Hey! There's a picture missing from her site. Last week when the questions solicitation article was up and I checked Georgy's site there were two or three pictures up. Now there's only one: gallery.
The missing picture was the one where she's in a snug T-shirt, which did not completely cover her lower back, and jeans and looking back at the camera from the computer. Yeah... you remember it... the good one.
Dude, 110 volts is most certainly enough to kill. True, most of us have been "tingled" by 110/115 a few times, and didn't die... all that proves is that we were lucky on those occassions.
Guys, come on. Voltage doesn't kill people; current kills people. (It's measured in amperes.) You can be killed by much less than 110V if the current is sufficient and you can be "tickled" by 10,000V and live to tell about it -- if the current is low enough.
If there are any doubters out there then explain to me why the product on this page is called a "stun gun" and not a "vaporize your blimey arse gun" : http://www.libertees.com/sedestgunstm.html
Given how few people will even pay for Slashdot content,...
Not trolling, just nitpicking. But, uh, what/. content? There are links to news stories on other sites (usually submitted by users) and then lots of comments on the stories, again, mostly from users.
Don't misunderstand, I love/. and think the whole comment and moderation system is outstanding. But, there isn't really much original "content" in the sense that that word is normally used. . . . Except for the polls, but who's paying for them.:P
If robots take over most of the jobs, is anyone actually going to be able to by the products produced? It sounds like a great deal, to not pay employees, but people without jobs don't make the greatest consumers. Once they quit buying stuff, we will have a bunch of unemployed robots
For the answer to this see another movie: "The Terminator".
Arnold voice: "I vas a fry cook. Now I hunt the human vermin."
It is official; Netcraft now confirms: *BSD is dying... Let's keep to the facts and look at the numbers.... All major surveys show that *BSD has steadily declined in market share.
I think I get it now. These trolls -- they're all government accountants!
"It depends what the meaning of the word 'more' is."
We don't need huge security structures and new laws to keep out black hat hackers, we need a closer watch on people inside companies and organisations keeping data.
And who watches the watchers? And who watches them?
What we need is more honest people. This problem is not primarily legal or structural. It's a cultural problem. Look at how many people were involved! Besides the two agents there were the people on the outside. One honest man anywhere in the process could have killed this little scheme before it was hatched.
... To see that this ruling is total crap. Definition of an unprotected threat: "on its face and in the circumstances in which it made is so unequivocal, unconditional, immediate and specific
as to the person threatened, as to convey a gravity of purpose imminent prospect of execution." The purpose of the website as stated on the front page: "A coalition of concerned citizens throughout the USA is cooperating in collecting dossiers on abortionists in anticipation that one day we may be able to hold them on trial for crimes against humanity." It's neither specific nor immediate nor unequivocal. More importantly (how incompetent/politicized are these judges?), there's absolutely no "immediate prospect of execution." These boneheads just run a website. They're not threatening to do anything but continue to run it.
It's a very slippery slope to say that that's obfuscation and they really have another purpose. It wouldn't be long before any harsh criticism could be interpreted as a death threat. The law is supposed to be treating the speech, NOT the purpose(/thoughts).
People, wake up. The first amendment is not just for those whom you agree with.
Sara, dear, I'm glad that you're doing well, but I believe (as you've posted against college three times) that you're projecting your circumstances on the rest of the world.
There was this psychological experiment on young children where the adult in the room said, "Here's a cookie. You can have it now. But, if you wait until I get back I'll give you two cookies." (They taped it. It was funny watching 6 year olds struggle with temptation.) The upshot is, the kids who were able to wait for the two cookies were uniformly more intelligent. My advice is wait for the two cookies. Go to college.
There have been many great arguments for college here. I'd like to reemphasize the importance of knowing the underlying concepts. Even though neither of my degrees were in CS or EE, the few computer classes I took (along with some incidental experience) allow me to regularly correct and explain things to the cert-monkeys. (Admittedly, mostly in reference to networking.)
If you're compentent enough to already be working in the field at your age, then you're obviously an enthusiastic self-teacher. In college you'll be able to continue learning things yourself, with other good people and teachers. You'll be able to spend a lot of time on the cool stuff you like. In a job you'll learn what the boss wants. (Which is all too often mind-numbing.)
Finally, if you screw this up it could come back to bite you. You don't ever want to have to tell your child (as I have) that you can't play because you have homework.
You have a choice and going to college can't hurt you. No one is going to throw away your resume because there IS a college degree on it! So, stop reading this crap and go fill out some college applications.
Slashdot Mirror
Hey! There's a picture missing from her site. Last week when the questions solicitation article was up and I checked Georgy's site there were two or three pictures up. Now there's only one: gallery.
... you remember it ... the good one.
The missing picture was the one where she's in a snug T-shirt, which did not completely cover her lower back, and jeans and looking back at the camera from the computer. Yeah
Dude, 110 volts is most certainly enough to kill. True, most of us have been "tingled" by 110/115 a few times, and didn't die... all that proves is that we were lucky on those occassions.
Guys, come on. Voltage doesn't kill people; current kills people. (It's measured in amperes.) You can be killed by much less than 110V if the current is sufficient and you can be "tickled" by 10,000V and live to tell about it -- if the current is low enough.
If there are any doubters out there then explain to me why the product on this page is called a "stun gun" and not a "vaporize your blimey arse gun" : http://www.libertees.com/sedestgunstm.html
Now that tickles.
Given how few people will even pay for Slashdot content, ...
/. content? There are links to news stories on other sites (usually submitted by users) and then lots of comments on the stories, again, mostly from users.
/. and think the whole comment and moderation system is outstanding. But, there isn't really much original "content" in the sense that that word is normally used. . . . :P
Not trolling, just nitpicking. But, uh, what
Don't misunderstand, I love
Except for the polls, but who's paying for them.
Good job! You win first, second and third place in my view.
If robots take over most of the jobs, is anyone actually going to be able to by the products produced? It sounds like a great deal, to not pay employees, but people without jobs don't make the greatest consumers. Once they quit buying stuff, we will have a bunch of unemployed robots
For the answer to this see another movie: "The Terminator".
Arnold voice: "I vas a fry cook. Now I hunt the human vermin."
It is official; Netcraft now confirms: *BSD is dying ... Let's keep to the facts and look at the numbers. ... All major surveys show that *BSD has steadily declined in market share.
I think I get it now. These trolls -- they're all government accountants!
"It depends what the meaning of the word 'more' is."
When in actuality the netcraft article says this: "Intriguingly, all of the Top 5 placed sites run the FreeBSD operating system" :)
:p
Indeed! One might wonder if a troll submitted this story pre-emptively, with a bad summary, as part of a damage control effort.
I like penguins. I just don't want them screwing up my machines.
Oh well, I wonder how long until that study comes out.
... but those weren't the people that they studied!
It could be quite sometime before they find a competent typist without debilitating wrist pain.
Oh
We don't need huge security structures and new laws to keep out black hat hackers, we need a closer watch on people inside companies and organisations keeping data.
And who watches the watchers? And who watches them?
What we need is more honest people. This problem is not primarily legal or structural. It's a cultural problem. Look at how many people were involved! Besides the two agents there were the people on the outside. One honest man anywhere in the process could have killed this little scheme before it was hatched.
I don't want to start a religious war or anything, but here it is, in python, in one expression :
int('10'*3,2)
(apologies to D.A.)
... To see that this ruling is total crap. Definition of an unprotected threat: "on its face and in the circumstances in which it made is so unequivocal, unconditional, immediate and specific as to the person threatened, as to convey a gravity of purpose imminent prospect of execution." The purpose of the website as stated on the front page: "A coalition of concerned citizens throughout the USA is cooperating in collecting dossiers on abortionists in anticipation that one day we may be able to hold them on trial for crimes against humanity." It's neither specific nor immediate nor unequivocal. More importantly (how incompetent/politicized are these judges?), there's absolutely no "immediate prospect of execution." These boneheads just run a website. They're not threatening to do anything but continue to run it.
It's a very slippery slope to say that that's obfuscation and they really have another purpose. It wouldn't be long before any harsh criticism could be interpreted as a death threat. The law is supposed to be treating the speech, NOT the purpose(/thoughts).
People, wake up. The first amendment is not just for those whom you agree with.
Sara, dear, I'm glad that you're doing well, but I believe (as you've posted against college three times) that you're projecting your circumstances on the rest of the world.
There was this psychological experiment on young children where the adult in the room said, "Here's a cookie. You can have it now. But, if you wait until I get back I'll give you two cookies." (They taped it. It was funny watching 6 year olds struggle with temptation.) The upshot is, the kids who were able to wait for the two cookies were uniformly more intelligent. My advice is wait for the two cookies. Go to college.
There have been many great arguments for college here. I'd like to reemphasize the importance of knowing the underlying concepts. Even though neither of my degrees were in CS or EE, the few computer classes I took (along with some incidental experience) allow me to regularly correct and explain things to the cert-monkeys. (Admittedly, mostly in reference to networking.)
If you're compentent enough to already be working in the field at your age, then you're obviously an enthusiastic self-teacher. In college you'll be able to continue learning things yourself, with other good people and teachers. You'll be able to spend a lot of time on the cool stuff you like. In a job you'll learn what the boss wants. (Which is all too often mind-numbing.)
Finally, if you screw this up it could come back to bite you. You don't ever want to have to tell your child (as I have) that you can't play because you have homework.
You have a choice and going to college can't hurt you. No one is going to throw away your resume because there IS a college degree on it! So, stop reading this crap and go fill out some college applications.