience might be the product of selective memory; having rewritten the story of my life to match where I am right now. (Wow, that's a really crappy answer, isn't it?)
The only thing of value that I can really tell you is to live right now. Focus on the present, and you'll be more centered and able to make the decisions (which all happen in the present) that affect your life without the burdens of the past's regrets or the future's fears. However I remember it, I do know that no action I ever took based on either fear or regret brought any good to my life. (I'm talking course-of-life stuff here, not that time I had to get out of the way of an oncoming bus.)
The other key thing is to figure out who you are. This takes time, solitude, and, in many cases, a philosophical construct that can provide an evaluative basis for who and what you are (Christianity for me, but, like all of this, that's something you have to figure out for yourself).
That the reason for this ban is more socieconomic than safety-concsious. After all, we are talking about SF here.
If you look back over the list of duplicates, nearly all of them are Taco's.
Those of us who are married know exactly what's going on here. When male human becomes married, all memory functions are relegated to the wife. I've been married for 10 years, and I do well to remember to wear pants, much less retain sufficient buffer space to run a news site.
They've released a teaser notice about potential UFO evidence to be discussed at a conference late this week.
Tickets to the conference are $20.
Riiiggghtt....
You might be the biggest idiot ever.
No, I'm just inexperienced. I'm learning fast, though. More on that later.
I'm glad you're getting down moderated and I would join in if I hadn't used all my points solely to shut you up.
Don't sweat it. I have moderators chasing down days old comments I made in other threads to shut me up. Whatever effect you wish would be underway is definately occuring. I am honestly quite surprised. I'd never imagined someone could say something on slashdot which would be so offensive to the core community that a massive counter-response would be launched against me personally via not only moderation, but against comments in other threads. Especially when the issue at hand is a simple difference of opinion.
You continue to defend your wrong position (note that it can't be an opinion if it's disproven by fact which a ton of people have pointed out to you) either because you're trolling (quite well, since I bit) or because you can't admit you're wrong.
My point has been that suing people for trolling Internet fora is unreasonable. That is opinion, not fact, and I am very much aware at this point that, although I don't think of myself as doing so, speaking for trolls is verboten. There are those quite violently opposed to what I am saying, so it makes little sense to keep saying it. Very few respondents want to discuss this rationally, which is pretty much impossible from wihin this moderation shitstorm. I want to stop the disruption (based on the sheer number of mod points expended against me )my comments have had on Slashdot.
I've participated in the /. community because I like it, and because I believe in what /. is about. Before today, I hadn't gone more than one point away from the karma cap since a few months after I started posting around here. (This is the only /. account I hold.) I would like to apologize for what I've said and ask forgiveness, if for no other reason than to put forth some effort to restore order and calm folks down. I'm really shocked over what's going on here. That said, however, I can't honestly say that I'm too terribly ashamed to find myself looking at Slashdot from a perspective I've never had before, and looking at a very dirty underbelly for the first time. I've never personally found that people who have something interesting and insightful to say enjoy very much popular response to their saying it. (The numb emptyspeak of politics would seem to indicate that an inverse relationship exists) Therefore, I simply cannot summon the shame to say whatever needs to be said to abate the attack on my /. account. No apology is forthcoming. If this situation amounts to my excommunication from /., my only regret will be in not realizing what /. was about until now.
Well, I'm going to get out of this thread, because I've become the target of a moderation witchhunt, and if I want to preserve enough karma to M2 abusers out of the M1 queue, I really need to shut up.
It's clear that the slashdot crowd believes that rights flow from property ownership (your suggestion of practicing religion on public land is hilarious - I could just see the protests if someone tried to do a revival in a national park), and that webmaster == indisputable master of the universe. Luckily, I am a landowner and a webmaster, so the irrestible tide of anti freedom hypocrisy won't affect me very much.
So, free speech applies only to landowners. Got it.
But your freedom of speech may be limited on someone else's property.
Someone else's property begins at my property line, and continues in all directions for thousands of miles. Do you mean to suggest that the first amdendment applies to me only within the confines of my property? May I practice relgion only in my yard, and peaceably assemble only in my living room? What, as I referenced earlier, of those who don't own land? You seem to seriously believe that the first amendment exists only for these people at the behest of exceptions in their lease agreement. Did you read the part in the Declaration of Independence about how we (Americans) believe rights flow? Rights are inherent, not to be granted by the government, but you seem to have no problem relegating those rights to landowners.
If a tenant who happened to create offensive religious art, such as photos of crosses in bowls of urine, were evicted on that basis, would you find that to be reasonable? What about an employee fired for wearing a pentragram pendant? What would you say if, not only were the wiccan fired, but also sued for "disrupting the flow of business"?
You want landowners to have final say on all power in this country. Shall we allow only landowners to vote?
We tech people have become quite used to the Godlike power of webmaster, haven't we? Have we become so used to it that we don't understand the freedom equation anymore?
Be careful what you post on this thread. There is some seriously unfair moderation going on.
It seems that many moderators are confusing the power of a webmaster with the freedom to speak.
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=51162&cid=5109 194
No it isn't. It's called private property and the principle has been around just as long as the first amendment.
Let's think about that for a moment. Are you suggesting that the freedom of speech only exists on one's own property? Suppose a landlord doesn't agree with a letter a tenant sent to the editor of a newspaper? Should that landlord be able to evict the tenant?
If you make noise on my property, I can kick you off.
Taking action against someone for criminal trespass is one thing. But you are talking about taking civil action against someone. A jury is not necessarily involved, and because civil law is about money rather than justice, you've just placed the first amendment in the purview of big money. See what happens when you confuse power with freedom?
To make your analogy more accurate. The homeless man was going into the restraunt, goosing the waitresses, yelling and throwing stuff until the customers left.
The idea that a commercial entity can incur an actionable loss because of the freedom of speech is a new and dangerous trend in our society right now, but the thought of suing every disruptive customer entering a public establishment is so absurd as to defy logical discourse. Are you trolling?
As individuals, we (Americans) live in a society that legally recognizes our inherent right of free speech. The corollary of that is that you might hear speech of which you disapprove. That is the price of freedom. Do you mean to suggest that a commercial entity is exempt from that cost, at the expense of the freedom of individuals?
If so, I must point out that you are in very poor company.
This one is it.
two months
Jeez. That would call for one HELL of a decel burn on intercept with Mars. I guess that's one way to solve the deep space exploration problem - haul ass.
Seriously, though, I smell bullshit here. At best, look for a cover to divert billions in secret funding to the police state.
Ugh. I've been trolled with ASCII porn.
Devices like this are sure to be major headaches for the GPS dependent US Military in the future...I wonder how they would get around them?
Based on what I've heard, the military has ways of getting around that problem. I don't think it's a major threat to their ability to operate. What it does do is make it difficult for rental car companies to keep track of where you are and how fast you've gone. I will also block most commercial use of GPS technology for invasive purposes.
To address your suggestion of banning jamming technology, it would be much more effective to ban the abuse of GPS information on the part of those who wish to violate our privacy. Then people would feel no need to build devices that could throw airplanes off course.
I for one would be thrilled to see a general purpose crypto processor in every computer.
What do you do if someone finds/builds in a cryptographic weakness in your hardware chip?
Wait exactly two weeks, then hit our power plants.
Thanks, APC.
I went through a turning point in my career some time in 1998. I was a Novell CNE, and it became obvious to me that I needed to get an MCSE to stay competitive in the systems administration/integration job market. And so I set out to do so.
I knew enough about Novell to see the stupid games commercial software vendors play with each other at the expense of the customer and the sanity of consultants hired to make sense of the mess. Starting on the MCSE training track was sufficient to raise my level of disgust to the point that I began questioning my career. My impression was that the industry was soulless, that hard work was not rewarded, and that the only way to make money in the business was to take advantage of customers and profit by their ignorance.
Just as I was thinking of opening a restaurant, the nagging love that I'd always had for working with computers took hold, so I set myself to the task of reinventing myself.
I'd started playing with Linux just a few months before, and was hopelessly inept, but found that it had rekindled my love for working with computers. Up to this point, however, I'd never considered it more than a hobby. I remembered, however, that my original decision to pursue IT was not a matter of economics, but because I really loved it. I got into computers because of the joy of programming on my C64. Long before computers were cool; long before I even knew I could make money working with them, I loved them. I realized that my hobby with Linux was in keeping with my beginnings in computers, but that I'd been restricting the time I spent with it so that I could keep up with the latest interopability problems with Groupwise and Exchange.
I already knew I couln't go to another training class; that I couldn't pick up another trade rag; that I couldn't spend the rest of my career begging support reps to tell me the secrets of making shit work that are known only in internal documents, protected by inane marketing concerns. So despite how stupid a move it seemed at the time, I had no choice but to spend my downtime studying Linux. I started my career following my interests, and I knew I had to keep doing so.
Then, the bottom fell out of the IT industry. In 2001, the company I was with was absorbed by another one, and in the process about 90% of the original staff was eventually hemorrhaged. I saw the writing on the wall before it really got bad, and managed to round up enough solo Linux work to get out while they were still in the mood to beg me to stay. I refused. I did solo Linux consulting for a while, then landed a hot job with a very successful network outfit. I now work exclusively in Linux, writing network automation scripting and performing enterprise security audits. I've remained employed throughout the recession thus far, and my income has steadily increased.
Do what you love. The rest will follow. Life's too short to deal with bullshit.
I have a couple of rottweilers and make no secret of it. Wanna try some social engineering on them?
No problem. For my demonstration, I will require a large explosive robot dressed in a female rottweiler suit.
So, you want to implement technology where any random third party can kill processes on your servers? In what universe should security people "get this"?